issue-1996-08-20•Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-20
Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-20
issue-1996-08-20Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-20Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-21174 Indiana: Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous Waste Management Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43009-43018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21174]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-5552-5]
Indiana: Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous
Waste Management Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Indiana has applied for final authorization of revisions to
its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 as amended (hereinafter RCRA). The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed Indiana's application and has made
a decision, subject to public review and comment, that Indiana's
hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for final authorization. Thus, EPA intends to
approve Indiana's hazardous waste program revisions, subject to
authority retained by EPA under the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (hereinafter HSWA). Indiana's application for
program revision is available for public review and comment.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Final authorization for Indiana shall be effective
October 21, 1996 unless EPA publishes a prior Federal Register action
withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on Indiana's
program revision application must be received by the close of business
September 19, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Indiana's program revision application are
available for inspection and copying, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., at the
following addresses: Indiana Department of Environmental Management,
100 North Senate, P.O. Box 6015, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206-6015,
contact: Lynn West (317) 232-3593; U.S. EPA, Region 5, DR-7J, 77 W.
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604, contact: Gary Westefer (312)
886-7450. Written comments should be sent to Mr. Gary Westefer, Indiana
Regulatory Specialist, U.S. EPA, Office of RCRA, DR-7J, 77 W. Jackson
Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604, phone 312/886-7450.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gary Westefer, U.S. EPA Region 5,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Phone: 312/886-
7450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
States with final authorization under Section 3006(b) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA or the Act), 42 U.S.C.
6929(b), have a continuing obligation to maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal hazardous waste program. In addition, as an interim
measure, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-
616, November 8, 1984, hereinafter HSWA) allows States to revise their
programs to become substantially equivalent instead of equivalent to
RCRA requirements promulgated under HSWA authority. States exercising
the latter option receive interim authorization for the HSWA
requirements under Section 3006(g) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), and
later apply for final authorization for the HSWA requirements.
In accordance with 40 CFR 271.21, revisions to State hazardous
waste programs are necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, State program revisions are necessitated by changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR Parts 124, 260-266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. Indiana
Indiana initially received final authorization for its program
effective January 31, 1986. (51 FR 3955, January 30, 1986.) Indiana
received authorization for revisions to its program effective on
December 31, 1986 (51 FR 39752, October 31, 1986), January 19, 1988 (53
FR 128, January 5, 1988), September 11, 1989 (54 FR 29557, July 13,
1989), September 23, 1991 (56 FR 33717, July 23, 1991), September 23,
1991 (56 FR 33866, July 24, 1991 ), September 27, 1991 (56 FR 35831,
July 29, 1991), and September 30, 1991 (56 FR 36010, July 30, 1991). On
September 23, 1992, Indiana submitted a program revision application
for an additional revision to its authorized program. This program
revision is due to an Indiana Legislative Services requirement that the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) recodify its
hazardous waste management rules in order to incorporate by reference
their Federal equivalent. The IDEM became the State agency responsible
for administering the authorized RCRA hazardous waste management
program in Indiana as of April 1, 1986. Those rules that were codified
as title 329 of the Indiana Administrative Code, Article 3 (329 IAC 3)
were recodified as title 329 of the Indiana Administrative Code Article
3.1 (329 IAC 3.1). This program revision reflects the recodified rules
that became effective February 24, 1992. The recodified rules
effectively continue the original 329 IAC 3 rules and in no way alter
the State's regulatory and statutory equivalence to the Federal RCRA
program. On August 5, 1992, the Indiana Attorney General certified that
the recodification of Indiana's hazardous waste management rules does
not affect the IDEM's authority to implement the State's authorized
RCRA program.
EPA has reviewed Indiana's application, and has made an immediate
final decision that Indiana's hazardous waste program revision does
reflect the State's equivalency with the Federal program and satisfies
all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization.
Consequently, EPA intends to grant final authorization to Indiana for
its additional program modification. The public may submit written
comments on EPA's immediate final decision up until September 19, 1996.
Copies of Indiana's application for program revision are available for
inspection and copying at the locations indicated in the ADDRESSES
section of this notice.
Approval of Indiana's program revision shall become effective in 60
days unless an adverse comment pertaining to the State's revision
discussed in this notice is received by the end of the comment period.
If an adverse comment is received, EPA will publish either (1) a
withdrawal of the immediate final decision or (2) a notice containing a
response to comments which either affirms that the immediate final
decision takes effect or reverses the decision.
[[Page 43010]]
On October 21, 1996, Indiana will be authorized to carry out, in
lieu of the Federal program, those provisions of the State's program
which were recodified at title 329 of the Indiana Administrative Code,
Article 3.1, and which are analogous to the following Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act rules found at Title 40 of the Code of
Federal regulations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recodified IAC Former IAC
Federal provision provision provision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR 124.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-3.. 329 IAC 3-39-1
40 CFR 124.3.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-3.. 329 IAC 3-39-2
40 CFR 124.5.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-7.. 329 IAC 3-39-3
40 CFR 124.6.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-8.. 329 IAC 3-39-4
40 CFR 124.8.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-9.. 329 IAC 3-39-5
40 CFR 124.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-10. 329 IAC 3-39-6
40 CFR 124.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-11. 329 IAC 3-39-7
40 CFR 124.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-12. 329 IAC 3-39-8
40 CFR 124.17................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-13. 329 IAC 3-39-9
40 CFR 260.3.................... 329 IAC 3.1-4-1... 329 IAC 3-1-3
40 CFR 260.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-4-1... 329 IAC 3-1-7
40 CFR 260.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-1-7... 329 IAC 3-1-6
40 CFR 260.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-2... 329 IAC 3-1-5
40 CFR 260.22................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-3... 329 IAC 3-1-4
40 CFR 260.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-4... 329 IAC 3-1-8
40 CFR 260.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-4... 329 IAC 3-1-9
40 CFR 260.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-4... 329 IAC 3-1-10
40 CFR 260.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-4... 329 IAC 3-1-11
40 CFR 260.40................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-5... 329 IAC 3-1-12
40 CFR 260.41................... 329 IAC 3.1-5-5... 329 IAC 3-1-13
40 CFR 261.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-1
40 CFR 261.2.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-2
40 CFR 261.3.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-3
40 CFR 261.4.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-4
40 CFR 261.5.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-5
40 CFR 261.6.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-6
40 CFR 261.7.................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-3-7
40 CFR 261.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-4-1
40 CFR 261.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-4-2
40 CFR 261.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-5-1
40 CFR 261.21................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-5-2
40 CFR 261.22................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-5-3
40 CFR 261.23................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-5-4
40 CFR 261.24................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-5-5
40 CFR 261.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-1
40 CFR 261.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-2
40 CFR 261.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-3
40 CFR 261.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-4
40 CFR 261.--Appendix I......... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-5
40 CFR 261.--Appendix II........ 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-6
40 CFR 261.--Appendix III....... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-7
40 CFR 261.--Appendix VII....... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-8
40 CFR 261.--Appendix VIII...... 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-9
40 CFR 261.--Appendix IX........ 329 IAC 3.1-6-1... 329 IAC 3-6-10
40 CFR 262.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-7-1
40 CFR 262.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-7-2
40 CFR 262.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-7-3
40 CFR 262.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-3... 329 IAC 3-8-1
40 CFR 262.21................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-4... 329 IAC 3-8-2
40 CFR 262.22................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-5... 329 IAC 3-8-3
40 CFR 262.23................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-6... 329 IAC 3-8-4
40 CFR 262.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-9-1
40 CFR 262.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-9-2
40 CFR 262.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-9-3
40 CFR 262.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-9-4
40 CFR 262.34................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-9-5
40 CFR 262.40................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-10-1
40 CFR 262.41................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-14.. 329 IAC 3-10-2
40 CFR 262.42................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-10-3
40 CFR 262.43................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-15.. 329 IAC 3-10-4
40 CFR 262.44................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-10-5
40 CFR 262.50................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11-1
40 CFR 262.51................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11-2
40 CFR 262.52................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-3
40 CFR 262.53................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-4
40 CFR 262.54................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-5
40 CFR 262.55................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-6
40 CFR 262.56................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-7
40 CFR 262.57................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.1-8
[[Page 43011]]
40 CFR 262.60................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.4-1
40 CFR 262.70................... 329 IAC 3.1-7-1... 329 IAC 3-11.5-1
40 CFR 262.--Appendix: Uniform 329 IAC 3.1-7-7... 329 IAC 3-14-3
Hazardous Waste Manifest and
Instructions.
329 IAC 3.1-7-8...
329 IAC 3.1-7-9...
329 IAC 3.1-7-10..
329 IAC 3.1-7-11..
329 IAC 3.1-7-12..
329 IAC 3.1-7-13..
40 CFR 263.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-12-1
40 CFR 263.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-12-2
40 CFR 263.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-12-3
40 CFR 263.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-13-1
40 CFR 263.21................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-13-2
40 CFR 263.22................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-13-3
40 CFR 263.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-3... 329 IAC 3-14-1
40 CFR 263.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-8-1... 329 IAC 3-14-2
40 CFR 264.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-40-1
40 CFR 264.3.................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-40-2
40 CFR 264.4.................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-40-3
40 CFR 264.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-1
40 CFR 264.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-2
40 CFR 264.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-3
40 CFR 264.13................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-4
40 CFR 264.14................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-5
40 CFR 264.15................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-6
40 CFR 264.16................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-7
40 CFR 264.17................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-8
40 CFR 264.18................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-41-9
40 CFR 264.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-1
40 CFR 264.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-2
40 CFR 264.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-3
40 CFR 264.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-4
40 CFR 264.34................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-5
40 CFR 264.35................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-6
40 CFR 264.37................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-42-7
40 CFR 264.50................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-1
40 CFR 264.51................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-2
40 CFR 264.52................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-3
40 CFR 264.53................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-4
40 CFR 264.54................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-5
40 CFR 264.55................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-6
40 CFR 264.56................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-43-7
40 CFR 264.70................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-1
40 CFR 264.71................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-2
40 CFR 264.72................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-3
40 CFR 264.73................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-4
40 CFR 264.74................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-5
40 CFR 264.75................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-6
40 CFR 264.76................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-7
40 CFR 264.77................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-44-8
40 CFR 264.90................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-1
40 CFR 264.91................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-2
40 CFR 264.92................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-3
40 CFR 264.93................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-4
40 CFR 264.94................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-5
40 CFR 264.95................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-6
40 CFR 264.96................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-7
40 CFR 264.97................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-8
40 CFR 264.98................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-9
40 CFR 264.99................... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-10
40 CFR 264.100.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-11
40 CFR 264.101.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-45-12
40 CFR 264.110.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-1
40 CFR 264.111.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-2
40 CFR 264.112.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-3
40 CFR 264.113.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-4
40 CFR 264.114.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-5
40 CFR 264.115.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-6
40 CFR 264.116.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-7
40 CFR 264.117.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-8
40 CFR 264.118.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-9
40 CFR 264.119.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-10
[[Page 43012]]
40 CFR 264.120.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-46-11
40 CFR 264.140.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-1.. 329 IAC 3-47-1
40 CFR 264.141.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-2.. 329 IAC 3-47-2
40 CFR 264.142.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-3.. 329 IAC 3-47-3
40 CFR 264.143.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-4.. 329 IAC 3-47-4
40 CFR 264.144.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-5.. 329 IAC 3-47-5
40 CFR 264.145.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-6.. 329 IAC 3-47-6
40 CFR 264.146.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-7.. 329 IAC 3-47-7
40 CFR 264.147.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-8.. 329 IAC 3-47-8
40 CFR 264.148.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-9.. 329 IAC 3-47-9
40 CFR 264.151.................. 329 IAC 3.1-15-10. 329 IAC 3-47-10
40 CFR 264.151(a)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-26. 329 IAC 3-22-26
40 CFR 264.151(b)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-27. 329 IAC 3-22-27
40 CFR 264.151(c)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-28. 329 IAC 3-22-28
40 CFR 264.151(d)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-29. 329 IAC 3-22-29
40 CFR 264.151(e)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-30. 329 IAC 3-22-30
40 CFR 264.151(f)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-31. 329 IAC 3-22-31
40 CFR 264.151(g)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-32. 329 IAC 3-22-32
40 CFR 264.151(h)(1)............ 329 IAC 3.1-14-33. 329 IAC 3-22-33
40 CFR 264.151(h)(2)............ 329 IAC 3.1-14-34. 329 IAC 3-22-34
40 CFR 264.151(i)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-35. 329 IAC 3-22-35
40 CFR 264.151(j)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-36. 329 IAC 3-22-36
40 CFR 264.170.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-1
40 CFR 264.171.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-2
40 CFR 264.172.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-3
40 CFR 264.173.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-4
40 CFR 264.174.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-5
40 CFR 264.175.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-6
40 CFR 264.176.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-7
40 CFR 264.177.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-8
40 CFR 264.178.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-48-9
40 CFR 264.190.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-1
40 CFR 264.191.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-3... 329 IAC 3-49-2
40 CFR 264.192.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-3
40 CFR 264.193.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-3... 329 IAC 3-49-4
40 CFR 264.194.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-5
40 CFR 264.195.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-6
40 CFR 264.196.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-7
40 CFR 264.197.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-8
40 CFR 264.198.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-9
40 CFR 264.199.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-49-10
40 CFR 264.220.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-1
40 CFR 264.221.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-2
40 CFR 264.226.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-3
40 CFR 264.227.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-4
40 CFR 264.228.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-5
40 CFR 264.229.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-6
40 CFR 264.230.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-7
40 CFR 264.231.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-50-8
40 CFR 264.250.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-1
40 CFR 264.251.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-2
40 CFR 264.254.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-3
40 CFR 264.256.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-4
40 CFR 264.257.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-5
40 CFR 264.258.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-6
40 CFR 264.259.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-51-7
40 CFR 264.270.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-1
40 CFR 264.271.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-2
40 CFR 264.272.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-3
40 CFR 264.273.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-4
40 CFR 264.276.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-5
40 CFR 264.278.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-6
40 CFR 264.279.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-7
40 CFR 264.280.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-8
40 CFR 264.281.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-9
40 CFR 264.282.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-10
40 CFR 264.283.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-52-11
40 CFR 264.300.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-1
40 CFR 264.301.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-2
40 CFR 264.303.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-3
40 CFR 264.309.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-4
40 CFR 264.310.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-5
40 CFR 264.312.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-6
40 CFR 264.313.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-7
[[Page 43013]]
40 CFR 264.314.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-8
40 CFR 264.315.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-9
40 CFR 264.316.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-10
40 CFR 264.317.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-53-11
40 CFR 264.340.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-1
40 CFR 264.341.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-2
40 CFR 264.342.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-3
40 CFR 264.343.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-4
40 CFR 264.344.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-5
40 CFR 264.345.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-6
40 CFR 264.347.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-7
40 CFR 264.351.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-8
40 CFR 264.600.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-9.1
40 CFR 264.601.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-9.2
40 CFR 264.602.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-9.3
40 CFR 264.603.................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-54-9.4
40 CFR 264.1030................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1031................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1032................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1033................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1034................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1035................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1036................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1050................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1051................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1052................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1053................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1054................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1055................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1056................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1057................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1058................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1059................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1060................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1061................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1062................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1063................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1064................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.1065................. 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... NONE
40 CFR 264.--Appendix I......... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-32-2
40 CFR 264.--Appendix IV........ 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-32-4
40 CFR 264.--Appendix V......... 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-32-5
40 CFR 264.--Appendix VI........ 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-32-6
40 CFR 264.--Appendix IX........ 329 IAC 3.1-9-1... 329 IAC 3-32-8
40 CFR 265.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-2.. 329 IAC 3-15-1
40 CFR 265.4.................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-15-2
40 CFR 265.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-1
40 CFR 265.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-2
40 CFR 265.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-3
40 CFR 265.13................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-4
40 CFR 265.14................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-5
40 CFR 265.15................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-6
40 CFR 265.16................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-7
40 CFR 265.17................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-8
40 CFR 265.18................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-16-9
40 CFR 265.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-1
40 CFR 265.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-2
40 CFR 265.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-3
40 CFR 265.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-4
40 CFR 265.34................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-5
40 CFR 265.35................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-6
40 CFR 265.37................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-17-7
40 CFR 265.50................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-1
40 CFR 265.51................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-2
40 CFR 265.52................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-3
40 CFR 265.53................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-4
40 CFR 265.54................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-5
40 CFR 265.55................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-6
40 CFR 265.56................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-18-7
40 CFR 265.70................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-1
40 CFR 265.71................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-2
40 CFR 265.72................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-3
40 CFR 265.73................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-4
40 CFR 265.74................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-5
[[Page 43014]]
40 CFR 265.75................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-6
40 CFR 265.76................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-7
40 CFR 265.77................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-19-8
40 CFR 265.90................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-20-1
40 CFR 265.91................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-20-2
40 CFR 265.92................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-20-3
40 CFR 265.93................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-20-4
40 CFR 265.94................... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-20-5
40 CFR 265.110.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-1
40 CFR 265.111.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-2
40 CFR 265.112.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-3
40 CFR 265.113.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-4
40 CFR 265.114.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-5
40 CFR 265.115.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-6
40 CFR 265.116.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-7
40 CFR 265.117.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-8
40 CFR 265.118.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-9
40 CFR 265.119.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-10
40 CFR 265.120.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-21-11
40 CFR 265.140.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-1.. 329 IAC 3-22-1
40 CFR 265.141.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-2.. 329 IAC 3-22-2
40 CFR 265.142.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-3.. 329 IAC 3-22-3
40 CFR 265.143.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-4.. 329 IAC 3-22-4
40 CFR 265.143(a)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-5.. 329 IAC 3-22-5
40 CFR 265.143(b)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-6.. 329 IAC 3-22-6
40 CFR 265.143(c)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-7.. 329 IAC 3-22-7
40 CFR 265.143(d)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-8.. 329 IAC 3-22-8
40 CFR 265.143(e)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-9.. 329 IAC 3-22-9
40 CFR 265.143(f)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-10. 329 IAC 3-22-10
40 CFR 265.143(g)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-11. 329 IAC 3-22-11
40 CFR 265.143(h)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-12. 329 IAC 3-22-12
40 CFR 265.144.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-13. 329 IAC 3-22-13
40 CFR 265.145.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-14. 329 IAC 3-22-14
40 CFR 265.145(a)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-15. 329 IAC 3-22-15
40 CFR 265.145(b)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-16. 329 IAC 3-22-16
40 CFR 265.145(c)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-17. 329 IAC 3-22-17
40 CFR 265.145(d)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-18. 329 IAC 3-22-18
40 CFR 265.145(e)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-19. 329 IAC 3-22-19
40 CFR 265.145(f)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-20. 329 IAC 3-22-20
40 CFR 265.145(g)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-21. 329 IAC 3-22-21
40 CFR 265.145(h)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-22. 329 IAC 3-22-22
40 CFR 265.146.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-23. 329 IAC 3-22-23
40 CFR 265.147.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-24. 329 IAC 3-22-24
40 CFR 265.148.................. 329 IAC 3.1-14-25. 329 IAC 3-22-25
40 CFR 265.151(a)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-26. 329 IAC 3-22-26
40 CFR 265.151(b)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-27. 329 IAC 3-22-27
40 CFR 265.151(c)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-28. 329 IAC 3-22-28
40 CFR 265.151(d)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-29. 329 IAC 3-22-29
40 CFR 265.151(e)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-30. 329 IAC 3-22-30
40 CFR 265.151(f)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-31. 329 IAC 3-22-31
40 CFR 265.151(g)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-32. 329 IAC 3-22-32
40 CFR 265.151(h)(1)............ 329 IAC 3.1-14-33. 329 IAC 3-22-33
40 CFR 265.151(h)(2)............ 329 IAC 3.1-14-34. 329 IAC 3-22-34
40 CFR 265.151(i)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-35. 329 IAC 3-22-35
40 CFR 265.151(j)............... 329 IAC 3.1-14-36. 329 IAC 3-22-36
40 CFR 265.170.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-1
40 CFR 265.171.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-2
40 CFR 265.172.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-3
40 CFR 265.173.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-4
40 CFR 265.174.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-5
40 CFR 265.176.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-6
40 CFR 265.177.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-23-7
40 CFR 265.190.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-1
40 CFR 265.191.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-2
40 CFR 265.192.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-3
40 CFR 265.193.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-4
40 CFR 265.194.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-5
40 CFR 265.195.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-6
40 CFR 265.196.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-7
40 CFR 265.197.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-8
40 CFR 265.198.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-9
40 CFR 265.199.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-10
40 CFR 265.200.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-11
40 CFR 265.201.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-24-12
[[Page 43015]]
40 CFR 265.220.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-1
40 CFR 265.221.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-2
40 CFR 265.222.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-3
40 CFR 265.223.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-4
40 CFR 265.225.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-5
40 CFR 265.226.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-6
40 CFR 265.228.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-7
40 CFR 265.229.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-8
40 CFR 265.230.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-25-9
40 CFR 265.250.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-1
40 CFR 265.251.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-2
40 CFR 265.252.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-3
40 CFR 265.253.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-4
40 CFR 265.254.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-5
40 CFR 265.256.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-6
40 CFR 265.257.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-7
40 CFR 265.258.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-26-8
40 CFR 265.270.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-1
40 CFR 265.272.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-2
40 CFR 265.273.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-3
40 CFR 265.276.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-4
40 CFR 265.278.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-5
40 CFR 265.279.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-6
40 CFR 265.280.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-7
40 CFR 265.281.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-8
40 CFR 265.282.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-27-9
40 CFR 265.300.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-1
40 CFR 265.301.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-2
40 CFR 265.302.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-3
40 CFR 265.309.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-4
40 CFR 265.310.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-5
40 CFR 265.312.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-6
40 CFR 265.313.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-7
40 CFR 265.314.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-8
40 CFR 265.315.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-9
40 CFR 265.316.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-28-10
40 CFR 265.340.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-1
40 CFR 265.341.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-2
40 CFR 265.345.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-3
40 CFR 265.347.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-4
40 CFR 265.351.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-5
40 CFR 265.352.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-29-6
40 CFR 265.370.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-1
40 CFR 265.373.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-2
40 CFR 265.375.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-3
40 CFR 265.377.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-4
40 CFR 265.381.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-5
40 CFR 265.382.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-6
40 CFR 265.383.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-30-7
40 CFR 265.400.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-1
40 CFR 265.401.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-2
40 CFR 265.402.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-3
40 CFR 265.403.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-4
40 CFR 265.404.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-5
40 CFR 265.405.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-6
40 CFR 265.406.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-31-7
40 CFR 265.430.................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-3.. 329 IAC 3-32-1
40 CFR 265.1030................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1031................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1032................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1033................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1034................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1035................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1050................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1051................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1052................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1053................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1054................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1055................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1056................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1057................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1058................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1059................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1060................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
[[Page 43016]]
40 CFR 265.1061................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1062................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1063................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.1064................. 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. NONE
40 CFR 265.--Appendix I......... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-32-2
40 CFR 265.--Appendix III....... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-32-3
40 CFR 265.--Appendix V......... 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-32-4
40 CFR 265.--Appendix VI........ 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.. 329 IAC 3-32-5
40 CFR 266.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-1
40 CFR 266.21................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-2
40 CFR 266.22................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-3
40 CFR 266.23................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-2.. 329 IAC 3-57-4
40 CFR 266.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-5
40 CFR 266.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-6
40 CFR 266.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-7
40 CFR 266.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-8
40 CFR 266.34................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-9
40 CFR 266.35................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-10
40 CFR 266.40................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-11
40 CFR 266.41................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-12
40 CFR 266.42................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-13
40 CFR 266.43................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-14
40 CFR 266.44................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-15
40 CFR 266.70................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-16
40 CFR 266.80................... 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.. 329 IAC 3-57-17
40 CFR 268.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.2.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.3.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.4.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.5.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.6.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.7.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.8.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.9.................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.13................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.. NONE
40 CFR 268.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.34................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.35................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.40................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.41................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.42................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.43................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.44................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 268.50................... 329 IAC 3.1-12-2.. NONE
40 CFR 270.1.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-2.. 329 IAC 3-33-1
40 CFR 270.2.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-33-2
40 CFR 270.4.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-33-3
40 CFR 270.5.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-33-4
40 CFR 270.6.................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-33-5
40 CFR 270.10................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-3.. 329 IAC 3-34-1
40 CFR 270.11................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-2
40 CFR 270.12................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-4.. 329 IAC 3-34-3
40 CFR 270.13................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-4
40 CFR 270.14................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-5
40 CFR 270.15................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-6
40 CFR 270.16................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-7
40 CFR 270.17................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-8
40 CFR 270.18................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-9
40 CFR 270.19................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-10
40 CFR 270.20................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-11
40 CFR 270.21................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-12
40 CFR 270.23................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-34-13
40 CFR 270.30................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-35-1
40 CFR 270.31................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-35-2
40 CFR 270.32................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-35-3
40 CFR 270.33................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-2.. 329 IAC 3-35-4
40 CFR 270.40................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-36-1
40 CFR 270.41................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-36-2
[[Page 43017]]
40 CFR 270.42................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-36-3
40 CFR 270.43................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-36-4
40 CFR 270.60................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-37-1
40 CFR 270.61................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-37-2
40 CFR 270.62................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-37-3
40 CFR 270.63................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-37-4
NONE............................ 329 IAC 3.1-13-5.. 329 IAC 3-37-5
40 CFR 270.65................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-37-6
40 CFR 270.70................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-38-1
40 CFR 270.71................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-38-2
40 CFR 270.72................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-38-3
40 CFR 270.73................... 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.. 329 IAC 3-38-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Decision
I conclude that Indiana's application for program revisions meets
all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA,
and its amendments. Accordingly, Indiana is granted final authorization
to operate its hazardous waste program as revised. Indiana now has
responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities within its borders and carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its revised program application, subject to the
limitations of the HSWA. Indiana also has primary enforcement
responsibilities, although EPA retains the right to conduct inspections
under Section 3007 of RCRA and to take enforcement actions under
Sections 3008, 3013, and 7003 of RCRA.
D. Incorporation by Reference
EPA incorporates by reference, authorized State programs in 40 CFR
Part 272, to provide notice to the public of the scope of the
authorized program in each State. Incorporation by reference of the
Indiana program will be completed at a later date.
Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes 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, EPA
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, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. Thus, today's rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has determined that this authorization will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
EPA recognizes that small entities may own and/or operate TSDFs that
will become subject to the requirements of an approved state hazardous
waste program. However, since such small entities which own and/or
operate TSDFs are already subject to the requirements in 40 CFR Parts
264, 265 and 270, this authorization does not impose any additional
burdens on these small entities. This is because EPA's authorization
would result in an administrative change (i.e., whether EPA or the
state administers the RCRA Subtitle C program in that state), rather
than result in a change in the substantive requirements imposed on
small entities. Once EPA authorizes a state to administer its own
hazardous waste program and any revisions to that program, these same
small entities will be able to own and operate their TSDFs under the
approved state program, in lieu of the federal program. Moreover, this
authorization, in approving a state program to operate in lieu of the
federal program, eliminates duplicative requirements for owners and
operators of TSDFs in that particular state.
Therefore, EPA provides the following certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. Pursuant to the provision at 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
I hereby certify that this authorization will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
authorization effectively approves the Indiana program to operate in
lieu of the federal program, thereby eliminating duplicative
requirements for handlers of hazardous waste in the state. It does not
impose any new burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does
not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. section 801(a)(1)(A) as added 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
[[Page 43018]]
Office prior to publication of the rule in today's Federal Register.
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S. C. section
804(2).
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal
agencies must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information
request contained in a proposed rule or a final rule. This rule will
not impose any information requirements upon the regulated community.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended
42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: July 29, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21174 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21173 Indiana: Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous Waste Management Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43018-43023]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21173]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-5552-4]
Indiana: Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous
Waste Management Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Indiana has applied for final authorization of revisions to
its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 as amended (hereinafter RCRA). Indiana's revisions
consist of provisions contained in rules promulgated between January
14, 1985, and June 26, 1992, otherwise known as HSWA Clusters I and II,
Non-HSWA Clusters III, IV, V, and VI, and RCRA Clusters 1 and 2. These
requirements are listed in Section B of this notice. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed Indiana's application and has made
a decision, subject to public review and comment, that Indiana's
hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for final authorization. Thus, EPA intends to
approve Indiana's hazardous waste program revisions, subject to
authority retained by EPA under the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (hereinafter HSWA). Indiana's application for
program revision is available for public review and comment.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Final authorization for Indiana shall be effective
October 21, 1996 unless EPA publishes a prior Federal Register action
withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on Indiana's
program revision application must be received by the close of business
September 19, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Indiana's program revision application are
available for inspection and copying, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., at the
following addresses: Indiana Department of Environmental Management,
100 North Senate, P.O. Box 6015, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206-6015,
contact: Lynn West (317) 232-3593; U.S. EPA, Region 5, DR-7J, 77 W.
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604, contact: Gary Westefer (312)
886-7450. Written comments should be sent to Mr. Gary Westefer, Indiana
Regulatory Specialist, U.S. EPA, Office of RCRA, DR-7J, 77 W. Jackson
Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604, phone 312/886-7450.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gary Westefer, U.S. EPA Region 5,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Phone: 312/886-
7450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
States with final authorization under Section 3006(b) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA or the Act), 42 U.S.C.
6929(b), have a continuing obligation to maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal hazardous waste program. In addition, as an interim
measure, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-
616, November 8, 1984, hereinafter HSWA) allows States to revise their
programs to become substantially equivalent instead of equivalent to
RCRA requirements promulgated under HSWA authority. States exercising
the latter option receive interim authorization for the HSWA
requirements under Section 3006(g) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), and
later apply for final authorization for the HSWA requirements.
In accordance with 40 CFR 271.21, revisions to State hazardous
waste programs are necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, State program revisions are necessitated by changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR Parts 124, 260-266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. Indiana
Indiana initially received final authorization for its program
effective January 31, 1986. (51 FR 3955, January 30, 1986). Indiana
received authorization for revisions to its program effective on
December 31, 1986 (51 FR 39752, October 31, 1986), January 19, 1988 (53
FR 128, January 5, 1988), September 11, 1989 (54 FR 29557, July 13,
1989), September 23, 1991 (56 FR 33717, July 23, 1991), September 23,
1991 (56 FR 33866, July 24, 1991), September 27, 1991 (56 FR 35831,
July 29, 1991), and September 30, 1991 (56 FR 36010, July 30, 1991). On
June 10, 1996, Indiana submitted a program revision application for
additional program approvals. Today, Indiana is seeking approval of its
program revision in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21(b)(3).
EPA has reviewed Indiana's application, and has made an immediate
final decision that Indiana's hazardous waste program revisions satisfy
all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization.
Consequently, EPA intends to grant final authorization for the
additional program modifications to Indiana. The public may submit
written comments on EPA's immediate final decision up until September
19, 1996. Copies of Indiana's application for program revision are
available for inspection and copying at the locations indicated in the
Addresses section of this notice.
Approval of Indiana's program revision shall become effective in 60
days unless an adverse comment pertaining to the State's revision
discussed in this notice is received by the end of the comment period.
If an adverse comment is received, EPA will publish either (1) a
withdrawal of the immediate final decision or (2) a notice containing a
response to comments which either affirms that the immediate final
decision takes effect or reverses the decision.
On October 21, 1996, Indiana will be authorized to carry out, in
lieu of the Federal program, those provisions of the State's program
which are analogous to the following provisions of the Federal program:
[[Page 43019]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal requirement Analogous State authority
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxin Listing and Management Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Standards; January 14, 1985 (CL 14), 3.1-9-1; 3.1-9-2; 3.1-9-3; 3.1-
50 FR 01978-2006.1 10-1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-13-1; 3.1-
13-2. Effective December 17,
1989.
Paint Filter Test; April 30, 1985 (CL Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-9-2;
16), 50 FR 18370-18375.1 3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2. Effective
December 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Small Quantity Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Generators; July 15, 1985 (CL 17A), 50 Effective December 17, 1989.
FR 28702-28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Household Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Waste; July 15, 1985 (CL 17C), 50 FR Effective December 17, 1989.
28702-28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Waste Rules 329 IAC 3.1-7-1; 3.1-7-2;
Minimization; July 15, 1985 (CL 17D), 3.1-7-14; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-13-1.
50 FR 28702-28755.1 Effective December 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Location Rule 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.
Standards for Salt Domes, Salt Beds, Effective December 17, 1989.
Mines and Caves; July 15, 1985 (CL
17E), 50 FR 28702-28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Liquids in Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-
Landfills; July 15, 1985 (CL 17F), 50 1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-13-1.
FR 28702-28755.1 Effective December 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Dust Rule 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.
Suppression; July 15, 1985 (CL 17G), Effective December 17, 1989.
50 FR 28702-28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Double Liners; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-9-2;
July 15, 1985 (CL 17H), 50 FR 28702- 3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2. Effective
28755.1 December 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Ground Water Rule 329 IAC 3.1-9-1. Effective
Monitoring; July 15, 1985 (CL 17I), 50 December 17, 1989.
FR 28702-28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Cement Kilns; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
July 15, 1985 (CL 17J), 50 FR 28702- 3.1-11-1. Effective December
28755.1 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Fuel Labeling; Rule 329 IAC 329 IAC 3.1-11-1.
July 15, 1985 (CL 17K), 50 FR 28702- Effective December 17, 1989.
28755.1
HSWA Codification Rule--Corrective Rule 329 IAC 3.1-9-1. Effective
Action; July 15, 1985 (CL 17L), 50 FR December 17,1989.
28702-28755.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule--Pre- Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-3.
Construction Ban; July 15, 1985 (CL Effective December 17, 1989.
17M), 50 FR 28702-28755.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule--Permit Life; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-
July 15, 1985 (CL 17N), 50 FR 28702- 2; 3.1-13-15. Effective
28755.\1\ December 17, 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Omnibus Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Provision; July 15, 1985 (CL 17O), 50 Effective December 17, 1989.
FR 28702-28755.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule--Interim Status; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-
July 15, 1985 (CL 17P), 50 FR 28702- 2. Effective December 17,
28755.\1\ 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Research and Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-
Development Permits; July 15, 1985 (CL 2. Effective December 17,
17Q), 50 FR 28702-28755.\1\ 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Hazardous Waste Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-2; 3.1-13-
Exports; July 15, 1985 (CL 17R), 50 FR 15. Effective December 17,
28702-28755.\1\ 1989.
HSWA Codification Rule--Exposure Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-2; 3.1-13-
Information;July 15, 1985 (CL 17S), 50 3. Effective December 17,
FR 28702-28755.\1\ 1989.
Listing of TDI, TDA, and DNT Wastes; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
July 15, 1985 (CL 18), 50 FR 28702- Effective February 24, 1992.
28755.\1\
Burning of Waste Fuel and Used Oil Fuel Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1; 3.1-11-1.
November 29, 1985 (CL 19), 50 FR 49164- Effective February 24, 1992.
49211;\1\ as amended April 13, 1987
(CL 19.1), 52 FR 11819-11822.\1\
Listing of Spent Solvents; December 31, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
1985 (CL 20), 50 FR 53315-53320; \1\ Effective February 24, 1992.
as amended January 21, 1986, 51 FR
02702 \1\ (CL 20.1)
Listing of EDB Wastes; February 13, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
1986 (CL 21), 51 FR 5327-5331.\1\ Effective February 24, 1992.
Listing of Four Spent Solvents; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
February 25, 1986 (CL 22), 51 FR 6537- Effective February 24, 1992.
6542.\1\
Generators of 100 to 1000 Kilograms of Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
Hazardous Waste; March 24, 1986 (CL 3.1-6-2; 3.1-7-1; 3.1-7-2; 3.1-
23), 51 FR 10146-10176.\1\ 7-3; 3.1-7-7; 3.1-7-8; 3.1-7-
9; 3.1-7-10; 3.1-7-11; 3.1-7-
12; 3.1-7-13; 3.1-8-1; 3.1-8-
2; 3.1-13-2. Effective
February 24, 1992.
Codification Rule, Technical Rule 329 IAC 3.1-10-1.
Correction; May 28, 1986 (CL 25), 51 Effective February 24, 1992.
FR 19176-19177.\1\
Correction to Listing of Commercial Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Chemical Products and Appendix VIII, Effective February 24, 1992.
Constituents; August 6, 1986 (CL 29),
51 FR 28296-28310.
Biennial Report Correction; August 8, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-9-2;
1986 (CL 30), 51 FR 28556.\1\ 3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2. Effective
February 24, 1992.
Exports of Hazardous Waste; August 8, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
1986 (CL 31), 51 FR 28664-28686.1 3.1-7-1; 3.1-7-14; 3.1-7-16;
3.1-8-1. Effective February
24, 1992.
Standards for Generators--Waste Rules 329 IAC 3.1-7-7; 3.1-7-8;
Minimization Certifications; October 3.1-7-9; 3.1-7-10; 3.1-7-11;
1, 1986 (CL 32), 51 FR 35190-35194.1 3.1-7-12; 3.1-7-13. Effective
December 17, 1989.
Listing of EDBC; October 24, 1986 (CL Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
33), 51 FR 37725-37729.1 Effective February 24, 1992.
Land Disposal Restrictions; November 7, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-1-1; 3.1-1-2;
1986 (CL 34), 51 FR 40572-40654; 1 as 3.1-2-1; 3.1-3-1; 3.1-4-1; 3.1-
amended June 4, 1987 (CL 34.1), 52 FR 5-1; 3.1-5-2; 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-
21010-21018.1 2; 3.1-7-1; 3.1-8-1; 3.1-9-1;
3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-12-1;
3.1-12-2; 3.1-13-1. Effective
February 24, 1992.
Definition of Solid Waste; Technical Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Corrections; June 5, 1987 (CL 37), 52 3.1-11-1. Effective February
FR 21306-21307. 24, 1992.
Amendments to Part B Information Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Requirements for Land Disposal Effective February 24, 1992.
Facilities; June 22, 1987 (CL 38), 52
FR 23447-23450; as amended September
9, 1987, 52 FR 33936 (CL 38.1).
[[Page 43020]]
California List Waste Restrictions; Rule 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-7-1;
July 8, 1987 (CL 39), 52 FR 25760- 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1; 3.1-12-1;
25792; 1 as amended October 27, 1987, 3.1-12-2; 3.1-13-1. Effective
52 FR 41295-41296 1 (CL 39.1). February 24, 1992.
List (Phase 1) of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-13-
Constituents for Ground-Water 1. Effective December 17,
Monitoring; July 9, 1987 (CL 40), 52 1989.
FR 25942-25953.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Waste; July 10, 1987 (CL 41), 52 FR Effective February 24, 1992.
26012.
Listing of Spent Pickle Liquor Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Correction 2; August 3, 1987 (CL Effective December 17, 1989.
26.2), 52 FR 28697.
Exception Reporting for Small Quantity Rules 329 IAC 3.1-7-1; 3.1-7-2.
Generators of Hazardous Waste; Effective February 24, 1992.
September 23, 1987 (CL 42), 52 FR
35894-35899.\1\
Liability Requirements for Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-14-9; 3.1-14-
Waste Facilities; Corporate Guarantee; 24; 3.1-14-34; 3.1-15-8; 3.1-
November 18, 1987 (CL 43), 52 FR 44314- 15-10. Effective February 24,
44321. 1992.
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Permit Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Application Requirements Regarding Effective February 24, 1992.
Corrective Action; December 1, 1987
(CL 44A), 52 FR 45788-45799.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Corrective Rule 329 IAC 3.1-9-1. Effective
Action Beyond the Facility Boundary; February 24, 1992.
December 1, 1987 (CL 44B), 52 FR 45788-
45799.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Permit Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Modification; December 1, 1987 (CL Effective February 24, 1992.
44D), 52 FR 45788-45799.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Permit as a Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Shield Provision; December 1, 1987 (CL Effective February 24, 1992.
44E), 52 FR 45788-45799.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Permit Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-2; 3.1-13-
Conditions to Protect Human Health and 3. Effective February 24,
the Environment; December 1, 1987 (CL 1992.
44F), 52 FR 45788-45799.\1\
HSWA Codification Rule 2--Post-Closure Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-
Permits; December 1, 1987 (CL 44G) 52 2. Effective February 24,
FR 45788-45799.\1\ 1992.
Closure, Post-Closure Financial Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-9-1;
Responsibility Requirements-- 3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-13-1;
Correction 1; March 10, 1988 (CL 3.1-14-1; 3.1-14-2; 3.1-14-3;
24.1), 53 FR 07740; as amended June 3.1-14-5; 3.1-14-6; 3.1-14-7;
26, 1990, 55 FR 25976 (CL 24.0A). 3.1-14-8; 3.1-14-9; 3.1-14-12;
3.1-14-13; 3.1-14-15; 3.1-14-
16; 3.1-14-17; 3.1-14-18; 3.1-
14-19; 3.1-15-6; 3.1-14-24;
3.1-15-8; 3.1-15-10. Effective
February 24, 1992.
Technical Corrections; Identification Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
and Listing of Hazardous Waste; April Effective February 24, 1992.
22, 1988 (CL 46), 53 FR 13382-13393.
Identification and Listing of Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Hazardous, Waste; Technical Effective February 24, 1992.
Correction; July 19, 1988 (CL 47), 53
FR 27162-27163.\1\
Farmer Exemptions; Technical Rules 329 IAC 3.1-7-1; 3.1-9-1;
Corrections (CL 48); July 19, 1988, 53 3.1-10-1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-12-1;
FR 27164-27165.\1\ 3.1-12-2; 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-2.
Effective February 24, 1992.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
Waste; Treatibility Studies Sample 3.1-6-2 Effective February 24,
Exemption; July 19, 1988 (CL 49), 53 1992
FR 27290-27302.
Land Disposal Restrictions for First Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-
Third Scheduled Wastes; August 17, 1; 3.1-11-1; 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-
1988 (CL 50), 53 FR 31138-31222 \1\; 2. Effective February 24,
as amended February 27, 1989, 54 FR 1992.
8264-8266 \1\ (CL 50.1).
Hazardous Waste Management System; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-9-1;
Standards for Hazardous Waste Storage 3.1-10-1; 3.1-13-1. Effective
and Treatment Tank Systems; September February 24, 1992.
2, 1988 (CL 52), 53 FR 34079-34087.\1\
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Waste; and Designation, Reportable Effective February 24, 1992.
Quantities, and Notification;
September 13, 1988 (CL 53), 53 FR
35412-35421.
Permit Modifications for Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1;3.1-10-1;
Waste Management Facilities; September 3.1-10-2; 3.1-13-1; 3.1-13-7.
28, 1988 (CL 54), 53 FR 37912-37942; Effective February 24, 1992.
as amended October 24, 1988, 53 FR
41649 (CL 54.1).
Statistical Methods for Evaluating Rule 329 IAC 3.1-9-1.Effective
Ground Water Monitoring Data from February 24, 1992.
Hazardous Waste Facilities; October
11, 1988 (CL 55), 53 FR 39720-39731.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Waste; Removal of Iron Dextran from Effective February 24, 1992.
the List of Hazardous Wastes; October
31, 1988 (CL 56), 53 FR 43878-43881.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Waste; Removal of Strontium Sulfide Effective February 24, 1992.
from the List of Hazardous Wastes;
October 31, 1988 (CL 57), 53 FR 43881-
43884.
Standards for Generators of Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-7-3; 3.1-7-7;
Waste; November 8, 1988 (CL 58), 53 FR 3.1-7-8; 3.1-7-9; 3.1-7-10;
45089-45093. 3.1-7-11; 3.1-7-12; 3.1-7-13.
Effective February 24, 1992.
Amendment to Requirements for Hazardous Rule 329 IAC 3.1-13-1.
Waste Incinerator Permits; January 30, Effective February 24, 1992.
1989 (CL 60), 54 FR 4286-4288.
Changes to Interim Status Facilities Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-1; 3.1-3-
for Hazardous Waste Management 2; 3.1-13-3. Effective
Permits; Procedures for Post-Closure February 24, 1992.
Permitting; March 7, 1989 (CL 61), 54
FR 9596-9609.
Land Disposal Restrictions--Amendments Rule 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.
to First Third Scheduled Wastes; May Effective February 24, 1992.
2, 1989 (CL 62), 54 FR 18836-18838.\1\
Land Disposal Restrictions for Second Rules 329 IAC 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-
Third Scheduled Wastes; June 23, 1989 2. Effective February 24,
(CL 63), 54 FR 26594-26652 \1\ 1992.
Delay of Closure Period for Hazardous Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-
Waste Management Facilities; August 1; 3.1-10-2; 3.1-13-1.
14, 1989 (CL 64), 54 FR 33376-33398. Effective February 24, 1992.
[[Page 43021]]
Mining Waste Exclusion I; September 1, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
1989 (CL 65), 54 FR 36592-36642. Effective February 24, 1992.
Land Disposal Restrictions; Correction Rules 329 IAC 3.1-11-1; 3.1-12-
to the First Third Scheduled Wastes; 1; 3.1-12-2. Effective
September 6, 1989 (CL 66), 54 FR 36967 February 24, 1992.
\1\; as amended June 13, 1990 (CL
66.1), 55 FR 23935.\1\
Testing and Monitoring Activities; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
September 29, 1989 (CL 67), 54 FR 3.1-6-2. Effective February
40260-40269. 24, 1992.
Reportable Quantity Adjustment--Methyl Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Bromide Production Wastes; October 6, Effective February 24, 1992.
1989 (CL 68), 54 FR 41402-41408.\1\
Reportable Quantity Adjustment; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
December 11, 1989 (CL 69), 54 FR 50968- Effective February 24, 1992.
50979.\1\
Changes to Part 124 Not Accounted for Rules 329 IAC 3.1-13-6; 3.1-13-
by Present Checklists; April 1, 1983 7; 3.1-13-8; 3.1-13-10; 3.1-13-
(CL 70), 48 FR 14146-14295; June 30, 12. Effective February 24,
1983, 48 FR 30113-30115; July 26, 1992.
1988, 53 FR 28118-28157; September 26,
1988, 53 FR 37396-37414; January 4,
1989, 54 FR 246-258.
Mining Waste Exclusion II; January 23, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
1990 (CL 71), 55 FR 2322-2354. 3.1-6-2; 3.1-7-6. Effective
February 24, 1992.
Modifications of F019 Listing; February Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
14, 1990 (CL 72), 55 FR 05340. Effective February 24, 1992.
Testing and Monitoring Activities; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
Technical Corrections; March 9, 1990 3.1-6-2. Effective February
(CL 73), 55 FR 8948-8950. 24, 1992.
Toxicity Characteristic Revisions; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
March 29, 1990 (CL 74), 55 FR 11798- 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1; 3.1-12-1.
11877 \1\ as amended June 29, 1990, 55 Effective February 24, 1992.
FR 26986-26998 \1\ (CL 74.1).
Listing of 1,1-Dimethylhydrazine Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Production Wastes; May 2, 1990 (CL Effective February 24, 1992.
75), 55 FR 18496-18506.\1\
Criteria for Listing Toxic Wastes; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Technical Amendment; May 4, 1990 (CL Effective February 24, 1992.
76), 55 FR 18726.
HSWA Codification Rule, Double Liners; Rule 329 IAC 3.1-9-1. Effective
Correction; May 9, 1990 (CL 77), 55 FR February 24, 1992.
19262-19264.\1\
Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Third Scheduled Wastes; June 1, 1990 3.1-7-1; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1;
(CL 78), 55 FR 22520-22720.\1\ 3.1-10-2; 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-2;
3.1-13-1. Effective February
24, 1992.
Organic Air Emmissions Standards for Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
Process Vents and Equipment Leaks; 3.1-6-2; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1;
June 21, 1990 (CL 79), 55 FR 25454- 3.1-13-1. Effective February
25519.\1\ 24, 1992.
Toxicity Characteristic; Hydrocarbon Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Recovery Operations; October 5, 1990 Effective February 24, 1992.
(CL 80), 55 FR 40834-40837 \1\; as
amended February 1, 1991, 56 FR 3978
\1\ (CL 80.1); as amended April 2,
1991, 56 FR 13406-13411 \1\ (CL 80.2).
Petroleum Refinery Primary and Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Secondary Oil/Water/Solids Separation Effective November 22, 1992.
Sludge Listings (F037 and F038);
November 2, 1990 (CL 81), 55 FR 46354-
46397 \1\; as amended December 17,
1990, 55 FR 51707 \1\ (CL 81.1).
Wood Preserving Listings; December 6, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-6-1;
1990 (CL 82), 55 FR 50450-50490.\1\ 3.1-6-2; 3.1-7-1; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-
9-3; 3.1-10-1; 3.1-13-1.
Effective November 22, 1992.
Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Third Scheduled Wastes; Technical 3.1-7-1; 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-2;
Amendments (CL 83); January 31, 1991, 3.1-13-1. Effective February
56 FR 3864-3928.\1\ 24, 1992.
Toxicity Characteristic; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
Chlorofluorocarbon Refrigerants; Effective February 24, 1992.
February 13, 1991 (CL 84), 56 FR 5910-
5915.\1\
Removal of Strontium Sulfide from the Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
List of Hazardous Wastes; Technical Effective February 24, 1992.
Amendment; February 25, 1991 (CL 86),
56 FR 7567-7568.
Organic Air Emission Standards for Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-
Process Vents and Equipment Leaks; 1; 3.1-13-1. Effective
Technical Amendment; April 26, 1991 February 24, 1992.
(CL 87), 56 FR 19290.\1\
Administrative Stay for K069 Listing; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
May 1, 1991 (CL 88), 56 FR 19951. Effective February 24, 1992.
Revision to F037 and F038 Listings; May Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
13, 1991 (CL 89), 56 FR 21955- Effective February 24, 1992.
21960.\1\
Mining Waste Exclusion III; June 13, Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
1991 (CL 90), 56 FR 27300-27330. Effective February 24, 1992.
Administrative Stay for F032, F034, and Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
F035 Listings; June 13, 1991 (CL 91), 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1. Effective
56 FR 27332-27336.\1\ February 24, 1992.
Wood Preserving Listings; Technical Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Corrections; July 1, 1991 (CL 92), 56 3.1-7-1; 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-1;
FR 30192-30198.\1\ 3.1-13-1. Effective November
22, 1992.
Land Disposal Restrictions for Electric Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
Arc Furnace Dust (K061); August 19, 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-2. Effective
1991 (CL 95), 56 FR 41164-41178.\1\ February 24, 1992.
Exports of Hazardous Waste; Technical Rule 329 IAC 3.1-7-16.
Correction; September 4, 1991 (CL 97), Effective February 24, 1992.
56 FR 47304.\1\
Amendments to Interim Status Standards Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-10-
for Downgradient Ground-Water 1; 3.1-10-2. Effective
Monitoring Well Locations; December February 24, 1992.
23, 1991 (CL 99), 56 FR 66365-66369.
Liners and Leak Detection Systems for Rules 329 IAC 3.1-4-1; 3.1-9-1;
Hazardous Waste Disposal Systems; 3.1-9-2; 3.1-10-1; 3.1-13-1.
January 29, 1992 (CL 100), 57 FR 03462- Effective November 22, 1992.
03497.\1\
Second Correction to the Third Third Rules 329 IAC 3.1-9-1; 3.1-10-
Land Disposal Restrictions; March 6, 1; 3.1-12-1; 3.1-12-2.
1992 (CL 102), 57 FR 8086-8089.\1\ Effective November 22, 1992.
[[Page 43022]]
Hazardous Debris Case by Case Capacity Rule 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.
Variance; May 15, 1992 (CL 103), 57 FR Effective November 22, 1992.
20766-20770.\1\
Used Oil Filter Exclusion; May 20, 1992 Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2.
(CL 104), 57 FR 21524-21534.\1\ Effective November 30, 1992.
Recycled Coke By Product Exclusion; Rules 329 IAC 3.1-6-1; 3.1-6-2;
June 22, 1992 (CL 105), 57 FR 27880- 3.1-11-1. Effective November
27888.\1\ 30, 1992.
Lead Bearing Hazardous Materials Case Rules 329 IAC 3.1-12-1.
by Case Capacity Variance; June 26, Effective November 30, 1992.
1992 (CL 106), 57 FR 28628-28632.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Indicates HSWA Provision.
CL=Checklist.
EPA shall administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits, or portions
of permits, that contain conditions based upon the Federal program
provisions for which the State is applying for authorization, and which
were issued by EPA prior to the effective date of this authorization.
EPA will suspend issuance of any further permits under the provisions
for which the State is being authorized on the effective date of this
authorization. EPA has previously suspended issuance of permits for the
other provisions on January 31, 1986, January 5, 1988, July 13, 1989,
July 29, 1991, and July 30, 1991, the effective dates of Indiana's
final authorizations for the RCRA base program and for the subsequent
program revisions, respectively.
This authorization includes authorization for Indiana to impose
certain land disposal prohibitions. Under 40 CFR 268.6, EPA may grant
petitions of specific duration to allow land disposal of certain
hazardous wastes provided certain criteria are met. States that have
authority to impose land disposal prohibitions may ultimately be
authorized under RCRA Section 3006 to grant petitions for such
exemptions. However, EPA is currently requiring that these petitions be
handled at EPA Headquarters. It should be noted that Indiana has its
own procedures for petition submission and approval to allow land
disposal of a prohibited waste. Therefore, the petitioner must satisfy
both Federal and Indiana requirements, and be granted approval by both
EPA and the State.
Indiana is not authorized to operate the Federal program on Indian
lands. This authority remains with EPA unless provided otherwise in a
future statute or regulation.
C. Decision
I conclude that Indiana's application for program revisions meets
all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA,
and its amendments. Accordingly, Indiana is granted final authorization
to operate its hazardous waste program as revised. Indiana now has
responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities within its borders and carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its revised program application, subject to the
limitations of the HSWA. Indiana also has primary enforcement
responsibilities, although EPA retains the right to conduct inspections
under Section 3007 of RCRA and to take enforcement actions under
Sections 3008, 3013, and 7003 of RCRA.
D. Incorporation by Reference
EPA incorporates by reference, authorized State programs in 40 CFR
Part 272, to provide notice to the public of the scope of the
authorized program in each State. Incorporation by reference of the
Indiana program will be completed at a later date.
Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes 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, EPA
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, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. When a written statement is needed for an EPA rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, giving
them meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising them on compliance with the
regulatory requirements. EPA has determined that this rule does not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. EPA does not
anticipate that the approval of Indiana's hazardous waste program
referenced in today's notice will result in annual costs of $100
million or more. EPA's approval of State programs generally have a
deregulatory effect on the private sector because once it is determined
that a State hazardous waste program meets the requirements of RCRA
section 3006(b) and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 CFR
Part 271, owners and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage,
or disposal facilities (TSDFs) may take advantage of the flexibility
that an approved State may exercise. Such flexibility will reduce, not
increase, compliance costs for the private sector. Thus, today's rule
is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The
Agency recognizes that small governments may own and/or operate TSDFs
that will become subject to the requirements of an approved State
[[Page 43023]]
hazardous waste program. However, such small governments which own and/
or operate TSDFs are already subject to the requirements in 40 CFR
Parts 264, 265 and 270. Once EPA authorizes a State to administer its
own hazardous waste program and any revisions to that program, these
same small governments will be able to own and operate their TSDFs with
increased levels of flexibility provided under the approved State
program.
Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has determined that this authorization will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
EPA recognizes that small entities may own and/or operate TSDFs that
will become subject to the requirements of an approved state hazardous
waste program. However, since such small entities which own and/or
operate TSDFs are already subject to the requirements in 40 CFR Parts
264, 265 and 270, this authorization does not impose any additional
burdens on these small entities. This is because EPA's authorization
would result in an administrative change (i.e., whether EPA or the
state administers the RCRA Subtitle C program in that state), rather
than result in a change in the substantive requirements imposed on
small entities. Once EPA authorizes a state to administer its own
hazardous waste program and any revisions to that program, these same
small entities will be able to own and operate their TSDFs under the
approved state program, in lieu of the federal program. Moreover, this
authorization, in approving a state program to operate in lieu of the
federal program, eliminates duplicative requirements for owners and
operators of TSDFs in that particular state.
Therefore, EPA provides the following certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. Pursuant to the provision at 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
I hereby certify that this authorization will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
authorization effectively approves the Indiana program to operate in
lieu of the federal program, thereby eliminating duplicative
requirements for handlers of hazardous waste in the state. It does not
impose any new burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does
not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. section 801(a)(1)(A) as added 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 5
U.S.C. section 804(2).
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal
agencies must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information
request contained in a proposed rule or a final rule. This rule will
not impose any information requirements upon the regulated community.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended
42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: July 29, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21173 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21144 Widely Attended Gatherings Gifts Exception Under the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42965-42970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21144]
========================================================================
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. 162 / Tuesday, August 20, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 42965]]
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS
5 CFR Part 2635
RIN 3209-AA04
Widely Attended Gatherings Gifts Exception Under the Standards of
Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch
AGENCY: Office of Government Ethics (OGE).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Government Ethics is issuing a final rule
revising the gift exception contained in the Standards of Ethical
Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch to permit employees to
accept invitations to certain widely attended gatherings from persons
other than the sponsors of those events, subject to appropriate
limitations, and to clarify that only those events attended by a large
number of persons qualify as widely attended gatherings. The rule also
permits agency authorization for a guest, other than the employee's
spouse, to accompany the employee to a widely attended gathering or to
a conference or other event at which the employee is assigned to
participate as a speaker, panel participant, or other presenter of
information.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Gressman or Vincent J.
Salamone, Office of Government Ethics, Suite 500, 1201 New York Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20005-3917; telephone: 202-208-8000; FAX: 202-208-
8037.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 15, 1995, the Office of Government Ethics published a
proposed amendment to the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of
the Executive Branch (Standards), as codified at 5 CFR part 2635, that
would allow acceptance by agency employees of certain invitations of
free attendance at widely attended gatherings from persons (individuals
or organizations) other than sponsors of the events and to otherwise
modify the gifts exception for such gatherings. See 60 FR 31415-31418,
which provided for a 60-day public comment period. The Office of
Government Ethics received eleven comment letters on the proposed rule
from eight executive agencies, two agency employees and one private
organization, as well as a few telephonic comments. In this rulemaking
document, OGE is finalizing the proposed amendment, with certain
changes (noted below) mostly in response to certain of the comments
received.
The section of the Standards subject to this rulemaking is 5 CFR
2634.204(g), one provision of subpart B of the Standards which
implements the outside source gift restrictions contained in 5 U.S.C.
7353 and section 101(d) of Executive Order 12674, as modified by
Executive Order 12731. In accordance with those authorities,
Sec. 2635.204 sets forth exceptions to the primary constraint at
Sec. 2635.202(a), which provides that, in the absence of an exception,
an employee shall not directly or indirectly solicit or accept a gift
from a prohibited source or a gift that is given because of the
employee's official position.
Section 2635.204(g)(2), as it has been in effect for the past three
and a half years, provides that an agency employee may accept an
unsolicited gift of free attendance at all or part of a widely attended
gathering from the sponsor of the event, subject to a determination of
agency interest. Unlike the de minimis exception at Sec. 2635.204(a)
for unsolicited gifts having a market value of $20 or less per occasion
(with a calendar year aggregate limit of $50), Sec. 2635.204(g)(2)
imposes no limitation on the market value of the gifts of free
attendance that may be accepted. While the tickets or other fees for
attendance at such gatherings ordinarily cost much less, this exception
would permit acceptance of free attendance at events for which the
ticket price exceeds even $1,000. In part to ensure that prohibited
sources do not use this exception to provide lavish entertainment to
employees of the agencies with which they do business or otherwise
interact, Sec. 2635.204(g)(2) has to date specified that an invitation
to a widely attended gathering can be accepted only if it is from the
sponsor of the event.
On March 9, 1993, shortly after the Standards first took effect,
the White House declared a six-month suspension of application, with
respect to attendance at press dinners, of that portion of
Sec. 2635.204(g)(2) that has limited acceptance of invitations of free
attendance at widely attended gatherings to those issued by the sponsor
of the event. Thus, during that six- month period, executive branch
officials were authorized to attend press dinners as guests of
individuals or organizations other than the event's sponsor, if the
event otherwise met the conditions of the widely attended gathering
exception. On December 21, 1993, with another round of press
association events in the offing, the White House issued another
memorandum to all agency heads once again temporarily suspending
administrative enforcement of that portion of the rule affecting widely
attended gatherings solely as it relates to dinners sponsored by news
associations for which admission for executive branch officials is paid
by news organizations.
In a December 21, 1993 letter addressed to OGE, the White House
asked OGE to consider a revision to Sec. 2635.204(g)(2) of the
Standards to provide that an employee may accept an invitation received
directly from a news organization to attend a widely attended gathering
sponsored by a news association where there has been a determination
that the employee's attendance is in the interest of the agency. In the
alternative, the White House suggested that OGE might wish to consider
revising Sec. 2635.204(g)(2) to provide an exception for invitations to
a broader range of widely attended gatherings from persons other than
the sponsors of those events. Both in the rule as proposed and as being
finally adopted here, OGE has opted for this alternative approach. The
White House specified in its above-referenced December 1993 memorandum
that the suspension as to press dinners was to extend until August 1,
1994, or until such later date as OGE responded to its request for
revision of Sec. 2635.204(g)(2).
[[Page 42966]]
Therefore, as noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, the White
House suspension as to press dinners has remained in effect. However,
when this final rule takes effect on September 19, 1996, that
suspension will be superseded by the broader ``nonsponsor'' free
attendance gift provisions of Sec. 2635.204(g) as amended in this
rulemaking document.
II. Analysis of Comments
As noted, the Office of Government Ethics has carefully considered
the comments submitted on last year's proposed rule and, as discussed
below, is modifying a few portions of the rule as proposed in adopting
it as final. The discussion below is focused on the major areas of
comment regarding the proposed rule changes.
Clarification of Widely Attended Gatherings Definition/A Large Number
of Persons
Several agencies commented on the proposed addition of an express
clause requiring attendance by ``a large number of persons'' to the
definition of a widely attended gathering in Sec. 2635.204(g)(2). One
commenter asked that the term be eliminated altogether from the final
rule. Four agencies questioned why the proposed change to the rule did
not require that a specific minimum number of persons be expected to
attend a gathering for it to be considered attended by a ``large number
of persons.'' One of these agencies commented that such a minimum
number designation would assist program administration by helping to
reduce the number of employee inquiries on this matter. However, three
agencies wanted ethics officials to be able to focus more on factors
other than the size of the event, such as the nature of the gathering
itself and the event's overall importance to the agency's programs and
operations when making a determination about a widely attended
gathering under Sec. 2635.204(g)(3). One agency suggested that OGE
might be able to avoid the limitations of setting a minimum number by
providing instead for an acceptable range of numbers. Further, two
commenters suggested that OGE could assist agencies more by providing
agencies with a list of factors that the agencies could apply to
determine if an event qualified as widely attended.
After carefully reviewing these recommendations, including the
alternative approaches suggested, OGE has decided not to change the
proposed addition of the ``large number of persons'' clause, other than
to add the clarification that attendance by such a number is
``expected.'' While a specific minimum number or a range of numbers
might, in some ways, facilitate agency administration of the rule and
even possibly reduce employee inquiries, OGE believes that setting such
numbers for sponsor gifts would unduly limit the flexibility that
agencies require to administer this rule effectively. (The newly
revised rule does require a minimum number of attendees as to
nonsponsor gifts of free attendance, which are subject to additional
safeguards (see the discussion below).)
It is OGE's belief that executive agencies are in the best position
to determine when unsolicited gifts of free attendance offered by
sponsors of widely attended gatherings (or nonsponsors) should be
permitted based on a balancing of the event's value in facilitating
administration of agency programs/operations versus any appearance
concerns. As stated in the proposed rule, agencies should apply the
normal meaning of the phrase ``widely attended'' as encompassing those
events that are attended by many persons and excluding those events
attended by only a few. Additionally, ethics officials should note that
the rule requires more than a ``large number'' of attendees--the
gathering itself must be of mutual interest to those in attendance. See
OGE Informal Advisory Letters 93 x 15, 93 x 18 and 94 x 2, as published
in ``The Informal Advisory Letters and Memoranda and Formal Opinions of
the United States Office of Government Ethics,'' which is available
from the U.S. Government Printing Office and is on OGE's electronic
bulletin board TEBBS (``The Ethics Bulletin Board System'').
In sum, the determination of whether an event is widely attended
requires ethics officials to carefully examine the particular
circumstances of each event in light of all the regulatory factors.
Even if an event is expected to be attended by a large number of
persons and to have present a diversity of views or interests (see
discussion below), agency ethics officials must still make a finding
that the agency's interest in the employee's participation in the event
outweighs any concern that the acceptance of the gift of free
attendance may or may appear to improperly influence the employee in
the performance of his or her official duties. We believe that these
requirements will help preserve the Government's valid interest in
ensuring that employees are free from improper influences and that the
acceptance of any gift of free attendance from an outside source will
not create the appearance of partiality.
Furthermore, one commentator asked if the term ``a large number of
persons'' would include any accompanying spouse or other guest of each
invitee. The Office of Government Ethics believes that accompanying
spouses and guests can be counted, both for determining whether a large
number of persons is expected to attend an event and for purposes of
the 100-person threshold applicable to acceptance of gifts of free
attendance from nonsponsors.
A few agencies pointed out that an ambiguity in the definition of a
widely attended gathering was created by the use of the term ``for
example'' in the second sentence of proposed Sec. 2635.204(g)(2). In
response to these concerns, OGE is changing the wording of the passage
in Sec. 2635.204(g)(2) of this final rule, by adding the words
``persons with a diversity of views or interests'' before the ``for
example'' phrase, to clarify that the types of events which are widely
attended are those at which a ``large number of persons'' is expected
to attend and at which persons having a diversity of viewpoints or
interests are expected to be present. The latter factor can be
satisfied if the event is open to members from throughout a given
industry or profession, if persons in attendance represent a range of
persons interested in a given matter, or if there is otherwise a
diversity of views or interests present. Agencies should consider both
factors in determining whether an event is ``widely attended''--the
number of persons attending the event and the breadth of the views and
interests presented by the group itself.
Several agencies expressed specific concerns with proposed new
Example 3 following the regulatory text of Sec. 2635.204(g), focusing
on the proposed disqualification of a 20-person dinner party as not
meeting the ``large number of persons'' test. Some comments noted that
the example might well be overly restrictive in the context of smaller
agencies. The desirability of agency discretion in setting a lower
limit for sponsor events was also stressed. One agency recommended that
Example 3 be revised so that reference to the number of persons in
attendance at the dinner party of the major utility be removed from the
example and that the event be merely referred to as a small dinner
party. In this way, the point would be made that agency officials
should consider the size of a gathering as part of their analysis on
whether an event was a widely attended gathering. The Office of
Government Ethics has rewritten Example 3 to try to clarify the main
point intended that a small dinner
[[Page 42967]]
party is not a widely attended gathering. Further, OGE has reworked the
comment at the end of the example about the additional requirement that
a range of persons interested in a given matter be present at any
qualified widely attended gathering. This passage has been broken out
into a separate sentence and the hypothetical facts have been modified,
to reference a larger company ``banquet'' as still not widely attended,
in order to emphasize that attendance by persons with a diverse set of
views or interests is an additional, separate requirement for finding
that a gathering is ``widely attended.''
Sponsor/Nonsponsor Distinction
Although there was general support for the proposed new exception
to allow employees to accept an invitation of free attendance to a
larger widely attended gathering from a source other than the sponsor
in appropriate cases, two agencies and a private organization
questioned the need for any distinction between such gifts from the
sponsor and from others. After carefully reviewing this matter, OGE has
decided to maintain the additional standards imposed as to
``nonsponsor'' gifts. The Office of Government Ethics believes that
there is an important distinction between situations in which gifts of
free attendance are offered by sponsors of widely attended gatherings,
as opposed to those circumstances where gifts of free attendance are
tendered by nonsponsors. When a sponsor invites an individual to attend
an event, the sponsor is presumably doing so for the benefit of all
those in attendance. The sponsor's attention is also not focused solely
upon the invitee at the event. Thus, the invitee does have more of an
opportunity to meet and mingle with a wider number of people in
attendance. This supports more fully the agency's interest in his or
her attendance at the event. When a nonsponsor invites an individual to
attend an event, however, the attention of the nonsponsor host is more
focused upon the employee. The 100-person threshold provides an
additional measure of public and press scrutiny of that relationship.
In addition, the $250 ceiling on nonsponsor donor gifts constitutes an
important further safeguard against more lavish entertainment, which a
nonsponsor might be able to afford in a one-on-one situation, but the
sponsor could not in any significant numbers. The dollar ceiling also
protects against excess in the case of fundraising events that are not
lavish, but exclusive because of cost of attendance. Finally, OGE
stresses that both nonsponsor and sponsor gifts must still be screened
by agencies for any appearance of conflict in accordance with
Sec. 2635.204(g)(3) of the Standards. Together, these protections will
help ensure that any gifts of free attendance accepted are in the best
interests of the agency concerned and do not involve an appearance of
undue influence or loss of impartiality.
Press Dinners
One agency suggested that OGE might consider adopting an exception
that applies to press dinners, because of the uniqueness of press
organizations, rather than carving out a broader sponsor/nonsponsor
distinction. Another commenter suggested an alternative approach in
which OGE would determine that journalist members of the press groups
were themselves ``individual sponsors'' of a dinner. As stated above
and in the preamble to the proposed rule, OGE earlier considered and
rejected the option of singling out the press under the widely attended
gatherings exception. The Office of Government Ethics does not believe
that the press should be treated differently than any other private
entities that deal with the Government. Thus, in liberalizing this
provision, with appropriate safeguards, OGE believes that there is no
reason to limit nonsponsor gifts to press entities.
The 100 Person Attendee Threshold for Nonsponsor Gifts
Four commenters recommended that OGE drop the proposed requirement
that 100 persons be in attendance at a widely attended gathering before
a gift of free attendance can be accepted from a nonsponsor. The
general consensus among these four commenters was that this number
should be left to the judgment of agency ethics officials and that it
would unduly restrict agency discretionary authority in those
situations where gifts of free attendance are offered by nonsponsors of
widely attended gatherings. An agency and one individual commenting
thought that the proposed 100-person threshold would not be fair to
smaller agencies or smaller industry groups. The agency indicated that,
particularly in the scientific and technical communities, an agency's
interest might be advanced by having a representative attend a public
meeting at which fewer than 100 persons are expected to disseminate
information about its agency functions and policies. Additionally, one
agency was concerned that a prohibited source could circumvent the rule
by ensuring that a sufficient number of persons were invited to an
event at the appropriate cost. One agency, however, favored the use of
specific numbers, stating that this would facilitate the administration
of the rule.
After reviewing these comments, OGE has decided to maintain the
proposed 100-person threshold in the final rule. The Office of
Government Ethics recognizes that it may be in the agency's interest,
in some cases, to have an employee attend a nonconflicting event where
less than 100 persons are expected if it would assist the agency in the
accomplishment of its mission. In that regard, OGE notes that the new
rule's specific 100-person threshold only applies to nonsponsor gifts.
Thus a sponsor's offer of free attendance to an otherwise qualified
widely attended gathering (including attendance by ``a large number of
persons'') could be accepted, if there were an agency interest
determination under Sec. 2635.204(g)(3), even though fewer than 100
persons were expected to attend. Furthermore, if permissible in terms
of appropriations principles, the agency could consider paying for the
employee's attendance at smaller events. The employee could also pay
his or her own way. Finally, as to other events involving fewer than
100 expected attendees, certain separate authorities, such as the
Government employees training statute, the law permitting agencies to
accept certain travel payments from non-Federal sources, or other
agency statutory authority might permit the acceptance of free
attendance. See 5 U.S.C. 4111 and 31 U.S.C. 1353, as well as the
respective implementing regulations of the Office of Personnel
Management, at subpart G of 5 CFR part 410, and the General Services
Administration, at 41 CFR part 304-1; see also the note following
Sec. 2635.204(g)(4) of the Standards.
The rationale for the 100-person threshold as to nonsponsor gifts
of free attendance is that the larger, generally more public events are
subject to greater potential press and public scrutiny, which will
serve as additional protection against any apparent conflict situation.
In combination with the $250 free attendance gift value limitation
(discussed below), these two requirements will protect against the
possibility that this new exception might result in the provision to
Government employees by a nonsponsor donor of lavish entertainment or
an opportunity to attend an event made highly exclusive by virtue of
the admission price.
One agency suggested that OGE provide agency designees with the
authority to except a nonsponsor offer of free attendance from the 100-
person
[[Page 42968]]
requirement in appropriate circumstances. However, OGE believes that
there should be a uniform threshold for nonsponsor gifts and has not
accepted that suggestion.
Another agency asked for additional clarification on whether
accompanying spouses and other guests are to be counted for purposes of
the 100-person requirement. In response, OGE notes that spouses and
guests, who often form an integral part of widely attended gatherings,
may be counted for purposes of determining whether the 100-person
requirement is met for a particular event.
The $250 Ceiling on Nonsponsor Gifts of Free Attendance
One agency comment indicated that having the $250 cap on nonsponsor
gifts would facilitate administration of the regulation. However,
another agency thought that the amount should be lowered, but that the
rule should provide an exemption for charitable events where the face
value of the ticket primarily reflects a charitable contribution and
not a benefit to the employee. The Office of Government Ethics is
concerned that providing for any such exemption would unnecessarily
complicate the rule and detract from the uniformity to be accorded as
to nonsponsor free attendance offers. Furthermore, the opportunity to
attend, free of charge, an event where the ticket prices include a
sizable donation, and thus make the event more exclusive, can also be
viewed as a benefit to the employee. On the other hand, one agency and
a private organization believed that the $250 numerical limitation for
free attendance in the case of a nonsponsor was too low. The Office of
Government Ethics has neither raised nor lowered the $250 ceiling
amount, because we believe that $250 is the right amount, permitting
reasonable application of the new authority as to nonsponsor gifts
while protecting against lavish entertainment by prohibited sources.
A few commentators suggested that provision be made for periodic
reevaluation of the ceiling amount. A commenting organization noted
that most hotels that accommodate many widely attended gatherings have
an escalation factor built into their contracts with private
organizations and that some sort of mechanism was needed to keep up
with rising costs. The Office of Government Ethics notes that the $250
ceiling on the value of free attendance that may be accepted from a
person other than the event's sponsor coincides generally with the
legislative and OGE consensus that gifts of lesser amount do not need
to be subjected to public or confidential financial reporting under the
Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. app., sections 102(a)(2) and 107, or
OGE's 5 CFR part 2634 regulation thereunder. Considering that the $250
ceiling is imposed only in those situations where the gift of free
attendance is coming from a nonsponsor, OGE believes it is a reasonable
limitation to protect Government employees and their agencies from the
possible appearance of favoritism or undue influence. The Office of
Government Ethics notes that it will periodically review the
appropriateness of the $250 ceiling in the future. If any adjustment to
that dollar amount appears appropriate, OGE will initiate a rulemaking
action to change it.
Accompanying Guest Authority
Two commenters supported the proposed revision of
Sec. 2635.204(g)(6) to permit acceptance of an offer of free attendance
to a widely attended gathering extended, by the same donor, to an
accompanying guest of an employee whether or not the guest is the
employee's spouse (that provision has been limited to an accompanying
spouse). One commenter opposed the proposed change. In this final rule,
OGE has decided to retain the change as proposed. The expansion of
acceptance authority to another guest, when appropriate, will provide
additional flexibility in cases where the agency has determined that
acceptance of the gift of free attendance for an accompanying guest, in
addition to the employee, at a widely attended gathering of mutual
interest to a number of parties will further agency programs and
operations. In addition to addressing the fact that many employees are
not married, the expanded rule would apply to situations in which a
spouse is unable or does not wish to attend an event, but another
family member, a colleague or another appropriate guest could attend.
The Office of Government Ethics notes that the offer of free attendance
for the guest must be from the same person offering to pay for the
employee's attendance. Further, only one guest of an employee maybe
authorized to accept an offer of free attendance to accompany the
employee to an event at which the employee himself or herself is
authorized by the employing agency to accept a gift of free attendance.
Moreover, in such cases, the value of the guest's free attendance must
be aggregated with that of the employee's in applying $250 ceiling for
nonsponsor gifts (see Sec. 2635.204(g)(6) and Example 2, the wording of
both of which has been slightly revised to reflect their application to
an accompanying guest's free attendance).
Miscellaneous
Finally, OGE is making a couple of minor clarifications to the rule
as proposed in adopting it as final.
III. Matters of Regulatory Procedure
Executive Order 12866
In promulgating this final rule, the Office of Government Ethics
has adhered to the regulatory philosophy and the applicable principles
of regulation set forth in section 1 of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review. This amendatory regulation has also
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under that
Executive order.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
As the Deputy General Counsel of OGE, I certify under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) that this amendatory
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because it primarily affects Federal executive
branch employees and their agencies.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply
to this amendatory regulation because it does not contain information
collection requirements that require OMB approval.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 2635
Conflict of interests, Executive branch standards of ethical
conduct, Government employees.
Approved: August 14, 1996.
Marilyn L. Glynn,
Deputy General Counsel, Office of Government Ethics.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Office
of Government Ethics is amending part 2635 of chapter XVI of title 5 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 2635--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 2635 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7351, 7353; 5 U.S.C. App. (Ethics in
Government Act of 1978); E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp.,
p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp.,
p. 306.
Subpart B--Gifts From Outside Sources
2. Section 2635.204 is amended as set forth below:
[[Page 42969]]
A. Revising paragraphs (g)(2) through (g)(5);
B. Revising the text of paragraph (g)(6) preceding Example 1 and
C. Redesignating Examples 2, 3 and 4 of paragraph (g)(6) as
Examples 4, 5 and 6, respectively; and
D. Adding new Examples 2 and 3 to paragraph (g)(6). The revisions,
and additions read as follows:
Sec. 2635.204 Exceptions.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) Widely attended gatherings. When there has been a determination
that his attendance is in the interest of the agency it will further
agency programs and operations, an employee may accept an unsolicited
gift of free attendance at all or appropriate parts of a widely
attended gathering of mutual interest to a number of parties from the
sponsor of the event or, if more than 100 persons are expected to
attend the event and the gift of free attendance has a market value of
$250 or less, from a person other than the sponsor of the event. A
gathering is widely attended if it is expected that a large number of
persons will attend and that persons with a diversity of views or
interests will be present, for example, if it is open to members from
throughout the interested industry or profession or if those in
attendance represent a range of persons interested in a given matter.
For employees subject to a leave system, attendance at the event shall
be on the employee's own time or, if authorized by the employee's
agency, on excused absence pursuant to applicable guidelines for
granting such absence, or otherwise without charge to the employee's
leave account.
(3) Determination of agency interest. The determination of agency
interest required by paragraph (g)(2) of this section shall be made
orally or in writing by the agency designee.
(i) If the person who has extended the invitation has interests
that may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance
of an employee's official duties or is an association or organization
the majority of whose members have such interests, the employee's
participation may be determined to be in the interest of the agency
only where there is a written finding by the agency designee that the
agency's interest in the employee's participation in the event
outweighs the concern that acceptance of the gift of free attendance
may or may appear to improperly influence the employee in the
performance of his official duties. Relevant factors that should be
considered by the agency designee include the importance of the event
to the agency, the nature and sensitivity of any pending matter
affecting the interests of the person who has extended the invitation,
the significance of the employee's role in any such matter, the purpose
of the event, the identity of other expected participants and the
market value of the gift of free attendance.
(ii) A blanket determination of agency interest may be issued to
cover all or any category of invitees other than those as to whom the
finding is required by paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section. Where a
finding under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section is required, a
written determination of agency interest, including the necessary
finding, may be issued to cover two or more employees whose duties
similarly affect the interests of the person who has extended the
invitation or, where that person is an association or organization, of
its members.
(4) Free attendance. For purposes of paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)
of this section, free attendance may include waiver of all or part of a
conference or other fee or the provision of food, refreshments,
entertainment, instruction and materials furnished to all attendees as
an integral part of the event. It does not include travel expenses,
lodgings, entertainment collateral to the event, or meals taken other
than in a group setting with all other attendees. Where the invitation
has been extended to an accompanying spouse or other guest (see
paragraph (g)(6) of this section), the market value of the gift of free
attendance includes the market value of free attendance by the spouse
or other guest as well as the market value of the employee's own
attendance.
Note: There are statutory authorities implemented other than by
part 2635 under which an agency or an employee may be able to accept
free attendance or other items not included in the definition of
free attendance, such as travel expenses.
(5) Cost provided by sponsor of event. The cost of the employee's
attendance will not be considered to be provided by the sponsor, and
the invitation is not considered to be from the sponsor of the event,
where a person other than the sponsor designates the employee to be
invited and bears the cost of the employee's attendance through a
contribution or other payment intended to facilitate that employee's
attendance. Payment of dues or a similar assessment to a sponsoring
organization does not constitute a payment intended to facilitate a
particular employee's attendance.
(6) Accompanying spouse or other guest. When others in attendance
will generally be accompanied by a spouse or other guest, and where the
invitation is from the same person who has invited the employee, the
agency designee may authorize an employee to accept an unsolicited
invitation of free attendance to an accompanying spouse or to another
accompanying guest to participate in all or a portion of the event at
which the employee's free attendance is permitted under paragraph
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this section. The authorization required by this
paragraph may be provided orally or in writing.
Example 1: An aerospace industry association that is a prohibited
source sponsors an industrywide, two-day seminar for which it charges a
fee of $400 and anticipates attendance of approximately 400. An Air
Force contractor pays $2,000 to the association so that the association
can extend free invitations to five Air Force officials designated by
the contractor. The Air Force officials may not accept the gifts of
free attendance. Because the contractor specified the invitees and bore
the cost of their attendance, the gift of free attendance is considered
to be provided by the company and not by the sponsoring association.
Had the contractor paid $2,000 to the association in order that the
association might invite any five Federal employees, an Air Force
official to whom the sponsoring association extended one of the five
invitations could attend if his participation were determined to be in
the interest of the agency. The Air Force official could not in any
case accept an invitation directly from the nonsponsor contractor
because the market value of the gift exceeds $250.
Example 2: An employee of the Department of Transportation is
invited by a news organization to an annual press dinner sponsored by
an association of press organizations. Tickets for the event cost $250
per person and attendance is limited to 400 representatives of press
organizations and their guests. If the employee's attendance is
determined to be in the interest of the agency, she may accept the
invitation from the news organization because more than 100 persons
will attend and the cost of the ticket does not exceed $250. However,
if the invitation were extended to the employee and an accompanying
guest, her guest could not be authorized to attend for free since the
market value of the gift of free attendance would be $500 and the
invitation is from a person other than the sponsor of the event.
Example 3: An employee of the Department of Energy (DOE) and his
wife have been invited by a major utility
[[Page 42970]]
executive to a small dinner party. A few other officials of the utility
and their spouses or other guests are also invited, as is a
representative of a consumer group concerned with utility rates and her
husband. The DOE official believes the dinner party will provide him an
opportunity to socialize with and get to know those in attendance. The
employee may not accept the free invitation under this exception, even
if his attendance could be determined to be in the interest of the
agency. The small dinner party is not a widely attended gathering. Nor
could the employee be authorized to accept even if the event were
instead a corporate banquet to which forty company officials and their
spouses or other guests were invited. In this second case,
notwithstanding the larger number of persons expected (as opposed to
the small dinner party just noted) and despite the presence of the
consumer group representative and her husband who are not officials of
the utility, those in attendance would still not represent a diversity
of views or interests. Thus, the company banquet would not qualify as a
widely attended gathering under those circumstances either.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-21144 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6345-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21143 Pressure Testing Older Hazardous Liquid and Carbon Dioxide Pipelines
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43026-43027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21143]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Part 195
[Docket No. PS-121; Amdt. 195-51B]
RIN 2137-AC 83
Pressure Testing Older Hazardous Liquid and Carbon Dioxide
Pipelines
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; extension of time for compliance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule extends the time for compliance with the
requirements for pressure testing of older hazardous liquid and carbon
dioxide pipelines. Plans for testing, which were to be completed by
December 7, 1995, would now be required by December 7, 1997. The dates
for actual completion of the testing, previously December 7, 1998, and
December 7, 2001, are extended by one year. RSPA is extending these
compliance dates to allow time to complete rulemaking based on the
American Petroleum Institute's (API) petition for a risk-based
alternative to the required pressure testing rule. RSPA will issue a
proposed rule for a risk-based alternative to the existing pressure
testing rule.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective August 20, 1996.
Compliance Dates: The deadline for complying with
Sec. 195.302(c)(1) is extended to December 7, 1997. The deadline for
complying with Sec. 195.302(c)(2)(i) is extended to December 7, 1999.
The deadline for complying with Sec. 195.302(c)(2)(ii) is extended to
December 7, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Israni, (202) 366-4571, regarding
the subject matter of this document, or the Dockets Unit (202) 366-
4453, for copies of this document or other information in the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
API Proposal
In a petition dated June 23, 1995, API submitted a risk-based
alternative to the pressure testing rule and requested that RSPA delay
implementation of the rule until the API proposal has been given full
consideration. A copy of the API proposal is available in the docket
(Dockets Unit, Room 8421 at DOT Headquarters will be temporary closed
from August 15 to September 15, 1996. During this period pipeline
safety dockets will be available in Room 2335 of the DOT Headquarters).
API urged that the rule on pressure testing older hazardous liquid and
carbon dioxide pipelines presents an opportunity to apply a risk-based
approach to pressure testing, and proposed a risk-based alternative to
the final rule issued on June 7, 1994 (59 FR 29379).
RSPA has been working with the pipeline industry to develop a risk
management framework for pipeline regulation and decided to evaluate
the API proposal carefully. Because substantial planning is required
before pressure testing older pipelines, an extension of time for
compliance was needed to avoid unnecessary costs in planning.
RSPA has now decided to initiate rulemaking on the API proposal. A
notice of proposed rulemaking will be published separately to
accomplish this.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
RSPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (Docket PS-
121; 60 FR 54328; October 23, 1995) proposing one year extension of the
compliance deadline to plan and schedule pressure testing. In addition,
RSPA recognized that a final rule on extended compliance dates could
not be issued in time to forestall the burden on operators of preparing
the plans because of late issuance of the final rule. Thus, RSPA
announced that it would not enforce December 7, 1995, compliance date.
RSPA held a meeting with API members on January 31, 1996, to
clarify their proposal and held a public meeting on the API proposal on
March 25, 1996. On May 8, 1996, RSPA briefed the Technical Hazardous
Liquid Pipeline Safety Committee (THLPSSC) on the API proposal.
RSPA received two written comments on the NPRM on the extension of
the compliance deadline. Both favored an extension. RSPA also received
several comments from the industry during the public meetings that all
the compliance deadlines for the current pressure test rule should be
extended. Industry argued that they were not sure of what changes RSPA
might suggest in the present rulemaking, so they could not plan in
advance.
RSPA agrees with the comments about the need for extension of the
comment period while rulemaking on
[[Page 43027]]
the API proposal is conducted. These new compliance dates are as
follows:
Before December 7, 1997, plan and schedule testing;
Before December 7, 1999, pressure test each pipeline containing
more than 50 percent by mileage of electric resistance welded pipe
manufactured before 1970; and at least 50 percent of the mileage of all
other pipelines; and
Before December 7, 2002, pressure test the remainder of the
pipeline mileage.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Policies and Procedures
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) does not consider this
final rule to be a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, OMB did not review the final rule
under that order. Also, DOT does not consider the final rule to be
significant under its regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034,
February 26, 1979). This extension of compliance dates does not warrant
preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation.
Executive Order 12612
We analyzed the final rule under the principles and criteria in
Executive Order 12612 (``Federalism''). The final rule does not have
sufficient federalism impacts to warrant preparation of a federalism
assessment.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify, under Section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 195
Carbon dioxide, Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, RSPA amends part 195 of title 49
of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 195--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 195 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109; and 49 CFR
1.53.
2. Section 195.302(c) (1) and (2) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 195.302 General requirements.
* * * * *
(c) Except for onshore pipelines that transport HVL, the following
compliance deadlines apply to pipelines under paragraphs (b)(1) and
(b)(2)(i) of this section that have not been pressure tested under this
subpart:
(1) Before December 7, 1997, for each pipeline each operator
shall--
(i) Plan and schedule testing according to this paragraph; or
(ii) Establish the pipeline's maximum operating pressure under
Sec. 195.406(a)(5).
(2) For pipelines scheduled for testing, each operator shall--
(i) Before December 7, 1999, pressure test--
(A) Each pipeline identified by name, symbol, or otherwise that
existing records show contains more than 50 percent by mileage of
electric resistance welded pipe manufactured before 1970; and
(B) At least 50 percent of the mileage of all other pipelines; and
(ii) Before December 7, 2002, pressure test the remainder of the
pipeline mileage.
Issued in Washington, D.C. on August 14, 1996.
Kelley S. Coyner,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-21143 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21125 Appeals Regulations, Rules of Practice: Hearings Before the Board of Veterans' Appeals at Department of Veterans Affairs Field Facilities
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43008-43009]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21125]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Parts 19 and 20
RIN 2900-AI11
Appeals Regulations, Rules of Practice: Hearings Before the Board
of Veterans' Appeals at Department of Veterans Affairs Field Facilities
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the Appeals Regulations for the Board of
Veterans' Appeals (Board) to shorten from 60 days to 30 days the
minimum notice the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must give an
appellant of the date and place of a hearing before the Board at a VA
field facility. This change will help reduce the number of ``no shows''
at field hearings.
This document also amends the Board's Rules of Practice to change,
from the initiation of an appeal to the perfection of the appeal, the
event beginning the period during which an appellant may request a
hearing before the Board at a VA field facility. This change would
reduce the number of hearings scheduled for appellants who never
perfect their appeals.
The Board adjudicates appeals of denials of claims for veterans'
benefits.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven L. Keller, Chief Counsel, Board
of Veterans' Appeals, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420 (202-565-5978).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Former 38 CFR 19.76 generally required VA to
notify an appellant and his or her representative of the time and place
of a hearing before the Board at a VA field facility at least 60 days
before the hearing. The Board has consistently experienced a high rate
of ``no shows'' at such hearings--sometimes as high as 60 percent--
which we believe is due, at least in part, to the relatively long time
between notice of the hearing and the hearing. VA believes that 30
days' notice to appellants and their representatives is sufficient and
may help reduce the rate of ``no shows'' at field hearings. We have
therefore changed Sec. 19.76 accordingly.
Former 38 CFR 20.703 permitted an appellant to request a hearing
before the Board at a VA field facility any time after filing a notice
of disagreement, which initiates an appeal to the Board. A substantive
appeal (VA Form 9) must be filed to perfect an appeal. 38 CFR 20.200.
Historically, fewer than 65% of VA claimants who initiated an appeal
perfected it. By allowing an appellant to request a hearing before
perfecting the appeal, VA expended resources scheduling hearings for
appellants who never perfected their appeals. We therefore have changed
Sec. 20.703 to permit an appellant to request a hearing before the
Board at a field facility only when or after filing a substantive
appeal.
This final rule concerns agency procedure or practice and,
consequently, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, is exempt from notice and
comment requirements.
The Secretary hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-
612. This rule will affect VA beneficiaries and will not affect small
businesses. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is
exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses
requirements of sections 603 and 604.
List of Subjects
38 CFR Part 19
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Veterans.
38 CFR Part 20
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Lawyers, Legal
services, Veterans.
Approved: June 28, 1996.
Jesse Brown,
Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 38 CFR parts 19 and 20 are
amended as set forth below:
PART 19--BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS: APPEALS REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 19 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a).
Subpart D--Hearings Before the Board of Veterans' Appeals at
Department of Veterans Affairs Field Facilities
Sec. 19.76 [Amended]
2. Section 19.76 is amended by removing ``60 days'' each time it
appears and adding, in its place, ``30 days''.
PART 20--BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS: RULES OF PRACTICE
3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a).
[[Page 43009]]
Subpart H--Hearings on Appeal
4. Section 20.703 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 20.703 Rule 703. When a hearing before the Board of Veterans'
Appeals at a Department of Veterans Affairs field facility may be
requested.
An appellant, or an appellant's representative, may request a
hearing before the Board of Veterans' Appeals at a Department of
Veterans Affairs field facility when submitting the substantive appeal
(VA Form 9) or anytime thereafter, subject to the restrictions in Rule
1304 (Sec. 20.1304 of this part). Requests for such hearings before a
substantive appeal has been filed will be rejected.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7105(a), 7107)
[FR Doc. 96-21125 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21123 Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21123]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 285
[I.D. 081496A]
Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS closes the fishery for school Atlantic bluefin tuna (ABT)
in the waters off New Jersey and states north. Closure of this fishery
is necessary because the annual quota is projected to be attained by
August 17, 1996. The intent of this action is to prevent overharvest of
the quota established for this fishery.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The closure is effective from 2330 hours local time
August 17 through December 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Hogarth, 301-713-2347.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations implemented under the authority
of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.) regulating
the harvest of ABT by persons and vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction
are found at 50 CFR part 285.
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), is authorized
under Sec. 285.20(b)(1) to monitor the catch and landing statistics
and, on the basis of those statistics, to project a date when the catch
of ABT will equal any quota under Sec. 285.22. The AA is further
authorized under Sec. 285.20(b)(1) to prohibit fishing for, or
retention of, ABT by those fishing in the category subject to the quota
when the catch of tuna equals the quota established under Sec. 285.22.
The AA has determined, based on the reported catch and estimated
fishing effort, that the annual quota of school ABT will be attained by
August 17, 1996. Fishing for, catching, possessing, or landing any
school ABT in any area must cease at 2330 hours local time on August
17, 1996. The Angling category fishery for bluefin tuna in the large
school and small medium classes (47 inches to less than 59 inches (119
cm to less than 150 cm), and 59 inches to less than 73 inches (150 cm
to less than 185 cm) curved fork length, respectively) was previously
closed on July 31, 1996 (61 FR 40352, August 2, 1996). However, anglers
may continue to tag and release fish greater than 27 inches (69 cm)
curved fork length under the NMFS tag-and-release program (50 CFR
285.27).
Classification
This action is taken under 50 CFR 285.20(b)(1) and is exempt from
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.
Dated: August 14, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21123 Filed 8-15-96; 9:10 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21122 Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon Aircraft Corporation Model 1900D Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42997-42999]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21122]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-CE-41-AD; Amendment 39-9720; AD 96-15-01]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon Aircraft Corporation Model
1900D Airplanes
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) 96-15-01, which was sent
previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of Raytheon Aircraft
Corporation (formerly Beech) Model 1900D airplanes. This AD requires
immediately pulling and banding the circuit breakers leading to the
windshield heat control on both the pilot and co-pilot sides, inserting
a copy of the priority letter AD into the Limitations section of the
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), and fabricating and installing a placard
instructing the pilot to avoid flight into known icing conditions.
Reports of smoke and fire in the cockpit on two Beech Model 1900D
airplanes caused by a high resistence short circuit condition in the
heated windshield wiring prompted the action. The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent smoke and fire
[[Page 42998]]
around the forward edge of the glare shield in the cockpit, which could
result in loss of control of the airplane.
DATES: Effective September 19, 1996, to all persons except those to
whom it was made immediately effective by priority letter AD 96-15-01,
issued July 10, 1996, which contained the requirements of this
amendment.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before October 21, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket 96-CE-41-AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th
Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Information related to this AD may
be examined at the Rules Docket at the address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harvey E. Nero, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room
100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas, 67209; telephone (316)
946-4137, facsimile (316) 946-4407.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has received reports of smoke and
fire in the cockpit of two Beech Model 1900D airplanes. The reports
indicate that a high resistence short circuit situation was created by
the braid wire that is attached to the low heat power terminal block
mounted on the pilot and co-pilot windshields, which led to arcing and
substantial amounts of heat, causing smoke and fire in the cockpit.
This condition, if not corrected, will result in a fire in the cockpit
and possible loss of control of the airplane.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop in other Beech Model 1900D airplanes of the same type
design, the FAA issued priority letter AD 96-15-01 to prevent smoke and
fire around the forward edge of the glare shield in the cockpit and
loss of control of the airplane.
The AD requires immediately pulling and banding the circuit
breakers leading to the windshield heat control on both the pilot and
co-pilot sides. The affected circuit breakers are the LEFT WSHLD,
CONTROL and PWR circuit breakers located on the circuit breaker panel
on the co-pilot's side (Zone 246) and the CO-PILOT WSHLD ANTI-ICE
circuit breaker located on the aft side of the forward pressure
bulkhead above the co-pilot left rudder pedal (Zone 222). This AD also
requires inserting a copy of this priority letter AD into the
Limitations section of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), fabricating a
placard that says ``FLIGHT IN KNOWN ICING CONDITIONS IS PROHIBITED,''
using letters at least 0.10-inch in height, and installing this placard
within the pilot's clear view on the instrument panel. This is
considered to be an interim action until final action is identified, at
which time the FAA may consider further rulemaking.
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 10, 1996 to all known U.S. owners and operators of Beech
Model 1900D airplanes. These conditions still exist, and the AD is
hereby published in the Federal Register as an amendment to section
39.13 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it
effective as to all persons.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting immediate flight safety and, thus, was not
preceded by notice and opportunity to comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified above. All communications
received on or before the closing date for comments will be considered,
and this rule may be amended in light of the comments received. Factual
information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions is
extremely helpful in 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 No. 96-CE-41-AD.'' 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 a new airworthiness directive
(AD) to read as follows:
96-15-01. Raytheon Aircraft Corporation (Raytheon): Amendment 39-
9720; Docket No. 96-CE-41-AD.
Applicability: Model 1900D airplanes (serial numbers UE-1
through UE-239), certificated in any category, with either
windshield part number 114-384020-1 or 114-384020-2 installed.
Note 1: The pilot windshield and co-pilot windshield may not
have the same windshield configuration. The actions of this AD are
only required on those windshields
[[Page 42999]]
incorporating part number 114-384020-1 or 114-384020-2.
Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (f) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it. Compliance: Required prior to further flight after the
effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished, except to
those operators receiving this action by priority letter issued July
10, 1996, which made these actions effective immediately upon
receipt.
To prevent smoke and fire around the forward edge of the glare
shield in the cockpit, accomplish the following:
(a) Pull and band the circuit breakers leading to the windshield
heat control on both the pilot and the co-pilot sides. The affected
circuit breakers are the LEFT WSHLD, CONTROL and PWR circuit
breakers located on the circuit breaker panel on the co-pilot's side
(Zone 246) and the CO-PILOT WSHLD ANTI-ICE circuit breaker located
on the aft side of the forward pressure bulkhead above the co-pilot
left rudder pedal (Zone 222).
(b) If either the pilot or co-pilot windshield heat is disabled,
then this action (de-activation of the circuit breaker) prohibits
flight into known icing conditions.
(c) A copy of this priority letter AD must be placed in the
Limitations section of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM).
(d) Fabricate a placard with the following words in letters at
least 0.10-inch in height and install this placard within the
pilot's clear view of the instrument panel: ``FLIGHT IN KNOWN ICING
CONDITIONS IS PROHIBITED.''
(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an equivalent level of safety may be
approved by the Manager, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,
1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas,
67209.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Wichita Aircraft Certification Office.
(g) Information related to this airworthiness directive may be
examined at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
(h) This amendment (39-9720) becomes effective on September 19,
1996, to all persons except those persons to whom it was made
immediately effective by priority letter AD 96-15-01, issued July
10, 1996, which contained the requirements of this amendment.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 13, 1996.
Michael Gallagher,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21122 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21120 Almonds Grown in California; Change in Quality Control Requirements
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42990-42991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21120]
[[Page 42990]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 981
[Docket No. FV96-981-3IFR]
Almonds Grown in California; Change in Quality Control
Requirements
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule changes the quality control
requirements currently prescribed under the California almond marketing
order. The marketing order regulates the handling of almonds grown in
California and is administered locally by the Almond Board of
California (Board). This rule removes the exemption from inspection for
the Peerless variety of almonds sold inshell. This change is needed to
bring the administrative rules and regulations into conformance with
amendments to the marketing order recently approved by a majority vote
of producers. In addition, this change will better reflect current
industry practices because most almonds are already inspected,
including the Peerless variety.
DATES: Effective August 21, 1996; comments received by September 19,
1996 will be considered prior to issuance of a final rule.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
concerning this rule. Comments must be sent in triplicate to the Docket
Clerk, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, room 2525-S, P.O. Box
96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456, Fax # (202) 720-5698. All comments
should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this
issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public
inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business
hours.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen M. Finn, Marketing
Specialist, Marketing Order Administration Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, room
2522-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone: (202)
720-1509, Fax # (202) 720-5698; or Martin Engeler, California Marketing
Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA,
2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721; telephone:
(209) 487-5901, Fax # (209) 487-5906.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order
No. 981 (7 CFR Part 981), as amended, regulating the handling of
almonds grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the ``order.''
This order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the
``Act.''
The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.
This rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or
policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this
rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the
petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the petition.
The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her
principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review the Secretary's
ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20
days after date of the entry of the ruling.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this action on small entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 115 handlers of almonds who are subject to
regulation under the order and approximately 7,000 producers of almonds
in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms, which includes
handlers, have been defined by the Small Business Administration (13
CFR 121.601) as those having annual receipts of less than $5,000,000,
and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual
receipts of less than $500,000. The majority of handlers and producers
of California almonds may be classified as small entities. Interested
persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory and
informational impacts of this action on small businesses.
This rule modifies language in the order's administrative rules and
regulations to remove an exemption from inspection for the Peerless
variety of almonds sold inshell as bleaching stock. It also modifies
the definition of adjusted kernel weight so that adjusted kernel weight
for the Peerless variety is based on actual weight, consistent with
other almonds, rather than calculated with a predetermined conversion
factor known as a shelling ratio. The majority of handlers already have
all almonds inspected, including the Peerless variety. Therefore, this
rule will better reflect current industry practice. In addition, this
rule is needed to bring the administrative rules and regulations into
conformance with amendments to the marketing order recently approved by
a majority vote of producers. Since virtually all of the Peerless
almonds sold inshell are currently inspected, there is little or no
impact expected on small businesses.
Therefore, the AMS has determined that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The almond marketing order authorizes quality control provisions
which include a requirement that almonds must be inspected prior to
processing to determine the percentage of inedible kernels in each lot,
and to determine the adjusted kernel weight of almonds in each lot.
Inedible kernels are reported to individual handlers and the Board, and
handlers are required to dispose of a quantity of almonds equal to
their inedible obligation as determined by the inspection. Inedible
kernels are disposed of to non-human consumption outlets for such uses
as animal feed or crushing into oil. Adjusted kernel weight is reported
to handlers by the Federal-State Inspection Service (FSIS). Handlers
are then required to report adjusted kernel weight to the Board, who
uses the information to report industry statistics.
The rules and regulations under the marketing order currently
exempt from inspection the Peerless variety of almonds used as
bleaching stock and sold inshell. When the quality control regulations
were initially implemented, it was determined there was no need to
establish the percentage of inedible kernels of almonds sold inshell,
which at that time were predominately of the Peerless variety, because
inedible kernels could not be removed from
[[Page 42991]]
product sold inshell and thus could not be disposed of in non-human
consumption outlets. Therefore, inshell almonds, including Peerless,
are exempt from meeting the inedible disposition obligation. However,
in order to determine the kernel weight of Peerless almonds sold
inshell for reporting to the Board, a predetermined shelling ratio
contained in the marketing order has been used in the absence of
inspection. This shelling ratio converted the weight of inshell almonds
to a shelled weight, or kernel weight. Over time, the total quantity
and varieties of all almonds sold inshell have increased, while
Peerless bleaching stock sales have declined. There has also been an
increased desire and need to obtain an accurate product weight for
growers, handlers, and the Board. Thus, it has become common industry
practice to have inspections performed on Peerless almonds sold
inshell, as with other varieties sold inshell, regardless of the
inspection exemption.
Consistent with the Act, the almond marketing order was recently
amended by a majority vote of producers to require that the weight of
inshell almonds be determined by weighing a representative sample of
such almonds. Previously, predetermined shelling ratios were used to
determine the kernel weight. Thus, the shelling ratios were removed
from the order. The purpose of the quality control amendments was to
reflect current industry practices as referenced above, and to provide
more accurate information for reporting purposes.
The amendments to the order necessitate conforming changes to the
administrative rules and regulations. Section 981.442 of the quality
control regulations is revised to remove an inspection exemption for
Peerless inshell almonds. Thus, all almonds, regardless of form or
variety, will be inspected.
In addition, Sec. 981.401 is revised to remove the exemption for
Peerless almonds from the definition of adjusted kernel weight.
Currently, the adjusted kernel weight of Peerless inshell almonds is
based on a predetermined weight contained in the shelling ratio table
that was removed from the marketing order. Since Peerless inshell
almonds will be required to have inspection, the actual kernel weight
will be determined, thus providing an accurate weight.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the Board's recommendation, and other information, it is found that
this interim final rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to
effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
This rule invites comments on a change to the quality control
requirements currently prescribed under the California almond marketing
order. Any comments received will be considered prior to finalization
of this rule.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined upon good
cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public
interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into
effect and that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date
of this rule until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register
because: (1) The marketing order amendments prompting these changes
were implemented on July 1, 1996; (2) related issues were discussed in
amendatory proceedings to the marketing order (including a public
hearing) and amendments to the order were subsequently approved by
producers; (3) the Board unanimously recommended these changes at a
public meeting and interested parties had an opportunity to provide
input; and (4) this rule provides a 30-day comment period and any
comments received will be considered prior to finalization of this
rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981
Almonds, Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 981 is
amended as follows:
PART 981--ALMONDS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 981 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
Sec. 981.401 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 981.401, the first sentence in paragraph (a) is amended
by removing the words ``Except for Peerless bleaching stock,'' and
capitalizing the first letter in the word ``adjusted'', and by removing
the last sentence; and by amending the first sentence in paragraph (b)
by removing the words ``Except for Peerless bleaching stock,'' and
capitalizing the first letter of the word ``the''.
3. In Sec. 981.442, paragraph (a)(1), the first sentence is amended
by removing the words ``, except lots of Peerless variety designated as
bleaching stock,'' and in paragraph (a)(4), the last sentence is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 981.442 Quality Control.
(a) * * *
(4) * * * For any almonds sold inshell, the weight may be reported
to the Board and the disposition obligation for that variety reduced
proportionately.
* * * * *
Dated: August 14, 1996.
Robert C. Keeney,
Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-21120 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21119 Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and Washington; Assessment Rate
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42991-42993]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21119]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 982
[Docket No. FV96-982-1 FIR]
Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and Washington; Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
that established an assessment rate for the Hazelnut Marketing Board
under Marketing Order No. 982 for the 1996-97 and subsequent marketing
years. The Board is responsible for local administration of the
marketing order which regulates the handling of hazelnuts grown in
Oregon and Washington. Authorization to assess hazelnut handlers
enables the Board to incur expenses that are reasonable and necessary
to administer the program.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective on July 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Sue Clark, Program Assistant,
Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,
AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456,
telephone 202-720-9918, FAX 202-720-5698, or Teresa L. Hutchinson,
Marketing Specialist, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Fruit and
Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, Green-Wyatt Federal Building, room 369,
1220 Southwest Third Avenue, Portland, OR 97204, telephone 503-326-
2724, FAX 503-326-7440. Small businesses may request information on
compliance with this regulation by contacting: Jay Guerber, Marketing
Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA,
P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456, telephone 202-
720-2491, FAX 202-720-5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 982, both as amended (7
[[Page 42992]]
CFR part 982; April 22, 1996, 61 FR 17556), regulating the handling of
hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington. The order is effective under
the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C.
601-674), hereinafter referred to as the ``Act.''
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. Under the marketing order now in effect, Oregon-
Washington hazelnut handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to
administer the order are derived from such assessments. It is intended
that the assessment rate as issued herein will be applicable to all
assessable hazelnuts beginning July 1, 1996, and continuing until
amended, suspended, or terminated. This rule will not preempt any State
or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an
irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on
the petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the
petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States
in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or
her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review the
Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not
later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this rule on small entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in
that they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 1,000 producers of Oregon and Washington
hazelnuts in the production area and approximately 25 handlers subject
to regulation under the marketing order. Small agricultural producers
have been defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601)
as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000, and small
agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts
are less than $5,000,000. The majority of Oregon and Washington
hazelnut producers and handlers may be classified as small entities.
The Oregon and Washington hazelnut marketing order provides
authority for the Board, with the approval of the Department, to
formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from
handlers to administer the program. The members of the Board are
producers and handlers of hazelnuts. They are familiar with the Board's
needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area and
are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and
assessment rate. The assessment rate is recommended by a mail vote and
discussed and reconfirmed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly
affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.
The Board, in a mail vote, unanimously recommended 1996-97
expenditures of $558,974 and an assessment rate of $0.007 per pound of
hazelnuts. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were
$483,685. The assessment rate of $0.007 is the same as last year's
established rate. Major expenditures recommended by the Board for the
1996-97 year include $50,020 for personal services (salaries), $5,640
for rent, $5,000 for auditing, $5,000 for compliance, $15,000 for a
crop survey, $275,000 for promotion, and $182,364 for the emergency
fund. Budgeted expenses for these items in 1995-96 were $50,735,
$5,650, $3,500, $5,000, $11,000, $250,000, and $140,000, respectively.
The Board will consider using emergency funds for authorized activities
when it is reasonably certain that its estimate of assessable hazelnuts
will be reached. It will not be able to make this determination until
December 1996, the month in which the hazelnut harvest and deliveries
to handlers usually are completed. Hence, any decision on whether or
not to undertake additional activities will not be made until December
1996, at the earliest.
The assessment rate recommended by the Board was derived by
dividing anticipated expenses by expected shipments of Oregon and
Washington hazelnuts. Hazelnut shipments for the year are estimated at
20,000,000 pounds which should provide $280,000 in assessment income.
Income derived from handler assessments, interest, and from the Nut
Growers Society in payment for services performed by the Board under an
agreement with the Society, along with funds from the Board's
authorized reserve, will be adequate to cover budgeted expenses. Funds
in the reserve will be kept within the maximum permitted by the order.
An interim final rule regarding this action was published in the
June 13, 1996, issue of the Federal Register (61 FR 29924). That
interim final rule added Sec. 982.340 to establish an assessment rate
for the Board. That rule provided that interested persons could file
comments through July 15, 1996. No comments were received.
While this rule will impose some additional costs on handlers, the
costs are in the form of uniform assessments on all handlers. Some of
the additional costs may be passed on to producers. However, these
costs will be offset by the benefits derived by the operation of the
marketing order. Therefore, the AMS has determined that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The assessment rate established in this rule will continue in
effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by the
Secretary upon recommendation and information submitted by the Board or
other available information.
Although this assessment rate is effective for an indefinite
period, the Board will continue to conduct a mail vote prior to or
during each fiscal period to recommend a budget of expenses and
consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. Any
mail votes will be discussed and reconfirmed at a public meeting. The
dates and times of Board meetings are available from the Board or the
Department. Board meetings are open to the public and interested
persons may express their views at those meetings. The Department will
evaluate Board recommendations and other available information to
determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed.
Further rulemaking will be undertaken as necessary. The Board's 1996-97
budget and those for subsequent marketing years will be reviewed and,
as appropriate, approved by the Department.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the information and recommendation submitted by the Board and other
available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as
hereinafter set forth,
[[Page 42993]]
will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined that good
cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until
30 days after publication in the Federal Register because: (1) The
Board needs to have sufficient funds to pay its expenses which are
incurred on a continuous basis; (2) the 1996-97 marketing year began on
July 1, 1996, and the marketing order requires that the rate of
assessment for each marketing year apply to all assessable hazelnuts
handled during such marketing year; (3) handlers are aware of this
action which was unanimously recommended by the Board at a public
meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past
years; and (4) an interim final rule was published on this action and
provided for a 30-day comment period, and no comments were received.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 982
Filberts, Hazelnuts, Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Note: This section will appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
PART 982--HAZELNUTS GROWN IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON
Accordingly, the interim final rule which was published at 61 FR
29924 on June 13, 1996, is adopted as a final rule without change.
Dated: August 13, 1996.
Robert C. Keeney,
Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-21119 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21118 Apricots Grown in Designated Counties in Washington; Temporary Suspension of Grade Requirements
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42988-42989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21118]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. FV96-922-1FIR]
Apricots Grown in Designated Counties in Washington; Temporary
Suspension of Grade Requirements
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
suspending for the 1996 season only, the minimum grade requirements
(Washington No. 1), for fresh shipments of apricots grown in
Washington. This change was recommended by the Washington Apricot
Marketing Committee (committee), which works with the Department in
administering the marketing order covering apricots grown in designated
counties in Washington. This rule enables handlers to ship more fruit
in fresh market channels, taking into consideration the damage caused
to Washington apricots by freezing temperatures during the growing
season. This change is expected to increase returns to producers and to
make more fresh apricots available to consumers.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Teresa L. Hutchinson, Northwest
Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1220
SW Third Avenue, room 369, Portland, OR 97204; telephone: (503) 326-
2724; or Caroline C. Thorpe, Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, room 2523-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC
20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-5331. Small businesses may request
information on compliance with this regulation by contacting: Jay
Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable
Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-
6456; telephone (202) 720-2491; Fax # (202) 720-5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement No. 132 and Marketing Order No. 922 (7 CFR Part 922), both as
amended, regulating the handling of apricots grown in designated
counties in Washington, hereinafter referred to as the ``order.'' The
order is authorized by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of
1937, as amended [7 U.S.C. 601-674], hereinafter referred to as the
``Act.''
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.
This rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or
policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this
rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the
petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the petition.
The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her
principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review the Secretary's
ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20
days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this action on small entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
[[Page 42989]]
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 75 handlers of Washington apricots who are
subject to regulation under the order and approximately 400 producers
in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms, which includes
handlers of Washington apricots, have been defined by the Small
Business Administration [13 CFR 121.601] as those having annual
receipts of less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are
defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $500,000. The
majority of Washington apricot handlers and producers may be classified
as small entities.
This rule finalizes an interim final rule suspending minimum grade
requirements and therefore is a relaxation in regulations which should
result in reduced costs and increased returns to handlers and
producers. This will lower inspection costs and also enable handlers to
ship a larger portion of their crop to the fresh market to meet
consumer needs. Therefore, AMS has determined that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The interim final rule was issued on June 12, 1996, and published
in the Federal Register (61 FR 30495, June 17, 1996), with an effective
date of June 15, 1996. That rule amended Sec. 922.321 of the rules and
regulations in effect under the order. That rule provided a 30-day
comment period which ended July 17, 1996. No comments were received.
Section 922.52 of the order authorizes the issuance of grade, size,
quality, maturity, container markings, pack, and container regulations
for any variety or varieties of apricots grown in any district or
districts of the production area. Section 922.53 further authorizes the
modification, suspension, or termination of regulations issued under
Sec. 922.52. Section 922.55 provides that whenever apricots are
regulated pursuant to Secs. 922.52 or 922.53, such apricots must be
inspected by the Federal-State Inspection Service, and certified as
meeting the applicable requirements of such regulations.
The minimum grade, maturity, color, and size requirements for
Washington apricots regulated under the order are specified in
Sec. 922.321 Apricot Regulation 21 [7 CFR 922.321]. This final rule
finalizes the interim final rule to temporarily suspend the minimum
grade requirement in Sec. 922.321. This provides that no handler shall
handle any container of apricots unless such apricots grade not less
than Washington No. 1, except for shipments subject to exemption under
the regulation. Other parts of Sec. 922.321 that remain in effect,
provide that the Moorpark variety in open containers must be generally
well matured. Also remaining in effect is the provision that with the
exception of exempt shipments, apricots must be at least reasonably
uniform in color, and be at least 1\5/8\ inches in diameter, except for
the Blenheim, Blenril, and Tilton varieties which must be at least 1\1/
4\ inches in diameter. Individual shipments of apricots are also exempt
from all these requirements if sold for home use only, do not exceed
500 pounds net weight, and containers are stamped or marked with the
words ``not for resale.''
This rule finalizes the interim final rule that amended paragraph
(a)(1) of Sec. 922.321 by continuing temporary suspension of the
minimum grade requirements for fresh shipments of apricots for the 1996
season only. The grade requirements currently specified in Sec. 922.321
will resume April 1, 1997, for 1997 and future seasons.
At its May 16, 1996, meeting, the committee unanimously recommended
suspending the grade requirements for the 1996 season. The committee
requested that this suspension be effective by June 15, the date
shipments of the 1996 Washington apricot crop are expected to begin.
The committee meets prior to and during each season to consider
recommendations for modification, suspension, or termination of the
regulatory requirements for Washington apricots which have been issued
on a continuing basis. Committee meetings are open to the public and
interested persons may express their views at these meetings. The
Department reviews committee recommendations and information submitted
by the committee and other available information, and determines
whether modification, suspension, or termination of the regulatory
requirements would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
The committee reports that the apricot crop was severely damaged by
several freezes last winter and early this spring. The severe weather
conditions resulted in a high percentage of damage from russeting, scab
spots, and other grade defects making it difficult for apricots to meet
the minimum grade requirements of Washington No. 1. The committee
estimates that only 2,300 tons of apricots will be shipped fresh during
the 1996 season, even with the grade requirements suspended as
requested. This amount is 52 percent of last season's fresh shipments
of 4,452 tons and 46 percent of the five-year average of 4,965 tons.
This final rule continues the suspension of the grade requirements
specified in Sec. 922.321. Thus, the color and minimum size
requirements for all varieties and the well matured requirements for
the Moorpark variety will remain unchanged.
This final rule enables handlers to continue to ship a larger
portion of their crop to the fresh market this season, taking into
account the abnormal growing conditions, than they would be allowed if
the minimum grade requirements were not suspended. Continued suspension
of the grade requirements for Washington apricots is intended to
increase fresh shipments to meet consumer needs and improve returns to
producers. It is the Department's view that the impact of this action
upon producers and handlers, both large and small, will be beneficial
because it will enable handlers to provide apricots consistent with
1996 season growing conditions.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, the
information and recommendations submitted by the committee, and other
information, it is found that finalizing the interim final rule,
without change, as published in the Federal Register (61 FR 30495, June
17, 1996) will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 922
Marketing agreements, Apricots, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 922 is
amended as follows:
PART 922--APRICOTS GROWN IN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN WASHINGTON
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR part 922 which
was published at 61 FR 30495 on June 17, 1996, is adopted as a final
rule without change.
Dated: August 13, 1996.
Robert C. Keeney,
Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-21118 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21117 Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42979-42988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21117]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 402
RIN 0563-AB09
Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement
AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) finalizes part
402 chapter IV of title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The
intended effect of this rule is to provide for a catastrophic risk
protection plan of insurance. This coverage is the lowest level
required to be purchased by a producer to be eligible for certain other
agricultural farm program benefits. The producer may execute a waiver
of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection
with the crop rather than obtain insurance coverage to be eligible for
certain other agricultural farm program benefits. This action is needed
to comply with statutory mandates of the Federal Crop Insurance Act
(Act), as amended by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994
(Reform Act) and the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of
1996 (1996 Act).
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louise Narber, Program Analyst,
Research and Development Division, Product Development Branch, Federal
Crop Insurance Corporation, United States Department of Agriculture,
9435
[[Page 42980]]
Holmes Road, Kansas City, MO 64131, telephone (816) 926-7730.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order No. 12866 and Departmental Regulation 1512-1
This action has been reviewed under United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) procedures established by Executive Order No. 12866.
This action constitutes a review as to the need, currency, clarity, and
effectiveness of these regulations under those procedures. The sunset
review date established for these regulations is December 1, 2001.
This rule has been determined to be economically significant for
the purposes of Executive Order No. 12866 and, therefore, has been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Cost Benefit Analysis
A Cost Benefit Analysis has been completed and is available to
interested persons at the address listed above. In summary, the
analysis finds that crop insurance reform, generally is expected to
result in net positive benefits to producers, taxpayers, and society.
The effects on individual producers compared to payments under ad hoc
disaster programs depends primarily on the farm program payment yield
compared to the farm's actual yield and market prices. In general,
however, the reform is expected to result in less volatility of
producers' incomes and less risk of no income due to adverse weather
events. Rural communities and producers will benefit from the certainty
of payments in times of catastrophic yield losses. The Government and
taxpayers will benefit from a single disaster protection program and
consequent reduced Federal outlays. Although producers who had not
previously participated in the Federal crop insurance program will have
an added burden to make application and report yields and acreage, the
benefits in terms of greater risk protection outweigh the costs.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
information collection requirements contained in these regulations have
been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB control number 0563-
0003 through September 30, 1998. The 1996 Act alleviates producers from
the requirement to obtain at least catastrophic coverage on crops of
economic significance to be eligible for certain other USDA program
benefits if the producer waives any eligibility for emergency crop loss
assistance in connection with the crop. Due to this provision, FCIC
anticipates that fewer producers will obtain insurance coverage. This
will reduce the paperwork burden. We estimate that approximately 30
percent of the insureds with CAT coverage will cancel their crop
insurance coverage. As a result the paperwork burden approved under OMB
Number 0563-0003 will be reduced by 44,176 hours. Copies of the
information collection may be obtained from Bonnie Hart, USDA, FSA,
Advisory and Corporate Operations Staff, Regulatory Review Group, P.O.
Box 2415, Ag Box 0572, Washington, D.C. 20013-2415, 8:15 a.m.-4:45
p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays, telephone (202) 690-2857.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. This rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the 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.
Executive Order No. 12612
It has been determined under section 6(a) of Executive Order No.
12612, Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. The
provisions contained in this rule will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or their political subdivisions, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
Government.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. However, it does provide additional
flexibility and cost savings for small entities in the following three
areas. First, producers are no longer required to obtain at least CAT
coverage for economically significant crops. Instead, they may sign a
waiver foregoing emergency crop loss assistance. Insureds likely to
decline coverage are those who believe that the costs associated with
obtaining insurance exceed the benefits. The producers most likely to
fall into this category are those who have insurance policies with low
liabilities. For these producers, the $50 fee for CAT would be most
likely to outweigh expected indemnities. Second, an allowance has been
made to allow all producers with a share in a tobacco crop under one
marketing card to insure the crop under one insurance policy. To
qualify under this provision, none of the shareholders may have an
interest in another tobacco crop in the county. It is estimated that
35,100 policyholders may utilize this allowance, thereby saving the $50
processing fee for each. Third, with specified restrictions, persons
who hold an undivided interest in a crop may be eligible to purchase
one insurance policy covering all shares to satisfy linkage
requirements. The restrictions associated with this allowance include:
all landowners must agree in writing to the arrangement; none of the
landowners may hold any other interest in the given crop in the county
for which they are required to buy at least CAT coverage; and the total
liability under the CAT endorsement for all landowners must be $2,500
or less. Because no data are available providing an indication of
insureds with an undivided interest, it is not possible to estimate the
savings associated with not paying the $50 processing fee in these
situations. However, some small entities will benefit from this
allowance.
Federal Assistance Program
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.450.
Executive Order No. 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
No. 12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with state and
local officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,
published at 48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983.
Executive Order No. 12778
The Office of the General Counsel has determined that these
regulations meet the applicable standards provided in sections 2(a) and
2(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12778. The provisions of this rule will
preempt state and local laws to the extent such state and local laws
are inconsistent herewith. The administrative appeal provisions
published at 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 must be exhausted before any action
for judicial review may be brought.
Environmental Evaluation
This action is not expected to have a significant impact on the
quality of the human environment, health, and safety. Therefore,
neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact
Statement is needed.
[[Page 42981]]
National Performance Review
This regulatory action is being taken as part of the National
Performance Review Initiative to eliminate unnecessary or duplicative
regulations and improve those that remain in force.
Background
The amendments to the Act, made by the Reform Act, were effective
on October 13, 1994. This regulation provides the policy and procedures
to carry out the catastrophic risk protection insurance requirements of
those amendments.
On Friday, January 6, 1995, FCIC published an interim rule in the
Federal Register at 60 FR 2000-2005 to add a new catastrophic risk
protection (CAT) level of insurance through the Catastrophic Risk
Protection Endorsement which amends new and existing crop insurance
policies, endorsements, and crop provisions when elected by the
insured. Following publication of that interim rule, the public was
afforded 60 days to submit written comments, data, and opinions. On
Monday, August 7, 1995, by publication at 60 FR 40055, FCIC reopened
and extended the comment period to August 18, 1995. A total of 40
comments were received from the crop insurance industry, FSA, producer
groups, and producers. The category, comments received, and FCIC
responses are as follows:
General Comments
Comment: One comment received from the crop insurance industry
suggested that the phrase ``at the option of the Secretary'' should be
added after, ``Catastrophic risk protection coverage may be offered
through approved insurance providers and'' in Section 402.1, to be
consistent with the Act. This change is needed to enable the FSA to
cease delivering CAT coverage in counties in which such coverage
becomes unnecessary.
Response: The Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of
1996 provides for CAT coverage to be offered by approved insurance
providers if there are a sufficient number available within an area. If
approved insurance providers are not sufficiently available, local
offices of the USDA will provide CAT coverage. FCIC agrees that the
Secretary must now make an affirmative determination that CAT can be
delivered through local FSA offices. The provision has been changed
accordingly.
Comments Regarding Definitions
Comment: One comment received from a producer group suggested that
the definitions should include a reference to the standards that will
be used in determining whether a producer's crop loss was due to
drought, flood, or other natural disaster as determined by the
Secretary. The comment recommended referencing other FCIC regulations
that are applicable in making this determination and similarly
referencing coverage exclusions.
Response: The insured is responsible for demonstrating that any
loss of production or value has been directly caused by one or more of
the insured causes during the insurance period. Catastrophic risk
protection is only available through an endorsement which becomes part
of the crop insurance policy. Each crop policy contains a section
regarding the causes of loss for which insurance is provided. Coverage
exclusions, such as failure to follow good farming practices, are also
specified in these policies. Therefore, a change to the definitional
section of this rule is not necessary.
Comment: Another comment received from a producer group indicated
that sustainable and alternative agricultural practices are frequently
and erroneously labeled as not being ``good farming practices'' simply
because they may be different from the traditional approach in the
area.
Response: The definition of ``good farming practices'' contained in
various crop policies does not exclude the use of sustainable or
alternative practices. However, farming practices must control weeds,
provide sufficient nutrients, protect against disease and insects,
etc., to be considered good farming practices. The definition will not
be changed.
Comment: Another comment received from the crop insurance industry
suggested clarifying the definition of ``catastrophic risk protection''
by deleting the word ``minimal'' and replacing it with either the word
``minimum'' or ``lowest.''
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has amended the
definition of ``catastrophic risk protection'' by replacing the word
``minimal'' with the word ``minimum.''
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested clarifying the
definition of ``crop of economic significance'' to explain the
consequences if a crop planted in 1994, is planted in 1995 although
originally there was no intent to plant the crop in 1995; and to
clarify who is responsible for determining which crops are of economic
significance.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has added provisions in
section 12 to clarify requirements regarding crops of economic
significance. Producers who do not intend to plant a crop do not have
to obtain crop insurance or execute a waiver of any eligibility for
emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the crop to remain
eligible for certain USDA program benefits, even if they produced the
crop the previous year. However, if the producer decides to plant the
crop after the sales closing date, the producer cannot obtain insurance
on the crop and must execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency
crop loss assistance in connection with the crop to be eligible for
certain other USDA program benefits. If a waiver is not executed, the
producer must return those benefits already received. Provisions were
also added indicating that it is the producer's responsibility to
determine crops of economic significance in the county and that the
producer may have to provide records to permit the insurance provider
to verify whether a crop is a crop of economic significance. FCIC has
issued a worksheet that may be used by producers to assist them in
determining crops of economic significance. USDA will be ultimately
responsible for determining eligibility and paying any amount due a
person for any applicable USDA program.
Comment: A producer group suggested that the definition of ``crop
of economic significance'' is contrary to the Act and invites legal
action to test it. They stated that the Act looks to a percentage of
all crops grown by the producer and the definition in this regulation
provides for a county by county test to be done.
Response: FCIC agrees that Sec. 508(b)(7) and (8) of the Act does
not specifically indicate that crops of economic significance are
determined on a county basis. However, an administrative interpretation
was made to operate on a county basis because of the language in
Sec. 508(b)(7)(A) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act. In addition,
operating on a county basis is consistent with the long standing
practice of insuring acreage on a county basis. Although the provisions
of the Act may have changed, the insurance rationale has not. No
changes will be made to conform to this suggestion.
Comment: The Farm Service Agency requested that the term ``limited
resource farmer'' be changed to ``limited income farmer.'' Farm Credit
Programs, which are part of FSA, have used the term ``limited resource
farmer'' for many years and it has a very different definition than the
definition of
[[Page 42982]]
``limited resource farmer'' used for crop insurance purposes.
Response: Section 508(b)(5) of the Act expressly authorizes FCIC to
waive the administrative fee for ``limited resource farmers.'' Since
``resources'' include more than the producer's ``income'' such as farm
size, the definition will not be changed.
Comment: The crop insurance industry and a producer group
questioned what the phrase ``a need to maximize farm income'' meant in
the definition of ``limited resource farmer'' and recommended an
explanation be added to the endorsement or the phrase deleted.
Response: FCIC has reconsidered this provision and amended the
definition of ``limited resource farmer'' by deleting the phrase ``a
need to maximize farm income.''
Comment: A producer group recommended defining or omitting the
phrase ``small or family farm'' in the definition of ``limited resource
farmer.'' They also questioned how a person is categorized as a limited
resource farmer and whether or not such person is required to obtain at
least catastrophic risk protection (CAT) coverage, if available. The
comment also asked if the limited resource status could be used as a
defense if a producer is denied benefits for failure to meet linkage
requirements.
Response: FCIC agrees that the terms ``small'' and ``family farm''
are not necessary in the definition and has amended the definition
accordingly. All producers, including limited resource farmers, are
required to obtain at least CAT coverage, if available, to be eligible
for certain other USDA program benefits, unless the producer executes a
waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in
connection with the crop. The limited resource farmer status only
authorizes FCIC to waive payment of the administrative fees and may not
be used as a defense for failure to obtain CAT coverage. Producers may
request limited resource farmer status at the time the application for
insurance is made.
Comment: A producer stated that a spouse's salary from a job in
town should not be included in total income when considering all
sources of revenue for a limited resource farmer.
Response: The purpose of this provision is to excuse producers from
paying the administrative fee when it would impose a financial
hardship. Since part of the farm's income is usually used to defray the
personal expenses of the producer, outside income such as a spouse's
salary will affect the determination. All of the income within the
family entity, from all sources of revenue, including the spouses' will
be considered as the annual gross income.
Comment: A producer group suggested that the word ``producer'' be
defined and used rather than the word ``person'' because it would be
less confusing since ``person'' is specifically defined with regard to
payment limitation rules. If this change is not made, the comment
suggested adding provisions to indicate that the definition in these
provisions does not reference the term ``person'' for payment
limitation purposes.
Response: A definition of ``person'' contained in any other statute
or regulation is not applicable to the Federal crop insurance program
unless expressly provided. Therefore, the definition of a person with
respect to payment limitation purposes is not relevant. The term
``person'' is defined for this program and has been used in the crop
insurance program for longer than payment limitation has existed. The
term ``person'' cannot be replaced with ``producer'' because not all
``persons'' are producers within the context of the program and to
alternate between the two terms would be confusing. No change to the
provisions will be made.
Comments Regarding Insurance Units
Comment: A producer observed that coverage was available only by
basic units, and stated that unit division on share basis was very
misleading.
Response: Unit division on a share basis is explained in section 3
(Unit Division) of the Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement. This
document is provided to all insureds who elect the endorsement.
Provisions contained therein are complete with examples and should not
be misleading to insureds. No change will be made.
Comments Regarding Linkage Requirements
Comment: Twenty-three (23) comments were received from producers
who disagreed with the mandatory requirement to purchase crop insurance
to remain eligible for certain other USDA program benefits. One
additional comment received from a FSA employee discussed producers'
aversion to the mandatory requirement to purchase crop insurance to be
eligible for certain other USDA benefits.
Response: (1) The mandatory requirement that producers obtain crop
insurance has been amended in the 1996 Act. (2) Now, section 508(b)(7)
of the Act requires the producer to obtain at least a CAT plan of
insurance or comparable coverage unless the producer executes a waiver
of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection
with the crop, to remain eligible for certain other USDA program
benefits. The intent of the Act is to encourage the fullest possible
participation in the Federal Crop Insurance program since ad hoc
disaster legislation is repealed. Crop insurance provides greater
assurance that producers are protected from the impacts of widespread
disaster causing a crop loss. The CAT endorsement will be amended to
conform to the statutory change.
Comment: Nine comments received from producers stated that it is
unfair to have to obtain insurance on other crops such as corn, wheat
and soybeans in order to remain eligible for the tobacco price support
program.
Response: The statutory requirement to obtain insurance for all
crops of economic significance, unless the producer executes a waiver
of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection
with the crop, is applicable to all Agriculture Marketing Transition
Act benefits, the conservation reserve program, and certain farm credit
programs. Producers who do not participate in these programs are not
required to obtain insurance on any of their crops. However, with the
elimination of ad hoc disaster assistance, a producers only available
protection is through crop insurance.
Comments Regarding Administrative Fees
Comment: Twenty-two (22) comments received from producers and 1
comment received from FSA state that: (1) Charging the same
administrative fee for both small producers and large producers was
unfair; (2) the larger producer will receive greater payments than the
small producer due to the differences in the acreages; (3) the number
of people involved in an operation does not increase the risk; (4) the
size of the operation affects the liability covered; (5) in determining
the administrative fees, factors should be used to compensate the
differences in the size of the acreage, not the number of crops; (6)
the amount of coverage or size of the operation should be a
consideration in determining the administrative fee; and (7) fees
should be pro-rated based on the size of the operation, a given amount
per acre, or something fair for the small farmer in respect to the
benefit they could attain from it.
Response: Section 508(b)(5) of the Act mandates the amount of
administrative
[[Page 42983]]
fee. The Act expressly states that the fee will be paid on a per crop
and per county basis. FCIC does not have the authority to change this
requirement. Further, this fee is not related to the amount of
liability or the risk associated with the size of the operation. The
fee is intended to defray the costs associated with calculating the
actual production history and processing applications, acreage reports,
etc., which do not normally vary greatly between small and large
farming operations. Producers who do not wish to obtain insurance and
pay the administrative fee for any or all of their crops may execute a
waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance for the
crop. Therefore, no change will be made.
Comment: Seven comments received from producers claimed the
administrative fee is not fair because separate fees are required for
(1) each crop; (2) each county; and (3) crops in two or more counties
when farms are consolidated in one FSA Farm Serial Number and
administered in one FSA office.
Response: Section 508(b)(5) of the Act mandates that the fee be
paid on a per crop and per county basis. FCIC does not have the
authority to change this requirement. Producers who do not wish to
obtain insurance and pay the administrative fee for any or all of their
crops may execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss
assistance for the crop. Therefore, no change will be made.
Comment: One comment from a producer claimed that as a result of
the narrow definition of ``limited resource farmer'' and ``crop of
economic significance,'' small farmers with several crops are required
to pay $200 plus idle acreage to be eligible for certain other USDA
program benefits. In return, they receive little more in program
benefits than the administrative fees incurred. The producer stated
that he would like to pay the administrative fee for each farm rather
than one fee per crop or have the fee based on acreage or something
fair for the small farmer.
Response: FCIC is statutorily mandated to charge an administrative
fee on a per crop basis. However, if the amount of liability under the
policy is equal to or less than the administrative fee, the crop is not
considered a ``crop of economic significance'' and the producer is not
required to obtain insurance for the crop. Further, under the 1996 Act,
producers of program crops are no longer required to idle acres.
Producers who do not wish to obtain insurance and pay the
administrative fee for any or all of their crops may execute a waiver
of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection
with the crop. Therefore, no change will be made.
Comment: Seven (7) comments received from producers stated that it
is unreasonable for each person sharing in a crop to pay separate
administrative fees.
Response: (1) Section 508(b)(7) states that each ``person'' must
obtain crop insurance on any crop of economic significance in which the
person has an interest. (2) The Act further states that each producer
must pay an administrative fee. However, persons who execute a waiver
of their eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance are still
eligible for the specified USDA benefits. FCIC has amended section 7 to
specify that, for tobacco producers, only one administrative fee will
be charged when one policy is issued for multiple shareholders,
provided: (1) A tobacco marketing card has been issued by FSA for a
specific producer and Farm Serial Number; (2) all of the shareholders
agree in writing; (3) this producer and other persons have a share in
the crop; and (4) neither this producer nor the other persons hold any
interest in another tobacco crop for which they are required to obtain
at least CAT coverage. Linkage requirements will be satisfied for each
shareholder of the crop. Section 7 has also been amended to allow a
landowner to obtain catastrophic risk protection and establish linkage
for all other landowners who hold an undivided interest in the
insurable acreage provided: (1) The landowners do not have multiple
farming interests; (2) all the landowners agree in writing to such
arrangement and have their social security number or employer
identification number listed on the application without regard to the
actual amount of their interest in the insured acreage; (3) the total
liability for all landowners is $2,500 or less; and (4) the landowner
insuring the crop will make application for insurance, provide name and
identification number for each person, pay the one administrative fee
for all the producers within the county, fulfill all agreements under
the contract, and receive and distribute the indemnity payments. This
is a new provision that will alleviate each producer in an undivided
interest from being required to pay a separate administrative fee when
all of the producers share in the crop and have no other insurable
interest in that crop and the total liability is $2,500 or less.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that the
administrative fees for CAT coverage should be addressed separately
from those for limited coverage (see section 6).
Response: The provisions of the Act mandate aggregation of the fees
for CAT and limited coverage in order to ensure that the producer does
not pay any administrative fee in excess of the amount required on a
per county per producer basis. Further, the use of the administrative
fee to offset the costs of delivery of the program is the same for both
CAT and limited coverage. This aggregation of fees is more clearly
communicated by the proposed language than it would be if the
provisions were separated therefore, no revisions will be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested clarifying the
language in section 5 (now 6) which explains that an insured may not
receive a refund of an administrative fee if the producer has insured
enough crops to generate fees in excess of the caps included in the
regulations.
Response: This provision has been clarified. Administrative fees
will not be refunded if, after the purchase of the additional coverage,
the producer still has 4 or more crops insured in the county, or 4 or
more crops insured in each of three or more counties, at the CAT or
limited coverage level.
Comment: The crop insurance industry stated that the endorsement
fails to include provisions requiring an insured to refund any benefits
received prior to the policy being terminated for nonpayment of fees.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has amended section 6(f)
of the endorsement accordingly.
Comments Regarding Insureds' Duties and Rights
Comment: A producer group suggested that there is insufficient
guidance as to appeal rights or the procedure that will be followed in
the event of a loss.
Response: Each crop policy contains provisions for procedure to be
followed in the event of a crop loss. These policies are published in
chapter IV of Title 7 of the CFR. The applicable appeal procedures are
published at 7 CFR parts 11 and 780. In addition, each reinsured
company has established mediation, arbitration, or similar procedures
to address insureds concerns. Therefore, no change will be made.
Claim for Indemnity
Comment: The crop insurance industry recommended that the CAT
endorsement contain a provision indicating that when the insured with
[[Page 42984]]
CAT coverage files a claim for indemnity under the policy, that filing
indicates the insured has made the election to receive a CAT indemnity
rather than a benefit under any other USDA program that compensates for
the same crop loss. It stated that the regulations need to specify how
the producer is to make this election, when he or she must make it, and
who is responsible for enforcing it.
Response: (1) The Act expressly provides the producer with the
choice of which program under which to receive benefits. (2) Since
information about other program benefits may not be available until
long after the crop loss has occurred, producers cannot be presumed to
have made a choice because they have not delayed receipt of benefits to
which they are entitled. (3) Producers cannot make informed choices
with respect to which program benefits to choose until they know what
benefits will be available. Therefore, section 9(b) of the endorsement
has been amended to permit producers to receive a CAT indemnity and, if
other program benefits are later made available, to reimburse the
entire amount of the CAT indemnity to be eligible for a benefit under
the other program. USDA will be responsible for determining if a crop
insurance payment has been made prior to making payment under any other
applicable USDA program.
Comment: Another comment from FSA stated that previous legislation
required emergency loan applicants to have obtained crop insurance the
previous year. The reform legislation forbids the applicant from
collecting the CAT indemnity, or noninsured crop disaster assistance
program (NAP) payment for the same loss that qualifies for the
emergency loan. This requires the producers to pay for coverage on
which they are never allowed to collect because if they collect the CAT
or NAP payment, they will immediately become ineligible for an
emergency loan. The commentor suggested a more reasonable approach
would be to limit the total benefits from all sources for a loss to the
total amount of loss, rather than limiting the benefit to a single
source. Otherwise the producer will often collect the payment and then
apply for a regular farm operating or farm ownership loan, rather than
an emergency loan. Denying the producer the opportunity to collect the
CAT or NAP payment will put a further strain on the Farm Credit
Programs already limited loan funds.
Response: The provision in previous legislation that required
emergency loan applicants to have obtained crop insurance the previous
year was removed in the Reform Act. The statute is clear that, for CAT
coverage policies, if another program provides compensation for the
same crop loss, the producer must elect only one program under which to
receive benefits. Therefore, the producer cannot receive benefits from
all sources up to the total amount of the loss. Further, since the Act
expressly provides the producer with the choice of which program to
receive benefits, FCIC cannot administratively abrogate that right.
However, any producer who receives a CAT indemnity payment is not
automatically prohibited from receiving assistance for the same loss
under other USDA programs. Such producers will be given the opportunity
to reimburse the entire amount of the indemnity and receive assistance
under the other USDA program. No change will be made.
Comments Regarding Eligibility
Comment: One comment was received from within FCIC recommending
that language be included that would deny benefits from other USDA
programs if the producer fails to carry out the producer's
responsibilities in accordance with policy provisions. It was suggested
that language be added to indicate that such failure would be
considered a scheme or device to circumvent the insurance requirement.
The comment indicates that some people are interpreting current
provisions to mean that once a producer applies for crop insurance on a
crop of economic significance, by signing an application for insurance,
that he or she has met the requirement for eligibility for certain
other USDA program benefits, even though he or she has not met the
requirements for crop insurance coverage to be in effect.
Response: FCIC agrees that failure to comply with all policy
provisions may result in ineligibility for certain other program
benefits specified in section 12(e). A new section 12(f) has been added
that states this requirement.
Comment: A producer group stated that section 9(b), which provides
that a person can receive either CAT benefits or other USDA benefits
for the same loss, but not both, should be clarified to state that a
producer will not have to forego other USDA payments that are not
specifically related to the crop loss, e.g., regular deficiency
payments.
Response: Deficiency payments do not compensate a producer for a
crop loss, they provided compensation for changes in the market price.
Therefore, deficiency payments could be made regardless of whether or
not the producer collected an indemnity. No changes have been made in
the provisions in response to this comment.
Comment: FSA suggested that the requirement for a producer to have
at least CAT coverage only applies to ``new'' Farm Credit loans not
``new and amended'' loans. The Act specifically listed the applicable
benefits in three loan-making authorities and the authority to service
(reschedule, reamortize, subordinate, write-down or otherwise amend)
loans is given in other sections of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act. There is a discrepancy over the effective date of the
CAT requirement. The requirement was effective upon enactment, however,
applicants could not be required to purchase CAT coverage before it was
available. The commentor continued to say that the effective
implementation date for their loan programs is January 23, 1995.
Response: Section 508(b)(7)(A) of the Act was effective on October
13, 1994, and mandated that the producer obtain at least CAT coverage
on crops of economic significance to be eligible for certain farm
credit benefits. Therefore, producers who obtained farm credit
programs, loans, or amended existing loans after October 13, 1994, are
statutorily required to comply with this provision. Amendments to
existing loans were included because such amendments can have a
significant effect on the terms and duration of such loans. Further,
Congress realized that some producers obtained loans in 1995, prior to
enactment of the Act. To permit producers to comply with the
requirements of section 508(b)(7)(A), sales closing dates for CAT
coverage were extended to April 13, 1995.
Comment: One comment received from FSA disagreed with provisions
that require the producer to obtain CAT coverage for the crop year in
which a farm credit loan is sought. The producer is not always able to
anticipate credit needs by the CAT sales closing date so it would be
more workable to allow the producer to obtain coverage for the
following year if the sales closing date had passed and it was not
possible to obtain coverage for the current year.
Response: The requirement for CAT coverage in the crop year for
which a benefit is sought is a statutory requirement, although now
producers may execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop
loss assistance in connection with the crop and remain eligible for
certain USDA program benefits. Therefore, no changes have been made. It
is the responsibility of the producer and the lender to anticipate
credit needs in the worst case scenario
[[Page 42985]]
so crop insurance can be obtained prior to the applicable sales closing
dates.
In addition to the changes described above, FCIC has made the
following changes to the CAT endorsement:
1. Sec. 402.1--Amend this section by adding, ``if provided by the
Corporation,'' after ``The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by
the Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, requires the Federal
Crop Insurance Corporation to implement a catastrophic risk protection
plan of insurance that provides a basic level of insurance coverage to
protect producers in the event of a catastrophic crop loss due to loss
of yield, or prevented planting'' to clarify that not all policies
offer prevented planting coverage.
2. Section 1--Clarify the definition of ``approved yield'' to cover
crops not included under 7 CFR part 400, sub- part G.
3. Section 1--Delete the phrase ``in which you have an insurable
share'' from the definition of ``crop of economic significance''. The
Act states that a determination of a ``crop of economic significance''
be based on the producer's share of all crops grown in the county, not
just the insurable crops.
4. Section 1--Add a definition for ``expected market price,''
``linkage requirement,'' and ``zero acreage report'' for clarification
purposes.
5. Section 1--Delete the definition of ``price election'' because
the definition of ``expected market price'' replaced it.
6. Section 1--Delete the definition of ``CFSA'' and add the
definition of ``FSA'' to reflect the change in the agency's name.
7. Section 4--Add a new section 4(e) to clarify that a producer
must have suffered at least a 50 percent loss in yield to be eligible
for an indemnity under this endorsement.
8. A new section 5(a) has been added specifying that acreage
reports be signed and filed before the acreage reporting date. To
minimize the burden imposed by the requirement, this provision also
allows that an operator may sign the acreage report for all other
persons with an insurable interest in the policy. All producers are
bound by all statements on the signed acreage report. Since the acreage
report is an integral part of the insurance contract and the document
upon which the premium is based it must be properly executed.
9. A new section 5(b) has been added to consolidate and clarify
information on share, share leases, cash leases, and insurance coverage
in multiple owner situations. Consequently, the definition of share and
section 3(c) of the interim rule has been deleted.
10. Section 6(c) (now 7(a)) has been amended to allow a producer to
obtain catastrophic risk protection coverage on high risk land from an
insurance provider other than the insurance provider where the limited
or additional coverage was obtained, if the provider of the limited or
additional coverage does not sell or service CAT policies. This change
was necessary because some companies who provide limited and additional
coverage do not provide CAT coverage.
11. Section 11(a) (now 12(e)) has been amended by replacing the
specifically named price support and production adjustment programs
under which producers receive benefits to benefits under the
Agricultural Market Transition Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 402
Claims, Crop insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Final Rule
Accordingly, for the reasons set out in the preamble, the interim
rule, ``Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement,'' published at 60 FR
2000-2005, is adopted as a final rule, effective for the 1997 and
succeeding crop year for all crops with a 1997 crop year contract
change date following the effective date of this rule and for the 1998
and succeeding crop years for all crops with a 1997 crop year contract
change date prior to the effective date of this rule, with changes as
follows:
7 CFR Part 402 is revised to read as follows:
PART 402--CATASTROPHIC RISK PROTECTION ENDORSEMENT; REGULATIONS FOR
THE 1997 AND SUBSEQUENT CROP YEARS
Sec.
402.1 General statement.
402.2 Applicability.
402.3 OMB control numbers.
402.4 Catastrophic risk protection endorsement.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l) and 1506(p).
Sec. 402.1 General statement.
The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal Crop
Insurance Reform Act of 1994, requires the Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation to implement a catastrophic risk protection plan of
insurance that provides a basic level of insurance coverage to protect
producers in the event of a catastrophic crop loss due to loss of yield
or prevented planting, if provided by the Corporation, provided the
crop loss or prevented planting is due to an insured cause of loss
specified in the crop insurance policy. This Catastrophic Risk
Protection Endorsement is a continuous endorsement that is effective in
conjunction with a crop insurance policy for the insured crop.
Catastrophic risk protection coverage will be offered through approved
insurance providers if there are a sufficient number available to
service the area. If there are an insufficient number available, as
determined by the Secretary, local offices of the Farm Service Agency
will provide catastrophic risk protection coverage.
Sec. 402.2 Applicability
This Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement is applicable to each
crop for which catastrophic risk protection coverage is available and
for which the producer elects such coverage.
Sec. 402.3 OMB control numbers.
The information collection activity associated with this rule has
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) under OMB
control number 0563-0003.
Sec. 402.4 Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement Provisions.
The Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement Provisions for the
1997 and succeeding crop years are as follows:
Department of Agriculture
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement
(This is a continuous endorsement)
If a conflict exists between this Endorsement and any of the
policies specified in section 2 or the Special Provisions for the
insured crop, this endorsement will control.
Terms and Conditions
1. Definitions
Additional coverage--Plans of crop insurance providing a level
of coverage equal to or greater than sixty-five percent (65%) of
your approved yield indemnified at one hundred percent (100%) of the
expected market price, or comparable coverage as established by
FCIC.
Administrative fee--The $50 fee the producer must pay on a per
crop and county basis with a maximum of $200 per producer per county
and $600 per producer for catastrophic and limited coverage on an
annual basis.
Approved insurance provider--A private insurance company,
including its agents, that has been approved and reinsured by FCIC
to provide insurance coverage to producers participating in the
Federal Crop Insurance program.
Approved yield--The amount of production per acre computed in
accordance with FCIC's Actual Production History Program (7 CFR part
400, subpart G) or for
[[Page 42986]]
crops not included under 7 CFR part 400, subpart G, the yield used
to determine the guarantee in accordance with the crop provisions or
the Special Provisions.
Catastrophic risk protection--The minimum level of coverage
offered by FCIC which meets the requirements for a person to qualify
for certain other USDA program benefits (see sections 4 and 12).
County--The political subdivision of a state listed in the
actuarial table and designated on your accepted application,
including land in an adjoining county, provided such land is part of
a field that extends into the adjoining county and the county
boundary is not readily discernable. For peanuts and tobacco, the
county will also include any land identified by a FSA farm serial
number for the county but physically located in another county.
Crop of economic significance--A crop that has either
contributed in the previous crop year, or is expected to contribute
in the current crop year, ten percent (10%) or more of the total
expected value of your share of all crops grown in the county.
However, a crop will not be considered a crop of economic
significance if the expected liability under the Catastrophic Risk
Protection Endorsement is equal to or less than the administrative
fee required for the crop.
Expected market price--(price election) The price per unit of
production (or other basis as determined by FCIC) anticipated during
the period the insured crop normally is marketed by producers. This
price will be set by FCIC before the sales closing date for the
crop. The expected market price may be less than the actual price
paid by buyers if such price typically includes remuneration for
significant amounts of post-production expenses such as
conditioning, culling, sorting, packing, etc.
FCIC--The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, a wholly owned
Government Corporation within USDA.
FSA--The Farm Service Agency, an agency of the United States
Department of Agriculture or any successor agency.
Insurance is available--When crop information is contained in
the county actuarial documents for a particular crop.
Limited coverage--Plans of insurance offering coverage that is
equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%) of your approved yield
indemnified at one hundred percent (100%) of the expected market
price, or a comparable coverage, but less than sixty-five percent
(65%) of your approved yield indemnified at one hundred percent
(100%) of the expected market price, or a comparable coverage.
Limited resource farmer--A producer or operator of a farm, with
an annual gross income of $20,000 or less derived from all sources
of revenue, including income from spouse's or other members of the
household, for each of the prior two years. Notwithstanding the
previous sentence, a producer on a farm or farms of less than 25
acres aggregated for all crops, where a majority of the producer's
gross income is derived from such farm or farms, but the producer's
gross income from farming operations does not exceed $20,000, will
be considered a limited resource farmer.
Linkage requirement--The legal requirement that a producer must
obtain at least catastrophic risk protection coverage for any crop
of economic significance as a condition of receiving benefits for
such crop from certain other USDA programs in accordance with
section 12(e), unless the producer executes a waiver of any
eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with
the crop.
Secretary--The Secretary of the United States Department of
Agriculture.
USDA--The United States Department of Agriculture.
Zero acreage report--An acreage report filed by you that
certifies you do not have a share in the crop for that crop year.
2. Eligibility, Life of Policy, Cancellation, and Termination
(a) You must have one of the following policies in force to
elect this Endorsement:
(1) The General Crop Insurance Policy (7 CFR 401.8) and crop
endorsement;
(2) The Common Crop Insurance Policy (7 CFR 457.8) and crop
provisions;
(3) The Group Risk Plan Policy, if available for catastrophic
risk protection; or
(4) A specific named crop insurance policy.
(b) You must have made application for catastrophic risk
protection on or before the sales closing date for the crop in the
county.
(c) You must be a ``person'' as defined in the crop policy to be
eligible for catastrophic risk protection coverage.
(d) In addition to the provisions specified in the applicable
crop policy, this Endorsement will terminate for the crop year for
which:
(1) You fail to pay the applicable administrative fee, as
specified in section 6;
(2) You elect to purchase limited or additional coverage for the
insured crop; or
(3) The applicable crop policy, to which this endorsement
attaches, automatically terminates (i.e., the policy must be renewed
each year).
3. Unit Division
(a) This section is in lieu of the unit provisions specified in
the applicable crop policy.
(b) For catastrophic risk protection coverage, a unit will be
all insurable acreage of the insured crop in the county on the date
coverage begins for the crop year:
(1) In which you have one hundred percent (100%) crop share; or
(2) Which is owned by one person and operated by another person
on a share basis.
(Example: If, in addition to the land you own, you rent land from
five landlords, three on a crop share basis and two on a cash basis,
you would be entitled to four units; one for each crop share lease
and one that combines the two cash leases and the land you own.)
(c) Further division of the units described in paragraph (b)
above is not allowed under this Endorsement.
4. Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining
Indemnities
(a) Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other policy
document, for the 1995 through 1998 crop years, catastrophic
coverage will offer protection equal to fifty percent (50%) of your
approved yield indemnified at sixty percent (60%) of the expected
market price, or a comparable coverage as established by FCIC.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other policy
document, for the 1999 and subsequent crop years, catastrophic
coverage will offer protection equal to fifty percent (50%) of your
approved yield indemnified at fifty-five percent (55%) of the
expected market price, or a comparable coverage as established by
FCIC.
(c) If the crop policy denominates coverage in dollars per acre
or other measure, or any other alternative method of coverage, such
coverage will be converted to the amount of coverage that would be
payable at fifty percent (50%) of your approved yield indemnified at
sixty percent (60%) of the expected market price for the 1995
through 1998 crop years and fifty percent (50%) of your approved
yield indemnified at fifty-five percent (55%) of the expected market
price for the 1999 and subsequent crop years.
(d) You may elect catastrophic coverage for any crop insured or
reinsured by FCIC on either an individual yield and loss basis or an
area yield and loss basis, if both options are offered as set out in
the Actuarial Table or the Special Provisions.
(e) To be eligible for an indemnity under this endorsement you
must have suffered at least a 50 percent loss in yield.
5. Report of Acreage
(a) The report of crop acreage that you file in accordance with
the crop policy must be signed on or before the acreage reporting
date. For catastrophic risk protection, unless the other person with
an insurable interest in the crop objects in writing prior to the
acreage reporting date and provides a signed acreage report on their
own behalf, the operator may sign the acreage report for all other
persons with an insurable interest in the crop without a power of
attorney. All persons with an insurable interest in the crop, and
for whom the operator purports to sign and represent, are bound by
the information contained in that acreage report.
(b) For the purpose of determining the amount of indemnity only,
your share will not exceed your insurable interest at the earlier of
the time of loss or the beginning of harvest. Unless the accepted
application clearly indicates that insurance is requested for a
partnership or joint venture, insurance will only cover the crop
share of the person completing the application. The share will not
extend to any other person having an interest in the crop except as
may otherwise be specifically allowed in this endorsement. Any
acreage or interest reported by or for your spouse, child or any
member of your household may be considered your share. A lease
containing provisions for both a minimum payment (such as a
specified amount of cash, bushels, pounds, etc.) and a crop share
will be considered a crop share lease. A lease containing provisions
for either a minimum payment (such as a specified amount of cash,
bushels, pounds, etc.,) or a crop share will be considered a cash
lease. Land rented for cash, a fixed commodity payment, or any
consideration other than a share in the insured crop on such land
will be considered as owned by the lessee.
[[Page 42987]]
6. Annual Premium and Administrative Fees
(a) Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other policy
document, you will not be responsible to pay a premium, nor will the
policy be terminated because the premium has not been paid. FCIC
will pay a premium subsidy equal to the premium established for the
coverage provided under this endorsement.
(b) In return for catastrophic risk protection, you must pay an
administrative fee as follows:
(1) To the insurance provider at the time of application (the
fee will not be refunded if you file a zero acreage report the
initial crop year for which the application is accepted);
(2) Annually, on or before the acreage reporting date for the
applicable crop for any subsequent crop years that catastrophic risk
protection is in effect (The fee will not be required if you file a
bonafide zero acreage report on or before the acreage reporting
date, however, filing a false zero acreage report could subject you
to criminal and administrative sanction); and
(3) Equal to $50 per crop per county, subject to a maximum of
two hundred dollars ($200) per county and six hundred dollars ($600)
for all counties in which you insure crops. In calculating the
maximum amount of administrative fees, the fees paid for both
catastrophic risk protection and limited coverage will be combined.
(c) The administrative fee provisions of paragraph (b) of this
section do not apply if you meet the definition of a limited
resource farmer (see section 1). If you qualify as a limited
resource farmer and desire to be exempted from paying the
administrative fee you must sign the waiver at the time of
application (on or before the sales closing date.)
(d) When a crop policy has provisions to allow you the option to
separately insure individual crop types or varieties, you must pay a
separate administrative fee in accordance with paragraph (b) of this
section for each type or variety you elect to separately insure.
(e) The administrative fee will be refunded if, after applying
for catastrophic risk protection and paying the administrative fee,
you elect to purchase additional coverage for such crop in the same
county on or before the sales closing date. Administrative fees will
not be refunded, however if, after the purchase of the additional
coverage, you still have 4 or more crops insured in the county, or 4
or more crops insured in each of three or more counties, at the CAT
or limited coverage level.
(f) If the administrative fee is not paid when due, the crop
insurance contract will terminate effective at the beginning of the
crop year for which the administrative fee was not paid. You may be
ineligible for certain other USDA program benefits as set out in
section 12, and all such benefits already received for the crop year
must be refunded. If you fail to pay the administrative fee when
due, the execution of a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop
loss assistance in connection with the crop will not be effective
for any crop year in which payment was not made.
7. Insured Crop
The crop insured is specified in the applicable crop policy,
however:
(a) Notwithstanding any other policy provision requiring the
same insurance coverage on all insurable acreage of the crop in the
county, if you purchase limited or additional coverage for a crop,
you may separately insure acreage under catastrophic coverage that
has been designated as ``high risk'' land by FCIC, provided that you
execute a High Risk Land Exclusion Option and obtain a catastrophic
risk protection policy with the same approved insurance provider, if
available, on or before the applicable sales closing date. If
catastrophic coverage is not available from the same insurance
provider, you may obtain the catastrophic risk protection policy for
the high risk land from another approved insurance provider or FSA,
if available. You will be required to pay a separate administrative
fee for both the limited or additional coverage policy and the
catastrophic coverage policy unless the maximum administrative fee
would be exceeded.
(b) A tobacco producer may insure one hundred percent (100%) of
the tobacco crop that is identified by a tobacco marketing card
issued by FSA for a specific producer and Farm Serial Number under
one CAT policy, provided the producer and other persons each have a
share in the crop, all the shareholders agree in writing to such
arrangement, and none of the persons hold any other interest in
another tobacco crop for which they are required to obtain at least
catastrophic coverage. If the tobacco crop is insured under one
policy:
(1) The linkage requirements will be satisfied for each
shareholder of the crop; and
(2) The producer insuring the crop will:
(i) Make application for insurance and provide the name and
social security number, or employer identification number, of each
person with a share in the tobacco crop;
(ii) File the acreage report showing a one-hundred percent
(100%) share in the crop (all insurable acreage covered by such
marketing card will be considered as one unit);
(iii) Be responsible to pay the one administrative fee for all
the producers within the county;
(iv) Fulfill all requirements under the crop insurance contract;
and
(v) Receive any indemnity payment under his or her social
security number or employer identification number and distribute the
indemnity payments to the other persons sharing in the crop.
(c) A landowner will be allowed to obtain catastrophic coverage
to satisfy linkage requirements for all other landowners who hold an
undivided interest in the insurable acreage, provided:
(1) All the landowners must agree in writing to such arrangement
and have their social security number or employer identification
number listed on the application, without regard to the actual
amount of their interest in the insured acreage;
(2) All landowners must have an undivided interest in the
insurable acreage;
(3) None of the landowners may hold any share in other acreage
for which they are required to obtain at least catastrophic
coverage;
(4) The total cumulative liability under the Catastrophic Risk
Protection Endorsement for all landowners must be $2,500 or less;
(5) The landowner insuring the crop will:
(i) Make application for insurance and provide the name and
social security number or employer identification number of each
person with an undivided interest in the insurable acreage;
(ii) Be responsible to pay the one administrative fee for all
the producers within the county;
(iii) Fulfill all requirements under the insurance contract; and
(iv) Receive any indemnity payment under the landowner's social
security number, or when applicable, employer identification number,
and distribute the indemnity payments to the other persons sharing
in the crop.
8. Replanting Payment
Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other crop
insurance document, no replant payment will be paid whether or not
replanting of the crop is required under the policy.
9. Claim for Indemnity
(a) If two or more insured crop types, varieties, or classes are
insured within the same unit, and multiple price elections are
applicable, the dollar amount of insurance and the dollar amount of
production to be counted will be determined separately for each
type, variety, class, etc., that have separate price elections and
then totaled to determine the total liability or dollar amount of
production to be counted for the unit.
(b) If you are eligible to receive an indemnity under this
endorsement and benefits compensating you for the same loss under
any other USDA program, you must elect the program from which you
wish to receive benefits. Only one payment or program benefit is
allowed. However, if other USDA program benefits are not available
until after you filed a claim for indemnity, you may refund the
total amount of the indemnity and receive the other program benefit.
Farm ownership and operating loans, may be obtained from the USDA in
addition to crop insurance indemnities.
10. Concealment or Fraud
Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other crop
insurance document, your CAT policy may be voided by us on all crops
without waiving any of our rights, including the right to collect
any amounts due:
(a) If at any time you conceal or misrepresent any material fact
or commit fraud relating to this or any other contract issued under
the authority of the Federal Crop Insurance Act with any insurance
provider; and
(b) The voidance will be effective as of the beginning of the
crop year during which such act or omission occurred. After the
policy has been voided, you must make a new application to obtain
catastrophic risk protection coverage for any subsequent crop year.
If your policy is voided under this
[[Page 42988]]
section, any waiver of eligibility for emergency crop loss
assistance in connection with the crop will not be effective for the
crop for the year in which the voidance occurred.
11. Exclusion of Coverage
(a) Options or endorsements that extend the coverage available
under any crop policy offered by FCIC will not be available under
this endorsement, except the Late Planting Agreement Option. Written
agreements are not available for any crop insured under this
endorsement.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision contained in any other crop
policy, hail and fire coverage and high-risk land may not be
excluded under catastrophic risk protection.
12. Eligibility for Other USDA Program Benefits
(a) Even if it was a crop of economic significance for the
previous crop year, if you do not intend to plant the crop in the
current crop year, you do not have to obtain crop insurance or
execute a waiver of your eligibility for any emergency crop loss
assistance in connection with the crop to remain eligible for the
USDA program benefits specified in subsection (e). However, if,
after the sales closing date, you plant that crop, you will be
unable to obtain insurance for that crop and you must execute a
waiver of your eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in
connection with the crop to remain eligible for the USDA program
benefits specified in section 12(e). Failure to execute such a
waiver will require you to refund any benefits already received
under a program specified in section 12(e).
(b) You are initially responsible to determine the crops of
economic significance in the county. The insurance provider may
assist you in making these initial determinations. However, these
determinations will not be binding on the insurance provider. To
determine the percentage value of each crop:
(1) Multiply the acres planted to the crop, times your share,
times the approved yield, and times the price;
(2) Add the values of all crops grown by the producer in the
county; and
(3) Divide the value of the specific crop by the result of
section 12(b)(2).
(c) You may use the type of price such as the current local
market price, futures price, established price, highest amount of
insurance, etc., for the price when calculating the value of each
crop, provided that you use the same type of price for all crops in
the county.
(d) You may be required to justify the calculation and provide
adequate records to enable the insurance provider to verify whether
a crop is of economic significance.
(e) You must obtain at least catastrophic coverage for each crop
of economic significance in the county in which you have an
insurable share, if insurance is available in the county for the
crop, unless you execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency
crop loss assistance in connection with the crop to be eligible for:
(1) Benefits under the Agricultural Market Transition Act;
(2) Loans or any other USDA provided farm credit, including:
guaranteed and direct farm ownership loans, operating loans, and
emergency loans under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act provided after October 13, 1994; and
(3) Benefits under the Conservation Reserve Program derived from
any new or amended application or contracts executed after October
13, 1994.
(f) Failure to comply with all provisions of the policy
constitutes a breach of contract and may result in ineligibility for
certain other farm program benefits for that crop year and any
benefit already received must be refunded. If you breach the
insurance contract, the execution of a waiver of any eligibility for
emergency crop loss assistance will not be effective for the crop
year in which the breach occurs.
Signed in Washington, D.C., on August 13, 1996.
Kenneth D. Ackerman,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 96-21117 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-FA-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21116 General Administrative Regulations; Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, Regulations for Implementation
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42970-42979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21116]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
7 CFR Part 400
RIN 0563-AB11
General Administrative Regulations; Federal Crop Insurance Reform
Act of 1994, Regulations for Implementation
AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) finalizes 7 CFR
part 400, subpart T of its General Administrative Regulations. The
intended effect of this final rule is to provide noninsured producers,
policyholders, and insurance companies the regulations applicable to
the catastrophic risk protection program. It will also provide other
changes in FCIC insurance programs to comply with statutory mandates of
the Federal Crop Insurance Act (Act), as amended by the Federal Crop
Insurance Reform Act of 1994 (Reform Act) and the Federal Agriculture
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (1996 Act).
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louise Narber, Program Analyst,
Research and Development Division, Product Development Branch, Federal
Crop Insurance Corporation, United States Department of Agriculture,
9435 Holmes Road, Kansas City, MO 64131, telephone (816) 926-7730.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order No. 12866 and Departmental Regulation 1512-1
This action has been reviewed under United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) procedures established by Executive Order No. 12866.
This action constitutes a review as to the need, currency, clarity, and
effectiveness of these regulations under those procedures. The sunset
review date established for these regulations is December 1, 2001.
This rule has been determined to be economically significant for
the purposes of Executive Order No. 12866 and, therefore, has been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Cost Benefit Analysis
A Cost Benefit Analysis has been completed and is available to
interested persons at the address listed above. In summary, the
analysis finds that crop insurance reform generally is expected to
result in net positive benefits to producers, taxpayers, and society.
The effects on individual producers compared to payments under ad hoc
disaster programs depends primarily on the farm program payment yield
compared to the farm's actual yield and market prices. In general,
however, the reform is expected to result in less volatility of
producers' incomes and less risk of no income due to adverse weather
events. Rural communities and producers will benefit from the certainty
of payments in times of catastrophic yield losses. The Government and
taxpayers will benefit from a single disaster protection program and
consequent reduced Federal outlays. Although producers who had not
previously participated in the Federal crop insurance program will have
an added burden to make application and report yields and acreage, the
benefits in terms of greater risk protection outweigh the costs.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
information collection requirements contained in these regulations have
been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB control number 0563-
0003 through September 30, 1998. Copies of the information collection
may be obtained from Bonnie Hart, USDA, FSA Advisory and Corporate
Operations Staff, Regulatory Review Group, P.O. Box 2415, Ag Box 0572,
Washington, D.C. 20013-2415, 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays, telephone (202) 690-2857.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. This rule contains no Federal
mandates (under the 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.
Executive Order No. 12612
It has been determined under section 6(a) of Executive Order No.
12612, Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. The
provisions contained in this rule will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or their political subdivisions, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
Government.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. However, it does provide additional
flexibility and cost savings for small entities in the following three
areas. First, producers are no longer required to obtain at least CAT
coverage for economically significant crops. Instead, they may sign a
waiver foregoing emergency crop loss assistance. Insureds likely to
decline coverage are those who believe that the costs associated with
obtaining insurance exceed the benefits. The producers most likely to
fall into this category are those who have insurance policies with low
liabilities. For these producers, the $50 fee for CAT would be most
likely to outweigh expected indemnities. Second, an allowance has been
made to allow all producers with a share in a tobacco crop under one
marketing card to insure the crop under one insurance policy. To
qualify under this provision, none of the shareholders may have an
interest in another tobacco crop in the county. It is estimated that
35,100 policyholders may utilize this allowance, thereby saving the $50
[[Page 42971]]
processing fee for each. Third, with specified restrictions, persons
who hold an undivided interest in a crop may be eligible to purchase
one insurance policy covering all shares to satisfy linkage
requirements. The restrictions associated with this allowance include:
all landowners must agree in writing to the arrangement; none of the
landowners may hold any other interest in the given crop in the county
for which they are required to buy at least CAT coverage; and the total
liability under the CAT endorsement for all landowners must be $2,500
or less. Because no data are available providing an indication of
insureds with an undivided interest, it is not possible to estimate the
savings associated with not paying the $50 processing fee in these
situations. However, some small entities will benefit from this
allowance.
Federal Assistance Program
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.450.
Executive Order No. 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
No. 12372, which require intergovernmental consultation with state and
local officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,
published at 48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983.
Executive Order No. 12778
The Office of the General Counsel has determined that these
regulations meet the applicable standards provided in sections 2(a) and
2(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12778. The provisions of this rule will
preempt state and local laws to the extent such state and local laws
are inconsistent herewith. The administrative appeal provisions
published at 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 must be exhausted before any action
for judicial review may be brought.
Environmental Evaluation
This action is not expected to have any significant impact on the
quality of the human environment, health, and safety. Therefore,
neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact
Statement is needed.
National Performance Review
This regulatory action is being taken as part of the National
Performance Review Initiative to eliminate unnecessary or duplicative
regulations and improve those that remain in force.
Background
The amendments to the Act, made by the Reform Act, were effective
on October 13, 1994. This regulation provides the procedures to carry
out the requirements of those amendments.
On Friday, January 6, 1995, FCIC published an interim rule in the
Federal Register at 60 FR 1996-2000 to add regulations to carry out the
general requirements of the Act. Following publication of that interim
rule, the public was afforded 60 days to submit written comments, data,
and opinions. On Monday, August 7, 1995, by publication at 60 FR 40055,
FCIC reopened and extended the comment period to August 18, 1995. A
total of 35 comments were received from the crop insurance industry,
FSA, and from producer groups. The comments received and FCIC responses
are as follows:
Comment: One comment received from the crop insurance industry
suggested clarifying the definition of ``catastrophic risk protection''
by deleting the word ``minimal'' and replacing it with either the word
``minimum'' or ``lowest'' and by deleting the word ``be'' and replacing
it with ``offer protection'' after ``such coverage will.''
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has amended the
definition of ``catastrophic risk protection'' by replacing the word
``minimal'' with the word ``minimum'' and by replacing the word ``be''
with ``offer protection.''
Comment: Another comment received from the crop insurance industry
suggested clarifying the definition of ``crop of economic
significance'' by deleting ``by the producer'' in the first sentence.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has modified the
definition of ``crop of economic significance'' accordingly.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested clarifying the
definition of ``crop of economic significance'' to explain the
consequences if a crop planted in 1994, is planted in 1995 although
originally there was no intent to plant the crop in 1995; and to
clarify who is responsible for determining which crops are of economic
significance.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has added new provisions
in section 400.653 to clarify requirements regarding crops of economic
significance. Producers who do not intend to plant a crop do not have
to obtain crop insurance or execute a waiver of their eligibility for
emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the crop to remain
eligible for certain other USDA program benefits, even if they produced
the crop the previous year. However, if the producer later decides to
plant the crop after the sales closing date, the producer cannot obtain
insurance on the crop and must execute a waiver of any eligibility for
emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the crop to be
eligible for certain USDA program benefits. If a waiver is not
executed, the producer must return those benefits already received.
Provisions were also added indicating that it is the producer's
responsibility to determine crops of economic significance in the
county and that the producer may have to provide records to permit the
insurance provider to verify whether a crop is a crop of economic
significance. FCIC has issued a worksheet that may be used by producers
to assist them in determining crops of economic significance. USDA will
be ultimately responsible for determining eligibility and paying any
amount due a person for any applicable USDA program.
Comment: A producer group suggested that the definition of ``crop
of economic significance'' is contrary to the Act and invites legal
action to test it. They stated that the Act looks to a percentage of
all crops grown by the producer and the definition in this regulation
provides for a county by county test to be done.
Response: FCIC agrees that Sec. 508(b)(7) and (8) of the Act does
not specifically indicate that crops of economic significance are
determined on a county basis. However, since FCIC's insurance program
has always been county based trying to operate one portion of the
program across county lines would be extremely difficult. No changes
will be made to conform to this suggestion.
Comment: The Farm Service Agency requested that the term ``limited
resource farmer'' be changed to ``limited income farmer.'' Farm Credit
Programs, which are part of FSA, have used the term ``limited resource
farmer'' for many years and it has a very different definition than the
definition of ``limited resource farmer'' used for crop insurance
purposes.
Response: Section 508(b)(5) of the Act expressly authorizes FCIC to
waive the administrative fee for ``limited resource farmers.'' Since
``resources'' include more than the producer's ``income'' such as farm
size, the definition will not be changed.
Comment: The crop insurance industry and a producer group
questioned what the phrase ``a need to maximize farm income'' meant in
the
[[Page 42972]]
definition of ``limited resource farmer'' and recommended an
explanation be added to the regulations or the phrase deleted.
Response: FCIC has reconsidered this provision and amended the
definition of ``limited resource farmer'' by deleting the phrase ``a
need to maximize farm income''.
Comment: A producer group recommended defining or omitting the
phrase ``small or family farm'' in the definition of ``limited resource
farmer.'' They also questioned how a person is categorized as a limited
resource farmer and whether or not such person is required to obtain at
least catastrophic risk protection (CAT) coverage, if available. The
comment also asked if the limited resource status could be used as a
defense if a producer is denied benefits for failure to meet linkage
requirements.
Response: FCIC agrees that the terms ``small'' and ``family farm''
are not necessary in the definition and has amended the definition
accordingly. All producers, including limited resource farmers, are
required to obtain at least CAT coverage, if available, to be eligible
for certain other USDA program benefits, unless the producer executes a
waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in
connection with the crop. The limited resource farmer status only
authorizes FCIC to waive payment of the administrative fees and may not
be used as a defense for failure to obtain CAT coverage. Producers may
request ``limited resource farmer status'' at the time the application
for insurance is made.
Comment: A producer group also suggested that the word ``producer''
be defined and used rather than the word ``person'' because it would be
less confusing since ``person'' is specifically defined with regard to
payment limitation rules. If this change is not made, the comment
suggested adding provisions to indicate that the definition in these
provisions does not reference the term ``person'' for payment
limitation purposes.
Response: A definition of ``person'' contained in any other statute
or regulation is not applicable to the Federal crop insurance program
unless expressly provided. Therefore, the definition of a person with
respect to payment limitation purposes is not relevant. The term
``person'' is defined for this program and has been used in the crop
insurance program for longer than payment limitation has existed. The
term ``person'' cannot be replaced with ``producer'' because not all
``persons'' are producers within the context of the program and to
alternate between the two terms would be confusing. No change to the
provisions will be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that the phrase ``at
the option of the Secretary'' should be added after ``through approved
insurance providers and'' in Sec. 400.652(b) to be consistent with the
Act. This change is needed to enable the FSA to cease delivering CAT
coverage in counties in which such coverage becomes unnecessary.
Response: The Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of
1996 provides for CAT coverage to be offered by approved insurance
providers if there are a sufficient number available within an area. If
approved insurance providers are not sufficiently available, local
offices of the USDA will provide CAT coverage. FCIC agrees that the
Secretary must now make an affirmative determination that CAT can be
delivered through local FSA offices. The provision has been changed
accordingly.
Comment: One comment was received from within FCIC recommending
that language be included that would deny benefits from other USDA
programs if the producers fail to carry out their responsibilities in
accordance with policy provisions. It was suggested that language be
added to indicate that such failure would be considered a scheme or
device to circumvent the insurance requirement. The comment indicates
that some people are interpreting current provisions to mean that once
a producer applies for crop insurance on a crop of economic
significance, by signing an application for insurance, that he or she
has met the requirement for eligibility for certain other USDA program
benefits, even though he or she has not met the requirements for crop
insurance coverage to be in effect.
Response: FCIC agrees that failure to comply with all policy
provisions may result in ineligibility for certain program benefits
specified in Sec. 400.657. A new Sec. 400.652(e) has been added that
states this requirement.
Comment: Two comments were received from the crop insurance
industry raising issues involving alternative crops.
(1) One comment suggested that the provisions regarding alternative
crops in Sec. 400.653 (now Sec. 400.654) be clarified with respect to
crops of economic significance, USDA linkage requirements, and late
filed applications.
(2) One comment states that this late application procedure could
provide producers with a false sense of security because of the
reliance on FCIC to make discretionary determinations following sales
closing. It states that the procedure limits the producer to CAT
coverage even if he or she had previously determined that a higher
level was necessary for the crop intended to be planted. The procedure
extends the sales closing date which is not permitted by the statute.
The procedure also requires the insured to make application prior to
the acreage reporting date, which requires the insured to make a
special trip to the agent or FSA office.
Response: Section 400.654 has been amended to clarify the
conditions under which a producer may insure a substitute crop. Section
400.651 has also been amended to add a definition of ``substitute
crop''. FCIC has not extended sales closing dates, it has simply
permitted another crop to be substituted for the intended crop,
provided that circumstances warrant such action. This provision was
intended to protect farm income by allowing the producer to plant and
insure another crop when there was an inability to plant the intended
crop or when a crop was planted and failed and replanting of such crop
was not practical. Since the producer must still obtain coverage by the
sales closing date for the initially intended crop, producers should
not have a false sense of security. The substitution of crops simply
permits producers to maintain their ability to manage their risks when
circumstances beyond their control require a change in the planned
farming operation. Since producers who have not executed a waiver of
any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with
the crop must obtain insurance coverage on all crops of economic
significance to remain eligible for other farm program benefits,
producers had to be given the opportunity to insure such crops planted
as a substitute crop. However, although producers may originally have
selected higher levels of coverage, they will be limited to CAT
coverage on substitute crops to comply with the linkage requirements
and limit exposure for losses that occur after the sales closing date.
The producer's decision to insure the substitute crop is voluntary and,
although it may require another visit to the insurance provider, the
producer will be ensured of protection against crop disasters.
Comment: The crop insurance industry strongly protested the
requirement that all acreage reports be signed. They stated that a
signed acreage report was not a requirement of the Act and must be
removed in the final rule. They also stated that such a requirement
[[Page 42973]]
should not be imposed on CAT coverage.
Response: Acreage reports are required by the contract and are
binding on the producer. If acreage reports are not signed, an
insurance provider may not be able to legally challenge the contents.
However, Sec. 400.653(d) (now Sec. 400.654(e)) has been amended for CAT
coverage only, to permit the operator to sign the acreage report for
all other persons with an insurable interest in the crop. These
producers will be bound by all statements on that signed acreage
report. Any person may sign the application, acreage report, or any
other document relative to crop insurance coverage, provided he or she
has a properly executed power of attorney or other legal document
recognized by the state authorizing such person to sign. Section
400.654(d) has been amended accordingly.
Comment: The crop insurance industry also suggested that a producer
be allowed to specify his or her intended acreage at the time of the
prior year's production reporting or at the time of application.
Response: Producers may submit ``intended'' acreage reports as
suggested by the comment, however, they will be required to confirm
acreage reporting information in accordance with the policy on or
before the final acreage reporting date. Premium owed and the
production guarantee are determined based on actual acreage, not
``intended'' acreage. No change will be made to this provision.
Comment: Both the crop insurance industry and a producer group
suggested clarifying the language in Sec. 400.654(b) (now
Sec. 400.655(b)) to state how, and to what extent, FCIC intends to
reduce an indemnity to reflect out-of-pocket expenses that were not
incurred by the producer as a result of not planting, caring for, or
harvesting the crop. They asked: If a prevented planting payment that
is already less than the guarantee under the policy for a planted crop,
will it be further reduced? They also asked: If an insured has a total
crop loss, would the guarantee be reduced compared to someone who
incurred harvesting costs?
Response: With respect to the prevented planting program, FCIC
elected to reduce the guarantee, instead of reducing the indemnity, to
reflect out-of-pocket expenses not incurred by the producer. Therefore,
prevented planting guarantees or indemnities will not be further
reduced and Sec. 400.655(b) will be amended accordingly. Producers with
a total crop loss that occurred before harvest may have the indemnity
reduced to reflect the costs associated with harvest that were not
incurred if such reduction is provided for in the applicable crop
policy. Section 400.655(b) has been amended to state that reductions in
indemnities will be in an amount determined in accordance with the crop
provisions or the Special Provisions for the specific crop.
Comment: One comment from a producer group suggested that there is
insufficient guidance as to the procedure that will be followed in the
event of a loss or for appeal rights.
Response: Each individual crop policy contains procedures to be
followed in the event of a crop loss. These policies are published in
chapter IV of title 7 of the CFR. The applicable appeal procedures are
published at 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 for determinations made by FCIC.
Therefore, no change will be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry recommended that
Sec. 400.654(c)(1) (now Sec. 400.655(d)(2)) contain a provision
indicating that when the insured with CAT coverage files a claim for
indemnity under the policy, that filing indicates the insured has made
the election to receive a CAT indemnity rather than a benefit under any
other USDA program that compensates for the same crop loss. It stated
that the regulations need to specify how the producer is to make this
election, when he or she must make it, and who is responsible for
enforcing it.
Response: The Act expressly provides the producer with the choice
of programs under which to receive benefits. Since information about
other program benefits may not be available until long after the crop
loss has occurred, producers cannot be presumed to have made a choice
because they have not delayed receipt of benefits to which they are
entitled. Producers cannot make informed choices with respect to which
program benefits to choose until they know what benefits will be
available. Therefore, Sec. 400.655(d)(2) has been amended to permit
producers to receive a CAT indemnity and, if other program benefits are
later made available, to reimburse the entire amount of the CAT
indemnity to be eligible for a benefit under the other program. USDA
will be responsible for determining if a crop insurance payment has
been made prior to making payment under any other applicable USDA
program.
Comment: A producer group stated that Sec. 400.654(c)(1) (now
Sec. 400.655(d)(2)), which provides that a person can receive either
CAT benefits or other USDA benefits for the same loss, but not both,
should be clarified to state that a producer will not have to forego
other USDA payments that are not specifically related to the crop loss,
e.g., regular deficiency payments.
Response: Deficiency payments did not compensate a producer for a
crop loss, they provided compensation for changes in the market price.
Therefore, deficiency payments could be made regardless of whether or
not the producer collected an indemnity. No changes have been made in
the provisions in response to the comment.
Comment: One comment from FSA stated that previous legislation
required emergency loan applicants to have obtained crop insurance the
previous year. The reform legislation prohibits the applicant from
collecting the CAT indemnity, or noninsured crop disaster assistance
program (NAP) payment, for the same loss that qualifies for the
emergency loan. This requires the producers to pay for coverage on
which they are never allowed to collect because if they collect the CAT
or NAP payment, they will immediately become ineligible for an
emergency loan. The commentor suggested a more reasonable approach
would be to limit the total benefits from all sources for a loss to the
total amount of loss, rather than limiting the benefit to a single
source. Otherwise the producer will often collect the payment and then
apply for a regular farm operating or farm ownership loan, rather than
an emergency loan. Denying the producer the opportunity to collect the
CAT or NAP payment will put a further strain on the Farm Credit
Programs already limited loan funds.
Response: The provision in previous legislation that required
emergency loan applicants to have obtained crop insurance the previous
year was removed in the Reform Act. The statute is clear that, for CAT
coverage policies, if another program provides compensation for the
same crop loss, the producer must elect only one program under which to
receive benefits. Therefore, the producer cannot receive benefits from
all sources up to the total amount of the loss. Further, since the Act
expressly provides the producer with the choice of which program to
receive benefits, FCIC cannot administratively abrogate that right.
However, any producer who receives a CAT indemnity payment is not
automatically prohibited from receiving assistance for the same loss
under other USDA programs. Such producers will be given the opportunity
to reimburse the entire amount of the indemnity and receive assistance
under the other USDA program. Farm ownership and operating loans which
are not conditioned on a production loss, may be obtained from the USDA
in addition
[[Page 42974]]
to crop insurance indemnities. This provision will not be changed in
response to the comment.
Comment: A producer group suggested that it is unnecessarily
confusing when one section requires that a person must obtain at least
catastrophic risk protection coverage, if available, for each crop on
all insurable acreage in the county; another section allows limited or
additional coverage on portions of the crop in the county; and yet
another section refers to linkage requirements if a crop is a crop of
economic significance. These requirements could be clarified,
distinguished, or perhaps even combined to make them easier to
comprehend.
Response: FCIC has combined these requirements into Sec. 400.655
for clarity.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that the provisions
need to be clarified to indicate that CAT coverage for high risk land
must be obtained from the same insurance provider from which limited or
additional coverage is obtained, if that provider sells and services
CAT coverage.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has amended
Sec. 400.655(c)(2) to clarify this requirement.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that the hail and
fire exclusion should be available for limited coverage as well as
additional coverage.
Response: Section 508(c)(7) of the Act specifies that the hail and
fire exclusion is available only for additional coverage. This
provision cannot be changed.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that the
administrative fees for CAT coverage should be addressed separately
from those for limited coverage (see Sec. 400.655(a)) (now
Sec. 400.656(a)).
Response: The provisions of the Act mandate aggregation of the fees
for CAT and limited coverage in order to ensure that the producer does
not pay any administrative fee in excess of the amount required on a
per county or per producer basis. Further, the use of the
administrative fee to offset the costs of delivery of the program is
the same for both CAT and limited coverage. This aggregation of fees is
more clearly communicated by the proposed language than it would be if
the provisions were separated, therefore, no revisions will be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggests that the terms
``additional'' and ``limited'' be clarified.
Response: FCIC believes that the terms are clearly defined with
respect to the applicable coverage level. No changes have been made in
the definitions of these terms.
Comment: Two comments received from the crop insurance industry
were against the provision requiring the administrative fee for limited
coverage being due at acreage reporting time.
(1) One comment stated that the administrative fee should be
payable with the premium for limited coverage as well as for additional
coverage. This comment also stated that it would be more consistent if
CAT policies had a $50 fee, and the limited and additional coverage
levels had a $10 fee in addition to the premium.
(2) One comment stated that they strongly protest the requirement
that the administrative fee for limited coverage must be paid at
acreage reporting time for carry-over policies.
Response: FCIC agrees that the administrative fee for limited
coverage should be paid during the normal premium billing cycle and has
modified Sec. 400.656(a)(3) accordingly. However, sections 508(b)(5)
and 508(c)(10) of the Act specifies that the administrative fee for
both CAT and limited coverage will be $50 per crop per county. No
changes in these amounts can be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that Sec. 400.655(a)
(now Sec. 400.656(a)) fails to include provisions requiring an insured
to refund any benefits received prior to the policy being terminated
for nonpayment of fees.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has amended
Sec. 400.656(a)(5) and (6) accordingly.
Comment: One comment received from the crop insurance industry
asked if the regulation as proposed would permit a company to collect
the $50 fee for a crop year at the same time it collects the production
information from the prior crop year for purposes of computing the
current crop year Actual Production History. They also stated that the
regulations should be flexible enough so that if a particular producer
has CAT, limited and additional coverage, all fees and premium could be
collected at the usual premium billing time.
Response: Section 508(b)(5)(A) of the Act requires that
administrative fees for CAT coverage be paid at the time of
application. Since the Act requires that administrative fees be paid up
front, FCIC only has the discretion to permit the payment of
administrative fees on or before the acreage reporting date for carry-
over policies the date the producer indicates the intention to continue
coverage for the crop year. Administrative fees for limited and
additional coverage may be collected during the normal billing cycle.
Any fee may be paid prior to the due date, however, the insurance
provider cannot require such payment. No change will be made.
Comment: The crop insurance industry suggested that Sec. 400.655(b)
(now Sec. 400.656(b)) be clarified to state, ``Payment of an
administrative fee will not be required if the insured files a zero
acreage report.''
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has added a new
Sec. 400.656(b)(3) accordingly. However, producers who falsely file a
zero acreage report may be subject to administrative and criminal
sanction.
Comment: The crop insurance industry also suggested that
Sec. 400.656(c) (now Sec. 400.657(c)) be clarified to provide that
eligibility for Conservation Reserve Program benefits is limited to new
or amended contracts and not contracts already in existence.
Response: FCIC agrees with the comment and has modified
Sec. 400.657(c) accordingly.
Comment: FSA suggested that the requirement for a producer to have
at least CAT coverage only applies to ``new'' Farm Credit loans not
``new and amended'' loans. The Act specifically listed the applicable
benefits in three loan-making authorities and the authority to service
(reschedule, reamortize, subordinate, write-down or otherwise amend)
loans is given in other sections of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act. There is a discrepancy over the effective date of the
CAT requirement. The requirement was effective upon enactment, however,
applicants could not be required to purchase CAT coverage before it was
available. The commentor continued to say that the effective
implementation date for their loan programs is January 23, 1995.
Response: Section 508(b)(7)(A) of the Act was effective on October
13, 1994, and mandated that the producer obtain at least CAT coverage
on crops of economic significance to be eligible for certain farm
credit benefits. Therefore, producers who obtained farm credit
programs, loans, or amended existing loans after October 13, 1994, are
statutorily required to comply with this provision. Amendments to
existing loans were included because such amendments can have a
significant effect on the terms and duration of such loans. Further,
Congress realized that some producers obtained loans in 1995, prior to
enactment of the Act. To permit producers to comply with the
requirements of section 508(b)(7)(A),
[[Page 42975]]
sales closing dates for CAT coverage were extended to April 13, 1995.
Comment: One comment received from FSA disagreed with provisions
that require the producer to obtain CAT coverage for the crop year in
which a farm credit loan is sought. The producer is not always able to
anticipate credit needs by the CAT sales closing date so it would be
more workable to allow the producer to obtain coverage for the
following year if the sales closing date had passed and it was not
possible to obtain coverage for the current year.
Response: The requirement for CAT coverage in the crop year for
which a benefit is sought is a statutory requirement, although the
producer may execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop
loss assistance in connection with the crop and remain eligible for
certain USDA program benefits. Therefore, no changes have been made. It
is the responsibility of the producer and the lender to anticipate
credit needs in the worst case scenario so crop insurance can be
obtained prior to the applicable sales closing date.
Comment: The crop insurance industry questioned why only insureds
who had participated in a conserving use program established for the
1994 crop year were eligible to receive the special prevented planting
benefits.
Response: Section 116 of the Reform Act specifically requires that
producers have participated in a conserving use program established for
the 1994 crop year for wheat, feed grains, upland cotton, or rice to be
eligible for the prevented planting payments.
In addition to the changes described above, FCIC has made the
following changes:
1. Sec. 400.651 has been amended to add definitions for ``Act,''
``administrative fee,'' ``expected market price,'' ``FSA,'' ``insurable
interest,'' ``intended crop,'' ``linkage requirement,'' ``Reform Act,''
``substitute crop,'' and ``zero acreage report'' for clarification
purposes.
2. Sec. 400.651 has been amended by clarifying the definition of
``approved yield.''
3. Sec. 400.654(c) has been amended to allow CAT coverage for a
crop planted as a substitute for the intended crop when the intended
crop is prevented from being planted or is planted and fails.
4. Sec. 400.654(d)(1) (now Sec. 400.655(e)(1)) has been amended by
deleting the phrase ``as determined by the approved insurance
provider.'' An insurance company is responsible for administering its
contract with an insured producer. The FSA will be responsible for
determining and paying the additional amount due the insured for any
applicable USDA program benefit, after first considering the amount of
any crop insurance payment.
5. Sec. 400.655 has been amended to add a new paragraph
Sec. 400.655(d)(4) to allow a tobacco producer to obtain catastrophic
risk protection for 100 percent of the tobacco crop that is identified
by a tobacco marketing card issued by FSA for a specific producer and
Farm Serial Number, when the producer and other persons share in the
crop and none of the persons hold any interest in another tobacco crop
for which they are required to obtain at least CAT coverage. This
change will alleviate the burden on each shareholder to pay separate
administrative fees in situations when numerous small shareholders have
a share in the crop.
6. Sec. 400.655 has been amended to add a new paragraph
Sec. 400.655(d)(5) to allow a landowner to obtain catastrophic risk
protection and establish linkage for all other landowners who hold an
undivided interest in the land, provided the landowners do not have
multiple farming interests and the total liability for all landowners
is $2,500 or less.
7. Sec. 400.655(b)(2) (now Sec. 400.656(b)(4)) has been amended to
include the provision that the administrative fee for additional
coverage is not subject to any limits.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 400
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Crop insurance,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Final Rule
Accordingly, for the reasons set out in the preamble, the interim
rule adding a new subpart T to 7 CFR part 400, published at 60 FR 1996-
2000, is adopted as a final rule effective for the 1997 and succeeding
crop years for all crops with a 1997 crop year contract change date
after the effective date of this rule and for the 1998 and succeeding
crop years for all crops with a 1997 crop year contract change date
prior to the effective date of this rule, with changes as follows:
Subpart T of part 400 is revised to read as follows:
PART 400--GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
Subpart T--Federal Crop Insurance Reform, Insurance Implementation;
Regulations for the 1997 and Subsequent Crop Years
Sec.
400.650 Purpose.
400.651 Definitions.
400.652 Insurance availability.
400.653 Determining crops of economic significance.
400.654 Application and acreage report.
400.655 Coverage provided.
400.656 Administrative fees and waivers.
400.657 Eligibility for other program benefits.
400.658 Coverage for acreage that is prevented from being planted.
400.659 Transitional yields for forage or feed crops, 1995-1997
crop years.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), and 1506(p)
Sec. 400.650 Purpose.
The Reform Act requires FCIC to implement a crop insurance program
that offers several levels of insurance coverage for producers. These
levels of protection include catastrophic risk protection, limited
coverage, and additional coverage insurance. This subpart provides
notice of the availability of these crop insurance options and
establishes provisions and requirements for implementation of the
insurance provisions of the Reform Act.
Sec. 400.651 Definitions.
Act--The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended (7 U.S.C.
Secs. 1501 et seq.).
Additional coverage--Plans of crop insurance providing a level of
coverage equal to or greater than sixty-five percent (65%) of the
approved yield indemnified at one hundred percent (100%) of the
expected market price, or comparable coverage as established by FCIC.
Administrative fee--The $50 fee the producer must pay on a per crop
and county basis with a maximum of $200 per producer per county and
$600 per producer for catastrophic and limited coverage on an annual
basis. Also, the $10 fee the producer must pay annually on a per crop
and county basis for additional coverage.
Approved insurance provider--A private insurance company, including
its agents, that has been approved and reinsured by FCIC to provide
insurance coverage to producers participating in the Federal crop
insurance program.
Approved yield--The amount of production per acre computed in
accordance with FCIC's Actual Production History Program (7 CFR part
400, subpart G) or for crops not included under 7 CFR part 400, subpart
G, the yield used to determine the guarantee in accordance with the
crop provisions or the Special Provisions.
Catastrophic risk protection--The minimum level of coverage offered
by FCIC which is required before a person may qualify for certain other
USDA program benefits unless the producer executes a waiver of any
eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the
crop. For the 1995
[[Page 42976]]
through 1998 crop years, such coverage will offer protection equal to
fifty percent (50%) of the approved yield indemnified at sixty percent
(60%) of the expected market price, or a comparable coverage as
established by FCIC. For the 1999 and subsequent crop years, such
coverage will offer protection equal to fifty percent (50%) of the
approved yield indemnified at fifty-five percent (55%) of the expected
market price, or a comparable coverage as established by FCIC.
Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement--The part of the crop
insurance policy that contains provisions of insurance that are
specific to catastrophic risk protection.
Crop of economic significance--A crop that has either contributed
in the previous crop year, or is expected to contribute in the current
crop year, ten percent (10%) or more of the total expected value of the
producer's share of all crops grown in the county. However, a crop will
not be considered a crop of economic significance if the expected
liability under the Catastrophic Risk Protection Endorsement is equal
to or less than the administrative fee required for the crop.
Expected market price--(price election) The price per unit of
production (or other basis as determined by FCIC) anticipated during
the period the insured crop normally is marketed by producers. This
price will be set by FCIC before the sales closing date for the crop.
The expected market price may be less than the actual price paid by
buyers if such price typically includes remuneration for significant
amounts of post-production expenses such as conditioning, culling,
sorting, packing, etc.
FCIC--The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, a wholly owned
Government Corporation within USDA.
FSA--The Farm Service Agency, an agency of the United States
Department of Agriculture or any successor agency.
Insurable interest--The value of the producer's interest in the
crop that is at risk from an insurable cause of loss during the
insurance period. The maximum indemnity payable to the producer may not
exceed the indemnity due on the producer's insurable interest at the
time of loss.
Intended crop--A crop stated on the application as submitted on or
before the sales closing date for the crop which the producer intended
to plant in the crop year for which application is made.
Limited coverage--Plans of insurance offering coverage that is
equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%) of the approved yield
indemnified at one hundred percent (100%) of the expected market price,
or a comparable coverage, but less than sixty-five percent (65%) of the
approved yield indemnified at one hundred percent (100%) of the
expected market price, or a comparable coverage.
Limited resource farmer--A producer or operator of a farm, with an
annual gross income of $20,000 or less derived from all sources of
revenue, including income from spouse's or other members of the
household, for each of the prior two years. Notwithstanding the
previous sentence, a producer on a farm or farms of less than 25 acres
aggregated for all crops, where a majority of the producer's gross
income is derived from such farm or farms, but the producer's gross
income from farming operations does not exceed $20,000, will be
considered a limited resource farmer.
Linkage requirement--The legal requirement that a producer must
obtain at least catastrophic risk protection coverage for any crop of
economic significance as a condition of receiving benefits for such
crop from certain other USDA programs in accordance with Sec. 400.657,
unless the producer executes a waiver of any eligibility for emergency
crop loss assistance in connection with the crop.
Person--An individual, partnership, association, corporation,
estate, trust, or other legal entity, and wherever applicable, a state
or a political subdivision or agency of a state.
Reform Act--The Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, Public
Law 103-354.
Secretary--The Secretary of the United States Department of
Agriculture.
Substitute crop--An alternative crop whose sales closing date has
passed and that is planted on acreage that is prevented from being
planted to an intended crop or where an intended crop is planted and
fails.
Zero acreage report--An acreage report filed by the producer that
certifies that the producer does not have a share in the crop for that
crop year.
Sec. 400.652 Insurance availability.
(a) If sufficient actuarial data are available, FCIC will offer
catastrophic risk protection, limited, and additional coverage plans of
insurance to indemnify persons for FCIC insured or reinsured crop loss
due to loss of yield or prevented planting, if the crop loss or
prevented planting is due to an insured cause of loss specified in the
applicable crop insurance policy.
(b) Catastrophic risk protection coverage may be offered through
approved insurance providers and through local offices of the Farm
Service Agency specified by the Secretary. Limited and additional
coverage will only be offered through approved insurance providers
unless there is not a sufficient number of approved insurance providers
that offer such insurance within a service area.
(c) A person must obtain at least catastrophic risk protection for
the crop on all insurable acreage in the county in which the person has
a share on or before the sales closing date designated by FCIC for the
crop in the county in order to satisfy the linkage requirements unless
the producer executes a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop
loss assistance in connection with the crop.
(d) For limited and additional coverage, in areas where insurance
is not available for a particular agricultural commodity that is
insurable elsewhere, FCIC may enter into a written agreement with a
person to insure the commodity, provided that the person has
actuarially sound data relating to the production of the commodity that
is acceptable to FCIC and that such written agreement is specifically
allowed by the crop insurance regulations applicable to the crop.
(e) Failure to comply with all provisions of the policy constitutes
a breach of contract and may result in ineligibility for certain other
farm program benefits for that crop year and any benefit already
received must be refunded. If a producer breaches the insurance
contract, the execution of a waiver of eligibility for emergency crop
loss assistance will not be effective for the crop year in which the
breech occurred.
Sec. 400.653 Determining crops of economic significance.
To be eligible for certain other program benefits under
Sec. 400.657 the following conditions will apply with respect to crops
of economic significance if the producer does not execute a waiver of
any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with
the crop.
(a) If a producer planted a crop of economic significance in the
preceding crop year, and does not intend to plant the same crop in the
present crop year, the producer does not have to obtain insurance
coverage or execute a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss
assistance in connection with the crop in the present crop year to
comply with the linkage requirements. However, if the producer later
decides to plant that crop, the producer will be unable to obtain
insurance after the sales closing date and must execute a waiver of any
eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the
crop to be eligible for benefits as
[[Page 42977]]
specified in Sec. 400.657. Failure to execute such a waiver will
require the producer to refund any benefits already received under a
program specified in Sec. 400.657.
(b) The producer is initially responsible to determine the crops of
economic significance in the county. The insurance provider may assist
the producer in making these initial determinations. However, these
determinations will not be binding on the insurance provider. To
determine the percentage value of each crop:
(1) Multiply the acres planted to the crop times the producer's
share, times the approved yield, and times the price;
(2) Add the values of all crops grown by the producer (in the
county); and
(3) Divide the value of the specific crop by the result of
paragraph (b)(2).
(c) The producer may use the type of price, such as the current
local market price, futures price, established price, highest amount of
insurance, etc., for the price when calculating the value of each crop,
provided that the producer uses the same type of price for all crops in
the county.
(d) The producer may be required to justify the calculation and
provide adequate records to enable the insurance provider to verify
whether a crop is of economic significance.
Sec. 400.654 Application and acreage report.
(a) To participate in catastrophic risk protection, limited, or
additional coverage plans of insurance, a producer must submit an
application for insurance on or before the applicable sales closing
date.
(b) In order to remain eligible for certain farm programs, as
specified in Sec. 400.657, a producer must obtain at least catastrophic
risk protection on all crops of economic significance, if catastrophic
risk protection is available in the county, unless the producer
executes a waiver of any eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance
in connection with the crop.
(c) Notwithstanding the requirements of Sec. 400.654(a) that
applications for insurance be submitted on or before the applicable
sales closing date, FCIC may permit a producer to insure crops other
than those specified on the application under the following conditions:
(1) The producer must be unable to plant the intended crop or it is
not practical to replant a failed crop before the final planting date.
FCIC will take into consideration marketing windows when determining
whether it was not practical to replant.
(2) Conditions must exist to warrant allowing a producer to insure
crops other than the intended crop.
(3) The producer must submit an application for the substitute crop
on or before the acreage reporting date for the substitute crop and pay
any applicable administrative fee. A producer may not substitute a crop
that the producer planted in the preceding crop year unless that crop
was listed on a timely filed application for the current crop year.
(4) If the producer plants a substitute crop that is a crop of
economic significance, the producer must obtain CAT coverage, if
available, to comply with the linkage requirements specified in
Sec. 400.657. The producer may not substitute a crop under this
provision if the producer has signed or intends to sign a waiver for
emergency crop loss assistance for the crop year.
(5) The substitute crop must be planted on or before the final
planting date or within the late planting period, if applicable, for
the substitute crop.
(6) Under no circumstances may a producer submit an application for
limited or additional coverage after the sales closing date for the
substitute crop.
(d) For all coverages, including catastrophic risk protection,
limited, and additional coverages, the producer must file a signed
acreage report on or before the acreage reporting date. Any person may
sign any document relative to crop insurance coverage on behalf of any
other person covered by such a policy, provided that the person has a
properly executed power of attorney or other legally sufficient
document authorizing such person to sign.
(e) Under catastrophic risk protection, unless the other person
with an insurable interest in the crop objects in writing prior to the
acreage reporting date and provides a signed acreage report on their
own behalf an operator may sign the acreage report for all other
persons with an insurable interest in the crop without a power of
attorney. All persons with an insurable interest in the crop, and for
whom the operator purports to sign and represent, are bound by the
information contained in that acreage report.
Sec. 400.655 Coverage provided.
(a) The specific causes of loss for which insurance coverage is
offered are designated in the crop insurance policy for each crop.
(b) An indemnity paid to a producer may be reduced, in an amount
determined in accordance with crop provisions or Special Provisions, to
reflect out-of-pocket expenses that were not incurred by the producer
as a result of not planting, caring for, or harvesting the crop.
Indemnities paid for acreage that is prevented from being planted will
be based on a reduced guarantee as provided for in the crop policy and
will not be further reduced to reflect expenses not incurred.
(c) The producer must obtain the same level of coverage
(catastrophic, limited, or additional) for all acreage of the crop in
the county unless one of the following applies:
(1) The applicable crop insurance policy allows the producer the
option to separately insure individual crop types or varieties. In this
case each individual type or variety insured by the producer will be
subject to separate administrative fees. For example, if two grape
varieties in California are insured under a CAT policy and two
varieties are insured under a limited coverage policy, a separate
administrative fee will be charged for each of the four varieties.
Although insurance may be elected by type or variety in these
instances, failure to insure a type or variety that is of economic
significance may result in the denial of other farm program benefits,
unless the producer executes a waiver of any eligibility for emergency
crop loss assistance in connection with the crop.
(2) The producer with limited or additional coverage for the crop
in the county has acreage that has been designated as ``high risk'' by
FCIC. Such producers will be able to obtain a High Risk Land Exclusion
Option for the high risk acreage under the limited or additional
coverage policies and insure the high risk acreage under a separate CAT
policy provided that the CAT coverage is obtained from the same
insurance provider from which the limited or additional coverage was
obtained. The producer may only obtain CAT from another insurance
provider if the original insurance provider does not deliver CAT
policies.
(d) Catastrophic risk protection.
(1) Any person who has a bona fide insurable interest in a crop is
eligible for catastrophic risk protection subject to any limitations
contained in the crop insurance contract.
(2) A person who is eligible to receive an indemnity under
catastrophic risk protection and is also eligible to receive
compensation for the same crop loss under any other USDA programs, must
elect the program from which to receive benefits. A payment or program
benefit under only one of the programs is allowed. If other USDA
program benefits are not available until after the producer filed a
claim for indemnity, the producer may refund the total amount of the
indemnity and receive the other program benefit. Farm ownership and
operating loans may be obtained from USDA in addition to crop insurance
indemnities.
[[Page 42978]]
(3) Catastrophic risk protection may, on a commodity-by-commodity
basis, be elected on an individual yield and loss basis, or, where
offered, may be elected on an area yield and loss basis.
(4) A tobacco producer may insure one hundred percent (100%) of the
tobacco crop that is identified by a tobacco marketing card issued by
FSA for a specific producer and Farm Serial Number under one CAT
policy, provided the producer and other persons each have a share in
the crop, all the shareholders agree in writing to such arrangement,
and none of the shareholders hold any other interest in another tobacco
crop for which they are required to obtain at least catastrophic
coverage. If the tobacco crop is insured under one policy:
(i) The linkage requirements will be satisfied for each shareholder
of the crop; and
(ii) The producer insuring the crop will:
(A) Make application for insurance and provide the name and social
security number or employer identification number of each person with a
share in the tobacco crop;
(B) File the acreage report showing a one-hundred percent (100%)
share in the crop (all insurable acreage covered by such marketing card
will be considered as one unit);
(C) Be responsible to pay one administrative fee for all the
producers within the county;
(D) Fulfill all requirements under the crop insurance contract; and
(E) Receive any indemnity payment under his or her social security
number or employer identification number and distribute the indemnity
payments to the other person sharing in the crop.
(5) A landowner will be allowed to obtain catastrophic coverage to
satisfy linkage requirements for all other landowners who hold an
undivided interest in the insurable acreage, provided:
(i) All landowners agree in writing to such arrangement and have
their social security number or employer identification number listed
on the application, without regard to the actual amount of their
interest in the insured acreage;
(ii) All landowners must have an undivided interest in the
insurable acreage;
(iii) None of the landowners may hold any share in other acreage
for which they are required to obtain at least catastrophic coverage;
(iv) The total cumulative liability under the Catastrophic Risk
Protection Endorsement for all landowners must be $2,500 or less;
(v) The landowner insuring the crop will:
(A) Make application for insurance and provide the name and social
security number or employer identification number of each person with
an undivided interest in the insurable acreage;
(B) Be responsible to pay one administrative fee for all the
producers within the county;
(C) Fulfill all requirements under the insurance contract; and
(D) Receive any indemnity payment under the landowner's social
security number or employer identification number and distribute the
indemnity payments to the other persons sharing in the crop.
(E) Limited and additional coverage. (1) A producer who is eligible
to receive an indemnity under a limited or an additional coverage plan
of insurance and who also is eligible to receive benefits for the same
loss under any other USDA program may receive benefits under both
programs, unless specifically limited by the crop insurance contract or
by law. However, the total amount received from all such sources may
not exceed the amount of the actual loss sustained by the insured. The
total amount of the actual loss is the difference between the fair
market value of the insured commodity before and after the loss, based
upon the producer's production records and the highest price election
or amount of insurance available for the applicable crop. FSA will
determine and pay the additional amount due the producer for any
applicable USDA program, after first considering the amount of any crop
insurance indemnity. Farm ownership and operating loans may be obtained
from the USDA in addition to crop insurance indemnities.
(2) Limited or additional coverage may, on a commodity-by-commodity
basis, be elected on an individual yield and loss basis, or, where
offered, on an area yield and loss basis.
(3) Hail and fire coverage may be excluded from the covered causes
of loss for a crop policy only if additional coverage is elected.
Sec. 400.656 Administrative fees and waivers.
(a) Catastrophic risk protection and limited coverage. (1) The
producer must pay an administrative fee each year of fifty dollars
($50.00) per crop per county, not to exceed two hundred dollars
($200.00) per county, and six hundred dollars ($600.00) for all
counties in which the producer has elected to obtain catastrophic or
limited coverage.
(2) The producer must pay this administrative fee for catastrophic
coverage at the time of application for the first year, and by the
acreage reporting date for all subsequent years that crop insurance
coverage is in effect.
(3) The administrative fee for limited coverage must be paid no
later than the time that premium is due.
(4) Except for the initial application year of a crop, payment of
an administrative fee will not be required for a crop if the insured
files a bona fide zero acreage report for the crop on or before the
acreage reporting date. Any producer who falsely files a zero acreage
report may be subject to administrative and criminal sanctions.
(5) For Catastrophic coverage, if the administrative fee is not
paid when due, the crop insurance contract will terminate effective at
the beginning of the crop year for which the administrative fee was not
paid. Persons failing to pay the administrative fee, and all persons
with an insurable interest in the crop under the same contract, may not
be eligible for certain other USDA program benefits as set out in
Sec. 400.657 and all such benefits already received for the crop year
must be refunded. If a producer fails to pay the administrative fee
when due, the execution of a waiver of any eligibility for emergency
crop loss assistance in connection with the crop will not be effective
for any crop year in which payment was not made.
(6) For limited coverage, persons failing to pay the administrative
fee by the due date, and all persons with an insurable interest in the
crop under the same contract, will not be eligible for certain other
USDA program benefits as set out in Sec. 400.657 and all such benefits
already received for the crop year must be refunded. Since insurance
coverage was in effect throughout the insurance period, the producer
will be required to pay both the administrative fee and the premium for
that crop year in accordance with provisions regarding any amounts due
us contained in the applicable crop policy. If a producer fails to pay
the administrative fee when due, the execution of a waiver of any
eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the
crop will not be effective for any crop year for which payment was not
made.
(7) The administrative fee may not be waived unless the insured
qualifies as a limited resource farmer.
(8) The administrative fee will be refunded if the insured has
previously obtained catastrophic risk protection or limited coverage
for the crop year, paid the administrative fee, and subsequently
purchased additional coverage for that same crop in the same county on
or
[[Page 42979]]
before the sales closing date. Administrative fees will not be refunded
if, after the purchase of the additional coverage, the producer still
has four or more crops insured in the county, or four or more crops
insured in each of three or more counties, at the catastrophic or
limited coverage level.
(9) The administrative fee will not be refunded for the year of
application even if the insured does not plant the crop for that year.
(10) For limited coverage, the administrative fee is in addition to
the amount of premium owed by the person.
(b) Additional coverage. (1) If additional coverage is elected, the
insured must pay, in addition to the premium, an administrative fee of
ten dollars ($10) per crop, per county, for the year of application and
each subsequent year in which crop insurance coverage remains in
effect. The administrative fee must be paid no later than the time that
premium is due.
(2) Persons failing to pay the administrative fee by the due date,
and all persons with an insurable interest in the crop under the same
contract, will not be eligible for certain other USDA program benefits
as set out in Sec. 400.657, and all such benefits already received for
the crop year must be refunded. Since insurance coverage was in effect
throughout the insurance period, the producer will be required to pay
both the administrative fee and the premium for that crop year in
accordance with provisions regarding any amounts due us contained in
the applicable crop policy. If a producer fails to pay the
administrative fee when due, the execution of a waiver of any
eligibility for emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the
crop will not be effective for any crop year for which payment was not
made.
(3) Payment of an administrative fee will not be required if the
insured files a bona fide zero acreage report on or before the acreage
reporting date for the crop. Any producer who falsely files a zero
acreage report may be subject to criminal and administrative sanctions.
(4) The administrative fee for additional coverage is not
refundable, is not subject to any limits, and may not be waived.
(c) When obtaining catastrophic risk protection, limited, or
additional coverage, a producer must provide information regarding crop
insurance coverage on any crop previously obtained at any other local
FSA office or from an approved insurance provider, including the date
such insurance was obtained and the amount paid in administrative fees.
If the producer paid more than the maximum allowable amount in
administrative fees, the producer will receive a refund of the excess
fees paid from the local FSA office or from the approved insurance
provider that last collected such fees.
Sec. 400.657 Eligibility for other program benefits.
The producer must obtain at least catastrophic coverage for each
crop of economic significance in the county in which the producer has
an insurable share, if insurance is available in the county for the
crop, unless the producer executes a waiver of any eligibility for
emergency crop loss assistance in connection with the crop, to be
eligible for:
(a) Benefits under the Agricultural Market Transition Act;
(b) Loans or any other USDA provided farm credit, including:
guaranteed and direct farm ownership loans, operating loans, and
emergency loans under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act
provided after October 13, 1994; and
(c) Benefits under the Conservation Reserve Program derived from
any new or amended application or contract executed after October 13,
1994.
Sec. 400.658 Coverage for acreage that is prevented from being
planted.
For the 1995 and succeeding crop years, the insurance period for
prevented planting for those crop insurance policies containing
prevented planting coverage shall be extended so that prevented
planting coverage begins:
(a) On the sales closing date for the insured crop in the county
for the crop year the application for insurance is accepted; or
(b) For any crop year following the crop year the application for
insurance is accepted, or for any crop year the insurance policy is
transferred to a different insurance provider, on the sales closing
date for the insured crop in the county for the previous crop year,
provided continuous coverage has been in effect since that date. For
example: If the producer makes application and purchases a corn crop
insurance policy for the 1995 crop year (which is not terminated or
canceled during or after the 1995 crop year), prevented planting
coverage for the 1996 crop year began on the 1995 sales closing date.
Cancellation for the purpose of transferring the policy to a different
insurance provider when there is no lapse in coverage will not be
considered terminated or canceled coverage for the purpose of the
preceding sentence.
Sec. 400.659 Transitional yields for forage or feed crops, 1995-1997
crop years.
(a) For the 1995 through the 1997 crop years, producers who produce
feed or forage will be eligible for an adjustment in the assigned yield
described in 7 CFR 400.55(b)(1) if:
(1) The feed or forage is primarily for use by the producer as
livestock, dairy, or poultry operations; and
(2) At least fifty percent (50%) of the producer's net farm income
is derived from the livestock, dairy, or poultry operations.
(b) Producers that qualify under paragraph (a) of this section will
receive an assigned yield, if required, under 7 CFR 400.55(b)(1) equal
to eighty percent (80%) of the T- or D-Yield.
Signed in Washington, DC, on August 13, 1996.
Kenneth D. Ackerman,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 96-21116 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-FA-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21103 Correction of Trading Records
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42999-43002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21103]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
17 CFR Part 1
Correction of Trading Records
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``Commission'') has
amended Commission regulations, which address the preparation,
submission and correction of trading cards, to make its provisions
applicable to all trading records. The Commission also has amended
regulations, which require the use of non-erasable ink and addresses
correction of errors, to require that the correction of erroneous
information on trading records will be accomplished in such a manner
that the originally recorded information must not be obliterated or
otherwise made illegible. The Commission has further amended the
regulations to require that a ply of the trading card, or in the
absence of plies the original trading card, that subsequently is
rewritten to correct erroneous information must be submitted to
contract market personnel or the clearing member in accordance with
contract market rules which set forth the required collection schedule
for trading cards. Contract markets are required to promulgate rules to
that effect.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 21, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Duane C. Andresen, Special Counsel,
Division of Trading and Markets, Commodity Futures Trading Commission,
Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Telephone: (202) 418-5490.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
Regulation 1.35(d)(7), which became effective on May 7, 1990,1
requires that trading cards prepared by members of contract markets
must be completed in non-erasable ink and submitted in accordance with
contract market rules adopted pursuant to Regulation 1.35(j)(1).2
It also provides, in paragraph (d)(7)(ii), that a member of a contract
market may correct any errors by crossing out erroneous information or
rewriting the trading card. Regulation 1.35(d)(7) was one of various
rule amendments adopted by the Commission that were intended, among
other things, to limit the opportunity for the fabrication or
alteration of trading records, to ensure accountability for trading
cards and to enhance exchange audit trails and trade surveillance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 55 FR 8127 (March 7, 1990).
\2\ Regulation 1.35(j)(1) requires that each contract market
maintain in effect rules which require, among other things, that
trading records prepared by a member of the contract market pursuant
to paragraphs (a-1) and (d) of this section be submitted to contract
market personnel or the clearing member within 15 minutes of
designated intervals not to exceed 30 minutes. Paragraph (a-1)
requires the creation of order tickets; paragraph (d) requires the
preparation of trading cards or other records showing purchases or
sales executed on or subject to the rules of a contract market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notwithstanding these provisions, the Commission has found, based
upon its oversight activities, instances in which it appears that trade
prices and quantities have been altered on trading records in order to
accomplish abuse of customer orders. The Commission believes that this
type of activity may be accomplished under the guise of correcting
erroneous information on a trading record if the information originally
recorded is obscured. Such treatment of trading records renders it more
difficult for the Commission and the exchanges to detect potentially
fraudulent activity. Further, correcting erroneous information by
obliteration of the original data can facilitate illegal purposes and
increases the difficulty of determining how to correctly reconstruct
and surveill trade activity.
The Commission believes that obscuring trade information originally
recorded not only can be used to facilitate illegal or fraudulent
conduct, but also is in itself illegal. Obscuring the information
originally recorded violates the Regulation 1.35 requirement that
members prepare accurate and complete trading records. The requirement
to record trades in non-erasable ink, found in Regulations 1.35
(d)(7)(ii) and (j)(8), was implemented, in part, to prevent the
obliteration of trade data through erasures. The paragraph (d)(7)(ii)
requirement that members be fully accountable for trading cards that
are rewritten in order to correct errors exists to assure that the
originally recorded data are maintained. As the Commission
[[Page 43000]]
has stated with regard to the requirement that members be accountable
for their trading cards, ``[b]ased on Regulations 1.35(d)(6) and
(j)(6), the Commission and the contract markets should be assured that
trading cards which may assist in determining whether improper activity
has occurred are available.'' 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 55 FR 8127, 8135 (March 7, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 6, 1996 the Commission published for public comment in the
Federal Register proposed amendments to Regulation 1.35(d)(7) 4 to
expressly address the issue by specifically prescribing the method by
which a member of a contract market may correct errors on trading
records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 61 FR 28806 (June 6, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Comments Received
The Commission received four comment letters on the proposed
amendments, all from contract markets.5 Two of the commenters
supported, and one raised no objection to, the regulatory goals of the
proposal but were opposed to the proposal's requirement that a specific
method be used, i.e., crossing out erroneous information with no more
than a single line through each character. One commenter believed that
the amendment was unnecessary and provided no additional benefits to
the exchange. This commenter further stated that original trade
information that is erroneous and subsequently changed such that the
original information is illegible is contrary to the provisions of the
current Regulation 1.35(d)(7). The Commission has carefully reviewed
and considered the comments received and, as a result, has modified and
clarified the proposed amendments as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Comment letters were received from the Chicago Mercantile
Exchange (``CME''), New York Mercantile Exchange (``NYMEX''),
Coffee, Sugar & Cocoa Exchange, Inc. (``CSCE'') and Kansas City
Board of Trade (``KCBT'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Amendments to Regulation 1.35(d)(7)
The final amendments would make paragraph (d)(7), which addresses,
among other things, the preparation of trading cards, applicable to all
trading records. The final amendments would modify paragraph
(d)(7)(ii), to require that the correction of erroneous information on
trading records must be accomplished in such a manner that the
originally recorded information would not be obliterated or otherwise
made illegible. The final amendments also would modify paragraph
(d)(7)(ii) to require that a ply of the trading card, or in the absence
of plies the original trading card, that subsequently is rewritten to
correct erroneous information must be submitted to contract market
personnel or the clearing member in accordance with contract market
rules which set forth the required collection schedule for trading
cards.
A. Proposed Paragraph (d)(7)
1. The Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendments would have made the provisions of paragraph
(d)(7) applicable to all trading records, not just trading cards. Thus,
the error correction provisions of paragraph (d)(7)(ii) would be
applicable to all trading records, thereby assuring that all trading
records are subject to the same error correction standards currently in
existence with regard to trading cards.6 Further, contract markets
would be required to maintain in effect rules that would require errors
on other trading records to be corrected in the manner prescribed by
paragraph (d)(7)(ii).7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ With regard to trading cards only, the member would still
have been able to correct erroneous information by rewriting the
trading card. Pursuant to paragraph (d)(6), the member would have
remained accountable for any trading card that was subsequently
rewritten.
\7\ Regulation 1.35(j)(8) requires that each contract market
maintain in effect rules which require that members complete trades
in non-erasable ink in the manner prescribed by paragraph
(d)(7)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other trading records to which this provision would have
applied included order tickets or other written records prepared under
Regulation 1.35(a-1) (2), (3) or (4), as well as order tickets received
on the floor through electronic order routing systems, and trading
records prepared for ``flashed'' orders.
2. Comments Received
In its comment letter, the CSCE stated that it had no objection to
the proposal to amend Regulation 1.35(d)(7) to make the error
correction procedure applicable to all trading records. The other
commenters did not specifically address this issue.
3. Regulation 1.35(d)(7)
Accordingly, the Commission has determined to make the proposed
amendment final as written, applying the provisions of paragraph (d)(7)
to all trading records, including order tickets or other written
records prepared under Regulation 1.35(a-1) (2), (3) or (4), order
tickets received on the floor through electronic order routing systems,
and trading records prepared for ``flashed'' orders.
B. Proposed Paragraph (d)(7)(ii)
1. The Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendments to paragraph (d)(7)(ii) would have required
that erroneous information crossed out on a trading record would have
to be crossed out with no more than a single line through each
character, without obliterating or otherwise making illegible any of
the originally recorded information. Thus, the erroneous information
being crossed out would not be obliterated and an audit would reveal
the original information recorded on the trading record, as well as any
information subsequently recorded.
2. Comments Received
Although all commenters recognized the need to maintain the
integrity of the originally recorded information, they were opposed to
the specificity of the amendment's proposed requirement that the
erroneous information be crossed out with no more than a single line
through each character. The CME commented that the requirement to cross
out erroneous information with a single line will prove counter-
productive and could conceivably result in greater outtrade percentages
with potentially significant economic impact. Further, the CME stated
that the CME and other contract markets are in the best position to
determine what constitutes ``obliteration'' and are best able to police
such activity. In its comment, NYMEX stated that the requirement of a
``single line'' deletion is unnecessary and that the Commission's goal
would be furthered simply by requiring that erroneous information not
be obliterated or otherwise made illegible so that exchanges would
retain the flexibility to determine the most effective means for
determining compliance. The CSCE commented that the single line
requirement overreaches in achieving the objective of preventing the
creation of fictitious trading records and recommended that the
Commission permit the correction of trade record errors as is usual and
customary for a particular member provided the original trade
information is not obscured or rendered illegible. The KCBT commented
that it was highly unlikely that the single line would always be
recognized as erroneous information by clerks entering trade
information for clearing, thus resulting in an outtrade.
3. Regulation 1.35(d)(7)(ii)
After reviewing the comments, the Commission is persuaded that the
method by which the erroneous information is corrected need not be
[[Page 43001]]
specified by Commission regulation so long as the regulatory objective,
the legibility of the originally recorded information, is met. The
Commission is aware that this objective can be attained by more than
one method. Accordingly, the amendment has been modified to delete the
single line requirement and to state that a member may correct any
errors by crossing out erroneous information without obliterating or
otherwise making illegible any of the originally recorded information.
The method by which this objective is identified to exchange membership
and enforced by each exchange may be determined by exchange rules.
The Commission also has decided to amend paragraph (d)(7)(ii) to
add the requirement that a ply of the trading card, or in the absence
of plies the original trading card, that subsequently is rewritten to
correct erroneous information also must be submitted to contract market
personnel or the clearing member in accordance with contract market
rules which set forth the required collection schedule for trading
cards.8 As stated previously, the Commission should be assured
that trading cards which may assist in determining whether improper
activity has occurred are available. Accordingly, the Commission is
requiring that a ply of the rewritten trading card, or in the absence
of plies the original trading card, be collected. The collection of
such rewritten cards would occur in accordance with the schedule for
collection of trading cards in place under exchange rules which were
implemented pursuant to Commission Regulation 1.35(j)(1).9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ As previously noted, trading cards prepared by members must
be submitted in accordance with contract market rules adopted
pursuant to Regulation 1.35(j)(1). The Commission believes that all
exchanges currently use multi-ply trading cards. At least one ply,
where practicable the top ply completed in non-erasable ink, must be
submitted to contract market personnel or the clearing member
pursuant to Regulation 1.35(j)(1). Where the top ply is not
submitted to contract market personnel or the clearing member, it
must be retained pursuant to Regulation 1.31 by the member as a
record required by Regulation 1.35(a).
\9\ The Commission recognizes that this creates an exception to
the Regulation 1.35(j)(1) provision that contract market rules need
not require that those original source documents which cannot be
relied upon by the contract market or clearing member for clearing
purposes be submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation 1.35(d)(7)(ii) states, in current and amended form, that
the member is accountable pursuant to paragraph (d)(6) for any card
that subsequently is rewritten. With regard to contract markets on
which the member's trading cards ordinarily are retained by his
clearing member, the Commission has previously stated, in the context
of the responsibility for a rewritten trading card, that the clearing
member would be responsible for those trading cards not used for trade
submission.10 With regard to contract markets on which the member
retains his own trading cards, a member who has a clerk rewrite his
trades on a new trading card because of an error now will have to
submit a ply of the rewritten trading card, or in the absence of plies
the original trading card, to the contract market.11 Thus, either
the clearing member or the contract market will have a ply of the
rewritten trading card, collected from the member within 15 minutes
after the 30-minute trading interval, available to assist in any
investigation conducted to determine whether improper activity has
occurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 54 FR 37117, 37122 (September 7, 1989). In these
circumstances, the dual requirement to submit a ply of the rewritten
trading card, or the original trading card, and remain accountable
for the card could be met in two ways. First, if the top ply, or the
original card, completed in non-erasable ink, is submitted to and
retained by the clearing member, the collection requirement is met
and, further, the clearing member assumes accountability for the
rewritten card. Second, if the member keeps the top ply and submits
a copy to the clearing member, the collection requirement is met and
the member remains accountable for the card and must retain the top
ply.
\11\ On those exchanges where the trading cards are multi-ply
and are collected by the exchange rather than a clearing member,
whether the member retains the top ply written in ink or a copy
would be determined by contract market rules but the member would,
nonetheless, be accountable for the rewritten trading card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Related Matters
A. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
requires that agencies, in proposing rules, consider the impact of
those rules on small businesses. The Commission has previously
determined to evaluate within the context of a particular rule proposal
whether all or some contract market members should be considered
``small entities'' for purposes of the RFA and, if so, to analyze the
economic impact on contract market members of any such rule at that
time. 47 FR 18618, 18620 (April 30, 1982).
The Acting Chairman, on behalf of the Commission, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the action taken herein will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The Commission recognizes that contract market members would be
subject to the proposed amendments and that certain contract market
members could be considered to be small entities for the purposes of
the RFA. However, the Commission believes that the final amendment, as
designed, would not impose a significant economic impact on such
members.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (``ACT''), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., imposes certain requirements on federal agencies (including the
Commission) in connection with their conducting or sponsoring any
collection of information as defined by the Act. While this rule has no
burden, the group of rules (3038-0022) of which this is a part has the
following burden:
Average burden hours per response--3,546.
Number of Respondents--15,286.
Frequency of Response--On occasion.
Copies of the Office of Management and Budget approved information
collection package associated with this rule may be obtained from Jeff
Hill, Office of Management and Budget, Room 3228, NEOB, Washington, DC
20503, (202) 395-7340.
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 1
Commodity futures, Commodity options, Contract markets, Customers,
Members of contract markets, Noncompetitive trading, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to the authority
contained in the Commodity Exchange Act and, in particular, Sections 4,
4g, 5, 5a, and 8a, 7 U.S.C. 6, 6g, 7, 7a, and 12a, the Commission
hereby proposes to amend part 1 of chapter I of title 17 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 1--GENERAL REGULATIONS UNDER THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT
1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 2a, 4, 4a, 6, 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, 6e, 6f,
6g, 6h, 6i, 6j, 6k, 6l, 6m, 6n, 6o, 6p, 7, 7a, 7b, 8, 9, 12, 12a,
12c, 13a, 13a-1, 16, 16a, 19, 21, 23 and 24, unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 1.35(d)(7) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.35 Records of cash commodity, futures, and option transactions.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) Trading records prepared by a member of a contract market
pursuant to contract market rules must:
(i) Be submitted in accordance with contract market rules adopted
pursuant to paragraph (j)(1) of this section; and
(ii) Be completed in non-erasable ink. A member may correct any
errors by
[[Page 43002]]
crossing out erroneous information without obliterating or otherwise
making illegible any of the originally recorded information. With
regard to trading cards only, a member may correct erroneous
information by rewriting the trading card; provided, however, that the
member must submit a ply of the trading card, or in the absence of
plies the original trading card, that is subsequently rewritten in
accordance with contract market rules which set forth the required
collection schedule for trading cards and provided further that the
member is accountable for any trading card that subsequently is
rewritten pursuant to paragraph (d)(6) of this section.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC on August 13, 1996 by the Commission.
Catherine D. Dixon,
Assistant to the Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 96-21103 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21009 Airworthiness Directives; Beech (Raytheon) Model Hawker 1000 and BAe 125-1000A Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42994-42996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21009]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-54-AD; Amendment 39-9718; AD 96-17-09]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Beech (Raytheon) Model Hawker 1000 and
BAe 125-1000A Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), applicable to certain Beech (Raytheon) Model Hawker 1000 and BAe
125-1000A series airplanes, that currently requires inspections to
detect various discrepancies of the fuel hose assemblies on the
auxiliary power unit (APU), and correction of any discrepancy found.
That AD was prompted by several reports of heat damage to the fuel hose
assembly on the APU. This amendment adds a requirement to replace the
existing conduit of the fuel feed hose with new
[[Page 42995]]
improved conduit, which will terminate the repetitive inspections. The
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of a fuel
hose due to heat damage caused by incorrect routing or bleed air
leakage; such failure could result in a malfunction of the APU, a fuel
fire in the fuselage rear equipment bay, and reduced structural
integrity of the surrounding structure.
DATES: Effective September 24, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of Beech (Raytheon/Hawker) Service
Bulletin SB.49-47-25A825A, dated August 1, 1995, listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
September 24, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 49-
44, dated January 20, 1995, listed in the regulations was approved
previously by the Director of the Federal Register as of May 23, 1995
(60 FR 22501, May 8, 1995).
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from Beech Aircraft Corporation, Hawker Customer Support
Department, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085. 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, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, Small
Airplane Directorate, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, ACE-116W, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 1801 Airport
Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; telephone (316)
946-4146; fax (316) 946-4407.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 95-10-01,
amendment 39-9218 (60 FR 22501, May 8, 1995), which is applicable to
certain Beech (Raytheon) Model Hawker 1000 and BAe 125-1000A series
airplanes, was published in the Federal Register on May 21, 1996 (61 FR
25418). That action proposed to supersede AD 95-10-01 to continue to
require inspections to detect various discrepancies of the fuel hose
assemblies on the auxiliary power unit (APU), and correction of any
discrepancy found. That action also proposed to add a new requirement
to replace the existing vinyl conduit of the fuel feed hose for the APU
with a new improved conduit, 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. No comments were submitted in response
to the proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public.
The FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require
the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 48 Beech Model Hawker 1000 and BAe 125-
1000A series airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The FAA estimates that 31 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected
by this proposed AD.
The actions that are currently required by AD 95-10-01 and retained
in this new AD take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to
accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on
these figures, the cost impact on U.S. operators of the actions
currently required is estimated to be $1,860, or $60 per airplane.
The new actions that are required by this new AD will take
approximately 4 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately
$218 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact on U.S.
operators of the new requirements of this AD is estimated to be
$14,198, or $458 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9218 (60 FR
22501, May 8, 1995), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD),
amendment 39-9718, to read as follows:
96-17-09 Beech Aircraft Corporation (formerly DeHavilland; Hawker
Siddeley; British Aerospace, plc; Raytheon Corporate Jets, Inc.):
Amendment 39-9718. Docket 96-NM-54-AD. Supersedes AD 95-10-01,
Amendment 39-9218.
Applicability: Model Hawker 1000 and BAe 125-1000A series
airplanes, post modification 259722C; 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 (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.
Note 2: Beech (Raytheon) Model BAe 125-1000B series airplanes
are similar in design to the airplanes that are subject to the
requirements of this AD and, therefore, also may be subject to the
unsafe condition
[[Page 42996]]
addressed by this AD. However, as of the effective date of this AD,
those models are not type certificated for operation in the United
States. Airworthiness authorities of countries in which the Model
BAe 125-1000B series airplanes are approved for operation should
consider adopting corrective action, applicable to those models,
that is similar to the corrective action required by this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent failure of a fuel hose assembly on the auxiliary
power unit (APU), which could result in a malfunction of the APU, a
potential fuel fire in the fuselage rear bay, and reduced structural
integrity of the surrounding structure, accomplish the following:
(a) Within 30 days after May 23, 1995 (the effective date of AD
95-10-01, amendment 39-9218), perform inspections to detect
discrepancies of the fuel feed hose assemblies on the APU; an
inspection to assure proper positioning of the air leak detection
system; and an inspection of the bleed air system for signs of
leakage; in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 49-44, dated January
20, 1995.
(1) If no discrepancy is found: Thereafter, following the last
flight of each day, perform an inspection to detect discoloration of
the fuel hose assembly (outlet from the fuel pump box) on the APU,
in accordance with paragraph 2.B.(2) and 2.C. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of the service bulletin.
(2) If any discrepancy is found, prior to further flight,
correct the discrepancy in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of the
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin.
(b) Within 200 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
replace the existing conduit of the fuel feed hose for the auxiliary
power unit (APU) with new improved conduit (modification 25A825A),
in accordance with Beech (Raytheon/Hawker) Service Bulletin SB.49-
47-25A825A, dated August 1, 1995. Accomplishment of the replacement
constitutes terminating action for 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, Wichita Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Small 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, Wichita ACO.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Wichita ACO.
(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 Raytheon
Service Bulletin SB 49-44, dated January 20, 1995, or Beech
(Raytheon/Hawker) Service Bulletin SB.49-47-25A825A, dated August 1,
1995. The incorporation by reference of Beech (Raytheon/Hawker)
Service Bulletin SB.49-47-25A825A, dated August 1, 1995, was
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. The incorporation by reference of
Raytheon Service Bulletin SB 49-44, dated January 20, 1995, was
approved previously by the Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 as of May 23, 1995
(60 FR 22501, May 8, 1995). Copies may be obtained from Beech
Aircraft Corporation, Hawker Customer Support Department, P.O. Box
85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085. Copies may be inspected at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; or at the FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,
Small Airplane Directorate, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-
Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the Office of the Federal
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(f) This amendment becomes effective on September 24, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 12, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21009 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21008 Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and 2000 Airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42996-42997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21008]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-255-AD; Amendment 39-9719; AD 96-17-10]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and
2000 Airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 Series Airplanes
Agency: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
Action: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain Beech Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and 2000
airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 series airplanes, that
requires replacement of outflow/safety valves with serviceable valves.
This amendment is prompted by a report of cracking and subsequent
failure of outflow safety valves in the pressurization system. The
actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent such cracking and
subsequent failure of the outflow/safety valves, which could result in
rapid decompression of the airplane.
Dates: Effective September 24, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 24, 1996.
Addresses: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from AlliedSignal Aerospace, Technical Publications, Dept. 65-
70, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2170. 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: Walter Eierman, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California
90712; telephone (310) 627-5336; 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 Beech Model 400, 400A, MU-
300-10, and 2000 airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 series
airplanes was published in the Federal Register on April 15, 1996 (61
FR 16416). That action proposed to require replacement of certain
discrepant outflow/safety valves with serviceable valves.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. No comments were submitted in response
to the proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public.
The FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require
the adoption of the rule as proposed.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 150 Beech Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and
2000 airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 series airplanes of
the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 105
airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will
take approximately 12 work hours per airplane to accomplish the
required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour.
The parts manufacturer has advised that it will provide replacement
parts at no cost to operators. Based on these figures, the cost impact
of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $75,600, or $720 per
airplane.
[[Page 42997]]
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.
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:
96-17-10 Beech Aircraft Corporation: Amendment 39-9719. Docket 95-
NM-255-AD.
Applicability: Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and 2000 airplanes,
Model 200 and B200 series airplanes having a maximum altitude
capability of greater than 31,000 feet, and Model 300 and B300
series airplanes; equipped with AlliedSignal outflow/safety valves,
as identified in AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletins 103570-21-
4012 and 103648-21-4022, both Revision 1, both dated May 30, 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
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 cracking and subsequent failure of the outflow/safety
valves, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
replace the outflow/safety valve in accordance with AlliedSignal
Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012 (for airplanes equipped
with valves having part number 103570-25, 103570-26, or 103570-27),
or 103648-21-4022 (for airplanes equipped with valves having part
number 103648-1, 103648-3, 103648-4, 103648-5, 103648-6, 103648-7,
or 103648-13), both Revision 1, both dated May 30, 1995, as
applicable.
(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no person shall install
an outflow/safety valve, having a part number and serial number
identified in AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012
(for airplanes equipped with valves having part number 103570-25,
103570-26, or 103570-27), or 103648-21-4022 (for airplanes equipped
with valves having part number 103648-1, 103648-3, 103648-4, 103648-
5, 103648-6, 103648-7, or 103648-13), both Revision 1, both dated
May 30, 1995, on any airplane unless that valve is considered to be
serviceable in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.
(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, 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.
(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 replacement shall be done in accordance with
AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, or 103648-
21-4022, both Revision 1, both dated May 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 AlliedSignal Aerospace, Technical
Publications, Dept. 65-70, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-
2170. 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.
(f) This amendment becomes effective on September 24, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 12, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21008 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20901 Implementation of Section 703 of the Communications Act of 1996
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43023-43025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20901]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[CS Docket No. 96-166; FCC 96-327]
Implementation of Section 703 of the Communications Act of 1996
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By adopting this Order, the Commission implements the self-
effectuating additions and revisions made by Section 703 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 to Section 224 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended. The pole attachment provisions of Section 224 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, initially only applied to
cable television system operators. However, Section 703 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 expanded the scope of the pole
attachment provisions under Section 224 to include telecommunications
carriers as well as cable television system operators.
DATES: Effective August 20, 1996. Written comments by the public on the
information collections contained herein are due October 21, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the information collections contained herein
should be submitted to Dorothy Conway, Federal Communications
Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via
the Internet to [email protected], and to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer,
10236 NEOB, 725--17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20503 or via the
Internet to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. McMenamin, Cable Services
Bureau, (202) 418-7200. For additional information concerning the
information collections contained in this Order contact Dorothy Conway
at 202-418-0217, or via the Internet at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Order, CS Docket No. 96-166, adopted August 2, 1996 and released August
6, 1996. The full text of this decision is available for inspection and
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room
239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20554, and may be purchased
from the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription
Service, (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20554.
Synopsis of the Order
Section 703 of the 1996 Act added and amended several provisions of
Section 224 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Section
224''). Specifically, Section 703 amended Sections 224 (a)(1), (a)(4),
(c)(1) and (c)(2)(B), and added new Sections 224 (a)(5), (d)(3), (e),
(f), (g), (h) and (i). Many of these additions and revisions to
existing federal statutory provisions are self-effectuating. This Order
conforms our rules to meet these new statutory requirements. We are
revising these rules without providing prior public notice and an
opportunity for comment because the rule modifications do not involve
discretionary action on the part of the Commission but rather, simply
conform our rules to the applicable provisions of the 1996 Act. We find
that notice and comment procedures are unnecessary, and that this
action falls
[[Page 43024]]
within the ``good cause'' exception of the Administrative Procedure
Act. Sections 224(e) is not self-effectuating. We will seek notice and
comment regarding implementation of Section 224(e) in a separate
proceeding consistent with the two-year period specified by Section
224(e). In addition, the Commission has sought notice and comment
regarding the implementation of Sections 224 (f) and (h) in a separate
proceeding.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Commission has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
Implementation of the Local Competition Provisions in the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, FCC 96-182, 61 FR 18311, par. 220-
225 (April 25, 1996), to implement the Interconnection provisions of
Section 251.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paperwork Reduction Act
This Order contains either proposed or modified information
collections. The Commission has requested Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') approval, under the emergency processing provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, of the information contained in
this rulemaking. Approval is requested to be effective no later than
the date that the summary of the Order appears in the Federal Register.
The OMB control number for information collections contained in this
rulemaking is 3060-0392. The Commission, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork burdens and to obtain regular OMB approval
of the information collections, invites the general public to comment
on the information collections contained in this Order, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Public and agency comments are due
October 21, 1996. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
OMB Approval Number: 3060-0392.
Title: 47 CFR 1.1401 through 1.1416 Pole Attachment Procedures.
Type of Review: Revision of existing collection.
Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities.
Number of Respondents: 83.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1-25 hours.
Total Annual Burden: 449 hours. Notices: 36 sets of notices x 2
hours each = 72 hours. Petitions for Stay: 10 Petitions x 8 hours
each = 80 hours. Complaints, responses and replies: 10 complaint cases
(20 parties). 50% of parties will use in-house legal assistance with an
average burden of 25 hours per case. 10 parties x 25 hours = 250
hours. 50% of parties will use outside legal counsel with an average
burden of 4 hours to coordinate information with outside legal counsel.
10 parties x 4 hours = 40 hours. State certifications: 7
certifications x 1 hour = 7 hours.
Total Annual Cost to Respondents: $41,100. Notices: 36 sets of
notices x $100 each for postage and stationery = $3,600. Complaints,
responses and replies: 50% of parties will use outside legal counsel
paid at $150 per hour. 10 parties x 25 hours per case x $150 per
hour = $37,500.
Needs and Uses: Initial pole attachment provisions were mandated by
Congress pursuant to Section 224 of the Communications Act of 1934.
Among other things, Section 224 initially mandated the following: The
Commission was required to establish rules to ensure that the rates,
terms and conditions under which cable television system operators
attach their hardware to utility poles are just and reasonable.
Utilities shall provide a cable television system operator no less than
60 days written notice prior to (1) removal of facilities or
termination of any service to those facilities, such removal or
termination arising out of a rate, term or condition of a cable
television pole attachment agreement, or (2) any increase in pole
attachment rates. The Commission was required to establish a Petition
for Stay process for the action contained in the notice. The Commission
was required to establish a complaint resolution process regarding pole
attachments. The Commission was required to establish a certification
process for states to use to make notice of their authority to regulate
the rates, terms and conditions for pole attachments. The provisions in
Section 224 were initially only applicable to cable television system
operators. However, Section 703 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
amends Section 224 to expand the scope of the pole attachment
provisions to include telecommunications carriers as well as cable
television system operators. The Commission's rules for pole attachment
provisions are contained in 47 CFR 1.1401 through 1.1416.
Accordingly, It is ordered that pursuant to Section 703 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Section 224 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 224), and to Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of
the Communications Act of 1934 as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r),
Subpart J of Part 1 of the Commission's Rules is amended as set forth
below. The rule changes will become effective August 20, 1996.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Communications common
carriers, Investigations, Lawyers, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Rules Changes
Part 1 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
1. The authority citation for Part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 303 and 309(j) unless otherwise
noted.
Subpart J--Pole Attachment Complaint Procedures
2. Section 1.1401 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.1401 Purpose.
The rules and regulations contained in this subpart J provide
complaint and enforcement procedures to ensure that the rates, terms
and conditions for pole attachments of cable television systems and
telecommunications carriers are just and reasonable.
3. Section 1.1402 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (d),
(e), and (f) and adding a new paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.1402 Definitions.
(a) The term utility means any person that is a local exchange
carrier or an electric, gas, water, steam, or other public utility, and
who owns or controls poles, ducts, conduits, or rights-of-way used, in
whole or in part, for any wire communications. Such term does not
include any railroad, any person that is cooperatively organized, or
any person owned by the Federal Government or any State.
(b) The term pole attachment means any attachment by a cable
television system or provider of telecommunications service to a pole,
[[Page 43025]]
duct, conduit, or right-of-way owned or controlled by a utility.
* * * * *
(d) The term complaint means a filing by a cable television system
operator, a cable television system association, a utility, an
association of utilities, a telecommunications carrier, or an
association of telecommunications carriers alleging that a rate, term,
or condition for a pole attachment is not just and reasonable.
(e) The term complainant means a cable television system operator,
a cable television system association, a utility, an association of
utilities, a telecommunications carrier, or an association of
telecommunications carriers who files a complaint.
(f) The term respondent means a cable television system operator, a
utility, or a telecommunications carrier against whom a complaint is
filed.
* * * * *
(h) For purposes of this subpart, the term telecommunications
carrier means any provider of telecommunications services, except that
the term does not include aggregators of telecommunications services
(as defined in 47 U.S.C. 226) or incumbent local exchange carriers (as
defined in 47 U.S.C. 251(h)).
4. Section 1.1403 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1.1403 Notice of removal and petition for temporary stay.
(a) A utility shall provide a cable television system operator or
telecommunications carrier no less than 60 days written notice prior
to:
(1) Removal of facilities or termination of any service to those
facilities, such removal or termination arising out of a rate, term, or
condition of the cable television system operator's or
telecommunications carrier's pole attachment agreement; or
(2) Any increase in pole attachment rates.
(b) A cable television system operator or telecommunications
carrier may file a ``Petition for Temporary Stay'' of the action
contained in a notice received pursuant to paragraph (a) of this
section within 15 days of receipt of such notice. Such submission shall
not be considered unless it includes, in concise terms, the relief
sought, the reasons for such relief, including a showing of irreparable
harm and likely cessation of cable television service or
telecommunication service, a copy of the notice, and certification of
service as required by Sec. 1.1404(b). The named respondent may file an
answer within 7 days of the date the Petition for Temporary Stay was
filed. No further filings under this section will be considered unless
requested or authorized by the Commission and no extensions of time
will be granted unless justified pursuant to Sec. 1.46.
5. Section 1.1404 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (d)
introductory text and (d) (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.1404 Complaint.
(a) The complaint shall contain the name and address of the
complainant, name and address of the respondent, and shall contain a
verification (in the form in Sec. 1.721(b)), signed by the complainant
or officer thereof if complainant is a corporation, showing
complainant's direct interest in the matter complained of. Counsel for
the complainant may sign the complaint. Complainants may join together
to file a joint complaint. Complaints filed by associations shall
specifically identify each utility, cable television system operator,
or telecommunications carrier who is a party to the complaint and shall
be accompanied by a document from each identified member certifying
that the complaint is being filed on its behalf.
* * * * *
(d) The complaint shall be accompanied by a copy of the pole
attachment agreement, if any, between the cable system operator or
telecommunications carrier and the utility. If there is no present pole
attachment agreement, the complaint shall contain:
* * * * *
(2) A statement that the cable television system operator or
telecommunications carrier currently has attachments on the poles,
ducts, conduits, or rights-of-way.
* * * * *
6. Section 1.1409 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) to read
as follows:
Sec. 1.1409 Commission consideration of the complaint.
* * * * *
(e) Section 1.1404 shall apply to the rate for any pole attachment
used by a cable system operator solely to provide cable service. Until
47 U.S.C. 224(e) is implemented, Sec. 1.1404 shall also apply to the
rate for any pole attachment used by a cable system or any
telecommunications carrier (to the extent such carrier is not a party
to a pole attachment agreement) to provide any telecommunications
service.
7. A new Section 1.1416 is added to subpart J to read as follows:
Sec. 1.1416 Access provisions for telecommunication carriers and cable
systems.
(a) A utility that engages in the provision of telecommunications
services or cable services shall impute to its costs of providing such
services (and charge any affiliate, subsidiary, or associate company
engaged in the provision of such services) an equal amount to the pole
attachment rate for which such company would be liable under this
section.
(b) An entity that obtains an attachment to a pole, conduit, or
right-of-way shall not be required to bear any of the costs of
rearranging or replacing its attachment, if such rearrangement or
replacement is required as a result of an additional attachment or the
modification of an existing attachment sought by any other entity
(including the owner of such pole, duct, conduit, or right-of-way).
[FR Doc. 96-20901 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20880 Public Information
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43002-43008]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20880]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
22 CFR Part 212
Public Information
AGENCY: United States Agency for International Development.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These amendments make technical revisions to the Agency's
Freedom of Information Act Regulations as set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Willette L. Smith, Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff, Office of
Administrative Services, 703/516-1849, Fax 703/516-1894.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Revisions and updated have been made to the
following sections of 22 of Chapter II of Title 22: (a) 212.25--change
of addresses for Public Reading Room; (b) 212.33 procedure for making
requests for agency's records; (c) 212.34 procedures for responding to
requests for records; (d) 212.35 (b) revised method of calculating
processing fees and 212.35(e) added an appeal rights to fee waiver
decision; 212.36 change appeal time period and update address of
Appeal's Officer; 212.38 revised Agency's predisclosure notification
procedures for processing request for confidential commercial
information.
This rule is not a major rule for the purposes of Executive Order
12291 of February 17, 1981. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, it is hereby certified that this rule will not have a significant
impact on small business entities.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 212
Freedom of information.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Part 212 of Chapter II
of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations is revised to read as
follows:
PART 212--PUBLIC INFORMATION
Subpart A--General
Sec.
212.1 Statement of policy.
Subpart B--Publication in the Federal Register
212.11 Materials to be published.
212.12 Effect of nonpublication.
212.13 Incorporation by reference.
Subpart C--Availability of Information for Public Inspection and
Copying
212.21 Public records.
212.22 Protection of personal privacy.
212.23 Current index.
212.24 Effect of noncompliance.
212.25 Procedures for obtaining materials under this subpart.
Subpart D--Access to Agency Records
212.31 Availability of agency records.
212.32 Identification of records.
212.33 Procedure for making requests.
212.34 Procedures for responding to requests for records.
212.35 Schedule of fees and methods of payment for services
rendered.
212.36 Denial of request for access to records.
212.37 Procedures for agency consideration of appeals.
212.38 Predisclosure notification procedures for confidential
commercial information.
Subpart E--Exemptions From Disclosure
212.41 Exemptions from publication and disclosure requirements of
subparts B, C, and D.
212.42 Exemption from 5 U.S.C. 552.
Subpart F--Opening of Records for Nonofficial Research Purposes.
212.51 General Policy
Authority: 22 U.S.C. 2381(a).
Subpart A--General
Sec. 212.1 Statement of policy.
(a) It is the policy of the United States Agency for International
Development (hereinafter ``USAID'' or ``the Agency'') that information
about its objectives and operations be freely available to the public
in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act
(``FOIA''), 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended; the President's Memorandum for
Heads of Departments and Agencies regarding the FOIA, 29 Weekly Comp.
Pres. Doc. 1999 (October 4, 1993); and the Attorney General's
Memorandum of the same title and date. The Director, Office of
Administrative Services, Bureau for Management, or his/her designee, is
responsible on behalf of the Agency for administration of the
provisions of the regulations set forth in this part.
(b) In addition, concerning the International Cooperation and
Development Agency (``IDCA''), pursuant to executive order and
delegations of authority USAID is responsible not only for management
of its own affairs but also for those of IDCA. The policy of IDCA in
the FOIA area has been determined by USAID to be identical to that of
USAID, as stated in this section. Therefore, all policies and
procedures set forth in this part apply equally to IDCA as to USAID;
and it is intended that references in this part to ``USAID'' or ``the
Agency'' shall, wherever appropriate, include or mean a reference to
IDCA. Accordingly, all IDCA FOIA-related matters shall be referred to
and processed by USAID staff under this part as though they were USAID
matters.
(c) All records of USAID shall be made available to the public upon
compliance with the procedures established in Sec. 212.33, except to
the extent a determination is made to withhold a record exemptible
under 5 U.S.C. 552(b). Such a determination shall be made pursuant to
procedures set forth in Sec. 212.36, 212.37 and 212.38.
(d) The term ``record'' as used in this part includes all books,
papers, maps, photographs, or other documentary material or copies
thereof, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made in or
received by USAID (including its missions or offices abroad), and
preserved as evidence of its organization, functions, policies,
decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities. The term does
not include copies of the records of other U.S. Government agencies,
foreign governments, international organizations, or non-governmental
entities which do not evidence organization, functions, policies,
decisions, procedures, operations, or activities of USAID.
Subpart B--Publication in the Federal Register
Sec. 212.11 Materials to be published.
(a) USAID separately states and currently publishes in the Federal
Register for the information and guidance of the public:
(1) Descriptions of its central and field organization and the
established places
[[Page 43003]]
at which, the officers from whom, and the methods whereby, the public
may secure information, make submittals or requests, or obtain
decisions;
(2) Statements of the general course and method by which its
functions are channelled and determined, including the nature and
requirements for all formal and informal procedures available;
(3) Rules of procedure, descriptions of forms available or the
places at which forms may be obtained, and instructions as to the scope
and contents of all papers, reports, or examinations;
(4) Substantive rules of general applicability adopted as
authorized by law, and statements of general policy or interpretations
of general applicability formulated and adopted by USAID; and
(5) Every amendment, revision or repeal of the material listed in
this section.
(b) USAID Public Notice No. 1 and the USAID Regulations published
in chapter II of Title 22 and in subtitle A, Chapter 7 of Title 41 of
the Code of Federal Regulations implement the provisions of this
section.
Sec. 212.12 Effect of nonpublication.
The materials referenced in Sec. 212.11 shall not be binding upon
or otherwise adversely affect a person unless either
(a) The materials were in fact published in the Federal Register or
(b) The person otherwise had actual and timely notice of the
content of such materials.
Sec. 212.13 Incorporation by reference.
For purposes of this subpart B, USAID matters which are reasonably
available to the class of persons affected thereby are deemed to be
published in the Federal Register when they have been incorporated by
reference therein with the approval of the Director of the Federal
Register.
Subpart C--Availability of Information for Public Inspection and
Copying
Sec. 212.21 Public records.
In accordance with this subpart, USAID makes the following
information and materials available for public inspection and copying:
(a) All final opinions (including concurring and dissenting
options), and all orders made in the adjudication of the cases:
(b) those statements of policy and interpretations which have been
adopted by the Agency and are not published in the Federal Register;
and
(c) Administrative staff manuals and instructions to staff that
affect any member of the public.
Sec. 212.22 Protection of personal privacy.
To the extent required to prevent a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy, USAID may delete identifying details when USAID makes
available or publishes an opinion, statement of policy, interpretation,
or staff manual or instruction. USAID will, in each such case, explain
in writing the justification for the deletion.
Sec. 212.23 Current index.
USAID maintains and makes available for public inspection and
copying a current index providing identifying information for the
public as to any matter which has been issued, adopted, or promulgated
after July 4, 1967, and which is required by Sec. 212.21 to be made
available or published. Publication of an index is deemed both
unnecessary and impractical. However, copies of the index are
available, upon request, for a fee based on the direct cost of
duplication.
Sec. 212.24 Effect of noncompliance.
No final order, opinion, statement of policy, interpretation, or
staff manual or instruction that affects any member of the public will
be relied upon, used, or cited as precedent by USAID against any
private party unless it has been indexed and either made available or
published as provided by this subpart, or unless that private party
shall have actual and timely notice of the terms thereof.
Sec. 212.25 Procedures for obtaining materials under this subpart.
(a) The materials required to be made available for public
inspection and copying in accordance with this subpart are available to
members of the public at USAID's Public Reading Room, Room 1113, 1621
North Kent Street, Rosslyn, Virginia 22209, which is open from 9 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on holidays. All such
materials are available in electronic form (disks) only; to a
reasonable degree, assistance will be provided in use of necessary
equipment.
(b) Requests for materials which are available under this subpart
should follow the procedures under Sec. 212.33(a) of this part.
(c) The direct costs of any necessary duplication will be charged
in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Sec. 212.35.
(d) USAID Missions and offices in countries abroad are not
responsible for the maintenance of the index and materials available
under this subpart. However, insofar as they do have these materials,
they will make them available to citizens of the United States who are
present in their respective countries upon application made either or
in person in writing to the USAID Director, or other principal USAID
officer, c/o American Embassy in the applicable country.
Subpart D--Access to Agency Records
Sec. 212.31 Availability of agency records.
Upon receiving a request which reasonably describes a USAID record,
and which is made in accordance with the provisions of this subpart,
USAID will make such records, except the following, promptly available
to the requesting party:
(a) Matters published in the Federal Register pursuant to subpart
B;
(b) Matters made available to the public pursuant to subpart C; and
(c) Matters exempt from disclosure pursuant to Sec. 212.41 or
Sec. 241.42 of this part.
Sec. 212.32 Identification of records.
The request for a record by a member of the public must contain a
reasonably specific description of the particular record sought so that
a USAID officer who is familiar with the subject matter of the request
may be able to locate the record with a reasonable amount of effort. A
description that includes as much information as possible, such as the
subject matter, format, approximate date and, where pertinent, the name
of the country or person involved, will facilitate the search for the
requested record.
Sec. 212.33 Procedure for making requests.
(a) Requests for records, other than records available at the
Public Reading Room identified in Sec. 212.24(a), may be made by a
member of the public in writing only to the Chief, Customer Outreach
and Oversight Staff, Room 1113, SA-16, Agency for International
Development, Department of State, 320 21st Street, N.W., Washington,
D.C. 20523-1608. The request and the envelope must be plainly marked
``FOIA Request.'' Requests may be made orally, that is, in person, only
for records and materials available at the Public Reading Room.
(b) Requests for records may be made directly to a USAID mission or
office abroad only by a citizen of the United States who is present in
that country and must be by written application to the USAID Director
(or other principal USAID officer), care of the American Embassy in
that country. Any such written request and its envelope must be plainly
marked ``FOIA Request.''
(c) Only signed original (as opposed to electronically transmitted)
requests are acceptable for procedures pursuant
[[Page 43004]]
to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Telephoned requests, or in-
person requests other than to the Public Reading Room, cannot be
accepted. If a written request not properly marked ``FOIA Request'' on
both the letter and envelope is thereby delayed in reaching the Chief,
Office of Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff, such request will not
be deemed received by USAID until actually received by that official.
In the event of such a delay, the person making the request will be
furnished a notice of the effective date of receipt.
Sec. 212.34 Procedures for responding to requests for records.
(a) Upon receipt by the Chief, Office of Customer Outreach and
Oversight Staff, of a reasonably specific request made pursuant to
Sec. 212.33 of this part, a maximum of ten working days will normally
be taken to determine to what extent the Agency can provide the
information requested. Upon the making of that determination, the
person making the request will be promptly so informed. Copies of the
releasable documents will be made available promptly thereafter upon
receipt of applicable fees and charges as set forth in Sec. 212.35.
(b)(1) In unusual circumstances, USAID may not be able to determine
the availability of the requested documents within ten working days, in
which event the person making the request will be informed by written
notice of the delay, the reasons for the delay and the date on which a
determination may be expected. In this context, the term ``unusual
circumstances'' refers to the following situations:
(i) When there is a need to search for and collect the requested
records from field facilities or other establishments that are separate
from the office processing the request;
(ii) When there is a need to search for, collect, and appropriately
examine a voluminous amount of separate and distinct records which are
sought in a single request; or
(iii) When there is a need for consultation (which will be
conducted with all practicable speed) with another agency having a
substantial interest in the determination of the request or among two
or more components of the Agency, each having substantial subject-
matter interest therein.
(2) The maximum time in making a determination of availability, in
the event of such unusual circumstances, will be twenty working days
from receipt of the request. In the event that only part of the
permissible ten working days extension is used, then USAID reserves the
right, if necessary, to use any remainder of such time for the
determination of an appeal, if one is made.
(c) If a request is made to USAID for material that is controlled
or held by another agency, the person making the request will be
immediately notified that USAID does not have or control the requested
material and he/she will be advised of the name of the controlling
agency and of the address from which the material may be requested,
unless the other agency has, by public regulation, delegated the
release authority to USAID. If release authority has been delegated,
USAID will follow the procedures authorized by the delegation in
determining whether to release the information. If a request for
material is referred to USAID from another agency, the time period for
determination of release of the information will not start until the
request is received by the Chief, Office of Customer Outreach and
Oversight Staff; and the person making the request will be immediately
notified of the referral and of the date the request was received in
USAID. USAID will not accept referral of requests unless and until the
Chief, Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff, or his/her designee,
determines that the material requested is actually within the scope and
control of the release authority of USAID.
(d) If only a part of a record is exempt from disclosure, then any
reasonably segregable portion of such record will be furnished after
deletion of the portions which are exempt, provided that the segregable
portion constitutes an intelligible record which is not distorted out
of context or contradictory to the substance of the entire record
before segregation.
Sec. 212.35 Schedule of fees and method of payment for services
rendered.
(a) Definitions. (1) Direct costs means those expenditures which
the Agency actually incurs in searching for and duplicating (and in the
case of commercial requesters, reviewing) documents in order to respond
to a FOIA request.
(2) Search includes all time spent looking for material that is
responsive to a request, including page-by-page or line-by-line
identification of material within documents. Line-by-line search will
not be done when duplicating an entire document would prove the less
expensive and quicker method of complying with a request. (``Search''
for this purpose is distinguished from ``review'' (see paragraph (a)(4)
of this section).
(3) Duplication refers to the process of making a copy of a
document available to the FOIA requester. Copies can take the form of
paper copy, microfilm or audiovisual materials (among others) and will
be in a form that is reasonably usable by requesters.
(4) Review refers to the process of examining documents located in
response to a commercial use request (see paragraph (a)(5) of this
section) to determine whether any portion of any document located is
permitted to be withheld. It also includes processing any documents for
disclosure, e.g., doing all that is necessary to redact those documents
of exempt material and otherwise preparing them for release. Review
does not include time spent resolving general legal or policy issues
regarding the application of exemptions.
(5) Commercial use request refers to a request from or on behalf of
one who seeks information for a use or purpose that is related to
commerce, trade, or the profit interest of the requester or of the
person on whose behalf the request is made. In determining whether a
requester properly belongs in this category, the Agency will determine
the use to which a requester will put the documents requested. Where
the Agency has reasonable cause to doubt the use to which a requester
will put the records sought, or where that use is not clear from the
request itself, the Agency may seek additional clarification before
assigning the request to a specific category.
(6) Educational institution refers to a preschool, a public or
private elementary or secondary school, an institution of graduate
higher education, an institution of undergraduate higher education, an
institution of professional education, or an institution of vocational
education which operates a program or programs of scholarly research.
(7) Non-commercial scientific institution refers to an institution
that is not operated on a ``commercial'' basis as that term is
referenced in paragraph (a)(5) of this section and which is operated
solely for the purpose of conducting scientific research, the results
of which are not intended to promote any particular product or
industry.
(8) Representative of the news media refers to any person actively
gathering news for an entity that is organized and operated to publish
or broadcast news to the public. The term ``news'' means information
that is about current events or that would be of current interest to
the public. Examples of news media entities include television or radio
stations broadcasting to the public at large, and publishers of
periodicals (but only in those instances when they can
[[Page 43005]]
qualify as disseminators of ``news'' who make their products available
for purchase or subscription by the general public). These examples are
not intended to be all-inclusive. Moreover, as traditional methods of
news delivery evolve (e.g., electronic dissemination of newspapers
through telecommunications services), such alternative media would be
included in this category. In the case of ``freelance'' journalists,
they may be regarded as working for a news organization if they can
demonstrate a sound basis for expecting publication through such an
organization, even though not actually employed by it. A publication
contract would be the clearest evidence, but the Agency may also look
to the past publication record of the requester in making this
determination.
(b) Fees to be charged. The following specific fees shall be
applicable with respect to services rendered to members of the public
under this part:
(1) Commercial use requesters. Fees are intended to cover the full
estimated direct costs of researching for, reviewing for release, and
duplicating the records requested. Search costs are computed based on
the following formula: hours spent by Agency personnel, whatever their
grade and location, and rounded up to the nearest full hour, and
including locality pay for Washington-based personnel only, at the
basic annual rate then payable to U.S. Government employees at the GS-
9/Step 4 level, times 1.17 (to factor in related benefits) and divided
by 2080 (hours per work year). Review costs are computed based on the
same formula but, instead, using the rate then payable to employees at
the GS-13/Step 4 level. Duplicating costs are $0.20 per page. Search
costs will be assessed even though no records may be found or even if,
after review, there is no disclosure of records.
(2) Educational and non-commercial scientific institution
requester. The Agency will provide documents to requesters in this
category for the cost of duplication alone ($0.20 per page), excluding
charges for the first 100 pages. To be eligible for inclusion in this
category, requesters must show that a request is being made under the
auspices of a qualifying institution and that the records are sought in
furtherance of scholarly research, if the request is from an
educational institution or scientific research, if the request is from
a non-commercial scientific institution. Requesters eligible for free
search must (as with all FOIA requesters) reasonably describe the
records sought.
(3) Requesters who are representatives of the news media. The
Agency will provide documents to requesters in this category for the
cost of reproduction alone ($0.20 per page), excluding charges for the
first 100 pages. To be eligible for inclusion in this category a
requester must meet the criteria in paragraph (a)(8) of this section,
and his/her request must not be made for commercial use. In reference
to this class of requesters, a request for records supporting the news
dissemination function of the requester shall not be considered to be a
request that is for a commercial use. Requesters eligible for free
search must also reasonably describe the records sought.
(4) All other requesters. The Agency will charge requesters who do
not fit into any of the categories in paragraphs (b) (1), (2), and (3)
of this section fees which recover the full direct cost of search, and
for reproducing records that are responsive to the request, except that
the first 100 pages and the first two hours of search time shall be
furnished without charge. The hourly rates outlined in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section will prevail. Requesters must reasonably describe the
records sought. Moreover, requests from subjects for records filed in
the Agency's Privacy Act System of Records will continue to be treated
under the fee provisions of the Privacy Act of 1975 except that the
first 100 pages of reproduction will be furnished without charge.
(c) Non-payment of fees. (1) The Agency will begin assessing
interest charges on the thirty-first day following the day on which the
requester is advised of the fee charge. Interest will be at the rate
prescribed in 31 U.S.C. 3717.
(2) Where a requester has previously failed to copy a fee charged
in a timely fashion (i.e. within thirty days of the billing date), the
Agency will require the requester to pay the full amount owed plus any
applicable interest as provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this section,
and to make an advance payment of the full amount of the remaining
estimated fee before the Agency begins to process a new request or
continues processing a then-pending request from the requester.
(3) When the Agency acts under paragraph (c) (1) or (2) of this
section the administrative time limits prescribed in subsection (a)(6)
of the FOIA (i.e., ten working days from receipt of initial request and
twenty working days from receipt of appeals from initial denial plus
permissible extensions of these time limits) will begin only after the
Agency has received fee payments described in this section.
(d) Advance payments or confirmation. Where USAID estimates or
determines that allowable charges to a requester are likely to exceed
$250, USAID will require a requester to make an advance payment of the
entire estimated charges before continuing to process the request.
Where the estimated charges are in the $25-$250 range, then USAID in
its discretion, before processing the request, may require either--
(1) An advance deposit of the entire estimated charges or (2)
Written confirmation of the requester's willingness, when billed, to
pay such charges.
(e) Waiving or reducing fee. In accordance with section (4)(A)(ii)
of the FOIA, the Agency will furnish documents without charge or at
reduced charges if disclosure of the information is ``in the public
interest'' in that such disclosure is likely to contribute
significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities
of the Government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of
the requester. A requester may at any time, up to a period not to
exceed thirty days from the final USAID decision concerning his/her
request, request such waiver or reduction of fee by letter addressed to
the Chief, Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff; such request shall
address the above criteria for waiver. Such request will initially be
decided by the Chief, Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff, or his/her
designee; such decision will normally be made, and the requester so
advised, within ten working days of its receipt. The requester, if
dissatisfied with that decision, may appeal pursuant to the same
procedures as apply under Sec. 212.36 and Sec. 212.37 of this part.
(f) Restrictions on assessing fees. With the exception of
requesters seeking documents for a commercial use, Section (4)(A)(iv)
of the FOIA, as amended, requires agencies to provide the first 100
pages of duplication and the first two hours of search time without
charge. Moreover, this section prohibits agencies from charging fees to
any requester, including commercial use requesters, if the cost of
collecting a fee would be equal to or greater than the fee itself.
These provisions work together so that, except for commercial use
requesters, the Agency will not begin to assess fees until it has
provided such free search and reproduction. For example, for a request
that involved two hours and ten minutes of search time and resulted in
105 pages of documents, the Agency will determine the cost of only ten
minutes of search time and only five pages of reproduction. If this
[[Page 43006]]
cost is equal to or less than the cost of processing the payment
instrument--a figure which the Agency will from time to time review and
determine--then there will be no charge to the requester.
(g) Other provisions--(1) Charges for unsuccessful search. The
Agency will assess charges for time spent searching even if the Agency
fails to locate the records or if records located are determined to be
exempt from disclosure.
(2) Aggregating requesters. When the Agency reasonably believes
that a requester or group of requesters is attempting to break a
request down into a series of requests for the purpose of evading the
assessment of fees, the Agency will aggregate any such requesters and
charge accordingly.
(3) Effect of the Debt Collection Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-365).
The Agency will use the authorities of the Debt Collection Act,
including disclosure to consumer reporting agencies and use of
collection agencies, where appropriate, to encourage repayment.
(4) Remittances. (i) Remittances will be in U.S. Dollars in the
form of either a personal check or bank draft drawn on a bank in the
United States or a money order.
(ii) Remittances shall be made payable to the order of the U.S.
Treasury and mailed to the Chief, Customer Outreach and Oversight
Staff, at the address set forth in Sec. 212.33(a) of this part.
Sec. 212.36 Denial of request for access to records.
(a) If it is determined that the Agency cannot comply with all or
part of a request for records, the person making the request shall be
immediately notified of the determination, the reasons for the
determination, the name and title of each officer responsible for the
denial, and the right of the person to appeal the adverse
determination.
(b) The denial of a request for records may be made, initially,
only by the Chief, Customer Outreach and Oversight Staff, or his/her
designee.
(c) (1) Any person who has been denied access to records pursuant
to this section may appeal the relevant decision not later than thirty
days after the date of the notification of denial or, in the case of a
partial denial, not later than thirty days after the date the
releasable documents are actually furnished to the person making the
request, whichever is later. The appeal shall be in writing addressed
to the Agency's FOIA Appeals Officer, who is:
The Director, Office of Administrative Services, Bureau for
Management, Room 803, SA-2, Agency for International Development,
21st and Virginia Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C., 20523-0217.
(2) In order for the Agency to make a timely response to the
appeal, both the text of the appeal and its envelope must be plainly
marked ``FOIA Appeal''. The appeal must contain a reasonable
description of the record sought and withheld, a copy of the initial
decision to deny access and any other information that will enable the
Appeals Officer to make the final decision.
Sec. 212.37 Procedures for agency consideration of appeals.
(a) Upon receipt of the appeal by the Appeals Officer, a maximum of
twenty working days will normally be taken to decide the appeal. In
unusual circumstances, as defined in Sec. 212.34, the twenty working
days may be extended by ten working days or by the number of days not
used in the original denial of the request.
(b) If the appeal is granted, the person making the appeal shall be
immediately notified and copies of the releasable documents shall be
made available promptly thereafter upon receipt of appropriate fees as
set forth in Sec. 212.35. If the appeal is denied in whole or part, the
person making the request shall be immediately notified of the
decisions and of the provisions for judicial review of the Agency's
denial of the request.
(c) In the event a determination is not issued within the
applicable time limit and the person making the request therefore
chooses to sue the Agency, the Agency-level determination process shall
nonetheless continue.
(d) If an appeal not properly marked ``FOIA Appeal'' on the text of
the appeal and/or envelope is thereby delayed in reaching the Appeals
Officer, it will not be deemed received by the Appeals Officer until
actually received by him/her. In such event, the person making the
appeal will be furnished notice of the effective date of receipt.
Sec. 212.38 Predisclosure notification procedures for confidential
commercial information.
(a) In general. Confidential commercial information provided to the
Agency shall not be disclosed pursuant to a FOIA request except in
accordance with this section. For purposes of this section, the
following definitions apply:
(1) Confidential commercial information means records provided to
the Agency by a submitter that arguably contain material exempt from
release under Exemption 4 of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), because
disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause substantial
competitive harm.
(2) Submitter means any person or entity who provides confidential
commercial information to the Agency. The term ``submitter'' includes,
but is not limited to, corporations, state governments and foreign
governments.
(b) Notice to submitters. Whenever the Agency receives a FOIA
request for confidential commercial information and, pursuant to
paragraph (c) of this section, the submitter of such information is
entitled to receive notice of that request, then the Agency shall
promptly notify the submitter that it has received the request, unless
such a notice is not required pursuant to paragraph (g) of this
section. The notice shall be in writing and shall either describe the
exact nature of the confidential commercial information requested or
provide a copy of the records or portion of the records containing the
confidential commercial information. The notice shall be addressed to
the submitter and mailed, postage prepaid, first class mail, to the
submitter's last known address. Where notice is required to be given to
a voluminous number of submitters, in lieu of such a mailing the notice
may be posted or published in a manner and place reasonably calculated
to provide notice to the submitters.
(c) When notice is required; related matters. (1) For confidential
commercial information submitted prior to January 1, 1988, the Agency
shall provide a submitter with notice of its receipt of a FOIA request
whenever:
(i) The records are less than ten years old and the information has
been designated by the submitter as confidential commercial
information; or
(ii) The Agency has reason to believe that the disclosure of the
information could reasonably be expected to cause substantial
competitive harm to the submitter thereof.
(2) For confidential commercial information submitted to the Agency
on or after January 1, 1988, the Agency shall provide a submitter with
notice of its receipt of a FOIA request whenever:
(i) The submitter has designated the information as confidential
commercial information pursuant to the requirements of this section; or
(ii) The Agency has reason to believe that the disclosure of the
information could reasonably be expected to cause substantial
competitive harm to the submitter.
(3) Notice of a request for confidential commercial information
falling within paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section shall be required
for a period of not more than ten years after the date of submission
unless the submitter
[[Page 43007]]
provides reasonable justification for a designation period of greater
duration.
(4) A submitter shall use good-faith efforts to designate by
appropriate markings, either at the time a record is submitted to the
Agency or within a reasonable period of time thereafter, those portions
of the record which it deems to contain confidential commercial
information. The designation shall be accompanied by a certification
made by the submitter, its agent or designee that to the best of the
submitter's knowledge, information and belief, the record does, in
fact, contain confidential commercial information that theretofore has
not been disclosed to the public.
(5) Whenever the Agency provides notice to the submitter in
accordance with paragraph (c) of this section, the Agency shall at the
same time provide written notice to the requester that it is affording
the submitter a reasonable period of time within which to object to the
disclosure, and that, therefore, the Agency may be required to enlarge
the time within which it otherwise would respond to the request.
(d) Opportunity to object to disclosure. To the extent permitted by
law, the notice required by paragraph (c) of this section shall afford
a submitter a reasonable period of time within which the submitter or
its authorized representative may provide the Agency with a written
objection to the disclosure of the confidential commercial information
and demonstrate why the submitter believes that the records contain
confidential commercial information whose disclosure would, probably,
cause substantial competitive injury to the submitter. Except where a
certification already has been made in conformance with the
requirements of paragraph (c)(4) of this section, the objection shall
be accompanied by certification made by the submitter, its agent or
designee, that to the best of the submitter's knowledge, information
and belief, the record does, in fact, contain confidential commercial
information that theretofore has not been disclosed to the public.
Information provided by a submitter pursuant to this paragraph may
itself be subject to disclosure under the FOIA.
(e) Notice of intent to disclose. (1) The Agency shall give careful
consideration to objections made by a submitter pursuant to paragraph
(d) of this section prior to making any administrative determination of
the issue. Whenever the Agency decides to disclose information despite
the objection of a submitter, the Agency shall forward to the submitter
a written notice which shall include:
(i) A statement of the reasons for which a submitter's disclosure
objections were not sustained; and
(ii) A description of the information to be disclosed.
(2) To the extent permitted by law, the notice required to be given
by paragraph (e)(1) of this section shall be provided to the submitter
a reasonable number of days prior to the specific disclosure date.
(3) Whenever the Agency provides notice to the submitter in
accordance with paragraphs (e) (1) and (2) of this section, the Agency
shall at the same time notify the requester
(i) That such a notice has been given and
(ii) Of the proposed date for disclosure.
(f) Notice of lawsuit. When a requester brings suit seeking to
compel the disclosure of information for which notice is required
pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section, the Agency shall promptly
notify the submitter that such suit has been filed.
(g) Exceptions to notice requirements. The notice requirements of
this section shall not apply if:
(1) The Agency determines that the information should not be
disclosed;
(2) The information has been published or has been officially made
available to the public;
(3) Disclosure of the information is required by an Agency rule
that;
(i) Was adopted pursuant to notice and public comment;
(ii) Specifies narrow classes of records submitted to the Agency
that are to be released under the FOIA; and
(iii) Provides in exceptional circumstances for notice when the
submitter provides written justification, at the time the information
is submitted or a reasonable time thereafter, that disclosure of the
information could reasonably be expected to cause substantial
competitive harm;
(4) For purposes of paragraph (c) of this section, the information
requested was not designated by the submitter as exempt from disclosure
when the submitter had an opportunity to make such designation at the
time of submission of the information or within a reasonable time
thereafter, unless;
(i) The Agency has substantial reason to believe that disclosure of
the information would result in competitive harm; or
(ii) The designation made by the submitter appears obviously
frivolous; except that, in such case, the Agency must provide the
submitter with written notice of any final administrative disclosure
determination within a reasonable number of days prior to the specified
disclosure date.
Subpart E--Exemptions From Disclosure
Sec. 212.41 Exemptions from publication and disclosure requirements of
subparts B, C, and D.
None of the provisions of subparts B, C, and D which provide for
publication and disclosure of certain information and records shall be
applicable to matters that are:
(a) Specifically authorized under criteria established by an
Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense
or foreign policy and are in fact properly classified pursuant to such
Executive Order;
(b) Related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of
the Agency;
(c) Specifically exempted from disclosure by statute;
(d) Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained
from a person and privileged and confidential;
(e) Interagency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would
not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation
with the agency;
(f) Personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of
which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy;
(g) Records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes,
but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement
records or information:
(1) Would reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement
proceedings;
(2) Would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an
impartial adjudication;
(3) Could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy;
(4) Could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a
confidential source, including a State, local or foreign agency or
authority or any private institution which furnished information on a
confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information
compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a
criminal investigation, or by an agency conducting a lawful security
intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential
source;
(5) Would disclose techniques and procedure for law enforcement
investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be
expected to risk circumvention of the law; or
(6) Could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical
safety of any individual.
(h) Contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition
[[Page 43008]]
reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of any agency
responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial
institutions; and
(i) Geological and geophysical information and data (including
maps) concerning wells.
Sec. 212.42 Exemption from 5 U.S.C. 552.
Whenever a request is made which involves access to records
described in paragraph (g) of Sec. 212.41 and the investigation or
proceedings involves a possible violation of criminal law; and there is
reason to believe that the subject of the investigation or proceeding
is not aware of its pendency, and disclosure of the existence of the
records could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement
proceedings, the Agency may, during only such time as that
circumstances continues, treat the records as not subject to the
requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552 and this subpart.
Subpart F--Opening of Records for Nonofficial Research Purposes
Sec. 212.51 General policy.
(a) The Agency will open its records on an equitable basis to all
individuals engaged in private research as soon as such action may be
taken without adversely affecting the national security, the
maintenance of friendly relations with other nations, the efficient
operation of the Agency, or the administrative feasibility of servicing
requests for access to such records.
(b) Access for research purposes to the classified foreign policy
records in the Agency's custody will be governed by the regulations of
the Department of State with respect thereto, as set forth in part 6,
chapter II of title II of the Code of Federal Regulations. Application
for such access may be made to the Chief, Customer Outreach and
Oversight Staff, at the address listed in Sec. 212.33(a) of this part.
That officer, or his/her designee, in consultation with the Director,
Historical Office, Department of State, or his/her designee, will
determine the action to be taken and will so advise the researcher.
Dated: July 31, 1996.
Willette L. Smith,
Public Affairs Specialist, Office of Admin. Services.
[FR Doc. 96-20880 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20790 Increased Assessment Rate for Domestically Produced Peanuts Handled By Persons Not Subject to Peanut Marketing Agreement No. 146 and for Marketing Agreement No. 146; Regulating the Quality of Domestically Produced Peanuts
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42993-42994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20790]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Parts 997 and 998
[Docket No. FV96-998-1 FIR]
Increased Assessment Rate for Domestically Produced Peanuts
Handled By Persons Not Subject to Peanut Marketing Agreement No. 146
and for Marketing Agreement No. 146; Regulating the Quality of
Domestically Produced Peanuts
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
that increased the administrative assessment rate under Marketing
Agreement 146 (agreement) for the 1995-96 crop year. Authorization of
the increase in the administrative assessment rate enabled the Peanut
Administrative Committee (Committee) to collect sufficient funds to pay
expenses for the remainder of the year. Funds to administer this
program are derived from assessments on handlers who have signed the
agreement. Public Law 103-66 requires the Department to impose an
administrative assessment on farmers' stock peanuts received or
acquired by handlers who are not signatory (non-signatory handlers) to
the agreement. Therefore, the increase in the assessment rate under the
agreement must be applied to all non-signatory handlers.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective July 1, 1995, through June 30, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Sue Clark, Program Assistant,
Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,
AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456,
telephone 202-720-9918, FAX 202-720-5698, or William G. Pimental,
Marketing Specialist, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Fruit and
Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 2276, Winter Haven, FL 33883-
2276, telephone 941-299-4770, FAX 941-299-5169. Small businesses may
request information on compliance with this regulation by contacting:
Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable
Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-
6456, telephone 202-720-2491, FAX 202-720-5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued pursuant to the
requirements of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), and as further amended December 12, 1989,
hereinafter referred to as the ``Act''; Pub. L. 101-220, section 4 (1),
(2), 103 Stat. 1878, December 12, 1989; Pub. L. 103-66, section
8b(b)(1), 107 Stat. 312, August 10, 1993; and under Marketing Agreement
146 (7 CFR part 998) regulating the quality of domestically produced
peanuts.
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. The Department established a 1995-96 crop year
assessment rate applicable to non-signatory and signatory handlers
effective July 1, 1995, through June 30, 1996. This rule increases the
administrative assessment rates for the crop year which began July 1,
1995. Farmers' stock peanuts received or acquired by non-signatory
handlers and farmers' stock peanuts received or acquired by handlers
signatory to the agreement, other than from those described in
Secs. 998.31 (c) and (d), are subject to the assessments. This rule
will not preempt any state or local laws, regulations, or policies,
unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There
are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to any
judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this rule on small entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened.
The interim final rule incorrectly stated that there are
approximately 45 non-signers and 76 signatory handlers subject to the
two regulations. Also, there are approximately 47,000 producers of
peanuts in the 16 States covered under the agreement. Small
agricultural producers have been defined by the Small Business
Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those having annual receipts of less
than $500,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as
those whose annual receipts are less than $5,000,000. A majority of the
producers and the non-signatory handlers may be classified as small
entities, and some of the handlers covered under the agreement are
small entities.
Under the agreement, the assessment rate for a particular crop year
applies to all assessable tonnage handled from the beginning of such
year (i.e., July 1). Funds to administer the peanut agreement program
are paid to the Committee and are derived from signatory handler
assessments. An annual budget of expenses is prepared by the Committee
and submitted to the Department for approval. The members of the
Committee are handlers and producers of peanuts. They are familiar with
the Committee's needs and with the costs for goods and services, and
personnel for program operations and, thus, are in a position to
formulate appropriate budgets. The budgets are formulated and discussed
at industry-wide meetings. Thus, all directly affected persons have an
opportunity to provide input in recommending the budget and assessment
rate. The handlers of peanuts who are directly affected have signed the
marketing agreement authorizing the expenses that
[[Page 42994]]
may be incurred and the imposition of assessments.
The assessment rate recommended by the Committee for the 1995-96
crop year was derived by dividing anticipated expenses by expected
receipts and acquisitions of farmers' stock peanuts. It applies to all
assessable peanuts received or acquired by handlers from July 1, 1995.
Farmers' stock peanuts received or acquired by handlers signatory to
the agreement, other than from those described in Secs. 998.31 (c) and
(d), are subject to assessments. Because that rate is applied to actual
receipts and acquisitions, it must be established at a rate which will
produce sufficient income to pay the Committee's expenses.
Approximately 95 percent of the domestically produced peanut crop is
marketed by handlers who are signatory to the agreement.
Public Law 101-220 amended section 608b of the Act to require that
all peanuts handled by persons who have not entered into the agreement
(non-signers) be subject to quality and inspection requirements to the
same extent and manner as are required under the Agreement.
Approximately 5 percent of the U.S. peanut crop is marketed by non-
signer handlers.
Public Law 103-66 (107 Stat. 312) provides for mandatory assessment
of farmers' stock peanuts acquired by non-signatory peanut handlers.
Under this law, paragraph (b) of section 1001, of the Agricultural
Reconciliation Act of 1993, specified that: (1) Any assessment (except
indemnification assessments) imposed under the Agreement on signatory
handlers also shall apply to non-signatory handlers, and (2) such
assessment shall be paid to the Secretary.
The 1995-96 Committee budget was published in the Federal Register
as an interim final rule on May 17, 1995 (60 FR 26348), and finalized
on July 18, 1995 (60 FR 36635). The non-signatory handler assessment
rate was published in the Federal Register as an interim final rule on
August 21, 1995 (60 FR 43353), and finalized on November 24, 1995 (60
FR 57907). The administrative expenses and assessment rate for the
1995-96 crop year were based on an estimated assessable tonnage of
1,525,000. The Committee now projects that total tonnage will only be
about 1,300,000. In order to have sufficient revenue to cover budgeted
expenses of $1,067,500, the Committee met on March 19, 1996, and
unanimously recommended that the 1995-96 crop year administrative
assessment be increased from $0.70 to $0.83 per net ton of assessable
farmers' stock peanuts.
An interim final rule regarding this action was published in the
June 13, 1996, issue of the Federal Register (61 FR 29926). That
interim final rule amended Secs. 997.100 and 998.408 to increase the
administrative assessment rate for the 1995-96 crop year for the
Committee and non-signatory handlers. That rule provided that
interested persons could file comments through July 15, 1996. No
comments were received.
While this action will impose some additional costs on handlers,
the costs are in the form of uniform assessments on all handlers
signatory to the agreement. Some of the additional costs may be passed
on to producers. However, these costs will be significantly offset by
the benefits derived from the operation of the marketing agreement.
This administrative assessment is required by law to be applied
uniformly to all non-signatory handlers and will be of benefit to all.
Therefore, the AMS has determined that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the information and recommendations submitted by the Committee and
other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as
hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of
the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined that good
cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until
30 days after publication in the Federal Register because: (1) The
Committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its expenses which are
incurred on a continuous basis; (2) Public Law 103-66 requires the
Department to impose an administrative assessment on peanuts received
or acquired for the account of non-signatory handlers; (3) the 1995-96
crop year began on July 1, 1995, and the marketing agreement and Pub.
L. 103-66 require that the rate of assessment for the crop year apply
to all peanuts handled during the crop year; (4) handlers are aware of
this action which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a
public meeting and is similar to other budget actions issued in past
years; and (5) an interim final rule was published on this action and
provided for a 30-day comment period, and no comments were received.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 997
Food grades and standards, Peanuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
7 CFR Part 998
Marketing agreements, Peanuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PART 997--PROVISIONS REGULATING THE QUALITY OF DOMESTICALLY
PRODUCED PEANUTS HANDLED BY PERSONS NOT SUBJECT TO THE PEANUT
MARKETING AGREEMENT
PART 998--MARKETING AGREEMENT REGULATING THE QUALITY OF
DOMESTICALLY PRODUCED PEANUTS
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR parts 997 and
998 to increase the administrative assessment rates which was published
at 61 FR 29926 on June 13, 1996, is adopted as a final rule without
change.
Dated: August 9, 1996.
Robert C. Keeney,
Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-20790 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-20706 Radio Broadcasting Services; Various Locations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43025-43026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20706]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
Radio Broadcasting Services; Various Locations
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission, on its own motion, editorially amends the
Table of FM Allotments to specify the actual classes of channels
allotted to various communities. The changes in channel classifications
have been authorized in response to applications filed by licensees and
permittees operating on these channels. This action is taken pursuant
to Revision of Section 73.3573(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules
Concerning the Lower Classification of an FM Allotment, 4 FCC Rcd 2413
(1989), and the Amendment of the Commission's Rules to permit FM
Channel and Class Modifications [Upgrades] by Applications, 8 FCC Rcd
4735 (1993).
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau,
(202) 418-2180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order, adopted July 19, 1996, and released July 26, 1996. The full
text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and
copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference
Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete
text of this decision
[[Page 43026]]
may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractors,
International Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite
140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-3800.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio broadcasting.
Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 73--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154,
as amended.
Sec. 73.202 [Amended]
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alabama, is
amended by removing Channel 255C and adding Channel 255C2 at
Montgomery, and by removing Channel 254C3 and adding Channel 254C2 at
Warrior.
3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under California,
is amended by removing Channel 296A and adding Channel 297C2 at Rio Del
and by removing Channel 299A and adding Channel 299B1 at Twentynine
Palms.
4. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Illinois, is
amended by removing Channel 224A and adding Channel 224B1 at Herrin.
5. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Minnesota,
is amended by removing Channel 269C3 and adding Channel 269C2 at
Duluth.
6. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Mississippi,
is amended by removing Channel 252A and adding Channel 252C3 at
Carthage.
7. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under New Mexico,
is amended by removing Channel 225C3 and adding Channel 225C2 at
Espanola, by removing Channel 298C3 and adding Channel 298C1 at Los
Almos and by removing Channel 234C and adding Channel 234C1 at Santa
Fe.
8. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oklahoma, is
amended by removing Channel 237A and adding Channel 237C3 at Lawton.
9. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Texas is
amended by removing Channel 228C3 and adding Channel 228C2 at
Breckenridge and by removing Channel 269A and adding Channel 268C2 at
Snyder.
10. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Wyoming, is
amended by removing Channel 266C2 and adding Channel 2266A at Pinedale.
Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-20706 Filed 8-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.