issue-1996-08-19•Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-19
Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-19
issue-1996-08-19Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-19Regulation
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. X96-10819 Coast Guard
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-10819]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
46 CFR Part 153
Coast Guard
CFR Correction
In title 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 140 to 155,
revised as of October 1, 1995, on page 171, Sec. 153.1046 was
inadvertently omitted. The omitted text should read as follows:
Sec. 153.1046 Sulfuric acid.
No person may liquefy frozen or congealed sulfuric acid other than
by external tank heating coils.
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21871 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42777-42779]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21871]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-241-AD; Amendment 39-9715; AD 96-17-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Airbus Model A310 series airplanes, that requires
repetitive inspections to detect discrepancies of the slat universal
joint and steady bearing assemblies, and replacement of any discrepant
assembly with a new, like assembly. This amendment also requires
replacement of all slat universal joint and steady bearing assemblies
with improved assemblies, which would terminate the repetitive
inspections. This amendment is prompted by reports of broken or missing
inner races on the slat universal joint and steady bearing assemblies
of the slat transmission system. The actions specified by this AD are
intended to prevent cracking of the inner race, which could cause it to
break off and, consequently, allow the slat universal joint and steady
bearing assemblies to become worn; this situation could result in
failure of the shaft of the slat transmission system, and subsequent
uncommanded movement of the associated slat.
DATES: Effective September 23, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 23, 1996.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules
Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-2589; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A310 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on May 8, 1996 (61 FR
20762). That action proposed to require repetitive visual inspections
to detect discrepancies of the slat universal joint and steady bearing
assemblies, and replacement of any discrepant assembly with a new,
[[Page 42778]]
like assembly. That action also proposed to require replacement of all
slat universal joint and steady bearing assemblies with new assemblies,
which would constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspection
requirements.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the two comments received.
Both commenters support the proposed rule.
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
The FAA estimates that 26 Airbus Model A310 series airplanes of
U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.
It will take approximately 5 work hours per airplane to accomplish
the required inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the required inspection on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $7,800, or $300 per airplane, per
inspection.
It will take approximately 9 work hours per airplane to accomplish
the required replacement, at an average labor rate of $60 per work
hour. Required parts will cost approximately $48,108 per airplane.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the required replacement on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,264,848, or $48,648 per airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-17-06 Airbus Industrie: Amendment 39-9715. Docket 95-NM-241-AD.
Applicability: Model A310 series airplanes, on which Airbus
Modification 6022 or 6485 has not been installed; certificated in
any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent failure of the shaft of the slat transmission system,
and subsequent uncommanded movement of the associated slat,
accomplish the following:
(a) Prior to the accumulation of 2,000 landings or 500 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later,
perform a visual inspection to detect discrepancies of the slat
universal joint and steady bearing assemblies, in accordance with
Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2040, Revision 2, dated January 5,
1995.
Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2040 inadvertently
references LUCAS/LIEBHERR Service Bulletin 551A-27-6010 as the
appropriate source for accomplishing the inspection. LUCAS/LIEBHERR
Service Bulletin 551A-27-610 is the appropriate source of
information.
(1) If no discrepancy is found, repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 2,000 landings.
(2) If any discrepancy is detected and the groove depth on the
shaft is greater than or equal to 1 mm (0.04 in.), prior to further
flight, replace the discrepant bearing assembly with a new, like
assembly, in accordance with the service bulletin. After
replacement, repeat the visual inspection thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 2,000 landings.
(3) If any discrepancy is detected and the groove depth on the
shaft is less than 1 mm (0.04 in.), prior to 50 landings after
accomplishing the initial inspection, replace the discrepant bearing
assembly with a new, like assembly, in accordance with the service
bulletin. After the replacement, repeat the visual inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,000 landings.
(b) Within 5 years after the effective date of this AD, replace
the slat universal joint and steady bearing assemblies with new
assemblies, in accordance with LUCAS/LIEBHERR Service Bulletin 523-
27-M523-1, dated April 25, 1986. Accomplishment of the replacement
constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspection
requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD.
(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,
who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(e) The actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A310-27-2040, Revision 2, dated January 5, 1995, and LUCAS/
LIEBHERR Service Bulletin 523-27-M523-1, dated April 25, 1986. This
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. Copies may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point
Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be
inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal
[[Page 42779]]
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(f) This amendment becomes effective on September 23, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 9, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21871 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21093 Establishment of Class E Airspace; Dexter, ME
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42784-42785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21093]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 96-ANE-23]
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Dexter, ME
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action establishes a Class E airspace area at Dexter, ME
(K1B0) to provide for adequate controlled airspace for those aircraft
using the new GPS RWY 34 Instrument Approach Procedure to Dexter
Regional Airport.
DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 10, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before September 18, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to: Manager, Operations
Branch, ANE-530, Federal Aviation Administration, Docket No. 96-ANE-23,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone
(617) 238-7530; fax (617) 238-7596. Comments may also be submitted
electronically to the following Internet address: ``neairspace-
[email protected]'' Comments must indicate Docket No. 96-ANE-23
in the subject line.
The official docket file may be examined in the Office of the
Assistant Chief Counsel, New England Region, ANE-7, Room 401, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone (617) 238-
7050; fax (617) 238-7055.
An informal docket may be examined during normal business hours in
the Air Traffic Division, Room 408, by contacting the Manager,
Operations Branch at the first address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph A. Bellabona, Operations
Branch, ANE-530.6, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-
5299; telephone (617) 238-7536; fax (617) 238-7596.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A new Standard Instrument Approach Procedure to Dexter Regional
Airport, the GPS RWY 34 approach, requires the establishment of Class E
airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface in the
vicinity of Dexter, ME. This action provides adequate controlled
airspace for those aircraft using the new GPS RWY 34 instrument
approach. Class E airspace designations for airspace areas extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface of the earth are published in
paragraph 6005 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 E airspace designation listed in this document will
be published subsequently in this Order.
The Direct Final Rule Procedure
The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comment, and, therefore, issues it as a direct final rule.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Unless a written adverse or negative comment, or a written notice of
intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received within the
comment period, the regulation will become effective on the date
specified above. After the close of the comment period, the FAA will
publish a document in the Federal Register indicating that no adverse
or negative comments were received and confirming the date on which the
final rule will become effective. If the FAA does receive, within the
comment period, an adverse or negative comment, or written notice of
intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct
final rule will be published in the Federal Register, and a notice of
proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment period.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a direct final rule, and was
not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, 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 under the caption ADDRESSES. All communications received on
or before the closing date for comments will be considered, and this
rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of the comments received.
Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions
is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of this action and
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
action will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 96-ANE-23.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Agency Findings
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 noncontroversial and
unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons
discussed in the preamble, I certify that this regulation: (1) Is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is
not a ``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as
these routine matters will only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation. It is certified that these proposed rules will not have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration amends part 71 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 71) as follows:
[[Page 42785]]
PART 71--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 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.
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 6005-Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth
* * * * *
ANE ME E5 Dexter, ME [New]
Dexter Regional Airport, ME
(Lat. 45 deg.00'16''N, long. 69 deg.14'12''W)
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of Dexter Regional Airport.
* * * * *
Issued in Burlington, MA, on August 12, 1996.
David J. Hurley,
Manager, Air Traffic Division, New England Region.
[FR Doc. 96-21093 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21092 Establishment of Class E Airspace; Oxford, ME
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42785-42786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21092]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 96-ANE-22]
Establishment of Class E Airspace; Oxford, ME
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action establishes a Class E airspace area at Oxford, ME
(K81B) to provide for adequate controlled airspace for those aircraft
using the new GPS RWY 33 Instrument Approach Procedure to Oxford County
Regional Airport.
DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 10, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before September 18, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on the proposal to: Manager, Operations
Branch, ANE-530, Federal Aviation Administration, Docket No. 96-ANE-22,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone
(617) 238-7530; fax (617) 238-7596. Comments may also be submitted
electronically to the following Internet address: ``neairspace-
[email protected]'' Comments must indicate Docket No. 96-ANE-22
in the subject line.
The official docket file may be examined in the Office of the
Assistant Chief Counsel, New England Region, ANE-7, Room 401, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone (617) 238-
7050; fax (617) 238-7055.
An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours in the Air Traffic Division, Room 408, by contacting the Manager,
Operations Branch at the first address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph A. Bellabona, Operations
Branch, ANE-530.6, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-
5299; telephone (617) 238-7536; fax (617) 238-7596.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A New Standard Instrument Approach Procedure
to Oxford County Regional Airport the GPS RWY 33 approach, requires the
establishment of Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface in the vicinity of Oxford, ME. This action provides
adequate controlled airspace for those aircraft using the new GPS RWY
33 instrument approach. Class E airspace designations for airspace
areas extending upward from 700 feet above the surface of the earth are
published in paragraph 6005 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 E airspace designation listed in this document
will be published subsequently in this Order.
The Direct Final Rule Procedure
The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comment, and, therefore, issues it as a direct final rule.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Unless a written adverse or negative comment, or a written notice of
intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received within the
comment period, the regulation will become effective on the date
specified above. After the close of the commentperiod, the FAA will
publish a document in the Federal Register indicating that no adverse
or negative comments were received and confirming the date on which the
final rule will become effective. If the FAA does receive, within the
comment period, an adverse or negative comment, or written notice of
intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct
final rule will be published in the Federal Register, and a notice of
proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment period.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a direct final rule, and was
not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, 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 under the caption ADDRESSES. All communications received on
or before the closing date for comments will be considered, and this
rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of the comments received.
Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions
is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of this action and
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
action will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 96-ANE-22.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Agency Findings
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 noncontroversial and
unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons
discussed in the preamble, I certify that this
[[Page 42786]]
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a Regulatory Evaluation as these routine matters will only affect
air traffic procedures and air navigation. It is certified that these
proposed rules will not have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration amends part 71 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 71) as follows:
PART 71--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 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.
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 6005--Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth
* * * * *
ANE ME E5 Oxford, ME [New]
Oxford County Regional Airport, ME
(Lat. 44 deg.09'27''N, long. 70 deg.28'53''W)
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 9.6-mile radius of Oxford County Regional Airport;
excluding that airspace within the Auburn, ME Class E airspace area.
* * * * *
Issued in Burlington, MA, on August 12, 1996.
David J. Hurley,
Manager, Air Traffic Division, New England Region.
[FR Doc. 96-21092 filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21083 Virginia Regulatory Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42788-42790]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21083]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 946
[VA-107-FOR]
Virginia Regulatory Program
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OSM is approving a proposed amendment to the Virginia
permanent regulatory program (hereinafter referred to as the Virginia
program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977
(SMCRA). The proposed amendment consists of statutory changes contained
in Virginia House Bill 706 and the implementing regulations, both of
which address sudden release of accumulated water from underground coal
mine voids. The amendment is intended to improve the effectiveness of
the Virginia program.
EFFECTIVE DATES: August 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert A. Penn, Director, Big
Stone Gap Field Office, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement, 1941 Neeley Road, Suite 201, Compartment 116, Big Stone
Gap, Virginia 24219, Telephone: (540) 523-4303.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on the Virginia Program.
II. Submission of the Amendment.
III. Director's Findings.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments.
V. Director's Decision.
VI. Procedural Determinations.
I. Background on the Virginia Program
On December 15, 1981, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally
approved the Virginia program. Background information on the Virginia
program including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of
comments, and the conditions of approval can be found in the December
15, 1981, Federal Register (46 FR 61085-61115). Subsequent actions
concerning the conditions of approval and program amendments are
identified at 30 CFR 946.11, 946.12, 946.13, 946.15, and 946.16.
II. Submission of the Amendment
By letter dated April 17, 1996 (Administrative Record No. VA-876),
Virginia submitted amendments to Sec. 45.1-243 of the Code of Virginia
contained in Virginia House Bill 706, and concerning the sudden release
of accumulated water from underground coal mine voids. Virginia also
submitted the proposed implementing regulations at Sec. 480-03-
19.784.14 concerning hydrologic information for reclamation and
operations plans, and Sec. 480-03-19.817.41 concerning performance
standards for hydrologic balance protection.
The proposed amendment was published in the May 3, 1996, Federal
Register (61 FR 19885), and in the same notice, OSM opened the public
comment period and provided opportunity for a public hearing on the
adequacy of the proposed amendment. The comment period closed on June
3, 1996.
III. Director's Findings
Set forth below, pursuant to SMCRA and the Federal regulations at
30 CFR 732.15 and 732.17, are the Director's findings concerning the
proposed amendment to the Virginia program.
The amendments proposed by Virginia are as follows:
1. Sec. 45.1-243 of the Code of Virginia is amended by adding a new
subsection to read as follows:
B. The Director's regulations shall require that permit applicants
submit hydrologic reclamation plans that include measures that will be
utilized to prevent the sudden release of accumulated water from
underground workings.
2. Sec. 480-03-19.784.14(g) of the Virginia regulations is amended
to add
[[Page 42789]]
the requirement that the hydrologic reclamation plan shall also include
identification of the measures to be taken to prevent the sudden
release of accumulated water from the underground workings.
3. Sec. 480-03-19.817.41(i) is amended by adding new subparagraph
(3) to read as follows:
(i)(3) Except where surface entries and accesses to underground
workings are located pursuant to (i)(1) of this Section, an unmined
barrier of coal shall be left in place where the coal seam dips toward
the land surface. The unmined barrier and associated overburden shall
be designed to prevent the sudden release of water that may accumulate
in the underground workings.
(i)(3)(i) The applicant may demonstrate the appropriate barrier
width and overburden height by either:
(A) providing a site specific design, certified by a qualified
registered professional engineer, which considers the overburden and
barrier characteristics; or
(B) providing the greater barrier width necessary for a minimum of
100 feet of vertical overburden or for an unmined horizontal barrier
calculated by the formula: W=50+H, when W is the minimum width in feet
and H is the calculated hydrostatic head in feet.
(i)(3)(ii) Exception to the barrier requirement may be approved
provided the Division finds, based upon the geologic and hydrologic
conditions, an accumulation of water in the underground workings cannot
reasonably be expected to occur or other measures taken by the
applicant are adequate to prevent the accumulation of water.
There are no Federal counterparts to the Virginia amendments. The
Director finds, however, that the amendments are reasonable, and not
inconsistent with SMCRA and the Federal regulations. The Virginia
amendments are technically sound, and will add an increased measure of
protection from the hazards of sudden releases of accumulated water
from underground workings.
IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
Federal Agency Comments
Pursuant to section 503(b) of SMCRA and 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(i),
comments were solicited from various interested Federal agencies. The
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service
responded and recommended that the amendments be accepted. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service responded and stated that the proposed
regulatory changes are not likely to adversely affect threatened or
endangered species or critical habitats.
The U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA) responded and stated that it may be useful for the State to
develop the criteria that would be employed to measure the phrase
``cannot reasonably be expected'' that appears at proposed Sec. 480-03-
19.817.41(i)(3)(ii). The provision provides for an exception to the
barrier width requirement of (i)(3)(i) when site specific conditions
indicate there will be no accumulation of water. In response to the
MSHA comment, the Division of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) said
that it chose not to specify in the proposed amendment each
circumstance an applicant may be able to demonstrate that water
``cannot reasonably be expected'' to accumulate within the abandoned
mine voids. DMME stated that it intends to depend upon conservative
scientific principles in evaluating each case specific demonstration.
DMME intends to consider the availability/proximity of water to the
underground voids as well as the geohydrologic parameters that may
affect the ability of the voids to hold such waters under head. In
response, the Director believes the DMME approach to be reasonable and
has determined in the Finding above, that the proposed amendments are
not inconsistent with SMCRA and the Federal regulations.
Public Comments
A public comment period and opportunity to request a public hearing
was announced in the May 3, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 19885). The
comment period closed on June 3, 1996. No comments were received and no
one requested an opportunity to testify at the scheduled public hearing
so no hearing was held.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Under 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), the Director is required to obtain
the written concurrence of the Administrator of the EPA with respect to
any provisions of a State program amendment that relate to air or water
quality standards promulgated under the authority of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et
seq.). The Director has determined that this amendment contains no
provisions in these categories and that EPA's concurrence is not
required.
Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the
proposed amendment from EPA. EPA responded on June 20, 1996
(Administrative Record No. VA-891) and stated that the amendment is in
compliance with the Clean Water Act and offered no additional comments.
V. Director's Decision
Based on the findings above, the Director is approving Virginia's
amendment concerning sudden release of accumulated water from
underground coal mine voids as submitted by Virginia on April 17, 1996.
The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 946 codifying decisions
concerning the Virginia program are being amended to implement this
decision. This final rule is being made effective immediately to
expedite the State program amendment process and to encourage States to
bring their programs into conformity with the Federal standards without
undue delay. Consistency of State and Federal standards is required by
SMCRA.
VI. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12866
This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review).
Executive Order 12988
The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) and has
determined that, to the extent allowed by law, this rule meets the
applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section.
However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of
State regulatory programs and program amendments since each such
program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM.
Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 30
CFR 730.11, 732.15 and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State
regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must
be based solely on a determined of whether the submittal is consistent
with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the
other requirements of 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.
National Environmental Policy Act
No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since
section 702(d) of SMCRA [30 U.S.C. 1292(d)] provides that agency
decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not
constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
[[Page 42790]]
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collections requirements
that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3507 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior has determined that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
The State submittal which is the subject of this rule is based upon
counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was
prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a
significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small
entities. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements
previously promulgated by OSM will be implemented by the State. In
making the determination as to whether this rule would have a
significant economic impact, the Department relied upon the data and
assumptions for the counterpart Federal regulations.
Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any
given year on any governmental entity or the private sector.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 946
Intergovernmetal relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Dated: July 30, 1996.
Allen D. Klein,
Regional Director, Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 30, chapter VII,
subchapter T of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth
below:
PART 946--VIRGINIA
1. The authority citation for part 946 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
2. In Sec. 946.15, paragraph (kk) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 946.15 Approval of regulatory program amendments
* * * * *
(kk) The amendment to the Virginia program concerning the sudden
release of accumulated water from underground coal mine voids as
submitted to OSM on April 17, 1996, is approved effective August 19,
1996.
[FR Doc. 96-21083 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-05-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21078 State of Alaska Petition for Exemption From Diesel Fuel Sulfur Requirement
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42812-42817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21078]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[FRL-5555-5]
State of Alaska Petition for Exemption From Diesel Fuel Sulfur
Requirement
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of direct final decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 14, 1994, EPA granted the State of Alaska a waiver
from the requirements of EPA's low sulfur diesel fuel program,
permanently exempting Alaska's remote areas and providing a temporary
exemption for areas of Alaska served by the Federal Aid Highway System
(FAHS). The exemption applied to certain requirements in section 211(i)
and (g) of the Clean Air Act, as implemented in EPA's regulations.
These exemptions were based on EPA's determination that it would be
unreasonable to require persons in these areas to comply with the low
sulfur diesel fuel requirements due to unique geographical,
meteorological and economic factors for
[[Page 42813]]
Alaska, as well as other significant local factors.
The temporary exemption for the areas of Alaska served by the FAHS
will expire on October 1, 1996. On December 12, 1995, the Governor of
Alaska petitioned EPA to permanently exempt the areas covered by the
temporary exemption. In this decision EPA is extending the temporary
exemption for an additional 24 months, but reserving a final decision
on whether it should be permanent.
Based on the factors and conditions identified in Alaska's December
12, 1995 petition, a continuation of the exemption is warranted at
least temporarily. However, EPA believes that recent comments submitted
to the agency merit further investigation before making a final
decision on a permanent exemption. EPA is therefore extending the
temporary exemption until October 1, 1998, or until such time that a
final decision is made on the permanent exemption, whichever is
shorter.
This decision will continue the current status in Alaska. It is not
expected to have a significant impact on the ability of Alaska's
communities to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
carbon monoxide and particulate matter, based on the limited
contribution of emissions from diesel motor vehicles in those areas and
the sulfur level currently found in motor vehicle diesel fuel used in
Alaska.
DATES: This action will become effective October 3, 1996 unless adverse
comments or a request for a public hearing are received by September
18, 1996. If EPA receives such comments or a request for a public
hearing, EPA will publish a timely notice in the Federal Register
withdrawing this rule.
ADDRESSES: Copies of information relevant to this petition are
available for inspection in public docket A-96-26 at the Air Docket of
the EPA, first floor, Waterside Mall, room M-1500, 401 M Street S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 260-7548, between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Paul N. Argyropoulos,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Fuels Implementation Group, Fuels
and Energy Division (6406J), 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460,
(202) 233-9004.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Regulated Entities
II. Electronic Copies of Rulemaking Documents
III. Background
IV. Petition for Exemption
V. Decision for Extending Current Temporary Exemption
VI. Public Participation
VII. Statutory Authority
VIII. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
IX. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act
X. Paperwork Reduction Act
XI. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
XII. Unfunded Mandates Act
I. Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this action are refiners,
marketers, distributors, retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers of
diesel fuel. Regulated categories and entities include:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................................... Petroluem distributors, marketers, retailers
(service station owners and operators), wholesale
purchaser consumers (fleet managers who operate a
refueling facility to refuel motor vehicles).
Citizens.................................................... Any owner or operator of a diesel motor vehicle.
Federal Government.......................................... Federal facilities, including military bases which
operate a refueling facility to refuel motor
vehicles.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine
the criteria contained in Sec. 80.29 and Sec. 80.30 of title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations as modified by today's action. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult one of the persons listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Electronic Copies of Rulemaking Documents
A copy of this document is also available electronically from the
EPA Internet site and via dial-up modem on the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN), which is an electronic bulletin board system (BBS)
operated by EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Both
services are free of charge, except for your existing cost of Internet
connectivity or the cost of the phone call to TTN. Users are able to
access and download files on their first call using a personal computer
per the following information. Any one of the following Internet
addresses may be used:
World Wide Web:
http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/
Gopher:
gopher://gopher.epa.gov/ Follow menus for: Offices/Air/OMS
FTP:
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/ Change Directory to pub/gopher/OMS
The steps required to access information on this rulemaking on the
TTN bulletin board system are listed below.
TTN BBS: 919-541-5742 (1,200-14,400 bps, no parity, eight data bits,
one stop bit)
Voice help: 919-541-5384
Internet address: TELNET ttnbbs.rtpnc.epa.gov
Off-line: Mondays from 8:00-12:00 Noon ET
1. Technology Transfer Network Top Menu: GATEWAY TO TTN TECHNICAL
AREAS (Bulletin Boards) (Command: T)
2. TTN TECHNICAL INFORMATION AREAS: OMS--Mobile Sources Information
(Command: M)
3. OMS BBS--MAIN MENU FILE TRANSFERS: Other OMS Documents (Command:
O)
At this stage, the system will list all available files in this
area. To download a file, select a transfer protocol that will match
the terminal software on your computer, then set your own software to
receive the file using that same protocol. If unfamiliar with handling
compressed (that is, ZIP'd) files, go to the TTN top menu, System
Utilities (Command: 1) for information and the necessary program to
download in order to unZIP the files of interest after downloading to
your computer. After getting the files you want onto your computer, you
can quit TTN BBS with the oodbye command.
III. Background
Section 211(i)(1) of the Act prohibits the manufacture, sale,
supply, offering for sale or supply, dispensing, transport, or
introduction into commerce of motor
[[Page 42814]]
vehicle diesel fuel which contains a concentration of sulfur in excess
of 0.05 percent (by weight), or which fails to meet a cetane index
minimum of 40 beginning October 1, 1993. Section 211(i)(3) establishes
the sulfur content for fuel used in the certification of heavy-duty
diesel vehicles and engines. Section 211(i)(4) provides that the States
of Alaska and Hawaii may seek an exemption from the requirements of
this subsection in the same manner as provided in section 325 1 of
the Act, and requires the Administrator to take final action on any
petition filed under this section, which seeks exemption from the
requirements of section 211(i), within 12 months of the date of such
petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 211(i) (4) mistakenly refers to exemptions under
Sec. 324 of the Act (``Vapor Recovery for Small Business Marketers
of Petroleum Products''). While the proper reference is to Sec. 325,
Congress clearly intended to refer to Sec. 325, as shown by the
language used in Sec. 211(i)(4), and the United States Code citation
used in Sec. 806 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Public Law
No. 101-549. Section 806 of the Amendments, which added paragraph
(i) to Sec. 211 of the Act, used 42 U.S.C. 7625-1 as the United
States Code designation for Sec. 324. This is the proper designation
for Sec. 325 of the Act. Also see 136 Cong. Rec. S17236 (daily ed.
October 26, 1990) (statement of Sen. Murkowski).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 325 of the Act provides that upon application by the
Governor of Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, or the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Administrator may
exempt any person or source in such territory from any requirement of
the Act, with some specific exceptions. Such exemption may be granted
if the Administrator finds that compliance with such requirements is
not feasible or is unreasonable due to unique geographical,
meteorological, or economic factors of such territory, or such other
local factors as the Administrator deems significant.
IV. Petition for Exemption
On February 12, 1993, the Honorable Walter J. Hickel, Governor of
the State of Alaska, submitted a petition to exempt motor vehicle
diesel fuel in Alaska from all of the requirements of section 211(i)
except the minimum cetane index requirement of 40. The petition
requested a short-term exemption for areas accessible by the Federal
Aid Highway System (``on-highway'') and a permanent exemption for areas
not accessible by the Federal Aid Highway System (``off-highway''). The
petition for a short-term exemption requested that EPA exempt motor
vehicle diesel fuel manufactured for sale, sold, supplied, or
transported within the Federal Aid Highway System (FAHS) from meeting
the sulfur content requirement specified in section 211(i) until
October 1, 1996. The petition also requested a permanent exemption from
such requirements for those areas of Alaska not reachable by the
Federal Aid Highway System. The petition was based on geographical,
meteorological, air quality, and economic factors unique to the State
of Alaska.
The petition was granted on March 14, 1994 and applied to all
persons in Alaska subject to section 211(i)(1) and (g) of the Act and
EPA's low sulfur requirement for motor vehicle diesel fuel in 40 CFR
Part 80.29. Persons in communities served by the FAHS are exempt from
compliance with the diesel fuel sulfur content requirement until
October 1, 1996. Persons in communities that are not served by the
Federal Aid Highway System are permanently exempt from compliance with
the diesel fuel sulfur content requirement. Both the permanent and
temporary exemption apply to all persons who manufacture, sell, supply,
offer for sale or supply, dispense, transport, or introduce into
commerce, in the State of Alaska, motor vehicle diesel fuel. Alaska's
exemption does not apply to the minimum cetane requirement for motor
vehicle diesel fuel.
On December 12, 1995, the Honorable Governor Knowles petitioned the
Administrator for a permanent exemption for all areas of the state
covered by the Federal Aid Highway System. This notice addresses EPA's
action on the petition submitted on December 12, 1995. We are making a
decision now for the 24 month extension and reserving the decision on
the state's request for a permanent exemption, so the agency may
consider possible alternatives for a longer period.
The following discussion summarizes the state's support for the
exemption as provided for in the petition, and the rationale for the
agency's extension of the temporary exemption.
A. Geography and Location of the State of Alaska
Alaska is about one-fifth as large as the combined area of the
lower 48 states. Because of its extreme northern location, rugged
terrain and sparse population, Alaska relies on barges to deliver a
large percentage of its petroleum products. No other state relies on
this type of delivery system to the extent Alaska does.
Only 35% of Alaska's communities are served by the Federal Aid
Highway System, which is a combination of road and marine highways. The
remaining 65% of Alaska's communities are served by barge lines and are
referred to as off-highway or ``remote'' communities. Although barge
lines can directly access some off-highway communities, those
communities that are not located on a navigable waterway are served by
a two-stage delivery system: over water by barge line and then over
land to reach the community.
Because of the State's high latitude, it experiences seasonal
extremes in the amount of daily sunlight and temperature, which in turn
affects the period of time during which construction can occur, and,
ultimately, the cost of construction in Alaska.
According to the petition, Alaska's extreme northern location
places it in a unique position to fuel transcontinental cargo flights
between Europe, Asia, and North America. Roughly 75% of all air transit
freight between Europe and Asia lands in Anchorage, as does that
between Asia and the United States. The result is a large market for
Jet-A fuel produced by local refiners, which decreases the importance
of highway diesel fuel to these refiners. Based on State tax revenue
receipts and estimates by Alaska's refiners, diesel fuel consumption
for highway use represents roughly 5% of total state distillate fuel
consumption.
B. Climate, Meteorology and Air Quality
Alaska's climate is colder than that of the other 49 states. The
extremely low temperatures experienced in Alaska during the winter
imposes a more severe fuel specification requirement for diesel fuel in
Alaska than in the rest of the country. This specification, known as a
``cloud point'' specification 2 significantly affects vehicle
start-up and other engine operations. Alaska has the most severe cloud
point specification for diesel fuel in the U.S. at -56 deg.F. Because
Alaska experiences extremely low temperatures in comparison to the
other 49 state's and the cloud point specifications are not as severe
for fuel in the lower 48 states, most diesel fuel used in the State of
Alaska is produced by refiners located in Alaska. Jet-A kerosene meets
the same cloud point specification as No. 1 diesel fuel (which is
marketed primarily during the winter in Alaska as opposed to No. 2
diesel fuel which is marketed primarily in the summer) and is commonly
mixed with or used as a substitute for No. 1 diesel fuel. However,
because Jet-A kerosene can have a sulfur content as high as 0.3%, the
diesel fuel sulfur requirement
[[Page 42815]]
of 0.05% would generally prohibit using Jet-A and No. 1 low sulfur
diesel fuel interchangeably.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The cloud point defines the temperature at which cloud or
haze or wax crystals appears in the oil. Its purpose is to ensure a
minimum temperature above which fuel lines and other engine parts
are not plugged by solids that form in the fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice formation on the navigable waters during the winter months
restricts fuel delivery to off-highway areas served by barge lines.
Therefore, fuel is generally only delivered to these areas between the
months of May and October. This further restricts the ability of fuel
distributors in Alaska to supply multiple grades of petroleum products
to these communities.
The only violations of national ambient air quality standards in
Alaska have been for carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter
(PM10). CO violations have only been recorded in the State's two
largest communities: Anchorage and Fairbanks. PM10 violations have
only been recorded in two rural communities, Mendenhall Valley of
Juneau and Eagle River, a community within the boundaries of Anchorage.
The most recent PM10 inventories for these two communities show
that these violations are largely the result of fugitive dust from
paved and unpaved roads, and that motor vehicle exhaust is responsible
for less than one percent of the overall PM10 being emitted within
the borders of each of these areas. 3 Moreover, Eagle River has
not had a violation of the PM10 standard since 1986 and plans to
apply to EPA for redesignation to attainment for PM10. Mendenhall
Valley has initiated efforts for road paving to be implemented to
control road dust. The sulfur content of diesel fuel is not expected to
have a significant impact on ambient PM10 or CO levels in any of
these areas because of the minimal contribution by motor vehicles to
PM10 in these areas and the insignificant effect of diesel fuel
sulfur content on CO emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``PM10 Emission Inventories for the Mendenhall Valley
and Eagle River Areas,'' prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region X, by Engineering-Science, February 1988.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, EPA recognizes that the primary purpose of reducing the
sulfur content of diesel fuel is to reduce vehicle particulate
emissions. Additional benefits cited in the final rule (55 FR 34120,
August 21, 1990) include a reduction in sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions and the ability to use exhaust after-treatment devices on
diesel fueled vehicles, which would result in some reduction of HC and
CO exhaust emissions. Despite the possibility that the use of high-
sulfur diesel fuel may cause plugging or increased particulate sulfate
emissions in diesel vehicles equipped with trap systems or oxidation
catalysts, any increase in sulfate particulate emissions would likely
have an insignificant effect on ambient PM levels in Alaska since
current motor vehicle contributions to PM10 emissions are minimal.
Also, the lower sulfur requirement for motor vehicle diesel fuel will
have no impact on the attainment prospects of Fairbanks and Anchorage
with respect to CO, since reducing sulfur content has no direct affect
on CO emissions. Since Alaska is in attainment with ozone and SO2
air quality standards, there is currently no concern for reducing HC or
SO2 emissions.
The Agency recognizes that granting this extension to the temporary
exemption means Alaska will forego the potential benefits to its air
quality resulting from the use of low-sulfur diesel fuel. However, the
Agency believes that the potential benefits to Alaska's air quality are
minimal and far outweighed by the increased costs resulting from
factors unique to Alaska, at this time, to communities served by the
FAHS.
C. Economic Factors
In complying with the section 211(i) sulfur requirement, refiners
have the option to invest in the process modifications necessary to
produce low-sulfur diesel fuel for use in motor vehicles, or not invest
in the process modifications and only supply diesel fuel for off-
highway purposes (e.g., heating, generation of electricity, fuel for
non-road vehicles). Most of Alaska's refiners indicated that local
refineries would choose to exit the market for highway diesel fuel if
an exemption from the low sulfur requirement is not granted, because of
limited refining capabilities, the small size of the market for highway
diesel fuel in Alaska, and the costs that would be incurred to produce
low-sulfur diesel fuel.
Demand for Jet-A kerosene, which is also sold as No. 1 diesel fuel
because it meets Alaska's winter cloud point specification, accounts
for almost fifty percent (50%) of Alaska's distillate consumption and
dominates refiner planning. A survey of the refiners in Alaska,
conducted by the State, revealed that it would cost over $100,000,000
in construction and process modifications to refine Alaska North Slope
(ANS) crude into 0.05% sulfur diesel fuel to meet the demand for
highway diesel fuel. Among the reasons for the high cost include the
construction costs in Alaska, which are 25% to 65% higher than costs in
the lower 48 states, and the cost of modifying the fuel production
process itself. The petition states that because there is such a small
demand for highway diesel fuel in Alaska, the costs that would be
incurred to comply with section 211(i)'s sulfur requirement are
excessive in light of the expected benefits. Without an exemption from
having to meet this requirement, most refiners would choose to exit the
market for highway diesel fuel.
Whether low-sulfur diesel fuel is produced in Alaska or imported
from the lower 48 states or Canada, there remains the problem of
segregating the two fuels for transport to communities accessible only
by navigable waterways and storage of the fuels thereafter. Fuel is
delivered to these communities only between the months of May and
October due to ice formation which blocks waterways leading to these
communities for much of the remainder of the year. The fuel supplied to
these communities during the summer months must last through the winter
and spring months until resupply can occur. Additionally, the existing
fuel storage facilities limit the number of fuel types that can be
stored for use in these communities. The cost of constructing separate
storage facilities and providing separate tanks for transport of low-
sulfur diesel fuel is prohibitive. This is largely due to the high cost
of construction in Alaska relative to the lower 48, and the constraints
inherent in distributing fuel in Alaska. One alternative to
constructing separate storage facilities is to supply only low-sulfur
diesel fuel to these communities. However, the result would require use
of the higher cost, low-sulfur diesel fuel for all diesel fuel needs.
This would greatly increase the already high cost of living in these
communities, since a large percentage of distillate consumption in
these communities is for off-highway uses, such as operating diesel
powered electrical generators.
D. Environmental Factors
Information provided to EPA by the State of Alaska indicates that
refiners supply and distribute standard diesel fuel in the summer which
has a sulfur content of approximately 0.3% by weight, and supply and
distribute Jet-A fuel in the winter as an Arctic-grade diesel, which
has a sulfur content between 0.065 and 0.11. Thus, the reported level
of sulfur in motor vehicle diesel fuel used in Alaska is below the
current ASTM sulfur specification which allows up to 0.5% (by weight).
Therefore, in general, the impact of not requiring the low sulfur
diesel fuel program in Alaska are not as significant as they would be
if the fuel were to approach the ASTM allowable sulfur content level.
Although the State's largest communities, Fairbanks and Anchorage,
[[Page 42816]]
are CO nonattainment areas, extending this exemption is not expected to
have any significant impact on ambient CO levels because the sulfur
content in diesel fuel does not significantly affect CO emissions. Two
rural communities are designated nonattainment areas with respect to
particulate matter (PM10); however, motor vehicle exhaust is
responsible for less than one percent of the overall PM10 being
emitted within the borders of these two areas where fugitive dust is
reported to be a problem. Thus, EPA believes that granting a 24-month
extension to the current temporary exemption to communities served by
the FAHS will not have a significant impact on the ability of any of
these communities to meet the NAAQS.
V. Decision for Extending the Current Temporary Exemption
In this notice, the Agency is extending the temporary exemption for
those areas in Alaska served by FAHS from the diesel fuel sulfur
content requirement of 0.05% (by weight), for a period of 24 months
from October 1, 1996, or until such time as a decision is made on the
petition for a permanent exemption, whichever is shorter. For the same
reasons, the Agency also extends the exemption for those areas in
Alaska covered by the FAHS from those provisions of section 211(g)(2)
4 of the Act that prohibit the fueling of motor vehicles with
high-sulfur diesel fuel. Sections 211(g) and 211(i) both restrict the
use of high-sulfur motor vehicle diesel fuel. Therefore, areas in
Alaska served by the Federal Aid Highway System are also exempt from
the related 211(g)(2) provisions until such time as a decision has been
made on the state's petition for a permanent exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This subsection makes it unlawful for any person to
introduce or cause or allow the introduction into any motor vehicle
of diesel fuel which they know or should know contains a
concentration of sulfur in excess of 0.05 percent (by weight). It
would clearly be impossible to hold persons liable for misfueling
with diesel fuel with a sulfur content higher than 0.05%, when such
fuel is permitted to be sold or dispensed for use in motor vehicles.
The proposed exemptions would include exemptions from this
prohibition, but not include the prohibitions in Sec. 211(g)(2)
relating to the minimum cetane index or alternative aromatic levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The basis for this decision is that compliance with this
requirement is unreasonable during such time period because, at this
time, it would continue to create a severe economic burden for
refiners, distributors and consumers of diesel fuel in the State of
Alaska. This economic burden is created by unique meteorological
conditions in Alaska and a set of unique distillate product demands in
the state. As a result of these conditions, during the term of this
exemption, it is not mandated that low-sulfur diesel fuel be available
for commercial use in Alaska. The Agency will make a final
determination on the state's petition for a permanent exemption, as
discussed below.
The EPA believes that a 24-month continuation of the current
exemption for areas served by the Federal Aid Highway System from the
diesel fuel sulfur content requirement is reasonable and appropriate so
that the Agency can consider recent comments on the state's petition. A
permanent exemption is not appropriate at this time because EPA has not
yet verified all relevant information and comments submitted by other
interested parties.
Alaska's most recent petition included a compilation of
information, provided by a Task Force (in which an EPA representative
participated) that was established after the first petition, to further
evaluate the conditions as described in that petition. These conditions
included: the availability of arctic-grade, low-sulfur diesel fuel from
out-of-state refiners, the costs associated with importing the fuel,
and the costs of storing and distributing the fuel to areas on the
highway system. The conditions and factors that were identified in the
initial petition were expanded upon in the task force review. At this
time there is sufficient evidence to support granting an extension to
the current exemption, however, the Agency believes there are several
issues that merit further investigation prior to making a final
decision to act on the state's request for a permanent exemption. These
issues include: consideration of an alternative fuel standard or fuel,
local environmental effects, manufacturer's emissions warranty and
recall liability, and the potential for tightening future heavy-duty
emission standards for model year 2004 engines.
The information which is summarized in this notice and other
pertinent information is being investigated in more detail by the
Agency, prior to issuing a decision on the States request for a
permanent exemption.
The Agency will publish a separate notice in the Federal Register
to take action on the state's petition for a permanent exemption.
VI. Public Participation
The Agency is publishing this action as a direct final rule because
this action is only extending Alaska's current temporary exemption from
the diesel fuel sulfur standards as established in section 211(i) of
the Act. The Agency views the changes contained herein as non-
controversial and based on outreach efforts with affected parties, EPA
anticipates no adverse or critical comments.
Following the August 27, 1993 publication of EPA's proposed
decision to grant the first exemption from the low sulfur diesel fuel
requirements requested by Alaska, there was a thirty day comment
period, during which interested parties could request a hearing or
submit comments on the proposal. The Agency received no request for a
hearing. Comments were received both in support of the proposal to
grant the exemption and expressing concerns over the impact of granting
the exemption. These comments were considered in the Agency's decision
to grant the previous exemption. The Agency received Alaska's request
for a permanent exemption for the FAHS areas in December of 1995. Since
that time, the Agency has received comment on the petition from the
Alaska Center for the Environment and the Engine Manufacturers of
America. Although the Agency believes that the petition does support an
extension of the current exemption, EPA believes the information in
these comments and the possible tightening of heavy duty engine
standards in 2004 necessitate further consideration before the Agency
proposes a decision on Alaska's request for a permanent waiver.
This action will become effective October 3, 1996 unless the Agency
receives adverse comments or a request for a public hearing by
September 18, 1996. If EPA receives such comments or request for a
public hearing, EPA will publish a timely notice in the Federal
Register withdrawing this rule. In the event that adverse or critical
comments are received, EPA is also publishing a Notice of Proposed
Decision in a separate action today, which proposes the same exemption
contained in this direct final decision. Any adverse comments received
by the date listed above will be addressed in a subsequent final
decision. That final decision will be based on the relevant portion of
the revision that is noticed as a proposed decision in the Federal
Register and that is identical to this direct final decision. The EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If
no such comments are received, the public is advised that this action
will be effective October 3, 1996.
VII. Statutory Authority
Authority for the action in this document is in sections 211(i)(4)
(42
[[Page 42817]]
U.S.C. 7545(i)(4)) and 325(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 7625-1(a)(1)) of the Clean
Air Act, as amended.
VIII. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866,5 the Agency must determine
whether a regulation is ``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB
review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 58 FR 51736 (October 4, 1993)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments of communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof, or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
this Executive Order.6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id. at section 3(f)(1)-(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
IX. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires that
Federal Agencies examine the impacts of their regulations on small
entities. The act requires an Agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in conjunction with notice and comment rulemaking,
unless the Agency head certifies that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. 5 U.S.C.
605(b).
Today's action to extend the temporary exemption of the low sulfur
diesel fuel requirements in the State of Alaska until October 1, 1998,
or until such time as the Agency proposes to act on the states request
for a permanent exemption, whichever period of time is shorter, will
not result in any additional economic burden on any of the affected
parties, including small entities involved in the oil industry, the
automotive industry and the automotive service industry. EPA is not
imposing any new requirements on regulated entities, but instead is
continuing an exemption from a requirement which makes it less
restrictive.
Therefore, the Administrator has determined that this direct final
decision will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities, and that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
necessary in connection with this decision.
X. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 544 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, do not apply to this action
as it does not involve the collection of information as defined
therein.
XI. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedures Act
(APA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller General of the General Accounting
Office prior to publication of the rule in today's Federal Register.
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by section 804(2) of the
APA as amended.
XII. Unfunded Mandates Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a federal mandate with estimated costs to the
private sector of $100 million or more, or to state, local, or tribal
governments of $100 million or more in the aggregate. Under section
205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent
with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a
plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that this direct final rule imposes no new
federal requirements and does not include any federal mandate with
costs to the private sector or to state, local, or tribal governments.
Therefore, the Administrator certifies that this direct final rule does
not require a budgetary impact statement.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Diesel fuel, Motor
vehicle pollution.
Dated: August 12, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21078 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21077 New Stationary Sources; Supplemental Delegation of Authority to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Nashville-Davidson County, Tennessee and Knox County, Tennessee
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42808-42812]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21077]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[FRL-5553-3]
New Stationary Sources; Supplemental Delegation of Authority to
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Nashville-Davidson County, Tennessee and Knox County,
Tennessee
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Delegation of authority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The States or Local Agencies of Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Nashville-
Davidson County, Tennessee and Knox County, Tennessee requested that
EPA delegate authority for implementation and enforcement of additional
categories of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). The EPA's review
of their pertinent laws, rules, and regulations prove to be adequate
and effective procedures for the implementation and enforcement of
these Federal standards. This document was written to inform the public
of delegations that were made to the above mentioned Agencies for which
a document was not previously written.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date is listed as the date of delegation
and can be found in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Section of this
action.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the request for delegation of authority and EPA's
letter of delegation are available for public inspection during normal
business hours at the following locations.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Air Programs Branch, 345
Courtland Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1751 Congressman W.L.
Dickinson Drive, Montgomery, Alabama 36109.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Twin Towers Office
Building, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 4244 International Parkway,
Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.
Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, 803
Schenkel Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601.
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 10385,
Jackson, Mississippi 39289-0385.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535.
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, 2600
Bull Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201.
Knox County Department of Air Pollution Control, City/County Building,
Suite 339, 400 West Main Street, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-2045.
Nashville-Davidson County Metropolitan Health Department, 311--23rd
Avenue, North, Nashville, Tennessee 37203.
Effective immediately, all requests, applications, reports and
other correspondence required pursuant to the delegated standards
should not be submitted to the Region 4 office, but should instead be
submitted to the following address:
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1751 Congressman W.L.
Dickinson Drive, Montgomery, Alabama 36109.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Twin Towers Office
Building, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 4244 International Parkway,
Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.
Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, 803
Schenkel Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601.
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 10385,
Jackson, Mississippi 39289-0385.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535.
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, 2600
Bull Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201.
Knox County Department of Air Pollution Control, City/County Building,
Suite 339, 400 West Main Street, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-2045.
Nashville-Davidson County Metropolitan Health Department, 311-23rd
Avenue, North, Nashville, Tennessee 37203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Bingham, Regulatory Planning
and Development Section, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 345 Courtland Street N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365,
(404) 347-3555, x4195.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 301, in conjunction with Sections
110 and 111(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act as amended November 15, 1990,
authorizes EPA to delegate authority to implement and enforce the
standards set out in 40 CFR Part 60, New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS).
The EPA has already delegated the authority for implementation and
enforcement of the NSPS programs to the State or Local Agencies of
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Nashville-Davidson County, Tennessee and Knox County,
Tennessee. These Agencies have subsequently requested a delegation of
authority for implementation and enforcement of the following NSPS
categories found in 40 CFR Part 60.
40 CFR Part 60
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of Alabama
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Fired Steam Generators.......... D 02/3/92
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units..... Da 02/20/91
Industrial Boilers.......................... Db 02/20/91
[[Page 42809]]
Incinerators................................ E 02/20/91
Municipal Combustors........................ Ea 02/03/92
Ferroalloy Production Facilities............ Z 02/20/91
Kraft Pulp Mills............................ BB 02/20/91
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.......... EE 02/03/92
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface RR 02/03/92
Coating Operations.
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances SS 02/03/92
Metal Coil Surface Coating.................. TT 02/03/92
Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry....... WW 02/03/92
Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry.......... BBB 02/20/91
VOC Emissions from the Polymer Manufacturing DDD 02/20/91
Industry.
Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities....... HHH 02/03/92
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit III 06/10/91
Processes.
Petroleum Dry Cleaners...................... JJJ 06/02/87
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--VOC......... KKK 06/02/87
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--SO2......... LLL 06/02/87
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation NNN 06/10/91
Operations.
Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants....... OOO 10/30/89
Wool Fiberglass Insulation.................. PPP 10/30/89
VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery QQQ 10/30/89
Wastewater Systems.
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Reactor Processes.. RRR 11/29/95
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities............ SSS 10/30/89
Plastic Parts for Business Machines Coating. TTT 02/03/92
Calciners and Dryers in Mineral Industries.. UUU 02/01/96
Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates VVV 02/20/91
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of Florida
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary Copper Smelters..................... P 09/03/93
Primary Zinc Smelters....................... Q 09/03/93
Primary Lead Smelters....................... R 09/03/93
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants........... S 09/03/93
Coal Preparation Plants..................... Y 09/03/93
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces and AAa 09/03/93
Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Vessels (8/7/
93).
Glass Manufacturing Plants.................. CC 09/03/93
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.......... EE 09/03/93
Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plants...... KK 09/03/93
Metallic Mineral Processing Plants.......... LL 09/03/93
Phosphate Rock Plants....................... NN 09/03/93
Graphic Arts Industry: Publication QQ 09/03/93
Rotogravure Printing.
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface RR 09/03/93
Coating Operations.
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances SS 09/03/93
Metal Coil Surface Coating.................. TT 09/03/93
Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing UU 09/03/93
Manufacture.
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Synthetic Organic VV 09/03/93
Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry....... WW 09/03/93
Bulk Gasoline Terminals..................... XX 09/03/93
VOC Emissions from the Polymer Manufacturing DDD 09/03/93
Industry.
Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and FFF 09/03/93
Printing.
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum GGG 09/03/93
Refineries.
Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities....... HHH 09/03/93
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit III 09/03/93
Processes.
Petroleum Dry Cleaners...................... JJJ 09/03/93
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--VOC......... KKK 09/03/93
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--SO2......... LLL 09/03/93
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation NNN 09/03/93
Operations.
Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants....... OOO 09/03/93
Wool Fiberglass Insulation.................. PPP 09/03/93
Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates VVV 09/03/93
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of Georgia
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart Delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial Boilers.......................... Db 06/02/88
[[Page 42810]]
Petroleum Refineries........................ J 06/02/88
Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids (6/11/ K 01/24/89
73-5/19/78).
Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids (5/18/ Ka 06/02/88
78).
Storage Vessels after (07/23/84)............ Kb 06/02/88
Automobile and Light Duty Truck Coating MM 06/02/88
Operations.
Graphic Arts Industry: Publication QQ 06/17/85
Rotogravure Printing.
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface RR 06/17/85
Coating Operations.
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances SS 06/17/85
Metal Coil Surface Coating.................. TT 06/02/88
Residential Wood Heaters.................... WW 06/17/85
Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and FFF 06/17/85
Printing.
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum GGG 06/17/85
Refineries.
Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities....... HHH 06/17/85
Petroleum Dry Cleaners...................... JJJ 06/02/88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of Kentucky
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil-Fuel Fired Steam Generators (8/71-9/ D 07/06/82
78).
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (9/ Da 03/26/81
78).
Incinerators................................ E 04/12/77
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of Mississippi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil-Fuel Fired Steam Generators (8/71-9/ D 09/09/91
78).
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (9/ Da 09/09/91
78).
Industrial Boilers.......................... Db 09/09/91
Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Dc 09/09/91
Steam Gen..
Incinerators................................ E 09/09/91
Municipal Combustors........................ Ea 09/09/91
Portland Cement Plants...................... F 09/09/91
Nitric Acid Plants.......................... G 09/09/91
Sulfuric Acid Plants........................ H 09/09/91
Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities.................. I 09/09/91
Petroleum Refineries........................ J 09/09/91
Secondary Lead Smelters..................... L 09/09/91
Secondary Brass and Bronze Ingot Production M 09/09/91
Plants.
Iron and Steel Plants....................... N 09/09/91
Secondary Emissions From BOP Steel Na 09/09/91
Facilities (01/20/83).
Sewage Treatment Plants..................... O 09/09/91
Primary Copper Smelters..................... P 09/09/91
Primary Zinc Smelters....................... Q 09/09/91
Primary Lead Smelters....................... R 09/09/91
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants........... S 09/09/91
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Wet Process T 09/09/91
Phosphoric Acid Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: U 09/09/91
Superphosphoric Acid Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Diammonium V 09/09/91
Phosphate Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Triple W 09/09/91
Superphosphate Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Granular X 09/09/91
Triple Superphosphate Storage.
Coal Preparation Plants..................... Y 09/09/91
Ferroalloy Production Facilities............ Z 09/09/91
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces......... AA 09/09/91
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces and AAa 09/09/91
Argon-Oxygen Decarburization.
Kraft Pulp Mills............................ BB 09/09/91
Glass Manufacturing Plants.................. CC 09/09/91
Grain Elevators............................. DD 09/09/91
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.......... EE 09/09/91
Stationary Gas Turbines..................... GG 09/09/91
Lime Manufacturing Plants................... HH 09/09/91
Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plants...... KK 09/09/91
Metallic Mineral Processing Plants.......... LL 09/09/91
Automobile and Light Duty Truck Coating MM 09/09/91
Operations.
Phosphate Rock Plants....................... NN 09/09/91
Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture................ PP 09/09/91
[[Page 42811]]
Graphic Arts Industry: Publication QQ 06/13/84
Rotogravure Printing.
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface RR 09/09/91
Coating Operations.
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances SS 09/09/91
Metal Coil Surface Coating.................. TT 09/09/91
Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing UU 09/09/91
Manufacture.
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Synthetic Organic VV 09/09/91
Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry....... WW 09/09/91
Bulk Gasoline Terminals..................... XX 09/09/91
Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry.......... BBB 09/09/91
VOC Emissions from the Polymer Manufacturing DDD 09/09/91
Industry.
Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and FFF 09/20/85
Printing.
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum......... GGG 09/20/85
Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities....... HHH 09/09/91
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit III 09/09/91
Processes.
Petroleum Dry Cleaners...................... JJJ 12/19/86
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--VOC......... KKK 12/19/86
Onshore Natural Gas Processing--SO2......... LLL 09/09/91
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation NNN 09/09/91
Operations.
Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants....... OOO 09/09/91
Wool Fiberglass Insulation.................. PPP 09/09/91
VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery QQQ 05/31/89
Wastewater Systems.
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Reactor Processes.. RRR 02/16/94
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities............ SSS 05/31/89
Plastic Parts for Business Machines Coating. TTT 09/09/91
Calciners and Dryers in Mineral Industries.. UUU 02/16/94
Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates VVV 09/09/91
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of North Carolina
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (9/ Da 12/04/81
78).
Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Dc 02/27/95
Steam Gen.
Incinerators................................ E 11/24/76
Municipal Combustors........................ Ea 02/27/95
Portland Cement Plants...................... F 11/24/76
Nitric Acid Plants.......................... G 11/24/76
Sulfuric Acid Plants........................ H 11/24/76
Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities.................. I 11/24/76
Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids (6/11/ K 11/24/76
73-5/19/78).
Secondary Lead Smelters..................... L 11/24/76
Secondary Brass and Bronze Ingot Production M 11/24/76
Plants.
Sewage Treatment Plants..................... O 11/24/76
Primary Copper Smelters..................... P 11/24/76
Primary Zinc Smelters....................... Q 11/24/76
Primary Lead Smelters....................... R 11/24/76
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants........... S 11/24/76
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Wet Process T 11/24/76
Phosphoric Acid Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: U 11/24/76
Superphosphoric Acid Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Diammonium V 11/24/76
Phosphate Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Triple W 11/24/76
Superphosphate Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Granular X 11/24/76
Triple Superphosphate Storage.
Coal Preparation Plants..................... Y 11/24/76
Ferroalloy Production Facilities............ Z 10/22/80
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces......... AA 11/24/76
Kraft Pulp Mills............................ BB 10/22/80
Glass Manufacturing Plants.................. CC 10/19/82
Grain Elevators............................. DD 10/22/80
Stationary Gas Turbines..................... GG 12/04/81
Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plants...... KK 10/19/82
Automobile and Light Duty Truck Coating MM 10/19/82
Operations.
Phosphate Rock Plants....................... NN 10/19/82
Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture................ PP 10/19/82
VOC Emissions from the Polymer Manufacturing DDD 02/27/95
Industry.
VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery QQQ 08/29/89
Wastewater Systems.
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities............ SSS 08/29/89
Plastic Parts for Business Machines Coating. TTT 08/29/89
Calciners and Dryers in Mineral Industries.. UUU 02/27/95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42812]]
NSPS Delegation of Authority for the State of South Carolina
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart Delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial Boilers.......................... Db 01/24/89
Portland Cement Plants...................... F 01/23/90
Graphic Arts Industry: Publication QQ 04/23/83
Rotogravure Printing.
Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry.......... BBB 01/23/90
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit III 08/07/90
Processes.
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation NNN 08/07/90
Operations.
VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery QQQ 01/24/89
Wastewater Systems.
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities............ SSS 01/23/90
Plastic Parts for Business Machines Coating. TTT 02/23/90
Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates VVV 01/23/90
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for Knoxville, Tennessee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calciners and Dryers in Mineral Industries.. UUU 04/10/95
Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates VVV 03/01/90
Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS Delegation of Authority for Nashville-Davidson, Tennessee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
Category Subpart delegated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Reactor Processes.. RRR 09/11/95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above listed NSPS categories are delegated with the exception
of the following sections within those subparts which may not be
delegated.
1. Subpart A--Sec. 60.8(b) (1) thru (5), Sec. 60.11(e) (7) and (8),
Sec. 60.13 (g), (i) and (j)(2)
2. Subpart B--Sec. 60.22, Sec. 60.27, and Sec. 60.29
3. Subpart Da--Sec. 60.45a
4. Subpart Db--Sec. 60.44b(f), Sec. 60.44b(g), Sec. 60.49(a)(4)
5. Subpart Dc--Sec. 60.48c(a)(4)
6. Subpart J--Sec. 60.105(a)(13)(iii), Sec. 60.106(i)(12)
7. Subpart Ka--Sec. 60.114a
8. Subpart Kb--Sec. 60.111b(f)(4), Sec. 60.114b, Sec. 60.116b(e)(3)
(iii) and (iv), Sec. 60.116b(f)(2)(iii)
9. Subpart O--Sec. 60.153(e)
10. Subpart EE--Sec. 60.316(d)
11. Subpart GG--Sec. 60.334(b)(2), Sec. 60.335(f)(1)
12. Subpart RR--Sec. 60.446(c)
13. Subpart SS--Sec. 60.456(d)
14. Subpart TT--Sec. 60.466(d)
15. Subpart UU--Sec. 60.474(g)
16. Subpart VV--Sec. 60.482-1(c)(2) and Sec. 60.484
17. Subpart WW--Sec. 60.496(c)
18. Subpart XX--Sec. 60.502(e)(6)
19. Subpart AAA--Sec. 60.530(c), Sec. 60.533, Sec. 60.534, Sec. 60.535,
Sec. 60.536(i)(2), Sec. 60.537, Sec. 60.538(e), Sec. 60.539
20. Subpart BBB--Sec. 60.543(c)(2)(ii)(B)
22. Subpart DDD--Sec. 60.562-2(c)
23. Subpart III--Sec. 60.613
24. Subpart NNN--Sec. 60.663(e)
25. Subpart RRR--Sec. 60.703(e)
26. Subpart SSS--Sec. 60.711(a)(16), Sec. 60.713(b)(1)(i),
Sec. 60.713(b)(1)(ii), Sec. 60.713(b)(5)(i), Sec. 60.713(d),
Sec. 60.715(a), Sec. 60.716
27. Subpart TTT--Sec. 60.723(b)(1), Sec. 60.723(b)(2)(i)(C),
Sec. 60.723(b)(2)(iv), Sec. 60.724(e), Sec. 60.725(b)
28. Subpart VVV--Sec. 60.743(a)(3)(v)(A) and (B), Sec. 60.743(e),
Sec. 60.745(a), Sec. 60.746
After a thorough review of the request, the Regional Administrator
determined that such a delegation was appropriate for the source
categories with the conditions set forth in the original delegation
letters of these State or Local agencies. All sources subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR Part 60 will now be under the jurisdiction of
the above mentioned State or Local Agencies.
Since review of the pertinent laws, rules, and regulations of these
State or Local Agencies has shown them to be adequate for the
implementation and enforcement of the aforementioned categories of
NSPS, the EPA hereby notifies the public that it has delegated the
authority for the source categories listed on the above various dates.
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of sections
101, 110, 111, 112, and 301 of the Clean Air Act, as Amended (42
U.S.C. 7401, 7410, 7411, 7412, and 7601).
Dated: July 3, 1996.
John H. Hankinson, Jr.,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21077 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21073 Miscellaneous Changes in Patent Practice
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42790-42807]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21073]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No: 950620162-6014-02]
RIN 0651-AA75
Miscellaneous Changes in Patent Practice
AGENCY: Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is amending the rules
of practice in patent cases to implement a number of miscellaneous
changes proposed in the rulemaking entitled ``Changes to Implement 18-
Month Publication of Patent Applications'' (Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking), published in the Federal Register at 60 FR 42352 (August
15, 1995), and in the Patent and Trademark Office Official Gazette 1177
Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 61 (August 15, 1995), that are not directly
related to the 18-month publication of patent applications. While the
proposed rule changes in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking were
designed primarily to implement the changes in practice related to the
publication of patent applications provided for in H.R. 1733, these
miscellaneous proposed changes clarify current rules of practice,
without regard to the publication of patent applications.
DATES: Effective Date: September 23, 1996.
Applicability Date: Sections 1.52 (a) and (b), 1.58, 1.72 (b), 1.75
(g), (h) and (i), 1.77, 1.84 (c), (f), (g) and (x), 1.96, 1.154, and
1.163 of 37 CFR apply to applications filed on or after September 23,
1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen G. Kunin by telephone at (703)
305-8850, by facsimile at (703) 305-8825, by electronic mail at
[email protected], or Jeffrey V. Nase by telephone at (703) 305-9285, or
by mail marked to the attention of Stephen G. Kunin, addressed to the
Assistant Commissioner for Patents, Washington, D.C. 20231. For copies
of the forms discussed in this final rule package, contact the Customer
Service Center of the Office of Initial Patent Examination at (703)
308-1214.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule package is designed to
implement the miscellaneous changes set forth in the proposed
rulemaking entitled ``Changes to Implement 18-Month Publication of
Patent Applications'' (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) that are not
directly related to 18-month publication of patent applications and
that are considered desirable even in the absence of an 18-month
publication system.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking indicated that, in addition to
implementing the 18-month publication of patent applications, the
Office also proposed to: (1) Clarify which applications claiming the
benefit of prior applications, or which prior applications for which a
benefit is claimed in a later application, will be preserved in
confidence; (2) amend the rules pertaining to the format and standards
for application papers and drawings to improve the standardization of
patent applications; (3) provide for those instances in which
inventions of a pending application or patent under reexamination and
inventions of a patent held by a single party are not identical, but
not patentably distinct; (4) clarify the practice for the delivery or
mailing of patents; (5) expedite the entry of international
applications into the national stage; and (6) amend a number of rules
for consistency and clarity. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking stated
that these proposed rule changes may be adopted as final rules even in
the absence of an 18-month publication system, and advised interested
persons to comment on any proposed rule change, regardless of whether
H.R. 1733 is enacted.
To avoid delays in the implementation of rule changes considered
desirable even in the absence of an 18-month publication system, this
final rule package provides for changes to 37 CFR 1.12(c), 1.14, 1.52
(a) and (b), 1.54, 1.58, 1.62 (e) and (f), 1.72(b), 1.75(g), 1.77, 1.78
(a) and (c), 1.84 (c), (f), (g) and (x), 1.96, 1.97, 1.107, 1.110,
1.131, 1.132, 1.154, 1.163, 1.291, 1.292, 1.315, 1.321 and 1.497, and
adds new Secs. 1.5(f), 1.75 (h) and (i), and 1.130, all of which are
based upon the changes proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
Implementation of 18-Month Publication Held in Abeyance Pending
Congressional Action on H.R. 1733
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking also proposed changes to 37 CFR
1.4, 1.5(a), 1.9, 1.11, 1.12 (a) and (b), 1.13, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19,
1.20, 1.24, 1.51, 1.52(d), 1.53, 1.55, 1.60, 1.78(a), 1.84(j), 1.85,
1.98, 1.108, 1.136, 1.138, 1.492, 1.494, 1.495, 1.701, 1.808, 3.31,
5.1, new Secs. 1.5(g), 1.306 through 1.308 and 5.9,
[[Page 42791]]
and further changes to Secs. 1.14, 1.54, 1.62, 1.107, 1.131, 1.132,
1.291 and 1.292 to implement the 18-month publication of patent
applications as contained in H.R. 1733 and provide procedures for the
treatment of national security classified applications. The adoption of
changes to these rules is held in abeyance pending Congressional action
on H.R. 1733.
The proposed rule changes in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
provide new procedures for the treatment of national security
classified applications are also being held in abeyance. These proposed
rule changes are separable from the implementation of 18-month
publication; however, they are sufficiently related to the
implementation of 18-month publication that they are also being held in
abeyance pending Congressional action on H.R. 1733.
In the event that H.R. 1733 is enacted, a final rule package to
implement this legislation will be published. Final rules to implement
18-month publication of patent applications based upon the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and the comments received in response to the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking may be adopted without either an additional
public hearing or an additional proposal being published for comment.
Implementation of the Miscellaneous Changes Proposed in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking
The following paragraphs of this section include: (1) A discussion
of the rules being added or amended in this final rule package, (2) the
reasons for those additions and amendments, and (3) an analysis of the
comments received in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
Changes to Proposed Rules
These final rules contain a number of changes to the text of the
rules as proposed for comment. The significant changes are discussed
below. Familiarity with the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is assumed.
Sections 1.14 (a) and (b) have been re-written for clarity. Section
1.14(a)(1) provides that patent applications are generally preserved in
confidence. Section 1.14(a)(2) sets forth the circumstances under which
status information concerning an application may be supplied, and
Sec. 1.14(a)(3) sets forth the circumstances under which access to, or
copies of, an application may be provided. Section 1.14(b) provides
that abandoned applications may be destroyed after 20 years from their
filing date. The reference to paragraph (b) in Sec. 1.14(e) has been
deleted for consistency with the changes to paragraphs (a) and (b) of
Sec. 1.14.
Section 1.52(a) is being changed to provide that all papers which
are to become a part of the permanent records of the Patent and
Trademark Office must be legibly ``written either by a typewriter or
mechanical printer in permanent dark ink or its equivalent,'' rather
than ``typed in permanent dark ink.'' This change will permit the
filing of papers printed by any computer operated printer, such as a
laser printer which uses toner rather than ink, and will avoid a
conflict between Sec. 1.52(a) and Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Rule
11.9. The phrase ``when required by the Office'' was also added to
Sec. 1.52(a).
Section 1.52(b) is being changed to provide that: (1) The
application papers must be plainly written with each page printed on
only one side of a sheet of paper, with the claim or claims commencing
on a separate sheet and the abstract commencing on a separate sheet;
(2) the lines of the specification, and any amendments to the
specification, must be 1\1/2\ or double spaced; and (3) the pages of
the specification including claims and abstract must be numbered
consecutively, starting with 1, the numbers being centrally located
above or preferably, below, the text. This change will clarify: (1) The
separate sheet requirement for both the claims and abstract, (2) that
the lines of the papers not comprising the specification and amendments
thereto need not be 1\1/2\ or double spaced, and (3) that the
specification, and not the transmittal sheets or other forms, must be
numbered.
Section 1.58 is being changed to provide that chemical and
mathematical formulae and tables must be presented in compliance with
Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), except that chemical and mathematical formulae
or tables may be placed in a landscape orientation if they cannot be
presented satisfactorily in a portrait orientation. This replaces the
requirement that ``[t]o facilitate camera copying when printing, the
width of formulas and tables as presented should be limited normally to
12.7 cm. (5 inches) so that it may appear as a single column in the
printed patent.'' However, chemical and mathematical formulae and
tables must still otherwise comply with Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b). This
change will avoid a conflict between Sec. 1.58 and PCT Rule 11.10(d).
Section 1.58 is also being changed to require ``0.21 cm.'' rather than
``2.1 mm.'' to ensure consistency.
Section 1.72 is being changed to provide that the abstract must
commence on a separate sheet, preferably following the claims. This
change will avoid renumbering pages of a specification submitted in the
arrangement set forth in Sec. 1.77 when filing the application as an
international application.
Section 1.75(h) is being changed to provide that the claim or
claims must commence on a separate sheet. This change will clarify that
Sec. 1.75 requires that the claim or claims commence or begin on a
separate sheet, rather than requiring that all of the claims must be on
a single separate sheet or that each claim must be on a separate sheet.
Section 1.77 is being changed to position the abstract as element
``(12)'' following the claims, rather than element ``(3)'' prior to the
first page of the specification to conform to Sec. 1.72.
Section 1.78(a)(2) is being changed to replace the reference to
Sec. 1.14(b) with a reference to Sec. 1.14(a).
Section 1.78(c) is being changed to replace the phrase ``[w]here an
application or a patent under reexamination and an application or a
patent'' with the phrase ``[w]here an application or a patent under
reexamination and at least one other application,'' since conflicting
claims between an application or a patent under reexamination and a
patent will be provided for in new Sec. 1.130. Section 1.78(c) is also
being changed to delete the sentence ``[i]n addition to making said
statement, the assignee may also explain why an interference should or
should not be declared,'' since the Office will not, unless good cause
is shown, declare or continue an interference when the application(s)
and patent are owned by a single party.
Section 1.78(d) is removed. The provisions of Sec. 1.78(d), as
proposed, are in new Sec. 1.130(b), since Sec. 1.130 provides for
conflicting claims between an application or a patent under
reexamination and a patent.
Section 1.84(x) is being changed from ``[n]o holes should be
provided in the drawings sheets'' to ``[n]o holes should be made by the
applicant in the drawing sheets'' to clarify that the application
papers, including drawings, should be submitted by the applicant
without holes provided therein, but that the Office will drill holes
through the application papers during the pre-examination processing of
the application.
Section 1.96(b) is being changed to provide that a listing
submitted as part of the specification ``must be direct printouts
(i.e., not copies) from the computer's printer'' for clarity.
Section 1.96(c) is being changed to substitute a reference to 36
CFR Part
[[Page 42792]]
1230 (Micrographics) for the enumerated American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) and National Micrographics Association (NMA)
standards. As 36 CFR Part 1230 sets forth the micrographic requirements
for government records, it is appropriate to reference this provision,
rather than promulgate separate standards for micrographics employed in
patent applications.
Section 1.97 is being changed to delete any reference to a
reexamination proceeding or a patent owner. The submission of an
information disclosure statement during a reexamination proceeding is
governed by Sec. 1.555(a).
Section 1.97(a) is being changed from ``[i]n order for an applicant
for patent or for reissue of a patent to have information considered by
the Office during the pendency of a patent application, an information
disclosure statement in compliance with Sec. 1.98 should be filed in
accordance with this section'' to ``[i]n order for an applicant for a
patent or for a reissue of a patent to have an information disclosure
statement in compliance with Sec. 1.98 considered by the Office during
the pendency of the application, it must satisfy paragraph (b), (c), or
(d) of this section'' for clarity. Sections 1.97 (c) and (d) are also
being changed to clarify the conditions in Sec. 1.97(c) under which a
certification as specified in Sec. 1.97(e) or the fee set forth in
Sec. 1.17(p) is required, and the conditions in Sec. 1.97(d) under
which a certification as specified in Sec. 1.97(e), a petition, and the
petition fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(i) are required.
Section 1.110 is amended to change the reference to Sec. 1.78(d) to
a reference to Sec. 1.130 for consistency.
The proposed addition of a new Sec. 1.131(a)(3) is being withdrawn
in this final rule package. This proposed change, as well as the
provisions of former Sec. 1.78(d), has been re-written as a new
Sec. 1.130. New Sec. 1.130(a) will provide a procedure for the
disqualification of a commonly owned patent claiming a patentably
indistinct but not identical invention. New Sec. 1.130(b) will include
the provisions of former Sec. 1.78(d).
Section 1.131(a) is being changed to replace the phrase ``U.S.
patent to another'' with ``U.S. patent to another or others.''
Section 1.154(a)(7) is being changed to add ``[f]eature'' prior to
``[d]escription,'' and Sec. 1.154(a)(8) is being changed to add ``a
single'' prior to ``claim.''
Section 1.163 is being changed to position the abstract as element
``(11)'' following the claims, rather than element ``(3)'' prior to the
first page of the specification. This change will parallel the change
to Sec. 1.77. In addition, Sec. 1.163(c)(10) is being changed to add
``a single'' prior to ``claim.''
Section 1.497(b)(2) is being changed to provide that ``[i]f the
person making the oath or declaration is not the inventor, the oath or
declaration shall state the relationship of the person to the inventor,
the facts required by Secs. 1.42, 1.43 or 1.47, and, upon information
and belief, the facts which the inventor would have been required to
state'' to better set forth the requirements of an oath or declaration
by a person who is not the inventor. Section 1.497(c) is being changed
to delete the initial phrase ``[t]he oath or declaration must comply
with the requirements of Sec. 1.63; however,'' since it is unnecessary.
Discussion of Specific Rules
Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1 is amended as
follows:
Section 1.5(f) is added to provide that a paper concerning a
provisional application must identify the application as such and by
the application number.
Section 1.12 is amended to revise paragraph (c) to read ``preserved
in confidence under Sec. 1.14'' for consistency with Sec. 1.14.
Section 1.14 is amended to revise the title and paragraphs (a) and
(e) to read ``preserved in confidence'' for consistency with the
language in 35 U.S.C. 122.
Section 1.14(a) is amended to add a paragraph (a)(1) to provide
that patent applications are generally preserved in confidence pursuant
to 35 U.S.C. 122, and that no information will be given concerning the
filing, pendency, or subject matter of any application for patent, and
no access will be given to, or copies furnished of, any application or
papers relating thereto, except as set forth in Sec. 1.14.
Section 1.14(a) is also amended to add a paragraph (a)(2) to
provide that status may be supplied: (1) Concerning an application or
any application claiming the benefit of the filing date of the
application, if the application has been identified by application
number or serial number and filing date in a published patent document;
(2) concerning the national stage application or any application
claiming the benefit of the filing date of a published international
application, if the United States of America has been indicated as a
Designated State in the international application; or (3) when it has
been determined by the Commissioner to be necessary for the proper
conduct of business before the Office. Status information includes
information such as whether the application is pending, abandoned, or
patented, as well as the application number and filing date. The
inclusion of applications claiming the benefit of the filing date of
applications so identified is to avoid misleading the public in
instances in which the application identified as set forth in
Sec. 1.14(a)(2) is abandoned, but an application claiming the benefit
of the filing date of the identified application (e.g., a continuing
application) is pending.
Section 1.14(a) is also amended to add a new paragraph (a)(3) to
provide that access to, or copies of, an application may be provided:
(1) When the application is open to the public as provided in
Sec. 1.11(b); (2) when written authority in that application from the
applicant, the assignee of the application, or the attorney or agent of
record has been granted; (3) when it has been determined by the
Commissioner to be necessary for the proper conduct of business before
the Office, or (4) to any person on written request, without notice to
the applicant, when the application is abandoned and available and is:
(a) Referred to in a U.S. patent, (b) referred to in an application
open to public inspection, (c) an application which claims the benefit
of the filing date of an application open to public inspection, or (d)
an application in which the applicant has filed an authorization to lay
open the complete application to the public.
Section 1.14(b) is amended to provide that complete applications
(Sec. 1.51(a)) which are abandoned may be destroyed and hence may not
be available for access or copies as permitted by paragraph (a)(3)(iv)
of this section after 20 years from their filing date, except those to
which particular attention has been called and which have been marked
for preservation. The sentence in Sec. 1.14(b) concerning the non-
return of abandoned applications is deleted as duplicative of the
provision in Sec. 1.59, which provides that papers in an application
which has received a filing date will not be returned, and is unrelated
to the preservation of applications in confidence under Sec. 1.14.
Section 1.52(a) is amended to provide that all papers which are to
become a part of the permanent records of the Office must be legibly
written by a typewriter or mechanical printer in permanent dark ink or
its equivalent in portrait orientation on flexible, strong, smooth,
non-shiny, durable and white paper. Section 1.52(a) is further amended
to provide that the application papers must be presented in a form
[[Page 42793]]
having sufficient clarity and contrast between the paper and the
writing thereon to permit electronic reproduction by use of digital
imaging and optical character recognition, as well as the direct
photocopy reproduction currently provided for. Section 1.52(a) is
further amended to provide that substitute typewritten or mechanically
printed papers ``will'' be required if the original application papers
are not of the required quality. As any substitute typewritten or
mechanically printed papers containing the subject matter of the
originally filed application papers would constitute a substitute
specification, the provisions of Sec. 1.125 governing the entry of a
substitute specification would be applicable, and Sec. 1.52(a) is
amended to include a specific reference to Sec. 1.125.
Section 1.52(b) is amended to provide that the claim or claims must
commence on a separate sheet and the abstract must commence on a
separate sheet. Section 1.72(b) provides that the abstract must
commence on a separate sheet, and Sec. 1.75(h) provides that the claim
or claims must commence on a separate sheet. Section 1.52(b) is amended
to provide that the sheets of paper must all be the same size and
either 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) or 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/
2\ by 11 inches), with a top margin of at least 2.0 cm. (\3/4\ inch), a
left side margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a right side margin of
at least 2.0 cm. (\3/4\ inch), and a bottom margin of at least 2.0 cm.
(\3/4\ inch), and that no holes should be made in the submitted paper
sheets. Section 1.52(b) is further amended to provide that the lines of
the specification, and any amendments to the specification, ``must'' be
1\1/2\ or double spaced, and that the pages of the specification
``must'' be numbered consecutively, starting with page one, with the
numbers being centrally located above or below the text. Finally,
Sec. 1.52(b) is amended to specifically reference drawings to clarify
that drawings are part of the application papers, but that the
standards for drawings are set forth in Sec. 1.84.
The proposed changes to Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), 1.58, 1.72(b), 1.75
(g), (h), and (i), 1.77, 1.84 (c), (f), (g), and (x), 1.96, 1.154, and
1.163 pertaining to the format and standards for application papers and
drawings in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are considered desirable,
regardless of whether H.R. 1733 is enacted.
While the vast majority of applications currently comply with
Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), 1.58, 1.72(b), 1.75(h), 1.84 (c), (f), (g), and
(x), and 1.96 as adopted in this final rule, those applications which
do not comply with Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), 1.58, 1.84 (c), (f), (g),
and (x), and 1.96 as adopted in this final rule (e.g., applications
containing hand-written papers) create an inordinate administrative
burden on the Office during the initial processing, examination, and
publishing of the application as a patent. In addition, the Office
plans to replace or augment the current microfilming process with
electronic data capture of at least the technical content (i.e., the
specification, abstract, claims and drawings) of the application-as-
filed for internal Office use, regardless of whether H.R. 1733 is
enacted. Therefore, the Office will no longer permit these relatively
few applicants to submit application papers and drawings that do not
meet the standards set forth in Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), 1.58, 1.84 (c),
(f), (g), and (x), and 1.96 as adopted in this final rule.
The application format set forth in Secs. 1.75 (g) and (i), 1.77,
1.154, and 1.163 as adopted in this final rule merely expresses the
Office's preferences for format of utility, design and plant
applications. They do not set forth mandatory requirements for
application papers and drawings.
Section 1.54(b) is amended to change ``application serial number''
to ``application number'' for consistency with Sec. 1.5(a).
Section 1.58(b) is removed and is reserved as unnecessary in view
of the amendments to Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b).
Section 1.58(c) is amended to provide that chemical and
mathematical formulae and tables must be presented in compliance with
Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), except that chemical and mathematical formulae
or tables may be placed in a landscape orientation if they cannot be
presented satisfactorily in a portrait orientation. Section 1.58(c) is
further amended to delete the following sentences to conform to the
writing and paper size and orientation limitations in Secs. 1.52 (a)
and (b): (1) ``[t]o facilitate camera copying when printing, the width
of formulas and tables as presented should be limited normally to 12.7
cm. (5 inches) so that it may appear as a single column in the printed
patent''; (2) ``[i]f it is not possible to limit the width of a formula
or table to 5 inches (12.7 cm.), it is permissible to present the
formula or table with a maximum width of 10\3/4\ inches (27.3 cm.) and
to place it sideways on the sheet''; and (3) ``[h]and lettering must be
neat, clean, and have a minimum character height of 0.08 inch (2.1
mm.).'' Section 1.58(c) is further amended to insert ``chosen'' between
``must be'' and ``from a block (nonscript) type font.'' Section 1.58(c)
is further amended to provide metric dimensions with English
equivalents in parentheticals, rather than vice versa.
Section 1.62(e) is amended to change ``application serial number''
to ``application number'' for consistency with Sec. 1.5(a).
Section 1.62(f) is amended to change ``secrecy'' to ``confidence''
as is found in 35 U.S.C. 122 and Sec. 1.14, and change ``37 CFR 1.14''
to ``Sec. 1.14'' for consistency.
Section 1.72(b) is amended to provide that the abstract must
``commence,'' rather than ``be set forth,'' on a separate sheet. This
change will conform the ``separate sheet'' requirement for the abstract
with that for the claims.
Section 1.75 is amended to include an amendment to paragraph (g),
and would add two new paragraphs. Section 1.75(g) is amended to add the
phrase ``[t]he least restrictive claim should be presented as claim
number 1'' to the beginning of the paragraph. Section 1.75(h) is added
to provide that the claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet.
Section 1.75(i) is added to provide that where a claim sets forth a
plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim
should be separated by a line indentation.
Section 1.77 is amended to provide that the elements of the
application, if applicable, should appear in the following order: (1)
Utility Application Transmittal Form; (2) Fee Transmittal Form; (3)
title of the invention; or an introductory portion stating the name,
citizenship, and residence of the applicant, and the title of the
invention; (4) cross-reference to related applications; (5) statement
regarding federally sponsored research or development; (6) reference to
a ``Microfiche appendix; (7) background of the invention; (8) brief
summary of the invention; (9) brief description of the several views of
the drawing; (10) detailed description of the invention; (11) claim or
claims; (12) abstract of the disclosure; (13) drawings; (14) executed
oath or declaration; and (15) sequence listing.
The phrase ``if applicable'' is inserted in the heading, rather
than associated with any particular listed element, to clarify that
Sec. 1.77 does not per se require that an application include all of
the listed elements, but merely provides that any listed element
included in the application should appear in the order set forth in
Sec. 1.77. Section 1.77 is further amended to provide that the (1)
title of the invention; (2) cross-reference to related applications;
(3) statement regarding federally sponsored research or development;
(4) background of the invention; (5) brief summary of the
[[Page 42794]]
invention; (6) brief description of the several views of the drawing;
(7) detailed description of the invention; (8) claim or claims; (9)
abstract of the disclosure; and (10) sequence listing, should appear in
upper case, without underlining or bold type, as section headings, and
if no text follows the section heading, the phrase ``Not Applicable''
should follow the section heading. Finally, Sec. 1.77 is amended to
change the reference to Sec. 1.96(b) in Sec. 1.77(a)(6) to Sec. 1.96(c)
for consistency with Sec. 1.96.
Section 1.78(a)(2) is amended to replace the reference to
Sec. 1.14(b) with a reference to Sec. 1.14(a) for consistency with
Secs. 1.14 (a) and (b) as amended.
Section 1.78(c) is amended to change ``two or more applications, or
an application and a patent'' to ``an application or a patent under
reexamination and at least one other application'' such that the
provisions of Sec. 1.78(c) will also be applicable to a patent under
reexamination. Section 1.78(c) is also amended to correct ``inventors
and owned by the same party contain conflicting claims'' to read
``inventors are owned by the same party and contain conflicting
claims.'' Section 1.78(c) is also amended to delete the sentence ``[i]n
addition to making said statement, the assignee may also explain why an
interference should or should not be declared.''
Section 1.78(d) is removed. The provisions of former Sec. 1.78(d),
as proposed, are in new Sec. 1.130(b).
Section 1.84(c) is amended to provide that a reference to the
application number, or, if an application number has not been assigned,
the inventor's name, may be included in the left-hand corner of the
drawing sheet, provided that reference appears within 1.5 cm. (\9/16\
inch) from the top of the sheet.
Section 1.84(f) is amended to provide that the size of all drawing
sheets in an application must be either 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size
A4) or 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by 11 inches) to conform to the
requirement in Sec. 1.52(b) concerning papers in an application.
Section 1.84(g) is amended to delete the margin requirements for
the sheet sizes that are no longer acceptable in view of the changes to
Sec. 1.84(f). Section 1.84(g) is further amended to provide that the
sheets should have scan targets (cross-hairs) on two catercorner margin
corners. Finally, Sec. 1.84(g) is amended to increase the bottom and
side margins such that each sheet must include a top margin of at least
2.5 cm. (1 inch), a left side margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a
right side margin of at least 1.5 cm. (\9/16\ inch), and a bottom
margin of at least 1.0 cm. (\3/8\ inch), thereby leaving a sight no
greater than 17.0 cm. by 26.2 cm. on 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4)
drawing sheets, and a sight no greater than 17.6 cm. by 24.4 cm. (6\15/
16\ by 9\5/8\ inches) on 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by 11 inch)
drawing sheets.
Section 1.84(x) is amended to delete the provisions indicating the
proper location for holes in a drawing sheet, and provide that no holes
should be provided in the drawing sheets.
Section 1.96 is amended to designate the text preceding current
paragraph (a) as paragraph (a) ``General,'' and would redesignate
current paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (b) and (c), respectively.
New Sec. 1.96(a) is further amended to insert a period between
``specification'' and ``[a] computer,'' to change ``these rules'' to
``this section,'' and to change ``may be submitted in patent
applications in the following forms'' to ``may be submitted in patent
applications as set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.''
New Sec. 1.96(b) is further amended to: (1) Change the sentences
``[t]he listing may be submitted as part of the specification in the
form of computer printout sheets (commonly 14 by 11 inches in size) for
use as `camera ready copy' when a patent is subsequently printed'' and
``[s]uch computer printout sheets must be original copies from the
computer with dark solid black letters not less than 0.21 cm. high, on
white, unshaded and unlined paper, the printing on each sheet must be
limited to an area 9 inches high by 13 inches wide, and the sheets
should be submitted in a protective cover'' to ``[a]ny listing
submitted as part of the specification must be direct printouts (i.e.,
not copies) from the computer's printer with dark solid black letters
not less than 0.21 cm. high, on white, unshaded and unlined paper, and
the sheets should be submitted in a protective cover''; (2) delete the
sentence ``[w]hen printed in patents, such computer printout sheets
will appear at the end of the description but before the claims and
will usually be reduced about 1/2 in size with two printout sheets
being printed as one patent specification page''; and (3) delete the
phrase ``if the copy is to be used for camera ready copy.'' New
Sec. 1.96(b)(1) provides that the requirements of Sec. 1.84 apply to
computer program listings submitted as sheets of drawings, and new
Sec. 1.96(b)(2) provides that the requirements of Sec. 1.52 apply to
computer program listings submitted as part of the specification.
New Sec. 1.96(c) is amended to: (1) Change the references to
Sec. 1.77(c)(2) in Sec. 1.96(c) to Sec. 1.77(a)(6) for consistency with
Sec. 1.77; (2) change ``may'' and ``should'' to ``must''; (3) delete
the sentence ``[a]ll computer program listings submitted on paper will
be printed as part of the patent''; (4) relocate the phrase ``except as
modified or clarified below'' in subsection (c)(2); (5) change the
phrase ``computer-generated information submitted as an appendix to an
application for patent shall be in the form of microfiche in accordance
with the standards'' to ``computer-generated information submitted as a
`microfiche appendix' to an application shall be in accordance with the
standards'' for clarity; (6) change the references to the specific
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or National Micrographics
Association (NMA) standards with 36 CFR Part 1230; (7) change ``serial
number'' to ``application number''; and (8) provide metric dimensions
with English equivalents in parentheticals, rather than vice versa.
Section 1.97(a) is amended to include the phrase ``for an applicant
for patent or for reissue of a patent.'' Paragraphs (a)-(d) are amended
to include the phrase ``by the applicant'' to clarify that Sec. 1.97 is
not available for any third party seeking to have information
considered in a pending application. Any third party seeking to have
information considered in a pending application must proceed under
Secs. 1.291 or 1.292. As discussed supra, Secs. 1.97 (a), (c) and (d)
are also being amended for clarity. Section 1.97(c) is further amended
to correct the phrase ``certification as specified in paragraph (3) of
this section'' to read ``certification as specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.''
Section 1.107 is amended to delete the phrase ``and the classes of
inventions.''
Section 1.110 is amended to change the reference to Sec. 1.78(d) to
a reference to Sec. 1.130 for consistency with the removal of
Sec. 1.78(d), and the location of the provisions of former Sec. 1.78(d)
in Sec. 1.130(b).
A new paragraph (a)(3) in Sec. 1.131 was proposed in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking to permit a showing of prior invention in a pending
application or patent under reexamination to avoid a rejection under 35
U.S.C. 103 based upon a patent which qualifies as prior art only under
35 U.S.C. 102 (a) or (e), where the application or patent under
reexamination and the patent upon which the rejection is based are both
owned by a single party, so long as the invention claimed in the
pending application or patent under reexamination and in the other
patent are not identical as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 102. Upon further
study, it is considered
[[Page 42795]]
appropriate to disqualify such patents, and provide for the obviation
of judicially created double patenting rejections in an application or
a patent under reexamination by the filing of a terminal disclaimer in
accordance with Sec. 1.321(c), in a separate Sec. 1.130.
New Sec. 1.130(a) provides that when any claim of an application or
a patent under reexamination is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 on a U.S.
patent to another or others which is not prior art under 35 U.S.C.
102(b), and the inventions defined by the claims in the application or
patent under reexamination and by the claims in the patent are
patentably indistinct but not identical as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 101,
and the inventions are owned by the same party, the applicant or owner
of the patent under reexamination may disqualify the patent as prior
art. Section 1.130(a) specifically provides that the patent can be
disqualified as prior art by submission of: (1) A terminal disclaimer
in accordance with Sec. 1.321(c), and (2) an oath or declaration
stating that the application or patent under reexamination and the
patent are currently owned by the same party, and that the inventor
named in the application or patent under reexamination is the prior
inventor under 35 U.S.C. 104.
Where inventions defined by the rejected claims in the application
or a patent under reexamination and by the claims in the patent upon
which the rejection is based are patentably distinct, the rejection may
be overcome pursuant to Sec. 1.131. Since Sec. 1.130 applies only when
inventions defined by the claims in an application or a patent under
reexamination and by the claims in the patent are patentably
indistinct, Sec. 1.130 expressly provides that an oath or declaration
submitted pursuant to Sec. 1.130 to disqualify a patent must be
accompanied by a terminal disclaimer in accordance with Sec. 1.321(c).
As the conflict between two pending applications can be avoided by
filing a continuation-in-part application merging the conflicting
inventions into a single application, Sec. 1.130 is limited to
rejections based upon a patent.
New Sec. 1.130(b) includes the provisions of former Sec. 1.78(d),
as proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Former Sec. 1.78(d)
was proposed to be amended to change ``obviousness-type double
patenting rejection'' to ``non-statutory double patenting rejections''
as current examining procedures authorize non-obviousness-type double
patenting rejections, as well as obviousness-type double patenting
rejections (See section 804(II) of the Manual of Patent Examining
Procedure (MPEP)), and either may be obviated by filing a terminal
disclaimer in accordance with Sec. 1.321(c). The phrase ``non-statutory
double patenting rejection,'' however, is being replaced with
``judicially created double patenting rejection'' to better set forth
the legal basis for the rejection.
Section 1.78(d) was also proposed to be amended to change each
instance of ``application'' to ``application or a patent under
reexamination'' for consistency with Sec. 1.321 and to clarify that
double patenting is a proper consideration in reexamination (Ex parte
Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60-61 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985)), and that a
judicially created double patenting rejection in a patent under
reexamination may be obviated by filing a terminal disclaimer in
accordance with Sec. 1.321(c).
New Sec. 1.130(b) specifically provides that where an application
or a patent under reexamination claims an invention which is not
patentably distinct from an invention claimed in a commonly owned
patent with the same or a different inventive entity, a double
patenting rejection will be made in the application or a patent under
reexamination, and that a judicially created double patenting rejection
may be obviated by filing a terminal disclaimer in accordance with
Sec. 1.321(c).
Section 1.131 is amended to change ``U.S. patent to another'' to
``U.S. patent to another or others'' to parallel the language in 35
U.S.C. 102(a), as well as 35 U.S.C. 102(e).
Section 1.132 is amended to change ``domestic patent'' to ``U.S.
patent,'' and ``does not claim the invention'' to ``does not claim the
same patentable invention, as defined in Sec. 1.601(n)'' for
consistency with Sec. 1.131.
Section 1.154 is amended to provide that the elements of a design
application, if applicable, should appear in the following order: (1)
Design Application Transmittal Form; (2) Fee Transmittal Form; (3)
preamble, stating name of the applicant and title of the design; (4)
cross-reference to related applications; (5) statement regarding
federally sponsored research or development; (6) description of the
figure or figures of the drawing; (7) feature description; (8) a single
claim; (9) drawings or photographs; and (10) executed oath or
declaration. The phrase ``[t]he following order of arrangement should
be observed in framing design specifications'' is changed to ``[t]he
elements of the design application, if applicable, should appear in the
following order'' to clarify that Sec. 1.154 does not per se require
that an application include all of the listed elements, but merely
provides that any listed element included in the application should
appear in the order set forth in Sec. 1.154. This amendment to
Sec. 1.154, however, does not modify the current requirement that an
application for a design patent have but a single claim.
A new Sec. 1.163(c) is added to provide that the elements of a
plant application, if applicable, should appear in the following order:
(1) Plant Application Transmittal Form; (2) Fee Transmittal Form; (3)
title of the invention; (4) cross-reference to related applications;
(5) statement regarding federally sponsored research or development;
(6) background of the invention; (7) brief summary of the invention;
(8) brief description of the drawing; (9) detailed botanical
description; (10) a single claim; (11) abstract of the disclosure; (12)
drawings (in duplicate); (13) executed oath or declaration; and (14)
Plant Color Coding Sheet. The phrase ``if applicable'' is included in
the heading, rather than associated with any particular listed element,
to clarify that Sec. 1.163 does not per se require that an application
include all of the listed elements, but merely provides that any listed
element included in the application should appear in the order set
forth in Sec. 1.163. This amendment to Sec. 1.163, however, does not
modify the current requirement that an application for a plant patent
have but a single claim.
A new Sec. 1.163(d) is added to define a plant color coding sheet.
A plant color coding sheet is a sheet that specifies a color coding
system as designated in a color dictionary, and lists every plant
structure to which color is a distinguishing feature and the
corresponding color code which best represents that plant structure.
The plant color coding sheet will provide a means for applicants to
uniformly convey detailed color characteristics of the plant. Providing
this information in a systematic manner will facilitate the examination
of the application.
Section 1.291 is amended to provide that a protest must be filed
prior to the mailing of a Notice of Allowance to be considered timely.
As a protest cannot be considered subsequent to issuance of the
application as a patent, Sec. 1.291(b) is amended to provide that the
protest will be considered if the application is still pending when the
protest and application file are provided to the examiner (i.e., that
the application was pending at the time the protest was filed would be
immaterial to its ultimate consideration). Finally, the sentences
[[Page 42796]]
``[p]rotests raising fraud or other inequitable conduct issues will be
entered in the application file, generally without comment on those
issues'' and ``[p]rotests which do not adequately identify a pending
patent application will be disposed of and will not be considered by
the Office'' in Sec. 1.291 are changed to ``[p]rotests raising fraud or
other inequitable conduct issues will be entered in the application
file, generally without comment on those issues'' and ``[p]rotests
which do not adequately identify a pending patent application will be
returned to the protestor and will not be further considered by the
Office,'' respectively, and are located in paragraph (b). The Office
will acknowledge protests prior to their entry into the application
file or return to the protestor, as appropriate.
Section 1.292 is amended to delete the phrase ``is filed by one
having information of the pendency of an application'' as unnecessary,
and would move the requirement for the fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(j)
from paragraph (a) to paragraph (b) where the conditions for entry of a
petition for the institution of public use proceedings are set forth.
Section 1.292 is amended to further require that any petition be served
on the applicant in accordance with Sec. 1.248, or be filed with the
Office in duplicate in the event that service on the applicant is not
possible. Finally, Sec. 1.292 is amended to provide that a petition to
institute public use proceedings to be considered timely must be filed
prior to the mailing of a Notice of Allowance.
Section 1.315 is amended to change ``the attorney or agent of
record, if there be one; or if the attorney or agent so request, to the
patentee or assignee of an interest therein; or, if there be no
attorney or agent, to the patentee or to the assignee of the entire
interest, if he so request'' to ``the correspondence address of record.
See Sec. 1.33(a).'' This change is to simplify Sec. 1.315, and because
patents are currently mailed to the patentee at the correspondence
address of record.
Section 1.321(c) is amended to change ``double patenting
rejection'' to ``judicially created double patenting rejection'' for
consistency with Sec. 1.78(c) and to clarify that the filing of a
terminal disclaimer is ineffective to overcome a statutory double
patenting rejection.
Section 1.497(a) is amended to provide that an applicant in an
international application must file an oath or declaration that: (1) Is
executed in accordance with either Secs. 1.66 or 1.68, (2) identifies
the specification to which it is directed, (3) identifies each inventor
and the country of citizenship of each inventor, and (4) states that
the person making the oath or declaration believes the named inventor
or inventors to be the original and first inventor or inventors of the
subject matter which is claimed and for which a patent is sought,
rather than an oath or declaration in accordance with Sec. 1.63, to
enter the national stage pursuant to Secs. 1.494 or 1.495. Currently,
the failure to file an oath or declaration in strict compliance with
Sec. 1.63 results in non-compliance with Sec. 1.497, and thus 35 U.S.C.
371, which in turn delays the entry of the international application
into the national stage. To expedite the entry of international
applications into the national stage, Sec. 1.497(a) is amended to
require only an oath or declaration that is properly executed,
identifies the specification to which it is directed, and, as required
by 35 U.S.C. 115, identifies each inventor and the country of
citizenship of each inventor and states that the person making the oath
or declaration believes the named inventor or inventors to be the
original and first inventor or inventors of the subject matter which is
claimed and for which a patent is sought.
Section 1.497(b) is subdivided into paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2).
Section 1.497(b)(1) is amended to provide that the oath or declaration
must be made by all of the actual inventors except as provided for in
Secs. 1.42, 1.43 or 1.47. Section 1.497(b)(2) is amended to change
``[i]f the international application was made as provided in
Secs. 1.422, 1.423 or 1.425, the applicant shall state his or her
relationship to the inventor and, upon information and belief, the
facts which the inventor is required by Sec. 1.63 to state'' to ``[i]f
the person making the oath or declaration is not the inventor, the oath
or declaration shall state the relationship of the person to the
inventor, the facts required by Secs. 1.42, 1.43 or 1.47, and, upon
information and belief, the facts which the inventor would have been
required to state.''
Section 1.497(c) is added to provide that the oath or declaration
must comply with the requirements of Sec. 1.63. Section 1.497(c)
further provides that in instances where the oath or declaration does
not comply with Sec. 1.63, but meets the requirements of Sec. 1.497 (a)
and (b), the oath or declaration will be accepted as complying with 35
U.S.C. 371(c)(4) and Secs. 1.494(c) or 1.495(c), thus permitting the
application to enter the national stage and the assignment of dates
under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) and 371(c). A supplemental oath or declaration
in compliance with Sec. 1.63, however, will be required in accordance
with Sec. 1.67.
Response to Comments
Two hundred and forty-two written comments were received in
response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. A public hearing was
held on September 19, 1995. Eight persons testified at the public
hearing.
The written comments, and the testimony at the public hearing, have
been analyzed. In the event that H.R. 1733 is enacted, the comments
directed to the proposed changes to the rules of practice to implement
the 18-month publication of patent applications will be considered and
addressed in the final rule package to implement 18-month publication.
Responses to the comments germane to the changes in this final rule
package follow.
Comment (1): One comment suggested that, in the absence of an 18-
month publication system, the proposed rules relating to application
format and standardization of applications be republished to give the
public an opportunity to comment on the desirability of these changes
in the absence of an 18-month publication system.
Response: The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking specifically stated
that the proposed rules relating to application format and
standardization of applications may be adopted as final rules even in
the absence of an 18-month publication system, and specifically advised
interested members of the public to comment on the advisability of the
proposed rules relating to application format and standardization of
applications, regardless of the legislative action on H.R. 1733. Thus,
the public was given an opportunity to comment on the desirability of
these changes in the absence of an 18-month publication system. Because
the standardization of applications is generally favored and will
substantially improve the Office's ability to efficiently and
effectively process applications, delaying their adoption as final
rules is not justified.
Comment (2): One comment stated that the Office has the authority
to require that applications be submitted in computer-readable form,
and in fact requires sequence listings to be submitted in such form.
The comment suggested that the cost of electronically scanning
application papers, as well as errors in scanning the application
papers, can be avoided by requiring applicants to provide the
specification in computer-readable form. Another comment stated that
the Office has the authority to permit electronic filing, and
electronic filing should be permitted. Several other comments indicated
that
[[Page 42797]]
scanning an application into a data base, rather than permitting
applicants to provide a copy of the application on an electronic
medium, is more costly, and is further more likely to introduce errors
that could render text searching unreliable. And, several comments
suggested that the scanning and typesetting costs associated with the
current publication process for issued patents could be reduced by the
acceptance of electronic media in place of or in addition to the paper
medium currently provided for in the rules of practice. These comments
further suggested that the Office should establish fees that reflect
the reduced cost to the Office when a copy of an application is
provided on an electronic medium (i.e., should establish reduced fees
for those who submit a copy of their application on an electronic
medium), which fee structure would provide an incentive to supply a
copy of an application on an electronic medium.
Response: As discussed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, while
the Office is considering the legislative and regulatory changes that
would be necessary to permit purely electronic filing of application
papers, it does not currently have in place an automated system for the
acceptance and processing of application papers in electronic form,
other than for sequence listings. Moreover, the Office does not
currently have the statutory authority to rebate statutory patent
filing fees to reflect any reduced cost to the Office due to the
submission of a copy of an application on an electronic medium. The
Office will give the comments further consideration as it designs and
develops the Patent Application Management (PAM) system.
Comment (3): Several comments noted that Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b)
impose a standard on applicants not currently observed by the Office,
and questioned whether papers in the application file prepared by the
Office will comply with Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b).
Response: Sections 1.52 (a) and (b) apply to the application
papers, and amendments or corrections thereto. As such, Secs. 1.52 (a)
and (b) do not apply to those papers in the application file prepared
by the Office, since they do not become part of the printed patent.
Comment (4): One comment noted that proposed Sec. 1.52 appears to
be neutral with regard to numbering the lines (e.g., a line number
every five lines) of the specification, and suggested that line
numbering is a beneficial practice which should be permitted, and even
encouraged.
Response: Section 1.52 neither requires nor prohibits line
numbering. Applicants are encouraged, but not required, to number the
lines of the specification. The Office will give the suggestion further
study and consideration in future rulemaking.
Comment (5): One comment noted that when paragraphs are separated
by a blank line only (i.e., no indentation) and end between pages, it
is not possible to tell that a paragraph break occurred. The comment
suggested that the application format requirements should additionally
require an indentation at the beginning of each new paragraph.
Response: It is desirable that a specification include an
indentation at the beginning of a new paragraph. This requirement,
however, was not proposed for comment in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. In addition, PCT Rule 11 does not require that the
beginning of each new paragraph in the specification be indented.
Comment (6): One comment noted that Sec. 1.52(a) would prohibit
handwriting or hand-printing on papers which are to become permanent
Office records. The comment questioned whether this requirement would
also apply to papers issued in the Office. The comment suggested
revising Office practice to prohibit an examiner from handwriting
comments on official papers (e.g., advisory actions or interview
summary records) because: (1) The handwriting is not always
decipherable, and (2) the handwriting as it comes through on the carbon
copies furnished to applicants is frequently too light at least in part
to be decipherable.
Response: The Office's goal is to create a readable administrative
record of the prosecution of every application. The Office is currently
designing, testing and implementing electronic forms and Office action
writing software to avoid or minimize the need for hand-writing/
printing in Office communications. Any applicant receiving an Office
communication in which the handwriting is not decipherable, or does not
adequately appear on the carbon copies to be decipherable, should
request a legible copy of such communication from the Office.
Comment (7): Several comments noted that the limitations in
Sec. 1.52 (a) and (b) regarding ``typed'' and ``ink'' appear to exclude
computer and laser printers, as well as commercially or mechanically
printed papers such as declaration forms. Another comment noted that
the limitations in Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b) regarding ``typed'' and
``ink'' are more restrictive than PCT Rule 11.9 (a) and (d).
Response: The phrase ``printed'' was proposed to be deleted since
it could be read to mean that hand-printing is acceptable. Section
1.52(a) will require, in part, that ``[a]ll papers which are to become
a part of the permanent records of the Patent and Trademark Office must
be legibly written either by a typewriter or mechanical printer in
permanent dark ink or its equivalent in portrait orientation on
flexible, strong, smooth, non-shiny, durable, and white paper.'' This
will clarify that papers printed by a computer-operated laser, or any
mechanical printer are acceptable, but that hand-printed papers are
not. This change will also avoid inconsistencies with the requirements
of PCT Rule 11.9.
Comment (8): One comment noted that the proposed changes to
Sec. 1.52(a) did not include any limitations regarding permissible type
fonts. The comment questioned, since the purpose of the proposed rule
change was to permit optical character recognition (OCR) scanning of
the application papers, whether script fonts would be permissible.
Response: Section 1.52(a) does not include any express prohibition
against the use of script fonts. Nevertheless, Sec. 1.52(a) requires
that ``the application papers must be presented in a form having
sufficient clarity and contrast between the paper and the writing
thereon to permit * * * electronic reproduction by use of digital
imaging and optical character recognition.'' Any application papers,
including application papers containing a script font, that are not in
a form having sufficient clarity and contrast between the paper and the
writing thereon to permit electronic reproduction by use of digital
imaging and optical character recognition will be objected to as not in
compliance with Sec. 1.52(a). Therefore, the Office cautions applicants
not to submit application papers having script fonts.
Comment (9): One comment noted that Sec. 1.52(b) would require that
all papers (including drawings per proposed Sec. 1.84) be limited to
either DIN size A4 or 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, which would eliminate the
currently allowed paper sizes of 8\1/2\ by 13 or 14 inches. The comment
questioned whether this would also apply to the official papers issued
by the Office, noting that the Office currently issues papers having a
paper size mix of 8\1/2\ by 11, 13, and 14 inches, which presents
problems for applicants. The comment suggested that the Office should
not issue papers of a size not permitted in Sec. 1.52.
Response: The Office is currently in the process of standardizing
to either
[[Page 42798]]
21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) or 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by
11 inches).
Comment (10): One comment suggested that the Office should not
issue papers with writing on the back side in accordance with
Sec. 1.52(b).
Response: The Office currently includes informational language on
the back side of certain forms. The alternatives to issuing such forms
with writing on the back side are: (1) Not providing this information
to applicants, (2) reducing the print size to permit all of the
information to be located on the front of the form, or (3) routinely
providing multiple page forms. Since none of the alternatives are
preferable to simply including informational language on the back side
of certain forms, the Office will continue to include information
language on the back of papers issued by the Office, until it fully
transforms all of its forms to electronically generated forms.
Comment (11): One comment questioned whether the phrase ``claims on
a separate sheet'' in Sec. 1.52(b) means that: (1) All of the claims
must appear on a single separate sheet, (2) each claim must appear on a
separate sheet, or (3) the claims (claim 1) must begin or commence on a
separate sheet. The comment suggested the PCT wording that the claims
shall commence on a separate sheet if the rule is intended to require
that the claims (claim 1) must begin or commence on a separate sheet.
Response: The phrase has been changed to ``the claim or claims
commencing on a separate sheet'' to clarify that the claims must begin
or commence on a separate sheet to parallel PCT requirements. Thus,
Secs. 1.52(b) and 1.75(h) require that the claims (claim 1) must begin
or commence on a separate sheet. Sections 1.52(b) and 1.75(h) do not
require that all of the claims be set forth on a single sheet, or that
each claim be set forth on a separate sheet.
Comment (12): One comment questioned whether the phrase ``abstract
and claims on a separate sheet'' in Sec. 1.52(b) means that the
abstract is to be on one separate sheet, and the claims are to be (or
commence) on another separate sheet.
Response: The phrase has been changed to ``the claim or claims
commencing on a separate sheet and abstract commencing on a separate
sheet'' to clarify that the claims must commence on one separate sheet
and the abstract must commence on another separate sheet.
Comment (13): One comment noted that the requirement in
Sec. 1.52(b), as proposed, will require that the lines in the oath or
declaration, as well as quotations from the rules, the MPEP, and court
decisions in subsequently filed amendments, be 1\1/2\ or double spaced,
and is inconsistent with the forms included for comment with the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking.
Response: Section 1.52(b) has been changed to require, inter alia,
that ``[t]he lines of the specification, and any amendments to the
specification, must be 1\1/2\ or double spaced.'' The requirement for
1\1/2\ or double spacing will not apply to oaths or declarations, pre-
printed forms, or all of the statements in the ``Remarks'' section of
an amendment. Applicants are nevertheless requested to submit papers
with lines 1\1/2\ or double spaced, except in standardized forms or
where single-spacing may be stylistically necessary (e.g., block
quotations).
Comment (14): One comment questioned whether the requirement in
Sec. 1.52(b), as proposed, that papers have lines 1\1/2\ or double
spaced will apply to Office actions. The comment suggested that not
placing block quotations from the statutes and regulations in single
spacing will decrease the readability of Office actions.
Response: As discussed supra, Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b) are designed
to facilitate patent printing and do not apply to Office actions.
Section 1.52(b) has been changed to require, inter alia, that ``[t]he
lines of the specification, and any amendments to the specification,
must be 1\1/2\ or double spaced.'' Therefore, the requirement for 1\1/
2\ or double spaced lines will not apply to Office actions.
Comment (15): Several comments objected to the requirement that
tables be in portrait orientation as inconsistent with PCT rules, and
as causing tables to be split over multiple pages.
Response: The suggestions are adopted. Section 1.58 will state that
``[c]hemical and mathematical formulae and tables must be presented in
compliance with Secs. 1.52 (a) and (b), except that chemical and
mathematical formulae or tables may be placed in a landscape
orientation if they cannot be presented satisfactorily in a portrait
orientation,'' rather than ``[t]o facilitate camera copying when
printing, the width of formulae and tables as presented should be
limited normally to 12.7 cm. (5 inches) so that it may appear as a
single column in the printed patent.''
Comment (16): One comment stated that Sec. 1.72 is contrary to PCT
Rule 11.4(a), and will require renumbering of the application pages for
later filing of that application in the European Patent Office (EPO) or
under the PCT.
Response: Section 1.72, as proposed in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, provided that the abstract be ``preferably prior to the
first page of the specification,'' and, as such, merely expressed the
Office's preference for the location of the abstract as prior to the
first page of the specification. Nevertheless, to avoid the undesirable
result of requiring an applicant who submitted an application in the
format set forth in Sec. 1.77 to renumber the specification pages for
filing that application in the EPO or under the PCT, Sec. 1.72 is
changed to state that the preferable location of the abstract is
following the claims.
Comment (17): One comment stated that requiring that the rarely
used section headings (e.g., statement regarding federally sponsored
research and development) be followed by the phrase ``not-applicable''
is confusing.
Response: Section 1.77 is permissive rather than mandatory. As
such, any applicant finding the format suggested therein to be
confusing is at liberty to simply include those section headings
applicable to the particular application. The use of each section
heading, even when the section is ``not-applicable,'' is desirable in
that it apprises the Office that the section at issue has been
considered and deemed inapplicable. Simply not providing a section
heading is ambiguous as to whether the applicant considers the section
inapplicable or has not considered whether the section is applicable to
the application. In addition, the use of such section headings will be
of greater benefit when the Office implements procedures to permit the
electronic filing of patent applications.
Comment (18): One comment stated that the requirements set forth in
Sec. 1.77 are in addition to those required by the PCT. The comment
argued that the Office cannot require international applications
entering the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371 to comply with these
requirements.
Response: As discussed supra, Sec. 1.77 merely expresses the
Office's preference for the arrangement of the application elements.
The Office may advise an applicant that the application does not comply
with the format set forth in Sec. 1.77, and suggest this format for the
applicant's consideration; however, the Office will not require any
application to comply with the format set forth in Sec. 1.77.
Therefore, there is no conflict between Sec. 1.77 and the PCT.
Comment (19): One comment noted that Secs. 1.154 and 1.163 apply to
design and plant applications, and, as such, they are not in conflict
with PCT Rules. The comment suggested that it would,
[[Page 42799]]
however, be preferable that all types of U.S. applications maintain the
same order of application elements, and that this order be the order
set forth by the PCT Rules.
Response: As discussed supra, the arrangement of the elements of an
application set forth in Sec. 1.77 is not mandatory, and, as such,
Sec. 1.77 is not in conflict with the PCT or PCT Rules. Section 1.77
merely expresses the Office's preference for the arrangement of the
elements of an application. The Office's preference for the format of
design applications (Sec. 1.154) and plant applications (Sec. 1.163) is
the same as the Office's preference for utility applications
(Sec. 1.77).
Comment (20): One comment stated that in the absence of statutory
requirements for the application elements proposed in Secs. 1.77,
1.154, and 1.163, the rule should clearly state that these application
elements or arrangements are preferred but not mandatory.
Response: Sections 1.77, 1.154, and 1.163 employ the phrase
``should'' rather than ``must,'' which is the language of a precatory
statement. Therefore, Secs. 1.77, 1.154, and 1.163 currently state that
these application elements or arrangements are preferred, but are not
mandatory.
Comment (21): One comment questioned whether the Application
Transmittal Form, and Fee Transmittal Form set forth in Sec. 1.77
should be numbered pages 1 and 2 pursuant to Sec. 1.52, and further
questioned where the drawings and oath or declaration are to be
numbered.
Response: Section 1.52 has been changed to provide that the pages
of the specification, not the application, should be consecutively
numbered beginning with page 1. The Application Transmittal Form, and
Fee Transmittal Form set forth in Sec. 1.77 are not part of the
specification. As such, they should not be numbered as pages 1 and 2,
respectively. Likewise, the drawings and oath or declaration are not
part of the specification, and need not be numbered.
Comment (22): One comment stated that the failure to include the
phrase ``not applicable'' by all of the application elements not
required by statute or regulation rendered it unclear as to whether the
Office would object to the lack of an application element for which the
phrase ``not applicable'' is not included.
Response: The Office anticipates that an applicant choosing to use
the Transmittal forms provided by the Office will arrange his or her
application in the format suggested by the Office. The patent statutes
and regulations set forth the requirements for a complete application,
as well as the requirements for obtaining a filing date in an
application. Applications are examined for compliance with the patent
statutes and regulations, not for consistency with any particular
transmittal form.
Comment (23): One comment noted, in regard to Sec. 1.84(c), that
the drawings of an international application, which are often used for
processing in the Office, will have the World Organization (WO)
publication number and International Bureau (IB) publication date on
the top of the drawing.
Response: The WO publication number and IB publication date placed
on the top of the drawing of an international application is not
objectionable under Sec. 1.84(c).
Comment (24): One comment stated that the scan target points
conflict with PCT Rule 11.6(e). As such, the scan target points would
have to be removed from applications to be filed as an international
application. The comment further stated that these target points are
unnecessary in view of the paper size and margin requirements.
Response: Section 1.84(g) states that drawings ``should,'' and not
``must,'' have scan target points printed on two catercorner margin
corners. Thus, Sec. 1.84(g) merely expresses the Office's preference
for scan target points on the drawings for filming and printing
purposes, which are considered desirable due to the different sights on
21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) and 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by
11 inch) drawing sheets. An applicant wishing to provide scan target
points on drawings that will later be filed in the EPO may simply copy
the drawings to be filed in the EPO, place the scan target points only
on the Office copy of the drawings, and submit the copy of the drawings
containing the scan target points to the Office. Likewise, applicants
filing drawings that were previously filed in the EPO should simply add
scan target points only to the copy of the drawings to be filed in the
Office. Nevertheless, as Sec. 1.84(g) merely expresses a preference for
scan target points for Office filming and printing purposes, an
applicant intending to later file the application in the EPO, or any
applicant, is at liberty to not include such scan target points on the
drawings. The Office will not object to the absence of scan target
points on any drawings filed in the Office. Therefore, Sec. 1.84(g)
does not include a requirement in excess of, or inconsistent, with PCT
Rules.
Comment (25): One comment stated that the term ``catercorner'' is
slang, and suggested that it be replaced in Sec. 1.84(g) with a phrase
such as ``diagonally opposite.''
Response: The term ``catercorner'' is not slang. While there are a
number of acceptable English phrases to denote diagonally opposite, the
term ``catercorner'' was selected to avoid using a multiple word phrase
where a single word will suffice.
Comment (26): One comment stated that the language proposed to be
added to Sec. 1.97 regarding a reexamination or patent owner is
inconsistent with Sec. 1.533 and suggested that it be deleted.
Response: The suggestion is adopted.
Comment (27): One comment stated that Sec. 1.131 does not specify
whether the phrase ``application'' includes provisional applications.
The comment suggested that Sec. 1.131 be amended to state ``unless the
date of such patent or publication is more than one year prior to the
earliest date on which the inventor's or patent owner's application or
provisional application from which that application claims priority
therefrom was filed in this country.''
Response: The proposed change to Sec. 1.131 is not adopted. It is
well established that the filing date of any abandoned application co-
pending with and referred to in a patent is the effective date of the
patent with respect to the common subject matter disclosed in the
patent and abandoned application. See In re Switzer, 166 F.2d 827, 77
USPQ 156 (CCPA 1948). Section 1.131 does not make a specific reference
to nonprovisional applications for which a benefit is claimed under 35
U.S.C. 120; however, it is understood that the effective date of any
patent sought to be antedated pursuant to Sec. 1.131 is the earliest
filing date of any application to which the patent is entitled to under
35 U.S.C. 120 with respect to the common subject matter disclosed in
the patent and the application. The provisions of title 35, except for
35 U.S.C. 115, 131, 135 and 157, apply to provisional applications. 35
U.S.C. 111(b)(8). It is therefore likewise unnecessary to specifically
reference provisional applications in Sec. 1.131.
Comment (28): Several comments objected to Secs. 1.291 and 1.292 as
pre-grant opposition, especially in view of the pre-grant publication
of pending applications that would be provided for in H.R. 1733, if
enacted, and the expanded reexamination that would be provided for in
H.R. 1732, if enacted. The comments either suggested that the protest
and public use proceeding
[[Page 42800]]
provisions of Secs. 1.291 and 1.292 be severely limited or abolished.
Response:
FR Doc. 96-21073 Miscellaneous Changes in Patent Practice
The changes to Secs. 1.291 and 1.292 place greater
obligations on third parties seeking to use these sections. As such,
this rule change does not add to any third party's ability to
participate in the prosecution of a pending application. Nevertheless,
as neither H.R. 1732 nor H.R. 1733 has presently been enacted, analysis
of whether modification of Secs. 1.291 and 1.292 in addition to that
proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is desirable in a pre-
grant publication or expanded reexamination system is held in abeyance
pending enactment of H.R. 1733 or 1732.
Comment (29): One comment noted that any standardization of patent
applications should not include pre-printed forms taking eleven hours
to complete. The comment further suggested that word-processor versions
of any collection of information, rather than pre-printed forms, would
be of greater assistance to members of the public.
Response: Initially, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking indicated
that the initial patent application (e.g., the specification, drawings,
as well as the standard forms), not merely the proposed standardized
forms, is a collection of information estimated to average eleven hours
to complete. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking stated that the public
reporting burden for these collections of information is estimated to
average: (1) Twelve minutes per response for the Fee Transmittal form,
(2) twelve minutes per response for the Utility Patent Application
Transmittal form, (3) twelve minutes per response for the Design Patent
Application Transmittal form, (4) twelve minutes per response for the
Plant Patent Application Transmittal form, (5) twelve minutes per
response for the Plant Color Coding Sheet, (6) twenty-four minutes per
response for the Declaration form, and (7) twenty-four minutes per
response for the Plant Patent Application Declaration. Nevertheless,
the final rules do not require the use of any standardized form. The
Office publishes standardized forms only as an aid to practitioners and
applicants.
Comment (30): One comment questioned whether use of the
standardized versions of the various forms would be required. Another
comment stated that the Office has no authority to require the use of
the published forms in the absence of statutory authority.t
Response: Use of the forms included for comment with the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is not mandatory. That is, an applicant need not
use the standardized versions of the Fee Transmittal form, Utility
Patent Application Transmittal form, Design Patent Application
Transmittal form, Plant Patent Application Transmittal form, Plant
Color Coding Sheet, Declaration form and Plant Patent Application
Declaration form, and need not use any fee transmittal form,
application transmittal form, or plant color coding sheet. These forms
were created to assist applicants in filing a patent application and to
help ensure the filing of a complete application accompanied by the
appropriate fees, thereby avoiding unnecessary delays in the
examination of the application.
Comment (31): One comment stated that the Office should not require
the use of mandated forms, and if the Office requires the use of
mandated forms, the Office should revise the forms to render them
readily reproducible by conventional software, and should arrange for
versions of these forms in various formats to be distributed by the
Internet, bulletin board, or floppy disk. Another comment suggested
that the Office should make its form or templates available for
electronic copying.
Response: Copies of the standard forms provided by the Office may
be obtained by contacting the Customer Service Center of the Office of
Initial Patent Examination at (703) 308-1214. Also, many standardized
forms have been loaded on the Office's Internet Website and may be
electronically copied via the Internet through anonymous file transfer
protocol (ftp) (address: ftp.uspto.gov). Nevertheless, use of the forms
included for comment with the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is not
mandatory.
Comment (32): One comment questioned why there is a box with an
instruction to type a plus sign in the box at the very top of the
standardized forms.
Response: As discussed supra, the Office plans to replace or
augment the current microfilming process with an electronic data base
which captures at least the technical content of the application-as-
filed for internal Office use. Typing a plus sign (+) into this box
will facilitate the image scanner in aligning the remaining typing on
the form during the scanning process.
Comment (33): One comment questioned: (1) Why the application
transmittal forms do not have a place for applicant to indicate the
type of new utility application being transmitted (e.g., a provisional,
original, continuation, division, continuation-in-part, reissue), and
(2) how the Office official will obtain this information for entry in
the official use ``application type'' box.
Response: The Utility Patent Application Transmittal form sets
forth instructions for filing utility applications under Sec. 1.53 in
the arrangement set forth in Sec. 1.77. All non-reissue, nonprovisional
utility applications (i.e., original, continuation, divisional, and
continuation-in-part applications) filed under Sec. 1.53 should be
submitted using the Utility Patent Application Transmittal form. The
Design Patent Application Transmittal form sets forth instructions for
filing design applications in the arrangement set forth in Sec. 1.154.
All non-reissue design applications should be submitted using the
Design Patent Application Transmittal form. The Plant Patent
Application Transmittal form sets forth instructions for filing plant
applications in the arrangement set forth in Sec. 1.163. All non-
reissue, nonprovisional plant applications should be submitted using
the Plant Patent Application Transmittal form.
A Reissue Patent Application Transmittal form is also available,
and all applications for the reissue of a patent should be submitted
using the Reissue Patent Application Transmittal form. The cover sheet
provided for in Sec. 1.53(b)(2)(i) for a provisional application
functions as a transmittal sheet for a provisional application. As
such, the standardized Provisional Application Cover Sheet is the
transmittal form for a provisional application. The provisional
application cover sheet was published in the rulemaking entitled
``Changes to Implement 20-Year Patent Term and Provisional
Applications,'' in the Federal Register at 60 FR 20230-31 (April 25,
1995), and in the Patent and Trademark Office Official Gazette at 1174
Off. Gaz. Pat Office 45-46 (May 2, 1995).
To provide a place on the Application Transmittal form for claims
under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120, or 121 would require the use of an
unacceptably smaller font on the Application Transmittal form. The
Declaration forms provide a place for stating claims under 35 U.S.C.
119, 120 or 121. The inclusion on filing of an executed or unexecuted
Declaration form containing this information would assist the Office in
ascertaining whether the application is an original, continuation,
divisional, or continuation-in-part application. In addition, in the
event that H.R. 1733 is enacted, and the proposed changes to
Secs. 1.55(a) and 1.78(a)(2) are adopted substantially as proposed, the
routine
[[Page 42801]]
inclusion of claims for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120, or 121 in an
executed or unexecuted declaration form accompanying the application
papers would be an excellent mechanism for avoiding an inadvertent
failure to timely submit a claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120,
or 121.
Comment (34): One comment noted that the heading ``DECLARATION''
does not state the types of applications with which the declaration
form could be used. The comment questioned whether it is intended to be
used with any type of nonprovisional application except plant
applications for which a separate form is proposed.
Response: The declaration form containing the heading
``DECLARATION'' is intended to be used with any type of nonprovisional
application except plant applications, for which a separate Plant
Declaration form is provided.
Comment (35): One comment suggested that in the foreign priority
claim section of the Declaration form, the last line, the phrase
``having a filing date before that of the application on which priority
is claimed'' should be changed to ``for which priority is not
claimed,'' to cover those foreign applications which have a filing date
after that of the application on which priority is claimed and the
benefit of which applicant does not want to claim. The comment also
indicated that, frequently, an application is filed after the
Convention Year.
Response: The suggestion is not adopted. Section 1.63(c) requires
that an oath or declaration in any application in which a claim for
priority is made pursuant to Sec. 1.55 identify * * * ``any foreign
application having a filing date before that of the application on
which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number,
country, day, month, and year of its filing.'' Thus, the language in
the Declaration form aids applicants in submitting a declaration in
compliance with Sec. 1.63(c). Any foreign application having a filing
date before that of the application on which priority is claimed is, by
definition, a foreign application for which priority is not claimed.
Comment (36): One comment suggested that in the foreign priority
claim section, the right hand columns, the heading should be corrected
to ``Certified Copy Attached'' since the Office does not routinely want
uncertified copies.
Response: The suggestion is adopted. The Declaration form has been
modified accordingly.
Comment (37): One comment noted that the Fee Calculation and
Application Transmittal are currently on a single sheet/form, where the
proposed forms provide a separate sheet/form for each. The comment also
noted that the current Declaration form is a single sheet, where the
proposed Declaration form contains multiple sheets.
Response: The Office currently receives application transmittals,
fee calculations/transmittals and declarations in a variety of forms
and in a multitude of formats. The proposed forms were developed as a
result of an analysis of the current practices and requirements of
applicants, as well as the Office's plans to scan application data from
these forms into an electronic data base. The Fee Transmittal form was
created to aid applicants in submitting the fees due on filing a new
patent application, as well as the fees that may be due throughout the
prosecution of the application. The Application Transmittal serves to
both aid applicants in filing a complete application, and simplify the
pre-examination processing of the application. To permit the inclusion
of additional fee calculation and application transmittal information
on the standardized forms, and to provide a Fee Transmittal form for
use throughout the prosecution of the application, a separate Fee
Transmittal form and Application Transmittal form were developed. A
multi-page Declaration form is necessary to accommodate the Office's
plans to scan application data from this Declaration form into an
electronic data base.
Comment (38): One comment indicated that the meaning or purpose of
``suffix'' in the inventor signature block is unclear, and requested an
explanation as to whether it refers to ``Jr.'' or ``II,'' or whether it
is a place to put the mother's name for those inventors whose family
name is followed by their mother's name.
Response: The field on the Declaration form labeled (inventor)
``suffix'' is intended to provide the applicant with an option to
indicate family position relative to age. Examples of an inventor's
suffix are: Jr., Sr., and III. This information is tracked by the
Office and is necessary to print patents which accurately reflect
bibliographic information about the inventor. The use of this field and
the data expected will be clarified and specified in the form
instructions.
Comment (39): One comment questioned the meaning or purpose of
``Applicant Authority'' in the last line of the inventor data block.
Response: The phrase ``Applicant Authority'' indicates the
authority that the applicant has in executing the application (e.g.,
inventor, executor (Sec. 1.42), assignee (Sec. 1.47(b)). This field is
an optional field for the applicant to complete. The electronic
versions of the proposed standard declaration forms would provide the
applicant with directions and a list of valid codes that correspond
with a specific identification of the authority the applicant retains
(e.g., the Authority Code for an executor will be ``04'').
Comment (40): One comment stated that due to the spacing and small
fonts on the fee transmittal form, this sheet cannot be used with a
conventional word processor.
Response: To accommodate all the fee descriptions on a one-page fee
transmittal it was necessary to use smaller fonts in the form's design.
These fonts are available in Word and WordPerfect. An electronic
version of the fee transmittal will be available from the Office soon.
Comment (41): One comment stated that the ``one form fits all''
mentality of the fee transmittal form should be reconsidered since
certain fees are submitted only once during the prosecution of an
application.
Response: The proposed standard one-page fee form is primarily to
facilitate and simplify the fee payment process. The one-page fee
transmittal is intended to aid applicants in providing complete fee
information to the Office for each application and paper submission.
This will enable the Office to more efficiently process and record fee
payments, which will avoid delays in the prosecution of an application.
Other Considerations
This final rule change is in conformity with the requirements of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), Executive Order
12612, and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
It has been determined that this final rule is not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulation of the
Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy,
Small Business Administration, that this rule change will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
(Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The principal effect of
this rule change is to simplify and clarify the rules governing the
form of patent application papers.
The Office has also determined that this notice has no Federalism
implications affecting the relationship between the National Government
and
[[Page 42802]]
the States as outlined in Executive Order 12612.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
This final rule package contains a collection of information
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
This collection of information is currently approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under Control No. 0651-0032. This collection of
information includes the initial patent application filing, the Fee
Transmittal form, the Utility Patent Application Transmittal form, the
Design Patent Application Transmittal form, the Plant Patent
Application Transmittal form, the Plant Color Coding Sheet, the
Declaration form, and the Plant Patent Application Declaration form.
The above-mentioned forms will reduce the burden and uncertainty
associated with the submission of an application and related
information, and enhance the Office's ability to use standardized
automation techniques (optical character recognition, etc.) to record
and process information concerning applications. The public reporting
burden for these collections of information is estimated to average:
(1) Ten hours per response for the specification and drawings of an
application, (2) twelve minutes per response for the Fee Transmittal
form, (3) twelve minutes per response for the Utility Patent
Application Transmittal form, (4) twelve minutes per response for the
Design Patent Application Transmittal form, (5) twelve minutes per
response for the Plant Patent Application Transmittal form, (6) twelve
minutes per response for the Plant Color Coding Sheet, (7) twenty-four
minutes per response for the Declaration form, and (8) twenty-four
minutes per response for the Plant Patent Application Declaration.
These estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collections of information.
Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden to the Office of System Quality and Enhancement, Data
Administration Division, Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC
20231, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (ATTN: Paperwork
Reduction Act Project 0651-0032).
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Freedom of
Information, Inventions and patents, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 37 CFR Part 1 is amended
as follows:
PART 1--RULES OF PRACTICE IN PATENT CASES
1. The authority citation for 37 CFR Part 1 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 35 U.S.C. 6, unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 1.5 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.5 Identification of application, patent or registration.
* * * * *
(f) When a paper concerns a provisional application, it should
identify the application as such and include the application number.
3. Section 1.12 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.12 Assignment records open to public inspection.
* * * * *
(c) Any request by a member of the public seeking copies of any
assignment records of any pending or abandoned patent application
preserved in confidence under Sec. 1.14, or any information with
respect thereto, must:
(1) Be in the form of a petition accompanied by the petition fee
set forth in Sec. 1.17(i); or
(2) Include written authority granting access to the member of the
public to the particular assignment records from the applicant or
applicant's assignee or attorney or agent of record.
* * * * *
4. Section 1.14 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraphs (a), (b), and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.14 Patent applications preserved in confidence.
(a) (1) Patent applications are generally preserved in confidence
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 122. No information will be given concerning the
filing, pendency, or subject matter of any application for patent, and
no access will be given to, or copies furnished of, any application or
papers relating thereto, except as set forth in this section.
(2) Status information, which includes information such as whether
the application is pending, abandoned, or patented, as well as the
application number and filing date, may be supplied:
(i) Concerning an application or any application claiming the
benefit of the filing date of the application, if the application has
been identified by application number or serial number and filing date
in a published patent document,
(ii) Concerning the national stage application or any application
claiming the benefit of the filing date of a published international
application, if the United States of America has been indicated as a
Designated State in the international application, or
(iii) When it has been determined by the Commissioner to be
necessary for the proper conduct of business before the Office.
(3) Access to, or copies of, an application may be provided:
(i) When the application is open to the public as provided in
Sec. 1.11(b),
(ii) When written authority in that application from the applicant,
the assignee of the application, or the attorney or agent of record has
been granted,
(iii) When it has been determined by the Commissioner to be
necessary for the proper conduct of business before the Office, or
(iv) To any person on written request, without notice to the
applicant, when the application is abandoned and available and is:
(A) Referred to in a U.S. patent,
(B) Referred to in an application open to public inspection,
(C) An application which claims the benefit of the filing date of
an application open to public inspection, or
(D) An application in which the applicant has filed an
authorization to lay open the complete application to the public.
(b) Complete applications (Sec. 1.51(a)) which are abandoned may be
destroyed and hence may not be available for access or copies as
permitted by paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section after 20 years from
their filing date, except those to which particular attention has been
called and which have been marked for preservation.
* * * * *
(e) Any request by a member of the public seeking access to, or
copies of, any pending or abandoned application preserved in confidence
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, or any papers relating
thereto, must:
[[Page 42803]]
(1) Be in the form of a petition and be accompanied by the petition
fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(i); or
(2) Include written authority granting access to the member of the
public in that particular application from the applicant or the
applicant's assignee or attorney or agent of record.
5. Section 1.52 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 1.52 Language, paper, writing, margins.
(a) The application, any amendments or corrections thereto, and the
oath or declaration must be in the English language except as provided
for in Sec. 1.69 and paragraph (d) of this section, or be accompanied
by a verified translation of the application and a translation of any
corrections or amendments into the English language. All papers which
are to become a part of the permanent records of the Patent and
Trademark Office must be legibly written either by a typewriter or
mechanical printer in permanent dark ink or its equivalent in portrait
orientation on flexible, strong, smooth, non-shiny, durable, and white
paper. All of the application papers must be presented in a form having
sufficient clarity and contrast between the paper and the writing
thereon to permit the direct reproduction of readily legible copies in
any number by use of photographic, electrostatic, photo-offset, and
microfilming processes and electronic reproduction by use of digital
imaging and optical character recognition. If the papers are not of the
required quality, substitute typewritten or mechanically printed papers
of suitable quality will be required. See Sec. 1.125 for filing
substitute typewritten or mechanically printed papers constituting a
substitute specification when required by the Office.
(b) Except for drawings, the application papers (specification,
including claims, abstract, oath or declaration, and papers as provided
for in this part and also papers subsequently filed, must have each
page plainly written on only one side of a sheet of paper, with the
claim or claims commencing on a separate sheet and the abstract
commencing on a separate sheet. See Secs. 1.72(b) and 1.75(h). The
sheets of paper must be the same size and either 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm.
(DIN size A4) or 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by 11 inches). Each sheet
must include a top margin of at least 2.0 cm. (\3/4\ inch), a left side
margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a right side margin of at least
2.0 cm. (\3/4\ inch), and a bottom margin of at least 2.0 cm. (\3/4\
inch), and no holes should be made in the sheets as submitted. The
lines of the specification, and any amendments to the specification,
must be 1\1/2\ or double spaced. The pages of the specification
including claims and abstract must be numbered consecutively, starting
with 1, the numbers being centrally located above or preferably, below,
the text. See Sec. 1.84 for drawings.
* * * * *
6. Section 1.54 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.54 Parts of application to be filed together; filing receipt.
* * * * *
(b) Applicant will be informed of the application number and filing
date by a filing receipt.
7. Section 1.58 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b)
and revising the section heading and paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.58 Chemical and mathematical formulae and tables.
* * * * *
(b) [Reserved]
(c) Chemical and mathematical formulae and tables must be presented
in compliance with Sec. 1.52 (a) and (b), except that chemical and
mathematical formulae or tables may be placed in a landscape
orientation if they cannot be presented satisfactorily in a portrait
orientation. Typewritten characters used in such formulae and tables
must be chosen from a block (nonscript) type font or lettering style
having capital letters which are at least 0.21 cm. (0.08 inch) high
(e.g., elite type). A space at least 0.64 cm. (\1/4\ inch) high should
be provided between complex formulae and tables and the text. Tables
should have the lines and columns of data closely spaced to conserve
space, consistent with a high degree of legibility.
8. Section 1.62 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) and (f) to
read as follows:
Sec. 1.62 File wrapper continuing procedure.
* * * * *
(e) An application filed under this section will utilize the file
wrapper and contents of the prior application to constitute the new
continuation, continuation-in-part, or divisional application but will
be assigned a new application number. Changes to the prior application
must be made in the form of an amendment to the prior application as it
exists at the time of filing the application under this section. No
copy of the prior application or new specification is required. The
filing of such a copy or specification will be considered improper, and
a filing date as of the date of deposit of the request for an
application under this section will not be granted to the application
unless a petition with the fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(i) is filed with
instructions to cancel the copy or specification.
(f) The filing of an application under this section will be
construed to include a waiver of confidence by the applicant under 35
U.S.C. 122 to the extent that any member of the public who is entitled
under the provisions of Sec. 1.14 to access to, or information
concerning either the prior application or any continuing application
filed under the provisions of this section may be given similar access
to, or similar information concerning, the other application(s) in the
file wrapper.
* * * * *
9. Section 1.72 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.72 Title and abstract.
* * * * *
(b) A brief abstract of the technical disclosure in the
specification must commence on a separate sheet, preferably following
the claims, under the heading ``Abstract of the Disclosure.'' The
purpose of the abstract is to enable the Patent and Trademark Office
and the public generally to determine quickly from a cursory inspection
the nature and gist of the technical disclosure. The abstract shall not
be used for interpreting the scope of the claims.
10. Section 1.75 is amended by revising paragraph (g) and adding
paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.75 Claim(s).
* * * * *
(g) The least restrictive claim should be presented as claim number
1, and all dependent claims should be grouped together with the claim
or claims to which they refer to the extent practicable.
(h) The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet.
(i) Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each
element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation.
11. Section 1.77 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.77 Arrangement of application elements.
(a) The elements of the application, if applicable, should appear
in the following order:
(1) Utility Application Transmittal Form.
(2) Fee Transmittal Form.
(3) Title of the invention; or an introductory portion stating the
name, citizenship, and residence of the applicant, and the title of the
invention.
[[Page 42804]]
(4) Cross-reference to related applications.
(5) Statement regarding federally sponsored research or
development.
(6) Reference to a ``Microfiche appendix.'' (See Sec. 1.96 (c)).
The total number of microfiche and total number of frames should be
specified.
(7) Background of the invention.
(8) Brief summary of the invention.
(9) Brief description of the several views of the drawing.
(10) Detailed description of the invention.
(11) Claim or claims.
(12) Abstract of the Disclosure.
(13) Drawings.
(14) Executed oath or declaration.
(15) Sequence Listing (See Secs. 1.821 through 1.825).
(b) The elements set forth in paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(5),
(a)(7) through (a)(12) and (a)(15) of this section should appear in
upper case, without underlining or bold type, as section headings. If
no text follows the section heading, the phrase ``Not Applicable''
should follow the section heading.
12. Section 1.78 is amended by removing paragraph (d) and revising
paragraphs (a)(2) and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.78 Claiming benefit of earlier filing date and cross references
to other applications.
(a) * * *
(2) Any nonprovisional application claiming the benefit of one or
more prior filed copending nonprovisional applications or international
applications designating the United States of America must contain or
be amended to contain in the first sentence of the specification
following the title a reference to each such prior application,
identifying it by application number (consisting of the series code and
serial number) or international application number and international
filing date and indicating the relationship of the applications. Cross-
references to other related applications may be made when appropriate.
(See Sec. 1.14(a)).
* * * * *
(c) Where an application or a patent under reexamination and at
least one other application naming different inventors are owned by the
same party and contain conflicting claims, and there is no statement of
record indicating that the claimed inventions were commonly owned or
subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person at the time
the later invention was made, the assignee may be called upon to state
whether the claimed inventions were commonly owned or subject to an
obligation of assignment to the same person at the time the later
invention was made, and if not, indicate which named inventor is the
prior inventor.
13. Section 1.84 is amended by revising paragraphs (c), (f), (g),
and (x) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.84 Standards for drawings.
* * * * *
(c) Identification of drawings. Identifying indicia, if provided,
should include the application number or the title of the invention,
inventor's name, docket number (if any), and the name and telephone
number of a person to call if the Office is unable to match the
drawings to the proper application. This information should be placed
on the back of each sheet of drawings a minimum distance of 1.5 cm.
(\5/8\ inch) down from the top of the page. In addition, a reference to
the application number, or, if an application number has not been
assigned, the inventor's name, may be included in the left-hand corner,
provided that the reference appears within 1.5 cm. (\9/16\ inch) from
the top of the sheet.
* * * * *
(f) Size of paper. All drawing sheets in an application must be the
same size. One of the shorter sides of the sheet is regarded as its
top. The size of the sheets on which drawings are made must be:
(1) 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4), or
(2) 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by 11 inches).
(g) Margins. The sheets must not contain frames around the sight;
i.e., the usable surface, but should have scan target points, i.e.,
cross-hairs, printed on two catercorner margin corners. Each sheet must
include a top margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a left side margin
of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a right side margin of at least 1.5 cm.
(\9/16\ inch), and a bottom margin of at least 1.0 cm. (\3/8\ inch),
thereby leaving a sight no greater than 17.0 cm. by 26.2 cm. on 21.0
cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) drawing sheets, and a sight no greater
than 17.6 cm. by 24.4 cm. (6\15/16\ by 9\5/8\ inches) on 21.6 cm. by
27.9 cm. (8\1/2\ by 11 inch) drawing sheets.
* * * * *
(x) Holes. No holes should be made by applicant in the drawing
sheets. (See Sec. 1.152 for design drawings, Sec. 1.165 for plant
drawings, and Sec. 1.174 for reissue drawings.)
14. Section 1.96 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.96 Submission of computer program listings.
(a) General. Descriptions of the operation and general content of
computer program listings should appear in the description portion of
the specification. A computer program listing for the purpose of this
section is defined as a printout that lists in appropriate sequence the
instructions, routines, and other contents of a program for a computer.
The program listing may be either in machine or machine-independent
(object or source) language which will cause a computer to perform a
desired procedure or task such as solve a problem, regulate the flow of
work in a computer, or control or monitor events. Computer program
listings may be submitted in patent applications as set forth in
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
(b) Material which will be printed in the patent. If the computer
program listing is contained on ten printout pages or less, it must be
submitted either as drawings or as part of the specification.
(1) Drawings. If the listing is submitted as drawings, it must be
submitted in the manner and complying with the requirements for
drawings as provided in Sec. 1.84. At least one figure numeral is
required on each sheet of drawing.
(2) Specification. (i) If the listing is submitted as part of the
specification, it must be submitted in accordance with the provisions
of Sec. 1.52, at the end of the description but before the claims.
(ii) Any listing submitted as part of the specification must be
direct printouts (i.e., not copies) from the computer's printer with
dark solid black letters not less than 0.21 cm. high, on white,
unshaded and unlined paper, and the sheets should be submitted in a
protective cover. Any amendments must be made by way of submission of
substitute sheets.
(c) As an appendix which will not be printed. If a computer program
listing printout is eleven or more pages long, applicants must submit
such listing in the form of microfiche, referred to in the
specification (see Sec. 1.77(a)(6)). Such microfiche filed with a
patent application is to be referred to as a ``microfiche appendix.''
The ``microfiche appendix'' will not be part of the printed patent.
Reference in the application to the ``microfiche appendix'' must be
made at the beginning of the specification at the location indicated in
Sec. 1.77(a)(6). Any amendments thereto must be made by way of revised
microfiche.
(1) Availability of appendix. Such computer program listings on
[[Page 42805]]
microfiche will be available to the public for inspection, and
microfiche copies thereof will be available for purchase with the file
wrapper and contents, after a patent based on such application is
granted or the application is otherwise made publicly available.
(2) Submission requirements. Except as modified or clarified in
this paragraph (c)(2), computer-generated information submitted as a
``microfiche appendix'' to an application shall be in accordance with
the standards set forth in 36 CFR part 1230 (Micrographics).
(i) Film submitted shall be a first generation (camera film)
negative appearing microfiche (with emulsion on the back side of the
film when viewed with the images right-reading).
(ii) Reduction ratio of microfiche submitted should be 24:1 or a
similar ratio where variation from said ratio is required in order to
fit the documents into the image area of the microfiche format used.
(iii) At least the left-most third (50 mm. x 12 mm.) of the header
or title area of each microfiche submitted shall be clear or positive
appearing so that the Patent and Trademark Office can apply an
application number and filing date thereto in an eye-readable form. The
middle portion of the header shall be used by applicant to apply an
eye-readable application identification such as the title and/or the
first inventor's name. The attorney's docket number may be included.
The final right-hand portion of the microfiche shall contain sequence
information for the microfiche, such as 1 of 4, 2 of 4, etc.
(iv) Additional requirements which apply specifically to microfiche
of filmed paper copy:
(A) The first frame of each microfiche submitted shall contain a
test target.
(B) The second frame of each microfiche submitted must contain a
fully descriptive title and the inventor's name as filed.
(C) The pages or lines appearing on the microfiche frames should be
consecutively numbered.
(D) Pagination of the microfiche frames shall be from left to right
and from top to bottom.
(E) At a reduction of 24:1, resolution of the original microfilm
shall be at least 120 lines per mm. (5.0 target).
(F) An index, when included, should appear in the last frame (lower
right-hand corner when data is right-reading) of each microfiche.
(v) Microfiche generated by Computer Output Microfilm.
(A) The first frame of each microfiche submitted should contain a
resolution test frame.
(B) The second frame of each microfiche submitted must contain a
fully descriptive title and the inventor's name as filed.
(C) The pages or lines appearing on the microfiche frames should be
consecutively numbered.
(D) It is preferred that pagination of the microfiche frames be
from left to right and top to bottom but the alternative, i.e., from
top to bottom and from left to right, is also acceptable.
(E) An index, when included, should appear on the last frame (lower
right-hand corner when data is right-reading) of each microfiche.
15. Section 1.97 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) through (d)
to read as follows:
Sec. 1.97 Filing of information disclosure statement.
(a) In order for an applicant for a patent or for a reissue of a
patent to have an information disclosure statement in compliance with
Sec. 1.98 considered by the Office during the pendency of the
application, it must satisfy paragraph (b), (c), or (d) of this
section.
(b) An information disclosure statement shall be considered by the
Office if filed by the applicant:
(1) Within three months of the filing date of a national
application;
(2) Within three months of the date of entry of the national stage
as set forth in Sec. 1.491 in an international application; or
(3) Before the mailing date of a first Office action on the merits,
whichever event occurs last.
(c) An information disclosure statement shall be considered by the
Office if filed by the applicant after the period specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, provided that the statement is
accompanied by either a certification as specified in paragraph (e) of
this section or the fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(p), and is filed before
the mailing date of either:
(1) A final action under Sec. 1.113; or
(2) A notice of allowance under Sec. 1.311, whichever occurs first.
(d) An information disclosure statement shall be considered by the
Office if filed by the applicant after the period specified in
paragraph (c) of this section, provided that the statement is filed on
or before payment of the issue fee and is accompanied by:
(1) A certification as specified in paragraph (e) of this section;
(2) A petition requesting consideration of the information
disclosure statement; and
(3) The petition fee set forth in Sec. 1.17(i).
* * * * *
16. Section 1.107 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.107 Citation of references.
(a) If domestic patents are cited by the examiner, their numbers
and dates, and the names of the patentees must be stated. If foreign
published applications or patents are cited, their nationality or
country, numbers and dates, and the names of the patentees must be
stated, and such other data must be furnished as may be necessary to
enable the applicant, or in the case of a reexamination proceeding, the
patent owner, to identify the published applications or patents cited.
In citing foreign published applications or patents, in case only a
part of the document is involved, the particular pages and sheets
containing the parts relied upon must be identified. If printed
publications are cited, the author (if any), title, date, pages or
plates, and place of publication, or place where a copy can be found,
shall be given.
* * * * *
17. Section 1.110 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.110 Inventorship and date of invention of the subject matter of
individual claims.
When more than one inventor is named in an application or patent,
the Patent and Trademark Office, when necessary for purposes of an
Office proceeding, may require an applicant, patentee, or owner to
identify the inventive entity of the subject matter of each claim in
the application or patent. Where appropriate, the invention dates of
the subject matter of each claim and the ownership of the subject
matter on the date of invention may be required of the applicant,
patentee or owner. See also Secs. 1.78(c) and 1.130.
18. A new Sec. 1.130 is added after the undesignated center heading
``Affidavits Overcoming Rejections'' to read as follows:
Sec. 1.130 Affidavit or declaration to disqualify commonly owned
patent as prior art.
(a) When any claim of an application or a patent under
reexamination is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of a U.S. patent
which is not prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), and the inventions
defined by the claims in the application or patent under reexamination
and by the claims in the patent are not identical but are not
patentably distinct, and the inventions are owned by the same party,
the applicant or owner of the patent under reexamination may disqualify
the patent as prior art. The patent can be disqualified as prior art by
submission of:
[[Page 42806]]
(1) A terminal disclaimer in accordance with Sec. 1.321(c), and
(2) An oath or declaration stating that the application or patent
under reexamination and the patent are currently owned by the same
party, and that the inventor named in the application or patent under
reexamination is the prior inventor under 35 U.S.C. 104.
(b) When an application or a patent under reexamination claims an
invention which is not patentably distinct from an invention claimed in
a commonly owned patent with the same or a different inventive entity,
a double patenting rejection will be made in the application or a
patent under reexamination. A judicially created double patenting
rejection may be obviated by filing a terminal disclaimer in accordance
with Sec. 1.321(c).
19. Section 1.131 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.131 Affidavit or declaration of prior invention to overcome
cited patent or publication.
(a) (1) When any claim of an application or a patent under
reexamination is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) or (e), or 35 U.S.C.
103 based on a U.S. patent to another or others which is prior art
under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) or (e) and which substantially shows or
describes but does not claim the same patentable invention, as defined
in Sec. 1.601(n), or on reference to a foreign patent or to a printed
publication, the inventor of the subject matter of the rejected claim,
the owner of the patent under reexamination, or the party qualified
under Secs. 1.42, 1.43, or 1.47, may submit an appropriate oath or
declaration to overcome the patent or publication. The oath or
declaration must include facts showing a completion of the invention in
this country or in a NAFTA or WTO member country before the filing date
of the application on which the U.S. patent issued, or before the date
of the foreign patent, or before the date of the printed publication.
When an appropriate oath or declaration is made, the patent or
publication cited shall not bar the grant of a patent to the inventor
or the confirmation of the patentability of the claims of the patent,
unless the date of such patent or printed publication is more than one
year prior to the date on which the inventor's or patent owner's
application was filed in this country.
(2) A date of completion of the invention may not be established
under this section before December 8, 1993, in a NAFTA country, or
before January 1, 1996, in a WTO member country other than a NAFTA
country.
* * * * *
20. Section 1.132 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.132 Affidavits or declarations traversing grounds of rejection.
When any claim of an application or a patent under reexamination is
rejected on reference to a U.S. patent which substantially shows or
describes but does not claim the same patentable invention, as defined
in Sec. 1.601(n), on reference to a foreign patent, on reference to a
printed publication, or on reference to facts within the personal
knowledge of an employee of the Office, or when rejected upon a mode or
capability of operation attributed to a reference, or because the
alleged invention is held to be inoperative, lacking in utility,
frivolous, or injurious to public health or morals, affidavits or
declarations traversing these references or objections may be received.
21. Section 1.154 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.154 Arrangement of specification.
(a) The elements of the design application, if applicable, should
appear in the following order:
(1) Design Application Transmittal Form.
(2) Fee Transmittal Form.
(3) Preamble, stating name of the applicant and title of the
design.
(4) Cross-reference to related applications.
(5) Statement regarding federally sponsored research or
development.
(6) Description of the figure or figures of the drawing.
(7) Feature Description.
(8) A single claim.
(9) Drawings or photographs.
(10) Executed oath or declaration (See Sec. 1.153(b)).
(b) [Reserved]
22. Section 1.163 is amended by adding new paragraphs (c) and (d)
to read as follows:
Sec. 1.163 Specification.
* * * * *
(c) The elements of the plant application, if applicable, should
appear in the following order:
(1) Plant Application Transmittal Form.
(2) Fee Transmittal Form.
(3) Title of the invention.
(4) Cross-reference to related applications.
(5) Statement regarding federally sponsored research or
development.
(6) Background of the invention.
(7) Brief summary of the invention.
(8) Brief description of the drawing.
(9) Detailed Botanical Description.
(10) A single claim.
(11) Abstract of the Disclosure.
(12) Drawings (in duplicate).
(13) Executed oath or declaration.
(14) Plant color coding sheet.
(d) A plant color coding sheet as used in this section means a
sheet that specifies a color coding system as designated in a color
dictionary, and lists every plant structure to which color is a
distinguishing feature and the corresponding color code which best
represents that plant structure.
23. Section 1.291 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 1.291 Protests by the public against pending applications.
(a) Protests by a member of the public against pending applications
will be referred to the examiner having charge of the subject matter
involved. A protest specifically identifying the application to which
the protest is directed will be entered in the application file if:
(1) The protest is submitted prior to the mailing of a notice of
allowance under Sec. 1.311; and
(2) The protest is either served upon the applicant in accordance
with Sec. 1.248, or filed with the Office in duplicate in the event
service is not possible.
(b) Protests raising fraud or other inequitable conduct issues will
be entered in the application file, generally without comment on those
issues. Protests which do not adequately identify a pending patent
application will be returned to the protestor and will not be further
considered by the Office. A protest submitted in accordance with the
second sentence of paragraph (a) of this section will be considered by
the Office if the application is still pending when the protest and
application file are brought before the examiner and it includes:
(1) A listing of the patents, publications, or other information
relied upon;
(2) A concise explanation of the relevance of each listed item;
(3) A copy of each listed patent or publication or other item of
information in written form or at least the pertinent portions thereof;
and
(4) An English language translation of all the necessary and
pertinent parts of any non-English language patent, publication, or
other item of information in written form relied upon.
* * * * *
24. Section 1.292 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
[[Page 42807]]
Sec. 1.292 Public use proceedings.
(a) When a petition for the institution of public use proceedings,
supported by affidavits or declarations is found, on reference to the
examiner, to make a prima facie showing that the invention claimed in
an application believed to be on file had been in public use or on sale
more than one year before the filing of the application, a hearing may
be had before the Commissioner to determine whether a public use
proceeding should be instituted. If instituted, the Commissioner may
designate an appropriate official to conduct the public use proceeding,
including the setting of times for taking testimony, which shall be
taken as provided by Secs. 1.671 through 1.685. The petitioner will be
heard in the proceedings but after decision therein will not be heard
further in the prosecution of the application for patent.
(b) The petition and accompanying papers, or a notice that such a
petition has been filed, shall be entered in the application file if:
(1) The petition is accompanied by the fee set forth in
Sec. 1.17(j);
(2) The petition is served on the applicant in accordance with
Sec. 1.248, or filed with the Office in duplicate in the event service
is not possible; and
(3) The petition is submitted prior to the mailing of a notice of
allowance under Sec. 1.311.
* * * * *
25. Section 1.315 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.315 Delivery of patent.
The patent will be delivered or mailed upon issuance to the
correspondence address of record. See Sec. 1.33(a).
26. Section 1.321 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.321 Statutory disclaimers, including terminal disclaimers.
* * * * *
(c) A terminal disclaimer, when filed to obviate a judicially
created double patenting rejection in a patent application or in a
reexamination proceeding, must:
(1) Comply with the provisions of paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(4)
of this section;
(2) Be signed in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section
if filed in a patent application or in accordance with paragraph (a)(1)
of this section if filed in a reexamination proceeding; and
(3) Include a provision that any patent granted on that application
or any patent subject to the reexamination proceeding shall be
enforceable only for and during such period that said patent is
commonly owned with the application or patent which formed the basis
for the rejection.
27. Section 1.497 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.497 Oath or declaration under 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(4).
(a) When an applicant of an international application desires to
enter the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371 pursuant to Secs. 1.494 or
1.495, he or she must file an oath or declaration that:
(1) Is executed in accordance with either Secs. 1.66 or 1.68;
(2) Identifies the specification to which it is directed;
(3) Identifies each inventor and the country of citizenship of each
inventor; and
(4) States that the person making the oath or declaration believes
the named inventor or inventors to be the original and first inventor
or inventors of the subject matter which is claimed and for which a
patent is sought.
(b)(1) The oath or declaration must be made by all of the actual
inventors except as provided for in Secs. 1.42, 1.43 or 1.47.
(2) If the person making the oath or declaration is not the
inventor, the oath or declaration shall state the relationship of the
person to the inventor, the facts required by Secs. 1.42, 1.43 or 1.47,
and, upon information and belief, the facts which the inventor would
have been required to state.
(c) If the oath or declaration meets the requirements of paragraphs
(a) and (b) of this section, the oath or declaration will be accepted
as complying with 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(4) and Secs. 1.494(c) or 1.495(c).
However, if the oath or declaration does not also meet the requirements
of Sec. 1.63, a supplemental oath or declaration in compliance with
Sec. 1.63 will be required in accordance with Sec. 1.67.
Dated: August 13, 1996.
Bruce A. Lehman,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and
Trademarks.
[FR Doc. 96-21073 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21069 Award of Fellowships to Applicants From Other American Republics
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42773]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21069]
========================================================================
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. 161 / Monday, August 19, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 42773]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Research Service
7 CFR Part 9
Award of Fellowships to Applicants From Other American Republics
AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action is being taken as part of the National Performance
Review program to eliminate unnecessary regulations and improve those
that remain. This final rule removes obsolete regulations pertaining to
award of fellowships to applicants from other American Republics by the
Agricultural Research Service.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 18, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darrell F. Cole, Assistant Deputy
Administrator, National Program Staff, Agricultural Research Service,
USDA, Bldg, 005, Room 120, Beltsville Agricultural Research Center,
Beltsville, MD 20705, (301) 504-5861.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule has been determined not to be
significant for the purpose of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore,
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Also,
this rule will not cause a significant economic impact or other
substantial effect on small entities and, therefore, the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., do not apply.
This action is being taken as part of the National Performance Review
program to eliminate unnecessary regulations. Since this rule relates
to internal agency management and removes obsolete recommendations
which have not been used for many years, notice of proposed rulemaking
and opportunity for public comment are not required, and this rule may
take effect 30 days after publication.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 9
Agriculture, Scholarships and fellowships, Type of fellowships,
qualifications, award of fellowships, allowances and expenses, duration
of fellowships, official notification, and definitions.
PART 9--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]
Accordingly, 7 CFR Part 9 is removed and reserved.
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301.
Done at Washington, D.C., this 12th day of August 1996.
Floyd P. Horn,
Administrator, Agricultural Research Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21069 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21067 Service of Process; Testimony by Employees and the Production of Documents in Legal Proceedings
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42807-42808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21067]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
37 CFR Parts 15 and 15a
[Docket No. 960722200-6200-01]
RIN 0651-XX07
Service of Process; Testimony by Employees and the Production of
Documents in Legal Proceedings
AGENCY: Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule removes parts dealing with service of process
on Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) employees in their official
capacity and with testimony by employees and production of documents in
legal proceedings. The PTO will rely on analogous Commerce Department
regulations found in title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth Corsello by telephone at (703) 305-9041; by mail marked to his
attention and addressed to the Office of the Solicitor, Box 8,
Washington, D.C. 20231; by electronic mail to [email protected]; or by
fax marked to his attention at (703) 305-9373.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In March 1995, President Clinton issued a
directive to Federal agencies regarding their responsibilities under
his Regulatory Reform Initiative. This initiative is part of the
National Performance Review and calls for immediate, comprehensive
regulatory reform. The President directed all agencies to undertake, as
part of this initiative, an exhaustive review of all of their
regulations--with an emphasis on eliminating or modifying those that
are obsolete or otherwise in need of reform. This final rule is part of
the Regulatory Reform Initiative.
The Department of Commerce regulations dealing with service of
process (15 CFR Part 15) and with employee testimony and the production
of documents (15 CFR Part 15a) apply to the PTO. Therefore, the PTO is
removing 37 CFR Parts 15 and 15a because they are unnecessary and
duplicative.
This rule is not a significant rule for the purposes of Executive
Order 12866. Notice and comment is not required for this rulemaking
because it relates to agency management or personnel, 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2), and thus no regulatory flexibility analysis is required, 5
U.S.C. 603(a). This rule does not change the paperwork burden imposed
on the public. See 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
List of Subjects
37 CFR Part 15
Administrative practice and procedure, Attorneys, Courts,
Government employees.
37 CFR Part 15a
Administrative practice and procedure, Attorneys, Courts,
Government employees.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and pursuant to the
authority
[[Page 42808]]
contained in 35 U.S.C. 6, 37 CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 15--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]
1. Part 15 is removed and reserved.
PART 15a--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]
1. Part 15a is removed and reserved.
Dated: August 13, 1996.
Bruce A. Lehman,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and
Trademarks.
[FR Doc. 96-21067 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21056 Revisions to Rules Regulating Money Market Funds
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21056]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
17 CFR Parts 230, 239, 270, and 274
[Release Nos. 33-7320; IC-22135; S7-34-93]
RIN 3235-AE17
Revisions to Rules Regulating Money Market Funds
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; suspension of compliance date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is suspending the compliance date set forth in
a final rule, which contains amendments to rules and forms that govern
money market funds.
EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date for the rule and form amendments
published on March 28, 1996 (61 FR 13956) remains June 3, 1996.
Effective August 19, 1996, the compliance date with respect to certain
of the amendments adopted in that rule is suspended. The Commission
will publish in the Federal Register a document notifying the public of
a new compliance date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marjorie S. Riegel, Senior Counsel,
Office of Chief Counsel (202) 942-0727, Division of Investment
Management, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20549.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is suspending the compliance
date in connection with amendments to rules 2a-7, 2a41-1, 12d-3 and
31a-1 [17 CFR 270.2a-7, 270.2a41-1, 270.12d-3 and 270.31a-1] under the
Investment Company Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. 80a-1, et seq.] (the ``March
Amendments'').1 Section V.A of the release adopting the March
Amendments (the ``March Release'') provided that money market funds
would be required to comply with certain of the March Amendments by
October 3, 1996.2 The Commission anticipates that it will be
proposing technical amendments (``Technical Amendments'') to certain of
the March Amendments, which are not expected to be adopted before
October 3, 1996. Therefore, the Commission is suspending the October 3,
1996 compliance date, and will establish a new compliance date for the
March Amendments subject to Section V.A.3 This new compliance date
will be published in the Federal Register in connection with the
adoption of the Technical Amendments.4 The compliance date with
respect to certain of the March Amendments adopted in 61 FR 13956 is
suspended effective upon publication of this release in the Federal
Register because such suspension ``grants or recognizes an exemption or
relieves a restriction.'' 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Investment Company Act Rel. No. 21837 (Mar. 21, 1996)
[61 FR 13956 (Mar. 28, 1996)].
\2\ Id.
\3\ Money market funds may comply with any of the amendments or
rules adopted in the March Release prior to the new compliance date.
See Section V.A. of the March Release.
\4\ Section V.B of the March Release ``grandfathered'' certain
securities by providing that money market funds could continue to
purchase such securities issued on or before June 3, 1996 (the
``Grandfathering Date''). The Commission intends to publish in the
Federal Register a new Grandfathering Date for securities of the
type described in Section V.B of the March Release. Such securities
issued prior to the new Grandfathering Date may continue to be
purchased and held by money market funds relying on the rule.
\5\ 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission notes that Section V.C of the March Release set
forth compliance dates for certain disclosure, advertising and
reporting requirements for money market funds. These requirements will
not be affected by the Technical Amendments. The Commission is not
suspending the compliance dates for these requirements, and all money
market funds are required to comply with these requirements by the
compliance dates set forth in the March Release.
Dated: August 13, 1996.
By the Commission.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-21056 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21034 Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal Inc. Model T5313B Turboshaft Engines
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42782-42784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21034]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-ANE-21; Amendment 39-9709, AD 96-17-01]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal Inc. Model T5313B
Turboshaft Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to AlliedSignal Inc. (formerly Textron Lycoming) Model
T5313B turboshaft engines. This action supersedes priority letter AD
96-15-07 that currently requires, prior to further flight, removal from
service of all suspect second stage power turbine disks, identified by
serial number, and replacement with serviceable parts. This action
corrects an incorrect second stage power turbine disk serial number.
This amendment is prompted by report of a typographical error in the
serial number listing. The actions specified by this AD are intended to
prevent possible failure of a second stage power turbine disk,
uncontained engine failure, and damage to aircraft.
DATES: Effective September 9, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before October 18, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-ANE-21, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299. Comments may also be
submitted to the Rules Docket by using the following Internet address:
``[email protected]''. All comments must contain the
Docket No. in the subject line of the comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Triozzi, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone (617)
238-7148, fax (617) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 16, 1996, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) issued priority letter airworthiness directive
(AD) 96- 15-07, applicable to AlliedSignal Inc. (formerly Textron
Lycoming) Model T5313B turboshaft engines, which requires prior to
further flight, removal from service of all suspect second stage power
turbine disks, identified by serial number, and replacement with
serviceable parts. That action was prompted by a report that surplus
military second stage power turbine disks, Part Number (P/N) 1-140-272-
04, were used on civil aircraft. These disks were manufactured by a
military parts supplier outside of a Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)-approved manufacturing quality system. When compared to parts
manufactured for civil use, parts manufactured for military service may
undergo different manufacturing procedures, and receive
[[Page 42783]]
different quality control inspections, that are not approved by the
FAA. After a review of some disk records, the FAA cannot determine
whether the suspect disks conform with the FAA-approved type design for
similar disks used in civil aircraft engines. Therefore, the suspect
disks are currently not airworthy for use in civil engines, and must be
removed from service. Twelve disks were subsequently installed in civil
engines, four of these disks are currently in service. Although the FAA
has not received any reports of suspect disk failures to date, it is
unknown whether the suspect disks provide an acceptable level of safety
for any period of operation. This condition, if not corrected, could
result in possible failure of a second stage power turbine disk,
uncontained engine failure, and damage to aircraft.
Since the issuance of that priority letter AD, the FAA received a
report of a typographical error in the serial number listing.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other engines of this same type design, this AD
supersedes priority letter AD 96-15-07 to correct an incorrect second
stage power turbine disk serial number.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public 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 under the caption ADDRESSES. 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 evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and 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
AD 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 Number 96-ANE-21.'' 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 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. A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-17-01 AlliedSignal Inc.: Amendment 39-9709. Docket No. 96-ANE-
21. Supersedes AD 96-15-07.
Applicability: AlliedSignal Inc., (formerly Textron Lycoming)
Model T5313B turboshaft engines, incorporating suspect second stage
power turbine disks, Part Number (P/N) 1-140-272-04, identified by
any of the following Serial Numbers: SC05903/32891-451, SC09442/
32891-476, SC09685/32891-623, SC09723/32891-654, SC09743/32891-437,
SC09759/32891-634, SC09755/32891-637, SC09779/32891-682, SC09908/
32891-657, SC10100/32891-649, SC10267/32891-573, SC10269/32891-471.
These engines are installed on but not limited to Bell
Helicopter Textron 205A-1 series rotorcraft.
Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each engine
identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of
whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area
subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been
modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the
requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this AD. The request should include an assessment
of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the
unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition
has not been eliminated, the request should include specific
proposed actions to address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent possible failure of a second stage power turbine
disk, uncontained engine failure, and damage to aircraft, accomplish
the following:
(a) Prior to further flight, remove from service all suspect
second stage power turbine disks, P/N 1-140-272-04, identified by
Serial Numbers listed in the applicability paragraph of this AD, and
replace with serviceable parts.
(b) An alternative method of compliance that provides an
acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager,
Engine Certification Office. The request should be forwarded through
an appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and
then send it to the Manager, Engine Certification Office.
Note: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the Engine Certification Office.
(c) This amendment supersedes priority letter AD 96-15-07,
issued July 16, 1996.
(d) This amendment becomes effective on September 9, 1996.
[[Page 42784]]
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 6, 1996.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21034 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21033 Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney JT8D-200 Series Turbofan Engines
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42781-42782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21033]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-ANE-19; Amendment 39-9714; AD 96-15-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney JT8D-200 Series
Turbofan Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule, request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document publishes in the Federal Register an amendment
adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD) 96-15-06 that was sent previously
to all known U.S. owners and operators of Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-200
series turbofan engines by individual letters. This AD requires, prior
to further flight, removal from service all affected fan hubs,
identified by serial number, and replacement with serviceable parts.
This amendment is prompted by a report of an accident involving an
uncontained failure of a stage 1 fan hub. The actions specified by this
AD are intended to prevent the initiation and propagation of a fatigue
crack, fracture of the fan hub, uncontained engine failure, and damage
to the aircraft.
DATES: Effective September 3, 1996, to all persons except those persons
to whom it was made immediately effective by priority letter AD 96-15-
06, issued on July 16, 1996, which contained the requirements of this
amendment.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before October 18, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-ANE-19, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299. Comments may also be
submitted to the Rules Docket by using the following Internet address:
``[email protected]''. All comments must contain the
Docket No. in the subject line of the comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert E. Guyotte, Manager, Engine
Certification Branch, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299; telephone (617) 238-
7142, fax (617) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 16, 1996, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) issued priority letter airworthiness directive
(AD) 96-15-06, applicable to Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-200 series
engines, which requires, prior to further flight, removal from service
all affected fan hubs, identified by serial number, and replacement
with serviceable parts. That action was prompted by a report of an
accident involving an uncontained failure of a stage 1 fan hub. A fan
hub failure poses a serious threat to safety of flight due to the
possibility of high energy engine fragments penetrating the aircraft
fuselage. The reported fan hub failure resulted from a fatigue crack
that originated in a tie bolt hole. The fatigue crack initiated from
mechanical surface damage produced during machining of the tie bolt
holes, and propagated in a low cycle fatigue mode due to normal engine
start-stop cycles. The manufacturing records indicate that a surface
anomaly was observed in a tie bolt hole during the Blue Etch Anodize
inspection which was determined to be acceptable. The manufacturing
records indicate that six other hubs with similar anomalies in the tie
bolt holes were installed on engines in revenue service. The FAA has
determined that all hubs that exhibited surface anomalies during
inspection of the type observed on the accident hub are not acceptable
and must be removed from service, and replaced with a serviceable part
prior to further flight. This condition, if not corrected, could result
in the initiation and propagation of a fatigue crack, fracture of the
fan hub, uncontained engine failure, and damage to the aircraft.
The FAA is continuing the investigation and based on investigative
findings, further rulemaking action may be required.
Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop
on other engines of the same type design, the FAA issued priority
letter AD 96-15-06 to prevent fracture of the fan hub, uncontained
engine failure, and damage to the aircraft. The AD requires, prior to
further flight, removal from service all affected fan hubs, Part Number
(P/N) 5000501-01, identified by any of the following Serial Numbers:
T50693, T50823, T50827, R32926, R32960, P66756, and replacement with
serviceable parts. The FAA determined this compliance time based on the
potential severity of the aircraft hazard in the event of a fan hub
failure, in conjunction with evidence of tie bolt hole surface
anomalies during manufacturing inspection.
Since it was found that immediate corrective action was required,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment thereon were
impracticable and contrary to the public interest, and good cause
existed to make the AD effective immediately by individual letters
issued on July 16, 1996, to all known U.S. owners and operators of PW
JT8D-200 series turbofan engines. These conditions still exist, and the
AD is hereby published in the Federal Register as an amendment to
Section 39.13 of part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
part 39) to make it effective to all persons.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public 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 under the caption ADDRESSES. 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 evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and 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
AD 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
[[Page 42782]]
statement is made: ``Comments to Docket Number 96-ANE-19.'' 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 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. A copy of it, if filed, may
be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-15-06 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 39-9714. Docket 96-ANE-19.
Applicability: Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D-200 series turbofan
engines incorporating affected first stage fan hubs, Part Number (P/
N) 5000501-01, identified by any of the following Serial Numbers:
T50693, T50823, T50827, R32926, R32960, P66756.
These engines are installed on but not limited to McDonnell
Douglas MD-80 series aircraft
Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) applies to each engine
identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of
whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area
subject to the requirements of this AD. For engines that have been
modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the
requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this AD. The request should include an assessment
of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the
unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition
has not been eliminated, the request should include specific
proposed actions to address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent the initiation and propagation of a fatigue crack,
fracture of the fan hub, uncontained engine failure, and damage to
the aircraft, accomplish the following:
(a) Prior to further flight, remove from service all affected
first stage fan hubs, P/N 5000501-01, identified by Serial Numbers
listed in the applicability paragraph of this AD, and replace with
serviceable parts.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Engine Certification Office. The
request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Engine Certification Office.
Note: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the Engine Certification Office.
(c) This amendment becomes effective September 3, 1996, to all
persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by priority letter AD 96-15-06, issued July 16, 1996,
which contained the requirements of this amendment.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 7, 1996.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21033 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21032 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner; Streamlining of the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42952-42954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21032]
[[Page 42951]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Housing and Urban Development
_______________________________________________________________________
24 CFR Part 280
Streamlining of the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program; Final
Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 161 / Monday, August 19, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 42952]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 280
[Docket No. FR-4090-F-01]
RIN 2502-AG76
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner; Streamlining of the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants
Program
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends HUD's regulations governing the
Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program (NHOP). Congress is no
longer authorizing grants under NHOP. Accordingly, this final rule
removes HUD's obsolete regulations implementing NHOP from title 24.
Those provisions which are necessary to the administration of existing
NHOP grants will be retained. This rule will make HUD's regulations
governing NHOP clearer and more concise.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 18, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard K. Manuel, Office of Insured
Single Family Housing, Room 9272, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20410, telephone
number (202) 708-2700. (This is not a toll-free telephone number.)
Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access this number via TTY
by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
HUD's regulations at 24 CFR part 280 describe the requirements for
the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program (NHOP). Under the NHOP,
HUD made grants to nonprofit organizations to be used to provide loans
to families purchasing homes constructed or substantially rehabilitated
in accordance with HUD approved programs. Section 289(a) of the
National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12839) repealed the NHOP.
Accordingly, HUD is no longer making new NHOP grants. This final rule
removes the obsolete regulations at 24 CFR part 280. However, those
regulatory provisions which are necessary to the administration of
existing NHOP grants are being retained.
For the convenience of readers, the following table summarizes the
changes made by this final rule to 24 CFR part 280:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Section title Summary of changes to section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 280.1..................... Applicability and Scope..... Amended to reflect elimination of the NHOP.
Sec. 280.5..................... Definitions................. Amended to remove obsolete definitions.
Sec. 280.100................... NHOP Assistance............. Redesignated as Sec. 280.10. Amended to reflect
elimination of the NHOP.
Sec. 280.103................... Assistance under other HUD Redesignated as Sec. 280.15.
programs.
Sec. 280.105................... Program size................ Removed.
Sec. 280.110................... Program location............ Removed.
Sec. 280.115................... Home quality................ Redesignated as Sec. 280.20.
Sec. 280.200................... Notice of fund availability. Removed.
Sec. 280.205................... Application requirements.... Removed.
Sec. 280.207................... Other Federal requirements.. Redesignated as Sec. 280.25.
Sec. 280.210................... Selection process........... Removed.
Sec. 280.215................... Threshold requirements...... Removed.
Sec. 280.220................... Ranking criteria............ Removed.
Sec. 280.225................... Final selection............. Removed.
Sec. 280.300................... Obligation of funds......... Removed.
Sec. 280.303................... Grant agreement............. Redesignated as Sec. 280.30.
Sec. 280.305................... Minimum participation....... Redesignated as Sec. 280.35.
Sec. 280.315................... Eligible purchasers......... Redesignated as Sec. 280.40.
Sec. 280.320................... Sales contract and Redesignated as Sec. 280.45. Amended to reflect
downpayment requirements. changes made by this final rule.
Sec. 280.322................... Loan requirements........... Redesignated as Sec. 280.50. Amended to reflect
changes made by this final rule.
Sec. 280.330................... Repayment of loan........... Redesignated as Sec. 280.55.
Sec. 280.335................... Funding amendments and Redesignated as Sec. 280.60.
deobligation of funds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Justification for Final Rulemaking
It is HUD's policy to publish rules for public comment before their
issuance for effect, in accordance with its own regulations on
rulemaking found at 24 CFR part 10. However, part 10 provides for
exceptions to the general rule if HUD finds good cause to omit advance
notice and public participation. The good cause requirement is
satisfied when prior public procedure is ``impracticable, unnecessary,
or contrary to the public interest'' (24 CFR 10.1.). HUD finds that
good cause exists to publish this rule for effect without first
soliciting public comment. This final rule merely removes obsolete
regulatory provisions from title 24. The rule does not establish or
affect substantive policy. Therefore, prior public comment is
unnecessary.
III. Findings and Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed and approved this final rule, and in so
doing certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule merely
streamlines regulations by removing obsolete provisions. Specifically,
this rule removes HUD's outdated regulations at 24 CFR part 280, which
govern participation in NHOP. HUD is only retaining those provisions
which are necessary to the administration of existing NHOP grants. The
final rule will have no adverse or disproportionate economic impact on
small businesses.
Environmental Impact
This rulemaking does not have an environmental impact. This
rulemaking simply amends existing regulations by removing obsolete
provisions and does not alter the environmental effect of the
[[Page 42953]]
regulations being amended. A Finding of No Significant Impact with
respect to the environment was made in accordance with HUD regulations
in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) at the time of
development of the regulations implementing NHOP. This finding remains
applicable to this rule and is available for public inspection between
7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the Office of the Rules Docket
Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Room 10276, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC.
Executive Order 12612, Federalism
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a)
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that this rule
will not have substantial direct effects on States or their political
subdivisions, or the relationship between the Federal government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government. This final rule removes the outdated
regulations governing NHOP from title 24. No programmatic or policy
changes will result from this rule that would affect the relationship
between the Federal Government and State and local governments.
Executive Order 12606, The Family
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this rule will not have
the potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance,
or general well-being, and thus is not subject to review under the
Order. This final rule streamlines HUD's regulations governing NHOP at
24 CFR part 280. Specifically, this rule removes outdated provisions
from part 280. No significant change in existing HUD policies or
programs will result from promulgation of this rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Secretary has reviewed this rule before publication and by
approving it certifies, in accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532), that this rule does not impose a Federal
mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year.
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 280
Community development, Grant programs--housing and community
development, Loan programs--housing and community development, Low and
moderate income housing, Nonprofit organizations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 24 CFR part 280 is amended as follows:
PART 280--NEHEMIAH HOUSING OPPORTUNITY GRANTS PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for 24 CFR part 280 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715l note; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).
2. The headings for subparts A, B, C, and D are removed.
3. Section 280.1 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 280.1 Applicability and scope.
(a) This part sets forth the requirements for existing grants under
the Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program (NHOP). NHOP was
established by title VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1987 (12 U.S.C. 1715l). Under NHOP, HUD made grants to nonprofit
organizations to be used to provide loans to families purchasing homes
constructed or substantially rehabilitated in accordance with a HUD
approved program. NHOP was repealed by Section 289(b) of the Cranston-
Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12839).
Accordingly, no new grants are being awarded under the program.
* * * * *
Sec. 280.5 [Amended]
4. Section 280.5 is amended by removing the definitions of
``Applicant'', ``Contiguous parcels of land'', and ``Financial and
other contributions to the program.''
Sec. 280.100 [Redesignated]
5. Section 280.100 redesignated as Sec. 280.10 and is revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 280.10 NHOP assistance.
Recipients may only use assistance under this part to provide loans
to families purchasing homes constructed or substantially rehabilitated
in accordance with an approved program.
Sec. 280.103 [Redesignated]
6. Section 280.103 is redesignated as Sec. 280.15.
Secs. 280.105 and 280.110 [Removed]
7. Sections 280.105 and 280.110 are removed.
Sec. 280.115 [Redesignated]
8. Section 280.115 is redesignated as Sec. 280.20.
Secs. 280.200 and 280.205 [Removed]
9. Sections 280.200 and 280.205 are removed.
Sec. 280.207 [Redesignated]
10. Section 280.207 is redesignated as Sec. 280.25.
Secs. 280.210, 280.215, 280.220, 280.225, and 280.300 [Removed]
11. Sections 280.210, 280.215, 280.220, 280.225, and 280.300 are
removed.
Sec. 280.303 [Redesignated]
12. Section 280.303 is redesignated as Sec. 280.30.
Sec. 280.305 [Redesignated]
13. Section 280.305 is redesignated as Sec. 280.35 and amended by
revising the introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 280.35 Minimum participation.
Except as provided in paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, the
recipient may not begin the construction or substantial rehabilitation
of homes until 25 percent of the homes to be constructed or
substantially rehabilitated under the program are contracted for sale
to purchasers who intend to live in the homes and the downpayments
required under Sec. 280.45(b) have been made.
* * * * *
Sec. 280.315 [Redesignated]
14. Section 280.315 is redesignated as Sec. 280.40.
Sec. 280.320 [Redesignated]
15. Section 280.320 is redesignated as Sec. 280.45 and amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 280.45 Sales contract and downpayment requirements.
(a) * * *
(2) The repayment provisions described in Sec. 280.55 of this part.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Date of downpayment. The downpayment must be made on the date
required by the recipient. Under Sec. 280.35, however, no construction
or rehabilitation may be begun until at least 25 percent of the homes
constructed or substantially rehabilitated under the program are
contracted for sale to purchasers who intend to live in the homes and
the downpayments are made.
* * * * *
16. Section 280.322 is redesignated as Sec. 280.50 and amended by
revising
[[Page 42954]]
paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 280.50 Loan requirements.
(a) * * *
(4) Is repayable to HUD upon the sale, lease, or other transfer of
the property; except, as an alternative, the nonprofit organization may
elect to provide the Homeowner Incentive under Sec. 280.55(c) for
subsequent sale or transfer of the property (the Homeowner Incentive is
not available upon the lease of the property).
* * * * *
(6) May not be used by the family to provide the downpayment
required under Sec. 280.45.
* * * * *
Sec. 280.330 [Redesignated]
17. Section 280.330 is redesignated as Sec. 280.55.
Sec. 280.335 [Redesignated]
18. Section 280.335 is redesignated as Sec. 280.60.
Dated: August 6, 1996.
Nicolas P. Retsinas,
Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 96-21032 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-27-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21031 Office of the Assistant Secretary for HousingFederal Housing Commissioner; Single Family Mortgage Insurance Premium; Correction to Final Rule
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42786-42787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21031]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Parts 203 and 221
[Docket No. FR-3899-C-02]
RIN 2502-AG55
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner; Single Family Mortgage Insurance Premium; Correction to
Final Rule
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule; Correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 19, 1996 (61 FR 37798), the Department published in
the
[[Page 42787]]
Federal Register, a final rule that finalized a proposed rule published
by the Department on January 26, 1996, which proposed many benefits to
the mortgage lenders that would reduce their servicing costs and the
confusion generated by adjustments to the annual mortgage insurance
premium (MIP) on cases not endorsed within the first six months after
amortization. The purpose of this document is to remove a redundant
sentence in the preamble of the rule and to make a clarifying change to
Sec. 203.264.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John L. Sahl, Acting Director, Office
of Mortgage Insurance Accounting and Servicing, Room 2108, Department
of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, S.W., Washington, DC
20410, telephone (202) 708-1046. For telephone communication, contact
Anne Baird-Bridges, Single Family Insurance Operations Division, at
(202) 708-2438. Hearing or speech-impaired individuals may call HUD's
TTY number (202) 708-4594. These are not toll-free numbers.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Accordingly, corrections are made to FR Doc.
96-18354, a final rule on Single Family Mortgage Insurance Premium,
published in the Federal Register on July 19, 1996 (61 FR 37798), as
follows:
1. On page 37798, in the first column, the preamble is corrected by
removing the third sentence in paragraph 2 of the SUMMARY that reads,
``A new system is being developed (and expected to be operational by
Summer 1997) which would produce a monthly notice of premiums due, and
the reconciliation will be made monthly by the lender when the premium
is paid.''
2. On page 37801, Sec. 203.264 is correctly revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 203.264 Payment of periodic MIP.
The mortgagee shall pay each MIP in twelve equal monthly
installments. Each monthly installment shall be due and payable to the
Commissioner no later than the tenth day of each month, beginning in
the month in which the mortgagor is required to make the first monthly
mortgage payment. This will be effective for amortization beginning on
or after September 1, 1996.
Dated: August 14, 1996.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 96-21031 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-27-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21018 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Intermodal Transportation
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42822-42823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21018]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
49 CFR Part 390
[FHWA Docket No. MC-93-17]
RIN 2125-AD14
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Intermodal
Transportation
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice; extension of effective date.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FHWA announces the extension of the effective date of its
final rule, published on December 29, 1994, implementing provisions of
the Intermodal Safe Container Transportation Act of 1992. The rule was
scheduled to take effect on September 1, 1996, but the FHWA believes
that further extension of the effective date until January 2, 1997, is
appropriate based on the inability, to date, of the educational and
informational outreach program undertaken by the FHWA to reach many
foreign shippers; a request from several Senators to delay the
effective date of this rule pending consideration of legislation to
amend the Act; and two petitions received earlier by the FHWA for
exemptions and amendments to the rule, which are currently outstanding.
DATES: The effective date of the final rule published on December 29,
1994, at 59 FR 67544 has been extended to January 2, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Peter C. Chandler, Office of Motor
Carrier Research and Standards, (202) 366-5763; or Mr. Charles E.
Medalen, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1354, Federal Highway
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590. Office
hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 29, 1994, the FHWA published a
final rule (59 FR 67544) which implemented the Intermodal Safe
Container Transportation Act of 1992 (the Act) (Pub. L. 102-548, 106
Stat. 3646, partly codified at 49 U.S.C. 5901-5907 (formerly 49 U.S.C.
501 and 508)). On August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40761), the FHWA extended the
rule's effective date until September 1, 1996, to allow the intermodal
transportation industry sufficient time to comply by means of
electronic data interchange, and to allow the FHWA, the intermodal
transportation industry, and other parties enough time to inform
affected domestic and foreign entities of their responsibilities. In
April and August of 1995, the FHWA received two petitions for
exemptions and amendments to the rule. The FHWA delayed the
international distribution of pamphlets about the rule and other
related educational projects until resolution of the petitions. On
March 29, 1996, the petitioners along with an industry coalition
requested that the FHWA delay its decision on the petitions and later
notified the agency that they would seek legislative action to amend
the Act. On July 16, 1996, a bill to amend the Act was introduced by
the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation with co-sponsorship of the Chairman and ranking minority
member of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant
Marine. The bill (S. 1957) would raise the jurisdictional weight
threshold from 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) to 13,154 kilograms
(29,000 pounds); reduce or eliminate paperwork burdens; provide
clarification concerning applicability, requirements, and terminology;
and establish additional liabilities. On July 23, 1996, the
[[Page 42823]]
sponsors of S. 1957 sent a letter to the Secretary of Transportation
requesting that the rule's September 1, 1996, effective date be
extended. The Senators expressed concern that implementation as
currently planned could have devastating consequences on intermodal
transportation including delays and severe congestion at ports.
The FHWA believes a further extension is appropriate because the
two petitions before the agency are not resolved, a significant number
of foreign entities are not familiar with their responsibilities, and
implementation of the rule prior to possible enactment of S. 1957 could
disrupt both interstate and foreign commerce. In the event that the
rule became effective on September 1 and S. 1957 later became law, the
rule would have to be suspended once again until it could be amended in
accordance with the new law. In view of the international reach of the
Act and the difficulty of explaining United States laws and regulations
to foreign shippers and their intermediaries, the FHWA has determined
that a further extension of the rule's effective date is warranted in
order to avoid the risk of confusion and disruption that would result
from frequent regulatory changes.
The FHWA is therefore extending the effective date of the final
rule until January 2, 1997.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5901-5907, 31132, 31133, 31136, 31502, and
31504; 49 CFR 1.48.
Issued on: August 8, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21018 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20987 Final Policy on Examination of Working Places
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42787-42788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20987]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Parts 56 and 57
Final Policy on Examination of Working Places
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Final rule; policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is revising
its policy concerning the examination of working places at all metal
and nonmetal mining operations to clarify operators' obligations under
30 CFR 56.18002 and 57.18002, Examination of Working Places. To ensure
that all interested persons are informed of this action, MSHA is
publishing the full text of the Program Policy Letter addressing these
standards in Appendix I of this notice. This policy letter supersedes
MSHA's existing policy regarding enforcement of these standards.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 18, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodric Breland, Chief, Division of
Safety, Metal and Nonmetal Mine Safety and Health, 703-235-8647.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirement in Secs. 56.18002 and
57.18002 has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under
control number 1219-0089.
II. Discussion of Final Policy
MSHA's safety standards in Secs. 56.18002 and 57.18002 concerning
examination of working places at metal and nonmetal mines were first
promulgated as advisory standards in July 1969 and became mandatory in
August 1979. MSHA issued Program Policy Letter (PPL) No. P94-IV-5 on
December 12, 1994, clarifying its policy concerning these standards.
Shortly thereafter, MSHA introduced a new procedure to encourage
participation in enforcement policy formulation and withdrew the PPL
concerning examination of working places. Subsequently, the PPL was
revised and published in the Federal Register (60 FR 9987) on February
22, 1995 and public input was solicited. The Agency also held public
meetings on July 6 and 7, 1995, in Cleveland, Ohio; and July 12 and 13,
1995, in Elko, Nevada. MSHA received comments from both labor and
industry, and considered these comments in the development of this
final policy.
The Agency is now publishing the final policy in the Federal
Register to ensure that all interested parties are informed. MSHA also
will issue this policy as Program Policy Letter No. P96-IV-2 and as an
update to the Program Policy Manual, Volume IV, pages 61 and 62. The
full text of this Program Policy Letter is published in Appendix I of
this notice. This policy letter supersedes MSHA's existing policy
regarding enforcement of these standards.
Dated: August 8, 1996.
J. Davitt McAteer,
Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and Health.
Appendix I--Program Policy Letter No. P96-IV-2--30 CFR 56.18002 and
57.18002--Examination of Working Places
Effective Date: November 18, 1996.
Expiration Date: 3/31/97.
Program Policy Letter No. P96-IV-2
From: Vernon R. Gomez, Administrator for Metal and Nonmetal Mine
Safety and Health.
Subject: 30 CFR 56.18002 and 57.18002--Examination of working
places.
Scope
This policy letter applies to metal and nonmetal mine operators
and Metal and Nonmetal Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)
enforcement personnel.
Purpose
This policy letter revises MSHA's existing policy regarding
enforcement of its standards in Title 30, Code of Federal
Regulations (30 CFR) Secs. 56.18002 and 57.18002, Examination of
working places, to clarify operators' obligations under these
standards. MSHA also is revising this policy in MSHA's Program
Policy Manual, Volume IV, pages 61 and 62.
Mine operators are responsible for preventing unsafe conditions
and practices and correcting safety and health hazards before miners
become exposed to them. MSHA believes that regular working place
examinations are fundamental to the prevention of accidents in the
mining industry. MSHA standards in 30 CFR 56.18002 and 57.18002
require the operator to conduct a regular examination of working
areas for hazards. As a result, miners will be ensured a safer and
more healthful mine environment.
Policy
30 CFR Secs. 56/57.18002, Examination of working places,
provide:
(a) A competent person designated by the operator shall examine
each working place at least once each shift for conditions which may
adversely affect safety or health. The operator shall promptly
initiate appropriate action to correct such conditions.
(b) A record that such examinations were conducted shall be kept
by the operator for
[[Page 42788]]
a period of one year, and shall be made available for review by the
Secretary or his authorized representative.
(c) In addition, conditions that may present an imminent danger
which are noted by the person conducting the examination shall be
brought to the immediate attention of the operator who shall
withdraw all persons from the area affected (except persons referred
to in section 104(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of
1977) until the danger is abated.
MSHA intends that the terms ``competent person'' and ``working
place,'' used in Secs. 56/57.18002(a), be interpreted as defined in
Secs. 56.2 and 57.2, Definitions.
A ``competent person,'' according to Secs. 56.2 and 57.2, is ``a
person having abilities and experience that fully qualify him to
perform the duty to which he is assigned.'' This definition includes
any person who, in the judgment of the operator, is fully qualified
to perform the assigned task. MSHA does not require that a competent
person be a mine foreman, mine superintendent, or other person
associated with mine management.
The phrase ``working place'' is defined in 30 CFR Secs. 56.2 and
57.2 as: ``any place in or about a mine where work is being
performed.'' As used in the standard, the phrase applies to those
locations at a mine site where persons work during a shift in the
mining or milling processes.
Standards 56/57.18002(b) require operators to keep records of
working place examinations. These records must include: (1) the date
the examination was made; (2) the examiner's name; and (3) the
working places examined. MSHA intends to allow operators
considerable flexibility in complying with this provision in order
to minimize the paperwork burden.
Records of examinations may be entered on computer data bases or
documents already in use, such as production sheets, logs, charts,
time cards, or other format that is more convenient for mine
operators.
In order to comply with the record retention portion of
Secs. 56.18002(b) and 57.18002(b), operators must retain workplace
examination records for the preceding 12 months. As an alternative
to the 12-month retention period, an operator may discard these
records after MSHA has completed its next regular inspection of the
mine, if the operator also certifies that the examinations have been
made for the preceding 12 months.
Evidence that a previous shift examination was not conducted or
that prompt corrective action was not taken will result in a
citation for violation of Secs. 56.18002 and 57.18002 (a) or (c).
This evidence may include information which demonstrates that safety
or health hazards existed prior to the working shift in which they
were found. Although the presence of hazards covered by other
standards may indicate a failure to comply with this standard, MSHA
does not intend to cite Secs. 56.18002 and 57.18002 automatically
when the Agency finds an imminent danger or a violation of another
standard.
Background
Failure to conduct working place examinations has been a
contributing cause of a significant number of recent accidents. In
the 5-year period from 1988-1992, MSHA has investigated 17 serious
and fatal accidents where working place examinations were not
conducted or were inadequately conducted and were found to have
contributed to the cause of the accident.
Authority
30 CFR Secs. 56.18002 and 57.18002.
Filing Instructions
This policy letter should be filed after the tab ``Program
Policy Letters,'' located behind Volume IV of the Program Policy
Manual.
Issuing Office and Contact Person
Metal and Nonmetal Mine Safety and Health, Division of Safety,
Richard Feehan, 703-235-8647
Distribution
Program Policy Manual Holders
Metal and Nonmetal Mine Operators
Metal and Nonmetal Independent Contractors
Metal and Nonmetal Special Interest Groups
[FR Doc. 96-20987 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20982 Native American Programs
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42817-42822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20982]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Part 1336
RIN 0970-AB37
Native American Programs
AGENCY: Administration for Native Americans, Administration for
Children and Families, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On September 30, 1992, the Congress passed the Older Americans
Act Amendments of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-375), amending the Native American
Programs Act of 1974. In accordance with these amendments, the
Administration for Native Americans (ANA) is amending 45 CFR Part 1336
to incorporate an appeals procedure for ANA ineligible applications.
This action affords the applicants in ANA grant program announcement
areas the opportunity to appeal the rejection of an application based
on a finding that either the applicant or the proposed activities are
ineligible for funding. A successful appeal would lead to
reconsideration of the application in the next cycle of grant proposals
following the HHS Departmental Appeals Board's determination to uphold
the appeal. It does not guarantee ANA approval for grant funding.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 18, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Denise Rodriguez (202) 690-6265,
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Room 348-F, Washington, DC
20201-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Program Description
In 1974, the Native American Programs Act (the Act) was enacted as
Title VIII of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, (Pub. L. 93-644)
(42 U.S.C. 2991a et seq.) to promote the goal of social and economic
self-sufficiency for
[[Page 42818]]
American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. The legislation
was subsequently amended by the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1987
(Pub. L. 100-175), which extended eligibility to Native American
Pacific Islanders (including American Samoan Natives), and the Indian
Environmental Regulatory Enhancement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-408) and
the Indian Reorganization Act Amendments (Pub. L. 100-581). Most
recently it was amended by the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1992
(Pub. L. 102-375); the Native American Languages Act of 1992 (Pub. L.
102-524); Technical Amendments to Certain Indian Statutes, 1992 (Pub.
L. 102-497); and the Older Americans Act Technical Amendments of 1993
(Pub. L. 103-171).
Background
Financial assistance provided by ANA, under the Act, is designed to
promote the goal of social and economic self-sufficiency for American
Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Native American Pacific
Islanders through programs and projects that: (1) Advance locally
developed social and economic development strategies (SEDS) and
strengthen local governance capabilities as authorized by Sec. 803(a);
(2) preserve Native American languages authorized by Sec. 803C; (3)
improve the capability of the governing body of the Indian tribe to
regulate environmental quality authorized by Sec. 803(d); and (4)
mitigate the environmental impacts to Indian lands due to Department of
Defense activities. The funding for the mitigation of environmental
impacts to Indian lands due to Department of Defense activities is
authorized by Sec. 8094A of the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 1994 (Pub. L. 103-139), and Sec. 8094A, the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1995 (Pub. L. 103-335). The Act also authorizes a
Hawaiian Loan Program in Sec. 803A. Under this program, ANA makes
grants to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs of the State of Hawaii to
support a revolving loan fund. Because of the unique nature of this
program, an appeal is unlikely to arise under it, and for this reason
ANA has not addressed the question of eligibility of organizations or
activities under this program in the regulations.
II. Discussion of Final Rule
A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) was published in the Federal
Register on April 21, 1995 (60 FR 19994). No comments were received.
However, we have made changes to the final rule for the benefit of all
parties concerned. We now identify the Departmental Appeals Board (DAB)
as the body that is delegated the authority to review appeals instead
of the Assistant Secretary for Children and Families as set forth in
the NPRM. On reconsideration of the NPRM, we determined that it would
be logical for the DAB to hear ANA grants eligibility determination
appeals, since the DAB already handles appeals regarding various grant
programs administered by the Department, including appeals of
terminations, suspensions and denials of refunding under ANA grant
programs pursuant to 45 CFR 1336.52(c)(2). Accordingly, the Assistant
Secretary has delegated the appeals process to the DAB. The Assistant
Secretary's delegation to the DAB strengthens the appeals process and
affords administrative convenience, beneficial to all parties
concerned. For purposes of clarification, we have revised our
descriptions of eligible applicants as described below.
Tribally Controlled Community Colleges, Tribally Controlled Post-
Secondary Vocational Institutions, and colleges and universities
located in Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Palau, or the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands which serve Native American Pacific
Islanders were added under 45 CFR 1336.33(a)(1) to the list of
organizations eligible for funding under the Social and Economic
Development Strategies (SEDS) and Preservation and Enhancement of
Native American Languages programs. This new category of organizations
was added to make it clear that such organizations are eligible to
apply for funding under these programs. These organizations would have
qualified under the proposed categories, but the addition of this
category will clearly establish the eligibility of such organizations.
The final regulations include a separate listing at Sec. 1336.33(a)(2)
of eligible organizations for the Alaska-Specific Social and Economic
Development Strategies (SEDS) Projects. These organizations were listed
under the eligible organizations for the SEDS program. The separate
listings are necessary because Alaskan organizations can elect to apply
under either the SEDS competition or the Alaska-Specific Social and
Economic Development Strategies Project. In the final rule,
Sec. 1336.33(a)(4), which was (a)(3) in the NPRM, we have added
Nonprofit Alaska Native Regional Corporations/Associations with
village-specific projects and other tribal or village organizations or
consortia of Indian tribes to the list of eligible organizations for
the program on the improvement of the capability of tribal governing
bodies to regulate environmental quality. We added these categories in
recognition of the possibility that such organizations performed
similar functions to the organizations listed in the NPRM.
The final rule establishes new procedures mandated by
reauthorization legislation, the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1992
(Pub. L. 102-375, Title VIII, Subtitle C; ``Native American Programs
Act Amendments of 1992''). The rule adds three new sections to 45 CFR
Part 1336, Subpart C that lists the categories of eligible applicants
and activities that are ineligible, Sec. 1336.33, requirements for the
notice of ineligibility, Sec. 1336.34, and the procedures for appeal of
such a determination, Sec. 1336.35. Appeals will be governed by the
Departmental Appeals Board regulations at 45 CFR Part 16, except as
otherwise provided in these regulations.
A successful appeal under Sec. 1336.35 would lead to
reconsideration of the application in the next cycle of grant
proposals. It does not guarantee ANA approval for grant funding.
Furthermore, the decision that an application is deficient by ANA prior
to competitive panel review for reasons other than applicant
ineligibility or the ineligibility of proposed activities is not
appealable under this section and in accordance with Sec. 810(b) of the
Act. The decision not to fund an application because it fails the
competitive review panel also is not appealable under this section.
Section by Section Discussion of the Final Rule
In Subpart C, Part 1336, Native American Projects, we are including
a new Sec. 1336.33, ``Eligible applicants and proposed activities which
are ineligible''. This section lists the categories of organizations
which are eligible for four of the grant programs administered by ANA.
An organization not within the categories specified for a program is
not eligible to receive funding under that program.
The provision also lists activities which, based upon its
experience in administering the program, ANA has declined to fund in
the past. The Agency has found that these activities are by their
nature of limited or no value in furthering the goals of the respective
grant programs administered by ANA.
Paragraph (a)(1) lists categories of applicants eligible to apply
for SEDS and Preservation and Enhancement of Native American Language
grants. The categories are in accordance with Section 803(a) of the
Native American Programs Act, as amended, and Section
[[Page 42819]]
803C, which provides that organizations eligible under Section 803(a)
are also eligible for grants under the Native American languages
program. The following are some examples of the eligible organizations
listed in paragraph (a)(1): Federally recognized Indian Tribes; urban
Indian Centers; consortia of Indian Tribes; Alaska Native villages as
defined by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) and/or
nonprofit village consortia; public and nonprofit private agencies
serving native peoples from Guam, American Samoa, Palau, or the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; public and nonprofit
private agencies serving Native Hawaiians; and incorporated non-
Federally recognized Tribes.
Applications from tribal components which are tribally-authorized
divisions of a larger tribe must be approved by the governing body of
the Tribe. This interpretation of the requirements of the Act reflects
the legal principle that Indian Tribes possess inherent governmental
power over all internal affairs. See for example, Merrion v. Jicarilla
Apache Tribe, 455 U.S. 130 (1982) (Tribe has inherent power to impose
severance tax on mining activities). Attributes of sovereign authority
of tribes extends over both their members and territory, except where
that authority has been withdrawn or modified by treaty or Federal
statute. Iowa Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaPlante, 480 U.S. 9, 14 (1987).
Tribes generally retain sovereignty by way of tribal self-government
and control over other aspects of its internal affairs. Brendale v.
Confederated Tribes and Band of Yakima, 109 S. Ct. 2994 (1989). When
the eligibility requirements of Sec. 803(a) are applied to such
organizations it is appropriate to interpret the requirements in light
of the principle that tribes have an inherent authority over their
internal affairs and over their members. To do otherwise would
undermine the ability of tribes to exercise that authority. It is also
particularly important in such circumstances to have the support of the
tribal government since the grant is intended to further the social and
economic development of the tribe and its members.
ANA also has included in the final rule a requirement for its
programs that ``[a]pplicants, other than tribes or Alaska Native
Village governments, proposing a project benefiting Native Americans or
Native Alaskans, or both, must provide assurance that its duly elected
or appointed board of directors is representative of the community to
be served.'' We believe this requirement is consistent with the NPRM
which made it clear from the proposed list of eligible organizations
that in order to be eligible an organization had to be in some way
representative of a Native American community. The requirement for an
assurance of the representativeness of the organizations's board is
only an elaboration of the existing requirement.
The requirements of paragraph (a)(1) set forth ANA's interpretation
of the eligibility requirements of Sec. 803(a) of the Act. The Agency
has removed 45 CFR 1336.30(a) which restated the language of the
statute. Continued use of that provision in the regulations would have
caused confusion. In addition, ANA has removed 45 CFR 1336.30(c) which
provided that projects in American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana
Islands received funding under Sec. 803 ``subject to the availability
of funds.'' This provision was based upon a requirement in Sec. 803(a)
which was deleted in 1992 by Pub. L. 102-497. In accordance with these
removals, the heading of Sec. 1336.30 has been changed to ``Eligibility
under sections 804 and 805 of the Native American Programs Act of
1974''.
Paragraph (a)(2) lists 5 categories of applicants eligible to apply
for funds under the Alaska-Specific Social and Economic Development
Strategies Project. As explained earlier, this separate listing
contains organizations that were in the NPRM but separate listings are
necessary because Alaskan organizations can elect to apply under either
the SEDS competition or the Alaska-Specific Social and Economic
Development Strategies Project.
Paragraph (a)(3), which was (a)(2) in the NPRM, lists 5 categories
of applicants eligible to apply for funds provided by the Department of
Defense (DoD) and ANA for the purpose of mitigating environmental
impacts on Indian Lands related to DoD activities. This list was
derived from the Environmental Mitigation Program Announcement as
published in the Federal Register: Availability of Financial
Assistance; (58 FR 69106; December 29, 1993). ANA does not interpret
Section 810(b) of the Act as requiring that applicants under the DoD
program have a right to appeal rulings of ineligibility; however the
ANA has decided as a matter of policy to include this program under the
regulations.
Paragraph (a)(4), which was (a)(3) in the NPRM, lists 5 categories
of applicants eligible to apply for funds for the improvement of the
capability of tribal governing bodies to regulate environmental
quality. The eligible categories of organizations are: (1) Federally
recognized Indian Tribes; (2) incorporated non-Federally recognized
Indian Tribes; (3) consortia of Indian Tribes; (4) Alaska Native
villages as defined by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)
and/or nonprofit village consortia; (5) Tribal governing bodies (Indian
Reorganization Act (IRA) or traditional councils) as recognized by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs. The list of 5 categories is derived from the
program announcement: Availability of Financial Assistance for
Improving the Capability of Indian Tribal Governments to Regulate
Environmental Quality (59 FR 16650, April 7, 1994).
The provisions being added to the regulations do not include a list
of organizations eligible for grants authorized by Sec. 805 of the Act,
which authorizes grants for research, demonstration and pilot projects.
Eligibility under Sec. 805 is addressed in part under the revised 45
CFR 1336.30. ANA is not currently awarding grants under this provision,
nor does it have plans to do so. If, at some point in the future, it
does issue an announcement for funding under Sec. 805, the Agency will
provide additional guidance on eligibility under that provision.
Applicants for funding under Sec. 805 who wish to appeal the rejection
of an application based on a finding that either the applicant or the
proposed activities are ineligible for funding will be able to do so by
submitting an appeal as provided for by 45 CFR 1336.35.
Paragraph (b) provides a nonexclusive list of activities that are
ineligible for funding under programs authorized by the Native American
Programs Act of 1974. (It is impossible to list all activities that
would be considered eligible.) With the exception of one activity, the
purchase of real estate, which is prohibited by law, the remaining
activities listed are derived from ANA's past experiences in managing
grants and working with organizations, both public and private. Several
examples of these are:
(a) Projects in which a grantee would provide training and/or
technical assistance (T/TA) to other tribes or Native American
organizations (``third party T/TA''). However, the purchase of T/TA
by a grantee for its own use or for its members' use (as in the case
of a consortium), where T/TA is necessary to carry out project
objectives, is acceptable. Third party T/TA is not an eligible
activity because ANA believes it is inefficient to fund
organizations which would otherwise be able to apply directly to ANA
for T/TA funding;
(b) Projects that request funds for feasibility studies,
business plans, marketing plans or written materials, such as
manuals, that are not an essential part of the applicant's SEDS
long-range development plan. ANA is not interested in funding ``wish
[[Page 42820]]
lists'' of business possibilities. This policy reflects ANA's belief
that the limited amount of funds available to the Agency is better
used to support activities which directly affect the well-being of
the members of Native American communities;
(c) The support of on-going social service delivery programs or
the expansion, or continuation, of existing social service delivery
programs. This area is covered by other Federal programs and would
result in a duplicative effort by ANA; and
(d) Core administration functions, or other activities, that
essentially support only the applicant's on-going administrative
functions. ANA funds are used for specific projects that become
self-sustaining and not for the on-going administration of tribes or
organizations. (However, in Alaska-Specific SEDS Projects, ANA will
consider funding core administrative capacity building projects at
the village government level if the village does not have governing
systems in place.) This exception has been added because grantees
for Alaska-Specific SEDS Projects at the village government level
are frequently village governments or organizations performing
governmental functions on behalf of village governments. In many
instances, such funding is necessary to ensure that villages develop
the minimum governmental services necessary to support social and
economic development.
In section 1336.34, Notice of ineligibility, we require that upon a
finding by the Commissioner that an organization which has applied for
funding is ineligible or that the activities proposed by an
organization are ineligible, the Commissioner shall inform the
applicant, by certified letter, of the decision. The notice must
include a statement of the legal and factual grounds for the finding
concerning eligibility, a copy of these regulations, and the statement
regarding how to appeal the decision.
In section 1336.35, ``Appeal of ineligibility'', we are
establishing the procedures an applicant must follow when seeking to
appeal the ANA Commissioner's determination that an applicant, or
proposed activities, are rejected on grounds of ineligibility. This
section describes the steps that apply when seeking such an appeal. In
accordance with the Native Americans Programs Act, Section 810(b), the
applicant may make an appeal to the Secretary for review of the
determination of ineligibility. The Secretary has delegated this
authority to the Assistant Secretary. The Assistant Secretary has
delegated to the DAB the review of appeals made under section 810(b).
Except as otherwise provided in these regulations, Appeals will be
governed by the DAB regulations at 45 CFR Part 16. Under this section,
the applicant has 30 days following receipt of ineligibility
notification to appeal, in writing, the Commissioner's ruling. The
appeal must clearly identify the issues. Under this section, the
Commissioner shall have 45 days to respond to the applicant's
submission and the applicant 20 days to respond to the Commissioner's
submission to DAB. The individual presiding over the appeal may request
the parties to submit additional information within a specified time
period before closing the record in the appeal. The DAB will provide a
final written decision within 30 days of the closing of the record,
unless the Board determines for good reason that a decision cannot be
issued within the time period and so notifies the parties. If a
determination is made by the DAB that the applicant or application is
eligible, as required by law, the eligibility will not take effect
until the next cycle of grant proposals are considered by ANA.
III. Impact Analysis
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 requires that regulations be drafted to
ensure that they are consistent with the priorities and principles set
forth in the Executive Order. The Department has determined that this
rule is consistent with these priorities and principles.
The final rule amends the current rules to establish an appeal
procedure authorized by the Older Americans Act Amendments of 1992. It
adds three new sections to 45 CFR Part 1336 that list the categories of
eligible applicants and ineligible activities, set forth requirements
for the notice of ineligibility, and establish procedures on how to
appeal determinations of ineligibility made by the Commissioner, ANA.
The final rule also deletes existing provisions from the regulations
that are no longer applicable or are rendered obsolete by this final
rule. We estimate that these regulations will not result in significant
additional costs to the Federal government or Native American programs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1995
Consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. Ch. 6], we
try to anticipate and reduce the impact of rules and paperwork
requirements on small businesses. For each rule with a ``significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,'' we prepare
an analysis describing the rule's impact on small entities. Small
entities are defined by the Act to include small businesses, small non-
profit organizations and small governmental entities. While this rule
affects small entities, i.e., Alaskan Native villages and non-profit
organizations, based on past experience with respect to other appeals
under ANA, we expect the impact to be minimal. For this reason, the
Assistant Secretary certifies that these rules will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13, all
Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval any reporting or recordkeeping
requirement contained in a proposed or final rule. This final rule does
not contain any reporting or recordkeeping requirements, thus, no
submission to OMB is required.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 1336
Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Appeals
Grant programs--Indians, Grant programs--social programs, Guam,
Indians, Native Hawaiians, Northern Mariana Islands, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 93.612 Native
American Programs)
Approved: July 23, 1996.
Mary Jo Bane,
Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 45 CFR Part 1336 is
amended as follows:
SUBCHAPTER D--THE ADMINISTRATION FOR NATIVE AMERICANS, NATIVE AMERICAN
PROGRAMS
PART 1336--NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for Part 1336 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2991 et seq.
2. Section 1336.30 is amended by removing paragraphs (a) and (c),
removing the designation (b) from the remaining paragraph, and revising
the section heading to read as follows:
Sec. 1336.30 Eligibility under sections 804 and 805 of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974.
* * * * *
3. Three new sections, Secs. 1336.33, 1336.34 and 1336.35, are
added to read as follows:
Sec. 1336.33 Eligible applicants and proposed activities which are
ineligible.
(a) Eligibility for the listed programs is restricted to the
following specified categories of organizations. In addition,
applications from tribal components which are tribally-authorized
divisions of a larger tribe must be approved by the
[[Page 42821]]
governing body of the Tribe. If the applicant, other than a tribe or an
Alaska Native Village government, is proposing a project benefiting
Native Americans or Native Alaskans, or both, it must provide assurance
that its duly elected or appointed board of directors is representative
of the community to be served.
(1) Social and Economic Development Strategies (SEDS) and
Preservation and Enhancement of Native American Languages:
(i) Federally recognized Indian Tribes;
(ii) Consortia of Indian Tribes;
(iii) Incorporated non-Federally recognized Tribes;
(iv) Incorporated nonprofit multi-purpose community-based Indian
organizations;
(v) Urban Indian Centers;
(vi) National and regional incorporated nonprofit Native American
organizations with Native American community-specific objectives;
(vii) Alaska Native villages as defined in the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act (ANSCA) and/or nonprofit village consortia;
(viii) Incorporated nonprofit Alaska Native multi-purpose
community-based organizations;
(ix) Nonprofit Alaska Native Regional Corporations/Associations in
Alaska with village specific projects;
(x) Nonprofit Native organizations in Alaska with village specific
projects;
(xi) Public and nonprofit private agencies serving Native
Hawaiians;
(xii) Public and nonprofit private agencies serving native peoples
from Guam, American Samoa, Palau, or the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands. (The populations served may be located on these
islands or in the United States);
(xiii) Tribally Controlled Community Colleges Tribally Controlled
Post-Secondary Vocational Institutions, and colleges and universities
located in Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Palau, or the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands which serve Native American Pacific
Islanders; and
(xiv) Nonprofit Alaska Native community entities or tribal
governing bodies (Indian Reorganization Act or traditional councils) as
recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(Statutory authority: Sections 803(a) and 803C of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991 b(a) and
42 U.S.C. 2991b-3)
(2) Alaska-Specific Social and Economic Development Strategies
(SEDS) Projects:
(i) Federally recognized Indian Tribes in Alaska;
(ii) Alaska Native villages as defined in the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act (ANCSA) and/or nonprofit village consortia;
(iii) Incorporated nonprofit Alaska Native multi-purpose community-
based organizations;
(iv) Nonprofit Alaska Native Regional Corporations/Associations in
Alaska with village specific projects; and
(v) Nonprofit Native organizations in Alaska with village specific
projects.
(3) Mitigation of Environmental Impacts to Indian Lands Due to
Department of Defense Activities:
(i) Federally recognized Indian Tribes;
(ii) Incorporated non-Federally and State recognized Tribes;
(iii) Nonprofit Alaska Native community entities or tribal
governing bodies (Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) or traditional
councils) as recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(iv) Nonprofit Alaska Native Regional Associations and/or
Corporations with village specific projects; and
(v) Other tribal or village organizations or consortia of Indian
Tribes. (Statutory authority: Sec. 8094A of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1994 (Public Law 103-139), Sec. 8094A of the Native
Americans Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991h(b)).
(4) Improvement of the capability of tribal governing bodies to
regulate environmental quality:
(i) Federally recognized Indian Tribes;
(ii) Incorporated non-Federally and State recognized Indian tribes;
(iii) Alaska Native villages as defined in the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act (ANSCA) and/or nonprofit village consortia;
(iv) Nonprofit Alaska Native Regional Corporations/Associations
with village-specific projects;
(v) Other tribal or village organizations or consortia of Indian
tribes: and
(vi) Tribal governing bodies (IRA or traditional councils) as
recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. (Statutory authority:
Sections 803(d) of the Native Americans Programs Act of 1974, as
amended 42 U.S.C. 2991b(d).)
(b) The following is a nonexclusive list of activities that are
ineligible for funding under programs authorized by the Native American
Programs Act of 1974:
(1) Projects in which a grantee would provide training and/or
technical assistance (T/TA) to other tribes or Native American
organizations (``third party T/TA''). However, the purchase of T/TA by
a grantee for its own use or for its members' use (as in the case of a
consortium), where T/TA is necessary to carry out project objectives,
is acceptable;
(2) Projects that request funds for feasibility studies, business
plans, marketing plans or written materials, such as manuals, that are
not an essential part of the applicant's SEDS long-range development
plan;
(3) The support of on-going social service delivery programs or the
expansion, or continuation, of existing social service delivery
programs;
(4) Core administration functions, or other activities, that
essentially support only the applicant's on-going administrative
functions; however, for Competitive Area 2, Alaska-Specific SEDS
Projects, ANA will consider funding core administrative capacity
building projects at the village government level if the village does
not have governing systems in place;
(5) The conduct of activities which are not responsive to one or
more of the three interrelated ANA goals (Governance Development,
Economic Development, and Social Development);
(6) Proposals from consortia of tribes that are not specific with
regard to support from, and roles of member tribes. An application from
a consortium must have goals and objectives that will create positive
impacts and outcomes in the communities of its members. ANA will not
fund activities by a consortium of tribes which duplicates activities
for which member tribes also receive funding from ANA; and
(7) The purchase of real estate. (Statutory authority: Sections
803B of the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b-2)
Sec. 1336.34 Notice of ineligibility.
(a) Upon a finding by the Commissioner that an organization which
has applied for funding is ineligible or that the activities proposed
by an organization are ineligible, the Commissioner shall inform the
applicant by certified letter of the decision.
(b) The letter must include the following:
(1) The legal and factual grounds for the Commissioner's finding
concerning eligibility;
(2) A copy of the regulations in this part; and
(3) The following statement: This is the final decision of the
Commissioner, Administration for Native Americans. It shall be the
final decision of the Department unless, within 30 days after receiving
this decision as provided in Sec. 810(b) of the Native Americans
Programs Act of 1974, as amended, and 45 CFR part 1336, you deliver or
mail
[[Page 42822]]
(you should use registered or certified mail to establish the date) a
written notice of appeal to the HHS Departmental Appeals Board, 200
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20201. You shall attach to
the notice a copy of this decision and note that you intend an appeal.
The appeal must clearly identify the issue(s) in dispute and contain a
statement of the applicant's position on such issue(s) along with
pertinent facts and reasons in support of the position. We are
enclosing a copy of 45 CFR part 1336 which governs the conduct of
appeals under Sec. 810(b). For additional information on the appeals
process see 45 CFR 1336.35. (Statutory authority: Sections 810(b) of
the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991h(b).)
Sec. 1336.35 Appeal of ineligibility.
The following steps apply when seeking an appeal on a finding of
ineligibility for funding:
(a) An applicant, which has had its application rejected either
because it has been found ineligible or because the activities it
proposes are ineligible for funding by the Commissioner of ANA, may
appeal the Commissioner's ruling to the HHS Departmental Appeals Board,
in writing, within 30 days following receipt of ineligibility
notification.
(b) The appeal must clearly identify the issue(s) in dispute and
contain a statement of the applicant's position on such issue(s) along
with pertinent facts and reasons in support of the position.
(c) Upon receipt of appeal for reconsideration of a rejected
application or activities proposed by an applicant, the Departmental
Appeals Board will notify the applicant by certified mail that the
appeal has been received.
(d) The applicant's request for reconsideration will be reviewed by
the Departmental Appeals Board in accordance with 45 CFR part 16,
except as otherwise provided in this part.
(e) The Commissioner shall have 45 days to respond to the
applicant's submission under paragraph (a) of this section.
(f) The applicant shall have 20 days to respond to the
Commissioner's submission and the parties may be requested to submit
additional information within a specified time period before closing
the record in the appeal.
(g) The Departmental Appeals Board will review the record in the
appeal and provide a final written decision within 30 days following
the closing of the record, unless the Board determines for good reason
that a decision cannot be issued within this time period and so
notifies the parties.
(h) If the Departmental Appeals Board determines that the applicant
is eligible or that the activities proposed by the applicant are
eligible for funding, such eligibility shall not be effective until the
next cycle of grant proposals are considered by the Administration for
Native Americans. (Statutory authority: Sections 810(b) of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991h(b).)
[FR Doc. 96-20982 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20873 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, -40, and KC-10A (Military) Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42776-42777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20873]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-177-AD; Amendment 39-9717; AD 96-17-08]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -15,
-30, -40, and KC-10A (Military) Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, -40,
and KC-10A (military) series airplanes, that requires modification of
the AC generator control units. This amendment is prompted by reports
of loss of electrical power from two generators and an engine that
flamed out due to an overfrequency condition of a generator. The
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent an overfrequency
condition of a generator, which could lead to the loss of all
electrical power of the airplane.
DATES: Effective September 23, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 23, 1996.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical Publications
Business Administration, Department C1-L51 (2-60). This information may
be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol
Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natalie Phan-Tran, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California
90712; telephone (310) 627-5343; fax (310) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model
DC-10-10, -15, -30, -40, and KC-10A (military) series airplanes was
published in the Federal Register on January 3, 1996 (61 FR 134). That
action proposed to require modification of the AC generator control
units.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
Support for the Proposal
Three commenters support the proposed rule.
Request Not to Adopt the Rule
One commenter requests that the proposed AD not be adopted as
proposed. The commenter states that the modification (i.e., addition of
a circuit that will provide overfrequency protection) proposed by the
AD causes a significant reduction in the reliability of the generator
control unit (GCU). The commenter notes that, following accomplishment
of the proposed modification, it has experienced an increase of GCU
removals and bus tie relay (BTR) lockouts on in-service airplanes. The
commenter acknowledges that the subject modification may add a margin
of operating safety to the electrical generator system of Model DC-10
series airplanes; however, the commenter notes that the margin may be
eliminated with the reduction in the reliability of the GCU and
increased BTR lockouts. Therefore, the commenter concludes that the FAA
should investigate the root cause of the failure of the constant speed
drive (CSD).
The FAA does not concur with the commenters request that the
proposal not be adopted. The FAA acknowledges that the subject
modification may cause a reduction in the reliability of the GCU, which
may lead to increased removals of the GCU; and may cause an increase in
the BTR lockouts. However, the FAA has determined that the GCU's have a
low failure rate, since the overfrequency protection circuit contains a
minimum of parts; therefore, the reduction in the reliability of the
GCU will be minimal. In addition, the FAA recognizes that the BTR
lockouts may be a nuisance; however, the FAA finds that such lockouts
will not adversely affect the safety of the fleet. Furthermore, the FAA
has evaluated the root cause of the CSD failure and concluded that
there are no assurances that could prevent the failure of the CSD.
Therefore, the FAA finds that modification of the GCU's is necessary to
provide overfrequency protection as a result of failure of the CSD. An
overfrequency condition of a generator, if not corrected, could lead to
the loss of all electrical power of the airplane.
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 419 Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, -40, and KC-
10A (military) series of the affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The FAA estimates that 276 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected
by this AD, that it will take approximately 5 work hours per airplane
to accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor rate is
$60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $2,896 per
generator control unit; there are 4 units per airplane. Based on these
figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$3,279,984, or $11,884 per airplane.
The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that
no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD
action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does
[[Page 42777]]
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation
of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-17-08 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-9717. Docket 95-NM-177-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, -40, and KC-10A
(military) series airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC10-24-111 RO1, Revision 1, dated August 14, 1995;
certificated in any category.
-Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent an overfrequency condition of the generator, which
could result in loss of all electrical power of the airplane,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within 2 years after the effective date of this AD, modify
the AC generator control units (GCU) in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin DC10-24-111 RO1, Revision 1, dated August
14, 1995.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(d) The modification shall be done in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin DC10-24-111 RO1, Revision 1, dated August
14, 1995. This incorporation by reference was approved by the
Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from McDonnell Douglas
Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846,
Attention: Technical Publications Business Administration,
Department C1-L51 (2-60). Copies may be inspected at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(e) This amendment becomes effective on September 23, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 9, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service. -
[FR Doc. 96-20873 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20870 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 Series Airplanes Equipped With Swivel-Type Bogie Beams on the Main Landing Gears
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42779-42781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20870]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-115-AD; Amendment 39-9716; AD 96-17-07]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 Series
Airplanes Equipped With Swivel-Type Bogie Beams on the Main Landing
Gears
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series airplanes,
that requires an inspection to detect cracking of the swivel bogie beam
lugs, and repair, if necessary. For airplanes on which no cracking is
found, this amendment also requires an inspection to detect corrosion
of the swivel pin lug surfaces and bores, and modification of the
forward bogie beams. This amendment is prompted by reports indicating
that swivel pin lugs of the main landing gear (MLG) have failed due to
cracks resulting from stress corrosion. The actions specified by this
AD are intended to prevent such stress corrosion, which could result in
failure of the swivel-type bogie beam of the MLG; this condition could
result in collapse of the MLG during landing.
DATES: Effective September 23, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 23, 1996.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Technical Publications
Business Administration, Department C1-L51 (2-60). This information may
be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712; telephone (310) 627-
5325; fax (310) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model
DC-8 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register as a
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on November 1, 1995 (60 FR
55496). That action proposed to require a magnetic particle inspection
to detect cracking of the swivel bogie beam lugs, and repair, if
necessary. For airplanes on which no cracking is found during the
magnetic particle inspection, that action also proposed to require a
visual inspection to detect corrosion of the swivel pin lug surfaces
and bores, and modification of the forward bogie beams.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the single comment received.
Request To Revise Proposed Compliance Times
The commenter states that the actions described in McDonnell
Douglas S.B. 32-182 (the service information referenced in the proposed
rule) should be accomplished at gear overhaul.
The FAA infers that the commenter requests the compliance times be
revised to reflect the intervals for gear overhaul. The FAA does not
concur that the compliance times need to be revised in this AD. In
developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, the FAA
considered not only the manufacturer's recommendation as to an
appropriate compliance time, but the degree of urgency associated with
addressing the subject unsafe condition, and the intervals for gear
overhaul of the majority of affected operators. In addition, paragraph
(a)(2) of the AD provides a grace period for those operators that may
have accomplished a gear overhaul just prior to the effective date of
this AD, or that may be required to accomplish such an overhaul soon
after this AD becomes effective. However, under the provisions of
paragraph (e) of the final rule, the FAA may approve requests for
adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted to
substantiate that an adjustment would provide an acceptable level of
safety.
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comment
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public
interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 148 McDonnell Douglas Model DC-8 series
airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA
estimates that 97 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this
AD, that it will take approximately 83 work hours per airplane to
accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60
per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $483,060, or $4,980 per airplane.
The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that
no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD
action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the
future if this AD were not adopted.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
[[Page 42780]]
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-17-07 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-9716. Docket 95-NM-115-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-8 airplanes equipped with main landing
gears having swivel type bogie beams on which the swivel pin lugs
have not been nickel plated, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (e) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent failure of the swivel-type bogie beam of the main
landing gear (MLG) due to stress corrosion, which could result in
collapse of the MLG during landing, accomplish the following:
(a) Perform a one-time magnetic particle inspection to detect
cracking of the swivel bogie beam lugs, in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995;
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated
July 21, 1995, or Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995; at the later
of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD.
(1) Prior to the accumulation of 11,600 total flight hours, or
within 10 years since the installation of the forward bogie beam of
the MLG, whichever occurs first.
(2) Prior to the accumulation of 2,000 flight hours, or 2 years
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
(b) If no cracking is detected during the inspection required by
paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, perform a visual
inspection to detect corrosion in the swivel pin lug surfaces and
bores, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin
32-182, dated January 20, 1995; or McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995, or
Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995.
Note 2: Particular attention should be paid to the lubrication
of the swivel pin lug and the lower swivel pin bushing during
regular normal maintenance.
(1) If no corrosion is detected, prior to further flight,
accomplish paragraph (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(ii), (b)(1)(iii), or
(b)(1)(iv) of this AD, as applicable, in accordance with the service
bulletin.
(i) For Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as
Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin.
(ii) For Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as
Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin.
(iii) For Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as
Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin.
(iv) For Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as
Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin.
(2) If any corrosion is detected, prior to further flight,
accomplish paragraph (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii), or
(b)(2)(iv), as applicable, in accordance with the service bulletin.
(i) For Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as
Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed
the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to
further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate.
(ii) For Group I airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group I airplanes) as
Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed
the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to
further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
(iii) For Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
not been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as
Condition 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed
the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to
further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
(iv) For Group II airplanes on which the forward bogie beam has
been modified previously: Modify the forward bogie beam in
accordance with the actions specified (for Group II airplanes) as
Condition 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin. If the dimensions of the reworked swivel pin lug exceed
the limits specified in Table I of the service bulletin, prior to
further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
(c) If any cracking is detected during the inspection required
by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
(d) As of the effective date of this AD, no forward bogie beam
swivel pin lug shall be installed on any airplane, unless that
swivel pin lug has been modified in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January 20, 1995; or
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1, Revision 1, dated
July 21, 1995, or Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995.
(e) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.
(f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(g) The inspections and modification shall be done in accordance
with McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin 32-182, dated January
20, 1995; McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO1,
Revision 1, dated July 21, 1995; or McDonnell Douglas DC-8 Service
Bulletin DC8-32-182 RO2, Revision 02, dated August 30, 1995. This
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. Copies may be obtained from McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention:
Technical Publications Business Administration, Department C1-L51
(2-60). Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 3960
[[Page 42781]]
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
(h) This amendment becomes effective on September 23, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 9, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-20870 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20672 Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42773-42776]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20672]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-181-AD; Amendment 39-9713; AD 96-17-05]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B series
airplanes. This action requires the installation of a mechanical flight
idle stop on the control quadrant of the flight compartment. This
action also requires a revision of the Airplane Flight Manual to ensure
the use of certain operating procedures after the mechanical flight
idle stop is installed. Additionally, this action provides an optional
terminating action for the requirements of this AD. This amendment is
prompted by a report indicating that the means of protection against
the selection of the ``beta'' range of propeller operation during
flight has been reduced on certain modified control quadrants.
Additionally, there have been reports indicating that power levers on
the control quadrant have been moved aft of the flight idle position
during flight due to improper usage of the mechanical beta stop. The
actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent such movement of
the power lever(s) during flight, which could result in propeller
overspeed, engine damage, and loss of power to one or both engines.
DATES: Effective September 3, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 3, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before October 18, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-181-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056.
The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from
SAAB Aircraft AF, SAAB Aircraft Product Support, S-581.88, Linkping,
Sweden. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth E. Harder, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-1721; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has received a report from an
operator of a Model SAAB 340B series airplane indicating that, during
training, the flightcrew noticed a reduction in the protection
associated with movement of the power levers aft of the flight idle
position during flight. Moving the power lever settings aft of the
flight idle position (or ``below flight idle'') places the airplane in
the ``beta'' range of operation. ``Beta'' is the range of propeller
operation intended for use only during taxi, ground idle, or reverse
operations. If ``beta'' range is selected, either intentionally or
inadvertently, during flight, it could result in propeller
[[Page 42774]]
overspeed, engine damage, and loss of power to one or both engines.
Automatic Flight Idle Stop Modification
The airplane involved in the incident referred to above was
equipped with a modified control quadrant. The installation of a new
control quadrant is described in Saab Service Bulletins 340-76-032 and
340-76-037, and is part of the modification necessary to install an
automatic flight idle stop system that will automatically prevent
movement of the power levers aft of flight idle during flight.
The modification also entails the removal of a certain beta stop
protection device that was a basic original feature of the Saab Model
340 series airplanes. This original protection device featured
serrations in the power lever assembly that helped to prevent the
inadvertent movement of the power levers aft of the flight idle
position. The modified control quadrant does not provide these
serrations, however, and thus eliminates what would serve as a ``back-
up'' feature for beta stop protection. This is not an issue of concern
on airplanes where the automatic flight idle stop system has been
installed and activated. However, for airplanes on which the modified
control quadrant is installed, but the automatic flight idle stop
system is not yet activated, beta stop protection is even further
reduced.
Mechanical Flight Idle Stop Modification
Some Saab Model 340 series airplanes have been modified with the
installation of a mechanical beta stop mechanism on the control
quadrant in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034.
(Procedures for installing a mechanical stop are also described in Saab
Service Bulletins 340-76-036 and 240-76-037.) This mechanical stop is
manually operated and, if used, prevents any power lever from being
unintentionally moved into beta range during retardation of the power
lever during flight. It is considered to be an interim improvement in
beta protection until the automatic flight idle stop system is
installed and activated.
While this mechanical stop serves as a means of beta protection,
the FAA has received several reports indicating that the flight crew
did not use the mechanical stop, or used it improperly, and moved the
power levers into the beta range during flight.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
Saab has issued the following service bulletins that pertain to
beta protection devices:
1. Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034, dated January 4, 1995,
describes procedures for installation of a mechanical flight idle stop
on the control quadrant in the flight compartment. Accomplishment of
this installation is intended to prevent the power levers from being
moved aft of the flight idle stop during flight. The Luftfartsverket
(LFV), the airworthiness authority for Sweden, has classified this
service bulletin as mandatory and issued Swedish airworthiness
directive 1-067, dated January 9, 1995, in order to assure the
continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Sweden.
2. Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-032, Revision 2, dated December 8,
1995; and Revision 3, dated March 25, 1996; describe procedures for
installation and activation of an automatic flight idle stop system on
the control quadrant in the flight compartment.
The installation involves:
--Removing the mechanical beta stop (if installed),
--Removing the old control quadrant,
--Installing a new/modified control quadrant with an automatic flight
idle stop, and
--Accomplishing a functional test of the flight idle stop system.
Accomplishment of this installation also will prevent the power
levers from being moved aft of the flight idle stop during flight.
Installation and activation of an automatic flight idle stop, if
accomplished, eliminates the need for installation of a mechanical
flight idle stop. The LFV classified this service bulletin as mandatory
and issued Swedish airworthiness directive 1-070, dated April 10, 1995,
in order to assure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in
Sweden.
3. Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-038, dated December 8, 1995,
describes procedures to reactivate the automatic flight idle stop
system for those systems that have been installed previously, but
deactivated in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-036. If
accomplished, such reactivation also eliminates the need for
installation of a mechanical flight idle stop. The LFV has approved the
technical content of this service bulletin.
U.S. Type Certification of the Airplanes
Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B series airplanes are
manufactured in Sweden and are type certificated for operation in the
United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral
airworthiness agreement.
Explanation of Requirements of Rule
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered
in the United States, this AD is being issued to prevent movement of
the power lever(s) aft of the flight idle position during flight. That
situation could result in the overspeed of the propeller and power
turbine of the engines and consequent loss of power to one or both
engines, as well as severe engine damage.
This AD requires the installation of the mechanical flight idle
stop on the control quadrant in the flight compartment in accordance
with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034, described previously.
To prevent inappropriate usage of this mechanical stop, this AD
also requires that the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) be
revised to ensure that the flight crews are advised of the specific
limitations necessary to address flight operations when the mechanical
flight idle stop is installed.
Additionally, this AD provides for optional terminating action for
the requirements of this AD, as installation of the modified control
quadrant and activation of the automatic flight idle stop.
Determination of Rule's Effective Date
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Interim Action
This AD is considered to be interim action. On March 15, 1996, the
FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), Docket 95-NM-243-AD
(61 FR 11591, March 21, 1996), to require installation and activation
of the automatic flight idle stop on certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and
SAAB 340B series airplanes. However, the FAA has determined that the
mechanical flight idle stop, as required by this AD, must be provided
for certain airplanes in the interim until the automatic flight idle
stops are installed and activated.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or
[[Page 42775]]
arguments as they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules
Docket number and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified
under the caption ADDRESSES. 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
evaluating the effectiveness of the AD action and 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
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-181-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it 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.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-17-05 SAAB Aircraft AB: Amendment 39-9713. Docket 96-NM-181-AD.
Applicability: Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B series airplanes
on which Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034, dated January 4, 1995;
Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-036, dated December 8, 1995; or Saab
Service Bulletin 340-76-037, dated December 8, 1995, have been
accomplished; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent the movement of both power levers aft of the flight
idle stop during flight, accomplish the following:
(a) For airplanes on which an automatic flight idle stop system
has been installed, but deactivated in accordance with Saab Service
Bulletin 340-76-036, dated December 8, 1995; or on which a control
quadrant in the flight compartment has been installed in accordance
with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-037, dated December 8, 1995:
Within 7 days after the effective date of this AD, install a
mechanical flight idle stop on the control quadrant in the flight
compartment in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034,
dated January 4, 1995, and accomplish the requirements of paragraph
(b) of this AD.
(b) For airplanes subject to paragraph (a) of this AD; and for
airplanes on which a mechanical flight idle stop has been installed
on the control panel in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-
76-034, dated January 4, 1995, previous to the effective date of
this AD: Within 7 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM) to include the following operating limitations. This may be
accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.
``Mechanical Beta Stop Operating Limitations
--The stop must be in the beta open position during all ground
operations including takeoff run.
--The stop must be lifted and positioned fully forward and down in
the beta stop position during climb-out after take-off.
--The stop must remain in the beta stop position throughout the
remainder of the flight until after touchdown.
--The stop must be lifted and positioned in the beta open position
immediately after touchdown.
--Landing Field Lengths Required must be increased by 5% and 8% for
flap settings 35 and 20, respectively.''
(c) Installation and activation of the automatic flight idle
stop system in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-032,
Revision 2, dated December 8, 1995, or Revision 3, dated March 25,
1996; or reactivation of the system in accordance with Saab Service
Bulletin 340-76-038, dated December 8, 1995; constitute terminating
action for the requirements of this AD. Once the system has been
activated, the mechanical flight idle stop and the AFM revision
required by this AD may be removed.
(d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA Transport Airport Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,
who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(f) The installation of the mechanical flight idle stop shall be
done in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-034, dated
January 4, 1995. The installation and activation of the automatic
flight idle stop system shall be done in accordance with Saab
Service Bulletin 340-76-032, Revision 2, dated December 8, 1995; or
Saab Service Bulletin 340-76-032, Revision 3, dated March 25, 1996.
The reactivation of the system shall be done in accordance with Saab
Service Bulletin 340-76-038, dated
[[Page 42776]]
December 8, 1995. This incorporation by reference was approved by
the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from SAAB Aircraft
AB, SAAB Aircraft Product Support, S-581.88, Linkoping, Sweden.
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,
Washington, DC.
(g) This amendment becomes effective on September 3, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 7, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-20672 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20563 Congregate Housing Services Program: Streamlining; Final Rule
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 161 (Monday, August 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42942-42949]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20563]
[[Page 42941]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Agriculture
Rural Housing Service
7 CFR Part 1944
_______________________________________________________________________
Department of Housing and Urban Development
24 CFR Part 700
_______________________________________________________________________
Congregate Housing Services Program: Streamlining; Final Common Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 161 / Monday, August 19, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 42942]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Housing Service
7 CFR Part 1944
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 700
[Docket No. FR-4033-F-01]
RIN 2501-AC21
Congregate Housing Services Program: Streamlining; Final Rule
AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, (USDA), and Office of the Secretary,
HUD.
ACTION: Final common rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the joint USDA and HUD regulations for
the Congregate Housing Services Program (CHSP or Program). In an effort
to comply with the President's regulatory reform initiatives, this rule
will streamline CHSP regulations by eliminating provisions that are
redundant of statutes or are otherwise unnecessary. This final rule
will make CHSP regulations clearer and more concise.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 18, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: With respect to HUD's Congregate
Housing Services Program: Carissa Janis, Program Analyst, Room 6176,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20410, telephone number (202) 708-3291 (this is not a
toll-free number). With respect to the Rural Housing Service's
Congregate Housing Services Program: Sue M. Harris-Green, Senior Loan
Officer, Rural Housing Service, Department of Agriculture, 14th and
Independence Avenue, S.W., room 5343, Washington, D.C., 20250,
telephone number (202) 720-1660. Hearing- and speech-impaired persons
may access these telephone numbers via TTY by calling the Federal
Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 4, 1995, President Clinton issued a
memorandum to all Federal departments and agencies regarding regulatory
reinvention. In response to this memorandum, the Department of Housing
and Urban Development conducted a page-by-page review of its
regulations to determine which can be eliminated, consolidated, or
otherwise improved. HUD and USDA have determined that the regulations
for CHSP can be improved and streamlined by eliminating unnecessary
provisions.
Several provisions in the regulations repeat statutory language
from the National Affordable Housing Act (NAHA) of 1990 and the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1992. It is unnecessary to maintain
statutory requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), since
those requirements are otherwise fully accessible and binding.
Furthermore, if regulations contain statutory language, HUD and USDA
must amend the regulations whenever Congress amends the statute.
Therefore, this final rule will remove repetitious statutory language
and replace it with a citation to the specific statutory section for
easy reference. Readers of 24 CFR part 700 must have copies of the
appropriate sections of both Acts readily available in order to
effectively read and understand this regulation.
Several other provisions in the regulations apply to more than one
program, and therefore HUD repeated these provisions in different
subparts. This repetition is unnecessary, and updating these provisions
is cumbersome and often creates confusion. Therefore, this final rule
will consolidate these duplicative provisions, maintaining appropriate
cross-references for the reader's convenience.
Justification for Final Rulemaking
HUD generally publishes a rule for public comment before issuing a
rule for effect, in accordance with its own regulations on rulemaking
in 24 CFR part 10. However, part 10 provides for exceptions to the
general rule if the agency finds good cause to omit advance notice and
public participation. The good cause requirement is satisfied when
prior public procedure is ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest'' (24 CFR 10.1). HUD and USDA find that good cause
exists to publish this rule for effect without first soliciting public
comment. This rule merely removes unnecessary regulatory provisions and
does not establish or affect substantive policy. Therefore, prior
public comment is unnecessary.
Other Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary concerned, in accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed and approved this final
rule, and in so doing certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule merely streamlines regulations by removing unnecessary
provisions. The rule will have no adverse or disproportionate economic
impact on small businesses.
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L.
104-4, established requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to state, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector. When such a
statement is needed for a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the agencies to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, more cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the
rule.
This rule contains no Federal mandates (under regulatory provisions
of Title II of the UMRA) for state, local, and tribal governments or
the private sector. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements
of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Environmental Impact
This rulemaking does not have an environmental impact. This
rulemaking simply amends an existing regulation by consolidating and
streamlining provisions and does not alter the environmental effect of
the regulations being amended. A Finding of No Significant Impact with
respect to the environment was made in accordance with HUD regulations
in 24 CFR part 50 that implement section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) at the time of
development of regulations implementing CHSP. That finding remains
applicable to this rule and is available for public inspection between
7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the Office of the Rules Docket
Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Room 10276, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC.
This document has been reviewed in accordance with 7 CFR part 1940,
subpart G, ``Environmental Program''. It is the determination of the
RHS that the proposed action does not constitute a major Federal order
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
[[Page 42943]]
1969, Pub. L. 91-190, an environmental impact statement is not
required.
Executive Order 12612, Federalism
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a)
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that this rule
will not have substantial direct effects on States or their political
subdivisions, or the relationship between the Federal government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government. No programmatic or policy changes
will result from this rule that would affect the relationship between
the Federal Government and State and local governments.
Executive Order 12606, The Family
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this rule will not have
the potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance,
or general well-being, and thus is not subject to review under the
Order. No significant change in existing HUD or USDA policies or
programs will result from promulgation of this rule.
Text of Final Common Rule
The text of the final common rule, as adopted by the agencies in
this document, appears below:
PART ______--CONGREGATE HOUSING SERVICES PROGRAM
Sec.
______.100 Purpose.
______.105 Definitions.
______.110 Announcement of fund availability, application process
and selection.
______.115 Program costs.
______.120 Eligible supportive services.
______.125 Eligibility for services.
______.130 Service coordinator.
______.135 Professional assessment committee.
______.140 Participatory agreement.
______.145 Cost distribution.
______.150 Program participant fees.
______.155 Grant agreement and administration.
______.160 Eligibility and priority for 1978 Act recipients.
______.165 Evaluation of Congregate Housing Services Programs.
______.170 Reserve for supplemental adjustment.
______.175 Other Federal requirements.
$______.100 Purpose.
The requirements of this part augment the requirements of section
802 of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 (approved November
28, 1990, Public Law 101-625) (42 U.S.C. 8011), (hereinafter, section
802), as amended by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992
(Public Law 102-550, approved October 28, 1992), which authorizes the
Congregate Housing Services Program (hereinafter, CHSP or Program).
Sec. ______ .105 Definitions.
In addition to the definitions in section 802(k), the following
definitions apply to CHSP:
Activity of Daily Living (ADL) means an activity regularly
necessary for personal care. (1) The minimum requirements of ADLs
include:
(i) Eating (may need assistance with cooking, preparing or serving
food, but must be able to feed self);
(ii) Dressing (must be able to dress self, but may need occasional
assistance);
(iii) Bathing (may need assistance in getting in and out of the
shower or tub, but must be able to wash self);
(iv) Grooming (may need assistance in washing hair, but must be
able to take care of personal appearance);
(v) Getting in and out of bed and chairs, walking, going outdoors,
using the toilet; and
(vi) Household management activities (may need assistance in doing
housework, grocery shopping or laundry, or getting to and from one
location to another for activities such as going to the doctor and
shopping, but must be mobile. The mobility requirement does not exclude
persons in wheelchairs or those requiring mobility devices.)
(2) Each of the Activities of Daily Living noted in paragraph (1)
of this definition includes a requirement that a person must be able to
perform at a specified minimal level (e.g., to satisfy the eating ADL,
the person must be able to feed himself or herself). The determination
of whether a person meets this minimal level of performance must
include consideration of those services that will be performed by a
person's spouse, relatives or other attendants to be provided by the
individual. For example, if a person requires assistance with cooking,
preparing or serving food plus assistance in feeding himself or
herself, the individual would meet the minimal performance level and
thus satisfy the eating ADL, if a spouse, relative or attendant
provides assistance with feeding the person. Should such assistance
become unavailable at any time, the owner is not obligated at any time
to provide individualized services beyond those offered to the resident
population in general. The Activities of Daily Living analysis is
relevant only with regard to determination of a person's eligibility to
receive supportive services paid for by CHSP and is not a determination
of eligibility for occupancy;
Adjusted income means adjusted income as defined in 24 CFR parts
813 or 913.
Applicant means a State, Indian tribe, unit of general local
government, public housing authority (PHA), Indian housing authority
(IHA) or local nonprofit housing sponsor. A State, Indian tribe, or
unit of general local government may apply on behalf of a local
nonprofit housing sponsor or a for-profit owner of eligible housing for
the elderly.
Area agency on aging means the single agency designated by the
State Agency on Aging to administer the program described in Title III
of the Older Americans Act of 1965 (45 CFR chapter 13).
Assistant Secretary means the HUD Assistant Secretary for Housing-
Federal Housing Commissioner or the HUD Assistant Secretary for Public
and Indian Housing.
Case management means implementing the processes of: establishing
linkages with appropriate agencies and service providers in the general
community in order to tailor the needed services to the program
participant; linking program participants to providers of services that
the participant needs; making decisions about the way resources are
allocated to an individual on the basis of needs; developing and
monitoring of case plans in coordination with a formal assessment of
services needed; and educating participants on issues, including, but
not limited to, supportive service availability, application procedures
and client rights.
Eligible housing for the elderly means any eligible project
including any building within a mixed-use project that was designated
for occupancy by elderly persons, or persons with disabilities at its
inception or, although not so designated, for which the eligible owner
or grantee gives preference in tenant selection (with HUD approval) for
all units in the eligible project (or for a building within an eligible
mixed-use project) to eligible elderly persons, persons with
disabilities, or temporarily disabled individuals. For purposes of this
part, this term does not include projects assisted under the Low-Rent
Housing Homeownership Opportunity program (Turnkey III (24 CFR part
905, subpart G)).
Eligible owner means an owner of an eligible housing project.
[[Page 42944]]
Excess residual receipts mean residual receipts of more than $500
per unit in the project which are available and not committed to other
uses at the time of application to HUD for CHSP. Such receipts may be
used as matching funds and may be spent down to a minimum of $500/unit.
For-profit owner of eligible housing for the elderly means an owner
of an eligible housing project in which some part of the project's
earnings lawfully inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or
individual.
Grantee or Grant recipient means the recipient of funding under
CHSP. Grantees under this Program may be states, units of general local
government, Indian tribes, PHAs, IHAs, and local nonprofit housing
sponsors.
Local nonprofit housing sponsor means an owner or borrower of
eligible housing for the elderly; no part of the net earnings of the
owning organization shall lawfully inure to the benefit of any
shareholder or individual.
Nonprofit includes a public housing agency as that term is defined
in section 3(b)(6) of the United States Housing Act of 1937.
Person with disabilities means a household composed of one or more
persons, at least one of whom is an adult who has a disability. (1) A
person shall be considered to have a disability if such person is
determined under regulations issued by the Secretary to have a
physical, mental, or emotional impairment which:
(i) Is expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration;
(ii) Substantially impedes his or her ability to live
independently; and
(iii) Is of such a nature that the person's ability could be
improved by more suitable housing conditions.
(2) A person shall also be considered to have a disability if the
person has a developmental disability as defined in section 102(5) of
the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act (42
U.S.C. 6001-7). Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this
paragraph, the terms ``person with disabilities'' or ``temporarily
disabled'' include two or more persons with disabilities living
together, one or more such persons living with another person who is
determined (under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of HUD) to be
essential to their care or well-being, and the surviving member or
members of any household where at least one or more persons was an
adult with a disability who was living, in a unit assisted under this
section, with the deceased member of the household at the time of his
or her death.
Program participant (participant) means any project resident as
defined in section 802(e)(1) who is formally accepted into CHSP,
receives CHSP services, and resides in the eligible housing project
served by CHSP grant.
Qualifying supportive services means those services described in
section 802(k)(16). Under this Program, ``health-related services''
mean non-medical supervision, wellness programs, preventive health
screening, monitoring of medication consistent with state law, and non-
medical components of adult day care. The Secretary concerned may also
approve other requested supportive services essential for achieving and
maintaining independent living.
Rural Housing Service (RHS) means a credit agency for rural housing
and rural development in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Secretary concerned means (1) The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development, with respect to eligible federally assisted housing
administered by HUD; and
(2) The Secretary of Agriculture with reference to programs
administered by the Administrator of the Rural Housing Service.
Service coordinator means CHSP staff person responsible for
coordinating Program services as described in section ______.130.
Service provider means a person or organization licensed or
otherwise approved in writing by a State or local agency (e.g.,
Department of Health, Department of Human Services or Welfare) to
provide supportive services.
State agency means the State or an agency or instrumentality of the
State.
State agency on aging means the single agency designated by the
Governor to administer the program described in Title III of the Older
Americans Act of 1965 (See 45 CFR part 13).
Sec. ______.110 Notice of funding availability, application process
and selection.
(a) Notice of funding availability. A Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA) will be published periodically in the Federal
Register by the Secretary concerned containing the amounts of funds
available, allocation or distribution of funds available among eligible
applicant groups, where to obtain and submit applications, the deadline
for submissions, and further explanation of the selection criteria,
review and selection process. The Secretary concerned will designate
the maximum allowable size for grants.
(b) Selection criteria are set forth in section 802(h)(1) and shall
include additional criteria specified by the Secretary concerned.
Sec. ______.115 Program costs.
(a) Allowable costs. (1) Allowable costs for direct provision of
supportive services includes the provision of supportive services and
others approved by the Secretary concerned for:
(i) Direct hiring of staff, including a service coordinator;
(ii) Supportive service contracts with third parties;
(iii) Equipment and supplies (including food) necessary to provide
services;
(iv) Operational costs of a transportation service (e.g., mileage,
insurance, gasoline and maintenance, driver wages, taxi or bus
vouchers);
(v) Purchase or leasing of vehicles;
(vi) Direct and indirect administrative expenses for administrative
costs such as annual fiscal review and audit, telephones, postage,
travel, professional education, furniture and equipment, and costs
associated with self evaluation or assessment (not to exceed one
percent of the total budget for the activities approved); and
(vii) States, Indian tribes and units of general local government
with more than one project included in the grant may receive up to 1%
of the total cost of the grant for monitoring the projects.
(2) Allowable costs shall be reasonable, necessary and recognized
as expenditures in compliance with OMB Cost Policies, i.e., OMB
Circular A-87, 24 CFR 85.36, and OMB Circular A-128.
(b) Nonallowable costs. (1) CHSP funds may not be used to cover
expenses related to any grantee program, service, or activity existing
at the time of application to CHSP.
(2) Examples of nonallowable costs under the program are:
(i) Capital funding (such as purchase of buildings, related
facilities or land and certain major kitchen items such as stoves,
refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, trash compactors or sinks);
(ii) Administrative costs that represent a non-proportional share
of costs charged to the Congregate Housing Services Program for rent or
lease, utilities, staff time;
(iii) Cost of supportive services other than those approved by the
Secretary concerned;
(iv) Modernization, renovation or new construction of a building or
facility, including kitchens;
(v) Any costs related to the development of the application and
plan of operations before the effective date of CHSP grant award;
(vi) Emergency medical services and ongoing and regular care from
doctors
[[Page 42945]]
and nurses, including but not limited to administering medication,
purchase of medical supplies, equipment and medications, overnight
nursing services, and other institutional forms of service, care or
support;
(vii) Occupational therapy and vocational rehabilitation services;
or
(viii) Other items defined as unallowable costs elsewhere in this
part, in CHSP grant agreement, and OMB Circular A-87 or 122.
(c) Administrative cost limitation. Grantees are subject to the
limitation in section 802(j)(4).
Sec. ______.120 Eligible supportive services.
(a) Supportive services or funding for such services may be
provided by state, local, public or private providers and CHSP funds. A
CHSP under this section shall provide meal and other qualifying
services for program participants (and other residents and
nonresidents, as described in Sec. ______ .125(a)) that are coordinated
on site.
(b) Qualifying supportive services are those listed in section
802(k)(16) and in section ______ .105.
(c) Meal services shall meet the following guidelines:
(1) Type of service. At least one meal a day must be served in a
group setting for some or all of the participants; if more than one
meal a day is provided, a combination of a group setting and carry-out
meals may be utilized.
(2) Hot meals. At least one meal a day must be hot. A hot meal for
the purpose of this program is one in which the principal food item is
hot at the time of serving.
(3) Special menus. Grantees shall provide special menus as
necessary for meeting the dietary needs arising from the health
requirements of conditions such as diabetes and hypertension. Grantees
should attempt to meet the dietary needs of varying religious and
ethnic backgrounds.
(4) Meal service standards. Grantees shall plan for and provide
meals which are wholesome, nutritious, and each of which meets a
minimum of one-third of the minimum daily dietary allowances as
established by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of
Sciences-National Research Council (or State or local standards, if
these standards are higher). Grantees must have an annual
certification, prepared and signed by a registered dietitian, which
states that each meal provided under CHSP meets the minimum daily
dietary allowances.
(5) Food stamps and agricultural commodities. In providing meal
services grantees must apply for and use food stamps and agricultural
commodities as set forth in section 802(d)(2)(A).
(6) Preference for nutrition providers: In contracting for or
otherwise providing for meal services grantees must follow the
requirements of section 802(d)(2)(B). These requirements do not
preclude a grantee or owner from directly preparing and providing meals
under its own auspices.
Sec. ______ .125 Eligibility for services.
(a) Participants, other residents, and nonresidents. Such
individuals are eligible either to participate in CHSP or to receive
CHSP services, if they qualify under section 802(e)(1), (4) and (5).
Under this paragraph, temporarily disabled persons are also eligible.
(b) Economic need. In providing services under CHSP, grantees shall
give priority to very low income individuals, and shall consider their
service needs in selecting program participants.
Sec. ______.130 Service coordinator.
(a) Each grantee must have at least one service coordinator who
shall perform the responsibilities listed in section 802(d)(4).
(b) The service coordinator shall comply with the qualifications
and standards required by the Secretary concerned. The service
coordinator shall be trained in the subject areas set forth in section
802(d)(4), and in any other areas required by the Secretary concerned.
(c) The service coordinator may be employed directly by the
grantee, or employed under a contract with a case management agency on
a fee-for-service basis, and may serve less than full-time. The service
coordinator or the case management agency providing service
coordination shall not provide supportive services under a CHSP grant
or have a financial interest in a service provider agency which intends
to provide services to the grantee for CHSP.
(d) The service coordinator shall:
(1) Provide general case management and referral services to all
potential participants in CHSP. This involves intake screening, upon
referral from the grantee of potential program participants, and
preliminary assessment of frailty or disability, using a commonly
accepted assessment tool. The service coordinator then will refer to
the professional assessment committee (PAC) those individuals who
appear eligible for CHSP;
(2) Establish professional relationships with all agencies and
service providers in the community, and develop a directory of
providers for use by program staff and program participants;
(3) Refer proposed participants to service providers in the
community, or those of the grantee;
(4) Serve as staff to the PAC;
(5) Complete, for the PAC, all paperwork necessary for the
assessment, referral, case monitoring and reassessment processes;
(6) Implement any case plan developed by the PAC and agreed to by
the program participant;
(7) Maintain necessary case files on each program participant,
containing such information and kept in such form as HUD and RHS shall
require;
(8) Provide the necessary case files to PAC members upon request,
in connection with PAC duties;
(9) Monitor the ongoing provision of services from community
agencies and keep the PAC and the agency providing the supportive
service informed of the progress of the participant;
(10) Educate grant recipient's program participants on such issues
as benefits application procedures (e.g. SSI, food stamps, Medicaid),
service availability, and program participant options and
responsibilities;
(11) Establish volunteer support programs with service
organizations in the community;
(12) Assist the grant recipient in building informal support
networks with neighbors, friends and family; and
(13) Educate other project management staff on issues related to
``aging-in-place'' and services coordination, to help them to work with
and assist other persons receiving housing assistance through the
grantee.
(e) The service coordinator shall tailor each participant's case
plan to the individual's particular needs. The service coordinator
shall work with community agencies, the grantee and third party service
providers to ensure that the services are provided on a regular,
ongoing, and satisfactory basis, in accordance with the case plan
approved by the PAC and the participant.
(f) Service coordinators shall not serve as members of the PAC.
Sec. ______.135 Professional assessment committee.
(a) General. (1) A professional assessment committee (PAC), as
described in this section, shall recommend services appropriate to the
functional abilities and needs of each eligible project resident. The
PAC shall be either a voluntary committee appointed by the project
management or an agency in the community which provides assessment
services and
[[Page 42946]]
conforms to section 802(e)(3)(A) and (B). PAC members are subject to
the conflict of interest provisions in section ______ .175(b).
(2) The PAC shall utilize procedures that ensure that the process
of determining eligibility of individuals for congregate services
affords individuals fair treatment, due process, and a right of appeal
of the determination of eligibility, and shall ensure the
confidentiality of personal and medical records.
(3) The dollar value of PAC members' time spent on regular
assessments after initial approval of program participants may be
counted as match. If a community agency discharges the duties of the
PAC, staff time is counted as its imputed value, and if the members are
volunteers, their time is counted as volunteer time, according to
sections ______.145(c)(2) (ii) and (iv).
(b) Duties of the PAC. The PAC is required to:
(1) Perform a formal assessment of each potential elderly program
participant to determine if the individual is frail. To qualify as
frail, the PAC must determine if the elderly person is deficient in at
least three ADLs, as defined in section ______.105. This assessment
shall be based upon the screening done by the service coordinator, and
shall include a review of the adequacy of the informal support network
(i.e., family and friends available to the potential participant to
assist in meeting the ADL needs of that individual), and may include a
more in-depth medical evaluation, if necessary;
(2) Determine if non-elderly disabled individuals qualify under the
definition of person with disabilities under section ______.105. If
they do qualify, this is the acceptance criterion for them for CHSP.
Persons with disabilities do not require an assessment by the PAC;
(3) Perform a regular assessment and updating of the case plan of
all participants;
(4) Obtain and retain information in participant files, containing
such information and maintained in such form, as HUD or RHS shall
require;
(5) Replace any members of the PAC within 30 days after a member
resigns. A PAC shall not do formal assessments if its membership drops
below three, or if the qualified medical professional leaves the PAC
and has not been replaced.
(6) Notify the grantee or eligible owner and the program
participants of any proposed modifications to PAC procedures, and
provide these parties with a process and reasonable time period in
which to review and comment, before adoption of a modification;
(7) Provide assurance of nondiscrimination in selection of CHSP
participants, with respect to race, religion, color, sex, national
origin, familial status or type of disability;
(8) Provide complete confidentiality of information related to any
individual examined, in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974;
(9) Provide all formal information and reports in writing.
(c) Prohibitions relating to the PAC. (1) At least one PAC member
shall not have any direct or indirect relationship to the grantee.
(2) No PAC member may be affiliated with organizations providing
services under the grant.
(3) Individuals or staff of third party organizations that act as
PAC members may not be paid with CHSP grant funds.
(d) Eligibility and admissions. (1) Before selecting potential
program participants, each grantee (with PAC assistance) shall develop
a CHSP application form. The information in the individual's
application is crucial to the PAC's ability to determine the need for
further physical or psychological evaluation.
(2) The PAC, upon completion of a potential program participant's
initial assessment, must make a recommendation to the service
coordinator for that individual's acceptance or denial into CHSP.
(3) Once a program participant is accepted into CHSP, the PAC must
provide a supportive services case plan for each participant. In
developing this plan, the PAC must take into consideration the
participant's needs and wants. The case plan must provide the minimum
supportive services necessary to maintain independence.
(e) Transition-out procedures. The grantee or PAC must develop
procedures for providing for an individual's transition out of CHSP to
another setting. Transition out is based upon the degree of supportive
services needed by an individual to continue to live independently. If
a program participant leaves the program, but wishes to retain
supportive services, he or she may do so, as long as he or she
continues to live in an eligible project, pays the full cost of
services provided, and management agrees (section 802(e)(4) and (5)). A
participant can be moved out of CHSP if he or she:
(1) Gains physical and mental health and is able to function
without supportive services, even if only for a short time (in which
case readmission, based upon reassessment to determine the degree of
frailty or the disability, is acceptable);
(2) Requires a higher level of care than that which can be provided
under CHSP; or
(3) Fails to pay services fees.
(f) Procedural rights of participants. (1) The PAC must provide an
informal process that recognizes the right to due process of
individuals receiving assistance. This process, at a minimum, must
consist of:
(i) Serving the participant with a written notice containing a
clear statement of the reasons for termination;
(ii) A review of the decision, in which the participant is given
the opportunity to present written or oral objections before a person
other than the person (or a subordinate of that person) who made or
approved the termination decision; and
(iii) Prompt written notification of the final decision to the
participant.
(2) Procedures must ensure that any potential or current program
participant, at the time of initial or regular assessment, has the
option of refusing offered services and requesting other supportive
services as part of the case planning process.
(3) In situations where an individual requests additional services,
not initially recommended by the PAC, the PAC must make a determination
of whether the request is legitimately a needs-based service that can
be covered under CHSP subsidy. Individuals can pay for services other
than those recommended by the PAC as long as the additional services do
not interfere with the efficient operation of the program.
Sec. ______ .140 Participatory agreement.
(a) Before actual acceptance into CHSP, potential participants must
work with the PAC and the service coordinator in developing supportive
services case plans. A participant has the option of accepting any of
the services under the case plan.
(b) Once the plan is approved by the PAC and the program
participant, the participant must sign a participatory agreement
governing the utilization of the plan's supportive services and the
payment of supportive services fees. The grantee annually must
renegotiate the agreement with the participant.
Sec. ______ .145 Cost distribution.
(a) General. (1) Grantees, the Secretary concerned, and
participants shall all contribute to the cost of providing supportive
services according to section 802(i)(A)(i). Grantees must contribute at
least 50 percent of program cost, participants must contribute fees
that in total are at least 10 percent of program
[[Page 42947]]
cost, and the Secretary concerned will provide funds in an amount not
to exceed 40 percent.
(2) Section 802(i)(1)(B)(ii) creates a cost-sharing provision
between grantee and the Secretary concerned if total participant fees
collected over a year are less than 10 percent of total program cost.
This provision is subject to availability of appropriated grant funds.
If funds are not available, the grantee must assume the funding
shortfall.
(b) Prohibition on substitution of funds and maintenance of
existing supportive services. Grantees shall maintain existing funding
for and provision of supportive services prior to the application date,
as set forth in section 802(i)(1)(D). The grantee shall ensure that the
activities provided to the project under a CHSP grant will be in
addition to, and not in substitution for, these previously existing
services. The value of these services do not qualify as matching funds.
Such services must be maintained either for the time the participant
remains in CHSP, or for the duration of CHSP grant. The grantee shall
certify compliance with this paragraph to the Secretary concerned.
(c) Eligible matching funds. (1) All sources of matching funds must
be directly related to the types of supportive services prescribed by
the PAC or used for administration of CHSP.
(2) Matching funds may include:
(i) Cash (which may include funds from Federal, State and local
governments, third party contributions, available payments authorized
under Medicaid for specific individuals in CHSP, Community Development
Block Grants or Community Services Block Grants, Older American Act
programs or excess residual funds with the approval of the Secretary
concerned),
(ii) The imputed dollar value of other agency or third party-
provided direct services or staff who will work with or provide
services to program participants; these services must be justified in
the application to assure that they are the new or expanded services of
CHSP necessary to keep the program participants independent. If
services are provided by the state, Indian tribe, unit of general local
government, or local nonprofit housing sponsor, IHA, PHA, or for-profit
or not-for-profit owner, any salary paid to staff from governmental
sources to carry out the program of the grantee and any funds paid to
residents employed by the Program (other than from amounts under a
contract under section ______.155) is allowable match.
(iii) In-kind items (these are limited to 10 percent of the 50
percent matching amount), such as the current market value of donated
common or office space, utility costs, furniture, material, supplies,
equipment and food used in direct provision of services. The applicant
must provide an explanation for the estimated donated value of any item
listed.
(iv) The value of services performed by volunteers to CHSP, at the
rate of $5.00 an hour.
(d) Limitation. (1) The following are not eligible for use as
matching funds:
(i) PHA operating funds;
(ii) CHSP funds;
(iii) Section 8 funds other than excess residual receipts;
(iv) Funds under section 14 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, unless
used for service coordination or case management; and
(v) Comprehensive grant funds unless used for service coordination
or case management;
(2) Local government contributions are limited by section
802(i)(1)(E).
(e) Annual review of match. The Secretary concerned will review the
infusion of matching funds annually, as part of the program or budget
review. If there are insufficient matching funds available to meet
program requirements at any point after grant start-up, or at any time
during the term of the grant (i.e., if matching funds from sources
other than program participant fees drop below 50 percent of total
supportive services cost), the Secretary concerned may decrease the
federal grant share of supportive services funds accordingly.
Sec. ______.150 Program participant fees.
(a) Eligible program participants. The grantee shall establish fees
consistent with section ______.145(a). Each program participant shall
pay CHSP fees as stated in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, up
to a maximum of 20 percent of the program participant's adjusted
income. Consistent with section 802(d)(7)(A), the Secretary concerned
shall provide for the waiver of fees for individuals who are without
sufficient income to provide for any payment.
(b) Fees shall include: (1) Cash contributions of the program
participant;
(2) Food Stamps; and
(3) Contributions or donations to other eligible programs
acceptable as matching funds under section ______.145(c).
(c) Older Americans Act programs. No fee may be charged for any
meals or supportive services under CHSP if that service is funded under
an Older Americans Act Program.
(d) Meals fees: (1) For full meal services, the fees for residents
receiving more than one meal per day, seven days per week, shall be
reasonable and shall equal between 10 and 20 percent of the adjusted
income of the project resident, or the cost of providing the services,
whichever is less.
(2) The fees for residents receiving meal services less frequently
than as described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section shall be in an
amount equal to 10 percent of the adjusted income of the project
resident, or the cost of providing the services, whichever is less.
(e) Other service fees. The grantee may also establish fees for
other supportive services so that the total fees collected from all
participants for meals and other services is at least 10 percent of the
total cost of CHSP. However, no program participants may be required to
pay more than 20 percent of their adjusted incomes for any combination
of services.
(f) Other residents and nonresidents. Fees shall be established for
residents of eligible housing projects (other than eligible project
residents) and for nonresidents who receive meals and other services
from CHSP under section ______.125(a). These fees shall be in an amount
equal to the cost of providing the services.
Sec. ________.155 Grant agreement and administration.
(a) General. HUD will enter into grant agreements with grantees, to
provide congregate services for program participants in eligible
housing projects, in order to meet the purposes of CHSP.
(b) Term of grant agreement and reservation of amount. A grant will
be for a term of five years and the Secretary concerned shall reserve a
sum equal to the total approved grant amount for each grantee. Grants
will be renewable at the expiration of a term, subject to the
availability of funds and conformance with the regulations in this
part, except as otherwise provided in section ______.160.
(c) Monitoring of project sites by governmental units. States,
Indian tribes, and units of general local government with a grant
covering multiple projects shall monitor, review, and evaluate Program
performance at each project site for compliance with CHSP regulations
and procedures, in such manner as prescribed by HUD or RHS.
(d) Reports. Each grantee shall submit program and fiscal reports
and program budgets to the Secretary concerned in such form and at such
times, as the Secretary concerned requires.
(e) Enforcement. The Secretary concerned will enforce the
obligations of the grantee under the agreement through such action as
may be
[[Page 42948]]
necessary, including terminating grants, recapturing grant funds, and
imposing sanctions.
(1) These actions may be taken for:
(i) A grantee's non-compliance with the grant agreement or HUD or
RHS regulations;
(ii) Failure of the grantee to provide supportive services within
12 months of execution of the grant agreement.
(2) Sanctions include but are not limited to the following:
(i) Temporary withholding of reimbursements or extensions or
renewals under the grant agreement, pending correction of deficiencies
by the grantee;
(ii) Setting conditions in the contract;
(iii) Termination of the grant;
(iv) Substitution of grantee; and
(v) Any other action deemed necessary by the Secretary concerned.
(f) Renewal of grants. Subject to the availability of funding,
satisfactory performance, and compliance with the regulations in this
part:
(1) Grantees funded initially under this part shall be eligible to
receive continued, non-competitive renewals after the initial five-year
term of the grant.
(2) Grantees will receive priority funding and grants will be
renewed within time periods prescribed by the Secretary concerned.
(g) Use of Grant Funds. If during any year, grantees use less than
the annual amount of CHSP funds provided to them for that year, the
excess amount can be carried forward for use in later years.
Sec. ______ .160 Eligibility and priority for 1978 Act recipients.
Grantees funded initially under 42 U.S.C. 8001 shall be eligible to
receive continued, non-competitive funding subject to its availability.
These grantees will be eligible to receive priority funding under this
part if they comply with the regulations in this part and with the
requirements of any NOFA issued in a particular fiscal year.
Sec. ________.165 Evaluation of Congregate Housing Services Programs.
(a) Grantees shall submit annually to the Secretary concerned, a
report evaluating the impact and effectiveness of CHSPs at the grant
sites, in such form as the Secretary concerned shall require.
(b) The Secretaries concerned shall further review and evaluate the
performance of CHSPs at these sites and shall evaluate the Program as a
whole.
(c) Each grantee shall submit a certification with its application,
agreeing to cooperate with and to provide requested data to the entity
responsible for the Program's evaluation, if requested to do so by the
Secretary concerned.
Sec. ________.170 Reserve for supplemental adjustment.
The Secretary concerned may reserve funds subject to section
802(o). Requests to utilize supplemental funds by the grantee shall be
transmitted to the Secretary concerned in such form as may be required.
Sec. ________.175 Other Federal requirements.
In addition to the Federal Requirements set forth in 24 CFR part 5,
the following requirements apply to grant recipient organizations in
this program:
(a) Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars and
Administrative Requirements. The policies, guidelines, and requirements
of OMB Circular No. A-87 and 24 CFR part 85 apply to the acceptance and
use of assistance under this program by public body grantees. The
policies, guidelines, and requirements of OMB Circular No. A-122 apply
to the acceptance and use of assistance under this program by non-
profit grantees. Grantees are also subject to the audit requirements
described in 24 CFR part 44 (OMB Circular A-128).
(b) Conflict of interest. In addition to the conflict of interest
requirements in OMB Circular A-87 and 24 CFR part 85, no person who is
an employee, agent, consultant, officer, or elected or appointed
official of the applicant, and who exercises or has exercised any
function or responsibilities with respect to activities assisted with
CHSP grant funds, or who is in a position to participate in a decision-
making process or gain inside information with regard to such
activities, may obtain a personal or financial interest or benefit from
the activity, or have an interest in any contract, subcontract, or
agreement with respect thereto, or any proceeds thereunder, either for
himself or herself or for those with whom he or she has family or
business ties during his or her tenure, or for one year thereafter.
CHSP employees may receive reasonable salary and benefits.
(c) Disclosures required by Reform Act. Section 102(c) of the HUD
Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545(c)) requires disclosure concerning
other government assistance to be made available with respect to the
Program and parties with a pecuniary interest in CHSP and submission of
a report on expected sources and uses of funds to be made available for
CHSP. Each applicant shall include information required by 24 CFR part
12 on form HUD-2880 ``Applicant/Recipient Disclosure/Update Report,''
as required by the Federal Register Notice published on January 16,
1992, at 57 FR 1942.
(d) Nondiscrimination and equal opportunity. (1) The fair housing
poster regulations (24 CFR part 110) and advertising guidelines (24 CFR
part 109);
(2) The Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Program requirements of
24 CFR part 200, subpart M, and the implementing regulations at 24 CFR
part 108; and
(3) Racial and ethnic collection requirements--Recipients must
maintain current data on the race, ethnicity and gender of program
applicants and beneficiaries in accordance with section 562 of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 and section 808(e)(6) of
the Fair Housing Act.
(e) Environmental requirements. Support services, including the
operating and administrative expenses described in
section________.115(a), are categorically excluded from the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.
These actions, however, are not excluded from individual compliance
requirements of other environmental statutes, Executive Orders, and
agency regulations where appropriate. When the responsible official
determines that any action under this part may have an environmental
effect because of extraordinary circumstances, the requirements of NEPA
shall apply.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Adoption of the Final Common Rule
The agency specific adoption of the final common rule, which
appears at the end of the common preamble, appears below:
RURAL HOUSING SERVICE
7 CFR Part 1944
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1944
Farm labor housing, Migrant labor, Nonprofit organizations, Public
housing, Rent subsidies, and Rural rental housing.
Dated: July 18, 1996.
Jill Long Thompson,
Under Secretary, Rural Development.
Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 1944 is amended as
follows:
1. The authority citation for subpart F continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1480, 8011 and 5 U.S.C. 301.
2. Subpart F, consisting of Secs. 1944.251 [______.100] through
[[Page 42949]]
1944.266 [________.175], is revised to read as set forth at the end of
the common preamble.
PART 1944--HOUSING
Subpart F--Congregate Housing Services Program
Sec.
1944.251 Purpose.
1944.252 Definitions.
1944.253 Announcement of fund availability, application process and
selection.
1944.254 Program costs.
1944.255 Eligible supportive services.
1944.256 Eligibility for services.
1944.257 Service coordinator.
1944.258 Professional assessment committee.
1944.259 Participatory agreement.
1944.260 Cost distribution.
1944.261 Program participant fees.
1944.262 Grant agreement and administration.
1944.263 Eligibility and priority for 1978 Act recipients.
1944.264 Evaluation of Congregate Housing Services Programs.
1944.265 Reserve for supplemental adjustment.
1944.266 Other Federal requirements.
3. The words ``this part'' are revised to read ``this subpart'' in
the following places: Secs. 1944.100, 1944.105 in the definition for
``Eligible housing for the elderly'', 1944.115(b)(2)(viii), 1944.155
(b) introductory text, (f) introductory text and (f)(1), 1944.160, and
1944.175(e).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 700
List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 700
Aged, Grant programs--housing and community development,
Individuals with disabilities, Low and moderate income housing,
Nutrition, Public housing, Rent subsidies, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Supportive services.
Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended by revising
part 700 to read as set forth at the end of the common preamble.
Dated: March 14, 1996.
Henry G. Cisneros,
Secretary.
PART 700--CONGREGATE HOUSING SERVICES PROGRAM
Sec.
700.100 Purpose.
700.105 Definitions.
700.110 Announcement of fund availability, application process and
selection.
700.115 Program costs.
700.120 Eligible supportive services.
700.125 Eligibility for services.
700.130 Service coordinator.
700.135 Professional assessment committee.
700.140 Participatory agreement.
700.145 Cost distribution.
700.150 Program participant fees.
700.155 Grant agreement and administration.
700.160 Eligibility and priority for 1978 Act recipients.
700.165 Evaluation of Congregate Housing Services Programs.
700.170 Reserve for supplemental adjustment.
700.175 Other Federal requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 8011.
[FR Doc. 96-20563 Filed 8-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-07-P; 4210-32-P
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.