Agricultural Marketing Service
Commodity Credit Corporation
Farm Service Agency
Forest Service
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled
Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Patent and Trademark Office
Navy Department
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Food and Drug Administration
Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Department
Land Management Bureau
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office
Immigration and Naturalization Service
Employment and Training Administration
Employment Standards Administration
Food and Drug Administration
Coast Guard
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Highway Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Research and Special Programs Administration
Foreign Assets Control Office
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Final rule.
This final rule establishes the Hass Avocado Promotion, Research, and Information Order (Order). This industry-funded program is authorized under the Hass Avocado Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 2000 (Act). Under the Order, producers and importers will pay an initial assessment of 2.5 cents per pound on fresh Hass avocados produced in or imported into the United States for consumption in the United States. Exports of U.S. Hass avocados are exempt from assessment. Initially only fresh domestic and imported Hass avocados will be assessed. The Hass Avocado Board (Board) will be appointed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA or the Department) to conduct research, promotion, industry information, and consumer information needed for the maintenance, expansion, and development of domestic markets for Hass avocados.
Effective September 9, 2002. Collection and remittance of assessments and applicable reporting will begin on January 2, 2003.
Julie Morin, Research and Promotion Branch, FV, AMS, USDA, Stop 0244, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 2535-S, Washington, DC 20250-0244, telephone (202) 720-6930, fax (202) 205-2800, e-mail julie.morin@usda.gov.
This Order is issued under the Hass Avocado Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 2000 (Act) (7 U.S.C. 7801-7813), enacted on October 23, 2000.
In a recent referendum, eligible producers and importers of Hass avocados voted in favor of implementing the Order. This action completes this rulemaking process.
The purpose of the program is to increase consumption of Hass avocados in the United States.
Producers and importers of Hass avocados will pay assessments under the program, and first handlers will be involved in the assessment collection process.
The Act provides that there will be a 12-member Board consisting of seven domestic Hass avocado producers, two importers, and three additional members who can either be importers or domestic producers. The three “swing” seats will be allocated to producers and importers so as to assure as nearly as possible that the composition of the Board reflects the proportion of domestic production and imports supplying the United States market. The proportion will be based on the average volume of domestic production and imports in the United States over the previous three years. Each member will have an alternate.
The Order provides for a nomination and election process to identify industry members who are interested and willing to serve on the Board. In the initial nomination process, the California Avocado Commission (Commission) will conduct an election to determine who will be nominated for each domestic producer seat. USDA will conduct an election among importers to determine who will be nominated to fill the importer seats. Two names must be submitted for each member and each alternate position. From the names submitted, USDA will appoint the members and alternates of the Board.
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
This rule has been reviewed under E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. Section 1212 of the Act states that the Act may not be construed to preempt or supersede any other program relating to Hass avocado promotion, research, industry information, and consumer information organized and operated under the laws of the United States or of a state.
Under Section 1207 of the Act, a person subject to the Oder may file a petition with USDA stating that the Order, any provision for the Order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the Order, is not established in accordance with law, and requesting a modification of the Order or an exemption from the Order. Any petition filed challenging the Order, any provision of the Order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the Order, shall be filed within two years after the effective date of the Order, provision, or obligation subject to challenge in the petition. The petitioner will have the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. Thereafter, USDA will issue a ruling on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601
In addition, the Order provisions were carefully reviewed, and every effort was made to minimize any unnecessary information collection and recordkeeping costs or requirements. In accordance with OMB regulation (5 CFR (part 1320) which implements the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the collection and recordkeeping requirements that are imposed by this Order were submitted to OMB and approved under OMB control numbers 0581-0197 and 0505-0001. The information collection numbers differ from what was published in the February 19, 2002, proposed rule because the rule inadvertently omitted OMB number 0505-0001 for the background nomination form. Section 1219.77 is corrected to add this OMB control number.
Copies of the final regulatory flexibility analysis and the discussion of the information collection and recordkeeping requirements contained in this rulemaking can be obtained from Julie Morin at the address listed above or by e-mail at
The Act authorizes the Department to establish a Hass avocado research, promotion, and information program. The program will be funded by an assessment levied on producers and importers of Hass avocados of 2.5 cents per pound of Hass avocados. The rate may be raised up to a maximum rate of 5 cents per pound. Exports of U.S. Hass avocados are exempt from assessment. The Act authorizes assessments on domestic Hass avocados and on imports of fresh, frozen, and processed Hass avocados. Initially, only fresh domestic and imported Hass avocados will be assessed.
The Board will use the funds to pay for research, promotion, industry information, and consumer information; administration, maintenance, and functioning of the Board; and expenses incurred by USDA in implementing and administering the Order, including referendum costs.
The Board will be composed of 12 voting members; 7 producers, 2 importers, and 3 producer and importers (swing seats). The three “swing” seats will be allocated to producers and importers so as to assure as nearly possible that the composition of the Board reflects the proportion of domestic production and imports supplying the United States market, based on the three-year average of domestic production and imports.
The producer assessment will be collected by first handlers, and the importer assessment will be collected by the U.S. Customs Service.
A state association of avocado producers (currently, the Commission) will receive 85 percent of the assessments paid by domestic producers, and importer associations will receive 85 percent of the assessments paid by their members. The state association could use the assessment funds to promote California Hass avocados in the United States, and the importer associations could use the assessments to promote Hass avocados on a country-of-origin basis in the United States. The funds remaining with the Board would be used to promote Hass avocados generically in the United States. The Board would also enter into contracts with the state association as provided for in the Act.
USDA issued a news release on January 8, 2001, requesting proposals for an initial Order or portions of an initial Order by February 7, 2001. A second news release, extending the deadline for submission of proposals to March 9, 2001, was issued on February 2, 2001.
An entire proposed Order was submitted by the Commission. In addition, proposals containing portions of an Order were submitted by the Asociacion de Productores y Empacadores Exportadores de Aguacate de Michoacan (APEAM); the Chilean Exporters Association (ASOEX), Chilean Fruit Growers Federation (FEDERUTA), and Comite de Paltas de Chile; and the New Zealand Avocado Growers Association (NZAGA) and the New Zealand Avocado Industry Council (NZAIC). USDA published a proposed rule on July 13, 2001, for comment. A second proposed rule was published on February 19, 2002. A referendum order that set the registration period from May 13-31, 2002, and voting period from June 24-July 12, 2002, was published on April 9, 2002. In the referendum, producers and importers of Hass avocados voted to implement the program.
The Order is summarized as follows: Sections 1219.1 through 1219.26 of the Order define certain terms, such as Hass avocado, handler, producer, and importer, which are used in the Order.
Sections 1219.30 through 1219.42 include provisions relating to the establishment, adjustment, and membership; nominations; appointment; term of office; vacancies; reimbursement; and the powers and duties of the Board.
The Board will be the body organized to administer the Order through the implementation of programs, plans, projects, budgets, and contracts to promote and disseminate information about Hass avocados, under the supervision of USDA. Further, the Board will be authorized to incur expenses necessary for the performance of its duties and to establish a reserve fund.
Sections 1219.50 through 1219.58 authorize the collection of assessments, specify who pays them and how, and specify persons who will be exempt from paying the assessment. The assessment rate may not exceed 5 cents per pound of Hass avocados. The assessment sections also outline the procedures to be followed by first handlers and importers for remitting assessments and establish interest charges for unpaid or late assessments.
Sections 1219.60 through 1219.65 concern reporting and recordkeeping requirements for persons subject to the Order; the confidentiality of information obtained from such books, records, or reports; and the maintenance of lists of importers and producers.
Sections 1219.70 through 1219.77 describe the rights of the Secretary of Agriculture; the authority for the Department to suspend or terminate the Order; proceedings after termination; the effect of termination or amendment; personal liability of Board members and staff; separability; amendments; and OMB control numbers.
The Department conducted a referendum among producers and importers of Hass avocados from June 24 through July 12, 2002, to determine whether the Order would become effective. The representative period for establishing voter eligibility was from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2001. It is determined that a majority of the eligible producers and importers
Pursuant to the provision in 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found and determined that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this action until 30 days after publication in the
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Consumer Information, Marketing agreements, Hass avocados, Promotion, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Title 7 of chapter XI of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
7 U.S.C. 7801-7813.
(a) A Hass Avocado Board, called the Board elsewhere in this part, is hereby established to administer the terms and provisions of this subpart. The Board shall consist of 12 members nominated by the Hass avocado industry and appointed by the Secretary as provided in this subpart, each of whom shall have an alternate nominated and appointed in the same manner as members of the Board are nominated and appointed. Board members and alternates shall be domiciled in the United States.
(b) The membership of the Board shall be divided as follows:
(1) Seven members and their alternates shall be producers of Hass avocados that are subject to assessments under this subpart;
(2) Two members and their alternates shall be importers of Hass avocados that are subject to assessments under this subpart; and
(3) Three members shall be producers of Hass avocados that are subject to assessments under this subpart or importers of Hass avocados that are subject to assessments under this subpart. Producers and importers shall be allocated to these positions so as to assure as nearly as possible that the composition of the 12-member Board reflects the proportion of domestic production and imports supplying the United States market. Such proportion shall be based on the Secretary's determination of the average volume of domestic production and the average volume of imports into the United States market over the previous three years, based on all information available to the Secretary.
(c) Three years after the assessment of funds commences pursuant to this
(d) For purposes of this section,
(a) The Association will nominate producer members and alternates to serve on the Board in accordance with the following procedures.
(1) The Association shall establish a list of producers in the United States who are eligible to serve on the Board and notify all producers that they may nominate persons to serve as members and alternates on the Board.
(2) After names are received from the producers, the Association shall prepare a ballot with the names of all persons nominated and mail it to all producers to allow them the opportunity to vote for the persons who will represent their interests on the Board.
(3) After tabulating the vote, the Association shall announce the results and submit two names for each producer member and two names for each alternate producer member to the Secretary from the persons receiving the highest number of votes.
(b) The Secretary shall select the producer members and alternates of the Board from the names submitted by the Association. Following the selection of the producer members, the Secretary shall select the alternate producer members. In selecting the alternate members, the Secretary shall consider the names submitted by the Association for each alternate member position along with the individuals whose names were submitted by the Association for each Board member position but were not selected for that position.
(a) The Department will conduct the nomination process for the initial importer members and alternates on the Board in accordance with the following procedures.
(1) The Department shall notify all known importers and importer organizations that they may nominate persons to serve as importer members and alternates on the Board.
(2) After names are received from the importers and importer organizations, the Department shall prepare a ballot with the names of all persons nominated and mail it to all known importers to allow them the opportunity to vote for the persons who will represent their interests on the Board.
(3) After tabulating the vote, the Department shall announce the results and submit two names for each importer member and two names for each alternate importer member to the Secretary from the persons receiving the highest number of votes.
(b) The Secretary shall select the importer members and alternates of the Board from the nominees elected by importers. Following the selection of the importer members, the Secretary shall select the alternate importer members. In selecting the alternate members, the Secretary shall consider the names for each alternate member position along with the individuals who were elected by importers for each Board member position but were not selected for that position.
The Board's staff shall announce at least 150 days in advance of the expiration of members' and alternates' terms that such terms are expiring and shall solicit nominations in accordance with procedures recommended by the Board and approved by the Secretary. Nominations for such positions should be submitted to the Secretary no less than 90 days prior to the expiration of the terms.
In any case in which producers or importers fail to nominate individuals for appointment to the Board, the Secretary may appoint individuals to fill vacancies from the appropriate segments of the industry.
The members and alternate members of the Board shall serve for terms of three years, except the members of the initial Board shall serve terms as follows: Four members and four alternates shall serve for two-year terms; four members and four alternates shall serve for three-year terms; and four members and four alternates shall serve for four-year terms. No member shall serve more than two consecutive three-year terms. Members and alternates serving initial two-year or four-year terms may serve for one additional three-year term. A Board member may serve as an alternate during the years the member is ineligible for a member position. Each term of office will end on October 31, with new terms of office beginning on November 1.
(a) In the event any member or alternate of the Board ceases to be a member of the category of members from which the member was appointed to the Board, such member or alternate shall be disqualified from serving on the Board and the position shall automatically become vacant.
(b) If a member of the Board consistently refuses to perform the duties of a member of the Board, or if a member of the Board engages in acts of dishonesty or willful misconduct, the Board may recommend to the Secretary that the member be removed from office. If the Secretary finds that the recommendation of the Board shows adequate cause, the member shall be removed from office.
(c) Should any Board member position become vacant in the event of the death, removal, resignation, or disqualification, the alternate of that member shall automatically assume the position of said member. The alternate shall serve until the end of the member's normal term. If there is no alternate member to assume the position of member, the successor member and alternate shall be nominated and selected in the manner specified in §§ 1219.31, 1219.32, or 1219.33.
(d) Should any alternate member become vacant in the event of death, removal, resignation, or disqualification, the Board may nominate persons to serve for the unexpired term of such alternate member. The nomination shall be conducted at a regularly scheduled Board meeting as soon as practicable after the vacancy occurs. The Board may
An alternate member of the Board, during the absence of the member for whom the person is the alternate, shall act in the place and stead of such member and perform such duties as assigned. In the event of the death, removal, resignation, or disqualification of any member, the alternate for that member shall automatically assume the position of said member. In the event that both a member of the Board and the alternate are unable to attend a meeting, the Board may not designate any other alternate to serve in such member's or alternate's place and stead for the meeting.
The Board shall have the following powers and duties in addition to the responsibilities and authorities specified in other sections of this subpart:
(a) To administer the Order in accordance with its terms and conditions and to collect assessments;
(b) To develop and recommend to the Secretary for approval such bylaws as may be necessary for the functioning of the Board and such rules as may be necessary to administer the Order, including activities authorized to be carried out under the Order;
(c) To meet, organize, and select from among the members of the Board a chairperson, other officers, committees, and subcommittees, at the start of each fiscal period, and at such other times as the Board determines to be appropriate;
(d) To recommend to the Secretary rules and regulations to effectuate the terms and conditions of this subpart;
(e) To employ such persons, other than the members, as the Board considers necessary to assist the Board in carrying out its duties and to determine the compensation and specify the duties of such persons;
(f) To appoint from its members an executive committee and to delegate to the committee authority to administer the terms and provisions of this subpart under the direction of the Board and within the policies determined by the Board and approved by the Secretary;
(g) To develop budgets for the implementation of this subpart and submit the budgets to the Secretary for approval and to propose and develop (or receive and evaluate), approve, and submit to the Secretary for approval programs, plans, and projects for Hass avocado promotion, industry information, consumer information, or related research;
(h) To develop and implement after the approval by the Secretary programs, plans, and projects for Hass avocado promotion, industry information, consumer information, or related research, to contract or enter into agreements with appropriate persons to implement the programs, plans, and projects, and to pay the costs of the implementation of contracts and agreements with funds collected under this subpart.
(i) To maintain such records and books and prepare and submit such reports and records from time to time to the Secretary as the Secretary may prescribe; to make appropriate accounting with respect to the receipt and disbursement of all funds entrusted to it; and to keep records that accurately reflect the actions and transactions of the Board;
(j) To work to achieve an effective, continuous, and coordinated program of promotion, research, consumer information, and industry information designed to strengthen the Hass avocado industry's position in the domestic marketplace; to maintain and expand existing domestic markets and uses for Hass avocados; to create new domestic markets; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Hass avocado industry;
(k) To evaluate on-going and completed programs, plans, and projects for Hass avocado promotion, industry information, consumer information, or related research and to comply with the independent evaluation provisions of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 [7 U.S.C. 7401
(l) To receive, investigate, and report to the Secretary complaints of violations of the Order;
(m) To recommend to the Secretary amendments to this Order;
(n) To invest, pending disbursement under a program, plan, or project, funds collected through assessments authorized under this Act only in:
(1) Obligations of the United States or any agency of the United States;
(2) General obligations of any State or any political subdivision of a State;
(3) Any interest-bearing account or certificate of deposit of a bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System; or
(4) Obligations fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States, except that income from any such invested funds may be used only for a purpose for which the invested funds may be used;
(o) To borrow funds necessary for the startup expenses of the Order;
(p) To cause the books of the Board to be audited by a qualified independent auditor at the end of each fiscal period and to submit a report of the audit directly to the Secretary;
(q) To give the Secretary the same notice of meetings and teleconferences of the Board and its committees as is given to members in order that the Secretary's representative(s) may attend or participate in the meetings;
(r) To act as intermediary between the Secretary and any producer, first handler, or importer;
(s) To periodically prepare and make public reports of its activities carried out, and at least once each fiscal period, to make public an accounting of funds received and expended; and
(t) To notify Hass avocado producers, first handlers, and importers of all Board meetings through news releases or other means.
(a) At a properly convened meeting of the Board, seven (7) members, including alternates acting in place of members of the Board, shall constitute a quorum:
(b) In lieu of voting at a properly convened meeting and, when in the opinion of the chairperson of the Board such action is considered necessary, the Board may take action if supported by one vote more than 50 percent of the members by mail, telephone, electronic mail, facsimile, or other means of communication. Such alternative means for the Board taking action may be undertaken for various reasons. These reasons include the need to address matters of an emergency nature when there is not enough time to call an assembled meeting of the Board. All telephone votes shall be confirmed promptly in writing. In that event, all members must be notified and provided an opportunity to vote. Any action so taken shall have the same force and effect as though such action had been taken at a properly convened meeting of the Board. All votes shall be recorded in the Board minutes.
(c) All Board members and alternates and the Secretary will be notified at least 10 days in advance of all Board meetings, except the chairperson of the Board can waive the 10-day requirement in matters of an emergency nature.
(d) Each member of the Board will be entitled to one vote on any matter put to the Board, and the motion will carry if supported by one vote more than 50 percent of the total votes represented by the Board members present.
(e) There shall be no voting by proxy.
(f) The chairperson shall be a voting member of the Board.
(a) The Board may establish committees as deemed necessary to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Order.
(b) The chairperson of the Board shall appoint all committee chairpersons and shall appoint all members of each committee after consultation with the committee chairperson affected. Appointments are subject to approval by the Board and may be changed from time to time as determined by the chairperson of the Board with the concurrence of the Board.
(c) The chairperson of the Board may appoint committee members from among the Board members and alternates and from the industry in general.
(d) The rules and procedures under which committees conduct their activities shall be prescribed in the Board's bylaws.
(e) Committee members and the Secretary will be notified at least 10 days in advance of all committee meetings.
(f) It will be considered a quorum at a committee meeting when at least one more than half of those assigned to the committee are present.
(g) There shall be no voting by proxy on committees.
(h) The chairperson of the Board shall be an ex-officio member of all committees.
(a) The members and alternates of the Board and committee members shall serve without compensation but shall be reimbursed for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses, as approved by the Board, incurred by them in the performance of their duties.
(b) The Board shall have in place sufficient internal controls to prevent reimbursements or expenditures for unreasonable or otherwise controversial travel and meeting expenses.
The Board may not engage in and shall prohibit its employees and agents from engaging in:
(a) Any action that would be a conflict of interest. For the purposes of this subpart, Board members and employees thereof must disclose any relationship with any organization or company that has a contract with the Board or operates a State promotion program. No member may vote on any matter in which the member or member's business entity has a financial interest.
(b) Using funds collected under this subpart for the purpose of influencing legislation or governmental action or policy, by local, national, and foreign governments, except to develop and make recommendations to the Secretary as provided for in this subpart.
(c) In a program, plan, or project conducted under this subpart:
(1) Making any reference to private brand names or making false, misleading, disparaging, or unwarranted claims on behalf of Hass avocados or
(2) Making any false, misleading, or disparaging statements with respect to the attributes or use of any agricultural product. This section shall not preclude the Board from offering its programs, plans, and projects for use by commercial parties under such terms and conditions as the Board may prescribe as approved by the Secretary.
(d) For the purposes of this section, a reference to State of origin or country of origin does not constitute a reference to a private brand name with regard to any funds credited to or disbursed by the Board to the Association or to any importer association established in accordance with § 1219.54.
(a) The Board shall submit to the Secretary, on a fiscal period basis, annual budgets of its anticipated expenses and disbursements of the Board in the administration of this subpart, including the projected costs of Hass avocado promotion, industry information, consumer information, and related research programs, plans, and projects. The first budget shall cover such period as may remain before the beginning of the next fiscal period. If such fiscal period is 90 days or less, the first budget shall cover such period, as well as the next fiscal period. Thereafter, the Board shall submit budgets for each succeeding fiscal period not less than 60 days before the beginning of such fiscal period.
(b) The Board shall receive and evaluate, or on its own initiative develop programs, plans and projects for Hass avocado promotion, industry information, consumer information as well as related research. The Board shall submit to the Secretary for approval any program, plan, or project authorized in this subpart. Such programs, plans or projects shall provide for:
(1) The establishment, implementation, issuance, effectuation, administration, and evaluation of appropriate programs, plans, or projects for advertising, sales promotion, other promotion, and consumer information with respect to Hass avocados directed toward increasing the general demand for Hass avocados in the United States. Funds shall be available as necessary to carry out this section;
(2) The establishment, implementation, issuance, effectuation, administration, and evaluation of appropriate programs, plans, and projects designed to strengthen the position of the Hass avocado industry in the domestic marketplace; to maintain, develop, and expand markets for Hass avocados in the United States; to lead to the development of new marketing strategies; to advance the image and desirability of, increase the efficiency of, and encourage further development of the Hass avocado industry; and to provide for the disbursement of necessary funds for the purposes described in this section;
(3) The establishment, implementation, issuance, effectuation, administration, and evaluation of programs, plans, and projects for marketing development research; research on the sale, distribution, marketing, use, quality, and nutritional value of Hass avocados; and other research with respect to Hass avocado marketing, promotion, industry information, or consumer information, including the creation of new products thereof. Information acquired from such plans and projects shall be disseminated as appropriate. Funds shall be available as necessary to carry out this section; and
(4) The Board to enter into contracts or make agreements for the development and carrying out of research, promotion, and information, and pay for the costs of such contracts or agreements with funds collected pursuant to § 1219.54.
(c) A budget, program, plan, or project for Hass avocados promotion, industry information, consumer information, or related research may not be implemented prior to approval of the budget, program, plan, or project by the Secretary. If the Secretary fails to provide notice to the Board or approval or disapproval of a budget, program, plan, or project within 45 days after
(d) The Board, from time to time, may seek advice and consult with experts from the production, import, wholesale, and retail segments of the Hass avocado industry to assist in the development of promotion, industry information, consumer information, and related research programs, plans, and projects. For these purposes, the Board may appoint special committees composed of persons other than Board members. A committee so appointed shall consult directly with the Board.
(e) Programs must be conducted throughout the year to reflect the periods when imported and domestic Hass avocados are in the U.S. marketplace.
(f) The Board shall consult with both the Association and importer associations on programs, plans, and projects for generic promotions.
(a) The Board shall enter into a contract or an agreement with the Association for the implementation of programs, plans, or projects for promotion, industry information, consumer information, or related research with respect to Hass avocados and for the payment of the cost of the contract or agreement with funds received by the Board under this subpart. The Board may disburse such funds as necessary for these purposes after such programs, plans, or projects have been submitted to and approved by the Secretary.
(b) Any contract or agreement entered into shall provide that the contracting or agreeing party shall develop and submit to the Board a program, plan or project, together with a budget that includes the estimated costs to be incurred for the program, plan or project, and such program, plan or project shall become effective on the approval of the Secretary. For such contract or agreement, the contracting or agreeing party shall:
(1) Keep accurate records of all transactions of the party;
(2) Account for funds received and expended;
(3) Make periodic reports to the Board of activities conducted; and
(4) Make such other reports as the Board or the Secretary shall require.
(c) The Secretary may audit the records of the contracting or agreeing party periodically.
(d) Contractors and subcontractors are subject to the provisions of § 1219.42.
(e) The Board may enter into contracts or agreements for administrative services, including contracts for employment, as may be required to conduct its business. To the extent appropriate to the contract involved, contracts or agreements entered into by the Board under the authority of this section shall conform to the provisions described in paragraph (b) of this section.
(a) As soon as practicable after September 9, 2002, and after consultation with the Secretary and other appropriate persons, the Board shall implement a system of cost controls based on normally accepted business practices to:
(1) Ensure that the costs incurred by the Board in administering this part in any fiscal period shall not exceed 10 percent of the projected level of assessments and other income received by the Board for generic promotion and research programs for that fiscal period; and
(2) Cover the minimum administrative activities and personnel needed to properly administer and enforce this subpart, and conduct, supervise, and evaluate programs, plans, and projects under this subpart.
(b) Reimbursements to the Secretary required under § 1219.53(b) are excluded from the limitation on spending.
(c) To the extent possible, the Board shall use the resources, staffs, and facilities of existing avocado organizations as provided in § 1219.54(a).
(a) The Board is authorized to incur such expenses, including provision for a reasonable reserve for operating contingencies, as the Secretary finds are reasonable and likely to be incurred by the Board for its maintenance and functioning and to enable it to exercise its powers and perform its duties in accordance with the provisions of this subpart. Such expenses shall be paid from funds received by the Board, including assessments, contributions from any person not subject to assessments under this subpart, and other funds available to the Board.
(b) The Board shall reimburse the Department:
(1) For expenses not to exceed $25,000 incurred by the Secretary in connection with any referendum conducted under the Act;
(2) For administrative costs incurred by the Secretary for supervisory work of up to two employee years annually after the Order or amendment to the Order has been issued and made effective; and
(3) For costs incurred by the Secretary in implementation of the Order, for enforcement of the Act and the order, for subsequent referenda conducted under the Act, and in defending the Board in litigation arising out of action taken by the Board or otherwise in defense of the Order.
(c) The Board shall establish and maintain the minimum level of annual administrative expenses necessary to efficiently and effectively carry out the programs authorized by the Act. The Board shall include its annual administrative expenses as a separate item in its annual report. The Board shall adhere to its fiduciary responsibilities and ensure that all monies are spent in accordance with the Act and the Order.
(d) With the approval of the Secretary, the Board may borrow money for the payment of administrative expenses, subject to the same fiscal, budget, and audit controls as other funds of the Board. Any funds borrowed by the Board shall be expended only for startup costs and capital outlays and are limited to the first period of operation of the Board.
(e) The Board may accept voluntary contributions, but these shall only be used to pay expenses incurred in the conduct of programs, plans, and projects. The contributions shall be free from any encumbrance by the donor, and the Board shall retain complete control of their use.
(a) Except as provided in § 1219.55, the initial rate of assessment shall be 2.5 cents per pound on fresh Hass avocados produced and handled in the United States and on fresh Hass avocados imported into the United States. An equivalent rate shall be assessed on processed and frozen Hass avocados on which an assessment has not been paid. Such equivalent rate will be assessed on processed or frozen Hass avocados upon the recommendation of the Board with the approval of the Secretary. The rate of assessment may be increased or decreased as recommended by the Board and approved by the Secretary. Such an increase or decrease may occur not more than once annually. Any change in the assessment rate shall be announced by the Board at least 30 days prior to going into effect and shall not be subject to a vote in a referendum. The maximum assessment rate authorized is 5 cents per pound. No more than one assessment shall be made on any Hass avocados.
(b)
(1) In the case of a producer acting as the producer's own first handler, the producer will be required to collect and remit the assessments due to the Board.
(2) Each first handler shall collect from the producer and pay to the Board an assessment of 2.5 cents per pound in accordance with this subpart. Assessments shall be remitted by each first handler to the Board or its agent within 30 days after the end of the month in which the sale or non-sale transfer subject to assessment under this subpart took place.
(3) The first handler shall maintain a separate record of the domestic Hass avocados of each producer whose domestic Hass avocados are handled, including the domestic Hass avocados owned by the handler and domestic Hass avocados that are exported.
(4) Assessment of other types of fresh avocados may be added at the recommendation of the Board with the approval of the Secretary.
(c)
(1) The assessment rate for imported fresh Hass avocados shall be the same or equivalent to the rate for fresh Hass avocados produced and handled in the United States.
(2) The import assessment shall be uniformly applied to imported fresh Hass avocados that are identified by the number 0804.40.00.10 in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States or any other numbers to identify fresh Hass avocados. Assessments on other types of imported fresh avocados or on processed Hass avocados, such as prepared, preserved, or frozen Hass avocados or Hass avocado paste, puree, and oil will be added at the recommendation of the Board with the approval of the Secretary.
(3) The assessments due on imported Hass avocados shall be paid when they are released from custody by Customs and introduced into the stream of commerce in the United States.
(d) All assessment payments and reports will be submitted to the Board's office. All final payments for a crop year are to be received no later than November 30 of that year, unless the Board determines that assessments due from the first handler shall be paid to the Board at a different time and manner, with approval of the Secretary.
(e) A late payment charge prescribed by the Secretary shall be imposed on any first handler who fails to remit to the Board the total amount for which any such handler is liable on or before the due date. In addition to the late payment charge, an interest charge shall be imposed on the outstanding amount for which the handler is liable. The rate of interest shall be prescribed by the Secretary. The timeliness of a payment to the Board shall be based on the date the payment is actually received by the Board.
(f) Regulations issued by the Secretary may provide for different first handler payment schedules of assessments on domestic Hass avocados, so as to recognize differences in marketing or purchasing practices and procedures.
(g) Persons failing to remit total assessments due in a timely manner may also be subject to actions under federal debt collection procedures.
(h) The Board may authorize other organizations to collect assessments on its behalf with approval of the Secretary.
(i) The collection of assessments shall commence on or after a date established by the Secretary and shall continue until terminated by the Secretary. If the Board is not constituted on the date the first assessments are to be remitted, the Secretary shall have the authority to receive assessments on behalf of the Board and may hold such assessments in an interest-bearing account until the Board is constituted and the funds are transferred to the Board.
(j) To facilitate the payment of assessments under this section, the Board shall publish lists of first handlers required to remit assessments under this subpart and exempt handlers.
(k) The Association shall receive an amount of assessment funds equal to 85 percent of the assessments paid on Hass avocados produced in such State. Such funds shall be remitted to such State organization no later than 30 days after such funds are received by the Board. In addition, such funds and any proceeds from the investment of such funds shall be used by the Association to finance promotion, research, consumer information, and industry information programs, plans, and projects in the United States. However, no such funds shall be used for any administrative expenses incurred by the Association.
(l) An association of Hass avocado importers established pursuant to § 1219.58 shall receive an amount of assessment funds equal to 85 percent of the assessments paid on Hass avocados imported by its members. Such funds shall be remitted to such importer association no later than 30 days after such funds are received by the Board. In addition, such funds and any proceeds from the investment of such funds shall be used by the importer association to finance promotion, research, consumer information, and industry information programs, plans, and projects in the United States. However, no such funds shall be used for any administrative expenses incurred by the importer association.
(m) In general, assessment funds received by the Board shall be used:
(1) For payment of costs incurred in implementing and administering this subpart;
(2) To provide for a reasonable reserve to be maintained from assessments to be available for contingencies; and
(3) To cover the administrative costs incurred by the Secretary in implementing and administering this Act, as set forth in § 1219.53(b).
(n) The Board may establish an operating monetary reserve which may carry over to subsequent fiscal periods:
(a) Any sale of Hass avocados for export from the United States is exempt from assessment.
(b) The Board may require persons receiving an exemption from assessments to provide to the Board reports on the disposition of exempt Hass avocados.
Whenever the Board or the Secretary determines through an audit of a person's reports, records, books, or accounts or by some other means that additional money is due to the Board, the person shall be notified of the amount due. The person shall then remit any amount due the Board by the next date for remitting assessments. Overpayments shall be credited to the account of the person remitting the overpayment and shall be applied against any amounts due in succeeding months unless the person requests a refund of the overpayment.
(a) Any patents, copyrights, trademarks, inventions, information, publications, and product formulations developed through the use of funds received by the Board under this subpart shall be the property of the U.S. Government as represented by the Board, and shall, along with any rents,
(b) Should patents, copyrights, trademarks, inventions, publications, or product formulations be developed through the use of funds collected by the Board under this subpart and funds contributed by another organization or person, ownership and related rights to such patents, copyrights, trademarks, inventions, publications, or product formulations shall be determined by agreement between the Board and the party contributing funds towards the development of such patent, copyright, trademark, invention, publication, or product formulation in a manner consistent with paragraph (a) of this section.
(a) An association of avocado importers is eligible to receive assessment funds and any proceeds from the investment of such funds only if such importer association is:
(1) Established pursuant to State law that requires detailed State regulation comparable to that applicable to the State organization of domestic avocado producers, as determined by the Secretary; or
(2) Certified by the Secretary as meeting the requirements applicable to the Board as to its operations and obligations, including budgets, programs, plans, projects, audits, conflicts of interest, and reimbursements for administrative costs incurred by the Secretary.
(b) An importer association may represent any importers of Hass avocados including importers of Hass avocados from a particular foreign country. An importer association may be composed of importers as well as representatives of foreign avocado exporting industries. An importer association should establish it own bylaws and may use existing organizations for the establishment of the association and coordination of the association's promotion and research efforts.
(c) For the purposes of the Order, the information required for certification of the importer associations by the Secretary may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Evidence of incorporation under any state law with all appropriate legal requirements;
(2) Evidence that the association is composed of importers that are located in any state and subject to assessments under the Order, no matter where the association has been incorporated or in which state the importers reside;
(3) Certification of the association's ability and willingness to further the aims and objectives of the Order;
(4) Evidence of stability and permanency; and
(5) A description of the functions of the association.
(a) Each first handler of domestic Hass avocados, producer, and importer subject to this subpart shall report to the administrative staff of the Board, at such times and in such manner as the Board may prescribe, such information as may be necessary for the Board to perform its duties.
(b) First handler reports shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
(1) Number of pounds of domestic Hass avocados received during the reporting period;
(2) Number of pounds on which assessments were collected;
(3) Assessments collected during the reporting period;
(4) Name and address of person(s) from whom the first handler collected the assessments on each pound handled;
(5) Date collection was made on each pound handled;
(6) Record of assessments paid, including a statement from the handler that assessments have been paid on all domestic Hass avocados handled during the reporting period; and
(7) Number of pounds exported.
(c) Each importer subject to this subpart may be required to report the following:
(1) Number of pounds of Hass avocados imported during the reporting period;
(2) Number of pounds on which an assessment was paid;
(3) Name and address of the importer;
(4) Date collection was made on each pound imported and to whom payment was made; and
(5) Record of each importation of Hass avocados during such period, giving quantity, variety, date, and port of entry.
Each producer, first handler, and importer subject to this subpart shall maintain and make available for inspection by the employees and agents of the Board and the Secretary, such books and records as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this subpart, and the regulations issued thereunder, including such records as are necessary to verify any reports required. Books and records shall be retained for at least two years beyond the fiscal period of their applicability.
(a) The Board shall maintain such books and records as the Secretary may require. Such books and records shall be made available upon request by the Secretary for inspection and audit.
(b) The Board shall prepare and submit to the Secretary, from time to time, such reports as the Secretary may require.
(c) The Board shall account for the receipt and disbursement of all the funds entrusted to the Board.
(d) The Board shall cause the books and records of the Board to be audited by an independent auditor at the end of each fiscal period. A report of each audit shall be submitted to the Secretary.
(a) All information obtained from the books, records, or reports under the Act, this subpart, and the regulations issued thereunder shall be kept confidential and shall not be disclosed to the public by any person, including all current and former officers, employees, staff and agents of the Department, the Board, and contracting and subcontracting agencies or agreeing parties having access to such information. Only those persons having a specific need for such information to effectively administer the provisions of this subpart shall have access to such information. Only such information so obtained as the Secretary deems relevant shall be disclosed, and then only in a judicial proceeding or administrative hearing brought at the direction, or upon the request, of the Secretary, or to which the Secretary or any officer of the United States is a party, and involving this subpart. Nothing in this subpart shall be deemed to prohibit:
(1) The issuance of general statements based upon the reports of the number of persons subject to this subpart or statistical data collected from such reports, if such statements do not identify the information furnished by any person; or
(2) The publication, by direction of the Secretary, of the name of any person who has been adjudged to have violated this subpart, together with a statement
(b) Any disclosure of any confidential information by any employee or agent of the Board shall be considered willful misconduct.
(c) No information on how a person voted in a referendum conducted under the Act shall be made public.
The administrative staff of the Board shall periodically review the list of importers of Hass avocados to determine whether persons on the list are subject to this subpart.
The administrative staff of the Board shall periodically review the list of producers of Hass avocados to determine whether the persons on the list of subject to this subpart. On the request of the Secretary or the Board, the Association shall provide to the Secretary or the administrative staff of the Board the list of producers of Hass avocados.
All fiscal matters, programs, plans, and projects, contracts, rules or regulations, reports, or other substantive actions proposed and prepared by the Board shall be submitted to the Secretary for approval.
(a) The Secretary shall suspend or terminate this part or subpart or a provision thereof if the Secretary finds that the part or subpart or a provision thereof obstructs or does not tend to effectuate the purposes of the Act, or if the Secretary determines that this part or subpart or a provision thereof is not favored by persons voting in a referendum conducted pursuant to the Order or the Act.
(b) The Secretary shall suspend or terminate this subpart at the end of the marketing year whenever the Secretary determines that its suspension or termination is approved or favored by a majority of the producers and importers voting who, during a representative period determined by the Secretary, have been engaged in the production or importation of Hass avocados.
(c) If, as a result of a referendum, the Secretary determines that this subpart is not approved, the Secretary shall:
(1) Suspend or terminate, as appropriate, the collection of assessments not later than 180 days after making such determination; and
(2) Suspend or terminate, as appropriate, all activities under this subpart in an orderly manner as soon as practicable.
(a) Upon the termination of this subpart, the Board shall recommend to the Secretary not more than five of its members to serve as trustees for the purpose of liquidating the affairs of the Board. Such persons, upon designation by the Secretary, shall become trustees of all of the funds and property owned, in possession of or under control of the Board, including claims for any funds unpaid or property not delivered or any other claim existing at the time of such termination.
(b) The said trustees shall:
(1) Continue in such capacity until discharged by the Secretary;
(2) Carry out the obligations of the Board under any contracts or agreements entered into by it pursuant to the Order;
(3) From time to time account for all receipts and disbursements and deliver all property on hand, together with all books and records of the Board and of the trustees, to such person or persons as the Secretary may direct; and
(4) Upon the request of the Secretary, execute such assignments or other instruments necessary and appropriate to vest in such persons title and right to all of the funds, property, and claims vested in the Board or the trustees pursuant to the Order.
(c) Any person to whom funds, property, or claims have been transferred or delivered pursuant to the Order shall be subject to the same obligations imposed upon the Board and the trustees.
(d) Any residual funds not required to defray the necessary expenses of liquidation shall be returned to the persons who contributed such funds, or paid assessments, or, if not practicable, shall be turned over to the Secretary to be distributed to authorized Hass avocado producer and importer organizations in the interest of continuing Hass avocado promotion, research, and information programs.
Unless otherwise expressly provided by the Secretary, the termination of this subpart or any regulation issued thereunder, or the issuance of any amendment to either thereof, shall not:
(a) Affect or waive any right, duty, obligation, or liability which shall have arisen or which may thereafter arise in connection with any provision of this subpart or any such rule or regulation issued thereunder; or
(b) Release or extinguish any violation of this subpart or of any rule or regulation issued thereunder; or
(c) Affect or impair any rights or remedies of the United States, or of the Secretary or of any person, with respect to any such violation.
No member, alternate member, employee, or agent of the Board shall be held personally responsible, either individually or jointly with others, in any way whatsoever, to any person for errors in judgment, mistakes, or other acts, either of Association or omission, as such member, alternate, employee, or agent, except for acts of dishonesty or willful misconduct.
If any provision of this subpart is declared invalid or the applicability thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of this subpart, or the applicability thereof to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Amendments to this subpart may be proposed, from time to time, by the Board or by any interested persons affected by the provisions of the Act, including the Secretary. Except for changes in the assessment rate, the provisions of the Act applicable to the Order are applicable to any amendment of the Order.
The control numbers assigned to the information collection requirements in this part by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, are OMB control numbers 0581-0197 and 0505-0001.
Small Business Administration (SBA).
Direct final rule; correction.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is correcting the direct final rule it published in the
The direct final rule is effective October 1, 2002, without further action, unless adverse comment is received by September 12, 2002. If adverse comment is received, SBA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the
Address all comments concerning the direct final rule to Gary M. Jackson, Assistant Administrator for Size Standards, Office of Size Standards, 409 Third Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416; via email to
Carl Jordan, Office of Size Standards, at (202) 205-6618 or
SBA published a direct final rule in the
In rule FR Doc. 02-20357 published on August 13, 2002 (67 FR 52597) make the following correction.
On page 52602, in the third column, correct amendatory instruction number 3 as follows:
3. Amend § 121.201 by revising the table of size standards to read as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
(a) The value of tires within Census Classification codes 30111 and 30112 which it manufactured in the United States during the previous calendar year is more than 50 percent of the value of its total worldwide manufacture,
(b) The value of pneumatic tires within Census Classification codes 30111 and 30112 comprising its total worldwide manufacture during the preceding calendar year was less than 5 percent of the value of all such tires manufactured in the United States during that period, and
(c) The value of the principal product which it manufactured or otherwise produced, or sold worldwide during the preceding calendar year is less than 10 percent of the total value of such products manufactured or otherwise produced or sold in the United States during that period.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
(a) “Research and Development” means laboratory or other physical research and development. It does not include economic, educational, engineering, operations, systems, or other nonphysical research; or computer programming, data processing, commercial and/or medical laboratory testing.
(b) For purposes of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program only, a different definition has been established by law. See § 121.701 of these regulations.
(c) “Research and Development” for guided missiles and space vehicles includes evaluations and simulation, and other services requiring thorough knowledge of complete missiles and spacecraft.
12.
13.
(a) If one of the activities of base maintenance, as defined in paragraph (b) (below in this endnote) can be identified with a separate industry and that activity (or industry) accounts for 50 percent or more of the value of an entire contract, then the proper size standard is that of the particular industry, and not the base maintenance size standard.
(b) “Base Maintenance” requires the performance of three or more separate activities in the areas of service or special trade construction industries. If services are performed, these activities must each be in a separate NAICS code including, but not limited to, Janitorial and Custodial Service, Fire Prevention Service, Messenger Service, Commissary Service, Protective Guard Service, and Grounds Maintenance and Landscaping Service. If the contract requires the use of special trade contractors (plumbing, painting, plastering, carpentry, etc.), all such special trade construction activities are considered a single activity and classified as Base Housing Maintenance. Since Base Housing Maintenance is only one activity, two additional activities are required for a contract to be classified as “Base Maintenance.”
14.
(a) For SBA assistance as a small business concern in the industry of Environmental Remediation Services, other than for Government procurement, a concern must be engaged primarily in furnishing a range of services for the remediation of a contaminated environment to an acceptable condition including, but not limited to, preliminary assessment, site inspection, testing, remedial investigation, feasibility studies, remedial design, containment, remedial action, removal of contaminated materials, storage of contaminated materials and security and site closeouts. If one of such activities accounts for 50 percent or more of a concern's total revenues, employees, or other related factors, the concern's primary industry is that of the particular industry and not the Environmental Remediation Services Industry.
(b) For purposes of classifying a Government procurement as Environmental Remediation Services, the general purpose of the procurement must be to restore a contaminated environment and also the procurement must be composed of activities in three or more separate industries with separate NAICS codes or, in some instances (
15.
Small Business Administration.
Final decision to waive the nonmanufacturer rule.
This document advises the public that the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is establishing a waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing. The basis for waivers is that no small business manufacturers are available to participate in the Federal market for these products. The effect of a waiver will allow otherwise qualified nonmanufacturers to supply the products of any domestic manufacturer on a Federal contract set aside for small business or awarded through the SBA 8(a) Program.
September 6, 2002.
Edith Butler, Program Analyst, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington DC 20416 Tel: (202) 619-0422.
Public Law 100-656, enacted on November 15, 1988, incorporated into the Small Business Act the previously existing regulation that recipients of Federal contracts set aside for small business or SBA 8(a) Program procurement must provide the product of a small business manufacturer or processor, if the recipient is other than the actual manufacturer or processor. This requirement is commonly referred to as the Nonmanufacturer Rule. The SBA regulations imposing this requirement are found at 13 CFR 121.406(b) and section 303(h) of the law provides for waiver of this requirement by SBA for any “class of products” for which there are no small business manufacturers or processors in the Federal market. To be considered available to participate in the Federal market on these classes of products, a small business manufacturer must have submitted a proposal for a contract solicitation or received a contract from the Federal Government within the last 24 months.
The SBA defines “class of products” based on six digit coding systems. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) replaced the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. The second is the Product and Service Code established by the Federal Procurement Data System.
This document waives the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Small Arms
Documents proposing to waive the nonmanufacturer rule for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing was published in the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This action establishes Class E5 airspace at Poplarville, MS. A VHF Omni Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME)—A, Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP), has been developed for Oreck Airport, Poplarville, MS. As a result, controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is needed to contain the SIAP and for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at Oreck Airport. The operating status of the airport will change from Visual Flight Rules (VFR) to include IFR operations concurrent with the publication of the SIAP.
0901 UTC, October 3, 2002.
Walter R. Cochran, manager, Airspace Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 305-5627.
On July 23, 2002, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) by establishing Class E5 airspace at Poplarville, MS, (67 FR 48066), to provide adequate controlled airspace to contain IFR operations at the Oreck Airport. Class E airspace designations for airspace areas extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9J, dated August 31, 2001, and effective September 16, 2001, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E5 designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments objecting to the proposal were received.
This amendment to Part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) establishes Class E5 airspace at Poplarville, MS.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore, (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) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4 mile—radius of Oreck Airport; excluding that airspace within the Bogalusa, LA, Class E airspace area.
Coast Guard, DOT.
Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.
The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a temporary deviation from the drawbridge operation regulations for the Metro North Saga Bridge, mile 1.1, across the Saugatuck River in Connecticut. This temporary deviation will allow the bridge to remain in the closed position from 1 a.m. on September 7, 2002 through 8 p.m. on September 8, 2002. This temporary deviation is necessary to facilitate structural repairs at the bridge.
This deviation is effective from September 7, 2002 through September 8, 2002.
Joseph Schmied, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District, at (212) 668-7195.
The Metro North Saga Bridge has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 13 feet at mean high water and 20 feet at mean low water. The existing regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.221.
The bridge owner, Metro North, requested a temporary deviation from the drawbridge operating regulations to facilitate structural maintenance,
The bridge opening records indicate this bridge has not received any requests to open during the requested closure time during the past four years; therefore, no navigational impacts to the marine transit system are expected.
This deviation from the drawbridge operation regulations will allow the bridge to remain in the closed position from 1 a.m. on September 7, 2002 through 8 p.m. on September 8, 2002.
This deviation from the drawbridge operation regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35, and will be performed with all due speed in order to return the bridge to normal operation as soon as possible.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), HHS.
Final rule.
Section 3102 of the Children's Health Act of 2000, Pub. L. 106-310, amends section 501 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa) to add a new subsection (m) entitled “Emergency Response.” This newly enacted subsection 501(m) authorizes the Secretary to use up to, but no more than, 2.5% of all amounts appropriated under Title V of the PHS Act, other than those appropriated under Part C, in each fiscal year to make “noncompetitive grants, contracts or cooperative agreements to public entities to enable such entities to address emergency substance abuse or mental health needs in local communities.”
Because Congress believed the Secretary needed the ability to respond to emergencies, it exempted any grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements authorized under this section from the peer review process. See section 501(m)(1) of the PHS Act. Instead, the Secretary is to use an objective review process by establishing objective criteria to review applications for funds under this authority.
This Final Rule will become effective on September 6, 2002.
Joseph D. Faha, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), (301) 443-7017.
In the
In response to the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, SAMHSA received two comments. Both commenters believe that the emergency criteria are too narrow in requiring that the emergency must have a “sudden, rapid onset and definite conclusion.” They point out, for example, that because the health needs of their community resulting from asbestos-related diseases “unfolded as an ongoing process of discovering long term latent health effects that occurred in the past, the precipitating event would not fit the criteria.” The Secretary has purposely included the criteria of “sudden, rapid onset and definite conclusion” to be consistent with the definition of an emergency in the regulations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and declines to modify the criteria.
The commenters also noted the importance of standardizing data collection from funded programs, in order to develop response models that fit each type of disaster, and to provide for meaningful evaluations of overall effectiveness and meta analysis. The Secretary responds that the primary purpose of the Emergency Response grants is to provide substance abuse and mental health services in the event of an emergency, and that focusing on data collection efforts to develop response models, evaluation, and meta analysis is outside the purview of this primary goal.
We are making a few minor technical changes to the rule. We find that these minor technical changes do not rise to the level of substantive change and thus comment is unnecessary. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
First, the term “Presidential disaster declaration” is defined in § 51d.2, but is not used in the regulation. We are deleting this definition because it is unnecessary.
Second, the Interim Final Rule, at § 51d.8, mistakenly indicated that 42 CFR part 50, subpart D—Public Health Service grant appeals procedure applies to the Emergency Grant awards. However, the Department amended this regulation to remove SAMHSA from the list of agencies to which these informal appeal procedures apply. Aggrieved grantees have direct access to the Departmental Appeals Board and that Board's original jurisdiction. See 63 FR 66062 (Dec. 1, 1998). We are deleting reference to this section to avoid any confusion.
Finally, the Interim Final Rule mistakenly indicated that 45 CFR part 75—Informal grant appeals procedures applies to the Emergency Grant awards. This provision has been deleted from the Code of Federal Regulations, as obsolete and ineffective. See 62 FR 38217 (July 17, 1997). We are deleting reference to this section to avoid any confusion.
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when rulemaking is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that provide the greatest net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health, safety distributive and equity effects). As noted in the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, we have determined that the rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of the Executive Order. This rule does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency, materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements,
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) requires that regulatory actions be analyzed to determine whether they will have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. As noted in the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, we have determined that this is not a “major” rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, and that it will not have an effect on the States or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requires that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before developing any rule that may result in an expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. As noted in the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, this rule contains no Federal mandates for State, tribal, or local governments or for the private sector.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism, requires that Federal agencies consult with State and local government officials in the development of regulatory policies with federalism implications. As noted in the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, we reviewed the rule as required under the Order and determined that it does not have any federalism implications. This rule will not have an effect on the States or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. This having been stated, States support the flexibility that this regulation offers them in seeking Federal assistance for substance abuse and/or mental health emergencies that may occur in their borders.
The information collection provisions in this final rule have been approved under OMB control number 0930-0229. This approval expires April 30, 2005.
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” “Policies that have tribal implications” is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.”
As noted in the October 11, 2001, Interim Final Rule, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Administrative practice and procedure, Disaster assistance, Drug abuse, Emergency medical services, Grant programs-health, Health facilities, Mental health programs, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 U.S.C. 290aa(m).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Final rule.
NOAA Fisheries is closing the waters of Pamlico Sound, NC, to fishing with gillnets with a mesh size larger than 4 1/4 inch (10.8 cm) stretched mesh (“large-mesh gillnet”), on a seasonal basis, from September 1 through December 15 each year, to protect migrating sea turtles. The closed area includes all inshore waters of Pamlico Sound south of 35°46.3' N. lat., north of 35°00' N. lat., and east of 76°30' W. long.
This final rule is effective on September 3, 2002.
Copies of the Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for this final rule may be obtained by writing to the Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, NOAA Fisheries, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Requests may also be sent via fax to 301-713-0376, Attn: Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources.
David M. Bernhart (phone, 727-570-5312; fax 727-570-5517; e-mail,
All sea turtles that occur in U.S. waters are listed as either endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The Kemp's ridley (
Under the ESA and its implementing regulations, taking sea turtles--even
On September 27, 2001, NOAA Fisheries implemented an interim final rule (66 FR 50350, October 3, 2001) closing the waters of Pamlico Sound, NC, to fishing with gillnets with a mesh size larger than 4 1/4 inch (10.8 cm) stretched mesh. The closure was in effect from September 28 to December 15, 2001. The interim final rule, which expires on September 14, 2002, was published with the intent of issuing a permanent rule to go into effect September 15, 2002. Two comments were received on the interim final rule and are addressed under section Response to Comments.
Concurrent with implementing the interim final rule, NOAA Fisheries issued an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) pursuant to section 10 of the ESA to North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF). The ITP authorized take of listed sea turtles as a result of the small- and large-mesh shallow water gillnet fisheries operating within designated areas of Pamlico Sound. The ITP required fishermen deploying gillnets in the shallow waters of southeastern Pamlico Sound to obtain permits from NCDMF. The ITP required a maximum limit of 2,000 yards (1,828 m) of net, a mandatory weekly report on sea turtle interactions, mandatory observer coverage, and fishery closures if the incidental take level specified in the ITP was exceeded. A limited amount of deep-water, large-mesh gillnet gear testing was also allowed under the ITP. Estimated levels of sea turtle interactions remained below thresholds specified in the ITP and, therefore, additional closures were not required during the 2001 season (Gearhart 2002).
A detailed summary relating the events leading up to the promulgation of the interim final rule and NCDMF ITP can be found in the background section of the interim final rule (66 FR 50350, October 3, 2001).
The Pamlico Sound large-mesh gillnet fishery can be divided into two components shallow-water and deep-water, which are distinguished by their fishing areas, seasons, tactics, participants, and vessel characteristics.
The deep-water fishery operates from September through December with fishermen setting nets along a slope adjacent to the main basin of Pamlico Sound. Fishing depths in this area range from 10 to 20 feet (3.0 to 6.1 m). Vessels are typical ocean sink gillnet boats ranging from 25 to 45 feet (7.6 to 13.7 m) in length. Each vessel is operated by a two-man crew. Each vessel sets between 2,000 yards (1,828 m) and 10,000 yards (9,140 m) of large-mesh, most often 5.5 to 6.5 inch (14.0 to 16.5 cm), gillnet, which are soaked for up to 3 days and retrieved with the aid of net reels. Net depths range from 8 to 12 feet (2.4 m to 3.7 m) with tie-downs 2 to 4 feet (.61 to 1.2 m) long attached to the float and lead lines at 50 foot (15.2 m) intervals along the net. Tie-downs are used in this fishery to produce a bag or pocket of webbing, which is believed to increase the catch efficiency for bottom-dwelling flounder. There were 25 active participants in this fishery during the 2000 fishing season, with most trips originating from Engelhard or Swan Quarter, N.C., and a small portion leaving from Hatteras, N.C. The deep-water, large-mesh gillnet fishery was closed in 2001 as a result of the NOAA Fisheries interim final rule. This fishery has grown within the past 10 years from what was initially only a few fishermen setting a few thousand yards of gillnet. Effort has steadily increased with more participants fishing more gear each year. During the past several years, gillnets have surpassed pound nets as the dominant gear for flounder in North Carolina's estuarine waters. Pound nets had long been the traditional means for harvesting flounder in North Carolina waters.
Monitoring of the deep-water fishery during the 2000 fishing season consisted of 13.1 percent observer coverage with 35 trips observed. Fourteen sea turtle interactions were observed involving four Kemp's ridleys, two greens, and eight loggerheads. Eight of these turtles were released alive; six were dead.
The shallow-water fishery operates from April through December in areas next to the barrier islands in Pamlico Sound, extending both north and southwest along the Outer Banks. Most fishing in these areas occurs in depths of less than 3 feet (0.9 m). Vessels are usually open skiffs ranging from 15 to 25 feet (4.6 to 7.6 m) in length with one- or two-man crews. Each fisherman typically sets 500 to 2000 yards (457 to 1,828 m) of large-mesh (5.5 to 7.0 inch (14.0 to 17.8 cm)) gillnet. The nets are soaked overnight and retrieved by hand. Tie-downs are not used in this fishery, but net depths range from 6 to 11 feet (1.8 to 3.4 m), with sets occurring in depths less than 3 feet (0.9 m). This combination of water depth and net depth provides the same bag effect as the tie-down in the deep-water fishery. There were 95 permitted, active participants during the 2001 fishing season. The shallow-water gillnet fishery is considered to be more traditional than the deep-water gillnet fishery.
Monitoring during the 2001 fishing season consisted of 9 percent observer coverage of the shallow-water, large-mesh fishery, with 131 trips observed. During these trips, five sea turtle interactions were observed, of which four were green turtles and one was a hawksbill. Three green turtles and the hawksbill were released alive; one green turtle was dead. The small mesh fishery was observed on 8.4 percent of the trips prior to November 1 and 20 percent of the trips after that. Coverage was increased in November because fishermen no longer were required to tend their nets and the possibility of a lethal turtle take was greater. No turtle interactions were documented in the small mesh fishery.
NOAA Fisheries issued the first ITP to NCDMF for the 2000 fall fishing season only. The exceeding of the authorized incidental take identified in the ITP resulted in a closure of the fishery in October 2000. Although section 10 ITPs are generally issued for multi-year periods, NOAA Fisheries and NCDMF believed that the newness of the fishery, the apparent high levels of turtle interaction, and the paucity of observer data for management decisions justified a single-year permit in 2000 to allow NCDMF to gather important information about bycatch issues in the fishery. NOAA Fisheries, in issuing the ITP, considered the effects of the fishery on listed species, pursuant to sections 7(a)(2) and 7(b) of the ESA. The resulting biological opinion concluded that, as a 1-year event, the issuance of the ITP and the fishery were not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species of sea turtle. The opinion did acknowledge, however, that additional future permits might be sought by NCDMF for large-mesh gillnetting in Pamlico Sound, perhaps modified based on the outcome of the 2000 permit. On September 27, 2001, NOAA Fisheries issued a second ITP to the NCDMF with similar review requirements. The ITP was again valid for 1 year. On July 18, 2002, NCDMF submitted an application for a 3-year ITP to reopen the shallow water areas under similar requirements as well as add the management of the shallow water fishery operating in an area of the mainland Hyde and Pamlico Counties
Through this final rule, NOAA Fisheries is closing the waters of Pamlico Sound NC, on an annual basis, to fishing with gillnets with a mesh size larger than 4 1/4 inches (10.8 cm) stretched mesh, from September 1 through December 15. This closure date is earlier than that of the previous interim final rule, based upon discussions with and recommendations by NCDMF regarding the observed times of high gillnet effort and high turtle occurrence in Pamlico Sound. In 2000 and 2001, 88 percent of the sea turtle interactions in shallow water occurred during the first three weeks of the season. The closed area includes all inshore waters of Pamlico Sound south of 35°46.3' N. lat. (the south side of Oregon Inlet), north of 35°00' N. lat. (the south end of Portsmouth Island), and east of 76°30' W. long. (a line of longitude which crosses the mouths of the Neuse River, Bay River, and Pamlico River). The Outer Banks and the COLREGS line form the seaward boundary of the closed area. The closed area includes all contiguous tidal waters to Pamlico Sound, within the stated boundaries. The large-mesh gillnet fishery in Pamlico Sound has been shown to take, including to capture and kill, numerous endangered and threatened sea turtles during their fall migration. NOAA Fisheries is taking this action to prevent further takes of listed species in this fishery.
NOAA Fisheries requested comments on the interim final rule in anticipation of issuing this final rule. Two comments were received during the comment period.
NOAA Fisheries prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for this final rule and concluded that these regulations and issuance of the permit would neither pose a significant adverse environmental impact nor have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
The actions implemented by this final rule are expected to impact approximately 95 large-mesh, gillnet vessel owners and operators. Assuming that a shallow-water fishery will be managed by NCDMF and many of these vessels will participate in the shallow-water fishery, NOAA Fisheries anticipates, under a worst-case scenario, that 25 large-mesh, deep-water boats will not participate in the fishery in Pamlico Sound. The anticipated loss of revenue could be $10,000 to $20,000 per vessel per year, depending on fish prices, for a total loss to the deep-water fishery operations of $250,000 to $500,000. These vessels, however, are the largest in the fishery and have the greatest number of alternative fisheries, as they are essentially ocean-gillnet vessels. They are also the most recent entrants into the fishery and did not operate in Pamlico Sound in the fall of 2001. Many of these operations may have switched gear to the more traditional pound net operations or moved offshore. Thus, the revenue loss anticipated for these large mesh deep water operations, under a worst-case scenario, is likely an overestimate. The shallow-water vessels, on the other hand, are considered more traditional to the fishery, they are generally smaller, and many of them cannot safely work outside the sheltered waters of the Sound. The primary effect of this final rule will be a redistribution of catch from deep-water gillnet fishermen to shallow-water and small-mesh gillnet fishermen and to pound net fishermen. The overall fishing effort targeting southern flounder in Pamlico Sound is very high and capable of fully exploiting the resource. In 2000, gillnet landings exceeded the previous year's levels, halfway through the season, despite NCDMF's closure of the primary fishing grounds to gillnetting with gear greater than 5-inch (12.7-cm) mesh. In 2001, the landings of flounder by gillnet dropped significantly from those in previous years, but the landings by pound net, which had been in decline for a number of years, rebounded dramatically to high levels.
This final rule does not contain collection-of-information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries has determined that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) not to delay the effective date of this rule for 30 days. Delaying this action would be contrary to the public interest because large-mesh gillnet fishing is presently allowed without restriction throughout Pamlico Sound. Allowing continued large-mesh gillnet fishing in the deep water areas of Pamlico Sound would likely result in a high level of sea turtle take and mortality. The NCDMF observer program has documented that sea turtle interactions occur at a high rate in September and around the inlets of Pamlico Sound. Without action, large-mesh gillnet fishing effort is expected to increase greatly in September, as changing water temperatures cause flounder to move through Pamlico Sound. Sea turtles apparently respond similarly to the fall weather in Pamlico Sound, increasing their vulnerability to being captured and killed as the fishing effort also peaks. In 2000, strandings in North Carolina's coastal waters reached a new record level of 838 turtles. In 2001, concurrent with a prohibition on the use of large mesh gillnets in the
In keeping with the intent of Executive Order 13132 to provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state and Federal interest, NOAA Fisheries has conferred with the State of North Carolina regarding the need for NOAA Fisheries to implement a closure to protect listed sea turtles. NOAA Fisheries is working with NCDMF on the issuance of an ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, which would create a partial exemption to the closure in this action. NOAA Fisheries intends to continue to consult with the State of North Carolina during the implementation of this final rule and regarding NCDMF's management of state water fisheries bycatch of sea turtles.
Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
16 U.S.C. 1531
(d) * * *
(7) Restrictions applicable to gillnet fisheries in North Carolina. No person may fish with gillnet fishing gear which has a stretched mesh size larger than 4 1/4 inches (10.8 cm), annually from September 1 through December 15, in the inshore waters of Pamlico Sound, North Carolina, and all contiguous tidal waters, bounded on the north by 35°46.3' N. lat., on the south by 35°00' N. lat., and on the west by 76°30' W. long.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Increase of Atlantic bluefin tuna General category daily retention limit.
NMFS has determined that the Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) General category daily catch limit should be adjusted to two large medium or giant BFT per vessel in order to allow for maximum utilization of the General category September time-period subquota.
Effective September 1, 2002, until September 14, 2002.
Brad McHale, 978-281-9260.
Regulations implemented under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (16 U.S.C. 971
Under § 635.23 (a)(4), NMFS may increase or decrease the daily retention limit of large medium and giant BFT over a range from zero (on RFDs) to a maximum of three per vessel to allow for maximum utilization of the quota for BFT. Based on a review of dealer reports, daily landing trends, and the availability of BFT on the fishing grounds, NMFS has determined that an increase of the daily retention limit for the first half of September is appropriate and necessary to allow full use of the September subquota. Therefore, NMFS adjusts the daily retention limit for September 1 through September 14 to two large medium or giant BFT per vessel.
The intent of this adjustment is to allow for maximum utilization of the General category subquotas for the September fishing period (specified under 50 CFR 635.27(a)) by General category participants in order to help achieve optimum yield in the General category fishery, to collect a broad range of data for stock monitoring purposes, and to be consistent with the objectives of the HMS FMP.
While catch rates have continued to be low so far this season, NMFS recognizes that they may increase. If catch rates remain depressed, NMFS may increase the daily retention limits and/or waive some or all of the previously scheduled RFDs. The RFD schedule will be announced with the publication of the final initial 2002 BFT quota specifications and General category effort controls. Until these specifications have been announced, no RFDs have been implemented.
This action is taken under 50 CFR 635.23(a)(4) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
16 U.S.C. 971
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Closure.
NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the C season allowance of the pollock total allowable catch (TAC) for Statistical Area 610 of the GOA.
Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), August 30, 2002, until 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 1, 2002.
Mary Furuness, 907-586-7228.
NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
Within any fishing year, underage or overage of a seasonal allowance may be added to or subtracted from subsequent seasonal allowances in a manner to be determined by the Regional Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, provided that the sum of the revised seasonal allowances does not exceed 30 percent of the annual TAC apportionment for the Central and Western Regulatory Areas in the GOA (§ 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(C)). For 2002, 30 percent of the annual TAC for the Central and Western Regulatory Areas is 15,187 mt. For 2002, the Regional Administrator has determined that within each area for which a seasonal allowance is established, any overage or underage of harvest from the previous season(s) shall be subtracted from or added to the seasonal allowance of the following season provided that the resulting sum of seasonal allowances in the Central and Western Regulatory Areas does not exceed 15,187 mt in any single season. The C season allowance of the pollock TAC in Statistical Area 610 of the GOA is 5,949 metric tons (mt) as established by an emergency rule implementing 2002 harvest specifications and associated management measures for the groundfish fisheries off Alaska (67 FR 956, January 8, 2002 and 67 FR 34860, May 16, 2002). The B season allowance in Statistical Area 610 was exceeded by 271 mt, therefore the Regional Administrator, in accordance with § 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(C), is reducing the C season pollock TAC in Statistical Area 610 by 271 mt to 5,678 mt.
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that the C season allowance of the pollock TAC in Statistical Area 610 will soon be reached. Therefore, the Regional Administrator is establishing a directed fishing allowance of 5,628 mt, and is setting aside the remaining 50 mt as bycatch to support other anticipated groundfish fisheries. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance will soon be reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 610 of the GOA.
Maximum retainable bycatch amounts may be found in the regulations at § 679.20(e) and (f).
This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is contrary to the public interest. This requirement is contrary to the public interest as it would delay the closure of the fishery, lead to exceeding the TAC, and therefore reduce the public's ability to use and enjoy the fishery resource.
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.
This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
16 U.S.C. 1801
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
Proposed rule.
This tentative decision adopts, on an interim final and emergency basis, provisions that amend certain features of the pooling standards of the Pacific Northwest Federal milk order. Specifically, this tentative decision establishes a cooperative manufacturing plant provision and “system pooling” for cooperative manufacturing plants. Additionally, this decision establishes a standard for the number of days during the month that the milk of a producer would need to be delivered to a pool plant in order for the rest of the milk of that producer to be eligible to be diverted to nonpool plants. A year-round diversion limit of 80 percent of total receipts for pool plants also is established. Public comments on the amendments adopted in this tentative decision are requested. Additionally, this decision requires determining if producers approve the issuance of the amended order on an interim basis.
Comments must be submitted on or before November 5, 2002.
Comments (6 copies) should be filed with the Hearing Clerk, Room 1083, South Building, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250. Reference should be made to the title of action and docket number.
Gino M. Tosi, Marketing Specialist, Order Formulation and Enforcement Branch, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, Stop 0231—Room 2971, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0231, (202) 690-1366, e-mail address:
This administrative action is governed by the provisions of Sections 556 and 557 of Title 5 of the United States Code and, therefore, is excluded from the requirements of Executive Order 12866.
The amendments to the rules proposed herein have been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. They are not intended to have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the proposed amendments would not preempt any state or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), 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 request modification or exemption from such order by filing with the Department of Agriculture (Department) 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 the law. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After a hearing, the Department 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 its principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review the Department's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
During May 2002, there were 972 producers pooled on, and 86 handlers regulated by, the Pacific Northwest order. Based on these criteria, 596 producers and 49 handlers would be considered small businesses. The adoption of the proposed pooling standards service to revise established criteria that determine those producers, producer milk, and plants that have a reasonable association with, and are consistently serving the fluid needs of, the Pacific Northwest milk marketing area. Criteria for pooling milk are established on the basis of performance standards that are considered adequate to meet the Class I fluid needs of the market and that determine those that are eligible to share in the revenue which arises from the classified pricing of milk. Criteria for pooling are established without regard to the size of any dairy industry organization or entity. The criteria established are applied in an equal fashion to both large and small businesses. Therefore, the proposed amendments will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
A review of reporting requirements was completed under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). It was determined that these proposed amendments would have no impact on reporting, record keeping, or other compliance requirements because they would remain identical to the current requirements. No new forms are proposed and no additional reporting requirements would be necessary.
This tentative decision does not require additional information
No other burdens are expected to fall on the dairy industry as a result of overlapping Federal rules. The rulemaking proceeding does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any existing Federal rules.
Prior document in this proceeding:
Notice is hereby given of the filing with the Hearing Clerk of this tentative final decision with respect to proposed amendments to the tentative marketing agreement and the order regulating the handling of milk in the Pacific Northwest marketing area. This notice is issued pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act and the applicable rules of practice and procedure governing the formulation of marketing agreements and marketing orders (7 CFR part 900).
Interested parties may file written exceptions to this decision with the Hearing Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, November 5, 2002. Six (6) copies of the exceptions should be filed. All written submissions made pursuant to this notice will be made available for public inspection at the office of the Hearing Clerk during regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27(b)).
The proposed amendments set forth below are based on the record of a public hearing held at Seattle, Washington, on December 4, 2001, pursuant to a notice of hearing issued November 14, 2001 (66 FR 57889).
The material issues on the record of hearing relate to:
1. Establishing a touch-base provision and year-round diversion limits for producer milk.
2. Establishing a cooperative pool manufacturing plant provision and “system” pooling for cooperative manufacturing plants.
3. Determining if emergency marketing conditions exist that would warrant the omission of a recommended decision and the opportunity to file written exceptions.
The following findings and conclusions on the material issues are based on evidence presented at the hearing and the record thereof:
A proposal seeking to change certain standards and features of the
Proposal 2, offered by Northwest Milk Marketing Federation (NMMF), Northwest Dairy Association (NDA), and the Tillamook County Creamery Association (TCCA), seeks to modify the order's pooling standards by establishing a 6-day touch-base standard during the month in order for the rest of the milk of a dairy farmer to be eligible to be diverted to nonpool plants and by establishing an 80 percent year-round limit on the amount of milk received by a pool plant that can be diverted to nonpool plants. NMMF, NDA, and TCCA are organizations owned by dairy-farmer members that supply a significant portion of the milk needs of the Pacific Northwest marketing area and whose milk is pooled on the Pacific Northwest order.
NDA, a proponent of Proposal 2, testified that pooling standards must be changed in order to prevent what they described as “artificial” pooling or “pool loading” that has been occurring in the Pacific Northwest order since the implementation of Federal order reform. The NDA witness noted that when milk is pooled on the order but never physically received, service to the Class I market is not demonstrated. To allow the pooling of milk which does not provide service to the Class I needs of the market only lowers returns to dairy farmers whose milk is actually supplying the local Class I market. The witness asserted that this occurs because the order's pooling standards are inadequate.
According to the NDA witness, pooling provisions that were once applicable in Federal orders more accurately identified the milk of producers serving the Class I market. These provisions included a touch-base standard that specified the minimum number of days during the month that a dairy farmer's milk needed to be received at a pool plant in order to be eligible to divert to nonpool plants the rest of the milk of that dairy farmer. In addition, the witness noted that the “dairy farmers for other markets” provision, that was applicable prior to order reform, provided that a dairy farmer would not be considered a producer on the order unless all of the farmer's milk was pooled on the order during the month. Also, the witness noted, milk was valued and priced by its relative location to the market prior to order reform. Milk farther from plants in the marketing area would have a lower value than milk located nearer to plants located in the marketing area, stressed the witness.
The NDA witness testified that provisions prior to Federal order reform deterred milk that did not serve the Order's Class I market from being pooled on the Pacific Northwest order. The witness explained that milk located outside of the marketing area and pooled on the order received the Pacific Northwest blend price minus the applicable location adjustment specified in the order. This measure, the witness said, made it unprofitable for milk located far from the marketing area to be pooled on the Pacific Northwest order. However, the witness emphasized that Federal order reform adopted a Class I price surface that does not provide for location adjustments in determining a relative value for milk to the market. According to the witness, the newly adopted Class I price surface establishes fixed values for milk regardless of its use for fluid or manufactured products. The witness characterized that this change effectively created a “backward incentive” to move milk from one order's bottling plant to a manufacturing
The NDA witness referred to a Cornell University economic model that was used in formulating the current Class I price surface. The model, according to the witness, produced a price surface map that valued milk in the east higher than milk in the west, inferring that milk should move from west to east. The witness asserted that when establishing the new Class I price surface, the Department did not take into account the variable price surface used by the model for manufactured products. The witness noted that while the Class I differential at Salt Lake City, Utah, is the same as in Seattle, Washington ($1.90 per hundredweight), the Pacific Northwest order blend price is often higher than the Western order blend price. According to the witness, the combined effect of fixed Class I differential values and blend price differences causes milk from Utah to move west to the Pacific Northwest, instead of moving east as predicted in the Cornell model.
The witness concluded that this movement of milk has resulted in disorderly market conditions in the Pacific Northwest and Western orders because the price surface provides an inappropriate incentive to move milk to manufacturing plants in the Pacific Northwest order where a higher Class I value prevails, rather than to bottling plants in the Western order where a lower Class I value prevails. The witness testified that the pooling provisions of the Pacific Northwest order need revision to correct disorderly market conditions.
NMMF's witness, testifying in support of Proposal 2, stated that the proposal is designed to correct unintended consequences generated by Federal order reform regarding the manner in which the producer location value of milk is determined. The witness testified that prior to order reform, location adjustments also acted as an effective means of identifying the producers who consistently served the Class I needs of the market. The witness testified that Federal order reform also established a new Class I price structure that reflected supply and demand conditions for fluid milk in every county of the United States. The witness asserted that this new structure uses the same Class I pricing locations to adjust pool draws on all milk regardless of how that milk is utilized.
According to the NMMF witness, under the new pricing system, milk that is diverted from plants in the marketing area and delivered hundreds of miles away can be valued at the same price as milk at the plant from which the milk was diverted. Value is then adjusted, the witness said, by differences in the level of the Class I differentials where the milk is actually delivered. According to the witness, this demonstrates a lack of economic consistency.
The NMMF witness also testified that millions of dollars have been transferred from dairy farmers who actually supply the fluid needs of the Pacific Northwest order to dairy farmers located in Southern Idaho and Utah who do not supply the local Class I market. Also, data was presented by the witness to demonstrate that when the milk of producers distant to the market is pooled on the Pacific Northwest order but never physically received at a Pacific Northwest pool plant, the milk of those distant producers receives a share of the Class I proceeds without the producers ever actually supplying milk to meet the Class I needs of the market.
According to the NMMF witness, the 80 percent diversion limit recommended in Proposal 2 would permanently continue the Market Administrator's February 2001 temporary revision to the marketing order. According to the witness, the 80 percent diversion limit has been operating well and should become the order's adopted standard for producer milk.
The NMMF witness also spoke on the merits of instituting a 6-day touch-base standard. The witness was of the opinion that producer milk standards should be linked to the order's supply plant performance standard of 20 percent. According to the witness, 6 days of a dairy farmer's milk production per month is equal to 20 percent of monthly production and is consistent with the 20 percent performance standard applicable for pool supply plants.
Dairy Farmers of America (DFA), a supporter of Proposal 2, testified about changes in the marketplace resulting from the new Class I price surface implemented under Federal order reform. It was DFA's opinion that the pooling of milk not serving the Class I market is inconsistent with Federal order policy. Returns to producers who regularly supply the Class I market are unnecessarily reduced when milk that does not service the Class I market is pooled, said the witness.
The DFA witness also testified that milk not actually supplying the Class I needs of the market but sharing in the revenue generated from fluid milk sales is an indicator of faulty pooling provisions. The witness asserted that if the current pooling standards are not amended, local dairy farmers who are actually supplying the local Class I market will continue to receive lower returns.
The DFA witness testified that the Pacific Northwest order's current diversion limit standard of 99 percent for certain months is inadequate because of the potential volume of milk that could be pooled on the order. According to the witness, it is this shortcoming of the current pooling provisions that has allowed milk which performs no reasonable service in meeting fluid milk demands to be pooled on the Pacific Northwest order. In this regard, DFA thought it was appropriate to set a limit on the amount of producer milk that pool plants can divert to nonpool plants consistent with the Market Administrator's temporary revision. The DFA witness indicated that a year-round diversion limit of 80 percent would be reasonable in light of the marketing area's Class I use of milk. The witness also supported the 6-day touch-base provision of Proposal 2 because it would better identify the milk of those producers that actually serve the Class I needs of the market.
Two Washington State dairy farmers also testified in support of Proposal 2. One dairy farmer asserted that Proposal 2 would correct what the witness described as a loophole in the Pacific Northwest pooling provisions that allows milk which does not serve the fluid market to be pooled on the Pacific Northwest order. The witness maintained that current provisions are contributing to the loss of millions of dollars to Washington State dairy farmers. The witness also stated that adopting Proposal 2 would provide for restoring the orderly marketing of milk in the Pacific Northwest and promote trust in the Federal milk order program. A second dairy farmer testified that disorderly marketing conditions are demonstrated when the blend price is reduced through what the witness described as manipulation of the order's pooling standards.
Several amendments to the
A cooperative manufacturing plant is a type of pool supply plant and will be defined as a manufacturing plant, owned and operated by a cooperative association or a wholly owned subsidiary, that delivers at least 20 percent of producer-member milk shipments either directly from farms or supply plants owned by the same cooperative association and is located within the marketing area. A cooperative manufacturing plant will have the same performance standards applicable to a supply plant specifying that 20 percent of total milk receipts must be supplied to a pool distributing plant in order to pool all other physical receipts and diversions of milk.
The Pacific Northwest marketing order
Proposal 1, offered by NMMF, NDA, and TCCA seeks to establish a “cooperative manufacturing plant” provision as a type of pool supply plant, and also to provide that two or more cooperative manufacturing plants may operate as a “system” of supply plants for the purpose of meeting pooling performance standards. According to the witnesses, the proposal eliminates the need for the current provision for cooperative associations that operate supply plants.
A witness for NMMF testified that the adoption of a provision providing for a cooperative manufacturing plant as a type of supply plant is predicated on the adoption of a touch-base standard contained in Proposal 2. According to the witness, if a touch-base standard is adopted, certain accommodations for cooperative manufacturing plants should be provided to prevent the inefficient movement of milk. A provision for a “system” of cooperative manufacturing plants should be made, noted the witness, so that the system of plants could qualify to have their combined milk receipts pooled when a single plant of the system meets all of the performance standards for the system of plants. The witness noted that providing this flexibility in the movement of milk will enable cooperative manufacturing plants to minimize transportation costs while still meeting the established touch-base standard. The witness noted that a similar provision for cooperative manufacturing plants is currently a feature of the Arizona-Las Vegas and Western milk marketing orders and would be beneficial for the Pacific Northwest order.
The NMMF witness predicted that the adoption of a cooperative manufacturing plant provision would encourage all supply plants in the Pacific Northwest to change their pooling status to this new type of pool supply plant because all supply plants in the Pacific Northwest are owned by cooperative associations. According to the witness, the proposed changes contained in Proposals 1 and 2 would serve to deter supply plants located far from the Pacific Northwest marketing area from inappropriately pooling milk on the Pacific Northwest order because these changes eliminate the ability to pool milk that is not physically received at the plants which actually provide milk to satisfy the marketing area's Class I demands.
A witness appearing on behalf of NDA, also a proponent of Proposal 1, agreed with the NMMF witness' conclusion that pooling provisions should ensure that only milk which actually performs in supplying the market's Class I needs would prevent the “artificial” pooling of milk. The witness stressed that NDA does not object to milk located outside of the order that regularly serves the fluid needs of the market from receiving the order's blend price.
The adoption of the proposed cooperative manufacturing plant provision, according to the NDA witness, also would provide producers who regularly serve the fluid needs of the market more flexibility in meeting the touch-base standard contained in Proposal 2. The witness was in agreement with NMMF that the proposal would prevent the inappropriate pooling of milk that is located at plants far from the marketing area that does not actually supply the fluid needs of the market. The NDA witness asserted that these changes to the order would ensure that only milk actually available to meet the market's fluid needs would be pooled.
A witness representing the TCCA also testified in support of Proposal 1. The witness presented an analysis on the loss of income to dairy farmers in Tillamook County, Oregon, due to the pooling of milk on the order that does not actually serve the Class I needs of the market. The impact of inappropriate pooling standards to Pacific Northwest dairy farmers, according to the witness' calculations, showed an average monthly decrease in revenue of $755 per farm. The witness testified that the adoption of Proposal 1 would correct the disorderly marketing conditions in the Pacific Northwest order by only allowing milk that actually serves the fluid needs of the market to receive the order's blend price.
The witness representing DFA testified in support of Proposal 1. According to the witness, two primary benefits of the Federal order program are allowing producers to benefit from the orderly marketing of milk and the marketwide distribution of revenue that results mostly from Class I milk sales. Orderly marketing influences milk to move to the highest value use when needed and to clear the market when not used in Class I, noted the witness. The witness testified that marketwide pooling allows qualified producers to equitably share in the returns from the market in a manner that provides incentives for supplying the market in the most efficient manner. The witness insisted that the pooling of milk which does not service the Class I market is inconsistent with Federal order policy.
The DFA witness asserted that Proposal 1 properly addresses the problem associated with what the witness described as the near “open pooling” of milk on the Pacific Northwest order. Specifically, the witness testified that the proposal would establish appropriate pooling performance standards for producer milk and handlers that are consistent with the objectives of the Federal milk order program.
Two members of the Washington State Dairy Federation also testified in support of Proposal 1. One witness indicated that when milk not serving the fluid needs of the Pacific Northwest market is pooled, returns that should be received by producers serving the Class I needs of the market are “siphoned” away. Another witness testified that dairy producers in Washington have lost millions of dollars in revenue as a result of the “loopholes” in the order's pooling provisions. The adoption of Proposal 1 would, according to the witness, make needed changes to the pooling standards and re-establish orderly marketing conditions for the Pacific Northwest marketing area.
All milk marketing orders, including the Pacific Northwest, provide standards for identifying producers and the milk of producers that supply the market's Class I needs. The pooling standards of an order serve to assure that an adequate supply of fluid milk is delivered to the market. Pooling
It is largely the revenue from Class I sales that provides additional returns to milk being pooled which is reflected in the order's blend price. Accordingly, the Federal order system consistently has stressed actual performance in meeting pooling standards designed to ensure an adequate supply of Class I milk for the market as a condition for receiving the order's blend price.
The pooling standards of an order are designed to identify those producers and the milk of those producers that demonstrate service to the Class I market. A touch-base standard serves to identify the producers and the milk of those producers who actually supply milk to the market in a specified minimum amount. Markets that exhibit a higher percentage of milk in fluid use typically have touch-base standards specifying more frequent physical milk deliveries to pool plants than in markets where Class I use is lower. When a touch-base standard is too low, the potential for disorderly marketing conditions arise on two fronts. First, pool plants are less assured of milk supplies. Second, and most germane to the Pacific Northwest marketing area, the lack of a touch-base standard provides a way for the milk of producers not serving the fluid needs of the market to be pooled on the order while not actually supplying milk to the market's pool plants. This reduces the blend price paid to producers who are actually incurring the costs of supplying the Class I needs of the market.
A significant portion of the testimony received at the hearing placed blame on the current Class I price structure as the root cause of the inappropriate pooling of milk on the Pacific Northwest order. The current price structure was faulted specifically as not providing location adjustments for milk as had been the case prior to the implementation of milk order reform.
Testimony indicated that the lack of location adjustments effectively undermines the pooling standards of the order. The decision to pool milk was once based on the economics of transporting milk—comparing the costs of transporting milk to the benefit of receiving the order's blend price. Testimony indicates this factor is as important as the pooling standards of the order. Hearing participants were of the opinion that placing a relative value on milk based on its distance from the market provided appropriate pooling discipline and fostered orderly marketing conditions. Some participants indicated disappointment by asserting that the Department did not offer a recommended decision in order reform from which to provide comments on the Class I pricing structure.
The reform of milk orders, contained in the recommended decision (63 FR 4802) and final decision (64 FR 16026), made purposeful changes to the Class I pricing structure. In this regard, a fixed adjustment for Class I milk prices was provided for every county location in the 48 contiguous states to create a national Class I pricing surface for the system of milk marketing orders. Changing this characteristic of the pricing structure ensured handlers that regardless of the marketing order by which regulated, the applicable prices would be the same.
Such change made a more clear distinction between the value milk has at a location from the pooling standards of any individual marketing order. Location adjustments were never a part of the pooling standards of the Pacific Northwest order or any other milk marketing order. Instead, location adjustments were an integral part of the
Pooling provisions of all orders, including the Pacific Northwest, are intended to define appropriate standards for the prevailing marketing conditions in assuring that the marketing area would be supplied with a sufficient supply of milk for fluid use and to identify those producers—and the milk of those producers—that actually service the Class I needs of the market. Taken as a whole, the pooling provisions of milk orders, including the Pacific Northwest order, are contained in the
The issue before the Department is to consider amendments to standards of the order that currently allow milk to be pooled on the Pacific Northeast order
It is the pooling standards of the order that address those producers who are relied upon to supply the Class I needs of the marketing area. The record evidence indicates that milk is being pooled on the Pacific Northwest order which does not demonstrate any reasonable association with the market and which is not actually received at pool plants that supply the Class I demands of the market. Instead, the milk being pooled is physically retained at plant locations located in another marketing area for manufacturing lower valued Class III or Class IV dairy products. This is causing producers who actually supply the market to receive a lower blend price.
On the basis of the record evidence, together with analysis performed by the Department, this decision finds reason to support adopting a 3-day touch-base standard. Analysis was performed using officially noticed Market Administrator data from June 2001 through April 2002. This time period was selected because of the change in Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) purchase prices for butter and nonfat dry milk that occurred on May 31, 2001, as part of the price support program. This change in the CCC support price purchases, or the “butter-powder tilt,” has caused the price gap between Class III and Class IV milk to be significantly reduced. This change in CCC purchase prices has had a noticeable effect on the total value of the marketwide pool for both the Pacific Northwest and Western orders.
A hypothetical blend price was computed for the Pacific Northwest order marketing area, absent the Class III and Class IV milk physically located in areas within the Western Order milk marketing area. Milk from this area had not historically been pooled on the Pacific Northwest. Additionally, a similar blend price was computed for the Western Order that assumed the Class III and Class IV milk pooled on the Pacific Northwest Order would instead be pooled on the Western order. The results indicated that the blend price received by dairy farmers pooled in the Pacific Northwest would increase, while the blend price received by dairy farmers pooled on the Western order would decrease.
Analysis of the newly derived blend price differences was performed to
On average the milk of a dairy farmer could be received at a pool plant in the Pacific Northwest order 3 days per month to adequately demonstrate that the milk of a producer is actually providing a reasonable and consistent service in meeting the fluid needs of the marketing area.
Providing a higher touch-base standard requires milk located outside the marketing area to demonstrate its availability to service the Class I needs of the Pacific Northwest marketing area. While this standard should continue to assure an adequate supply of Class I milk, it also will serve as a safeguard against the unwarranted erosion of blend prices caused by the pooling of milk which could not reasonably be determined as bearing the cost associated with serving the fluid needs of the market.
The establishment of a touch-base standard also reinforces the integrity of the order's other performance standards. Together with providing for a cooperative manufacturing plant and their system pooling, reasonable assurance is provided that milk which does not regularly service the fluid needs of the market will not receive the Pacific Northwest order's blend price. Additionally, this decision provides authority for the Market Administrator to adjust the touch-base standard in the same way the order currently provides authority for the Market Administrator to adjust the performance standards for supply plants and diversion limits for all pool plants.
Providing for the diversion of milk is a desirable and needed feature of an order because it facilitates the orderly and efficient disposition of milk not needed for fluid use. When producer milk is not needed by the market for Class I use, some provision should be made for milk to be diverted to nonpool plants for use in manufactured products and to be pooled and priced under the order. However, it is just as necessary to safeguard against excessive milk supplies becoming associated with the market through the diversion process.
Milk diverted to nonpool plants is milk not physically received at a pool plant. However, it is included as a part of the total producer milk receipts of the diverting plant. While diverted milk is not physically received by the diverting plant, it is nevertheless an integral part of the milk supply of that plant. If such milk is not part of the integral supply of the diverting plant, then that milk should not be associated with the diverting plant and should not be pooled.
A diversion limit establishes the amount of producer milk that may be associated with the integral milk supply of a pool plant. With regard to the pooling issues of the Pacific Northwest order, the record reveals that high diversion limits contributed to the pooling of large volumes of milk on the order that may not have serviced to the Class I market needs. Therefore, lowering the order's diversion limit standard would be appropriate.
Associating more milk than is actually part of the legitimate reserve supply of the diverting plant unnecessarily reduces the potential blend price paid to dairy farmers who service the market's Class I needs. Without reasonable diversion limits, the order's ability to provide for effective performance standards and orderly marketing is weakened.
Diversion limit standards that are too high can open the door for pooling more milk on the market, as seen with the 99 percent diversion limit that had been applicable for the months of March through August prior to the adjustments made by the Market Administrator in February 2001. With respect to the marketing conditions of the Pacific Northwest marketing area evidenced by the record, this decision finds good reason to continue with the diversion limits on producer milk set by the Market Administrator at 80 percent of total receipts as the order's appropriate diversion limit for every month of the year.
Therefore, an 80 percent diversion limit standard for producer milk in each month of the year should be adopted immediately. To the extent that this diversion limit standard may warrant future adjustments, the order already provides the Market Administrator authority to adjust these diversion standards as marketing conditions may warrant.
This decision finds that several changes to the pooling standards contained in the
This decision also finds agreement with the proponents of Proposal 1 that a cooperative manufacturing plant provision will provide flexibility in qualifying milk to be pooled. Allowing cooperative manufacturing plants the option to function as part of a pooling system will also assist producers and handlers in transporting milk in the most cost-efficient manner. This provision will give the cooperatives operating manufacturing plants the ability to supply milk to distributing plants from a plant of the system located nearer a distributing plant without causing disruption to the market. System pooling will allow cooperative manufacturing plants to make more cost-effective decisions in transporting milk while still satisfying the Class I demands of the order without disruption.
Evidence presented at the hearing establishes that the pooling standards of the Pacific Northwest order are inadequate and are resulting in a significant present and ongoing erosion of the blend price received by producers who actually demonstrate performance by supplying the Class I needs of the market. This unwarranted erosion of blend prices stems from the lack of a reasonable and effective standard to ensure that the milk of the producer being pooled is actually being delivered to pool plants that supply milk to meet the Class I needs of the market. The erosion of the blend price received by producers is also compounded by an unnecessarily high diversion limit standard for the months of March through August. These shortcomings have allowed milk that has not provided a reasonable expectation of or demonstration of service in meeting the Class I needs of the marketing area to be pooled on the order. Consequently, it is determined that emergency marketing conditions exist in the Pacific
In view of this situation, an interim final rule amending the order will be issued as soon as the approval of producers is determined.
Briefs, proposed findings and conclusions were filed on behalf of certain interested parties. These briefs, proposed findings and conclusions, and the evidence in the record were considered in making the findings and conclusions set forth above. To the extent that the suggested findings and conclusions filed by interested parties are inconsistent with the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the requests to make such findings or reach such conclusions are denied for the reasons previously stated in this decision.
The findings and determinations hereinafter set forth supplement those that were made when the Pacific Northwest order was first issued and when it was amended. The previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and confirmed, except where they may conflict with those set forth herein.
(a) The tentative marketing agreement and the order, as hereby proposed to be amended, and all of the terms and conditions thereof, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act;
(b) The parity prices of milk as determined pursuant to section 2 of the Act are not reasonable in view of the price of feeds, available supplies of feeds, and other economic conditions which affect market supply and demand for milk in the marketing area, and the minimum prices specified in the tentative marketing agreement and the order, as hereby proposed to be amended, are such prices as will reflect the aforesaid factors, insure a sufficient quantity of pure and wholesome milk, and be in the public interest; and
(c) The tentative marketing agreement and the order, as hereby proposed to be amended, will regulate the handling of milk in the same manner as, and will be applicable only to persons in the respective classes of industrial and commercial activity specified in, the marketing agreement upon which a hearing has been held.
Annexed hereto and made a part hereof are two documents; an Interim Marketing Agreement regulating the handling of milk, and an Interim Order amending the order regulating the handling of milk in the Pacific Northwest Marketing Area, which has been decided upon as the detailed and appropriate means of effectuating the foregoing conclusions.
It is hereby ordered, that this entire tentative decision and the interim order and the interim marketing agreement annexed hereto be published in the
The month of May, 2002, is hereby determined to be the representative period for the purpose of ascertaining whether the issuance of the order, as amended and as hereby proposed to be amended, regulating the handling of milk in the Pacific Northwest marketing area is approved or favored by producers, as defined under the terms of the order as hereby proposed to be amended, who during such representative period were engaged in the production of milk for sale within the aforesaid marketing area.
Milk marketing order.
This interim order shall not become effective unless and until the requirements of § 900.14 of the rules of practice and procedure governing proceedings to formulate marketing agreements and marketing orders have been met.
The findings and determinations hereinafter set forth supplement those that were made when the order was first issued and when it was amended. The previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and confirmed, except where they may conflict with those set forth herein.
(a)
Upon the basis of the evidence introduced at such hearing and the record thereof, it is found that:
(1) The said order as hereby amended, and all of the terms and conditions thereof, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act:
(2) The parity prices of milk, as determined pursuant to section 2 of the Act, are not reasonable in view of the price of feeds, available supplies of feeds, and other economic conditions which affect market supply and demand for milk in the aforesaid marketing area. The minimum prices specified in the order as hereby amended are such prices as will reflect the aforesaid factors, insure a sufficient quantity of pure and wholesome milk, and by in the public interest; and
(3) The said order as hereby amended regulates the handling of milk in the same manner as, and is applicable only to persons in the respective classes of industrial or commercial activity specified in, a marketing agreement upon which a hearing has been held.
The authority citation for 7 CFR part 1124 continues to read as follows:
7 U.S.C. 601-674.
1. Section 1124.7 is amended by:
a. Removing paragraph (c)(2) and (c)(3);
b. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as (c)(2);
c. Adding new paragraphs (d) and (f); and
d. Revising paragraph (g).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
(d) A manufacturing plant located within the marketing area and operated by a cooperative association, or its wholly owned subsidiary, if, during the month, or the immediately preceding 12-month period ending with the current month, 20 percent or more of
(1) The plant does not qualify as a pool plant under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section or under comparable provisions of another Federal order; and
(2) The plant is approved by a duly constituted regulatory agency for the handling of milk approved for fluid consumption in the marketing area.
(3) A request is filed in writing with the market administrator before the first day of the month for which it is to be effective. The request will remain in effect until a cancellation request is filed in writing with the market administrator before the first day of the month for which the cancellation is to be effective.
(f) A system of two or more plants identified in § 1124.7(d) operated by one or more cooperative handlers may qualify for pooling by meeting the above shipping requirements subject to the following additional requirements:
(1) The cooperative handler(s) establishing the system submits a written request to the market administrator on or before the first day of the month for which the system is to be effective requesting that such plants qualify as a system. Such request will contain a list of the plants participating in the system in the order, beginning with the last plant, in which the plants will be dropped from the system if the system fails to qualify. Each plant that qualifies as a pool plant within a system shall continue each month as a plant in the system until the handler(s) establishing the system submits a written request before the first day of the month to the market administrator that the plant be deleted from the system or that the system be discontinued. Any plant that has been so deleted from a system, or that has failed to qualify in any month, will not be part of any system. In the event of an ownership change or the business failure of a handler that is a participant in the system, the system may be reorganized to reflect such a change if a written request to file a new marketing agreement is submitted to the market administrator; and
(2) If a system fails to qualify under the requirement of this paragraph, the handler responsible for qualifying the system shall notify the market administrator of which plant or plants will be deleted from the system so that the remaining plants may be pooled as a system. If the handler fails to do so, the market administrator shall exclude one or more plants, beginning at the bottom of the list of plants in the system and continue up the list as necessary until the deliveries are sufficient to qualify the remaining plants in the system.
(g) The applicable shipping percentage of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section may be increased or decreased by the market administrator if the market administrator finds that such adjustment is necessary to encourage needed shipments or to prevent uneconomic shipments. Before making such a finding, the market administrator shall investigate the need for adjustment either on the market administrator's own initiative or at the request of interested parties if the request is made in writing at least 15 days prior to the month for which the requested revision is desired to be effective. If the investigation shows that an adjustment of the shipping percentages might be appropriate, the market administrator shall issue a notice stating that an adjustment is being considered and invite data, views and arguments. Any decision to revise an applicable shipping percentage must be issued in writing at least one day before the effective date.
2. Section 1124.13 is amended by:
a. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) as paragraphs (e)(2) through (6);
b. Adding a new paragraph (e)(1); and
c. Revising redesignated paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(5), and (e)(6).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
(e) * * *
(1) Milk of a dairy farmer shall not be eligible for diversion unless at least 3 days' production of such dairy farmer's production is physically received at a pool plant during the month.
(2) Of the quantity of producer milk received during the month (including diversions, but excluding the quantity of producer milk received from a handler described in § 1000.9(c)) the handler diverts to nonpool plants not more than 80 percent.
(5) Any milk diverted in excess of the limits prescribed in paragraph (e)(2) of this section shall not be producer milk. If the diverting handler or cooperative association fails to designate the dairy farmers' deliveries that are not to be producer milk, no milk diverted by the handler or cooperative association during the month to a nonpool plant shall be producer milk. In the event some of the milk of any producer is determined not to be producer milk pursuant to this paragraph, other milk delivered by such producer as producer milk during the month will not be subject to § 1124.12(b)(5).
(6) The delivery day requirement in paragraph (e)(1) of this section and diversion percentage in paragraph (e)(2) of this section may be increased or decreased by the market administrator if the market administrator finds that such revision is necessary to assure the orderly marketing and efficient handling of milk in the marketing area. Before making such finding, the market administrator shall investigate the need for the revision either on the market administrator's own initiative or at the request of interested persons if the request is made in writing at least 15 days prior to the month for which the requested revision is desired to be effective. If the investigation shows that a revision might be appropriate, the market administrator shall issue a notice stating that the revision is being considered and inviting written data, views, and arguments. Any decision to revise the delivery day requirement or the diversion percentage must be issued in writing at least one day before the effective date.
The parties hereto, in order to effectuate the declared policy of the Act, and in accordance with the rules of practice and procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR part 900), desire to enter into this marketing agreement and do hereby agree that the provisions referred to in paragraph I hereof as augmented by the provisions specified in paragraph II hereof, shall be and are the provisions of this marketing agreement as if set out in full herein.
I. The findings and determinations, order relative to handling, and the provisions of §§ 1124.1 to 1124.86 all inclusive, of the order regulating the
II. The following provisions: Record of milk handled and authorization to correct typographical errors.
(a) Record of milk handled. The undersigned certifies that he/she handled during the month of May 2002, ____ hundredweight of milk covered by this marketing agreement.
(b) Authorization to correct typographical errors. The undersigned hereby authorizes the Deputy Administrator, or Acting Deputy Administrator, Dairy Programs, Agricultural Marketing Service, to correct any typographical errors which may have been made in this marketing agreement.
Effective date. This marketing agreement shall become effective upon the execution of a counterpart hereof by the Department in accordance with Section 900.14(a) of the aforesaid rules of practice and procedure.
In Witness Whereof, The contracting handlers, acting under the provisions of the Act, for the purposes and subject to the limitations herein contained and not otherwise, have hereunto set their respective hands and seals.
Small Business Administration (SBA).
Proposed rule; correction.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is correcting the proposed rule it published in the
SBA must receive comments to the proposed rule on or before September 12, 2002.
Address all comments concerning the proposed rule to Gary M. Jackson, Assistant Administrator for Size Standards, Office of Size Standards, 409 Third Street, SW, Washington, DC 20416; via email to
Carl Jordan, Office of Size Standards, at (202) 205-6618 or
SBA published a proposed rule in the
In rule FR Doc. 02-20358 published on August 13, 2002 (67 FR 52633) make the following correction.
On page 52638, in the third column, correct amendatory instruction number 3 as follows:
3. Amend § 121.201 by revising the table of size standards to read as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
(a) The value of tires within Census Classification codes 30111 and 30112 which it manufactured in the United States during the previous calendar year is more than 50 percent of the value of its total worldwide manufacture,
(b) The value of pneumatic tires within Census Classification codes 30111 and 30112 comprising its total worldwide manufacture during the preceding calendar year was less than 5 percent of the value of all such tires manufactured in the United States during that period, and
(c) The value of the principal product which it manufactured or otherwise produced, or sold worldwide during the preceding calendar year is less than 10 percent of the total value of such products manufactured or otherwise produced or sold in the United States during that period.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
(a) “Research and Development” means laboratory or other physical research and development. It does not include economic, educational, engineering, operations, systems, or other nonphysical research; or computer programming, data processing, commercial and/or medical laboratory testing.
(b) For purposes of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program only, a different definition has been established by law. See § 121.701 of these regulations.
(c) “Research and Development” for guided missiles and space vehicles includes evaluations and simulation, and other services requiring thorough knowledge of complete missiles and spacecraft.
12.
13.
(a) If one of the activities of base maintenance, as defined in paragraph (b) (below in this endnote) can be identified with a separate industry and that activity (or industry) accounts for 50 percent or more of the value of an entire contract, then the proper size standard is that of the particular industry, and not the base maintenance size standard.
(b) “Base Maintenance” requires the performance of three or more separate activities in the areas of service or special trade construction industries. If services are performed, these activities must each be in a separate NAICS code including, but not limited to, Janitorial and Custodial Service, Fire Prevention Service, Messenger Service, Commissary Service, Protective Guard Service, and Grounds Maintenance and Landscaping Service. If the contract requires the use of special trade contractors (plumbing, painting, plastering, carpentry, etc.), all such special trade construction activities are considered a single activity and classified as Base Housing Maintenance. Since Base Housing Maintenance is only one activity, two additional activities are required for a contract to be classified as “Base Maintenance.”
14.
(a) For SBA assistance as a small business concern in the industry of Environmental Remediation Services, other than for Government procurement, a concern must be engaged primarily in furnishing a range of services for the remediation of a contaminated environment to an acceptable condition including, but not limited to, preliminary assessment, site inspection, testing, remedial investigation, feasibility studies, remedial design, containment, remedial action, removal of contaminated materials, storage of contaminated materials and security and site closeouts. If one of such activities accounts for 50 percent or more of a concern's total revenues, employees, or other related factors, the concern's primary industry is that of the particular industry and not the Environmental Remediation Services Industry.
(b) For purposes of classifying a Government procurement as Environmental Remediation Services, the general purpose of the procurement must be to restore a contaminated environment and also the procurement must be composed of activities in three or more separate industries with separate NAICS codes or, in some instances (e.g., engineering), smaller sub-components of NAICS codes with separate, distinct size standards. These activities may include, but are not limited to, separate activities in industries such as: Heavy Construction; Special Trade Construction; Engineering Services; Architectural Services; Management Services; Refuse Systems; Sanitary Services, Not Elsewhere Classified; Local Trucking Without Storage; Testing Laboratories; and Commercial, Physical and Biological Research. If any activity in the procurement can be identified with a separate NAICS code, or component of a code with a separate distinct size standard, and that industry accounts for 50 percent or more of the value of the entire procurement, then the proper size standard is the one for that particular industry, and not the Environmental Remediation Service size standard.
15.
Small Business Administration (SBA).
Notice of proposed rule; notice of reopening of the comment period.
The proposed rule proposes to increase the size standard for Testing Laboratories from $6 million to $10 million under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 541380. The proposed revision is being
The comment date for the proposed rule on the Testing Laboratories industry size standard is reopened through September 30, 2002.
Send comments to Gary M. Jackson, Assistant Administrator for Size Standards, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third St., SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416; via e-mail to
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
Proposed rule; reopening and extension of public comment period on proposed amendment.
We, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), are announcing receipt of revisions to a previously proposed amendment to the Mississippi regulatory program (Mississippi program) under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The revisions pertain to the definition of “immediate mining area” and provisions concerning limited use vehicular pathways. Mississippi intends to revise its program to be consistent with the corresponding Federal regulations and to improve operational efficiency.
We will accept written comments until 4 p.m., c.d.t., September 23, 2002.
You should mail or hand deliver written comments to Arthur W. Abbs, Director, Birmingham Field Office at the address listed below.
You may review copies of the Mississippi program, the amendment, and all written comments received in response to this document at the addresses listed below during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. You may receive one free copy of the amendment by contacting OSM's Birmingham Field Office.
Arthur W. Abbs, Director, Birmingham Field Office. Telephone: (205) 290-7282. Internet:
Section 503(a) of the Act permits a state to assume primacy for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands within its borders by demonstrating that its program includes, among other things, “a state law which provides for the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations in accordance with the requirements of the Act; and rules and regulations consistent with regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to the Act.” See 30 U.S.C. 1253(a)(1) and (7). On the basis of these criteria, the Secretary of the Interior conditionally approved the Mississippi program on September 4, 1980. You can find background information on the Mississippi program, including the Secretary's findings and the disposition of comments, in the September 4, 1980,
By letter dated September 28, 2001 (Administrative Record No. MS-0388), Mississippi sent us an amendment to its program under SMCRA and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(b). Mississippi sent the amendment in response to our letters dated August 17, 2000, and August 23, 2000 (Administrative Record Nos. MS-0382 and MS-0381, respectively), that we sent to Mississippi in accordance with 30 CFR 732.17(c). Mississippi also sent the amendment in response to required program amendments at 30 CFR 924.16(i) and (l). Finally, the amendment included changes made at Mississippi's own initiative.
We announced receipt of the amendment in the November 2, 2001,
During our review of the amendment, we identified concerns relating to the definition of “immediate mining area,” and provisions concerning limited use vehicular pathways. We notified Mississippi of these concerns by letter dated January 23, 2002 (Administrative Record No. MS-0390). By letter dated July 22, 2002, Mississippi sent us a revised amendment (Administrative Record No. MS-0394). Below is a description of the revisions Mississippi submitted.
Mississippi proposes to add language to its proposed definition of “immediate mining area” to provide that routes of travel within the immediate mining area will be either consumed by mining, reclaimed, or have design plans submitted for approval as permanent postmine features prior to phase II bond release.
1. Paragraph (a)(4)(ii). Mississippi proposes to revise its proposed provisions at paragraph (a)(4)(ii) to provide that limited use vehicular pathways cannot have bridges or other cross-drainage structures. Previously, this proposed provision would have allowed culverts if the Department approved them prior to construction.
2. Paragraph (a)(4)(iii). Mississippi proposes to revise its proposed provision at paragraph (a)(4)(iii) to provide that limited use vehicular pathways cannot be located in and/or cross or ford any channel of an intermittent or perennial stream. Previously, this proposed provision would have allowed limited use vehicular pathways to be located in and/or cross or ford any channel of an intermittent or perennial stream if the Department approved it.
3. Paragraph (a)(5). Mississippi proposes to revise its proposed
(5) A limited use vehicular pathway:
(iii) will be reclassified as a road if upgraded by construction activities such as blading, construction, placement of a compacted surface, cut and fill of the natural grade, construction of drainage ditches or low water crossings, or installation of drainage structures. The submittal and approval of plans and drawings required by these regulations must be completed prior to the upgrading of a limited use vehicular pathway.
We are reopening the comment period on the proposed Mississippi program amendment to provide you an opportunity to reconsider the adequacy of the amendment in light of the additional materials sent to us. Under the provisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), we are requesting comments on whether the amendment satisfies the program approval criteria of 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the amendment, it will become part of the Mississippi program.
This rule does not have takings implications. This determination is based on the analysis performed for the counterpart Federal regulation.
This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and has determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and program amendments because each program is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have been met.
This rule does not have Federalism implications. SMCRA delineates the roles of the Federal and State governments with regard to the regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations. One of the purposes of SMCRA is to “establish a nationwide program to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of surface coal mining operations.” Section 503(a)(1) of SMCRA requires that State laws regulating surface coal mining and reclamation operations be “in accordance with” the requirements of SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that State programs contain rules and regulations “consistent with” regulations issued by the Secretary pursuant to SMCRA.
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 which requires agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) considered significant under Executive Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Because this rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 and is not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
This rule does not require an environmental impact statement because section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
This rule does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507
The Department of the Interior certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule: (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million; (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local governmental agencies or geographic regions; and (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation was not considered a major rule.
This rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any given year. This determination is based upon the fact that the State submittal, which is the subject of this rule, is based upon counterpart Federal regulations for which an analysis was prepared and a determination made that the Federal regulation did not impose an unfunded mandate.
Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.
Request for comments.
The Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury is soliciting comments concerning the effectiveness of OFAC's licensing procedures implementing the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (Title IX of Pub. L. 106-387, 22 U.S.C. 7201
Written comments should be received on or before October 7, 2002, to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to the Licensing Division, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Annex—2d Floor, Washington, DC 20220.
Requests for additional information about these licensing procedures should be directed to the Licensing Division, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, Annex—2d Floor, Washington, DC 20220, telephone: (202) 622-2480. Additional information about these licensing procedures is also available under the heading “Sanctions Program and Country Summaries” at
The current procedures used by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) for authorizing the export of agricultural commodities, medicine, and medical devices to Sudan, Libya, and Iran are set forth in 31 CFR 538.523-526, 31 CFR 550.569-573, and 31 CFR 560.530-533.
Under the provisions of section 906(c) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (Title IX of Pub. L. 106-387, 22 U.S.C. 7201
(1) The number and types of licenses applied for;
(2) The number and types of licenses approved;
(3) The average amount of time elapsed from the date of filing of a license application until the date of its approval;
(4) The extent to which the licensing procedures were effectively implemented; and
(5) A description of comments received from interested parties about the extent to which the licensing procedures were effective, after holding a public 30-day comment period.
This notice serves as public notice soliciting comments from interested parties regarding the effectiveness of OFAC's licensing procedures for the export of agricultural commodities, medicine, and medical devices to Sudan, Libya, and Iran.
Interested parties submitting comments are asked to be as specific as possible. All comments received on or before October 7, 2002, will be considered by OFAC in developing the report to the Congress. In the interest of accuracy and completeness, OFAC requires written comments.
Comments received after the end of the comment period will be considered, if possible, but their consideration cannot be assured. OFAC will not accept comments accompanied by a request that part or all of the comments be treated confidentially because of their business proprietary nature or for any other reason. OFAC will return such comments when submitted by regular mail to the person submitting the comments and will not consider them.
All comments made will be a matter of public record. Copies of the public record concerning these regulations may be obtained from OFAC's Web site (
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notification to the Secretary of Agriculture.
This document notifies the public that the Administrator of EPA has forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture a draft proposed rule as required by section 25(a) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The draft proposed rule would update data requirements for conventional pesticide products to reflect current scientific knowledge and understanding and to support the Agency's mandate to better protect sensitive subpopulations from pesticide risks. The proposal would also codify existing data requirements that are applied on a case-by-case basis. Please note that the draft proposed rule is not currently publicly available. It will only become publicly available when the proposed rule is signed, at which time it will be published in the
Melissa Chun, Field and External Affairs Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington DC 20460; telephone number: 703-305-4027; e-mail address: chun.melissa@epa.gov.
This action is directed to the public in general. It simply announces the submission of a draft proposed rule to USDA and does not otherwise affect any specific entities. This action may, however, be of particular interest to persons who register pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) or who seek a tolerance or tolerance exemption for a pesticide under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be interested in this action. If you have any questions regarding the this action, consult the person listed under
Section 25(a)(2) of FIFRA requires the Administrator to provide the Secretary of Agriculture with a copy of any proposed regulation at least 60 days before signing it for publication in the
No. this document is not a proposed rule, it is merely a notification of submission to the Secretary of Agriculture. As such, none of the regulatory assessment requirements apply to this document.
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
We are proposing to change some of the safety standards for hazardous liquid and carbon dioxide pipelines. The changes are based on recommendations by the National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives (NAPSR). We believe the changes will improve the clarity and effectiveness of the present standards.
Persons interested in submitting written comments on the rules proposed in this notice must do so by November 5, 2002. Late filed comments will be considered so far as practicable.
You may submit written comments by mailing or delivering an original and two copies to the Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001. The Dockets Facility is open from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays when the facility is closed. Or you may submit written comments to the docket electronically at the following Web address:
L. M. Furrow by phone at 202-366-4559, by fax at 202-366-4566, by mail at U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590, or by e-mail at
All written comments should identify the docket and notice numbers stated in
NAPSR is a non-profit association of officials from state agencies that participate with RSPA in the federal pipeline safety regulatory program. Each year NAPSR holds regional meetings to discuss safety and administrative issues, culminating in resolutions for program improvement.
Following NAPSR's comprehensive review of the gas pipeline safety standards in 49 CFR Part 192,
We have reviewed each recommendation to decide if rulemaking is needed. The results of that review, which led to the rule changes proposed by this notice, are discussed under the next heading. We found that 18 of the recommendations had already been adopted or proposed to be adopted in earlier rulemaking actions (No. 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 30). Of the remaining 12 recommendations, we are proposing to adopt 5 (No. 11, 13, 17, 19, and 28) and have declined to adopt 7 (No. 2, 3, 7, 8, 14, 22, and 29).
RSPA's authority to regulate rural gathering lines is limited to certain lines called “regulated gathering lines,” which must be defined based on various factors in addition to pipe diameter (49 U.S.C. 60101). The statutory provision we believe NAPSR had in mind merely requires that the definition of “regulated gathering line” exclude certain lines 6 inches or less in nominal diameter. This provision does not require DOT to regulate rural gathering lines larger than 6 inches in nominal diameter. We have not yet decided to regulate any rural gathering lines and so have not yet proposed to define “regulated gathering line.”
In the interest of making our gas and hazardous liquid pipeline regulations consistent as far as practical, we are proposing to amend § 195.222 as NAPSR recommended. In view of the B31.4 requirement for welder requalification, which generally represents current industry safety practices, the proposed amendment should not significantly increase the costs of compliance. Moreover, companies that operate both regulated gas and hazardous liquid pipelines may find regulatory consistency advantageous because it may ease the transfer of welders from liquid to gas pipelines.
We agree with NAPSR that this more specific wording has the potential to increase safety for hazardous liquid and carbon dioxide pipelines, particularly in light of the requirement in § 195.204 that pipe installation must be inspected for compliance with Part 195. Therefore, we are proposing to replace § 195.252 with the standards in § 192.319(b). Because this proposal merely clarifies an existing requirement, there should not be any increased cost of compliance.
NAPSR further suggested we require that backfill material be free of objects which may cause damage to the pipe or pipe coating. We did not adopt this suggestion because such material may not always be readily available in the quantity needed to fill the ditch. Under § 192.319(b) and the proposed rule, material with potentially damaging rocks may be used in backfilling, but only if damage to the pipe or coating is prevented by means such as a sufficient initial layer of material that is free of potentially damaging rocks.
Therefore, it is necessary to mathematically account for any temperature-related pressure change to ensure the absence of leaks during the test. Operators customarily collect temperature data and make such calculations during hydrostatic tests.
The main purpose of keeping test records is to show compliance with the testing requirements, one of which is to maintain the test pressure without leakage (§ 195.302(a)). NAPSR's recommendation is consistent with this objective. Adopting the recommendation should not increase costs significantly because operators commonly collect temperature data. Therefore, we are proposing to amend § 195.310 to require operators to include relevant temperature data among their test records.
Therefore, as NAPSR recommended, we are proposing to amend § 195.403(a)(5) to require that emergency response training include basic evaluation of fire hazards and the appropriate use of portable fire extinguishers and other on-site fire control equipment. We did not include in the proposed rule several other items NAPSR recommended (response appropriate to the situation, contacting the fire department, evacuating people from the immediate area, closing valves which could supply fuel to the fire, and coordination with emergency responders such as firefighters) because they are covered by existing regulations. Under §§ 195.402(e) and 195.403(a)(1), operators must develop procedures for handling these items and then train personnel to carry out the procedures.
Regarding pipelines temporarily removed from service, if the pipeline continues to contain a potentially harmful quantity of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide, we consider it to be used in transportation and subject to the operation and maintenance requirements of Part 195, including corrosion control and routine surveys. If no potentially harmful quantity of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide remains in the pipeline, we do not consider it to be in use, and the pipeline need not meet the operation and maintenance requirements while it is not used in transportation. However, before returning the pipeline to service, the operator must ensure that it fully complies with the operation and maintenance requirements. NAPSR recommends that if an operator defers maintenance on a temporarily out-of-service pipeline, the pipeline should be disconnected, purged, and sealed as if it were abandoned. Considering the low risk involved (given the absence of a potentially harmful quantity of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide), and the temporary out-of-service status of the pipeline, we do not think such additional requirements are needed for safety or environmental protection. Furthermore, under § 195.402, operators' operation and maintenance manuals should contain procedures for the safe temporary removal of a pipeline from service and for responding to any inadvertent operation of the pipeline while it is out of service. Thus, we have not adopted NAPSR's recommendation regarding out-of-service pipelines.
Any pipeline that is abandoned under Part 195 and later returned to Part 195 service would have to fully comply with the operation and maintenance requirements upon its return to service. NAPSR recommends that, in addition, we require such pipelines to meet the § 195.5 conversion requirements, which entail review of operation and maintenance records, visual inspections, and strength testing. But compliance with the operation and maintenance standards would involve a records review to learn which recurring inspections and tests must be performed. And visual inspections of rights-of-way and aboveground facilities would also be required. Although the operation and maintenance standards do not require visual inspection of selected portions of buried pipelines as § 195.5 does, if a recommissioned abandoned pipeline affects a high consequence area, the operator would have to pressure test or internally inspect the pipeline in accordance with
NAPSR's report suggests that more specific requirements for uprating are needed, like those for gas pipelines in Part 192. However, the report does not explain why the present regulations are inadequate, and we are not aware of any accidents related to inappropriate uprating procedures. Although the report indicates that a few operators may not fully understand the present requirements, we do not feel lack of knowledge is sufficient reason to make the regulations more detailed. Therefore, we have not adopted the recommendation.
NAPSR's recommendation closely parallels the National Transportation Safety Board's recommendation (P-98-38) that operators periodically evaluate the effectiveness of their public education programs using scientific techniques. In response to that recommendation, we are working with the Common Ground Alliance to develop guidelines operators may use in evaluating the effectiveness of their public education programs. In addition, we are working with industry trade associations to develop consensus standards that operators can use to improve their public education programs. To this end, we invited the public to participate in this voluntary standards-setting effort (67 FR 34754; May 15, 2002). Upon completion of these activities, we will decide if regulatory changes are needed regarding public education programs.
We prepared a Draft Regulatory Evaluation of the proposed rules and a copy is in the docket. The evaluation concludes there should be only minimal additional cost, if any, for operators to comply with the proposed rules. If you disagree with this conclusion, please provide information to the public docket described above.
Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, RSPA proposes to amend 49 CFR part 195 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 195 continues to read as follows:
49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, 60118; and 49 CFR 1.53.
2. Amend § 195.222 as follows:
a. Redesignate the existing text as paragraph (a); and
b. Add paragraph (b) to read as follows:
(b) No welder may weld with a particular welding process unless,
(1) Engaged in welding with that process; and
(2) Had one weld tested and found acceptable under Section 6 of API 1104.
3. Revise § 195.252 to read as follows:
When a ditch for a pipeline is backfilled, it must be backfilled in a manner that:
(a) Provides firm support under the pipe; and
(b) Prevents damage to the pipe and pipe coating from equipment or from the backfill material.
4. Amend § 195.310 as follows:
a. Remove the word “and” at the end of paragraph (b)(8);
b. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (b)(9) and add “; and” in its place; and
c. Add paragraph (b)(10) to read as follows:
(b) * * *
(10) Temperature of the test medium or pipe during the test period.
5. Revise § 195.403(a)(5) to read as follows:
(a) * * *
(5) Learn the potential causes, types, sizes, and consequences of fire and the appropriate use of portable fire extinguishers and other on-site fire control equipment, involving, where feasible, a simulated pipeline emergency condition.
6. Revise § 195.434 to read as follows:
Each operator must maintain signs visible to the public around each pumping station and breakout tank area. Each sign must contain the name of the operator and a telephone number (including area code) where the operator can be reached at all times.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
Notice of regulatory review; request for comments.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) seeks comments on the economic impact of its regulations on small entities. As required by Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we are attempting to identify rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We also request comments on ways to make these regulations easier to read and understand. The focus of this notice is rules that specifically relate to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, incomplete vehicles, motorcycles, and motor vehicle equipment.
Comments must be received on or before September 20, 2002.
You should mention the docket number of this document in your comments and submit your comments in writing to: Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20590. You may call Docket Management at: (202) 366-9324. You may visit the Docket from 10 am to 5 pm Monday through Friday.
Nita Kavalauskas, Office of Regulatory Analysis, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Budget, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Facsimile (fax): (202) 366-2559.
Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), requires agencies to conduct periodic reviews of final rules that have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. The purpose of the reviews is to determine whether such rules should be continued without change, or should be amended or rescinded, consistent with the objectives of applicable statutes, to minimize any significant economic impact of the rules on a substantial number of such small entities.
The Department of Transportation (DOT) published its Semiannual Regulatory Agenda on November 22, 1999, listing in Appendix D (64 FR 64684) those regulations that each operating administration will review under section 610 during the next 12 months. Appendix D also contains DOT's 10-year review plan for all of its existing regulations.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, “we”) has divided its rules into 10 groups by subject area. Each group will be reviewed once every 10 years, undergoing a two-stage process—an Analysis Year and a Review Year. For purposes of these reviews, a year will coincide with the fall-to-fall publication schedule of the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda. Thus, Year 1 (1998) began in the fall of 1998 and ended in the fall of 1999; Year 2 (1999) began in the fall of 1999 and ended in the fall of 2000; and so on.
During the Analysis Year, we will request public comment on and analyze each of the rules in a given year's group to determine whether any rule has a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities and, thus, requires review in accordance with section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. In each fall's Regulatory Agenda, we will publish the results of the analyses we completed during the previous year. For rules that have subparts, or other discrete sections of rules that do have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, we will announce that we will be conducting a formal section 610 review during the following 12 months.
The section 610 review will determine whether a specific rule should be revised or revoked to lessen its impact on small entities. We will consider: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of complaints or comments received from the public; (3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other federal rules or with state or local government rules; and (5) the length of time since the rule has been evaluated or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area
The schedule has been revised from its listing in the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda on November 22, 1999. A major revision to Parts 591 through 594 has been proposed. Thus, we deemed it appropriate to delay our small business impact review of these parts from year 3 to year 8, and move the other regulations forward one year.
The following table shows the 10-year analysis and review schedule:
During Year 5 (2002), the Analysis Year, we will conduct a preliminary assessment of the following sections of 49 CFR parts 571 and 580 through 588:
We are seeking comments on whether any requirements in parts 571 and 580 through 588 have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. “Small entities” include small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations under 50,000. Business entities are generally defined as small businesses by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code, for the purposes of receiving Small Business Administration (SBA) assistance. Size standards established by SBA in 13 CFR 121.201 are expressed either in number of employees or annual receipts in millions of dollars, unless otherwise specified. The number of employees or annual receipts indicates the maximum allowed for a concern and its affiliates to be considered small. If your business or organization is a small entity and if any of the requirements in parts 571 and 580 through 588 have a significant economic impact on your business or organization, please submit a comment to explain how and to what degree these rules affect you, the extent of the economic impact on your business or organization, and why you believe the economic impact is significant.
If the agency determines that there is a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, it will ask for comment in a subsequent notice during the Review Year on how these impacts could be reduced without reducing safety.
Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration of the following questions:
• Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
• Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
• Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
• Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
• Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
• Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
• What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?
If you have any responses to these questions, please include them in your comments on this document.
In conjunction with our section 610 reviews, we will be performing plain language reviews over a ten-year period on a schedule consistent with the section 610 review schedule. We will review parts 571 and 580 through 588 to determine if these regulations can be reorganized and/or rewritten to make them easier to read, understand, and use. We encourage interested persons to submit draft regulatory language that clearly and simply communicates regulatory requirements, and other recommendations, such as for putting information in tables that may make the regulations easier to use.
Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket number of this document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21.) We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length of the attachments.
Please submit two copies of your comments, including the attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under
Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by logging onto the Docket Management System Web site at
If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by mail.
If you wish to submit any information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim to be confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. In addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the address given above under
We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above under
You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the address given above under
You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, take the following steps:
(1) Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the Department of Transportation (
(2) On that page, click on “search.”
(3) On the next page (
(4) On the next page, which contains docket summary information for the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may download the comments. However, since the comments are imaged documents, instead of word processing documents, the “pdf” versions of the documents are word searchable.
Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid (ACVFA).
This meeting will feature discussion of the Administration's development assistance initiatives, including the Millennium Challenge Account, the Global Development Alliance, and four major partnerships announced at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Participants will have an opportunity to ask questions of the speakers and to discuss the issues in more depth in small groups.
The meeting is free and open to the public. Persons wishing to attend the meeting can fax or e-mail their name to Larritus Jackson, 202-347-9212,
Commodity Credit Corporation; Farm Service Agency, USDA.
Notice of availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
The Commodity Credit Corporation and the Farm Service Agency announce the availability of the draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The draft PEIS assesses the potential environmental impacts of alternatives to be considered in the administration of the CRP. The draft PEIS also provides a means for the public to voice any concern they may have about the program and any ideas for improving it. This Notice of Availability informs the public that the draft PEIS is available and solicits public comment.
FSA invites comments on the draft PEIS. Comments should be submitted by close of business on October 21, 2002, to ensure consideration. Comments submitted after this date will be considered to the extent possible.
Written comments on and requests for copies of the draft PEIS should be directed to CRP PEIS, P.O. Box 6830, Falls Church, VA 22204-6830,
Don Steck, USDA/FSA/CEPD/Stop 0513, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-0513, (202) 690-0224, or e-mail at:
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.
The Salmon-Challis National Forest, will prepare a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) in order to make a new decision on the Salmon Wild and Scenic River Management Plan. On September 21, 2001, a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed that selected Alternative 4, which provided for temporary outfitter and guide use at the Stub Creek, Arctic Creek and Smith Gulch camps. It also required removal of all permanent structures and facilities at those three camps by December 31, 2002. During the appeal of that decision, the permittees brought forward additional economic information showing economic impacts to them associated with the December 31, 2002 removal date. This DSEIS will reevaluate impacts to permittees and consider a possible change of camp removal to a later date.
Written comments must be received on or before 45 days after the Notice of Availability is published in the
Submit written comments concerning this notice to Patricia Pearson, Project Coordinator, Salmon-Challis National Forest, 50 Hwy 93 South, Salmon, Idaho, 83467.
Patricia Pearson at (208) 756-5148.
The Central Idaho Wilderness Act (CIWA) designated 79 miles of the Salmon River stretching from Wheat Creek to Long Tom Bar as “Wild” and directed that the river corridor be managed under the provision of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA). Three private camps are located within this Wild segment: Arctic Creek, Stub Creek and Smith Gulch. The owner and
In two previous court orders the Forest Service was directed to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Salmon Wild & Scenic River Management Plan Revision specifically focused on use of these three camps. The Forest completed the EIS and the first Salmon Wild and Scenic River Record of Decision (ROD) was approved on June 5, 1995. That ROD authorized use and occupancy of the three private camps through the year 2010. The decision was both appealed and litigated.
On September 19, 2000, the Court issued a decision that use of the three private camps was not consistent with the WSRA. The Court remanded the decision to the Forest Service to fashion a remedy consistent with the court opinion. In 2001 the Forest updated the 1995 EIS with a Supplemental Information Report (SIR). The SIR reviewed the existing analysis in the 1995 EIS to determine if there was any new information and if the conclusions regarding environmental effects remained the same. A second ROD was approved on September 19, 2001 selecting Alternative 4 of the 1995 FEIS. That decision authorized the use of temporary outfitter camps at three campsites and set the date of December 31, 2002 for removal of all permanent facilities at Arctic Creek, Stub Creek and Smith Gulch.
The 2001-ROD was appealed by the permittees. The Appeal Reviewing Officer affirmed the decision, but directed the Forest Service to reconsider the timeline for removal with better consideration of the individual appellants' interests, to evaluate whatever economic and operational information the appellants provided regarding their interests, and to determine if it necessitated a change in the Decision.
The DSEIS is expected to be available for public review early in September 2002. The comment period on the DSEIS will be 45 days from the date of the
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
The Salmon-Challis National Forest Supervisor has determined that preparation of a Supplemental EIS (Draft and Final) is required in order to make a new decision, under CEQ regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1501-1508).
I am the responsible official for this Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. My address is Salmon-Challis National Forest, 50 Hwy 93 South, Salmon, Idaho 83467.
North Central Idaho Resource Advisory Committee, Grangeville, Idaho, USDA, Forest Service.
Notice of Meeting.
Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-393) the Nez Perce and Clearwater National Forests' North Central Idaho Resource Advisory Committee will meet Tuesday, October 8, 2002 in Moscow, Idaho for a business meeting. The meeting is open to the public.
The business meeting on October 8 begins at 10 a.m., in Room 207, Latah County Courthouse, 522 S. Adams Street, Moscow, Idaho 83843. Agenda topics will include discussion of project screening and selection process. A public forum will begin at 2:30 p.m. (PST).
Thor Mereszczak, Staff Officer and Designated Federal Officer, at (208) 983-1950.
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meetings.
Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393) the Lolo and Kootenai National Forests' Sanders County Resource Advisory Committee will meet on September 17 and 25 at 6:30 p.m. in Thompson Falls, Montana for business meetings. The meetings are open to the public.
September 17 and 25, 2002.
The meeting will be held at the Thompson Falls Courthouse, 1111 Main Street, Thompson Falls, MT 59873.
Lisa Krueger, Designated Forest Official (DFO), District Ranger Plains/Thompson Falls District, Lolo National Forest at (406) 826-4321, or Brian Avery, District Ranger Cabinet Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest at (406) 827-3533.
Agenda topics include reviewing project proposals and receiving public comment. If the meeting location is changed, notice will be posted in the local newspapers, including the Clark
Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.
Proposed additions to and deletions from Procurement List.
The Committee is proposing to add to the Procurement List services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and to delete products previously furnished by such agencies.
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259.
Sheryl D. Kennerly, (703) 603-7740.
This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the possible impact of the proposed actions.
If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice for each service will be required to procure the services listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities. I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:
1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the services to the Government.
2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the services to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the services proposed for addition to the Procurement List. Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information.
The following services are proposed for addition to Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:
I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:
1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products to the Government.
2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the products proposed for deletion from the Procurement List.
The following products have been proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:
Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.
Additions to Procurement List.
This action adds to the Procurement List products and services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.
October 6, 2002.
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259.
Sheryl D. Kennerly, (703) 603-7740.
On July 27, 2001, and July 12, 2002, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (66 FR 39142, and 67 FR 46170) of proposed additions to the Procurement List.
After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the products and services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the products and services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4.
I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:
1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small
2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government.
3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the products and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List.
Accordingly, the following products and services are added to the Procurement List:
This action does not affect current contracts awarded prior to the effective date of this addition or options that may be exercised under those contracts.
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB).
Notice announcing Sunshine Act public meeting.
The CSB will hold a public meeting on September 17, 2002 in Houston, Texas at the Hilton Houston Hobby Airport, to deliberate and vote on a series of findings and recommendations arising from a two-year investigation into reactive chemical hazards. The Board will also conduct other business as more fully described below.
The Public Meeting will be held on Tuesday, September 17, 2002, beginning at 9 a.m. at Hilton Houston Hobby Airport, 8181 Airport Boulevard, Houston, TX 77061, Telephone number: (713) 645-3000.
The public meeting will be broadcast live and without charge over the Internet from the CSB Web site,
Robert Wager at (202)-261-7636, or e-mail at:
On August 24, 2000 the CSB approved an investigative report on the April 1998 explosion at the Morton Specialty Chemical's (now Rohm and Haas) Paterson, New Jersey facility. The report stated that the incident might not have occurred had the company's safety program for reactive chemicals followed recommended industry safety practices. The blast injured nine workers and released chemicals into the neighboring community. The Board adopted a number of recommendations, including two to both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The first recommendation requested that EPA and OSHA issue joint guidelines for the management of reactive chemical process hazards. The Board believed that existing federal safety standards did not provide sufficient guidance for reactive chemical process safety, in such areas as reporting and investigating deviations from normal operations, the use of chemical screening techniques and the proper design for pressure relief, emergency cooling and safety interlock systems.
The other recommendation involving OSHA and EPA urged the two agencies to join the CSB, and other chemical safety organizations, including industry, in a CSB “hazard investigation” of reactive chemical processes.
The objectives of CSB's investigation included: evaluation of the impacts of reactive chemical incidents; examination of how OSHA and EPA authorities and regulations address reactive hazards; analysis of the appropriateness and consideration of alternatives to reliance on the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) instability rating system to define reactive substances covered under OSHA's process safety management (PSM) regulation; examination of how industry and other private sector organizations address reactive hazards; and development of recommendations for reducing the number and severity of reactive chemical incidents.
During its study, the CSB staff examined 167 chemical incidents and held a public hearing on May 30th, 2002, in Paterson, New Jersey, City where the staff presented findings and preliminary conclusions from this investigation to the Board. The hearing also provided a forum for interested parties to provide input prior to CSB's formulation of final recommendations and issuance of a report.
After the conclusion of the presentation of the reactives investigation report, Board Members will also meet in open session on the following topics: (a) Revisions to CSB strategic plan, (b) update by the Chief Operating Officer on current CSB investigative efforts, and (c) status changes to selected CSB recommendations.
Friday, Spetember 13, 2002, 10:30 a.m.
Wyndham Wilmington Hotel, 700 King Street, Wilmington, DE 19801.
Les Jin, Press and Communications (202) 376-7700.
Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:
Whereas, by an Act of Congress approved June 18, 1934, an Act “To provide for the establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,” as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u) (the Act), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) is authorized to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;
Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR part 400) provide for the establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest;
Whereas, an application from the Board of Habor Commissioners of the City of Long Beach, California, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 50, requesting special-purpose subzone status for the oil refinery complex of Valero Energy Corporation (formerly Ultramar, Inc.), located in the Los Angeles County, California, area, was filed by the Board on November 27, 2001, and notice inviting public comment was given in the
Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations would be satisfied, and that approval of the application would be in the public interest if approval is subject to the conditions listed below;
Now, therefore, the Board hereby authorizes the establishment of a subzone (Subzone 501) at the oil refinery complex of the Valero Energy Corporation in the Los Angeles County, California, area, at the location described in the application, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including § 400.28, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Foreign status (19 CFR 146.41, 146.42) products consumed as fuel for the refinery shall be subject to the applicable duty rate.
2. Privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41) shall be elected on all foreign merchandise admitted to the subzone, except that non-privileged foreign (NPF) status (19 CFR 146.42) may be elected on refinery inputs covered under HTSUS Subheadings #2709.00.10, #2709.00.20, #2710.11.25, #2710.11.45, #2710.19.05, #2710.19.10, #2710.19.45, #2710.91.00, #2710.99.05, #2710.99.10, #2710.99.16, #2710.99.21, and #2710.99.45 which are used in the production of:
Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:
Whereas, the City of San Diego, California, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 153, submitted an application to the Board for authority to expand FTZ 153 to include a new site (Site 8) at the Ocean View Hills Corporate Center/Otay Mesa within the San Diego Customs port of entry (FTZ Docket 7-2002; filed 1/30/02);
Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the
Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest;
Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:
The application to expand FTZ 153 is approved, subject to the Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.
Attest:
Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:
Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act provides for “* * * the establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for other purposes,” and authorizes the Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;
Whereas, the Board‘s regulations (15 CFR part 400) provide for the establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest;
Whereas, the City of San Diego, California, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 153, has made application to the Board for authority to establish a special-purpose subzone at the projection television screen manufacturing and warehousing facilities of DNP Electronics America, LLC, located in Chula Vista, California (FTZ Docket 14-2002, filed 2/8/02);
Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the
Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner‘s report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest;
Now, therefore, the Board hereby grants authority for subzone status at the projection television screen manufacturing and warehousing facilities of DNP Electronics America, LLC, located in Chula Vista, California (Subzone 153C), at the location described in the application, and subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including § 400.28.
Attest:
An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board (the Board) by the County of Merced, California, grantee of FTZ 226, requesting authority to expand and reorganize its zone in Tulare and Fresno Counties, California, within and adjacent to the Fresno Customs port of entry. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR Part 400). It was formally filed on August 26, 2002.
FTZ 226 was approved on December 22, 1997 (Board Order 946, 63 F.R. 778, 1/7/98). A minor boundary modification (A(27f)-26-2002) was approved in mid-2002 which temporarily added and deleted certain sites. The zone project currently consists of the following sites within and adjacent to the Fresno Customs port of entry area:
The applicant is now requesting authority to expand and reorganize the zone as described below. The proposal requests extension of zone status for parcels with temporary authority, permanent deletion of the sites/parcels that were temporarily deleted, deletion of certain additional sites, and expansion of existing Site 2 to include two new parcels.
Site 2 will be reorganized and expanded to include on a permanent basis the temporary sites at the MidState 99 Distribution Center (48 acres) and to add two new parcels (203 acres) within the 344-acre industrial park located in Visalia (Tulare County). Zone status is also being requested on a permanent basis for the temporary site (25 acres) at the Fresno Yosemite International Airport in Fresno (Site 10, as listed above). The application is also requesting authority to permanently delete a parcel (20 acres) from existing Site 1 and to delete Site 5 in its entirety (118 acres), as well as formalize the deletions made in the boundary modification. The total size of Site 2 will be increased to 251 acres while the size of Site 1 will be decreased to 800 acres. (The following sites would remain unchanged as listed above: 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12.) No specific manufacturing requests are being made at this time. Such requests would be made to the Board on a case-by-case basis.
In accordance with the Board's regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff has been designated examiner to investigate the application and report to the Board.
Public comment on the application is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at one of the following addresses:
1. Submissions via Express/Package Delivery Services: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Franklin Court Building-Suite 4100W, 1099-14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005; or
2. Submissions via the U.S. Postal Service: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, FCB-Suite 4100W, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.
The closing period for their receipt is November 5, 2002. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be
A copy of the application and accompanying exhibits will be available during this time for public inspection at address Number 1 listed above, and at the Merced County Action Business Center, 2000 M Street, Merced, CA 95340.
Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:
Whereas, the Bi-State Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 146 (Lawrence County, Illinois), has requested authority on behalf of North American Lighting, Inc. (NAL), operator of FTZ 146A, at the NAL automotive lighting products manufacturing facilities in Flora and Salem, Illinois, to expand the subzone to include a third site in Paris, Illinois; to expand the boundary of Site 1; and, to expand the scope of manufacturing authority to include new manufacturing capacity under FTZ procedures (FTZ Doc. 43-2001, filed 10/31/2001);
Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in the
Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest;
Now therefore, the Board hereby approves the request, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), DOC.
Notice of availability of final evaluation findings.
Notice is hereby given of the availability of the final evaluation findings for the Washington, South Carolina, California, Puerto Rico, and the Northern Mariana Islands Coastal Management Programs, and the Great Bay (New Hampshire) and Rookery Bay (Florida) National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERRs). Sections 312 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), as amended, require a continuing review of the performance of coastal states with respect to approval of coastal management programs, and the operation and management of NERRs.
The states of Washington, South Carolina, California, and the territories of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands were found to be implementing and enforcing their federally approved coastal management programs, addressing the national coastal management objectives identified in CZMA Section 303(2)(A)-(K), and adhering to the programmatic terms of their financial assistance awards. Great Bay and Rookery Bay NERRs were found to be adhering to programmatic requirements of the NERR System.
Copies of these final evaluation findings may be obtained upon written request from: Ralph Cantral, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, 10th Floor, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or
Proposed collection; comment request.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing and proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Written comments must be submitted on or before November 5, 2002.
Direct all written comments to Susan K. Brown, Records Officer, Office of Data Management, Data Administration Division, USPTO, Suite 310, 2231 Crystal Drive, Washington, DC 20231; by telephone at 703-308-7400; by e-mail at
Requests for additional information should be directed to the attention of Christine Nucker, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Box OED, Washington, DC 20231, by telephone at 703-306-4097; by e-mail at
This collection of information is required by 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(D), which permits the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to establish regulations governing the recognition and conduct of agents, attorneys or other persons representing applicants or other parties before the USPTO. This statute also permits the USPTO to require information from applicants which shows that they are of good moral character and reputation and have the necessary qualifications to assist applicants with the patent process and to represent them before the USPTO.
The USPTO administers the statute through 37 CFR 10.5 to 10.19. These rules address the requirements to apply for the examination for registration and to demonstrate eligibility to be a registered attorney or agent before the
There are four forms associated with this information collection. These forms are Form PTO-158 (Application for Registration to Practice Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office), Form PTO-158A (Application for Registration to Practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office Under 37 CFR 10.6(c) By a Foreign Resident), Form PTO/275 (Undertaking Under 37 CFR 10.10(b)), and Form PTO-107A (Data Sheet—Register of Patent Attorneys and Agents). The applicant uses Form PTO-158 to apply for the examination. Forms PTO-158, PTO-158A, and PTO/275 are used as applicable for applicants seeking registration. Form PTO-107A is used by the applicant to supply information for the register.
Form PTO-1209 Oath or Affirmation is being added into this collection. The USPTO has previously been aware of this form but has reconsidered its inclusion into this collection due to the fact that it includes a notary public requirement which involves record keeping costs.
A requirement that was previously overlooked is being added to this information collection in the way of a petition that may be filed under 37 CFR 10.170 requesting in writing that a requirement of the regulations, which is not a requirement of the statutes, be suspended or waived by the Commissioner in an extraordinary situation, when justice requires. There is no form associated with this requirement.
A written request for reconsideration for individuals who receive a disapproval notice and desire further review or consideration, that was previously overlooked, is being added into this collection. The final decision by the Director of OED may be appealed to the USPTO Director. There is no form associated with this requirement.
Also being added to this collection is a petition for reinstatement of an individual who has resigned or who has been suspended or excluded, so long as the individual meets the requirements of 37 CFR 10.7, including taking and passing an examination and paying all costs and expenses as may be appropriate. There is no form associated with this requirement.
The information supplied to the USPTO by an applicant seeking to apply for the examination for registration and/or to request that they be included on the Register of Patent Attorneys and Agents is used by the USPTO to review applicants for the examination, and to determine whether an applicant may be added to, or an existing practitioner may remain on the Register of Patent Attorneys and Agents.
By mail to the USPTO when the individual desires to participate in the information collection.
There are record keeping costs for this collection as a result of the Oath which includes a notary public requirement. The average fee for having a having a
There are filing fees associated with this collection which are also part of the nonhour cost burden. The application fees are broken out to include the fact that the one application form can cover any one of five different categories: As applicable when used for examination application, examination and registration fees; as applicable when used for examination application and examination fees only; as applicable when used for registration fees; as applicable when used for reinstatement fees; and as applicable when used for examination application only. Following is a chart listing the filing fees and the nonhour cost burden. The total annual nonhour cost burden associated with filing fees is $2,553,210.00.
There are mailing costs that also need to be added into the total annual nonhour cost burden for this collection. The General Requirements Bulletin for Admission to the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases before the USPTO states that all business with the USPTO should be transacted in writing. Personal attendance is unnecessary. The actions of the OED will be based exclusively on the written record in the USPTO (37 CFR 1.2). All documents may be submitted to the USPTO by first-class mail through the United States Postal Service. All correspondence should include a certificate of mailing for each piece of correspondence enclosed, stating the date of deposit or transmission to the USPTO. The USPTO estimates that the average first-class postage cost is 49 cents. Therefore, the USPTO estimates that it will receive 19,649 responses to this information collection per year, for a total cost of $9,628 per year (19,649 × $0.49 = $9,628) in postage fees.
The total annual nonhour cost burden is $2,569,838.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Notice of open meeting.
The Secretary of the Navy's Advisory Subcommittee on Naval History, a subcommittee of the Department of Defense Historical Advisory Committee will meet to review naval historical activities since the last meeting of the Advisory Subcommittee on Naval History, which was conducted on September 20, and September 21, 2001 and to make comments and recommendations on these activities to the Secretary of the Navy. The meetings will be open to the public.
The meetings will be held on Thursday, September 19, 2002, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and Friday, September 20, 2002, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.
The meetings will be held at the Navy Museum of The Naval Historical Center, 805 Kidder Breese Street, SE, Building 76, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5060.
Dr. William S. Dudley, Director of Naval History, 805 Kidder Breese Street, SE, Bldg. 57, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374-5060, telephone (202) 433-2210.
This notice of open meeting is provided in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2). The purpose of these meetings is to review naval historical activities since the last meeting of the Advisory Subcommittee on Naval History and to make comments and recommendations on these activities to the Secretary of the Navy.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Notice.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the Department of the Navy (DON) announces the appointment of members to the DON's numerous Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Boards (PRBs). The purpose of the PRBs is to provide fair and impartial review of the annual SES performance appraisal prepared by the senior executive's immediate and second level supervisor; to make recommendations to appointing officials regarding acceptance or modification of the performance rating; and to make recommendations for monetary performance awards. Composition of the specific PRBs will be determined on an ad hoc basis from among individuals listed below:
Ms. Carmen Arrowood, Office of Civilian Human Resources, telephone (202) 764-0635.
Department of Energy.
Revision to Record of Decision.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.315, the Department of Energy (DOE) is revising the Record of Decision for the Department of Energy's Waste Management Program: Treatment and Storage of Transuranic Waste issued on January 20, 1998 (63 FR 3629), as revised previously on December 19, 2000 (65 FR 82985) and July 13, 2001 (66 FR 38646). The Department has now decided to transfer approximately 27 cubic meters of transuranic (TRU) waste from a portion of the Battelle Columbus Laboratory, the Battelle West Jefferson North Site (West Jefferson) in Columbus, Ohio, and approximately 9 cubic meters of TRU waste from the Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC) in Canoga Park, California, to the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington, for storage. DOE expects that this TRU waste will ultimately be shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico for disposal. The TRU waste will be shipped to Hanford from both sites in Type B truck-mounted shipping casks licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
In its previous Record of Decision (ROD), based on the analysis in the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS), DOE/EIS-0200F, dated May 1997, DOE had decided (with one exception) that each DOE site would prepare its own TRU waste for disposal, and store the waste onsite until it could be shipped to WIPP for disposal.
Copies of the Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, the WIPP Disposal Phase Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, the first WM ROD, the first and second revised WM RODs, the WIPP disposal ROD, and this revised WM ROD are available from: The Center for Environmental Management Information, P.O. Box 23769, Washington, DC 20026-3769, Telephone: 1-800-736-3282 (in Washington, DC: 202-863-5084).
For copies of the Environmental Assessment for the Battelle Columbus Laboratories Decommissioning Project, June 1990, and further information about the management of TRU waste at the Battelle West Jefferson Site, contact: Mr. Thomas A. Baillieul, Columbus Environmental Management Project, U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box 200, West Jefferson, OH 43162, Telephone: 614-424-3559.
For copies of the draft Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center, January 2002, and further information about the management of TRU waste at ETEC, contact: Ms. Mary Gross, Oakland Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 1301 Clay Street, Room 700N, Oakland, CA 94612, Telephone: 510-637-1629.
For further information on the disposal of TRU waste at WIPP, contact: Ms. Lynne Smith, U.S. Department of Energy, WIPP Office EM-23, Office of Environmental Management, 19001 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874, Telephone: 301-903-4688.
For further information on Hanford site TRU operations, contact: Mr. Todd Shrader, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, P.O. Box 550, MSIN A6-38, Richland, WA 99352, Telephone: 509-376-2725.
For information on DOE's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, contact: Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, Telephone 202-586-4600, or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.
The WM PEIS evaluated the potential environmental impacts of treating and storing TRU waste at DOE generator sites and at DOE sites, such as Hanford, where this waste could be consolidated on a regional or centralized basis. In the WM PEIS ROD for TRU waste, DOE selected the Decentralized Alternative, stating that “each of the Department's sites that currently has or will generate TRU waste will prepare and store its waste on site” prior to shipment to WIPP.
TRU waste is waste that contains alpha particle-emitting radionuclides with atomic numbers greater than that of uranium (92) and half-lives greater than 20 years in concentrations greater than 100 nanocuries per gram. TRU waste is classified according to the radiation dose at a package surface. Contact-handled TRU waste has a radiation dose rate at a package surface of 200 millirem per hour or less; this
WIPP is not currently authorized by the State of New Mexico to accept remote-handed TRU waste for disposal. However, DOE submitted a request for an amendment of its operating permit to include remote-handled TRU waste on June 28, 2002. The approval process for the permit amendment is expected to take approximately 2 years. DOE currently expects to begin shipping remote-handled TRU waste to WIPP in late 2004 or 2005.
DOE is contractually responsible for the disposal of approximately 27 cubic meters of contact- and remote-handled TRU waste generated as part of the cleanup of the Battelle West Jefferson North Site. This waste consists of sample residues, analytical equipment, and hot cell fixtures that became highly contaminated during several decades of metallurgical and nuclear fuel research. The remote-handled waste is currently being characterized and packaged into approximately 115 55-gallon drums. These packaged drums will meet or exceed the draft Waste Acceptance Criteria for disposal of remote-handled TRU waste at WIPP before it will be shipped to the Hanford Site. The contact-handled TRU waste from an earlier decommissioning of a former plutonium laboratory at the site, (up to 10 drums,
As part of the closeout of its nuclear materials research contract, the Department of Energy is assisting in the remediation of the site. Although the West Jefferson facility is privately owned, contract terms specify that all radioactive waste generated during the facility cleanup is “DOE-owned” for the purposes of disposal. The site's TRU waste is being stored in shielded holding areas within the hot cell building, one of three buildings slated for demolition. In order to meet the site's schedule for building demolition, removal of the stored TRU waste must begin by the summer of 2002 and be completed within 12 months, well in advance of DOE's anticipated timeframe (late 2004 or 2005) for commencing shipments of remote-handled TRU waste to WIPP.
Continued storage of the TRU waste elsewhere on the West Jefferson site until WIPP is ready to receive the remote-handled waste would require construction of a new, shielded facility licensed by the State of Ohio and the NRC. Also, building a new facility would divert funding away from necessary clean-up activities and be inconsistent with DOE's goal of early removal of radioactive waste from privately owned sites. Therefore, DOE needs to ship the remote-handled TRU waste to another DOE site that has the requisite remote-handling and storage capabilities.
DOE is responsible for the disposal of 11 cubic meters of TRU waste at ETEC, a government-owned complex of buildings located on the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in southern California. Up to 9 cubic meters of the TRU waste are remote-handled and approximately 2 cubic meters are contact-handled. (The remote-handled TRU waste will be repackaged and reduced in volume prior to shipment. DOE expects that the volume of remote-handled TRU waste to be shipped will be between 3 and 7 cubic meters. Thus, the maximum TRU shipping volume is expected to be about 9 cubic meters.)
The contact-handled TRU waste consists of solidified oils from the decontamination and decommissioning of a nuclear materials development facility and debris waste from the decontamination and demolition of glove boxes used for nuclear fuel decladding and repackaging operations. The remote-handled TRU waste, most of which has a low (approximately 130 parts per million) concentration of PCB contaminant, consists of drain line residue that accumulated in the Hot Laboratory (Building 020) drain line system over 30 years of facility operation, and one drum of debris waste from the cleanup of the Hot Laboratory and a nuclear materials development facility. TRU wastes are currently stored in the Radioactive Waste Handling Building at ETEC.
The waste will be packaged in 26 to 45 55-gallon drums for shipping (approximately 11 drums of contact-handled and 15 to 34 drums of remote-handled TRU waste). Up to 50 percent of this contact-handled TRU waste could be determined to be low-level radioactive waste (LLW) after further characterization. ETEC does not have the capability to perform the radiological characterization that is required to identify any non-TRU drums and remove them from the waste stream. In addition, ETEC does not have the capability to certify that the contact-handled TRU waste meets the present WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria. For these reasons, ETEC cannot currently ship its contact-handled TRU waste directly to WIPP.
ETEC is operated by Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power, a division of The Boeing Company, which owns the Santa Susana Field Laboratory land. DOE has determined that ETEC is surplus to its current needs. DOE intends to remove all radioactive materials and waste resulting from DOE activities at ETEC and turn the site over to Rocketdyne in 2006. In January 2002, DOE issued a draft Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center (DOE/EA-1345) that describes the cleanup, decommissioning, and demolition of the remaining facilities at ETEC.
Developing the ability at ETEC to certify the contact-handled TRU waste as meeting the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria would require the construction of a new radiological facility or use of a mobile vendor to certify the waste. It would be impractical to construct and then to decontaminate and remove a radioactive waste management facility at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, and mobile vendors are not capable of certifying all of the ETEC contact-handled TRU waste.
Storage of remote-handled TRU waste elsewhere at ETEC until it could be sent to WIPP would require construction of a new storage facility. Further, ETEC does not have the capability to characterize and prepare the remote-handled TRU waste for shipment to WIPP. Building a facility with these capabilities would be impractical, would divert funding away from necessary clean-up activities, and would be inconsistent with DOE's goal of early removal of radioactive waste from privately owned sites. Therefore, DOE needs to ship the remote-handled TRU waste to another DOE site that has the requisite capabilities for storing this waste and preparing it for eventual
DOE has decided to transfer approximately 27 cubic meters (approximately 125 55-gallon drums) of contact- and remote-handled TRU waste from the West Jefferson site to the DOE Hanford Site for storage prior to disposal at WIPP. DOE will ship this TRU waste in NRC-licensed Type B truck-mounted casks that are specifically certified for the West Jefferson TRU wastes. Approximately 15 truck shipments will be required to transfer the inventory of packaged TRU waste to Hanford. The shipments are expected to commence in summer of 2002 and to be completed within 12 months. Onsite activities will involve packaging the waste for shipment and loading trucks for transport.
DOE has decided to transfer up to 9 cubic meters of TRU waste (26 to 45 55-gallon drums), of which most of the remote-handled TRU waste has a low (approximately 130 parts per million) concentration of PCB contaminant, from ETEC to the DOE Hanford Site for storage prior to planned disposal at WIPP. DOE will ship this waste in NRC-licensed Type B truck-mounted casks that will be specifically certified for the ETEC TRU wastes. Up to five casks will be required to transfer the inventory of packaged TRU waste to the receiving site in 1 to 5 shipments, depending on the volume of ETEC waste that can be placed in each cask and the number of casks that can be transported per shipment. DOE intends to complete the shipments over a 12-month period. Onsite activities will involve packaging the waste for shipment and loading trucks for transport. However, DOE will continue its consultation with EPA before packaging the waste for transport.
The Hanford Site, located in Washington State near Richland, has an established radioactive waste management capability in the central plateau of the 586-square mile (1,520-square kilometer) reservation. At Hanford, the West Jefferson and ETEC TRU remote-handled waste will be stored in shielded containers at the solid radioactive and mixed waste management complex located in the 200 West Area of the site until it can be accepted at WIPP. ETEC and West Jefferson contact-handled TRU waste will be assayed at Hanford, and any fraction determined to be LLW will be disposed of at Hanford. Both ETEC (also known as Rocketdyne on Hanford's approved generator's list) and West Jefferson are currently approved generator sites for disposal of LLW at Hanford. The remaining fraction determined to be contact-handled TRU waste will be packaged, certified to meet the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria, and shipped to WIPP for disposal.
DOE needs to begin shipping its TRU waste from the West Jefferson and ETEC sites in the near future in order to meet the Department's timetables for cleanup of contaminated buildings at these sites. However, the TRU waste at both sites is predominantly remote-handled TRU waste, which cannot presently be accepted at WIPP for disposal. Constructing new facilities to continue onsite storage until the waste could be accepted at WIPP (estimated to be approximately late 2004 or 2005) would be costly, and would divert funds from decontamination and decommissioning activities. Constructing new storage capacity would also be contrary to the DOE's goal of early removal of radioactive waste from privately owned sites.
DOE's Hanford Site offers a practical, safe, and secure location for storing the wastes from West Jefferson and ETEC. Hanford also has a WIPP-approved program for certifying contact-handled TRU waste for disposal. Comparatively large volumes of remote- and contact-handled TRU waste (including PCB-commingled TRU waste) have been and are being managed at Hanford, which has trained waste management personnel and storage capacity for TRU waste at the 200 Area waste management complex. No new storage facilities would be needed at any of the three sites; thus, the potential cost and health and environmental impacts associated with building new facilities at the two small sites, including a capability at ETEC to characterize and prepare its remote-handled TRU waste, would be avoided.
Hanford's program for certifying and shipping contact-handled TRU waste according to WIPP's Waste Acceptance Criteria and applicable state and federal regulations is operational. The site's planning for facilities and operations to characterize, certify and package remote-handled TRU waste is also well underway.
DOE's previous analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (WM PEIS, WIPP SEIS-II, and the Environmental Assessment for Battelle Columbus Laboratories Decommissioning Project (DOE/EA-0433, June 1990)) indicate that the potential health and environmental impacts of shipping a total of approximately 36 cubic meters of TRU waste from West Jefferson and ETEC to Hanford would be very small. Further, based on its review of the previous NEPA documents, DOE found that it is clear that its decision to ship TRU waste from the Battelle West Jefferson Site and ETEC to Hanford, for storage and subsequent disposal at WIPP, is not a substantial change to the proposed action analyzed in the previous NEPA documentation relevant to environmental concerns, and that there are no significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts. Therefore, DOE concluded that additional NEPA review is not required under 40 CFR 1502.9(c) or 10 CFR 1021.314 to implement this decision.
Although the WM PEIS did not analyze the onsite impacts of preparing all of the TRU waste that DOE now has decided to ship off site from West Jefferson (identified as Battelle Columbus or BCL in the WM PEIS) and ETEC, the inventory data for West Jefferson (580 cubic meters) and ETEC (9 cubic meters) were included and those impacts were analyzed in the WIPP SEIS-II. The onsite health and environmental impacts of preparing the West Jefferson (identified as Battelle Columbus or BCL in the WIPP SEIS-II) and ETEC wastes for offsite shipment were very small (see WIPP SEIS-II, Sections 5.1.9, 5.1.10, and 5.1.11), and the impacts of the volumes of TRU waste that DOE has now decided to ship will be within the impacts identified in the WIPP SEIS-II.
Although the WM PEIS did not identify specific transportation corridor impacts between the West Jefferson or ETEC sites and the Hanford Site, the WM PEIS analyzed a centralized alternative under which approximately 700 cubic meters of remote-handled
In addition, the Environmental Assessment for Battelle Columbus Laboratories Decommissioning Project identified transportation corridor impacts between West Jefferson and Hanford for shipping 1,800 cubic meters of TRU waste over a period of 2 years and also found that the potential impacts would be very small. The 27 cubic meters of West Jefferson waste DOE has now decided to ship, and thus the potential transportation corridor impacts, would be substantially less than those identified in the environmental assessment.
The WM PEIS analyzed the onsite impacts at Hanford of storing, characterizing, and preparing up to 17,000 cubic meters of remote-handled TRU waste and 38,000 cubic meters of contact-handled TRU waste for shipment to WIPP (TRU waste generated at Hanford and TRU waste shipped to Hanford from offsite generators [Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory]) (see WM PEIS, Table 8.1-1 and Section 8.3.4). The health and environmental impacts of managing these volumes of waste at Hanford were small (see WM PEIS, Volume II, Site Data Tables, Section II.5.3). Although the WM PEIS did not analyze the specific waste inventory at West Jefferson and ETEC that DOE has now decided to ship to Hanford (approximately 36 cubic meters total), the characteristics of the West Jefferson and ETEC wastes are similar to the TRU wastes analyzed in the WM PEIS at Hanford. Further, the waste volumes to be shipped to Hanford would represent a very small fraction of the total contact- and remote-handled TRU waste to be prepared at Hanford for shipment to WIPP (0.07 percent) as analyzed in the WM PEIS.
For the reasons stated above, DOE is revising its earlier decision and will transfer approximately 27 cubic meters of TRU waste from the West Jefferson site and approximately 9 cubic meters of TRU waste from the ETEC site to Hanford for storage until certification and shipment to WIPP for disposal. Low-level waste (if any) identified during the certification process will be disposed of at Hanford according to existing procedures.
Take notice that on August 22, 2002, Ameren Services Company (ASC) tendered for filing an unexecuted Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement and Network Operating Agreement between ASC and Southwestern Electric Cooperative, Inc. ASC asserts that the purpose of the Agreement is to replace the unexecuted Agreements in Docket No. ER02-2236-000 with the revised unexecuted Agreements with Cinergy Power Marketing, as agent for Southwestern Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Central Illinois Generation (CIGI) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) additional information to support CIGI's Application for Market-Based Rate Authority, Waivers and Acceptance of Power Supply and Interconnection Agreements filed on May 1, 2002, as supplemented on June 14, 2002, in Docket No. ER02-1688-000.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 23, 2002, Enbridge Pipelines (AlaTenn) Inc. (AlaTenn), 1100 Louisiana, Suite 3300, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP02-429-000, a request pursuant to 157.205 and 157.211(a)(2) (18 CFR Sections 157.205 and 157.211(a)(2)) of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA), for authorization to construct and operate a new delivery point facilities to serve an end-user in Madison County, Alabama under AlaTenn's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP85-359-000, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Specifically, AlaTenn states that it is seeking authority to construct, own and operate new delivery point facilities on its existing 12-inch Mainline and 10-inch Loop Line to accommodate natural gas deliveries to Metal Working Products, a division of TDY Industries, Inc. (MWP), in Madison County, Alabama. AlaTenn states that MWP presently receives its natural gas service from Huntsville Utilities, the local distribution company. According to AlaTenn, the proposed facilities will be used to transport up to 1,200 Dth of natural gas per day on a firm basis to MWP, which will be within AlaTenn's certificated level of services. AlaTenn further states that it will provide such firm transportation service on behalf of its marketing affiliate, Enbridge Marketing (US) Inc. under its existing authorized FT Rate Schedule, and within certificated entitlements. According to AlaTenn, the proposed facilities will not have an impact on AlaTenn's peak day deliveries, and that it has sufficient capacity to render the proposed transportation service without detriment or disadvantage to its existing customers. AlaTenn states that the total estimated cost of the proposed facilities is $71,490, will be totally reimbursed by MWP, and that the volumes will be transported under AlaTenn's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP89-2201-000.
Any questions concerning this request may be directed to Claudia Schrull, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Enbridge Pipelines (AlaTenn) Inc., 1100 Louisiana, Suite 3300, Houston, Texas 77002 at (713) 821-2045.
Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to Section 157.205 of the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
Take notice that on August 20, 2002, Honeoye Storage Corporation (Honeoye), c/o HALLC, 55 Union Street, 4th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts 02108, filed an application in the above captioned docket seeking a certificate of public convenience and necessity and related authorizations pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), as amended, and the Commission's Rules and Regulations thereunder. Honeoye's application requests that the Commission issue an order authorizing Honeoye to make a well modification and increase the Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) of its compressor station and field gathering system as described in the application. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Honeoye's application states that it does not seek to increase the existing certificated storage capacity or injection/withdrawal deliverability of its facility. Honeoye also indicated that the proposed activities will improve operational efficiency of its storage reservoir located in Ontario County, New York within existing certificated limits. Honeoye asserts that while it has met all of its service obligations, it is unable to completely fill the storage reservoir during the injection cycle to its certificated capacity because of limits on the existing MAOP. In addition, Honeoye states that it has experienced a decline in deliverability during late stages of withdrawal from the Honeoye facility because of the installation of smaller casing/tubing sizes in certain injection/withdrawal wells.
Consequently, Honeoye proposes to increase the MAOP of its compressor station and field gathering system from its presently authorized limit of 1045 psia to 1322 psia to improve injection rates during late stages of injection.
Honeoye states that all proposed work will be completed on or beneath land and existing right of ways and leases which it now owns, and therefore, Honeoye indicates that this application does not require the exercise of the right of eminent domain.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before September 23, 2002, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceedings. Only parties to the proceedings can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
The Commission may issue a preliminary determination on non-environmental issues prior to the completion of its review of the environmental aspects of the project. This preliminary determination typically considers such issues as the need for the project and its economic effect on existing customers of the applicant, on other pipelines in the area, and on landowners and communities. For example, the Commission considers the extent to which the applicant may need to exercise eminent domain to obtain rights-of-way for the proposed project and balances that against the non-environmental benefits to be provided by the project. Therefore, if a person has comments on community and landowner impacts from this proposal, it is important either to file comments or to intervene as early in the process as possible.
Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link.
If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal hearing before an Administrative Law Judge the Commission will issue another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's review process, a final Commission order approving or denying a certificate will be issued.
Take notice that on August 28, 2002, KeySpan Energy Development Corporation, KeySpan-Ravenswood, LLC, the New York Power Authority, Electric Power Supply Association and Independent Power Producers of New York, Inc. filed a Complaint against the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) requesting that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission direct the NYISO to (1) prepare a revised Cost Allocation Report for the Class of 2001 that complies with the NYISO Open Access Transmission Tariff with revised allocations of the cost of system upgrade facilities and (2) prepare cost allocation reports for succeeding years in compliance with the Commission's decision in this proceeding.
Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. The answer to the complaint and all comments, interventions or protests must be filed on or before September 17, 2002. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 28, 2002, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC (KMIGT) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1-B, Second Revised Sheet No. 54A and Original Sheet No. 54B , to be effective October 1, 2002.
KMIGT states that the purpose of this filing is to revise the provisions of KMIGT's Tariff in the General Terms and Conditions (GT&C) relating to capacity releases by shippers which are not creditworthy or which become noncreditworthy.
KMIGT states that a copy of this filing has been served upon all of its customers and affected state commissions.
Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 23, 2002, Lake Cogen, Ltd. (Applicant) filed in the above-referenced docket a request for a temporary waiver of the operating and efficiency standards for its qualifying cogeneration facility (Facility) in Umatilla, Florida, pursuant to Section 292.205(c) of the Commission's regulations.
The waiver being requested is for calendar year 2002 due to a reduction in the amount of steam used by the Facility's steam host. The Facility supplies steam to a fruit processing plant operated by Citrus World. Applicant also sells electric power to Florida Power Corporation.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on July 29, 2002, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a Notice of Withdrawal of Filing of the Midwest ISO of its June 5, 2002 filing of an Interconnection and Operating Agreement.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) and American Transmission Company LLC (ATCLLC) submitted a compliance filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) in accordance with the Commission's August 1, 2002 Order in this proceeding to change the liability limitation provisions in the Midwest ISO OATT to remove the monetary caps on the recovery of direct damages for ordinary negligence.
The Midwest ISO states that it has served copies of its filing upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in the above-captioned proceeding.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 23, 2002, Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C. (Ozark), 515 Central Park Drive, Suite 600, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105, filed in Docket No. CP02-428-000, an application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), as amended, and Part 157 of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), for authorization to abandon facilities by sale or transfer and for a declaration that certain facilities will be exempt gathering facilities following their transfer, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Ozark states that it is asking the Commission to issue an order granting permission and approval for Ozark to abandon certain jurisdictional facilities by sale to another interstate pipeline to accommodate service to a new electric generating facility currently under construction, and to transfer certain related lateral facilities to others which are to be non-jurisdictional gathering facilities.
Specifically, Ozark is seeking authorization to: (1) Abandon by sale to Reliant Energy Gas Transmission Company (REGT) a 28.97 mile segment of Ozark's interstate pipeline system in Pittsburg and Latimer Counties, Oklahoma, including certain associated lateral pipelines and facilities (REGT Transferred Facilities); and (2) to abandon by transfer to Ozark's gathering pipeline affiliate, Ozark Gas Gathering, L.L.C. (OGG), the Moss Lateral pipeline and associated facilities (Moss Lateral Facilities), which are interconnected with the facilities to be sold to REGT near milepost 252 of the current Ozark mainline pipeline. Ozark states that it is also requesting a Commission determination that the Moss Lateral Facilities will be gathering facilities exempt from NGA regulation once they have been abandoned by Ozark.
According to Ozark, REGT intends to use the REGT Transferred Facilities to deliver gas to the 1,220 MW Kiamichi Energy Facility (Kiamichi Facility), a new, combined-cycle, natural gas-fired electric generating facility which is currently under construction in Pittsburg County near Kiowa, Oklahoma. The Kiamichi Facility, which is being developed by Kiowa Power Partners, LLC, is expected to commence commercial operation in April 2003.
As stated by Ozark, REGT plans to acquire the REGT Transferred Facilities, to provide service on the REGT Transferred Facilities and to perform associated construction pursuant to its blanket construction certificate and Section 157.208 of the Commission's Regulations. REGT has informed Ozark that it will file a “prior notice” concerning its proposed acquisition and related construction shortly after the Commission gives notice of Ozark's Application.
Ozark states that the shippers whose gas currently is transported through the facilities Ozark proposes to abandon will not be harmed by the proposed transaction. REGT will continue to operate the REGT Transferred Facilities and provide transportation access to all interconnected producers and parties purchasing their gas. The other facilities to be abandoned in this proceeding will not be retired as part of Ozark's abandonment in this proceeding;
Ozark states that it and REGT have entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale, dated August 2, 2002, that will
Ozark states that it and OGG have entered into an Asset Transfer Agreement, dated August 22, 2002, that will govern the transfer of the Moss Lateral Facilities, at net book value, from Ozark to OGG.
It is noted that the Kiamichi Facility may require natural gas transportation service on Ozark to test its facilities before the proposed abandonment, sale, purchase and construction will be completed. Accordingly, to provide for services to the Kiamichi Facility from October 1, 2002 until the earlier of July 1, 2003 or the commercial operation date of April 1, 2003, it is explained that Ozark and REGT have entered into an interruptible transportation service agreement under Ozark's Rate Schedule ITS for transportation of up to 240,000 MMBtu on the Ozark system. Similarly, to meet the Kiamichi Facility's need for firm service beginning on the earlier of July 1, 2003, or the commercial operation date of April 1, 2003, Ozark and REGT have entered into a firm transportation service agreement under Ozark's Rate Schedule FTS for transportation of up to 240,000 MMBtu on the Ozark system.
Any questions concerning this application may be directed to James F. Bowe, Jr., Hugh E. Hilliard, Dewey Ballantine LLP, 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006-4605, at (202) 862-1000 or fax (202) 862-1093; or Marla K. Adams, Manager, Governmental Affairs, Enogex Inc., 515 Central Park Drive, Suite 600, Oklahoma City, OK 73105, at (405) 557-5274 or fax (405) 557-7903.
There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before September 20, 2002, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link.
If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the Commission will issue another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's review process, a final Commission order approving or denying a certificate will be issued.
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) tendered for filing a response to FERC's deficiency letter dated May 17, 2002, in this docket. PG&E's letter pertains to several Agreements filed on March 18, 2002, including an executed Generator Interconnection Agreement (GIA) to replace an unexecuted placeholder GIA that is part of the Generator Special Facilities Agreement (GSFA), between PG&E and Los Medanos Energy Center LLC (LMEC) and which provides for Special Facilities and the parallel operation of LMEC's generating facility and the PG&E-owned electric system that is on file with the Commission as Service Agreement No. 8 to PG&E Electric Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 5. In the August 26, 2002 filing PG&E included additional information requested by FERC, including a proposed crediting mechanism for network upgrades.
Copies of this filing have been served upon LMEC, Calpine Corporation, the California Independent System Operator Corporation, and the California Public Utilities Commission, and the parties to this docket.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, PPL Montana, LLC, PPL Colstrip I, LLC and PPL Colstrip II, LLC (collectively the Companies) filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) an updated market power analysis pursuant to the Commission's order in Illinova Power Marketing, Inc.,
The Companies have served a copy of this filing on the parties on the Commission's official service list for this docket.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, Twenty-First Revised Sheet No. 26A, Thirty-First Revised Sheet No. 26B, and Third Revised Sheet No. 220A, with an effective date of September 26, 2002.
Tennessee states that this filing is to update Rate Schedule NET-284 to reflect the conversion of four shippers to service under six Rate Schedule FT-A Agreements.
Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Take notice that on July 18, 2002, Union Light, Heat and Power Company (Union) filed pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2) of the Commission's regulations, a petition for rate approval requesting that the Commission approve the proposed rates as fair and equitable for transportation and storage services performed under section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA).
Union proposes to establish a monthly 100% reservation charge rate of $0.3046 per Dekatherm of demand associated with a no-notice quality service to be rendered pursuant to its Order No. 63 blanket certificate issued on December 1, 1998, in Docket No. CP98-70-000.
Pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2)(ii), if the Commission does not act within 150 days of the date of this filing, the rates will be deemed to be fair and equitable and not in excess of an amount which interstate pipelines would be permitted to charge for similar transportation service. The Commission may, prior to the expiration of the 150 day period, extend the time for action or institute a proceeding to afford parties an opportunity for written comments and for the oral presentation of views, data, and arguments.
Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or before September 16, 2002. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. This filing is available for review at the
The following filings have been made with the Commission. The filings are listed in ascending order within each docket classification.
Take notice that on August 23, 2002, Aquila Merchant Services, Inc. (Aquila Merchant) filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) pursuant to section 203 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824b, and Part 33 of the Commission regulations, 18 CFR part 33. Aquila Merchant seeks authorization and approval to assign a Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement Confirmation Letter and a Base Agreement for Electric Power Purchase and Sale Transactions to the MidAmerican Energy Company.
Take notice that on August 22, 2002, USGen New England, Inc. (USGenNE) and Constellation Power Source, Inc. (CPS), tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), pursuant to section 203 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824b (1994), and Part 33 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR part 33, an application requesting that the Commission approve the transfer of a negotiated percentage of the right and obligation of USGenNE to serve the Massachusetts Electric Company and the Nantucket Electric Company to CPS.
Take notice that on August 22, 2002, USGen New England, Inc. (USGenNE) and Constellation Power Source, Inc. (CPS), tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) , pursuant to section 203 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824b (1994), and Part 33 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR part 33, an application requesting that the Commission approve the transfer of a negotiated percentage of the right and obligation of USGenNE to serve The Narragansett Electric Company to CPS.
Take notice that on August 23, 2002 ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) and the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) filed a Petition for a Declaratory Order seeking an order that the proposed Northeastern Regional Transmission Organization would qualify as a Regional Transmission Organization.
ISO-NE and the NYISO are serving a copy of the petition on the Governors and utility regulatory commissions of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. A copy is also being posted on the Web sites of ISO-NE and the NYISO.
E. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
The following filings have been made with the Commission. The filings are listed in ascending order within each docket classification.
Take notice that on August 20, 2002, Mirant Neenah, LLC (Mirant Neenah), tendered for filing a notification of change in status with respect to its authority to engage in wholesale sales of capacity, energy, and ancillary services at market-based rates.
Take notice that on August 21, 2002, Atlantic City Electric Company (Atlantic) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a Service Agreement dated August 1, 2002 between NUI Energy Brokers, Inc. and Atlantic under Atlantic's Wholesale Market Based Rate Tariff; and an executed copy of Edison Electric Institute's Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement dated August 1, 2002 between NUI Energy Brokers, Inc. and Atlantic.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Central Maine Power Company (CMP) tendered for filing revisions to the Continuing Site/Interconnection
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) submitted a firm point-to-point transmission service agreement and a non-firm transmission service agreement (the Agreements) establishing TXU Energy Trading Company, LP (TXU) a customer under the terms of SCE&G's Open Access Transmission Tariff.
SCE&G requests an effective date of August 1, 2002 for the Agreements. Accordingly, SCE&G requests waiver of the Commission's notice requirements. Copies of this filing were served on TXU and the South Carolina Public Service Commission.
Take notice that on August 26, 2002, PacifiCorp tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) in accordance with Part 35 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations (18 CFR Part 35), a Mutual Netting/Settlement Agreement with Eagle Mountain City.
Copies of this filing were supplied to the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, the Utah Public Service Commission and the Public Utility Commission of Oregon.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Allegheny Energy Service Corporation, on behalf of Monongahela Power Company, The Potomac Edison Company, and West Penn Power Company, dba Allegheny Power, filed a revised Schedule D to the Power Supply Agreement among them to reflect membership in PJM West. An effective date of April 1, 2002, is requested.
Copies of the filing have been provided to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, the Maryland Public Service Commission, the Virginia State Corporation Commission, and the West Virginia Public Service Commission.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, American Electric Power Service Corporation (AEPSC) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) an executed Interconnection and Operation Agreement between Ohio Power Company and Lawrence Energy Center, LLC. The agreement is pursuant to the AEP Companies' Open Access Transmission Service Tariff (OATT) that has been designated as the Operating Companies of the American Electric Power System FERC Electric Tariff Second Revised Volume No. 6, effective June 15, 2000. AEP requests an effective date of October 25, 2002.
A copy of the filing was served upon Lawrence Energy Center, LLC and the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, CNG Power Services Corporation tendered for filing a Notice of Cancellation of its Rate Schedule, Designated as Rate Schedule FERC No. 1. CNG Power Services Corporation requests cancellation effective October 28, 2002, which is sixty days after the date of this filing.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Dominion Retail, Inc. tendered for filing a Notice of Cancellation of its Rate Schedule, Designated as Rate Schedule FERC No. 1. Dominion Retail, Inc. request cancellation effective October 28, 2002, which is sixty days after the date of this filing.
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Central Maine Power Company (CMP) tendered for filing an executed Local Network Operating Agreements (LNOA) and executed service agreements for Local Network Transmission Service (LNSA) entered into with Topsham Hydro Partners Limited Partnership (Topsham Hydro). These agreements supersede agreements previously filed on March 4, 2002. Service will be provided pursuant to CMP's Open Access Transmission Tariff, designated rate schedule CMP—FERC Electric Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 3, under the following Service Agreement Numbers:
Take notice that on August 27, 2002, Central Maine Power Company (CMP) tendered for filing a service agreement for Non-Firm Local Point-to-Point Transmission Service by and between CMP and FPL Energy Maine, Inc., designated as FERC Electric Tariff, Fifth Revised, Volume No. 3, Original Service Agreement No. 159.
E. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed a Land and Shoreline Management Plan for the Kingsley Dam Hydroelectric Project, located on the North Platte and Platte Rivers, in Garden, Keith, Lincoln, Dawson, and Gosper Counties, Nebraska, and has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA). The Kingsley Dam Project does not occupy any federal or tribal lands.
The DEA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that approving the Land and Shoreline Management Plan, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
A copy of the DEA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this notice and should be addressed to: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. Please affix Project No. 1417-080 to all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
For further information, contact Steve Hocking at (202) 502-8753 or
On September 11, 2002, staff of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP) will attend an interagency meeting and pre-certification site visit of Hackberry LNG Terminal L.L.C.'s (Hackberry LNG) proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal and storage facility in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. Representatives of Federal and state resource agencies, as well as representatives of Hackberry LNG, will be present.
All interested parties may attend the site visit. Those planning to attend must provide their own transportation. Anyone interested in participating should meet at the proposed LNG terminal site, located approximately 15 miles south of Sulphur, Louisiana along Louisiana State Route 27, at 8:30 a.m. on September 11, 2002. The meeting place is a gravel drive on the left side of Louisiana State Route 27, two miles south of the Intracoastal Waterway bridge.
An environmental assessment (EA) for Project No. 2738-049 is available for public review. The EA examines the New York State Electric and Gas Corporation's (NYSEG) proposal to change land rights, and sell 101 acres within the current boundary of the Saranac River Hydroelectric Project to Clinton County, New York (County) or New England Waste Services of New York, Inc. (NEWSNY). The County and NEWSNY have a public-private partnership currently operating a solid waste landfill adjacent to NYSEG's Kents Falls development, and propose to expand the landfill upon the project lands they would acquire. The Kents Falls development is located along the Saranac River within the town of Schuyler Falls, Clinton County, New York.
The EA was written by staff in the Office of Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Copies of the EA can be viewed during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m) in the Commission's Public Reference Room at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This document may also be viewed on the FERC Internet Web site (
Additional information about the proposed project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208-FERC, or contact the environmental project manager, Paul Friedman, at (202) 502-8059.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12196-000) on any comments or motions filed.
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing a document with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k.
l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
m. Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
n. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant (s) named in this public notice.
p. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project.
q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
r. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper, see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12201-000) on any comments or motions filed.
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
j.
k. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
l. Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
m. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
n. Notice of intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.
o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project.
p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
q. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12210-000) on any comments or motions filed.
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. j.
j.
k. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
l. Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
m. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
n. Notice of intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.
o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project.
p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
q. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
Take notice that the following hydroelectric applications have been filed with the Commission and are available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the noted project numbers on any comments or motions filed.
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
j.
k. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
l. Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
m. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
n. Notice of intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.
o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project.
p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.
q. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at (202) 564-7167.
An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated April 12, 2002 (67 FR 17992).
Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7167 or
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
In accordance with section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, EPA is issuing a notice of receipt of a request by a registrant to voluntarily cancel certain pesticide registrations for disulfoton, or O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl]phosphorodithioate.
Unless EPA receives comments within the public comment period that would merit the Agency's further review of this request, EPA will issue an order canceling all of these registrations effective December 31, 2003. EPA is accepting comments on this Notice until October 7, 2002.
Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit I. of the
Christina Scheltema, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 308-2201; fax number: (703) 308-8005; e-mail address: scheltema.christina@epa.gov.
This action is directed to the public in general. You may be affected by this action if you manufacture, sell, distribute, or use disulfoton products. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under
1.
2.
You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket control number OPP-2002-0135 in the subject line on the first page of your response.
1.
2.
3.
Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public version of the official record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice or collection activity.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket control number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and
EPA has received a request from Adams Technology, the authorized
FIFRA section 6(f)(1)(B) requires that EPA provide a 30-day comment period in which the public may comment before the Agency may act on the request for voluntary cancellation. EPA intends to grant the request for voluntary cancellation, unless during the comment period EPA receives substantive comments that would merit the Agency's further review of this request. For purposes of the cancellation order that the Agency intends to issue at the close of the comment period for this notice, EPA intends to include certain provisions governing the sale, distribution and use of existing stocks. The term “existing stocks” as defined in EPA's existing stocks policy in the
Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request voluntary cancellation of any of its pesticide registrations. The Act further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the
Environmental protection, Disulfoton, Pesticides, Reregistration, Voluntary cancellation.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Notice of availability of final document.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces the availability of a final document, Ecological Risk Assessment for the Middle Snake River, Idaho (EPA/600/R-01/017, February 2002), prepared as a collaborative effort between the National Center for Environmental Assessment-Washington (NCEA-W), within EPA's Office of Research and Development; the Office of Environmental Assessment, Region 10 of the EPA; the University of Idaho; and the University of Illinois. Mathematical models and field observations were used to estimate ecological risks to rainbow trout, mountain whitefish, and white sturgeon from stressors such as reduced water flows and sedimentation. The report serves as an example of using ecological risk assessment to improve the use of sound science in watershed-scale decision making.
The document is available electronically from the NCEA Web site (
For further information, please contact Victor Serveiss (202-564-3251); mailing address: NCEA-W (8623D), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460; facsimile: 202-565-0076; e-mail:
The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that
Written comments should be submitted on or before October 7, 2002. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all comments to Judith Boley Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., DC 20554 or via the Internet to
For additional information or copies of the information collection(s), contact Judith Boley Herman at 202-418-0214 or via the Internet at
Petitions for Reconsideration have been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). The full text of this document is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International (202) 863-2893. Oppositions to these petitions must be filed by September 23, 2002.
The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties can review or obtain copies of agreements at the Washington, DC offices of the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Room 940. Interested parties may submit comments on an agreement to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days of the date this notice appears in the
By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed with the Federal Maritime Commission an application for license as a Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean Transportation Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR part 515).
Persons knowing of any reason why the following applicants should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of Transportation Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573.
Notice is hereby given that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary license has been reissued by the Federal Maritime Commission pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515.
9 a.m. (EDT) September 17, 2002.
4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.
Parts will be open to the public and part closed to the public.
1. Approval of the minutes of the August 19, 2002, Board member meeting.
2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the Executive Director.
3. Review of FY 2002 budget and projected expenditures, approval of FY 2003 proposed budget, and review of FY 2004 budget estimate.
4. Litigation review (closed to the public).
Litigation review.
Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of External Affairs, (202) 942-1640.
Office for Civil Rights, HHS.
Notification of a New System of Records (SOR).
In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is publishing notice of a new system of records (SOR) called the “Program information Management System (PIMS), HHS/OS/OCR (09-90-0052).” We are giving notice of the routine uses for this new system.
OCR invites interested parties to submit comments on the proposed internal and routine uses on or before October 7, 2002. OCR has sent a Report of a New System of Records to the Congress and to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on August 6, 2002. The system of records
The public should address comments to: Larry Velez, Program, Policy and Training Division, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Health and Human Services, Room 553E, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201. Comments also may be sent via e-mail to
Claudia Schlosberg, Acting Director, Program, Policy and Training Division, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Health and Human Services, Room 553E, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201. Telephone number: (202) 619-3197.
The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is responsible for enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and other statutes which prohibit discrimination by programs or entities that receive Federal financial assistance. Additionally, OCR has jurisdiction over Federally conducted programs in cases involving disability-based discrimination under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, over state and local public entities in cases involving disability-based discrimination under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and certain health plans, health clearinghouses and health care providers with respect to enforcement of medical privacy obligations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Currently, OCR maintains two system of records: the “Case Information Management System (CIMS), HHS/OS/OCR (09-90-0050),” and the “Complaint File and Log, HHS/OS/OCR (09-90-0051).” CIMS also includes the Case Activity Tracking System (CATS) which was created to use newer computer technology (
CMS is used to track complaints and compliance review activity. The Complaint File and Log consists primarily of paper files, complaint allegations, information gathered during complaint investigations or reviews, letters of findings and correspondence relating to investigations. The Complaint File and Log was exempted from the notification, access, correction and amendment provisions of the Privacy Act under subsection (k)(2) concerning records compiled for law enforcement purposes. 49 FR 14107 (April 10, 1984).
OCR proposes to establish a new system of records: “Program Information Management System (PIMS), HHS/OS/OCR (09-90-0052).” PIMS will be used for OCR staff and will consist of an electronic repository of information and documents, and supplementary paper document files. PIMS effectively combines and replaces OCR's two existing systems of records, (CIMS and the Complaint File and Log), into a single integrated system with enhanced electronic storage, retrieval and tracking capacities. While the types of information collected and stored in PIMS will be the same as the information collected in CIMS and the Complaint File and Log, PIMS will allow OCR to manage more effectively the information that it does collect.
The PIMS system will allow OCR to integrate all of OCR's various business processes, including all its compliance activities, to allow for real time access and results reporting and other varied information management needs. PIMS will provide: (1) A single, central, electronic, repository of all OCR documents and information including investigative files, correspondence, administrative records, policy and procedure manuals and other documents and information developed or maintained by OCR; (2) easy, robust capability to search all the information in OCR's repository; (3) better quality control at the front end with simplified data entry and stronger data validation; (4) tools to help staff work on and manage their casework, and (5) supplementary document files. The system will have the capacity to generate reports concerning the status of all current and closed complaints, reviews and correspondence, and will allow OCR to track outreach, training and other activities and to locate and retrieve information in order to manage more efficiently its work and report results. In addition, PIMS, consistent with its predecessor management information systems, will allow for the tracking of work assignments to employees to facilitate workload balancing, timely response to complaints and completion of reviews, and outreach and public education initiatives focused on organizations and individuals.
OCR investigative files maintained in PIMS either as paper records or electronic documents are records compiled for law enforcement purposes. In the course of investigations, OCR often has a need to obtain confidential information involving individuals other than the complainant. In these cases, it is necessary for OCR to preserve the confidentiality of this information to avoid unwarranted invasions of personal privacy and to assure recipients of Federal financial assistance that such information provided to OCR will be kept confidential. This assurance is often central to resolving disputes concerning access by OCR to the recipients's records, and is necessary to facilitate prompt and effective completion of the investigations.
Unrestricted disclosure of confidential information in OCR files can impede ongoing investigations, invade personal privacy of individuals, reveal the identities of confidential sources, of otherwise impair the ability of OCR to conduct investigations. For these reasons, the Department is exempting all investigative files from the notification, access, correction and amendment provisions under subsection (k)(2) of the Privacy Act.
The PIMS system will conform to applicable law and policy governing the privacy and security of Federal automated information systems. These include, but are not limited to: The Privacy Act of 1984, Computer Security Act of 1987, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and OMB Circular A-130, Appendix, III, “Security of Federal Automated Information Resources.” OCR has prepared a system security plan as required by OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III. This plan conforms fully to guidance issued by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) in NIST Special Publication 800-18, “Guide for Developing Security Plans for Information Technology Systems.” The plan includes conduct of a risk assessment that addresses the confidentiality and integrity of the data.
Only authorized users whose official duties require the use of such information will have regular access to the records in this system. Records may be disclosed to student volunteers, individuals working under a personal services contract, and other individuals performing functions for the Department, but technically not having the status of agency employees, if they need access to the records in order to perform their assigned agency functions.
The routine uses proposed for this system are compatabile with the stated purpose of the system. The first routine use proposed for this system, permitting disclosure to a congressional office,
The following notice is written in the present, rather than future tense, in order to avoid the unnecessary expenditure of public funds to republish the notice after the system has become effective.
Program Information Management System (PIMS), HHS/OS/OCR.
None.
The automated portion of the system is maintained at OCR Headquarters. Paper files are maintained in headquarters and regional offices as noted in Appendix I.
Covered individuals include persons who file complaints alleging discrimination or violation of their rights under the statutes identified below (Authority for Maintenance) and covered entities (
The system encompasses a variety of records having to do with complaints, reviews, and correspondence. The complaint files and log include complaint allegations, information gathered during the complaint investigation, findings and results of the investigation, and correspondence relating to the investigation, as well as status information for all complaints. This component of PIMS is being exempted from the notification, access, correction and amendment provisions of the Privacy Act (see below: Systems Exempted From Certain Provisions of the Act). Equivalent types of information are maintained for reviews and correspondence activities—namely information gathered, findings, results, correspondence and status.
Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; sections 533, 542, 794, 855, 1947 and 1908 of the Public Health Service Act; sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; the Equal Employment Opportunity Provisions of the Public Telecommunications Financing Act of 1978; Title VI and Title XVI of the Public Health Service Act (the “community services of obligation” of facilities funded under the Act); Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments; section 407 of the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act; section 321 of the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act of 1970; section 508 of the Social Security Act, the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act; Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981; Section 1808 of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996; and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).
PIMS will be used by OCR staff and will consist of an electronic repository of information and documents, and supplementary paper document files. PIMS effectively combines and replaces OCR's two existing systems of records, the “Case Information Management System (CIMS), HHS/OS/OCR, 09-90-0050,” and the “Complaint File and Log, HHS/OS/OCR 09-00-0051,” into a single integrated system with enhanced electronic storage, retrieval and tracking capacities. While the types of information collected and stored in PIMS will be the same as the information collected in CIMS and the Complaint File and Log, PIMS will allow OCR to manage more effectively the information that it does collect. The system is designed to allow OCR to integrate all of OCR's various business processes, including all its compliance activities, to allow for real time access and results reporting and other varied information management needs. PIMS will provide: (1) A single, central, electronic, repository of all significant OCR documents and information, including investigative files, correspondence, administrative records, policy and procedure manuals and other documents and information developed or maintained by OCR; (2) easy, robust capability to search all the information in OCR's repository; (3) better quality control at the front end with simplified data entry and stronger data validation; (4) tools to help staff work on and manage their casework, and (5) supplementary papaer document files. The system will have the capacity to generate reports concerning the status of all current and closed complaints, reviews and correspondence, and will allow OCR to track outreach, training and other activities and to locate and retrieve information in order to manage more efficiently its work and report results. In addition, PIMS, consistent with its predecessor management information systems, will allow for the tracking of work assignments to employees to facilitate workload balancing, timely response to complaints and completion of review, and outreach and public education initiatives focused on organizations and individuals.
The routine uses proposed for this system are compatible with the stated purpose of the system. The first routine use proposed for this system, permitting disclosure to a congressional office, allows subject individuals to obtain assistance from their representatives in Congress, should they so desire. Such disclosure would be made only pursuant to the request of the individual. The second routine use allows disclosure to the Department of Justice or a court in the event of litigation. The third routine use allows referral to the appropriate agency, in the event that a System of Records maintained by this agency to carry out its functions indicates a violation or potential violation of law. The fourth routine use allows disclosure of records to contractors for the purpose of processing or refining records in the system.
Automated records are maintained on magnetic disc and tape back-up. Paper records are kept in file folders.
Records are indexed by transaction number, but may be retrieved by name, street address, and other complainant or covered entity characteristic (such as type of entity, city, state and type of service provided) by OCR staff engaged in compliance activities.
The PIMS system will conform to applicable law and policy governing the privacy and security of Federal automated information systems. These include but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1984, Computer Security Act of 1987, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III, “Security of Federal Automated Information Resources.” OCR has prepared a system security plan as required by OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III. This plan conforms fully to guidance issued by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) in NIST Special Publication 800-18, “Guide for Developing Security Plans for Information Technology Systems.” The plan includes conduct of a risk assessment that addresses the confidentiality and integrity of the data.
Only authorized users have access to the information in the system. Categories of users include: OCR investigators, regional and headquarters managers, team leaders, OCR budget and Government Performance and Results Act planning staff, program and policy staff, and data analysts. Specific access to structured around need and is determined by the person's role in the organization. Access is managed through the use of electronic access control lists, which regulate the ability to read, change and delete information in the system. Each OCR user has read access to designated information in the system, with the ability to modify only their own submissions or those of others within their region or group. Data identified as confidential is so designated and only specified individuals are granted access. The system maintains an audit trail of all actions against the data base.
All electronic data is stored on servers maintained in locked facilities with computerized access control allowing access to only those support personnel with a demonstrated need for access. A data base is kept of all individuals granted security cart access to the room, and all visitors are escorted while in the room. The server facility has appropriate environmental security controls, including measures to mitigate damage to automated information system resources caused by fire, electricity, water and inadequate climate controls.
Access control to servers, individual computers and databases includes a required user log-on with a password, inactivity lockout to systems based on a specified period of time, legal notices and security warnings at log-on, and remote access security that allows user access for remote users (e.g., while on government travel) under the same terms and conditions as for users within the office. System administrators have appropriate security clearance.
Printed materials are filed in secure cabinets in secure Federal buildings with access based on need as described above for the automated component of the PIMS system.
Documents related to complaints and reviews are retained at OCR for two years from the date the complaint is closed and then are archived at the National Archives and Records Administration for 15 years. Correspondence is retained for one year following the end of the fiscal year in which processed.
PIMS Project Manager, Resource Management Division, Office for Civil Rights, 200 Independence Ave. SW., Room 509F, Washington, DC 20201.
Contact System Manager (above). Include name and address of complainant, and name of the recipient against which the allegation was filed. The Department is exempting all investigative records from this provision (see below: Records Exempted).
Same as notification procedures. Requesters should also reasonably specify the record contents being sought. Request should be made to the system manager (above). The Department is exempting all investigative records from this provision (see below: Records Exempted).
Contact the official(s) at the address specified under System Manager, and reasonably identify the record and specify the information to be contested and corrective action sought with supporting justification. (These procedures are in accordance with Department Regulations (45 CFR 5b.7)
Information is provided by complainants and covered entities.
OCR investigative records maintained in PIMS, either as paper records or electronic documents are records complied for law enforcement purposes and will be exempt under subsection (k)(2) from the notification, access, correction and amendment provisions of the Privacy Act.
This system is located at HHS offices in the following cities.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) (formerly known as the Health Care Financing Administration).
Notice of modified or altered System of Records (SOR).
In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, CMS is proposing to modify or alter an SOR, “National Claims History (NCH),” System No. 09-70-0005. We propose to modify the purpose of this system by deleting from the NCH, a sub-file titled “Expanded Modified Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File.” This sub-file is used for statistical analyses bearing on Medicare payment policies for inpatient hospital services and skilled nursing facilities. To accomplish this activity, we propose to establish in a separate notice, a new SOR, “Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MEDPAR) System No. 09-70-0009.” We propose to further reduce the scope of activities covered by the NCH with the deletion of two additional sub-files, derived from the Expanded Modified MEDPAR file, known as: “Quality of Care MEDPAR File (QC/MEDPAR),” and the “Medicare Mortality Information File (MMIF).” The QC/MEDPAR data were initially developed for the purpose of conducting research and effectiveness of care provided in hospitals. The MMIF includes mortality predictors that have been statistically derived by CMS from data provided by the hospital, national data, and the number of previous hospitalizations in all hospitals.
CMS proposes to delete published routine use number 2 authorizing disclosures to the Bureau of the Census; number 5 authorizing disclosures for statistical analysis of inpatient hospital services, number 7 authorizing disclosures to conduct research on QC/MEDPAR data, number 8 authorizing disclosures to an agency of a state government, number 9 authorizing disclosure of data derived from the MMIF, number 10 authorizing disclosures to the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB), number 12 authorizing disclosures to other insurers, number 13 authorizing disclosures to another Federal agency, number 14 authorizing disclosures to states for administration of health care programs, and an unnumbered routine use authorizing disclosure to the Social Security Administration (SSA).
Published routine use number 2 is being deleted because it unnecessarily duplicates Exception 4 of the Privacy Act, allowing release of data to the Bureau of the Census. Routine uses number 5, 7, and 9 are no longer needed because they authorize disclosures from the MEDPAR subfiles that are being removed from this system. Disclosures permitted under routine use number 8, 10, 13, 14, and to SSA will be made a part of proposed routine use number 2. Proposed routine use number 2 will allow for release of information to “another Federal and/or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent.” Disclosures authorized under published routine use number 12 will be combined with published routine use number 11, which authorizes disclosures to insurance companies. These disclosures to insurance companies will now be covered under proposed routine use number 4.
The security classification previously reported as “None” will be modified to reflect that the data in this system is considered to be “Level Three Privacy Act Sensitive.” We are modifying the language in the remaining routine uses to provide clarity to CMS's intention to disclose individual-specific information contained in this system. The routine uses will then be prioritized and reordered according to their usage. We will also take the opportunity to update any sections of the system that were affected by the recent reorganization and to update language in the administrative sections to correspond with language used in other CMS SORs.
The primary purpose of the SOR is to collect and maintain billing and utilization data on Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in hospital insurance (Part A) or medical insurance (Part B) of the Medicare program for statistical and research purposes related to evaluating and studying the operation and effectiveness of the Medicare program. Information in this system will also be used to: (1) Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the Agency or by a contractor or consultant, (2) another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent, (3) quality Improvement Organizations (QIO), (4) other insurers for processing individual insurance claims, (5) facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, as well as payment-related projects, (6) support constituent requests made to a congressional representative, (7) support litigation involving the Agency, and (8) combat fraud and abuse in certain health benefits programs. We have provided background information about the modified system in the “Supplementary Information” section below. Although the Privacy Act requires only that CMS provide an opportunity for interested persons to comment on the proposed routine uses, CMS invites comments on all portions of this notice. See
CMS filed a modified or altered system report with the Chair of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, the Chair of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on August 2, 2002. To ensure that all parties have adequate time in which to comment, the modified or altered SOR will become effective 30 days from the publication of the notice, or from the date it was submitted to OMB and the congress, whichever is later, unless CMS receives comments that require alterations to this notice.
The public should address comments to: Director, Division of Data Liaison and Distribution, CMS, Room N2-04-27, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Comments received will be available for review at this location, by appointment, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m.-3 p.m., eastern daylight time.
Michael Rappaport, Director, Division of Enrollment and Utilization Data Development, Enterprise Databases Group, Office of Information Services, CMS, Room N3-16-28, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. The telephone number is 410-786-6759.
In 1989, CMS established an SOR titled “National Claims History, System No. 09-70-0005.” This system is published at 54 FR 32482 (Aug. 8, 1989). The latest publication of this system was at 59 FR 19181 (April 22, 1994), an unnumbered routine use was added for the Social Security Administration (SSA) at 61 FR 6645 (Feb. 21, 1996), three new fraud and abuse routine uses were added at 63 FR 38414 (July 16, 1998), and at 65 FR 50552 (August 18, 2000), two of the fraud and abuse routine uses were revised and a third deleted.
Authority for maintenance of this SOR is given under the authority of sections 1874(a) and 1875 of the Social Security Act (the Act) and Title 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 1395(ll).
The system contains billing and utilization information on Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in hospital insurance or medical insurance parts of the Medicare program, as well as provider specific information. This system contains name of the beneficiary, residence address, state and county code, mailing zip code, health insurance claim (HIC) number, diagnosis and procedural codes, race, sex, date of birth, as well as the basis for the beneficiary's Medicare entitlement. The system contains provider characteristics and an assigned provider number (facility, referring/servicing physician), admission date, service dates, diagnosis and procedure codes, total charges, Medicare payment amount, and beneficiary's liability.
The Privacy Act permits us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such disclosure of data is known as a “routine use.” The government will only release NCH information that can be associated with an individual as provided for under “Section III. Proposed Routine Use Disclosures of Data in the System.” Both identifiable and non-identifiable data may be disclosed under a routine use.
We will only disclose the minimum personal data necessary to achieve the purpose of NCH. CMS has the following policies and procedures concerning disclosures of information that will be maintained in the system. In general, disclosure of information from the SOR will be approved only for the minimum information necessary to accomplish the purpose of the disclosure and only after CMS:
1. Determines that the use or disclosure is consistent with the reason that the data is being collected,
2. Determines that:
a. The purpose for which the disclosure is to be made can only be accomplished if the record is provided in individually identifiable form;
b. The purpose for which the disclosure is to be made is of sufficient importance to warrant the effect and/or risk on the privacy of the individual that additional exposure of the record might bring; and
c. There is a strong probability that the proposed use of the data would in fact accomplish the stated purpose(s).
3. Requires the information recipient to:
a. Establish administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized use of disclosure of the record;
b. Remove or destroy at the earliest time all individually-identifiable information; and
c. Agree to not use or disclose the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed.
4. Determines that the data are valid and reliable.
These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the NCH without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. Each proposed disclosure of information under these routine uses will be evaluated to ensure that the disclosure is legally permissible, including but not limited to ensuring that the purpose of the disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. We propose to establish or modify the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system:
1. To Agency contractors or consultants who have been contracted by the Agency to assist in accomplishment of a CMS function relating to the purposes for this SOR and who need to have access to the records in order to assist CMS.
We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing a CMS function relating to purposes for this SOR.
CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or consultant whatever information is necessary for the contractor or consultant to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or consultant from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requires the contractor or consultant to return or destroy all information at the completion of the contract.
2. To another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent pursuant to agreements with CMS to:
a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS's proper payment of Medicare benefits; and/or
b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.
c. Assist Federal/state Medicaid programs within the state.
Other Federal or state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require NCH information in order to support evaluations and monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries, including proper reimbursement for services provided.
The Internal Revenue Service may require NCH data for the application of tax penalties against employers and employee organizations that contribute to Employer Group Health Plan or Large Group Health Plans that are not in compliance with 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b).
In addition, state agencies in their administration of a Federal health program may require NCH information for the purposes of determining, evaluating and/or assessing cost, effectiveness, and /or the quality of health care services provided in the state.
The RRB requires NCH information to enable them to assist in the implementation and maintenance of the Medicare program.
SSA requires NCH data to enable them to assist in the implementation and maintenance of the Medicare program.
Disclosure under this routine use shall be used by state Medicaid agencies pursuant to agreements with the HHS for determining Medicaid and Medicare eligibility, for quality control studies, for determining eligibility of recipients of assistance under Titles IV, XVIII, and XIX of the Act, and for the
We also contemplate disclosing information under this routine use in situations in which state auditing agencies require NCH information for auditing state Medicaid eligibility considerations. CMS may enter into an agreement with state auditing agencies to assist in accomplishing functions relating to purposes for this SOR.
3. To Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) in connection with review of claims, or in connection with studies or other review activities conducted pursuant to Part B of Title XI of the Act and in performing affirmative outreach activities to individuals for the purpose of establishing and maintaining their entitlement to Medicare benefits or health insurance plans.
QIOs will work to implement quality improvement programs, provide consultation to CMS, its contractors, and to state agencies. QIOs will assist the state agencies in related monitoring and enforcement efforts, assist CMS and intermediaries in program integrity assessment, and prepare summary information for release to CMS.
4. To insurance companies, underwriters, third party administrators (TPA), employers, self-insurers, group health plans, health maintenance organizations (HMO), health and welfare benefit funds, managed care organizations, other supplemental insurers, non-coordinating insurers, multiple employer trusts, other groups providing protection against medical expenses of their enrollees without the beneficiary's authorization, and any entity having knowledge of the occurrence of any event affecting: (a) An individual's right to any such benefit or payment, or (b) the initial right to any such benefit or payment, for the purpose of coordination of benefits with the Medicare program and implementation of the Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) provision at 42 U.S.C. 1395y (b). Information to be disclosed shall be limited to Medicare utilization data necessary to perform that specific function. In order to receive the information, they must agree to:
a. Certify that the individual about whom the information is being provided is one of its insured or employees, or is insured and/or employed by another entity for whom they serve as a TPA;
b. Utilize the information solely for the purpose of processing the individual=s insurance claims; and
c. Safeguard the confidentiality of the data and prevent unauthorized access.
Other insurers may require NCH information in order to support evaluations and monitoring of Medicare claims information of beneficiaries, including proper reimbursement for services provided.
5. To an individual or organization for research, evaluation, or epidemiological projects related to the prevention of disease or disability, and the restoration or maintenance of health, or payment related projects.
NCH data will provide for research, evaluations and epidemiological projects, a broader, longitudinal, national perspective of the status of Medicare beneficiaries. CMS anticipates that many researchers will have legitimate requests to use these data in projects that could ultimately improve the care provided to Medicare beneficiaries and the policy that governs the care.
6. To a Member of Congress or congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
Beneficiaries often request the help of a Member of Congress in resolving an issue relating to a matter before CMS. The Member of Congress then writes CMS, and CMS must be able to give sufficient information to be responsive to the inquiry.
7. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court, or adjudicatory body when:
a. The Agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the Agency in his or her official capacity, or
c. Any employee of the Agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government,
Whenever CMS is involved in litigation, or occasionally when another party is involved in litigation and CMS's policies or operations could be affected by the outcome of the litigation, CMS would be able to disclose information to the DOJ, court, or adjudicatory body involved.
8. To a CMS contractor (including, but not limited to fiscal intermediaries and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such program.
We contemplate disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contract or grant with a third party to assist in accomplishing CMS functions relating to the purpose of combating fraud and abuse.
CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor or grantee whatever information is necessary for the contractor or grantee to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor or grantee from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requiring the contractor or grantee to return or destroy all information.
9. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any state or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
Other agencies may require NCH information for the purpose of combating fraud and abuse in such Federally funded programs.
This SOR contains Protected Health Information as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 82462 (Dec. 28, 00), as amended by 66 FR 12434 (Feb. 26, 01)). Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.”
In addition, our policy will be to prohibit release even of non-identifiable data, except pursuant to one of the routine uses, if there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell
The NCH system will conform to applicable law and policy governing the privacy and security of Federal automated information systems. These include but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974, Computer Security Act of 1987, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and the Office and Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-130, Appendix III, “Security of Federal Automated Information Resources.” CMS has prepared a comprehensive system security plan as required by OMB Circular A-130. This plan conforms fully to guidance issued by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) in NIST Special Publication 800-18, “Guide for Developing Security Plans for Information Technology Systems.” Paragraphs A-C of this section highlight some of the specific methods that CMS is using to ensure the security of this system and the information within it.
Authorized users: Personnel having access to the system have been trained in Privacy Act and systems security requirements. Employees and contractors who maintain records in the system are instructed not to release any data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate administrative, technical, procedural, and physical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality of the data and to prevent unauthorized access to the data. In addition, CMS is monitoring the authorized users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Records are used in a designated work area or workstation and the system location is attended at all times during working hours.
To assure security of the data, the proper level of class user is assigned for each individual user as determined at the Agency level. This prevents unauthorized users from accessing and modifying critical data. The system database configuration includes five classes of database users:
• Database Administrator class owns the database objects;
• Quality Control Administrator class has read and write access to key fields in the database;
• Quality Indicator Report Generator class has read-only access to all fields and tables;
• Policy Research class has query access to tables, but are not allowed to access confidential individual identification information; and
• Submitter class has read and write access to database objects, but no database administration privileges.
All server sites have implemented the following minimum requirements to assist in reducing the exposure of computer equipment and thus achieve an optimum level of protection and security for the NCH system:
Access to all servers is controlled, with access limited to only those support personnel with a demonstrated need for access. Servers are to be kept in a locked room accessible only by specified management and system support personnel. Each server requires a specific log-on process. All entrance doors are identified and marked. A log is kept of all personnel who were issued a security card, key and/or combination that grants access to the room housing the server, and all visitors are escorted while in this room. All servers are housed in an area where appropriate environmental security controls are implemented, which include measures implemented to mitigate damage to Automated Information System resources caused by fire, electricity, water and inadequate climate controls.
Protection applied to the workstations, servers and databases include:
• User Log-ons—Authentication is performed by the Primary Domain Controller/Backup Domain Controller of the log-on domain.
• Workstation Names—Workstation naming conventions may be defined and implemented at the Agency level.
• Hours of Operation—May be restricted by Windows NT. When activated all applicable processes will automatically shut down at a specific time and not be permitted to resume until the predetermined time. The appropriate hours of operation are determined and implemented at the Agency level.
• Inactivity Log-out—Access to the NT workstation is automatically logged out after a specified period of inactivity.
• Warnings—Legal notices and security warnings display on all servers and workstations.
• Remote Access Services (RAS)—Windows NT RAS security handles resource access control. Access to NT resources is controlled for remote users in the same manner as local users, by utilizing Windows NT file and sharing permissions. Dial-in access can be granted or restricted on a user-by-user basis through the Windows NT RAS administration tool.
All automated systems must comply with Federal laws, guidance, and policies for information systems security as stated previously in this section. Each automated information system should ensure a level of security commensurate with the level of sensitivity of the data, risk, and magnitude of the harm that may result from the loss, misuse, disclosure, or modification of the information contained in the system.
CMS proposes to establish this system in accordance with the principles and requirements of the Privacy Act and will collect, use, and disseminate information only as prescribed therein.
We will only disclose the minimum personal data necessary to achieve the purpose of NCH. Disclosure of information from the SOR will be approved only to the extent necessary to accomplish the purpose of the disclosure. CMS has assigned a higher level of security clearance for the information maintained in this system in an effort to provide added security and protection of data in this system.
CMS will take precautionary measures to minimize the risks of unauthorized access to the records and the potential harm to individual privacy or other personal or property rights. CMS will collect only that information necessary to perform the system's functions. In addition, CMS will make disclosure from the proposed system only with consent of the subject individual, or his/her legal representative, or in accordance with an applicable exception provision of the Privacy Act.
CMS, therefore, does not anticipate an unfavorable effect on individual privacy as a result of the disclosure of information relating to individuals.
National Claims History, HHS/CMS/OIS.
Level Three Privacy Act Sensitive.
CMS Data Center, 7500 Security Boulevard, North Building, First Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
The system contains billing and utilization information on Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in hospital insurance (Part A) or medical insurance (Part B) of the Medicare program.
This system contains Medicare billing and utilization data, name of the beneficiary, health insurance claim (HIC) number, diagnosis and procedural codes, race, sex, date of birth, residence address, state and county code, mailing zip code, as well as the basis for the beneficiary's Medicare entitlement. The system contains provider characteristics, assigned provider number (facility, referring/servicing physician), admission date, service dates, diagnosis and procedure codes, total charges, Medicare payment amount, and beneficiary's liability.
Authority for maintenance of the system is given under the authority of sections 1874(a) and 1875 of the Act and Title 42 United States Code (U.S.C.), section 1395 (ll).
The primary purpose of the SOR is to collect and maintain billing and utilization data on Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in hospital insurance (Part A) or medical insurance (Part B) of the Medicare program for statistical and research purposes related to evaluating and studying the operation and effectiveness of the Medicare program. Information in this system will also be used to: (1) Support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the Agency or by a contractor or consultant, (2) another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent, (3) Quality Improvement Organizations (QIO), (4) other insurers for processing individual insurance claims, (5) facilitate research on the quality and effectiveness of care provided, as well as payment-related projects, (6) support constituent requests made to a congressional representative, (7) support litigation involving the Agency, and (8) combat fraud and abuse in certain health benefits programs.
The Privacy Act allows us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such compatible use of data is known as a “routine use.” The proposed routine use in this system meets the compatibility requirement of the Privacy Act. In addition, this SOR contains Protected Health Information as defined by HHS regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 82462 (Dec. 28, 00), as amended by 66 FR 12434 (Feb. 26, 01)). Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.” It is also our policy to prohibit release even of non-identifiable data, except pursuant to one of the routine uses, if there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary). We are proposing to establish the following routine use disclosures of information that will be maintained in the system:
1. To Agency contractors or consultants who have been contracted by the Agency to assist in accomplishment of a CMS function relating to the purposes for this SOR and who need to have access to the records in order to assist CMS.
2. To another Federal or state agency, agency of a state government, an agency established by state law, or its fiscal agent pursuant to agreements with CMS to:
a. Contribute to the accuracy of CMS's proper payment of Medicare benefits, and/or
b. Enable such agency to administer a Federal health benefits program, or as necessary to enable such agency to fulfill a requirement of a Federal statute or regulation that implements a health benefits program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.
c. Assist Federal/state Medicaid programs within the state.
3. To Quality Improvement Organizations (QIO) in connection with review of claims, or in connection with studies or other review activities, conducted pursuant to Part B of Title XI of the Social Security Act and in performing affirmative outreach activities to individuals for the purpose of establishing and maintaining their entitlement to Medicare benefits or health insurance plans.
4. To insurance companies, underwriters, third party administrators, employers, self-insurers, group health plans, health maintenance organizations, health and welfare benefit funds, managed care organizations, other supplemental insurers, non-coordinating insurers, multiple employer trusts, other groups providing protection against medical expenses of their enrollees without the beneficiary's authorization, and any entity having knowledge of the occurrence of any event affecting (a) an individual's right to any such benefit or payment, or (b) the initial right to any such benefit or payment, for the purpose of coordination of benefits with the Medicare program and implementation of the Medicare Secondary Payer provision at 42 U.S.C. 1395y (b). Information to be disclosed shall be limited to Medicare utilization data necessary to perform that specific function. In order to receive the information, they must agree to:
a. Certify that the individual about whom the information is being provided is one of its insured or employees, or is insured and/or employed by another entity for whom they serve as a third party administrator;
b. Utilize the information solely for the purpose of processing the individual's insurance claims; and
c. Safeguard the confidentiality of the data and prevent unauthorized access.
5. To an individual or organization for research, evaluation, or epidemiological projects related to the prevention of disease or disability, and the restoration or maintenance of health, or payment related projects.
6. To a Member of Congress or congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the congressional office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
7. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when:
a. The Agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the Agency in his or her official capacity, or
c. Any employee of the Agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government, is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are
8. To a CMS contractor (including, but not limited to fiscal intermediaries and carriers) that assists in the administration of a CMS-administered health benefits program, or to a grantee of a CMS-administered grant program, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such program.
9. To another Federal agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States (including any state or local governmental agency), that administers, or that has the authority to investigate potential fraud or abuse in, a health benefits program funded in whole or in part by Federal funds, when disclosure is deemed reasonably necessary by CMS to prevent, deter, discover, detect, investigate, examine, prosecute, sue with respect to, defend against, correct, remedy, or otherwise combat fraud or abuse in such programs.
Records are stored on both tape cartridges (magnetic storage media) and in a DB2 relational database management environment (DASD data storage media).
Information is most frequently retrieved by HIC, provider number (facility, physician, supplier IDs), service dates, type of bill, Medicare status code, diagnoses, procedure codes, and beneficiary state code.
CMS has safeguards for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and systems security requirements. Employees who maintain records in the system are instructed not to release any data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate administrative, technical, procedural, and physical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality of the data and to prevent unauthorized access to the data.
In addition, CMS has physical safeguards in place to reduce the exposure of computer equipment and thus achieve an optimum level of protection and security for the NCH system. For computerized records, safeguards have been established in accordance with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) standards and National Institute of Standards and Technology guidelines, e.g., security codes will be used, limiting access to authorized personnel. System securities are established in accordance with HHS, Information Resource Management Circular #10, Automated Information Systems Security Program; CMS Automated Information Systems Guide, Systems Securities Policies, and OMB Circular No.A-130, Appendix III.
Records are maintained with identifiers for all transactions after they are entered into the system for a period of 20 years. Records are housed in both active and archival files.
Director, Division of Enrollment and Utilization Data Development, Enterprise Databases Group, Office of Information Services, CMS, Room N3-16-28, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
For purpose of notification, the subject individual should write to the system manager who will require the system name, and the retrieval selection criteria (e.g., HIC, facility ID, physician/supplier number, service dates, type of bill, etc.).
For purpose of access, use the same procedures outlined in Notification Procedures above. Requestors should also reasonably specify the record contents being sought. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.5(a)(2)).
The subject individual should contact the system manager named above, and reasonably identify the record and specify the information to be contested. State the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction with supporting justification. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.7).
Fee-for-Service (FFS) billing and utilization information contained in this records system is obtained from the Common Working File, System No. 09-70-0526. Medicare+Choice (M+C) organization utilization information to be contained in this records system will be obtained from a single front-end processor that will function as both a Fiscal Intermediary (System No. 09-70-0503) and Carrier (System No. 09-70-0501).
None.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
Notice of new system of records (SOR).
In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, we are proposing to establish a new system of records, called the “Correspondence Tracking Management System (CTMS),” HHS/CMS/OSORA No. 09-70-3005. The CMTS replaces the Correspondence and Assignment Tracking and Control System (CATCS), System No. 09-70-9001 that was deleted from CMS' database inventory through a published notice in the
We have provided background information about the proposed system in the “Supplementary Information” section, below. Although the Privacy Act requires only that the “routine use” portion of the system be published for comment, CMS invites comments on all portions of this notice. See “Effective Dates” section for comment period.
CMS filed a new system report with the Chair of the House Committee on Government
The public should address comments to: Director, Division of Data Liaison and Distribution (DDLD), CMS, Room N2-04-27, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. Comments received will be available for review at this location, by appointment, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m.-3 p.m., eastern time zone.
Chris Worrall, Division of Correspondence Control, Office of Communications and Operations Support, CMS, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
42 CFR 401.101-401.148 and 1106(a) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1306(a).
The CMTS is being established to replace the Correspondence and Assignment Tracking and Control System (CATCS), System No. 09-70-9001 that was deleted from CMS' database inventory through a published notice in the
The CMTS includes the following information: name and address of correspondent(s); subject of request; Centers/Office to which case is assigned, correspondence control number, date of initial entry and any subsequent updating, location of case, due date, type(s) of information requested, any cross reference, incoming correspondence, response and if provided in the correspondence, information about a beneficiary (
The Privacy Act permits us to disclose information without an individual's consent if the information is to be used for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose(s) for which the information was collected. Any such disclosure of data is known as a “routine use.” The government will only release CMTS information that can be associated with an individual as provided for under “Section III. Entities Who May Receive Disclosures Under Routine Use.” Both identifiable and non-identifiable data may be disclosed under a routine use. Identifiable data includes individual records with CMTS information and identifiers. Non-identifiable data includes individual records with CMTS information and masked identifiers or CMTS information with identifiers stripped out of the file.
CMS will only disclose the minimum personal data necessary to achieve the purpose of the CMTS. CMS has the following policies and procedures concerning disclosures of information that will be maintained in the system. In general, disclosure of information from the SOR will be approved only for the minimum information necessary to accomplish the purpose of the disclosure after CMS:
1. Determines that the use or disclosure is consistent with the reason that the data are being collected;
2. Determines that:
a. The purpose for which the disclosure is to be made can only be accomplished if the record is provided in individually identifiable form;
b. The purpose for which the disclosure is to be made is of sufficient importance to warrant the effect and/or risk on the privacy of the individual that additional exposure of the record might bring; and
c. There is a strong probability that the proposed use of the data would, in fact, accomplish the stated purpose(s).
3. Requires the information recipient to:
a. Establish administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to prevent unauthorized use of disclosure of the record;
b. Remove or destroy at the earliest time all individually, identifiable information; and
c. Agree to not use or disclose the information for any purpose other than the stated purpose under which the information was disclosed.
4. Determines that the data are valid and reliable.
These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the CMTS without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. Each proposed disclosure of information under these routine uses will be evaluated to ensure that the disclosure is legally permissible, including but not limited to ensuring that the purpose of the disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. CMS proposes to establish the following routine use disclosures of information maintained in the system:
1. To agency contractors, or consultants that have been contracted by the agency to assist in the performance of a service related to this system of records and that need to have access to the records in order to perform the activity.
CMS contemplates disclosing information under this routine use only in situations in which CMS may enter into a contractual or similar agreement with a third party to assist in accomplishing agency business functions relating to purposes for this system of records.
CMS occasionally contracts out certain of its functions when doing so would contribute to effective and efficient operations. CMS must be able to give a contractor whatever information is necessary for the contractor to fulfill its duties. In these situations, safeguards are provided in the contract prohibiting the contractor from using or disclosing the information for any purpose other than that described in the contract and requires the contractor to return or destroy all information at the completion of the contract.
2. To a Member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional Office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
Individuals sometimes request the help of a Member of Congress in resolving some issue relating to a matter before CMS. The Member of Congress then writes CMS, and CMS must be able to give sufficient information to be responsive to the inquiry.
3. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when:
a. The agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity; or
c. Any employee of the agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government; is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation.
Whenever CMS is involved in litigation, or occasionally when another party is involved in litigation and CMS's policies or operations could be affected by the outcome of the litigation, CMS would be able to disclose information to the DOJ, court or adjudicatory body involved. A determination would be made in each instance that, under the circumstances involved, the purposes served by the use of the information in the particular litigation is compatible with a purpose for which CMS collects the information.
In addition, CMS policy will be to prohibit release even of non-identifiable data, except pursuant to one of the routine uses, if there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary).
This System of Records contains Protected Health Information as defined by the Department of Health and Human Services' regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 82462 as amended by 66 FR 12434). Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.”
The CMTS system will conform to applicable law and policy governing the privacy and security of Federal automated information systems. These include but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974, Computer Security Act of 1987, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III, “Security of Federal Automated Information Resources.” CMS has prepared a comprehensive system security plan as required by OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III. This plan conforms fully to guidance issued by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) in NIST Special Publication 800-18, “Guide for Developing Security Plans for Information Technology Systems.” Paragraphs A-C of this section highlight some of the specific methods that CMS is using to ensure the security of this system and the information within it.
Personnel having access to the system have been trained in Privacy Act and systems security requirements. Employees who maintain records in the system are instructed not to release any data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate administrative, technical, procedural, and physical safeguards sufficient to protect the confidentiality of the data and to prevent unauthorized access to the data. Records are used in a designated work area and system location is attended at all times during working hours.
To ensure security of the data, the proper level of class user is assigned for each individual user level. This prevents unauthorized users from accessing and modifying critical data. The system database configuration includes five classes of database users:
•
•
•
•
•
All server sites will implement the following minimum requirements to assist in reducing the exposure of computer equipment and thus achieve an optimum level of protection and security for the CMS system:
Access to all servers is to be controlled, with access limited to only those support personnel with a demonstrated need for access. Servers are to be kept in a locked room accessible only by specified management and system support personnel. Each server is to require a specific log-on process. All entrance doors are identified and marked. A log is kept of all personnel who were issued a security card, key and/or combination, which grants access to the room housing the server, and all visitors are escorted while in this room. All servers are housed in an area where appropriate environmental security controls are implemented, which include measures implemented to mitigate damage to Automated Information Systems (AIS) resources caused by fire, electricity, water and inadequate climate controls.
Protection applied to the workstations, servers and databases include:
• User Log-on—Authentication is to be performed by the Primary Domain Controller/Backup Domain Controller of the log-on domain.
• Workstation Names—Workstation naming conventions may be defined and implemented at the agency level.
• Hours of Operation—May be restricted by Windows NT. When activated all applicable processes will automatically shut down at a specific time and not be permitted to resume until the predetermined time. The appropriate hours of operation are to be determined and implemented at the agency level.
• Inactivity Lockout—Access to the NT workstation is to be automatically locked after a specified period of inactivity.
• Warnings—Legal notices and security warnings are to be displayed on all servers and workstations.
• Remote Access Security—Windows NT Remote Access Service (RAS) security handles resource access control. Access to NT resources is to be controlled for remote users in the same manner as local users, by utilizing Windows NT file and sharing permissions. Dial-in access can be granted or restricted on a user-by-user basis through the Windows NT RAS administration tool.
All automated systems must comply with Federal laws, guidance, and policies for information systems security. These include, but are not limited to: the Privacy Act of 1974; the Computer Security Act of 1987; OMB Circular A-130, revised; Information Resource Management Circular #10; HHS AIS Security Program; the CMS Information Systems Security Policy, Standards, and Guidelines Handbook;
CMS proposes to establish this system in accordance with the principles and requirements of the Privacy Act and will collect, use, and disseminate information only as prescribed therein. Data in this system will be subject to the authorized releases in accordance with the routine uses identified in this system of records.
CMS will monitor the collection and reporting of CMTS data. CMTS information is submitted to CMS through standard systems. CMS will use a variety of onsite and offsite edits and audits to increase the accuracy of CMTS data.
CMS will take precautionary measures (see item IV., above) to minimize the risks of unauthorized access to the records and the potential harm to individual privacy or other personal or property rights of patients whose data are maintained in the system. CMS will collect only that information necessary to perform the system's functions. In addition, CMS will make disclosure from the proposed system only with consent of the subject individual, or his/her legal representative, or in accordance with an applicable exception provision of the Privacy Act.
CMS, therefore, does not anticipate an unfavorable effect on individual privacy as a result of maintaining this system of records.
Correspondence Tracking Management System, (CMTS).
Level 3, Privacy Act Sensitive.
HCFA Data Center, 7500 Security Boulevard, North Building, First Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. CMS contractors and agents at various locations.
The system of records will contain data on any correspondent whose letter is sent to CMS and on individuals referenced in such correspondence (
The system contains incoming correspondence, responses to correspondence and information CMS uses to track correspondence, and
42 CFR 401.101-401.148 and sec 1106(a) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1306(a).
The primary purpose of the system of records is to aid CMS in tracking incoming correspondence about CMS programs from the Office of the Secretary, Medicare beneficiaries and Medicaid recipients. In addition, it will track all correspondence from the public, other government agencies, contractors, and members of the Congress. Information retrieved from this system of records will be used to support regulatory, reimbursement, and policy functions performed within the agency or by a contractor or consultant; support constituent requests made to a Congressional representative; and support litigation involving the agency.
These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the CMTS without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. Each proposed disclosure of information under these routine uses will be evaluated to ensure that the disclosure is legally permissible, including but not limited to ensuring that the purpose of the disclosure is compatible with the purpose for which the information was collected. In addition, CMS policy will be to prohibit release even of non-identifiable data, except pursuant to one of the routine uses, if there is a possibility that an individual can be identified through implicit deduction based on small cell sizes (instances where the patient population is so small that individuals who are familiar with the enrollees could, because of the small size, use this information to deduce the identity of the beneficiary). Be advised, this System of Records contains Protected Health Information as defined by the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) regulation “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information” (45 CFR parts 160 and 164, 65 FR 8462 as amended by 66 FR 12434). Disclosures of Protected Health Information authorized by these routine uses may only be made if, and as, permitted or required by the “Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information.”
1. To agency contractors, or consultants that have been contracted by the agency to assist in the performance of a service related to this system of records and that need to have access to the records in order to perform the activity.
2. To a Member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional Office made at the written request of the constituent about whom the record is maintained.
3. To the Department of Justice (DOJ), court or adjudicatory body when:
a. The agency or any component thereof, or
b. Any employee of the agency in his or her official capacity; or
c. Any employee of the agency in his or her individual capacity where the DOJ has agreed to represent the employee, or
d. The United States Government; is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, CMS determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation.
All records are stored on magnetic media.
Name of correspondent, name of individual referenced in the correspondence, or correspondence control number retrieves the records.
CMS has safeguards for authorized users and monitors such users to ensure against excessive or unauthorized use. Personnel having access to the system have been trained in the Privacy Act and systems security requirements. Employees who maintain records in the system are instructed not to release any data until the intended recipient agrees to implement appropriate administrative, technical, procedural, and physical safeguards sufficient to
In addition, CMS has physical safeguards in place to reduce the exposure of computer equipment and thus achieve an optimum level of protection and security for the CMS system. For computerized records, safeguards have been established in accordance with HHS standards and National Institute of Standards and Technology guidelines;
The records are maintained on-line in the system for 2 years. After a 2-year period, records are transferred to an archive file and destroyed three years later.
Due to a freeze imposed by the Department of Justice in 1992, correspondence documenting/supporting a specific claim, reconsideration, appeal or similar case will be maintained until further notice. Once the freeze is lifted, destroy 6 years and 3 months after final payment/resolution.
Director, Division of Correspondence Control, Office of Communications and Operations Support, Health Care Financing Administration, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.
For purpose of access, the subject individual should write to the system manager, who will require the system name, the subject individual's name (woman's maiden name, if applicable), social security number (SSN) (furnishing the SSN is voluntary, but it may make searching for a record easier and prevent delay), address, date of correspondence.
For purpose of access, use the same procedures outlined in Notification Procedures above. Requestors should also reasonably specify the record contents being sought. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.5(a)(2).)
The subject individual should contact the system manager named above, and reasonably identify the record and specify the information to be contested. State the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction with supporting justification. (These procedures are in accordance with Department regulation 45 CFR 5b.7.)
Incoming correspondence and responses to such correspondence.
None.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice; denial of petition.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is denying the petition submitted by the Orthopedic Surgical Manufacturers Association (OSMA) to reclassify the hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with a cemented acetabular component and the hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with an uncemented acetabular component from class III (premarket approval) into class II (special controls). The agency is denying the petition because OSMA failed to provide any new information to establish that special controls would provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the devices. The agency is also publishing the recommendation of FDA's Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel (the Panel) concerning the petition. This action is being taken under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act), as amended by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (the 1976 amendments), the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 (SMDA), and the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA).
Glenn A. Stiegman, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-410), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-2036.
The act (21 U.S.C. 301
Under section 513 of the act, devices that were in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 (the date of enactment of the amendments), generally referred to as preamendments devices, are classified after FDA has: (1) Received a recommendation from a device classification panel (an FDA advisory committee); (2) published the panel's recommendation for comment, along with a proposed regulation classifying the device; and (3) published a final regulation classifying the device. FDA has classified most preamendment devices under these procedures.
Devices that were not in commercial distribution prior to May 28, 1976, generally referred to as postamendments devices, are classified automatically by statute (section 513(f) of the act) into class III without any FDA rulemaking process. Those devices remain in class III and require premarket approval, unless and until: (1) The device is reclassified into class I or II; (2) FDA issues an order classifying the device into class I or II in accordance with new section 513(f)(2) of the act, as amended by FDAMA; or (3) FDA issues an order finding the device to be substantially equivalent, under section 513(i) of the act, to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval. The agency determines whether new devices are substantially equivalent to previously marketed devices by means of premarket notification procedures in
Reclassification of classified preamendments devices is governed by section 513(e) of the act. This section of the act provides that FDA may, by rulemaking, reclassify a device (in a proceeding that parallels the initial classification proceeding) based on “new information.” The reclassification can be initiated by FDA or by the petition of an interested person. The term “new information,” as used in section 513(e) and 515(b)(2)(A)(iv) of the act (21 U.S.C. 360e(b)(2)(A)(iv)), includes information developed as a result of a reevaluation of the data before the agency when the device was originally classified, as well as information not presented, not available, or not developed at that time. (See, e.g.,
Reevaluation of the data previously before the agency is an appropriate basis for subsequent regulatory action where the reevaluation is made in light of newly available regulatory authority (see
In the
In the
On September 25, 2000, FDA received a petition (Ref. 1) from OSMA requesting that the classification of hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prostheses be changed from class III into class II.
FDA has identified the hip joint, metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with a cemented acetabular component and the hip joint, metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with a cemented acetabular component as follows: A hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with a cemented acetabular component, prosthesis is a two part device intended to be implanted to replace a hip joint. The device limits translation and rotation in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulation surfaces. It has no linkage across-the-joint. This generic type of device includes prostheses that consist of a femoral and an acetabular component, both made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum. This generic type of device is limited to those prostheses intended for use with bone cement.
A hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prosthesis with an uncemented acetabular component is a two part device intended to be implanted to replace a hip joint. The device limits translation and rotation in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulation surfaces. It has no linkage across-the-joint. This generic type of device includes prostheses that consist of a femoral and an acetabular component, both made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum. This generic type of device is limited to those prostheses intended for use without bone cement.
In a public meeting on August 8, 2001, the Panel recommended five to two that the hip joint metal/metal semi-constrained prostheses not be reclassified from class III into class II (Ref. 2). The Panel concluded that the information in the petition did not demonstrate that special controls would provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device and that there was not sufficient information to establish special controls for the device. Specifically, the Panel determined that there was insufficient clinical and preclinical testing information to establish special controls. The Panel concluded that the length and rate of the long-term patient followup data were inadequate to demonstrate that special controls would provide reasonable assurance that the devices are safe and effective for their intended use. In addition, the Panel discussed that preclinical information, including validation of wear simulation, nonideal preclinical wear testing, and biological evaluation of metallic wear debris generated by the devices were not established. The particle size of the metallic wear debris generated by these devices is substantially smaller than the particle size of the metallic wear debris generated by other hip joint prostheses, and the short- and long-term biological effects from human retrievals or preclinical evaluation of these smaller-size metallic wear particles, are unknown. The Panel believed that premarket approval is necessary for the devices because there is insufficient information to establish that special controls would provide reasonable assurance of their safety and effectiveness.
Based on its review of the information contained in the petition and presented at the Panel meeting, as well as the Panel's discussion, the agency concurred with the Panel's recommendations. FDA agrees that there is insufficient valid scientific evidence to determine that special controls, in addition to the general controls applicable to all devices, would provide reasonable assurance of the devices' safety and effectiveness for their
FDA has determined that the clinical and preclinical information in the petition is insufficient to support the requested change in classification of these devices. FDA believes that additional clinical data, including a longer patient followup time and a higher rate of patient followup, are necessary to develop special controls to ensure the safety and effectiveness of these devices. The agency believes that additional preclinical data, including the validation of hip simulation and nonideal wear testing of the devices at extreme loading angles, higher than normal loads, and start-stop cyclic loading, are necessary. FDA also believes that preclinical evaluation of the response to smaller sized metallic wear debris is necessary to establish special controls to provide the reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the devices. FDA notes that the evaluation of the response to wear particles may include the evaluation of retrieved human devices.
In a future issue of the
The following references have been placed on display in the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. These references may be seen by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
1. Petition for Reclassification for Metal/Metal Semi-Constrained Hip Joint Prosthesis submitted by the Orthopedic Surgical Manufacturers Association, Warsaw, IN, dated September 25, 2000, and amended on November 28, 2000, and June 4, 2001.
2. Transcript of the Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel Meeting, August 8, 2001, pp. 1 to 244.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the draft guidance entitled “Medical Devices Made With Polyvinylchloride (PVC) Using the Plasticizer di-(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP); Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA.” Through this draft guidance, FDA is proposing to offer suggestions to manufacturers who fabricate their PVC devices using the plasticizer DEHP. The guidance recommends ways that manufacturers may reduce or eliminate potential risks that may be associated with DEHP. This draft guidance is neither final nor is it in effect at this time.
Submit written or electronic comments on this guidance by December 5, 2002.
Submit written requests for single copies on a 3.5″ diskette of the guidance document entitled “Medical Devices Made With Polyvinylchloride (PVC) Using the Plasticizer di-(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP); Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA” to the Division of Small Manufacturers, International, and Consumer Assistance (HFZ-220), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., Rockville, MD 20850. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request, or fax your request to 301-443-8818. See the
Robert Gatling, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-404), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-1190.
DEHP is recognized as an important chemical ingredient that affords PVC many of the physical properties that make the material optimally suited for use in many of today's medical devices. DEHP is a chemical whose long-term effects on the human body are unknown. In this draft guidance, FDA is suggesting that manufacturers label certain devices with their DEHP content and consider eliminating the use of DEHP in certain devices that can result in high aggregate exposures in sensitive patient populations.
FDA recognizes that many devices with PVC containing DEHP are not used in ways that result in significant human exposure to the chemical. Therefore, this draft guidance focuses on the small subset of medical devices where PVC containing DEHP may come in contact with the tissue of a sensitive patient population in a manner and for a period of time that may raise concerns about the aggregate exposure to DEHP.
This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance represents the agency's current thinking on medical devices made with PVC using the plasticizer DEHP. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statute and regulations.
In order to receive the “Medical Devices Made With Polyvinylchloride (PVC) Using the Plasticizer di-(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP); Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA” via your fax machine, call the CDRH Facts-On-Demand system at 800-899-0381 or 301-827-0111 from a touch-tone telephone. Press 1 to enter the system. At the second voice prompt press 1 to order a document. Enter the document number (1407) followed by the pound
Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may also do so using the Internet. CDRH maintains an entry on the Internet for easy access to information including text, graphics, and files that may be downloaded to a personal computer with Internet access. Updated on a regular basis, the CDRH home page includes device safety alerts,
You may submit to the Dockets Management Branch (
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.
Notice.
The proposed information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.
Comments Due Date: November 5, 2002.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control number and should be sent to: Mildred M. Hamman, Reports Liaison Officer, Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 4249, Washington, DC 20410-5000.
Mildred M. Hamman, (202) 708-0614, extension 4128, for copies of the proposed forms and other available documents. (This is not a toll-free number).
The Department will submit the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended).
This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
This Notice also lists the following information:
Desription of the need for the information and proposed use: Housing Agencies (HAs) are required to submit occupancy information to HUD electronically for monitoring dwelling, nondwelling, demolished, boarded-up, under repair/modernization rehabilitation or vacant units. THe information should be verified on the Form HUD-51234 before it is submitted electrtonically. The information enables HUD to monitor the rate and extent at which the Low-income Public Housing Program is being used by HAs to assist low-income families.
Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended.
Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.
Notice.
The proposed information collection requirement described below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB approval number (2502-0314) and should be sent to: Lauren Wittenberg, OMB Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; Fax number (202) 395-6974; e-mail
Wayne Eddins, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, Southwest, Washington, DC 20410; e-mail
The Department has submitted the proposal for the collection of information, as described below, to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The Notice lists the following information: (1) The title of the information collection proposal; (2) the office of the agency to collect the information; (3) the OMB approval number, if applicable; (4) the description of the need for the information and its proposed use; (5) the agency form number, if applicable; (6) what members of the public will be affected by the proposal; (7) how frequently information submissions will be required; (8) an estimate of the total number of hours needed to prepare the information submission including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response; (9) whether the proposal is new, an extension, reinstatement, or revision of an information collection requirement; and (10) the name and telephone number of an agency official familiar with the proposal and of the OMB Desk Officer for the Department.
This Notice also lists the following information:
Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as amended.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.
Notice.
This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.
September 6, 2002.
Mark Johnston, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room 7262, 451 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1234; TTY number for hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 1-800-927-7588.
In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in
Office of the Secretary, Department of the Interior.
Notice of meeting.
This notice announces an upcoming meeting of the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission. Notice of this meeting is required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463).
The agenda for the meeting will focus on implementation of the Management Action Plan for the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor and State Heritage Park. The Commission was established to assist the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its political subdivisions in planning and implementing an integrated strategy for protecting and promoting cultural, historic and natural resources. The Commission reports to the Secretary of the Interior and to Congress.
The Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission was established by Public Law 100-692, November 18, 1988 and extended through Public Law 105-355, November 13, 1998.
C. Allen Sachse, Executive Director, Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission, 10 E. Church Street, Room A-208, Bethlehem, PA 18018, (610) 861-9345.
Bureau of Land Management, Interior; Forest Service, Agriculture.
Notice of re-open of a call for nominations for the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument Advisory Committee.
Under the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument Act of 2000, Public Law 106-351 (16 U.S.C. 431 note), the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Agriculture's U.S. Forest Service are re-opening nominations for five members of the public to serve on the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument Advisory Committee. Nominations will be accepted for thirty days following the publication date of this notice.
The call for nominations is for representatives for the County of Riverside, the cities of Indian Wells and Cathedral City, the Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy, and the Winter Park Authority.
Committee members will be appointed to serve 3-year terms and may be nominated for reappointment for an additional three-year term. The three-year term would begin November 2002. All members will serve without pay but will be reimbursed for travel and per diem expense at the current rates for government employees under 5 U.S.C. 5703. The Secretary of the Interior will make appointments to the Committee with the concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture.
The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument Act of 2000 (Act) required that the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture establish a National Monument Advisory Committee (Committee) to advise them on resource management issues associated with the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument, specifically providing guidance on the National Monument Plan. This notice requests the public to submit nominations for five memberships on the Committee. The Committee is managed under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
As directed by the Act, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture jointly established an advisory committee for the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument (Monument). The Committee's purpose is to advise the Secretaries with respect to the preparation and implementation of a management plan for the Monument. The Committee meets every other month on a Saturday. The purpose of the Committee is to gather and analyze information, conduct studies and field examinations, hear public testimony, ascertain facts, and, in an advisory capacity only, develop recommendations concerning planning for the management and uses of the National Monument. The designated Federal officer, or his or her designee, in connection with special needs for advice, may call additional meetings. A Committee Chairperson and Vice Chairperson will be elected by the Committee from among its' members annually.
Any individual or organization may nominate one or more persons to serve on the Committee. Individuals may nominate themselves for Committee membership. You may obtain nomination forms from the BLM or Forest Service by contacting the individuals listed in
Submit nominations to the address listed below no later than 30 days after the publication of this notice to re-open the call for nomininations in the
Send nominations to: Advisory Committee Nominations, Ms. Danella George, Bureau of Land Management, P.O. Box 581260, North Palm Springs, California, 92258-1260.
Ms. Danella George, Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument, (760) 251-4800.
United States International Trade Commission.
Institution of investigation and invitation for written submissions.
August 30, 2002.
Following receipt of a request on August 16, 2002, from the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Commission instituted investigation No. 332-446, Agriculture: Probable Economic Effects on the U.S. Economy of Eliminating or Reducing U.S. Tariffs on Certain Products from FTAA Countries and WTO Members, under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)).
As requested by USTR, the Commission will prepare assessments of the probable economic effects on the economy as a whole of (1) eliminating U.S. tariffs on certain agricultural products from 33 countries within the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), and (2) eliminating and reducing by 50 percent U.S. tariffs on certain agricultural products from World Trade Organization (WTO) member.
Industry-specific information may be obtained from Ronald Babula, Project Leader (202-205-3331 or
The Commission does not plan to hold a public hearing in connection with this investigation. However, interested parties are invited to submit written statements (original and 14 copies) concerning the matters to be addressed by the Commission in its report on this investigation. Commercial or financial information that a submitter desires the Commission to treat as confidential must be submitted on separate sheets of paper, each clearly marked “Confidential Business Information” at the top. All submissions requesting confidential treatment must conform with the requirements of section 201.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be made available in the Office of the Secretary to the Commission for inspection by interested parties. The Commission may include such confidential business information in the report it sends to USTR. To be assured of consideration by the Commission, written statements relating to the Commission's report should be submitted to the Commission at the earliest practical date and should be received no later than the close of business on September 19, 2002. All submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. The Commission's rules do not authorize filing submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means.
Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact of the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000.
FTAA, WTO, tariffs, and trade.
By order of the Commission.
International Trade Commission.
September 12, 2002 at 2:00 p.m.
Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.
Open to the public.
1.
2. Minutes
3. Ratification List.
4. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-376-377 and 379 and 731-TA-788-793 (Final)(Remand)(Certain Stainless Steel Plate from Belgium, Canada, Italy, Korea, South Africa, and Taiwan)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination and Commissioners' views on remand to the Court of International Trade on or before September 27, 2002.)
5. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-309-A-B and 731-TA-528 (Review)(Remand)(Pure Magnesium from Canada)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination and Commissioners' views on remand to the NAFTA Binational Panel on or before October 15, 2002.)
6.
In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.
By order of the Commission:
In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that a proposed consent decree in
The proposed Consent Decree prohibits Lamplight from discharging any pollutant into waters of the United States, unless such discharge complies with the provisions of the Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations, and requires the payment of a civil penalty.
The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to this proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this notice. Please address comments to Lisa Noller, Assistant U.S. Attorney, 219 S. Dearborn, 5th Floor, Chicago, Illinois, 60604 and refer to this case name and civil action number.
The proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Clerk's Office, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In addition, the proposed Consent Decree may be viewed on the World Wide Web at
In accordance with the Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that a Consent Decree in
The Department of Justice will accept written comments on the proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this notice. Please address comments to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of Justice, PO Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044-7611, and refer to
Copies of the proposed Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the United States Attorney, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 615 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 and at EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. A copy of the proposed Consent Decree may be obtained by mail from the U.S. Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library, PO Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611. When requesting a copy of the proposed Consent Decree, please enclose a check to cover the twenty-five cents per page reproduction costs payable to the “U.S. Treasury” in the amount of $6.00 (for Decree without appendices) or $78.25 (for Decree with appendices) and please reference
Immigration and Naturalization Service, Justice.
Notice.
The Attorney General is authorized by regulation to require, by notice in the
This Notice is effective September 11, 2002.
Dan Brown, Office of the General Counsel, Immigration and Naturalization Service, 425 I Street, NW., Room 6100, Washington, DC 20536, telephone (202) 514-2895.
Section 262(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) (8 U.S.C. 1302(a)) provides that all aliens who are age 14 or older and who have not previously been registered and fingerprinted at a consular office abroad, pursuant to section 221(b) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1201(b)) or sections 30 or 31 of the Alien Registration Act, 1940, have a duty to apply for registration and to be fingerprinted if they remain in the United States for 30 days or longer. As authorized by section 262(c) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1302(c)), however, the regulations at 8 CFR 264.1(e) contain general provisions waiving the requirement of fingerprinting for many nonimmigrant aliens. Accordingly, most nonimmigrant aliens are admitted to the
In addition to those general registration requirements, section 263(a) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1303(a)) authorizes the Attorney General to prescribe special registration for, among other classes, “aliens of any other class not lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence.” Pursuant to this section, as well as the Attorney General's authority under sections 214 and 262 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1184, 1302), the Attorney General has promulgated regulations, to be effective September 11, 2002, and to be codified at 8 CFR 264.1(f)(2)(i) and (ii), that authorize the Attorney General, by notice published in the
The most recent Notice published by the Attorney General pursuant to the authority of existing 8 CFR 264.1(f) provides for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, at the port-of-entry, to register, fingerprint, and photograph arriving aliens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Sudan who are applying for admission to the United States in nonimmigrant status.
This Notice supplants the July 21, 1998, Notice and designates Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Syria as the countries whose nationals or citizens will be subject to the expanded special registration requirements in 8 CFR 264.1(f), as amended. The Attorney General has consulted the Secretary of State in designating these countries. In addition, all the countries covered by this Notice have been designated by the Department of State as state sponsors of terrorism. Certain nonimmigrant alien who are nationals or citizens of one of the countries designated in this Notice will be subject to the special registration requirements of 8 CFR 264.1(f), as amended. As set forth in 8 CFR 264.1(f)(1), as amended, the special registration requirements of 8 CFR 264.1(f), as amended, do not apply to nonimmigrant aliens applying for admission to the United States under sections 101(a)(15)(A) or 101(a)(15)(G) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(A) or (G)). In accordance with 8 CFR 264.1(f)(2)(ii), the special registration requirements also will apply to any nonimmigrant aliens who a consular officer or an inspecting officer has reason to believe are nationals or citizens of one of the five designated countries. This authority is necessary because a review of travel documentation occasionally raises questions regarding the actual nationality or citizenship of a particular nonimmigrant alien. For example, an alien may be a dual national or citizen of one of the designated countries as well as another country for which he or she presents documents.
The July 21, 1998, Notice also provided that the Attorney General, after consultation with the Secretary of State, could exempt certain nonimmigrant aliens from the registering, fingerprinting, and photographing requirements when such action was deemed to be in the interest of foreign policy or national security. The process for granting relief from the requirements of 8 CFR 264.1(f) to nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration requirements is addressed in 8 CFR 264.1(f)(7), as amended, and is therefore not included in this Notice.
Pursuant to 8 CFR 264.1(f), and 8 CFR 264.1(f)(2)(i) and (ii) as amended at 67 FR 52584, 52592, and after consultation with the Secretary of State, I hereby order:
All nonimmigrant aliens who are nationals or citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, or Syria, or who a consular officer or an inspecting officer has reason to believe are nationals or citizens of such countries, and who are applying for admission to the United States in a nonimmigrant category other than under section 101(a)(15)(A) or 101(a)(15)(G) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(A) or (G)), shall be subject to the registration requirements in 8 CFR 264.1(f)(3), (5), (6), (8), and (9), as amended. All such nonimmigrant aliens subject to special registration shall be advised of the provisions of 8 CFR 264.1(f), and their obligations to comply with those provisions, when admission is granted.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection requests (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each individual ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Marlene Howze at (202) 693-4158 or e-mail
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for ESA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 ((202) 395-7316) within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
* Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
* Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
* Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection requests (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Darrin King on (202) 693-4129 to e-mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 ((202) 395-7316), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
* Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
* Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
* Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
* Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Darrin King on 202-693-4129 or e-mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 (202-395-7316), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
* Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
* Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
* Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
* Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Section 1910.146(c)(2) requires the employer to post danger signs to inform exposed employees of the existence and location of and the danger posed by permit spaces.
Section 1910.146(c)(4) requires the employer to develop and implement a written permit space program if the employer decides that its employees will enter permit spaces. The written program is to be made available for inspection by employees and their authorized representatives. Section 1910.146(d) provides the employer with the requirements of a permit-required confined space program (permit space program) required under this paragraph.
Section 1910.146(c)(5)(i)(E) requires that the determinations and supporting data required by paragraphs (c)(5)(i)(A), (c)(5)(i)(B), and (c)(5)(i)(C) of this section are documented by the employer and are made available to each employee who enters a permit space or to that employee's authorized representative.
Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(H) of 1910.146, the employer is required to verify that the space is safe for entry and that the pre-entry measures required by paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this section have been taken, through a written certification that contains the date, the location of the space, and the signature of the person providing the certification. The certification is to be made before entry and is required to be made available to each employee entering the space or to that employee's authorized representative.
Section 1910.146(c)(7)(iii) requires the employer to document the basis for determining that all hazards in a permit space have been eliminated, through a certification that contains the date, the location of the space, and the signature of the person making the determination. The certification is to be made available to each employee entering the space or to that employee's authorized representative.
Section 1910.146(e) requires the employer to document the completion of measures required by paragraph (d)(3) by preparing an entry permit before employee entry is authorized. Paragraph (e)(3) requires that the employer make the completed permit available at the time of entry to all authorized entrants by posting the permit at the entry portal or by any other equally effective means, so that the entrants can confirm that the pre-entry preparations have been completed. Paragraph (e)(6) requires the employer to retain each canceled entry permit for at least one year.
Section 1910.146(g)(4) requires that the employer certify that the training required by paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) has been accomplished by preparing a written certification record.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Darrin King on 202-693-4129 or e-mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 (202-395-7316), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
* Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
* Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
* Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
*Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contract Darrin King on 202-693-4129 or e-Mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Atten: OMB Desk Officer for ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 (202-395-7316), within 30 days from the date of the this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
* Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
* Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
* Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
* Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, medicinal, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Data collected on the WOTC and the WtW Tax Credits is collected by the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) and provided to the U.S. Employment Service. The data will be used, primarily, to supplement IRS Form 8850. This data will help expedite the processing of employer requests for Certifications generated through IRS Form 8850 or issuance of Conditional Certifications (CCs) and employer requests for Certifications as a result of hiring individuals who have received SWAs' or participating agencies' generated CCS. The data will also help streamline SWAs' mandated verification activities, aid and expedite the preparation of the quarterly reports, and provide a significant source of information for the Secretary's Annual Report to Congress on the WOTC program. The data recorded through the use of these forms will also help in the preparation of an annual report Congress. Also, the plans submitted by the states will tell the regional and national Offices how the states plan to administer the WOTC and the WtW tax credits and use the funds allocated to them. Finally, the data obtained through the use of the Technical Assistance and Review guide will help the Regional Coordinators determine if the states are administering the tax credit program in compliance with the reauthorizing legislation, the IRS Code of 1986, as amended, and the ETA Handbook No. 408.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Darrin King on 202-693-4129 or e-mail:
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 (202-395-7316), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
*Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
*Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
*Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
*Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
General wage determination decisions of the Secretary of Labor are issued in accordance with applicable law and are based on the information obtained by the Department of Labor from its study of local wage conditions and data made available from other sources. They specify the basic hourly wage rates and fringe benefits which are determined to be prevailing for the described classes of laborers and mechanics employed on construction projects of a similar character and in the localities specified therein.
The determinations in these decisions of prevailing rates and fringe benefits have been made in accordance with 29 CFR part 1, by authority of the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act of March 3, 1931, as amended (46 Stat. 1494, as amended, 40 U.S.C. 276a) and of other Federal statutes referred to in 29 CFR part 1, Appendix, as well as such additional statutes as may from time to time be enacted containing provisions for the payment of wages determined to be prevailing by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. The prevailing rates and fringe benefits determined in these decisions shall, in accordance with the provisions of the foregoing statutes, constitute the minimum wages payable on Federal and federally assisted construction projects to laborers and mechanics of the specified classes engaged on contract work of the character and in the localities described therein.
Good cause is hereby found for not utilizing notice and public comment procedure thereon prior to the issuance of these determinations as prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay in the effective date as prescribed in that section, because the necessity to issue current construction industry wage determinations frequently and in large volume causes procedures to be impractical and contrary to the public interest.
General wage determination decisions, and modifications and supersedeas decisions thereto, contain no expiration dates and are effective from their date of notice in the
Any person, organization, or governmental agency having an interest in the rates determined as prevailing is encouraged to submit wage rate and fringe benefit information for consideration by the Department. Further information and self-explanatory forms for the purpose of submitting this data may be obtained by writing to the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Wage and Hour Division, Division of Wage Determinations, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-3014, Washington, DC 20210.
The number of the decisions listed to the Government Printing Office document entitled “General Wage Determinations Issued Under the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts” being modified are listed by Volume and State. Dates of publication in the
General wage determinations issued under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts, including those noted above, may be found in the Government Printing Office (GPO) document entitled “General Wage Determinations Issued Under the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts”. This publication is available at each of the 50 Regional Government Depository Libraries and many of the 1,400 Government Depository Libraries across the country.
General wage determinations issued under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts are available electronically at no cost on the Government Printing Office site at
Hard-copy subscriptions may be purchased from: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800.
When ordering hard-copy subscription(s), be sure to specify the State(s) of interest, since subscriptions may be ordered for any or all of the six separate Volumes, arranged by State. Subscriptions include an annual edition (issued in January or February) which includes all current general wage determinations for the States covered by each volume. Throughout the remainder of the year, regular weekly updates will be distributed to subscribers.
The Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals will meet in executive session on Tuesday, 8 October 2002, from 8:00 a.m. to 9:15 a.m. The public sessions of the Commission and the Committee meeting will be held on Tuesday, 8 October 2002, from 9;30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., on Wednesday, 9 October 2002, from 8:15 a.m. to 5:15 p.m., and on Thursday, 10 October 2002, from 8;15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
Town and Country Resort & Convention Center, 500 Hotel Circle, San Diego CA 92108; phone, 619-291-7131; fax: 619-291-3584.
The executive session will be closed to the public. At it, matters relating to international negotiations in process, personnel, and the budget of the Commission will be discussed. All other portions of the meeting will be open to public observation. Public participation will be allowed as time permits and as determined to be desirable by the Chairman.
The Commission and Committee will meet in public session to discuss a broad range of marine mammal matters. While subject to change, major issues that the Commission plans to consider at the meeting include activities involving the International Whaling Commission; issues related to the incidental take of dolphins in the eastern tropical Pacific tuna fishery; the status of the vaquita in the Gulf of California; the gray whale stocks in the eastern and western Pacific Ocean; sea otters in California, the Pacific Northwest and Alaska waters; killer whale stocks; issues related to the Hawaiian Islands; and fisheries and other human interactions with pinnipeds.
Robert H. Mattlin, Executive Director, Marine Mammal Commission, 4340 East-West Highway, Room 905, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301-504-0087.
National Science Foundation.
Notice of Permit Applications Received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-541.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permit applications received to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45 part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of permit applications received.
Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by September 27, 2002. Permit applications may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.
Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.
Nadene G. Kennedy at the above address or (703) 292-7405.
The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), has developed regulations that implement the “Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Fauna and Flora” for all United States citizens. The Agreed Measures, developed by the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties, recommended establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain
The applications received are as follows:
1.
3.
4.
Notice of meeting.
In accordance with 15 U.S.C. 7106(b), the National Women's Business Council (NWBC) announces a forthcoming meeting. The meeting will cover action items worked on by the NWBC, will be used to gather information on future NWBC endeavors (including research projects), to analyze relevant issues and facts, and discuss administrative matters of the committee. Although the regulations implementing the Federal Advisory Committee Act do not require notification of meetings adjourned to discuss pre-deliberative or administrative work, the NWBC would like to open the meeting to the public and therefore notify the public of the time and place.
September 17, 2002.
U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Eisenhower Conference Room A 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Open to the public.
National Women's Business Council, 409 Third Street, Suite 210, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 205-6695—Gilda Presley.
Please RSVP by September 16, 2002.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-72 issued to Florida Power Corporation (the licensee) for operation of the Crystal River, Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant located in Citrus County, Florida.
The proposed amendment would revise the note to the Improved Technical Specification (ITS) 3.7.18 Completion Time to allow a 24-hour extension of completion time for entry into ITS 3.0.3. This change is requested as a contingency for two inoperable Control Complex chillers while Control Complex Cooling System chiller refurbishment is performed.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously [analyzed].
The Control Complex Cooling System is not an initiator of any design basis accident. The basis for this request is that the risk of a design basis event [occurring] within the 24-hour period during which alternative cooling will be used is acceptably small, and is less than the risk posed by a forced shutdown of the unit. The Control Complex Cooling System safety function is to provide sufficient cooling to ensure operability of safety-related equipment located in the control room and other portions of the Control Complex. Control Complex cooling, within the 24-hour period, is being accomplished by the compensatory measures in place which include providing alternate cooling by aligning the Appendix R Chilled Water System to supply cooling to the vital equipment areas in the Control Complex and operation of pre-staged portable air conditioning that provides cooling to the Control Room. Control Complex Habitability Envelope Integrity will be maintained throughout the duration of this operating condition, which will ensure that potential post-accident dose to operators, is maintained within analyzed limits. Therefore, granting this License Amendment Request for a 24-hour delay for entry into ITS 3.0.3, due to inoperability of a second chiller, does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does not create the possibility of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously [analyzed].
The proposed License Amendment Request for a 24-hour delay for entry into ITS 3.0.3, due to inoperability of a second chiller, will not result in changes to the design, physical configuration of the plant. Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
During the 24-hour delay for entry into ITS 3.0.3, due to inoperability of a second chiller, measures will be implemented to ensure the availability of temporary and permanently installed non-safety backup systems capable of providing cooling to the control room and other vital equipment areas in the Control Complex. From the risk significance perspective, using installed non-safety backup systems to provide cooling to the control room and other vital equipment areas in the Control Complex is acceptable. Areas with essential equipment in the Control Complex will be monitored to ensure temperatures do not exceed acceptable limits. Therefore, granting a License Amendment Request for a 24-hour delay for entry into ITS 3.0.3, due to inoperability of a second chiller, does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below.
By October 7, 2002, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714,
(1) A petition for leave to intervene or a request for hearing, consider the following factors, among other things:
(i) The nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding.
(ii) The nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding.
(iii) The possible effect of any order that may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.
(2)The admissibility of a contention, refuse to admit a contention if:
(i) The contention and supporting material fail to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section; or
(ii) The contention, if proven, would be of no consequence in the proceeding because it would not entitle petitioner to relief.”
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition should also identify the specific aspect(s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the above date. Because of the continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested that petitions for leave to intervene and requests for hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated August 14, 2002, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued for public comment a proposed revision of a guide in its Regulatory Guide Series. Regulatory Guides are developed to describe and make available to the public such information as methods acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data needed by the staff in its review of applications for permits and licenses.
The draft guide is temporarily identified by its task number, DG-1119, which should be mentioned in all correspondence concerning this draft guide. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1119, the Proposed Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.180, “Guidelines for Evaluating Electromagnetic and Radio-Frequency Interference in Safety-Related Instrumentation and Control Systems,” is being developed to provide up-to-date guidance to licensees and applicants on methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying with the NRC's regulations on design, installation, and testing practices for addressing the effects of electromagnetic and radio-frequency interference and power surges on safety-related instrumentation and control systems.
This draft guide has not received complete staff approval and does not represent an official NRC staff position.
Comments may be accompanied by relevant information or supporting data. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; or they may be hand-delivered to the Rules and Directives Branch, ADM, at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. Comments will be most helpful if received by November 8, 2002.
You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking Web site through the NRC home page (
Although a time limit is given for comments on these draft guides, comments and suggestions in connection with items for inclusion in guides currently being developed or improvements in all published guides are encouraged at any time.
Regulatory guides are available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD; the PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555; telephone (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205; fax (301) 415-3548; e-mail
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
OPIC's Sunshine Act notice of its public hearing was published in the
Information on the hearing cancellation may be obtained from Connie M. Downs at (202) 336-8438, via facsimile at (202) 218-0136, or via email at
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend the account type codes under Exchange Rule . The text of the proposed rule change appears below. New text is in italics. Deleted text is in brackets.
(a) through (d) No change.
.01 No change.
.02 Regardless of whether or not a registered clearing agency is being used for comparison and/or settlement, each clearing member organization shall submit the following trade data and audit trail information with respect to contracts for securities entered into on the Exchange to a registered clearing agency in such form and within such time periods as may be described by the registered clearing agency or the Exchange:
(1) Name or identifying symbol of the security,
(2) The clearing firm's number or alpha symbol as may be used from time to time, in regard to its side of the contract,
(3) The executing broker's badge number or alpha symbol as may be used from time to time, in regard to its side of the contract,
(4) Trade date,
(5) The time the trade was executed,
(6) Number of shares or quantity of security,
(7) Transaction price,
(8) The clearing firm's number or alpha symbol as may be used from time to time, in regard to the contra side of the contract,
(9) The executing broker badge number or alpha symbol as may be used from time to time, in regard to the contra side of the contract,
(10) The terms of settlement,
(11) Specialist, registered trader, and market maker acronyms in regards to options transactions,
(12) Account type code “equities only. The current account type codes for equity transactions are as follows. Members should use the most restrictive account type code available. Thus, for example, members only should use the “A” account type code for an agency transaction when no other account type code accurately describes the trade. These codes may be changed from time to time as the Exchange may determine:
New York Stock Exchange program trade audit trail account type codes as used from time to time also are acceptable.
(13) Account type code—options only. The current account type codes for option transactions are as follows. Members should use the most restrictive account type code available. These codes may be changed from time to time as the Exchange may determine:
(14) Such other information as the Exchange may from time to time require. Clearing members may not “summarize” multiple trades in the same security, executed at the same price with the same contra clearing firm as this results in degradation of the audit trail.
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange's rules require clearing members to submit to comparison different types of information for each transaction that they clear. These requirements are set forth in Exchange Rule 719. Among the different data that clearing firms must submit for each trade is an account type code. These codes identify the type of account for which the trade was effected (
The Exchange is proposing to amend the account type codes under Exchange Rule 719. Specifically, the Exchange proposes that the letter “P” would be used to identify an Amex option specialist or option market maker trading a “paired security”
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act
The proposed rule change will impose no burden on competition.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609. Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Amex. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2002-65 and should be submitted by September 27, 2002.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The CBOE proposes to amend its rules to facilitate trading of fixed-income Index Portfolio Shares and options overlying those shares. The text of the proposed rule change is below. New language is in italics; deleted language is in brackets.
(a)-(yy) No change.
. . . Interpretations and Policies:
.01-.02 No change.
.03 The term “Index Portfolio Shares” or IPSs means securities that (a) are issued by an open-end management investment company based on a portfolio of stocks
.04 No change.
(a)-(b) No change.
. . . Interpretations and Policies:
.01-.05 No change.
.06 Securities deemed appropriate for options trading shall include shares or other securities (“Units”) that represent interests in registered investment companies (or series thereof) organized as open-end management investment companies, unit investment trusts or similar entities that are principally traded on a national securities exchange or through the facilities of a national securities association and reported as “national market” securities, and that hold portfolios of securities comprising or otherwise based on or representing investments in indexes or portfolios of securities (or that hold securities in one or more other registered investment companies that themselves hold such portfolios of securities); provided that all of the following conditions are met:
(A) any non-U.S. component [stocks]
(B) [stocks]
(C) [stocks]
(D) either (x) the Units meet the criteria and guidelines set forth in Rule 5.3 and Interpretation and Policy .01 thereunder, or (y) the Units are available for creation or redemption each business day from or through the investment company in cash or in kind at a price related to net asset value, and the investment company is obligated to issue Units in a specified aggregate number even if some or all of the securities required to be deposited have not been received by the investment company, subject to the condition that the person obligated to deposit the securities has undertaken to deliver the securities as soon as possible and such undertaking is secured by the delivery and maintenance of collateral consisting of case or cash equivalents satisfactory to the investment company, all as described in the investment company prospectus.
.07-.09 No change.
In its filing with the Commission, the CBOE included statements concerning the purpose, of and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the definition of Index Portfolio Shares (“IPSs”) in CBOE's rules to reflect that IPSs may be based on fixed-income securities indexes. This proposed rule change corresponds to an American Stock Exchange (“Amex”) rule change filing recently approved by the Commission.
CBOE also seeks to clarify that certain listing requirements for options overlying IPSs, or exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) generally, should apply to options overlying ETFs that are based on fixed income securities indexes. Currently, CBOE Rule 5.3, Interpretation and Policy .06, governing the listing of ETF options, provides that, among other things, the following conditions must be met to list options on an ETF:
(A) any non-U.S. component stocks of the index or portfolio on which the Units are based that are not subject to comprehensive surveillance agreements do not in the aggregate represent more than 50% of the weight of the index or portfolio;
(B) stocks for which the primary market is in any one country that is not subject to a comprehensive surveillance agreement do not represent 20% or more of the weight of the index; and
(C) stocks for which the primary market is in any two countries that are not subject to comprehensive surveillance agreements do not represent 33% or more of the weight of the index.
While a fixed-income ETF technically meets (A)-(C) above, CBOE believes those provisions were meant to apply to any foreign
The Exchange believes that clarifying its rules governing IPSs and options on IPS and ETFs will benefit investors. Accordingly, the proposed rule change is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act,
The CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.
The CBOE has designated that the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time
A proposed rule change filed under rule 19b-4(f)(6)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609. Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2002-47 and should be submitted by September 27, 2002.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend Article XX, Rule 37 of the CHX Rules, which governs, among other things, automatic execution of market and marketable limit orders. Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new language is italicized; deletions are bracketed.
1. Eligible Orders. Specialists must accept and guarantee execution of all agency
2. Market
3-7. No change to text.
(b) Automated Executions. The Exchange's Midwest Automated Execution System (the MAX System) may be used to provide an automated delivery and execution facility for orders that are eligible for automatic execution
(1) Size. The MAX System has two size parameters which must be designated by the specialist on a stock-by-stock basis. These parameters are the auto-execution threshold and the auto-acceptance threshold. For both Dual Trading System issues and NASDAQ/NM Securities, the auto-execution threshold must be set at 300 shares or greater and the auto-acceptance threshold must be set at 1000 shares or greater. In no event may the auto-acceptance threshold be less than the auto-execution threshold. If the order sending firm sends an agency market order in a Dual Trading System issue through MAX, such order will be executed in accordance with paragraph (b)(6) of this Rule. If the order sending firm sends an agency market order in a Nasdaq/NM Security through MAX, such order shall be executed in accordance with paragraph (b)(7) of this Rule.
.01—.09 No change in text.
With respect to MAX System agency market or marketable limit orders in NASDAQ?NM Securities which have a size equal to or less than the auto-execution threshold but which are not auto-executed under the provisions of Rule 37(b)(7) of this article, a specialist shall be obligated to either (i) manually executed such orders at the NBBO in existence when the order is received or better, or (ii) act as agent for such orders in seeking to obtain the best available price for such orders on a marketplace other than the Exchange. A specialist acting as agent pursuant to subparagraph (ii) above shall use order routing systems where appropriate.]
.05 Interaction between professional limit orders and agency limit orders that are not professional orders (“Agency Orders”).
In the event that a professional order “has the post,”
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received regarding the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Article XX, Rule 37 and Rule 43 of the CHX Rules, which governs, among other things, automatic execution of market and marketable limit orders and execution prices due orders. The proposed amendments to Rules 37 and 43 are intended to modify a CHX specialist's order execution obligations to address post-decimalization market conditions, specifically the significant reduction in liquidity at each price point, including the national best bid and offer (“NBBO”). The CHX requests the Commission's approval of the proposed rule change on a pilot basis, for six months from the date of the Commission's approval order.
New York Stock Exchange, American Stock Exchange and Nasdaq issues are traded on the CHX; each issue traded is assigned to a single specialist. The vast
To provide order-sending firms with an incentive to route orders to our market, the CHX, like most regional exchanges, has what is referred to at the CHX as the “BEST Rule.” The BEST Rule provides that if a specialist accepts an order (or in actuality the MAX system accepts the order for the specialist), the specialist generally must execute the order at the NBBO price up to the NBBO displayed quantity,
In addition to the BEST Rule that governs execution prices, the CHX rules also provide for automatic execution of orders,
Although a specialist can set his auto execution threshold in a variety of ways, a fairly typical setting would be to automatically execute all orders, in a particular issue, of 599 shares or less regardless of the quantity offered at the BBO and automatically execute orders up to 1099 shares provided that order size does not exceed the BBO displayed quantity. If an order exceeds the specialist's auto-execution threshold, the order is automatically directed into the specialist's book for manual execution, unless the order-sending firm has elected to receive partial automatic executions, in which case a portion of the order will automatically execute, up to the size of the auto-execution threshold, and the balance of the order will be placed in the specialist's book for manual execution.
Under the current version of the CHX rules, a CHX specialist has unlimited (and the CHX believes unwarranted) auto-execution exposure, because a rapid succession of orders entered into the MAX system at or below the specialist's auto-execution threshold are due an automatic fill at the prevailing NBBO price. For example, if a specialist set the auto-execution threshold as described in the preceding paragraph, and the NBBO was 600 shares offered at $30.00, the specialist would be obligated to automatically execute 10 500-share market orders to buy at $30.00 if those orders were rapidly sent by one or more customers while the NBBO remained unchanged. The specialist, who intended to offer price and liquidity equivalent to the best market, instead provided 4400 additional shares of liquidity.
The problem of providing more than the intended amount of liquidity through automatic executions has grown more acute since the conversion to decimal trading. The availability of liquidity at a price point has become a more significant factor in order routing decisions. While the quantity offered at the NBBO has generally declined since the conversion to decimals, this consequence can be easily avoided by rapidly submitting a succession of small orders eligible for automatic execution at the NBBO price to a CHX specialist. The specialist, if he chooses to offset the position in another market, however, will encounter the limited liquidity that drove the order sender to take advantage of the specialist's auto execution of orders and the liquidity it provides.
After careful consideration of the issue by the leaders of the CHX Listed Specialist Product Subcommittee, OTC Specialist Product Subcommittee, Rules Subcommittee and Committee on Floor Procedure, the CHX proposes amendment of Article XX, Rule 37 to address the foregoing issue. Specifically, the CHX believes that in today's decimal trading environment, where it is very difficult to find liquidity at the NBBO price point and the NBBO price is constantly “flickering,” it is appropriate for a specialist to limit his or her aggregate auto-execution and BEST Rule liability to the then-current and accessible NBBO price and size. In other words, the specialist's auto-execution threshold would no longer constitute a guarantee of automatic execution of an unlimited number of orders at the NBBO price. CHX proposes below two principal changes to CHX Article XX, Rule 37, which CHX seeks to incorporate into its rules and which a specialist could elect to enable.
Under the proposed revision to CHX Article XX, Rule 37(a), a CHX specialist would no longer be obligated to provide the NBBO price for every order accepted by the specialist. Instead, the proposed rule change incorporates revised standards for handling orders; these standards are taken directly from the Commission's order-handling rules.
Significantly, the revised order-handling standards will continue to be subject to surveillance by the CHX Department of Market Regulation and
This second proposal would amend CHX Article XX, Rule 37(b) to limit a specialist's unintended automatic execution liability by incorporating an Aggregate Share Threshold into the specialist's designated auto-execution parameters. The Aggregate Share Threshold could be enabled by a specialist on an issue-by-issue basis. This functionality would be entirely optional, however, and a specialist could still elect to provide additional liquidity guarantees. Under this voluntary systems enhancement, the specialist would agree to auto-execution (at the BBO price) of an aggregate number of shares (the “Aggregate Share Threshold”). Once an aggregate number of shares equal to the Aggregate Share Threshold was automatically executed, whether as a result of one order or numerous orders, subsequent orders would be directed into the specialist's book for manual execution. Under the proposed rule change, these subsequent orders would not necessarily be due a fill at the BBO price, but would be subject to the specialist's best execution obligation under revised Rule 37(a). The specialist could act as agent to obtain the best available price on a marketplace other than the Exchange or could voluntarily elect to fill the order at the BBO price. The Aggregate Share Threshold would reset after a prescribed amount of time designated by a specialist
The following examples illustrate how the automatic executions would work. They assume that the specialist has set his or her Aggregate Share Threshold at a level equal to the size at the prevailing NBBO.
The CHX believes that these two proposed rule changes would be sufficient to address the unintended adverse consequences of current CHX rules relating to auto-execution liquidity and price guarantees. It is important to note that neither of the proposed changes would operate to discriminate against order-sending firms in any way; operation of these changes to the MAX system would be enabled on an issue-by-issue basis and would apply equally to all order-sending firms. Similarly, the Exchange believes that the intended outcome of the MAX changes would not have a disparate impact on any order-sending firm or class of firm.
The CHX would further note that in today's market environment, where specialists are required to make public their quality-of-execution statistics and broker-dealers are bound as fiduciaries to make order-routing decisions in accordance with best execution practices, there exist sufficient market-based incentives for specialists to continue to provide execution prices and liquidity akin to the best available in the national market. These incentives render a rule-based requirement largely obsolete, and amply support the rule changes proposed herein.
The proposed rule is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of section 6(b) of the Act.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any inappropriate burden on competition.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve the proposed rule change, or
(B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington DC 20549-0609. Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying at the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CHX-2002-20 and should be submitted by September 27, 2002.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
PCX proposes to limit the number of equity option issues to which marketing fees may apply to only those that are ranked in the 250 most actively traded equity options. The Exchange is also proposing to require that PCX Lead Market Makers who make payments to order flow providers as part of the Exchange's marketing fee program make, keep current, and preserve records relating to marketing fee arrangements and make those records available to the PCX upon request for inspection and review. The text of the proposed rule change is below; new language is italicized.
Rule 6.41
In its filing with the Commission, the PCX included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The PCX has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
On August 31, 2000, the PCX began collecting a marketing fee of $0.40 per contract on all equity options traded at the PCX.
The Exchange is now proposing to make certain amendments to its marketing fee program. Specifically the Exchange proposes to establish a limit on the number of equity options as to which a marketing fee may be charged to include only those issues that are within the top 250 most active, nationally-traded issues based on volume statistics reported by the Options Clearing Corporation.
The Exchange is also proposing to adopt new Rule 6.41(b) to require PCX Lead Market Makers who make payments to order flow providers as part of the Exchange's marketing fee program to make, keep current, and preserve records relating to payment for order flow arrangements, including but not limited to all records pertaining to the identity of the order flow providers. Such records must be maintained in a fashion to permit the Exchange to track payments made to order flow providers on the basis of payment. Such books and records must be made available to the PCX upon request for inspection and review.
The Exchange's determination of whether an equity option ranks in the top 250 most active, nationally traded issues will be based on volume statistics reported by the Options Clearing Corporation. The Exchange will consider changes to the marketing fees that are charged on a specific issue at the beginning of the March, June, September and December trade months. Any issue that is designated as a top 250 issue at the beginning of the March, June, September or December trade month will remain a top 250 issue for the purposes of charging a marketing fee until at least the next quarter that the Exchange amends its marketing fees. The Exchange will not ordinarily change marketing fees other than on a quarterly basis. The list of designated issues will be based on volume statistics for trading activity that occurred two months before the beginning of each quarter. For example, the list of top 250 issues for the March/April/May quarter will be based on January's volume; and the list of top 250 issues for the June/July/August quarter will be based on April's volume.
The Exchange intends to notify its Members of the issues that are designated to be in the top 250 via a regulatory bulletin that will be published at the beginning of each quarter.
The Exchange believes the proposed record keeping requirements should help the PCX review and verify that funds collected for order flow purposes are not used for improper purposes.
The Exchange proposes that the changes become effective for the September 2002 trade month.
The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor received.
The PCX has designated that the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition; and (3) does not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has provided the Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the filing date. Therefore, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549-0609. Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the PCX. All
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.
Department of State.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 [79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459], Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 [112 Stat. 2681,
For further information, including a list of exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, 202/619-5997, and the address is United States Department of State, SA-44, Room 700, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547-0001.
Department of State.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
For further information, contact Orde F. Kittrie, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, Department of State, (telephone: 202/401-4779). The address is Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.
Acting under the authority of section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, and in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General, I hereby determine that the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) has committed, or poses a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.
Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 13224 that “prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,” I determine that no prior notice need be provided to any person subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States because to do so would render ineffectual the measures authorized in the Order.
This notice shall be published in the
The Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation will meet in the Department of State, 2201 “C” Street NW., Washington, DC, September 23-24, 2002, in Conference Room 1105. Prior notification and a valid photo are mandatory for entrance into the building. One week before the meeting, members of the public planning to attend must notify Gloria Walker, Office of the Historian (202-663-1124) to provide relevant dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and telephone numbers.
The Committee will meet in open session from 1:30 p.m. through 3 p.m.
Questions concerning the meeting should be directed to Marc J. Susser, Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation, Department of State, Office of the Historian, Washington, DC, 20520, telephone (202) 663-1123, (e-mail
Tennessee Valley Authority.
Adoption of Final Supplement 1 Environmental Impact Statement and issuance of record of decision.
In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 to 1508) and the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), TVA has decided to adopt the Final Supplement 1 Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) issued by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in May 2001. The FSEIS, entitled “
Linda B. Shipp, Senior NEPA Specialist, Environmental Policy and Planning, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Mail Stop WT 8C, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499, telephone (865) 632-3440 or e-mail
The Kentucky Lock and Dam (L&D) project is located in Marshall and Livingston Counties in western Kentucky at Tennessee River Mile 22.4. The project is part of the Kentucky-Barkley Reservoirs' navigation system. The originally approved design for the Lock Addition Project was evaluated in a Final Feasibility Study and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FS/FEIS) completed by USACE on March 13, 1992. In its adoption of the FS/FEIS and issuance of a Record of Decision (ROD) on September 30, 1999, TVA adopted the USACE's preferred alternative, Alternative Plan A. Alternative Plan A recommended the construction of a second and main 110-foot-wide by 1200-foot-long navigation lock chamber and related features at the existing Kentucky L&D to improve the capacity and efficiency of the navigation system. The project was authorized by section 101(a)(13) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, and funding to initiate construction was included in the Fiscal Year 1998 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.
In recommending the construction of a new navigation lock chamber at Kentucky Dam, the USACE recognized that additional engineering evaluations and hydraulic modeling studies would be required before some features, such as a possible navigation training dike, could be designed. Further, USACE recognized that those modified project components would be addressed in subsequent NEPA documents, tiered from the 1992 FEIS. The FSEIS was prepared to address the project changes not covered by previous NEPA documents.
Two broad plans were considered in the FSEIS: A No Action Plan and a Proposed Action Plan. Under the No Action Plan, the project would be implemented as described in the original 1992 FEIS, as modified in a subsequent October 1999 Environmental Decision Record on the relocation of transmission structures and a March 2000 Environmental Assessment on the relocation of the U.S. Highway 62/641 bridge off Kentucky L&D. Under the Proposed Action Plan, the previously approved project would be implemented with the following design changes and modifications:
• Relocation of the new lock upstream about 200 feet and toward the river about 20 feet.
• Modification of construction methods to reduce the size of areas within cofferdams and to construct more features in the “wet.”
• Construction of a non-public, temporary access road from the main lock area to the Vulcan Disposal Area.
• Mitigation for the loss of the TVA Taylor Park Campground (TPC), temporarily closed by TVA in 1997, through construction of facilities for use by fishermen. These new or modified facilities include: A new lock visitors' center, Powerhouse Island fishing pier, additional Powerhouse Island parking and restroom facilities, west bank fishing pier, and improvements to existing coffer cell.
• Placement of fill up to elevation of contour 385 feet in the TPC area during construction and possibly permanently.
• Mitigation for closure of the east bank boat ramp by constructing a new public boat ramp and courtesy dock in an expanded west bank boat basin for use after construction.
• Use of the expanded boat basin for contractor activities during construction.
• Refinements in some upstream lock features and the approach channel.
• Refinements in some downstream lock features and the approach channel.
• Modification of the size and location of the navigation training dike off Powerhouse Island to improve commercial navigation conditions.
• Mitigation for construction-related closures of the west bank by construction of two fishing jetties along the downstream part of the west bank shoreline.
• Elimination of placement of excavated or dredged material on the east bank between Russell Creek and the Interstate 24 bridge.
• Elimination of the aquatic disposal site at Tennessee River Mile 19.9.
All of the items listed above were determined to be independent features, each of which could be dropped from the project without jeopardizing the construction of the new lock chamber or any of the other independent features. In addition, utility lines (including water, sewer, power, and telephone) associated with those features will be constructed and/or relocated within the project boundaries.
The USACE used a 1:100 scale physical model of Kentucky L&D at its Engineering Research and Development Center to evaluate alternative lock orientations and the design of the navigation and spillway training dikes. The model also was used to develop designs of project facilities that would have minimal environmental impacts. The proposed upstream lock location was selected because it reduced construction costs and environmental impacts by reducing previously planned downstream channel and bank modifications. Modeling determined that bank excavations and in-water excavations to widen the downstream navigation channel were not required. With the reduced volume of wet material requiring disposal, the need for an aquatic disposal site at Tennessee River Mile 19.9 was eliminated. In addition, the need for placing rock along the east bank between Russell Creek and the Interstate 24 bridge also was eliminated.
Alternative locations for replacement of the fisherman access intended to be provided by the east bank boat ramp included other east bank locations, expansion of the existing west bank ramp (as proposed in the 1992 FEIS), and construction of a new ramp in an expanded west bank boat basin. Other east bank locations were dropped due to environmental conflicts (extensive mussel beds) and safety concerns (proximity to lock approach channel). The location of the new ramp in the expanded boat basin was selected because it provided both improved recreational facilities and easy construction access to the river. Alternative contractor ramp locations upstream of the basin in areas with known higher density of mussels were dropped during preliminary scoping discussions with the resources agencies.
Like the USACE, TVA has decided to adopt the Proposed Action Plan because it reduces many environmental impacts of the earlier design, including mitigating unavoidable recreational impacts, reducing impacts to listed and non-listed mussel species, and improving recreational fishing. None of the changes resulted in public controversy. The Proposed Action Plan is the environmentally preferable alternative.
As with the preparation of the 1992 FEIS, the issues of major concern for the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) were impacts to the high quality mussel beds downstream of the L&D and impacts of construction activities on recreation fishing in the tailwater area. Refinements to the lock design have lessened the degree of in-stream work, such as bank excavation and channel dredging, as well as eliminating the need for placement of material along about 3000 linear feet of the right bank from Russell Creek to the Interstate 24 bridge. Construction techniques were modified to reduce the area to be dewatered behind cofferdams. Proposed techniques for building the lower approach wall call for some features (slurry wall and drilled shafts) to be constructed in the “wet.” Much of the lower guidewall would be constructed on a working platform typically 5 feet above normal water levels. These changes are expected to reduce potential mussel impacts.
Recreational facilities closed or displaced by construction activities are being mitigated according to plans that have been coordinated with the public and resource agencies. Additional recreational and tailwater fishing facilities are being constructed with funds previously allocated to mitigate the closure of the TVA TPC, including the lock visitors' center, two fishing piers, and additional parking and restroom facilities. As mitigation for the loss of public access to the west bank of the tailwater for 5-8 years during construction, west bank jetties are being constructed that will provide additional shoreline fishing areas downstream from the construction site. As mitigation for the loss of the east bank boat ramp, a new ramp and courtesy dock will be constructed in the expanded west bank boat basin for post-construction public use.
Relocation and construction of utility lines (including water, sewer, power, and telephone), associated with changes in project design, although not directly addressed in the SEIS, are within the project construction area evaluated in the FSEIS. Most of the proposed utility lines are along an existing right-of-way. As with overall project construction, best management practices will be used to minimize erosion impacts. Therefore, impacts of utility line construction and/or relocation will be minor and localized.
All structures displacing aquatic habitat have been designed to the minimum size necessary to achieve the targeted effects (
Overall, the Proposed Action Plan reduces construction impacts of the original project design while improving long-term recreation facilities for fishermen and tourists. The environmental commitments presented in the FSEIS for the Proposed Action Plan include:
• Construction sequencing will be implemented to minimize some project impacts. The west bank fishing jetties would be constructed early to offset impacts from closing areas of the west bank upstream of the boat basin to public access.
• Seasonal restrictions on in-stream, bottom-disturbing activities, such as blasting, dredging, and fill placement, to protect fish spawning. For the tailwater, this seasonal restriction is during
• Active construction areas are to be cordoned off to protect the general public. This would include the west bank above the existing boat basin and localized areas on the river and reservoir during active construction of in-water features.
• Escort tugs will be required during active construction of the lock guidewalls and approach dredging to protect both construction crews and traffic entering/exiting the lock.
• Conducting in-stream activities during low-flow periods, where applicable.
• Visual turbidity monitoring during in-stream activities.
• Use of a weighted silt curtain during construction of the expanded west bank boat basin.
• Use of rock with minimal fines for construction of in-stream structures, such as dikes and jetties.
• Relocation of abundant mussel resources where they occur at in-water construction sites.
• Notification of Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources during blasting activities for monitoring potential fish kills.
• Proper control of fugitive dust and tracking of sediment onto public roads.
• Compliance with solid waste regulations for disposal of demolition and construction-related wastes.
• If cultural resources are encountered, work is to stop until the site is investigated by a qualified archaeologist. The existing “protective” layer of fill at archaeological site 15Lv12 will not be modified. The berm separating site 15Lv12 from the Vulcan Disposal Area Haul Road also is to remain undisturbed.
• Stabilization of all disturbed areas after construction including use of native plants where areas are not to be mowed or manicured.
• Wetland mitigation for the entire Lock Addition Project, including the 0.11 acres associated with the Vulcan Disposal Area Haul Road, will be completed at a site in Benton, Kentucky. The wetland mitigation site will be monitored to ensure successful restoration of the hydrology and the establishment of wetland vegetation.
• Restoration of the Livingston County Trail System after construction use of the Vulcan Disposal Area Haul Road.
Further, as stated in the USACE's ROD: “Compliance with applicable environmental review and consultation requirements has been accomplished through the development of the FSEIS. The FSEIS documents consideration and compliance with the Clean Water Act; the Endangered Species Act; the National Environmental Policy Act; the National Historic Preservation Act; Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management); Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice); Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands); Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and other applicable environmental protection statutes, regulations, and orders. * * *”
Tennessee Valley Authority (Meeting No. 1541).
9 a.m. (EDT), September 10, 2002.
TVA West Tower Auditorium, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Open.
Approval of minutes of meeting held on July 23, 2002.
A1. Approval of short-term borrowing from the United States Treasury.
A2. Approval of Fiscal Year 2003 TVA budget and change in accounting policy.
C1. Supplements to contracts with MESA Associates, Inc., and Sargent & Lundy LLC for engineering and design services.
C2. Contract with Pinkerton Government Services, Inc., for security services.
C3. Extension through 2010 of the march 3, 1999, delegation of authority to the Senior Vice President, Procurement, or a designee, to enter into individual contracts of up to $15 million each for uranium.
C4. Contract with Westinghouse Process Controls, Inc., for a distributed control system at various fossil plants.
E1. Approval of the Pickwick Reservoir Land Management Plan for the use and management of 19,238 acres of land on Pickwick Reservoir in Colbert and Lauderdale Counties, Alabama; Tishomingo County, Mississippi; and Hardin County, Tennessee.
E2. Public auction sale of approximately 6 acres of land on Pickwick Reservoir in Tishomingo County, Mississippi, to facilitate industrial development, Tract No. XYECR-13.
E3. Sale of a permanent easement to the Pickwick Cemetery Association for a cemetery expansion, affecting approximately .3 acre of land on Pickwick Reservoir in Hardin County, Tennessee, Tract No. XPR-465CE.
E4. Sale of noncommercial, nonexclusive permanent easements to Hiwassee Properties, Inc., Tract No. XTELR-230RE; Robert D. and Carolyn A. Franke, Tract No. XTELR-231RE; and Bobby E. Booker, Tract No. XTELR-232RE, affecting approximately .21 acre of land on Tellico Reservoir in Loudon and Monroe Counties, Tennessee, for construction and maintenance of recreational water-use facilities on Tellico Reservoir in Loudon and Monroe Counties, Tennessee.
E5. Grant of a permanent easement to the City of Lexington, Tennessee, for highway improvement purposes affecting approximately .12 acre of land on the Beech Dam Reservation in Henderson County, Tennessee, Tract No. XTBRBR-4H.
E6. Grant of a 30-year term public recreation easement to the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, affecting approximately 6,486 acres of land on Pickwick Reservoir in Lauderdale County, Alabama, Tract No. XTPR-60WL.
E7. Transfer of 811 acres of land on Tims Ford Reservoir in Franklin and Moore Counties, Tennessee, Tract Nos. XTTMFR-23 through -41, to the State of Tennessee; grant of a permanent easement for state office building purposes affecting .4 acre of land in Franklin County, Tennessee, and grant of a permanent easement for a water intake and pumping station affecting .2 acre in Moore County, Tennessee, Tract Nos. XTTMFR-43B and XTTMFR-44PS; and acquisition of 2,000 acres of land in Franklin and Moore Counties, Tennessee, from the State of Tennessee, Tract Nos. TMFR-3409 through -3518.
E8. Grant of a permanent easement for an office/operations building to Tellico Area Services System, affecting approximately 4.7 acres of land on Tellico Reservoir in Monroe County, Tennessee, Tract No. XTTELR-41E.
E9. Grant of a 19-year term public recreation easement to the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural
E10. Public auction sale of approximately 2.56 acres in Whitfield County, Georgia, Tract Nos. XRSCP-1, XRSCP-2, XRSCP-3, XRSCP-4, and XRSCP-5.
1. Approval of wholesale power contract flexibility options.
2. Approval to supplement contract with Page Clearing Contractors for right-of-way clearing to support new transmission line construction.
3. Approval of contract with Universal Construction Company, Inc., for the construction of a new administration building at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant.
4. Approval of membership and chair appointments to the second-term Regional Resource Stewardship Council.
For more information: Please call TVA Media Relations at (865) 632-6000, Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also available at TVA's Washington Office (202) 898-2999. People who plan to attend the meeting and have special needs should call (865) 632-6000. Anyone who wishes to comment on any of the agenda in writing may send their comments to: TVA Board of Directors, Board Agenda Comments, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extension of the currently approved collection. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and the expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on June 12, 2002, page 40373.
Comments must be submitted on or before October 7, 2002. A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.
Judy Street on (202) 267-9895.
Send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention FAA Desk Officer.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of intent to rule on application.
The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the application to use PFC revenue at Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and Part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 158).
Comments must be received on or before October 7, 2002.
Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered in triplicate to the FAA at the following address: Mr. J. Wade Bryant, Manager; Seattle Airports District Office, SEA-ADO; Federal Aviation Administration; 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Suite 250, Renton, Washington 98055-4056
In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be mailed or delivered Mr. Robb Parish, Airport Manager, at the following address: Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, 3200 Airport Complex North, P.O. Box 249, Pullman, Washington 99163-0249.
Air Carriers and foreign air carriers may submit copies of written comments previously provided to Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, under section 158.23 of part 158.
Ms. Suzanne Lee-Pang, (425) 227-2654, Seattle Airports District Office, SEA-ADO; Federal Aviation Administration; 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Suite 250, Renton, Washington 98055-4056. The application may be reviewed in person at this same location.
The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the application 02-03-U-00-PUW to use PFC revenue at Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158).
On August 12, 2002, the FAA determined that the application to use the revenue from a PFC submitted by The City of Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport Pullman, Washington, was substantially complete within the
The following is a brief overview of the application.
Any person may inspect the application in person at the FAA office listed above under
In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the application, notice and other documents germane to the application in person at the Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of intent to rule on application.
The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the application to: impose and use PFC revenue at Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 158).
Comments must be received on or before October 7, 2002.
Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered in triplicate to the FAA at the following address: Mr. J. Wade Bryant, Manager; Seattle Airports District Office, SEA-ADO; Federal Aviation Administration; 1601 Lind Avenue SW., suite 250, Renton, Washington 98055-4056.
In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be mailed or delivered to Mr. Robb Parish, Airport Manager, at the following address: 3200 Airport Complex North, PO Box 249, Pullman, WA 99163-0249.
Air Carriers and foreign air carriers may submit copies of written comments previously provided to Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, under section 158.23 of Part 158.
Ms. Suzanne Lee-Pang, (425) 227-2654, Seattle Airports District Office, SEA-ADO; Federal Aviation Administration; 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Suite 250, Renton, Washington 98055-4056. The application may be reviewed in person at this same location.
The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the application 02-04-C-00-PUW to impose and use PFC revenue at Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and part 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158).
On August 12, 2002, the FAA determined that the application to impose and use the revenue from a PFC submitted by Moscow-Pullman Regional Airport Name, Pullman, Washington was substantially complete within the requirements of section 158.25 of part 158. The FAA will approve or disapprove the application, in whole or in part, no later than November 12, 2002.
The following is a brief overview of the application.
Any person may inspect the application in person at the FAA office listed above under
In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the application, notice and other documents germane to the application in person at the Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); Department of Transportation
Notice of Intent.
The FHWA is issuing this notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for a proposed highway improvement in Lincoln County, Oregon. The proposed project is near the rural unincorporated community of Beverly Beach. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and FHWA will be analyzing alternatives to constructing a modified or replacement crossing of US 101 over Spencer Creek.
Anthony Boesen, Region 2 Liaison Engineer, Federal Highway Administration, Equitable Center, Suite 100, 530 Center Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97301, Telephone (503) 399-5749.
The FHWA, in cooperation with ODOT and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), will conduct technical studies, prepare a Draft EIS (DEIS), and conduct a public open house to receive comments regarding the proposed
The proposed project is necessary to maintain US 101 as a functional state lifeline highway route. The proposed project will involve a replacement bridge crossing of Spencer Creek on US 101 and construction of stable approaches to the bridge. The original Spencer Creek bridge, built in 1947 and located about six miles north of Newport, Oregon has deteriorated to the point that it has been determined unsafe and closed to traffic. A temporary bridge was constructed in 1999 immediately shoreward of the old bridge and has a design service life of five to eight years. Consequently, the existing Spencer Creek Bridge across the stream must be replaced. The sea cliffs and embankments that support the US 101 approaches to the old and temporary bridges are adjacent to the beach and are unstable. They have been substantially damaged from erosion caused by waves attacking the sea cliff. Landslides have also damaged the existing highway, and may pose hazards further inland. Consequently, any long term solution to the bridge problem will also need to involve stabilization of roadway approaches to any bridge crossing Spencer Creek in order to maintain the state lifeline highway route.
Possible Build Alternatives that will be considered as the proposed project develops will involve two basic concepts. The first concept would generally follow the existing alignment of US 101. The second concept would realign the highway inland and away from the beach. Depending on the location of the highway under either concept, shoreline stabilization may be required. As required by NEPA, a No-Build Alternative will be considered to provide an understanding about what will happen if nothing is done to solve the problem. The DEIS will address the No-Build Alternative and one or more Build Alternatives.
While the FHWA will be the lead agency for preparing the EIS, the COE will be a cooperating agency. Under section 103 of the 1962 River and Harbor Act, the COE has approved funding for planning, engineering and environmental investigations for shoreline stabilization options that would protect US 101 highway facilities along the beach. The COE is expected to consider as part of the proposed action some or all of the following design options—off shore breakwater, terracing the sea cliff, sea cliff toe armoring, and beach nourishment. Pursuant to the NEPA, the COE's analysis of the proposed action will be incorporated into the EIS.
Public workshops, meetings, and a public open house will be held as needed to identify an adequate range of reasonable alternatives, review alternatives, and aid in selection of an alternative. Appropriate notice to interested parties will be provided for all public gatherings regarding the proposed.
The EIS process will combine COE, and FHWA/ODOT work into one series of environmental documents (
To ensure that the full range of issues related to the proposed action are addressed and potentially significant and insignificant issues identified, comments, and suggestions are invited from all interested parties. Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the EIS should be directed to the FHWA at the address provided above.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, Highway Research, Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal Programs and activities apply to this program.)
Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
Notice; issuance of advisory bulletin.
The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) is issuing this advisory to owners and operators of gas distribution, gas transmission, and hazardous liquid pipeline systems, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. Owners and operators should ensure that telephonic reports of incidents to the National Response Center (NRC) are both prompt and accurate and fully communicate the estimated extent of the damages. Additional reports should be made if there is a significant change in an estimate of the size of the gas or liquid release, the extent of the damage, or the number of deaths or injuries.
OPS is issuing this advisory bulletin to ensure that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the OPS are notified (via the NRC) when the information provided in the initial telephonic report significantly changes due to new information available soon after the initial report.
Roger Little, (202) 366-4569; or by e-mail,
The pipeline safety regulations require gas pipeline, hazardous liquid pipeline, and LNG facility operators to make a telephonic report of a pipeline incident to the NRC in Washington, DC at the earliest practicable opportunity. For the purposes of this document, the term incident will refer to either an incident, an accident, a leak or a spill (the term differs in the regulations depending on whether the release involves gas, hazardous liquid or LNG). The information required to be reported includes the name of the operator, the name and telephone number of the person making the report, the location of the incident, the number of fatalities and injuries, and all other relevant significant facts. (49 CFR 191.5, 193.2011, and 195.52.)
Because an operator is required to make a telephonic report at the earliest practicable moment following discovery, an operator normally provides the first telephonic notification one to two hours after it discovers an incident on its pipeline. Additional information on the nature, cause, and extent of the damage usually becomes available as emergency response proceeds. If this additional information leads to a significant change (greater or lesser) in the estimated amount of product released, the estimated number of fatalities and injuries, the extent of environmental damage, or the extent of property damage, the operator should make an additional telephonic report to the NRC. OPS considers a significant change to include any of the following:
1. An increase or decrease in the number of previously reported injuries or fatalities;
2. A revised estimate of the product release amount that is at least 10 times greater than the amount reported; for example, the initial reported amount of product released was 300 barrels and the revised estimated amount is 3,000 barrels;
3. A revised estimate of the property damage that is at least 10 times greater than the reported property damage estimate; for example, the initial reported amount of damage was 100,000 dollars and the revised estimate is 1,000,000 dollars.
Often when the telephonic report is made, early information on an incident is incomplete. Sometimes, new information changes the understanding of the severity or nature of the incident. Although the telephonic reporting regulations do not state that multiple reports are required, the nature and timing of emergency response are dependent on the information reported to the NRC. It is critical that an operator provide accurate information on the extent of the incident. Therefore, OPS expects an operator to provide significant update information during the emergency response phase. For natural gas or LNG events, the initial emergency response phase usually ends between 24 and 48 hours following an incident. For hazardous liquid events, the initial emergency response phase may last several days as spill clean-up continues. Once the emergency response phase is complete, OPS does not expect an operator to continue to update the NRC throughout long-term recovery or remedial action activities.
Some hazardous liquid operators do not provide an estimated product release amount when reporting an incident to the NRC. OPS recognizes the difficulty in estimating spill amounts, especially if the release is underground or into water. However, OPS's and NTSB's response to the incident may depend on the reported spill size. OPS and NTSB may not investigate a ten barrel spill and may perform an onsite investigation of a 20,000 barrel spill. To get this critical information, OPS is asking the NRC to request operators to provide an estimate of the spill amount. If an estimated amount is not provided, NRC assumes, for emergency notification and response purposes, that a major spill has occurred. Therefore, if the operator does not provide a spill estimate, NRC will enter a default spill estimate of 1,000 barrels. OPS will be notified of all spills over 500 barrels and any spill over 100 barrels that impacts water.
In providing information on significant changes from the original telephonic report, operators need to be aware that the NRC does not update a prior report, but, instead, accepts additional reports. An operator should tell the NRC representative if a previous report was filed for the incident and provide the NRC Report Number of the original telephonic.
If, during the emergency response period, additional information about the incident becomes available that shows a significant change in the number of fatalities and injuries, product release estimate, or the extent of property damage, an additional report to the NRC will be necessary. Although the regulation does not state that additional revised reports are required, it is important for emergency response purposes that the NRC be given accurate information on the extent of the incident.
The NRC will accept additional reports, but will not update a previous report. Therefore, operators should file an additional report(s) when circumstances and estimates change significantly. An operator should provide an estimate of the damage in the initial report and in any subsequent report. The operator should include the NRC Report Number of the initial report when making a subsequent report. If an operator reports that a damage estimate is unknown or unavailable, the NRC will assume that a major spill has taken place for emergency notification and response purposes.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that a meeting of the President's Task Force to Improve Health Care delivery for Our Nation's Veterans is scheduled for Wednesday, September 11, 2002, beginning at 9 a.m. and adjourning at 4:45 p.m. and Thursday, September 12, 2002, beginning at 9 a.m. and adjourning at 1 p.m. The September 11 session will be held in the Horizon Ballroom of the Ronald Reagan Building International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington DC. The September 12 session will be held in the Washington Ballroom of the Radisson Hotel Old Town, 901 North Fairfax Street, Alexandria, VA. Both sessions are open to the public.
The purpose of the President's Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans is to:
(a) Identify ways to improve benefits and services for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) beneficiaries and Department of Defense (DoD) military retirees who are also eligible for benefits from VA, through better coordination of the activities of the two departments;
(b) Identify opportunities to remove barriers that impede VA and DoD coordination, including budgeting processes, timely billing, cost accounting, information technology, and reimbursement; and
(c) Identify opportunities through partnership between VA and DoD, to maximize the use of resources and infrastructure, including buildings, information technology and data sharing systems, procurement of supplies, equipment and services.
On the morning of September 11, the President's Task Force will receive presentations by and have discussions with Dr. Robert H. Roswell, Under Secretary for Health, Department of Veterans Affairs. For the remainder of the day, staff consultants will lead a discussion of major themes and issues to be addressed in the Final Report of the President's Task Force.
On September 12, the President's Task Force will receive a presentation by and have discussions with Mr. Thomas A. Scully, Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Mr. John G. Clarkson, MD, Dean, University of Miami Medical School, representing the Association of American Medical Colleges.
Interested parties can provide written comments to Mr. Dan Amon, Communications Director, President's Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans, 1401 Wilson Boulevard, 4th Floor, Arlington, Virginia, 22209.
By Direction of the Secretary:
As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice that the Special Medical Advisory Group has scheduled a meeting on Wednesday, September 25, 2002. The meeting will convene at 9 a.m. and end at 2 p.m. The meeting will be held at VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 830, Washington, DC. The purpose of the meeting is to advise the Secretary and Under Secretary for Health relative to the care and treatment of disabled veterans and other matters pertinent to the Department's Veterans Health Administration.
The agenda for the meeting will include: an update on Enrollment; Budget; Long Term Care; Tertiary and Specialized Care; Waiting Times; Workforce needs; and Capital Asset Realignment for Enhance services program.
All sessions will be open to the public. Those wishing to attend should contact Ms. Celestine Brockington, Office of the Under Secretary for Health (10A), Department of Veterans Affairs. Her phone number is (202) 273-5860.
By Direction of the Secretary:
In notice document 02-22204 beginning on page 55844 in the issue of Friday, August 30, 2002, make the following correction:
On page 55844, in the
In notice document 02-22124 beginning on page 55855 in the issue of Friday, August 30, 2002, make the following correction:
On page 55858, in the first column, in the fourth full paragraph, in the second line from the bottom, the web address
In notice document 02-21651 beginning on page 54832 in the issue of Monday, August 26, 2002, make the following correction:
On page 54835, in the second column, in section
In proposed rule document 02-21136 beginning on page 55180 in the issue of Wednesday, August 28, 2002 make the following correction:
On page 55181, in the second column, in § 71.1, under the heading
The Employment and Training Administration interprets federal law requirements pertaining to unemployment compensation (UC). These interpretations are issued in Unemployment Insurance Program Letters (UIPLs) to State Workforce Agencies. The UIPL described below is published in the
UIPL No. 30-02 and its attachment provides the states with the requirements of the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC) Act of 2002 as operating instructions and responses to questions raised pertaining to the TEUC program. With minor clarifying modifications to the instructions, this document consolidates the previous instructions to states for the treatment of claims filed under the TEUC program.
Classification: OWS.
Correspondence Symbol: OIS/DUO.
Date: July 5, 2002
1.
2.
3.
TEUC is payable to individuals who (1) filed an initial (new or additional) claim that was effective during or after the week of March 15, 2001; and (2) have exhausted regular benefits or have no benefit rights due to expiration of a benefit year ending during or after the week of March 15, 2001; and (3) have no rights to regular or extended benefits under any state or federal law; and (4) are not receiving benefits under Canadian law.
Rescissions: UIPL 17-02; UIPL 17-02, Change 1; UIPL 18-02; UIPL 18-02, Change 1.
Expiration Date: Continuing.
However, the Governor of a state may elect to pay TEUC in lieu of Extended Benefits.
In general, in order to qualify for TEUC, individuals must have had employment of 20 weeks of work, or the equivalent in wages, in their base periods. Continuing eligibility is determined under the requirements of the state law.
TEUC is administered through voluntary agreements between states and the Department of Labor. TEUC is payable in a state the week following the week in which an agreement is signed. The first week for which benefits may be paid is the week beginning March 10, 2002. The last week for which benefits are payable is the week ending December 28, 2002 (December 29, 2002 for New York).
SWAs are required to submit a separate financial status report (Standard Form 269) for administrative grants and costs associated with the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC) program.
4.
The instructions in this document are issued to the states and cooperating state agencies as guidance provided by the Department of Labor in its role as the principal in the TEUC program. As agents of the United States, the states and cooperating state agencies may not vary from the operating instructions in the document without the prior approval of the Department. The interpretations, policies, and procedures issued in this document supercede those previously issued as UIPL 17-02, UIPL 17-02, Change 1, UIPL 18-02 and UIPL 18-02, Change 1.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Title II of Public Law 107-147 is short-titled the “Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002” and is referenced throughout this publication as the “Act.”
The Act creates a federally funded benefit extension, called Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC), which provides up to 26 weeks of benefits to exhaustees, as defined, who otherwise meet the requirements of the Act.
Throughout these instructions various references are made to state laws pertaining to the payment of regular benefits by using such phrases as “in accordance with” or “as required by” or similar phrasing. In all cases such phrasing means law provisions as they apply to the determination and payment of regular benefits.
These instructions reference sections of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 by using such phrases as “in accordance with” or “as required by” or similar phrasing. In all cases such phrasing mean state law provisions that are “in accordance with” or “as required by” the specific provisions of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, as implemented by 20 CFR part 615.
Title II of Pub. L. 107-147 may be found at
This section contains the definitions of terms used throughout this document. To the extent possible, these definitions follow the EB regulations found at 20 CFR 615.2 as required by section 207 of the Act regarding these terms listed there. References to 5 U.S.C. Chapter 85 are to the UCFE/UCX law.
1. “Act” means the Temporary Unemployment Compensation Act of 2001, Title VII, Public Law 107-147.
2. “Additional Compensation” means compensation totally financed by a state under its law by reason of conditions of high unemployment or by reason of other special factors, and when so payable includes compensation payable pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Chapter 85.
3. “Agreement” means the agreement entered into pursuant to the Act between a state and the Department of Labor, under which the state agency makes payments of TEUC in accordance with the Act as interpreted by the Secretary or the Department of Labor as set forth in these instructions or other instructions issued by the Department.
4. “Applicable Benefit Year” means, the current benefit year, with respect to an individual with an unexpired benefit year only in the state in which an initial claim for TEUC is filed. In any other case, when the individual has unexpired or expired benefit year(s) in more than one state, the applicable benefit year is the individual's most recent benefit year ending during or
5. “Applicable State” means, with respect to an individual, the state with respect to which the individual is an exhaustee for TEUC purposes, and, in the case of a combined wage claim for regular compensation, the term means the “paying State” for such claim as defined in 20 CFR 616.6(e).
6. “Applicable State Law” means the state law of the state which is the applicable state for an individual.
7. “Base Period” means, with respect to an individual, the base period as determined under the applicable state law for the individual's applicable benefit year.
8. “Benefit Year” means, with respect to an individual, the benefit year as defined in the applicable state law.
9. “Compensation” means cash benefits (including dependents’ allowances) payable to individuals with respect to their unemployment, and includes regular compensation, additional compensation, extended compensation and TEUC as defined in this section.
10. “Extended Compensation” means the extended unemployment compensation payable to an individual for weeks of unemployment which begin in an extended benefit period, under those provisions of a state law which satisfy the requirements of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, and, when so payable, includes compensation payable pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Chapter 85, but does not include regular compensation or additional compensation. Extended compensation is referred to as Extended Benefits or EB.
11. “Regular Compensation” means compensation payable to an individual under any state law, and, when so payable, includes compensation payable pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Chapter 85, but does not include extended compensation or additional compensation.
12. “Secretary” means the Secretary of Labor of the United States.
13. “State” means the States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
14. “State Agency” means the Employment Security Agency (currently referred to as the State Workforce Agency) of a state which administers the state law.
15. “State Law” means the unemployment compensation law of a state approved by the Secretary under section 3304(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (26 U.S.C. 3304(a)).
16. “Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation” means the extended compensation payable under the Act, and which is referred to as TEUC, TEUC first tier, TEUC second tier (TEUC-X).
17. “TEUC First Tier” means the amount of TEUC benefit payable to an individual based on a determination of entitlement under the requirements of section 203(b)(1) of the Act.
18. “TEUC Second Tier” means the amount of TEUC benefit payable to an individual based on a determination of entitlement under the requirements of section 203(c) of the Act and is synonymous with TEUC-X.
19. “Week” means, for purposes of eligibility for and benefit payments under this Act, a week as defined in the applicable state law.
20. “Week of Unemployment” means a week of total, part-total, or partial unemployment as defined in the applicable state law, which shall be applied in the same manner to the same extent to claims filed under the requirements of this Act.
1.
States may terminate the TEUC agreement upon 30 days written notice. The TEUC period will end in a state 30 days from the date the state notifies the Secretary of its election to terminate the TEUC program. No TEUC will be payable for weeks which begin after the date the termination of the agreement is effective. However, TEUC is payable for weeks of unemployment up to such termination date. The agreement may also be terminated by the Secretary, as provided in the agreement.
2.
a.
A potentially eligible claimant is any claimant who has a benefit year that ends during or after the week of March 15, 2001, and has received all regular compensation payable based on employment and/or wages during the applicable base period, or whose rights to regular compensation have been terminated by reason of the expiration of the benefit year with respect to which such rights existed.
(1)
The liable state is responsible for identifying and notifying all potentially eligible interstate claimants of their potential eligibility, including filing instructions.
b.
3.
Under the Act, the receipt of EB does not reduce the amount of TEUC payable. A state is not required to trigger “off” EB if it elects to pay TEUC in lieu of EB.
4.
5.
a.
(1) have exhausted all rights to regular compensation under the applicable state law with respect to the applicable benefit year.
(2) have no rights to regular or extended compensation with respect to the week under such law or any other state or Federal unemployment compensation law.
(3) not be receiving compensation with respect to such week under the unemployment compensation law of Canada,
(4) have filed an initial claim, new or additional, effective during or after the week of March 15, 2001. Although the Act says “on or after” March 15, UI eligibility is determined on a weekly basis; therefore the Act is read to apply to the entire week. Please note that the period of time during which the filing of an initial claim that satisfies this requirement extends through the life of the TEUC program if the claimant had a benefit year on file as of the week of March 15, 2001.
b.
(1)
—the individual must have received all regular compensation payable based on employment and/or wages during the applicable base period; or
—the individual's rights to regular compensation have been terminated by reason of the expiration of the benefit year with respect to which such rights existed;
(2)
(A) as a result of an appeal concerning wages or employment or both which were not included in the original monetary determination, the individual may subsequently be determined to have entitlement to more or less compensation;
(B) the individual may be denied benefits under a state law seasonality provision, but who has entitlement to future weeks in the off season;
(C) after having established a benefit year during such year his/her wage credits were canceled or the right to regular or extended compensation was
(D) the individual has not exhausted AB;
(E) the individual is precluded from establishing a subsequent benefit year or qualifying for benefits in a subsequent benefit year by reason of state law requalifying provisions that require earnings after the beginning of the first benefit year;
Note that an individual who has no rights to benefits in cases involving the failure to meet requalifying requirements ceases to be an exhaustee when the requalifying earnings requirement is met and regular compensation is payable in a new benefit year. When regular compensation becomes payable, the individual is no longer entitled to TEUC.
c.
An individual is not entitled to receive TEUC for a week to which a disqualification would apply but for the fact that the individual has exhausted all rights to regular compensation.
For example, an individual is disqualified for voluntary leaving until the individual earns six times the WBA. The individual's benefit year has ended and the individual has insufficient earnings to establish a new benefit year and, therefore, files a TEUC claim. Until this individual satisfies the requalification requirement imposed during the benefit year of the regular claim, the individual is not eligible to receive TEUC.
d.
To determine which of these earnings requirements the state may use to determine if the claimant has a qualifying applicable benefit year for TEUC, the state must consult “the provisions of state law implementing section 202(a)(5).” Thus, for example, if the state law authorizes the use of just one of the three requirements, the state may only use that single requirement for TEUC purposes. If the state law authorizes the use of two alternatives, then the state may use the two alternatives and if the state law authorizes the use of all three alternatives, then all three alternatives may be used.
The suitable work and work search requirements of section 202(a)(3) of the EUCA of 1970 do not apply to the TEUC program. Neither do the subsequent employment provisions of section 202(a)(4) of the EUCA of 1970.
e.
(l)
The provisions of section 233(d) of the Trade Act of 1974 (relating to reduction of EB entitlement because of the receipt of TRA in the most recent benefit year) are not applicable to determinations of entitlement to TEUC.
(2)
6.
a.
If a redetermination or an appeal decision results in a determination that an individual is entitled to more or less regular compensation, the individual's status as an exhaustee must be redetermined, as appropriate, and an appropriate change shall be made in the individual's TEUC account.
b.
TEUC-X may also be payable in some states where EB has not triggered on. Section 203(d)(2)(B) of the Act provides that a state will be treated as being in an EB period if section 203(d) of the EUCA of 1970, which sets the 5 percent insured unemployment rate trigger, contained a 4 percent trigger. All requirements for an EB period using a 5 percent IUR must also be met under the 4 percent trigger, including the 120 percent “lookback” provision, the 13-week minimum “on” period, and the 13-week minimum “off” period if the state dips below the required trigger. The beginning date of a state's 4 percent TEUC EB period will be based on when the state would have triggered “on” using such a trigger. For example, if a state would have triggered on EB for the week beginning March 3 using the 4 percent trigger, the state will remain on for a TEUC EB period for at least 13 weeks from that date.
The Department will provide regular notices to states of which states qualify for TEUC second tier, and the beginning and ending dates of the 4 percent TEUC EB period during which TEUC-X is payable. See the reporting instructions for the ETA 539 in Section VI of this document.
7.
a.
b.
8.
a.
b.
9.
10.
1.
a. Claim Filing and Reporting;
b. Information to individuals, as appropriate;
c. Notices to individuals and employers, as appropriate, including notice to each individual of each determination and redetermination of eligibility for or entitlement to TEUC;
d. Determinations, redeterminations, appeals, and hearings;
e. Disqualification, including disqualifying income provisions;
f. Ability to work and availability for work;
g. The Interstate Benefit Payment Plan; and
h. The Interstate Arrangement for Combining Employment and Wages.
2.
a.
b.
(1) Complete an Initial Interstate Claim, Form IB-1, check claim type “other” and identify as TEUC;
(2) Review the individual's work history and advise the individual of all filing options;
(3) Transmit a TC-IBl to the liable state.
c.
d.
Administrative, entitlement and eligibility requirements provided in this document also apply to claims filed under the CWC program, except where clearly inconsistent with combined wage (and interstate, when applicable) procedures, policies and rules.
When a TEUC determination or redetermination is issued on a CWC claim, no Report of Determination of Combined-Wage Claim, TC-IB5, will be issued to the transferring state. The paying state will not bill transferring states for TEUC. The paying state will charge all TEUC benefits paid on CWC claims directly to the EUCA account in accordance with the fiscal instructions provided in Section V.
3.
4.
a.
b.
c.
d.
Under 18 U.S.C. 1001, knowingly and willfully concealing a material fact by any trick, scheme, or device or knowingly making a false statement in connection with this claim is a Federal Offense, punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.
e.
f.
5.
a.
b.
c.
(1) Decisions on appeals under the TEUC Program shall accord with the Secretary's “Standard for Appeals Promptness-Unemployment Compensation” in 20 CFR part 650.
(2) Any provision of an applicable state law for advancement or priority of unemployment compensation cases on judicial calendars, or otherwise intended to provide for the prompt payment of unemployment compensation when due, shall apply to proceedings involving entitlement to TEUC.
6.
a.
(1) shall be ineligible for further TEUC
(2) shall be subject to prosecution under section 1001 of Title 18, U.S.C.
Provisions of state law relating to disqualification for fraudulently claiming or receiving a payment of compensation shall apply to claims for and payment of TEUC.
When a state has sufficient facts to make a prima facie case under 18 U.S.C. 1001, it will consider referral for criminal prosecution in accordance with the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General (USDOL-OIG) and the Employment and Training Administration, which was transmitted as an attachment to UIPL No. 10-87 (also see UIPL No. 16-85 and UIPL No. 21-90).
States should pursue TEUC fraud cases in the same way all other state and federal claims are handled. At this time,
For those cases not referred to the OIG for investigation and prosecution or if the OIG does not accept the case for investigation, or if it is accepted, but is later returned because the U.S. Attorney declines prosecution, the state should refer the case for prosecution under state law provisions.
b.
(1)
In making these determinations, the state shall apply the same standards as are applied in making such determinations with respect to the waiver of overpayments of regular compensation.
(2)
(A) The state may waive recovery of a non-fraudulent TEUC overpayment if it determines that—
(B) In determining whether fault exists, the following factors must be considered:
(C) In determining whether equity and good conscience exists, the following factors may be considered:
(3)
(A) Unless a TEUC overpayment is otherwise recovered, or is waived, the state shall, during the three-year period after the date the individual received the payment of TEUC to which the individual was not entitled, recover the overpayment by deductions from any sums payable to the individual under any federal unemployment compensation law administered by the state or any other federal law administered by the state which provides for the payment of any assistance or an allowance with respect to unemployment.
(B) To the extent permitted under state law, a TEUC overpayment may be recovered by offset, except that: (1) no single offset may exceed 50 percent of the amount otherwise payable to the individual for the week; and (2) offset of benefits payable is limited to the three-year period following the date that the claimant received the improper payment(s).
(C) At the end of the three-year period, the state may remove the overpayment from its accounting record. Although no further active collection efforts by the state are required, the state shall maintain an administrative record during the subsequent three-year period to provide for possible collection. After the subsequent three-year period (a total of six years from the date the claimant received the improper payment(s)), the state may dispose of the overpayment record.
(D) TEUC overpayment recovery shall be enforced by any action or proceeding which may be brought under state or federal law, unless recovery of the overpayment is waived or prohibited in accordance with the Act and the instructions in this section.
(E) Overpayments of TEUC recovered in any manner shall be deposited into the fund from which payment was made.
(F) If a state has an agreement in effect with the Secretary to implement the cross-program offset provisions of section 303(g)(2) of the SSA, TEUC payments shall be used to offset state compensation overpayments, and state compensation payments shall be used to offset TEUC overpayments. If the state does not have an agreement with the Secretary under section 303(g)(2), SSA, the state
(G) If a state has the cross-program offset agreement and an Interstate Reciprocal Overpayment Recovery Arrangement in effect with the National Association of State Workforce Agencies, TEUC payments may be used to offset state compensation overpayments for other states that also have both agreements in effect. If the other state does not have an agreement with the Secretary under section 303(g)(2), SSA, TEUC benefits may only be used to offset overpayments of
1.
a.
Benefits paid to former employees of state and local governments, “501(c)(3)” nonprofit organizations and federally recognized Indian tribes are funded from U.S. Treasury general revenues through the EUCA. This does not affect the process for requesting funds, but does affect the reporting of those benefits on the ETA 2112. States are to report all TEUC payments, including reimbursable, UCFE/X on line 39, column F. (Note that it does not matter whether these employers have elected reimbursement status.) See the reporting instructions in Section VI for details.
b.
2.
a.
b.
c.
d.
(1) TEUC advances to the states' UTF accounts, and disbursements for TEUC benefit payments will be reported on the monthly ETA 2112. Do
(2) Since TEUC paid to UCFE and UCX will be funded out of General Revenues, the Federal Employees Compensation (FEC) Account will not be used to pay TEUC benefits. Therefore, federal agencies will not be required to reimburse the Unemployment Trust Fund for TEUC paid to federal employees. The ETA 191 report and UCFE/UCX detailed claimant data provided by states to Federal agencies must exclude TEUC.
3.
a.
The second scenario is when a state actually has the funds in its federal UI account that are required to be returned to the appropriate program line. This should be accomplished by the state processing a book transfer transaction that accomplishes a transfer from its UI account to the appropriate program under the EUCA account.
1.
Reporting will begin with the first reporting period in which the effective date of the TEUC program falls. Reporting for all Reports except the ETA 2112 will continue for twelve full months or four full quarters after the last payable week of the TEUC program. For those reporting periods in this post-TEUC time frame, only reports, which have non-zero data, need be submitted. Reporting on the ETA 2112 should continue for as long as there is activity.
2.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
(1)
(2)
f.
Line 15.
Line 16.
Line 23.
Lines 33, 34, 35. Enter total benefits paid, attributable to state and local governments, “501(c)(3)” nonprofits, and Indian tribes, as appropriate, on the appropriate line for the type of employer, excluding TEUC benefits.
Line 36.
Line 39.
(1)
(2)
(3)
Line 41.
Line 43.
Line 50.
g.
h.
3.
States with a 4 percent IUR as of enactment of the TEUC Act should immediately declare a TEUC EB period indicating a beginning date in accordance with the requirements of 20 CFR 615.12. Send letter to: Ms. Grace Kilbane, Office of Workforce Security, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-4231, Washington, DC 20210.
Any paper reports should be faxed to 202-693-3229 instead of mailing. The cover sheet should indicate delivery to UI Required Reports.
4.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
a.
(1) has exhausted all rights to regular compensation;
(2) has no rights to regular or extended compensation under any state or Federal law;
(3) is not receiving compensation under the Canadian law; and who
(4) filed an initial claim (new or additional, including transitionals) for compensation during the week of or after March 15, 2001. (This condition may be met with the filing of an initial claim at any time up until the TEUC program ends.)
The individual exhausted benefits with the week ending January 6, 2001, and his/her benefit year ended Saturday, June 2, 2001. The individual did not file an additional claim on that claim during or after the week that included March 15, 2001. If the individual files a new claim for regular compensation between the week of March 15, 2001 and the end of the TEUC program and is determined monetarily ineligible, he/she is potentially eligible for TEUC.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
a.
b.
c.
d.
a.
b.
c.
a.
b.
The TEUC Trigger notice shows all states that are in a TEUC EB period, which includes those in a regular EB period and those using the 4 percent
c.
d.
e.
a.
b.
c.
a.
b.
a.
b.
* * * amounts required to be withheld under state law must be withheld prior to any voluntary withholding requested by the claimants. The Department continues to leave to the state the matter of priorities among amounts that are required to be withheld.
As a result, any overpayments or child support required to be withheld must be withheld prior to any withholding of income taxes.
c.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
a.
b.
c.
a.
a.
However, if the individual has been terminated from or voluntarily left the SEA program, and if otherwise eligible, the individual may be paid TEUC since the individual is an exhaustee for TEUC qualifying purposes.
b.
With respect to an individual withdrawing from a SEA program solely to qualify for TEUC: The same terms and conditions that apply to regular compensation apply to the payment of TEUC. Therefore, if an individual leaves the SEA program by abandoning self-employment, the state, to determine TEUC eligibility, will need to determine whether the individual meets state law eligibility requirements for regular compensation. Under state law it may be, for example, that the leaving of the self-employment (especially if the only reason given is to collect TEUC) itself is cause for ineligibility.
c.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Additionally, TRA does not reduce TEUC entitlement as section 233(d) of the Trade Act only relates to a reduction of Federal-State Extended Benefits (EB) entitlement, not TEUC.
k.
l.
m.
n.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
(1)
(2)
(3)
a.
b.
c.
With respect to an individual filing from an agent state that is not in a regular EB period, that individual is an exhaustee for TEUC purposes after the two weeks of EB are paid. If the individual relocates to a state (agent or liable) that is in a regular EB period and EB is again payable, the individual ceases to be an exhaustee for TEUC purposes.
a.
a.
a.
a.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Direct final rule.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its rules to clarify when and how licensees and other members of the public may use electronic means such as CD-ROM and e-mail to communicate with the agency. These amendments are necessary to implement the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA). At the same time that the NRC is amending its rules, it is also making available for comment, guidance on how to submit documents to the agency electronically. When this direct final rule becomes effective, this new guidance document, which is appended to this rule, will supersede earlier guidance on electronic submissions.
The final rule will become effective on December 5, 2002, unless significant adverse comments on the amendments are received by October 21, 2002. If the rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely notice will be published in the
Mail written comments to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
Comments may also be submitted via the NRC's interactive rulemaking Web site at
Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), One White Flint North, First Floor, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, or by contacting the PDR by phone at (301) 415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209. Comments received may also be viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking Web site. Comments will also be available electronically for public inspection in the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) Library component of the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC's Web site at
The public meeting will be held in the auditorium at NRC Headquarters, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville, MD, beginning at 8:30 a.m. and ending about 12:30 p.m.
John A. Skoczlas, (301) 415-7186,
This rulemaking has the simple aim of conforming the NRC's regulations to the GPEA by removing from the regulations language that states or suggests an unnecessary prohibition of electronic submission of documents to the agency. Because the NRC believes that this action should not cause controversy, the NRC is using the direct final rule process for this rule. The amendments in this rule will become effective on December 5, 2002. However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments on this direct final rule by October 21, 2002, the NRC will publish a document that withdraws this action. In that event, the comments received in response to these amendments would then be considered as comments on the companion proposed rule published elsewhere in this
Title XVII of Pub. L. 105-277, the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999, enacted October 21, 1998, contains provisions known as the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), sections 1701
Well before the passage of the GPEA, the NRC had taken major steps to increase the use of electronic communication. For example, many of the agency's regulations on recordkeeping have long permitted storage in electronic format. After the GPEA became law, the NRC moved quickly to meet the Act's requirements. In June 1999, the agency began testing a system that permitted holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors and the vendors that supplied them to make electronic submissions to the agency in a secure manner. On several occasions, the NRC held public meetings with licensees, vendors, and others to describe and demonstrate its Electronic Information Exchange (EIE) capability.
As a result of this pilot program, on January 26, 2001, the NRC issued Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) 2001-05, “Guidance on Submitting Documents to the NRC by Electronic Information Exchange or on CD-ROM,” which informs all part 50 applicants and licensees that they have the option of submitting documents to the NRC over the Internet by the EIE process or on CD-ROM under procedures spelled
This rulemaking expands participation in electronic submissions by affording all licensees, vendors, applicants, and members of the public the option, where practicable, of submitting documents to the NRC in an electronic format, for example on CD-ROM, by e-mail, or through a special Web-based interface such as the NRC's Electronic Information Exchange. Electronic submission of documents to the NRC remains strictly voluntary; paper documents remain an acceptable form of submission.
Under the amendments in this rule, when an electronic submission is made in a medium other than CD-ROM, only one copy need be submitted to meet the requirements of the regulations, and no paper copy need accompany the electronic submission. However, the amendments in this rule will continue to require multiple copies of paper submissions. Moreover, if a person chooses to submit electronically a document on CD-ROM, the person must submit the same number of CD-ROMs as the number of paper copies required by the regulations, and the CD-ROMs should be accompanied by one signed paper copy.
The guidance that is appended to this rule indicates that a signed paper copy must be included with documents submitted on CD-ROM to avoid sharp increases in NRC's reproduction costs. Large documents submitted on CD-ROM typically contain engineering drawings, other graphics, and color, often intermixed with text. Some of the material is oversized and cannot be viewed easily on standard-sized monitors. Moreover, NRC's experience in using existing technology to produce paper copies of CD-ROMs has proven to be labor intensive and cost prohibitive. Individual files on the CD must be identified as to type, printed out on the printers appropriate to each type—for example, oversize engineering drawings must be printed on specialized equipment—and then reassembled into one correctly ordered document. Until there is technology that allows the NRC staff to produce paper copies of CDs on a single machine, or view drawings on a large enough screen, it is not practicable for the staff to eliminate the need for a paper copy of submissions on CD-ROM. The paper copy allows the NRC to rapidly produce the number of copies sufficient to conduct its business and to make the document available to the public. The NRC believes that having the submitter supply a paper copy is cost effective because a paper copy can be generated at minimal expense when the document is created, but the paper copy can be generated only at considerable expense when it is produced from another medium through a conversion process. This slight increase in costs for the submitter is at least partially offset by avoiding the increase in the NRC's overhead costs, and thus in the fees charged to licensees and applicants, that would result if the NRC produced paper copies from CD-ROM.
Documents submitted via EIE, without special attributes such as 3D images, do not pose the same printing concerns. Thus, paper copies are not required for these documents.
Documents with special attributes, may be submitted on paper or CD-ROM (with a paper copy) but may not be submitted via EIE. See the guidance document, presented as an appendix to this direct final rule for details.
In considering the question of whether a CD-ROM must be accompanied by a paper copy, we have encountered the first of several questions about what is “practicable” to do electronically. The GPEA requires that agencies accept electronic submissions only when it is “practicable” to do so, but the statute does not define the term “practicable.” However, the term tends to acquire meaning in concrete circumstances, in, for example, considering whether the state of technology enables us to dispense entirely with paper copies of applications. The NRC has also had to consider, among other questions, to what extent sensitive information could be protected in electronic submissions, whether such submissions could serve the needs of immediate notification, and whether the agency was prepared to make all of its outgoing communications electronic. In each of these cases, as will be discussed further below, the agency has concluded that electronic submissions are not yet always “practicable,” because use of electronic submission in these other situations can entail disproportionate costs in time, labor, and other resources, and sometimes can even delay doing something that needs to be done quickly. If one aim of the GPEA is to reduce the cost of government, then, when the use of electronic forms of submission adds to that cost, the use of those processes are, at least for the time being, not “practicable.”
What is practicable in a given situation can change quickly because the underlying technology changes quickly. Under these continually changing circumstances, the NRC does not want to write certain technologies into its regulations. Therefore, the technologically driven details of how to make electronic submissions to the NRC are laid out in the guidance document that is appended to this rule for public comment. The guidance document will be updated as necessary to reflect new technology and agency experience. The guidance discusses, among other topics, the formats the NRC is prepared to accept, the use of electronic signatures, and the treatment of nonpublic information. Most of the amendments made by this rule take the limited approach of letting readers of the regulations know that the option of electronic submission is available in many cases, and that readers should consult the agency's guidance on electronic submissions.
When this direct final rule takes effect, the new guidance document will supersede both of the existing guidance documents on electronic submissions—the Regulatory Issue Summary 2001-05, which was directed toward Part 50 applicants and licensees, and the August 10, 2001, letter, which was directed toward certain fuel cycle facilities.
Few of the NRC's regulations on communications explicitly rule out electronic communications. Thus it has not proven difficult to remove regulatory text that impedes electronic communications in circumstances where electronic communications would be practicable. In searching our regulations, we found only one regulation—§ 50.4(c)—that explicitly requires submission of paper. Many of our regulations require written, or written and signed, communications. These requirements need not be changed because electronic communications certainly are “written” and we have in place technology for electronic signatures.
We have not had to propose amendments to our regulations on maintenance of records. A great many of these already explicitly permit the use of electronic means to maintain records, and those that do not explicitly permit
Thus, our amendments are confined largely to regulations that imply that electronic means of communication are prohibited. The typical regulation of this sort says that communications under a certain part of our regulations must be by mail or delivery in person. By appearing to be exhaustive, the regulation may be read to imply that electronic communication is prohibited. We have amended almost all of these or similar provisions, leaving in place only those regulations that dictate telephonic or similar communications when circumstances demand, as, for example, when a licensee must notify the agency immediately of a radiological overexposure or an accidental release of radioactive material.
These amendments and the guidance document appended to this direct final rule do not address the submission of documents in hearings under the NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 2 and other parts that govern hearings. The use of electronic submissions in Federal litigation is being widely discussed, and this rulemaking is not intended to resolve issues of when and how to use electronic submissions during hearings. Separate rules or guidance addressing procedures for electronic communications in hearings will be issued in the future for public comment, but it should be noted that the document format standards outlined in the attached guidance document subsequently may be determined to apply to documents submitted to agency adjudicatory dockets. It is conceivable that, as a result of a future rulemaking proceeding, the current format requirements in 10 CFR part 2, subpart J, for example, could be superseded by the document format standards presented in this guidance document. Accordingly, interested parties should consider the impact the approach outlined in this guidance could have on their preparation of materials for future submission. For at least the near future, parties in hearings must follow the requirements presiding officers establish for submissions.
This direct final rule applies only to communications from licensees, applicants, vendors who are required to submit documents to the NRC, external entities (Federal, state and local governments) and other members of the public to the NRC, but the GPEA is usually read to apply also to communications from Federal agencies to the public. Though the NRC is working to comply with this aspect of the GPEA also, it is not yet practicable for the agency to send all of its communications to licensees and other members of the public by means of electronic submissions. Moreover, the agency must take into account that not all persons who are interested in its work have access to electronic communication. Nonetheless, the NRC posts a large amount of information on its external Web site, including significant agency communications, and makes the information publicly available via ADAMS.
Well over 100 of our regulations are being amended by this direct final rule. However, we are making only a very few kinds of changes, and so an analysis of each and every amended section would be highly repetitious and, more important, would obscure the aims and forms of the amendments. Therefore, rather than describe each amended section, we will describe only the few kinds of changes we are making and why we are making them.
Many of the kinds of changes are adequately represented by the proposed changes to sections of part 30.
(1) The changes to § 30.6, “Communications,” are examples of the most important kind of amendment in this rule. Section 30.6 and its analogues in other parts of the NRC's regulations have typically said that communications are to be mailed or delivered by hand to the agency or one of its regional offices. The amended section makes clear that the current list of options is not exhaustive, and that electronic communications are permitted where “practicable.” The amendment refers readers to guidance for answers to questions about what is practicable and how electronic submissions are to be made. The NRC has developed a guidance document that provides specific information concerning electronic submissions. This guidance document appears as an appendix to this direct final rule. Please note that the guidance document will not be codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.
A variation on § 30.6 requires that paper submissions be on a “page-replacement” basis or that an envelope be marked a certain way. See, for example, § 72.70(c) and § 9.67. We have also amended these regulations to make clear that an electronic option is available on a full replacement basis.
The amendment of § 30.6 illustrates a general principle we have followed throughout the amendments, namely, that the amended regulations should contain no less information than the previous regulations. We had considered saving time and reducing printed regulatory text by leaving existing communications regulations unchanged and simply adding to Chapter I of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations a single new regulation on communications, applicable to communications under every part of the NRC's regulations. This regulation would have said that, with certain exceptions, the electronic option was available, notwithstanding what any other NRC communications regulation said. However, regulations on communications then would have contradicted each other, and readers of one of the other parts could have been misled by the part they were reading into thinking that communications had to be by mail or delivery in person. Thus, to avoid inconsistencies and to ensure that the new regulations contain as much information as the old ones, we have revised any section that, because it mentioned only one or two options for communications, implied that the electronic option was ruled out. Thus, we have been led to amend § 30.6 in several places.
(2) The amendments to § 30.50(c), “Reporting requirements,” and § 30.55 (c), “Tritium reports,” are instances of a second major class of amendment in this direct final rule. The sections amended by this class typically required two or three kinds of notification to the NRC—a more or less immediate notification by phone or sometimes telefax or telegram of an incident, a pending shipment, or other time-sensitive matter; then a followup report several hours later, again by phone, telefax, or telegram; and finally, several days later, a written report to the appropriate office director. Section 30.50 requires all three kinds of reports. Generally speaking, we have not added an electronic option for the first two kinds of reports, because the aims of these required reports are best served by consistently stable, rapid, and fully interactive means of communications. Electronic Information Exchange communications may not yet consistently meet these needs. E-mail delivery times, for example, can still be measured in days sometimes, and even “instant messaging” does not always permit the same facility of information exchange and discussion that the telephone permits. Thus, we have concluded that, at the present time, electronic communication of short-term reports is not yet “practicable.” We will revisit these requirements as the technology advances. Nonetheless, the amendments in this direct final rule add the electronic option for communicating
(3) The amendment to § 30.7(e)(3) is an example of a third class of amendment that is less important than the two that have already been discussed. Several regulations require that a licensee or applicant acquire a copy of an NRC form, either for posting at the licensee's facility (as in the case of § 30.7), for filling out and sending to the NRC to apply for a license, or to meet a reporting requirement. These regulations typically say that the form may be acquired by writing to a certain address or by calling a certain number. The amendments to these sections add that the forms may be acquired by visiting the NRC's Web site.
In addition, we have also reduced copy requirements throughout the regulations. For example, § 51.66 previously required submittal of 25 copies of the Environmental Report and retention of an additional 125 copies for later distribution. The submittal requirement is now being reduced to 5 copies, and instead of being required to retain copies, an applicant will be required to maintain the capability to generate additional copies as directed.
The rule text also makes a number of other minor, administrative changes, such as changes in phone numbers and street and e-mail addresses.
The Presidential Memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled, “Plain Language in Government Writing,” directed that the Government's writing be in plain language. The NRC requests comments on this direct final rule specifically with respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the language used. Comments should be sent to the address listed under the heading
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless using such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this direct final rule, the NRC is not adopting any technical standard. It is simply helping to ensure, through a rulemaking, that the agency will be in timely compliance with the requirement in the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, Pub. L. 105-277, that Federal agencies allow electronic submissions of information where practicable. Thus, no showing of compliance with the NTTAA is necessary here.
The NRC has determined that this direct final rule is the type of action described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(2), because this action seeks non-policy, procedural changes to the NRC's regulations. Moreover, because of the broad nature of this action and the number of the NRC's regulations affected, several other categorical exclusions apply to this rule, including 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1), and (3)(i)-(iii). Also, 10 CFR 51.22(c)(16) applies to the guidance being issued in connection with this rule, and to the rule itself. Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been prepared for these changes to the regulations. Because of its procedural nature, this action does not raise environmental justice concerns.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that, because this direct final rule provides the option of collecting information by use of electronic means, but does not amend the existing information collections to which the rule pertains, OMB's review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 and following) are not required.
A regulatory analysis has not been prepared for this rulemaking. The amendments below will neither impose nor relax new safety requirements and, thus, do not call for the sort of safety/cost analysis described in the agency's regulatory analysis guidelines in NUREG/BR-0058. Moreover, the NRC is required by the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, Pub. L. 105-277 (44 U.S.C. 3505, note), to allow electronic submissions where practicable, and the direct final rule does simply that. Thus, an analysis of costs and benefits could not alter a decision to implement the policy embodied in this rule. However, the NRC believes that the rule will afford all persons who deal with the agency greater flexibility in choosing the format of many of their communications and, thus, will allow them to choose less costly alternatives, often reducing the current costs of their communications with the NRC.
In accordance with Section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Title 5, Chapter 6 of the U.S. Code), the Commission certifies that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, in accordance with Section 605(b), the NRC is not preparing a regulatory flexibility analysis. The rule will in fact apply to the many small entities that are among the NRC's licensees, but it will impose no new burdens on those small entities. To the contrary, as noted in the regulatory analysis section of this notice, the agency's expectation is that the rule should reduce burdens.
The NRC invites comment on this certification. The agency is also providing the certification to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA, in accordance with Section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The NRC has determined that a backfit analysis is not required for this direct final rule because these amendments do not include any provisions that would require backfits as defined in 10 CFR Chapter I. Furthermore, this rule is necessary so that the NRC can respond adequately to the mandate in the Government Paperwork Elimination Act of 1998 that Federal agencies “provide for the option of the electronic maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information, when practicable as a substitute for paper * * * ” (Pub. L. 105-277, Sec. 1704). Therefore, a backfit analysis has not been prepared for this direct final rule.
The provisions of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801
Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalties, Sex discrimination, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste treatment and disposal.
Administrative practice and procedure, Blind, Buildings, Civil rights, Employment, Equal employment opportunity, Federal aid programs, Grant programs, Handicapped, Loan programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sex discrimination.
Criminal penalties, Freedom of information, Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sunshine Act.
Hazardous materials—transportation, Investigations, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Special nuclear material.
Administrative practice and procedure, Debt collection.
Criminal penalties, Environmental protection, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sex discrimination.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Licensed material, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Occupational safety and health, Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste treatment and disposal.
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Classified information, Criminal penalties, Investigations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Government contracts, Intergovernmental relations, Isotopes, Nuclear materials, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Labeling, Nuclear materials, Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Labeling, Nuclear materials, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Criminal penalties, Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Radiography, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Drugs, Health facilities, Health professions, Medical devices, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Nuclear material, Oil and gas exploration—well logging, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures, Source material, Special nuclear material.
Criminal penalties, Government contracts, Hazardous materials transportation, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Source material, Uranium.
Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Fire protection, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact statement, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Backfitting, Combined license, Early site permit, Emergency planning, Fees, Inspection, Limited work authorization, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Probabilistic risk assessment, Prototype, Reactor siting criteria, Redress of site, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Standard design, Standard design certification.
Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Criminal penalties, High-level waste, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
Criminal penalties, Low-level waste, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
Administrative practice and procedure, Denial of access, Emergency access to low-level waste disposal, Low-level radioactive waste, Low-level radioactive waste treatment and disposal, Low-level waste policy amendments act of 1985, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Criminal penalties, High-level waste, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
Criminal penalties, Hazardous materials transportation, Material control and accounting, Nuclear materials, Packaging and containers, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment, Security measures, Special nuclear material.
Criminal penalties, Hazardous materials transportation, Nuclear materials, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Administrative practice and procedure, Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing.
Criminal penalties, Export, Hazardous materials transportation, Import, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
Accounting, Criminal penalties, Hazardous materials transportation,
Criminal penalties, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
Certification, Criminal penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and record keeping requirements, Security measures, Special nuclear material, Uranium enrichment by gaseous diffusion.
Administrative practice and procedure, Inventions and patents.
Classified information, Criminal penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reactor siting criteria.
Administrative practice and procedure, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Export, Import, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scientific equipment.
Criminal penalties, Extraordinary nuclear occurrence, Insurance, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Criminal penalties, Hazardous materials transportation, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Source material, Special nuclear material.
Byproduct material, Import and export licenses, Intergovernmental relations, Non-payment penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear material.
Annual charges, Byproduct material, Holders of certificates, registrations, approvals, Intergovernmental relations, Nonpayment penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear material.
Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L. 87-615, 76 Stat. 409 (42 U.S.C. 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552; sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 105, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 114(f); Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2213, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10143(f)); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.C. 5871). Section 2.102, 2.103, 2.104, 2.105, 2.721 also issued under secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 183i, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2233, 2239). Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Sections 2.200-2.206 also issued under secs. 161 b, i, o, 182, 186, 234, 68 Stat. 948-951, 955, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201 (b), (i), (o), 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88 Stat 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Section 2.205(j) also issued under Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 90, as amended by section 3100(s), Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321-373 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note). Section 2.600-2.606 also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332). Section 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 554. Sections 2.754, 2.760, 2.770, 2.780 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557. Section 2.764 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 2.790 also issued under sec. 103, 68 Stat. 936, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133) and 5 U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553, Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553, and sec. 29, Pub. L. 85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2039). Subpart K also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Subpart L also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Subpart M also issued under sec. 184 (42 U.S.C. 2234) and sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Appendix A also issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91-560, 84 Stat. 1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135).
(a) * * * Requests must be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission and must be filed either by hand delivery to the NRC's Offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; by mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; or by electronic submission, for example, via facsimile, Electronic Information Exchange, e-mail, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) Any interested person may petition the Commission to issue, amend or rescind any regulation. The petition should be addressed to the Secretary, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and sent either by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by facsimile; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, e-mail, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) * * * A prospective petitioner also may telephone the Rules and Directives Branch on (301) 415-7163, or toll free on (800) 368-5642, or e-mail to
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Subpart A also issued under secs. 602-605, Pub. L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 252, 253 (42 U.S.C. 2000d-1-2000d-4); sec. 401, 88 Stat. 1254 (42 U.S.C. 5891).
Subpart B also issued under sec. 504, Pub. L. 93-112, 87 Stat. 394 (29 U.S.C. 706); sec. 119, Pub. L. 95-602, 92 Stat. 2984 (29 U.S.C. 794); sec. 122, Pub. L. 95-602, 92 Stat. 2984 (29 U.S.C. 706(6)).
Subpart C also issued under Title III of Pub. L. 94-135, 89 Stat. 728, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6101).
Subpart E also issued under 29 U.S.C. 794.
5. Section 4.5 is revised to read as follows:
Except as otherwise indicated, communications and reports relating to this part may be sent to the NRC by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(c) The Civil Rights Program Manager, Office of Small Business and Civil Rights, shall be responsible for coordinating implementation of this section. Complaints should be sent to the NRC using an appropriate method listed in § 4.5.
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552; 31 U.S.C. 9701; Pub. L. 99-570.
Subpart B is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a.
Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552b.
Except as otherwise indicated, communications relating to this part may be sent to the NRC by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission via e-mail to the FOIA e-mail address. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) A person may request agency records by submitting a request authorized by 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(3) to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. The request should be clearly marked “Freedom of Information Act Request.” * * *
(a) * * * For agency records denied by an Office Director reporting to the Executive Director for Operations, the appeal should be addressed to the Executive Director for Operations and sent using an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. * * * The appeal should be clearly marked “Appeal from Initial FOIA Decision.” * * *
(a) * * *
(2) Each request for a waiver or reduction of fees should be addressed to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, and sent using an appropriate method listed in § 9.6.
(a) Requests may be made in person or in writing. Assistance regarding requests or other matters relating to the Privacy Act of 1974 may be obtained by writing to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. Requests relating to records in multiple systems of records should be made to the same Officer. That Officer shall assist the requestor in identifying his request more precisely and shall be responsible for forwarding the request to the appropriate system manager.
(b) All written requests must be made to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6, and should be clearly marked “Privacy Act Request,” “Privacy Act Disclosure Accounting Request,” or “Privacy Act Correction Request,” as appropriate. * * *
(b) * * * For agency records denied by the Assistant Inspector General for Investigations, the appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Inspector General, and sent by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. * * * The appeal should be clearly marked “Privacy Act Appeal—Denial of Access.” * * *
(b) * * * The appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, and sent by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6, for submission to the appropriate appellate authority for a final determination. The appeal should be clearly marked “Privacy Act Correction Appeal.” * * *
(a) * * * “Statements of Disagreement” must be addressed, as appropriate, to the Inspector General or the Executive Director for Operations, and sent by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. They should also be clearly marked “Privacy Act Statement of Disagreement.”
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 11.15(e) also issued under sec. 501, 85 Stat. 290 (31 U.S.C. 483a).
(a)(1) Application for special nuclear material access authorization, renewal, or change in level must be filed by the licensee on behalf of the applicant with the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T7-D57, either by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 161, 186, 68 Stat. 948, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2236); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1, Pub. L. 97-258, 96 Stat. 972 (31 U.S.C. 3713); sec. 5, Pub. L. 89-508, 80 Stat. 308, as amended (31 U.S.C. 3716); Pub. L. 97-365, 96 Stat. 1749 (31 U.S.C. 3719); Federal Claims Collection Standards, 31 CFR Chapter IX, parts 900-904; 31 U.S.C. 3701, 3716; 31 CFR part 285; 26 U.S.C. 6402(d); 31 U.S.C. 3720A; 26 U.S.C. 6402(c); 42 U.S.C. 664; Pub. L. 104-134, as amended (31 U.S.C. 3713); 5 U.S.C. 5514; Executive Order 12146 (3 CFR 1980 Comp. pp. 409-412); Executive Order 12988 (3 CFR, 1996 Comp., pp. 157-163).
Unless otherwise specified, communications concerning the regulations in this part may be addressed to the Secretary of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, One White Flint North, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 53, 63, 81, 103, 104, 161, 186, 68 Stat. 930, 933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2236, 2282, 2297f); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(c) * * *
(2) Additional copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a) * * * The complainant may obtain review of this determination by submitting a written statement of position to the Executive Director for Operations, either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 53, 63, 65, 81, 103, 104, 161, 182, 186, 68 Stat. 930, 933, 935, 936, 937, 948, 953, 955, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232, 2236, 2297f), secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Unless otherwise specified, communications or reports concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO), and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(d) All licensees, other than those holding an operating license for a nuclear power plant, who make reports under paragraph (a) of this section shall submit the report in writing either by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(c) The licensee shall file the report required by § 20.2206(b), covering the preceding year, on or before April 30 of each year. The licensee shall submit the report to the REIRS Project Manager by an appropriate method listed in § 20.1007.
NRC Forms 540, 540A, 541, 541A, 542 and 542A, and the accompanying instructions, in hard copy, may be obtained by writing or calling the Publishing Services Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-5877, or by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2282, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 21.2 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161).
Except where otherwise specified in this part, written communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part must be addressed to the NRC's Document Control Desk, and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 145, 161, 68 Stat. 942, 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2165, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); E.O. 10865, as amended, 3 CFR 1959—1963 Comp., p. 398 (50 U.S.C. 401, note); E.O. 12829, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 570; E.O. 12958, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 333; E.O. 12968, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 396.
Appendix A also issued under 96 Stat. 1051 (31 U.S.C. 9701).
Except where otherwise specified, communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the Director, Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T7-D57, and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 81, 82, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2112, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); secs. 201 as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 30.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 30.34(b) also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 30.61 also issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).
(a) * * *
(1) By mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
(2) By hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
(3) Where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) The Commission has delegated to the four Regional Administrators licensing authority for selected parts of its decentralized licensing program for nuclear materials as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Any communication, report, or application covered under this licensing program must be submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator. The Administrators' jurisdictions and mailing addresses are listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(2) * * *
(i) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, Nuclear Material Section B, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(ii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, Material Licensing/Inspection Branch, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85, Atlanta, GA 30303; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, Material Licensing Section, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iv) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV, Material Radiation Protection Section, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(e) * * *
Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(c) * * *
(2) * * * These written reports must be sent to the NRC using an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a); and a copy must be sent to the appropriate NRC Regional office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter. * * *
(c) * * * Copies of such written report shall be sent to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a). * * *
Secs. 81, 161, 183, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201, 2233); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended,1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(c) * * *
(8) * * *
(ii) Shall, within 30 days after the transfer of a device to a specific licensee or export, furnish a report to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, ATTN: GLTS, using an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter. The report must contain—
(9) * * *
(i) * * * Within 30 days of the transfer, the transferor shall report to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, ATTN: GLTS, using an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter—
(11) * * * If the general licensee cannot provide the requested information within the allotted time, it shall, within that same time period, request a longer period to supply the information by providing the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, a written justification for the request.
(b) * * *
(1) Has filed NRC Form 483, “Registration Certificate—In Vitro Testing with Byproduct Material Under General License,” with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a), and has received from the Commission a validated copy of NRC Form 483 with a registration number assigned; or
Secs. 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(a) Each person licensed under § 32.11 shall maintain records of transfer of material and file a report with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter. A copy of the report must be sent to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter.
(a) Each person licensed under § 32.14 or § 32.17 shall maintain records of transfer of material and file a report with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter.
(b) The licensee shall file a summary report stating the total quantity of each isotope transferred under the specific license with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter.
(c) Maintain records and file reports with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a), with copies to the appropriate NRC Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter.
(a) The person shall report to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, ATTN: GLTS, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a), all transfers of such devices to persons for use under the general license in
Each person licensed under § 32.53 shall file an annual report with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, which report must state the total quantity of tritium or promethium-147 transferred to persons generally licensed under § 31.7 of this chapter. * * *
(b) The request for review must be sent to the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Materials Safety and Inspection Branch, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter.
Secs. 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841). Section 34.45 also issued under sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(d) * * * A report must be filed with the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, the report to be filed within 5 days of any test with results that exceed the threshold in this subsection, and to describe the equipment involved, the test results, and the corrective action taken. * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * * (An independent organization that would like to be recognized as a certifying entity shall submit its request to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter.) or
(a) In addition to the reporting requirements specified in § 30.50 and under other sections of this chapter, such as § 21.21, each licensee shall send a written report to the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, with a copy to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, within 30 days of the occurrence of any of the following incidents involving radiographic equipment:
Secs. 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(b) A licensee shall notify the Commission no later than 30 days after:
(c) The licensee shall send the documents required in this section to the appropriate address identified in § 30.6 of this chapter.
(e) * * *
(2) File a report within five days of the leakage test with the appropriate NRC Office listed in § 30.6 of this chapter, with a copy to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6 of this chapter, describing the equipment involved, the test results, and the action taken.
Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 82, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(a) The licensee shall immediately notify the appropriate NRC Regional Office by telephone and subsequently, within 30 days, by confirmation in writing, using an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, if the licensee knows or has reason to believe that a sealed source has been ruptured. The written confirmation must designate the well or other location, describe the magnitude and extent of the escape of licensed materials, assess the consequences of the rupture, and explain efforts planned or being taken to mitigate these consequences.
Secs. 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat. 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub. L. 95-604, 92 Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2014(e)(2), 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095, 2111, 2113, 2114, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C. 2021); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 275, 92 Stat. 3021, as amended by Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2067 (42 U.S.C. 2022); sec. 193, 104 Stat. 2835, as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 40.46
(a) * * *
(1) By mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
(2) By hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
(3) Where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) The Commission has delegated to the four Regional Administrators licensing authority for selected parts of its decentralized licensing program for nuclear materials as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Any communication, report, or application covered under this licensing program must be submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator. The administrators' jurisdictions and mailing addresses are listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(2) * * *
(i) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(ii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II Material Licensing/Inspection Branch, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85, Atlanta, Georgia 30303; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, Material Licensing Section, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iv) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV, Material Radiation Protection Section, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(e) * * *
(3) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(b)(1) Persons generally licensed under paragraph (a) of this section, who plan to carry a transient shipment with scheduled stops at a United States port, shall notify the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 40.5. * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Persons who receive, acquire, possess, or use depleted uranium pursuant to the general license established by paragraph (a) of this section shall file NRC Form 244, “Registration Certificate—Use of Depleted Uranium Under General License,” with the Director of the NRC's Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, by an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Administrator. * * *
(e)(1) Report to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, all transfers of industrial products or devices to persons for use under the general license in § 40.25. * * *
(f) * * * The licensee shall furnish the change to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, and to affected offsite response organizations, within six months after the change is made. * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * * These written reports must be sent to the NRC's Document Control Desk by an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, with a copy to the appropriate NRC regional office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter. * * *
(a) * * * Copies of the instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(b) * * * Copies of the reporting instructions may be obtained either by writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(c) * * * The initial report must be followed within a period of fifteen (15) days by a written report submitted to the appropriate NRC Regional Office, using an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, which report must set forth the details of the incident and its consequences. A copy of such written report must be sent to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Within 60 days after January 1, 1976 and July 1, 1976, and within 60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year thereafter, submit a report to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 40.5, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter; which report must specify the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and in gaseous effluents during the previous six months of operation, and such other information as the Commission may require to estimate maximum potential annual radiation doses to the public resulting from effluent releases. * * *
(a) Each licensee authorized to export natural uranium, other than in the form of ore or ore residue, in amounts exceeding 500 kilograms, shall notify the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 40.5. * * *
(a) Each licensee authorized to import natural uranium, other than in the form of ore or ore residue, in amounts exceeding 500 kilograms, from countries not party to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (see Appendix F to Part 73 of this chapter) shall notify the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 40.5. * * *
Secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 50.10 also issued under secs. 101, 185, 68 Stat. 955 as amended (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235), sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, 50.54(dd), and 50.103 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat. 939, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23, 50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued under sec. 185, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2235). Sections 50.33a, 50.55a and appendix Q also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 and 50.54 also issued under sec. 204, 88 Stat. 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5844). Sections 50.58, 50.91, and 50.92 also issued under Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Sections 50.80-50.81 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Appendix F also issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C 2237).
(a)
(b)
(1)
(2)
(i) Applications for licenses for facilities described in § 50.21 (a) and (c) and amendments to these applications must be sent to the NRC's Document Control Desk, with a copy to the appropriate Regional Office. If the application or amendment is on paper, the submission to the Document Control Desk must be the signed original.
(ii) Applications for permits and licenses for facilities described in § 50.21(b) or § 50.22, and amendments to these applications must be sent to the NRC's Document Control Desk, with a copy to the appropriate Regional Office, and a copy to the appropriate NRC Resident Inspector, if one has been assigned to the site of the facility. If the application or amendment is on paper or CD-ROM, the submission to the Document Control Desk must be 38 copies, one of which must be the signed original if the submission is on paper.
(3)
(4)
(i) Physical security plan under § 50.34;
(ii) Safeguards contingency plan under § 50.34;
(iii) Change to security plan, guard training and qualification plan, or safeguards contingency plan made without prior Commission approval under § 50.54(p);
(iv) Application for amendment of physical security plan, guard training and qualification plan, or safeguards contingency plan under § 50.90.
(5)
(i) Emergency plan under § 50.34;
(ii) Change to an emergency plan under § 50.54(q);
(iii) Emergency implementing procedures under Appendix E.V of this part.
(6)
(7)
(ii) A change to an NRC-accepted quality assurance topical report from nonlicensees (
(8)
(9)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(e) * * *
(2) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a) * * *
(2) The applicant shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies of the general information and the safety analysis report, or part thereof or amendment thereto, for subsequent distribution in accordance with the written instructions of the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, or the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate.
(s)(1) * * * These plans (10 copies if on paper or CD-ROM) must be forwarded to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation with a copy (3 copies if on paper or CD-ROM) to the Administrator of the appropriate NRC regional office. * * *
(e) * * *
(6) * * *
(ii) Written notification submitted to the Document Control Desk, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, by an appropriate method listed in § 50.4, with a copy to the appropriate Regional Administrator at the address specified in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter and a copy to the appropriate NRC resident inspector within 30 days following receipt of information by the director or responsible corporate officer under paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this section, on the identification of a defect or failure to comply.
Each licensee shall notify the appropriate Regional Administrator as listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter within 30 days of the following in regard to a licensed operator or senior operator:
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953, (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Subpart A also issued under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, secs. 102, 104, 105, 83 Stat. 853-854, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); and Pub. L. 95-604, Title II, 92 Stat. 3033-3041; and sec. 193, Pub. L. 101-575, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S.C. 2243). Sections 51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80. and 51.97 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241, and sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-223 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161, 10168). Section 51.22 also issued under sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688, as amended by 92 Stat. 3036-3038 (42 U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, sec 121, 96 Stat. 2228 (42 U.S.C. 10141). Sections 51.43, 51.67, and 51.109 also under Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, sec 114(f), 96 Stat. 2216, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)).
(c) Questions concerning environmental matters should be addressed to the following NRC staff offices as appropriate:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(a) Each applicant for a license to construct and operate a production or utilization facility covered by paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(4) of § 51.20, each applicant for renewal of an operating license for a nuclear power plant, each applicant for a license amendment authorizing the decommissioning of a production or utilization facility covered by § 51.20, and each applicant for a license or license amendment to store spent fuel at a nuclear power plant after expiration of the operating license for the nuclear power plant shall submit 41 copies to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, or 5 copies to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate, of an environmental report or any supplement to an environmental report. These reports must be sent either by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between the hours of 8:15 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) Each applicant for a license to manufacture a nuclear power reactor, or
(a) Each applicant for a license or other form of permission, or an amendment to or renewal of a license or other form of permission issued pursuant to Parts 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 61, 70 and/or 72 of this chapter, and covered by paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of § 51.60; or by § 51.61 or § 51.62 shall submit to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards an environmental report or any supplement to an environmental report in the number of copies specified in the manner specified in § 51.55(a). The applicant shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies of the environmental report or any supplement to the environmental report for subsequent distribution to Federal, State, and local officials and any affected Indian tribes in accordance with written instructions issued by the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
(b)
Individuals or organizations desiring information on the NRC's NEPA process or on the status of specific NEPA actions should address inquiries to:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, 1244, 1246, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
A. Tier 1, Tier 2, and the generic technical specifications in the U.S. ABWR Design Control Document, GE Nuclear Energy, Revision 4 dated March 1997, are approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies of the generic DCD may be obtained from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, Web site at
A. Tier 1, Tier 2, and the generic technical specifications in the System 80+ Design Control Document, ABB-CE, with revisions dated January 1997, are approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies
A. * * * A copy of the generic DCD is available for examination and copying at the NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, telephone (301) 415-4737, e-mail
Secs. 107, 161, 182, 68 Stat. 939, 948, 953, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2137, 2201, 2232, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 55.41, 55.43, 55.45, and 55.59 also issued under sec. 306, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2262 (42 U.S.C. 10226). Section 55.61 also issued under secs. 186, 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2237).
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) By delivery in person to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, or
(3) Where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) * * *
(2) Any application for a license or license renewal filed under the regulations in this part involving a nuclear power reactor licensed under 10 CFR Part 50 and any related inquiry, communication, information, or report must be submitted to the Regional Administrator by an appropriate method listed in paragraph (a) of this section. The Regional Administrator or the Administrator's designee will transmit to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation any matter that is not within the scope of the Regional Administrator's delegated authority.
(i) If the nuclear power reactor is located in Region I, submissions must be made to the Regional Administrator of Region I. Submissions by mail or hand delivery must be addressed to the Administrator at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(ii) If the nuclear power reactor is located in Region II, submissions must be made to the Regional Administrator of Region II. Submissions by mail or hand delivery must be addressed to the Administrator at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Atlanta Federal Center, Suite 23T85, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iii) If the nuclear power reactor is located in Region III, submissions must be made to the Regional Administrator of Region III. Submissions by mail or hand delivery must be addressed to the Administrator at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iv) If the nuclear power reactor is located in Region IV, submissions must be made to the Regional Administrator of Region IV. Submissions by mail or hand delivery must be addressed to the Administrator at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000, Arlington, Texas 76011; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(3)(i) Any application for a license or license renewal filed under the regulations in this part involving a test and research reactor facility licensed under 10 CFR Part 50 and any related inquiry, communication, information, or report must be submitted to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs at the NRC's headquarters, by an appropriate method listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
(ii) For all test and research reactor facilities located in the NRC's
Regions, submissions must be made to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Director of the Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs at the NRC's headquarters, by an appropriate method listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
To certify the medical fitness of the applicant, an authorized representative of the facility licensee shall complete and sign NRC Form 396, “Certification of Medical Examination by Facility Licensee,” which can be obtained by writing the Publishing Services Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by calling the Branch at (301) 415-5877, or by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) * * *
(1) Complete NRC Form 398, “Personal Qualification Statement—Licensee,” which can be obtained by writing the Publishing Services Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by calling the Branch at (301) 415-5877, or by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 51, 53, 62, 63, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); secs. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5842, 5846); secs. 10 and 14, Pub. L. 95-601, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 2021a and 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 114, 121, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2213g, 2228, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134, 10141), and Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(a) Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk: Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(e) * * *
(2) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a) An application for a license to receive and possess source, special nuclear, or byproduct material at a geologic repository operations area at a site which has been characterized, and any amendments thereto, and an accompanying environmental impact statement and any supplements, must be signed by the Secretary of Energy or the Secretary's authorized representative and must be filed with the Director, in triplicate if the document is submitted in paper form or on CD-ROM.
(b) If submitted in paper form or on CD-ROM, each portion of such application and any amendments, and each environmental impact statement and any supplements, shall be accompanied by 30 additional copies. DOE shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies for distribution in accordance with written instructions from the Director or the Director's designee.
95. In § 60.44, the fifth sentence of paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
(b) * * * The DOE shall furnish the report to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by an appropriate method listed in § 60.4(a), with a copy to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. * * *
Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); secs. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1244, 1246, (42 U.S.C. 5842, 5846); secs. 10 and 14, Pub. L. 95-601, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 2021a and 5851) and Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123, (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk; Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's Offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(e) * * *
(2) Copies of NRC Form 3 can be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a) An application for a license under this part, and any amendments thereto, must be filed with the Director, must be signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative under oath or affirmation, and, if the document is in paper form or on CD-ROM, must consist of three copies, one of which is the signed original if the document is on paper.
(b) If the document is on paper or CD-ROM, the applicant shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies of the application for distribution in accordance with written instructions
(i)(1) Each licensee authorized to dispose of waste materials received from other persons under this part shall submit annual reports to the Director of the Division of Waste Management in the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by an appropriate method listed in § 60.4, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter. * * *
Secs. 81, 161, as amended, 68 Stat. 935, 948, 949, 950, 951, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2111, 2201); secs. 201, 209, as amended, 88 Stat. 1242, 1248, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5849); secs. 3, 4, 5, 6, 99 Stat. 1843, 1844, 1845, 1846, 1847, 1848, 1849, 1850, 1851, 1852, 1853, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857 (42 U.S.C. 2021c, 2021d, 2021e, 2021f); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 51, 53, 62, 63, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233); secs. 202, 206, 88 Stat.1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5842, 5846); secs. 10 and 14, Pub. L. 95-601, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 2021a and 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 114, 121, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2213g, 2238, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134, 10141), and Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 2902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
The
(a) Except as otherwise specified, in this part or in Subpart J of Part 2 of this chapter, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent to the NRC by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(e) * * *
(2) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, from the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(b) DOE shall submit 30 additional copies of each portion of the application and any amendments, and each environmental impact statement and any supplements. DOE shall maintain the capability to generate additional copies for distribution in accordance with written instructions from the Director or the Director's designee.
(c) * * *
(2) No less frequently than every 24 months, DOE shall prepare a report containing a brief description of such changes, tests, and experiments, including a summary of the evaluation of each. These written reports must be sent to the NRC using an appropriate method listed in § 63.4; and DOE shall furnish the report to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, with a copy to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Any report submitted under this paragraph must be made a part of the public record of the licensing proceedings.
(c) The NRC shall place communications by the Director under this section in the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) Library and furnish copies to DOE.
(f) The NRC shall place all proposals submitted under this section, and responses to them, in the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) Library.
(d) The requisite notification must be as specified in the applicable regulation. A copy of the written report must be sent to the NRC Operations Center, Document Control Desk, U.S. NRC, to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and to the NRC onsite representative using an appropriate method listed in § 63.4 of this chapter.
(b) * * *
(1) The signed document must be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555, one copy to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material and Safeguards, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and one copy to the appropriate NRC Resident Inspector, if one has been assigned to the site or facility, using an appropriate method listed in § 63.4 of this chapter.
Secs. 51, 53, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 948, 953, 954, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2282, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 204, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1245, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5845, 5846). Sec. 193, 104 Stat. 2835, as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 70.1(c) and 70.20a(b) also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 70.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 70.21(g) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 70.31 also issued under sec. 57d, Pub. L. 93-377, 88 Stat. 475 (42 U.S.C. 2077). Sections 70.36 and 70.44 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 70.81 also issued under secs. 186, 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2237). Section 70.82 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat. 939, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2138).
(a) * * *
(1) By mail addressed to: ATTN: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
(2) By hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
(3) Where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, and CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(b) The Commission has delegated to the four Regional Administrators licensing authority for selected parts of its decentralized licensing program for nuclear materials as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Any communication, report, or application covered under this licensing program must be submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator. The Administrators' jurisdictions and mailing addresses are listed in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(2) * * *
(i) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, Nuclear Material Section B, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(ii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II, Material Licensing/Inspection Branch, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Suite 23T85, Atlanta, GA 30303; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iii) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, Material Licensing Section, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351; Where e-mail is appropriate it should be addressed to
(iv) * * * All mailed or hand-delivered inquiries, communications, and applications for a new license or an amendment or renewal of an existing license specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must use the following address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV, Material
(e) * * *
(3) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, from the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(f)(1) Persons generally licensed under this section, who plan to carry transient shipments with scheduled stops at United States ports, shall notify in writing the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a).
(2) * * *
(ii) The Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, has been notified by telephone at (301) 415-8524, at least 10 days before transport of the shipment commences at the shipping facility, that a written advance shipping notice has been sent to the Office; and
(iii) The Spent Fuel Project Office will be notified by telephone at (301) 415-8524 of any changes to the shipment itinerary.
(g) * * *
(1) Provide to the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, the information required under paragraph (f) of this section.
(a)(1) A person may apply for a license to possess and use special nuclear material in a plutonium processing or fuel fabrication plant, or for a uranium enrichment facility license by filing the application with the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards in accordance with the instructions in § 70.5(a). If the application is on paper or CD-ROM, one copy must be provided. If the application is submitted electronically, see guidance for electronic submissions to the Commission.
(2) A person may apply for any other license issued under this part, by filing the application in accordance with the instructions in § 70.5(a). If the application is on paper, one copy must be provided. If the application is submitted electronically, see guidance for electronic submissions to the Commission.
(c) * * *
(2) * * * Licensees located in all four Regions as indicated in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter shall furnish the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), a report containing a description of each change within:
(d) * * * Within two months after each change, a report containing a description of the change must be furnished to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a); and a copy must be sent to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter.
(e) * * * The licensee shall maintain records of changes to the plan made without prior Commission approval, for three years from the effective date of the change, and shall, within two months after the change is made, furnish a report containing a description of each change to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; the report may be sent using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), and a copy of the report must be sent to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter.
(g) * * * The licensee shall maintain each change to the plan made without prior approval as a record during the period for which possession of a formula quantity of special nuclear material is authorized under a license and retain the superseded portion for 3 years after the effective date of the change, and shall, within 60 days after the change is made, furnish a report containing a description of each change to the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards; the report may be sent using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), and a copy of the report must be sent to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate NRC Regional Office as specified in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter.
(i) * * * Within six months after each change is made, the licensee shall, using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), furnish the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards a copy of each change, with copies to the appropriate NRC Regional Office specified in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter and to affected offsite response organizations. * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * * These written reports must be sent to the NRC's Document Control Desk, using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), with a copy to the appropriate NRC regional office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter. * * *
Within 60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year, and using an appropriate method listed in § 70.5(a), each licensee authorized to possess and use special nuclear material for processing and fuel fabrication, scrap recovery, conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or in a uranium enrichment facility shall submit a report addressed: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, with a
Secs. 53, 57, 62, 63, 81, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 71.97 also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-295, 94 Stat. 789-790.
(a) Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(c) * * *
(3) Before the licensee's first use of the package, submits in writing to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in § 71.1(a), the licensee's name and license number and the package identification number specified in the package approval.
Using an appropriate method listed in § 71.1(a), the licensee shall report to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards within 30 days—
(c) * * *
(3) A notification delivered by any other means than mail must reach the office of the governor or of the governor's designee at least 4 days before the beginning of the 7-day period during which departure of the shipment is estimated to occur.
(c) * * * Using an appropriate method listed in § 71.1(a), each licensee shall file a description of its quality assurance program, including a discussion of which requirements of this subpart are applicable and how they will be satisfied, with the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
Secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended; sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended; 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended; 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241; sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2224 (42 U.S.C. 10101, 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 U.S.C. 10198).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. eastern time; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(e) * * *
(2) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the Regional
Administrator of the appropriate U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, by calling the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a)
(c)
(f) * * * Within six months after any change is made, the licensee shall submit, in accordance with § 72.4, a report containing a description of any changes made in the plan addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Washington, DC 20555-0001; with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office shown in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter. * * *
(c)(1) The update of the FSAR must be filed in accordance with § 72.4. If the update is filed on paper, it should be filed on a replacement-page basis; if filed electronically, it should be filed on a full replacement basis. See Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the Commission at
(2) A paper update filed on a replacement-page basis must include a list that identifies the current pages of the FSAR following page replacement;
(3) Each changed page must include both a change indicator for the area changed, for example a bold line vertically drawn in the margin adjacent to the portion actually changed, and a page change identification (date of change or change number or both);
(a) * * * Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail
(a) * * * Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail
(b) * * * The licensee shall maintain records of changes to any such plan made without prior approval for a period of three years from the date of the change, and shall, within two months after the change is made, submit a report addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk; Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001, in accordance with § 72.4, containing a description of each change. A copy of the report must be sent to the Regional Administrator of the appropriate NRC Regional Office specified in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter.
(c)(1) The update of the FSAR must be filed in accordance with § 72.4. If the update is filed on paper, then it should be filed on a replacement-page basis; if filed electronically, it should be filed on a full replacement basis. See Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the Commission at
(2) A paper update filed on a replacement-page basis must include a list that identifies the current pages of the FSAR following page replacement;
(3) Each changed page must include both a change indicator for the area changed, for example a bold line vertically drawn in the margin adjacent to the portion actually changed, and a page change identification (date of change or change number or both);
Secs. 53, 161, 68 Stat. 930, 948, as amended, sec. 147, 94 Stat. 780 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2201); sec. 201, as amended, 204, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1245, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844, 2297f); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 73.1 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 73.37(f) also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-295, 94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 note). Section 73.57 is issued under sec. 606, Pub. L. 99-399, 100 Stat. 876 (42 U.S.C. 2169).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning
(a) * * *
(2) Each applicant for a license to operate a nuclear power reactor under Part 50 of this chapter shall submit fingerprints for those individuals who have or will have access to Safeguards Information.
(d) * * *
(1) For the purpose of complying with this section, licensees shall, using an appropriate method listed in § 73.4, submit to the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-6E46, two completed, legible standard fingerprint cards (Form FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where practicable, other fingerprint record for each individual requiring unescorted access to the nuclear power facility or access to Safeguards Information, to the Director of the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, marked for the attention of the Division's Criminal History Check Section. Copies of these forms may be obtained by writing to the Publishing Services Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001, by calling the branch at (301) 415-5877, or by e-mail to
(2) * * * Any Form FD-258 or other fingerprint record containing omissions or evident errors will be returned to the licensee for corrections. * * * The one free resubmission must have the initial (rejected) fingerprint cards or other records attached. * * *
(3) * * * Licensees shall submit payment with the application for the processing of fingerprints through corporate check, certified check, cashier's check, money order, or electronic payment, made payable to “U.S. NRC” (for guidance on making electronic payments, contact the Personnel Security Branch, Division of Facilities and Security, at (301) 415-7404). The amount of the fee is the user fee for processing fingerprints submitted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on behalf of nuclear power plants charged by the FBI for each fingerprint card or other fingerprint record. * * *
(4) The Commission will forward to the submitting licensee all data received from the FBI as a result of the licensee's application(s) for criminal history checks, to include the FBI fingerprint record.
(f) * * *
(5) The licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history records received from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file has been transferred, on an individual (including data indicating no record) for 1 year after termination or denial of unescorted access to the nuclear power facility or access to Safeguards Information.
(a) * * *
(4) The initial telephonic notification must be followed within a period of 30 days by a written report submitted to the NRC by an appropriate method listed in § 73.4. * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Notify in writing the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using any appropriate method listed in § 73.4;
(4) Notify the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by telephone at (301) 415-8524 at least 10 days before the shipment commences at the shipping facility that an advance notice has been sent; and
(5) Notify the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by telephone at (301) 415-8524 of any changes to the shipment itinerary.
(a) * * *
(1) Notify in writing the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using any appropriate method listed in § 73.4;
(b) A licensee who needs to amend a written advance notification required by paragraph (a) of this section may do so by telephoning the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, at (301) 415-8524.
(a) * * *
(1) Notify in writing the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using any appropriate method listed in § 73.4;
(b) A licensee who needs to amend a written advance notification required by paragraph (a) of this section may do so by telephoning the Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, at (301) 415-8524.
Secs. 53, 57, 161, 182, 183, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 948, 953, 954, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2077, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2282, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
(a) By mail addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
(b) By hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
(c) Where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) * * * Copies of these instructions (NUREG/BR-0006 and NMMSS Report D-24 “Personal Computer Data Input for NRC Licensees”) may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(a) * * * Using an appropriate method listed in § 74.6, the licensee shall report the inventory results by plant and total facility to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
(b) * * * Using an appropriate method listed in § 74.6, the licensee shall report the inventory results by plant and total facility to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
(c) Each licensee shall notify the NRC Operations Center by telephone on (301) 816-5100 of any MC&A alarm that remains unresolved beyond the time period specified for its resolution in the licensee's fundamental nuclear material control plan. * * *
(f) * * *
(2) Within 24 hours, the licensee shall notify the NRC Operations Center by telephone on (301) 816-5100 that an MC&A alarm resolution procedure has been initiated.
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) Investigate and report, by an appropriate method listed in § 74.6, to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, any difference that exceeds three times the standard deviation determined from the sequential analysis;
Secs. 53, 63, 103, 104, 122, 161, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 936, 937, 939, 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2093, 2133, 2134, 2152, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 75.4 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161).
(c) Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed: Attn: Document Control Desk; Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (or Director, Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, secs. 1312, 1701, as amended, 106 Stat. 2932, 2951, 2952, 2953, 110 Stat. 1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2297b-11, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, 204, 206, 88 Stat. 1244, 1245, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5845, 5846). Sec. 234(a), 83 Stat. 444, as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243(a)); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Section 76.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601. sec. 10, 92 Stat 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 76.22 is also issued under sec.193(f), as amended, 104 Stat. 2835, as amended by Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321, 1321-349 (42 U.S.C. 2243(f)). Section 76.35(j) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand-delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
156. In § 76.7, paragraph (e)(3) is revised to read as follows:
(e) * * *
(3) Copies of NRC Form 3 may be obtained by writing to the NRC Region III Office listed in Appendix D to Part 20 of this chapter, from the Publishing Services Branch at (301) 415-5877, via e-mail to
(a) * * *
(1) An application for a certificate of compliance must be tendered by filing the application with the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, with copies sent to the NRC Region III Office and appropriate resident inspector, in accordance with § 76.5. If the application is on paper or CD-ROM, 20 copies must be filed with the Director. If submitted electronically, see Guidance for Electronic Submission to the Commission at
(d) * * *
(2) * * * These written reports must be sent to the NRC by an appropriate method listed in § 76.5. * * *
Sec. 156, 161, 68 Stat. 947, 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2186, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
All communications concerning the regulations in this part, including applications for licenses, should be sent to the NRC either by mail addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 145, 161, 193, 68 Stat. 942, 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2165, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); E.O. 10865, as amended, 3 CFR 1959-1963 Comp., p. 398 (50 U.S.C. 401, note); E.O. 12829, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 570; E.O. 12958, as amended, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 333; E.O. 12968, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p. 391.
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the Director of the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-7D57, and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) * * * A written description of the proposed change must be furnished to the CSA and the NRC Regional Administrator of the cognizant Regional Office listed in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter, and, if the NRC is not the CSA, also to the Director of the Division of Facilities and Security in the NRC's Office of Administration; the communications to NRC personnel should be by an appropriate method listed in § 95.9. * * *
(a) * * * Requests for downgrading or declassifying any NRC classified information should be forwarded to the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, in the Office of Administration, using an appropriate method listed in § 95.9. * * *
Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 948, 953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Secs. 51, 53, 54, 57, 63, 64, 65, 81, 82, 103, 104, 109, 111, 126, 127, 128, 129, 161, 181, 182, 183, 187, 189, 68 Stat. 929, 930, 931, 932, 933, 936, 937, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2074, 2077, 2092-2095, 2111, 2112, 2133, 2134, 2139, 2139a, 2141, 2154-2158, 2201, 2231-2233, 2237, 2239); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 5, Pub. L. 101-575, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S.C. 2243); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 110.1(b)(2) and 110.1(b)(3) also issued under Pub. L. 96-92, 93 Stat. 710 (22 U.S.C. 2403). Section 110.11 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152) and secs. 54c and 57d, 88 Stat. 473, 475 (42 U.S.C. 2074). Section 110.27 also issued under sec. 309(a), Pub. L. 99-440. Section 110.50(b)(3) also issued under sec. 123, 92 Stat. 142 (42 U.S.C. 2153). Section 110.51 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Section 110.52 also issued under sec. 186, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2236). Sections 110.80-110.113 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552, 554. Sections 110.130-110.135 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. Sections 110.2 and 110.42(a)(9) also issued under sec. 903, Pub. L. 102-496 (42 U.S.C. 2151
Except where otherwise specified in this part, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the Deputy Director of the NRC's Office of International Programs, either by telephone to (301) 415-2344; by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) A person shall file an application for a specific license to export or import with the Deputy Director of the NRC's Office of International Programs, using an appropriate method listed in § 110.4.
(a) A petition for rulemaking should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, for the attention of the Secretary's Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. The petition should be sent using an appropriate method listed in § 110.4.
Secs. 161, 170, 68 Stat. 948, 71 Stat. 576, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2210);
Except where otherwise specified, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part and applications filed under them should be sent by mail addressed to: Attn: Document Control Desk; Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (or Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) In the event of bodily injury or property damage arising out of or in connection with the possession or use of the radioactive material at the location or in the course of transportation, or in the event any claim is made therefor, written notice containing particulars sufficient to identify the licensee and reasonably obtainable information with respect to the time, place, and circumstances thereof, or to the nature of the claim, shall be furnished by or for the licensee to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, or the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, as appropriate, using an appropriate method listed in § 140.5, but in any case as promptly as practicable. * * *
Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688 (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2021); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
Sections 150.3, 150.15, 150.15a, 150.31, 150.32 also issued under secs. 11e(2), 81, 68 Stat. 923, 935, as amended, secs. 83, 84, 92 Stat. 3033, 3039 (42 U.S.C. 2014e(2), 2111, 2113, 2114). Section 150.14 also issued under sec. 53, 68 Stat. 930, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2073). Section 150.15 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 150.17a also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 150.30 also issued under sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444 (42 U.S.C. 2282).
Except where otherwise specified in this part, all communications and reports concerning the regulations in this part should be sent by mail addressed: Attn: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and sent either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
(a) * * * Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(b) * * *
(2) Within 15 days, the licensee shall follow the initial report with a written report that sets forth the details of the incident. The report must be sent by an appropriate method listed in § 150.4 of this part to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office, shown in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter.
(a) * * * Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(b) * * * Copies of the reporting instructions may be obtained from the NRC's Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, by writing the Division at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail
(c) * * * The initial report must be followed within a period of fifteen days by a written report that sets forth the details of the incident and its consequences. The report must be submitted using an appropriate method listed in § 150.4 to the Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, with a copy to the appropriate NRC Regional Office, as shown in Appendix A to Part 73 of this chapter. * * *
(c) * * * The initial report must be followed within a period of fifteen days by a written report that sets forth the details of the incident and its consequences. The report must be submitted to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, using an appropriate method listed in
Sec. 9701, Pub. L. 97-258, 96 Stat. 1051 (31 U.S.C. 9701); sec. 301, Pub. L. 92-314, 86 Stat. 227 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93-438, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 205a, Pub. L. 101-576, 104 Stat. 2842, as amended (31 U.S.C. 901, 902); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
All communications concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the NRC's Chief Financial Officer, either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
Sec. 7601, Pub. L. 99-272, 100 Stat. 146, as amended by sec. 5601, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330, as amended by sec. 3201, Pub. L. 101-239, 103 Stat. 2132, as amended by sec. 6101, Pub. L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388, as amended by sec. 2903a, Pub. L. 102-486, 106 Stat. 3125 (42 U.S.C. 2213, 2214); sec. 301, Pub. L. 92-314, 86 Stat. 227 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93-438, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
All communications concerning the regulations in this part should be addressed to the NRC's Chief Financial Officer, either by mail to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, or CD-ROM. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
This appendix will not be printed in the Code of Federal Regulations
On September 6, 2002, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) promulgated a direct final rule on electronic submission of information to the agency. This rule modified many NRC regulations to explicitly authorize electronic communications with the agency. The final rule stated that the NRC would issue specific guidance on acceptable procedures for electronic submissions. That guidance is contained in this document. This guidance document is the controlling source of information on electronic submissions to the NRC and supersedes NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2001-05, Guidance on Submitting Documents to the NRC by Electronic Information Exchange or on CD-ROM, and the August 10, 2001, letter issued to certain fuel cycle facilities extending to them the option of electronic submissions in many instances. The NRC plans to update this guidance periodically to reflect changes in technology and agency experience. While the Commission encourages the submission
This guidance document governs the electronic submission of documents to the NRC. It includes the required procedures for corresponding electronically with the NRC via the Internet using Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), by CD-ROM, or by e-mail. It also includes procedures for corresponding by facsimile (fax). It does not address submission of other forms of electronic information (
EIE software provides for the electronic submission of information to the NRC in a secure manner. It requires the use of digital signatures and certain software plug-ins. Procedures for acquiring a digital signature for communicating with the NRC via EIE can be found at Section 3.4, and procedures for acquiring the required software can be found at Section 3.5.
Documents or other information submitted under oath or affirmation, or other documents where secure transfer is either required or appropriate, should be submitted over the Internet using EIE or submitted on CD-ROM. While e-mail is not appropriate for most submissions required by NRC regulations, e-mail may be used for certain other correspondence and communications with the NRC, such as rulemaking petitions and comments on rulemaking proceedings, collaborative communications with States and other Federal agencies, requests for enforcement actions under 10 CFR 2.206, and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and appeals, but not for information covered under the Privacy Act.
E-mail may be addressed to either specific individuals named as contacts in
All communications with the NRC may be submitted electronically via the Internet except for the following:
1. Classified information (
2. “Immediate” or “prompt” notifications to the NRC that NRC regulations require be made by telephone, telefax or telegram up to one week before or after an event (
3. Notice of filing of bankruptcy petition, whether voluntary or involuntary (
4. Hearing requests, and documents pertaining to hearings or associated appeals, including, but not limited to, those associated with hearings conducted under 10 CFR Parts 2, 4, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 25, 76, 81, 110, 140, and 150. Separate rules or guidance addressing procedures for electronic communications in hearings will be issued in the future for public comment, but it should be noted that the document format standards outlined in this guidance document subsequently may be determined to apply to documents submitted to agency adjudicatory dockets. It is conceivable that, as a result of a future rulemaking proceeding, the current format requirements in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J, for example, could be superseded by the document format standards presented in this guidance document. Accordingly, interested parties should consider the impact the approach outlined in this guidance could have on their preparation of materials for future submission. (Nothing in this guidance document precludes presiding officers from their current practice of authorizing electronic communications on a case-by-case basis.)
5. Documents served on the NRC as a participant in Federal Court proceedings or in non-NRC administrative proceedings (such as administrative proceedings before the Merit Systems Protection Board, unless electronic submission is authorized by rule or order issued by a Federal Court or Agency).
6. NRC contractor proposals or invoices submitted in response to specific contractual requirements. (Because Federal Acquisition Regulation guidance as contained in Section 30 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act [41 U.S.C. 426] allows the Federal Government to use electronic commerce whenever practical, guidance for electronic submittal of proposals and invoices will be addressed in individual procurements. Further guidance for submission of these documents will be issued at a later date.)
7. Financial assurance instruments to meet decommissioning cost requirements and prescribed by regulation at 10 CFR 30.35(e), 40.36(e), and 70.25(f) (including surety bonds, letters of credit, lines of credit, and insurance).
8. Documents with special attributes. (See section 2.7)
9. Fingerprint cards (Form FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) required for criminal history checks under 10 CFR 73.57.
Each form referred to in the NRC regulations can be found on the NRC Web site at
Financial payments required by regulations can be submitted electronically. Copies of NRC Form 628 to establish financial authorization electronically can be found at the NRC Web site at
Submissions requiring oath or affirmation may be submitted electronically using EIE or on CD-ROM. (See Sections 3.6 and 4.3.2 of this guidance document). These include the following:
1. Documents that by statute must be submitted under oath or affirmation (e.g., Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 USC 2232). Generally, oath or affirmation requirements exist for applications for a license, amendments to a license, some licensee responses to Notices of Violation (NOV), and certain letters of transmittal. The NRC's regulations in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50 implement these statutory requirements, and certain regulations require an oath or affirmation for submission of documents (see, e.g., 10 CFR 50.54(f) and 10 CFR 50.30(b)).
2. Documents that must be sent by certified mail (e.g., 10 CFR Part 30, Appendix A II. C. 2).
Rulemaking petitions, comments filed in rulemaking proceedings (10 CFR Part 2, Subpart H), and requests for enforcement action under 10 CFR 2.206 may be submitted via EIE, CD-ROM, or e-mail. Other documents submitted pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart B, “Procedure for Imposing Requirements By Order, or for Modification, Suspension, or Revocation of a License, or for Imposing Civil Penalties,” may be submitted via EIE or CD-ROM. Submission of all other documents covered under Part 2 are excluded from the scope of this guidance document. Separate rules or guidance addressing procedures for electronic communications in hearings will be issued in the future for public comment, but it should be noted that the document format standards outlined in this guidance document subsequently may be determined to apply to documents submitted to agency adjudicatory dockets. It is conceivable that, as a result of a future rulemaking proceeding, the current format requirements in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J, for example, could be superseded by the document format standards presented in this guidance document. Accordingly, interested parties should consider the impact the approach outlined in this guidance could have on their preparation of materials for future submission.
All Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and appeals may be submitted electronically by EIE, CD-ROM, or e-mail. Privacy Act requests cannot be submitted electronically because additional identification is required before the agency will process the request. See 10 CFR 9.54.
Unless otherwise noted in the sections detailing the mode of submission which follow, all electronic documents submitted to the NRC should meet the file format specifications delineated in this section. These specifications also apply to all enclosures or attachments that are documents as well. Note: any electronic file that can be converted to PDF format (spread sheets, slide presentations, etc.) are considered documents by the NRC and are subject to these specifications.
Submittals may also contain other forms of electronic information including data files, computer models, and video or audio clips that are not considered documents. These files are not required to conform to the file format specifications established for documents.
The acceptable file formats for submitting documents via EIE, CD-ROM, and e-mail with the associated versions, default file extensions, and preferred use are shown in the tables below.
In most cases the NRC recommends that spreadsheet applications also be converted to one of the acceptable PDF file formats. However, spreadsheets that are submitted to the NRC so that the NRC staff can use the data to perform additional calculations/analyses using the native software applications may be submitted using the following acceptable formats.
When submitting the electronic file using one of the acceptable formats listed in the tables above, do not change the default, three-character extension for the file (
Documents submitted to the NRC using CD-ROM or e-mail must:
(1) Have filenames that are limited to 116 characters in length (including the “.” and the three-character filename extension).
(2) Retain the default three-character file extension associated with the format in which the document was created (Example: for files created to conform to Adobe's Portable Document Format, “.pdf”; for files created to conform to the Tagged Image Format, “.tif”).
(3) Include a three-digit numeric prefix (
Large size files create challenges for both the NRC staff and the public when viewing or downloading the documents. Therefore, the NRC requests that submitters make every effort to limit the file size of electronic submittals. For example, when generating documents for submission, files should be created using logical breaks in the document (
Submissions should not contain any security settings, password protections, or any other attributes that will exclude full NRC access to and use of the files. NRC's internal security and archival processes will maintain the integrity of the materials that are submitted.
Tagged Image File Format (TIFF) or PDF documents must be created using the following resolution guidelines:
The NRC discourages the use of color because it significantly increases file size. If the use of color adds no value to the understanding of the information presented, its use should be avoided. If color is required to make the document understandable, its limited use is acceptable. Examples of color documents that meet this criteria are graphs, bar-charts, and engineering drawings that depend exclusively on the differences in color to understand the information and data being presented.
Documents that contain electronic files with special attributes present many challenges when trying to manage them in an electronic environment. The NRC currently does not have the technical capability to quickly and cost-effectively reproduce documents with special printing requirements (such as requiring the use of a plotter or other special equipment to print) or other enhancements such as 3D images, etc. Therefore, if a person chooses to submit documents with special attributes electronically, he or she must submit the number of CD-ROMs required by the regulations, plus one paper copy.
Files containing objects (
Files received by the NRC will be checked for viruses prior to acceptance. Any submission that contains a virus will be returned to the submitter.
Macros in files such as Microsoft
Except as provided below, submitting information electronically to the NRC through the EIE process shall be deemed to constitute authority for the NRC to place a copy of the information on its public document database and to reproduce and distribute sufficient copies to carry out its official responsibilities. Any person submitting information shall be deemed to represent to the NRC that he or she has legal authority to submit the document and to permit NRC to reproduce and distribute the document, and shall hold the NRC harmless from damages that result from the NRC's reproducing or distributing the documents.
If a document contains a copyright notice, or is accompanied by any other statement restricting reproduction, NRC will not accept the information electronically unless the submitter provides an explicit statement authorizing the NRC to make copies of the material in accordance with this guidance. If the submitter lacks authority to permit NRC to reproduce the document, NRC will not accept the information electronically until the submitter provides written authorization from the copyright owner for the NRC to make copies of the material in accordance with this guidance.
NRC use of the information specified herein does not constitute authority for others to use the information outside applicable requirements of copyright law.
Licensees and vendors submitting documents via EIE do not need to send confirming hard copies of the electronic documents. Licensees, applicants, and members of the public submitting documents on CD-ROM are required to submit as many copies as required by the applicable agency regulation or order and accompanied by one paper copy as well. This is because the agency does not have the capability to reproduce paper copies of these submissions cost effectively or rapidly enough to meet the needs of the NRC and the public. However, as the technology evolves and the NRC staff gains more experience processing and reproducing documents in the electronic environment, and becomes more comfortable working in an electronic environment, NRC will reassess this approach and modify the guidance document, as appropriate.
The participant population includes applicants, licensees, external entities (including Federal, State, and Local governments), and vendors who are required to submit documents to the NRC. The EIE is designed to ensure that electronic documents can be transmitted via the Internet in a secure and unalterable manner. Submittals such as those that are required to be submitted under oath or affirmation may be safely transmitted via the Internet. Applicants, licensees, vendors
The NRC provides for overall administration of the EIE process through the designated Local Registration Authority (LRA). The LRA creates and maintains an Authorized Certificate List (ACL) consisting of authorized internal and external EIE participants. Each participant must send an ACL containing the name and e-mail addresses of individuals who will be submitting digitally signed documents to the NRC. The ACL must be sent to the NRC in a signed paper form to the following address: Local Registration Authority (T6 C30), Electronic Information Exchange, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Upon receipt of the ACL, the NRC will e-mail to each individual named a unique personal identification number (PIN) to be used in applying for a digital certificate. Once received, the digital certificate will then enable individual users to digitally sign documents and submit them in a secure manner. The PIN number will be sent approximately 3 to 5 business days after receipt of the ACL. Participants may add or delete names from the ACL by written notification to the NRC using the above address. The LRA will use the ACL to validate authorized individuals requesting digital signature certificates. The LRA may be contacted via e-mail at
Participating individuals in the EIE initiative may use their existing workstations with standard desktop configuration. The recommended workstation configuration requires a Pentium 133 MHZ (or higher) with a minimum of 32 MB of RAM, 20 MB of available disk space, and access to the World Wide Web (Web) through an Internet Service Provider (ISP). The operating system should be either Windows NT or Windows 95 (or higher). In addition, each workstation must be equipped with browser software, consisting of either Netscape Navigator or Communicator (version 4.6 or higher) or Microsoft Internet Explorer (version 5.0 or higher). Other browser types, such as AOL or Mosaic, are not currently supported for use in the EIE system.
In order to utilize EIE, each individual must obtain a digital signature certificate (Digital ID). (See Section 3.4 of this guidance document.) Additionally, there are software plug-ins that must be downloaded and installed. In the subsequent sections, each process and step required to setup a computer or workstation to use EIE is described. The processes and steps described are specific to both Netscape Navigator/Communicator 4.6 or higher and Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher.
All users must have a Digital ID in order to use EIE. A Digital ID is used to submit and digitally sign the form used to submit
To obtain a Digital ID, authorized participants must first complete and submit an enrollment form. VeriSign, Inc. acts as the NRC's Certificate Authority (CA) and provides the NRC with a Digital Certificate (ID) enrollment page on their Web site. The NRC provides VeriSign Onsite Digital Certificates (ID's) at no cost. The steps for obtaining a Digital Certificate are provided on the EIE home page at
In order to utilize the EIE system, users will need to download and install two software plug-ins. The software plug-ins required are browser-dependent and can be obtained from the EIE home page on the NRC Web site at (
Documents eligible for submission to the NRC are restricted to specific formats. No documents with special attributes (
Once the form is displayed, users will need to fill in the fields on the form and attach the document(s) for submission to the NRC. Once the fields have been filled in and the intended documents are attached, the form must be digitally signed.
Documents submitted electronically using EIE do not need to be digitally signed by the author(s). They may be digitally signed by the person who transmits them, but the author(s) are accountable for the content of the document(s) submitted. Generally, the persons who will digitally sign documents and transmit them electronically to the NRC are the same persons who currently dispatch licensing documents through the mail to the NRC. Licensees and vendors submitting documents via EIE do not need to send confirming hard copies of the electronic documents.
NRC regulations require that some documents be filed under oath or affirmation. If such a document is transmitted electronically using EIE, it must conclude with a statement to this effect:
“I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [date]”.
Documents transmitted to the NRC electronically using EIE will be time- and date-stamped when the last bit of the transmittal is received by the EIE server. The time and date of the transmission will become part of the record in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The transmitter will be e-mailed a notice of receipt of the document. The notice will include the time and date the transmission was received at the NRC.
Submission of documents via EIE satisfies agency submittal requirements. The submitter need not send additional copies to NRC regions or other agency offices.
For more detailed information and step-by-step procedures on how to submit documents to the NRC using EIE, see the “EIE Submittal Procedures” on NRC's Web site at
Documents submitted using EIE are automatically sent to the NRC Document Processing Center for processing into ADAMS. No additional information is necessary, except for submittals intended for a Region. Submissions intended for the Regions should have the Region(s) listed in the comment box contained on the submission form.
Additional information, as well as detailed user guides can be obtained from NRC's Web site at (
Should you have any questions, please contact the Local Registration Authority (LRA) at (301) 415-6030 or by e-mail at
This guidance is intended for licensees, applicants, external entities (including Federal, State, and Local governments), vendors, and members of the public who submit documents to the NRC.
Documents may be submitted via CD-ROM,
Each CD-ROM submission must be transmitted by a signed letter in paper format. Documents submitted pursuant to NRC regulations must cite the relevant regulations in either the subject line or the first paragraph of the transmittal letter. The transmittal letter must include the name, phone number, mailing, and e-mail address of a contact person who can respond to questions about the submission. In addition, if there are any special instructions regarding the use of the CD-ROM (
The sensitivity level of the transmitted documents must be included on the first page of the accompanying transmittal letter. Documents containing Classified Information (
NRC regulations require that some documents be filed under oath or affirmation. If such a document is submitted on CD-ROM, the transmittal letter must contain the oath and the signature of the person swearing to the accuracy of the information submitted. Specifically, the letter must include the following statement with the signature of the person affirming it:
“I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [date]”.
Many large documents historically submitted to the NRC have been maintained as living documents and have used a page-replacement strategy for update. In the electronic environment this approach is not practicable. Consequently, if a submitter chooses to use electronic submission of these documents, all subsequent updates must be performed on a total-replacement basis. The updated version must include a list of changed pages and each changed page must include both a change indicator for the area changed, for example a bold line vertically drawn in the margin adjacent to the portion actually changed, and a page change identification (date of change or change number or both).
The acceptable file formats are stated in Section 2.1. However, for text-oriented documents, the preferred file formats are Portable Data Format (PDF) Normal and PDF Original Image with Hidden Text. PDF Image Only is preferred for submission of graphic\image documents. PDF files and TIFF files should be scanned at the resolutions stated in Section 2.5 of this document.
Large documents made up of multiple files, folders, etc., often require the inclusion of a search engine on the CD-ROM to facilitate navigation, search, and retrieval of the document. The inclusion of the search engine enables the user to access the material contained on the CD-ROM without having to rely on other software in the users' resident environment. The NRC encourages the inclusion of these search engines to facilitate the use of the materials in stand-alone mode. However, only those products that do not require the end-user to purchase a license to use are acceptable.
When submitting documents that contain both publicly and non-publicly available files, all of the files should be included on a CD-ROM. In addition, a separate CD-ROM must be provided that contains only the publicly available files. Each CD-ROM must be clearly labeled indicating its availability. CD-ROMs labeled as “Publicly Available” will be released to the public (sent to the Public Document Room, where they are available for inspection and copying). The mailing package containing CD-ROMs with documents comprised of Safeguards, Proprietary, or Privacy Act Information must be marked in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 2.790(b) and 73.21(e). The mailing package forwarding CD-ROMs containing Classified Information must be submitted to NRC in accordance with the requirements contained in 10 CFR 95.39.
It is not practicable for the NRC to accept:
• Any submission that contains a virus.
• Files submitted that are compressed.
• File formats other than those listed in Section 2.1.
• CD-ROMs that contain both publicly and non-publicly available files on a single CD, unless a second CD with only publicly available information is also provided.
• CD-ROMs containing OLE (Object Linking and Embedding), DDE (Dynamic Data Exchange), or any other object linking.
Send CD-ROMs with transmittal letter to the mailing address specified in the regulation, order, or other document governing the submission of that particular application, report or correspondence.
Information can be found in the “CD-ROM Submittal Procedures”, found in Related Information, by visiting the NRC's Web site at
For assistance or to discuss problems with making CD-ROM submissions of electronic filings, contact the Document Processing Services Section at 301-415-2488 during the NRC's normal business hours (7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. eastern time) or e-mail
This guidance is intended for licensees, applicants, external entities (including Federal, State, and Local governments), vendors and members of the public who submit documents to the NRC.
Documents (except for collaborative communications with States and other Federal agencies) submitted by e-mail, including the text of the e-mail, should contain only information that could be made available to the public and may be used for:
• Rulemaking petitions and comments in rulemaking proceedings.
• Requests for enforcement action under 10 CFR 2.206, which may be sent to
• FOIA requests and appeals (unless Privacy Act information is sought; review Section 1.3.5 for additional details).
• Responses to Federal Register Notices or other agency communications where NRC has provided a specific e-mail address.
Multiple document attachments are acceptable, but the e-mail cannot exceed the 10MB size limitation, and the e-mail must include the required information as listed in Section 5.4.
In addition, the NRC provides a listing of contacts on the NRC Web site at
File submissions that do not meet the parameters outlined in this document, especially as outlined in Section 2.0, will be rejected and will require re-submission. If the e-mail (with attachments) exceeds the 10 MB size requirement or contains a virus, the sender will receive an automated “Undelivered Mail” notice stating the reason for the delivery rejection.
If the documents do not comply with other file parameters outlined in Section 2.0 (
Files sent via e-mail must be sent as an attachment to the e-mail message in order to retain the original formatting of the document(s). The e-mail message must include the name of a contact person who can respond to questions about the submission, along with the contact person's daytime phone number, mailing, and e-mail address. The e-mail must also identify/describe each document attached to the e-mail message. The format used to generate each of the identified file(s) must also be listed.
E-mail may be addressed to either specific individuals named as contacts or to the office specified in the regulation or communication specific to the document(s) being submitted, to addresses the NRC Web site provides for individual program offices or specific agency functions or services, or to the Office of Public Affairs. Individual program offices may be contacted by using the addresses found at the NRC Web site at
This guidance is intended for licensees, applicants, external entities (including Federal, State, and Local governments), vendors and members of the public who submit documents to the NRC.
Documents (except for collaborative communications with States and other Federal agencies) submitted by fax should contain only information that could be made available to the public and may be used for:
• Rulemaking petitions and comments in rulemaking proceedings.
• Requests for enforcement action under 10 CFR 2.206.
• FOIA requests and appeals made directly to the FOIA and Privacy Act Officer (unless Privacy Act information is sought; review Section 1.3.5 for additional details).
• Responses to Federal Register Notices or other agency communications where NRC has provided for response by fax.
• Responses to NRC licensing-related questions.
• Information from export/import license applicants, and licensees.
Faxes must include the name of a contact person who can respond to questions about the submission, along with the contact person's daytime phone number and mailing or e-mail address.
The NRC has established centralized receipt points (see listing of fax locations provided in Section 6.5) for official submissions transmitted by fax at each of the Regional Offices, the Office of International Programs, and NRC Headquarters. All official transmissions should be sent to one of these official receipt points to ensure that they are captured as official records of the agency.
To obtain general information about accessing documents filed electronically (viewing, printing, and downloading), contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) during business hours.
You may contact the PDR librarians by any of the following means:
Reading Room: 7:45 a.m.—4:15 p.m. eastern time, Federal Workdays.
Telephone Service: 8:30 a.m.—4:15 p.m., eastern time, Federal Workdays.
NRC, EIE Web site;
The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10—Energy
Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552
Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Proposed rule.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposes to amend its rules to clarify when and how licensees and other members of the public may use electronic means such as CD-ROM and e-mail to communicate with the agency. These amendments are necessary to implement the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA). In the Rules and Regulations section of this
The comment period for this proposed rule ends on October 21, 2002. Comments received after that date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure only that comments received on or before this date will be considered. The NRC staff will hold a public meeting to answer questions on issues arising from this action on October 3, 2002.
Mail written comments to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Comments may also be submitted via the NRC's interactive rulemaking Web site at
Comments received may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking Web site. Comments will also be available electronically for public inspection in the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) Library component of the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC's Web site at
The public meeting will be held in the auditorium at NRC Headquarters, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville, MD, beginning at 8:30 a.m. and ending about 12:30 p.m.
John A. Skoczlas, 301-415-7186,
See the information provided in the direct final rule of the same title, which is found in the Rules and Regulations section of this
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Office of the Secretary; Interior Board of Indian Appeals; Office of Hearings and Appeals, Interior.
Notice of appeal procedures and practice.
This notice is effective immediately.
Office of the Secretary, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240.
Robert More, Office of Hearings and Appeals, 801 N. Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22203.
Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of the Interior has directed the Interior Board of Indian Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, pursuant to 43 CFR 4.1(b)(2)(ii) and 4.330(a)(2), and Secretarial Order No. 3242, to exercise administrative review authority for appeals from all historical accountings by the Office of Historical Trust Accounting. The Procedures and Practice specified in 43 CFR part 4 shall apply to appeals from the Office of Historical Trust Accounting to the Interior Board of Indian Appeals. References to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in such Procedures and Practices (including those in 43 CFR 4.331(c), 4.312, 4.314(a), 4.318, 4.331, 4.332, 4.333, 4.335, 4.338, and 4.340) shall be deemed also to apply to the Office of Historical Trust Accounting for the purpose of administrative review by the Interior Board of Indian Appeals.