5–23–95 tuesday vol. 60 no. 99 may 23, 1995 pages …; no password is required. ... noram gas...

fede

ral r

egiste

r

1

TuesdayMay 23, 1995Vol. 60 No. 99

Pages 27221–27400

5–23–95

Briefings on How To Use the Federal RegisterFor information on a briefing in Boston, MA seeannouncement on the inside cover of this issue.

II

FEDERAL REGISTER Published daily, Monday through Friday,(not published on Saturdays, Sundays, or on official holidays), bythe Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and RecordsAdministration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal RegisterAct (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and theregulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register(1 CFR Ch. I). Distribution is made only by the Superintendent ofDocuments, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC20402.

The Federal Register provides a uniform system for makingavailable to the public regulations and legal notices issued byFederal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations andExecutive Orders and Federal agency documents having generalapplicability and legal effect, documents required to be publishedby act of Congress and other Federal agency documents of publicinterest. Documents are on file for public inspection in the Officeof the Federal Register the day before they are published, unlessearlier filing is requested by the issuing agency.

The seal of the National Archives and Records Administrationauthenticates this issue of the Federal Register as the official serialpublication established under the Federal Register Act. 44 U.S.C.1507 provides that the contents of the Federal Register shall bejudicially noticed.

The Federal Register is published in paper, 24x microfiche and asan online database through GPO Access, a service of the U.S.Government Printing Office. The online database is updated by 6a.m. each day the Federal Register is published. The databaseincludes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1(January 2, 1994) forward. It is available on a Wide AreaInformation Server (WAIS) through the Internet and viaasynchronous dial-in. The annual subscription fee for a singleworkstation is $375. Six-month subscriptions are available for $200and one month of access can be purchased for $35. Discounts areavailable for multiple-workstation subscriptions. To subscribe,Internet users should telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov and login asnewuser (all lower case); no password is required. Dial-in usersshould use communications software and modem to call (202)512–1661 and login as swais (all lower case); no password isrequired; at the second login prompt, login as newuser (all lowercase); no password is required. Follow the instructions on thescreen to register for a subscription for the Federal Register Onlinevia GPO Access. For assistance, contact the GPO Access UserSupport Team by sending Internet e-mail [email protected], or a fax to (202) 512–1262, or by calling(202) 512–1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Mondaythrough Friday, except Federal holidays.

The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paperedition is $494, or $544 for a combined Federal Register, FederalRegister Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA)subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Registerincluding the Federal Register Index and LSA is $433. Six monthsubscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The chargefor individual copies in paper form is $8.00 for each issue, or $8.00for each group of pages as actually bound; or $1.50 for each issuein microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postageand handling. International customers please add 25% for foreignhandling. Remit check or money order, made payable to theSuperintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO DepositAccount, VISA or MasterCard. Mail to: New Orders,Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA15250–7954.

There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearingin the Federal Register.

How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and thepage number. Example: 60 FR 12345.

SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES

PUBLICSubscriptions:

Paper or ficheAssistance with public subscriptions

202–512–1800512–1806

Online:Telnet swais.access.gpo.gov, login as newuser <enter>, no

password <enter>; or use a modem to call (202) 512–1661,login as swais, no password <enter>, at the second login asnewuser <enter>, no password <enter>.

Assistance with online subscriptions 202–512–1530

Single copies/back copies:Paper or ficheAssistance with public single copies

512–1800512–1803

FEDERAL AGENCIESSubscriptions:

Paper or ficheAssistance with Federal agency subscriptions

523–5243523–5243

For other telephone numbers, see the Reader Aids sectionat the end of this issue.

THE FEDERAL REGISTER

WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT

FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of FederalRegulations.

WHO: The Office of the Federal Register.

WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present:1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register

system and the public’s role in the development ofregulations.

2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code ofFederal Regulations.

3. The important elements of typical Federal Registerdocuments.

4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system.

WHY: To provide the public with access to information necessary toresearch Federal agency regulations which directly affect them.There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations.

2

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995

BOSTON, MAWHEN: June 20 at 9:00 amWHERE: Room 419, Barnes Federal Building

495 Summer Street, Boston, MARESERVATIONS: Call the Federal Information Center

1–800–347–1997

Contents Federal Register

III

Vol. 60, No. 99

Tuesday, May 23, 1995

Agricultural Research ServiceNOTICESPatent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially

exclusive:biosys, 27250

Agriculture DepartmentSee Agricultural Research ServiceSee Food Safety and Inspection ServiceSee Forest Service

Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNOTICESGrants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

Adult blood lead epidemiology surveillance programsand/or intervention projects to prevent adult leadpoisoning, 27317–27320

Children and Families AdministrationNOTICESOrganization, functions, and authority delegations:

Refugee Resettlement Office, 27316–27317Regional Offices, 27315–27316

Civil Rights CommissionNOTICESMeetings; State advisory committees:

Wyoming, 27271

Commerce DepartmentSee Export Administration BureauSee Foreign-Trade Zones BoardSee International Trade AdministrationSee National Institute of Standards and Technology

Committee for the Implementation of Textile AgreementsNOTICESTextile consultation; review of trade:

India and Brazil, 27273–27274India and Honduras, 27275–27276India and Hong Kong, 27274–27275Philippines et al., 27276–27277

Consumer Product Safety CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 27374

Copyright Office, Library of CongressNOTICESVisual Artists Rights Act of 1990; moral rights provision

waiver; hearing, 27329–27332

Customs ServicePROPOSED RULESUruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA):

Textiles and textile products; country of origindetermination, 27378–27391

Defense DepartmentSee Navy Department

NOTICESFederal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):

Agency information collection activities under OMBreview, 27277–27278

Education DepartmentRULESFederal regulatory review, 27223–27226NOTICESMeetings:

National Assessment Governing Board, 27279National Educational Research Policy and Priorities

Board, 27278–27279

Energy DepartmentSee Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Environmental Protection AgencyNOTICESFederal regulatory review:

Reinvention pilot programs; proposals solicitation andcomment request, 27282–27291

Executive Office of the PresidentSee Presidential Documents

Export Administration BureauNOTICESMeetings:

Regulations and Procedures Technical AdvisoryCommittee, 27271–27272

Farm Credit AdministrationNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 27374

Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 27374

Federal Emergency Management AgencyRULESFlood insurance; communities eligible for sale:

Pennsylvania et al., 27226–27228NOTICESDisaster and emergency areas:

Louisiana, 27291North Dakota, 27291

Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionNOTICESNatural gas certificate filings:

Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. et al., 27279–27280Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

IEP Power Marketing, L.L.C., 27280Koch Gateway Pipeline Co., 27280NorAm Gas Transmission Co., 27281Northeast Utilities Service Co., 27281Northern Natural Gas Co., 27281Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Co., 27281–27282Trunkline Gas Co., 27282Williams Natural Gas Co., 27282

IV Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Contents

Federal Maritime CommissionRULESMaritime carriers in domestic offshore and foreign

commerce:Tariffs filing, posting, publishing, etc.; CFR parts

removed, 27228–27231PROPOSED RULESOcean freight forwarders, marine terminal operations, and

passenger vessels:Service contract filing requirements; miscellaneous

revisions, 27248–27249

Federal Reserve SystemNOTICESApplications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

Barol, Edward N., Trustee for Irrevocable Trust andTravel One et al., 27292

Towne Bancorp, Inc., et al., 27292

Federal Trade CommissionPROPOSED RULESTrade regulation rules:

Extension ladders; deceptive advertising and labeling asto length, 27245–27246

Glass fiber curtains and draperies and glass fiber curtainand drapery fabrics; failure to disclose that skinirritation may result from washing or handling,27243–27244

Non-prismatic and partially prismatic instruments beingprismatic binoculars; deception, 27241–27242

Quick-freeze aerosol spray products used for frostingcocktail glasses; lethal effects of inhaling, failure todisclose, 27244–27245

Sleeping bags; advertising and labeling as to size, 27240–27241

Tablecloths and related products; deceptive advertisingand labeling as to size, 27242–27243

NOTICESProhibited trade practices:

B.A.T. Industries p.l.c. et al., 27309Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp., 27292–27305Del Monte Foods Co. et al., 27305National Dietary Research, Inc., et al., 27305–27309Original Marketing, Inc., 27309–27314

Fish and Wildlife ServicePROPOSED RULESMigratory bird hunting:

Migratory bird harvest information program, 27249

Food and Drug AdministrationRULESAnimal drugs, feeds, and related products:

Guaifenesin, 27223Human drugs:

Antibiotic drugs—Cefuroxime axetil for oral suspension, 27221–27223

NOTICESReports; availability, etc.:

Iron-containing products; warning labels; consumerresearch, 27321

Food Safety and Inspection ServiceNOTICESCodex Alimentarius Commission; international sanitary and

phytosanitary standard-setting activities, 27250–27270

Foreign-Trade Zones BoardNOTICESApplications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

GeorgiaMerck & Co., Inc.; pharmaceutical manufacturing

facility, 27272Puerto Rico

Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quimica de Puerto Rico, Inc.;pharmaceutical manufacturing facility, 27272

Forest ServiceNOTICESEnvironmental statements; availability, etc.:

Coconino National Forest, AZ, 27270–27271Meetings:

State Foresters Committee, 27271Western Washington Cascades Provincial Interagency

Executive Committee Advisory Committee, 27271

General Services AdministrationNOTICESFederal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):

Agency information collection activities under OMBreview, 27277–27278

Health and Human Services DepartmentSee Centers for Disease Control and PreventionSee Children and Families AdministrationSee Food and Drug AdministrationSee Public Health Service

Intergovernmental Relations Advisory CommissionNOTICESUnfunded Mandates Reform Act:

Evaluation of existing mandates on State, local, and tribalgovernments—

Proposed criteria, 27324–27325

Interior DepartmentSee Fish and Wildlife ServiceSee Land Management BureauSee National Park ServiceSee Reclamation BureauSee Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement OfficePROPOSED RULESRegulatory agenda

Correction, 27247–27248

Internal Revenue ServiceNOTICESOrganization, functions, and authority delegations:

Director, Employee Plans Division, 27373

International Trade AdministrationNOTICESAntidumping:

New shipper administrative review request, 27273

Interstate Commerce CommissionNOTICESRailroad services abandonment:

CSX Transportation, Inc., 27328–27329

Justice DepartmentNOTICESPollution control; consent judgments:

Kanter Cars, Inc., 27329

VFederal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Contents

Land Management BureauNOTICESAlaska Native claims selection:

Chugach Alaska Corp., 27325

Library of CongressSee Copyright Office, Library of Congress

National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNOTICESEnvironmental statements; availability, etc.:

International space station program; assembly andoperation, 27332–27333

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR):Agency information collection activities under OMB

review, 27277–27278Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially

exclusive:MERCO Inc., 27333

National Credit Union AdministrationPROPOSED RULESCredit unions:

Corporate credit unions; requirements for insurance,27240

National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationRULESChild restraint systems:

Rear facing infant; interaction between child restraint andair bags—

Cutoff devices, 27233–27239

National Institute for LiteracyNOTICESMeetings:

Advisory Board, 27333–27334

National Institute of Standards and TechnologyNOTICESMeetings:

Orthopaedic joint replacement implant materials;accelerated wear resistance screening tests;cooperative research and development consortium,27273

National Park ServiceNOTICESEnvironmental statements; availability, etc.:

Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, WA, 27325–27326National Register of Historic Places:

Pending nominations, 27326–27327Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway, MN and WI;

temporary restricted access program to prevent spreadof exotic zebra mussel, 27327

Navy DepartmentNOTICESMeetings:

Naval Research Advisory Committee, 27277

Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 27374–27375Operating licenses, amendments; no significant hazards

considerations; biweekly notices, 27334–27353

Presidential DocumentsPROCLAMATIONSSpecial observances:

Maritime Day, National (Proc. 6803), 27399–27400ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERSMexico; certification regarding use of Exchange

Stabilization Fund and Federal Reserve in relation toeconomic crisis (Memorandum of May 17, 1995),27395–27396

Public Health ServiceSee Centers for Disease Control and PreventionSee Food and Drug AdministrationNOTICESGrants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

Family planning services projects, 27321–27324

Reclamation BureauNOTICESEnvironmental statements; availability, etc.:

Yakima River Basin, WA; water enhancement project,27327–27328

Research and Special Programs AdministrationRULESHazardous materials:

Hazardous materials transportation—Registration and fee assessment program, 27231–27233

Securities and Exchange CommissionNOTICESSelf-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes:

American Stock Exchange, Inc., 27353–27357Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 27357–27360Depository Trust Co., 27360–27362

Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:Northern Life Insurance Co. et al., 27362–27365Quest for Value Distributors et al., 27365–27366Smith Barney/Travelers Series Fund, et al., 27366–27371

Small Business AdministrationNOTICESLicense surrenders:

Investor’s Equity, Inc., 27371Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

Exim Capital Corp., 27371–27372

Social Security AdministrationNOTICESMeetings:

Social Security Advisory Council, 27372

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement OfficePROPOSED RULESPermanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation

plan submissions:North Dakota, 27246–27247

Textile Agreements Implementation CommitteeSee Committee for the Implementation of Textile

Agreements

Transportation DepartmentSee National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationSee Research and Special Programs Administration

Treasury DepartmentSee Customs ServiceSee Internal Revenue Service

VI Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Contents

NOTICES

Organization, functions, and authority delegations:Commissioner, Financial Management Service, 27372–

27373

Separate Parts In This Issue

Part IIDepartment of the Treasury, Customs Service, 27378–27391

Part IIIThe President, 27395–27396

Part IVThe President, 27399–27400

Reader AidsAdditional information, including a list of public laws,telephone numbers, and finding aids, appears in the ReaderAids section at the end of this issue.

Electronic Bulletin BoardFree Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Lawnumbers, Federal Register finding aids, and a list ofdocuments on public inspection is available on 202–275–1538 or 275–0920.

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in theReader Aids section at the end of this issue.

VIIFederal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Contents

3 CFRAdministrative Orders:Memorandum:May 17, 1995...................27395Proclamations:6803.................................2739912 CFRProposed Rules:704...................................27240741...................................2724016 CFRProposed Rules:400...................................27240402...................................27241404...................................27242413...................................27243417...................................27244418...................................2724519 CFRProposed Rules:10.....................................2737812.....................................27378102...................................2737821 CFR436...................................27221442...................................27221522...................................2722330 CFRProposed Rules:934...................................2724634 CFR78.....................................27223208...................................27223215...................................27223230...................................27223232...................................27223233...................................27223234...................................27223236...................................27223238...................................27223241...................................27223245...................................27223246...................................27223247...................................27223250...................................27223251...................................27223252...................................27223253...................................27223254...................................27223255...................................27223256...................................27223257...................................27223258...................................27223282...................................27223298...................................27223346...................................27223347...................................27223354...................................27223362...................................27223372...................................27223374...................................27223405...................................27223407...................................27223408...................................27223409...................................27223414...................................27223416...................................27223417...................................27223418...................................27223419...................................27223422...................................27223423...................................27223424...................................27223

445...................................27223462...................................27223463...................................27223471...................................27223473...................................27223474...................................27223475...................................27223476...................................27223500...................................27223501...................................27223520...................................27223524...................................27223525...................................27223526...................................27223537...................................27223538...................................27223548...................................27223561...................................27223573...................................27223574...................................27223581...................................27223629...................................27223665...................................27223671...................................27223673...................................27223691...................................27223698...................................27223700...................................27223706...................................27223707...................................27223708...................................27223722...................................27223750...................................27223755...................................27223757...................................27223758...................................27223760...................................27223761...................................27223762...................................27223763...................................27223768...................................27223773...................................27223778...................................27223779...................................27223790...................................27223

43 CFRProposed Rules:11.....................................27247

44 CFR64.....................................27226

46 CFR501...................................27228502...................................27228503...................................27228504...................................27228514...................................27228515...................................27228550...................................27228552...................................27228560...................................27228572...................................27228580...................................27228581...................................27228582...................................27228583...................................27228Proposed Rules:514...................................27248

49 CFR107...................................27231571...................................27233

50 CFRProposed Rules:20.....................................27249

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains regulatory documents having generalapplicability and legal effect, most of whichare keyed to and codified in the Code ofFederal Regulations, which is published under50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold bythe Superintendent of Documents. Prices ofnew books are listed in the first FEDERALREGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

27221

Vol. 60, No. 99


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ANDHUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 436 and 442

[Docket No. 94N–0352]

Antibiotic Drugs; Cefuroxime Axetil forOral Suspension

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is amending theantibiotic drug regulations to includethe accepted standards for cefuroximeaxetil for its use in a new dosage formof cefuroxime axetil, cefuroxime axetilfor oral suspension. The manufacturerhas supplied sufficient data andinformation to establish its safety andefficacy.DATES: Effective June 22, 1995; writtencomments, notice of participation, andrequests for a hearing by June 22, 1995;data, information, and analyses tojustify a hearing by July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: Submit written commentsto the Dockets Management Branch(HFA–305), Food and DrugAdministration, rm. 1–23, 12420Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:James Timper, Center for DrugEvaluation and Research (HFD–520),Food and Drug Administration, 5600Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,301–443–6714.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA hasevaluated data submitted in accordancewith regulations promulgated undersection 507 of the Federal Food, Drug,and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 357), asamended, with respect to a request forapproval of a new dosage form of

cefuroxime axetil, cefuroxime axetil fororal suspension. The agency hasconcluded that the data supplied by themanufacturer concerning this antibioticdrug are adequate to establish its safetyand efficacy when used as directed inthe labeling and that the regulationsshould be amended in parts 436 and 442(21 CFR parts 436 and 442) to includethe accepted standards for this product.

Environmental Impact

The agency has determined under 21CFR 25.24(c)(6) that this action is of atype that does not individually orcumulatively have a significant effect onthe human environment. Therefore,neither an environmental assessmentnor an environmental impact statementis required.

Submitting Comments and FilingObjections

This final rule announces standardsthat FDA has accepted in a request forapproval of an antibiotic drug. Becausethis final rule is not controversial andbecause, when effective, it providesnotice of accepted standards, FDA findsthat notice and comment procedure isunnecessary and not in the publicinterest. This final rule, therefore, iseffective June 22, 1995. Howeverinterested persons may, on or beforeJune 22, 1995, submit written commentsto the Dockets Management Branch(address above). Two copies of anycomments are to be submitted, exceptthat individuals may submit one copy.Comments are to be identified with thedocket number found in brackets in theheading of this document. Receivedcomments may be seen in the DocketsManagement Branch between 9 a.m. and4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Any person who will be adverselyaffected by this final rule may fileobjections to it and request a hearing.Reasonable grounds for the hearingmust be shown. Any person whodecides to seek a hearing must file (1)on or before June 22, 1995, a writtennotice of participation and request for ahearing, and (2) on or before July 24,1995, the data, information, andanalyses on which the person relies tojustify a hearing, as specified in 21 CFR314.300. A request for a hearing may notrest upon mere allegations or denials,but must set forth specific facts showing

that there is a genuine and substantialissue of fact that requires a hearing. Ifit conclusively appears from the face ofthe data, information, and factualanalyses in the request for a hearing thatno genuine and substantial issue of factprecludes the action taken by this order,or if a request for a hearing is not madein the required format or with therequired analyses, the Commissioner ofFood and Drugs will enter summaryjudgment against the person(s) whorequest(s) the hearing, making findingsand conclusions and denying a hearing.All submissions must be filed in threecopies, identified with the docketnumber appearing in the heading of thisdocument and filed with the DocketsManagement Branch.

The procedures and requirementsgoverning this order, a notice ofparticipation and request for a hearing,a submission of data, information, andanalyses to justify a hearing, othercomments, and grant or denial of ahearing are contained in 21 CFR314.300.

All submissions under this order,except for data and informationprohibited from public disclosure under21 U.S.C. 331(j) or 18 U.S.C. 1905, maybe seen in the Dockets ManagementBranch (address above) between 9 a.m.and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Parts 436 and442

Antibiotics.Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and underauthority delegated to the Commissionerof Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 436and 442 are amended as follows:

PART 436—TESTS AND METHODS OFASSAY OF ANTIBIOTIC ANDANTIBIOTIC-CONTAINING DRUGS

1. The authority citation for 21 CFRpart 436 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 507 of the Federal Food,Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 357).

2. Section 436.215 is amended byalphabetically adding a new entry to thetable in paragraph (b) and by revisingparagraph (c)(9) to read as follows:

§ 436.215 Dissolution test.

* * * * *(b) * * *

27222 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Dosage form Dissolution medium Rotation rate 1 Sampling time(s) Apparatus

* * * * * * *Cefuroxime axetil for oral sus-

pension.900 mL Sorenson’s Modi-

fied Phosphate Buffer,pH 7.0.

50 ..................................... 30 min .............................. 2

* * * * * * *

1 Rotation rate of basket or paddle stirring element (revolutions per minute).

(c) * * *(9) Cefuroxime axetil tablets and

powder for oral suspension—(i)Preparation of working standardsolution—(a) Cefuroxime axetil tablets.Accurately weigh approximately 60milligrams of cefuroxime axetil workingstandard into a suitable-sizedvolumetric flask. Dissolve in 5milliliters of methanol and dilute tovolume with 0.07N hydrochloric acid toobtain a known concentrationequivalent to 0.01 to 0.02 milligram ofcefuroxime activity per milliliter.

(b) Cefuroxime axetil for oralsuspension. Accurately weighapproximately 15 milligrams ofcefuroxime axetil working standard intoa 100-milliliter volumetric flask.Dissolve in 5 milliliters of methanol anddilute to volume with Sorenson’sModified Phosphate Buffer, pH 7.0 (4.2grams of sodium dihydrogenorthophosphate dihydrate and 14.3grams of hydrogen disodiumorthophosphate dodecahydrate per literof water).

(ii) Preparation of sample solution—(a) Cefuroxime axetil tablets. Filterthrough a 0.45-micron filter and dilutean accurately measured portion of thefiltrate with sufficient 0.07Nhydrochloric acid to obtain aconcentration equivalent to 0.01 to 0.02milligram of cefuroxime activity permilliliter (estimated).

(b) Cefuroxime axetil for oralsuspension. Filter the sample throughan 8-micron filter. A coarse prefiltermay be used to prevent clogging. Usethe filtrate solution without furtherdilution.

(iii) Procedure—(a) Cefuroxime axetiltablets. Using a suitablespectrophotometer and 0.07Nhydrochloric acid as the blank,determine the absorbance of eachstandard and sample solution at theabsorbance peak at approximately 280nanometers. Determine the exactposition of the absorption peak for theparticular instrument used.

(b) Cefuroxime axetil for oralsuspension. Using a suitablespectrophotometer and Sorenson’s

Modified Phosphate Buffer, pH 7.0 (4.2grams of sodium dihydrogenorthophosphate dihydrate and 14.3grams of hydrogen disodiumorthophosphate dodecahydrate per literof water) as the blank, determine theabsorbance of each standard and samplesolution at the absorbance peak atapproximately 280 nanometers.Determine the exact position of theabsorption peak for the particularinstrument used.

(iv) Calculations. Determine the totalamount of cefuroxime activity dissolvedas follows:

TA d

AU C

s

= × × × 900

where:T = Total milligrams of cefuroxime activity

dissolved;AU = Absorbance of sample;c = Cefuroxime activity of working standard

solution in milligrams per milliliter;d = Dilution factor of sample filtrate; andAs = Absorbance of standard.

* * * * *

PART 442—CEPHA ANTIBIOTICDRUGS


Authority: Sec. 507 of the Federal Food,Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 357).

§ 442.119a [Redesignated from § 442.119]4. Section 442.119 is redesignated as

§ 442.119a and new §§ 442.119 and442.119b are added to subpart B to readas follows:

§ 442.119 Cefuroxime axetil oral dosageforms.

§ 442.119b Cefuroxime axetil for oralsuspension.

(a) Requirements for certification—(1)Standards of identity, strength, quality,and purity. Cefuroxime axetil for oralsuspension is cefuroxime axetil withone or more suitable and harmlessdiluents, suspending and sweeteningagents, and flavorings. Whenreconstituted as directed in the labeling,

it contains cefuroxime axetil equivalentto 25 milligrams of cefuroxime permillimeter. Its potency is satisfactory ifit is not less than 90 percent and notmore than 115 percent of the number ofmilligrams of cefuroxime that it isrepresented to contain. It passes thedissolution test. Its moisture content isnot more than 0.2 percent. Whenreconstituted as directed in the labeling,its pH is not less than 3.5 and not morethan 5.5. It passes the identity test. Thecefuroxime axetil used conforms to thestandards prescribed by § 442.19(a)(1).

(2) Labeling. It shall be labeled inaccordance with the requirements of§ 432.5 of this chapter.

(3) Requests for certification; samples.In addition to complying with therequirements of § 431.1 of this chapter,each such request shall contain:

(i) Results of tests and assays on:(A) The cefuroxime axetil used in

making the batch for potency, isomer Aratio, moisture, crystallinity, andidentity.

(B) The batch for cefuroxime potency,dissolution, moisture, pH of constitutedsuspension, and identity.

(ii) Samples, if required by theDirector, Center for Drug Evaluation andResearch:

(A) The cefuroxime axetil used inmaking the batch: 10 packages, eachcontaining approximately 500milligrams.

(B) The batch: A minimum of 12immediate containers.

(b) Tests and methods of assay—(1)Potency. Proceed as directed in§ 442.19(b)(1). Working standard andsample solutions and calculations are asfollows:

(i) Preparation of working standardsolution. Dissolve approximately 15milligrams of the cefuroxime axetilworking standard, accurately weighed,in 20.0 milliliters of methanol in a 50-milliliter volumetric flask. Dilute tovolume with deionized water, and swirlto mix. Store for no more than 8 hoursunder refrigeration and protected fromlight.

(ii) Preparation of sample solution.Reconstitute the sample as directed in

27223Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

the labeling. Transfer an accuratelymeasured representative portion of thesuspension equivalent to one dose intoa 200-milliliter volumetric flask. Add 10milliliters of methanol and disperse thesample. Dilute to volume withmethanol. Dilute 20.0 milliliters of thissolution to volume in a 50-millilitervolumetric flask with deionized water,swirl to mix, and allow to stand for 10minutes. (Note: A white turbidity isformed.) Filter this solution via asuitable disposable filter unit,discarding the first 5 milliliters. Storefor no more than 8 hours underrefrigeration and protect from light.

(iii) Calculations. Calculate themilligrams of cefuroxime per dose (5milliliters) as follows:

Milligrams ofcefuroxime per

5 millilitersof sample

= × ××

A P d

AU S

S 1 000,

where:AU = Sum of the areas of the cefuroxime

axetil sample isomer A and isomer Bpeaks;

AS = Sum of the peak areas of the cefuroximeaxetil working standard isomer A andisomer B peaks;

PS = Cefuroxime activity in the cefuroximeaxetil working standard solution inmicrograms per milliliter; and

d = Dilution factor of the sample.(2) Dissolution. Proceed as directed in

§ 436.215 of this chapter. The quantityQ (the amount of cefuroxime activitydissolved) is 60 percent at 30 minutes.

(3) Moisture. Proceed as directed in§ 436.201 of this chapter.

(4) pH. Reconstitute as directed in thelabeling and proceed as directed in§ 436.202 of this chapter.

(5) Identity. The high-performanceliquid chromatogram of the sampledetermined as directed in paragraph(b)(1) of this section comparesqualitatively to that of the cefuroximeaxetil working standard.

Dated: May 9, 1995.Murray M. Lumpkin,Deputy Director, Center for Drug Evaluationand Research.[FR Doc. 95–12604 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

21 CFR Part 522

[Docket No. 95N–0096]

Implantation or Injectable DosageForm New Animal Drugs; Guaifenesin

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is amending the

animal drug regulations to reflect thechange of the animal drug name fromglyceryl guaiacolate to guaifenesin. Thisamendment is an administrative changeto redesignate glyceryl guaiacolateproducts as guaifenesin products.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 23, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mohammad I. Sharar, Center forVeterinary Medicine (HFV–216), Foodand Drug Administration, 7500 StandishPl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301–594–1722.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In theFederal Register of June 30, 1972 (37 FR12936) and November 5, 1976 (41 FR48732), FDA published final ruleswhich reflected approval of injectableglyceryl guaiacolate products. In theFederal Register of December 10, 1984(49 FR 48038), FDA published a finalrule which reflected approval of aguaifenesin powder for injection.Guaifenesin is the newer chemical namefor glyceryl guaiacolate. At the time ofthe December 10, 1984, approval, theprior approvals were not amended toreflect the newer chemical name. FDAis amending the regulations in part 522(21 CFR part 522) to reflect the newerchemical name by removing§§ 522.1060, 522.1060a, and 522.1060b;by adding a new sponsor to § 522.1085;and by adding new § 522.1086Guaifenesin injection.

FDA has determined under 21 CFR25.24(a)(9) that this action is of a typethat does not individually orcumulatively have a significant effect onthe human environment. Therefore,neither an environmental assessmentnor an environmental impact statementis required.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522

Animal drugs.

Therefore, under the Federal Food,Drug, and Cosmetic Act and underauthority delegated to the Commissionerof Food and Drugs and redelegated tothe Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21CFR part 522 is amended as follows:

PART 522—IMPLANTATION ORINJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEWANIMAL DRUGS


Authority: Sec. 512 of the Federal Food,Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b).

§ 522.1060 [Removed]

2. Section 522.1060 Glycerylguaiacolate implantation or injectabledosage forms is removed.

§ 522.1060a [Removed]3. Section 522.1060a Glyceryl

guaiacolate sterile powder is removed.

§ 522.1060b [Removed]4. Section 522.1060b Glyceryl

guaiacolate injection is removed.

§ 522.1085 [Amended]5. Section 522.1085 Guaifenesin

sterile powder is amended in paragraph(b) by removing ‘‘000031’’ and adding inits place the phrase ‘‘000031 and037990’’.

6. New § 522.1086 is added to read asfollows:

§ 522.1086 Guaifenesin injection.(a) Specifications. Each milliliter of

sterile aqueous solution contains 50milligrams of guaifenesin and 50milligrams of dextrose.

(b) Sponsor. See No. 037990 in§ 510.600(c) of this chapter.

(c) Conditions of use. (1) The drug isused intravenously in horses as askeletal muscle relaxant.

(2) Administer rapidly at a dosage of1 milliliter per pound of body weight.

(3) No to be used in horses intendedfor food.

(4) Federal law restricts this drug touse by or on the order of a licensedveterinarian.

Dated: May 5, 1995.Stephen F. Sundlof,Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.[FR Doc. 95–12506 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Parts 78, 208, 215, 230, 232,233, 234, 236, 238, 241, 245, 246, 247,250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257,258, 282, 298, 346, 347, 354, 362, 372,374, 405, 407, 408, 409, 414, 416, 417,418, 419, 422, 423, 424, 445, 462, 463,471, 473, 474, 475, 476, 500, 501, 520,524, 525, 526, 537, 538, 548, 555, 561,573, 574, 581, 629, 665, 671, 673, 691,698, 700, 706, 707, 708, 722, 750, 755,757, 758, 760, 761, 762, 763, 768, 773,778, 779, and 790

Removal of Regulations

AGENCY: Department of Education.ACTION: Final regulations.

SUMMARY: The Secretary amends theCode of Federal Regulations (CFR) toremove unnecessary and obsoleteregulations. As a result of newlegislation, absence of funding, andreview in accordance with thePresident’s regulatory reinventioninitiative, the Secretary has determined


that these regulations are no longerneeded. The Secretary takes this actionto remove the regulations from the CFR.EFFECTIVE DATE: These regulations areeffective June 22, 1995.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Kenneth C. Depew, U.S. Department ofEducation, Room 5112, FB-10, 600Independence Avenue, SW,Washington, DC 20202–2241.Telephone: (202) 401–8300. Individualswho use a telecommunications devicefor the deaf (TDD) may call the FederalInformation Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8p.m., Eastern time, Monday throughFriday.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PresidentClinton’s memorandum of March 4,1995, titled ‘‘Regulatory ReinventionInitiative’’ directed heads ofdepartments and agencies to review allexisting regulations to eliminate thosethat are outdated and modify others toincrease flexibility and reduce burden.The Department has undertaken athorough review of its existingregulations and has identified theregulations removed by this documentas obsolete and unnecessary.

The regulations being removed are nolonger necessary to administer theprogram, have been superseded by newlegislation, or were issued to implementa program that is no longer funded. Tothe extent that regulations are needed toimplement new legislation, they will beissued separately from this document.Any determination to issue newregulations will be carefully consideredto ensure that it is consistent with thePresident’s regulatory reform efforts andthe principles in Executive Order 12866.

In consultation with customers andpartners, the Department is alsoreviewing its other existing regulationsthoroughly at this time, and thoseregulations will be amended asappropriate to eliminate or reviseoutdated provisions, reduce burden, orincrease flexibility. Amendments thatcan be accomplished without statutorychanges are expected to be published forpublic comment as soon as the reviewsare completed and regulatory changesare drafted. For example, the notice ofproposed rulemaking published on May1, 1995 (60 FR 21400), implementingamendments to the Title I—HelpingDisadvantaged Children Meet HighStandards program under theElementary and Secondary EducationAct of 1965, as amended by theImproving America’s Schools Act of1994, includes the removal of fouradditional parts. In addition, theSecretary will seek appropriate statutorychanges if legislative authority is

required in order to achieve regulatoryreform.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking

In accordance with section 437 of theGeneral Education Provisions Act (20U.S.C. 1232) and the AdministrativeProcedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), it is thepractice of the Secretary to offerinterested parties the opportunity tocomment on proposed regulations.However, these regulations merelyreflect statutory changes and removeunnecessary and obsolete regulatoryprovisions. Removal of the regulationsdoes not establish or affect substantivepolicy. Therefore, the Secretary hasdetermined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.553(b)(B), that public comment isunnecessary and contrary to the publicinterest.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

These regulations have beenexamined under the PaperworkReduction Act of 1980 and have beenfound to contain no informationcollection requirements.

Assessment of Educational Impact

Based on its own review, theDepartment has determined that theregulations in this document do notrequire transmission of information thatis being gathered by or is available fromany other agency or authority of theUnited States.

List of Subjects

34 CFR Part 78

Administrative practice andprocedure, Education Appeal Board,Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 208

Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education, Teachers.

34 CFR Part 215

Education of disadvantaged,Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 230

Drug abuse, Grant programs—education, Hawaiian natives.

34 CFR Part 232

Drug abuse, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 233

Drug abuse, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education, Teachers.

34 CFR Part 234

Drug abuse, Colleges and universities,Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 236


34 CFR Part 238


34 CFR Part 241

Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education, Law.

34 CFR Part 245

Grant programs—education, Equaleducational opportunity, Women.

34 CFR Part 246


34 CFR Part 247


34 CFR Part 250

Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education, Indians—education.

34 CFR Part 251


34 CFR Part 252


34 CFR Part 253


34 CFR Part 254


34 CFR Part 255


34 CFR Part 256

Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education, Indians—education, Teachers.

34 CFR Part 257

Adult education, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education, Indians—education.


34 CFR Part 258

Adult education, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education, Indians—education.

34 CFR Part 282

Adult education, Education ofdisadvantaged, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education, Teachers.

34 CFR Part 298

Education of disadvantaged,Elementary and secondary education,Grant programs—education, Libraries,Teachers.

34 CFR Part 346

Grant programs—education, Scienceand technology.

34 CFR Part 347

Grant programs—education, Scienceand technology.

34 CFR Part 354

Educational research, Grantprograms—education.

34 CFR Part 362

Grant programs—education,Vocational rehabilitation.

34 CFR Part 372

Grant programs—education,Vocational rehabilitation.

34 CFR Part 374

Grant programs—education,Recreation and recreation areas,Vocational rehabilitation.

34 CFR Part 405

Colleges and universities, Grantprograms—education, Vocationaleducation.

34 CFR Part 407

Grant programs—education,Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 408

Education of disadvantaged,Employment, Grant programs—education, Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 409


34 CFR Part 414

College and universities, Grantprograms—education,Telecommunications, Vocationaleducation.

34 CFR Part 416

Grant programs—education, Studentaid, Teachers, Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 417

Grant programs—education, Teachers,Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 418

Colleges and universities, Grantprograms—education, Scholarships andfellowships, Teachers, Vocationaleducation.

34 CFR Part 419

Grant programs—education,Scholarships and fellowships,Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 422

Grant programs—education,Prisoners, Vocational education.

34 CFR Part 423

Grant programs—education,Education of disadvantaged, Vocationaleducation.

34 CFR Part 424


34 CFR Part 445

Colleges and universities, Elementaryand secondary education, Grantprograms—education, Vocationaleducation.

34 CFR Part 462

Adult education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 463

Adult education, Education ofdisadvantaged, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 471


34 CFR Part 473

Adult education, Grant programs—education, Manpower trainingprograms, Small businesses.

34 CFR Part 474

Adult education, Education ofdisadvantaged, Youth, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 475

Adult education, Grant programs—education, Migrant labor.

34 CFR Part 476


34 CFR Part 500

Bilingual education, Grantprograms—education.

34 CFR Part 501


34 CFR Part 520

Bilingual education, Equaleducational opportunity, Grantprograms—education.

34 CFR Part 524


34 CFR Part 525


34 CFR Part 526


34 CFR Part 537


34 CFR Part 538

Bilingual education, Education ofdisadvantaged, Grant programs—education, Refugees.

34 CFR Part 548


34 CFR Part 555


34 CFR Part 561


34 CFR Part 573

Bilingual education, Colleges anduniversities, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 574


34 CFR Part 581

Bilingual education, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 629

Adult education, Colleges anduniversities, Grant programs—education, Veterans.

34 CFR Part 665

Colleges and universities, Grantprograms—education, Teachers.

34 CFR Part 671

Colleges and universities, Grantprograms—education, Libraries.


34 CFR Part 673

Colleges and universities, Grantprograms—education, Loan programs.

34 CFR Part 691

Colleges and universities,Scholarships and fellowships, Studentaid.

34 CFR Part 698

Colleges and universities, Civil rights,Crime, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 700


34 CFR Part 706


34 CFR Part 707


34 CFR Part 708


34 CFR Part 722

Business and industry, Colleges anduniversities, Education ofdisadvantaged, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 750

Educational research, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 755


34 CFR Part 757


34 CFR Part 758


34 CFR Part 760

Education of disadvantaged,Educational research, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs—education.

34 CFR Part 761

Educational research, Equaleducational opportunity, Grantprograms—education.

34 CFR Part 762

Educational research, Scholarshipsand fellowships.

34 CFR Part 763

Drug abuse, Elementary andsecondary education, Grant programs-education.

34 CFR Part 768

Grant programs—education, Libraries.

34 CFR Part 773

Colleges and universities, Educationalresearch, Grant programs—education,Libraries.

34 CFR Part 778

Educational research, Grantprograms—education, Libraries.

34 CFR Part 779

Grant programs—education, Libraries.

34 CFR Part 790

Grant programs—education, Teachers.Dated: May 19, 1995.

Richard W. Riley,Secretary of Education.(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistancenumbers do not apply.)

For the reasons set forth in thepreamble, under the authority at 20U.S.C. 1221e–3, the Secretary ofEducation amends Title 34 of the Codeof Federal Regulations by removingParts 78, 208, 215, 230, 232, 233, 234,236, 238, 241, 245, 246, 247, 250, 251,252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 282,298, 346, 347, 354, 362, 372, 374, 405,407, 408, 409, 414, 416, 417, 418, 419,422, 423, 424, 445, 462, 463, 471, 473,474, 475, 476, 500, 501, 520, 524, 525,526, 537, 538, 548, 555, 561, 573, 574,581, 629, 665, 671, 673, 691, 698, 700,706, 707, 708, 722, 750, 755, 757, 758,760, 761, 762, 763, 768, 773, 778, 779,and 790, and by removing the reserveddesignation for parts 404 and 420.

[FR Doc. 95–12732 Filed 5–19–95; 1:54 pm]BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCYMANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket No. FEMA–7617]

List of Communities Eligible for theSale of Flood Insurance

AGENCY: Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA).ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule identifiescommunities participating in theNational Flood Insurance Program(NFIP). These communities haveapplied to the program and have agreed

to enact certain floodplain managementmeasures. The communities’participation in the program authorizesthe sale of flood insurance to owners ofproperty located in the communitieslisted.EFFECTIVE DATES: The dates listed in thethird column of the table.ADDRESSES: Flood insurance policies forproperty located in the communitieslisted can be obtained from any licensedproperty insurance agent or brokerserving the eligible community, or fromthe NFIP at: Post Office Box 6464,Rockville, MD 20849, (800) 638–6620.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Robert F. Shea, Jr., Division Director,Program Implementation Division,Mitigation Directorate, 500 C Street,SW., room 417, Washington, DC 20472,(202) 646–3619.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIPenables property owners to purchaseflood insurance which is generally nototherwise available. In return,communities agree to adopt andadminister local floodplain managementmeasures aimed at protecting lives andnew construction from future flooding.Since the communities on the attachedlist have recently entered the NFIP,subsidized flood insurance is nowavailable for property in the community.

In addition, the Director of theFederal Emergency Management Agencyhas identified the special flood hazardareas in some of these communities bypublishing a Flood Hazard BoundaryMap (FHBM) or Flood Insurance RateMap (FIRM). The date of the flood map,if one has been published, is indicatedin the fourth column of the table. In thecommunities listed where a flood maphas been published, Section 102 of theFlood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, asamended, 42 U.S.C. 4012(a), requiresthe purchase of flood insurance as acondition of Federal or federally relatedfinancial assistance for acquisition orconstruction of buildings in the specialflood hazard areas shown on the map.

The Director finds that the delayedeffective dates would be contrary to thepublic interest. The Director also findsthat notice and public procedure under5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable andunnecessary.

National Environmental Policy Act

This rule is categorically excludedfrom the requirements of 44 CFR part10, Environmental Considerations. Noenvironmental impact assessment hasbeen prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Associate Director certifies thatthis rule will not have a significant


economic impact on a substantialnumber of small entities in accordancewith the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5U.S.C. 601 et seq., because the rulecreates no additional burden, but liststhose communities eligible for the saleof flood insurance.

Regulatory Classification

This final rule is not a significantregulatory action under the criteria ofsection 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 ofSeptember 30, 1993, RegulatoryPlanning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not involve anycollection of information for purposes of

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.3501 et seq.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

This rule involves no policies thathave federalism implications underExecutive Order 12612, Federalism,October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,p. 252.

Executive Order 12778, Civil JusticeReform

This rule meets the applicablestandards of section 2(b)(2) of ExecutiveOrder 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR55195, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 309.


Flood insurance, Floodplains.Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is

amended as follows:

PART 64—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 64continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

§ 64.6 [Amended]

2. The tables published under theauthority of § 64.6 are amended asfollows:

State/location CommunityNo. Effective date of eligibility Current effective

map date

New Eligibles—Emergency Program:Pennsylvania: McConnellsburg, borough of, Fulton Coun-

ty.422701 Apr. 7, 1995.

Montana: Roosevelt County, unincorporated areas .......... 300166 Apr. 7, 1995 ...................................................... Dec. 4, 1979.Illinois: Nauvoo, city of, Hancock County .......................... 170767 Apr. 7, 1995 ...................................................... Oct. 10, 1975.Alaska: Fort Yukon, city of, unorganized borough ............ 020045 Apr. 24, 1995.North Dakota: Minnewaukan, city of, Benson County ....... 380240 ......do.Georgia: Sumter County, unincorporated areas ................ 130521 Apr. 26, 1995.Michigan: Millington, township of, Tuscola County ............ 260929 ......do.Texas:

Burton, city of, Washington County ............................ 480649 ......do ................................................................ Dec. 20, 1974.Ector, city of, Fannin County ...................................... 480809 ......do ................................................................ July 11, 1975.Trinity County, unincorporated areas ......................... 481031 ......do ................................................................ May 2, 1980.

South Carolina: Sellers, town of, Marion County .............. 450145 ......do ................................................................ May 2, 1980.Reinstatements:

New York: Cherry Creek, town of, Chautauqua County ... 361107 July 8, 1980 Emerg; July 2, 1982 Reg; Nov. 4,1992, Susp; Apr. 28, 1995, Rein.

July 2, 1982.

Pennsylvania: Huston, township of, Blair County .............. 422332 Feb. 6, 1976, Emerg; Sept. 30, 1980, Reg;June 16, 1993, Susp; Apr. 28, 1995, Rein.

Sept. 30, 1980.

Regular Program Conversions:Region I:

Maine: Phillips, town of, Franklin County .......................... 230060 Apr. 17, 1995 Suspension Withdrawn ............. Apr. 17, 1995.Region III:

Pennsylvania: Springhill, township of, Fayette County ...... 421639 ......do.Region IV:

Mississippi: Coahoma County, unincorporated areas ....... 280038 ......do ................................................................ Do.Tennessee: Ripley, town of, Lauderdale County ............... 470100 ......do ................................................................ Do.

Region V:Minnesota:

Dover, city of, Olmsted County ................................... 270566 ......do ................................................................ Do.Eyota, city of, Olmsted County ................................... 270329 ......do ................................................................ Do.Oronoco, city of, Olmsted County .............................. 270330 ......do ................................................................ Do.Stewartville, city of, Olmsted County .......................... 270332 ......do ................................................................ Do.

Ohio: Richwood, village of, Union County ......................... 390549 ......do ................................................................ Do.Region VII:

Missouri:Clarkton, city of, Dunklin County ................................ 290126 ......do ................................................................ Do.Independence, city of, Clay and Jackson Counties ... 290172 ......Do. .............................................................. Do

Code for reading fourth column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension; Rein.—Reinstatement.


(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’)

Issued: May 16, 1995.Frank H. Thomas,Deputy Associate Director, MitigationDirectorate.[FR Doc. 95–12575 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6718–21–P

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

46 CFR Parts 501, 502, 503, 504, 514,515, 550, 552, 560, 572, 580, 581, 582,and 583

[Docket No. 95–01]

Filing of Tariffs by Marine TerminalOperators, Publishing, Filing andPosting of Tariffs in Domestic OffshoreCommerce; Publishing and Filing ofTariffs by Common Carriers in theForeign Commerce of the UnitedStates; Service Contracts

AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal MaritimeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) isremoving its rules relating to Filing ofTariffs by Marine Terminal Operators;Publishing, Filing and Posting of Tariffsin Domestic Offshore Commerce;Publishing and Filing of Tariffs byCommon Carriers in the ForeignCommerce of the United States; andService Contracts. These regulationscontain the guidelines, standards, andprocedures for marine terminaloperators (‘‘MTO’s’’) and commoncarriers by water to file and publishtheir tariffs and/or service contractessential terms with the Commission inpaper format. With the full scaleimplementation of the Commission’sAutomated Tariff Filing and InformationSystem (‘‘ATFI’’), which now requirestariffs and service contracts to be filedelectronically, these regulations are nolonger necessary. The Commission isalso amending various other regulationsto delete references to removedregulations and add replacementcitations.EFFECTIVE DATE: May 23, 1995.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Bryant L. VanBrakle, Director, Bureau ofTariffs, Certification and Licensing,Federal Maritime Commission,Washington, D.C. 20573, (202) 523–5796.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheFederal Maritime Commission initiatedthis proceeding by publishing a Noticeof Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPR’’) in theFederal Register on January 12, 1995.The NPR solicited comments on a

proposal to remove certain regulationsthat governed the filing of tariffs andservice contracts: 46 CFR Part 515,Filing of Tariffs by Marine TerminalOperators; 46 CFR Part 550, Publishing,Filing and Posting of Tariffs in DomesticOffshore Commerce; 46 CFR Part 580,Publishing and Filing of Tariffs byCommon Carriers in the ForeignCommerce of the United States; and 46CFR Part 581, Service Contracts.

The Commission is removing theseparts because ATFI is now fullyimplemented and all MTO’s andcommon carriers are now required tofile their tariffs and service contracts inelectronic format. (See Public Law 102–582, the High Seas Driftnet FisheriesEnforcement Act, section 502 of whichdirects carriers to ‘‘file electronicallywith the Commission all tariffs and allessential terms of service contractsrequired to be filed’’ by the 1916, 1933,or 1984 Acts; see also, 46 CFR Part 514).

The Commission did not receive anycomments on the proposal to removethese regulations. The Commission istherefore adopting the proposed rule asits final rule; and in addition, theCommission is amending Parts 501, 502,503, 504, 514, 552, 560, 572, 582, and583 to delete references to the aboveremoved parts and to add replacementcitations. Also, 46 CFR § 514.15 isamended by removing paragraph(b)(23)(ii) which erroneously refers toPart 525 which was previously removedby the Commission. These additionalchanges were not part of the NPR andare not substantive changes.

The Federal Maritime Commissioncertifies, pursuant to section 605(b) ofthe Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.605(b), that this final rule will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities,including small businesses, smallorganizational units, and smallgovernmental organizations. ‘‘Thecriteria contained in this sectionrequires the agency head to examineboth the degree of impact as well as thedispersion of that impact.’’ S. Rep. No.878, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 14 (1980)reprinted at 1980 U.S. Code Cong. andAdmin. News, p. 2788 at 2801. TheCommission does not believe that theremoval of Parts 515, 550, 580 and 581under the circumstances describedabove will result in an impact upon asubstantial number of small entities.

This final rule does not contain anycollection of information requirementsas defined by the Paperwork ReductionAct of 1980, as amended. Therefore,OMB review is not required.

List of Subjects

46 CFR Part 501

Administrative practice andprocedure, Authority delegations(Government agencies), Organizationand functions (Government agencies),Seals and insignia.

46 CFR Part 502

Administrative practice andprocedure, Claims, Equal access tojustice, Investigations, Lawyers,Maritime carriers, Penalties, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 503

Classified information, Freedom ofinformation, Privacy, Sunshine Act.

46 CFR Part 504

Environmental impact statements,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

46 CFR Part 514

Freight, Harbors, Maritime carriers,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

46 CFR Part 515

Freight, Harbors, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements,Warehouses.

46 CFR Part 550

Maritime carriers, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 552

Maritime carriers, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements, UniformSystem of Accounts.

46 CFR Part 560

Administrative practice andprocedure, Antitrust, Freight, Maritimecarriers, Penalties, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 572

Administrative practice andprocedure, Maritime carriers, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 580

Freight, Maritime carriers, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 581

Freight, Maritime carriers, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements.

46 CFR Part 582

Maritime carriers, Penalties,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.


46 CFR Part 583

Freight, Maritime carriers, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements, Suretybonds.

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553;sections 17 and 43 of the Shipping Act,1916 (46 U.S.C. app. 816, 841(a));sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the IntercoastalShipping Act, 1933 (46 U.S.C. app. 843,844, 845, 845(a), 845(b), 847); sections 8,10, and 17 of the Shipping Act of 1984(46 U.S.C. app. 1707, 1709, 1716);chapter IV of title 46 of the Code ofFederal Regulations is amended asfollows:

PART 515—[REMOVED]

1. Part 515 is removed.







PART 501—THE FEDERAL MARITIMECOMMISSION—GENERAL


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551–557, 701–706,2903 and 6304; 31 U.S.C. 3721; 41 U.S.C. 414and 418; 44 U.S.C. 501–520 and 3501–3520;46 U.S.C. app. 801–848, 876, 1111, and1701–1720; Reorganization Plan No. 7 of1961, 26 FR 7315, August 12, 1961; Pub. L.89–56, 79 Stat. 195; 5 CFR Part 2638.

6. Section 501.5 is amended byrevising the second sentence ofparagraph (h) introductory text to readas follows:

§ 501.5 Functions of the organizationalcomponents of the Federal MaritimeCommission.

* * * * *(h) * * * These programs carry out

provisions of the Shipping Act, 1933;the Shipping Act of 1984; and Pub. L.89–777, as implemented under Parts510, 514, 540, 552, 582 and 583 of thischapter. * * ** * * * *

7. Section 501.23 is revised to read asfollows:

§ 501.23 Delegation to the GeneralCounsel.

The authority listed in this section isdelegated to the General Counsel:Authority to classify carriers as state-controlled carriers within the meaningof section 3(8) of the Shipping Act of1984, except where a carrier submits a

rebuttal statement pursuant to§ 514.4(c)(2)(ii) of this chapter.

8. Section 501.27 is amended byrevising paragraphs (i), (j), and (k) toread as follows:

§ 501.27 Delegation to and redelegation bythe Director, Bureau of Tariffs, Certificationand Licensing.

* * * * *(i) Authority contained in § 514.7(j) of

this chapter to notify filing parties of theCommission’s intent to reject a servicecontract and/or statement of essentialterms and subsequently reject andreturn such contracts.

(j) Authority contained in part 514 ofthis chapter to approve, but not deny,requests for permission to correctclerical or administrative errors in theessential terms of filed service contracts.

(k) Authority contained in parts 514and 583 of this chapter to cancel thetariffs of NVOCCs who fail to file asurety bond, guaranty or insurancepolicy or, if required, designate an agentfor receipt of process, or whose suretybond or agent designation is canceled.* * * * *

PART 502—RULES OF PRACTICE ANDPROCEDURE


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 504, 551, 552, 553,556(c), 559, 561–569, 571–596; 12 U.S.C.1141j(a); 18 U.S.C. 207; 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3);28 U.S.C. 2112(a); 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C.app. 817, 820, 826, 841a, 1114(b), 1705,1707–1711, 1713–1716; E.O. 11222 of May 8,1965 (30 FR 6469); 21 U.S.C. 853a; and Pub.L. 88–777 (46 U.S.C. app. 817d, 817e).

10. Section 502.67 is amended byrevising the first sentence of paragraph(b)(2) to read as follows:

§ 502.67 Proceedings under section 3(a) ofthe Intercoastal Shipping Act, 1933.

* * * * *(b) * * *(2) Protests against across-the-board

increases, as defined in § 514.2 of thischapter, and against other proposedchanges in tariffs filed on at least thirty(30) days’ notice, shall be filed andserved no later than twenty (20) daysprior to the proposed effective date ofthe change. * * ** * * * *

PART 503—PUBLIC INFORMATION


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552, 552a, 552b, 553;31 U.S.C. 9701; E.O. 12356, 47 FR 14874,15557, 3 CFR 1982 Comp., p. 167.

12. Section 503.32 is amended byrevising paragraph (d) to read asfollows:

§ 503.32 Records generally available.* * * * *

(d) Terminal tariffs filed pursuant topart 514 of this chapter.* * * * *

PART 504—PROCEDURES FORENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ANALYSIS


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552, 553; secs. 21 and43 of the Shipping Act, 1916 (46 U.S.C. app.820 and 841a); secs. 13 and 17 of theShipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 1712and 1716); sec. 102 of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.4332(2)(b) and sec. 382(b) of the EnergyPolicy and Conservation Act of 1975 (42U.S.C. 6362).

14. Section 504.4 is amended byremoving the semicolon at the end ofparagraphs (a)(2), (a)(4), and (a)(5) andadding a period in its place and byrevising paragraphs (a)(6) and (a)(7) toread as follows:

§ 504.4 Categorical exclusions.* * * * *

(a) * * *(6) Consideration of special

permission applications filed pursuantto 46 CFR part 514.

(7) Receipt of terminal tariffs pursuantto 46 CFR part 514.* * * * *

PART 514—TARIFFS AND SERVICECONTRACTS


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; 31 U.S.C.9701; 46 U.S.C. app. 804, 812, 814–817(a),820, 833a, 841a, 843, 844, 845, 845a, 845b,847, 1702–1712, 1714–1716, 1718, 1721 and1722; and sec. 2(b) of Pub. L. 101–92, 103Stat. 601.

16. Section 514.1 is amended byrevising the first sentence of paragraph(c)(1)(iii)(E) to read as follows:

§ 514.1 Scope, purpose, requirements,penalties and fees.* * * * *

(c) * * *(1) * * *(iii) * * *(E) The tariff(s) of any common carrier

who files an anti-rebate certificationafter December 31 but before the end ofthe forty-five (45) days’ notice periodwill not be canceled; however, thecommon carrier will be subject to civilpenalties as provided in parts 502 and582 of this chapter. * * ** * * * *


§ 514.15 [Amended]17. Section 514.15 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph(b)(23)(ii).

PART 552—FINANCIAL REPORTS OFVESSEL OPERATING COMMONCARRIERS BY WATER IN THEDOMESTIC OFFSHORE TRADES


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46U.S.C. app. 817(a), 820, 841a, 843, 844, 845,845a and 847.

19. Section 552.1 is amended byrevising the second sentence ofparagraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 552.1 Purpose.(a) * * * Compliance is mandatory

and failure to file the reports requiredunder this part may result in denial ofrate increases or rejection of tariff lineitems implementing rate changes orpenalties of up to $100 for each day ofsuch default (46 U.S.C. app. 820(a)).* * * * *

20. Section 552.5 is amended byrevising paragraphs (b) and (c) to readas follows:

§ 552.5 Definitions.

* * * * *(b) The service means those voyages

and/or terminal facilities in which cargosubject to the Commission’s regulationunder part 514 of this chapter is eithercarried or handled.

(c) The trade means that part of theService subject to the Commission’sregulation under part 514 of thischapter, more extensively defined underDomestic offshore trade in paragraph (f)of this section.* * * * *

PART 560—AGREEMENTS BYCOMMON CARRIERS AND OTHERPERSONS SUBJECT TO THESHIPPING ACT, 1916


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46U.S.C. app. 814, 817(a), 820, 821, 833a, and841a.

22. Section 560.308 is amended byrevising the first sentence of paragraph(a) introductory text to read as follows:

§ 560.308 Marine terminal servicesagreements—exemption.

(a) Marine terminal servicesagreement means an agreement,contract, understanding, arrangement orassociation, written or oral (includingany modification, cancellation orappendix) between a marine terminal

operator and a common carrier by waterin interstate commerce that applies tomarine terminal services as defined in46 CFR 514.2 (including any marineterminal facilities, as defined in 46 CFR514.2, which may be providedincidentally to such marine terminalservices) that are provided to and paidfor by a common carrier by water ininterstate commerce. * * ** * * * *

23. Section 560.702 is amended byrevising the last sentence of paragraph(c) to read as follows:

§ 560.702 Filing of minutes—includingshippers’ requests and complaints.

* * * * *(c) * * * This reporting exemption

does not apply to discussions involvinggeneral rate policy, general rate changes,the opening or closing of rates, ordiscussions involving items, that ifadopted, would be required to bepublished in other tariff sections asspecified in Part 514 of this chapter.* * * * *

PART 572—AGREEMENTS BY OCEANCOMMON CARRIERS AND OTHERPERSONS SUBJECT TO THESHIPPING ACT OF 1984


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46U.S.C. app. 1701–1707, 1709–1710, 1712 and1714–1717.

25. Section 572.310 is amended byrevising the first sentence of paragraph(a) introductory text to read as follows:

§ 572.310 Marine terminal servicesagreements— exemption

(a) Marine terminal servicesagreement means an agreement,contract, understanding, arrangement orassociation, written or oral (includingany modification, cancellation orappendix) between a marine terminaloperator and an ocean common carrierthat applies to marine terminal servicesas defined in 46 CFR 514.2 (includingany marine terminal facilities, asdefined in 46 CFR 514.2, which may beprovided incidentally to such marineterminal services) that are provided toand paid for by an ocean commoncarrier. * * ** * * * *

26. Section 572.801 is amended byrevising the last sentence of paragraph(b)(1) to read as follows:

§ 572.801 Independent action.

* * * * *(b) (1) * * * A conference agreement

shall not require or permit a conferencemember to give more than 10 calendar

days’ notice to the conference, exceptthat in the case of a new or increasedrate the notice period shall conform tothe requirements of § 514.9(b) of thischapter.* * * * *

PART 582—CERTIFICATION OFCOMPANY POLICIES AND EFFORTSTO COMBAT REBATING IN THEFOREIGN COMMERCE OF THEUNITED STATES


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 46 U.S.C. app.1701, 1702, 1707, 1709, 1712, and 1714–1716.

28. Section 582.1 is amended byrevising the third sentence of paragraph(b) to read as follows:

§ 582.1 Scope.

* * * * *(b) * * * Failure of a common carrier

to file an anti-rebate certification andpublish notice of certification in itstariffs as provided by this part and part514 of this chapter will result in tariffcancellation effective forty-five (45)days after notice, as provided in§ 514.1(c)(1)(iii)(C) of this chapter or, ifan initial tariff filing, rejection. * * *

PART 583—SURETY FOR NON-VESSEL-OPERATING COMMONCARRIERS


Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46U.S.C. app. 1702, 1707, 1709, 1710–1712,1716 and 1721.

30. Section 583.5 is amended byrevising paragraphs (d) and (e) to readas follows:

§ 583.5 Resident agent.

* * * * *(d) Designations of resident agent

under paragraphs (a) and (b) of thissection and provisions relating toservice of process under paragraph (c) ofthis section shall be published in theNVOCC’s tariff in accordance with§ 514.15(b)(24) of this chapter.

(e) Every non-vessel-operatingcommon carrier using a group orassociation of NVOCCs to cover all orpart of its financial responsibilityrequirement under § 583.4 shall publishthe name and address of the group orassociation’s resident agent for receiptof judicial and administrative process,including subpoenas, in its tariff inaccordance with § 514.15(b)(24)(ii) ofthis chapter.


31. Section 583.7 is amended byrevising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) toread as follows:

§ 583.7 Proof of Compliance.

* * * * *(b) * * *(2) Reviewing a copy of the tariff rule

published by the NVOCC and in effectunder § 514.15(b)(24) of this chapter; or

(3) Any other appropriate procedure,provided that such procedure is setforth in the carrier’s tariff of generalapplicability as required by§ 514.15(b)(25) of this chapter.* * * * *

By the Commission.Joseph C. Polking,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12511 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6730–01–W

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special ProgramsAdministration

49 CFR Part 107

[Docket No. HM–208B, Amdt. No. 107–34]

RIN 2137–AC58

Hazardous Materials TransportationRegistration and Fee AssessmentProgram

AGENCY: Research and Special ProgramsAdministration (RSPA), DOT.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: RSPA is maintaining thecurrent annual registration fee of $300(which includes a $50 processing fee),for persons engaged in transporting oroffering for transportation certaincategories and quantities of hazardousmaterials in intrastate, interstate, andforeign commerce. In addition, this finalrule adopts two changes to thestatutorily mandated registration and feeassessment program. Applicability ofthe registration requirement to materialsthat are extremely toxic by inhalation(Hazard Zone A) is expanded to includematerials in a hazard class or divisionother than Division 2.3 or Division 6.1.RSPA is also adopting an exceptionfrom the registration requirement forforeign offerors, as authorized by theamended statute.EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1996.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:David Donaldson, Office of HazardousMaterials Planning and Analysis, (202)366–4484, or Joan McIntyre, Office ofHazardous Materials Standards, (202)366–4488, RSPA, Department of

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW.,Washington, DC 20590–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On July 9, 1992, RSPA published afinal rule under Docket HM–208 [57 FR30620], establishing a nationalregistration and fee assessment program,as required by 49 U.S.C. 5108 et seq.(Federal hazardous materialstransportation law), for persons engagedin transporting or offering fortransportation certain categories andquantities of hazardous materials inintrastate, interstate, and foreigncommerce. Persons subject to theregistration program are required to fileannually a registration statement withRSPA and pay a total annual fee of$300, of which $250 is used to fund theHazardous Materials Public SectorTraining and Planning Grants Program,and $50 is used to offset processingcosts. The registration fee of $250 is theminimum amount permitted under thestatute. Grants to States and Indiantribes are expected to total more than$20 million through 1995, the third yearthat this program has been in effect.Average annual funding levels ($6.3million) however have been below thecongressionally authorized level of$18.975 million per year.

On January 30, 1995, RSPA issued anotice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)(Docket HM–208B; 60 FR 5822) thatproposed changes to increase the annualregistration fee for certain persons. TheNPRM distinguished between large,medium, and small entities that conductoperations in one or more of the fivecategories for which registration isrequired. RSPA proposed a four-levelfee structure that considered thecomparative risks that may be posed bythe types and quantities oftransportation activities covered by theregistration requirement. The annualfee, under the graduated fee scheduleproposed by RSPA, would bedetermined on the basis of theregistrant’s transportation activityduring the prior calendar year: large($5,050), medium ($2,550), small ($500),and low ($300).

II. Graduated Fee Schedule

More than 350 comments werereceived in response to the NPRM.Commenters opposing the increased feeschedule generally claimed thatimproved compliance efforts wouldeliminate the need to increase the feesto fully fund the grant program. Twelvecommenters who supported theproposal to increased fees representingseveral States and local emergency

response organizations that benefitdirectly from the grants programindicated a need for increased fundingfor grants. Approximately 100 inquirieswere forwarded by Members of Congresson behalf of their constituents. Manycommenters raised several complexissues and suggested various fundingalternatives.

As indicated in the notice of proposedrulemaking, an Industry Working Group(IWG), facilitated by the HazardousMaterials Advisory Council, andreflecting the perspective of manypersons subject to the registration andfee collection requirements, providedrecommendations on how theregistration and fee collectionrequirement could be improved. Thoserecommendations contain the basicthemes that are reflected in many of the350 comments. In addition, the IWGoffered numerous suggestions on howRSPA may be able to more effectivelycommunicate registration requirementsin non-technical language that theregulated community can more easilyunderstand. RSPA has revised itsbrochure describing the registrationprogram to reflect many of changessuggested by the IWG.

RSPA received comments on behalf ofthe Alliance for Uniform HazmatTransportation Procedures (Alliance),the National Conference of StateLegislatures (NCSL), and the NationalAssociation of SARA Title III Officials.These commenters, reflecting theperspective of entities that benefit fromthe State and Indian tribe grant programfunded by the fee, also generallyopposed RSPA’s proposed graduated feestructure. For example, NCSL believesthat because RSPA has not generated,collected, or disbursed what NCSLconsiders as ‘‘modestly authorizedlevels,’’ the purpose of the Federalprogram has been eroded. NCSLstrongly recommended that RSPAreevaluate the Federal registrationprogram with an eye towardelimination. The Alliance opposed thefee schedule and believes that RSPA’sactions will create obstacles in theregistration of motor carriers by Statesand that implementation of theproposed fee schedule is premature.

Based on the comments RSPAreceived in response to the NPRM,including the various alternatives andrecommendations presented, RSPA hasdecided not to adopt the currentproposal to increase the registration feesat this time. Regulations regardingregistration (Subpart G to 49 CFR Part107) are retained. Therefore, the annualregistration fee remains at $300. Thisdecision will maintain the current levelsof funding to the States and Indian


tribes for the Hazardous MaterialsPublic Sector Training and PlanningGrants Program.

RSPA plans to assess fully theregistration and grants program beforeconsidering further action regarding anincrease in the fee. RSPA will work withits Federal, State, and local partners,industry and labor, and environmentaland public interest groups, to examinethe costs and benefits of these programs.One aspect of this assessment mayinclude an evaluation of combiningseveral legislative mandates into a State-administered uniform program forpermits and registration. RSPA’soutreach efforts on this matter mayinclude public meetings and workshops,as well as participation in meetings andseminars sponsored by others. RSPAwill also continue to promote maximumcompliance with the current registrationprogram.

III. Foreign Offerors

Foreign offerors are included in thedefinition of ‘‘persons’’ who are subjectto the registration requirement to theextent that they engage in any of theactivities covered by the registrationprogram. However, because of thepotential for reciprocal actions by othergovernments, and significant problemsassociated with informing andidentifying the parties concerned, RSPAdelayed application of the registrationrequirement to these entities until July1, 1996. See 49 CFR 107.606(f).Subsequently, section 104 of Public Law103–311, enacted August 26, 1994,amended 49 U.S.C. 5108(a) by adding anew subparagraph that reads as follows:

(4) The Secretary may waive the filing ofa registration statement, or the payment of afee, required under this subsection, or both,for any person not domiciled in the UnitedStates who solely offers hazardous materialsfor transportation to the United States froma place outside the United States if thecountry of which such person is adomiciliary does not require personsdomiciled in the United States who solelyoffer hazardous materials for transportationto the foreign country from places in theUnited States to file registration statements,or to pay fees, for making such an offer.

In this final rule, RSPA makespermanent the exception currentlyprovided in § 107.606(f). However, asproposed in the NPRM, the generalexception in § 107.606(a)(6) is limited topersons who offer hazardous materialsfor transportation to the United Statesfrom a foreign country that does notimpose a registration statement or feepayment requirement on a persondomiciled in the United States whooffers hazardous materials fortransportation to that country.

In § 107.606(b), RSPA explains thatpersons domiciled in countries thatenforce a registration statement or feepayment requirement must file aregistration statement and pay theannual fee upon a positivedetermination made by RSPA’sAssociate Administrator for HazardousMaterials Safety, the U.S. CompetentAuthority, that the other country’srequirement is prejudicial to personsdomiciled in the United States. The U.S.Competent Authority’s determinationwill be communicated directly to theother country’s Competent Authority,and will be published in the FederalRegister. No later than 60 daysfollowing publication in the FederalRegister of that Competent Authoritydetermination, offerors domiciled in theother country are required to file aregistration statement and pay theannual fee. If such an offeror does notregister as required, it may not offer ahazardous material for transportationfrom that country to the United States.

IV. Expanded PIH RegistrationRequirements

As proposed in § 107.601(c), RSPA isbroadening the scope of materialsextremely toxic by inhalation coveredby the registration requirement, toinclude every ‘‘material poisonous byinhalation’’ (PIH) as defined in 49 CFR171.8 that meets the criteria for HazardZone A (extremely toxic). This changeaddresses several PIH materials that arelisted in the Hazardous Materials Tablein 49 CFR 172.101 as a Class 3, Class 8,Division 4.2 or Division 5.1 hazardousmaterial. RSPA believes that this changewill not add a substantial number ofpersons that are required to register.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOTRegulatory Policies and Procedures

This final rule is considered asignificant regulatory action undersection 3(f) of Executive Order 12866and was reviewed by the Office ofManagement and Budget. This rule isconsidered a significant rule under theRegulatory Policies and Procedures ofthe Department of Transportation [44 FR11034]. A regulatory evaluation isavailable for review in the Docket.Because the statute mandates theestablishment and collection of fees, thediscretionary aspects of this rulemakingare limited to setting the amount of thefee within the statutory range for eachperson subject to the registrationprogram. The fees are not related to thecost of RSPA’s hazardous materialssafety programs. The fees to be paid byshippers and carriers of certain

hazardous materials in transportationare related to the benefits received bythese persons from the sale andtransportation of hazardous materialsand from emergency response servicesprovided by public sector resources,should an accident or incident occur.The fees are also related to expensesincurred by State, Indian tribal, andlocal hazardous materials emergencypreparedness and response activities.

B. Executive Order 12612

This action has been analyzed inaccordance with Executive Order 12612(‘‘Federalism’’). States and localgovernments are ‘‘persons’’ under 49U.S.C. 5102, but are specificallyexempted from the requirement to file aregistration statement. The regulationsherein have no substantial effects on theStates, on the current Federal-Staterelationship, or on the currentdistribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government. This registrationregulation has no preemptive effect. Itdoes not impair the ability of States,local governments or Indian tribes toimpose their own fees or registration orpermit requirements on intrastate,interstate or foreign offerors or carriersof hazardous materials. Thus, RSPAlacks discretion in this area, andpreparation of a federalism assessmentis not warranted.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This final rule maintains theminimum fee requirement mandated bystatute for shippers and carriers ofhazardous materials who are subject tothe registration requirement. Therefore,I certify that this final rule will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

Under 49 U.S.C. 5108, the informationmanagement requirements of thePaperwork Reduction Act [44 U.S.C.3501 et seq.) do not apply to this finalrule.

E. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

A regulation identifier number (RIN)is assigned to each regulatory actionlisted in the Unified Agenda of FederalRegulations. The Regulatory InformationService Center publishes the UnifiedAgenda in April and October of eachyear. The RIN number contained in theheading of this document can be usedto cross-reference this action with theUnified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 107Administrative practice and

procedure, Hazardous materials


1 A complete description of various steps NHTSAhas taken to address this problem can be found inthe October 7 notice.

transportation, Packaging andcontainers, Penalties, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

On the basis of the foregoing, 49 CFRpart 107 is amended as follows:

PART 107—HAZARDOUS MATERIALSPROGRAM PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 107continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5127, 44701; 49CFR 1.45, 1.53.

2. In § 107.601, paragraph (c) isrevised to read as follows:

§ 107.601 Applicability.

* * * * *(c) More than one L (1.06 quarts) per

package of a material extremely toxic byinhalation (i.e., ‘‘material poisonous byinhalation,’’ as defined in § 171.8 of thischapter, that meets a criteria for ‘‘hazardzone A,’’ as specified in §§ 173.116(a) or173.133(a) of this chapter);* * * * *

3. Section 107.606 is revised to readas follows:

§ 107.606 Exceptions.(a) The following are excepted from

the requirements of this subpart:(1) An agency of the Federal

government.(2) A State agency.(3) An agency of a political

subdivision of a State.(4) An employee of any of those

agencies in paragraphs (a)(1) through(a)(3) of this section with respect to theemployee’s official duties.

(5) A hazmat employee (including, forpurposes of this subpart, the owner-operator of a motor vehicle thattransports in commerce hazardousmaterials, if that vehicle at the time ofthose activities, is leased to a registeredmotor carrier under a 30-day or longerlease as prescribed in 49 CFR part 1057or an equivalent contractual agreement).

(6) A person domiciled outside theUnited States, who offers solely from alocation outside the United States,hazardous materials for transportationin commerce, provided that the countryof which such a person is a domiciliarydoes not require persons domiciled inthe United States, who solely offerhazardous materials for transportationto the foreign country from places in theUnited States, to file a registrationstatement or to pay a registration fee.

(b) Upon making a determination thatpersons domiciled in the United States,who offer hazardous materials fortransportation to a foreign countrysolely from places in the United States,must file registration statements or payfees to that foreign country, the U.S.

Competent Authority will providenotice of such determination directly tothe Competent Authority of that foreigncountry and by publication in theFederal Register. Persons who offerhazardous materials for transportationto the United States from that foreigncountry must file a registrationstatement and pay the required fee nolater than 60 days following publicationof the determination in the FederalRegister.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 18,1995, under the authority delegated in 49CFR part 1.D.K. Sharma,Administrator, Research and SpecialPrograms Administration.[FR Doc. 95–12658 Filed 5–19–95; 9:58 am]BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. 74–14; Notice 94]

RIN 2127–AF30

Federal Motor Vehicle SafetyStandards; Occupant Crash Protection

AGENCY: National Highway TrafficSafety Administration. (NHTSA), DOT.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule allowsmanufacturers the option of installing amanual device that motorists could useto deactivate the front passenger-side airbag in vehicles in which infantrestraints can be used in the front seatonly. The affected vehicles arepassenger cars and light trucks withoutrear seats and vehicles with rear seatsthat are too small to accommodatetypical rear-facing infant restraints andconvertible infant restraints used in therear-facing mode (hereafter referred to as‘‘typical rear-facing infant restraints’’).The deactivation device is neededbecause when rear-facing infantrestraints are used in the front seats ofdual air bag vehicles, they extendforward to a point near the dashboardwhere they can be struck by a deployingair bag. Testing has shown this to havethe potential for serious injury toinfants. The ability to deactivate thepassenger air bag will allow parents tosafely use rear-facing infant restraints inthe front seat of these vehicles. Theneed for the deactivation device issteadily growing because manufacturersare beginning to install, and soon willbe required to install, passenger-side airbags in all passenger cars and lighttrucks.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendmentsmade in this rule are effective June 22,1995.

Petition Date: Any petitions forreconsideration must be received byNHTSA no later than June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Any petitions forreconsideration should refer to thedocket and notice number of this noticeand be submitted to: Administrator,National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration, 400 Seventh Street SW.,Washington, DC 20590.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mr. Daniel Cohen, Chief, Frontal CrashProtection Division, Office of VehicleSafety Standards, NRM–12, NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration,400 Seventh Street SW., Washington,DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366–2264.


Background

On October 7, 1994, NHTSApublished a notice of proposedrulemaking (NPRM) which proposed toallow manufacturers the option ofinstalling a manual device (hereafterreferred to as a ‘‘cutoff device’’) thatmotorists could use to deactivate thefront passenger air bag in a vehiclewithout rear seats for the purpose ofallowing them to safely use rear-facinginfant restraints in the front seat (59 FR51158). NHTSA issued the NPRMbecause one particular type of childrestraint, i.e., a rear-facing infantrestraint, should not be placed in thefront seat of a vehicle equipped with apassenger air bag. This poses a problembecause manufacturers are beginning toinstall, and soon will be required toinstall, passenger air bags in vehicles.

While NHTSA had taken a number ofsteps to warn parents of air bag/infantrestraint interaction problems, membersof the American AutomobileManufacturers Association (AAMA)indicated a need for further action in ameeting with NHTSA on January 24,1994.1 AAMA asked for the meeting toexplore the possibility of installing anair bag cutoff device to allow rear-facinginfant restraints to be placed in air bag-equipped passenger seating positions.AAMA representatives discussed thegeneral concept of an air bag cutoffdevice, which could be either automaticor manual. However, the representativesemphasized that the industry is notquite ready to install automatic devicesbecause automatic cutoff technology isnot yet ready for production. At themeeting, AAMA asked whether


2 By ‘‘inadequate rear seat,’’ the agency isreferring to seats which do not have sufficient fore-and-aft clearance to accommodate typical rear-facing infant restraints.

Standard No. 208 would permit suchdevices and, if not permitted, whetherthe agency would consider initiatingrulemaking to permit such devices. Asexplained in the October 7 NPRM,NHTSA decided to propose to allowmanufacturers to install a manual cutoffdevice because of concerns that itswarnings about the use of rear facinginfant restraints are of little avail whena parent must transport his or her infantin a vehicle that is physically unable toaccommodate a child any place otherthan the front seat.

The October 7 NPRM proposed toallow the use of manual cutoff devicesin vehicles with no rear seats, subject tocertain conditions. If installed, thedevice could only be operable by usingthe ignition key and the device wouldhave to be separate from the ignitionswitch. Once turned off, the air bagwould have to remain off untilreactivated using the ignition key. Theagency also proposed requiring a yellowwarning light that was capable ofseveral levels of brightness and bore theidentifying words ‘‘AIR BAG OFF’’ toinform vehicle occupants that thepassenger side air bag was off. Thewarning light could not be combinedwith the vehicle’s air bag readinessindicator. The vehicle owner’s manualwould have to contain completeinstructions regarding the operation ofthe cutoff device, including warningsabout the safety consequences ofmisuse. Finally, the device would onlyhave been allowed for approximatelytwo years to encourage the orderlydevelopment and introduction ofautomatic cutoff devices.

The agency received 15 comments onthe October 7 NPRM. Commentersincluded three automobilemanufacturers (Ford, Mazda, andVolvo), GenCorp Aerojet (an equipmentmanufacturer), Advocates for Highwayand Auto Safety (Advocates), theAmerican Academy of Pediatrics (AAP),the AAMA, the Automotive OccupantRestraints Council (AORC), theInsurance Institute for Highway Safety(IIHS), the National Automobile DealersAssociation (NADA), SafetyBeltSafeU.S.A., the Wisconsin Department ofTransportation (DOT), and three privatecitizens. In general, all commenterssupported the proposal. Automobilemanufacturers and the AAMA believeda number of the conditions in the NPRMwere too restrictive. Safety groupspremised their support on theconditions that NHTSA had proposedplacing on manual cutoff devices and onthe limited time during which theywould be allowed. All of thesecomments were considered by theagency in formulating this final rule,

and the most significant comments areaddressed below.

Affected Vehicles

NHTSA proposed to allow, but notrequire, manual cutoff devices only inpassenger cars and light trucks whichdo not have forward-facing rear seats.NHTSA stated that it did not believethat manual cutoff devices should beallowed in vehicles which canaccommodate a rear-facing infantrestraint in the rear seat, because, evenin vehicles without air bags, NHTSArecommends the rear seat as theoptimum location for any childrestraint.

Five commenters (Mazda, AAMA,NADA, and the private citizens) askedNHTSA to allow manual cutoff devicesin all vehicles, since parents often preferto place infants in the front seat evenwhen a rear seat is available. Twocommenters (Ford and AAMA) said thatNHTSA should also allow the manualcutoff device in vehicles with rear seatsthat are too small to accommodate arear-facing infant restraint. Two othercommenters (Mazda and Advocates)explicitly discussed inadequate rearseats, and one additional commenter(IIHS) implicitly discussed inadequaterear seats. The Wisconsin DOT askedNHTSA to also allow manual cutoffdevices in police vehicles. Advocatesand IIHS supported the proposal.

With the exception of includingvehicles with a rear seat which is toosmall to accommodate a typical rear-facing infant restraint, NHTSA is notexpanding the class of vehicles that arepermitted to have a manual cutoffdevice. NHTSA does not believe that itshould allow all vehicles to have amanual cutoff device to accommodateparental preference for placement in thefront seat. If any child seat can beplaced in a rear seat, that is the safestposition.

As explained previously, twocommenters (Ford and AAMA) said thatNHTSA should also allow the manualcutoff device in vehicles with rear seatsthat are too small to accommodate arear-facing infant restraint. Onecommenter (Advocates) said thatNHTSA should not allow the manualcutoff device in such vehicles as a rear-facing infant seat can be accommodatedeven if the seat is too small for an adult.

In response to these comments,NHTSA examined whether there werevehicles that had inadequate rear seats 2

and thus should be allowed to have a

cutoff switch. As stated in the NPRM,NHTSA intended to allow the cutoffswitch whenever a rear-facing infantrestraint could not be accommodated inthe rear seat of a vehicle. NHTSAexamined this issue to determine theconsistency of that stated intent and itstentative conclusion that the onlyvehicles in this category were vehicleswithout rear seats. NHTSA obtaineddimensional information on rear seatoccupant space and rear-facing infantrestraints. After examining rear-facinginfant restraint sizes and rear seatgeometries, NHTSA concluded thatsome rear-facing infant restraints willnot fit in some vehicles under certainconditions. A complete discussion ofNHTSA’s research and methodology canbe found in a document titled‘‘Evaluation of Infant Seat Fit inPassenger Cars and Light Trucks’’ whichNHTSA has placed in the docket for thisnotice.

Based on the results presented in thatdocument, NHTSA has modified thisrule to allow the installation of a cutoffdevice in any vehicle with less than 720millimeters between the rearwardsurface of the front seat back and theforward surface of the rear seat back,measured longitudinally in a horizontalline tangent to the highest point of therear seat bottom, and with the front seatin its mid-track fore-and-aft adjustmentposition. NHTSA estimates that thisprovision will allow approximately 27percent of all passenger cars to have acutoff device.

NHTSA considered using alternativedimensions for identifying inadequaterear seats. For example, the agencyconsidered using other front seatadjustment positions. If the agency usedthe full forward position, fewer vehicleswould be classified as havinginadequate rear seats. However, thatresult would be based on an unrealisticposition for the front seat. Many adultscould not use the front seat comfortablyin the full-forward position.Alternatively, the agency could haveused the full rear position. Thatadjustment position would allow thelargest adults to sit comfortably in thefront seat. However, it would also haveincreased the number of vehiclesclassified as having an inadequate rearseat. The mid-track position, which isused for other Standard No. 208 testing,was chosen as a compromise.

The agency also consideredalternative values to represent thelength of rear-facing infant restraints.The agency selected the average lengthof the child seats NHTSA measured. Bychoosing this measurement, the agencyis ensuring that the vehicles which donot have a cutoff device for the


passenger side air bag are those thathave a rear seat large enough to giveparents a fairly wide choice ofrestraints, including convertiblerestraints, which will fit in the rear seat.

While police vehicles could use amanual cutoff device to avoidinteractions with communications andpolice equipment, NHTSA is notallowing installation of the device. Tokeep law enforcement and policeequipment manufacturers informed,Ford and General Motors met withgroups and associations to prepare themfor the installation of passenger side airbags. Ford and General Motorsrecommend that equipment not bemounted within the air bag deploymentarea. Many equipment manufacturersnow produce smaller, more compactpolice equipment and mounting devicesto facilitate this.

In October 1993, NHTSA, theInternational Association of Chiefs ofPolice, and the Law EnforcementTelevision Network (LETN), inconjunction with Ford and GeneralMotors, conducted a seminar, ‘‘Dual AirBags: Where Do I Put My Equipment?,’’to explain the deployment area andsafety benefits of passenger side airbags. This seminar was videotaped byLETN and broadcast at least 25 times.Additionally, NHTSA duplicated copiesof the videotape for disseminationthroughout the nation. Because othermeans are available to avoid air bag/equipment interaction, NHTSA is notallowing the installation of the manualcutoff device in police vehicles.

Phase-Out of Manual Cutoff DevicesIn the NPRM, NHTSA tentatively

concluded that the installation ofmanual cutoff devices should not bepermitted indefinitely. The agency alsotentatively concluded that vehicles withair bags having manual cutoff devicesshould not be counted towardcompliance with the phase-in for airbags. Further, the agency said thatmanual cutoff devices should beprohibited in all passenger carsmanufactured on or after September 1,1997, and all light trucks manufacturedon or after September 1, 1997, and alllight trucks manufactured on or afterSeptember 1, 1998. These are the dateson which 100 percent compliance isrequired by 49 U.S.C. 30127. Toimplement these proposals, NHTSAproposed to amend S4.1.5.1(b)’sdefinition of an ‘‘inflatable restraintsystem,’’ a term used in the paragraphsrelating to the air bag requirements, tostate that it does not include an air bagthat can be deactivated by a manualcutoff device. NHTSA stated that itbelieved this several year period would

give manufacturers time to develop andintroduce automatic cutoff devices.

Five commenters (Ford, Mazda, AAP,AAMA and a private citizen) expressedconcern that automatic cutoff devicesmight not be available before the end ofthe period in which manual cutoffdevices would be allowed. Fourcommenters (GenCorp, Advocates,AORC, and IIHS) expressed confidencethat automatic cutoff devices would beavailable before the end of this timeperiod.

NHTSA is not extending the timeperiod in which manual cutoff deviceswould be allowed. First, one of thecommenters which expressedconfidence that automatic cutoff deviceswould soon be available was GenCorp,a company which develops suchdevices. Another, AORC, is anorganization whose member companies(equipment manufacturers, some ofwhom develop such devices) ‘‘areconfident that satisfactory automaticsolutions will be successfully developedon a timely basis.’’ Second, in thediscussion of automatic devices in manyof the comments, it is clear that thevehicle manufacturers were discussingmore sophisticated sensors, i.e., one thatwould deactivate the air bag in anumber of situations, not just when arear-facing infant seat is present.

Two commenters, AAMA and Ford,asked for confirmation that an LTV witha driver’s air bag, and a passenger sideair bag with a manual cutoff devicewould quality for the ‘‘one truck credit’’and the ‘‘1.5 truck credit’’ during thephase-in periods for the automaticprotection and mandatory air bagrequirements. The ‘‘one truck credit’’permits light trucks equipped with anair bag for the driver and a manual lap/shoulder belt for the front passenger tocount as one truck towards the phase-in requirements for both automaticprotection and mandatory air bags. The‘‘1.5 truck credit’’ permits light trucksequipped with an air bag for the driverand some type of automatic protectionfor the front passenger to count as 1.5trucks towards the phase-inrequirements for automatic protectiononly.

With regard to the ‘‘one truck credit,’’these commenters are correct. Since avehicle with a driver’s air bag wouldqualify for credit as one vehicle towardboth the automatic protectionrequirement and the mandatory air bagrequirement with a manual belt systemalone, it would also qualify for thecredit if equipped with a voluntarily-installed air bag with a manual cutoffdevice, presuming the vehicle had amanual belt on the passenger side.

With regard to the ‘‘1.5 truck credit’’during the automatic restraint phase-in,NHTSA has decided that a vehicle witha passenger air bag equipped with amanual cutoff device should quality forthis credit. While such a system doesnot provide the equivalent level ofautomatic protection to the passenger asan air bag without a cutoff device,NHTSA believes that it provides agreater level of occupant protection thana manual lap/shoulder belt alone, andwarrants additional credit. No change inthe regulatory text is required to allowthis credit as the amended definition of‘‘inflatable restraint’’ does not apply toS4.1.2.1(a), the section the passengerseating position must comply with toqualify for the credit.

Means of ActivationNHTSA proposed to require the use of

the ignition key to activate the cutoffdevice. NHTSA believed thisrequirement would make the devicesimple and easy to use, but still requireconscious thought and deliberate actionon the part of the user. In addition, itwould also place control of the devicein the hands of the driver, therebyminimizing the likelihood of accidentalor inappropriate activation.

IIHS said that the device should notbe activated by the ignition key, but thatNHTSA should require a means toprevent inadvertent activation (i.e.,shielded switches). AAMA and Fordasked the agency to delete the word‘‘only’’ to permit ‘‘other ignition keyssimilar but not identical to the ignitionkey.’’ Ford expressed its believe thatalternate means of activation would notbe so effective in meeting NHTSA’sgoals. Mazda stated that it believed itwould be sufficient to require a meansto prevent inadvertent activationswithout specifying the use of theignition key.

After reviewing these comments,NHTSA has decided to retain therequirement that the cutoff device beactivated by an ignition key, though notrequiring it to be an identical ignitionkey. NHTSA believes that this addressesIIHS’s concern that, if a parent forgot toturn off the air bag prior to starting thecar, they would be unlikely to turn offthe car to deactivate the air bag, leavingan infant at risk if the air bag deployed.NHTSA does not believe that Mazda’ssuggestion is appropriate, since there isno objective means of determining thatinadvertent activation is not likely.

As explained in AAMA’s comment,the use of the identical ignition keywould require cutoff devices ‘‘to beequipped with lock tumblers andmanufactured and stocked in the manykey combinations used to deter vehicle


theft.’’ AAMA believed this wouldincrease the risk that the driver wouldbe unable to deactivate the air bag,either because non-matching locktumblers were installed at the factory, orbecause the ignition lock was replacedwith a non-matching key cylinder.Deleting the word ‘‘only’’ from theregulatory text will allow manufacturersto install a lock on the cutoff devicewhich has fewer tumblers than the locksused in ignitions. While the ignition keywill operate both the ignition and thecutoff device, manufacturers will also beable to provide a separate key whichoperated only the cutoff device.

Air Bag Reactivation

NHTSA proposed to require thatmanual cutoff devices be designed sothat, once the cutoff device has beenused to deactivate the air bag, the air bagwill remain deactivated until it ismanually reactivated by means of thecutoff device. NHTSA requestedcomments on whether it should, in thealternative, require that the air bag beautomatically reactivated when thevehicle is turned off. NHTSA explainedthat its ultimate decision would bebased on weighing the relative risks toinfants who might be placed in the frontseat when the air bag is activated againstthe risks to adults who might ride in thepassenger seat while the air bag is notactivated.

In its preliminary estimate of thoserelative risks, the agency estimated that1,050 air bag deployments a year willoccur in pickup trucks and two-seatervehicles when a front passenger seat isoccupied by an infant in a rear-facinginfant seat. The level of the injuriesresulting from these deployments areuncertain, but may well be severe.Conversely, the agency estimated thatfailure to reactivate the air bag for thebenefit of non-infant passengers, wouldresult in approximately 3 occupantswho are at least one year old receivingAIS 2–5 (survivable) injuries. Inaddition, 1–3 fatalities and 23–32additional injuries could occur eachyear as a result of deliberate misuse.Based on these estimates, the agencybelieved that the number of infants whowould avoid potentially serious injuryfar exceeds the number of non-infantswho might be injured.

Five commenters (Ford, Volvo, AAP,AAMA, and IIHS) agreed with NHTSA’sproposal. Two commenters (Advocatesand AORC) stated that NHTSA shouldrequire automatic reactivation of the airbag. NADA suggested that NHTSAcould require automatic reactivation ifthe cutoff device did not incorporate awarning light.

NHTSA has decided to adopt themanual reactivation requirement.NHTSA believes that all air bags shouldbe reactivated in the same way. Nocommenter provided specific data torefute the analysis NHTSA made in theNPRM which resulted in the tentativeconclusion to propose manualreactivation. Adult passengers will beable to see the warning light, and willbe informed if the air bag is notactivated. In addition, such passengerswill receive significant safety protectionby wearing lap/shoulder belts. AAPsuggested that NHTSA requireinformation in the owner’s manualrecommending that parents educatenon-infant, non-literate children of thefunction of the warning light so thatthey will also be aware of the need toremind the driver to turn the air bag on.While NHTSA is not requiring suchinformation in the owner’s manual,NHTSA agrees that it would be a goodpractice.

Warning LightNHTSA proposed requiring that there

be a telltale light on the dashboard thatis clearly visible from both the driverand front passenger seating positionsand that is illuminated whenever thepassenger air bag has been deactivatedby means of the cutoff device. This lightwould be separate from the air bagreadiness indicator already required byStandard No. 208. NHTSA proposedthat the color of the telltale be yellow,with the words ‘‘AIR BAG OFF’’ clearlyvisible on the telltale when thepassenger side air bag has beendeactivated.

Two commenters (Ford and AAMA)asked NHTSA to allow the telltale tohave one brightness level. Ford alsoasked the agency to allow either thewords ‘‘AIR BAG OFF’’ OR ‘‘OFF’’ onthe telltale, Advocates asked the agencyto require the words ‘‘WARNING, AIRBAG OFF’’ on the telltale. Mazda askedthe agency to permit the telltale to becombined with the readiness indicator.AORC, which supported automaticreactivation of the air bag, asked theagency to require a telltale whichwarned of the possible need todeactivate the air bag. Volvo suggestedthat the agency should require a telltaleif a vehicle is equipped with anautomatic cutoff device. Finally,SafetyBeltSafe said the agency shouldrequire the telltale to indicate bothwhen the air bag is ‘‘off’’ and when itis ‘‘on.’’

After reviewing these comments,NHTSA is modifying the warning lightrequirement only to allow one level ofbrightness and to permit the words ‘‘AIRBAG OFF’’ to be either on the telltale or

adjacent to the telltale. Other telltalesare allowed to have only one level ofbrightness. NHTSA believes that havingthe words ‘‘AIR BAG OFF’’ adjacent tothe telltale will be as effective a meansof informing the driver or passenger ofthe purpose of the telltale as words onthe telltale itself. NHTSA is not addingthe word ‘‘WARNING’’ because NHTSAbelieves that drivers are aware that thepurpose of a telltale is to warn them ofa condition that may require immediateattention.

Air Bag Readiness IndicatorCurrently, S4.5.2 of FMVSS No. 208

requires that every vehicle equippedwith an air bag also be equipped withan air bag readiness indicator thatinforms the driver about the operationalstatus of the air bag system. Asexplained in the NPRM, NHTSA is notaware of any manufacturer whichcomplies with this requirement byinstalling separate readiness indicators,one for the driver air bag and another forthe passenger air bag. Therefore,NHTSA proposed to amend S4.5.2 tolimit the operation of a single readinessindicator when the cutoff device is ‘‘on’’so that the indicator monitors only theair bag that is not deactivated, i.e., thedriver air bag. When the cutoff device is‘‘off,’’ the passenger air bag would beactivated, and the readiness indicatorwould monitor the readiness of both thedriver air bag and the passenger air bag.

Advocates stated that NHTSA shouldrequire separate readiness indicators foreach air bag. Volvo asked the agency tostandardize the ‘‘design, locations andidentification’’ of readiness indicators.

NHTSA is not modifying theproposed change to the readinessindicator requirements. NHTSA doesnot believe it is necessary to require aseparate indicator since the warninglight, in effect, acts as a readinessindicator for the passenger air bag.NHTSA is also not aware of any safetyneed to specify the readiness indicatorrequirements in greater detail asrequested by Volvo.

TestingAAMA asked the agency to specify

that compliance testing of the passengerair bag in a vehicle with a manual cutoffdevice would be done only with the airbag activated. NHTSA has addedexplicit language to that effect in theregulatory language.

CostsIn the NPRM, NHTSA estimated the

per vehicle price for a passenger air bagcutoff device to be $10.15. Fordcommented that its ‘‘manualdeactivation system is several times the


agency’s estimated consumer cost, evenwithout the photocell dimming featurewhich the agency estimates would costanother $5.00.’’

Ford did not provide anydocumentation to substantiate its claimthat the real cost was several times whatthe agency estimated. Therefore,NHTSA does not have any basis for re-examining its estimate. Since the agencyis not requiring more than one level ofbrightness, the cost is estimated to be$4.86. In any event, the agency is notrequiring such devices; thus, any cost isassociated with voluntary installation.

Owner’s Manual

NHTSA also proposed to require thatmanufacturers include informationconcerning the cutoff device in theowner’s manual. NHTSA did notpropose specific language which mustbe included in the owner’s manual.NHTSA proposed to require the owner’smanual to include instructions on theoperation of the cutoff device, astatement that the cutoff device shouldonly be used when a rear-facing infantrestraint is installed in the frontpassenger seating position, and awarning about the safety consequencesof using the cutoff device at other times.

These requirements have beenincluded in the final rule since nocommenter disagreed with any aspect ofthe owner’s manual requirement.

Labels

Currently, Standard No. 208 requiresthat, by September 1, 1994, air bag-equipped vehicles will bear a label onthe sun visor that warns, in part:

Do not Install Rearward-Facing ChildSeats in any Front Passenger SeatPosition

Also, Standard No. 213 has beenamended to require either of thefollowing labels on rear-facing infantseats or on child restraints that can beconverted for use in a rear-facing infantmode:

Warning—Place This Restraint in aVehicle Seat That Does Not Have an AirBag

or

Warning—When Your Baby’s SizeRequires That This Restraint be Used soThat Your Baby Faces the Rear of theVehicle, Place the Restraint in a VehicleSeat That Does Not Have an Air Bag

The first warning is to be used forchild seats that are rear-facing only, andthe second warning is to be used forinfant seats that covert from forward-facing to rear-facing.

In the NPRM, NHTSA tentativelyconcluded that the language of theselabels did not need to be amended.

Ford and AAMA asked the agency toamend the sun visor label to add aphrase like, ‘‘unless the passenger airbag is turned off.’’ Because it agrees thatsome motorists may be confused by thismessage if the vehicle has a manualcutoff device, NHTSA is amending thevehicle label requirements for vehiclesequipped with manual cutoff devices.However, NHTSA is not adopting thespecific language requested by Ford.Ford’s language is predicated on adesign which incorporates a switch withan on and off position, as Ford’s designdoes. NHTSA is concerned that thisdesign-based wording could beconfusing if other vehicle manufacturersused designs differing from Ford’s.

Automatic Cutoff Devices

As discussed in the NPRM, NHTSAconcluded that Standard No. 208currently allows automatic cutoffdevices. NHTSA requested commentson whether the agency should regulateautomatic cutoff devices. Specifically,NHTSA requested comments onwhether any or all of the proposals inthe NPRM relating to warning lights,readiness indicators, owner’s manuals,and labels should also apply to vehiclesequipped with automatic cutoff devices.

Only one commenter, Volvo, believedthat some aspects of this final ruleshould also apply to automatic cutoffdevices. In addition, Volvo expressedconcern that, contrary to NHTSA’sbelief, some automatic cutoff devicesmay deactivate the air bag during theStandard No. 208 compliance test.NHTSA is deferring any decision onregulations for automatic cutoff devicesuntil there is further information onhow, and under what circumstances,such devices would operate.

Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Restraints

In the NPRM, NHTSA described anumber of activities the agency hastaken to inform consumers on properuse of child restraints. While this noticehas discussed one reason why parentsmay not be able to use a child restraintcorrectly (i.e., insufficient fore-aftclearance to place the child restraint inthe rear seat), improper installation canresult from other factors.

On February 13, 1995, the agencyannounced the information of a ‘‘blueribbon panel’’ to further address theissue of how child restraints can bemade easier to install and use. Thepanel was asked to present itsrecommendations by June 1, 1995.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOTRegulatory Policies and Procedures

NHTSA has considered the impact ofthis rulemaking action under E.O. 12866and the Department of Transportation’sregulatory policies and procedures. Thisrulemaking document was reviewedunder E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planningand Review.’’ This action has beendetermined to be ‘‘significant’’ underthe Department of Transportation’sregulatory policies and procedures.

The agency estimates that theconsumer cost of the voluntarilyinstalled manual cutoff device is $4.86.The $5.00 light sensor is not required inthe final rule and the $5.15 for the cutoffdevice was wrong in the October 7, 1994NPRM. The $5.15 included $0.29 for aplacard label that the agency decidednot to propose. The PreliminaryRegulatory Evaluation included thecorrect estimate of $4.86 (1993 dollars).

The agency has revised its estimatesof the number of air bag deploymentsper year when a front passenger seat isoccupied by an infant in a rear-facinginfant restraint in pickup trucks or two-seater vehicles to be 793. The agencyalso estimates that the number of similardeployments in other vehicles with lessthan 720 millimeters of rear seat spacethat would be eligible for a manualcutoff device is 845. Thus, the totaldeployments per year in vehicles thatwould be eligible for a manual cutoffdevice when the front passenger seat isoccupied by an infant in a rear-facinginfant restraint is estimated to be 1,638.These estimates assume that the frontseat positions continue to be used byinfants in vehicles with air bags andthey are used by infants in vehicleswithout air bags, and that the warninglabels are not effective in changingpeople’s behavior. The level of injuriesfrom these deployments are uncertain,but may well be severe.

In an effort to assess the potential forsafety trade-offs resulting from thefailure to reactivate the air bag after ithas been deactivated for an infant, theagency estimates that only 1.3 percent ofthe vehicles permitted to have a cutoffdevice would be carrying an infant. Ifone assumes for the purpose of analysisthat 10 percent of these were notreactivated, approximately 14 olderoccupants may receive AIS 2–5(survivable) injuries. In addition, forevery one percent of the vehicles inwhich the air bag is deliberatelydeactivated, 3 fatalities and 100–111AIS 2–5 injuries would occur annually.Since the agency believes that thepercentage of vehicles in which the airbag is inadvertently left off or


deactivated would be fairly small, thenumber of infants who would avoidpotentially serious injury far exceed thenumber of non-infants who might beinjured.

A final regulatory evaluation has beenprepared for this rulemaking. A moredetailed explanation of the costs andbenefits can be found in that document.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

NHTSA has also considered theimpacts of this final rule under theRegulatory Flexibility Act. I herebycertify that this rule will not have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities. Asexplained above, NHTSA does notanticipate a significant economic impactfrom this rulemaking action.


In accordance with the PaperworkReduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96–511),there are no requirements forinformation collection associated withthis final rule.

National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has also analyzed this finalrule under the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act and determined that it willnot have a significant impact on thehuman environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

NHTSA has analyzed this rule inaccordance with the principles andcriteria contained in E.O. 12612, andhas determined that this rule will nothave significant federalism implicationsto warrant the preparation of aFederalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

This final rule does not have anyretroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C.30103, whenever a Federal motorvehicle safety standard is in effect, aState may not adopt or maintain a safetystandard applicable to the same aspectof performance which is not identical tothe Federal standard, except to theextent that the State requirementimposes a higher level of performanceand applies only to vehicles procuredfor the State’s use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 setsforth a procedure for judicial review offinal rules establishing, amending orrevoking Federal motor vehicle safetystandards. That section does not requiresubmission of a petition forreconsideration or other administrativeproceedings before parties may file suitin court.


Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motorvehicles.

In consideration of the foregoing, 49CFR Part 571 is amended as follows:

PART 571—FEDERAL MOTORVEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

1. The authority citation for Part 571of Title 49 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at49 CFR 1.50.

2. Section 571.208 is amended byrevising sections S4.1.5.1(b),S4.5.1(b)(1), and S4.5.2 and adding newsections S4.5.4 and S4.5.4.1 throughS4.5.4.4 and S8.4, to read as follows:

§ 571.208 Standard No. 208, OccupantCrash Protection.

* * * * *S4.1.5.1 Front/angular automatic protection

system.

* * * * *(b) For the purposes of sections S4.1.5

through S4.1.5.3 and S4.2.6 through S4.2.6.2,an inflatable restraint system means an airbag that is activated in a crash, other than anair bag that can be deactivated by a manualcutoff device permitted by S4.5.4 of thisstandard.

* * * * *S4.5.1 Labeling and owner’s manual

information.

* * * * *(b) Label on sun visor above front outboard

seating positions equipped with inflatablerestraint.

(1) Each vehicle manufactured on or afterSeptember 1, 1994, shall comply with eitherS4.5.1(b)(1)(i) or S4.5.1(b)(1)(ii).

(i) Each front outboard seating position thatprovides an inflatable restraint shall have alabel permanently affixed to the sun visor forsuch seating position on either side of thesun visor, at the manufacturer’s option.Except as provided in S4.5.1(b)(3), this labelshall read:

CAUTION

TO AVOID SERIOUS INJURY:

For maximum safety protection in all typesof crashes, you must always wear yoursafety belt.

Do not install rearward-facing child seats inany front passenger seat position.

Do not sit or lean unnecessarily close to theair bag.

Do not place any objects over the air bag orbetween the air bag and yourself.

See the owner’s manual for furtherinformation and explanations.

(ii) If the vehicle is equipped with a cutoffdevice permitted by S4.5.4 of this standard,each front outboard seating position thatprovides an inflatable restraint shall have alabel permanently affixed to the sun visor forsuch seating position on either side of thesun visor, at the manufacturer’s option. Thislabel shall read:

CAUTION

TO AVOID SERIOUS INJURY:

For maximum safety protection in all typesof crashes, you must always wear yoursafety belt.

Do not install rearward-facing child seats inany front passenger seat position, unlessthe air bag is off.

Do not sit or lean unnecessarily close to theair bag.

Do not place any objects over the air bag orbetween the air bag and yourself.

See the owner’s manual for furtherinformation and explanations.

* * * * *S4.5.2 Readiness Indicator. An occupant

protection system that deploys in the eventof a crash shall have a monitoring systemwith a readiness indicator. The indicatorshall monitor its own readiness and shall beclearly visible from the driver’s designatedseating position. If the vehicle is equippedwith a single readiness indicator for both adriver and passenger air bag, and if thevehicle is equipped with a cutoff devicepermitted by S4.5.4 of this standard, thereadiness indicator shall monitor only thereadiness of the driver air bag when thepassenger air bag has been deactivated bymeans of the cutoff device. A list of theelements of the system being monitored bythe indicator shall be included with theinformation furnished in accordance withS4.5.1 but need not be included on the label.

* * * * *S4.5.4 Passenger Air Bag Manual Cutoff

Device. Passenger cars, trucks, buses, andmultipurpose passenger vehicles may beequipped with a device that deactivates theair bag installed at the right front passengerposition in the vehicle, if all of theconditions in S4.5.4.1 through S4.5.4.4 aresatisfied.

S4.5.4.1 The vehicle complies with eitherS4.5.4.1(a) or S4.5.4.1(b).

(a) The vehicle has no forward-facingdesignated seating positions to the rear of thefront seating positions.

(b) With the seats and seat backs adjustedas specified in S8.1.2 and S8.1.3, thedistance, measured along a longitudinalhorizontal line tangent to the highest point ofthe rear seat bottom in the longitudinalvertical plane described in eitherS4.5.4.1(b)(1) or S4.5.4.1(b)(2), between therearward surface of the front seat back andthe forward surface of the rear seat back isless than 720 millimeters.

(1) In a vehicle equipped with front bucketseats, the vertical plane at the centerline ofthe driver’s seat cushion.

(2) In a vehicle equipped with front benchseating, the vertical plane which passesthrough the center of the steering wheel rim.

S4.5.4.2 The device is operable by meansof the ignition key for the vehicle. The deviceshall be separate from the ignition switch forthe vehicle, so that the driver must take someaction with the ignition key other thaninserting it or turning it in the ignition switchto deactivate the passenger air bag. Oncedeactivated, the passenger air bag shallremain deactivated until it is reactivated bymeans of the device.


S4.5.4.3 A telltale light on the dashboardshall be clearly visible from all front seatingpositions and shall be illuminated wheneverthe passenger air bag is deactivated. Thetelltale:

(a) Shall be yellow;(b) Shall have the identifying words ‘‘AIR

BAG OFF’’ on the telltale or within 25millimeters of the telltale;

(c) Shall remain illuminated for the entiretime that the passenger air bag is deactivated;

(d) Shall not be illuminated at any timewhen the passenger air bag is notdeactivated; and,

(e) Shall not be combined with thereadiness indicator required by S4.5.2 of thisstandard.

S4.5.4.4 The vehicle owner’s manualshall provide, in a readily understandableformat:

(a) Complete instructions on the operationof the cutoff device;

(b) A statement that the cutoff deviceshould only be used when a rear-facinginfant restraint is installed in the frontpassenger seating position; and,

(c) A warning about the safetyconsequences of using the cutoff device atother times.

* * * * *S8.4 Frontal test condition. If the vehicle

is equipped with a cutoff device permitted byS4.5.4 of this standard, the device isdeactivated.

* * * * *Issued on May 18, 1995.

Ricardo Martinez,Administrator.[FR Doc. 95–12555 Filed 5–18–95; 1:52 pm]BILLING CODE 4910–59–M

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains notices to the public of the proposedissuance of rules and regulations. Thepurpose of these notices is to give interestedpersons an opportunity to participate in therule making prior to the adoption of the finalrules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

27240

Vol. 60, No. 99


NATIONAL CREDIT UNIONADMINISTRATION

12 CFR Parts 704 and 741

Corporate Credit Unions;Requirements for Insurance

AGENCY: National Credit UnionAdministration (NCUA).ACTION: Extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: On April 13, 1995, the NCUABoard issued a proposed rule revisingits regulations governing corporatecredit unions and requirements forinsurance. 60 FR 20438 (April 26, 1995).Comments were requested by June 26,1995.

The supplementary section of theproposed rule indicated that NCUAwould be conducting analyticalassessments of the proposed regulation’seffect on corporate credit union earningsand capital accumulation. 60 FR at20443. NCUA has been working with anoutside firm to provide suchassessments, using simulation modelingtechniques. The process has proved tobe more time-consuming thanenvisioned, due to the need to tailorexisting modeling programs to thespecifics of corporate credit unionbalance sheets.

The NCUA Chairman indicated at theApril 13, 1995, Board meeting that thecomment period would be extended ifadditional time were needed because ofunanticipated circumstances. The Boardhas determined that additional time isnecessary to allow NCUA and the publicsufficient opportunity to analyze theresults of the modeling process and theimplications for the proposedregulation. Accordingly, the commentperiod is being extended 60 days toAugust 25, 1995.DATES: The comment period is extendedfrom June 26, 1995, to August 25, 1995.ADDRESSES: Mail comments to BeckyBaker, Secretary of the Board, NationalCredit Union Administration, 1775Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314–3428. Send comments to Ms. Baker via

the bulletin board by dialing 703–518–6480.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H.Allen Carver, Director, Office ofCorporate Credit Unions (703) 518–6640, at the above address.

Authority: The authority for this action isthe general rulemaking authority of theNCUA Board.

By the National Credit UnionAdministration Board on May 17, 1995.Becky Baker,Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 95–12599 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7535–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 400

Trade Regulation Rule: Advertisingand Labeling as to Size of SleepingBags

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Advance notice of proposedrulemaking (ANPR).

SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) proposesto repeal its Trade Regulation Ruleentitled ‘‘Advertising and Labeling as toSize of Sleeping Bags’’ (‘‘Sleeping BagRule’’), 16 CFR part 400. The proceedingwill address whether the Sleeping BagRule should be repealed or remain ineffect. The Commission is solicitingwritten comment, data and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 400’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, 6th Street & PennsylvaniaAvenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:John A. Crowley, Esq., (202) 326–3280,Division of Service Industry Practices,Bureau of Consumer Protection, FederalTrade Commission, Washington, DC20580.


Part A—Background InformationThis notice is published pursuant to

Section 18 of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a et seq.,the provisions of part 1, subpart B of theCommission’s rules of practice, 16 CFR1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. This

authority permits the Commission topromulgate, modify and repeal traderegulation rules that define withspecificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingcommerce within the meaning ofsection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45(a)(1).

The Sleeping Bag Rule, promulgatedby the Commission on October 11, 1963,declares that it is an unfair method ofcompetition and an unfair or deceptiveact or practice to use the ‘‘cut size’’ ofthe materials from which a sleeping bagis made to describe the size of a sleepingbag in advertising, labeling or markingunless:

(1) ‘‘The dimensions of the cut sizeare accurate measurements of the yardgoods used in construction of thesleeping bags’’; and

(2) ‘‘Such ‘cut size’ dimensions areaccompanied by the words ‘cut size’ ’’;and

(3) The reference to ‘‘cut size’’ is‘‘accompanied by a clear andconspicuous disclosure of the lengthand width of the finished products andby an explanation that such dimensionsconstitute the finished size.’’

The Commission periodically reviewsthe rules and guides it has promulgated,seeking information about the costs andbenefits of such rules and guides andtheir regulatory and economic impact.The information obtained assists theCommission in identifying rules andguides that warrant modification orrescission. Pursuant to its reviewschedule, on April 19, 1993, theCommission published in the FederalRegister a request for public commentson the Sleeping Bag Rule. 58 FR 21095.The Commission asked commenters toaddress questions relating to the costsand benefits of the rule, the burdens itimposes, and the basis for assessingwhether it should be retained, oramended.

The Commission received only onecomment relating to the Sleeping BagRule. The commenter stated that therewas a continuing need for the rule todeter deceptive practices.

Prior to the request for comments,Commission staff conducted an informalinquiry and inspected sleeping bags atseveral national chain stores. Thisinquiry found no violations of the Ruleon either the sleeping bag packagingmaterials or the labels affixed to theproduct itself. In fact, it appeared from

27241Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Proposed Rules

1 In a memorandum to all federal departmentsand agencies dated March 4, 1995, the Presidentrequested all agencies to review their regulationsand to initiate proceedings to eliminate those theydetermined were obsolete or unnecessary. In 1992,the Commission adopted a plan to review all itsrules and guides at least once during a ten-yearperiod. In response to the President’s request, theCommission accelerated its scheduled review ofcertain rules to identify any that might beappropriate candidates for repeal or amendment.

that limited inquiry that industryproducts were marked with only thefinished size. Additionally, theCommission has no record of receivingany complaints regarding non-compliance with the rule, or ofinitiating any law enforcement actionsalleging violations of the rule’srequirements. Finally, the UniformPackaging and Labeling Regulation,which has been adopted by 47 states,regulates the labeling of sleeping bags,and appears to provide that these itemsmust be labeled with their finished size.

Part B—ObjectivesBased on the review described above,

the Commission has determined thatthere may no longer be a need tocontinue the Sleeping Bag Rule in lightof the apparent changes in industrypractices and the existence of laws innearly all of the states that appear tomandate point-of-sale disclosuressimilar to those required by the rule.The objective of this notice is to solicitcomment on whether the Commissionshould initiate a rulemaking proceedingto repeal the Sleeping Bag Rule.

Part C—Alternative ActionsThe Commission is not aware of any

feasible alternatives to either repealingor retaining the Sleeping Bag Rule.

Part D—Request for CommentsMembers of the public are invited to

comment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the SleepingBag Rule. Comments submitted duringthe regulatory review proceedingdescribed above will be made part of therecord, and need not be resubmitted. Acomment that includes the reasoning orbasis for a proposition will likely bemore persuasive than a commentwithout supporting information. TheCommission requests that factual dataupon which the comments are based besubmitted with the comments. In thissection, the Commission identifies anumber of issues on which it solicitspublic comment. The identification ofissues is designed to assist the public tocomment on relevant matters andshould not be construed as a limitationon the issues on which public commentmay be submitted.

Questions(1) Do manufacturers and sellers of

sleeping bags currently use ‘‘cut size’’ asa means of marking the size of theirproducts for sale at retail to consumers?

(2) Does the fact that nearly all of thestates have adopted the UniformPackaging and Labeling Regulation,which governs the labeling of sleeping

bags, eliminate or greatly lessen theneed for the Sleeping Bag Rule?

(3) What are the benefits to consumersfrom the rule?

(4) What are the costs to industryimposed by the rule?

(5) Is there a continuing need for therule or should the rule be repealed?

Authority: Sec. 18(d)(2)(B) of the FederalTrade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C.57a(d)(2)(B).


Advertising, Trade practices, Sleepingbags.

By direction of the Commission.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12580 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

16 CFR Part 402

Trade Regulation Rule ConcerningDeception as to Non-Prismatic andPartially Prismatic Instruments BeingPrismatic Binoculars

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Advance notice of proposedrulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (the ‘‘Commission’’)proposed to repeal its Trade RegulationRule entitled ‘‘Deception as to Non-Prismatic and Partially PrismaticInstruments Being PrismaticBinoculars’’ (‘‘Binocular Rule’’), 16C.F.R. part 402. The proceeding willaddress whether the Binocular Ruleshould be repealed or remain in effect.The Commission is soliciting writtencomment, data, and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 402’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, Room 159, Sixth Streetand Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Phillip S. Priesman, Attorney, FederalTrade Commission, Division ofAdvertising Practices, Bureau ofConsumer Protection, Washington, D.C.20580. (202) 326–2484.


Part A—Background Information

This notice is being publishedpursuant to Section 18 of the FederalTrade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) Act, 15U.S.C. 57a et seq., the provisions of Part1, Subpart B of the Commission’s Rules

of Practice, 16 CFR 1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551et seq. This authority permits theCommission to promulgate, modify, andrepeal trade regulation rules that definewith specificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingcommerce within the meaning ofSection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45.

The Binocular Rule was published infinal form in the Federal Register onJune 5, 1964, and became effective onDecember 2, 1964. The Rule requires aclear and conspicuous disclosure on anyadvertising or packaging for non-prismatic or partially prismaticbinoculars that the instruments are notfully prismatic. Fully prismaticbinoculars rely on a prism within theinstrument to reverse the visual imageentering the lens so that it appears right-side up to the user. Other binocularsrely partially or entirely on mirrors toreverse the visual image. When the rulewas promulgated, the Commission wasconcerned that consumers could bemisled into believing that non-prismaticbinoculars were in fact prismatic, absentsuch a disclosure.

To prevent consumer deception, therule proscribed the use of the term‘‘binocular’’ to describe anything otherthan a fully prismatic instrument,unless the term was modified toindicate the true nature of the item.Under the Rule, non-prismaticinstruments could be identified asbinoculars only if they incorporated adescriptive term such as ‘‘binocular-nonprismatic,’’ ‘‘binocular-mirrorprismatic,’’ or ‘‘binocular-nonprismaticmirror.’’

Part B—ObjectivesAs part of its continuing review of its

trade regulation rules to determine theircurrent effectiveness and impact, theCommission recently obtainedinformation bearing on the need for thisRule.1 The objective of this notice is tosolicit comment on whether theCommission should initiate arulemaking proceeding to repeal theBinocular Rule.

Part C—Alternative ActionsThe Commission will consider

alternatives to repealing the BinocularRule if the comments indicate that the

27242 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Rule continues to serve its originalpurpose.

Part D—Request for Comments

Members of the public are invited tocomment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the BinocularRule. The Commission requests thatfactual data upon which the commentsare based be submitted with thecomments. In this section, theCommission identifies the issues onwhich it solicits public comment. Theidentification of issues is designed toassist the public and should not beconstrued as a limitation on the issueson which public comment may besubmitted.

Questions

(1) Is any manufacturer currentlymanufacturing non-prismatic orpartially-prismatic binoculars?

(2) Is any individual or businessentity currently marketing non-prismatic or partially-prismaticbinoculars?

(3) Do any retail stores or suppliersstill maintain stocks of non-prismatic orpartially-prismatic binoculars?

(4) What benefits do consumers derivefrom the Rule?

(5) Should the Rule be kept in effector should it be repealed?

Authority: Section 18(d)(2)(B) of theFederal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C.57a(d)(2)(B).


Binoculars, Trade practices.By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12583 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

16 CFR Part 404

Trade Regulation Rule: DeceptiveAdvertising and Labeling as to Size ofTablecloths and Related Products


SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) proposesto repeal its Trade Regulations Ruleentitled ‘‘Deceptive Advertising andLabeling as to Size of Tablecloths andRelated Products (‘‘Tablecloth Rule’’),16 CFR part 404. The proceeding willaddress whether the Tablecloth Ruleshould be repealed or remain in effect.The Commission is soliciting written

comment, data and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 404’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, 6th Street & PennsylvaniaAvenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:John A. Crowley, Esq., (202) 326–3280,Division of Service Industry Practices,Bureau of Consumer Protection, FederalTrade Commission, Washington, DC20580.


Part A—Background InformationThis notice is published pursuant to

Section 18 of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a et seq.,the provisions of part 1, subpart B of theCommission’s rules of practice, 16 CFR1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. Thisauthority permits the Commission topromulgate, modify and repeal traderegulation rules that define withspecificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingcommerce within the meaning ofsection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45(a)(1).

The Tablecloth Rule, promulgated bythe Commission on August 5, 1964,declares that in connection with the saleor offering for sale of tablecloths andrelated products such as doilies, tablemats, dresser scarves, place mats, tablerunners, napkins and tea sets, anyrepresentation of the cut size (that is,the dimensions of materials used in theconstruction of such products)constitutes an unfair method ofcompetition and an unfair anddeceptive act or practice unless:

(a) ‘‘Such ‘cut size’ dimensions areaccompanied by the words ‘cut size’ ’’;and

(b) ‘‘The ‘cut size’ is accompanied bya clear and conspicuous disclosure ofthe dimensions of the finished productsand by an explanation that suchdimensions constitute the finishedsize.’’.

The Commission periodically reviewsthe rules and guides it has promulgated,seeking information about the costs andbenefits of such rules and guides andtheir regulatory and economic impact.The information obtained assists theCommission in identifying rules andguides that warrant modification orrescission. Pursuant to its reviewschedule, on April 19, 1993, theCommission published in the FederalRegister a request for public commentson the Tablecloth Rule. 58 FR 21124.The Commission asked commenters to

address questions relating to the costsand benefits of the rule, the burdens itimposes, and the basis for assessingwhether it should be retained, oramended.

The Commission received only onecomment specifically addressing thisrule along with a general commentreferring to several rules under review.The comment specific to this rule wassubmitted by a trade group representingthe textile rental, linen supply, uniformrental, dust control and commerciallaundry services industries. In its one-page comment letter, the associationstated there is a continuing need for thisrule. The commenter believes that therule does not impose any additionalcosts or burdens on entities subject tothe rule and that the rule raises the levelof professionalism in the industry.

In addition, one general comment,applicable to several rules beingreviewed, was received from anadvertising agency association. Thisorganization recommends rescission ofthe Tablecloth Rule because the generalprohibitions covering false anddeceptive advertising apply to theindustry and thus the rule createsunnecessary administrative costs for thegovernment, industry members andconsumers. The advertising associationdid not submit any analysis or datarelating to the imposition ofunnecessary administrative costs onaffected industry members, governmentor consumers.

Prior to the request for comments,Commission staff engaged in aninformal review of industry practices byexamining the marking of dimensionson tablecloths and other items subject tothe rule available for retail sale atseveral national chain stores. Thisinformal review revealed no instances ofrule violations. In fact, it appeared fromthat limited review that industryproducts were marked with only thefinished size. Additionally, theCommission has no record of receivingany complaints regarding non-compliance with the rule, or ofinitiating any law enforcement actionsalleging violations of the rule’srequirements. Finally, the UniformPackaging and Labeling Regulation,which has been adopted by 47 states,regulates the labeling of tablecloths,providing that these items must belabeled with their finished size.

Part B—ObjectivesBased on the review described above,

the Commission has determined thatthere may no longer be a need tocontinue the Tablecloth Rule in light ofthe apparent changes in industrypractices and the existence of laws in


1 In a memorandum to all federal departmentsand agencies dated March 4, 1995, the Presidentrequested all agencies to review their regulationsand to initiate proceedings to eliminate those theydetermined were obsolete or unnecessary. In 1992,the Commission adopted a plan to review all itsrules and guides at least once during a ten-yearperiod. In response to the President’s request, theCommission accelerated its scheduled review ofcertain rules to identify any that might beappropriate candidates for repeal or amendment.For example, under the ten-year plan, the FiberglassCurtain Rule was scheduled for review in 1998.

nearly all of the states mandating thepoint-of-sale disclosure required by therule. The objective of this notice is tosolicit comment on whether theCommission should initiate arulemaking proceeding to repeal theTablecloth Rule.

Part C—Alternative Actions

The Commission is not aware of anyfeasible alternatives to either repealingor retaining the Tablecloth Rule.


Members of the public are invited tocomment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the TableclothRule. Comments submitted during theregulatory review proceeding describedabove will be made part of the record,and need not be resubmitted. Acomment that includes the reasoning orbasis for a proposition will likely bemore persuasive than a commentwithout supporting information. TheCommission requests that factual dataupon which the comments are based besubmitted with the comments. In thissection, the Commission identifies anumber of issues on which it solicitspublic comment. The identification ofissues is designed to assist the public tocomment on relevant matters andshould not be construed as a limitationon the issues on which public commentmay be submitted.

Questions

(1) Do manufacturers and sellers oftablecloths currently use ‘‘cut size’’ as ameans of marking the size of theirproducts for sale at retail to consumers?

(2) Does the fact that nearly all of thestates have adopted the UniformPackaging and Labeling Regulation,which governs the labeling oftablecloths, eliminate or greatly lessenthe need for the Tablecloth Rule?






Advertising, Trade practices,Tablecloths.


16 CFR Part 413

Trade Regulation Rule Concerning theFailure To Disclose That Skin IrritationMay Result From Washing or HandlingGlass Fiber Curtains and Draperiesand Glass Fiber Curtain and DraperyFabrics


SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (the ‘‘Commission’’)proposes to commence a rulemakingproceeding to repeal its TradeRegulation Rule entitled ‘‘Failure toDisclose that Skin Irritation May Resultfrom Washing or Handling Glass FiberCurtains and Draperies and Glass FiberCurtain and Drapery Fabrics’’(‘‘Fiberglass Curtain Rule’’), 16 CFR Part413. The proceeding will addresswhether the Fiberglass Curtain Ruleshould be repealed or remain in effect.The Commission is soliciting writtencomment, data, and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 413’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, Room 159, Sixth Streetand Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Edwin Rodriguez or Janice Frankle,Attorneys, Federal Trade Commission,Division of Enforcement, Bureau ofConsumer Protection, Washington, DC20580, (202) 326–3147 or (202) 326–3022.



This notice is being publishedpursuant to Section 18 of the FederalTrade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) Act, 15U.S.C. 57a et seq., the provisions of Part1, Subpart B of the Commission’s Rulesof Practice, 16 CFR 1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551et seq. This authority permits theCommission to promulgate, modify, andrepeal trade regulation rules that definewith specificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingcommerce within the meaning ofSection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45.

The Fiberglass Curtain Rule requiresmarketers of fiberglass curtains ordraperies and fiberglass curtain ordrapery cloth to disclose that skinirritation may result from handlingfiberglass curtains or curtain cloth andfrom contact with clothing or other

articles which have been washed (1)with such glass fiber products, or (2) ina container previously used for washingsuch glass fiber products unless theglass particles have been removed fromsuch container by cleaning.

The Rule was promulgated on July 28,1967 (32 FR 11023 (1967)). TheStatement of Basis and Purpose for theRule stated that the ‘‘record is repletewith consumer statements relating theirexperiences with varying degrees ofirritation resulting from the exposure oftheir skin to particles from glass fibercurtains, draperies, and fabrics.’’Consequently, the Commissionconcluded that it was in the publicinterest to caution consumers that skinirritation could result from the directhandling of fiberglass curtains, drapes,and yard goods, and from body contactwith clothing or other articles that hadbeen contaminated with fiberglassparticles when they were washed withfiberglass products or in a containerpreviously used to wash fiberglassproducts when the container had notbeen cleaned of all glass particles.

Part B—Objectives

As part of its continuing review of itstrade regulation rules to determine theircurrent effectiveness and impact, theCommission recently obtainedinformation bearing on the need for thisRule.1 Based on this review, theCommission has tentatively determinedthat fiberglass curtains and drapes andfiberglass curtain or drape fabric nolonger present a substantial threat ofskin irritation to the consumer becausetechnological developments in fireretardant fabrics have caused fiberglassfabric to be displaced by polyester andmodacrylics in the curtain and draperyarea. Fiberglass fabrics are now usedalmost exclusively for very specializedindustrial uses. These technologicaldevelopments and market changessuggest that the Fiberglass Curtain Rulemay not be necessary and in the publicinterest. The objective of this notice isto solicit comment on whether theCommission should initiate arulemaking proceedings to repeal theFiberglass Curtain Rule.


1 In a memorandum to all federal departmentsand agencies dated March 4, 1995, the Presidentrequested all agencies to review their regulationsand to initiate proceedings to eliminate those theydetermined were obsolete or unnecessary. In 1992,the Commission adopted a plan to review all itsrules and guides at least once during a ten-yearperiod. In response to the President’s request, theCommission accelerated its scheduled review ofcertain rules to identify any that might beappropriate candidates for repeal or amendment.For example, under the ten-year plan, the Quick-Freeze Rule was scheduled for review in 1999, tenyears after its last review.

2 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7671i. Regulations promulgatedby the Environmental Protection Agencyimplementing the Clean Air Act banchlorofluorocarbons in aerosols and foams for non-essential uses. 40 CFR 82.64. The ban, whichincludes fluorocarbon 12, became effective onJanuary 17, 1994.


feasible alternatives to repealing theFiberglass Curtain Rule.


comment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the FiberglassCurtain Rule. The Commission requeststhat factual data upon which thecomments are based be submitted withthe comments. In this section, theCommission identifies the issues onwhich it solicits public comment. Theidentification of issues is designed toassist the public and should not beconstrued as a limitation on the issueson which public comment may besubmitted.

Questions(1) Is any manufacturer currently

manufacturing and marketing fiberglassfabric for decorative use, as opposed toindustrial use such as electronic circuitboards, joint tape, and insulation?

(2) Is any individual or businessentity currently marketing fiberglasscurtains or drapes?


(4) Have there been any technologicalor other changes that have reduced oreliminated the possibility of skinirritation from contact from glass fibermaterial?



List of Subjects in 16 CFR 413Fiberglass curtains and curtain fabric,

Trade practices.By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12584 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

16 CFR Part 417

Trade Regulation Rule Concerning theFailure To Disclose the Lethal Effectsof Inhaling Quick-Freeze Aerosol SprayProducts Used for Frosting CocktailGlasses


SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (the ‘‘Commission’’)proposes to commence a rulemaking

proceeding to repeal its TradeRegulation Rule entitled ‘‘Failure toDisclose the Lethal Effects of InhalingQuick-Freeze Aerosol Spray ProductsUsed for Frosting Cocktail Glasses’’(‘‘Quick-Freeze Spray Rule’’), 16 CFRpart 417. The proceeding will addresswhether the Quick-Freeze Spray Ruleshould be repealed or remain in effect.The Commission is soliciting writtencomment, data, and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 417’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, Room 159, Sixth Streetand Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Lemuel W. Dowdy or George BrentMickum IV, Attorneys, Federal TradeCommission, Division of Enforcement,Bureau of Consumer Protection,Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–2981or (202) 326–3132.


Part A—Background InformationThis notice is being published

pursuant to Section 18 of the FederalTrade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) Act, 15U.S.C. 57a et seq., the provisions of part1, subpart B of Commission’s rules ofpractice, 16 CFR 1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551et seq. This authority permits theCommission to promulgate, modify, andrepeal trade regulation rules that definewith specificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingcommerce within the meaning ofsection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45.

The Quick-Freeze Spray Rule requiresa clear and conspicuous warning onaerosol spray products used for frostingbeverage glasses. The warning statesthat the contents should not be inhaledin concentrated form and that doing somay cause injury or death. Glass frostingproducts contain a compound known asFluorocarbon 12(dichlorodifluoromethane), which isalso the principal ingredient used incoolants for automobile air conditionersand refrigerators.

The Rule was promulgated onFebruary 20, 1969 (34 FR 2417 (1969)).The Statement of Basis and Purpose forthe Rule stated that, although theproduct is not harmful when used asdirected, there had been severalinstances where the intentional misuseof this product by inhaling its vaporsresulted in death. Consequently, theCommission concluded that it was inthe public interest to caution purchasers

who may not otherwise be aware of thelethal effects of inhaling the product.

On October 25, 1989, the Commissionpublished a notice in the FederalRegister soliciting public comments onthe Rule’s impact on small entities. (54FR 43435). No comments were receivedin response to the notice. TheCommission determined, however, thata small amount of quick freeze aerosolproducts were still available for sale.Therefore, the Commission determinedthat because the Rule’s safety warnings,if followed, could prevent physicalharm and loss of life, the Rule shouldbe retained.

Part B—ObjectivesAs part of its continuing review of its

trade regulation rules to determine theircurrent effectiveness and impact, theCommission recently obtainedinformation bearing on the need for thisRule.1 Based on this review, theCommission has determined that glassfrosting products are no longerproduced and that they are precludedby the Clean Air Act from beingreintroduced into the market place.2The objective of this notice is to solicitcomment on whether the Commissionshould initiate a rulemaking proceedingto repeal the Quick-Freeze Spray Rule.


feasible alternatives to repealing theQuick-Freeze Spray Rule.


comment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the Quick-Freeze Spray Rule. The Commissionrequests that factual data upon whichthe comments are based be submittedwith the comments. In this section, theCommission identifies the issues onwhich it solicits public comment. Theidentification of issues is designed to


assist the public and should not beconstrued as a limitation on the issueson which public comment may besubmitted.

Questions

(1) Is any manufacturer currentlymanufacturing quick-freeze sprayproducts?

(2) Is any individual or businessentity currently marketing quick-freezespray products?

(3) Do any retail stores or suppliersstill maintain stocks of quick-freezespray products for resale?


(5) Does regulation of this product bythe Environmental Protection Agencyrender the Rule unnecessary?




Quick-freeze aerosol spray, Tradepractices.


16 CFR Part 418

Trade Regulation Rule: DeceptiveAdvertising and Labeling as to Lengthof Extension Ladders


SUMMARY: The Federal TradeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) proposesto repeal its Trade Regulation Ruleentitled ‘‘Deceptive Advertising andLabeling as to Length of ExtensionLadders’’ (‘‘Extension Ladder Rule’’), 16CFR part 418. The proceeding willaddress whether the Extension LadderRule should be repealed or remain ineffect. The Commission is solicitingwritten comment, data and argumentsconcerning this proposal.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe identified as ‘‘16 CFR Part 418’’ andsent to Secretary, Federal TradeCommission, 6th Street & PennsylvaniaAvenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:John A. Crowley, Esq., (202) 326–3280,Division of Service Industry Practices,

Bureau of Consumer Protection, FederalTrade Commission, Washington, DC20580.



This notice is published pursuant toSection 18 of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a et seq.,the provisions of part 1, subpart B of theCommission’s rules of practice, 16 CFR1.7, and 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. Thisauthority permits the Commission topromulgate, modify and repeal traderegulation rules that define withspecificity acts or practices that areunfair or deceptive in or affectingCommerce within the meaning ofsection 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.45(a)(1).

The Extension Ladder Rule,promulgated by the Commission onJune 22, 1969, declares that it is anunfair or deceptive act or practice andan unfair method of competition torepresent the size or length of anextension ladder, in terms of the totallength of the component sectionsthereof, unless:

(a) Such size or length representationis accompanied by the words ‘‘totallength of sections’’ or words withsimilar meanings which clearly indicatethe basis of the representation; and,

(b) Such size or length representationis accompanied by a statement in closeproximity which clearly andconspicuously shows the maximumlength of the product when fullyextended for use (i.e., excluding thefootage lost in overlapping) along withan explanation for the basis of suchrepresentation.

The Commission periodically reviewsrules and guides seeking informationabout the costs and benefits of suchrules and guides and their regulatoryand economic impact. The informationobtained assists the Commission inidentifying rules and guides thatwarrant modification or rescission.Pursuant to its review schedule, onApril 19, 1993, the Commissionpublished in the Federal Register arequest for public comments on itsExtension Ladder Rule. 58 FR 21125.The Commission asked commenters toaddress questions relating to the costsand benefits of the rule, the burdens itimposes, and the basis for assessingwhether it should be retained, oramended.

The request for comments on theExtension Ladder Rule elicited sixspecific comments. One commenter, aconsumer, opined that the only labelthat should be on ladders is the‘‘maximum working length’’ since

consumers should not have to do anyfiguring to determine the length of theladder that would meet their needs.

Of the other five commenters, four aremanufacturers or suppliers of laddersand one is a trade association. A numberof these comments refer to ANSIstandard A14, which governs thelabeling of ladders. ANSI standard A14details the requirements for labelingportable wood ladders, portable metalladders, fixed ladders, job made laddersand portable reinforced plastic ladders.The ANSI standard requiresspecification of the maximum workinglength of extension ladders, as well asseveral other pieces of information notrequired by the Extension Ladder Rule,including the total length of the ladder’ssections and the highest standing levelof the ladder. Compliance with theANSI standard therefore ensurescompliance with the labelingrequirements of the Extension LadderRule.

Several commenters noted thisoverlap in the coverage of the ExtensionLadder Rule and ANSI standard A14,and recommended that the rule beretained unchanged.

Another commenter stated that therule has imposed minor, incrementalcosts, but opined that the benefits havebeen significant in that consumers havea better understanding of extensionladder length. The commenterquestioned whether there was acontinuing need for this rule given theexistence of ANSI standard A14 and ULStandard 184.

In addition to this specific comment,one general comment, applicable toseveral rules being reviewed, wasreceived from an advertising agencyassociation. This organizationrecommends rescission of the ExtensionLadder Rule because the generalprohibitions covering false anddeceptive advertising apply to theladder industry, and thus the Rulecreates unnecessary administrative costsfor the government, industry membersand consumers. The advertisingassociation did not submit any analysisor data relating to the imposition ofunnecessary administrative costs onaffected industry members, governmentor consumers.

Finally, Commission staff engaged inan informal review of industry practicesby examining the marking of length onextension ladders available for retailsale at several chain stores. That reviewindicated general compliance with therequirements of the rule. Additionally,the Commission has no record ofreceiving any complaints regarding non-compliance with the rule, or ofinitiating any law enforcement actions


alleging violations of the rule’srequirements.

Part B—Objectives

Based on the review described above,the Commission has determined thatthere may no longer be a need tocontinue the Extension Ladder Rule inlight of the apparent changes in industrypractices and the existence of standardsmandating the point-of-sale disclosuresrequired by the rule. The objective ofthis notice is to solicit comment onwhether the Commission should initiatea rulemaking proceeding to repeal theExtension Ladder Rule.

Part C—Alternative Actions

The Commission is not aware of anyfeasible alternatives to either repealingor retaining the Extension Ladder Rule.


Members of the public are invited tocomment on any issues or concerns theybelieve are relevant or appropriate to theCommission’s review of the ExtensionLadder Rule. Comments submittedduring the regulatory review proceedingdescribed above will be made part of therecord, and need not be resubmitted. Acomment that includes the reasoning orbasis for a proposition will likely bemore persuasive than a commentwithout supporting information. TheCommission requests that factual dataupon which the comments are based besubmitted with the comments. In thissection, the Commission identifies anumber of issues on which it solicitspublic comment. The identification ofissues is designed to assist the public tocomment on relevant matters andshould not be construed as a limitationon the issues on which public commentmay be submitted.

Questions

(1) Does the existence of the ANSIstandard governing the labeling ofextension ladders eliminate or greatlylessen the need for the rule?






Advertising, Trade practices,extension ladders.


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamationand Enforcement

30 CFR Part 934

North Dakota Regulatory Program

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening andextension of public comment period onproposed amendment.

SUMMARY: OSM is announcing receipt ofrevisions and additional explanatoryinformation pertaining to a previouslyproposed amendment to the NorthDakota regulatory program (hereinafter,the ‘‘North Dakota program’’) under theSurface Mining Control andReclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Therevisions and additional explanatoryinformation pertain to North Dakota’s‘‘Standards for Evaluation ofRevegetation Success andRecommended Procedures for Pre- andPostmining Vegetation Assessments.’’The amendment is intended to revisethis document to be consistent with theFederal regulations and to improveoperational efficiency.DATES: Written comments must bereceived by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., June 7,1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe mailed or hand delivered to GuyPadgett at the address listed below.

Copies of the North Dakota program,the proposed amendment, and allwritten comments received in responseto this document will be available forpublic review at the addresses listedbelow during normal business hours,Monday through Friday, excludingholidays. Each requester may receiveone free copy of the proposedamendment by contacting OSM’s CasperField Office.Guy Padgett, Director, Casper Field

Office, Office of Surface MiningReclamation and Enforcement, 100East B Street, Room 2128, Casper, WY82601–1918, Telephone: (307) 261–5776

Edward J. Englerth, Director,Reclamation Division, North DakotaPublic Service Commission, CapitolBuilding, Bismarck, ND 58505–0165,Telephone: (701) 224–4092

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Guy Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261–5776.


I. Background on the North DakotaProgram

On December 15, 1980, the Secretaryof the Interior conditionally approvedthe North Dakota program. Generalbackground information on the NorthDakota program, including theSecretary’s findings, the disposition ofcomments, and the conditions ofapproval of the North Dakota programcan be found in the December 15, 1980,Federal Register (45 FR 82214).Subsequent actions concerning NorthDakota’s program and programamendments can be found at 30 CFR934.12, 934.13, 934.15, 934.16, and934.30.

II. Proposed AmendmentBy letter dated February 17, 1994,

North Dakota submitted a proposedamendment to its program pursuant toSMCRA (administrative record No. ND–U–01). North Dakota submitted theproposed revisions to its ‘‘Standards forEvaluation of Revegetation Success andRecommended Procedures for Pre- andPostmining Vegetation Assessments’’(hereinafter, the ‘‘revegetation successdocument’’) in response to requiredprogram amendments at 30 CFR 934.16(b) through (i), (w), and (x), and at itsown initiative.

OSM announced receipt of theproposed amendment in the March 14,1994, Federal Register (49 FR 11744),provided an opportunity for a publichearing or meeting on its substantiveadequacy, and invited public commenton its adequacy (administrative recordNo. ND–U–05). Because no onerequested a public hearing or meeting,none was held. The public commentperiod ended on April 13, 1994.

During its review of the amendment,OSM identified concerns and notifiedNorth Dakota of these concerns by letterdated September 9, 1994 (administrativerecord No. ND–U–10). North Dakotaresponded in a letter dated December21, 1994, by submitting a revisedamendment and additional explanatoryinformation (administrative record No.ND–U–14) that addressed the concernsidentified by OSM.

OSM announced receipt of theDecember 21, 1994, revised amendmentin the January 19, 1995, FederalRegister (60 FR 3790) and invited publiccomment on its adequacy(administrative record No. ND–U–15).The public comment period ended onFebruary 3, 1995.

Subsequently, North Dakota requesteda meeting with OSM to discuss itsDecember 21, 1994, revisions that weremade in response to OSM’s September


9, 1994, issue letter. OSM and NorthDakota met on April 11, 1995(administrative record No. ND–U–16).North Dakota, by letter dated May 11,1995 (administrative record No. ND–U–17), submitted, at its own initiative,additional revisions and explanatoryinformation to its revegetation successdocument.

In its May 11, 1995, revisedamendment, North Dakota proposes (1)A county-wide correction factor to beused with the U.S. Natural ResourcesConservation Service (NRCS) yieldinformation to adjust for climatic yieldconditions on land reclaimed for use ascropland or prime farmland, (2) deletionof the allowance for ‘‘auxiliaryshelterbelts’’ without revegetationsuccess standards on land reclaimed foruse as shelterbelts, (3) addition of theability for North Dakota to require, bypermit condition, shelterbelts as apostmining land use that meet thesuccess standards in its revegetationsuccess document, (4) addition of theallowance for tree and shrub stockingstandards approved by the State Gameand Fish Department and the StateForest Service, as well as by the U.S.NRCS, on land reclaimed for use asshelterbelts, (5) addition of therequirement that all species in theapproved seed mixture must be presentat the time of final bond release on landreclaimed for use as tame pastureland,(6) clarification that actual samplemeans must be used in formulas thatdetermine sample size when measuringsuccess of revegetation for bond release,(7) addition of specifications for sizeand location of representative stripsused to demonstrate the restoration ofsoil productivity on land reclaimed foruse as cropland and prime farmland, (8)deletion of the State wetlandclassification system and retention ofthe Stewart and Kantrud system ofwetland classification for preminingassessments on land to be reclaimed foruse as fish and wildlife habitat, (9)clarification of the requirement thatsampling techniques for measuringsuccess of woody plant density use a 90-percent statistical confidence interval,(10) allowance as a normal conservationpractice the voluntary planting of treesand shrubs on agricultural land at therequest of the land owner or for fish andwildlife enhancement, and (11)clarification that a single reinforcedinterseeding may be allowed withoutrestarting the liability period on landreclaimed for use as native grazing land.

III. Public Comment ProceduresOSM is reopening the comment

period on the proposed North Dakotaprogram amendment to provide the

public an opportunity to reconsider theadequacy of the proposed amendmentin light of the additional materialssubmitted. In accordance with theprovisions of 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM isseeking comments on whether theproposed amendment satisfies theapplicable program approval criteria of30 CFR 732.15. If the amendment isdeemed adequate, it will become part ofthe North Dakota program.

Written comments should be specific,pertain only to the issues proposed inthis rulemaking, and includeexplanations in support of thecommenter’s recommendations.Comments received after the timeindicated under DATES or at locationsother than the Casper Field Office willnot necessarily be considered in thefinal rulemaking or included in theadministrative record.

IV. Procedural Determinations

1. Executive Order 12866

This rule is exempted from review bythe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) under Executive Order 12866(Regulatory Planning and Review).

2. Executive Order 12778

The Department of the Interior hasconducted the reviews required bysection 2 of Executive Order 12778(Civil Justice Reform) and hasdetermined that this rule meets theapplicable standards of subsections (a)and (b) of that section. However, thesestandards are not applicable to theactual language of State regulatoryprograms and program amendmentssince each such program is drafted andpromulgated by a specific State, not byOSM. Under sections 503 and 505 ofSMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 12550) andthe Federal regulations at 30 CFR730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),decisions on proposed State regulatoryprograms and program amendmentssubmitted by the States must be basedsolely on a determination of whether thesubmittal is consistent with SMCRA andits implementing Federal regulationsand whether the other requirements of30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 havebeen met.

3. National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement isrequired for this rule since section702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))provides that agency decisions onproposed State regulatory programprovisions do not constitute majorFederal actions within the meaning ofsection 102(2)(C) of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).

4. Paperwork Reduction ActThis rule does not contain

information collection requirements thatrequire approval by OMB under thePaperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.3507 et seq.).

5. Regulatory Flexibility ActThe Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entitiesunder the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittalthat is the subject of this rule is basedupon counterpart Federal regulations forwhich an economic analysis wasprepared and certification made thatsuch regulations would not have asignificant economic effect upon asubstantial number of small entities.Accordingly, this rule will ensure thatexisting requirements previouslypromulgated by OSM will beimplemented by the State. In making thedetermination as to whether this rulewould have a significant economicimpact, the Department relied upon thedata and assumptions for thecounterpart Federal regulations.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 934Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.Dated: May 17, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,Regional Director, Western RegionalCoordinating Center.[FR Doc. 95–12574 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

Office of the Secretary

43 CFR Part 11

RIN 1090–AA43

Natural Resource DamageAssessments; Type B—Nonuse Values

AGENCY: Department of the Interior.ACTION: Notice of correction tosemiannual regulatory agenda.

SUMMARY: On May 8, 1995, thesemiannual regulatory agenda waspublished. The agenda incorrectly listedthe Department of the Interior’s NaturalResource Damage Assessments; TypeB—Nonuse Values rulemaking as acompleted/long-term action that hadbeen withdrawn on March 31, 1995. 60FR 23408, 23419. This rulemaking hasneither been withdrawn nor completed.A proposed rule was issued on May 4,1994. 59 FR 23097. The comment periodclosed on October 7, 1994. 59 FR 32175.The Department is currently reviewingand considering the comments received.


1 A service contract is defined by section 3(21) ofthe Act as:

* * * a contract between a shipper and anocean common carrier or conference in which theshipper makes a commitment to provide a certainminimum quantity of cargo over a fixed timeperiod, and the ocean common carrier or conferencecommits to a certain rate or rate schedule as wellas a defined level—such as assured space, transittime, port rotation, or similar service features; thecontract may also specify provisions in the event ofnonperformance on the part of either party.

2 Section 8(c) of the 1984 Act provides:* * * each [service] contract entered into * * *

shall be filed confidentially with the Commission,and at the same time, a concise statement of itsessential terms shall be filed with the Commissionand made available to the general public in tariffformat, and those essential terms shall be available

to all shippers similarly situated. The essentialterms shall include—

(1) the origin and destination port ranges in thecase of port-to-port movements, and the origin anddestination geographic areas in the case of throughintermodal movements;

(2) the commodity or commodities involved;(3) the minimum volume;(4) the line-haul rate;(5) the duration;(6) service commitments; and(7) the liquidated damages for nonperformance, if

any.3 This requirement is implemented in the

Commission’s rules and regulations at 46 CFR514.7(f)(1).

Dated: May 16, 1995.Willie R. Taylor,Director, Office of Environmental Policy andCompliance.[FR Doc. 95–12514 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–RG–M

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

46 CFR Part 514

[Docket No. 95–08]

Service Contract FilingRequirements—MiscellaneousRevisions

AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission.ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Federal MaritimeCommission proposes to amend its rulesto provide an optional, abbreviatedservice contract format and to requireservice contracts to include certainidentifying information concerning thesignatories. This should reduceduplication and Commission and carriercosts, as well as facilitate automation ofthe Commission’s service contractrecords.DATES: Comments due June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Comments (original and 15copies) are to be submitted to: Joseph C.Polking, Secretary, Federal MaritimeCommission, 800 North Capitol Street,N.W., Washington, D.C. 20573, (202)523–5725.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Bryant L. VanBrakle, Director, Bureau ofTariffs, Certification and Licensing,Federal Maritime Commission, 800North Capitol Street, N.W., Washington,D.C. 20573, (202) 523–5796.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Servicecontracts subject to section 8(c) of theShipping Act of 1984 (‘‘1984 Act’’ or‘‘the Act’’), 46 U.S.C. app. 1707(c),1 arefiled confidentially with the FederalMaritime Commission (‘‘FMC’’ or‘‘Commission’’).2 Prior to such filing, a

statement of each contract’s essentialterms (‘‘ET’’) is filed electronically inthe Commission’s Automated TariffFiling and Information System(‘‘ATFI’’), made available to the generalpublic in tariff format, and offered to allsimilarly situated shippers.3

ETs have been required to be filed inATFI since November 1993. However,the associated confidential servicecontracts continue to be filed in paperformat and can often be of considerablelength. There is significant duplicationbetween a service contract’s text andthat of its corresponding ET. To theextent the overlap between theseinterdependent documents can beminimized, the rate of error between thetwo documents should also be reduced.

Because service contracts are filedconfidentially with the Commission,they must be secured under lock andkey. Given the rapidly rising number ofcontract filings, and their sheer physicalbulk, these documents are consumingan ever larger portion of theCommission’s limited secured storagespace.

Apart from the foregoing, theCommission is also proposing toaddress a ministerial detail relating tothe content of service contracts. Thecurrent service contract rules do notrequire contracts to set forth thesignatories’ addresses. This has resultedin difficulty in clearly identifyingshipper parties, including namedaffiliates, to certain service contracts,and, in some cases, hampered theCommission’s investigative efforts.

The Commission therefore proposesto afford service contract parties theoption of filing their service contracts inan abbreviated format, on condition thatsuch filings incorporate by reference thecorresponding ATFI ETs; certify thatsaid ET contains all aspects of theparties’ contract which are not set forthin the service contract filing; and setforth certain specific information. TheFMC also proposes to require servicecontracts to set forth the parties’ names,titles and addresses.

The collection of informationrequirements contained in this proposedrule have been submitted to the Officeof Management and Budget for reviewunder the provisions of the PaperworkReduction Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–511),as amended. Public reporting burden forthis collection of information isestimated to decrease to an average ofone manhour per response, includingthe time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the dataneeded, and completing and reviewingthe collection of information. Sendcomments regarding this burdenestimate or any other aspect of thiscollection of information, includingsuggestions for reducing the burden, toBruce A. Dombrowski, DeputyManaging Director, Federal MaritimeCommission, Washington, D.C. 20573and to the Office of Information andRegulatory Affairs, Office ofManagement and Budget, Washington,D.C. 20503.

The Chairman of the Commissioncertifies, pursuant to section 605(b) ofthe Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.601, et seq., that this proposed rule willnot have a significant economic impacton a substantial number of smallentities, including small businesses,small organizational units, and smallgovernmental jurisdictions.


Administrative practice andprocedure, Antitrust, Automatic dataprocessing, Cargo vessels, Confidentialbusiness information, Contracts,Exports, Freight, Freight forwarders,Imports, Maritime carriers, Penalties,Rates and fares, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553and sections 3, 8, and 17 of theShipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app.1702, 1707 and 1716), the FederalMaritime Commission proposes toamend Part 514 of Title 46 of the Codeof Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 514—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 514continues to read:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; 31 U.S.C.9701; 46 U.S.C. app. 804, 812, 814–817(a),820, 833a, 841a, 843, 844, 845, 845a, 845b,847, 1702–1712, 1714–1716, 1718, 1721, and1722; and sec. 2(b) of Pub. L. 101–92, 103Stat. 601.

2. Section 514.7 is amended byrevising paragraphs (h)(1)(v) and(h)(1)(vi) and adding paragraph(h)(2)(i)(C) to read as follows:


1 See Exhibit II of this part for an example of anabbreviated format service contract.

§ 514.7 Service contracts in foreigncommerce.* * * * *

(h) * * *(1) * * *(v) The true and complete names and

addresses of the contract parties and thetypewritten names, titles and addressesof the representatives signing thecontract for the parties. Any furtherreferences in the contract to such partiesshall be consistent with the firstreference (e.g., (exact name), ‘‘carrier,’’‘‘shipper,’’ or ‘‘association,’’ etc.); and

(vi) The true and complete names andaddresses of every affiliate of eachcontract party named under paragraph(h)(1)(v) of this section entitled toreceive or authorized to offer servicesunder the contract, except that in thecase of a contract entered into by aconference or shippers’ association,individual members need not be namedunless the contract includes or excludesspecific members. In the event the listof affiliates is too lengthy to be includedon the first page, reference shall bemade to the exact location of suchinformation.* * * * *

(2) * * *(i) * * *(C) Section 514.7(h)(2)(i)(A) does not

apply to a service contract thatincorporates by reference all of theassociated essential terms filing aspublished in ATFI, provided that theparties certify that, other than for thoseprovisions set forth in the filed servicecontract, such essential terms filing setsforth the parties’ true and completecontract.1

* * * * *By the Commission.

Joseph C. Polking,Secretary.

Exhibit II to Part 514

Sample Abbreviated Format ServiceContractService Contract No.: SC 1–95FMC File No.: 50,000Essentials Terms No.: ET 1–95Amendment No.: lllService Contract Essential Terms Publication

No.: 003Tariff(s) of General Applicability No.: 001,

002Carrier/Conference Name: Efficient Liner

Transportation, Inc.Carrier/Conference Address: 1227 Seaway

Drive, Washington, DC 20573

andShipper Name: ABC Electronics CompanyShipper Address: 7221 Happiness Lane, New

York, NY 10001This is a service contract pursuant to the

Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 1701 etseq.) and FMC rules at 46 C.F.R. Part 514,between ‘‘CARRIER/CONFERENCE’’ and‘‘SHIPPER’’ parties named herein. Thecontract parties certify that the terms set forthherein and the essential terms as publishedin Carrier/Conference Service ContractEssential Terms Tariff No. 003, ET No. 1–95,in the Federal Maritime Commission’sAutomated Tariff Filing and InformationSystem, constitute the true and completecopy of all aspects of this contract and arehereby incorporated by reference.

Further, shipper party named hereincertifies its status and that of any affiliate(s)/subsidiary(ies) named herein as (checkappropriate box(es):b NVOCCb Shippers’ Associationb Owner of Cargob Other (Please specify)

Records maintained to support shipmentsunder this service contract are: bills oflading, shipping manifests, and other relatedwritten correspondence between contractparties.

Contact person for records in the event ofa request by the Federal MaritimeCommission: Efficient Liner Transportation,Inc., Traffic Manager, 1227 Seaway Drive,Washington, DC 20573, (202) 523–5856.lllllllllllllllllllll

(Carrier/Conference Signature)Date llllllllllllllllll

Carl T. Booker, PresidentEfficient Liner Transportation, Inc.lllllllllllllllllllll

(Shipper Signature)Date llllllllllllllllll

Vanessa M. Banks, PresidentABC Electronics CompanyAffiliate of shipper: Quality Compact Discs,

Inc.Affiliate’s address: 7221–A Happiness Lane,

New York, NY 10001

[FR Doc. 95–12512 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6730–01–P


Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 20

RIN 1018–AD08

Migratory Bird Harvest InformationProgram

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,Interior.

ACTION: Proposed Rule; Extension ofComment Period.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and WildlifeService (Service) announces theextension of the comment period forService’s March 15, 1995, ProposedRule published in the Federal Registerfrom April 1 to May 31, 1995.

DATES: The comment period for theproposed framework will end on May31, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments shouldbe sent to: Chief, Office of MigratoryBird Management, U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, 10815 Loblolly PineDrive, Laurel, Maryland 20708–4028.Comments received will be available forpublic inspection during normalbusiness hours in Building 158, 10815Loblolly Pine Drive (Gate 4, PatuxentEnvironmental Science Center), Laurel,Maryland 20708–4028.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PaulI. Padding, Office of Migratory BirdManagement, (301) 497–5980, FAX(301) 497–5981.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheService announced in the March 15,1995, Federal Register (60 FR 14194)the planned expansion of the MigratoryBird Harvest Information Program(Program) to include the States ofMichigan, Oklahoma, and Oregonbeginning in the 1995–96 huntingseason, and minor modifications to theProgram. This Program providesannually a nationwide sample frame ofmigratory bird hunters, from whichrepresentative samples of hunters areselected and asked to participate in avoluntary survey. State wildlife agenciesprovide a sample frame of hunters byannually collecting the name, address,date of birth, and a brief summary ofmigratory bird hunting activity from theprevious year from each licensedmigratory bird hunter in their State.States forward this information to theService, and the Service sampleshunters and conducts national hunteractivity and harvest surveys.

Dated: May 16, 1995.

George T. Frampton, Jr.Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife andParks[FR Doc. 95–12508 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–F

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains documents other than rules orproposed rules that are applicable to thepublic. Notices of hearings and investigations,committee meetings, agency decisions andrulings, delegations of authority, filing ofpetitions and applications and agencystatements of organization and functions areexamples of documents appearing in thissection.

Notices Federal Register

27250

Vol. 60, No. 99


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Research Service

Notice of Intent To Grant ExclusiveLicense

AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service,USDA.ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given thatthe U.S. Department of Agriculture,Agricultural Research Service, intendsto grant to biosys of Palo Alto, Californiaan exclusive license to U.S. Patent No.5,061,697 issued October 29, 1991, (S.N.07/389,090), ‘‘AdherentAutoencapsulating Spray Formulationsof Biocontrol Agents.’’ Notice ofAvailability was published in theFederal Register on December 19, 1989.DATES: Comments must be received onor before July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: Send comments to USDA,ARS, Office of Technology Transfer,Room 401, Building 005, BARC-West,Baltimore Boulevard, Beltsville,Maryland 20705–2350.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:June Blalock of the Office of Technologytransfer at the Beltsville address givenabove; telephone: 301–504–5989.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheFederal Government’s patent rights tothis invention are assigned to the UnitedStates of America, as represented by theSecretary of Agriculture. It is in thepublic interest to so license thisinvention as biosys has submitted acomplete and sufficient application fora license. The prospective exclusivelicense will be royalty-bearing and willcomply with the terms and conditionsof 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Theprospective exclusive license may begranted unless, within sixty days fromthe date of this published Notice, theAgricultural Research Service receiveswritten evidence and argument whichestablishes that the grant of the licensewould not be consistent with the

requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37CFR 404.7.R.M. Parry, Jr.,Assistant Administrator.[FR Doc. 95–12507 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–03–M

Food Safety and Inspection Service

[Docket No. 95–007N]

International Standard-SettingActivities

AGENCY: Food Safety and InspectionService, USDA.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice informs the publicof the sanitary and phytosanitarystandard-setting activities of the CodexAlimentarius Commission (Codex), inaccordance with section 491 of theTrade Agreements Act of 1979, asamended by the Uruguay RoundAgreements Act, Public Law 103–465,108 Stat. 4809 (1994), and seekscomments on standards currently underconsideration and recommendations fornew standards. This notice covers thetime periods from June 1, 1994, to May31, 1995, and May 31, 1995, to June 1,1996.ADDRESSES: Submit written commentsin triplicate to Diane Moore, DocketClerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture,Food Safety and Inspection Service,Room 4352–S, Washington, DC 20250–3700. Please state that your commentsrefer to Codex and, if your commentsrelate to specific Codex committees,please identify those committees in yourcomments. All comments submitted inresponse to the sanitary andphytosanitary standard-setting activitiesof Codex will be available for publicinspection in the Docket Clerk’s Officebetween 8:30 a.m. and 1 p.m., and 2p.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday throughFriday.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Dr. Marvin A. Norcross, U.S.Coordinator for Codex Alimentarius,Office of the U.S. Codex Alimentarius,U.S. Department of Agriculture, FoodSafety and Inspection Service, West EndCourt, Room 311, Washington, DC20250; (202) 254–2517. For informationpertaining to particular committees, thedelegate of that committee may becontacted. (A complete list of U.S.

delegates and alternate delegates can befound in Appendix 1 to this notice.)


BackgroundThe World Trade Organization (WTO)

was established on January 1, 1995, asthe common international institutionalframework for the conduct of traderelations among its members in mattersrelated to the Uruguay RoundAgreements. The WTO is the successororganization to the General Agreementson Tariffs and Trade (GATT). U.S.membership in the WTO was approvedby Congress when it enacted theUruguay Round Agreements Act, whichwas signed into law by the President onDecember 8, 1994. Pursuant to section491 of the Trade Agreements Act of1979, as amended, the President isrequired to designate an agency to beresponsible for informing the public ofthe sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS)standard-setting activities of eachinternational standard-settingorganization, the Codex AlimentariusCommission (Codex), InternationalOffice of Epizootics (OIE), and theInternational Plant ProtectionConvention (IPPC). The President,pursuant to Proclamation No. 6780 ofMarch 23, 1995 (60 FR 15845),designated the U.S. Department ofAgriculture as the agency responsiblefor informing the public of sanitary andphytosanitary standard-setting activitiesof each international standard-settingorganization. The Secretary ofAgriculture is delegating to the UnderSecretary for Food Safety theresponsibility to inform the public ofthe SPS standard-setting activities ofCodex. The Acting Under Secretary forFood Safety has, in turn, assigned theresponsibility for informing the publicto the Office of U.S. Codex Alimentariusin the Food Safety and InspectionService (FSIS).

The Codex Alimentarius Commission(Codex), was created in 1962 by twoU.N. organizations, the Food andAgriculture Organization (FAO) and theWorld Health Organization (WHO).Codex is the major internationalorganization for encouraging fairinternational trade in food andprotecting the health and economicinterests of consumers. Throughadoption of food standards, codes ofpractice, and other guidelinesdeveloped by its committees and by

27251Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Notices

promoting their adoption andimplementation by governments, Codexseeks to ensure that the world’s foodsupply is sound, wholesome, free fromadulteration, and correctly labeled. Inthe United States, FSIS, USDA; the Foodand Drug Administration (FDA),Department of Health and HumanServices (HHS), and the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) manage andcarry out U.S. Codex activities. Asupplemental Federal Register noticeon the acceptance procedures for Codexstandards will be published at a laterdate.

As the agency responsible forinforming the public of the sanitary andphytosanitary standard-setting activitiesof Codex, FSIS will be publishing thisnotice in the Federal Register annually,setting forth the following information:

1. The sanitary or phytosanitarystandards under consideration orplanned for consideration; and

2. For each sanitary or phytosanitarystandard specified:

a. A description of the considerationor planned consideration of thestandard;

b. Whether the United States isparticipating or plans to participate inthe consideration of the standard;

c. The agenda for United Statesparticipation, if any; and

d. The agency responsible forrepresenting the United States withrespect to the standard.

TO OBTAIN COPIES OF THOSESTANDARDS LISTED IN THIS NOTICETHAT ARE UNDER CONSIDERAITONBY CODEX, PLEASE CONTACT THECODEX DELEGATE OR THE OFFICE OFU.S. CODEX ALIMENTARIUS. This

notice also solicits public comment onthose standards that are underconsideration and on recommendationsfor new standards. All commentsreceived will be circulated by FSIS tothe U.S. delegate on the relevant Codexcommittee, and, whent he delegate isnot from the agency responsible forrepresenting the United States withrespect to the standard, also to theagency that will be responsible forrepresenting the United States withrespect to the standard. The delegage, inconjuction with the responsible agency,will take the comments received intoaccount in paritcipating in theconsideration of the standards and inproposing matters to be considered byCodex.

The information proved belowdescribes the status of Codex standard-setting activities by the CodexCommittees for the two year period fromJune 1, 1994 to June 1, 1996. Inaddition, the following information isincluded with this Federal Registernotice:Appendix 1. List of U.S. Codex Officials

(includes U.S. delegates and alternatedelegates).

Appendix 2. Timetable fo CodexSessions (June 1994 through June1996).

Appendix 3. Definitions for Purpose ofCodex Alimentarius.

Appendix 4. Uniform Procedure for theElaboration of Codex Standards andRelated Texts.

Appendix 5. Nature of Codex Standards.Appendix 6. Provisional Agenda of the

Joint FAO/WHO Food StandardsProgram, Codex AlimentariusCommission, 21st Session.

Done at Washington, DC, on May 17, 1995.

Michael R. Taylor,Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety.

Codex Committee on Residues ofVeterinary Drugs in Foods

The Codex Committee on Residues ofVeterinary Drugs in Foods wasestablished in 1986. The Committeedetermines priorities for theconsideration of residues of veterinarydrugs in foods and recommendsmaximum levels of such substances. ACodex Maximum Limit for Residues ofVeterinary Drugs (MRLVD) is themaximum concentration of residueresulting from the use of a veterinarydrug (expressed in mg/kg or µg/kg on afresh weight basis) that is recommendedby the Codex Alimentarius Commissionto be legally permitted or recognized asacceptable in or on a food.

An MRLVD is based on the type andamount of residue considered to bewithout any toxicological hazard forhuman health as expressed by theAcceptable Daily Intake (ADI)*, or onthe basis of a temporary ADI thatutilizes an additional safety factor. AnMRLVD also takes into account otherrelevant public health risks as well asfood technological aspects.

When establishing an MRLVD,consideration is also given to residuesthat occur in food of plant origin and/or the environment. Furthermore, theMRLVD may be reduced to be consistentwith good practices in the use ofveterinary drugs and to the extent thatpractical and analytical methods areavailable.

Codex committee Standard Status of consideration U.S. partici-pation/agenda

Responsibleagency

Residues of Veterinary Drugs inFoods (to be considered atTwenty-first Session of theCodex Alimentarius Commission)(CAC) Ref. Alinorm 95/31.

Sulfadimizine .................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Flubendazole ................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Thiabendazole ............................... MRL Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Isometamidium ............................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Bovine Somatotropins .................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Triclabendazole .............................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step7.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Levamisole ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step4&5.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Diminazene .................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step5.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Carazolol ........................................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Spiramycin ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

27252 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Notices


Responsibleagency

Febantel ......................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Fenbendazole ................................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Oxfendazole ................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Spectinomycin ................................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dexamethasone ............................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

*Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI): An estimate by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the amount of a veteri-nary drug, expressed on a body weight basis, that can be ingested daily over a lifetime without appreciable health risk (standard man = 60 kg).

Food Additives and Contaminants

The Codex Committee on FoodAdditives and Contaminants establishesor endorses permitted maximum orguideline levels for individual foodadditives, contaminants, and naturallyoccurring toxicants in food and animalfeed.

The following matters contained inAlinorm 95/12A will be brought to theTwenty-first session of the CodexAlimentarious Commission in July,1995:

fl Proposed Draft General Standardfor Food Additives, Annex A(Guidelines for the Estimation ofAppropriate Levels of Use of FoodAdditives) for adoption at Step 5; (Note:The draft standard is being developed instages according to food additivefunctional classes, beginning withantioxidants and preservatives (at Step4); see attached list.)

fl *Specifications for sulfuric acid,potassium sodium L(+)-tartrate, sodiumdihydrogen phosphate and sodium L(+)-tartrate; (*Not in Step Procedure)

fl Proposed Draft Preamble to theGeneral Standard for Contaminants andToxins in Foods for adoption at Step 8;(Note: A number of potentialcontaminants are currently underconsideration (at Step 4) to determinethe need for establishing maximum

allowable levels in foods; see attachedlist.)

fl Proposed Draft General Standardfor Contaminants and Toxicants in Food(excluding preamble), Annex B at Step5;

fl Position paper on aflatoxincontrol at Step 1;

fl Draft Maximum Level forAflatoxin M1 in Milk at Step 7;

fl Proposed Draft Code of Practicefor the Reduction of Aflatoxins in RawMaterials and Supplementary Feedingstuffs for Milk-Producing Animals atStep 3;

fl Position Paper on Ochratoxins atStep 1;

fl Proposed Draft Code of Practiceon Source Directed Measures to ReduceContamination of Food Stuffs at Step 3;and

fl Proposed Draft Standard for Leadat Step 3.AGENCY RESPONSIBLE: HHS/FDAU.S. PARTICIPATION: Yes

Food Additives and Contaminants

For the purposes of Codex, a foodadditive means any substance notnormally consumed as a food by itselfand not normally used as a typicalingredient in the food, whether or not ithas nutritive value, the intentionaladdition of which to food for atechnological (including organoleptic)

purpose in the manufacture, processing,preparation, treatment, packing,packaging, transport, or holding of suchfood results, or may be reasonablyexpected to result, (directly orindirectly) in it or its by-productsbecoming a component of or otherwiseaffecting the characteristics of suchfoods. The food additive term does notinclude ‘‘contaminants’’ or substancesadded to food for maintaining orimproving nutritional qualities.

The General Standard for FoodAdditives (GSFA) will set forthmaximum levels of use of food additivesin various foods and food categories.The maximum levels will be based onthe food additive provisions ofpreviously established Codexcommodity standards, as well as on theuse of the additives in non-standardizedfoods.

Only those food additives that havebeen found to be acceptable by the JointFAO/WHO Expert Committee on FoodAdditives (JECFA) will be included inthe general Standard for FoodAdditives. The draft GSFA, which isbeing developed in stages, currentlycovers only those JECFA-reviewed foodadditives that are used as antioxidantsand preservatives. These JECFA-reviewed food additives are listed in thetable below.

Codex committee Substance Status of consideration U.S. partici-pation/agenda

Responsibleagency

(Food Additives and Contaminants)Ref. Alinorm 95/12A.

Acetic Acid ..................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Anoxomer ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ascorbic Acid ................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ascorbyl Palmitate ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ascorbyl Stearate .......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Benzoic Acid .................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Benzoyl Peroxide ........................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Butylated Hydroxyanisole .............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.



Responsibleagency

Butylated Hydroxytoluene .............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Acetate ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Ascorbate ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Benzoate .......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium DisodiumEthylenediaminetetraacetate.

Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Hydrogen Sulphite ........... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Propionate ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Sorbate ............................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Calcium Sulphite ............................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Carbon Dioxide .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Citric Acid ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dilauryl Thiodipropionate ............... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dimethyl Decarbonate ................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Diphenyl ......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

DisodiumEthylenediaminetetraacetate.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dodecyl Gallate ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Erythorbic Acid ............................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ethyl p-Hydroxybenzoate ............... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Formic Acid .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Glucose Oxidase from Aspergillusniger.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Guaiac Resin ................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Hexamethylene Tetramine ............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Isopropyl Citrates ........................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Lecithin ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Lysozyme ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Methyl p-Hydroxybenzoate ............ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nisin ............................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Octyl Gallate .................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ortho-Phenylphenol ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Oxystearin ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Pimaricin (Natamycin) .................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium Acetate ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium Ascorbate ..................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium Benzoate ...................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium Hydrogen Sulphite ....... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium Lactate ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.



Responsibleagency

Potassium Metabisulphite .............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium Nitrite ................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium o-Phenylphenol ................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium Propionate ........................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium Sorbate ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium Sulphite ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sodium Thiosulphate ..................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sorbic Acid ..................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Stannous Chloride ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sulphur dioxide .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

tert-Butylhydroquinone ................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Thiodipropionic Acid ...................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tocopherols Concentrate, Mixed ... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tocopherols, d-Alpha ..................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tocopherols, d-Alpha, Concentrate Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Food Additives and ContaminantsA contaminant means any substance

not intentionally added to food, whichis present in such food as a result of theproduction (including operationscarried out in crop husbandry, animalhusbandy and veterinary medicine),manufacture, processing, preparation,treatment, packing, packaging,transport, or holding of such food or asa result of environmentalcontamination. The term contaminantdoes not include insect fragments,rodent hairs, and other extraneousmatter.

The Codex maximum level (ML) for acontaminant or naturally occurringtoxicant in a food or feed commodity isthe maximum concentration of thatsubstance recommended by the CodexAlimentarius Commission to be legallypermitted in that commodity. The ML isintended to ensure free movement offood in international trade whileprotecting the health of the consumer.

The General Standard forContaminants and Toxins in Foods willestablish maximum levels forcontaminants in foods based on thefollowing considerations: toxicological

data, human exposure estimates,availability of analytical procedures, fairtrade and technological implications,regional variations, risk assessment, andrisk management.

The criteria for inclusion of amaximum level for a contaminant in afood are that: (a) Consumption of thecontaminated food presents a significantrisk to consumers; and (b) the existenceof actual problems in trade of food. Thecontaminants currently being examinedto determine whether they meet thesecriteria are listed below.


Responsibleagency

(Food Additives and Contaminants)Ref. Alinorm 95/12A.

Aluminum ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Antimony ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Arsenic ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Barium ............................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Beryllium ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Cadmium ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Cobalt ............................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chromium ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Copper ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.



Responsibleagency

Iron ................................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Lead ............................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Manganese .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Mercury .......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Molybdenum .................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nickel ............................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tin .................................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Thallium ......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Zinc ................................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Fluor (compounds) ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Bromine (compounds) ................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Bromide ion .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Iodine (compounds) ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Iodide ion ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Selenium (compounds) .................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nitrogen (compounds) ................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nitrate ion ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nitrite ion ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Asbestos ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Monochloromethane (methyl chlo-ride).


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dichloromethane ............................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Trichloromethane (chloroform) ...... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tetrachloromethane ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Monochloroethene (vinylchloride) .. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

1,1-Dichloroethane ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

1,2-Dichloroethane ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Dichloroethene ............................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

1,1,1-trichloroethane ...................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Trichloroethene .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tetrachloroethene .......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Halogenated aliphatic hydro-carbons (other than chlorinated).


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aromatic halogenated hydro-carbons.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Pentachlorobenzene ...................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Polychlorotbiphenyls (PCBs) ......... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Polychloroterphenyls (PCTs) ......... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.



Responsibleagency

Polybromobiphenyls (PBBs) .......... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tetrachlorobenzyltoluenes(TCBTs).


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chlorinated dibenzodioxins anddibenzofurans.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Brominated dibenzodioxins anddibenzofurans.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chlorinated alcohols and relatedcompounds.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

1,3-dichloro-2-propanol .................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

3-chloro-1,2-propanediol ................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

3-chloro-1,2-propanediol ................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chlorinated phenols ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other chlorinated aromatic com-pounds.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other brominated aromatic com-pounds.


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aliphatic hydrocarbons .................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Hexane ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aromatic hydrocarbons .................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Benzene ......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Toluene .......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Styrene ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs).


Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Heterocyclic compounds ................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Alcohols and ethers ....................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aldehydes and ketones ................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Carbonic acids and esters ............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Phthalate esters ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Amino compounds ......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nitrile compounds .......................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Acrylonitrile .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Methacrylonitrile ............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nitrosamines .................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Detergents and disinfectants ......... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other organic compounds ............. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ethylcarbamate .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aflatoxins ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aflatoxins, total .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aflatoxin B1 .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Aflatoxin M1 .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ochtratoxins ................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.



Responsibleagency

Trichothecenes .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

T–2 toxin ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Fusarenon-X .................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Monacetoxyscirpenol ..................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Diacetoxyscirpenol. ........................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Neosolaniol .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Verrucarin ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Nivalenol ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Deoxynivalenol ............................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other fusarium toxins .................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Fumonisin ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Monififormin ................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Zearalenon ..................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ergot alkaloids ............................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other mycotoxins ........................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Patulin ............................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Sterigmatocystin ............................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Luteoskyrin ..................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Phycotoxins .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

DSP ................................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

PSP ................................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Bacterial toxins .............................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Food processing related toxins ..... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Glycoalkaloids ................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Solanine ......................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Chaconine ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tomatine ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Glucosinolates ............................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Cyanogenic glycosides .................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Other food plant related toxins ...... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Safrole ............................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Agaritin ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Erucic acid ..................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Animal inherent food toxins ........... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Americium ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Cesium 134 .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.


*Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of a chemical isthe daily intake which, during an entire lifetime,appears to be without appreciable risk to the health

of the consumer on the basis of all the known factsat the time of the evaluation of the chemical by theJoint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues. It

is expressed in milligrams of the chemical perkilogram of body weight.


Responsibleagency

Cesium 137 .................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Cobalt ............................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Iodine ............................................. Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Polonium ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Plutonium ....................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Radium ........................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Ruthenium ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Strontium ........................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Tritium ............................................ Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Potassium ...................................... Maximum Levels Under Consider-ation at Step 4.

Yes ............... HHS/FDA.

Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues

The Codex Committee on PesticideResidues establishes maximum limitsfor pesticide residues for specific fooditems or in groups of food. A CodexMaximum Limit for Pesticide Residues(MRLP) is the maximum concentrationof a pesticide residue (expressed as mg/kg), recommended by the CodexAlimentarius Commission to be legallypermitted in or on food commoditiesand animal feeds. MRLs are based ontoxicological effects and on GoodAgricultural Practice (GAP) data andfoods derived from commodities that

comply with the respective MRLPs areintended to be toxicologicallyacceptable.

Codex MRLPs, which are primarilyintended to apply in international trade,are derived from reviews conducted bythe Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues(JMPR) following:

(a) Toxicological assessment of thepesticide and its residue; and

(b) Review of residue data fromsupervised trials and supervised usesincluding those reflecting national goodagricultural practices. Data fromsupervised trials conducted at thehighest nationally recommended,

authorized, or registered uses areincluded in the review. In order toaccommodate variations in national pestcontrol requirements, Codex MRLPstake into account the higher levelsshown to arise in such supervised trials,which are considered to representeffective pest control practices.

Consideration of the various dietaryresidue intake estimates anddeterminations both at the national andinternational level in comparison withthe ADI,* should indicate that foodscomplying with Codex MRLPs are safefor human consumption.


Responsibleagency

Pesticide Residues (to be consid-ered at the 27th Session of theCodex Committee on PesticideResidues Ref. CL 1994/24–PR).

Aldicarb .......................................... MRL Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Benalaxyl ....................................... MRL Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Bentazone ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Bromopropylate .............................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Carbofuran ..................................... MRL Under Consideration (With-drawal)1.

Yes ............... EPA.

Chlorothalonil ................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Cycloxydim ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Cyfluthrin ........................................ MRL Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

DDT ................................................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Diazinon ......................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Dichlorvos ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.


*Not in Step procedure.


Responsibleagency

Dithiocarbamates ........................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Endosulfan ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Ethylenethiourea ............................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step8.

Yes ............... EPA.

Etofenprox ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Fenbutatinoxide ............................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and Withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Fenpropathrin ................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Fentin ............................................. MRL Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Flucythrinate .................................. MRLs Under Consideration (With-drawals).

Yes ............... EPA.

Flusilazole ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Folpet ............................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and withdrawals.

Yes ............... EPA.

Heptachlor ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration (With-drawals).

Yes ............... EPA.

Hexaconazole ................................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Methidathion .................................. MRL Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Monocrotophos .............................. MRL Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Omethoate ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Oxydemetonmethyl ........................ MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Phorate .......................................... MRL Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Procymidone .................................. MRLs Under Consideration at Step3 and 6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Profenofos ...................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

Pyrazophos .................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3.

Yes ............... EPA.

Triazophos ..................................... MRLs Under Consideration at Step3, 6, 8.

Yes ............... EPA.

Vinclozolin ...................................... MRL Under Consideration at Step6.

Yes ............... EPA.

1 Withdrawal—Recommended for withdrawal from Codex (see CL 1994/24–PR).

Codex Committee on Methods ofAnalysis and Sampling

The Codex Committee on Methods ofAnalysis and Sampling serves as acoordinating body for Codex with otherinternational groups working inmethods of analysis and sampling andquality assurance systems forlaboratories.

The following matters will be broughtto the attention of the 21st session of theCodex Alimentarius Commission in July1995, for adoption:

• The Proposed Revised Protocol forthe Design, Conduct and Interpretationof Collaborative Studies*;

• The Proficiency TestingHarmonized Protocol for LaboratoryAnalysis*; and

• Five Codex General Methods ofAnalysis for Contaminants at Step 8.fl Lead and Cadmium in Foodfl Copper, Iron, and Nickel in Edible

Oils and Fatsfl Lead in Edible Oils and Fatsfl Tin in Canned Foodsfl Multiple Elements in Foodstuffs

A revised paper on the Impact ofImplementation of the Proposed Criteriafor Evaluating Acceptable Methods ofAnalysis and Other Methods of Analysisis being circulated for comments.

In addition, the Draft Codex GeneralGuidelines and the Development ofObjective Criteria For Assessing theCompetence of Testing LaboratoriesInvolved in the Import and ExportControl of Foods were circulated forcomment.

The reference documents is Alinorm95/23.

Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Food Import andExport Certification and InspectionSystems

The Codex Committee on Food Importand Export Certification and InspectionSystems is charged with developingprinciples and guidelines for foodimport and export certification systems.Included in the charge are application ofmeasures by competent authorities toprovide assurance that foods complywith essential requirements.Recognition of quality assurancesystems through the development ofguidelines will help ensure that foodsconform to the essential requirements.

The Third Session of the Committee(Alinorm 95/30A) recommended thatthe Proposed Draft Guidelines for theExchange of Information on Rejections


*Not in the Step Procedure

be considered by the Twenty-firstsession of the Codex AlimentariusCommission in July, 1995.

Two documents to be considered forfinal adoption at Step 8 by theCommission are:fl Draft Principles for Food Import and

Export Inspection and Certification;and

fl Draft Guidelines for the Exchange ofInformation in Food ControlEmergency Situations.The proposed draft guidelines for the

exchange of information on rejectionswill be considered by the Commissionat Step 5. Several documents are beingelaborated for future discussion by theCommittee:fl Proposed Draft Guidelines on the

Principle Elements in an ElectronicDocumentation System at Step 3;

fl Proposed Draft Generic Guidelinesfor the Design, Operation, Assessmentand Accreditation of Food Inspectionand Certification Systems at Step 3;

fl Application of the ISO 9000 Seriesto Food Inspection and CertificationSystems at Step 2; and

fl Proposed Draft Guidelines for theDevelopment of Agreements betweenExporting and Importing Countries atStep 1.


Codex Committee on General Principles

The Codex Committee on GeneralPrinciples deals with rules andprocedures referred to it by the CodexAlimentarius Commission. None of thefollowing recommendations forchanging the rules of procedure forCodex are in the Step Procedure. Thereference document is Alinorm 95/33.

The Eleventh Session recommendedthat the Rules of Procedure of CodexAlimentarius be amended to providethat one-third of the members of theCommission would be a quorum tomake recommendations for amendmentof the Statutes and Rules of Procedure.The Committee also agreed to reviseseveral sections of the ProceduralManual including General Principles ofthe Codex Alimentarius, Guidelines forCodex Committees, and RelationsBetween Commodity Committees andGeneral Committees. These matters willbe considered for adoption by theTwenty-first session of the CodexAlimentarius Commission in July 1995.

The Committee also agreed tocontinue its work on the integration ofscience and other factors in the Codexdecision-making process.Responsible Agency: USDA/FSISU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Food LabellingThe Codex Committee on Food

Labelling is responsible for draftingprovisions on labelling applicable to allfoods and to study specific labellingproblems assigned by the CodexAlimentarius Commission. All of theguidelines and recommendations listedbelow are in Alinorm 95/22.

The Proposed Draft Guidelines on theUse of Health and Nutrition Claims willbe considered by the CodexAlimentarius Commission at its Twenty-first session in July, 1995, and theProposed Draft Guidelines on the Use ofthe Term ‘‘Halal’’ will also beconsidered by Commission. BothProposed Draft Guidelines will beconsidered by the Commission at Step5.

Two documents are being circulatedfor comment with a view to discussionat the next Committee Session:fl Draft Guidelines for the Labelling,

Production, Processing, andMarketing of Organically ProducedFoods at Step 6; and

fl Proposed Draft Recommendationsfor the Labelling of Foods andIngredients that can causeHypersensitivity at Step 3.In addition, the document on the

Implications of Biotechnology preparedby the United States delegation for theTwenty-third Session of the Committeewill be circulated for additionalcomment and recommendations on howthe Committee should proceed.

Codex Committee on Food HygieneThe Food Hygiene Committee drafts

basic provisions on food hygiene for allfoods. The term ‘‘hygiene’’ alsoincludes, where applicable,microbiological specifications for foodand associated methodology.

The Proposed Revised Draft Code ofPractice on the General Principles ofFood Hygiene, including the Annex onthe Application of HACCP Systems, willbe considered at Step 5 by the CodexAlimentarius Commission at its Twenty-first session in July, 1995.

In addition, the Commission willconsider the Draft Code of Practice forSpices and Dried Aromatic Plants forfinal adoption at Step 8.

Certain documents are to beelaborated prior to the next session ofthe Committee in late 1995. They are:fl Revision of the Principles for the

Establishment and Application ofMicrobiological Criteria for Foods atStep 3;

fl Proposed Draft Code of Practice forRefrigerated Packaged Foods withExtended Shelf-life at Step 3;

fl Proposed Draft Code of HygienicPractice for Uncured/Unripened

Cheese and Ripened Soft Cheese atStep 3;

fl *Recommendations for the Controlof Listeria monocytogenes; and

fl *Implementation of RiskAssessment—Development ofGuidelines on the Application of thePrinciples of Risk Assessment andRisk Management to Food Hygiene,Including Strategies for TheirApplication.The Committee also agreed to propose

that the following items be consideredin its future work:fl *Implications for the Broader

Application of the HACCP System:fl *Guidelines for Consumer

Education in Food Hygienefl *Code of Practice for All Foodstuffs

Transported in Bulkfl *Code of Hygienic Practice for

Bottled WaterAll documents listed above are

contained in Alinorm 95/13.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDA, USDA/

FSISU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Tropical FreshFruits and Vegetables

The Codex Committee on TropicalFresh Fruits and Vegetables wasestablished in June 1988. TheCommittee is responsible for elaboratingworld-wide standards and codes ofpractice as may be appropriate fortropical fresh fruits and vegetableswhich are grown exclusively in tropicalzones. Several of the standards listedbelow are contained in ALINORM 95/35.

The fifth session of the Committeerecommended that the followingstandards and Code of Practice beconsidered by the Twenty-first sessionof the Codex Alimentarius Commissionin July, 1995, at Step 8:fl Draft Standard for Litchi;fl Draft Standard for Avocado; andfl Draft Code of Practice for the

Packaging and Transport of TropicalFresh Fruits and VegetablesThe Committee also recommended

initiation or continuation of work in thefollowing areas:fl Draft Standard for Banana (at Step

6);fl Draft Standard for Mangosteen (at

Step 5);fl Draft Standard for Oranges (at Step

3);fl Draft Standard for Limes (at Step 3);fl Draft Standard for Pummelo (at Step

3);fl Draft Standard for Tropical

Asparagus (at Step 3);


fl Code of Practice for the QualityInspection and Certification of FreshFruits and Vegetables (at Step 3);

fl Draft Standard for Guava (at Step 1);fl Draft Standard for Chayote (at Step

1);fl Draft Standard for Fresh Coconut (at

Step 1);fl Preparation of a paper on the

Objective Indices of Maturity inCommercial Transactions of Fruitsand Vegetables (at Step 1); and

fl Document concerning theApplication of Quality Tolerances atImport (at Step 1)

Responsible Agency: USDA/AMSU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Nutrition andFoods for Special Dietary Uses

The Committee on Nutrition andFoods for Special Dietary Uses isresponsible for studying nutritionalproblems referred by the CodexAlimentarius Commission. TheCommittee also drafts provisions onnutritional aspects for all foods anddevelops guidelines, general principles,and standards for foods for specialdietary uses.

The reference document for thefollowing standards is Alinorm 95/26.Matters which will be brought beforethe Twenty-first session in July, 1995,are:fl Draft Standard for Formula Foods

for Use in Very Low Energy Diets forWeight Reduction for adoption at Step8; and

fl Proposed Draft Standard forFormulated Supplementary Foodsand in Particular Processed CerealBased Foods for Infants and YoungChildren at Step 3.The Nineteenth Commission directed

the Committee to develop a standardcombining the Guidelines forFormulated Supplementary Foods forOlder Infants and Young Children andthe Codex Standard Processed Cereal-Based Foods for Infants and YoungChildren. The Committee attemptedunsuccessfully to combine the guidelineand the standard and is seekingapproval from the Twenty-firstCommission to abandon the attempt.The Committee recognizes that theStandard for Processed Cereal-BasedFoods needs revision.fl Other matters to be presented to the

Twenty-first Commission include:fl Proposed Draft Amendment of the

Standard for Food Grade Salt toinclude the Iodization of Salt at Step3;

fl Proposed Draft Guidelines forDietary Supplements of Vitamins andMinerals at Step 3;

fl Proposed Draft Revised Standard forGluten-free Foods at Step 3;

fl Criteria for Definitions of NutrientReference Values and need forgovernments to submit existing dataat Step 1;

fl Proposed Draft Amendment to theStandard for Infant Formula to reviseVitamin B12 at Step 3 of acceleratedprocedure;

fl Proposed Draft Revised Guidelineson the Inclusion of Provisions onNutritional Quality at Step 3; and

fl Revision of Standard for InfantFormula at Step 1.The Committee obtained general

support, at its last meeting, for renamingthe Committee the Codex Committee onNutrition.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Fish and FisheryProducts

The Fish and Fishery ProductsCommittee is responsible for elaboratingstandards for fresh and frozen fish,crustaceans, and mollusks.

The following Draft Standards will beconsidered for adoption by the Twenty-first session of the Codex AlimentariusCommission in July, 1995, at Step 8:fl Draft General Standard for Quick

Frozen Fish Fillets;fl Draft Standard for Quick Frozen

Raw Squid;fl Draft Revised Standard for Quick

Frozen Blocks of Fish Fillets, MincedFish Flesh and Mixtures and Filletsand Minced Fish Flesh;

fl Draft Revised Standard for QuickFrozen Finfish, Eviscerated andUneviscerated;

fl Draft Revised Standard for QuickFrozen Lobsters;

fl Draft Revised Standard for QuickFrozen Fish Sticks (Fish Fingers), FishPortions and Fish Fillets-Breaded andin Batter;

fl Draft Revised Standard for QuickFrozen Shrimps or Prawns;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedCrab Meat;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedFinfish;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedSalmon;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedSardines and Sardine-Type Products;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedShrimps and Prawns;

fl Draft Revised Standard for CannedTuna and Bonito; and

fl Proposed Draft Revised Standard forSalted Fish and Dried Salted Fish ofthe Gadidae FamilyThe Committee agreed to have the

following Codes redrafted, to take into

account the recommendations of theCommission as well as to incorporatethe HACCP approach at Step 3;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Frozen Fish;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Canned Fish;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Frozen Shrimps and Prawns;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Molluscan Shellfish;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Fresh Fish;Proposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Smoked Fish; andProposed Draft Revised Code of Practice

for Salted Fish;The Committee also agreed to have

the following documents elaborated atStep 3 for consideration of the nextsession:fl Proposed Draft Code of Practice for

the Products of Aquaculture;fl Proposed Draft Code of Practice for

Frozen Surimi;fl Proposed Draft Guidelines for the

Sensory Evaluation of Fish andShellfish; and

fl Proposed Draft Appendix to theGuideline Levels for Methylmercuryin Fish.The reference document contained

the above information is Alinorm 95/18.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulsesand Legumes

The Codex Committee on Cereals,Pulses and Legumes is responsible forthe elaboration of world-wide standardsand/or codes of practice as may beappropriate for cereals, pulses, andlegumes and their products.

The following Draft Standards will beconsidered for adoption by the Twenty-First session of the Codex AlimentariusCommission in July, 1995, at Step 8:fl Rice;fl Wheat and Durum Wheat;fl Peanuts;fl Oats; and;fl Processed Couscous.

In addition, the Commission willconsider the following proposed draftCodex Standards for adoption at Step 5,with the recommendation to omit Steps6 and 7 for adoption at Step 8:fl Wheat Flour;fl Maize (Corn);fl Whole Maize (Corn) Meal;fl Degermed Maize (Corn) Meal;fl Maize (Corn) Grits;fl Certain Pulses;fl Sorghum Grains;fl Sorghum Flour;fl Durum Wheat Semolina and Durum

Wheat Flour;


* There has been no activity in these committeesover the past year and none is expected in the nextyear.

fl Gari;fl Whole and Decorticated Pearl Millet

Grains;fl Pearl Millet Flour; andfl Edible Cassava Flour;

The Committee also agreed to advancethe following document:

Proposed Draft Guideline Level andSampling Plan for Total Aflatoxins inPeanuts intended for further Processing(at Step 5).

The reference document containingthe above information is ALINORM 95/29.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDA and

USDA/GIPSAU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Milk and MilkProducts

The Codex Committee on Milk andMilk Products was established by theCodex Alimentarius Commission at itsTwentieth session. The Committee wasoriginally established by the Food andAgriculture Organization (FAO) and theWorld Health Organization (WHO) in1958. The Committee was integratedinto the Joint FAO/WHO FoodStandards Programme in 1962. Until1993, the Committee was named theJoint FAO/WHO Committee ofGovernment Experts on the Code ofPrinciples Concerning Milk and MilkProducts. The Committee is responsiblefor establishing international codes andstandards concerning milk and milkproducts. All of the standards listedbelow are contained in Alinorm 95/11.

The First session of the Milk and MilkProducts Committee recommended thatthe following standards be consideredby the Twenty-first session of theCommission in July, 1995 at Step 5:fl Butter;fl Milkfat Products;fl Evaporated Milks;fl Sweetened Condensed Milks;fl Milk and Cream Powders;fl Cheese; andfl Whey Cheese.

The Committee also recommendedthat the Twenty-first Commission adoptthe Draft Standards for Whey Powdersand Edible Casein Products at Step 8.

The Committee also recommendedinitiation or continuation of thefollowing:fl Fermented Milk Products with Heat

Treatment after Fermentation; (at Step1)

fl Fermented Milk Products withoutHeat Treatment; (at Step 1)

fl Cheeses in Brine; (at Step 6)fl Unripened Cheeses; (at Step 6)fl Processed Cheese; (at Step 3)fl Cream; (at Step 3)fl Yoghurt; (at Step 3)

fl Individual Cheeses; (at Step 3)fl Review of the Code of Principles

concerning Milk and Milk Products;(at Step 1)

fl Nutritional and Quality Descriptors;(at Step 1) and

fl Definitions of Heat Treatment (atStep 1)

Agency Responsible: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Codex Committee on Fats and Oils

The Fats and Oils Committee isresponsible for elaborating standards forfats and oils of animal, vegetable, andmarine origin.

The following Proposed Draft Codeand Standards will be considered at theTwenty-first session of the CodexAlimentarius Commission in July, 1995,at Step 5:fl Proposed Draft Code of Practice for

the Storage and Transport of Fats andOils in Bulk;

fl Proposed Draft Standard for EdibleFats and Oils not Covered byIndividual Standards;

fl Proposed Draft Standard forProducts Sold as an Alternative toGhee;

fl Proposed Draft Standard for NamedAnimal Fats;

fl Proposed Draft Standard for NamedVegetable Oils;

fl Proposed Draft Standard for FatSpreads;

fl Proposed Draft Standard for OliveOils and Olive-Pomace Oils; and

fl Proposed Draft Standard forMayonnaise.The following two standards will be

considered for adoption by theCommission at its Twenty-first session:fl Draft Standard for Palm Olein at

Step 8; andfl Draft Standard Palm Stearin at Step

8All of the above documents are

contained in Alinorm 95/17.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Certain Codex Subject Committees

Several Codex Alimentarius GeneralSubject Committees have adjourned sinedie. The following Committees fall intothis category:fl Cocoa Products and Chocolate *


fl Edible Icesfl Meat Hygiene *

Responsible Agency: USDA/FSISU.S. Participation: Yes

fl Natural Mineral Waters *Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

fl Processed Meat and PoultryProducts *


fl Processed Fruits and Vegetables *Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

fl Sugarsfl Soups and Brothsfl Vegetable Proteins *

Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: YesA brief report on activities of the

Codex Committee on Edible Ices, theCodex Committee on Sugars, and theCodex Committee on Soups and Brothsfollows:

Edible Ices

The Committee on Edible Ices isresponsible for elaborating standards forall types of edible ices, including mixesand powders used for theirmanufacture. The Committee has beenadjourned since 1978. However, asdirected by the Codex AlimentariusCommission, the Secretariat of the HostCountry (Sweden) has prepared aRevised Codex Standard for Edible Icesand Ice Mixes (see CL 1995/7–EI). ThisRevised Standard was circulated tomember governments for comments byMay 15, 1995. The objective of therevision is to focus the standard only onpublic health, food safety, andconsumer protection. Provisions in theexisting standard that deal with qualityfactors and criteria typically used incommerce to define or describe theproduct are of an advisory nature andhave been removed in the RevisedStandard.Agency Responsible: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Sugars

The Codex Committee on Sugars isresponsible for elaborating world-widestandards for all types of sugars andsugar products. The Committee has beenadjourned since 1974. At the directionof the Codex Alimentarius Commission,the Secretariat of the Host Government(the United Kingdom) was asked toexamine the existing Codex Standardsrelating to sugars and the CodexStandard for Honey. During theNineteenth session of the CodexAlimentarius Commission, theCommission agreed that existing CodexStandards should be reviewed in orderto simplify them. Those documentswere revised and circulated to membergovernments (see CL 1995/5–S) forcomments by April 30, 1995. The


objective of the revision is to focus thestandards only on public health, foodsafety, and consumer protection.Agency Responsible: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

Soups and BrothsThe Codex Committee on Soups and

Broths is responsible for elaboratingworld-wide standards for soups, broths,bouillons, and consommes. Thecommittee adjourned since die in 1977.

In light of the decision made by the19th session of the Commission tosimplify and revise Codex standards, arevised version of the standard forBouillons and Consommes will bepresented to the Twenty-first session ofthe Commission in July, 1995, foradoption. The Revised Proposed DraftWorld-Wide Codex Standard forBouillons and Consommes wascirculated to member governments forcomments by October 1, 1994, and canbe found in CL 1993/32–SB.Agency Responsible: USDA/FSISU.S. Participation: Yes

Joint U.N.E.C.E. Codex AlimentariusGroups of Experts

Two groups of experts dealt withspecific commodities much as theCodex Commodity Committees do. TheJoint Groups of Experts have completedtheir main tasks and have adjourned.They could be called to meet again if theCodex Alimentarius Commission sodecided. These Groups are:fl Standardization of Quick Frozen

Foods; andfl Standardization of Fruit Juices.

There are no standards from eithergroup for consideration by the Twenty-first session of the Commission in July,1995, and we are unaware of any beingconsidered for the Twenty-secondsession of the Commission in 1997.Responsible Agency: HHS/FDAU.S. Participation: Yes

FAO/WHO Regional CoordinatingCommittees

The Codex Alimentarius Commissionis made up of an Executive Committee,as well as approximately 25 subsidiarybodies. Included in these subsidiarybodies are several coordinatingcommittees.

There are currently five RegionalCoordinating Committees:—Coordinating Committee for Africa—Coordinating Committee for Asia—Coordinating Committee for Europe—Coordinating Committee for Latin

America and the Caribbean

—Coordinating Committee for NorthAmerica and the South-West PacificThe United States participates as an

active member of the CoordinatingCommittee for North America and theSouth-West Pacific, and is informed ofthe other coordinating committeesthrough meeting documents, finalreports, and representation at meetings.

Each regional committee:—Defines the problems and needs of the

region concerning food standards andfood control;

—Promotes within the committeecontacts for the mutual exchange ofinformation on proposed regulatoryinitiatives and problems arising fromfood control and stimulates thestrengthening of food controlinfrastructures;

—Recommends to the Commission thedevelopment of world-wide standardsfor products of interest to the region,including products considered by thecommittee to have an internationalmarket potential in the future;

—And, exercises a general coordinatingrole for the region and such otherfunctions as may be entrusted to it bythe Commission.

Codex Coordinating Committee forNorth America and the South-WestPacific

The Coordinating Committee isresponsible for defining problems andneeds concerning food standards andfood control of all Codex membercountries of the regions.

The Committee, at its Third session,recommended that the ExecutiveCommittee consider proposalsconcerning the broader application ofthe HACCP system and that theproposals also be considered by theTwenty-first session of the CodexAlimentarius Commission. TheCommittee also requested that acomprehensive plan for risk assessmentmethodology and decision makingcriteria be developed by theCommission, and that risk analysis beconsidered as part of the Codex StrategyPlan.

The Committee expressed the viewthat the Commission should be thefocus of international harmonizationinitiatives with respect to geneticallyengineered foods. In addition, theCommittee recommended that furtherwork should be carried out on the saleof potentially harmful herbs andbotanicals as food. Finally, theCommittee recommended that the workof the Commission should be expedited.

(The information contained above canbe found in ALINORM 95/32).


Appendix 1—U.S. Codex AlimentariusOfficials

April 3, 1995

Steering Committee Members

Dr. Marvin A. Norcross, U.S. Coordinator forCodex Alimentarius, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, West End Court, Room 311,1255 22nd Street, NW., Washington, DC20250, Phone #: (202) 254–2517, Fax #:(202) 254–2530

Mr. Michael Taylor, Acting Under Secretaryfor Food Safety, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 331–E, AdministrationBuilding, 14th and Independence Avenue,SW., Washington, DC 20250, Phone #:(202) 720–7025, Fax #: (202) 690–4437

Ms. Patricia Jensen, Acting AssistantSecretary, Marketing and RegulatoryPrograms, U.S. Department of Agriculture,Room 228–W, Administration Building,14th and Independence Avenue, SW.,Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)720–4256, Fax #: (202) 720–5775

Mr. Thomas Billy, Associate Administrator,Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 331–E,Administration Building, 14th andIndependence Avenue, SW., Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–7025, Fax #:(202) 690–4437

Dr. Alex Thiermann, Deputy Administrator,International Services, Animal and PlantHealth Inspection Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, Room 324–E,Administration Building, 14th andIndependence Avenue, SW., Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–7593, Fax #:(202) 690–1484

Dr. Lynn R. Goldman, AssistantAdministrator, Office of Prevention,Pesticides and Toxic Substances, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, 401 MStreet, SW. (7101), 637 East Tower,Washington, DC 20460, Phone #: (202)260–2902, Fax #: (202) 260–1847

Dr. Penelope A. Fenner-Crisp, DeputyDirector, Office of Pesticide Programs(7501C), U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,DC 20460, Phone #: (703) 305–7092, Fax #:(703) 308–4776

Mr. William Schultz, Deputy Commissionerfor Policy, Food and Drug Administration,HF–22, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD20857, Phone #: (301) 443–2854, Fax #:(301) 443–5930

Dr. Fred R. Shank, Director, Center for FoodSafety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–1),Food and Drug Administration, Room6815, 200 C Street, SW., Washington, DC20204, Phone #: (202) 205–4850, Fax #:(202) 205–5025


CODEX COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS

[March 15, 1995]

Mr. Steven N. Tanner, Deputy Director, Quality Assurance and Research Divi-sion, Federal Grain Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 10383N. Executive Hills Blvd., Kansas City, MO 64153–1394, Phone #: (816) 891–0404, Fax #: (816) 891–8070.

Cereals, Pulses and Legumes (adjourned sine die).

Dr. John Kvenberg, Strategic Manager for HACCP Policy, Center for Food Safetyand Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, Room 3014, HFS–10,200 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202) 205–4010, Fax #:(202) 205–4121.

Food Hygiene.

Mr. Gerald R. Parlet, Assistant to the Chief, Processed Products Branch, Fruitand Vegetable Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Ag-riculture, Room 0713, South Building, Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)720–9896, Fax #: (202) 690–1527.

Processed Fruits and Vegetables (adjourned sine die).

Dr. Stephen F. Sundlof, Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and DrugAdministration, 7500 Standish Place (HFV–1), Rockville, MD 20855, Phone #:(301) 594–1740, Fax #: (301) 594–1830.

Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods.

Listing of U.S. Delegates and AlternateDelegates

Worldwide General Subject CodesCommittees

Codex Committee on Residues of VeterinaryDrug in Foods

(Host Government—United States)

U.S. Delegate:Dr. Marvin A. Norcross, Food Safety and

Inspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, West End Court, Room 311,1255 22nd Street, NW., Washington, DC20250, Phone #: (202) 254–2517, Fax #:(202) 254–2530

Alternate Delegate:Dr. Robert C. Livingston, Director, Office of

New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center forVeterinary Medicine (HFV–100), Foodand Drug Administration, 7500 StandishPlace, Rockville, MD 20855, Phone #:(301) 594–1620, Fax #: (301) 594–2297

Codex Committee on Food Additives andContaminants

(Host Government—The Netherlands)

U.S. Delegate:Dr. Fred R. Shank, Director, Center for

Food Safety and Applied Nutrition(HFS–1), Food and Drug Administration,200 C Street, SW., Room 6185,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–4850, Fax #: (202) 205–5025

Alternate Delegate:(Vacant)

Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues

(Host Government—The Netherlands)

U.S. Delegate:Dr. Richard Schmitt, Deputy Director,

Special Review and ReregistrationDivision, Office of Pesticide Programs,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,401 M Street, SW. (7508W), Washington,DC 20460, Phone #: (703) 308–8000, Fax#: (703) 308–8005

Alternate Delegates:Mr. John R. Wessel, Director, Contaminants

Policy Staff, Food and DrugAdministration, Room 13–74 (HFC–6),5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,Phone #: (301) 443–1815, Fax #: (301)443–7707

Dr. Richard Parry, Jr., AssistantAdministrator, Cooperative Interactions,Agricultural Research Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 358–A,Administration Bldg., Washington, DC20250, Phone #: (202) 720–3973, Fax #:(202) 720–5427

Codex Committee on Methods of Analysisand Sampling

(Host Government—Hungary)

U.S. Delegate:Dr. William Horwitz, Scientific Advisor,

Center for Food Safety and AppliedNutrition (HFS–500), Food and DrugAdministration, Room 3832, 200 CStreet, SW., Washington, DC 20204,Phone #: (202) 205–4346, Fax #: (202)401–7740

Alternate Delegate:Dr. William Franks, Director, Science

Division, Agricultural Marketing Service,U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room3507, South Building, 14th andIndependence Avenue, SW.,Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)720–5231, Fax #: (202) 720–6496

Codex Committee on Food Import and ExportCertification and Inspection Systems

(Host Government—Australia)

Delegate:Dr. Fred R. Shank, Director, Center for

Food Safety and Applied Nutrition(HFS–1), Food and Drug Administration,Room 6815, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–4850, Fax #: (202) 205–5025

Alternate Delegate:Dr. John Prucha, Deputy Administrator,

International Programs, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 341–E,Administration Building, Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–3473, Fax#: (202) 690–3856

Codex Committee on General Principles

(Host Government—France)

Delegate:Note: A member of the Steering Committee

heads the delegation to meetings of theGeneral Principles Committee

Codex Committee on Food Labeling(Host Government—Canada)

Delegate:Dr. F. Edward Scarbrough, Director, Office

of Food Labeling, Center for Food Safetyand Applied Nutrition (HFS–150), Foodand Drug Administration, 200 C Street,SW., Room 1832, Washington, DC 20204,Phone #: (202) 205–4561, Fax #: (202)205–4594

Alternate Delegate:Mr. John W. McCutcheon, Deputy

Administrator, Regulatory Programs,Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 350–E,Administration Building, Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–2709, Fax#: (202) 720–2025

Codex Committee on Food Hygiene(Host Government—United States)

Delegate:Dr. Robert L. Buchanan, Deputy

Administrator, Science and Technology,Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 402,Annex Building, Washington, DC 20250,Phone #: (202) 205–0495, Fax #: (202)401–1760

Alternate Delegate:Mr. E. Spencer Garrett, Director, National

Seafood Inspection Laboratory, NationalMarine Fisheries, 705 Convent Street,Pascagoula, MS 39568–1207, Phone #:(601) 762–7403, Fax #: (601) 769–9200

Worldwide Commodity Codex Committees

Codex Committee on Tropical Fresh Fruitsand Vegetables

(Host Government—Mexico)

Delegate:Mr. David Priester, International Standards

Coordinator, FPB, Fruit and VegetableDivision, Agricultural Marketing Service,U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room2068, South Building, 14th andIndependence Ave., SW., Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–2184, Fax#: (202) 720–0016

Alternate Delegate:Ms. Sharon E. Bomer-Lauritsen, Asst. to

Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division,Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.


Department of Agriculture, Room 2071,South Building, 14th and IndependenceAvenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250,Phone #: (202) 720–2173, Fax #: (202)720–0016

Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods forSpecial Dietary Uses

(Host Government—Germany)

Delegate:Dr. Elizabeth Yetley, Acting Director,

Office of Special Nutritionals, Center forFood Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA,200 C Street, SW. (HFS–450),Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–4168, Fax #: (202) 205–5295

Alternate Delegate:Ms. Linda P. Posati, Deputy Director,

Product Assessment Division, Labels,Standards and Review Program, RP, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Food Safetyand Inspection Service, West End CourtBuilding, Room 329, 1255 22 Street,NW., Washington, DC 20037, Phone #:(202) 254–2565, Fax #: (202) 254–2499

Codex Committee on Fish and FisheryProducts

(Host Government—Norway)

Delegate:Mr. Thomas Billy, Associate

Administrator, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 331–E,Administration Building, 14th andIndependence Avenue, SW.,Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)720–7025, Fax #: (202) 690–4437

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Samuel W. McKeen, Director, Office of

Trade and Industry Services, NationalOceanic and AtmosphericAdministration, NMFS, 1335 East-WestHighway, Room 6490, Silver Spring, MD20910, Phone #:(301) 713–2351, Fax #:(301) 713–1081

Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses andLegumes


Delegate:Mr. Charles W. Cooper, Director,

International Activities Staff, Center forFood Safety and Applied Nutrition,Room 5823 (HFS–585), Food and DrugAdministration, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–5042, Fax #: (202) 401–7739

Alternate Delegate:Mr. David Shipman, Chief, Standards and

Procedures Branch, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 1661-South Building,14th and Independence Ave., SW.,Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)720–0228, Fax #: (202) 720–1015

Codex Committee on Milk and Milk Products

(Host Government—New Zealand)

Delegate:Mr. Duane Spomer, Chief, Dairy

Standardization Branch, U.S.Department of Agriculture, AgriculturalMarketing Service, Room 2750-SouthBuilding, 14th and Independence Ave.,

SW., Washington, DC 20250, Phone #:(202) 720–9385, Fax #: (202) 720–2643

Alternate Delegate:(Vacant).

Codex Committee on Fats and Oils

(Host Government—United Kingdom)



Alternate Delegate:Mr. Timothy L. Mounts, Research Leader,

Food Quality and Safety Research Unit,National Center for AgriculturalUtilization Research, AgriculturalResearch Service, USDA, 1815 NorthUniversity Street, Peoria, IL 61604,Phone #: (309) 681–6555, Fax #: 681–6679

Worldwide Commodity Codex Committees

(Adjourned sine die)

Codex Committee on Cocoa Products andChocolate

(Host Government—Switzerland)

Delegate:Mr. Charles W. Cooper, Director

International Activities Staff, Center forFood Safety and Applied Nutrition,Room 5823 (HFS—585), Food and DrugAdministration, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–5042, Fax #: (202) 401–7739

Alternate Delegate:Dr. Michelle Smith, Food Technologist,

Office of Food Labeling, Center for FoodSafety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–158),200 C Street, SW., Washington, DC20204, Phone #: (202) 205–5099, Fax #:(202) 205–4594

Codex Committee on Sugars

(Host Government—United Kingdom)

Delegate:Dr. Thomas J. Army, Area Director,

Northern Plains Area, AgriculturalResearch Center, 1201 Oakridge Drive,Suite 150, Ft. Collins, CO 80525–5562,Phone #: (303) 229–5557, Fax #: (303)229–5531

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Durward Dodgen, Office of Premarket

Approval, Center for Food Safety andApplied Nutrition, (HFS–200), Food andDrug Administration, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)418–3100, Fax #: (202) 418–3131

Codex Committee on Processed Fruits andVegetables


U.S. Delegate:Mr. Richard B. Boyd, Senior Marketing

Specialist, Fruit and Vegetable Division,Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 717,South Building, 14th and IndependenceAvenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250,

Phone #: (202) 720–5021, Fax #: (202)690–1527

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Charles W. Cooper, Director,


Codex Committee on Edible Ices

(Host Government—Sweden)




Codex Committee on Soups and Broths


Delegate:Mr. Charles Edwards, Director, Product

Assessment Division, Labels, Standardsand Review Program, RP, Food Safetyand Inspection Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, West End Court Building,Room 329, 1255 22nd Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037, Phone #: (202)254–2565, Fax #: (202) 254–2499

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Robert Post, Branch Chief, Food

Standards and Ingredients Branch, PAD,Regulatory Programs, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, West End Court Building,Room 237, 1255 22nd Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037, Phone #: (202)254–2588, Fax #: (202) 254–2499

Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins

(Host Government—Canada)

U.S. Delegate:Dr. Wilda H. Martinez, Associate Deputy

Administrator, Aqua Products andHuman Nutrition Sciences, U.S.Department of Agriculture, AgricultureResearch Service, Room 107, B–005,Beltsville, MD 20705, Phone #: (301)504–6275, Fax #: (301) 504–6699

Alternate Delegate:Ms. Elizabeth J. Campbell, Director,

Division of Programs and EnforcementPolicy, Center for Food Safety andApplied Nutrition (HFS–155), Food andDrug Administration, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–5229, Fax #: (202) 205–4594

Codex Committee on Meat Hygiene

(Host Government—New Zealand)

Delegate:Dr. John Prucha, Deputy Administrator,

International Programs, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 341–E,Administration Building, Washington,DC 20250, Phone #: (202) 720–3473, Fax#: (202) 690–3856

Alternate Delegate:


Dr. Richard Mikita, Export Advisor,International Programs, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Room 6916A, FranklinCourt, Suite 6900E, Washington, DC20250–3700, Phone #: (202) 501–6703,Fax #: (202) 501–6399

Codex Committee on Processed Meat andPoultry Products

(Host Government—Denmark)

U.S. Delegate:Mr. Charles Edwards, Director, Product

Assessment Division, Labels, Standardand Review Program, RP, Food Safetyand Inspection Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, West End Court Building,Room 329, 1255 22 Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037, Phone #: (202)254–2565, Fax #: (202) 254–2499

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Syed Amjad Ali, Food Technologist,

Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, West EndCourt, Room 311, 1255 22nd Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20250, Phone #: (202)254–2517, Fax #: (202) 254–2530

Codex Committee on Natural Mineral Waters


U.S. Delegate:

Dr. Terry C. Troxel, Director, Division ofPrograms and Enforcement Policy,Center for Food Safety and AppliedNutrition (HFS–305), Food and DrugAdministration, 200 C Street, SW.,Washington, DC 20204, Phone #: (202)205–5321, Fax #: (202) 205–4422


Joint U.N.E.C.E. Codex Alimentarius Groupsof Experts

Joint ECE/Codex Alimentarius Group ofExperts on Standardization of Quick FrozenFoods

U.S. Delegate:Mr. Richard B. Boyd, Senior Marketing

Specialist, Fruit and Vegetable Division,Agriculture Marketing Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 0717,South Building, 14th and IndependenceAvenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250,Phone #: (202) 720–5021, Fax #: (202)690–1527

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Charles W. Cooper, Director,


Joint ECE/Codex Alimentarius Group ofExperts on Standardization of Fruit Juices

U.S. Delegate:(Vacant)

Alternate Delegate:Mr. Richard B. Boyd, Senior Marketing

Specialist, Fruit and Vegetable Division,Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.Department of Agriculture, Room 0717,South Building, 14th and IndependenceAvenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250,Phone #: (202) 720–5021, Fax #: (202)690–1527

Subsidiary Bodies of the Codex Alimentarius

There are five regional coordinatingcommittees:Coordinating Committee for AfricaCoordinating Committee for AsiaCoordinating Committee for EuropeCoordinating Committee for Latin America

and the Caribbean, andCoordinating Committee for North America

and the South-West PacificContact:

Ms. Rhonda S. Nally, Executive Officer forCodex Alimentarius, Food Safety andInspection Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, West End Court, Room 311,1255 22nd Street, NW., Washington, DC20250, Phone #: (202) 254–2517, Fax #:(202) 254–2530

APPENDIX 2.—TIMETABLE OF CODEX SESSIONS

[June 1994 through June 1996]

1994

CX 732–3 Codex Coordinating Committee for North America and the South-West Pacific(3rd Session).

31 May–3 June ........ Vancouver.

CX 730–8 Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (8th Session) ......... 7–10 June ................ Washington, DC.CX 702–41 Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (41st Session) ........ 28–30 June .............. Rome.CX 731–5 Codex Committee on Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (5th Session) ............ 5–9 Sept .................. Mexico City.CX 712–27 Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (27th Session) ............................................... 17–21 Oct ................ Washington, DC.CX 714–23 Codex Committee on Food Labeling (23rd Session) ............................................... 24–28 Oct ................ Ottawa.CX 729–9 Codex Committee on Cereals, Pulses and Legumes (9th Session) ....................... 31 Oct.–4 Nov .......... Washington, DC.CX 703–1 Codex Committee on Milk and Milk Products (1st Session) .................................... 28 Nov.–2 Dec ......... Rome.

1995

CX 733–3 Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Sys-tems (3rd Session).

27 Feb.–3 Mar ......... Canberra.

CX 711–27 Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (27th Session) ............... 20–24 Mar ................ The Hague.CX 720–19 Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (19th Ses-

sion).27–31 Mar ................ Bonn.

CX 725–9 Codex Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean (9th Ses-sion).

3–6 Apr .................... Brasilia.

CX 718–27 Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (27th Session) ....................................... 24–29 Apr ................ The Hague.CX 707–11 Codex Coordinating Committee for Africa (11th Session) ....................................... 8–11 May ................. Abuja.CX 702–42 Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (42nd Session) ...... 28–30 June .............. Rome.CX 701–21 Codex Alimentarius Commission (21st Session) ..................................................... 3–8 July ................... Rome.CX 715–20 Codex Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling (20th Session) .............. 2–6 Oct .................... Budapest.CX 712–28 Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (28th Session) ............................................... TBA .......................... Washington, DC.CX 730–9 Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (9th Session) ......... TBA .......................... Washington, DC.CX 732–4 Codex Coordinating Committee for North America and the South-West Pacific

(4th Session).5–8 Dec ................... [Rotorua] N.Z.

1996

CX 731–6 Codex Committee on Tropical Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (6th Session) ............ 29 Jan.–2 Feb .......... Mexico City.CX 711–28 Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (28th Session) ............... 11–15 Mar ................ The Hague.CX 727–10 Codex Regional Coordinating Committee for Asia (10th Session) .......................... 19–22 Mar ................ [Tokyo].CX 718–28 Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (28th Session) ....................................... 15–20 Apr ................ The Hague.CX 706–20 Codex Regional Coordinating Committee for Europe (20th Session) ..................... 23–26 Apr ................ Stockholm.CX 722–22 Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (22nd Session) ........................... 6–10 May ................. Bergen.CX 714–24 Codex Committee on Food Labelling (24th Session) .............................................. 14–17 May ............... Ottawa.


APPENDIX 2.—TIMETABLE OF CODEX SESSIONS—Continued[June 1994 through June 1996]

CX 703–1 Codex Committee on Milk and Milk Products (2nd Session) .................................. 27–31 May ............... Rome.CX 702–43 Executive Committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (43rd Session) ....... 4–7 June .................. Geneva.CX 708–16 Codex Committee on Cocoa Products and Chocolate (16th Session) .................... 10–12 June .............. TBA.CX 719–5 Codex Committee on Natural Mineral Waters (5th Session) ................................... 13–14 June .............. TBA.CX 707–12 Codex Regional Coordinating Committee for Africa (12th Session) ........................ TBA .......................... TBA.

Appendix 3—Definitions for the Purpose ofCodex Alimentarius

Words and phrases have specific meaningswhen used by the Codex Alimentarius. Forthe purposes of Codex, the followingdefinitions apply:

1. Food means any substance, whetherprocessed, semi-processed or raw, which isintended for human consumption, andincludes drink, chewing gum, and anysubstance which has been used in themanufacture, preparation or treatment of‘‘food’’ but does not include cosmetics ortobacco or substances used only as drugs.

2. Food Hygiene comprises conditions andmeasures necessary for the production,processing, storage and distribution of fooddesigned to ensure a safe, sound, wholesomeproduct fit for human consumption.

3. Food Additive means any substance notnormally consumed as a food by itself andnot normally used as a typical ingredient ofthe food, whether or not it has nutritivevalue, the intentional addition of which tofood for a technological (includingorganoleptic) purpose in the manufacture,processing, preparation, treatment, packing,packaging, transport, or holding of such foodresults, or may be reasonably expected toresult (directly or indirectly) in it or its by-products becoming a component of orotherwise affecting the characteristics of suchfoods. The food additive term does notinclude ‘‘contaminants’’ or substances addedto food for maintaining or improvingnutritional qualities.

4. Contaminant means any substance notintentionally added to food, which is presentin such food as a result of the production(including operations carried out in crophusbandry, animal husbandry, and veterinarymedicine), manufacture, processing,preparation, treatment, packing, packaging,transport or holding of such food or as aresult of environmental contamination. Theterm does not include insect fragments,rodent hairs and other extraneous matters.

5. Pesticide means any substance intendedfor preventing, destroying, attracting,repelling, or controlling any pest includingunwanted species of plants or animals duringthe production, storage, transport,distribution and processing of food,agricultural commodities, or animal feeds orwhich may be administered to animals forthe control of ectoparasites. The termincludes substances intended for use as aplant-growth regulator, defoliant, desiccant,fruit thinning agent, or sprouting inhibitorand substances applied to crops either beforeor after harvest to protect the commodityfrom deterioration during storage andtransport. The term pesticides excludes

fertilizers, plant and animal nutrients, foodadditives, and animal drugs.

6. Pesticide Residue means any specifiedsubstance in food, agricultural commodities,or animal feed resulting from the use of apesticide. The term includes any derivativesof a pesticide, such as conversion products,metabolites, reaction products, andimpurities considered to be of toxicologicalsignificance.

7. Good Agricultural Practice in the Use ofPesticides (GAP) includes the nationallyauthorized safe uses of pesticides underactual conditions necessary for effective andreliable pest control. It encompasses a rangeof levels of pesticide applications up to thehighest authorized use, applied in a mannerwhich leaves a residue which is the smallestamount practicable.

Authorized safe uses are determined at thenational level and include nationallyregistered or recommended uses, which takeinto account public and occupational healthand environmental safety considerations.

Actual conditions include any stage in theproduction, storage, transport, distributionand processing of food commodities andanimal feed.

8. Codex Maximum Limit for PesticideResidues (MRLP) is the maximumconcentration of a pesticide residue(expressed as mg/kg), recommended by theCodex Alimentarius Commission to belegally permitted in or on food commoditiesand animal feeds. MRLPs are based on theirtoxicological effects and on GAP data andfoods derived from commodities that complywith the respective MRLPs are intended to betoxologically acceptable.

Codex MRLPs, which are primarilyintended to apply in international trade, arederived from reviews conducted by the JMPRfollowing:

(a) Toxicological assessment of thepesticide and its residue and

(b) Review of residue data from supervisedtrials and supervised uses including thosereflecting national good agriculturalpractices. Data from supervised trialsconducted at the highest nationallyrecommended, authorized, or registered usesare included in the review. In order toaccommodate variations in national pestcontrol requirements, Codex MRLPs take intoaccount the higher levels shown to arise insuch supervised trials, which are consideredto represent effective pest control practices.

Consideration of the various dietaryresidue intake estimates and determinationsboth at the national and international level incomparison with the ADI, should indicatethat foods complying with Codex MRLPs aresafe for human consumption.

9. Veterinary Drug means any substanceapplied or administered to any food-producing animal, such as meat or milk-producing animals, poultry, fish or bees,whether used for therapeutic, prophylactic ordiagnostic purposes or for modification ofphysiological functions or behavior.

10. Residues of Veterinary Drugs includethe parent compounds and/or theirmetabolites in any edible portion of theanimal product, and include residues ofassociated impurities of the veterinary drugconcerned.

11. Codex Maximum Limit for Residues ofVeterinary Drugs (MRLVD) is the maximumconcentration of residue resulting from theuse of a veterinary drug (expressed in mg/kgor µg/kg on a fresh weight basis) that isrecommended by the Codex AlimentariusCommission to be legally permitted orrecognized as acceptable in or on food.

An MRLVD is based on the type andamount of residue considered to be withoutany toxicological hazard for human health asexpressed by the Acceptable Daily Intake(ADI), or on the basis of a temporary ADI thatutilizes an additional safety factor. AnMRLVD also takes into account otherrelevant public health risks as well as foodtechnological aspects.

When establishing an MRLVD,consideration is also given to residues thatoccur in food of plant origin and/or theenvironment. Furthermore, the MRLVD maybe reduced to be consistent with goodpractices in the use of veterinary drugs andto the extent that practical and analyticalmethods are available.

12. Good Practice in the Use of VeterinaryDrugs (GPVD) is the official recommended orauthorized usage including withdrawalperiods approved by national authorities, ofveterinary drugs under practicableconditions.

13. Processing Aid means any substance ormaterial, not including apparatus or utensils,not consumed as a food ingredient by itself,intentionally used in the processing of rawmaterials, foods or its ingredients, to fulfill acertain technological purpose duringtreatment or processing and which mayresult in the non-intentional but unavoidablepresence of residues or derivatives in thefinal product.

Appendix 4—Uniform Procedure for theElaboration of Codex Standards and RelatedTexts

Steps 1, 2 and 3

(1) The Commission decides, taking intoaccount the ‘‘Criteria for the Establishment ofWork Priorities and for the Establishment ofSubsidiary Bodies,’’ to elaborate a Worldwide


2 Without prejudice to any decision that may betaken by the Commission at Step 5, the proposeddraft standard may be sent by the Secretariat forgovernment comment prior to its consideration atStep 5, when, in the opinion of the subsidiary bodyor other body concerned, the time between therelevant session of the Commission and thesubsequent session of the subsidiary or other bodyconcerned requires such action in order to advancethe work.

Codex Standard and also decides whichsubsidiary body or other body shouldundertake the work. A decision to elaboratea Worldwide Codex Standard may also betaken by subsidiary bodies of theCommission in accordance with the above-mentioned criteria, subject to subsequentapproval by the Commission or its ExecutiveCommittee at the earliest possibleopportunity. In the case of Codex RegionalStandards, the Commission shall base itsdecision on the proposal of the majority ofmembers belonging to a given region or groupof countries submitted at a session of theCodex Alimentarius Commission.

(2) The Secretariat arranges for thepreparation of a proposed draft standard. Inthe case of Maximum Limits for Residues ofPesticides or Veterinary Drugs, theSecretariat distributes the recommendationsfor maximum limits, when available from theJoint Meetings of the FAO Panel of Expertson Pesticide Residues in Food and theEnvironment and the WHO Panel of Expertson Pesticide Residues (JMPR), or the JointFAO/WHO Expert Committee on FoodAdditives (JECFA). In the cases of milk andmilk products or individual standards forcheeses, the Secretariat distributes therecommendations of the International DairyFederation (IDF).

(3) The proposed draft standard is sent tomembers of the Commission and interestedinternational organizations for comment onall aspects including possible implications ofthe proposed draft standard for theireconomic interests.

Step 4

The comments received are sent by theSecretariat to the subsidiary body or otherbody concerned which has the power toconsider such comments and to amend theproposed draft standard.

Step 5 2

The proposed draft standard is submittedthrough the Secretariat to the Commission orto the Executive Committee with a view toits adoption as a draft standard. Whenmaking any decision at this step, theCommission or the Executive Committee willgive due consideration to any comments thatmay be submitted by any of its membersregarding the implications which theproposed draft standard or any provisions ofthe standard may have for their economicinterests. In the case of Regional Standards,all members of the Commission may presenttheir comments, take part in the debate andpropose amendments, but only the majorityof the Members of the region or group ofcountries concerned attending the sessioncan decide to amend or adopt the draft.When making any decisions at this step, themembers of the region or group of countries

concerned will give due consideration to anycomments that may be submitted by any ofthe members of the Commission regardingthe implications which the proposed draftstandard or any provisions of the proposeddraft standard may have for their economicinterests.

Step 6

The draft standard is sent by the Secretariatto all members and interested internationalorganizations for comment on all aspects,including possible implications of the draftstandard for their economic interests.

Step 7

The comments received are sent by theSecretariat to the subsidiary body or otherbody concerned, which has the power toconsider such comments and amend the draftstandard.

Step 8

The draft standard is submitted throughthe Secretariat to the Commission togetherwith any written proposals received frommembers and interested internationalorganizations for amendments at Step 8 witha view to its adoption as a Codex Standard.In the case of Regional standards, allmembers and interested internationalorganizations may present their comments,take part in the debate and proposeamendments but only the majority ofmembers of the region or group of countriesconcerned attending the session can decideto amend and adopt the draft.

Appendix 5—Nature of Codex Standards

Codex standards contain requirements forfood aimed at ensuring for the consumer asound, wholesome food product free fromadulteration, and correctly labelled. A Codexstandard for any food or foods should bedrawn up in accordance with the Format forCodex Commodity Standards and contain, asappropriate, the criteria listed therein.

Format for Codex Commodity StandardsIncluding Standards Elaborated Under theCode of Principles Concerning Milk and MilkProducts

Introduction

The format is also intended for use as aguide by the subsidiary bodies of the CodexAlimentarius Commission in presenting theirstandards, with the object of achieving, as faras possible, a uniform presentation ofcommodity standards. The format alsoindicates the statements which should beincluded in standards as appropriate underthe relevant headings of the standard. Thesections of the format required to becompleted for a standard are only thoseprovisions that are appropriate to aninternational standard for the food inquestion.Name of the StandardScopeDescriptionEssential Composition and Quality FactorsFood AdditivesContaminantsHygieneWeights and MeasuresLabelling

Methods of Analysis and Sampling

Format for Codex Standards

Name of the Standard

The name of the standard should be clearand as concise as possible. It should usuallybe the common name by which the foodcovered by the standard is known or, if morethan one food is dealt with in the standard,by a generic name covering them all. If a fullyinformative title is inordinately long, assubtitle could be added.

Scope

This section should contain a clear,concise statement as to the food or foods towhich the standard is applicable unless thename of the standard clearly and conciselyidentifies the food or foods. A genericstandard covering more than one specificproduct should clearly identify the specificproducts to which the standard applies.

Description

This section should contain a definition ofthe product or products with an indication,where appropriate, of the raw materials fromwhich the product or products are derivedand any necessary references to processes ofmanufacture. The description may alsoinclude references to types and styles ofproduct and to type of pack. The descriptionmay also include additional definitions whenthese additional definitions are required toclarify the meaning of the standard.

Essential Composition and Quality Factors

This section should contain all quantitativeand other requirements as to compositionincluding, where necessary, identitycharacteristics, provisions on packing mediaand requirements as to compulsory andoptional ingredients. It should also includequality factors which are essential for thedesignation, definition, or composition of theproduct concerned. Such factors couldinclude the quality of the raw material, withthe object of protecting the health of theconsumer, provisions on taste, odor, color,and texture which may be apprehended bythe senses, and basic quality criteria for thefinished products, with the object ofpreventing fraud. This section may refer totolerances for defects, such as blemishes orimperfect material, but this informationshould be contained in appendix to thestandard or in another advisory text.

Food Additives

This section should contain the names ofthe additives permitted and, whereappropriate, the maximum amount permittedin the food. It should be prepared inaccordance with guidance given on pages 93to 96 of the Codex Procedural Manual andmay take the following form:

‘‘The following provisions in respect offood additives and their specifications ascontained in section . . . of the CodexAlimentarius are subject to endorsement[have been endorsed] by the CodexCommittee on Food Additives andContaminants.’’

A tabulation should then follow, viz.:‘‘Name of additive, maximum level (in

percentage or mg/kg).’’


Contaminants(a) Pesticide Residues: This section should

include, by reference, any levels for pesticideresidues that have been established by theCodex Committee on Pesticide Residues forthe product concerned.

(b) Other Contaminants: In addition, thissection should contain the names of othercontaminants and where appropriate themaximum level permitted in the food, andthe text to appear in the standard may takethe following form:

‘‘The following provisions in respect ofcontaminants, other than pesticide residues,are subject to endorsement [have beenendorsed] by the Codex Committee on FoodAdditives and Contaminants.’’

A tabulation should then follow, viz.:‘‘Name of contaminant, maximum level (in

percentage or mg/kg).’’

HygieneAny specific mandatory hygiene provisions

considered necessary should be included inthis section. They should be prepared inaccordance with the guidance given on pages96 to 98 of the Codex Procedural Manual.Reference should also be made to applicablecodes of hygienic practice. Any parts of suchcodes, including in particular any end-product specifications, should be set out inthe standard, if it is considered necessarythat they should be made mandatory. Thefollowing statement should also appear:

‘‘The following provisions in respect of thefood hygiene of the product are subject toendorsement [have been endorsed] by theCodex Committee on Food Hygiene.’’

Weights and Measures

This section should include all provisions,other than labelling provisions, relating toweights and measures, e.g. whereappropriate, fill of container, weight,measure or count of units determined by anappropriate method of sampling andanalysis. Weights and measures should beexpressed in S.I. units. In the case ofstandards which include provisions for thesale of products in standardized amounts,e.g. multiples of 100 grams, S.I. units shouldbe used, but this would not precludeadditional statements in the standards ofthese standardized amounts in approximatelysimilar amounts in other systems of weightsand measures.

Labelling

This section should include all thelabelling provisions contained in thestandard and should be prepared inaccordance with the guidance given on pages91 to 93 of the Codex Procedural Manual.Provisions should be included by referenceto the General Standard for the Labelling ofPrepackaged Foods. The section may alsocontain provisions which are exemptionsfrom, additions to, or which are necessary for

the interpretation of the General Standard inrespect of the product concerned providedthat these can be justified fully. Thefollowing statement should also appear:

‘‘The following provisions in respect of thelabelling of this product are subject toendorsement [have been endorsed] by theCodex Committee on Food Labelling.’’

Methods of Analysis and Sampling

This section should include, eitherspecifically or by reference, all methods ofanalysis and sampling considered necessaryand should be prepared in accordance withthe guidance given on pages 99 to 102 of theCodex Procedural Manual. If two or moremethods have been proved to be equivalentby the Codex Committee on Methods ofAnalysis and Sampling, these could beregarded as alternative and included in thissection either specifically or by reference.The following statement should also appear:

‘‘The methods of analysis and samplingdescribed hereunder are to be endorsed [havebeen endorsed] by the Codex Committee onMethods of Analysis and Sampling.’’Appendix 6

Provisional Agenda of the Joint FAO/WHOFood Standards Programme, CodexAlimentarius Commission, Twenty-FirstSession, Plenary Hall, FAO Headquarters,Rome, July 3–8, 1995:

Item and subject matter Document

1. Adoption of the Agenda ............................................................................................................................................. ALINORM 95/1.2. Election of Officers of the Commission and Members of the Executive Committee and Appointment of Regional

Coordinators.ALINORM 95/2.

3. Report on the financial situation of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme for 1994/95 and 1996/97 ... ALINORM 95/5.4. Implementation of the Medium-Term Plan of the Codex Alimentarius Commission: ALINORM 95/6.

(a) Report on progress in achieving the Medium-Term Plan(b) Strategies for achieving the Medium-Term Plan

5. Implementation of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Working arrangements between theCodex Alimentarius Commission and the World Trade Organization.

ALINORM 95/7.

6. Consideration of proposals to base Codex standards and other recommendations of scientific principles and theextent to which other factors need to be taken into account.

ALINORM 95/8.

7. Risk assessment/risk analysis in Codex: Recommendations of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation ................ ALINORM 95/9.8. Cooperation with the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in the elaboration of world-wide stand-

ards for fresh fruit and vegetables and related products.ALINORM 95/10.

9. Consideration of draft amendments to the Procedural Manual of the Codex Alimentarius Commission: ALINORM 95/14.(a) Rules of Procedure(b) Guidelines for Codex Committees(c) Format of Codex Standards

10. Consideration of draft and proposed draft standards and related texts for general application: ALINORM 95/21 Part I.(a) Food Additives(b) Contaminants(c) Pesticides (Maximum residue limits)(d) Veterinary drugs (Maximum residue limits)(e) Food labelling (Amendments)(f) Food Hygiene (Codes of Practice)(g) Methods of analysis and sampling(h) Import/export inspection and certification

11. Consideration of draft and proposed draft standards and related texts for specific commodities: ALINORM 95/21 Part II.(a) Fish and fishery products(b) Fats and oils(c) Milk and milk products(d) Tropical fresh fruit and vegetables(e) Other products

12. Consideration of proposals to elaborate new standards and/or related texts as Step 1 ........................................ ALINORM 95/21 Part III.(a) Proposals by Codex Committee(b) Opinion of the Executive Committee(c) New proposals

13. Matters arising from the reports of Codex Committees .......................................................................................... ALINORM 95/21 Part IV.14. Confirmation of Chairmanship of Codex Committees ............................................................................................. ALINORM 95/16.


Item and subject matter Document

15. Other business16. Adoption of Report

[FR Doc. 95–12570 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–DM–M

Forest Service

Coconino National Forest, Arizona;Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)for Pocket/Baker Ecosystem

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare anEnvironmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: The Long Valley RangerDistrict of the Coconino National Forestis planning to prepare an environmentalimpact statement on a proposal tomanage lands within the Pocket/BakerEcosystem. Some of the projects to beconsidered include thinning theunderstory in ponderosa pine stands toreduce the high levels of dwarfmistletoe infection; prescribingcontrolled fire for the reduction of forestfuels, nutrient cycling, and stimulationof fire dependent grasses and forbes;reconfiguring the grazing patterns ofcattle to improve the range vegetationand the watershed condition; thinningof trees along state highways 87 and 260to feature the more prominent largetrees and for the reduction of shade thatcauses ice hazards on the roadway;reducing the use and/or improving thedispersed recreation sites for sustainablefuture use; reversing the declininghealth and vigor of remnant quakingaspen stands; restoring and protectinghistoric drainage structures; and closingand/or rehabilitating roads locatedwithin stream courses or theirassociated filter strips.RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The DistrictRanger, Bruce C. Greco, will be theresponsible official and will select oneof the alternatives presented in theenvironmental impact statement.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Bruce Greco, Long Valley DistrictRanger or John Gerritsma, PlanningTeam Leader at (602) 354–2216.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Analysiswork began on the Pocket portion of thePocket/Baker 20K in 1991. In 1993 thescope of the project was broadened toinclude the Baker portion to create amore logical ecosystem for analysis. Theinterdisciplinary planning teamfollowed a formal NEPA evaluationprocess with active, detailed scopingand involvement for a wide range ofinterests. Because of the complexity and

diversity of this ecosystem, and thepotential significance of severalresource issues, we are evaluatingcompletion of the analysis through anEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS).The issues include:

(1) Sustaining vegetative conditionsfor threatened, endangered, andsensitive species (TE&S). Many of theponderosa pine sites are heavilyinfected with Southwestern dwarfmistletoe, a parasitic disease commonthroughout the Forest. Current treedensities needed for the Mexicanspotted owl (MSO) cannot be sustaineddue to mortality induced by dwarfmistletoe. Harvesting trees now toreduce dwarf mistletoe infection willdecrease tree crown densities, modifyMSO habitat, and result in adverseeffects to the proposed critical habitat ofthe MSO. The consequences of notreatment is also declining canopyclosures as trees die, that after 30–60years will result in the same impacts asreducing dwarf mistletoe now. Inaddition, delaying these treatments nowwill increase the costs (in dollars andenvironmental impacts) and reducefuture options for maintaining desiredconditions.

(2) Absence of fire in the ecosystem.Past aggressive fire suppression, limitedprescribed burning, and incompletetreatment of forest litter has resulted inheavy forest fuels along the MogollanRim. Potentially catastrophic fire couldoccur in this area given the proximity tothe communities of Pine andStrawberry, fuel loading, prevailingwinds, topography, and heavy publicrecreation use.

(3) Treatment of small diameterponderosa pine trees. Dense ponderosapine sites are at a higher risk ofcatastrophic events such as fire anddisease than less dense sites. Also,without natural or managementthinning actions, trees on these siteswill not grow into the desired matureyellow pines within a reasonableamount of time.

(4) Demand for recreationopportunities on the Mogollon Rim. Theexpressed need for an increased varietyand amount of yearlong recreationalactivities is increasing faster than theecosystem can handle. This situation isevident by the increasing number ofpeople trying to play in the snow alongHighway 87 each winter, almostcontinuous summer camping and

vehicle use within meadows and themore popular camping areas, andincreasing firewood cutting (both legaland illegal).

(5) Decline of aspen in the ecosystem.Aspen is declining in this ecosystem forseveral reasons. Lack of fire is retardingaspen sprouting and increasingcompetition from both grasses and othertree species. Also, the large elkpopulations seek out young aspenshoots, thereby limiting reproductionsuccess. Options to reverse thedeclining presence of aspen are limitedby environmental and social concerns.

Preparing an EIS will allow us to fullyevaluate the significance of theenvironmental effects of these resourcecomponents and issues. Scoping forcomments and field trips werepreviously accomplished prior to thisanalysis becoming an EIS. However,comments on the issues and suggestionsfor additional issues are welcome inresponse to the draft environmentalimpact statement which will follow thisNotice of Intent, shortly. TheInterdisciplinary Team will reconveneto consider new comments.

The draft environmental impactstatement can be expected in June 1995.A forty-five-day comment periodpursuant to 36 CFR 219.10(b) will beprovided for the public to makecomments on the draft environmentalimpact statement. A record of decisionwill be prepared and filed with the finalenvironmental impact statement. Aforty-five-day appeal period pursuant to36 CFR 217.8(a) will be applicable.

The forty-five day comment period onthe draft environmental impactstatement will begin when theEnvironmental Protection Agency’sNotice of Availability appears in theFederal Register.

The Forest Service believes, at thisearly stage, it is important to givereviewers notice of several court rulingsrelated to public participation in theenvironmental review process. To bemost helpful, comments on the draftenvironmental impact statement shouldbe as specific as possible and mayaddress the adequacy of the statement orthe merits of the alternatives discussed(see Council on Environmental QualityRegulations for implementing theprocedural provisions of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act at 40 CFR1503.3).

In addition, Federal court decisionshave established that reviewers of draft


environmental impact statements muststructure their participation in theenvironmental review of the proposal sothat it is meaningful and alerts anagency to the reviewer’s position andcontentions. Vermont Yankee NuclearPower Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553(1978). Environmental objections thatcould have been raised at the draft stagemay be waived if not raised until aftercompletion of the final environmentalimpact statement. City of Angoon v.Hodel, (9th Circuit, 1986) andWisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980).The reason for this is to ensure thatsubstantive comments and objectionsare made available to the Forest Serviceat a time when it can meaningfullyconsider them and respond to them inthe final.

Dated: May 15, 1995.Bruce C. Greco,District Ranger, Long Valley Ranger District,Coconino National Forest.[FR Doc. 95–12537 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Committee of State Foresters

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Committee of StateForesters will meet in Flatwoods, WestVirginia, on June 19–20, 1995. Themeeting will begin at 1 p.m. on June 19and end at noon on June 20. TheCommittee is comprised of 7 membersof the Executive Committee of theNational Association of State Foresters.The meeting provides an opportunityfor committee members to consult withthe Secretary of Agriculture regardingthe administration and application ofvarious parts of the Cooperative ForestryAssistance Act of 1978. The UnderSecretary for Natural Resources andEnvironment will chair this meeting.The meeting is open to publicattendance; however, participation islimited to Forest Service personnel andCommittee members. Persons who wishto bring cooperative forestry matters tothe attention of the Committee may filewritten statements with the ExecutiveSecretary of the Committee before orafter the meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held fromJune 19–20, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held inthe conference room at the Days Inn (I–79, Exit 67), 2000 Sutton Lane, Sutton,West Virginia. Members of the publicwho wish to attend must register inadvance with Marlene Edwards, Office

of the Deputy Chief for State and PrivateForestry.

Send written comments to Joan M.Comanor, Executive Secretary,Committee of State Foresters, c/o ForestService, USDA, P.O. Box 96090,Washington, DC 20090–6090, (202) 205–1657.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Marlene Edwards, Office of the DeputyChief for State and Private Forestry,Forest Service, (202) 205–1657.


Joan M. Comanor,Deputy Chief, S&PF.[FR Doc. 95–12578 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Western Washington CascadesProvincial Interagency ExecutiveCommittee (PIEC) Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

SUMMARY: The Western WashingtonCascades PIEC Advisory Committee willmeet on June 14, 1995 at the MountBaker-Snoqualmie National ForestHeadquarters, 21905 64th Avenue West,in Mountlake Terrace, Washington. Themeeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. andcontinue until 4:30 p.m. Agenda itemsto be covered include: (1) Discussion offederal and state watershed analysisprocesses; (2) discussion of agencycriteria for setting watershed analysispriorities in fiscal year 1996; (3) discusstribal activities and processes related tofederal and state watershed analysis; (4)discussion of fiscal year 1995 watershedanalysis opportunities; (5) other topicsas appropriate; and (6) open publicforum. An informational workshop onthe federal watershed analysis processwill precede the June 14th meeting. Theworkshop will be held on June 13, 1995,at Edmonds Community College, Room202, Mountlake Terrace Hall, 2000068th Avenue West, Lynnwood,Washington. The workshop willcommence at 1:00 p.m. and continueuntil 4:00 p.m. that day. All WesternWashington Cascades ProvinceAdvisory Committee meetings are opento the public. Interested citizens areencouraged to attend.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Direct questions regarding this meetingto Bob Dunblazier, Province Liaison,USDA, Mount Baker-SnoqualmieNational Forest, 21905 64th AvenueWest, Mountlake Terrace, Washington98043, 206–744–3270.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Dennis E. Bschor,Forest Supervisor.[FR Doc. 95–12543 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meetingof the Wyoming Advisory Committee

Notice is hereby given, pursuant tothe provisions of the rules andregulations of the U.S. Commission onCivil Rights, that a meeting of theWyoming Advisory Committee to theCommission will convene at 10:00 a.m.and adjourn at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday,June 17, 1995, at the Little America,2800 W. Lincolnway, Cheyenne,Wyoming 82003. The purpose of themeeting is to brief Committee memberson Commission and regional activities,discuss current civil rights issues in theState, and approve plans for futureactivities.

Persons desiring additionalinformation, or planning a presentationto the Committee, should contactCommittee Chairperson Oralia G.Mercado, 307–472–2105 or Ki-TaekChun, Acting Director of the RockyMountain Regional Office, 303–866–1040 (TDD 303–866–1049). Hearing-impaired persons who will attend themeeting and require the services of asign language interpreter should contactthe Regional Office at least five (5)working days before the scheduled dateof the meeting.

The meeting will be conductedpursuant to the provisions of the rulesand regulations of the Commission.

Dated at Washington, DC, May 16, 1995.Carol-Lee Hurley,Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.[FR Doc. 95–12557 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6335–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration

Regulations and Procedures TechnicalAdvisory Committee; Notice of MeetingChange

Federal Register citation of previousannouncement: p. 21792, May 3, 1995.

Previously announced time ofmeeting: 9:00 a.m., May 23, 1995. Newtime of meeting: 9:00 a.m., June 15,1995, Room 3884.


Dated: May 19, 1995.Lee Ann Carpenter,Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit.[FR Doc. 95–12719 Filed 5–19–95; 12:18 pm]BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 743]

Grant of Authority for Subzone Status;Merck & Co., Inc. (Pharmaceuticals);Dougherty County, Georgia

Whereas, by an Act of Congressapproved June 18, 1934, an Act ‘‘Toprovide for the establishment * * * offoreign-trade zones in ports of entry ofthe United States, to expedite andencourage foreign commerce, and forother purposes,’’ as amended (19 U.S.C.81a-81u) (the Act), the Foreign-TradeZones Board (the Board) is authorized togrant to qualified corporations theprivilege of establishing foreign-tradezones in or adjacent to U.S. Customsports of entry;

Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15CFR Part 400) provide for theestablishment of special-purposesubzones when existing zone facilitiescannot serve the specific use involved;

Whereas, an application from theSavannah Airport Commission, granteeof Foreign-Trade Zone 104, for authorityto establish special-purpose subzonestatus at the pharmaceuticalmanufacturing facility of Merck & Co.,Inc., in Dougherty County, Georgia, wasfiled by the Board on January 3, 1994,and notice inviting public comment wasgiven in the Federal Register (FTZDocket 1–94, 59 FR 1925, 1–13–94);and,

Whereas, the Board has found that therequirements of the FTZ Act andBoard’s regulations are satisfied, andthat approval of the application is in thepublic interest;

Now, therefore, the Board herebyauthorizes the establishment of asubzone (Subzone 104A) at the plantsite of Merck & Co., Inc., in DoughertyCounty, Georgia, at the locationdescribed in the application, subject tothe FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations,including § 400.28.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day ofMay 1995.Susan G. Esserman,Assistant Secretary of Commerce for ImportAdministration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.[FR Doc. 95–12596 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[Order No. 741]

Grant of Authority for Subzone Status;Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc. (Pharmaceuticals);Arecibo, Puerto Rico

Whereas, by an Act of Congressapproved June 18, 1934, an Act ‘‘Toprovide for the establishment * * * offoreign-trade zones in ports of entry ofthe United States, to expedite andencourage foreign commerce, and forother purposes,’’ as amended (19 U.S.C.81a–81u) (the Act), the Foreign-TradeZones Board (the Board) is authorized togrant to qualified corporations theprivilege of establishing foreign-tradezones in or adjacent to U.S. Customsports of entry;


Whereas, an application from theCommercial and Farm Credit andDevelopment Corporation of PuertoRico, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 61,for authority to establish special-purpose subzone status at thepharmaceutical manufacturing facilityof Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc., in Arecibo, PuertoRico, was filed by the Board on August9, 1993, and notice inviting publiccomment was given in the FederalRegister (FTZ Docket 39–93, 58 FR44492, 8–23–93); and,


Now, therefore, the Board herebyauthorizes the establishment of asubzone (Subzone 61D) at the plant siteof Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc., in Arecibo, PuertoRico, at the location described in theapplication, subject to the FTZ Act andthe Board’s regulations, including§ 400.28.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day ofMay 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for ImportAdministration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

[FR Doc. 95–12594 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[Order No. 742]

Grant of Authority for Subzone Status;Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc. (Pharmaceuticals);Barceloneta, Puerto Rico

Whereas, by an Act of Congressapproved June 18, 1934, an Act ‘‘Toprovide for the establishment * * * offoreign-trade zones in ports of entry ofthe United States, to expedite andencourage foreign commerce, and forother purposes,’’ as amended (19 U.S.C.81a–81u) (the Act), the Foreign-TradeZones Board (the Board) is authorized togrant to qualified corporations theprivilege of establishing foreign-tradezones in or adjacent to U.S. Customsports of entry;


Whereas, an application from theCommercial and Farm Credit andDevelopment Corporation of PuertoRico, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 61,for authority to establish special-purpose subzone status at thepharmaceutical manufacturing facilityof Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc., in Barceloneta, PuertoRico, was filed by the Board on August30, 1993, and notice inviting publiccomment was given in the FederalRegister (FTZ Docket 49–93, 58 FR47858, 9–13–93); and,


Now, therefore, the Board herebyauthorizes the establishment of asubzone (Subzone 61E) at the plant siteof Merck, Sharp & Dohme Quı́mica dePuerto Rico, Inc., in Barceloneta, PuertoRico, at the location described in theapplication, subject to the FTZ Act andthe Board’s regulations, including§ 400.28.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day ofMay 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for ImportAdministration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

[FR Doc. 95–12595 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M


International Trade Administration

Initiation of New Shipper AntidumpingDuty Administrative Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration,International Trade Administration,Department of Commerce.ACTION: Notice of initiation of NewShipper Antidumping DutyAdministrative Reviews.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce(the Department) has received a requestto conduct new shipper administrativereviews of an antidumping duty orderwith an April anniversary date. In

accordance with the CommerceRegulations, we are initiating thoseadministrative reviews.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Holly A. Kuga, Office of AntidumpingCompliance, Import Administration,International Trade Administration,U.S. Department of Commerce, 14thStreet and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone:(202) 482–4737.


Background

The Department has received arequest, in accordance with 19 CFR353.22(h) (1995), for new shipperreviews of an antidumping duty orderwith an April anniversary date.

Initiation of Reviews

In accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(h),we are initiating two new shipperreviews of the antidumping duty orderon fresh and chilled Atlantic salmonfrom Norway. We intend to issue thefinal results of these reviews not laterthan February 9, 1996.

Antidumping duty proceeding Period to be reviewed

Norway:Fresh and Chilled Atlantic SalmonA–403–801

Cocoon Ltd. A/S; Nordic Group A/L ................................................................................................................................. 11/01/94–04/30/95

Concurrent with publication of thisnotice, we will instruct the CustomsService to allow, at the option of theimporter, the posting, until thecompletion of the review, of a bond orsucurity in lieu of a cash deposit foreach entry of the merchandise (19 CFR353.22(h)(3)(ii)(B)(4) (1995)).

Interested parties must submitapplications for disclosure underadministrative protective orders inaccordance with 19 CFR 353.34(b).

These initiations and this notice arein accordance with section 751(a) of theTariff Act of 1930, as amended (19U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 353.22(h).

Dated: May 17, 1995.Joseph A. Spetrini,Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance.[FR Doc. 95–12593 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M

National Institute of Standards andTechnology

Announcement of a Meeting toDiscuss an Opportunity to Join aCooperative Research andDevelopment Consortium forAccelerated Wear ResistanceScreening Tests for Orthopedic JointReplacement Implant Materials

AGENCY: National Institute of Standardsand Technology.ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The National Institute ofStandards and Technology (NIST)invites interested parties to attend ameeting on July 6, 1995 to discuss the

possibility of setting up a cooperativeresearch consortium on thedevelopment of methods to acceleratethe evaluation of wear resistance oforthopedic hip and knee implantmaterials. Parties interested inparticipating in the consortium shouldbe prepared to invest adequate resourcesin the collaboration and be firmlycommitted to the goal of developingnew accelerated wear evaluationtechnology.

Any program undertaken will bewithin the scope and confines of TheFederal Technology Transfer Act of1986 (Pub. L. 99–502, 15 U.S.C. 3710a),which provides federal laboratoriesincluding NIST, with the authority toenter into cooperative researchagreements with qualified parties.Under this law, NIST may provide‘‘personnel, service, facilities,equipment or other resources with orwithout reimbursement (but not fundsto non-federal parties)’’—to thecooperative research program.

The meeting will be held on July 6,1995 at 8:30 a.m., Room A315, Building224 at NIST in Gaithersburg, MD, forinterested parties. The meeting willdiscuss the possible formation of aresearch consortium including NISTand orthopedic industry to conductresearch in this area. This is not a grantprogram.DATES: The meeting will be held on July6, 1995. Interested parties shouldcontact NIST to confirm theirattendance at the address, telephonenumber or FAX number shown belowno later than June 22, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will held at8:30 a.m., Room A315, Building 224,National Institute of Standards andTechnology, Gaithersburg, MD.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.John A. Tesk, Building 224, Room A143,National Institute of Standards andTechnology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899.Telephone: 301–975–6799; FAX: 301–963–9143; e-mail: tesk@ micf.nist.gov.

Dated: May 16, 1995.Raymond G. Kammer,Deputy Director.[FR Doc. 95–12548 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–13–M

COMMITTEE FOR THEIMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILEAGREEMENTS

Request for Public Comments onBilateral Textile Consultations onMen’s and Boys’ Wool Coats OtherThan Suit Type

May 17, 1995.AGENCY: Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreements(CITA).ACTION: Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Janet Heinzen (India) and Anne Novak(Brazil), International Trade Specialists,Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S.Department of Commerce, (202) 482–4212. For information on categories forwhich consultations have beenrequested, call (202) 482–3740.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:


Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March3, 1972, as amended; section 204 of theAgricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7U.S.C. 1854).

Under the terms of Article 6 of theUruguay Round Agreement on Textilesand Clothing (ATC) and the UruguayRound Agreements Act, the Governmentof the United States requestedconsultations, on April 18, 1995 andApril 26, 1995, respectively, with theGovernments of India and theFederative Republic of Brazil withrespect to men’s and boys’ wool coatsother than suit type in Category 434,produced or manufactured in India andBrazil.

The purpose of this notice is to advisethe public that, if no solution is agreedupon in consultations with theGovernment of India and theGovernment of the Federative Republicof Brazil, the Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreementsmay later establish a limit for the entryand withdrawal from warehouse forconsumption of wool textile products inCategory 434, produced ormanufactured in India and Brazil andexported during the twelve-monthperiod April 18, 1995 through April 17,1996, at a level of not less than 45,750dozen, in the case of India, and exportedduring the twelve-month period April26, 1995 through April 25, 1996, at alevel of not less than 9,519 dozen, in thecase of Brazil. On April 18, 1995, CITAdropped its request for consultationswith India on Category 434 that wasmade on December 30, 1994 (see 60 FR5653, published on January 30, 1995)and resubmitted the request underArticle 6 of the ATC.

A summary statement of seriousdamage concerning Category 434follows this notice.

Anyone wishing to comment orprovide data or information regardingthe treatment of Category 434, or tocomment on domestic production oravailability of products included inCategory 434, is invited to submit 10copies of such comments or informationto Rita D. Hayes, Chairman, Committeefor the Implementation of TextileAgreements, U.S. Department ofCommerce, Washington, DC 20230;ATTN: Helen L. LeGrande. Thecomments received will be consideredin the context of the consultations withthe Government of India and theGovernment of the Federative Republicof Brazil.

Because the exact timing of theconsultations is not yet certain,comments should be submittedpromptly. Comments or informationsubmitted in response to this notice willbe available for public inspection in the

Office of Textiles and Apparel, roomH3100, U.S. Department of Commerce,14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC.

Further comments may be invitedregarding particular comments orinformation received from the publicwhich the Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreementsconsiders appropriate for furtherconsideration.

The solicitation of commentsregarding any aspect of the agreement orthe implementation thereof is not awaiver in any respect of the exemptioncontained in 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1) relatingto matters which constitute ‘‘a foreignaffairs function of the United States.’’

The United States remains committedto finding a solution concerningCategory 434. Should such a solution bereached in consultations with theGovernments of India and theFederative Republic of Brazil, furthernotice will be published in the FederalRegister.

A description of the textile andapparel categories in terms of HTSnumbers is available in theCORRELATION: Textile and ApparelCategories with the Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States (seeFederal Register notice 59 FR 65531,published on December 20, 1994).Rita D. Hayes,Chairman, Committee for the Implementationof Textile Agreements.

Statement of Serious DamageMen’s and Boys’ Wool Coats Other ThanSuit Type—Category 434April 1995

The sharp and substantial increase inimports of men’s and boys’ wool coatsother than suit type, Category 434, iscausing serious damage to the U.S.industry producing men’s and boys’wool coats other than suit type.

U.S. imports of men’s and boys’ woolcoats other than suit type, Category 434,surged to 189,180 dozen in the yearending January 1995, 40 percent abovethe same period a year earlier.

Serious damage to the domesticindustry resulting from the sharp andsubstantial increase in imports of men’sand boys’ wool coats other than suittype is attributed to India and Brazil.The combination of high import levels,surging imports, and low priced goodsfrom these countries have resulted inloss of domestic output, market share,investment, employment, man-hoursworked, and total annual wages.

Total imports from the two countrieslisted above increased from 31,371dozen in the year ending January 1994to 55,269 dozen in the twelve monthsending in January 1995, a sharp and

substantial increase of 76 percent.Together their year ending January 1994imports were 23 percent of totalCategory 434 imports. Their share oftotal category imports increased to 29percent in the year ending January 1995.Their year ending January 1995 importswere 36 percent of total U.S. productionof men’s and boys’ non-suit type woolcoats in the year ending September1994.[FR Doc. 95–12600 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

Request for Public Comments onBilateral Textile Consultations onWoven Wool Shirts and Blouses

April 17, 1995.AGENCY: Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreements(CITA).ACTION: Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Janet Heinzen (India) and Anne Novak(Hong Kong), International TradeSpecialists, Office of Textiles andApparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,(202) 482–4212. For information oncategories for which consultations havebeen requested, call (202) 482–3740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March

3, 1972, as amended; section 204 of theAgricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7U.S.C. 1854).

Under the terms of Article 6 of theUruguay Round Agreement on Textilesand Clothing (ATC) and the UruguayRound Agreements Act, the Governmentof the United States requestedconsultations, on April 18, 1995 andApril 27, 1995, respectively, with theGovernments of India and the HongKong with respect to woven wool shirtsand blouses in Category 440, producedor manufactured in India and HongKong.

The purpose of this notice is to advisethe public that, if no solution is agreedupon in consultations with theGovernment of India and theGovernment of Hong Kong, theCommittee for the Implementation ofTextile Agreements may later establisha limit for the entry and withdrawalfrom warehouse for consumption ofwool textile products in Category 440,produced or manufactured in India andHong Kong and exported during thetwelve-month period April 18, 1995through April 17, 1996, at a level of notless than 76,698 dozen, in the case ofIndia, and exported during the twelve-month period April 27, 1995 throughApril 26, 1996, at a level of not less than


5,428 dozen, in the case of Hong Kong.On April 18, 1995, CITA dropped itsrequest for consultations with India onCategory 440 that was made onDecember 30, 1994 (see 60 FR 5653,published on January 30, 1995) andresubmitted the request under Article 6of the ATC.


Anyone wishing to comment orprovide data or information regardingthe treatment of Category 440, or tocomment on domestic production oravailability of products included inCategory 440, is invited to submit 10copies of such comments or informationto Rita D. Hayes, Chairman, Committeefor the Implementation of TextileAgreements, U.S. Department ofCommerce, Washington, DC 20230;ATTN: Helen L. LeGrande. Thecomments received will be consideredin the context of the consultations withthe Government of India and theGovernment of Hong Kong.

Because the exact timing of theconsultations is not yet certain,comments should be submittedpromptly. Comments or informationsubmitted in response to this notice willbe available for public inspection in theOffice of Textiles and Apparel, roomH3100, U.S. Department of Commerce,14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC.



The United States remains committedto finding a solution concerningCategory 440. Should such a solution bereached in consultations with theGovernments of India and Hong Kong,further notice will be published in theFederal Register.

A description of the textile andapparel categories in terms of HTSnumbers is available in theCORRELATION: Textile and ApparelCategories with the Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States (see

Federal Register notice 59 FR 65531,published on December 20, 1994).Rita D. Hayes,Chairman, Committee for the Implementationof Textile Agreements.

Summary Statement of Serious DamageWoven Wool Shirts and Blouses—Category440April 1995

The sharp and substantial increase inimports of woven wool shirts andblouses, Category 440, is causing seriousdamage to the U.S. industry producingwoven wool shirts and blouses.

Category 440 imports surged to141,502 dozen in the year endingJanuary 1995, nearly double the yearending January 1994 level.

Serious damage to the domesticindustry resulting from the sharp andsubstantial increase in imports of wovenwool shirts and blouses is attributed toIndia and Hong Kong. The combinationof high import levels, surging imports,and low priced goods from thesecountries have resulted in loss ofdomestic output, market share,investment, employment, man-hoursworked, and total annual wages.

Total imports from these twocountries increased from 17,687 dozenin the year ending January 1994 to82,126 dozen in the twelve monthsending in January 1995, a sharp andsubstantial increase of 364 percent.Together their year ending January 1994imports were 24 percent of totalCategory 440 imports. Their share oftotal category imports increased to 58percent in the year ending January 1995.Their year ending January 1995 importswere 107 percent of total U.S.production of woven wool shirts andblouses in the year ending September1994.[FR Doc. 95–12601 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

Request for Public Comments onBilateral Textile Consultations onWomen’s and Girls’ Wool Coats

May 17, 1995.

AGENCY: Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreements(CITA).

ACTION: Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Janet Heinzen (India) and JenniferAldrich (Honduras), International TradeSpecialists, Office of Textiles andApparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,(202) 482–4212. For information oncategories for which consultations havebeen requested, call (202) 482–3740.



Under the terms of Article 6 of theUruguay Round Agreement on Textilesand Clothing (ATC) and the UruguayRound Agreements Act, the Governmentof the United States requestedconsultations, on April 18, 1995 andApril 24, 1995, respectively, with theGovernments of India and Honduraswith respect to women’s and girls’ woolcoats in Category 435, produced ormanufactured in India and Honduras.

The purpose of this notice is to advisethe public that, if no solution is agreedupon in consultations with theGovernment of India and theGovernment of Honduras, theCommittee for the Implementation ofTextile Agreements may later establisha limit for the entry and withdrawalfrom warehouse for consumption ofwool textile products in Category 435,produced or manufactured in India andHonduras and exported during thetwelve-month period April 18, 1995through April 17, 1996, at a level of notless than 37,487 dozen, in the case ofIndia, and exported during the twelve-month period April 24, 1995 throughApril 23, 1996, at a level of not less than14,400 dozen, in the case of Honduras.On April 18, 1995, CITA dropped itsrequest for consultations with India onCategory 435 that was made onDecember 30, 1994 (see 60 FR 5653,published on January 30, 1995) andresubmitted the request under Article 6of the ATC.


Anyone wishing to comment orprovide data or information regardingthe treatment of Category 435, or tocomment on domestic production oravailability of products included inCategory 435, is invited to submit 10copies of such comments or informationto Rita D. Hayes, Chairman, Committeefor the Implementation of TextileAgreements, U.S. Department ofCommerce, Washington, DC 20230;ATTN: Helen L. LeGrande. Thecomments received will be consideredin the context of the consultations withthe Government of India and theGovernment of Honduras.

Because the exact timing of theconsultations is not yet certain,comments should be submittedpromptly. Comments or informationsubmitted in response to this notice willbe available for public inspection in theOffice of Textiles and Apparel, roomH3100, U.S. Department of Commerce,


14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC.



The United States remains committedto finding a solution concerningCategory 435. Should such a solution bereached in consultations with theGovernments of India and Honduras,further notice will be published in theFederal Register.

A description of the textile andapparel categories in terms of HTSnumbers is available in theCORRELATION: Textile and ApparelCategories with the Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States (seeFederal Register notice 59 FR 65531,published on December 20, 1994).Rita D. Hayes,Chairman, Committee for the Implementationof Textile Agreements.

Summary Statement of Serious DamageWomen’s and Girls’ Wool Coats—Category435April 1995

The sharp and substantial increase inimports of women’s and girls’ woolcoats, Category 435, is causing seriousdamage to the U.S. industry producingwomen’s and girls’ wool coats.

Category 435 imports surged to1,206,632 dozen in the year endingJanuary 1995, 9 percent above the yearending January 1994 level.

Serious damage to the domesticindustry resulting from the sharp andsubstantial increase in imports ofwomen’s and girls’ wool coats isattributed to India and Honduras. Inboth cases surging imports and lowpriced goods have resulted in loss ofdomestic output, market share,investment, employment, man-hoursworked, and total annual wages.

Total imports from these twocountries increased from 10,366 dozenin the year ending January 1994 to51,887 dozen in the twelve monthsending in January 1995, a sharp andsubstantial increase of 400 percent.Together their year ending January 1994imports were 0.9 percent of totalCategory 435 imports. Their share oftotal category imports increased to 4.3percent in the year ending January 1995.

Their year ending January 1995 importswere 5.7 percent of total U.S.production of women’s and girls’ woolcoats in the year ending September1994.[FR Doc. 95–12603 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

Request for Public Comments onBilateral Textile Consultations on Man-Made Fiber Luggage

May 17, 1995.AGENCY: Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreements(CITA).ACTION: Notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Janet Heinzen (Philippines), Helen L.LeGrande (Sri Lanka) and Ross Arnold(Thailand), International TradeSpecialists, Office of Textiles andApparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,(202) 482–4212. For information oncategories for which consultations havebeen requested, call (202) 482–3740.



Under the terms of Article 6 of theUruguay Round Agreement on Textilesand Clothing (ATC) and the UruguayRound Agreements Act, the Governmentof the United States requestedconsultations, on April 24, 1995(Philippines) and April 27, 1995 (SriLanka and Thailand), with theGovernments of the Philippines, theDemocratic Socialist Republic of SriLanka and Thailand with respect toman-made fiber luggage in Category670–L, produced or manufactured in thePhilippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand.

The purpose of this notice is to advisethe public that, if no solution is agreedupon in consultations with theGovernment of the Philippines and theGovernment of the Democratic SocialistRepublic of Sri Lanka and theGovernment of Thailand, the Committeefor the Implementation of TextileAgreements may later establish a limitfor the entry and withdrawal fromwarehouse for consumption of man-made fiber textile products in Category670–L, produced or manufactured in thePhilippines, Sri Lanka and Thailandand exported during the twelve-monthperiod April 24, 1995 through April 23,1996, at a level of not less than7,718,533 kilograms, in the case of thePhilippines; exported during the twelve-month period April 27, 1995 throughApril 26, 1996, at a level of not less than

3,420,904 kilograms, in the case of SriLanka; and exported during the twelve-month period April 27, 1995 throughApril 26, 1996, at a level of not less than19,792,859 kilograms, in the case ofThailand. On April 27, 1995, CITAdropped its request for consultationswith Thailand on Category 670–L thatwas made on November 28, 1994 (see 60FR 2081, published on January 6, 1995)and resubmitted the request underArticle 6 of the ATC.

A summary statement of seriousdamage concerning Category 670–Lfollows this notice.

Anyone wishing to comment orprovide data or information regardingthe treatment of Category 670–L, or tocomment on domestic production oravailability of products included inCategory 670–L, is invited to submit 10copies of such comments or informationto Rita D. Hayes, Chairman, Committeefor the Implementation of TextileAgreements, U.S. Department ofCommerce, Washington, DC 20230;ATTN: Helen L. LeGrande. Thecomments received will be consideredin the context of the consultations withthe Government of the Philippines, theGovernment of the Democratic SocialistRepublic of Sri Lanka and theGovernment of Thailand.

Because the exact timing of theconsultations is not yet certain,comments should be submittedpromptly. Comments or informationsubmitted in response to this notice willbe available for public inspection in theOffice of Textiles and Apparel, roomH3100, U.S. Department of Commerce,14th and Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC.



The United States remains committedto finding a solution concerningCategory 670–L. Should such a solutionbe reached in consultations with theGovernments of the Philippines, SriLanka and Thailand, further notice willbe published in the Federal Register.

A description of the textile andapparel categories in terms of HTSnumbers is available in theCORRELATION: Textile and ApparelCategories with the Harmonized Tariff


Schedule of the United States (seeFederal Register notice 59 FR 65531,published on December 20, 1994).Rita D. Hayes,Chairman, Committee for the Implementationof Textile Agreements.

Summary Statement of Serious DamageManmade Fiber Luggage—Category 670–LApril 1995

The sharp and substantial increase inimports of manmade fiber luggage,Category 670–L, is causing seriousdamage to the U.S. industry producingmanmade fiber luggage.

Manmade fiber luggage imports,Category 670–L, increased from72,550,000 kilograms in 1992 to77,238,000 kilograms in 1993, a sixpercent increase. Manmade fiberluggage imports, Category 670–L,continued to increase in 1994 and 1995,reaching 87,413,000 kilograms duringyear ending January 1995, 13 percentabove the year ending January 1994level and 20 percent above the 1992level.

Serious damage to the domesticindustry resulting from the sharp andsubstantial increase in imports ofmanmade fiber luggage is attributed toimports from Thailand, Philippines andSri Lanka. The combination of highimport levels, surging imports and lowpriced luggage from these countrieshave resulted in loss of domestic output,market share, investment, employment,and man-hours worked.

Total imports of manmade fiberluggage, Category 670–L, from the threecountries listed above increased from24,069,000 kilograms in the year endingJanuary 1994 to 30,932,000 kilograms inthe twelve months ending in January1995, a sharp and substantial increase of29 percent. Together their year endingJanuary 1994 imports were 31 percent oftotal U.S. imports in Category 670–L.Their share of total Category 670–Limports increased to 35 percent in theyear ending January 1995. Their yearending January 1995 imports, measuredin kilograms of fabric content, were 102percent of total 1994 U.S. production ofmanmade fiber luggage.[FR Doc. 95–12602 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy

Naval Research Advisory Committee;Meeting

Pursuant to the provisions of theFederal Advisory Committee Act (5U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given

that the Naval Research AdvisoryCommittee Panel on Reduced Manningwill meet on May 23 and 24, 1995. Themeeting will be held at the Office ofNaval Research, 800 North QuincyStreet, Room 915, Ballston Center TowerOne, Arlington, Virginia. The firstsession will commence at 10:00 a.m.and terminate at 5:00 p.m. on May 23;the second session will commence at8:00 a.m. and terminate at 5:00 p.m. onMay 24, 1995. All sessions of themeeting will be open to the public.

The purpose of the meeting is toprovide the Navy with an assessment ofthe force structure and ship conceptswhich would require a minimummanning level with a goal of 25%reduction of current manning.

The meeting will include briefingsand discussions relating to ship systemsautomation, shipboard manning,manpower planning, damage control,and lessons learned.

This Notice is being published latebecause of administrative delays whichconstitute an exceptional circumstance,not allowing Notice to be published inthe Federal Register at least 15 daysbefore the date of the meeting.

For further information concerningthis meeting contact:Ms. Diane Mason-Muir, Office of Naval Research, BallstonCenter Tower One, 800 North QuincyStreet, Arlington, VA 22217-5660,Telephone Number: (703) 696-4870.

Dated: May 11, 1995M. D. SCHETZSLE,LT, JAGC, USNR, Alternate Federal RegisterLiaison Officer.[FR Doc. 95-12650 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3810–AE–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICESADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDSPACE ADIMINISTRATION

[OMB Control No. 9000–0088]

Clearance Request for Travel Costs

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD),General Services Administration (GSA),and National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA).ACTION: Notice of request for anextension to an existing OMB clearance(9000–0088).

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44U.S.C. 3501), the Federal AcquisitionRegulation (FAR) Secretariat has

submitted to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) a request to reviewand approve an extension of a currentlyapproved information collectionrequirement concerning Travel Costs.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Beverly Fayson, Office of FederalAcquisition Policy, GSA (202) 501–4755.


A. PurposeFAR 31.205–46, Travel Costs, requires

that, except in extraordinary andtemporary situations, costs incurred bya contractor for lodging, meals, andincidental expenses shall be consideredto be reasonable and allowable only tothe extent that they do not exceed on adaily basis the per diem rates in effectas of the time of travel as set forth in theFederal Travel Regulation for travel inthe conterminous 48 United States, theJoint Travel Regulations, Volume 2,Appendix A, for travel in Alaska,Hawaii, the Commonwealth of PuertoRico, and territories and possessions ofthe United States, and the Departmentof State Standardized Regulations,section 925, ‘‘Maximum Travel PerDiem Allowances for Foreign Areas.’’The burden generated by this coverageis in the form of the contractorpreparing a justification whenever ahigher actual expense reimbursementmethod is used.

B. Annual Reporting BurdenPublic reporting burden for this

collection of information is estimated toaverage 15 minutes per response,including the time for reviewinginstructions, searching existing datasources, gathering and maintaining thedata needed, and completing andreviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding this burdenestimate or any other aspect of thiscollection of information, includingsuggestions for reducing this burden, toGeneral Services Administration, FARSecretariat, 18th and F Streets, NW.,Room 4037, Washington, DC 20405.

The annual reporting burden isestimated as follows: Respondents,16,000; responses per respondent, 10;total annual responses, 160,000;preparation hours per response, .25; andtotal response burden hours, 40,000.OBTAINING COPIES OF PROPOSALS:Requester may obtain copies of OMBapplications or justifications from theGeneral Services Administration, FARSecretariat (VRS), Room 4037,Washington, DC 20405, telephone (202)501–4755. Please cite OMB Control No.9000–0088, Travel Costs, in allcorrespondents.



Beverly Fayson,

FAR Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 95–12534 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–M

[OMB Control No. 9000–0095]

Clearance Request for CommercePatent Regulations

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD),General Services Administration (GSA),and National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA).ACTION: Notice of request for anextension to an existing OMB clearance(9000–0095).

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44U.S.C. 3501), the Federal AcquisitionRegulation (FAR) Secretariat hassubmitted to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) a request to reviewand approve an extension of a currentlyapproved information collectionrequirement concerning CommercePatent Regulations, Public Law 98–620.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Beverly Fayson, Office of FederalAcquisition Policy, GSA (202) 501–4755.


A. Purpose

As a result of the Department ofCommerce (Commerce) publishing afinal rule in the Federal Registerimplementing Public Law 98–620 (52FR 8552, March 18, 1987), a revision toFAR subpart 27.3 to implement theCommerce regulation was published inthe Federal Register as an interim ruleon June 12, 1989 (54 FR 25060).

A Government contractor must reportall subject inventions to the contractingofficer, submit a disclosure of theinvention, and identify any publication,or sale, or public use of the invention(52.227–11(c), 52.228–12(c), and52.227–13(e)(2)). Contractors arerequired to submit periodic or interimand final reports listing subjectinventions (27.303(a); 27.304–1(e)(1) (i)and (ii); 27.304–1(e)(2) (i) and (ii);52.227–12(f)(7); 52.227–14(e)(3)). Inorder to ensure that subject inventionsare reported, the contractor is requiredto establish and maintain effectiveprocedures for identifying anddisclosing subject inventions (52.227–11, Alternate IV; 52.227–12(f)(5);52.227–13(e)(1)). In addition, thecontractor must require his employees,by written agreements, to disclose

subject inventions (52.227–11(f)(2);52.227–12(f)(2); 52.227–13(e)(4)). Thecontractor also has an obligation toutilize the subject invention, and agreeto report, upon request, the utilizationor efforts to utilize the subject invention(27.302(e); 52.227–11(h); 52.227–12(h)).

B. Annual Reporting BurdenPublic reporting burden for this

collection of information is estimated toaverage 3.9 hours per response,including the time for reviewinginstructions, searching existing datasources, gathering and maintaining thedata needed, and completing andreviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding this burdenestimate or any other aspect of thiscollection of information, includingsuggestions for reducing this burden, toGeneral Services Administration, FARSecretariat, 18th & F Streets, NW, Room4037, Washington, DC 20405.

The annual reporting burden isestimated as follows: Respondents,1,200; responses per respondent, 9.75;total annual responses, 11,700;preparation hours per response, 3.9; andtotal response burden hours, 45,630.OBTAINING COPIES OF PROPOSALS:Requester may obtain copies of OMBapplications or justifications from theGeneral Services Administration, FARSecretariat (VRS), Room 4037,Washington, DC 20405, telephone (202)501–4755. Please cite OMB Control No.9000–0095, Commerce PatentRegulations, in all correspondence.

Dated: April 12, 1995.

Beverly Fayson,

FAR Secretariat.

[FR Doc. 95–12535 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–M

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

National Educational Research Policyand Priorities Board; Meeting

AGENCY: National Educational ResearchPolicy and Priorities Board; Education.ACTION: Notice of partially closedmeeting.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth theschedule and proposed agenda of aforthcoming meeting of the NationalEducational Research Policy andPriorities Board. This notice alsodescribes the functions of the Board.Notice of this meeting is required underSection 10(a)(2) of the Federal AdvisoryCommittee Act and is intended to notifythe general public of their opportunity

to attend the open portions of themeeting.DATES: June 8 and 9, 1995.TIMES: June 8, 1995, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.(open). June 9, 1995, 8 a.m. toapproximately 9 a.m. (closed);approximately 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. (open).LOCATION: Association of AmericanRailroads Conference Center, Rooms Aand B, Fourth Floor, 50 F St., NW.,Washington, DC 20001. On June 8, fromapproximately 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.only, the meeting will move to room326, 555 New Jersey Ave., NW.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:John Christensen, Designated FederalOfficial, Office of Educational Researchand Improvement, 555 New Jersey Ave.,NW., Washington, DC 20208–7579.Telephone: (202) 219–2065.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheNational Educational Research Policyand Priorities Board is authorized bySection 921 of the EducationalResearch, Development, Dissemination,and Improvement Act of 1994. TheBoard works collaboratively with theAssistant Secretary for the Office ofEducational Research and Improvementto forge a national consensus withrespect to a long-term agenda foreducational research, development, anddissemination, and to provide adviceand assistance to the Assistant Secretaryin administering the duties of the Office.

The meeting of the Board is open tothe public, except for a portion whichwill be closed on June 9 from 8 a.m. toapproximately 9 a.m. The proposedagenda on June 8 includessubcommittee reports, a meeting withrepresentatives from educationalassociations, and reports on researchand development center priorities andon standards for the evaluation ofresearch, and discussion of the researchpriorities plan.

On June 9 the Board will considerpersonnel, organizational, and businessmatters and develop approaches to aresearch agenda. The meeting will beclosed to the public from 8 a.m. toapproximately 9 a.m. under theauthority of Section 10(d) of the FederalAdvisory Committee Act and underexemptions (2) and (6) of Section552b(c) of Title 5 U.S.C. to discuss theprocedure for the selection of anexecutive director. The Board willconsider matters that relate solely to theinternal personnel rules and practices ofthe Board and also to the personalqualifications and experience ofpotential candidates for this position,matters that would disclose informationof a personal nature where disclosure


would constitute a clearly unwarrantedinvasion of personal privacy ifconducted in open session.

A final agenda will be available fromthe Board office on June 1, 1995.

A summary of the activities at theclosed session and related matterswhich are informative to the publicconsistent with the policy of Title 5U.S.C. 552b will be available to thepublic within 14 days of the meeting.Records are kept of all Boardproceedings, and are available for publicinspection at the office of the NationalEducational Research Policy andPriorities Board, 555 New Jersey Ave.,NW., Washington, DC 20208–7564.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Sharon P. Robinson,Assistant Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12516 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4000–01–M

National Assessment GoverningBoard; Meeting

AGENCY: National AssessmentGoverning Board; Education.AGENCY: Notice of Achievement LevelsCommittee Teleconference meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth theschedule and proposed agenda of aforthcoming teleconference meeting ofthe Achievement Levels Committees ofthe National Assessment GoverningBoard. This notice also describes thefunctions of the Board. Notice of thismeeting is required under Section10(a)(2) of the Federal AdvisoryCommittee Act. This document isintended to notify the general public oftheir opportunity to attend.DATES: June 12, 1995.TIME: 2:00 P.M. (e.t.), until adjournment,approximately, 3:30 p.m., (open).LOCATION: 800 North Capitol Street,NW., Suite 825, Washington, D.C.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mary Ann Wilmer, Operations Officer,National Assessment Governing Board,Suite 825, 800 North Capitol Street,NW., Washington, D.C. 20002–4233,Telephone: (202) 357–6938.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheNational Assessment Governing Boardis established under section 412 of theNational Education Statistics Act of1994 (Title IV of the ImprovingAmerica’s Schools Act of 1994), (Pub. L.103–382).

The Board is established to formulatepolicy guidelines for the NationalAssessment of Educational Progress.The Board is responsible for selectingsubject areas to be assessed, developingassessment objectives, identifying

appropriate achievement goals for eachgrade and subject tested, andestablishing standards and proceduresfor interstate and national comparisons.

On June 12, the Achievement LevelsCommittee will hold a teleconferencemeeting beginning at 2:00 p.m. Thepurpose of this meeting is to select (1)exemplar items for the 1994 U.S. historyand world geography reports, and (2)exemplar items for the 1994 readingreport. Other agenda items includeconsideration of a report from NCES ontechnical issues in performanceassessments, and discussion of theAdvisory Council on EducationStatistics document on standards.

Records are kept of all Boardproceedings and are available for publicinspection at the U.S. Department ofEducation, National AssessmentGoverning Board, Suite 825, 800 NorthCapitol Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.,from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Dated: May 18, 1995.Roy Truby,Executive Director, National AssessmentGoverning Board.[FR Doc. 95–12547 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4000–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission

[Docket No. CP95–493–000, et al.]

Columbia Gas TransmissionCorporation, et al.; Natural GasCertificate FilingsMay 16, 1995.

Take notice that the following filingshave been made with the Commission:

1. Columbia Gas TransmissionCorporation

[Docket No. CP95–493–000]

Take notice that on May 11, 1995,Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation(Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue,S.E., Charleston, West Virginia 25314,filed in Docket No. CP95–493–000 arequest pursuant to §§ 157.205 and157.211 of the Commission’sRegulations under the Natural Gas Act(18 CFR 157.205, 157.211) forauthorization to construct and operatethe facilities necessary to establishthirteen new points of delivery toexisting customers for firmtransportation service under Columbia’sblanket certificate issued in Docket No.CP83–76–000 pursuant to Section 7 ofthe Natural Gas Act, all as more fully setforth in the request that is on file withthe Commission and open to publicinspection.

Specifically, Columbia proposes toconstruct and operate twelve new pointsof delivery to Mountaineer GasCompany (MGC) all of which would belocated in West Virginia and wouldhave a total estimated design day andannual quantity of 18 Dth and 1,800Dth, respectively. In addition, Columbiaproposes to construct and operate onenew point of delivery to West Ohio GasCompany (WOG) which would belocated in Ohio and would have anestimated design day and annualquantity of 3 Dth and 175 Dth,respectively. Columbia states that thenew points of delivery would allowMGC and WOG to serve residentialcustomers.

Columbia states that the quantities tobe provided through the new deliverypoints will be within Columbia’sauthorized level of services and,therefore, there is no impact onColumbia’s existing design day andannual obligations to the customers as aresult of the construction and operationof the new points of delivery for firmtransportation service.

Columbia estimates that the cost toinstall the new taps to be approximately$150 per tap which will be treated as anO&M expense.

Columbia states that it will complywith all of the environmentalrequirements of § 157.206(d) of theCommission’s regulations prior to theconstruction of any facilities.

Comment date: June 30, 1995, inaccordance with Standard Paragraph Gat the end of this notice.

2. Panhandle Eastern Pipe LineCompany

[Docket No. CP95–496–000]Take notice that on May 12, 1995,

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company(Panhandle), P.O. Box 1642, Houston,Texas 77251–1642, filed in Docket No.CP95–496–000 a request pursuant to§§ 157.205 and 157.216 of theCommission’s Regulations under theNatural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,157.216) for authorization to abandon inplace approximately 5,330 feet of 18-inch pipeline under Panhandle’sblanket certificate issued in Docket No.CP83–83–000 pursuant to Section 7 ofthe Natural Gas Act, all as more fully setforth in the request that is on file withthe Commission and open to publicinspection.

Panhandle proposes to abandon inplace approximately 5,300 feet of 18-inch pipeline. In conjunction with theproposed abandonment Panhandle willperform additional work under itsblanket certificate and § 157.208(a)(1) ofthe Commission’s Regulations to installapproximately 8,550 feet of new 18-inch


pipeline. The facilities are located inOakland County, Michigan.


3. Algonquin Gas TransmissionCompany

[Docket No. CP95–497–000]Take notice that on May 10, 1995,

Algonquin Gas Transmission Company(Algonquin), 1284 Soldiers Field Road,Boston, MA 02135, filed in Docket No.CP95–497–000 a request pursuant toSection 7 of the Natural Gas Act, asamended, and §§ 157.205, 157.212,157.216(b) for authorization to constructand operate certain appurtenantfacilities at its existing Ponkapoag meterstation in connection with volumes tobe delivered to Boston Gas Company(Boston Gas) at the Ponkapoag deliverypoint in Milton, Massachusetts and toabandon the facilities that are replacedby the new facilities. This request ismade in accordance with the authoritygranted to Algonquin in its blanketcertificate issued in Docket No. CP87–317–000 pursuant to 18 CFR Part 157,Subpart F of the Natural Gas Act, all asmore fully set forth in the request thatis on file with the Commission and openfor public inspection.

Algonquin states that Boston Gas hasrequested and Algonquin has agreed toconstruct appurtenant facilities at anexisting meter station, at an estimatedcost of $1,596,600. Algonquin wouldinstall additional heaters in the meterstation yard and replace pressureregulators, headers and meter runs. It isstated that construction activities wouldbe within the existing fenced area at themeter station site in previouslydisturbed areas. It is further stated thatBoston Gas would reimburse Algonquinfor costs incurred in installing thefacilities.


Standard ParagraphsG. Any person or the Commission’s

staff may, within 45 days after issuanceof the instant notice by the Commission,file pursuant to Rule 214 of theCommission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR385.214) a motion to intervene or noticeof intervention and pursuant to§ 157.205 of the Regulations under theNatural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) aprotest to the request. If no protest isfiled within the time allowed therefore,the proposed activity shall be deemed tobe authorized effective the day after thetime allowed for filing a protest. If aprotest is filed and not withdrawnwithin 30 days after the time allowed

for filing a protest, the instant requestshall be treated as an application forauthorization pursuant to Section 7 ofthe Natural Gas Act.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12522 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. ER95–802–000]

IEP Power Marketing, L.L.C.; Notice ofIssuance of Order

May 17, 1995.On March 22 and April 4, 1995, IEP

Power Marketing, L.L.C. (IPM)submitted for filing a rate scheduleunder which IPM will engage inwholesale electric power and energytransactions as a marketer. IPM alsorequested waiver of various Commissionregulations. In particular, IPM requestedthat the Commission grant blanketapproval under 18 CFR Part 34 of allfuture issuances of securities andassumptions of liability by IPM.

On May 11, 1995, pursuant todelegated authority, the Director,Division of Applications, Office ofElectric Power Regulation, grantedrequests for blanket approval under Part34, subject to the following:

Within thirty days of the date of theorder, any person desiring to be heardor to protest the blanket approval ofissuances of securities or assumptions ofliability by IPM should file a motion tointervene or protest with the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission, 825North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rulesof Practice and Procedure (18 CFR385.211 and 385.214).

Absent a request for hearing withinthis period, IPM is authorized to issuesecurities and assume obligations orliabilities as a guarantor, indorser,surety, or otherwise in respect of anysecurity of another person; providedthat such issuance or assumption is forsome lawful object within the corporatepurposes of the applicant, andcompatible with the public interest, andis reasonably necessary or appropriatefor such purposes.

The Commission reserves the right torequire a further showing that neitherpublic nor private interests will beadversely affected by continuedapproval of IPM’s issuances of securitiesor assumptions of liability.

Notice is hereby given that thedeadline for filing motions to interveneor protests, as set forth above, is June 12,1995.

Copies of the full text of the order areavailable from the Commission’s PublicReference Branch, Room 3308, 941North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,D.C. 20426.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–12523 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]


[Docket No. RP95–245–001]

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company;Notice of Compliance Filing

May 17, 1995.

Take notice that on May 15, 1995,Koch Gateway Pipeline Company (KochGateway) tendered for filing as part ofits FERC Gas Tariff Fifth RevisedVolume No. 1, the following tariffsheets, to be effective May 4, 1995:

Second Revised Sheet No. 3606

Koch Gateway states that on May 5,1995, the Office of Pipeline Regulation(OPR) issued a Letter Order in the abovecaptioned proceeding. Pursuant to thatLetter Order, Koch Gateway wasdirected to file within 10 days to correctpagination on Tariff Sheet No. 3606.Accordingly, Koch Gateway has revisedthe pagination to delete First RevisedSheet No. 3606, which has previouslybeen approved by the Commission, andadded Second Revised Sheet No. 3606.

Koch Gateway also states that thetariff sheets are being mailed to allparties on the official service list createdby the Secretary in this proceeding.

Any person desiring to protest saidfiling should file a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,825 North Capitol Street, N.E.,Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordancewith § 385.211 of the Commission’sRegulations. All such protests should befiled on or before May 24, 1995. Protestswill be considered by the Commissionin determining appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceedings.Copies of this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–12524 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]



[Docket No. CP95–495–000]

NorAm Gas Transmission Company;Notice of Request Under BlanketAuthorization

May 17, 1995.

Take notice that on May 12, 1995,NorAm Gas Transmission Company(NGT), 1600 Smith Street, Houston,Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP95–495–000 a request pursuant to§§ 157.205 and 157.211 and 216 of theCommission’s Regulations under theNatural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,157.211 and 216) for authorization toabandon, replace, and relocate certainfacilities on Line 3, 4–H, and 4–14under NGT’s blanket certificate issuedin Docket No. CP82–384–000, et al.,pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural GasAct, all as more fully set forth in therequest that is on file with theCommission and open to publicinspection.

Specifically, NGT proposes to:(1) Abandon twenty eight 1-inch rural

domestic taps on Lines 3 and 4–H andto install three taps on Line 4–1–4 at aconstruction cost of $4,454;

(2) Abandon the Hunter Town BorderStation on Line 3 and relocate it on Line4–14 at a construction cost of $28,540;

(3) Abandon and relocate the GarberRegulator Station on Line 4–A at aconstruction cost of $17,673; and

(4) Abandon the Pond Creek RegulatorStation on Line 4–1–4 and replace andrelocate it on Line 4–B (Extension) at aconstruction cost of $14,672.

Arkla will reimburse NGT for thecosts associated with the taps to beinstalled on Line 4–1–4.

Any person or the Commission’s staffmay, within 45 days after issuance ofthe instant notice by the Commission,file pursuant to Rule 214 of theCommission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR385.214) a motion to intervene or noticeof intervention and pursuant to§ 157.205 of the Regulations under theNatural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) aprotest to the request. If no protest isfiled within the time allowed therefor,the proposed activity shall be deemed tobe authorized effective the day after thetime allowed for filing a protest. If aprotest is filed and not withdrawnwithin 30 days after the time allowedfor filing a protest, the instant requestshall be treated as an application forauthorization pursuant to Section 7 ofthe Natural Gas Act.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12525 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. ER95–357–000]

Northeast Utilities Service Company;Notice of Filing

May 17, 1995.Take notice that on March 31, 1995,

Northeast Utilities Service Company(NUSCO) tendered for filing on behalf ofThe Connecticut Light and PowerCompany (CL&P), WesternMassachusetts Electric Company(WMECO), Holyoke Water PowerCompany (HWP), Holyoke Power andElectric Company and Public ServiceCompany of New Hampshire (together,the NU System Companies) clarificationof the formula for the determination ofoperation and maintenance expensecontained in Schedule B to theDistribution Service Agreementpreviously filed by NUSCO in theabove-referenced docket.

NUSCO renews its request that theproposed rate schedule changes bepermitted to become effective January 1,1995. NUSCO states that a copy of thefiling has been mailed or delivered tothe affected parties.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or protest with the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission, 825North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rulesof Practice and Procedure (18 CFR385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All suchmotions or protests should be filed onor before May 26, 1995. Protests will beconsidered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceeding.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12526 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Northern Natural Gas Company; Noticeof Technical Conference

May 17, 1995.In the Commission’s order issued

March 10, 1995, the Commission heldthat the filing in the above captionedproceeding raises issues that should beaddressed in a technical conference.

Take notice that the technicalconference will be held on ThursdayMay 25, 1995, at 1:00 p.m., in Room2402–A at the offices of the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 825North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,D.C. 20426. All interested parties andStaff are permitted to attend.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12527 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Northern Natural Gas Company; Noticeof Technical Conference

May 17, 1995.In the Commission’s order issued

February 15, 1995, the Commission heldthat the filing in the above captionedproceeding raises issues that should beaddressed in a technical conference.

Take notice that the technicalconference will be held on Thursday,May 25, 1995, at 2:00 p.m., Room 2402–A at the offices of the Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission, 825 NorthCapitol Street, N.E., Washington D.C.20426. All interested parties and Staffare permitted to attend.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12528 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company;Notice of Tariff Changes

May 17, 1995.Take notice that on May 15, 1995,

Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company(Northwest Alaskan), tendered for filingin Docket No. RP95–297–000 to becomepart of its FERC Gas Tariff OriginalVolume No. 2, Thirty-Sixth RevisedSheet No. 5.

Northwest Alaskan states that it issubmitting Thirty-Sixth Revised SheetNo. 5 reflecting a decrease in totaldemand charges for Canadian gaspurchased by Northwest Alaskan fromPan-Alberta Gas Ltd. (Pan-Alberta) andresold to Northwest Alaskan’s two U.S.purchasers, Pan-Alberta Gas (U.S.), Inc.(‘‘PAG–US’’) under Rate Schedules X–1,X–2 and X–3, and Pacific InterstateTransmission Company (‘‘PIT’’) underRate Schedule X–4.

Northwest Alaskan states that it issubmitting Thirty-Sixth Revised SheetNo. 5 pursuant to the provisions of theamended purchase agreements betweenNorthwest Alaskan and PAG–US andPIT, and pursuant to Rate Schedules X–1, X–2, X–3 and X–4, which provide forNorthwest Alaskan to file 45 days priorto the commencement of the nextdemand charge period (July 1, 1995


through December 31, 1995) the demandcharges and demand charge adjustmentswhich Northwest Alaskan will chargeduring the period.

Northwest Alaskan requests thatThirty-Sixth Revised Sheet No. 5become effective July 1, 1995.

Northwest Alaskan States that a copyof this filing has been served onNorthwest Alaskan’s customers.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a petitionto intervene or protest with the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission, 825North Capitol Street, NE., Washington,DC 20426, in accordance with rules 211and 214 of the Commission’s Rules ofPractice and Procedure. All suchpetitions or protests should be filed onor before May 24, 1995. Protests will beconsidered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceeding.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a petition to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12529 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice ofCompliance Filing


Trunkline Gas Company (Trunkline)tendered for filing revised workingpapers reflecting its Initial StrandedTransportation (IST) Cost Surchargereconciliation to reflect the calculationof interest on excess recoveries incompliance with Ordering Paragraph (C)of the Commission’s Order of April 27,1995 in Docket No. RP95–217–000.

Trunkline states that copies of thisfiling have been served on all affectedcustomers and applicable statecommissions.

Any person desiring to protest saidfiling should file a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,825 North Capitol Street, NE.,Washington, DC 20426, in accordancewith Rule 211 of the Commission’sRules of Practice and Procedure 18 CFR385.211. All such protests should befiled on or before May 24, 1995. Protestswill be considered by the Commissionin determining the appropriate action tobe taken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceeding.Copies of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for publicinspection.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12530 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Williams Natural Gas Company; Noticeof Proposed Changes in FERC GasTariff


William Natural Gas Company (WNG)tendered for filing as part of its FERCGas Tariff, Second Revised Sheet No.11, Second Substitute First RevisedSheet No. 12. The proposed effectivedate of this tariff sheet is November 5,1994.

WNG states that this filing is beingmade in compliance with Commissionorder issued May 2, 1995 in Docket No.RP95–3. WNG was directed by the orderto file, within 30 days of the issuance ofthe order, actual tariff sheets reflectingthe $35 million direct bill thateliminates the small municipalcustomers identified in WNG’s SmallCustomer Settlement filed October 5,1994, in Docket No. RP95–3–001.

WNG states that a copy of its filingwas served on all jurisdictionalcustomers and interested statecommissions.

Any person desiring to protest saidfiling should file a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,825 North Capitol Street, NE.,Washington, DC 20426, in accordancewith Section 385.211 of theCommission’s Rules and Regulations.All such protests should be filed on orbefore May 24, 1995. Protests will beconsidered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceeding.Copies of this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public ReferenceRoom.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12531 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M


Williams Natural Gas Co.; Notice ofProposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff


Williams Natural Gas Company (WNG)tendered for filing as part of its FERC

Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No.1, First Revised Sheet No. 253. Theproposed effective date of this tariffsheet is June 15, 1995.

WNG states that the purpose of theinstant filing is to amend Article 14 ofthe General Terms and Conditions ofWNG’s FERC Gas Tariff to provide forthe extension of WNG’s pricingdifferential mechanism (PDM) untilOctober 1, 1997. The Commission haspreviously held that PDMs willcontinue for two years from the effectivedate of Order No. 636 restructuring.While WNG’s FERC Gas Tariff does notexplicitly so provide, WNG’s PDMwould expire on October 1, 1995.

WNG states that a copy of its filingwas served on all jurisdictionalcustomers and interested statecommissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,825 North Capitol Street, NE.,Washington, DC 20426, in accordancewith Sections 385.214 and 385.211 ofthe Commission’s Rules andRegulations. All such motions orprotests should be filed on or beforeMay 24, 1995. Protests will beconsidered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceeding.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public ReferenceRoom.Lois D. Cashell,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12532 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY

[FRL–5197–9]

Regulatory Reinvention (XL) PilotProjects

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Solicitation of proposals andrequest for comment.

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a set ofactions to give regulated sources theflexibility to develop alternativestrategies that will replace or modifyspecific regulatory requirements on thecondition that they produce greaterenvironmental benefits. This documentannounces three of EPA’s regulatory


reinvention pilot programs: the XLprogram for facilities; the industry-wideor sector-based XL program; and XLprogram dealing with governmentagencies regulated by EPA. EPA invitesprivate and public entities or groups ofentities regulated by EPA under itsvarious statutory authorities to submitproposals in these areas. Proposals for afourth area—the community-based XLprogram—will be accepted at a latertime. This document also invitesinterested members of the public tocomment on all aspects of theseprograms. The document responds toPresident Clinton’s announcement,contained in the March 16, 1995,document Reinventing EnvironmentalRegulation, that EPA would implementpilot programs to develop innovativealternatives to the current regulatorysystem. EPA has set a goal ofimplementing a total of fifty projects inthe four program areas. Each project willinvolve the exercise of regulatoryflexibility by EPA in exchange for acommitment on the part of the regulatedentity to achieve better environmentalresults than would have been attainedthrough full compliance with allapplicable regulations. This programwill be undertaken in full partnershipwith the states. These pilotscomplement EPA’s ongoing regulatoryreinvention activities, including theCommon Sense Initiative and theEnvironmental Leadership Program.This summer, EPA will select up to sixproject proposals and begin thedevelopment of a final projectagreement. Final Project Agreements forthe remaining pilots will be based onEPA’s learning experience on the initialprojects.

The document includes backgroundinformation on the programs; adescription of the programs; theirrelationship to other regulatoryreinvention activities; the criteria,process, and timing for the selection ofprojects; an invitation for publiccomment; and the InformationCollection Request document requiredby the Paperwork Reduction Act.DATES: The period for submission ofproposals will begin upon EPA’sannouncement in the Federal Registerthat clearance has been obtained underthe Paperwork Reduction Act, allowingEPA to accept proposals. This will be anopen solicitation with no set end date,and project proponents may submitmore than one project proposal. Theperiod for comment on all aspects of theprograms will begin with publication ofthis document and extend for thirtydays. The period for comment on theattached Information Collection Request

will begin with the publication of thisdocument and extend for ten days.ADDRESSES: Project proposals and allcomments should be sent to: RegulatoryReinvention Pilot Projects, FRL–5197–9,Water Docket, Mail Code 4101, US EPA,401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC,20460. The docket accepts no faxes. Inaddition to providing generalinformation about the proposed project,project proponents are encouraged tocomment on the relationship of theirproposals to the criteria for projectselection described in this notice.Proponents of projects are invited, butby no means required, to submit otheruseful materials in paper or other audio/visual or electronic formats.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Jon Kessler, Office of Policy, Planningand Evaluation; United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency; WestTower 1013; 401 M Street, SW.; MailCode 2111; Washington, DC, 20460. Thetelephone number for the Office is (202)260–4034. The facsimile number is(202) 401–6637.


BackgroundOver the last two years, the

Environmental Protection Agency hascharted a course designed todemonstrate that environmental goalscan best be achieved by providingregulatory and policy flexibility whilemaintaining accountability, thatflexibility can also provide greaterprotection at a lower cost, that betterdecisions result from a collaborativeprocess with people working together,and that environmental solutions areoften achieved by focusing efforts at thefacility or place where protection isbeing sought. EPA has found thatallowing facilities, communities, andother entities to explore non-traditionalpollution control solutions can result inregulated entities achievingenvironmental protection resultsbeyond those anticipated by currentregulations or policies. Often thesealternative approaches can producecheaper, more efficient results as well.

Description of the ProgramsOn March 16, 1995, the President

announced as part of his NationalPerformance Review regulatoryreinvention initiative that EPA woulddevelop a set of pilot projects thatprovide the flexibility to test alternativestrategies to achieve environmentalgoals. The initiative will give a limitednumber of regulated entities anopportunity to demonstrate excellenceand leadership. They will be given theflexibility to develop alternative

strategies that will replace or modifyspecific regulatory requirements on thecondition that they produce greaterenvironmental benefits. In exchange forgreater flexibility, regulated entities willbe held to a higher standard ofaccountability for demonstrating projectresults. This Federal Register Notice isa solicitation for pilot project proposalsin the three general areas: Industry-wideprojects (XL for Sectors); facility basedprojects (XL for Facilities); andgovernment agency projects (XL forGovernment). Proposals are invited fromgroups of firms in an industry,individual regulated facilities, andgovernment agencies regulated by EPA.

These projects will require theparticipation of state and tribalregulatory agencies. In most cases, theseagencies are full partners with EPA asthey implement EPA programs that havebeen delegated to them. EPA is taking adecentralized or ‘‘franchising’’ approachto the implementation of XL programs.Under this approach, individualprojects will be managed in most casesby the units of government that are bestsuited to address the issues raised bythe projects. These may be state or tribalenvironmental agencies that are co-regulators with EPA, EPA headquarters,or EPA regional offices. As they developproject proposals, project proponentsshould coordinate with and gain thesupport of their state and tribalenvironmental agencies that haveregulatory responsibility within thescope of the project. In addition to theirrole as co-regulators, these sameagencies, as well as other localgovernment agencies, are majorstakeholders in the management ofenvironmental quality. As such, theirsupport for project proposals should besought in any case.

Selection and participation in theprogram will proceed as indicated in theflow chart that follows. EPA expectsthat there will be competition amongproject proponents for acceptance intothe program. The first stage in theprocess begins with the publication ofthis notice. Those who have projectsmeeting the listed criteria areencouraged to submit initial projectproposals. EPA will then reviewsubmissions to select those that do mostto advance the purposes of this program.An internal review process has beenestablished to evaluate proposalssubmitted in response to this notice.This group, consisting of representativesof state and tribal environmentalagencies as well as EPA headquartersand regional offices, will screen allproposals, considering the criteriadescribed in this notice, andrecommend proposals for further


development. The group may also seekadditional comment from relevant localenvironmental officials.

Based on the recommendations of thereview group, EPA will invite particularproject proponents to join with state ortribal environmental agencies as well asother coregulators, to develop a FinalProject Agreement. EPA will encourageproject proponents at this stage toincorporate their project plans into theoverall strategic plan of the businessentity. In any case, the responsibility fordeveloping detailed project plans thataddress the program criteria will bewith the project proponents. Only thesigning of a Final Project Agreementwill constitute the selection of a pilot asa full fledged pilot project. Parties to theFinal Project Agreement should include

at least EPA, project proponents, state ortribal environmental agencies, as well asother co-regulators. These agreementswill deal with project-specific issuessuch as legal authority for projectimplementation, provision forregulatory flexibility for pilots, publicinvolvement, specific commitments toenvironmental progress, expectedenvironmental results, enforceability,etc. Each Final Project Agreementshould clearly set forth objective,specific requirements that the subjectfacility or facilities have agreed to meet.EPA anticipates that the agreements willbe structured so that any enforcementrelief EPA has provided with respect toapplicable regulatory requirements willbe conditioned on the facilities’

compliance with the specifiedrequirements. EPA invites projectproponents to include, in theirproposals, suggestions for additional oralternative approaches to enforcingthese requirements. Unless otherwiseagreed to by both EPA and theproponent, the time to negotiate andsign a Final Project Agreement shouldbe limited to six months from the dateof initial project acceptance. The finalphase of the program involvesimplementation, monitoring, andevaluation of the agreement terms.

EPA will hold a series of state andregional workshops to provideadditional information on the programsand on project proposal development.



BILLING CODE 6560–50–C


Data Quality Issues

To demonstrate that an alternativeenvironmental management strategy ismore effective than existing andreasonably foreseeable future regulatoryrequirements, project proponentsshould estimate both the baseline resultfrom these requirements and theenvironmental results from thealternative strategy for their specificprojects. These estimates are likely to beuncertain due to scientific and/orengineering questions as well as tointerpretations of future applicableregulatory requirements. An importantelement of the Final Project Agreementwill be an explicit statement concerningwhat data and analyses are needed tomake these findings. The Final ProjectAgreement will be based on the learningexperience EPA has with the projects itinitially selects.

Project Examples

Consistent with EPA’s objective todevelop and demonstrate more flexibleenvironmental management strategies,EPA intends to be flexible inentertaining proposals pursuant to thisnotice. In evaluating proposals, EPAwill consider the selection criteriaincluded in this notice. EPA alsoencourages proponents of proposals tobe creative in suggesting alternativestrategies and new forms of flexibility.To help stimulate such creativity, weprovide the following guidance for thethree different types of pilot projects.These examples are intended to beillustrative only; EPA encourages thesubmission of other types of projectsthat address the selection criteria andthat have the strong prospect ofproducing ‘‘cleaner, cheaper, smarter’’results compared to the current system.

Facility-based XL projects. Nationalenvironmental requirements may notalways be the best solution toenvironmental problems. Substantialcost savings can sometimes be realized,and environmental quality enhanced,through more flexible approachesinvolving pollution prevention. Pilotprojects focused on individual facilitiesshould test alternatives to currentenvironmental management approachesdriven by compliance with existingregulations. Taking account of facility-specific circumstances, the overallobjective should be to devise and testmore flexible approaches that result inboth better environmental results andreduced compliance costs.

Industry-wide XL projects. The manyregulations affecting an industry areoften promulgated piecemeal over along period of time rather than as acomprehensive environmental program.

In many cases, national regulationsapply relatively uniform requirementsto many industries with very differentenvironmental and economiccharacteristics. Pilot projects addressingthese problems might take many forms.One example is the approach taken inThe Netherlands, where overallenvironmental performance objectivesand emission reduction targets for entireindustries are negotiated between tradeassociations and the government,followed by enforceable facility-specificagreements to implement the industry-wide goals. Such projects might take theform of combining all federal (andpossible state) requirements for anindustry into a single, integrated FinalProject Agreement. Sector-based andplace-based strategies might becombined in a project that focused on anumber of facilities in the same orrelated industries within a givengeographic region or ecosystem. Projectsmight propose development ofenforceable ‘‘best managementpractices’’ for pollution prevention orpilot the application of upcoming ISO14000 voluntary environmentalstandards within a specific industrysector. EPA also encourages projectsthat combined an industry-widecomponent with facility-specific pilotsto test the industry-wide strategy beingdeveloped.

XL projects for government agenciesregulated by EPA. Government agencies,in the management of their facilities,have the same environmentalresponsibilities and face many of thesame regulatory issues as privatebusinesses. Agency-sponsored projectsmight test concepts with broadapplication in both public and privatesector facilities. In seeking to complywith environmental statutes, however,government agencies also face uniqueobstacles and often have uniqueopportunities to innovate. Pilot projectsin this category might addressthemselves to the unique issues faced bygovernment agencies, such as theoptimization of environmental controlstrategies over the long term in thecontext of annual budgeting, or theability to reduce overall compliancecosts by controlling specific pollutionsources out of reach of environmentalregulators. Outside of the processdescribed today, the Department ofDefense and EPA are working todevelop pilot projects at two to fourDOD facilities. The DOD pilots will seekto define performance goals and createan optimal approach to achieve thosegoals, combining compliance withunique pollution prevention andtechnology resources available to DOD.

Relationship of Pilots to OtherReinvention Efforts

The Common Sense Initiative waslaunched to move the Agency beyondthe traditional medium by mediumapproach to environmental managementto a systematic, sector-based approach.Announced in July 1994, the CSIfocuses on six industry sectors—automanufacturing, computers andelectronics, iron and steel, metalfinishing, petroleum refining, andprinting industries. Each is directed bya consensus-based, multi-stakeholderadvisory subcommittee, with CSI as awhole directed by the Common SenseInitiative Council operating under theFederal Advisory Committee Act. Thepurpose of CSI is to recommend changesin environmental regulations, statutesand programs that will result in‘‘cleaner, cheaper, and smarter’’outcomes for entire industries. Suchchanges, when accepted andpromulgated, will lead to permanentadjustments to current programs.

Each of the CSI sector-specificsubcommittees is developing a plancovering a broad spectrum of activitiesincluding (but not limited to)regulations, pollution prevention,reporting requirements and publicaccess to data, permitting, innovativecompliance assistance and enforcement,and innovative technology. In somecases, these plans will include projectsthat meet the criteria outlined today forregulatory reinvention pilots. Firms orother project sponsors in CSI industriesare encouraged to develop XL projects.Project sponsors in CSI industriesconsidering such projects should workthrough CSI in order to develop them.This will enable them to take advantageof the substantial progress being madethrough CSI including establishedstakeholder committees, workingrelationships among stakeholders, andprogress toward identifying commonconcerns. (Project sponsors in CSIindustries should contact Vivian Daub,Interim Director, Common SenseInitiative, at (202) 260–7417.)

The Environmental LeadershipProgram (ELP) grew out of a desire totest innovative compliance approachessuch as third-party auditing. It is one ofthe means for streamlining complianceoversight as referenced in thePresident’s March 16 announcement.ELP allows facilities to identify ways tostreamline reporting requirements andreduce compliance inspections, withoutsacrificing environmental and publichealth protection. Facilities will useinnovative management techniquessuch as environmental auditing andpollution prevention to reduce the


burden of paperwork and inspections onthe facilities, while enhancingcompliance with existing environmentallaws. At the completion of these one-year pilot projects, the lessons learnedfrom these projects will be applied toothers.

ELP differs from the XL programsbeing announced today in that the XLprograms include flexibility fromexisting regulation in exchange for theattainment of environmental resultsbeyond what would have been achievedthrough full compliance with thoseregulations. ELP projects, on the otherhand, work to achieve improvements inenvironmental quality within existingregulatory requirements.

EPA expects that compliance-orientedELP projects may include regulatoryinnovations, and that some projectsconducted pursuant to today’s noticewill also address compliance systems.EPA welcomes XL program proposalsfrom ELP participants. (For informationon ELP contact Tai-Ming Chang,Director, Environmental LeadershipProgram, at (202) 564–5081.)

Legal Mechanisms for Pilot ProjectsEPA will seek to use a variety of

administrative and compliancemechanisms to provide regulatoryflexibility for final project agreements.Where a pilot project does not fullycomply with one or more environmentalrequirements (e.g., where a facility doesnot fully attain a technology-basedemission or discharge standard butadopts a pollution prevention programor installs additional controls on otherreleases so as to achieve superiorenvironmental results at the facility),EPA will use enforcement mechanismsto facilitate the projects. These will beconditioned on the pilot project meetingrequirements specified in the projectplan. In particular circumstances, EPAmay consider changes in underlyingregulations, or may seek changes inunderlying statutes. EPA recognizes thatthese questions raise issues ofimportance both to the Government andto potential participants in regulatorypilot projects. Applicants are invited topresent EPA with proposed approachestailored to provide the regulatoryflexibility for their pilot projects.

Project CriteriaEPA will consider the following

criteria in evaluating pilot projectproposals:

1. Environmental results. Projects thatare chosen should be able to achieveenvironmental performance that issuperior to what would be achievedthrough compliance with current andreasonably anticipated future regulation.

‘‘Cleaner results’’ can be achieveddirectly through the environmentalperformance of the project or throughthe reinvestment of the cost savingsfrom the project in activities thatproduce greater environmental results.Explicit definitions and measures of‘‘cleaner results’’ should be included inthe project agreement negotiated amongstakeholders.

2. Cost savings and paperworkreduction. The project should producecost savings or economic opportunity,and/or result in a decrease in paperworkburden.

3. Stakeholder support. The extent towhich project proponents have soughtand achieved the support of parties thathave a stake in the environmentalimpacts of the project is an importantfactor. Stakeholders may includecommunities near the project, local orstate governments, businesses,environmental and other public interestgroups, or other similar entities.

4. Innovation/Multi-Media PollutionPrevention. EPA is looking for projectsthat test innovative strategies forachieving environmental results. Thesestrategies may include processes,technologies, or management practices.Projects should embody a systematicapproach to environmental protectionthat tests alternatives to severalregulatory requirements and/or affectsmore than one environmental medium.EPA has a preference for protecting theenvironment by preventing thegeneration of pollution rather than bycontrolling pollution once it has beencreated. Pilot projects should reflect thispreference.

5. Transferability. The pilots areintended to test new approaches thatcould conceivably be incorporated intothe Agency’s programs or in otherindustries, or other facilities in the sameindustry. EPA is therefore mostinterested in pilot projects that test newapproaches that could one day beapplied more broadly.

6. Feasibility. The project should betechnically and administrativelyfeasible and the project proponentsmust have the financial capability tocarry it out.

7. Monitoring, reporting andevaluation. The project proponentsshould identify how to makeinformation about the project, includingperformance data, available tostakeholders in a form that is easilyunderstandable. Projects should haveclear objectives and requirements thatwill be measurable in order to allowEPA and the public to evaluate thesuccess of the project and enforce itsterms. Also, the project sponsor should

be clear about the time frame withinwhich results will be achievable.

8. Shifting of risk burden. The projectmust be consistent with Executive Order12898 on Environmental Justice. It mustprotect worker safety and ensure that noone is subjected to unjust ordisproportionate environmentalimpacts.

EPA intends to work cooperativelywith project proponents to develop andrefine acceptable approaches. At thesame time, the Agency must retain theultimate authority to select projectsbased on a qualitative consideration ofthese criteria. Moreover, given the pilotnature of the programs proposed todayand the limited number of slots, projectsthat satisfy many or all of the criteriamay nonetheless not be selected if, inthe Agency’s judgment, other proposedprojects better serve the objectives of theprogram. Moreover, no person isrequired to submit a proposal or obtainapproval as a condition of commencingor continuing a regulated activity.Accordingly, there will be no formaladministrative review available forproposals that are not selected, nor doesEPA believe there will be a right tojudicial review.

Timing for Project SelectionEPA intends to invite selected project

proponents to negotiate final projectagreements on a phased basis, with asmall number of early selectionsfollowed by a period of project selectionon a rolling basis. This summer, EPAplans to invite approximately six projectproponents to begin the development ofa Final Project Agreement. Beyond thatdate, project proponents will be invitedto enter the next phase of the programon a rolling basis. EPA intends to selectand initiate approximately 50 pilotprojects within the next two years.

Request for Comment on Aspects ofProgram Pilots

Interested members of the public areinvited to comment on all aspects of thepilot project program. EPA requestsspecific comment on the legalmechanisms for implementing projectagreements, and the data requirementsfor determining both existingenvironmental baselines and the level ofenvironmental quality that would resultfrom the project agreement.

Paperwork Reduction ActThe information collection provisions

in this notice, including the request forproposals, have been submitted forapproval to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) under the PaperworkReduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.An Information Collection Request


document has been prepared by EPA(ICR No. 1749.01) and is attached as anappendix to this notice. Additionalcopies may be obtained from SandyFarmer, Information Policy Branch;EPA, 401 M Street, SW. (Mail Code2136); Washington, DC 20460 or bycalling (202) 260–2740. Theseinformation collection provisions arenot effective until OMB approves themand a notice of OMB approvalcontaining the ICR control number ispublished in the Federal Register. EPAwill announce by separate FederalRegister notice when proposals may besubmitted.

Public reporting burden for thiscollection of information is estimated toaverage 150 hours per applicationresponse, including: time for reviewinginstructions; developing the proposal;reviewing the proposal throughrespondent management; and consultingin some fashion with state or tribal co-regulatory agencies as encouraged in thesolicitation. An additional 10 hours perrespondent are estimated to be requiredof the state and tribal agencies consultedin the development of project proposals.

Send comments regarding the burdenestimate or any other aspect of thiscollection of information, includingsuggestions for reducing this burden toChief, Information Policy Branch; EPA;401 M Street, SW. (Mail Code 2136);Washington, DC 20460; and to theOffice of Information and RegulatoryAffairs, Office of Management andBudget, Washington, DC 20503, marked‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’ Theperiod of comment for the InformationCollection Request will begin with thepublication of this notice and extend forten days.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Fred Hansen,Deputy Administrator.

Solicitation for Proposals forRegulatory Reinvention Pilot Projects—Supporting Statement for InformationCollection Request (#1749.01)

1. Identification of the InformationCollection

1(a) Title and Number of theInformation Collection

Title: Regulatory Reinvention PilotProjects

1(b) Short Characterization

This is a solicitation for proposals fora new program established pursuant toPresident Clinton’s March 16, 1995,National Performance Review initiative:Reinventing Environmental Regulation.Regulatory Reinvention Pilot Projectsare a set of pilot projects to test

performance-based environmentalmanagement systems as alternatives tocommand and control regulatoryapproaches. These projects (calledProject XL) are divided into fourcategories: facility-based projects,industry- or sector-based projects,community-based projects, andgovernment agency-based projects.Under these projects, regulated entitieswill be given flexibility to depart fromexisting regulatory requirements inexchange for enforceable commitmentsto achieve environmental results that,on the whole, go beyond what wouldhave been achieved through fullcompliance with those regulations. Acompetitive proposal process will allowus to select those projects that show themost promise to demonstrate successfulalternative environmental managementstrategies.

The information will be collected byEPA’s Office of Policy, Planing, andEvaluation (OPPE), which has beengiven responsibility for implementationof this program. The program itself willinclude other offices within EPAheadquarters, EPA regions, state andtribal environmental agencies. Thesolicitation will help us identify thoseregulated entities who are interested inparticipating in Project XL pilotprojects, the types of projects they areinterested in pursuing, and the extent towhich those projects our criteria forproject selection. EPA has no form thatis designated for a collection of thistype.

This solicitation for proposals will beincluded in a Federal Register noticeannouncing Project XL, and will be sentto parties that have already expressedinterest in developing pilot projects.Potential project proponents will mailcompleted proposals to the Office ofPolicy, Planning and Evaluation at EPA.The proposals will be distributed to across-agency review group that willevaluate and select proposals for initialparticipation in pilot projectdevelopment. The process is furtherdescribed in the attached notice.

2. Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

The information is needed toimplement the regulatory reinventionpilot project initiative outlined byPresident Clinton in his ReinventingEnvironmental Regulation directive.Under this initiative, EPA is to solicit itsregulated entities for their best ideas onregulatory reinvention, and for pilotprojects to test those ideas.

2(b) Use/Users of the Data

The proposals collected pursuant tothis solicitation will be used as thestarting point for development of full-fledged pilot projects. A competitiveprocess will ensure that EPA can choosefrom a pool of useful project ideas.Moreover, a simple and flexibleproposal format such as envisioned herewill allow a diversity of regulatedentities, small as well as large firms,agencies, and communities, to developproposals. EPA will use the proposalsubmissions to screen ideas and selectthe most promising ones for furtherdevelopment.

3. The Respondents and the InformationRequested

3(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

Potential respondents include allentities regulated by EPA pursuant to itsauthority under the variousenvironmental statutes who wish toparticipate in the regulatory reinventionpilot project program.

3(b) Information Requested

The attached notice does not specifya format for proposals. It requests thatproposals include, ‘‘* * * in addition toproviding general information about theproposed project, project proponents areencouraged to comment on therelationship of their proposals to thecriteria for project selection described inthis notice. Proponents of projects areinvited, but by no means required, tosubmit other useful materials in paperor other audio/visual or electronicformats.’’ As noted earlier, EPA’s goal isto create as flexible as possible asolicitation process.

The nature of activities respondentsare expected to conduct include:preparation of technical proposals,discussion with management of therespondent, consultation with state,tribal agencies, local governments andcommunity or environmentalstakeholders, and clerical mattersrelated to project proposal. In technicalpreparation, respondents areencouraged to address the nine criteriadescribed in the attached notice.Respondents are expected to describethe nature of control, pollutionprevention, or other activities to beundertaken as part of the project; todefine the scope of regulatory flexibilityneeded to undertake these activities (i.e.The otherwise required actions to beforgone in this project); and to discussthe nature of stakeholder or otherprocesses the project would propose inorder to move to Final ProjectAgreement. Proposals would likely


require some level of management sign-off from the respondent.

There is no recordkeepingrequirement. Time for managementdiscussions is also included in burdenestimates. The notice stronglyencourages consultation with state,tribal and community stakeholders,such as holding a meeting with theapplicable regulatory agency.

4. The Information Collected—AgencyActivities, Collection Methodology, andInformation Management

4(a) Agency Activities

EPA will receive proposals and willdevelop a method for screening thembased on the criteria described in theattached notice. These proposals willthen be distributed to the cross-agencyworkgroup, with proposals addressingspecific areas of regulatory policyhighlighted to those parts of EPA withspecific interest in those areas.Although the number of proposalssubmitted in response to this notice isa matter of speculation, EPA hasestimated that it will be between onehundred and five hundred. EPA intendsto ultimately implement about 50projects. As such, proposals that clearlyviolate or do not address the criteriawill be screened out at this point.However, OPPE intends to provide theother EPA, state and tribal agenciesparticipating in the cross-agency projectselection process maximum opportunityto view project proposals. As such, mostproposals will be distributed directly tothe committee without initial screening.

As was noted earlier, this will be anopen solicitation following a ‘‘rollingadmissions’’ model with no set enddate. (A cutoff will ultimately beannounced via a future Federal Registernotice.) As such, proposals will bescreened and reviewed as they arrive.Once screened and reviewed, proposalswill be responded to in one of threefashions. Proposals will be rejected, andproposers thanked for their interest.Proposals will be accepted, andproponents invited to participate in thedevelopment of Final ProjectAgreements, or proposals will bedeferred for future consideration. In thisinstance, EPA may discuss with theproject proponent ways to increase theattractiveness of the proposal.

4(b) Collection Methodology andManagement

This notice was developed by a teamconsisting of EPA headquarters andregional personnel; and representativesof state environmental agencies, throughthe Environmental Commission of theStates. EPA also held discussions with

a number of program stakeholders,including environmental and regulatedcommunity organizations. Also, anumber of comments on the solicitationprocess were received unsolicited inresponse to President Clinton’s March16 directive and follow up presscoverage of the regulatory reinventioneffort. The solicitation process is theresult of all of these comments andopinions.

The collection process will be asfollows. EPA will place this solicitationin the Federal Register. EPA will alsodistribute copies upon request, andparticipate where invited in workshopsdesigned to assist potential projectproponents in development ofproposals. Proposals will be sent to anEPA docket, where they will be loggedin and catalogued. The docket willretain a copy for archival purposes, anddisplay a copy for public viewing. Threeadditional copies will then be sent toOPPE for screening, reference purposes,and distribution to the cross-agencycommittee for proposal review. OPPEhas also developed a Lotus Notesdatabase for purposes of trackingproposals and telephone or otherinquiries related to them.

4(c) Small Entity FlexibilityThe flexible proposal process

described earlier is designed to beuseful to large as well as small entities.It was designed to be simple to respondto, with no undue burden on entitieswithout full-time environmentalmanagers, etc. EPA does not expect thatthis solicitation would imposeadditional burdens on small entities.

4(d) Collection ScheduleThis will be an open solicitation for

proposals, beginning with publication ofthe attached notice and with no set enddate. In terms of choosing projects forinitial participation in the program, EPAintends to select up to six projects bymid-June.

5. Nonduplication, Consultations, andOther Collection Criteria

5(a) NonduplicationEPA does not have a form that would

collect the information needed underthe Regulatory Reinvention PilotProjects pursuant to therecommendations of our cross-agencycommittee. Nor do existing databases ofproject proposals (e.g. EnvironmentalTechnology Initiative) provide a usefulsource of projects for this effort.

5(b) ConsultationsThis notice was developed by a team

consisting of EPA headquarters andregional personnel; and representatives

of state environmental agencies, throughthe Environmental Commission of theStates. EPA also held discussions witha number of program stakeholders,including environmental and regulatedcommunity organizations. Also, anumber of comments on the solicitationprocess were received unsolicited inresponse to President Clinton’s March16 directive and follow up presscoverage of the regulatory reinventioneffort. The solicitation process is theresult of all of these comments andopinions.

5(c) Not Applicable

5(d) Not Applicable

5(e) Not Applicable

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of theCollection

6(a) Respondent BurdenThis section presents EPA’s estimates

of the burden hours and cost tocomplete the information collectionactivities associate with this collection.In using this analysis, however, itshould be remembered not only that allresponses to this solicitation arevoluntary, but also that respondentshave some expected value attached withtheir participation. Fundamental toprojects in this program will be reducedcost of compliance due to increasedregulatory flexibility. Not unlike acontracts-based Request For Proposals,one would not expect a response fromany entity where the burdens associatedwith preparing the response outweighthe expected benefits to the respondent.

As noted earlier, EPA estimates thenumber of response proposals pursuantto this solicitation to be approximately100 to 500. Estimating respondent costsin developing proposals is madedifficult by the extremely flexibleapproach to this solicitation. Recall thatthe solicitation does not specify theform or nature of responses, except togive respondents a sense that only briefproposals (no more than 10 pages) arerequested. EPA has already receivedseveral unsolicited proposals inresponse to the March 16, 1995,Reinventing Environmental Regulationdocument in which the pilot projectprograms were announced. To estimatethe cost of proposal development, EPAasked (via telephone conversation) asample of seven of these proposalsponsors to estimate the cost ofpreparing their unsolicited submissions.The data presented here are based onthe median of their responses.

The proposal development process is,for these purposes, divided into fourphases: technical aspects, managementdiscussion, consultation with


government agencies and other potentialstakeholders, and clerical preparation.Technical aspects cover development ofthe substantive portions of the proposal.The average for technical aspects ofproposal development is estimated at 50person hours. Management discussioncovers presentation and refinement ofproposals at corporate or other entitymanagement levels. Management timealso includes estimates of legal review,

which though technical, has higher thanaverage technical labor costs. Theaverage time for management leveldiscussions is estimated at 30 personhours. The solicitation stronglyencourages project proponents to seekthe support of state or tribalenvironmental agencies in advance ofproposal to EPA. Although none of ourunsolicited respondents had activelypursued this, they estimated the cost of

doing so at approximately 60 personhours of management and technicaltime for the regulated entities, and 10person hours of mixed management andtechnical time for the state or tribalagency. Clerical aspects of the proposal,such as typing, mailing, etc., wereestimated at 10 hours. These figures,along with labor costs associated withthem, are summarized in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1.—ESTIMATE OF RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COSTS

Hours

Management Technical Clerical Total

Prepare technical proposal ...................................................................... 10 35 5 50Discuss with management ....................................................................... 25 5 ......................... 30Consult with state/tribal agencies ............................................................ 40 20 ......................... 60Clerical aspects of proposal ..................................................................... ......................... ......................... 10 10

Subtotal—technical proposal ............................................................ 75 60 15 150

Subtotal (@ 100 respondents) ...................................................... 7,500 6,000 1,500 15,000Subtotal (@ 500 respondents) ...................................................... 37,500 30,000 7,500 75,000

State/tribal consultation ............................................................................ 5 5 ......................... 10Subtotal (@ 100 respondents) .......................................................... 500 500 ......................... 1,000Subtotal (@ 500 respondents) .......................................................... 2,500 2,500 ......................... 5,000

Range of total burden hours ......................................................... 8,000–40,000 6,500–32,500 1,500–7,500 16,000–80,000

Costs

Labor cost assumptions (per hour) .......................................................... $70 $50 $20 .........................Subtotal—technical proposal ............................................................ 5,250 3,000 300 $8,550

Subtotal (@ 100 respondents) ...................................................... 525,000 300,000 30,000 855,000Subtotal (@ 500 respondents) ...................................................... 2,625,000 1,500,000 150,000 4,275,000

Subtotal—state/tribal costs ............................................................... 350 250 ......................... 600Subtotal (@ 100 respondents) ...................................................... 35,000 25,000 ......................... 60,000Subtotal (@ 500 respondents) ...................................................... 175,000 125,000 ......................... 300,000

Range of total labor costs (x $1000) ......................................... $560–$2,800 $325–$1,625 $30–$150 $915–$4,575

In summary, respondent burden areestimated at 150 hours per respondentfor preparation of each application(including consultation with state andtribal authorities, and mailing), and anadditional 10 hours per state or tribalgovernment agency are estimated to berequired for consultation in thedevelopment of each project proposals.Given the expected range of between100 and 500 applications, the totalapplication burden are estimated atbetween 16,000 and 80,000 hours.

6(b) Respondent CostsPer the previous discussion, total

respondent costs are estimated to rangebetween $915,000 (100 applicants), and$4,575,000 (500 applicants). Thisincludes between $855,000 and$4,275,000 to develop the technicalproposal, and another $60,000 to$300,000 for state and tribalconsultation in proposal development.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and CostEPA will incur costs to process and

review specific proposal and provideoutreach in support of proposalpreparation. For specific applications,

EPA will incur costs to: Receive andprocess the proposals; initially screenthe proposals; and distribute proposalsto the cross-agency review group. (Thisdocument does not estimate the costs ofthe full regulatory reinvention pilotproject program, but only the gatheringof information through this solicitation).In addition, EPA will incur costs toperform outreach and training anddisseminate information on thesolicitation. Agency costs aresummarized in Figure 2. Total EPAcosts, at the upper range of five hundredresponses, are estimated at $432,500.

FIGURE 2.—ESTIMATE OF EPA COST FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION

Proposal Total

Receive and process proposals ............................................................................................................................................ $10 ...............Perform initial screening ........................................................................................................................................................ 50 ...............distribute proposals across Agency ....................................................................................................................................... 5 ...............Specific proposal costs .......................................................................................................................................................... 65 $32,500Creating additional information documents ........................................................................................................................... ................. 50,000


FIGURE 2.—ESTIMATE OF EPA COST FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION—Continued

Proposal Total

Conducting workshops/public outreach ................................................................................................................................. ................. 350,000Total ................................................................................................................................................................................ ................. $432,500

6(d) Bottom Line Burden Hours andCosts

Total respondent burden and cost forcompleting the proposals solicited inthe Regulatory Reinvention Pilot Projectare estimated at approximately 16,000 to80,000 burden hours, and $915,000 to$4,575,000. Total EPA costs forprocessing specific proposals andsupporting proposal developmentthrough technical outreach andworkshops is estimated at $432,500.

6(e) Reasons for Change in Burden

This new burden results from thedesire to implement regulatoryreinvention pilot projects to testimplementation alternative,performance-based, options toconventional command and controlregulatory approaches.

6(f) Burden Statement

Public reporting burden for thiscollection of information is estimated toaverage 150 hours per applicationresponse, including: time for reviewinginstructions, developing the proposal;reviewing the proposal throughrespondent management; and consultingwith state or tribal co-regulatoryagencies, and other community orenvironmental stakeholders areencouraged in the solicitation. Anadditional 10 hours per respondent areestimated to be required of the state andtribal agencies consulted in thedevelopment of project proposals. Sendcomments regarding this burdenestimate or any other aspect of thiscollection of information, includingsuggestions for reducing this burden, to:Director, Regulatory InformationDivision, Mail Code 2136, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, 401M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.,20460, Attention RegulatoryReinvention Pilot Projects InformationCollection Burden (ICR#1749.01); and tothe Office of Management and BudgetPaperwork Reduction Project,Washington, D.C. 20503.

[FR Doc. 95–12563 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]


FEDERAL EMERGENCYMANAGEMENT AGENCY

[FEMA–1049–DR]

Louisiana; Amendment to Notice of aMajor Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA).ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice amends the noticeof a major disaster for the State ofLouisiana (FEMA–1049–DR), dated May10, 1995, and related determinations.EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 1995.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Pauline C. Campbell, Response andRecovery Directorate, FederalEmergency Management Agency,Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3606.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The noticeof a major disaster for the State ofLouisiana dated May 10, 1995, is herebyamended to include the following areasdetermined to have been adverselyaffected by the catastrophe declared amajor disaster by the President in hisdeclaration of May 10, 1995:

St. Bernard and St. Tammany Parishes forPublic Assistance (already designated forIndividual Assistance).(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.83.516, Disaster Assistance.)Richard W. Krimm,Associate Director, Response and RecoveryDirectorate.[FR Doc. 95–12577 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6718–02–M

[FEMA–1050–DR]

North Dakota; Major Disaster andRelated Determinations

AGENCY: Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA).ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This is a notice of thePresidential declaration of a majordisaster for the State of North Dakota(FEMA–1050–DR), dated May 16, 1995,and related determinations.EFFECTIVE DATE: May 16, 1995.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Pauline C. Campbell, Response andRecovery Directorate, FederalEmergency Management Agency,Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice ishereby given that, in a letter dated May16, 1995, the President declared a majordisaster under the authority of theRobert T. Stafford Disaster Relief andEmergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.5121 et seq.), as follows:

I have determined that the damage incertain areas of the State of North Dakota,resulting from severe storms, flooding andground saturation due to high water tablesbeginning on March 1, 1995 and continuing,is of sufficient severity and magnitude towarrant a major disaster declaration underthe Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief andEmergency Assistance Act (‘‘the StaffordAct’’). I, therefore, declare that such a majordisaster exists in the State of North Dakota.

In order to provide Federal assistance, youare hereby authorized to allocate from fundsavailable for these purposes, such amounts asyou find necessary for Federal disasterassistance and administrative expenses.

You are authorized to provide PublicAssistance in the designated areas.Individual Assistance may be added at a laterdate, if requested and warranted. Consistentwith the requirement that Federal assistancebe supplemental, any Federal funds providedunder the Stafford Act for Public Assistancewill be limited to 75 percent of the totaleligible costs.

The time period prescribed for theimplementation of section 310(a),Priority to Certain Applications forPublic Facility and Public HousingAssistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be fora period not to exceed six months afterthe date of this declaration.

Notice is hereby given that pursuantto the authority vested in the Director ofthe Federal Emergency ManagementAgency under Executive Order 12148, Ihereby appoint David P. Grier of theFederal Emergency Management Agencyto act as the Federal CoordinatingOfficer for this declared disaster.

I do hereby determine the followingareas of the State of North Dakota tohave been affected adversely by thisdeclared major disaster.

Benson, Bottineau, Cavalier, Griggs,Nelson, Ramsey, Rolette, Steele, Towner, andWalsh Counties for Public Assistance.(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.83.516, Disaster Assistance.)James L. Witt,Director.[FR Doc. 95–12576 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6718–02–M


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Edward N. Barol, Trustee for theIrrevocable Trust and Travel One, etal.; Change in Bank Control Notices;Acquisitions of Shares of Banks orBank Holding Companies

The notificants listed below haveapplied under the Change in BankControl Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and §225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bankholding company. The factors that areconsidered in acting on the notices areset forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available forimmediate inspection at the FederalReserve Bank indicated. Once thenotices have been accepted forprocessing, they will also be availablefor inspection at the offices of the Boardof Governors. Interested persons mayexpress their views in writing to theReserve Bank indicated for that noticeor to the offices of the Board ofGovernors. Comments must be receivednot later than June 6, 1995.

A. Federal Reserve Bank ofPhiladelphia (Michael E. Collins, SeniorVice President) 100 North 6th Street,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105:

1. Edward N. Barol, Trustee for theIrrevocable Trust and Travel One,Narberth, Pennsylvania; to acquire anadditional 18.43 percent, for a total of21.44 percent, of the voting shares ofFirst Bank of Philadelphia,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago(James A. Bluemle, Vice President) 230South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois60690:

1. Mr. Bernard D. Cooper, Marion,Iowa; to acquire 100 percent of thevoting shares of Delhi Bancshares, Inc.,Delhi, Iowa, and thereby indirectlyacquire Delhi Savings Bank, Delhi,Iowa.

Board of Governors of the Federal ReserveSystem, May 17, 1995.Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 95–12540 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–F

Towne Bancorp, Inc., et al.; Formationsof; Acquisitions by; and Mergers ofBank Holding Companies

The companies listed in this noticehave applied for the Board’s approvalunder section 3 of the Bank HoldingCompany Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and §225.14 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12CFR 225.14) to become a bank holdingcompany or to acquire a bank or bank

holding company. The factors that areconsidered in acting on the applicationsare set forth in section 3(c) of the Act(12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).

Each application is available forimmediate inspection at the FederalReserve Bank indicated. Once theapplication has been accepted forprocessing, it will also be available forinspection at the offices of the Board ofGovernors. Interested persons mayexpress their views in writing to theReserve Bank or to the offices of theBoard of Governors. Any comment onan application that requests a hearingmust include a statement of why awritten presentation would not sufficein lieu of a hearing, identifyingspecifically any questions of fact thatare in dispute and summarizing theevidence that would be presented at ahearing.

Unless otherwise noted, commentsregarding each of these applicationsmust be received not later than June 16,1995.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland(John J. Wixted, Jr., Vice President) 1455East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio44101:

1. Towne Bancorp, Inc., Perrysburg,Ohio; to become a bank holdingcompany by acquiring 100 percent ofthe voting shares of Towne Bank,Perrysburg, Ohio.

B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago(James A. Bluemle, Vice President) 230South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois60690:

1. Foursquare Cornerstone, Inc.,Brookfield, Wisconsin; to become abank holding company by acquiring 100percent of the voting shares ofCornerstone Bank, Brookfield,Wisconsin, a de novo bank.

C. Federal Reserve Bank ofMinneapolis (James M. Lyon, VicePresident) 250 Marquette Avenue,Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480:

1. Security Northwest Bancorporation,Inc., Bloomington, Minnesota; to mergewith The Highland Bancorporation, Inc.,Bloomington, Minnesota, and therebyindirectly acquire The Highland Bank,St. Paul, Minnesota.

D. Federal Reserve Bank of KansasCity (John E. Yorke, Senior VicePresident) 925 Grand Avenue, KansasCity, Missouri 64198:

1. Whitcorp Financial Company,Leoti, Kansas; to merge with WesternBancorp, Inc., Garden City, Kansas, andthereby indirectly acquire Western StateBank, Garden City, Kansas.

Board of Governors of the Federal ReserveSystem, May 17, 1995.Jennifer J. Johnson,Deputy Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 95–12541 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6210–01–F

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File No. 951 0022]

Columbia/HCA HealthcareCorporation; Proposed ConsentAgreement With Analysis To AidPublic Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.

SUMMARY: In settlement of allegedviolations of federal law prohibitingunfair acts and practices and unfairmethods of competition, this consentagreement, accepted subject to finalCommission approval, would permit,among other things, Columbia/HCA andHealthtrust, Inc. to merge, provided thatColumbia/HCA divests seven hospitalswithin twelve months (nine months forthe divestiture of three hospitals in theSalt Lake City area). The proposedconsent agreement would require therespondent, for ten years, to obtainCommission approval before acquiringanother acute care hospital in any of thesix market areas at issue, and beforetransferring an acute care hospital inany of the areas to another entity thatalready operates one in that area.DATES: Comments must be received onor before July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: Comments should bedirected to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW.,Washington, DC 20580FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mark Horoschak, FTC/S–3115,Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–2756.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto Section 6(f) of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.46 and Section 2.34 of the Commission’sRules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), noticeis hereby given that the followingconsent agreement containing a consentorder to cease and desist, having beenfiled with and accepted, subject to finalapproval, by the Commission, has beenplaced on the public record for a periodof sixty (60) days. Public comment isinvited. Such comments or views willbe considered by the Commission andwill be available for inspection andcopying at its principal office inaccordance with Section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) ofthe Commission’s Rules of Practice (16CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).


Agreement Containing Consent Order

In the matter of Columbia/HCA HealthcareCorporation, a corporation File No. 951–0022.

The Federal Trade Commission(‘‘Commission’’), having initiated aninvestigation into the proposedacquisition of Healthtrust, Inc.—TheHospital Company (‘‘Healthtrust’’) byColumbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation(‘‘Columbia/HCA’’), and of certain actsand practices of Columbia/HCA, and itnow appearing that Columbia/HCA(‘‘proposed respondent’’) is willing toenter into an agreement containing anorder to divest certain assets, to ceaseand desist from making certainacquisitions, and providing for otherrelief:

It is hereby agreed by and between theproposed respondent by its dulyauthorized officers and attorneys, andcounsel for the Commission that:

1. The proposed respondentColumbia/HCA is a corporationorganized, existing, and doing businessunder and by virtue of the laws ofDelaware, with its principal place ofbusiness at One Park Plaza, Nashville,Tennessee 37203.

2. The proposed respondent admitsall the jurisdictional facts set forth inthe draft of complaint.

3. The proposed respondent waives:a. any further procedural steps;b. the requirement that the

Commission’s decision contain astatement of findings of fact andconclusions of law;

c. all rights to seek judicial review orotherwise to challenge or contest thevalidity of the order entered pursuant tothis agreement; and

d. any claim under the Equal Accessto Justice Act.

4. This agreement shall not become apart of the public record of theproceeding unless and until it isaccepted by the Commission. If thisagreement is accepted by theCommission it, together with the draft ofcomplaint contemplated thereby, will beplaced on the public record for a periodof sixty (60) days and information inrespect thereto publicly released. TheCommission thereafter may eitherwithdraw its acceptance of thisagreement and so notify the proposedrespondent, in which event it will takesuch action as it may considerappropriate, or issue and serve itscomplaint (in such form as thecircumstances may require) anddecision, in disposition of theproceeding.

5. This agreement is for settlementpurposes only and does not constitutean admission by the proposed

respondent that the law has beenviolated as alleged in the draft ofcomplaint or that the facts as alleged inthe draft of complaint, other thanjurisdictional facts, are true.

6. This agreement contemplates that,if it is accepted by the Commission, andif such acceptance is not subsequentlywithdrawn by the Commission pursuantto the provisions of Section 2.34 of theCommission’s Rules, the Commissionmay, without further notice to theproposed respondent, (1) issue itscomplaint corresponding in form andsubstance with the draft of complaintand its decision containing thefollowing order to divest and to ceaseand desist, and other relief indisposition of the proceedings, and (2)make information public with respectthereto. When so entered, the ordershall have the same force and effect andmay be altered, modified, or set aside inthe same manner and within the sametime provided by statute for otherorders. The order shall become finalupon service. Delivery by the U.S.Postal Service of the complaint anddecision containing the agreed-to orderto proposed respondent’s address asstated in this agreement shall constituteservice. The proposed respondentwaives any right it may have to anyother manner of service. The complaintmay be used in construing the terms ofthe order, and no agreement,understanding, representation, orinterpretation not contained in the orderor this agreement may be used to varyor contradict the terms of the order.

7. The proposed respondent has readthe proposed complaint and ordercontemplated hereby. The proposedrespondent understands that once theorder has been issued, it will berequired to file one or more compliancereports showing that it has fullycomplied with the order. Proposedrespondent further understands that theCommission’s approval, pursuant to theCommission’s order in Docket No. C–3538, of the Acquisition, as defined inthe following order, is conditioned uponthe proposed respondent’s compliancewith the terms of the following order.The proposed respondent furtherunderstands that it may be liable forcivil penalties in the amount providedby law for each violation of thefollowing order after it becomes final, oras the successor to Healthtrust, Inc.—The Hospital Company, of theCommission’s order in Docket No. C–3538.

Order

I

It is ordered That, as used in thisorder, the following definitions shallapply:

A. ‘‘Columbia/HCA’’ or ‘‘respondent’’means Columbia/HCA HealthcareCorporation, its partnerships, jointventures, companies, subsidiaries,divisions, and groups and affiliatescontrolled by Columbia/HCA; theirdirectors, officers, employees, agents,and representatives; and theirsuccessors and assigns.

B. ‘‘Healthtrust’’ means Healthtrust,Inc.—The Hospital Company, itspartnerships, joint ventures, companies,subsidiaries, divisions, and groups andaffiliates controlled by Healthtrust; theirdirectors, officers, employees, agents,and representatives; and theirsuccessors and assigns.

C. ‘‘Commission’’ means the FederalTrade Commission.

D. The ‘‘Acquisition’’ means thetransaction contemplated by the October4, 1994, agreement between Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust, wherebyColumbia/HCA will acquire all the stockof Healthtrust, a wholly-ownedsubsidiary of Columbia/HCA will bemerged with and into Healthtrust, andHealthtrust will operate as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Columbia/HCA.

E. ‘‘Acute care hospital’’ means ahealth care facility, licensed as ahospital, other than a federally-ownedfacility, having a duly organizedgoverning body with overalladministrative and professionalresponsibility, and an organizedprofessional staff, that provides 24-hourinpatient care, that may also provideoutpatient services, and having as aprimary function the provision ofinpatient services for medical diagnosis,treatment, and care of physically injuredor sick persons with short term orepisodic health problems or infirmities.

F. To ‘‘operate’’ an acute care hospitalmeans to own, lease, manage, orotherwise control or direct theoperations of an acute care hospital,directly or indirectly.

G. To ‘‘acquire’’ an acute care hospitalmeans, directly or indirectly, throughsubsidiaries, partnerships, or otherwise:

1. To acquire the whole or any part ofthe assets used or previously usedwithin the last two years (and stillsuitable for use) for operating an acutecare hospital from any person presentlyengaged in, or within the two yearspreceding such acquisition engaged in,operating an acute care hospital;

2. To acquire the whole or any part ofthe stock, share capital, equity, or otherinterest in any person engaged in, or


within the two years preceding suchacquisition engaged in, operating anacute care hospital;

3. To acquire or otherwise obtain theright to designate, directly or indirectly,directors or trustees of an acute carehospital; or

4. To enter into any other arrangementto obtain direct or indirect ownership,management, or control of an acute carehospital or any part thereof, including,but not limited to, a lease of ormanagement contract for an acute carehospital.

H. ‘‘Affiliate’’ means any entity whosemanagement and policies are controlledin any way, directly or indirectly, by theperson with which it is affiliated.

I. ‘‘Person’’ means any natural person,partnership, corporation, company,association, trust, joint venture, or otherbusiness or legal entity, including anygovernmental agency.

J. ‘‘Relevant area(s)’’ means:1. the Salt Lake City-Ogden

Metropolitan Statistical Area,encompassing three contiguous countiesin northern Utah: Weber County, DavisCounty, and Salt Lake County;

2. the Pensacola area, encompassingthe Florida counties of Escambia andSanta Rosa;

3. the Okaloosa area, encompassingthe Florida county of Okaloosa;

4. the Denton area, encompassing theTexas counties of Cooke and Denton(excluding the incorporated city ofLewisville and that portion of DentonCounty south of Texas highway number121);

5. the Ville Platte-Mamou-Opelousasarea, encompassing the Louisianaparishes of Evangeline and St. Landry;and

6. the Orlando area, encompassing theFlorida counties of Seminole, Orange,and Osceola.

K. ‘‘CLHS’’ means Central LouisianaHealthcare System Limited Partnership,a Louisiana partnership in commendamin which Columbia/HCA currentlyholds a partnership interest, itspartnerships, joint ventures, companiesincluding the Ville Platte MedicalCenter, subsidiaries, divisions, andgroups and affiliates controlled byCLHS; their directors, officers,employees, agents, and representatives;and their successors and assigns.

L. ‘‘ORHS’’ means Orlando RegionalHealthcare System, Inc., a Floridacorporation, its partnerships, jointventures, companies, subsidiaries,divisions, and groups and affiliatescontrolled by ORHS; their directors,officers, employees, agents, andrepresentatives; and their successorsand assigns.

M. The ‘‘SSH Joint Venture’’ meansthe Florida partnership in whichHealthtrust (through a wholly-ownedsubsidiary) and ORHS (through awholly-owned subsidiary) holdpartnership interests, which owns andoperates the South Seminole Hospital inLongwood, Florida.

N. The ‘‘SSH Joint Venture Interest’’means Healthtrust’s interest in the SSHJoint Venture.

O. The ‘‘Schedule A Assets’’ meansthe assets listed on the attachedSchedule A.

P. The ‘‘Schedule B Assets’’ meansthe assets listed on the attachedSchedule B.

Q. The ‘‘Utah Healthtrust Assets’’means the assets listed on the attachedSchedule C.

R. ‘‘Assets and Businesses’’ include,but are not limited to, all assets,properties, businesses, rights, privileges,contractual interests, licenses, andgoodwill of whatever nature, tangibleand intangible, including, withoutlimitation, the following:

1. all real property interests(including fee simple interests and realproperty leasehold interests, whether aslessor or lessee), together with allbuildings, improvements, and fixtureslocated thereon, all construction inprogress thereat, all appurtenancesthereto, and all licenses and permitsrelated thereto (collectively, the ‘‘RealProperty’’);

2. all contracts and agreements withphysicians, other health care providers,unions, third party payors, HMOs,customers, suppliers, salesrepresentatives, distributors, agents,personal property lessors, personalproperty lessees, licensors, licensees,consigners, and consignees (collectively,the ‘‘Contracts’’);

3. all machinery, equipment, fixtures,vehicles, furniture, inventories, andsupplies (other than such inventoriesand supplies as are used in the ordinarycourse of business during the time thatColumbia/HCA owns the assets)(collectively, the ‘‘Personal Property’’);

4. all research materials, technicalinformation, management informationsystems, software, software licenses,inventions, trade secrets, technology,know how, specifications, designs,drawings, processes, and quality controldata (collectively, the ‘‘IntangiblePersonal Property’’);

5. all books, records, and files,excluding, however, the corporateminute books and tax records ofColumbia/HCA and its affiliates; and

6. all prepaid expenses.

II

It is further ordered That:

A. Respondent shall divest (or in thecase of the Ville Platte Medical Centershall cause CLHS to divest), absolutelyand in good faith, within twelve (12)months of the date this order becomesfinal, the Schedule A Assets.

B. Respondent shall also divestabsolutely and in good faith, withintwelve (12) months of the date this orderbecomes final, the Assets and Businessof, including all improvements,additions, and enhancements made tosuch facilities prior to divestiture, eitherof the following:

1. Denton Regional Medical Center,4405 North Interstate 35, Denton, Texas76207, including the following(collectively ‘‘DRMC’’):

a. DRMC Office Building, 4401 NorthI–35, Denton, Texas 76207;

b. the medical office building andvacant land at 3353 I–35E South,Denton, Texas 76107;

c. the satellite offices operated atDenton Regional Medical Center, 1207ANorth Grand Avenue, Gainesville, Texas76240;

d. Flow Rehabilitation Hospital, 1310Scripture, Denton, Texas 76201;

e. Denton Regional Medical Center—Little Elm, 420 FM720 West, Suite 9,Little Elm, Texas 75068;

f. Professional Health Care Services,621 Londonderry Lane, Denton, Texas76205; or

2. Denton Community Hospital, 107N. Bonnie Brae, Denton, Texas 76201,and the Medical Office Building atScripture/Bonnie Brae (collectively‘‘Denton Community Hospital’’).

C. Respondent shall also divest suchadditional Assets and Businessesancillary to the Schedule A Assets andto either DRMC or Denton CommunityHospital, and effect such arrangementsas are necessary to assure themarketability, viability, andcompetitiveness of the Schedule AAssets, DRMC and Denton CommunityHospital.

D. Respondent shall divest theSchedule A Assets, and either DRMC orDenton Community Hospital, only to anacquirer or acquirers that receive theprior approval of the Commission andonly in a manner that receives the priorapproval of the Commission. Ifrespondent proposes to divest DentonCommunity Hospital, it must providethe Commission with the writtenconsent of the landlord of such facilitiesto the proposed assignment anddivestiture at the time that Commissionapproval of the divestiture is sought.The purpose of the divestitures of theSchedule A Assets and of either DRMCor Denton Community Hospital, is toensure the continuation of the ScheduleA Assets and of either DRMC or Denton


Community Hospital, as ongoing, viableacute care hospitals and to remedy thelessening of competition resulting fromthe Acquisition as alleged in theCommission’s complaint.

E. With respect to the Schedule AAssets and DRMC, respondent shallcomply with all terms of the Agreementto Hold Separate Regarding the Florida,Texas, and Louisiana Assets, attachedhereto and made a part hereof asAppendix I. Said Hold Separate shallcontinue in effect until such time asrespondent had fulfilled the divestiturerequirements of this order or until suchother time as said Hold Separateprovides.

F. Pending divestiture of the ScheduleA Assets and DRMC or DentonCommunity Hospital, respondent shalltake such actions as are necessary tomaintain the present marketability,viability, and competitiveness of theSchedule A Assets, DRMC, and DentonCommunity Hospital, and to prevent thedestruction, removal, wasting,deterioration, or impairment of any ofthe Schedule A Assets, DRMC, andDenton Community Hospital, except forordinary wear and tear.

G. A condition of approval by theCommission of each divestiture shall bea written agreement by the acquirer(s) ofthe Schedule A Assets and of eitherDRMC or Denton Community Hospital,that it will not sell for a period of ten(10) years from the date of divestiture,directly or indirectly, throughsubsidiaries, partnerships, or otherwise,without the prior approval of theCommission, any Schedule A Asset,DRMC, or Denton Community Hospitalto any person who operates, or willoperate immediately following the sale,any other acute care hospital in thesame relevant area where the divestedacute care hospital is located. Provided,however, that the acquirer is notrequired to seek prior approval of theCommission for the sale of any of theassets identified in any Part II ofSchedule A.

IIIIt is further ordered That:A. Within six (6) months of the date

this order becomes final, respondentshall terminate, absolutely and in goodfaith, the SSH Joint Venture, by eitheracquiring ORSH’s interest in the SSHJoint Venture or by divesting the SSHJoint Venture Interest. The purpose ofthe termination of the SSH Joint Ventureis to ensure the continuation of theSouth Seminole Hospital as an ongoing,viable acute care hospital and to remedythe lessening of competition resultingfrom the Acquisition as alleged in theCommission’s complaint.

B. If respondent terminates the SSHJoint Venture by acquiring ORHS’sinterest in the SSH Joint Venture, suchacquisition shall occur only in such amanner that receives the prior approvalof the Commission. If respondentterminates the Joint Venture bydivesting the SSH Joint Venture Interest,such divestiture shall be made only toan acquirer that receives the priorapproval of the Commission and only ina manner that receives the priorapproval of the Commission.

C. With respect to the SSH JointVenture Interest, respondent shallcomply with all terms of the Agreementto Hold Separate Regarding the Florida,Texas, and Louisiana Assets, attachedhereto and made a part hereof asAppendix I. Said Hold Separate shallcontinue in effect until such time asrespondent has fulfilled the divestiturerequirements of this order or until suchother time as said Hold Separateprovides.

D. Pending the divestiture of the SSHJoint Venture Interest, respondent shalltake such actions as are necessary tomaintain the present marketability,viability, and competitiveness of theSouth Seminole Hospital, and toprevent the destruction, removal,wasting, deterioration, or impairment ofthe South Seminole Hospital, except forordinary wear and tear.

E. A condition of approval by theCommission of the divestiture of theSSH Joint Venture Interest, to anyacquirer except ORHS, shall be a writtenagreement by the acquirer of the SSHJoint Venture Interest that it will not sellfor a period of ten (10) years from thedate of divestiture, directly orindirectly, through subsidiaries,partnerships, or otherwise, without theprior approval of the Commission, anyinterest in South Seminole Hospital toany person who operates, or willoperate immediately following the sale,any other acute care hospital in theOrlando area.

IVIt is further ordered That:A Respondent shall divest, absolutely

and in good faith, within nine (9)months of the date the Commissionapproves the Acquisition pursuant toParagraph IV.E. of the order in DocketNo. C–3538, the Schedule B Assets.

B. Respondent shall also divest suchadditional Assets and Businessesancillary to the Schedule B Assets andeffect such arrangements as arenecessary to assure the marketability,viability, and competitiveness of theSchedule B Assets.

C. Respondent shall divest theSchedule B Assets only to an acquirer

or acquirers that receive the priorapproval of the Commission, and onlyin a manner that receives the priorapproval of the Commission. Thepurpose of the divestitures of theSchedule B Assets is to ensure thecontinuation of the Schedule B Assetsas ongoing, viable acute care hospitalsand to remedy the lessening ofcompetition resulting from theacquisition as alleged in theCommission’s complaint and asdescribed in the Commission’s letterapproving the Acquisition.

D. Respondent shall comply with allterms of the Agreement to Hold Separateregarding the Utah Healthtrust Assetslisted on Schedule C, and as describedin Appendix II which is attached heretoand made a part hereof (‘‘Utah HoldSeparate’’). Said Utah Hold Separateshall continue in effect until such timeas respondent has fulfilled thedivestiture requirements of Paragraph IVof this order, or until such other time asthe Utah Hold Separate provides.

E. Pending divestiture of the ScheduleB Assets, respondent shall take suchactions as are necessary to maintain thepresent marketability, viability, andcompetitiveness of the Schedule BAssets and of the Utah HealthtrustAssets, and to prevent the destruction,removal, wasting, deterioration, orimpairment of any of the Schedule BAssets and any of the Utah HealthtrustAssets, except for ordinary wear andtear.

F. A condition of approval by theCommission of each divestiture shall bea written agreement by the acquirer(s) ofeach Schedule B Asset that it will notsell for a period of ten (10) years fromthe date of divestitute, directly orindirectly, through subsidiaries,partnerships, or otherwise, without theprior approval of the Commission, anySchedule B Asset to any person whooperates, or will operate immediatelyfollowing the sale, any other acute carehospital in the same relevant area wherethe divested acute care hospital islocated. Provided, however, that theacquirer is not required to seek priorapproval of the Commission for the saleof any of the assets identified in anyPart II of Schedule B.

VIt Is further ordered That:A. If the respondent has not divested

(or in the case of the Ville PlatteMedical Center has not caused CLHS todivest), absolutely and in good faith andwith the Commission’s prior approval,each Schedule A Asset and eitherDRMC or Denton Community Hospital,in accordance with this order, withintwelve (12) months of the date this order


becomes final, the Commission mayappoint a trustee to divest theundivested Schedule A Assets andeither DRMC or Denton CommunityHospital.

B. If the respondent has notterminated absolutely and in good faithand with the Commission’s priorapproval, the SSH Joint Venture, inaccordance with this order, within six(6) months of the date this orderbecomes final, the Commission mayappoint a trustee to divest the SSH JointVenture Interest.

C. If the respondent has not divested,absolutely and in good faith and withthe Commission’s prior approval, eachSchedule B Asset, in accordance withthis order within nine (9) months of thedate the Commission approves theAcquisition pursuant to the order inDocket No. C–3538, the Commissionmay appoint a trustee to divest the UtahHealthtrust Assets.

D. In the event that the Commissionor the Attorney General brings an actionfor any failure to comply with this orderor in any way relating to theAcquisition, pursuant to section 5(l) ofthe Federal Trade Commission Act, 15U.S.C. 45(l), or any other statuteenforced by the Commission, therespondent shall consent to theappointment of a trustee in such action.Neither the appointment of a trustee nora decision not to appoint a trustee underParagraph V.A, V.B, or V.C shallpreclude the Commission or theAttorney General from seeking civilpenalties or any other relief available toit for any failure by the respondent tocomply with this order, or the order inDocket No. C–3538.

E. If a trustee is appointed by theCommission or a court pursuant toParagraph V.A, V.B, or V.C of this order,the respondent shall consent to thefollowing terms and conditionsregarding the trustee’s powers, duties,authority, and responsibilities:

1. The Commission shall select thetrustee, subject to the consent of therespondent, which consent shall not beunreasonably withheld. The trusteeshall be a person with experience andexpertise in acquisitions anddivestitures. If respondent has notopposed, in writing, including thereasons for opposing, the selection ofany proposed trustee within ten (10)days after notice by the staff of theCommission to respondent of theidentity of any proposed trustee,respondent shall be deemed to haveconsented to the selection of theproposed trustee.

2. Subject to the prior approval of theCommission, the trustee shall have theexclusive power and authority to divest

any undivested Schedule A Asset,DRMC or Denton Community Hospital,the SSH Joint Venture Interest, or UtahHealthtrust Asset.

3. Within ten (10) days afterappointment of the trustee, respondentshall execute a trust agreement that,subject to the prior approval of theCommission and, in the case of a court-appointed trustee, of the court, transfersto the trustee all rights and powersnecessary to permit the trustee to effectthe divestiture(s) required by this order.

4. The trustee shall have twelve (12)months from the date the Commissionapproves the trust agreement describedin Paragraph V.E.3 to accomplish thedivestiture(s), which shall be subject tothe prior approval of the Commission.If, however, at the end of the twelve-month period, the trustee has submitteda plan of divestiture or believes thatdivestiture can be achieved within areasonable time, the divestiture periodmay be extended by the Commission, orin the case of a court-appointed trustee,by the court; provided however, theCommission may extend this periodonly two (2) times.

5. The trustee shall have full andcomplete access to the personnel, books,records, and facilities related to theSchedule A Assets, DRMC, DentonCommunity Hospital, the SSH JointVenture Interest, the Schedule B Assets,the Utah Healthtrust Assets, or to anyother relevant information as the trusteemay request. Respondent shall developsuch financial or other information assuch trustee may reasonably request andshall cooperate with the trustee.Respondent shall take no action tointerfere with or impede the trustee’saccomplishment of the divestiture(s).Any delays in divestiture caused byrespondent shall extend the time fordivestiture under this Paragraph in anamount equal to the delay, asdetermined by the Commission or, for acourt appointed trustee, by the court.

6. The trustee shall use his or her bestefforts to negotiate the most favorableprice and terms available in eachcontract that is submitted to theCommission, subject to the respondent’sabsolute and unconditional obligation todivest at no minimum price. Thedivestiture(s) shall be made in themanner and to an acquirer(s) as set forthin Paragraph II for the Schedule AAssets and DRMC or DentonCommunity Hospital; Paragraph III forthe SSH Joint Venture Interest; andParagraph IV and Paragraph V.C for theUtah Healthtrust Assets; provided,however, if the trustee receives bonafide offers from more than one acquiringentity for any one facility or asset, andif the Commission determines to

approve more than one such acquiringentity, the trustee shall divest to theacquiring entity selected by respondentfrom among those approved by theCommission.

7. The trustee shall serve, withoutbond or other security, at the cost andexpense of the respondent, on suchreasonable and customary terms andconditions as the Commission or a courtmay set. The trustee shall have theauthority to employ, at the cost andexpense of respondent, suchconsultants, accountants, attorneys,investment bankers, business brokers,appraisers, and other representativesand assistants as are necessary to carryout the trustee’s duties andresponsibilities. The trustee shallaccount for all monies derived from thesale and all expenses incurred. Afterapproval by the Commission and, in thecase of a court-appointed trustee, by thecourt, of the account of the trustee,including fees for his or her services, allremaining monies shall be paid at thedirection of the respondent and thetrustee’s power shall be terminated. Thetrustee’s compensation shall be based atleast in significant part on a commissionarrangement contingent on the trustee’sdivesting the undivested Schedule AAssets, either DRMC or DentonCommunity Hospital, the SSH JointVenture Interest, or the Utah HealthtrustAssets.

8. Respondent shall indemnify thetrustee and hold the trustee harmlessagainst any losses, claims, damages,liabilities, or expenses arising out of, orin connection with, the performance ofthe trustee’s duties, including allreasonable fees of counsel and otherexpenses incurred in connection withthe preparation for, or defense of anyclaim, whether or not resulting in anyliability, except to the extent that suchliabilities, losses, damages, claims, orexpenses result from misfeasance, grossnegligence, willful or wanton acts, orbad faith by the trustee.

9. If the trustee ceases to act or failsto act diligently, a substitute trusteeshall be appointed in the same manneras provided in Paragraph V.A, V.B, orV.C of this order.

10. The Commission or, in the case ofa court-appointed trustee, the court,may on its own initiative, or at therequest of the trustee, issue suchadditional orders or directions as maybe necessary or appropriate toaccomplish the divestiture(s) requiredby this order.

11. The trustee shall have noobligation or authority to operate ormaintain the Schedule A Assets, DRMC,Denton Community Hospital, the SSH


Joint Venture Interest, or the UtahHealthtrust Assets.

12. The trustee shall report in writingto the respondent and to theCommission every sixty (60) daysconcerning the trustee’s effort toaccomplish divestiture.

VI

It is further ordered That, for a periodof ten (10) years from the date this orderbecomes final, respondent shall not,without the prior approval of theCommission, directly or indirectly,through subsidiaries, partnerships, orotherwise:

A. Acquire any stock, share capital,equity, or other interest in any personpresently engaged in, or within the twoyears preceding such acquisitionengaged in, operating an acute carehospital in any relevant area;

B. Acquire any assets used, orpreviously used, in any relevant area(and still suitable for use) for operatingan acute care hospital from any personpresently engaged in, or within the twoyears preceding such acquisitionengaged in, operating an acute carehospital in any relevant area;

C. Enter into any agreement or otherarrangement to obtain direct or indirectownership, management, or control ofany acute care hospital, or any partthereof, in any relevant area, includingbut not limited to, a lease of ormanagement contract for any such acutecare hospital;

D. Acquire or otherwise obtain theright to designate, directly or indirectly,directors or trustees of any acute carehospital in any relevant area;

E. Permit any acute care hospital itoperates in any relevant area to beacquired by any person that operates, orwill operate immediately following suchacquisition, any other acute carehospital in the same relevant area.

Provided, however, that such priorapproval shall not be required for:

1. the establishment by respondent ofa new acute care hospital facility in arelevant area: (a) that is a replacementfor an existing acute care hospitalfacility operated by respondent, and notrequired to be divested by respondentpursuant to this order, in the samerelevant area; or (b) that is not areplacement for any acute care hospitalfacility in any relevant area;

2. any transaction otherwise subject tothis Paragraph VI of this order if the fairmarket value of (or, in case of an assetacquisition, the consideration to be paidfor) the acute care hospital or partthereof to be acquired does not exceedone million dollars ($1,000,000); or

3. the acquisition of products orservices in the ordinary course ofbusiness.

VIIIt is further ordered That, for a period

of ten (10) years from the date this orderbecomes final, respondent shall not,directly or indirectly, throughsubsidiaries, partnerships or otherwise,without providing advance writtennotification to the Commission,consummate any joint venture or otherarrangement with any other acute carehospital in any relevant area for thejoint establishment or operation of anynew acute care hospital, or any hospital,medical, surgical, diagnostic, ortreatment service or facility, or partthereof in the same relevant area whereboth parties operate an acute carehospital. Such advance notificationshall be filed immediately uponrespondent’s issuance of a letter ofintent for, or execution of an agreementto enter into, such a transaction,whichever is earlier.

Said notification required by thisParagraph VII of this order shall begiven on the Notification and ReportForm set forth in the Appendix to Part803 of Title 16 of the Code of FederalRegulations (as amended), and shall beprepared and transmitted in accordancewith the requirements of that part,except that no filing fee will be requiredfor any such notification, notificationneed not be made to the United StatedDepartment of Justice, and notificationis required only of respondent and notof any other party to the transaction.Respondent is not required to observeany waiting period for said notificationrequired by this Paragraph VII.

Respondent shall comply withreasonable requests by the Commissionstaff for additional informationconcerning any transaction subject tothis Paragraph VII of this order, withinfifteen (15) days of service of suchrequests.

Provided, however, that notransaction shall be subject to thisParagraph VII of this order if:

1. the fair market value of the assetsto be contributed to the joint venture orother arrangement by acute carehospitals not operated by respondentdoes not exceed one million dollars($1,000,000);

2. the service, facility, or part thereofto be established or operated in atransaction subject to this order is toengage in no activities other than theprovision of the following services:Laundry; data processing; purchasing;materials management; billing andcollection; dietary; industrialengineering; maintenance; printing;

security; records management;laboratory testing; personnel education,testing, or training; or

3. notification is required to be made,and has been made, pursuant to Section7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, orprior approval by the Commission isrequired, and has been requested,pursuant to Paragraph VI of this order.

VIII

It is further ordered That, for a periodof ten (10) years from the date this orderbecomes final, respondent shall notpermit all, or any substantial part of,any acute care hospital it operates inany relevant area to be acquired by anyother person (except pursuant to thedivestitures required by Paragraphs II,III, and IV of this order), unless theacquiring person files with theCommission, prior to the closing of suchacquisition, a written agreement to bebound by the provisions of this order,which agreement respondent shallrequire as a condition precedent to theacquisition.

IX

It is further ordered That:A. Within sixty (60) days after the

date this order becomes final and everysixty (60) days thereafter until therespondent has fully complied withParagraphs II, III, and IV of this order,respondent shall submit to theCommission a verified written reportsetting forth in detail the manner andform in which it intends to comply, iscomplying, and has complied withParagraphs II, III, and IV of this order.Respondent shall include in itscompliance reports, among other thingsthat are required from time to time, afull description of the efforts beingmade to comply with Paragraphs II, III,and IV of the order, including adescription of all substantive contacts ornegotiations for the divestitures or thetermination of the SSH joint venture,and the identify of all parties contacted.Respondent shall include in itscompliance reports copies of all writtencommunications to and from suchparties, all internal memoranda, and allreports and recommendationsconcerning the divestitures.

B. One (1) year from the date thisorder becomes final, annually for thenext nine (9) years on the anniversary ofthe date this order becomes final, and atother times as the Commission mayrequire, respondent shall file a verifiedwritten report with the Commissionsetting forth in detail the manner andform in which it has complied and it iscomplying with Paragraphs V, VI, VII,and VIII of this order.


X

It is further ordered That respondentshall notify the Commission at leastthirty (30) days prior to any proposedchange in the corporate respondent suchas dissolution, assignment, saleresulting in the emergence of asuccessor corporation, or the creation ordissolution of subsidiaries or any otherchange in the corporation that mayaffect compliance obligations arising outof the order.

XI

It is further ordered That, for thepurpose of determining or securingcompliance with this order, therespondent shall permit any dulyauthorized representative of theCommission:

A. Access, during office hours and inthe presence of counsel, to inspect andcopy all books, ledgers, accounts,correspondence, memoranda, and otherrecords and documents in thepossession or under the control of therespondent relating to any matterscontained in this order; and

B. Upon five days’ notice torespondent and without restraint orinterference from it, to interviewofficers, directors, or employees ofrespondent, who may have counselpresent regarding such matters.

Schedule AThe assets to be divested pursuant to

Paragraph II (‘‘Schedule A Assets’’) shallconsist of, without limitation, all Assetsand Businesses (including allimprovements, additions andenhancements made to such assets priorto divestiture), of the following:

A. The Pensacola area Schedule AAssets are:

Part I

1. Medical Center of Santa Rosa, Inc.,d.b.a. Santa Rosa Medical Center,1450 Berryhill Road, Milton, Florida32570

Part II

2. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging)—free-standing modular buildingattached to hospital by walkway,leased 60 months—originated in 1993.

3. EMS (Emergency Medial Services),4930 Glover Lane, Milton, Florida32570

4. Berryhill Medical Park—includingundeveloped land Milton, Florida32570Master Leased 10 years:Building 1—1540 Berryhill Medical

Park (7,612 sq. ft.)Building 2—1550 Berryhill Medical

Park (5,943 sq. ft.)Building 3—1560 Berryhill Medical

Park (4,427 sq. ft.)5. Santa Rosa Primary Care Center,

Leased Building at 4928 Highway 90,Pace, Florida 32571

6. Office Space Leases (as Tenant):3,250 sq. ft. from Pace Medical Center

Partnership, 2874 Highway 90,Building A, Pace, Florida 32571

1,360 sq. ft. from Pace Medical CenterPartnership, 2874 Highway 90,Building B, Pace, Florida 32571

25,200 sq, ft. from Dave Gilbert, 5950Berryhill Road, Building 1.3, SantaRosa, Florida 32570

2. The Okaloosa area Schedule AAssets are:

Part I

1. North Okaloosa Medical Center—Hospital, 151 Redstone Avenue,Crestview, Florida 32539 (withapproximately 34 acres of land).

Part II

2. Crestview Professional CondominiumAssociation, Professional OfficeBuildings, 131 Redstone Avenue,Crestview, Florida 32539 (Suites 101,103, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109)

3. Lease of North Okaloosa MedicalOffice Building, 131 RedstoneAvenue, Crestview, Florida 32539(Suites 125, 127 and 129)

4. Lease of Medical Office Building, 127Redstone Avenue, Crestview, Florida32539

5. Rural Health Clinic, LaGrangeMedical Clinic Building, Rt. 3, Box16, Highway 331 North, Freeport,Florida 34329

6. Bluewater Bay Clinic, Market PlaceProfessional Center, 1507 MerchantsWay, Niceville, Florida 32588

7. Rural Health Clinic, Lease of AccessMedical Clinic Building, 130Redstone Avenue, Crestview, Florida325393. The Ville Platte-Mamou-Opelousas

area Schedule A Assets are:

Part I

1. Ville Platte Medical Center, 800 EastMain Street, Ville Platte, Louisiana70586

Part II

2. Lease (expires October 1995) of theArdwin Physicians Office Building,Ville Platte, Louisiana

Schedule B

The assets to be divested pursuant toParagraph IV (‘‘Schedule B Assets’’)shall consist of, without limitation, allAssets and Businesses (including allimprovements, additions andenhancements made to such assets priorto divestiture), of the following:

a. The Pioneer Valley Assets are:

Part I

1. Pioneer Valley Hospital, 3460 SouthPioneer Park, West Valley City, Utah84120

Part II

2. Three (3) Medical Office Buildings(on hospital campus)

3. Lease of 69,382 sq. ft. (on hospitalcampus)

4. Land (empty lot), 40th West Street,West Jordan, Utah 84088

5. Lease of 11,750 sq. ft. (corner of 90thSouth Street and 27th West Street),West Jordan, Utah 84088

6. Least of 7,134 sq. ft., 150 Wright Bros.Drive, Suite 540, Salt Lake City, Utah84116

7. Salt Lake Industrial Clinic, 441 S.Redwood Road, Salt Lake City, Utah84104B. The Jordan Valley Assets are:

Part I

1. Jordan Valley Hospital, 3580 West9000 South, West Jordan, Utah 84088

Part II

2. Three (3) leases of office space (onhospital campus) (12,000 sq, ft.; 3,374sq. ft; and 4,620 sq. ft)

3. 12% limited liability partnership inSouth Ridge Professional Plaza (oncampus)

4. Lease of Medical Office Building(Perry Realty), South Valley MedicalPlaza, 3590 West 9000 South, WestJordan, Utah 84088C. The Davis Hospital Assets are:

Part I

1. Davis Hospital and Medical Center,1600 West Antelope Drive, Layton,Utah 84041

Part II

2. Medical Office Building, 1660 WestAntelope Drive, Layton, Utah 84041

3. Medical Office Building, 2132 North1700 West, Layton, Utah 84041

Schedule C—Utah Healthtrust Assets

The Utah Healthtrust Assets shallconsist of, without limitation, all Assetsand Businesses (including allimprovements, additions andenhancements made to such assets priorto divestiture), of Healthtrust in theState of Utah at the time of theAcquisition, including, withoutlimitation, the following:

1. The following facilities:a. Pioneer Valley Hospital, 3460

South Pioneer Park, West Valley City,Utah 84120; three (3) medical officebuildings on the campus of the hospital;the lease of 69,382 sq. feet on thehospital campus; land (empty lot) at


40th West Street, West Jordan, Utah84088; lease of 11,750 sq. ft. (corner of90th South Street and 27th West Street),West Jordan, Utah 84088; and lease of7,134 sq. ft., 150 Wright Bros. Drive,Suite 540, Salt Lake City, Utah 84116;

b. Jordan Valley Hospital, 3580 West9000 South, West Jordan, Utah 84084;three (3) leases of office space on thecampus of the hospital (12,000 sq. ft.,3,374 sq. ft., and 4,620 sq. ft.); a 12percent limited lability partnership inSouth Ridge Professional Plaza, and thelease of Medical Office Building (PerryRealty), South Valley Medical Plaza;3590 West 9000 South, West Jordan,Utah 84088;

c. Lakeview Hospital, 630 EastMedical Drive, Bountiful, Utah 84010;

d. Brigham City Community Hospital,950 South 500 West, Brigham City, Utah84302;

e. Ogden Regional Medical Center,5475 South 500 East, Ogden, Utah84405;

f. Castleview Hospital, 300 NorthHospital Drive, Price, Utah 84501;

g. Springville Medical Center, 730East 300 South, Springville, Utah 84663;and

h. Ashley Valley Medical Center, 151West 200 North, Vernal, Utah 84078;and

2. HTI of Utah, Inc., its partnerships,joint ventures, companies, subsidiaries,divisions, and groups and affiliatescontrolled by HTI of Utah or Healthtrustin Utah; their directors, officers,employees, agents, and representatives;and their successors and assigns; andthe following corporations and theirsuccessors and assigns;

a. Brigham City Community Hospital,Inc.;

b. Castleview Hospital, Inc.;c. HTI HomeMed of Utah, Inc.;d. HTI-Managed Care of Utah, Inc.;e. HTI Physician Services of Utah,

Inc.;f. HTI Utah Data Corporation;g. Hospital Corporation of Utah;h. Intergroup Healthcare Corporation

of Utah;i. Medical Services of Salt Lake City,

Inc.;j. MHHE Corporation;k. Mountain View Hospital, Inc.;l. Ogden Medical Center, Inc.;m. Pioneer Valley Hospital, Inc.; andn. West Jordan Hospital Corporation.

Appendix I—Agreement to Hold SeparateRegarding the Florida, Texas, and LouisianaAssets

In the matter of Columbia/HCA HealthcareCorporation, a corporation. File No. 951–0022.

This agreement to Hold Separate Regardingthe Florida, Texas and Louisiana Assets

(‘‘Agreement’’) is by and between Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation (‘‘Columbia/HCA’’ or ‘‘respondent’’), a corporationorganized, existing, and doing businessunder and by virtue of the laws of the Stateof Delaware, with its principal place ofbusiness at One Park Plaza, Nashville,Tennessee 37203; and the Federal TradeCommission (‘‘Commission’’), anindependent agency of the United StatesGovernment, established under the FederalTrade Commission Act of 1914, 15 U.S.C. 41,et seq.

Premises

Whereas, on October 4, 1994, Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust Inc.—The HospitalCompany (‘‘Healthtrust’’) entered into anagreement whereby Columbia/HCA willacquire all the stock of Healthtrust, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Columbia/HCA will bemerged with and into Healthtrust, andHealthtrust will operate as a wholly-ownedsubsidiary of Columbia (the ‘‘Acquisition’’);and

Whereas, Columbia/HCA, with itsprincipal place of business at one Park Plaza,Nashville, Tennessee 37203, owns andoperates, among other things, acute carehospitals; and

Whereas, the Commission is nowinvestigating the Acquisition to determine ifit would violate any of the statutes enforcedby the Commission; and

Whereas, if the Commission accepts theAgreement Containing Consent Order(‘‘Consent Order’’), which would require thedivestiture of certain assets listed inParagraph II of the Consent Order (‘‘ScheduleA Assets and DRMC or Denton CommunityHospital’’) and termination of certaininterests described in Paragraph III of theConsent Order (‘‘SSI Joint Venture’’), theCommission must place the Consent Orderon the public record for a period of at leastsixty (60) days and may subsequentlywithdraw such acceptance pursuant to theprovisions of Section 2.34 of theCommission’s Rules; and

Whereas, the Commission is concernedthat if an understanding is not reached,preserving the status quo ante of theSchedule A Assets, DRMC and the SSI JointVenture Interest (collectively the ‘‘HoldSeparate Assets’’), during the period prior tothe final acceptance and issuance of theConsent Order by the Commission (after the60-day public comment period), divestituresresulting from any proceeding challengingthe legality of the Acquisition might not bepossible, or might be less than an effectiveremedy; and

Whereas, the Commission is concernedthat if the Acquisition is consummated, itwill be necessary to preserve theCommission’s ability to require thedivestitures of the Schedule A Assets, DRMCor Denton Community Hospital, and the SSIJoint Venture Interest, and the Commission’sright to have the Hold Separate Assetscontinue as viable acute care hospitalsindependent of Columbia/HCA; and

Whereas, the purposes of this Agreementand the Consent Order are to:

(i) preserve the Hold Separate Assets asviable, competitive, and ongoing acute care

hospitals, independent of Columbia/HCA,pending the divestitures of the Schedule AAssets and DRMC or Denton CommunityHospital, and the termination of the SSI JointVenture as required under the terms of theConsent Order;

(ii) prevent interim harm to competitionfrom the operation of the Hold SeparateAssets pending the divestitures as requiredunder the terms of the Consent Order;

(iii) remedy any anticompetitive effects ofthe Acquisition;

Whereas, respondent’s entering into thisAgreement shall in no way be construed asan admission by respondent that theAcquisition is illegal; and

Whereas, respondent understands that noact or transaction contemplated by thisAgreement shall be deemed immune orexempt from the provisions of the antitrustlaws or the Federal Trade Commission Act byreason of anything contained in thisAgreement.

Now, therefore, the parties agree, uponunderstanding that the Commission has notyet determined whether the Acquisition willbe challenged, and in consideration of theCommission’s agreement that, at the time itaccepts the Consent Order for publiccomment it will grant early termination ofthe Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period, andunless the Commission determines to rejectthe Consent Order, it will not seek furtherrelief from respondent with respect to theAcquisition, except that the Commission mayexercise any and all rights to enforce thisAgreement and the Consent Order to whichit is annexed and made a part thereof, andin the event the required divestitures of theSchedule A Assets and DRMC or DentonCommunity Hospital, and the termination ofthe SSI Joint Venture are not accomplished,to appoint a trustee to seek divestitures ofsaid assets pursuant to the Consent Order, toseek civil penalties, to seek a court appointedtrustee, and/or seek other equitable relief, asfollows:

1. Respondent agrees to execute theAgreement Containing Consent Order and bebound by the Consent Order.

2. Respondent agrees that from the datethis Agreement is accepted until the earliestof the dates listed in subparagraphs 2.a or2.b, it will comply with the provisions ofparagraph 3 of this Agreement:

a. three (3) business days after theCommission withdraws its acceptance of theConsent Order pursuant to the provisions ofSection 2.34 of the Commission’s Rules; or

b. the day after the last of the divestituresof the Schedule A Assets and DRMC orDenton Community Hospital, and thetermination of the SSI Joint Venture, asrequired by the Consent Order, is completed.

3. To ensure the complete independenceand viability of the hold Separate Assets, andto assure that no competitive information isexchanged between Columbia/HCA and themanagers of the Hold Separate Assets,respondent shall hold the Schedule A Assets,DRMC and the SSI Joint Venture Interest, asthey are presently constituted, separate andapart on the following terms and conditions:

a. The Hold Separate Assets, as they arepresently constituted, shall be held separateand apart and shall be managed and operated


independently of respondent (meaning herand hereinafter, Columbia/HCA excludingthe Hold Separate Assets), except to theextent that respondent must exercisedirection and control over such assets toassure compliance with this Agreement orthe Consent Order, and except as otherwiseprovided in this Agreement.

b. Prior to, or simultaneously with theAcquisition, respondent shall organize adistinct and separate legal entity, either acorporation, limited liability company, orgeneral or limited partnership (‘‘NewCompany’’) and adopt constituent documentsfor the New Company that are notinconsistent with other provisions of thisAgreement or the Consent Order. Respondentshall transfer (or in the case of the Ville PlatteMedical Center, cause the Central LouisianaHealthcare System Limited Partnership(‘‘CLHS’’) to transfer) all ownership andcontrol of all Hold Separate Assets to theNew Company.

c. The board of directors of the NewCompany, or, in the event respondentorganizes an entity other than a corporation,the government body of the entity (‘‘NewBoard’’), shall have three members.Respondent shall elect the members of theNew Board. The New Board shall consist ofthe following three persons: Winfield C.Dunn, Samuel H. Howard, and David C.Colby, provided they agree, or comparable,knowledgeable persons. The Chairman of theNew Board shall be: Winfield C. Dunn(provided he agrees), or a comparable,knowledgeable person, who shall remainindependent of Columbia/HCA andcompetent to assure the continued viabilityand competitiveness of the Hold SeparateAssets and the south Seminole Hospital inLongwood, Florida. The New Board shallinclude no more than one member who is adirector, officer, employee, or agent ofrespondent, who shall be David C. Colby,provided he agrees, or a comparableknowledgeable person (‘‘the respondent’sNew Board member’’). The New Board shallmeet monthly during the course of the HoldSeparate, and as otherwise necessary.Meetings of the New Board during the termof this Agreement shall be audiographicallytranscribed and the tapes retained for two (2)years after the termination of this Agreement.

d. Respondent shall not exercise directionor control over, or influence directly orindirectly, the Hold Separate Assets or SouthSeminole Hospital, the independentChairman of the Board of the New Company,the New Board, or the New Company or anyof its operations or businesses; provided,however, that respondent may exercise onlysuch direction and control over the NewCompany as is necessary to assurecompliance with this Agreement or theConsent Order, or with all applicable laws.In addition, as to the SSH Joint Venture andSouth Seminole Hospital, only the followingindividuals within Columbia/HCA andHealthtrust shall have access to orinvolvement with termination of the SSI JointVenture or efforts to divest the SSI JointVenture Interest: Richard L. Scott, Stephen T.Braun, Donald P. Fay, Ashby Q. Burks,Joseph D. Moore, Phillip D. Wheeler, andGeorge M. Garrett.

e. Respondent shall maintain the viability,competitiveness, and marketability of theHold Separate Assets; shall not sell, transfer,or encumber said Assets (other than in thenormal course of business); and shall notcause or permit the destruction, removal,wasting, or deterioration, or otherwise impairtheir viability, competitiveness, ormarketability of said Hold Separate Assets.

f. Except for the respondent’s New Boardmember, respondent shall not permit anydirector, officer, employee, or agent ofrespondent to also be a director, officer, oremployee of the New Company.

g. The New Company shall be staffed withsufficient employees to maintain thevisibility and competitiveness of the HoldSeparate Assets, which employees shall beselected from the existing employee base ofeach facility or entity and may also be hiredfrom sources other than these facilities andentities.

h. With the exception of the respondent’sNew Board Member, respondent shall notchange the composition of the New Boardunless the independent Chairman consents.The independent Chairman shall have powerto remove members of the New Board forcause and to require respondent to appointreplacement members to the New Board asprovided in Paragraph 3.c. Respondent shallnot change the composition of themanagement of the New Company exceptthat the New Board shall have the power toremove management employees for cause.

i. If the independent Chairman ceases toact or fails to act diligently, a substituteChairman shall be appointed in the samemanner as provided in Paragraph 3.c of thisAgreement.

j. Except as required by law, and except tothe extent that necessary information isexchanged in the course of evaluating theAcquisition, defending investigations,defending or prosecuting litigation, obtaininglegal device, negotiating agreements to divestassets, or complying with this Agreement orthe Consent Order, respondent shall notreceive or have access to, or use or continueto use, any Material Confidential Informationnot in the public domain about the NewCompany or the activities of the hospitalsoperated by the New Board. Access toMaterial Confidential Information relating toSouth Seminole Hospital or the SSH JointVenture, for these limited, stated purposesshall be restricted within Columbia/HCA andHealthrust to those individuals named inParagraph 3.d, above. Nor shall the NewCompany or the New Board receive or haveaccess to, or use or continue to use, anyMaterial Confidential Information not in thepublic domain about respondent and relatingto respondent’s acute care hospitals.Respondent may receive, on a regular basis,aggregate financial information relating to theNew Company necessary and essential toallow respondent to prepare United Statesconsolidated financial reports, tax returns,and personnel reports. Any such informationthat is obtained pursuant to thissubparagraph shall be used only for thepurposes set forth in this subparagraph.(‘‘Material Confidential Information,’’ as usedherein, means competitively sensitive orproprietary information not independently

known to an entity from sources other thanthe entity to which the information pertains,and includes, but is not limited to, customerlists, price lists, marketing methods, patents,technologies, processes, or other tradesecrets.)

k. Except as permitted by this Agreement,the respondent’s New Board member shallnot, in his or her capacity as a New Boardmember, receive Material ConfidentialInformation and shall not disclose any suchinformation received under this Agreementto respondent, or use it to obtain anyadvantage for respondent. The respondent’sNew Board member shall enter aconfidentiality agreement prohibitingdisclosure of Material ConfidentialInformation. The respondent’s New Boardmember shall participate in matters thatcome before the New Board only for thelimited purposes of considering a capitalinvestment or other transaction exceeding$250,000, approving any proposed budgetand operating plans, and carrying outrespondent’s responsibilities under thisAgreement and the Consent Order. Except aspermitted by this Agreement, therespondent’s New Board member shall notparticipate in any matter, or attempt toinfluence the votes of the other members ofthe New Board with respect to matters, thatwould involve a conflict of interest ifrespondent and the New Company wereseparate and independent entities.

l. Any material transaction of the NewCompany that is out of the ordinary courseof business must be approved by a majorityvote of the New Board; provided that theNew Company shall engage in no transaction,material or otherwise, that is precluded bythis Agreement.

m. If necessary, respondent shall providethe New Company with sufficient workingcapital to operate the Hold Separate Assets attheir respective current rates of operation, tomeet any capital calls anticipated in respectof the SSH Joint Venture, and to carry outany capital improvement plans for theSchedule A Assets, DRMC and the SouthSeminole Hospital that have already beenapproved.

n. Columbia/HCA shall continue toprovide the same support services to theHold Separate Assets as are being providedto such assets by Columbia/HCA orHealthtrust as of the date this Agreement issigned. Columbia/HCA may charge the HoldSeparate Assets the same fees, if any, chargedby Columbia/HCA or Healthtrust for suchsupport services as of the date of thisAgreement. Columbia/HCA personnelproviding such support services must retainand maintain all Material ConfidentialInformation of the Hold Separate Assets ona confidential basis, and, except as ifpermitted by this Agreement, such personsshall be prohibited from providing,discussing, exchanging, circulating, orotherwise furnishing any such information toor with any person whose employmentinvolves any of respondent’s businesses.Such personnel shall also executeconfidentiality agreements prohibiting thedisclosure of any Material ConfidentialInformation of the Hold Separate Assets.

o. During the period commencing on thedate this Agreement is effective and


terminating on the earlier of (i) twelve (12)months after the date the Consent Orderbecomes final, or (ii) the date contemplatedby subparagraph 2.b (the ‘‘Initial DivestiturePeriod’’), respondent shall make available foruse by the New Company funds sufficient toperform all necessary routine maintenanceto, and replacement of, the Hold SeparateAssets (‘‘normal repair and replacement’’).Provided, however, that in any event,respondent shall provide the New Companywith such funds as are necessary to maintainthe viability, competitiveness, andmarketability of such Assets.

p. Columbia/HCA shall circulate, to itsmanagement employees responsible for theoperation of acute care hospitals in any of therelevant areas defined in the Consent Orderin this matter, a notice of this Hold Separateand Consent Order in the form attached asAttachment A.

q. The New Board shall serve at the costand expense of Columbia/HCA. Columbia/HCA shall indemnify the New Board againstany losses or claims of any kind that mightarise out of its involvement under this HoldSeparate, except to the extent that such lossesor claims result from misfeasance, grossnegligence, willful or wanton acts, or badfaith by the New Board directors.

r. The NEw Board shall have access to andbe informed about all companies who inquireabout, seek, or propose to buy any HoldSeparate Asset.

s. Within thirty days (30) after the date thisAgreement is accepted by the Commissionand every thirty (30) days thereafter until thisAgreement terminates, the New Board shallreport in writing to the Commissionconcerning the New Board’s efforts toaccomplish the purposes of this HoldSeparate. In addition, within thirty days (30)after the date this Agreement is accepted bythe Commission and every thirty (30)thereafter until this Agreement terminates,respondent shall file with the Commission averified written report, setting forth, amongother things that may be required from timeto time, a detailed memorialization of allcommunications, both intra-company andwith third parties, relating to the terminationof the SSH Joint Venture.

4. Should the Commission seek in anyproceeding to compel respondent to divestany of the Hold Separate Assets, as providedin the Consent Order, or to seek any otherinjunctive or equitable relief for any failureto comply with the Consent Order or thisAgreement, or in any way relating to theAcquisition, as defined in the draft ofcomplaint, respondent shall not raise anyobjection based upon the expiration of theapplicable Hart-Scott-Rodino AntitrustImprovements Act waiting period or the factthat the Commission has permitted theAcquisition. Respondent also waives allrights to contest the validity of thisAgreement.

5. To the extent that this Agreementrequires respondent to take, or prohibitsrespondent from taking, certain actions thatotherwise may be required or prohibited bycontract, respondent shall abide by the termsof this Agreement or the Consent Order andshall not assert as a defense such contractrequirements in a civil penalty action

brought by the Commission to enforce theterms of this Agreement or Consent Order.

6. For the purposes of determining orsecuring compliance with this Agreement,and subject to any legally recognizedprivilege, and upon written request withreasonable notice to respondent made to itsprincipal office, respondent shall permit anyduly authorized representatives of theCommission:

a. Access, during office hours ofrespondent and in the presence of counsel,to inspect and copy all books, ledgers,accounts, correspondence, memoranda, andall other records and documents in thepossession or under the control of therespondent relating to compliance with thisAgreement;

b. Upon five (5) days’ notice to respondentand without restraint or interference fromrespondent, to interview officers, directors,or employees of respondent, who may havecounsel present, regarding such matters.

7. This Agreement shall not be findinguntil approved by the Commission.

Attachment A—Notice of Divestiture andRequirement for Confidentiality

Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporationand Healthtrust Inc.—The Hospital Companyhave entered into a Consent Agreement andAgreement to Hold Separate with the FederalTrade Commission relating to the divestitureof certain Healthtrust and Columbia/HCAacute care hospitals and the termination of ajoint venture agreement (‘‘Assets’’). Thehospitals to be divested include:

1. Santa Rosa Medical Center, 1450Berryhill Road, Milton, Florida 32572.

2. North Okaloosa Medical Center, 151Redstone Avenue Southeast, Crestview,Florida 32536.

3. Denton Regional Medical Center, 4405North Interstate 35, Denton, Texas 76207 orthe Denton Community Hospital, 107 N.Bonnie Brae, Denton, Texas 76201.

4. Ville Platte Medical Center, 800 EastMain Street, Ville Platte, Louisiana 70586.

5. Davis Hospital and Medical Center, 1600West Antelope Drive, Layton, Utah 84041.

6. Pioneer Valley Hospital, 3460 SouthPioneer Parkway, West Valley City, Utah84120, including the Salt Lake IndustrialClinic, 441 S. Redwood Road, Salt Lake City,Utah 84104.

7. Jordan Valley Hospital, 3580 West 9000South, West Jordan, Utah 84088.

The joint venture agreement that must beterminated involves the joint venture thatowns South Seminole Hospital in Longwood,Florida. Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust mustterminate the joint venture either by sellingHealthtrust’s interest in the joint venture orby acquiring the other joint venture partner’sinterest.

Until after the FTC’s Order becomes finaland the Assets are divested, the Assets mustbe managed and maintained as separate,ongoing businesses, independent of all otherColumbia/HCA businesses. All competitiveinformation relating to the Assets must beretained and maintained by the personsinvolved in the operation of the Assets on aconfidential basis, and such persons shall beprohibited from providing, discussing,exchanging, circulating, or otherwise

furnishing any such information to or withany other person whose employmentinvolves any other Columbia/HCA business.Similarly, all such persons involved inColumbia/HCA shall be prohibited fromproviding, discussing, exchanging,circulating, or otherwise furnishing any suchinformation to or with any other personwhose employment involves any of theAssets.

Any violation of the Consent Agreement orthe Agreement to Hold Separate,incorporated by reference as part of theConsent Order, may subject Columbia/HCAto civil penalties and other relief as providedby law.

Appendix II—Agreement to Hold SeparateRegarding the Utah Healthtrust Assets

In the matter of Columbia/HCA HealthcareCorporation, a corporation. File No. 951–0022.

This Agreement to Hold SeparateRegarding the Utah Healthtrust Assets(‘‘Agreement’’) is by and between Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation (‘‘Columbia/HCA’’ or ‘‘respondent’’), a corporationorganized, existing, and doing businessunder and by virtue of the laws of the Stateof Delaware, with its principal place ofbusiness at One Park Plaza, Nashville,Tennessee 37203; and the Federal TradeCommission (‘‘Commission’’), anindependent agency of the United StatesGovernment, established under the FederalTrade Commission Act of 1914, 15 U.S.C. 41,et seq.

PremisesWhereas, on October 4, 1994, Columbia/

HCA and Healthtrust Inc.—The HospitalCompany (‘‘Healthtrust’’) entered into anagreement whereby Columbia/HCA willacquire all the stock of Healthtrust, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Columbia/HCA will bemerged with and into Healthtrust, andHealthtrust will operate as a wholly-ownedsubsidiary of Columbia (the ‘‘Acquisition’’);and

Whereas, on October 20, 1994, theCommission, with the consent of Healthtrust,issued its complaint and made final its Orderto settle charges that the acquisition byHealthtrust of certain assets of Holy CrossHealth System Corporation violated Section7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C.18, and Section 5 of the Federal TradeCommission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45(In the Matter of Healthtrust, Inc.—TheHospital Company, Docket No. C–3538); and

Whereas, the Order in Docket No. C–3538provides that for a period of ten (10) years,Healthtrust shall not permit any acute carehospital it operates in the Three-County Areaof Utah, as defined in Paragraph I.G. of theOrder in Docket No. C–3538, to be acquired,without the prior approval of theCommission, by any person that operates anyother acute care hospital in the Three-CountyArea; and

Whereas, on February 15, 1995, Healthtrustpetitioned the Commission to approve thesale of four Healthtrust acute care hospitals(the ‘‘Utah Healthtrust Hospitals’’) toColumbia/HCA; and

Whereas, Columbia/HCA, with itsprincipal place of business at One Park Plaza,


Nashville, Tennessee 37203, owns andoperates, among other things, acute carehospitals in the Three-County Area of Utah,and elsewhere; and

Whereas, the Commission is nowinvestigating the Acquisition to determinewhether it would violate any of the statutesenforced by the Commission and whether theCommission should approve the Acquisitionpursuant to the Order in In the Matter ofHealthtrust, Inc.—The Hospital Company,Docket No. C–3538); and

Whereas, the Commission has determinedto grant Healthtrust the prior approvalrequired for its sale of the Utah HealthtrustHospitals to Columbia/HCA, conditioned,however, upon Columbia/HCA divesting, asrequired by the Agreement ContainingConsent Order (‘‘Consent Agreement’’ or‘‘Consent Order’’), to which this HoldSeparate is attached and made a part thereofas Appendix II, three Utah hospitals andrelated assets (the ‘‘Schedule B Assets’’ asdefined in Paragraph I of the Consent Order);and

Whereas, if the Commission accepts theConsent Order, which would require thedivestiture of the Schedule B Assets pursuantto Paragraph IV of the Consent Order, theCommission must place the Consent Orderon the public record for a period of at leastsixty (60) days and may subsequentlywithdraw such acceptance pursuant to theprovisions of Section 2.34 of theCommission’s Rules; and

Whereas, the Commission is concernedthat if an understanding is not reached,preserving the status quo ante of the UtahHealthtrust Assets, as identified in ScheduleC to the Consent Order, during the periodprior to the final acceptance and issuance ofthe Consent Order by the Commission (afterthe 60-day public comment period),divestitures resulting from any proceedingchallenging the legality of the Acquisitionmight not be possible, or might be less thanan effective remedy; and

Whereas, if the Commission accepts theConsent Order, and Columbia/HCA has notdivested with the Commission’s priorapproval, each Schedule B Asset, inaccordance with the Consent Order, withinnine (9) months of the date the Commissionconditionally approves the Acquisitionpursuant to the order in Docket No. C–3538,the Commission may appoint a trustee todivest the Utah Healthtrust Assets, asidentified in Schedule C to the ConsentOrder; and

Whereas, the Commission is concernedthat if the Acquisition is consummated, itwill be necessary to preserve theCommission’s ability to require thedivestitures of the Utah Healthtrust Assetsand the Commission’s right to have the UtahHealthtrust Assets continue as viable acutecare hospitals independent of Columbia/HCA; and

Whereas, the purposes of this Agreementand the Consent Order are to:

(i) preserve the Utah Healthtrust Assets asviable, competitive, and ongoing acute carehospitals, independent of Columbia/HCA,pending the divestitures of the Schedule BAssets or the Utah Healthtrust Assets asrequired under the terms of the ConsentOrder; and

(ii) prevent interim harm to competitionfrom the operation of the Utah HealthtrustAssets pending divestitures of the ScheduleB Assets or the Utah Healthtrust Assets asrequired under the terms of the ConsentOrder; and

(iii) remedy any anticompetitive effects ofthe Acquisition;

Whereas, respondent’s entering into thisAgreement shall in no way be construed asan admission by respondent that theAcquisition is illegal; and

Whereas, respondent understands that noact or transaction contemplated by thisAgreement shall be deemed immune orexempt from the provisions of the antitrustlaws or the Federal Trade Commission Act byreason of anything contained in thisAgreement.

Now, therefore, the parties agree, uponunderstanding that the Commission has notyet determined whether the Acquisition willbe challenged, and in consideration of theCommission’s conditional approval of theAcquisition and its agreement that, at thetime it accepts the Consent Order for publiccomment it will grant early termination ofthe Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period, andunless the Commission determines to rejectthe Consent Order, it will not seek furtherrelief from respondent with respect to theAcquisition, except that the Commission mayexercise any and all rights to enforce thisAgreement and the Consent Order to whichit is annexed and made a part thereof, andthe Order in Docket No. C–3538, and in theevent the required divestitures of theSchedule B Assets are not accomplished, toappoint a trustee to seek divestitures of theUtah Healthtrust Assets pursuant to theConsent Order, to seek civil penalties, to seeka court appointed trustee, and/or to seekother equitable relief, as follows:

1. Respondent agrees to execute theAgreement Containing Consent Order and bebound by the attached Consent Order.

2. Respondent agrees that from the datethis Agreement is accepted until the earliestof the dates listed in subparagraphs 2.a or2.b, it will comply with the provisions ofparagraph 3 of this Agreement:

a. three (3) business days after theCommission withdraws its acceptance of theConsent Order pursuant to the provisions ofSection 2.34 of the Commission’s Rules; or

b. the day after the last of the divestituresof the Schedule B Assets or the UtahHealthtrust Assets, as required by theConsent Order, is completed.

3. To ensure the complete independenceand viability of the Utah Healthtrust Assets,and to assure that no competitive informationis exchanged between Columbia/HCA andthe managers of the Utah Healthtrust Assets,respondent shall hold the Utah HealthtrustAssets, as they are presently constituted,separate and apart on the following termsand conditions:

a. The Utah Healthtrust Assets, as they arepresently constituted, shall be held separateand apart and shall be managed and operatedindependently of respondent (meaning hereand hereinafter, Columbia/HCA excludingthe Utah Healthtrust Assets), except to theextent that respondent must exercisedirection and control over such assets to

assure compliance with this Agreement orthe Consent Order, and except as otherwiseprovided in this Agreement.

b. Prior to, or simultaneously with theAcquisition, respondent shall transfer allownership and control of all Utah HealthtrustAssets to HTI of Utah, Inc.

c. The board of directors of HTI of Utah,Inc. (‘‘HTI Board’’), shall have threemembers. Respondent shall elect themembers of the HTI Board. The HTI Boardshall consist of the following three persons:(i) Kent H. Wallace; (ii) Kenneth W. Perry;and (iii) David C. Colby, provided they agree,or comparable, knowledgeable persons. TheChairman of the HTI Board shall be Kent H.Wallace, provided he agrees, or a comparableknowledgeable person, who shall remainindependent of Columbia/HCA andcompetent to assure the continued viabilityand competitiveness of the Healthtrust UtahAssets. The HTI Board shall include no morethan one member who is a director, officer,employee, or agent of respondent, who shallbe David C. Colby, provided he agrees, or acomparable, knowledgeable person (‘‘therespondent’s HTI Board member’’). The HTIBoard shall meet monthly during the courseof the Hold Separate, and as otherwisenecessary. Meetings of the HTI Board duringthe term of this Agreement shall beaudiographically transcribed and the tapesretained for two (2) years after thetermination of this Agreement.

d. Respondent shall not exercise directionor control over, or influence directly orindirectly, the Utah Healthtrust Assets, theindependent Chairman of the Board of theHTI of Utah Inc., HTI of Utah Inc., or any ofits operations or businesses; provided,however, that respondent may exercise onlysuch direction and control over HTI of UtahInc. as is necessary to assure compliancewith this Agreement or the Consent Order, orwith all applicable laws.

e. Respondent shall maintain the viability,competitiveness, and marketability of theUtah Healthtrust Assets, shall not sell,transfer, or encumber said Assets (other thanin the normal course of business); and shallnot cause or permit the destruction, removal,wasting, or deterioration, or otherwise impairtheir viability, competitiveness, ormarketability of said Assets.

f. Except for the respondent’s HTI Boardmember, respondent shall not permit anydirector, officer, employee, or agent ofrespondent to also be a director, officer, oremployee of HTI of Utah Inc.

g. HTI Utah of Utah Inc. shall be staffedwith sufficient employees to maintain theviability and competitiveness of the UtahHealthtrust Assets, which employees shall beselected from the existing employee base ofeach facility or entity and may also be hiredfrom sources other than these facilities andentities.

h. With the exception of the respondent’sHTI Board Member, respondent shall notchange the composition of the HTI Boardunless the independent Chairman consents.The independent Chairman shall have powerto remove members of the HTI Board forcause and to require respondent to appointreplacement members to the New Board asprovided in Paragraph 3.c. Respondent shall


not change the composition of themanagement of HTI of Utah Inc., except thatthe HTI Board shall have the power toremove management employees for cause.

i. If the independent Chairman ceases toact or fails to act diligently, a substituteChairman shall be appointed in the samemanner as provided in Paragraph 3.c of thisAgreement.

j. Except as required by law, and except tothe extent that necessary information isexchanged in the course of evaluating theAcquisition, defending investigations,defending or prosecuting litigation, obtaininglegal advice, negotiating agreements to divestassets, or complying with this Agreement orthe Consent Order, respondent shall notreceive or have access to, or use or continueto use, any Material Confidential Informationnot in the public domain about HTI of UtahInc., or the activities of or the hospitalsoperated by the HTI Board. Nor shall HTI ofUtah Inc. or the HTI Board receive or haveaccess to, or use or continue to use, anyMaterial Confidential Information not in thepublic domain about respondent and relatingto respondent’s acute care hospitals.Respondent may receive, on a regular basis,aggregate financial information relating toHTI of Utah Inc. necessary and essential toallow respondent to prepare United Statesconsolidated financial reports, tax returns,and personnel reports. Any such informationthat is obtained pursuant to thissubparagraph shall be used only for thepurposes set forth in this subparagraph.(‘‘Material Confidential Information,’’ as usedherein, means competitively sensitive orproprietary information not independentlyknown to an entity from sources other thanthe entity to which the information pertains,and includes, but is not limited to, customerlists, price lists, marketing methods, patents,technologies, processes, or other tradesecrets.)

k. Except as permitted by this Agreement,the respondent’s HTI Board member shallnot, in his or her capacity as an HTI Boardmember, receive Material ConfidentialInformation and shall not disclose any suchinformation received under this Agreementto respondent, or use it to obtain anyadvantage for respondent. The respondent’sHTI Board member shall enter aconfidentiality agreement prohibitingdisclosure of Material ConfidentialInformation. The respondent’s HTI Boardmember shall participate in matters thatcome before the HTI Board only for thelimited purposes of considering a capitalinvestment or other transaction exceeding$250,000, approving any proposed budgetand operating plans, and carrying outrespondent’s responsibilities under thisAgreement and the Consent Order. Except aspermitted by this Agreement, therespondent’s HTI Board member shall notparticipate in any matter, or attempt toinfluence the votes of the other members ofthe HTI Board with respect to matters, thatwould involve a conflict of interest ifrespondent and HTI of Utah Inc. wereseparate and independent entities.

l. Any material transaction of HTI of UtahInc. that is out of the ordinary course ofbusiness must be approved by a majority vote

of the HTI Board; provided that HTI of UtahInc. shall engage in no transaction, materialor otherwise, that is precluded by thisAgreement.

m. If necessary, respondent shall provideHTI of Utah Inc. with sufficient workingcapital to operate the Utah Healthtrust Assetsat their respective current rates of operationand to carry out any capital improvementplans for the Utah Healthtrust Assets thathave already been approved.

n. Columbia/HCA shall continue toprovide the same support services to theUtah Healthtrust Assets, as are beingprovided to such Assets by Healthtrust as ofthe date this Agreement is signed. Columbia/HCA may charge the HTI of Utah Inc. thesame fees, if any, charged by Healthtrust forsuch support services as of the date of thisAgreement. Columbia/HCA personnelproviding such support services must retainand maintain all material confidentialinformation of the Utah Healthtrust Assets ona confidential basis, and, except as ispermitted by this Agreement, such personsshall be prohibited from providing,discussing, exchanging, circulating, orotherwise furnishing any such information toor with any person whose employmentinvolves any of respondent’s businesses.Such personnel shall also executeconfidentiality agreements prohibiting thedisclosure of any Material ConfidentialInformation of the Utah Healthtrust Assets.

o. During the period commencing on thedate this Agreement is effective andterminating on the earlier of (i) twelve (12)months after the date the Consent Orderbecomes final, or (ii) the date contemplatedby subparagraph 2.b (the ‘‘Initial DivestiturePeriod’’), respondent shall make available foruse by HTI of Utah Inc. funds sufficient toperform all necessary routine maintenanceto, and replacements of, the Utah HealthtrustAssets (‘‘normal repair and replacement’’).Provided, however, that in any event,respondent shall provide HTI of Utah Inc.with such funds as are necessary to maintainthe viability, competitiveness, andmarketability of such Assets.

p. Columbia/HCA shall circulate, to itsmanagement employees responsible for theoperation of acute care hospitals in any of therelevant areas defined in the Consent Orderin this matter, a notice of this Hold Separateand Consent Order in the form attached asAttachment A.

q. The HTI Board shall serve at the costand expense of Columbia/HCA. Columbia/HCA shall indemnify the HTI Board againstany losses or claims of any kind that mightarise out of its involvement under this HoldSeparate, except to the extent that such lossesor claims result from misfeasance, grossnegligence, willful or wanton acts, or badfaith by the HTI Board directors.

r. The HTI Board shall have access to andbe informed about all companies who inquireabout, seek, or propose to buy any ScheduleB Assets or the Utah Healthtrust Assets.

s. Within thirty (30) days after the date thisAgreement is accepted by the Commissionand every thirty (30) days thereafter until thisAgreement terminates, the HTI Board shallreport in writing to the Commissionconcerning the HTI Board’s efforts to

accomplish the purposes of this HoldSeparate.

4. Should the Commission seek in anyproceeding to compel respondent to divestany of the Schedule B Assets or the UtahHealthtrust Assets, as provided in theConsent Order, or to seek any otherinjunctive or equitable relief for any failureto comply with the Consent Order or thisAgreement, or in any way relating to theacquisition, as defined in the draft ofcomplaint, respondent shall not raise anyobjection based upon the expiration of theapplicable Hart-Scott-Rodino AntitrustImprovements Act waiting period or the factthat the Commission has permitted theAcquisition. Respondent also waives allrights to contest the validity of thisAgreement.

5. To the extent that this Agreementrequires respondent to take, or prohibitsrespondent from taking, certain actions thatotherwise may be required or prohibited bycontract, respondent shall abide by the termsof this Agreement or the Consent Order andshall not assert as a defense such contractrequirements in a civil penalty actionbrought by the Commission to enforce theterms of this Agreement or Consent Order.

6. For the purposes of determining orsecuring compliance with this Agreement,and subject to any legally recognizedprivilege, and upon written request withreasonable notice to respondent made to itsprincipal office, respondent shall permit anyduly authorized representatives of theCommission:

a. Access, during office hours ofrespondent and in the presence of counsel,to inspect and copy all books, ledgers,accounts, correspondence, memoranda, andall other records and documents in thepossession or under the control of therespondent relating to compliance with thisAgreement;

b. Upon five (5) days’ notice to respondentand without restraint or interference fromrespondent, to interview officers, directors,or employees of respondent, who may havecounsel present, regarding such matters.

7. This Agreement shall not be bindinguntil approved by the Commission.

Attachment A—Notice of Divestiture andRequirement for Confidentiality

Columbia/RCA Healthcare Corporation andHealthtrust Inc.—The Hospital Companyhave entered into a Consent Agreement andAgreement to Hold Separate with the FederalTrade Commission relating to the divestitureof certain Healthtrust and Columbia/HCAacute care hospitals and the termination of ajoint venture agreement (‘‘Assets’’). Thehospitals to be divested include:

1. Santa Rosa Medical Center, 1450Berryhill Road, Milton, Florida 32572.

2. North Okaloosa Medical Center, 151Redstone Avenue Southeast, Crestview,Florida 32536.

3. Denton Regional Medical Center, 4405North Interstate 35, Denton, Texas 76207 orthe Denton Community Hospital, 107 N.Bonnie Brae, Denton, Texas 76201.

4. Ville Platte Medical Center, 800 EastMain Street, Ville Platte, Louisiana 70586.

5. Davis Hospital and Medical Center, 1600West Antelope Drive, Layton, Utah 84041.


6. Pioneer Valley Hospital, 3460 SouthPioneer Parkway, West Valley City, Utah84120, including the Salt Lake IndustrialClinic, 441 S. Redwood Road, Salt Lake City,Utah 84104.

7. Jordan Valley Hospital, 3580 West 9000South, West Jordan, Utah 84088.

The joint venture agreement that must beterminated involves a joint venture that ownsSouth Seminole Hospital in Longwood,Florida. Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust mustterminate the joint venture either by sellingHealthtrust’s interest in the joint venture orby acquiring the other joint venture partner’sinterest.

Until after the FTC’s Order becomes finaland the Assets are divested, the Assets mustbe managed and maintained as separate,ongoing businesses, independent of all otherColumbia/HCA businesses. All competitiveinformation relating to the Assets must beretained and maintained by the personsinvolved in the operation of the Assets on aconfidential basis, and such persons shall beprohibited from providing, discussing,exchanging, circulating, or otherwisefurnishing any such information to or withany other person whose employmentinvolves any other Columbia/HCA business.Similarly, all such persons involved inColumbia/HCA shall be prohibited fromproviding, discussing, exchanging,circulating, or otherwise furnishing any suchinformation to or with any other personwhose employment involves any of theAssets.

Any violation of the Consent Agreement orthe Agreement to Hold Separate,incorporated by reference as part of theConsent Order, may subject Columbia/HCAto civil penalties and other relief as providedby law.

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To AidPublic Comment

The Federal Trade Commission(‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, subject to finalapproval, a proposed consent order fromColumbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation(‘‘Columbia/HCA’’). The agreement isdesigned to remedy anticompetitive effectsstemming from Columbia/HCA’s proposedacquisition of Healthtrust, Inc.—The HospitalCompany (‘‘Healthtrust’’).

The proposed consent order has beenplaced on the public record for sixty days forreception of comments by interested persons.Comments received during this period willbecome part of the public record. After sixtydays, the Commission will again review theagreement and the comments received andwill decide whether it should withdraw fromthe agreement or make final the agreement’sproposed order.

Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust both ownand/or operate acute care hospitals in variouslocalities around the country. TheCommission’s draft complaint accompanyingthe proposed consent order charges that onor about October 4, 1994, Columbia/HCAagreed to acquire all the stock of Healthtrust,and that the Commission has reason tobelieve that the acquisition, as well as theagreement to enter into the acquisition, maysubstantially lessen competition, in violationof Section 7 of the Clayton Act and Section5 of the FTC Act.

According to the draft complaint, theproposed acquisition may have ananticompetitive impact upon competition foracute care hospital services in six localities(‘‘relevant areas’’) where Columbia/HCA andHealthtrust are direct competitors. Thecomplaint alleges that the acute care hospitalservices market in each area is already highlyconcentrated, and entry by new competitorswould be difficult. The complaint alleges thatthe Commission has reason to believe thatthe acquisition would violate Section 7 of theClayton Act and Section 5 of the FederalTrade Commission Act, unless an effectiveremedy eliminates the anticompetitiveeffects. The relevant areas in which thecomplaint alleges the acquisition may lessencompetition, and the hospitals Columbia/HCA and Healthtrust own and/or operate ineach relevant area, are as follows:

(1) The Pensacola area, which encompassesthe Florida counties of Escambia and SantaRosa. Columbia/HCA’s acute care hospital inthis area is the West Florida RegionalMedical Center, in Pensacola; andHealthtrust’s acute care hospital in this areais the Santa Rosa Medical Center, in Milton.

(2) The Okaloosa area, which encompassesthe Florida county of Okaloosa. Columbia/HCA’s acute care hospitals in this area areTwin Cities Hospital, in Niceville; FortWalton Beach Medical Center, in Ft. WaltonBeach; and Destin Community Hospital, inDestin. Healthtrust’s acute care hospital inthis area is North Okaloosa Medical Center,in Crestview.

(3) The Denton area, encompassing theTexas counties of Cooke and Denton(excluding the incorporated city of Lewisvilleand that portion of Denton County south ofTexas highway number 121). Columbia/HCA’s acute care hospital in this area isDenton Community Hospital, in Denton; andHealthtrust’s acute care hospital in this areais Denton Regional Medical Center, also inDenton.

(4) The Ville Platte-Mamou-Opelousasarea, encompassing the Louisiana parishes ofEvangeline and St. Landry. Columbia/HCA’sacute care hospital in this area is the VillePlatte Medical Center, in Ville Platte; andHealthtrust’s acute care hospitals in this areaare Savoy Medical Center, in Savoy, andDoctors Hospital of Opelousas, in Opelousas.

(5) The Salt Lake City—OgdenMetropolitan Statistical Area (‘‘MSA’’),encompassing three contiguous counties innorthern Utah: Weber County, Davis County,and Salt Lake County. This area includes theSalt Lake City area (encompassing Salt LakeCounty and southern Davis County) and theOgden area (encompassing Weber Countyand northern Davis County). Columbia/HCA’s acute care hospitals in the MSA areDavis Hospital and Medical Center, inLayton, and St. Mark’s Hospital, in Salt LakeCity. Healthtrust’s acute care hospitals in theMSA are Pioneer Valley Hospital, in WestValley City; Jordan Valley Hospital, in WestJordan; Lakeview Hospital, in Bountiful; andOgden Regional Medical Center, in Ogden.

(6) The Orlando area, encompassing theFlorida counties of Seminole, Orange, andOsceola. Columbia/HCA’s acute carehospitals in this area are Central FloridaRegional Hospital, in Sanford; Columbia Park

Medical Center, in Orlando; Osceola RegionalHospital, in Kissimmee; and Winter ParkMemorial Hospital, in Winter Park.Healthtrust’s acute care hospital in this areais South Seminole Hospital, in Lakewood.The complaint further alleges that SouthSeminole Hospital is jointly owned byHealthtrust and the Orlando Regional HealthSystem (‘‘ORHS’’), and that ORHS operatesfour additional hospitals in the Orlando area.

Healthtrust is subject to a priorCommission order issued in Healthtrust,Inc.—The Hospital Company, Docket No. C–3538. Under that order, Healthtrust mustobtain prior Commission approval beforetransferring its hospitals in the Salt Lake Cityarea to anyone who operates other hospitalsin that relevant area. Healthtrust requestedthe Commission’s prior approval to transferits hospitals in the Salt Lake City area toColumbia/HCA, and the Commission grantedthat approval at the same time it acceptedthis consent agreement with Columbia/HCAfor public comment.

The consent order, if issued in final formby the Commission, would settle charges thatthe acquisition many substantially lessencompetition in the six relevant areas. Theorder contains provisions requiringdivestiture by Columbia/HCA of thefollowing acute care hospitals, in five of therelevant areas:

(1) The Pensacola area—Healthtrust’s SantaRosa Medical Center, in Milton;

(2) The Okaloosa area—Healthtrust’s NorthOkaloosa Medical Center, in Crestview;

(3) The Denton area—Healthtrust’s DentonRegional Medical Center, in Denton, or in thealternative, Columbia/HCA’s DentonCommunity Hospital, also in Denton;

(4) The Ville Platte-Mamou-Opelousasarea—Columbia’s Ville Platte Medical Center,in Ville Platte; and

(5) The Salt Lake City—Ogden MSA—Columbia/HCA’s Davis Hospital and MedicalCenter, in Layton, and Healthtrust’s PioneerValley Hospital, in West Valley City andJordan Valley Hospital, in West Jordan.

The purpose of these hospital divestituresis to maintain the scope and intensity ofcompetition among general acute carehospitals in each of the foregoing areas, asexisted before the acquisition.

In addition, in the Orlando area, Columbiamust terminate the joint venture with ORHSin the South Seminole Hospital, inLakewood, either by buying out the co-venturer’s interest, or by selling Healthtrust’sinterest in the venture. The purpose of thedivestiture in the Orlando area is to preventtwo major competitors, Columbia/HCA andORHS, from sharing ownership of the SouthSeminole Hospital.

The proposed order requires Columbia/HCA to obtain the approval of theCommission for the divestiture of thehospitals in the relevant areas. Under theterms of the order, the required divestituresin four of the areas, the Pensacola area, theOkaloosa area, the Denton area, and the VillePlatte-Mamou-Opelousas area, must becompleted within twelve months of the datethe order becomes final. In the Salt LakeCity–Ogden MSA, Columbia/HCA mustdivest the identified hospitals within ninemonths of the date the Commission granted


1 Copies of the Complaint, the Decision andOrder, and Commissioner Starek’s statement areavailable from the Commission’s Public ReferenceBranch, H–130, 6th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue,NW., Washington, DC 20580.

prior approval for Healthtrust to transfer itshospitals to Columbia/HCA. In the Orlandoarea, Columbia/HCA must terminateHealthtrust’s participation in the SouthSeminole Hospital within six months of thedate the order becomes final.

If the required divestitures in the Pensacolaarea, the Okaloosa area, the Denton area, andthe Ville Platte-Mamou-Opelousas area, arenot completed within twelve months,Columbia/HCA would consent to theappointment of a trustee, who would havetwelve additional months to effect thedivestitures. If the required divestitures inthe Salt Lake City–Ogden MSA are notcompleted within nine months, Columbia/HCA would consent to the appointment of atrustee, who would have twelve months tosell all the Utah assets of Healthtrust,including all the Healthtrust hospitals inUtah. If the joint venture in Orlando is notterminated within six months, Columbia/HCA would consent to the appointment of atrustee, who would have twelve months tosell Healthtrust’s interest in the joint venture.

The two hold-separate agreementsexecuted in conjunction with the consentagreement require Columbia/HCA, until thecompletion of the divestitures or as otherwisespecified, to hold separate and preserve theassets and businesses necessary to insure theviability and marketability of the assets to bedivested, including all of Healthtrust’s assetsin the state of Utah. The proposed orderprovides that approval by the Commission ofthe divestitures shall be conditioned uponthe agreement by the acquirers that, for tenyears from the date of the divestiture, it willnot sell, without the prior approval of theCommission, to another person operating (orin the process of acquiring) any acute carehospital in the same relevant area.

The order would prohibit Columbia/HCAfrom acquiring any acute care hospital in anyof the six relevant areas without the priorapproval of the Federal Trade Commission. Itwould also prohibit Columbia/HCA fromtransferring, without prior Commissionapproval, any acute care hospital it operatesin any relevant area to another personoperating (or in the process of acquiring) anacute care hospital in the same relevant area.These provisions, in combination, wouldgive the Commission authority to prohibitany substantial combination of the acute carehospital operations of Columbia/HCA withthose of any other acute care hospital in thesame relevant area, unless Columbia/HCAconvinced the Commission that a particulartransaction would not endanger competitionin that relevant area. The provisions wouldnot apply to acquisitions or sales where thevalue of the transferred assets is $1 millionor less, and the provisions would expire tenyears after the order becomes final.

For ten years, the order would prohibitColumbia/HCA from transferring all or anysubstantial part of any acute care hospital inany relevant area to another party withoutfirst filing with the Commission anagreement by the transferee to be bound bythe order.

The purpose of this analysis is to invitepublic comment concerning the proposedorder, to assist the Commission in itsdetermination whether to make the order

final. This analysis is not intended toconstitute an official interpretation of theagreement and order or to modify their termsin any way.

The agreement is for settlement purposesonly and does not constitute an admission byColumbia/HCA that its proposed acquisitionwould have violated the law, as alleged inthe Commission’s complaint.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12589 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

[Dkt. C–3569]

Del Monte Foods Company, et al.;Prohibited Trade Practices, andAffirmative Corrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Consent order.

SUMMARY: In settlement of allegedviolations of federal law prohibitingunfair acts and practices and unfairmethods of competition, this consentorder requires, among other things, DelMonte Corporation and Pacific CoastProducers to terminate the purchaseoption agreement and the provisions ofthe supply agreement that relate toplanning for the 1995 canning seasonwithin three days after this orderbecomes final, and to terminate theremaining provisions of the supplyagreement by June 30, 1995. In addition,the order requires the California-basedrespondents to obtain, for ten years,Commission approval before acquiringany stock or assets of a United Statescanned fruit manufacturer and beforeentering into a variety of marketing,packing, or other agreements withcompetitors.DATES: Complaint and Order issuedApril 11, 1995.1FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ronald Rowe, FTC/S–2105,Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326–2610.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Friday,January 27, 1995, there was publishedin the Federal Register, 60 FR 5397, aproposed consent agreement withanalysis In the Matter of Del MonteFoods Company, et al., for the purposeof soliciting public comment. Interestedparties were given sixty (60) days inwhich to submit comments, suggestionsor objections regarding the proposedform of the order.

No comments having been received,the Commission has ordered theissuance of the complaint in the form

contemplated by the agreement, madeits jurisdictional findings and enteredan order to cease and desist, as set forthin the proposed consent agreement, indisposition of this proceeding.(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interpretor apply sec. 5, 38 Stat. 719, as amended; sec.7, 38 Stat. 731, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45, 18)Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12586 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

[Dkt. 9263]

National Dietary Research, Inc., et al.;Proposed Consent Agreement withAnalysis To Aid Public Comment


SUMMARY: In settlement of allegedviolations of federal law prohibitingunfair acts and practices and unfairmethods of competition, this consentagreement, accepted subject to finalCommission approval, would prohibit,among other things, a Florida-basedcorporation and its owner from makingclaims regarding weight loss, hungerreduction, calorie absorption,cholesterol reduction, effects oncellulite or body measurements, or anyother health benefits of any product orprogram they advertise or sell, unlessthe respondents possess competent andreliable scientific evidence tosubstantiate the claims. Also, theconsent agreement would prohibit therespondents from misrepresenting testresults, from representing that anyadvertisement is something other than apaid advertisement, and fromrepresenting that an endorsement istypical of the experience of consumerswho use the product, unless the claimis substantiated. In addition, the consentagreement would require NationalDietary Research to pay $100,000 to theCommission.DATES: Comments must be received onor before July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: Comments should bedirected to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW.,Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JoelWinston or Richard Cleland, FTC/S–4002, Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326–3153 or 326–3088.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto section 6(f) of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.46 and § 3.25(f) of the Commission’srules of practice (16 CFR 3.25(f)), noticeis hereby given that the following


consent agreement containing a consentorder(s) to cease and desist, having beenfiled with and accepted, subject to finalapproval, by the Commission, has beenplaced on the public record for a periodof sixty (60) days. Public comment isinvited. Such comments or views willbe considered by the Commission andwill be available for inspection andcopying at its principal office inaccordance with § 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of theCommission’s rules of practice (16 CFR4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Agreement Containing Consent Order toCease and Desist

In the matter of National Dietary Research,Inc., a corporation; The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation; and William H.Morris, individually and as an officer of saidcorporations. Docket No. 9263.

The agreement herein, by andbetween National Dietary Research, Inc.,and The William H. Morris Company,corporations, by their duly authorizedofficer; and William H. Morris,individually and as an officer of saidcorporations, hereinafter sometimesreferred to as respondents, and theirattorneys, and counsel for the FederalTrade Commission, is entered into inaccordance with the Commission’s rulegoverning consent order procedures. Inaccordance therewith the parties herebyagree that:

1. Respondent National DietaryResearch, Inc. is a corporationorganized, existing, and doing businessunder and by virtue of the laws of theState of Florida, with its office andprincipal place of business located at1377 K Street, NW., Suite 553,Washington, DC 20005.

Respondent The William H. MorrisCompany is a corporation organized,existing, and doing business under andby virtue of the laws of the State ofFlorida, with its office and principalplace of business located at 2804Smitter Road, Tampa, Florida, 33618.

Respondent William H. Morris is anofficer of said corporations. Heformulates, directs, and controls thepolicies, acts, and practices of saidcorporations. His home address is 2906Smitter Road, Tampa, Florida, 33618.

2. Respondents have been served witha copy of the complaint issued by theFederal Trade Commission chargingthem with violations of sections 5(a)and 12 of the Federal Trade CommissionAct, and have filed answers to saidcomplaint denying said charges.

3. Respondents admit all thejurisdictional facts set forth in theCommission’s complaint in thisproceeding.

4. Respondents waive:(a) Any further procedural steps;

(b) The requirement that theCommission’s decision contain astatement of findings of fact andconclusions of law;

(c) All rights to seek judicial reviewor otherwise to challenge or contest thevalidity of the order entered pursuant tothis agreement; and

(d) Any claim under the Equal Accessto Justice Act.

5. This agreement shall not become apart of the public record of theproceeding unless and until it isaccepted by the Commission. If thisagreement is accepted by theCommission it will be placed on thepublic record for a period of sixty (60)days and information in respect theretopublicly released. The Commissionthereafter may either withdraw itsacceptance of this agreement and sonotify the respondents, in which eventit will take such action as it mayconsider appropriate, or issue and serveits decision, in disposition of theproceeding.

6. This agreement is for settlementpurposes only and does not constitutean admission by respondents that thelaw has been violated as alleged in thecomplaint, or that the facts as alleged inthe compliant, other than jurisdictionalfacts, are true.

7. This agreement contemplates that,if it is accepted by the Commission, andif such acceptance is not subsequentlywithdrawn by the Commission pursuantto the provisions of § 3.25(f) of theCommission’s rules, the Commissionmay without further notice torespondents, (1) Issue its decisioncontaining the following order to ceaseand desist in disposition of theproceeding, and (2) make informationpublic in respect thereto. When soentered, the order to cease and desistshall have the same force and effect andmay be altered, modified or set aside inthe same manner and within the sametime provided by statute for otherorders. The order shall become finalupon service. Delivery by the U.S.Postal Service of the decision containingthe agreed-to order to respondents’addresses as stated in this agreementshall constitute service. Respondentswaive any right they might have to anyother manner of service. The complaintmay be used in construing the terms ofthe order, and no agreement,understanding, representation, orinterpretation not contained in the orderor in the agreement may be used to varyor to contradict the terms of the order.

8. Respondents have read thecomplaint and the order contemplatedhereby. They understand that once theorder has been issued, they will berequired to file one or more compliance

reports showing that they have fullycomplied with the order. Respondentsfurther understand that they may beliable for civil penalties in the amountprovided by law for each violation ofthe order after it becomes final.

9. If it is accepted by the Commission,this Agreement constitutes a fullsettlement between the Commission andrespondents as to the activities allegedin the complaint to have constitutedviolations of the Federal TradeCommission Act and which occurredprior to the date of entry of the order.As to those activities alleged in thecomplaint, and which occurred prior tothe date of entry of the order, theCommission hereby releases therespondents from all other furtherliability to the Commission.

Order

I

It is ordered That respondentsNational Dietary Research, Inc., acorporation, its successors and assigns,and its officers, agents, representatives,and employees, The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation, its successorsand assigns, and its officers, agents,representatives, and employees, andWilliam H. Morris, individually and asan officer of the corporate respondents,directly or through any partnership,corporation, subsidiary, division orother device, in connection with theadvertising, packaging, labeling,promotion, offering for sale, sale ordistribution of any product or programin or affecting commerce, as‘‘commerce’’ is defined in the FederalTrade Commission Act, do forthwithcease and desist from representing, inany manner, directly or by implication,that the product or programa. Provides any weight loss benefit;b. Is an effective treatment for obesity;c. Reduces hunger or is an effective

appetite suppressant;d. Decreases the intestinal absorption of

calories;e. Reduces, can reduce or helps reduce

serum cholesterol;f. Provides, can provide or helps

provide any other health benefit; org. Has any effect on cellulite or on the

user’s body measurements,unless, at the time they make suchrepresentation, respondents possess andrely upon competent and reliablescientific evidence that substantiates therepresentation. For purposes of thisOrder, competent and reliable scientificevidence shall mean tests, analyses,research, studies, or other evidencebased on the expertise of professionalsin the relevant area, that has beenconducted and evaluated in an objective


manner by persons qualified to do so,using procedures generally accepted inthe profession to yield accurate andreliable results.

IIIt is further ordered That respondents

National Dietary Research, Inc., acorporation, its successors and assigns,and its officers, agents, representatives,and employees, The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation, its successorsand assigns, and its officers, agents,representatives, and employees, andWilliam H. Morris, individually and asan officer of the corporate respondents,directly or through any partnership,corporation, subsidiary, division orother device, in connection with theadvertising, packaging, labeling,promotion, offering for sale, sale ordistribution of any product or programin or affecting commerce, as‘‘commerce’’ is defined in the FederalTrade Commission Act, do forthwithcease and desist from misrepresenting,in any manner, directly or byimplication,a. The existence, contents, validity,

results, conclusions, or interpretationsof any test or study;

b. The amount of fiber or any othernutrient or dietary constituentcontained in or provided by theproduct or program, whetherdescribed in quantitative orqualitative terms;

c. That the product or program containsor provides a high, rich, excellent orsuperior source of fiber or any othernutrient or dietary constituent usingthose words or words of similarmeaning; or

d. The research activities or otheractivities of National Dietary Researchor any other organization affiliatedwith respondents.

IIIIt is further ordered That respondents

National Dietary Research, Inc., acorporation, its successors and assigns,and its officers, agents, representatives,and employees, The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation, its successorsand assigns, and its officers, agents,representatives, and employees, andWilliam H. Morris, individually and asofficer of the corporate respondents,directly or through any partnership,corporation, subsidiary, division orother device, in connection with theadvertising, packaging, labeling,promotion, offering for sale, sale ordistribution of any product or programin or affecting commerce, as‘‘commerce’’ is defined in the FederalTrade Commission Act, do forthwithcease and desist from creating,

producing, selling or disseminating anyadvertisement that misrepresents, in anymanner, directly or by implication, thatit is not a paid advertisement.

IVIt is further ordered That respondents

National Dietary Research, Inc., acorporation, its successors and assigns,and its officers, agents, representatives,and employees, The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation, its successorsand assigns, and its officers, agents,representatives, and employees, andWilliam H. Morris, individually and asan officer of the corporate respondents,directly or through any partnership,corporation, subsidiary, division orother device, in connection with theadvertising, packaging, labeling,promotion, offering for sale, sale ordistribution of any product or programin or affecting commerce, as‘‘commerce’’ is defined in the FederalTrade Commission Act, do forthwithcease and desist from representing, inany manner, directly or by implication,that any endorsement (as‘‘endorsement’’ is defined in 16 CFR255.0(b)) of a product or programrepresents the typical or ordinaryexperience of members of the publicwho use the product or program, unlessat the time of making suchrepresentation, the representation istrue, and respondents possess and relyupon competent and reliable evidence,which when appropriate must becompetent and reliable scientificevidence, that substantiates suchrepresentation, provided, however,respondents may use suchendorsements if the statements ordepictions that comprise theendorsements are true and accurate, andif respondents disclose clearly andprominently and in close proximity tothe endorsement what they generallyexpected performance would be in thedepicted circumstances or the limitedapplicability of the endorser’sexperience to what consumers maygenerally expect to achieve, that is, thatconsumers should not expect toexperience similar results.

VNothing in this Order shall prohibit

respondents from making anyrepresentation that is specificallypermitted in labeling for any product byregulations promulgated by the Foodand Drug Administration pursuant tothe Nutrition Labeling and EducationAct of 1990.

VINothing in this Order shall prohibit

respondents from making any

representation for any drug that ispermitted in labeling for any such drugunder any tentative final or finalstandard promulgated by the Food andDrug Administration, or under any newdrug application approved by the Foodand Drug Administration.

VIIIt is further ordered That no later than

the date that this Order becomes final,respondents National Dietary Research,Inc., a corporation, its successors andassigns, The William H. MorrisCompany, a corporation, its successorsand assigns, and William H. Morris,individually and as officer of thecorporate respondents, shall depositinto an escrow account, to beestablished by the Commission for thepurpose of receiving payment due underthis Order (‘‘escrow account’’), the sumof one hundred thousand dollars($100,000).

The funds paid by respondents,together with accrued interest, shall, inthe discretion of the Commission, beused by the Commission to providedirect redress to purchasers of FoodSource One in connection with the actsor practices alleged in the complaint,and to pay any attendant costs ofadministration. If the Commissiondetermines, in its sole discretion, thatredress to purchasers of this product iswholly or partially impracticable or isotherwise unwarranted, any funds notso used shall be paid to the UnitedStates Treasury. Respondents shall benotified as to how the funds aredistributed, but shall have no right tocontest the manner of distributionchosen by the Commission. No portionof the payment as herein provided shallbe deemed a payment of any fine,penalty, or punitive assessment.

At any time after this Order becomesfinal, the Commission may direct theescrow agent to transfer funds from theescrow account, including accruedinterest, to the Commission to bedistributed as herein provided. TheCommission, or its representative, shall,in its sole discretion, select the escrowagent.

Respondents relinquish all dominion,control and title to the funds paid intothe escrow account, and all legal andequitable title to the funds vested in theTreasurer of the United States and in thedesignated consumers. Respondentsshall make no claim to or demand forreturn of the funds, directly orindirectly, through counsel orotherwise; and in the event ofbankruptcy of respondents, respondentsacknowledge that the funds are not partof the debtor’s estate, nor does the estatehave any claim or interest therein.


VIII

It is further ordered That, for five (5)years after the last date of disseminationof any representation covered by thisOrder, respondents, or their successorsand assigns, shall maintain and uponrequest make available to the FederalTrade Commission for inspection andcopying:1. All materials that were relied upon to

substantiate any representationcovered by this Order; and

2. All test reports, studies, surveys,demonstrations or other evidence intheir possession or control, or ofwhich they have knowledge, thatcontradict, qualify, or call intoquestion such representation or thebasis upon which respondents reliedfor such representation, includingcomplaints from consumers.

IX

It is further ordered That the corporaterespondents shall notify the FederalTrade Commission at least thirty (30)days prior to any proposed change inthe corporations such as dissolution,assignment, or sale resulting in theemergence of a successor corporation,the creation or dissolution ofsubsidiaries or any other change in thecorporations which may affectcompliance obligations arising underthis Order.

X

It is further ordered That the corporaterespondents shall distribute a copy ofthis Order to each of their operatingdivisions and to each of their officers,agents, representatives, or employeesengaged in the preparation or placementof advertisements, promotionalmaterials, product labels or other suchsales materials covered by this Order.

XI

It is further ordered That theindividual respondent shall, for a periodof five (5) years from the date ofissuance of this Order, notify theCommission within thirty (30) days inthe event of the discontinuance of hispresent business or employment, theactivities of which include theadvertising, offering for sale, sale, ordistribution of consumer products, andof his affiliation with any new businessor employment involving suchactivities. Each notice of affiliation withany new business or employment shallinclude respondent’s new businessaddress and telephone number, currenthome address, and a statementdescribing the nature of the business oremployment and his duties andresponsibilities.

XII

It is further ordered That respondentsshall, within sixty (60) days after serviceof this Order upon them and at suchother times as the Federal TradeCommission may require, file with theCommission a report, in writing, settingforth in detail the manner and form inwhich they have complied or intend tocomply with this Order.

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order ToAid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission hasaccepted, subject to final approval, anagreement to a proposed consent orderfrom National Dietary Research, Inc.,William H. Morris Company andWilliam H. Morris, the president andsole owner of the corporate respondents.The respondents sell various tabletsmade of compressed fiber and otheringredients, which are advertised fortheir alleged weight loss and cholesterollowering benefits.

On November 9, 1993, theCommission issued an administrativecomplaint in this matter (describedbelow), and a complaint andcorresponding motion for preliminaryinjunctive relief was filed in the U.S.district Court for the Middle District ofFlorida, Tampa Division on November17, 1993. The administrative complaintwas withdrawn from adjudication onJanuary 23, 1993 for the purpose ofconsidering the proposed consentagreement. The preliminary injunctiveaction was dismissed without prejudiceon February 20, 1995.

The proposed consent order has beenplaced on the public record for sixty(60) days for receipt of comments byinterested persons. Comments receivedduring this period will become part ofthe public record. After sixty (60) days,the Commission will again review theagreement and the comments receivedand will decide whether it shouldwithdraw from the agreement and takeother appropriate action, or make finalthe proposed order contained in theagreement.

This matter concerns advertisingclaims made in connection with the saleof two of the respondents’ products,Food Source One (‘‘FS–1’’), a purportedweight loss and cholesterol loweringtablet containing small amounts ofdietary fiber and other ingredients, andVancol 5000 (‘’Vancol’’), a purportedcholesterol lowering tablet containingsmall amounts of psyllium fiber,chromium picolinate and otheringredients.

The Commission’s complaint in thismatter charges the respondents withmaking unsubstantiated claims, in

advertisements and promotionalmaterials, regarding the efficacy of FS–1 for weight loss and lowering serumcholesterol and unsubstantiated claimsregarding the efficacy of Vancol forlowering serum cholesterol. With regardto FS–1, the complaint alleges that therespondents have represented, directlyor by implication, that the product:Causes significant weight loss; causessignificant weight loss without dietingor otherwise changing normal eatingpatterns; is an effectives treatment forobesity; reduces hunger and is aneffective appetite suppressant; decreasesthe intestinal absorption of calories; andmay significantly reduce serumcholesterol. The complaint charges thatthe respondents failed to possess andrely upon a reasonable basis for theserepresentations.

The complaint alleges that therespondents also represented, directlyor by implication, that: Scientificstudies of certain ingredients containedin FS–1, including studies published inthe British Journal or Nutrition and theAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition,demonstrate that FS–1 causessignificant weight loss; scientific studiesof certain ingredients contained in FS–1, including a study published in theBritish Journal of Nutrition, demonstratethat FS–1 causes significant weight losswithout dieting; FS–1 has a high fibercontent; National Dietary Research is abona fide, independent researchorganization that has conductedresearch seeking nutritional solutions toworld-wide health problems; andcertain of the respondents’advertisements for FS–1 areindependent newspaper stories and notpaid advertisements. The complaintalleges that these representations arefalse and misleading.

With regard to Vancol, the complaintalleges that the respondents haverepresented, directly or by implication,that the product significantly reducesserum cholesterol and that itsignificantly reduces serum cholesterolwithout dieting or otherwise changingnormal eating patterns. The complaintcharges that the respondents failed topossess and rely upon a reasonable basisfor these representations. The complaintalso alleges that the respondentsrepresented, directly or by implication,that scientific studies of certainingredients contained in Vancoldemonstrate that Vancol significantlyreduces serum cholesterol. Thecomplaint charges that thisrepresentation is false and misleading.

In addition to the above-mentionedcomplaint allegations, the complaintalso alleges that through the use ofstatements in certain advertisements for


1 Copies of the Complaint and the Decision andOrder are available from the Commission’s PublicReference Branch, H–130, 6th Street & PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580.

FS–1 and Vancol, the respondents haverepresented, directly or by implication,that testimonials from consumersappearing in advertisements for FS–1and Vancol reflect the typical orordinary experience of members of thepublic who have used the products. Thecomplaint charges that the respondentsfailed to possess and rely upon areasonable basis for theserepresentations.

The proposed order containsprovisions designed to remedy thealleged violations. The proposed orderalso provides for consumer redress of$100,000. In the event that consumerredress is not feasible, the proposedorder provides that the funds will bedeposited in the United States Treasury.

Part I of the proposed order requiresthe respondents to cease from makingany representation that any product orprogram provides any weight lossbenefit, is an effective treatment forobesity, reduces hunger or suppressesthe appetite, decreases the intestinalabsorption of calories, reduces serumcholesterol, provides, can provide orhelps provide any other health benefitor has any effect on cellulite or on theuser’s body measurements, unless theypossess and rely upon competent andreliable scientific evidence thatsubstantiates the representation. PartII(a) of the order prohibits therespondents from misrepresenting theexistence, contents, validity, results,conclusions, or interpretations of anytest or study. Part II (b) and (c),respectively, prohibit misrepresentationof the amount of fiber or any nutrientcontained in a product and prohibitfalse claims that a product is a highsource of fiber or any other nutrient.Part II(d) prohibits misrepresentation ofthe research activities or other activitiesof National Dietary Research or anyother organization affiliated with therespondents.

Part III of the proposed orderprohibits the respondents fromdisseminating any advertisement for anyproduct or program that misrepresents,in any manner, that it is not a paidadvertisement. Part IV of the orderprohibits representations thattestimonials represent the typical orordinary experience of consumers whouse the product, unless therepresentations are true and therespondents have competent andreliable evidence that substantiates suchrepresentations. An additional provisionin this Part permits the respondents touse a truthful, non-typical testimonial, ifthey disclose clearly and prominently inclose proximity to the testimonial whatthe generally expected performancewould be in the depicted circumstances,

or the limited applicability of theendorser’s experience to whatconsumers may generally expect toachieve, that is, that consumers shouldnot expect to experience similar results.

Parts V and VI of the proposed ordercontain provisions permitting certainclaims that are approved for labels bythe FDA, under either the NutritionLabeling and Education Act, a tentativefinal or final monograph, or any newdrug application approved by the FDA.

Part VII of the proposed order requiresthe respondents to pay $100,000 inconsumer redress, or if that isimpracticable, to pay the same amountto the U.S. Treasury.

Parts VIII, IX, X, XI and XII of theproposed order are compliancereporting provisions that require therespondents to: retain all records thatwould bear on the respondents’compliance with the order; to notify theCommission of any changes in thestructure of the corporate respondentsthat may affect their complianceobligations under the order, or anychanges in the business affiliations ofthe individual respondent relating to theadvertising, offering for sale, sale ordistribution of consumer products; todistribute copies of the order to thecorporate respondents’ operatingdivisions and to those personsresponsible for the preparation andreview of advertising material coveredby the order; and to report to theCommission their compliance with theterms of the order.

The purpose of this analysis is tofacilitate public comment on theproposed order. It is not intended toconstitute an official interpretation ofthe agreement and proposed order or tomodify in any way their terms.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12587 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

[Dkt. 9271]

B.A.T Industries p.l.c., et al.; ProhibitedTrade Practices, and AffirmativeCorrective Actions

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Consent order.

SUMMARY: In settlement of allegedviolations of federal law prohibitingunfair acts and practices and unfairmethods of competition, this consentorder permits, among other things,B.A.T Industries and Brown &Williamson Tobacco Corporation toconsummate the acquisition ofAmerican Tobacco Company, but

requires them to divest, within twelvemonths, six American Tobacco discountcigarette brands and to divest to thepurchaser of these brands threeAmerican Tobacco full-revenue brands,as well as the American Tobaccomanufacturing facility in Reidsville,N.C. If the required divestitures are notcompleted on time, the consent orderpermits the Commission to appoint atrustee to complete the transactions. Inaddition, the consent order requires therespondents, for ten years, to obtainCommission approval before acquiringany interest in a cigarette manufactureror any assets used to manufacture ordistribute cigarettes in the UnitedStates.DATES: Complaint issued November 28,1994. Order issued April 19, 1995.1FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Joseph Krauss, FTC/H–324, Washington,D.C. 20580. (202) 326–2713.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OnWednesday, January 11, 1995, there waspublished in the Federal Register, 60 FR2751, a proposed consent agreementwith analysis In the Matter of B.A.TIndustries p.l.c., et al., for the purposeof soliciting public comment. Interestedparties were given sixty (60) days inwhich to submit comments, suggestionsor objections regarding the proposedform of the order.

Comments were filed and consideredby the Commission. The Commissionhas made its jurisdictional findings andentered an order to divest, as set forthin the proposed consent agreement, indisposition of this proceeding.(Sec. 6, 38 Stat. 721; 15 U.S.C. 46. Interpretor apply sec. 5, 38 Stat. 719, as amended; sec.7, 38 Stat. 731, as amended; 15 U.S.C. 45, 18)Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12585 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

[File No. 932–3234]

Original Marketing Inc.; ProposedConsent Agreement with Analysis toAid Public Comment


SUMMARY: In settlement of allegedviolations of federal law prohibitingunfair acts and practices and unfairmethods of competition, this consentagreement, accepted subject to finalCommission approval, would prohibit,among other things, the Florida-based


corporation, two of its officers and anaffiliated advertising agency frommaking performance or benefit claimsfor any weight-loss or weight-controlproduct or program or acupressuredevice unless the claims are true andsubstantiated by competent and reliablescientific evidence. Also, the proposedconsent agreement would prohibit therespondents from misrepresenting anyendorsement or testimonial for anyweight-loss or weight-control product orprogram or any acupressure device asrepresenting the typical or ordinaryexperience of users. In addition, theindividual respondents would berequired to post a $300,000 performancebond, or to pay that amount into anescrow account, before marketing anyweight-loss or weight-control product orprogram or any acupressure device.DATES: Comments must be received onor before July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: Comments should bedirected to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,Room 159, 6th Street and PennsylvaniaAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Richard Cleland, FTC/S–4002,Washington, D.C. 20580, (202) 326–3088.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto Section 6(f) of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.46 and Section 2.34 of the Commission’sRules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), noticeis hereby given that the followingconsent agreement containing a consentorder to cease and desist, having beenfiled with and accepted, subject to finalapproval, by the Commission, has beenplaced on the public record for a periodof sixty (60) days. Public comment isinvited. Such comments or views willbe considered by the Commission andwill be available for inspection andcopying at its principal office inaccordance with Section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) ofthe Commission’s Rules of Practice (16CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

In the matter of Original Marketing, Inc., d/b/a ACU–STOP 2000, and Franklin & Joseph,Inc., corporations, Barry A. Weiss,individually and as an officer and director ofOriginal Marketing, Inc., and Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer and director ofOriginal Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., File No. 932–3234.

Agreement Containing Consent OrderTo Cease and Desist

The Federal Trade Commissionhaving initiated an investigation ofcertain acts and practices of OriginalMarketing, Inc. d/b/a Acu-Stop 2000(‘‘OMI’’) and Franklin & Joseph, Inc.,corporations; Barry A. Weiss,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc.; and

Roger Franklin, individually and as anofficer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc. and Franklin & Joseph,Inc., hereinafter sometimes referred toas proposed respondents, and it nowappearing that proposed respondentsare willing to enter into an agreementcontaining an order to cease and desistfrom the use of the acts and practicesbeing investigated,

It is hereby agreed by and betweenOriginal Marketing, Inc. d/b/a Acu-Stop2000 and Franklin & Joseph, Inc., bytheir duly authorized officers; Barry A.Weiss, individually and as an officerand director of Original Marketing, Inc.;and Roger Franklin, individually and asan officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc. and Franklin & Joseph,Inc., and their attorney and counsel forthe Federal Trade Commission that:

1. Proposed respondent OMI is acorporation organized, existing anddoing business under and by virtue ofthe laws of the State of Florida, with itsoffice and principal place of businesslocated at 11570 Wiles Road, in the Cityof Pompano Beach, State of Florida.

Proposed respondent Franklin &Joseph, Inc. is a corporation organized,existing and doing business under andby virtue of the laws of the State of NewYork, with its office and principal placeof business located at 237 MamaroneckAvenue, in the City of White Plains,State of New York.

Proposed respondent Barry A. Weissis an officer and director of OMI. Heformulates, directs and controls thepolicies, acts and practices of OMI. Heresides at 22471 Vista Wood Way, BocaRaton, Florida.

Proposed respondent Roger Franklinis an officer and director of OMI andFranklin & Joseph, Inc. He formulates,directs and controls the acts andpractices of said corporations. Heresides at 33 Maplemoor Lane, WhitePlains, New York.

2. Proposed respondents admit all thejurisdictional facts set forth in the draftof complaint.

3. Proposed respondents waive:(a) Any further procedural steps;(b) The requirement that the

Commission’s decision contain astatement of findings of fact andconclusions of law; and

(c) All rights to seek judicial reviewor otherwise to challenge or contest thevalidity of the order entered pursuant tothis agreement.

4. This agreement shall not becomepart of the public record of theproceeding unless and until it isaccepted by the Commission. If thisagreement is accepted by theCommission it, together with the draft ofcomplaint contemplated thereby, will be

placed on the public record for a periodof sixty (60) days and information inrespect thereto publicly released. TheCommission thereafter may eitherwithdraw its acceptance of thisagreement and so notify the proposedrespondents, in which event it will takesuch action as it may considerappropriate, or issue and serve itscomplaint (in such form as thecircumstances may require) anddecision, in disposition of theproceeding.

5. This agreement is for settlementpurposes only and does not constitutean admission by proposed respondentsof facts, other than jurisdictional facts,or of violations of law as alleged in thedraft of complaint.

6. This agreement contemplates that,if it is accepted by the Commission, andif such acceptance is not subsequentlywithdrawn by the Commission pursuantto the provisions of § 2.34 of theCommission’s Rules, the Commissionmay, without further notice to proposedrespondents, (1) issue its complaintcorresponding in form and substancewith the draft of complaint and itsdecision containing the following orderto cease and desist in disposition of theproceeding and (2) make informationpublic in respect thereto. When soentered, the order to cease and desistshall have the same force and effect andmay be altered, modified or set aside inthe same manner and within the sametime provided by statute for otherorders. The order shall become finalupon service. Delivery by the U.S.Postal Service of the complaint anddecision containing the agreed-to orderto proposed respondents’ addresses asstated in this agreement shall constituteservice. Proposed respondents waiveany right they might have to any othermanner of service. The complaint maybe used in construing the terms of theorder, and no agreement, understanding,representation, or interpretation notcontained in the order or in theagreement may be used to vary orcontradict the terms of the order.

7. Proposed respondents have readthe proposed complaint and ordercontemplated hereby. They understandthat once the order has been issued,they will be required to file one or morecompliance reports showing that theyhave fully complied with the order.Proposed respondents furtherunderstand that they may be liable forcivil penalties in the amount providedby law for each violation of the orderafter it becomes final.

Order

For the purposes of this Order:


1. ‘‘Component and reliable scientificevidence’’ shall mean tests, analyses,research, studies, or other evidencebased on the expertise of professionalsin the relevant area, that has beenconducted and evaluated in an objectivemanner by persons qualified to do so,using procedures generally accepted inthe profession to yield accurate andreliable results.

2. ‘‘Acupressure device’’ shall meanany product, program, or service that isintended to function by means of theprinciples of acupressure.

IIt is ordered That respondents,

Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., corporations, theirsuccessors and assigns, and theirofficers; Barry A. Weiss, individuallyand as an officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc.; Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc. andFranklin & Joseph, Inc.; andrespondents’ agents, representatives andemployees, directly or through anypartnership, corporation, subsidiary,division or other device, in connectionwith the advertising, packaging,labeling, promotion, offering for sale,sale, or distribution of the AcuStop 2000or any other acupressure device in oraffecting commerce, as ‘‘commerce’’ isdefined in the Federal TradeCommission Act, do forthwith cease anddesist from representing, in any manner,directly or by implication, that

a. Such product causes significantweight loss;

B. Such product causes significantweight loss without the need to diet orexercise;

C. Such product controls appetite oreliminates a person’s craving for food;or

D. Such product is scientificallyproven to cause significant weight lossor control appetite.

IIIt is further ordered That respondents,

Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., corporations, theirsuccessors and assigns, and theirofficers; Barry A. Weiss, individuallyand as an officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc.; Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc. andFranklin & Joseph, Inc.; andrespondents’ agents, representatives andemployees, directly or through anypartnership, corporation, subsidiary,division or other device in connectionwith the advertising, packaging,labeling, promotion, offering for sale,sale, or distribution of any weight-loss

or weight-control product or program orany acupressure device in or affectingcommerce, as ‘‘commerce’’ is defined inthe Federal Trade Commission Act, doforthwith cease and desist from makingany representation, directly or byimplication, regarding the performance,benefits, efficacy, or safety of suchproduct, program, or device unless suchrepresentation is true and unless, at thetime of making such representation,respondents possess and rely uponcompetent and reliable scientificevidence that substantiates therepresentation.

IIIIt is further ordered That respondents,

Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., corporations, theirsuccessors and assigns, and theirofficers; Barry A. Weiss, individuallyand as an officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc.; Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc. andFranklin & Joseph, Inc.; andrespondents’ agents, representatives andemployees, directly or through anypartnership, corporation, subsidiary,division or other device, in connectionwith the advertising, packaging,labeling, promotion, offering for sale,sale, or distribution of any weight-lossor weight-control product or program orany acupressure device in or affectingcommerce, as ‘‘commerce’’ is defined inthe Federal Trade Commission Act, doforthwith cease and desist fromrepresenting, directly or by implication,that any endorsement (as‘‘endorsement’’ is defined in 16 C.F.R.§ 255.0(b)) of the product, program, ordevice represents the typical or ordinaryexperience of members of the publicwho use the product, program, or deviceunless this is the case.

IVIt is further ordered That respondents,

Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., corporations, theirsuccessors and assigns, and theirofficers; Barry A. Weiss, individuallyand as an officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc.; Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc. andFranklin & Joseph, Inc.; andrespondents’ agents, representatives andemployees, directly or through anypartnership, corporation, subsidiary,division or other device, in connectionwith the advertising, packaging,labeling, promotion, offering for sale,sale, or distribution of any weight-lossor weight-control product or program orany acupressure device in or affectingcommerce, as ‘‘commerce’’ is defined in

the Federal Trade Commission Act, doforthwith cease and desist frommisrepresenting, in any manner,directly or by implication, the contents,validity, results, conclusions, orinterpretations of any test or study.

V

It is further ordered That respondents,and their successors and assigns, arejointly and severally liable for, and shallpay refunds to eligible consumers ofAcu-Stop 2000 as provided herein.‘‘Eligible consumer’’ shall mean anyperson who purchases, or haspurchased, an Acu-Stop 2000 fromrespondents; who returns, or hasreturned, the device to respondentsrequesting a refund prior to ninety (90)days after the date this Order becomesfinal; and who has not previouslyreceived a refund. ‘‘Eligible consumer’’shall not include persons who request acredit from a credit card issuer and whodo not otherwise request a credit orrefund from respondents. Respondentsshall provide to the Commission allinformation necessary to identifyeligible consumers and to verify theireligibility.

A. Not later than the date this Orderbecomes final, respondents shall depositinto an escrow account, to beestablished by the Commission for thepurpose of receiving payments dueunder the provisions of this Order(‘‘escrow account’’), the sum of fiftythousand dollars ($50,000.00). Thesefunds, together with accrued interest,less any amount necessary to pay thecosts of administering the escrowaccount and refund program providedherein, shall be used by the Commissionor its representative to pay refunds tothose eligible consumers who purchasedan Acu-Stop 2000 from respondentsprior to January 1, 1995. Any fundsremaining in the escrow account afterall refunds to consumers under thissubparagraph have been paid shall bepaid to the United States Treasury.

At any time after this Order becomesfinal, the Commission may direct theescrow agent to transfer funds from theescrow account, including accruedinterest, to the Commission to bedistributed as herein provided.Respondents shall be notified as to howthe funds are distributed, but shall haveno right to contest the manner ofdistribution chosen by the Commission.The Commission, or its representative,shall, in its sole discretion, select theescrow agent. Costs associated with theadministration of the escrow accountand refund program provided herein, ifany, shall be paid from funds in theescrow account.


Respondents relinquish all dominion,control and title to the funds paid intothe escrow account, and all legal andequitable title to the funds shall vest inthe Treasurer of the United States andin the designated consumers.Respondents shall make no claim to ordemand for the return of the funds,directly or indirectly, through counselor otherwise; and in the event ofbankruptcy of respondents, respondentsacknowledge that the funds are not partof the debtor’s estate, nor does the estatehave any claim or interest therein.

B. Respondents shall pay from theirown funds refunds to all eligibleconsumers who are not paid from theescrow account provided herein. Thisrequirement shall include:

(1) all refund requests from eligibleconsumers who purchased an Acu-Stop2000 after January 1, 1995, and

(2) all refund requests undersubparagraph A that exceed the amountavailable in the escrow account.

All refunds required in subparagraphB.1 shall be paid within thirty (30) daysafter the receipt of the request, or withinthirty (30) days after the date this Orderbecomes final, whichever is later. Allrefunds required in subparagraph B.2shall be paid within thirty (30) daysafter notification to respondents that thefunds available in the escrow account topay refunds have been depleted.

VI

It is further ordered That for three (3)years after this Order becomes final,respondents, and their successors andassigns, shall maintain documents andrecords demonstrating the manner andform of respondents’ compliance withPart V of this Order, and upon requestmake available to the Commission, at aplace it designates for inspection andcopying, copies of:

A. All documents and recordsevidencing the refunds respondentspaid, or charge card credits issued, toeligible consumers, as that term isdefined in Part V;

B. A list containing the name, mailingaddress, and purchase price for eacheligible consumer who requested arefund;

C. The name and last known addressof each consumer who requested arefund but was refused and the reasonfor each refusal to refund; and

D. Copies of all correspondence andother communications to, or from, anyconsumers regarding a refund.

VII

It is further ordered the respondentsBarry A. Weiss, Roger Franklin, andtheir agents, representatives, andemployees, directly or through any

partnership, corporation, subsidiary,division, joint venture or other device,do forthwith cease and desist fromadvertising, promoting, offering for sale,selling, or distributing any weight-lossor weight-control product or program orany acupressure device to the generalpublic, unless, prior to advertising,promoting, offering for sale, selling, ordistributing to the general public anysuch product, respondents Weiss andFranklin first obtain a performance bondin the principal sum of three hundredthousand dollars ($300,000). Said bondshall be conditioned upon complianceby respondents Weiss and Franklin withthe provisions of the Federal TradeCommission Act, and with theprovisions of this Order. The bond shallbe deemed continuous and remain infull force and effect as long asrespondents Weiss and Franklincontinue to advertise, promote, offer forsale, sell, or distribute any weight-lossor weight-control product or program orany acupressure device, directly orindirectly, to the general public, and forat least five (5) years after they haveceased any such activity. The bond shallcite this Order as the subject matter ofthe bond and provide surety againstrespondents’ failure to pay consumerredress or disgorgement as set forthherein. Such performance bond shall bean influence agreement providing suretyissued by a surety company that isadmitted to do business in a state inwhich respondents Weiss and Franklinare doing business and that holds aFederal Certificate of Authority asAcceptable Surety on Federal Bondingand Reinsuring.

Respondents Weiss and Franklin shallprovide a copy of such performancebond to the associate director of theFederal Trade Commission’s Division ofEnforcement, 6th Street & PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580,prior to the commencement of anybusiness for which such bond isrequired.

Provided, however, in lieu of aperformance bond, respondents Weissand Franklin may establish and fund,pursuant to the terms set forth herein,an escrow account in the principal sumof three hundred thousand dollars($300,000) in cash, or such other assetsof equivalent value, which theCommission, or its representative, in itssole discretion may approve.Respondents Weiss and Franklin shallmaintain such amount in that accountfor as long as they continue to advertise,promote, offer for sale, sell, or distributeany weight-loss or weight-controlproduct or program or any acupressuredevice, directly or indirectly, to thegeneral public, and for at least five (5)

years after they have ceased any suchactivity. Respondents Weiss andFranklin shall pay all costs associatedwith the creation, funding, operation,and administration of the escrowaccount. The Commission, or itsrepresentative, shall, in its solediscretion, select the escrow agent. Theescrow agreement shall be insubstantially the form attached to thisOrder as Exhibit A.

The performance bond or escrowagreement shall provide that the suretycompany or escrow agent, within thirty(30) days following receipt of notice thata final judgment or an order of theCommission against respondent Weissand/or respondent Franklin forconsumer redress or disgorgement in anaction brought under the provisions ofthe Federal Trade Commission Act hasbeen entered, or, in the case of an orderof the Commission, has become final,finding that Weiss and/or Franklin hasviolated the terms of this Order or theFederal Trade Commission Act, anddetermining the amount of consumerredress or disgorgement to be paid, shallpay to the Commission so much of theperformance bond or funds of theescrow account as does not exceed theamount of consumer redress ordisgorgement ordered, and whichremains unsatisfied at the time notice isprovided to the surety company orescrow agent, provided that, ifrespondents have agreed to the entry ofa court order or an order of theCommission, a specific finding thatrespondents violated the terms of thisOrder or the provisions of the FederalTrade Commission Act shall not benecessary. A copy of the noticeprovided for herein shall be mailed torespondent Weiss and/or respondentFranklin at their last known address.

Respondents Weiss and Franklin maynot disclose the existence of theperformance bond or escrow account toany consumer, or other purchaser orprospective purchaser, to whom acovered product, program, or device isadvertised, promoted, offered for sale,sold, or distributed, without alsodisclosing at the same time and in a likemanner that the performance bond orescrow account is required by order ofthe Federal Trade Commission insettlement of changes that respondentsengaged in false and misleadingrepresentations.

VIIIIt is further ordered That for five (5)

years after the last date of disseminationof any representation covered by thisOrder, respondents, or their successorsand assigns, shall maintain and uponrequest make available to the Federal


Trade Commission or its staff forinspection and copying:

A. All materials that were relied uponin disseminating such representation;and

B. All tests, reports, studies, surveys,demonstrations or other evidence intheir possession or control thatcontradict, qualify, or call into questionsuch representation, or the basis reliedupon for such representation, includingcomplaints from consumers.

IX

It is further ordered That respondents,Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., shall:

A. Within thirty (30) days after serviceof this Order, provide a copy of thisOrder to each of respondents’ currentprincipals, officers, directors andmanagers, and to all personnel, agents,and representatives having sales,advertising, or policy responsibilitywith respect to the subject matter of thisOrder; and

B. For a period of five (5) years fromthe date of issuance of this Order,provide a copy of this Order to each ofrespondents’ future principals, officers,directors, and managers, and to allpersonnel, agents, and representativeshaving sales, advertising, or policyresponsibility with respect to the subjectmatter of this Order who are associatedwith respondents or any subsidiary,successor, or assign, within three (3)days after the person assumes his or herposition.

X

It is further ordered That respondents,Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., shall notify the FederalTrade Commission at least thirty (30)days prior to any proposed change intheir corporate structures, including butnot limited to dissolution, assignment,or sale resulting in the emergence of asuccessor corporation, the creation ordissolution of subsidiaries or affiliates,the planned filing of a bankruptcypetition, or any other corporate changethat may affect compliance obligationsarising out of this Order.

XI

It is further ordered That respondents,Barry A. Weiss and Roger Franklin,shall, for a period of five (5) years fromthe date of issuance of this Order, notifythe Commission within thirty (30) daysof the discontinuance of his presentbusiness or employment and of hisaffiliation with any new business oremployment. Each notice of affiliationwith any new business or employmentshall include respondents’ new businessaddress and telephone number, current

home address, and a statementdescribing the nature of the business oremployment and his duties andresponsibilities.

XIIIt is further ordered That respondents,

Original Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc., corporations, theirsuccessors and assigns, and theirofficers; Barry A. Weiss, individuallyand as an officer and director of OriginalMarketing, Inc.; and Roger Franklin,individually and as an officer anddirector of Original Marketing, Inc. andFranklin & Joseph, Inc., shall, withinsixty (60) days after service of thisOrder, and at such other times as theFederal Trade Commission may require,file with the Commission a report, inwriting, setting forth in detail themanner and form in which they havecomplied with this Order.

Exhibit AThis Escrow Agreement, made and

entered into this lll day oflllll, ll, by and betweenlllllllll (hereinafter‘‘lllll’’); and the Federal TradeCommission, an agency of theGovernment of the United States ofAmerica, by and throughllllllll (hereinafter ‘‘FTC’’);and llllllllll (hereinafter‘‘Escrow Agent’’);

Witnesseth:Whereas, the FTC and llllll

have entered into an AgreementContaining Consent Order to Cease andDesist (hereinafter ‘‘Consent Order’’), acopy of which is attached hereto asExhibit A; and

Whereas, the Consent Order requiresthat lllll cease and desist fromadvertising, promoting, offering for sale,selling, or distributing any weight-lossor weight-control product or program orany acupressure device to the generalpublic unless lll first establishesand maintains an escrow account, underthe terms and conditions specified inthe Consent Order;

Now, Wherefore, in accordance withthe terms of the Consent Order, whichare incorporated herein by reference, theparties covenant and agree as follows:

1. llll shall establish an EscrowAccount at lllllllll, to bestyled lllll Escrow Account,llllllll, Escrow Agent.lllll shall deposit into the EscrowAccount an initial sum of at least threehundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00)in cash, or other approved assets ofequivalent value. Thereafter, lllllshall deposit such additional amountsinto the Escrow Account as are

necessary to maintain the total amountin the Escrow Account at three hundredthousand dollars ($300,000.00).

2. The Escrow Agent shall be the solesignatory on the Escrow Account andaccess to the funds held in that accountshall be solely through the EscrowAgent. It is understood by the parties tothis Escrow Agreement that upon thesigning of this Agreement, llllllrelinquishes to the Escrow Agent, alllegal title to the escrow funds, except asto such amounts in the Escrow Accountthat are in excess of three hundredthousand dollars ($300,000.00). Untiland unless the Escrow Account isterminated as provided for herein,llllll agrees to make no claim toor demand for return of the funds,directly or indirectly, through counselor otherwise; and, in the event ofbankruptcy, llllll acknowledgesthat the funds are not part ofllllll’s estate, nor does theestate have any claim or interest therein.

3. The Escrow Agent and the partieshereto agree that the escrow funds shallbe held only in accordance with theterms of the Consent Order and theEscrow Agreement. lllll shall payall costs associated with the creation,funding, operation, and administrationof the Escrow Account as they becomedue. In the event that llllll failsto pay such costs as they become due,the Escrow Agent shall pay the costsfrom the interest earned on the escrowfunds.

4. The Escrow Agent, within thirtydays following receipt of notice that afinal judgment or an order of theCommission against llllll forconsumer redress or disgorgement in anaction brought under the provisions ofthe Federal Trade Commission Act hasbeen entered, or, in the case of an orderof the Commission, has become final,finding that ll has violated the termsof the Consent Order or the provisionsof the Federal Trade Commission Act,and determining the amount ofconsumer redress or disgorgement to bepaid, which notice shall also be mailedto llllll at his last knownaddress, shall pay to the Commission somuch of the funds of the EscrowAccount as does not exceed the amountof consumer redress or disgorgementordered, and which remains unsatisfiedat the time notice is provided to theEscrow Agent, provided that, Ifllllll has agreed to the entry ofa court order or an order of theCommission, a specific finding thatllllll violated the terms of theConsent Order or the provisions of theFederal Trade Commission Act shall notbe necessary. The Escrow Agent shallhave the power to convert to cash so


much of the Escrow Account assets asare necessary to satisfy the obligationsof the judgment or order .

5. The Escrow Account shall continueuntil at least five years afterllllll last advertises, promotes,offers for sale, sells, or distributes anyproduct specified in the Consent Order,at which time, if there are no pendingFTC investigations, legal oradministrative actions by the FTCagainst llllll, or unsatisfiedobligations pursuant to a judgment ororder described in paragraph 4 herein,for which a claim could be made againstthe escrow funds under the terms of theConsent Order, the FTC shall, uponllllll’s request, instruct theEscrow Agent to terminate the EscrowAccount and return the balance of theEscrow Account to llllll. Atsuch time, the Escrow Agent shall befully and completely released from itsagency as herein described. The legaltitle to the escrow funds shall vest inllllll at such time as the EscrowAgent, pursuant to instructions from theFTC, returns the funds to llllll.

Witness the signatures of the parties,the day and year first above written.

Date:Signatures

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order toAid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission hasaccepted an agreement, subject to finalapproval, to a proposed consent orderfrom proposed respondents OriginalMarketing, Inc. d/b/a Acu-Stop 2000;Franklin & Joseph, Inc.; Barry A. Weiss;and Roger Franklin.

The proposed consent order has beenplaced on the public record for sixty(60) days for reception of comments byinterested persons. Comments receivedduring this period will become part ofthe public record. After sixty (60) days,the Commission will again review theagreement and the comments receivedand will decide whether it shouldwithdraw from the agreement and takeother appropriate action or make finalthe agreement’s proposed order.

This matter concerns advertisingrelated to the sale of an ear-moldacupressure device, marketed under thename Acu-Stop 2000, which nests in theear. The Commission’s Complaintcharges that proposed respondentsOriginal Marketing, Inc. d/b/a Acu-Stop2000; Franklin & Joseph, Inc.; Barry A.Weiss; and Roger Franklin falselyrepresented that the Acu-Stop 2000: (1)Causes significant weight loss; (2)causes significant weight loss withoutthe need to diet or exercise; and (3)

controls appetite or eliminates aperson’s craving for food.

The Complaint also alleges thatproposed respondents falsely andmisleadingly represented that theypossessed and relied upon a reasonablebasis when they made those claims. TheComplaint further alleges that proposedrespondents falsely represented that theAcu-Stop 2000 is scientifically provento cause significant weight loss andcontrol appetite. Finally, the Complaintalleges that proposed respondentsfalsely represented that testimonialsfrom consumers appearing inadvertisements for the Acu-Stop 2000reflect the typical or ordinaryexperience of members of the publicwho have used the device.

The proposed consent order containsprovisions designed to remedy theviolations charged and to preventproposed respondents from engaging insimilar acts in the future.

Part I of the proposed order prohibitsproposed respondents from representingthat the Acu-Stop 2000 or any otheracupressure device: (1) Causessignificant weight loss; (2) causessignificant weight loss without the needto diet or exercise; (3) controls appetiteor eliminates a person’s craving forfood; or (4) is scientifically proven tocause significant weight loss and controlappetite. The order defines‘‘acupressure device’’ as ‘‘any product,program, or service that is intended tofunction by means of the principles ofacupressure.’’ Part II requires proposedrespondents to possess competent andreliable scientific evidence beforemaking representations regarding theperformance, benefits, efficacy, or safetyof any weight-loss or weight-controlproduct or program or any acupressuredevice. Part III prohibits proposedrespondents from falsely claiming thatendorsements or testimonials for anyweight-loss or weight-control product orprogram or any acupressure devicerepresent the typical or ordinaryexperience of members of the publicwho use the product, program, ordevice. Part IV prohibits proposedrespondents from misrepresenting theresults of tests or studies for any weight-loss or weight-control product orprogram or any acupressure device.

Part V holds proposed respondentsjointly and severally liable for, andrequires them to pay, refunds to allpurchasers of the Acu-Stop 2000 whoreturn or have returned the device for arefund. Part V.A. requires respondentsto deposit $50,000 into an escrowaccount for payment of refunds toeligible consumers who purchased thedevice prior to January 1, 1995, and whopreviously have requested a refund or

do so within ninety days after theproposed order becomes final. Part V.B.requires proposed respondents to pay,out of their own funds, all refundrequests from eligible consumers thatexceed $50,000 and all such requests forpurchases made after January 1, 1995.Together, these two provisions requireproposed respondents to pay all existingrefund requests and future requestsmade up to ninety days after theproposed order becomes final. Part VIrequires that proposed respondentsmaintain records demonstrating themanner and form of their compliancewith the requirement that they makerefunds.

Part VII requires that proposedrespondents Weiss and Franklin post abond or fund an escrow account in theamount of $300,000 prior to the futuremarketing any weight-loss or weight-control product or program or anyacupressure device.

Part VIII requires proposedrespondents to maintain, for five (5)years, all materials that support,contradict, qualify, or call into questionany representations they make whichare covered by the proposed order. PartIX requires proposed respondentsOriginal Marketing, Inc. and Franklin &Joseph, Inc. to distribute a copy of theorder to current and future principals,officers, directors, and managers, as wellas to any employees having sales,advertising, or policy responsibilitywith respect to the subject matter of theorder. Under Part X of the proposedorder, proposed respondents OriginalMarketing, Inc. and Franklin & Joseph,Inc. shall notify the Federal TradeCommission at least thirty (30) daysprior to any proposed change in theircorporate structures that may affectcompliance with the order’s obligations.Part XI requires that proposedrespondents Weiss and Franklin, for aperiod of five (5) years, notify theCommission of any change in theirbusiness or employment. Part XIIobliges proposed respondents to filecompliance reports with theCommission.

The purpose of this analysis is tofacilitate public comment on theproposed order, and it is not toconstitute an official interpretation ofthe agreement and proposed order or tomodify in any way their terms.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12588 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]



DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ANDHUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children andFamilies

The Regional Offices of theAdministration for Children andFamilies Statement of Organization,Functions, and Delegations ofAuthority

This Notice amends Part K of theStatement of Organization, Functions,and Delegations of Authority of theDepartment of Health and HumanServices (DHHS), Administration forChildren and Families (ACF) as follows:Chapter KD, The Regional Offices of theAdministration for Children andFamilies (58 FR 44343), as lastamended, August 20, 1993. Thisreorganization realigns the functions inRegion 6 to support their streamliningplan. This Chapter is amended asfollows:1. KD.10 Organization. Regions 1, 3, 4,

5, 7 through X are organized asfollows:

Office of the Regional Administrator(KD1A, KD3A, KD4A, KD5A, KD7Athrough KDXA)

Office of Financial Operations (KD1B,KD3B, KD4B, KD5B, KD7B throughKDXB)

Office of Family Security (KD1C,KD3C, KD4C, KD5C, KD7C throughKDXC)

Office of Family Supportive Services(KD1D, KD3D, KD4D, KD5D, KD7Dthrough KDXD)

After the end of KD2.20 Functions,Paragraph D, insert the following:2. KD6.10 Organization. The

Administration for Children andFamilies, Region 6, is organized asfollows:

Office of the Regional Administrator(KD6A)

Office of State and Tribal Programs(KD6E)

Office of Community Programs(KD6F)

Functions. A. The Office of theRegional Administrator is headed by aRegional Administrator. In addition, theOffice of the Regional Administrator hasa Deputy Regional Administrator whoreports to the Regional Administrator.The Office provides executiveleadership and directives to state,county, city, territorial and tribalgovernments, as well as public andprivate local grantees to ensure effectiveand efficient program and financialmanagement. It ensures that theseentities conform to federal laws,regulations, policies and procedures

governing the programs, and exercisesall delegated authorities andresponsibilities for oversight of theprograms. The office takes action toapprove state plans and submitsrecommendations to the AssistantSecretary for Children and Familiesconcerning state plan disapproval. TheOffice contributes to the development ofnational policy based on regionalperspectives on all ACF programs. Itoversees ACF operations, themanagement of ACF regional staff;coordinates activities across regionalprograms; and assures that goals andobjectives are met and departmental andagency initiatives are carried out. TheOffice alerts the Assistant Secretary forChildren and Families to problems andissues that may have significant regionalor national impact. The Officerepresents ACF at the regional level inexecutive communications within ACF,with the HHS Regional Director, otherHHS operating divisions, other federalagencies, and public or private localorganizations representing children andfamilies.

Within the Office of the RegionalAdministrator, the Program Coordinatorand Planning Unit (PCPU), headed bythe Executive Officer and consisting ofadministrative staff, assists the RegionalAdministrator and Deputy RegionalAdministrator in providing day-to-daysupport for regional administrativefunctions, including budget, internalsystems, employee relations and humanresource development activities. ThePCPU develops and implements theregional planning process. Tracking,monitoring and reporting on regionalprogress in the attainment of ACFnational goals and objectives are carriedout. The PCPU coordinates publicawareness activities, informationdissemination and education campaignsin accordance with the ACF Office ofPublic Affairs and in conjunction withthe HHS Regional Director. The Unitalso assists the Regional Administratorin management of cross-cuttinginitiatives and activities among theregional components, and ensureseffective and efficient management ofinternal automation processes.

B. The Office of State and TribalPrograms is headed by an AssistantRegional Administrator who reports tothe Regional Administrator. The Officeis responsible for providing centralizedmanagement, financial managementservices, and technical administration ofACF formula, block and entitlementprograms such as Aid to Families withDependent Children (AFDC), ChildSupport Enforcement (CSE), JobOpportunities and Basic Skills Training(JOBS), Title IV–A Child Care, Child

Care and Development Block Grant(CCDBG), Child Welfare Services, FosterCare and Adoption Assistance, ChildAbuse and Neglect and DevelopmentalDisabilities. The Office provides policyguidance to state, county, city or townand tribal governments and public andprivate organizations to assureconsistent and uniform adherence tofederal requirements governing formulaand entitlement programs. State plansare reviewed and recommendationsconcerning state plan approval ordisapproval are made to the RegionalAdministrator. The Office providestechnical assistance to entitiesresponsible for administering theseprograms to resolve identified problems,ensures that appropriate procedures andpractices are adopted, monitors theprograms to ensure their efficiency andeffectiveness, establishes regionalfinancial management priorities andreviews cost allocation plans, andoversees the management andcoordination of office automationsystems in the regional and monitorsstate systems projects for the CSE,AFDC, Child Welfare and JOBSprograms. The Office provides financialmanagement services for ACF formulaand entitlement grants in the region.Also reviews cost estimates and reportsfor ACF entitlement and formula grantprograms and recommends fundinglevels. The Office performs systematicfiscal reviews and makesrecommendations to the RegionalAdministrator to approve, defer ordisallow claims for federal financialparticipation in ACF formula andentitlement grant programs. Asapplicable, recommendations are madeon the clearance and closure of auditsof state programs, paying particularattention to financial managementdeficiencies that decrease the efficiencyand effectiveness of the ACF programsand taking steps to monitor theresolution of such deficiencies. TheOffice represents the RegionalAdministrator in dealing with ACFProgram Offices on all program andfinancial policy matters under itsjurisdiction. Alerts or early warnings areprovided to the Regional Administratorregarding problems or issues that mayhave significant implications for theprograms.

C. The Office of Community Programsis headed by an Assistant RegionalAdministrator who reports to theRegional Administrator. The Office isresponsible for providing centralizedmanagement, financial managementservices, and technical administration ofACF discretionary grant programs suchas Head Start and Runaway and


Homeless Youth (RHY). In that regard,the Office provides policy guidance tostate, county, city or town and tribalgovernments and public and privateorganizations to assure consistent anduniform adherence to federalrequirements. The Office providestechnical assistance to entitiesresponsible for administering theseprograms to ensure that appropriateprocedures and practices are adopted,and monitors the programs to ensuretheir efficiency and effectiveness. TheOffice performs systematic fiscalreviews and makes recommendations tothe Regional Administrator to approveor disallow costs under ACFdiscretionary grant programs. The Officeissues certain discretionary grantawards based on a review of projectobjectives, budget projections, andproposed funding levels. As applicable,recommendations are made on theclearance and closure of audits ofgrantee programs, paying particularattention to financial managementdeficiencies that decrease the efficiencyand effectiveness of the ACF programsand taking steps to monitor theresolution of such deficiencies. TheOffice oversees the management andcoordination of office automationsystems in the region such as the PCCost and HS Cost systems for budgetanalysis on Head Start Applications andmonitors grantee systems projects suchas the Head Start Program InformationReport, Head Start ManagementTracking System and the YouthDevelopment and Head Start BulletinBoard. The Office represents theRegional Administrator in dealing withACF Program Offices on all programpolicy and financial matters under itsjurisdiction. Alerts or early warnings areprovided to the Regional Administratorregarding problems or issues that mayhave significant implications on theprograms.

Dated: May 15, 1995.Mary Jo Bane,Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.[FR Doc. 95–12550 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4148–01–M

Office of Refugee Resettlement;Statement of Organization, Functions,and Delegations of Authority

This Notice amends Part K, Chapter Kof the Statement of Organization,Functions and Delegations of Authorityof the Department of Health and HumanServices, Administration for Childrenand Families (56 FR 42332) as lastamended, August 27, 1991; KR, TheOffice of Refugee Resettlement (59 FR

23888), as last amended, May 9, 1994.This reorganization will realign thefunctions of the Office of RefugeeResettlement into two divisions, therebyimproving the efficiency andeffectiveness of the refugee activities inthe Administration for Children andFamilies. Specifically, we are amendingChapter KR with the following:

KR.00 Mission. The Office of RefugeeResettlement (ORR) advises theSecretary, through the AssistantSecretary for Children and Families, onmatters relating to refugee resettlement,immigration, and repatriation. TheOffice plans, develops and directsimplementation of a comprehensiveprogram for domestic refugee andentrant resettlement assistance. Itdevelops, recommends, and issuesprogram policies, procedures andinterpretations to provide programdirection. The Office monitors andevaluates the performance of states andother public and private agencies inadministering these programs andsupports actions to improve them. Itprovides leadership and direction in thedevelopment and coordination ofnational public and private programsthat provide assistance to refugees,entrants, and other immigrants.

The Office also plans, develops andprovides direction on the administrationof the U.S. Repatriate Program.

KR.10 Organization. The Office ofRefugee Resettlement is headed by aDirector who reports directly to theAssistant Secretary for Children andFamilies and consists of:Office of the Director [KRA]Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency

[KRE]Division of Community Resettlement

[KRF]KR.20 Functions. A. Office of the

Director is directly responsible to theAssistant Secretary for Children andFamilies for carrying out ORR’s missionand providing guidance and generalsupervision to the components of ORR.Within the Office of the Director, staffassist the Director in managing theformulation of program policy andbudget and in the formulation of salariesand expense budgets. Staff also provideadministrative, personnel and dataprocessing support services.

The Office coordinates with the leadrefugee and entrant program offices ofother federal departments; providesleadership in representing refugee andentrant programs, policies andadministration to a variety ofgovernmental entities and other publicand private interests; and acts as thecoordinator of the total refugee andentrant resettlement effort for ACF andthe Department.

B. Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency provides direction forassuring that refugees are providedassistance and services through theState-administered program andalternative programs such as thevoluntary agency program and Wilson/Fish projects in a manner that helpsrefugees to become employed andeconomically self-sufficient as soonafter their arrival in the United States aspossible. It monitors and providestechnical assistance to the state-administered domestic assistanceprograms and develops guidance andprocedures for their implementation;manages special initiatives to increaserefugee self-sufficiency such as throughdemonstration or pilot programs;manages the unaccompanied minorsprogram to ensure that refugee andentrant unaccompanied minors areprovided appropriate care and services;manages the allocation and tracking offunds for refugee cash and refugeemedical assistance and Stateadministrative costs; prepares annualbudget estimates and related materials;and develops regulations, legislativeproposals, and routine interpretations ofpolicy regarding the State-administeredand alternative programs.

C. Division of CommunityResettlement directs and manageseffective refugee resettlement throughthe programmatic implementation ofgrants, contracts and special initiativesassociated with national discretionaryactivity and other activities as specifiedby the Director or required byCongressional mandate.

The Division ensures the quality ofmedical screening and initial medicaltreatment of refugees; collects data andperforms analyses on the changingneeds of the refugee and entrantpopulation; provides leadership toidentify data needs and sources,formulates data and reportingrequirements; assists states and privateagencies on data reporting and theresolution of reporting problems;compiles, evaluates, and disseminatesinformation on the nationwideperformance and costs of refugee serviceprograms; responds to unanticipatedrefugee and entrant arrivals orsignificant increases in arrivals tocommunities where adequate orappropriate services do not exist;strengthens the role of ethniccommunity national or multi-Stateorganizations to promote economicindependence among refugees; providesfor English Language Training andprovides where specific needs havebeen shown and recognized by theDirector for health (including mental


health) services, social services,educational and other services.

The Division develops Repatriationplans to make arrangements andapprove payments for temporaryassistance to certain U.S. citizens anddependents repatriated from foreigncountries, and for the hospitalization ofcertain U.S. Nationals repatriatedbecause of mental illness.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Mary Jo Bane,Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.[FR Doc. 95–12551 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4184–01–M

Centers for Disease Control andPrevention

[Announcement 553]

Cooperative Agreement for AdultBlood Lead Epidemiology SurveillancePrograms and/or Intervention Projectsto Prevent Adult Lead Poisoning

Introduction

The Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC) announces theavailability of fiscal year (FY) 1995funds for new and competingcontinuation of State-Based Adult BloodLead Epidemiology and SurveillancePrograms (ABLES) and interventionprojects to prevent adult lead poisoningin high-risk industries and occupations.The Public Health Service (PHS) iscommitted to achieving the healthpromotion and disease preventionobjectives of Healthy People 2000, aPHS-led national activity to reducemorbidity and mortality and improvethe quality of life. This announcementis related to the priority area ofOccupational Safety and Health. (Toorder a copy of Healthy People 2000, seethe Section Where To Obtain AdditionalInformation.)

Authority

This program is authorized under theOccupational Safety and Health Act of1970, section 20(a), (29 U.S.C. 669(a)),and section 22(e)(7), (29 U.S.C.671(e)(7)).

Smoke-Free Workplace

The Public Health Service stronglyencourages all grant recipients toprovide a smoke-free workplace andpromote the non-use of all tobaccoproducts, and Public Law 103–227, thePro-Children Act of 1994, prohibitssmoking in certain facilities that receiveFederal funds in which education,library, day care, health care, and earlychildhood development services areprovided to children.

Environmental Justice InitiativeActivities conducted under this

announcement should be consistentwith the Federal Executive Order No.12898 entitled ‘‘Federal Actions toAddress Environmental Justice inMinority Populations and Low-IncomePopulations.’’ Awardees, to the greatestextent practicable and permitted by law,shall make achieving environmentaljustice part of its program’s mission byidentifying and addressing, asappropriate, disproportionately highand adverse human health andenvironmental effects of lead onminority populations and low-incomepopulations.

Eligible ApplicantsEligible applicants must have

regulations for reporting blood leadlevels or provide assurances that suchregulations will be in place within sixmonths of awarding the cooperativeagreement. Eligible applicants are Statehealth departments or other State healthagencies or departments deemed mostappropriate by the State to direct andcoordinate the State’s adult leadpoisoning prevention program. Thiseligibility includes health departmentsor other official organizational authority(agency or instrumentality) of theDistrict of Columbia, theCommonwealth of Puerto Rico, and anyterritory or possession of the UnitedStates. Also eligible are federallyrecognized Indian tribal governments.

Note: Other official State and territorialagencies with occupational safety and healthjurisdiction may also apply. Applicants otherthan health departments must apply incollaboration with and through their Stateand territorial health department.

For Surveillance Funds Only: Eligibleapplicants must have regulations forreporting of blood lead (PbB) levels byboth public and private laboratories orprovide assurances that such regulationswill be in place no later than September30, 1995. This program is intended toinitiate and build capacity forsurveillance of adult PbB levels.Therefore, any applicant that alreadyhas in place a PbB level surveillanceactivity must demonstrate how thesegrant funds will be used to enhance,expand or improve the current activity,in order to remain eligible for funding.CDC funds should be added to blood-lead surveillance funding from othersources, if such funding exists.Applicants other than State healthdepartments must apply in conjunctionwith their State or territorial healthdepartment. If a State agency applyingfor cooperative agreement funds is otherthan the official State health

department, written concurrence by theState health department must beprovided.

(In order to compete for additionalfunding, applicants that are currentlybeing funded for ‘‘Adult Blood LeadEpidemiology and Surveillance’’programs must submit newsupplemental proposals for theirsurveillance activities, and/or aproposal for an intervention project.These supplements must meet all theabove eligibility and will be evaluatedas a part of the surveillance program/intervention project objective review.)

Availability of Funds

Surveillance/Intervention Funds

Approximately $539,500 will beavailable in FY 1995. These funds willbe awarded as follows:

Surveillance Programs

A. Approximately $81,000 to fund upto three cooperative agreements forStates currently without a leadsurveillance program but who meet theeligibility criteria. These awards areexpected to range from approximately$25,000 to $30,000 with the averageaward being approximately $27,000.

B. Approximately $278,500 to fundup to thirteen cooperative agreements.Eligible applicants include those Statescurrently receiving CDC/NIOSH ABLESsupport and those which providequarterly data to the national reportingsystem. These awards are expected torange from $20,000 to $22,000, with theaverage award being approximately$21,500.

Intervention Project(s)

C. Approximately $180,000 to fundup to two cooperative agreements forintervention projects. These awards areexpected to range from $80,000 to$100,000, with the average award beingapproximately $90,000.

The new awards are expected to beginon or about September 30, 1995. Newawards for surveillance programs listedunder Parts A and B are made for 12-month budget periods within projectperiods not to exceed 5 years. Awardsfor Intervention project(s) under Part Care made for a project period of oneyear. Funding estimates outlined aboveare subject to change based on the actualavailability of funds and the scope andquality of applications received.Continuation awards within the projectperiod will be made on the basis ofsatisfactory progress and availability offunds.

These awards are intended todevelop, expand, or improve adultblood lead epidemiology and


surveillance programs and/or developstatewide capacity for conductingsurveillance of elevated blood-leadlevels. Funds for intervention projectsare for the development and conduct ofprojects to reduce adult lead poisoning.Cooperative agreement funds should beused to increase the level ofexpenditures from State, local, andother funding sources. Awards will bemade with the expectation thatexpanded or improved surveillanceactivities will continue when awardedfunds are terminated at the end of theproject period.

PurposeThis program is intended to initiate

and build capacity for blood lead levelsurveillance and/or conductinterventions to prevent adult leadpoisoning. Therefore, any applicant thatalready has a blood lead levelsurveillance activity in place mustdemonstrate how these cooperativeagreement funds will be used toenhance, expand, or improve thecurrent activity in order to remaineligible for funding.

Cooperative agreement funds shouldbe added to blood lead surveillancefunding from other sources, if suchfunding exists. Funds for this programmay not be used in place of any existingfunding for blood lead surveillance orintervention activities. Funds should beused to: (1) Collect data on adults withelevated blood lead levels; (2) identifypossible sources of lead exposure; (3)monitor medical, occupational, andenvironmental management of lead-poisoned adults; (4) provide informationon adult lead poisoning and itsprevention and management to thepublic, health professionals, and policyand decision makers; (5) encourage andsupport community-based programsdirected to the goal of eliminating adultlead poisoning; and (6) build capacityfor conducting surveillance of elevatedblood lead (BLL’s) levels in adults.

Cooperative Agreement funds forsurveillance are to be used to developand implement complete surveillancesystems for blood lead levels in adultsto ensure appropriate targeting for high-risk industries and occupations andtrack progress in the elimination ofadult lead poisoning. Intervention fundsare to be used to develop effectivemodels for intervention in theprevention of adult lead poisoning.

Surveillance ProgramsThis cooperative agreement program

is intended to assist State healthdepartments or other appropriateagencies to implement a complete bloodlead surveillance activity. For the

purpose of these programs a completeblood lead surveillance activity isdefined as a process which: (1)Systematically collects information overtime about adults (primarily workers)with elevated BLL’s using laboratoryreports as the data source; (2) collectsfollow-up information on industry andoccupation of individuals identified onlaboratory reports; (3) provides for thefollow-up of cases, including fieldinvestigations when necessary; and (4)provides timely and useful analysis andreporting of the accumulated data.

Intervention Projects

The purpose of these awards is toassist State health departments or otherappropriate agencies to developeffective models for intervention in theprevention of occupational leadpoisoning. In particular, the focusshould be on lead-using industries andoccupations covered under theOccupational Safety and HealthAdministration (OSHA) Lead Standardfor General Industry (29 CFR 1025.1910)or the Construction Standard (29 CFRpart 1926) to determine methods foreffective interventions to control leadexposures and reduce blood lead levels.An effective intervention strategydeveloped by the program will serve asa model for other programs nationally.

Goals

Surveillance Programs

The surveillance component of thisannouncement is intended to assistState health departments or otherappropriate agencies to implement acomplete surveillance activity for BLL’sin adults. Development of surveillancesystems at the local, State and nationallevels is essential for targetinginterventions to high-risk industries andoccupations and for tracking progress ineliminating adult poisoning.

The goals of the ABLES program areto:1. Increase the number of State health

departments with surveillancesystems for elevated BLL’s;

2. Build the capacity of State- orterritorial-based BLL surveillancesystems;

3. Use data from these systems toconduct national surveillance ofelevated BLL’s;

4. Disseminate data on the occurrence ofelevated BLL’s to governmentagencies, researchers, employers, andmedical care providers;

5. Direct intervention efforts to reduceoccupational and environmental leadexposure;

6. Characterize reports by industry andoccupation to assist with targeting

educational outreach efforts andprevention activities.

Intervention Project(s)Intervention funds are to be used for

developing effective models forintervention in the prevention of adultlead poisoning. The goals are to:1. Develop a model for intervention

related to lead poisoning targetinghigh-risk industries or occupationalbusinesses;

2. Build occupational diseaseprevention capacity via State healthdepartments or other appropriateagencies at the State, or local level;

3. Design, field test, demonstrate, andevaluate the effectiveness of theintervention.

Program RequirementsIn conducting activities to achieve the

purpose of this program, the recipientwill be responsible for conductingactivities under A. (RecipientActivities), and CDC/NIOSH will beresponsible for the activities listedunder B. (CDC/NIOSH Activities).

The following requirements are forsurveillance only cooperative agreementprojects:

A. Recipient Resources and Activities1. Develop effective, well-defined,

working relationships with childhoodlead poisoning prevention programswithin the applicants’ State.

2. Refine and implement, incollaboration with CDC/NIOSH, themethodology for surveillance asproposed in the respective programapplication.

3. Provide collaborative partnershipswith CDC/NIOSH in any interim and/or final evaluation of the surveillanceactivity.

4. Monitor and evaluate all majorprogram activities and services.

5. Demonstrate experience or access toprofessionals knowledgeable inconducting and evaluating publichealth programs.

6. Develop ability to translate programfindings to State and local publichealth officials, policy- and decision-makers, and to others seeking tostrengthen program efforts.

B. CDC/NIOSH Activities1. Provide technical assistance and

consultation in the implementation ofthe surveillance activities throughoutthe project period.

2. Provide a format for reportingsurveillance data to CDC/NIOSH.

3. Analyze and provide summarysurveillance data for nationalreporting.

4. Provide timely feedback to therecipient from the review of quarterly


reports on the program activitiesconducted by the recipient.

5. Provide assistance in the conduct offield investigations at the recipient’srequest and as resources permit.The following requirements are for

Adult Lead Poisoning Intervention onlyprojects:

A. Recipient Activities1. Hire or establish a full-time director/

coordinator with authority andresponsibility to carry out therequirements of intervention projectactivities.

2. Collaborate with CDC/NIOSH torefine the methodology for theproposed intervention as described inthe program application.

3. Develop and document all facets ofthe intervention program.

4. Develop plan for evaluatingintervention process and outcomes.

5. Evaluate the model program usingCDC Prevention Effectiveness Criteria.

B. NIOSH/CDC Activities1. Provide technical assistance and

consultation in the implementation ofthe model program throughout theproject period.

2. Provide assistance in the conduct offield investigations and interventionefforts, at the recipient’s request.

3. Provide guidelines for evaluating theintervention activities and technicalassistance for the evaluation.Note: Applicants may submit proposals for

surveillance programs and/or interventionproject(s).

Evaluation CriteriaThe review of applications will be

conducted by an objective reviewcommittee who will review the qualityof the application based on the strengthand completeness of the plan submitted.The budget justification will be used toassess how well the technical plan islikely to be carried out using availableresources. The maximum ratings scoreof an application is 100 points.

A: The Factors To Be Considered in theEvaluation of Applications forSurveillance Program Funds Only Are

1. Surveillance Activity (35%)The clarity, feasibility, and scientific

soundness of the surveillance approach.Also, the extent to which a proposedschedule for accomplishing eachactivity and methods for evaluating eachactivity are clearly defined andappropriate.

The following points will bespecifically evaluated:a. How laboratories report PbB levels.b. How data will be collected and

managed.

c. How data quality and completeness ofreporting will be assured.

d. How and when data will be analyzed.e. How summary data will be reported

and disseminated.f. Protocols for follow-up of individuals

with elevated PbB levels.g. Provisions to obtain industry and

occupation data.

2. Progress Toward Complete Blood-Lead Surveillance (30%)

The extent to which the proposedactivities are likely to result insubstantial progress toward establishinga complete State-based PbB surveillanceactivity (as defined in the PURPOSESection).

3. Project Sustainability (20%)

The extent to which the proposedactivities are likely to result in the long-term maintenance of a complete State-based PbB surveillance system. Inparticular, specific activities that will beundertaken by the State during theproject period to ensure that thesurveillance program continues aftercompletion of the project period.

4. Personnel (10%)

The extent to which the qualificationsand time commitments of projectpersonnel are clearly documented andappropriate for implementing theproposal. (Project requires full-timedirector/coordinator with authority andresponsibility to carry out therequirements of surveillance programactivities. Position must be approved bythe applicant’s personnel system.)

5. Use of Existing Resources (5%)

The extent to which the proposalwould make effective use of existingresources and expertise within theapplicant agency or throughcollaboration with other agencies.

6. BUDGET (Not Scored)

The extent to which the budget isreasonable, clearly justified, andconsistent with the intended use offunds.

B: The Factors To Be Considered in theEvaluation of Applications forIntervention Project Funds Only Are

1. The clarity, feasibility, andscientific soundness of the approach.The following will be specificallyconsidered: (30%)a. Who will be targeted for the

intervention?b. How will the intervention be

conducted and by whom?c. How will the intervention be

evaluated?d. How will the data be analyzed?

2. The extent to which the proposedactivities are likely to result in thedevelopment and execution of a modelintervention strategy to prevent andreduce occupational lead poisoning inhigh-risk industries or occupations.(25%)

3. The extent to which the proposedschedule for accomplishing each of theproject activities and the methods forevaluating each activity are clearlydefined and appropriate. (15%)

4. The extent to which the proposedactivities are feasible and a plan fordocumenting all facets of theintervention is provided such that themodel program may be adopted by otherhealth departments or appropriateagencies or organizations. (15%)

5. The extent to which thequalifications and time commitments ofproject personnel are clearlydocumented and appropriate forimplementing the proposal. (10%)

6. The extent to which the proposalwould make effective use of existingresources and expertise within theapplicant agency or throughcollaboration with other agencies. (5%)

7. The extent to which the budget isreasonable, clearly justified andconsistent with the intended use offunds. (not scored)

Funding PrioritiesApplicants applying for ABLES

surveillance funds will be considered intwo categories:

Priorities

(A) Approximately $81,000 to fund upto three new cooperative agreements(new is defined as ABLES programs notcurrently supported by CDC/NIOSH)who meet the eligibility requirements.

(B) Approximately $278,500 will beavailable to fund up to thirteencooperative agreements for those Statescurrently receiving CDC/NIOSH ABLESfunding or for those States whichprovide quarterly data to the nationalsurveillance program but are notsupported monetarily by CDC/NIOSH.High priority will be given to proposalswhich devise strategies for enhancingtheir current surveillance system bycoding industry and occupation anddeveloping augmentation efforts such ascalculation of State-specific rates.

(C) Approximately $180,000 will beavailable to fund up to two cooperativeagreements for intervention projectstargeting high-risk industries andoccupations (high-risk defined as thepotential for highest lead exposuresbased on investigations of worksites ortargeting worker populations wherecases of elevated blood lead levelspersist.) Eligible applicants may also


apply for intervention project funds inaddition to surveillance funds andshould develop separate proposals,within the same request for assistance,for intervention projects.

Interested persons are invited tocomment on the proposed fundingpriority. Comments received within 30days after publication in the FederalRegister will be considered before thefinal funding priority is established. Ifthe funding priority should change as aresult of any comments received, arevised announcement will bepublished in the Federal Register, andrevised applications will be acceptedprior to final selection of awards.

Written comments should beaddressed to Henry S. Cassell, III, GrantsManagement Officer, GrantsManagement Branch, Procurement andGrants Office, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC), 255 EastPaces Ferry Road, NE., Room 300,Mailstop E–13, Atlanta, GA 30305.

Executive Order 12372 Review

Applications are subject toIntergovernmental Review of FederalPrograms as governed by ExecutiveOrder (E.O.) 12372. E.O. 12372 sets upa system for State and local governmentreview of proposed Federal assistanceapplications. Applicants should contacttheir State Single Point of Contact(SPOC) as early as possible to alert themto the prospective applications andreceive any necessary instructions onthe State process. For proposed projectsserving more than one State, theapplicant is advised to contact the SPOCfor each affected State. Indian tribes arestrongly encouraged to request tribalgovernment review of the proposedapplication. A current list of SPOCs isincluded in the application kit.

If the SPOCs or tribal governmentshave any State process or tribal processrecommendations on applicationssubmitted to CDC, they should sendthem to Henry S. Cassell, III, GrantsManagement Officer, GrantsManagement Branch, Procurement andGrants Office, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC), 255 EastPaces Ferry Road, NE., Atlanta, GA30305, no later than 60 days after theapplication due date. The grantingagency does not guarantee to‘‘accommodate or explain’’ State ortribal process recommendations itreceives after that date.

Public Health System ReportingRequirement

This program is not subject to thePublic Health System ReportingRequirements.

Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceNumber

The Catalog of Federal DomesticAssistance number is 93.197.

Other Requirements


Projects that involve the collection ofinformation from ten or moreindividuals and funded by thiscooperative agreement will be subject toapproval by the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) under the PaperworkReduction Act.

Human Subjects

If the proposed project involvesresearch on human subjects, theapplicant must comply with theDepartment of Health and HumanServices Regulations, 45 CFR part 46,regarding the protection of humansubjects. Assurance must be provided todemonstrate the project will be subjectto initial and continuing review by anappropriate institutional reviewcommittee. The applicant will beresponsible for providing assurance inaccordance with the appropriateguidelines and form provided in theapplication kit.

In addition to other applicablecommittees, Indian Health Service (IHS)institutional review committees alsomust review the project if anycomponent of IHS will be involved orwill support the research. If anyAmerican Indian community isinvolved, its tribal government mustalso approve that portion of the projectapplicable to it.

Application Submission and Deadline

The original and two copies of thePHS 5161–1 (Revised 7/92, OMBNumber 0937–0189) must be submittedto Henry S. Cassell, III, GrantsManagement Officer, GrantsManagement Branch, Procurement andGrants Office, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC), 255 EastPaces Ferry Road, NE., Room 300,Atlanta, GA 30305 on or before July 14,1995.

1. Deadline: Applications shall beconsidered as meeting the deadline ifthey are either:

(a) Received on or before the deadlinedate, or

(b) Sent on or before the deadline dateand received in time for submission forthe review process. Applicants mustrequest a legibly dated U.S. PostalService postmark or obtain a legiblydated receipt from a commercial carrieror U.S. Postal Service. Private meteredpostmarks shall not be acceptable asproof of timely mailing.

2. Late Applications: Applicationswhich do not meet the criteria in 1.(a)or 1.(b) above are considered lateapplications. Late applications will notbe considered in the currentcompetition and will be returned to theapplicant.

Where To Obtain AdditionalInformation

To receive additional writteninformation call (404) 332–4561. Youwill be asked to leave your name,address, and telephone number and willneed to refer to Announcement 553.You will receive a complete programdescription, information on applicationprocedures, and application forms.

If you have questions after reviewingthe contents of all the documents,business management technicalassistance may be obtained from OppieByrd, Grants Management Specialist,Grants Management Branch,Procurement and Grants Office, Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention(CDC), 255 East Paces Ferry Road, NE.,Room 300, Mailstop E–13, Atlanta, GA30305, telephone (404) 842–6796 .

Technical assistance on surveillanceprograms and/or intervention projectsmay be obtained from Robert Roscoe,M.S., Epidemiologist, ABLES ProjectOfficer, or Shiro Tanaka, M.D., Divisionof Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations andField Studies, National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health, Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention(CDC), 4676 Columbia Parkway,Mailstop R–21, Cincinnati, OH 45226,telephone (513) 841–4353.

Please refer to AnnouncementNumber 553 when requestinginformation and submitting anapplication.

Potential applicants may obtain acopy of Healthy People 2000 (FullReport, Stock No. 017–001–00474–0) orHealthy People 2000 (Summary Report,Stock No. 017–001–00473–1) throughthe Superintendent of Documents,Government Printing Office,Washington, DC 20402–9325, telephone(202) 512–1800.


Diane D. Porter,Acting Director, National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health, Centers forDisease Control and Prevention (CDC).[FR Doc. 95–12545 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163–19–P


Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. 91P–0186 and 93P–0306]

Proposed Warning Labels for Iron-Containing Products; FDA Report onConsumer Research; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is announcing theavailability of a report entitled‘‘Consumer Research on ProposedWarning Labels for Iron-ContainingProducts,’’ which describes the resultsof research conducted by the agency toevaluate consumer understanding of theproposed warning labels for iron-containing products. FDA is invitingcomments on the findings in this report.DATES: Written comments by July 24,1995.ADDRESSES: Submit written commentsand requests for single copies of‘‘Consumer Research on ProposedWarning Labels for Iron-ContainingProducts’’ to the Dockets ManagementBranch (HFA–305), Food and DrugAdministration, rm. 1–23, 12420Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857.Comments and requests should beidentified with the docket numberfound in brackets in the heading of thisdocument. Send two self-addressedadhesive labels to assist that office inprocessing your requests. After thecomment period shown above, copies ofthe document will be available at costfrom the Freedom of Information Staff(HFI–35), Food and DrugAdministration, rm. 12A–16, 5600Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.‘‘Consumer Research on ProposedWarning Labels for Iron-ContainingProducts’’ and received comments areavailable for public examination in theDockets Management Branch between 9a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday throughFriday.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Raymond E. Schucker, Center for FoodSafety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–725), Food and Drug Administration,200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204,202–205–5657.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In theFederal Register of October 6, 1994 (59FR 51030), FDA issued a proposal (‘‘theinitial proposal’’) on actions that ittentatively concluded were necessary tostop the recent epidemic of pediatricpoisonings from over consumption ofiron-containing products. In the FederalRegister of February 16, 1995 (60 FR8989), the agency issued asupplementary proposal to clarify

changes in its legal authority with thepassage of the Dietary SupplementHealth and Education Act (Pub. L. 103–417).

In the initial proposal, FDAannounced that it may conduct focusgroup research to evaluate consumerunderstanding of the proposed warningmessages and to ensure that themessages are not misleading. FDA hasconducted this research. Consumersprovided feedback as to theirunderstanding of the proposed warningsand the degree to which the specificwording of the messages was believable,relevant, confusing, or irritating.Additional warning messages werecreated as a result of public comment onthe proposed rule, and these messageswere also evaluated in the focus groups.

FDA stated in the initial proposal thatit would make a report of the results ofthis research available for publiccomment before it issued the finalregulations. The research report is nowavailable for public comment.

Dated: May 18, 1995.David A. Kessler,Commissioner of Food and Drugs.[FR Doc. 95–12605 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

Public Health Service

Announcement of Availability of Fundsfor Family Planning Service Grants

AGENCY: Public Health Service, HHS.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Office of PopulationAffairs announces the availability offunds for FY 1996 family planningservices grant projects under theauthority of Title X of the Public HealthService Act (42 U.S.C. 300, et seq.) andsolicits applications for competing grantawards to serve the areas and/orpopulations set out below. Onlyapplications which propose to serve thepopulations and/or areas set out belowwill be accepted for review and possiblefunding.OMB Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance 93.217.DATES: Application due dates vary. SeeSupplementary Information below.ADDRESSES: Additional information maybe obtained from and completedapplications should be sent to theappropriate Regional HealthAdministrator at the address below:Region I—(Connecticut, Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire,Rhode Island, Vermont): DHHS/PHSRegion I, John F. Kennedy Federal

Building, Government Center, Room1400, Boston, MA 02203

Region II—(New Jersey, New York,Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands): DHHS/PHS Region II, 26 Federal Plaza,Room 3337, New York, NY 10278

Region III—(Delaware, District ofColumbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania,Virginia, W. Virginia DHHS/PHSRegion III, 3535 Market Street,Philadelphia, PA 19101

Region IV—(Alabama, Florida, Georgia,Kentucky, Mississippi, N. Carolina, S.Carolina, Tennessee): DHHS/PHSRegion IV, 101 Marietta Tower, Suite1106, Atlanta, GA 30323

Region V—(Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin): DHHS/PHS Region V, 105 West AdamsStreet, 17th Floor, Chicago, IL 60603

Region VI—(Arkansas, Louisiana, NewMexico, Oklahoma, Texas): DHHS/PHS Region VI 1200 Main TowerBuilding, Room 1800, Dallas, TX75202

Region VII—(Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,Nebraska): DHHS/PHS Region VII,601 East 12th Street, 5th Fl. W.,Kansas City, MO 64106

Region VIII—(Colorado, Montana, N.Dakota, S. Dakota, Utah, Wyoming):DHHS/PHS Region VIII, 1961 StoutStreet, Denver, CO 80294

Region IX—(Arizona, California,Hawaii, Nevada, Commonwealth ofthe Northern Mariana Islands,American Samoa, Guam, Republic ofPalau, Federated States of Micronesia,Republic of the Marshall Islands):DHHS/PHS Region IX, 50 UnitedNations Plaza, Room 327, SanFrancisco, CA 94102

Region X—(Alaska, Idaho, Oregon,Washington): DHHS/PHS Region X,Blanchard Plaza, 2201 Sixth Avenue,M/S RX–20, Seattle, WA 98121.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Regional Grants Management Officers:Region I, Mary O’Brien—617/565–1482;Region II, Steven Wong—212/264–4496;Region III, Marty Bree—215/596–6653;Region IV, Wayne Cutchins—404/331–2597; Region V, Lawrence Poole—312/353–8700; Region VI, Joyce Bailey—214/767–3879; Region VII, MichaelRowland—816/426–2924; Region VIII,Susan A. Jaworowski—303/844–4461;Region IX, Ken Souza—415/556–8187;Region X, Jim Tipton—206/615/2473.

Regional Program Consultants forFamily Planning: Region I, JamesSliker—617/565–1452; Region II,Margaret Lee—212/264–2571; RegionIII, Elizabeth Reed—215/596–6686;Region IV, Christino Rodrigues—404/331–5254; Region V, GeorgeHockenberry—312/535–1700; RegionVI, Paul Smith—214/767–3072; Region


VII, Susan Moskosky—816/426–2924;Region VIII, John J. McCarthy, Jr.—303/844–5955; Region IX, James Hauser—415/556–7117; Region X, KarenMatsuda—206/615–2501.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title X ofthe Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C.300, et seq., authorizes the Secretary ofHealth and Human Services (HHS) toaward grants to public or privatenonprofit entities to assist in theestablishment and operation ofvoluntary family planning projects toprovide a broad range of acceptable andeffective family planning methods andservices (including natural familyplanning methods, infertility services,and services for adolescents). Thestatute requires that, to the extentpracticable, entities shall encouragefamily participation. Also, Title X fundsmay not be used in programs whereabortion is a method of family planning.Implementing regulations appear at 42CFR Part 59 Subpart A.

On February 5, 1993, HHS publishedat 58 FR 7462 an interim rule thatsuspends the 1988 Title X rules,pending the promulgation of newregulations. The principal effect of thisaction was to suspend the definitions of‘‘family planning,’’ ‘‘grantees,’’‘‘prenatal care,’’ ‘‘Title X,’’ ‘‘Title XProgram,’’ and ‘‘Title X Project’’presently found at 42 CFR 59.2 and 42CFR 59.7–59.10. Proposed rules werealso published at 58 FR 7464 on thesame date. During the pendency ofrulemaking, the compliance standardsthat were in effect prior to the issuanceof the 1988 rule, including those set outin the 1981 Family Planning Guidelines,are being used to administer theprogram. Copies of the pre-1988compliance standards are available from

the Regional Program Consultants listedabove.

The Title X program has establishedthese five priorities:(1) Increasing outreach to women not

likely to seek services, includinghomeless persons, disabled persons,substance abusers and adolescents;

(2) Expanding the comprehensiveness ofreproductive health services,including STD and cancer screeningand prevention, increasedinvolvement of male partners, HIVprevention, education and counseling,and substance abuse screening andreferral;

(3) Serving adolescents, including morecommunity education, emphasis onpostponement of sexual activity, andmore accessible provision ofcontraceptive counseling andcontraception;

(4) Eliminating disincentives to providehigh-cost but highly effectivecontraceptives such as Norplant andDepo-Provera, serving high risk (andhigh-unit cost) clients, and providingnonrevenue-generating services suchas community education andprevention services; and

(5) Emphasizing training and retentionof family planning nursepractitioners, particularly minoritynurse practitioners and nursepractitioners serving disadvantagedand medically underservedcommunities.These program priorities represent

overriding goals which are beingpursued to the extent that fundingincreases or increases in programefficiency allow. Some funding may beavailable to Title X grantees to improveand expand services.

The Administration’s FY 1996 budgetrequest for this program is $198.9million. This amount represents a threepercent increase over the FY 1995appropriation of $193.3 million, ofwhich $179.6 million will be madeavailable to Title X service grantees.Approximately 17 percent of the fundsappropriated for FY 1996 and madeavailable to Title X service grantees willbe used for competing grants. Theremaining funds will be used for non-competing continuation grants. Thisprogram announcement is subject to theappropriation of funds and is acontingency action being taken toensure that, should funds becomeavailable for this purpose, they can beawarded in a timely fashion consistentwith the needs of the program as wellas to provide for the distribution offunds throughout the fiscal year. Sincethe precise funding levels for FY 1996are uncertain at this point, the fundinglevels set out below are based on the FY1994 appropriation level. However, it isexpected that funding levels will beincreased, if the appropriation for FY1996 increases.

For FY 1995, the entire $179.6 millionwill be allocated among the 10 DHHSregions, and will in turn be awarded topublic and private non-profit agencieslocated within the regions. Eachregional office is responsible forevaluating applications, establishingpriorities, and setting funding levelsaccording to criteria in 42 CFR 59.11.

This notice announces the availabilityof funds to provide family planningservices in 16 States, the NavajoReservation, and the Commonwealth ofthe Northern Mariana Islands.Competing grant applications areinvited for the following areas:

Populations or areas to be servedNumber of

grants to beawarded

FY 1994funding

Applicationdue date

Grant fundingdate

Region I:Connecticut ................................................................................................... 1 $1,486,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Boston, MA .................................................................................................... 1 1,226,000 3/1/96 7/1/96/Southeastern MA .......................................................................................... 1 712,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Western MA .................................................................................................. 1 662,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Central MA .................................................................................................... 1 501,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Northeastern MA ........................................................................................... 1 746,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Maine ............................................................................................................. 1 1,089,000 3/1/96 7/1/96New Hampshire ............................................................................................. 1 637,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Rhode Island ................................................................................................. 1 415,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Vermont ......................................................................................................... 1 541,000 9/1/95 1/1/96

Region V:St. Paul, MN .................................................................................................. 1 235,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Cleveland, OH ............................................................................................... 1 1,346,000 12/1/95 4/1/96

Region VI:Oklahoma ...................................................................................................... 1 2,639,000 8/1/95 12/1/95Texas ............................................................................................................. 1 9,426,000 12/1/95 4/1/96

Region VII:Missouri ......................................................................................................... 1 3,517,000 12/1/95 4/1/96Nebraska ....................................................................................................... 1 1,168,000 3/1/96 7/1/96


Populations or areas to be servedNumber of

grants to beawarded

FY 1994funding

Applicationdue date

Grant fundingdate

Region VIII:North Dakota ................................................................................................. 1 470,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Utah ............................................................................................................... 1 140,000 3/1/96 7/1/96

Region IX:Navajo Reservation-AZ ................................................................................. 1 511,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Hawaii ............................................................................................................ 1 874,000 3/1/96 7/1/96Clark County, NV .......................................................................................... 1 584,000 9/1/95 1/1/96Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands ....................................... 1 67,000 9/1/95 1/1/96

Total ........................................................................................................... 22 28,992,000 ....................... .......................

Applications must be postmarked or,it not sent by U.S. mail, received at theappropriate Grants Management Officeno later than close of business onapplication due dates listed above.Private metered postmarks will not beacceptable as proof of timely mailing.Applications which are postmarked or,if not sent by U.S. mail, delivered to theappropriate Grants Management Officelater than the application due date willbe judged late and will not be acceptedfor review. (Applicants should request alegibly dated postmark from the U.S.Postal Service.) Applications which donot conform to the requirements of thisprogram announcement or do not meetthe applicable regulatory requirementsat 42 CFR part 59, subpart A will not beaccepted for review. Applicants will beso notified, and the applications will bereturned.

Applications will be evaluated on thefollowing criteria:

(1) The number of patients and, inparticular, the number of low-incomepatients to be served;

(2) The extent to which family planningservices are needed locally;

(3) The relative need of the applicant;(4) The capacity of the applicant to

make rapid and effective use of theFederal assistance;

(5) The adequacy of the applicant’sfacilities and staff;

(6) The relative availability of non-Federal resources within thecommunity to be served and thedegree to which those resources arecommitted to the project; and

(7) The degree to which the project planadequately provides for therequirements set forth in the Title XregulationsThe Public Health Service (PHS) is

committed to achieving the healthpromotion and disease preventionobjectives of Healthy People 2000, aPHS—led national activity for settingpriority areas. This announcement isrelated to the priority areas of FamilyPlanning. A midcourse review of theobjectives is presently ongoing, and the

proposed revisions are contained in adraft report. A notice of Availability andRequest for Comment on the HealthyPeople 2000 Midcourse Revisions waspublished in the Fedeal Register onOctober 3, 1994 (59 FR 50253). Requestsfor copies of the Draft for Public Reviewand Comment: Healthy People 2000Midcourse Revisions can be faxed to(301) 594–5981 or mailed to: OFP/OPA,East-West Towers, Suite 200, 5600Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. Anew PHS report, Healthy People 2000Midcourse Review and Revisions,featuring the final revisions and statusreport on progress in achieving targetsfor the year 2000, will be published in1995.

The Public Health Service stronglyencourages all grant recipients toprovide a smoke-free workplace andpromote the non-use of all tobaccoproducts. This is consistent with thePHS mission to protect and advance thephysical and mental health of theAmerican people.

Application Requirements

Application kits (including theapplication form, PHS 5161—approvedby OMB under control number 0937–0189) and technical assistance forpreparing proposals are available fromthe regional offices. An applicationmust contain: (1) A narrativedescription of the project and themanner in which the applicant intendsto conduct it in order to carry out theregulations of the law and regulations;(2) a budget that includes an estimate ofproject income and costs, withjustification for the amount of grantfunds requested; (3) a description of thestandards and qualifications that will berequired for all personnel and facilitiesto be used by the project; and (4) suchother pertinent information as may berequired by the Secretary as specified inthe application kit. In preparing anapplication, applications shouldrespond to all applicable regulatoryrequirements.

Application Review and Evaluation

Each regional office is responsible forestablishing its own review process.Applications must be submitted to theappropriate regional office at theaddress listed above. Staff are availableto answer questions and provide limitedtechnical assistance in the preparationof grant applications.

Grant Awards

Grant projects are generally approvedfor 3 to 5 years with an annual non-competitive review of a continuationapplication to obtain continued support.Non-competing continuation awards aresubject to factors such as the projectmaking satisfactory progress and theavailability of funds. In all cases,continuation awards require adetermination by HHS that continuedfunding is in the best interest of theFederal Government.

Review Under Executive Order 12372

Applicants under this announcementare subject to the review requirements ofExecutive Order 12372, State Review ofapplications for Federal FinancialAssistance, as implemented by 45 CFRpart 100. As soon as possible, theapplicant should discuss the projectwith the State Single Point of Contact(SPOC) for each State to be served. Theapplication kit contains the currentlyavailable listing of the SPOCs whichhave elected to be informed of thesubmission of applications. For thoseStates not represented on the listing,further inquiries should be made by theapplicant regarding the submission tothe Grants Management Office of theappropriate region. State Single Point ofContact comments must be received bythe regional office 30 days prior to thefunding date to be considered.

When final funding decisions havebeen made, each applicant will benotified by letter of the outcome of itsapplication. The official documentnotifying an applicant that a projectapplication has been approved forfunding is the Notice of Grant Award,


which specifies to the grantee theamount of money awarded, thepurposes of the grant, and terms andconditions of the grant award.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Felicia H. Stewart,Deputy Assistant Secretary for PopulationAffairs.[FR Doc. 95–12556 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–17–M

ADVISORY COMMISSION ONINTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Proposed Criteria for Reviewing andMaking Recommendations on FederalMandates

ACTION: Notice of proposed criteria.

SUMMARY: The Advisory Commission onIntergovernmental Relations (ACIR) issoliciting public comments on itsproposed criteria for investigating andreviewing existing federal mandates andformulating recommendations tomodify, suspend, or terminate specificmandates on State, local, or Tribalgovernments.DATES: Comments must be received byJune 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent toPhilip M. Dearborn, Director,Government Finance Research, ACIR,800 K Street NW., Suite 450 South,Washington, DC 20575.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Philip Dearborn at 202/653–5538.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheAdvisory Commission onIntergovernmental Relations (ACIR, 42U.S.C. 4271) is charged in Sec. 302 ofthe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of1995 (Pub. L. 104–4, 109 Stat. 67) withinvestigating and reviewing the role ofFederal mandates in intergovernmentalrelations and formulatingrecommendations to modify, suspend,or terminate specific mandates on State,local, or Tribal governments.

Section 302 defines ‘‘Federalmandate’’ very broadly for the purposesof the ACIR review as ‘‘any provision instatute or regulation or any Federalcourt ruling that imposes an enforceableduty on State, local, or Tribalgovernments including a condition ofFederal assistance or a duty arising fromparticipation in a voluntary Federalprogram.’’

ACIR will select for in-depth reviewthose Federal mandates generallyrecognized as creating significantconcerns within the intergovernmentalsystem. In accordance with Public Law104–4, ACIR will give review priority tomandates that are subject to judicial

proceedings in Federal courts. Toformulate its recommendations, ACIRwill evaluate each mandate to determinethe specific conditions causing concern.

The Commission will make the finaldecisions about which mandates it willreview based on two types of criteria:

(1) Those that provide a basis foridentifying mandates of significantconcern; and

(2) Those that provide a basis forformulating recommendations tomodify, suspend, or terminate specificmandates that are of concern.

Criteria for Identifying Mandates ofSignificant Concern

In general, Federal mandates will beselected for intensive review if theyhave one or more of the followingcharacteristics:

1. The mandate requires State, local,or Tribal governments to expendsubstantial amounts to their ownresources in a manner that significantlydistorts their spending priorities. Thisaddresses mandates that require morethan incidental amounts of spending. Itwill not include all Federal mandatesthat require governments to spendmoney.

2. The mandate establishes terms orconditions for Federal assistance in aprogram or activity in which State,local, or Tribal governments have littlediscretion over whether or not toparticipate. This will include mandatesin entitlements and discretionaryprograms. It will exclude conditions ofgrants in small categorical programs thatare distributed on the basis of annual orperiodic applications and that arereceived only by a limited number ofgovernments.

3. The mandates abridges historicpowers of State, local, or Tribalgovernments, the exercise of whichwould not adversely affect otherjurisdictions. This will includemandates that have an impact oninternal State, local, and Tribalgovernment affairs related to issues notwidely acknowledged as being ofnational concern and for which theabsence of the mandate would notcreate adverse spillover effects.

4. The mandate imposes compliancerequirements that make it difficult orimpossible for State, local, and Tribalgovernments to implement.Implementation delays, issuance ofcourt orders, or assessment of fines maybe indicative of mandate requirementsthat go beyond State, local, or Tribalfiscal resources, or administrative ortechnological capacity, after reasonableefforts at compliance have been made.

5. The mandate has been the subjectof widespread objections and

complaints by State and localgovernments and their representatives.This will include mandates that arebased on problems of national scope,but are not federally funded.

Criteria for FormulatingRecommendations

ACIR will investigate the specificcharacteristics of each mandate causingsignificant concern in order to formulatea recommendation to modify, suspend,or terminate the mandate. For purposesof formulating such recommendations,ACIR will focus on specific provisionsin laws, regulations, or court orders.

When a mandate affects a State orlocal program that directly competeswith a comparable private sectoractivity, ACIR will consider the effectson both the government and privatesector in making its recommendation.ACIR also will consider (1) impacts ofmandates on working men and womenand (2) mandates for utilization ofmetric systems.

ACIR will investigate each mandateselected for intensive review todetermine whether or not they have oneor more of the following characteristics:

1. Federal Intrusion• Requirements are not based on

demonstrated national needs.• Requirements are related to issues

not widely recognized as nationalconcerns or as being within theappropriate scope of Federal activities.

• Requirements are based onproblems of national scope, but whichState, local, or Tribal governments havebeen able or willing to solve effectively,either independently or throughvoluntary cooperation.

• Requirements are based onproblems of national scope, but are notfederally funded.

These mandates should be terminatedor modified to express non-bindingnational guidelines. In some instances,the basis provision could be retained inFederal law, but compliance could bemade voluntary.

2. Unnecessarily Rigid• Provisions do not permit

adjustments to the circumstances orneeds of individual jurisdictions.

• Provisions restrict flexibility to useless costly or less onerous alternativeprocedures to achieve the goal of themandate.

• Provisions do not allowgovernments to set implementation orcompliance priorities and schedules,taking into account risk analysis,greatest benefit, or other factors.

These mandates should be modifiedto provide options, waivers, orexemptions, or be terminated.


3. Unnecessarily Complex

• Requirements are unnecessarilydetailed and difficult to understand.

• Provisions are too process specificrather than results oriented.

These mandates should be simplified,clarified, or otherwise revised tofacilitate understanding andimplementation, or be terminated.

4. Unclear Goals or Standards

• Goals or standards are too vague,confusing, or poorly written to permitclear or consistent implementation ofrequirements or measurement of results.

These goals or standards should berewritten or the mandate should beterminated.

5. Contradictory or Inconsistent

• Provisions in one mandate maymake it difficult or impossible tocomply with other provisions in thesame or other Federal, State, local, orTribal laws.

• Requirements use conflicting andconfusing definitions and standards.These mandates should be modified tobring conflicting requirements intoconformance. In some instances, it maybe appropriate to terminate one or all ofthe requirements. Where possible,common definitions and standardsshould be used, especially in planningand reporting requirements.

6. Duplicative

• Provisions in two or more Federalmandates may have the same generalgoals but require different actions forcompliance.

These mandates could be terminated,consolidated, to modified or facilitatecompliance.

7. Obsolete

• Provisions were enacted whenconditions or needs were different orbefore existing technologies wereavailable.

• Provisions have been superseded bylater requirements.

These mandates should be modifiedto reflect current conditions or existingtechnology. If a mandate is no longernecessary or has been superseded, itshould be terminated.

8. Inadequate Scientific Basis

• Provisions were enacted based oninadequate or inconclusive scientificresearch or knowledge.

• Provisions are not based on current,peer-reviewed scientific research.

• Provisions are not justified by riskassessment or cost-benefit.

These mandates should be terminatedor modified to reflect current science. Insome cases, suspension of the mandate

may be appropriate to provide time foradditional research.

9. Lacking in Practical Value

• Requirements do not achieve theintended results.

• Requirements are perceived bycitizens as unnecessary, insignificant, orineffective, thereby producingcredibility problems for governments.

• Requirements have high costsrelative to the importance of the issue.

These mandates should be evaluatedto determine whether or not they areeffective. If they cannot be shown to beeffective and worthy of public support,they should be terminated. If they areeffective, it still may be appropriate tosuspend the mandates to allow time forpublic education and consensusbuilding on their value.

10. Resource Demands Exceed Capacity

• Requirements for complianceexceed State, local, and Tribalgovernments’ fiscal, administrative,and/or technological capacity.

These mandates should be terminatedor modified to reduce complianceproblems, or assistance could beprovided to upgrade capacity. In someinstances, compliance scheduleextensions or exemptions may beappropriate.

11. Compounds Fiscal Difficulties

• Compliance with the requirementsof any one mandate or with multiplemandates compounds fiscal difficultiesof governmental jurisdictions that areexperiencing fiscal stress.

In these situations, certain of themandates affecting the jurisdictions—exclusive of those that are vital to publichealth or safety—should be consideredfor partial or total suspension until thegovernment experiencing fiscal stress isable to comply. The conditionstriggering consideration of suchsuspensions should include:

a. Governments faced with costsdramatically out of line with theirrevenue bases, as determined bycomparisons with other similargovernments that are complying; or

b. Governments that are experiencingsevere fiscal distress for reasons notimmediately within their control. Thereshould be some definitive evidence ofsevere problems, such as Statereceivership, State declaration ofdistress, Chapter 9 bankruptcy, or a debtrating below investment grade. Thisshould not include annual budgetbalancing problems.

Dated: May 18, 1995.William E. Davis III,Executive Director.[FR Doc. 95–12591 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 5500–01–M


Bureau of Land Management

[AK–962–1410–00–P; AA–10968]

Alaska Native Claims Selection

In accordance with Departmentalregulation 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice ishereby given that a decision to issueconveyance under the provisions ofSection 14(h)(1) of the Alaska NativeClaims Settlement Act of December 18,1971, 43 U.S.C. 1601, 1613(h), will beissued to Chugach Alaska Corporationfor 0.10 acre. The land involved is in thevicinity of Long Bay, Alaska.U.S. Survey No. 6935, Alaska.

A notice of the decision will bepublished once a week, for four (4)consecutive weeks, in the AnchorageDaily News. Copies of the decision maybe obtained by contacting the AlaskaState Office of the Bureau of LandManagement, 222 West SeventhAvenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513–7599 ((907) 271–5960).

Any party claiming a property interestwhich is adversely affected by thedecision, an agency of the Federalgovernment or regional corporation,shall have until June 22, 1995 to file anappeal. However, parties receivingservice by certified mail shall have 30days from the date of receipt to file anappeal. Appeals must be filed in theBureau of Land Management at theaddress identified above, where therequirements for filing an appeal may beobtained. Parties who do not file anappeal in accordance with therequirements of 43 CFR part 4, subpartE, shall be deemed to have waived theirrights.Margaret J. McDaniel,Acting Chief, Branch of Gulf RimAdjudication.[FR Doc. 95–12558 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–JA–P

National Park Service

Environmental Assessment forProposed M.J. Murdock AviationCenter and Proposed Master PlanAmendment for Fort VancouverNational Historic Site, Washington

ACTION: Notice of availability ofenvironmental assessment.


SUMMARY: This Notice announces theavailability of an EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) for the proposed M.J.Murdock Aviation Center; the site planconstitutes a proposed amendment ofthe Master Plan for Fort VancouverNational Historic Site. This Notice alsoannounces a public meeting for thepurpose of receiving public comment onthe EA.DATES: Written comments on the EAshould be received no later than June22, 1995. The date of the public meetingis 7 June (Wednesday) 1995.ADDRESSES: Copies of the EA areavailable on request from theSuperintendent, Fort VancouverNational Historic Site, 612 East ReserveStreet, Vancouver, WA 98661–3811;telephone (360) 696–7655, ext. 2.Written comments should be submittedto the above address.

The public meeting will be held at theClark Public Utilities District (PUD)Building, 1200 Fort Vancouver Way,Vancouver, Washington, from 7:00–9:00p.m. on Wednesday, 7 June 1995.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Theproposed amendment of the Master Planwould provide for the adaptive reuse ofthree historic aviation structures and thereconstruction of a hanger as theprincipal components of the proposedM.J. Murdock Aviation Center, anaviation museum to be located adjacentto Pearson Field. The proposed museumdevelopment would implement aprovision of a 1994 Memorandum ofAgreement between the National ParkService and the City of Vancouver. Theproposed Center would be locatedwithin Fort Vancouver National HistoricSite. The City of Vancouver would havethe responsibility for the aviationmuseum’s development, operation andmaintenance.

Dated: May 11, 1995.William C. Walters,Acting Regional Director, Pacific NorthwestRegion, National Park Service.[FR Doc. 95–12592 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–70–M

National Register of Historic Places;Notification of Pending Nominations

Nominations for the followingproperties being considered for listingin the National Register were receivedby the National Park Service before May13, 1995. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36CFR Part 60 written commentsconcerning the significance of theseproperties under the National Registercriteria for evaluation may be forwardedto the National Register, National ParkService, P.O. Box 37127, Washington,

D.C. 20013–7127. Written commentsshould be submitted by June 7, 1995.Carol D. Shull,Keeper of the National Register.

ARKANSAS

Crawford CountySlack—Comstock—Marshall Farm, N

of AR 220 W, Uniontown, 95000694Izard County

Caney Springs CumberlandPresbyterian Church, NW of jct. ofAR 289 and Co. Rd. 70, Sagevicinity, 95000693

Prairie CountyAmerican Legion Hut—Des Arc, 206

Erwin St., Des Arc, 95000692

GEORGIA

Brantley CountyBrantley County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), 117Brantley St., Nahunta, 95000712

Bryan CountyBryan County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), CollegeSt., Pembroke, 95000713

Cook CountyCook County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), 212 N.Hutchinson Ave., Adel, 95000714

Emanuel CountyEmanuel County Courthouse and

Sheriff Department (Georgia CountyCourthouses TR), Main St.,Swainsboro, 95000715

Fannin CountyFannin County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), Jct. of W.Main and Summit Sts., Blue Ridge,95000716

Hall CountyHall County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), Jct. ofSpring and Green Sts., Gainesville,95000717

Quitman CountyQuitman County Courthouse and Old

Jail (Georgia County CourthousesTR), Main St., Georgetown,95000718

Taylor CountyTaylor County Courthouse (Georgia

County Courthouses TR), Main St.,Butler, 95000719

Telfair CountyTelfair County Courthouse and Jail

(Georgia County Courthouses TR),Courthouse Sq., McRae, 95000720

Troup CountyTroup County Courthouse, Annex,

and Jail (Georgia CountyCourthouses TR), E. Haralson St.,LaGrange, 95000721

INDIANA

Clark CountyBottorff—McCulloch Farm, 6702

Bethany Rd., Charlestown vicinity,

95000699Decatur County

Greensburg Carnegie Public Library,114 N. Michigan Ave., Greensburg,95000701

Hamilton CountyHolliday Hydroelectric Powerhouse

and Dam, Riverwood Ave. at jct.with 211th St., across the White R.,Noblesville vicinity, 95000706

Jackson CountySeymour Commercial Historic

District, Roughly bounded byWalnut, Third, Ewing and BruceSts., Seymour, 95000708

Lake CountyEmerson, Ralph Waldo, School, 716 E.

7th Ave., Gary, 95000702Lawrence County

Bedford Courthouse Square HistoricDistrict, Roughly bounded by L,14th, 17th and H Sts., Bedford,95000704

Helton—Mayo Farm, Jct. of Boyd Ln.and IN 58, Bedford vicinity,95000709

Marion CountyBush Stadium, 1501 W. 16th St.,

Indianapolis, 95000703P. C. C. & St. L. Railroad Freight

Depot, 449 S. Pennsylvania St.,Indianapolis, 95000697

Monroe CountyStinesville Commercial Historic

District, 8201, 8211, 8223, 8231 and8237 W. Main St., Stinesville,95000707

Vigo CountyTerre Haute Masonic Temple, 224 N.

Eighth St., Terre Haute, 95000705Wayne County

Witt—Champe—Myers House, Jct. ofSpring and Foundry Sts., SE corner,Dublin, 95000700

IOWA

Fayette CountyBigler Building, 210 Mill St.,

Clermont, 95000691

KANSAS

Pratt CountyRice, J. R., Barn and Granary, N of US

54, NW of Cullison, Cullisonvicinity, 95000695

MASSACHUSETTS

Norfolk CountyMilton Hill Historic District, Roughly

bounded by Adams and School Sts.,Randolph and Canton Aves. andBrook Rd., Milton, 95000698

MISSISSIPPI

Hinds CountyPoindexter Park Historic District,

Roughly bounded by W. Pearl St.,Rose St., Hunt St., W. Capitol St.and Clifton St., Jackson, 95000685


NORTH CAROLINA

Chatham CountyDeep River Camelback Truss Bridge,

Adjacent to NC 2153 over Deep R.,Cumnock-Gulf vicinity, 95000696

OREGON

Jackson CountyAshland Cemetery (Historic

Cemeteries of Ashland MPS), Jct. ofE. Main and Morton Sts., Ashland,95000687

Mountain View Cemetery (HistoricCemeteries of Ashland MPS), Jct. ofNormal Ave. and OR 66, Ashland,95000688

Linn CountyElkins Flour Mill, Bounded by US 20,

Industrial Way, the Santiam-AlbanyCanal and the Callaghan RR tracks,Lebanon, 95000689

Multnomah CountyHill Hotel, 2255–2261 Burnside St.,

Portland, 95000690Wasco County

Trevitt’s Addition Historic District,Roughly bounded by 2nd, Libertyand 6th Sts. and Mill Cr., TheDalles, 95000686

RHODE ISLAND

Providence CountyBlackstone Boulevard Realty Plat

Historic District, Roughly boundedby Blackstone Blvd., RochambeauAve., Holly St. and Elmgrove Ave.,Providence, 95000711

In order to assist in the preservationof the following property, the 15-daycommenting period is being waived:

MASSACHUSETTS

Middlesex CountyBullard Farm, 7 Bullard Ln.,

Holliston, 95000710

[FR Doc. 95–12509 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway,Minnesota and Wisconsin

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.ACTION: Notice—temporary restrictedaccess.

SUMMARY: The National Park Service isestablishing a temporary restrictedaccess program for the Federally-administered portion of the Lower SaintCroix National Scenic Riverway for the1995 boating season. This program isbeing put in place to prevent the spreadof the exotic zebra mussel into theupper section of the riverway. Therestrictions are now being implementedand are effective through November 30,1995. This notice is given pursuant to36 CFR Sections 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7.

DATES: This action is effectiveimmediately and provides notice of theimplementation of restrictions on theFederal portion of the Lower Saint CroixNational Scenic Riverway throughNovember 30, 1995.ADDRESSES: Copies of the 1995 ZebraMussel Response Plan are available forpublic review at the following locations.Superintendent’s Office, Saint Croix

National Scenic Riverway, 401Hamilton Street, St. Croix Falls, WI54024.

St. Croix National Scenic Riverway,Lower River Visitor Center, 117 MainStreet, Stillwater, MN 55082.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Anthony L. Andersen, Superintendent,Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway,P.O. Box 708, Saint Croix Falls,Wisconsin 54024; telephone 715–483–3284.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The exoticzebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha)was accidently introduced into thewaters of the United States in 1986. Thezebra mussel is a small filter-feedingmollusk that attaches itself to hardsurfaces. It has been identified as anaquatic nuisance species in theNonindigenous Aquatic NuisancePrevention Control Act of 1990, 16U.S.C. 4701. Since that time,populations have spread from the GreatLakes throughout the major eastern andmidwestern river systems, including theMississippi River as far upstream asMinneapolis, Minnesota. The primaryvector in the spread of the zebra musselis by in-water vessels. Once establishedin river systems the spread may bedownstream by current.

Prevention efforts are directed atminimizing the risk of unintentionalintroduction and spread of the zebramussels as a nuisance species.Minimizing such risks is particularlyimportant since once the zebra musselhas become established, it is nearlyimpossible to eliminate. Researchsuggests that the biological impact of thezebra mussel may be dramatic due to:(1) Its ability to filter large quantities ofwater, thus limiting the food available toother species and (2) its demonstratedpotential to extirpate native speciescommon of mussels.

At immediate threat on the St. CroixRiver are a variety of natural andeconomic resources, values andinterests dependent upon the riverincluding the Northern States KingPower Plant at Bayport, several marinas,several communities and municipalitiesand supporting infrastructure andindustry, thousands of individualboatowners and riparian landowners,

native fauna and flora and the overallwater quality of the river itself.

The 1995 Zebra Mussel Response Planexpands upon activities initiated in1993 and continued in 1994. Thechange for the 1995 boating season isthe implementation of a zebra musselfree certification/pass program forvessels traveling upstream past theArcola Sandbar, approximately 5 milesupstream of the north city limits ofStillwater, Minnesota.

The components of this programinclude:

1. ‘‘Passes’’: Free daily passes will beissued for vessels traveling downstreamfrom upstream of the Arcola Sandbar.These passes will be issued at theArcola Ranger Station and will allowthe vessel to return upstream of theArcola Sandbar before 12 midnight onthe same day the pass is issued. Anyvessel not returning on the same daybefore 12 midnight must bedecontaminated at an approved cleaningstation and certified free of zebramussels before proceeding upstream ofthe Arcola Sandbar. To receive a pass,boat operators must certify that theywill not travel downstream ofKinnickinnic Narrows, approximatemile 6 of the St. Croix River.

2. ‘‘Certification of Decontamination’’:Any vessel may travel upstream of theArcola Sandbar that has beendecontaminated at an approved cleaningstation and certified free of zebramussels before proceeding upstream ofthe Arcola Sandbar. The upstream travelmust be done before 1200 midnight onthe same day of cleaning andcertification.

Vessel cleaning and certification areavailable at Wolf Marine in Stillwater,MN. At the time of this notice WolfMarine is the only officially approvedcleaning station.

Dated: May 18, 1995.Bob Marriott,Acting Chief, Ranger Activities Division.[FR Doc. 95–12590 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

Bureau of Reclamation

Yakima River Basin WaterEnhancement Project, Yakima,Washington

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,Interior.ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare aprogrammatic environmental impactstatement.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) of1969, as amended, the Bureau of


Reclamation (Reclamation) intends toprepare a programmatic environmentalimpact statement (PEIS) forimplementing provisions of thelegislation authorizing the Yakima RiverBasin Water Enhancement Project(Enhancement Project). The purpose ofthe Enhancement Project is to meet thecompeting needs of the Yakima Riverbasin through improved waterconservation and management, andother appropriate means. This mayinclude reducing water diversions byimproving conveyance, distribution,and onfarm irrigation facilities; andchanging operations, management, andadministration of Yakima River basinwater. Conserved water will be used toincrease instream flows and provide amore stable irrigation supply. TheEnhancement Project legislation alsoauthorizes actions on the Yakima IndianReservation to benefit the members ofthe Yakima Indian Nation.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mr. Cline Sweet, EnvironmentalProgram Manager, Upper Columbia AreaOffice, Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box1749, Yakima, WA 98907–1749;telephone (509) 575–5848.


Background

Federal involvement in the YakimaRiver basin began in 1905 withauthorization of the first facilities of theYakima Project. The Yakima Projectnow consists of seven divisions: Astorage division consisting of sevenreservoirs and six water servicedivisions with separate diversion,conveyance, and distribution facilities.

The Yakima River basin is highlydependent upon water from the YakimaRiver and its tributaries to meet amultitude of economic, environmental,and societal needs. The Yakima Projectprovides the primary facilities for theregulation and use of basin waters.

Congress first authorized a study ofthe Enhancement Project in 1979. Phaseone of the Enhancement Project wasimplemented in 1984 when Congressauthorized the Secretary of the Interior,through Reclamation, to construct fishpassage and protective facilities in theYakima River basin. The work wasperformed in partnership with theBonneville Power Administration, theState of Washington, and others underthe auspices of the Fish and WildlifeProgram of the Northwest PowerPlanning Council.

The Columbia River Basin Fish andWildlife Program adopted by theNorthwest Power Planning Council in1982 identified the Yakima River basinas one of the areas with the greatest

potential for the production of salmonand steelhead. With the existing projectfacilities and operational requirements,maintaining a stable irrigation watersupply and instream flows for themaintenance and enhancement ofsalmon and steelhead in the YakimaRiver basin is difficult to achieve.

In dry years, the water supplyavailable is allocated among the waterusers pursuant to entitlements set forthin a Federal District Court Judgment ofJanuary 31, 1945 (1945 Consent Decree).The 1945 Consent Decree requiresreductions in the water supply availableto junior water right holders before anyreductions to senior right holders.Additionally, a Federal Court directiveon November 28, 1980, requiringReclamation to make releases fromYakima Project reservoirs to assureadequate instream flows for anadromousfish spawning and rearing furtherreduces the reliability of irrigation watersupplies.

Current ActivitiesThe Enhancement Project legislation

established the Yakima River BasinWater Conservation Program which iscentral to balancing the competingdemands on the basin’s water supply.This voluntary program will reducedemands on the available water supplyby promoting conservation measures toimprove:

• The efficiency of water delivery anduse.

• Instream flows for fish and wildlife.• The reliability of the irrigation

water supply.The actual measures that will be

adopted depend on the preparation ofwater conservation plans detailing whatcan be done. Cost effectiveness will beconsidered and separate NEPAcompliance will be completed whenrecommending water conservationactions for implementation. The waterconservation measures will occur insteps over a period of years providingthe opportunity to monitor, evaluate,and adjust subsequent measures.

The legislation also directs theSecretary of the Interior to establish aconservation advisory group, inconsultation with the State ofWashington, the Yakama Indian Nation,the Yakima River basin irrigators, andother interested parties. A charter forthe group has been drafted andnominees are being sought.

The legislation was developed by aconsortium of local, tribal, State, andFederal entities involved with waterresource activities in the basin and isthe result of a consensus building effortto structure an acceptable,comprehensive approach to the basin’s

water problems. An extensive scopingeffort will be conducted by mail alongwith public scoping sessions which willbe scheduled at a later date.

Alternative Measures

The PEIS will serve as an umbrelladocument to ensure that the interactionand cumulative effects of all activitiesproposed for implementation underTitle XII of the Act of October 31, 1994(Pub. L. 103–434), which authorized theEnhancement Project, are addressed.The provisions and measures for thelegislation will set the limits onactivities to be evaluated in the PEIS.

Two major alternatives are beingconsidered: action, i.e., implementingthe legislation, and no action. Theaction alternative will be an incrementalanalysis showing impacts at differentlevels of implementation of projectcomponents. Separate NEPA analysesaddressing various alternatives will beconducted for site specific actions notcovered in sufficient detail in the PEIS.

Potential Federal Action

Reclamation is seeking funding toimplement Public Law 103–434. Thedraft PEIS is expected to be completedin June of 1996.

Anyone interested in moreinformation concerning the study, orwho has information concerning thestudy or suggestions as to significantenvironmental issues, should contactMr. Sweet as provided above.

Dated: April 27, 1995.John W. Keys, III,Regional Director, Pacific Northwest Region.[FR Doc. 95–12559 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–94–M

INTERSTATE COMMERCECOMMISSION

[Docket No. AB–55 (Sub-No. 506X)]

CSX Transportation, Inc.—Abandonment Exemption—in FanninCounty, GA

CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), hasfiled a notice of exemption under 49CFR 1152 Subpart F—ExemptAbandonments to abandonapproximately 14.23 miles of rail lineextending between milepost LKX–382.47 at McCaysville and milepostLKX–396.7 at Blue Ridge, in FanninCounty, GA.

CSXT has certified that: (1) No localtraffic has moved over the line for atleast 2 years; (2) there is no overheadtraffic on the line; (3) no formalcomplaint filed by a user of rail serviceon the line (or by a state or local


1 A stay will be issued routinely where aninformed decision on environmental issues(whether raised by a party or by the Commission’sSection of Environmental Analysis in itsindependent investigation) cannot be made prior tothe effective date of the notice of exemption. SeeExemption of Out-of-Service Rail Lines, 5 I.C.C.2d377 (1989). Any entity seeking a stay onenvironmental grounds is encouraged to filepromptly so that the Commission may act on therequest before the effective date.

2 See Exempt. of Rail Abandonment Offers ofFinan. Assist., 4 I.C.C.2d 164 (1987).

3 The Commission will accept late-filed trail usestatements so long as it retains jurisdiction.

government entity acting on behalf ofsuch user) regarding cessation of serviceover the line either is pending with theCommission or with any U.S. DistrictCourt or has been decided in favor ofthe complainant within the 2-yearperiod; and (4) the requirements at 49CFR 1105.7 (environmental reports), 49CFR 1105.8 (historic report), 49 CFR1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR1105.12 (newspaper publication), and49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice togovernmental agencies) have been met.

As a condition to use of thisexemption, any employee adverselyaffected by the abandonment shall beprotected under Oregon Short Line R.Co.—Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C.91 (1979). To address whether thiscondition adequately protects affectedemployees, a petition for partialrevocation under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d)must be filed.

Provided no formal expression ofintent to file an offer of financialassistance (OFA) has been received, thisexemption will be effective on June 22,1995 (unless stayed pendingreconsideration). Petitions to stay thatdo not involve environmental issues,1formal expressions of intent to file OFAunder 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2),2 and trailuse/rail banking requests under 49 CFR1152.29 3 must be filed by June 2, 1995.Petitions to reopen or requests forpublic use conditions under 49 CFR1152.28 must be filed by June 12, 1995,with: Office of the Secretary, CaseControl Branch, Interstate CommerceCommission, Washington, DC 20423.

A copy of any pleading filed with theCommission should be sent toapplicant’s representative: Charles M.Rosenberger, CSX Transportation, Inc.,500 Water Street J150, Jacksonville, FL32202.

If the notice of exemption containsfalse or misleading information, theexemption is void ab initio.

CSXT has filed an environmentalreport which addresses theabandonment’s effects, if any, on theenvironment and historic resources. TheSection of Environmental Analysis(SEA) will issue an environmental

assessment (EA) by May 26, 1995.Interested persons may obtain a copy ofthe EA by writing to SEA (Room 3219,Interstate Commerce Commission,Washington, DC 20423) or by callingElaine Kaiser, Chief of SEA, at (202)927–6248. Comments on environmentaland historic preservation matters mustbe filed within 15 days after the EAbecomes available to the public.

Environmental, historic preservation,public use, or trail use/rail bankingconditions will be imposed, whereappropriate, in a subsequent decision.

Decided: May 16, 1995.By the Commission, Joseph H. Dettmar,

Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.Vernon A. Williams,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12554 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7035–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of SettlementPursuant to the Clean Air Act

In accordance with Departmentalpolicy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is herebygiven that on May 15, 1995 a proposedJoint Stipulation And Order ofDismissal in United States v. Jeffrey M.Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc. CivilAction No. 1:95 CV 1073 was lodgedwith the United States District Court forthe Northern District of Ohio. This JointStipulation And Order of Dismissalrepresents a settlement of claims againstJeffrey M. Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc.for violations of the Clean Air Act.

On May 15, 1995, the United Statesfiled a Complaint pursuant to Sections204 and 205 of the Clean Air Act(‘‘CAA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), 42 U.S.C. 7523and 7524, for injunctive relief andassessment of civil penalties againstJeffrey M. Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc.The Complaint alleged that Jeffrey M.Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc. violatedCAA Section 203(a)(1), 42 U.S.C.7522(a)(1), by manufacturing and sellingCitroen 2CV based automobiles whichwere not covered by certificates ofconformity issued under CAA Section206(a), 42 U.S.C. 7525(a). The UnitedStates, Jeffrey M. Kanter, and KanterCars, Inc. have reached a settlementwhich resolves the issues set forth in theComplaint. Under this settlement,Jeffrey M. Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc.will pay the United States a civilpenalty of $4800.00.

The Department of Justice will receivefor a period of thirty (30) days from thedate of this publication commentsrelating to the proposed JointStipulation And Order of Dismissal.

Comments should be addressed to theAssistant Attorney General of theEnvironment and Natural ResourcesDivision, Department of Justice,Washington, D.C. 20530, and shouldrefer to United States v. Jeffrey M.Kanter and Kanter Cars, Inc., D.J. ref.90–5–2–1–1870A.

The proposed Joint Stipulation AndOrder of Dismissal may be examined atthe Office of the United States Attorney,Northern District of Ohio, 1800 BankOne Center, 600 Superior Ave,Cleveland, OH 44114–2600 and at theConsent Decree Library, 1120 G Street,NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005.A copy of the proposed Joint StipulationAnd Order of Dismissal may be obtainedin person or by mail from the ConsentDecree Library, 1120 G Street, NW., 4thFloor, Washington, DC 20005. Inrequesting a copy, please enclose acheck in the amount of $2.00 (25 centsper page reproduction costs) payable tothe Consent Decree Library.Joel M. Gross,Acting Chief, Environmental EnforcementSection, Environment and Natural ResourcesDivision.[FR Doc. 95–12560 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

[Docket No. 95–5]

Request for Comments on the Waiverof Moral Rights in Visual Artworks

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library ofCongress.ACTION: Notice of hearing and requestfor public comment.

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office isholding a public hearing to solicitcomments on the effect of the waiver ofmoral rights provision of the VisualArtists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA).Section 608 of VARA requires theCopyright Office to study the effect ofVARA’s waiver provision and to publishits findings. To fulfill the statutoryobligations of section 608, the CopyrightOffice is examining the extent to whichauthors waive moral rights in theirvisual artworks under the waiverprovision. The Office also will acceptwritten comments.DATES: The public hearing will be heldon Wednesday, June 21, 1995, from10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Requests topresent oral testimony at the hearingshould be received on or before June 16,1995. Written comments by thosepersons testifying at the hearing should


1 This provision was added in the RomeConference (1928). As part of the VARA study, theCopyright Office is examining the moral rightsprotection, if any, in selected countries and alsolooking at case law and practices in those countries.This overview should provide some insight intointernational practice on waiver of moral rights.

2 It also explicitly excludes posters, maps, globes,charts, technical drawings, diagrams, models,books, magazines, newspapers, periodicals, databases, electronic information services, electronicpublications and similar publications, anymerchandising item or advertising, promotional,descriptive, covering, or packaging material orcontainer, and any portion or part of any of theseitems. Works not entitled to copyright protectionunder title 17 are also excluded. 17 U.S.C. 101(1990).

be received on or before June 19, 1995.All other written comments must bereceived on or before July 31, 1995.ADDRESSES: Interested parties shouldsubmit written comments and requeststo present oral testimony by mail toMarilyn J. Kretsinger, Acting GeneralCounsel, Copyright Office GC/I&R, P.O.Box 70400, Southwest Station,Washington, D.C. 20024, or by handdelivery to the Office of GeneralCounsel, Copyright Office, JamesMadison Memorial Building, Room LM407, First Street and IndependenceAvenue, S.E., Washington, D.C., or byTelefax: (202) 707–8366. The hearingwill be held in Room 414, which islocated on the fourth floor of the Libraryof Congress, James Madison MemorialBuilding, First Street and IndependenceAvenue, S.E., Washington, D.C. Writtencomments and a transcript of thehearing will be available for publicinspection in the Office of the GeneralCounsel, Copyright Office, JamesMadison Memorial Building, Room LM–407, First Street and IndependenceAvenue, S.E., Washington, D.C.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:Marilyn J. Kretsinger, Acting GeneralCounsel, Copyright Office GC/I&R, P.O.Box 70400, Southwest Station,Washington, D.C. 20024. Telephone(202) 707–8389. Telefax: (202) 707–8366.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OnDecember 1, 1990, President Bushsigned into law the Visual Artists RightsAct (VARA), which was codified assection 106A of title 17 of the UnitedStates Code and went into effect on June1, 1991. VARA grants certain visualartists the moral right of attribution,which is the right to claim or disclaimauthorship of a work, and the moralright of integrity, which is the right toprevent any intentional distortion,mutilation or other modification of awork which is prejudicial to the artist’sreputation or honor and to prevent thedestruction of a work of recognizedstature by any intentional or grosslynegligent act. VARA also provides thatthese rights may not be transferred butcan be waived.

The waiver provision was the mostcontroversial portion of VARA.Congress was concerned that artistsmight be compelled to waive their rightsof integrity and attribution. Thisconcern is detailed in the House Report:

The Committee intends to ensure that thewaiver provisions serve to facilitate currentpractices while not eviscerating theprotections provided by the proposed law. Itis important, therefore, for the Congress toknow whether waivers are beingautomatically obtained in every case

involving a covered work of visual art,whether any imbalance in the economicbargaining power of the parties serves tocompel artists to waive their rights, andwhether the parties are properly adhering tothe strict rules governing waiver.

H.R. Rep. No. 514, 101st Cong., 2d Sess.22 (1990).

To address this concern, whenCongress passed VARA it includedsection 608, requiring the CopyrightOffice to study the waiver provision todetermine whether artists’ contractsroutinely provide for waiver of moralrights. Specifically, section 608 requiresthe Copyright Office to study the extentto which the rights conferred by VARAare being waived by visual artists and topresent its findings to Congress in aninterim report which was submitted onDecember 1, 1992, and in a final reportwhich must be submitted by December1, 1995. The Copyright Office is in theprocess of preparing this final report.

I. Background

On March 1, 1989, the United Statesacceded to the Paris text of the BerneConvention for the Protection of Literaryand Artistic Works. Article 6bis of theBerne Convention requires countries toprovide protection of the moral rights ofpaternity and integrity.1 During thedebate on adherence to the BerneConvention, some argued that theUnited States needed to enact specificmoral rights legislation. The vastmajority of those seeking adherencecontended that existing laws, bothFederal and State, statutory andcommon, were sufficient to meet therequirements of the Berne Convention.Congress agreed with the majority andtherefore did not include anysubstantive moral rights provisions inthe Berne Convention ImplementationAct. H.R. Rep. No. 514, 101st Cong., 2dSess. 7–8 (1990).

Congress acknowledged thatadherence to the Berne Convention didnot end the debate about whether theUnited States should adopt artists’rights laws and it did enact such a lawin 1990; through VARA it created auniform Federal system of rights forcertain visual artists.

The scope of VARA is very narrow; itapplies only to works of fine art whichare identified as ‘‘works of visual art.’’A ‘‘work of visual art’’ as defined in theCopyright Code includes any painting,drawing, print, sculpture, or still

photographic image produced forexhibition purposes, produced in asingle copy or an edition of 200 or fewerif signed and consecutively numberedby the artist. 17 U.S.C. 101 (1990).VARA specifically excludes works forhire, motion pictures and otheraudiovisual works, and works ofapplied art.2

If a work qualifies as a ‘‘work of visualart’’ the author of that work is grantedtwo rights: the right of attribution andthe right of integrity. The right ofattribution gives the visual artist theright to be named as author of a work;the right to prevent use of his or hername as author of a work he or she didnot create; and the right to prevent theuse of his or her name if the work hasbeen distorted, mutilated or modified ina manner that would be prejudicial tothe artist’s honor or reputation. 17U.S.C. 106A(a) (1990). The right ofintegrity allows the artist to preventintentional distortion or modification ofthe work that would be prejudicial tothe artist’s honor or reputation, and toprevent destruction of a work ofrecognized stature. Id.

The rights granted by VARA are notabsolute. The integrity rights are subjectto special provisions if the work ofvisual art is incorporated into orotherwise made part of a building.Where such a work of visual art cannotbe removed from the building withoutbeing damaged or otherwise modified,the moral right of integrity in section106A will apply unless the work wasinstalled in the building before theeffective date of VARA or the artistsigned a written agreementacknowledging that the work may bedamaged or modified when it isremoved from the building. 17 U.S.C.113(d)(1) (1990). If the work of visual artcan be removed from the buildingwithout damage or modification, themoral rights in section 106A will applyunless the owner of the buildingcomplies with special noticerequirements. See 17 U.S.C. 113(d)(2)(1990).

Another limitation on the rightsgranted by VARA concerns theirduration. Despite Berne’s generalrequirement that the term of protectionfor moral rights be at least coextensivewith the term of protection for economic


3 VARA does not permit blanket waivers andprohibits the specific person to whom the waiveris made from transferring the waiver to a thirdparty. H.R. Rep. No. 514, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 18–19 (1990).

4 Comments were received from the NebraskaArts Council; Professor of Law, John HenryMerryman; the Capital Arts Center/BG–WC ArtsCommission; the General Services Administration;the Committee for America’s Copyright Community;Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts of Massachusetts,Inc.; and Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts of NewYork.

rights, which is the life of the authorand fifty years after the author’s death,VARA rights endure only for the life ofthe artist, or where the work is a jointwork, the life of the last surviving artist.17 U.S.C. 106A(d) (1990).

The subject of the study is waiver ofthe rights of integrity and attribution.Congress explicitly provided that themoral rights of integrity and attributionmay be waived. 17 U.S.C. 106A(e)(1990). For a waiver to be valid it mustbe expressly agreed to in a writteninstrument that is signed by the artistand that specifically identifies the workand the uses of the work to which thewaiver applies. 17 U.S.C. 106A(e)(1)(1990). A waiver will apply only to thework and uses identified in the writteninstrument. Id.3 In the case of a jointwork, a valid waiver by one authorconstitutes a waiver of the rights for alljoint authors. Id.

The Copyright Office published aFederal Register notice on June 10,1992, requesting information andinviting public comment on the moralrights waiver provision in VARA. 57 FR24659 (1992). In response to this notice,the Copyright Office received a total ofseven comments.4 Although thecomments were helpful, most of themwere very brief. At the time of theinterim report, VARA had been in effectfor only two years and there were few,if any, measurable effects of the waiverprovision. The comments of the sevenparties are summarized in the interimreport, submitted to Congress onDecember 1, 1992.

II. Current Status of the CopyrightOffice Study

The results of the interim studydemonstrated that obtaining informationfrom artists on their experience with thewaiver provision for the final reportwould be a major challenge. TheCopyright Office thus began anextensive outreach program aimed atgetting factual information on the effectsof VARA’s waiver provision.

To reach individual artists, theCopyright Office developed a surveyquestionnaire designed to reveal theeffect of VARA waiver provisions on thevisual arts community. The survey was

modeled in part after the ‘‘VolunteerLawyers for the Arts Visual ArtistsRights Act of 1990 Questionnaire’’submitted by the MassachusettsVolunteer Lawyers for the Arts inresponse to the June 1992 FederalRegister notice.

One goal of the survey was todetermine whether waiver of moralrights provisions are routinely includedin art contracts; and, if so, whether thisoccurs because of the parties’ relativebargaining power or for other reasons.Another goal of the survey was toascertain whether waivers occur only inthe context of a written contract, asrequired by statute, or whether waiversalso occur orally.

Following review of the survey by agroup consisting of copyright expertsand representatives of the artcommunity, the Office revised anddistributed the survey questionnaire tohundreds of visual art-relatedorganizations. These organizationsconsisted primarily of state art councils,volunteer lawyers for the artsassociations, and art schools anduniversities. Altogether, the CopyrightOffice mailed out more than 6,800surveys. The actual number of surveysdistributed was far greater, however,because many of the surveys wereduplicated by the recipientorganizations and distributed to stillothers in the visual arts community.

III. Preliminary Analysis of VARASurvey

By May 15, 1995, the Copyright Officehad received 1063 completed surveys.Our final report to Congress will includea detailed analysis of survey results, buta preliminary analysis of 985 surveysreceived by mid-April reveals thefollowing data.

A. Knowledge of VARA

Even five years after VARA’senactment, survey results indicated thateducating artists about their new moralrights is perhaps as critical as theCongressional intent to study the extentto which artists waive these rights. Thesurvey, therefore, fulfilled aneducational need. Before receiving thesurvey, 73 percent of all respondentswere aware of moral rights in certainworks of visual art. Fifty-eight percent,however, previously were unaware suchrights could be waived, and sixty-sixpercent did not know that waiverrequires an express, written agreement.Seventy-nine percent of all respondentssaid they have not seen contracts thatinclude a waiver provision. Eightpercent have waived moral rights in asigned contract, but a full 77 percent

have not, and five percent said they didnot know.

B. Respondent ProfileThe majority of responses were from

artists. Ninety percent of respondentsbelieved they were covered by thesurvey’s definition of ‘‘visual artist’’(i.e., one who creates a ‘‘work of visualart’’ as defined by VARA). Of these, 58percent identified themselves aspainters (an artist could check as manymedia as applied). Only eight percent ofrespondents were not VARA artists: Ofthese, five percent created art works notcovered by VARA, another two percentwere art professors, and the remainingwere others associated with the arts.

Most respondents did not earn asignificant income from their art. Morethan half have worked undercommission, but 68 percent earned lessthan $10,000 from their art in an averageyear. Five percent claimed incomebetween $25,000–$40,000, and ninepercent said their art-related incomeexceeded that amount. Roughtly halfwere represented by a gallery or agent,but 42 percent had no repression.

C. Willingness to Waive Moral RightsForty-four percent of artists indicated

they were unwilling to waive moralrights in the future. Seven percentwould waive such rights; 36 percent didnot know whether they would waivethese rights, and 123 artists declined tosay.

Of seventy-nine individuals who hadwaived the right of integrity orattribution in a signed contract, 42 saidthey did so to gain exposure and 37 saidthey did so to make a sale. Elevenpercent had declined a contract becauseit included a waiver clause, and 13percent had insisted such a clause bestruck before signing. Most artists (58%)did not know whether rejecting a waiverwould cost them the contract, but some(15%) thought it would. Eighty-onepercent had never been pressured towaive moral rights, but six percent had.

IV. Subject Matter To Be Addressed atthe Public Hearing

To supplement the informationgathered through the survey, theCopyright Office will hold a publichearing to solicit comments on the effectof the waiver of moral rights provisionin the Visual Artists Rights Act. Weanticipate that the hearing will providean opportunity to obtain moreinformation on existing practicesrelating to waivers of moral rights invisual art.

The Copyright Office is also interestedin studying actual or model contractsthat contain language concerning waiver


of moral rights. We would like to seeexamples of as many visual art contractsas possible, especially those withwaivers, and would appreciate anyparty sending us such contracts.

The Copyright Office specificallyinvites comments on the followingquestions:

Awareness of rights. To what extentare artists aware of VARA and the rightsof integrity and attribution provided byVARA? Has awareness of VARAincreased? Please give examples.

Extent of waiver. Are waiver of moralrights provisions routinely included inartists’ contracts? Do parties that obtainwaiver of moral rights in a contractexercise the waiver or is a waiversecured merely as an ‘‘insurancepolicy’’? Does waiver vary depending onthe nature of the work? For example, aremobiles and sculptures treateddifferently than paintings and prints?Does it vary based on the location of thework, for example, murals that are partof buildings? What experiences haveartists had with owners of buildings?Does it vary depending on thepurchaser? Does it matter whether thepurchaser is a national or regionalinstitution, an owner of a public orprivate building, an art collector orinvestor? Please give examples wherepossible.

Contract specifics. What is theeconomic effect of a waiver in thecourse of contract negotiations? Is thereany evidence on how much a waiver isworth—that is, how much more apurchaser would pay if the artist waivedthe right? Are there proportionatelymore waivers given for artistic worksthat are included in buildings than forother types of works? When a waiver isincluded in a contract, does the contractspecifically identify the work and usefor which the waiver applies? Whattypes of contracts include waivers:contracts for sale of work? contracts fortransfer of copyright ownership?contracts for commissioned works?contracts that include only a waiverprovision? If a waiver is included in acontract, is that waiver limited induration? If limited in duration, what isthe typical term of the waiver?

Artists’ concerns. What are the factorsartists consider when determiningwhether to agree to a waiver of moralrights in a contract? Describe anyinstances where artists were coercedinto waiving their moral rights. HasVARA had an effect on commission ofvisual art?

Do artists have unequal bargainingpower when dealing with establishedgalleries and other organizations? If theartist’s selling power (demand for his orher works) or reputation affects or

determines whether or not waiver willbe required, how much experience orhow well know does the artist have tobe in order to avoid waiver? Givespecific examples, if possible.

Experience in other countries. Whattypes of experiences have artists hadwith moral rights abroad? Are artistsasked to waive their moral rights incontracts entered into in foreigncountries? If so, in what countries?

Experience with U.S. law. Shouldmoral rights be waivable? Should theprovisions of the Visual Artists RightsAct be amended or modified in anyway?

The Copyright Office is interested inreceiving public comment on theseissues and any other issues relevant tothe VARA study.

Dated: May 18, 1995.Marybeth Peters,Register of Copyrights.[FR Doc. 95–12606 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 1410–30–M

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDSPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 95–031]

National Environmental Policy Act;International Space Station Program

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare aTier 2 environmental impact statement(EIS) and conduct scoping for theassembly and operation of the proposedInternational Space Station (ISS)Program.

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration, in accordancewith the National Environmental PolicyAct of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council onEnvironmental Quality Regulations forImplementing the Procedural Provisionsof NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508), andNASA’s policy and procedures (14 CFRPart 1216 Subpart 1216.3), intends toprepare a Tier 2 EIS for the ISS Program.The proposed action by NASA is tocontinue to provide U.S. participationin the assembly and operation of theISS. The alternative is cancellation ofthe ISS Program, specifically, the ‘‘NoAction’’ alternative. The Tier 2 EIS willfocus on those areas of the ISS Programwhich have changed substantially sincethe Tier 1 EIS was prepared. Thisincludes modifications to the spacestation itself, its assembly andoperation, and an assessment of theprobability and consequences of reentryof the station into Earth’s atmosphere.

DATES: Interested parties are invited tosubmit written comments to NASA onor before July 7, 1995, to ensure fullconsideration during the scopingprocess.ADDRESSES: Comments should be inwriting and addressed to Mr. DavidRuszczyk, NASA Johnson Space FlightCenter, Code OF, Houston, Texas77058–3696.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mr. David Ruszczyk, 713–244–7756.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NASAissued the Final Tier 1 EnvironmentalImpact Statement for Space StationFreedom, March 1991 (hereinafterreferred to as the ‘‘Tier 1 EIS’’). The Tier1 EIS was prepared as part of thedecision process to determine whetherto proceed with the development,assembly, and operation of a humanoccupied space station in cooperationwith the Canadian Space Agency, theEuropean Space Agency, and Japan’sNational Space Development Agency.Several programmatic and designconfiguration alternatives wereconsidered, along with the alternative totake no action. The program decision,made on the basis of the Tier 1 EIS andother relevant documents, was toproceed with full scale design anddevelopment of the concept known asSpace Station Freedom.

At the time the Tier EIS was prepared,detailed design information was notavailable. As a consequence, someissues relating to the potentialenvironmental effects of Space StationFreedom were deferred to the Tier 2 EIS.These issues included the impacts ofany significant design modificationsthat might be incorporated as the designmatured; and a quantitative analysis ofthe probability and consequences ofaccidental or uncontrolled reentry intothe Earth’s atmosphere during assemblyand operation. Other impacts that werereserved include venting of nontoxicgases during station operation, andchange to a hydrazine propulsionsystem.

On March 9, 1993, the Presidentdirected NASA to undertake a majorredesign of the space station program insuch a manner that major reductions inthe projected costs of Space StationFreedom could be realized. An AdvisoryCommittee on the Redesign of the SpaceStation was chartered to provide advicewith respect to the redesign options forthe U.S. space station program. Theresults of the redesign studies werepresented in the Space Station RedesignTeam Final Report to the AdvisoryCommittee on the Redesign of the SpaceStation, dated June 1993. The result wasthe currently proposed ISS, which


includes design modifications andagreements to include Russia as apartner, and incorporates Russianhardware and capabilities into theprogram.

The proposed action considered inthis Tier 2 EIS is to continue theimplementation of the U.S. contributionto the overall effort to assemble andoperate the ISS. The remainingalternative involves the ‘‘No Action’’alternative (i.e., cancellation of U.S.participation in the ISS). Significantdesign changes that have occurred sincethe Tier 1 EIS include, but are notnecessarily limited to, the following:The number of research laboratories onthe space station has been increasedfrom three to six; the number of logisticsmodules has been increased from one totwo; the pressurized volume has beenalmost doubled; the crew size has beenincreased from four to six; and theorbital inclination has been changedfrom 28.5 degrees to 51.6 degrees,permitting space station access byRussian launch vehicles and additionalmission control capabilities fromRussia’s mission control center. The ISScontemplates 15 Russian launches,increasing the total number of launchesthrough completion of assembly from 32to 44, and reducing the number of U.S.launches from 29 to 27, one Europeanlaunch, and one launch yet to bedetermined. Accordingly, resupplyflights to the completed ISS will nowinclude Russian as well as U.S. flights;whereas Space Station Freedom was tobe resupplied exclusively by U.S. SpaceShuttle flights. The planned U.S.launches will not include anyexpendable launch vehicles; only theSpace Shuttle will be used. However,the U.S. may use expendable launchvehicles in a contingency or backuprole.

The design of the ISS has progressedto the point where it is now possible toconduct a quantitative analysis of theprobability and consequences ofaccidental or uncontrolled reentry intothe Earth’s atmosphere. The Tier 2 EISwill assess the probabilities andpotential impacts associated withaccidental or uncontrolled reentry. TheTier 2 EIS also will addressdecommissioning alternatives,including the plan presented in the Tier1 EIS.

Other issues to be addressed in theTier 2 EIS include, but will notnecessarily be limited to, the following:the cumulative effects of the U.S.launches associated with the assemblyand operation of the ISS; the change toa Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine/Nitrogen Tetroxide propulsion system;and the venting and outgassing of

nontoxic gases from the ISS. The Tier 2EIS will address environmental effectson the United States and the integratedISS impacts on the global commons.

Written public input and commentson the range of alternatives beingconsidered and the potentialenvironmental issues related to theassembly and the operation of theInternational Space Station are herebysolicited.

Dated: May 12, 1995.Benita A. Cooper,Associate Administrator for ManagementSystems and Facilities.[FR Doc. 95–12553 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

[Notice 95–032]

Intent To Grant a Partially ExclusiveLicense

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration.ACTION: Notice of intent to grant a patentlicense.

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice ofintent to grant MERCO Incorporated,1667 Cole Boulevard, Suite 400, Golden,Colorado 80401, a partially exclusivelicense to practice the inventionprotected by U.S. Patent No. 5,128,797,‘‘NON-MECHANICAL OPTICAL PATHSWITCHING AND ITS APPLICATIONTO DUAL BEAM SPECTROSCOPYINCLUDING GAS FILTERCORRELATION RADIOMETRY,’’ whichwas issued on July 7, 1992, by theUnited States of America as representedby the Administrator of the NationalAeronautics and Space Administration.The partially exclusive license willcontain appropriate terms andconditions to be negotiated inaccordance with the Department ofCommerce patent licensing regulations(37 CFR 404). NASA will negotiate thefinal terms and conditions and grant thelicense unless, within 60 days of thedate of this notice, the Director of PatentLicensing receives written objections tothe grant, together with supportingdocumentation. The Director ofLicensing will review all writtenresponses to the notice and thenrecommend to the Associate GeneralCounsel (Intellectual Property) whetherto grant the license.DATES: Comments to the notice must bereceived by July 24, 1995.ADDRESSES: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration, Code GP,Washington, DC 20546.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mr. Harry Lupuloff, NASA, Director ofPatent Licensing, (202) 358–2041.

Dated: May 16, 1995.Edward A. Frankle,General Counsel.[FR Doc. 95–12552 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LITERACY

National Institute for Literacy AdvisoryBoard; Meeting

AGENCY: National Institute for LiteracyAdvisory Board, National Institute forLiteracy.ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This Notice sets forth theschedule and proposed agenda of aforthcoming meeting of the NationalInstitute for Literacy Advisory Board(Board). This notice also describes thefunction of the Board. Notice of thismeeting is required under section10(a)(2) of the Federal AdvisoryCommittee Act. This document isintended to notify the general public oftheir opportunity to attend the meeting.DATES AND TIMES: June 15, 1995, 9 a.m.to 4 p.m.ADDRESSES: World Education, 210Lincoln Street, 6th Floor, Boston,Massachusetts, 02111.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Sharyn M. Abbott, Acting ExecutiveOfficer, National Institute for Literacy,800 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite200, Washington, DC 20006. Telephone(202) 632–1503.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Boardis established under Section 384 of theAdult Education Act, as amended byTitle I of Public Law 102–73, theNational Literacy Act of 1991. TheBoard consists of ten individualsappointed by the President with theadvice and consent of the Senate. TheBoard is established to advise and makerecommendations to the InteragencyGroup, composed of the Secretaries ofEducation, Labor, and Health andHuman Services, which administers theNational Institute for Literacy (Institute).The Interagency Group considers theBoard’s recommendations in planningthe goals of the Institute and in theimplementation of any programs toachieve the goals of the Institute.Specifically, the Board performs thefollowing functions: (a) Makesrecommendations concerning theappointment of the Director and thestaff of the Institute; (b) providesindependent advice on operation of theInstitute; and (c) receives reports fromthe Interagency Group and the Directorof the Institute. In addition, the Instituteconsults with the Board on the award of


fellowships. The Board will meet inBoston, Massachusetts on June 15, 1995from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. The meeting of theBoard is open to the public. The agendaincludes discussion of the Institute’splans and priorities for program years1995 and 1996; the status of new Boardmember nominations; and otherrelevant Institute matters. Records arekept of all Board proceedings and areavailable for public inspection at theNational Institute for Literacy, 800Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 200,Washington, DC 20006 from 8:30 a.m. to5 p.m.

Dated: May 17, 1995.Andrew J. Hartman,Executive Director, National Institute forLiteracy.[FR Doc. 95–12536 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6055–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION

Biweekly Notice; Applications andAmendments to Facility OperatingLicenses Involving No SignificantHazards Considerations

I. BackgroundPursuant to Public Law 97–415, the

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission(the Commission or NRC staff) ispublishing this regular biweekly notice.Public Law 97–415 revised section 189of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, asamended (the Act), to require theCommission to publish notice of anyamendments issued, or proposed to beissued, under a new provision of section189 of the Act. This provision grants theCommission the authority to issue andmake immediately effective anyamendment to an operating licenseupon a determination by theCommission that such amendmentinvolves no significant hazardsconsideration, notwithstanding thependency before the Commission of arequest for a hearing from any person.

This biweekly notice includes allnotices of amendments issued, orproposed to be issued from May 1, 1995,through May 12, 1995. The lastbiweekly notice was published on May10, 1995 (60 FR 24904).

Notice of Consideration of Issuance ofAmendments to Facility OperatingLicenses, Proposed No SignificantHazards Consideration Determination,and Opportunity for a Hearing

The Commission has made aproposed determination that thefollowing amendment requests involveno significant hazards consideration.

Under the Commission’s regulations in10 CFR 50.92, this means that operationof the facility in accordance with theproposed amendment would not (1)involve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated; or (2)create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from anyaccident previously evaluated; or (3)involve a significant reduction in amargin of safety. The basis for thisproposed determination for eachamendment request is shown below.

The Commission is seeking publiccomments on this proposeddetermination. Any comments receivedwithin 30 days after the date ofpublication of this notice will beconsidered in making any finaldetermination.

Normally, the Commission will notissue the amendment until theexpiration of the 30-day notice period.However, should circumstances changeduring the notice period such thatfailure to act in a timely way wouldresult, for example, in derating orshutdown of the facility, theCommission may issue the licenseamendment before the expiration of the30-day notice period, provided that itsfinal determination is that theamendment involves no significanthazards consideration. The finaldetermination will consider all publicand State comments received beforeaction is taken. Should the Commissiontake this action, it will publish in theFederal Register a notice of issuanceand provide for opportunity for ahearing after issuance. The Commissionexpects that the need to take this actionwill occur very infrequently.

Written comments may be submittedby mail to the Rules Review andDirectives Branch, Division of Freedomof Information and PublicationsServices, Office of Administration, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Washington, DC 20555, and should citethe publication date and page number ofthis Federal Register notice. Writtencomments may also be delivered toRoom 6D22, Two White Flint North,11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,Maryland from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.Federal workdays. Copies of writtencomments received may be examined atthe NRC Public Document Room, theGelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC. The filing of requestsfor a hearing and petitions for leave tointervene is discussed below.

By June 23, 1995, the licensee mayfile a request for a hearing with respectto issuance of the amendment to thesubject facility operating license andany person whose interest may be

affected by this proceeding and whowishes to participate as a party in theproceeding must file a written requestfor a hearing and a petition for leave tointervene. Requests for a hearing and apetition for leave to intervene shall befiled in accordance with theCommission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice forDomestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10CFR part 2. Interested persons shouldconsult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714which is available at the Commission’sPublic Document Room, the GelmanBuilding, 2120 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC and at the local publicdocument room for the particularfacility involved. If a request for ahearing or petition for leave to interveneis filed by the above date, theCommission or an Atomic Safety andLicensing Board, designated by theCommission or by the Chairman of theAtomic Safety and Licensing BoardPanel, will rule on the request and/orpetition; and the Secretary or thedesignated Atomic Safety and LicensingBoard will issue a notice of a hearing oran appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, apetition for leave to intervene shall setforth with particularity the interest ofthe petitioner in the proceeding, andhow that interest may be affected by theresults of the proceeding. The petitionshould specifically explain the reasonswhy intervention should be permittedwith particular reference to thefollowing factors: (1) The nature of thepetitioner’s right under the Act to bemade a party to the proceeding; (2) thenature and extent of the petitioner’sproperty, financial, or other interest inthe proceeding; and (3) the possibleeffect of any order which may beentered in the proceeding on thepetitioner’s interest. The petition shouldalso identify the specific aspect(s) of thesubject matter of the proceeding as towhich petitioner wishes to intervene.Any person who has filed a petition forleave to intervene or who has beenadmitted as a party may amend thepetition without requesting leave of theBoard up to 15 days prior to the firstprehearing conference scheduled in theproceeding, but such an amendedpetition must satisfy the specificityrequirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the firstprehearing conference scheduled in theproceeding, a petitioner shall file asupplement to the petition to intervenewhich must include a list of thecontentions which are sought to belitigated in the matter. Each contentionmust consist of a specific statement ofthe issue of law or fact to be raised orcontroverted. In addition, the petitionershall provide a brief explanation of the


bases of the contention and a concisestatement of the alleged facts or expertopinion which support the contentionand on which the petitioner intends torely in proving the contention at thehearing. The petitioner must alsoprovide references to those specificsources and documents of which thepetitioner is aware and on which thepetitioner intends to rely to establishthose facts or expert opinion. Petitionermust provide sufficient information toshow that a genuine dispute exists withthe applicant on a material issue of lawor fact. Contentions shall be limited tomatters within the scope of theamendment under consideration. Thecontention must be one which, ifproven, would entitle the petitioner torelief. A petitioner who fails to file sucha supplement which satisfies theserequirements with respect to at least onecontention will not be permitted toparticipate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene becomeparties to the proceeding, subject to anylimitations in the order granting leave tointervene, and have the opportunity toparticipate fully in the conduct of thehearing, including the opportunity topresent evidence and cross-examinewitnesses.

If a hearing is requested, theCommission will make a finaldetermination on the issue of nosignificant hazards consideration. Thefinal determination will serve to decidewhen the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that theamendment request involves nosignificant hazards consideration, theCommission may issue the amendmentand make it immediately effective,notwithstanding the request for ahearing. Any hearing held would takeplace after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that theamendment request involves asignificant hazards consideration, anyhearing held would take place beforethe issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petitionfor leave to intervene must be filed withthe Secretary of the Commission, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Washington, DC 20555, Attention:Docketing and Services Branch, or maybe delivered to the Commission’s PublicDocument Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington DC, bythe above date. Where petitions are filedduring the last 10 days of the noticeperiod, it is requested that the petitionerpromptly so inform the Commission bya toll-free telephone call to WesternUnion at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Unionoperator should be given DatagramIdentification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to (ProjectDirector): petitioner’s name andtelephone number, date petition wasmailed, plant name, and publicationdate and page number of this FederalRegister notice. A copy of the petitionshould also be sent to the Office of theGeneral Counsel, U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission, Washington,DC 20555, and to the attorney for thelicensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions forleave to intervene, amended petitions,supplemental petitions and/or requestsfor a hearing will not be entertainedabsent a determination by theCommission, the presiding officer or theAtomic Safety and Licensing Board thatthe petition and/or request should begranted based upon a balancing offactors specified in 10 CFR2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to thisaction, see the application foramendment which is available forpublic inspection at the Commission’sPublic Document Room, the GelmanBuilding, 2120 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC, and at the local publicdocument room for the particularfacility involved.

Arizona Public Service Company, et al.,Docket Nos. STN 50–528, STN 50–529,and STN 50–530, Palo Verde NuclearGenerating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3,Maricopa County, Arizona

Date of application for amendments:April 6, 1995.

Brief description of amendments: Theproposed amendment involves changesin personnel titles, implementation ofline item improvements delineated inGeneric Letter 93–07, ‘‘Modification ofthe Technical SpecificationAdministrative Control Requirementsfor Emergency and Security Plans,’’changes in the Plant Review Board, andmiscellaneous minor changes.

Basis for proposed no significanthazards consideration determination:As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thelicensee has provided its analysis of theissue of no significant hazardsconsideration, which is presentedbelow:

(1) The proposed changes do not involvea significant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

These changes involve (1) minor changesin the organization of PVNGS, (2) line itemimprovements recommended by the NRC, or(3) clarification or corrections to existingspecifications. It is expected that theorganizational changes will have a positiveeffect on the conduct of plant operations andsafety-related work. Functions which arenecessary to operate the facility safely and inaccordance with the operating licenses,

remain in the new organization. The lineitem improvements to the TechnicalSpecifications will not affect the safeoperation of the plant and continue to ensureproper control of administrative activities.The proposed changes will not affect theoperation of structures, systems andcomponents, and will not reduceprogrammatic controls such that plant safetywould be affected. Therefore, the proposedchanges do not involve a significant increasein the probability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

(2) The proposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyanalyzed.

The proposed changes will not affect theoperation of structures, systems andcomponents, and will not reduceprogrammatic controls such that plant safetywould be affected. The changes in theorganization and as a result of line itemimprovements will continue to providenecessary oversight and control ofadministrative processes. Therefore, theproposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any previously evaluated.

(3) The proposed changes do not involvea significant reduction in a margin of safety.

These changes are administrative and willnot diminish any organizational oradministrative controls currently in place.The proposed changes will not affect theoperation of structures, systems andcomponents, and will not reduceprogrammatic controls such that plant safetywould be affected. Therefore, the proposedchanges do not involve a significantreduction in a margin of safety.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Phoenix Public Library, 12East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona85004.

Attorney for licensee: Nancy C. Loftin,Esq., Corporate Secretary and Counsel,Arizona Public Service Company, P.O.Box 53999, Mail Station 9068, Phoenix,Arizona 85072–3999.

NRC Project Director: William H.Bateman.

Arizona Public Service Company, et al.,Docket Nos. STN 50–528, STN 50–529,and STN 50–530, Palo Verde NuclearGenerating Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and3, Maricopa County, Arizona

Date of amendment requests: April18, 1995.

Description of amendment requests:The proposed Technical Specificationamendments would revise thesurveillance requirements for TechnicalSpecification 3/4.4.4, ‘‘SteamGenerators,’’ and the associated Bases.These amendments would allow theinstallation of tube sleeves as analternative to plugging defective steamgenerator tubes.

Basis for proposed no significanthazards consideration determination:


As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thelicensee has provided its analysis of theissue of no significant hazardsconsideration, which is presentedbelow:

1. The proposed change does not involvea significant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed amendment to permit theuse of steam generator tube sleeves as analternative to tube plugging is a safe andeffective repair procedure that does notrequire removing a tube from service.Mechanical strength, corrosion resistance,installation methods, and inserviceinspection techniques of sleeves have beenshown to meet NRC acceptance criteria.

Analytical verifications were performedusing design and operating transientparameters selected to envelope loadsimposed during normal operating andaccident conditions. Fatigue and stressanalysis of sleeved tube assemblies werecompleted in accordance with therequirements of Section III of the ASMECode. The results of qualification testing,analysis and plant operating experience atother facilities demonstrates that the sleevingprocess is an acceptable means ofmaintaining steam generator tube integrity.The sleeve configuration has been designedand analyzed in accordance with thestructural margins specified in RegulatoryGuide (RG) 1.121. Furthermore, the installedsleeve will be monitored through periodicinspections on a sample basis with eddycurrent techniques. A sleeve-specificplugging margin, per the recommendations ofRG 1.121, has been specified withappropriate allowances for NDE(nondestructive examination) uncertaintyand defect growth rate.

The consequences of accidents previouslyanalyzed are not increased as a result ofsleeving activities. The hypothetical failureof the sleeve would be bounded by thecurrent steam generator tube rupture analysiscontained in the PVNGS (Palo Verde NuclearGenerating Station) UFSAR (updated finalsafety analysis report). Due to the slightreduction in diameter caused by the sleevewall thickness, it is expected that the primaryrelease rates would be less than assumed forthe steam generator tube rupture analysis,and therefore would result in lower totalprimary fluid mass release to the secondarysystem. Additionally, further conservatism isintroduced if the break were postulated tooccur at a location on the tube higher thanthe location where a sleeve is installed. Theoverall effect would be reduced steamgenerator tube rupture release rates. Theminimal reduction in flow area associatedwith a tube sleeve has no significant affect onsteam generator performance with respect toheat transfer or system flow resistance andpressure drop. The installation of sleevesrather than plugging also maintains a greaterheat transfer surface in the steam generator.In any case, the impacts are bounded byevaluations which demonstrate theacceptability of tube plugging which totallyremoves the tube from service. Therefore, incomparison to plugging, tube sleeving is

considered a significant improvement withrespect to steam generator performance. Thecumulative impact of multiple sleeved tubeswas evaluated to ensure the effects remainwithin the analytical design bases.

Recent industry experience with forcedshutdown events associated with tubefailures at sleeve junctions was assessed byASP and ABB–CE. The root cause of theseevents has been attributed to the lack ofproper post-installation stress relief and/orthe imposition of high stresses due the tubegrowth restrictions at locked tube support.The material and design of the PVNGS steamgenerator supports minimizes the potentialfor locked supports. The tube supports are ofeggcrate design and are constructed of ferriticstainless steel. The large flow area in theeggcrate design provides better irrigation andreduces the potential for steam blanketing,therefore, the tube-to-tube support crevicesare less likely to be blocked by crud, boilerwater deposits and corrosion products. Sincethe support material is type 409 ferriticstainless steel, it is not susceptible tomagnetite corrosion which has resulted indenting and lockup at plants with carbonsteel supports. These conclusions have beensubstantiated via tube pull activitiesconducted in PVNGS Unit 2. Although ABB–CE does not require post-weld heat treatmentin all applications, APS will require that apost-weld stress relief be conducted for allsleeve installations.

APS has incorporated an integrated leakagemonitoring program, utilizing equipment,procedure upgrades and administrativeshutdown limits significantly lower thanTechnical Specification requirements. Theprogram is designed to provide plantoperators with the ability to detect andrespond to changes in primary-to-secondaryleakage and shutdown the unit prior to asignificant leak or steam generator tuberupture, should sleeve or tube degradationexceed expected values. The program isdesigned to reduce the probability of steamgenerator tube rupture events.

Therefore, based on the above, theproposed amendment does not significantlyincrease the probability or consequences ofan accident previously evaluated.

2. The proposed change does not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyanalyzed.

A sleeved steam generator tube performsthe same function in the same passivemanner as an unsleeved steam generatortube. Tube sleeves are designed, qualified,and maintained under the stress and pressurelimits of Section III of the ASME Code andRegulatory Guide 1.121.

The installation of the sleeve, includingweld and welder qualification andnondestructive examination (NDE), meets orexceeds the requirements of ASME SectionXI. Three types of NDE are conducted.Ultrasonic Testing (UT) is performed toverify adequacy of the tube to sleeve weldassuring proper fusion. Eddy current testing(ET) is performed following each installationto establish baseline data for each sleeve inorder to monitor future degradation of theprimary to secondary pressure boundary.Visual inspections may be performed to

verify or ascertain the mechanical andstructural condition of a weld. Criticalconditions which are checked include weldwidth and completeness, and the absence ofvisibly noticeable indications such as cracks,pits, and burn through.

ABB-Combustion Engineering Inc., ReportCEN–613–P, ‘‘Arizona Public Service Co.,Palo Verde Units 1, 2, and 3, Steam GeneratorTube Repair Using Leak Tight Sleeves,’’Revision 01, January 1995, demonstrates thatthe repair of degraded steam generator tubesusing tube sleeves will result in tube bundleintegrity consistent with the original designbasis. An extensive analysis and corrosionand mechanical test programs wereundertaken to prove the adequacy of tubesleeve repair. The proposed amendmentshave no significant effect on theconfiguration of the plant, and the changedoes not effect the way in which the plantis operated. Based upon the results of theanalytical and test programs described in theABB Combustion Engineering Inc. report, thetube sleeve fulfills its intended function andmeets or exceeds established design criteria.Therefore, the proposed change does notcreate the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

3. The proposed change does not involvea significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Evaluation of the sleeved tubes indicatesno detrimental effects on the sleeve-tubeassembly resulting from reactor system flow,coolant chemistries, or thermal and pressureconditions. Structural analyses of the sleeve-tube assembly, using demonstrated marginsof safety, have established sleeve-tubeintegrity under normal and accidentconditions. Structural analyses have beenperformed for sleeves which span the tube atthe top of the tubesheet and which span theflow distribution plate or eggcrate support.Mechanical testing has been performed tosupport the analyses. Corrosion testing oftypical sleeve-tube assemblies has beencompleted and reveals no evidence of sleeveor tube corrosion considered detrimentalunder anticipated service conditions.

Based upon the testing and analysesperformed, the installation of tube sleeveswill not result in a significant reduction ina margin of safety.

Steam generator tube integrity ismaintained under the same limits for sleevedtubes as for unsleeved tubes, i.e., Section IIIof the ASME Code and Regulatory Guide1.121. The portions of the installed sleeveassembly which represents the reactorcoolant pressure boundary can be monitoredfor the initiation and progression of sleeve/tube wall degradation, thus satisfying therequirements of Regulatory Guide 1.83. Thedegradation limit at which a sleeve/tubeboundary is considered inoperable has beenanalyzed in accordance with RegulatoryGuide 1.121 and is specified. Eddy currentdetectability of flaws has been verified byABB Combustion Engineering. The TechnicalSpecifications continue to require monitoringand restriction of primary to secondarysystem leakage through the steam generators.A conservative integrated leakage programemployed by APS provides reasonableassurance than an orderly unit shutdown will


occur prior to a significant increase inleakage due to failure of a sleeved orunsleeved tube. The minimal reduction inreactor coolant system flow, due to sleeving,is considered to have an insignificant impacton steam generator operation during normaloperation or accident conditions and isbounded by tube plugging evaluations.Therefore, this change does not involve asignificant reduction in a margin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on thatreview, it appears that the threestandards of § 50.92(c) are satisfied.Therefore, the NRC staff proposes todetermine that the amendment requestsinvolve no significant hazardsconsideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Phoenix Public Library, 12East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona85004.

Attorney for licensees: Nancy C.Loftin, Esq., Corporate Secretary andCounsel, Arizona Public ServiceCompany, P.O. Box 53999, Mail Station9068, Phoenix, Arizona 85072–3999.


Commonwealth Edison Company,Docket Nos. 50–237 and 50–249,Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2and 3, Grundy County, Illinois, DocketNos. 50–254 and 50–265, Quad CitiesNuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2,Rock Island County, Illinois

Date of application for amendmentrequest: February 16, 1993, assupplemented by letter dated May 2,1995.

Description of amendment request: Asa result of findings by a DiagnosticEvaluation Team inspection performedby the NRC staff at the Dresden NuclearPower Station in 1987, CommonwealthEdison Company (ComEd, the licensee)made a decision that both the DresdenNuclear Power Station and sister siteQuad Cities Nuclear Power Station,needed attention focused on the existingcustom Technical Specifications (TS)used.

The licensee made the decision toinitiate a Technical SpecificationUpgrade Program (TSUP) for bothDresden and Quad Cities. The licenseeevaluated the current TS for bothDresden and Quad Cities against theStandard Technical Specifications (STS)contained in NUREG–0123, ‘‘StandardTechnical Specifications GeneralElectric Plants BWR/4.’’ The licensee’sevaluation identified numerouspotential improvements such asclarifying requirements, changing TS tomake them more understandable and toeliminate interpretation, and deletingrequirements that are no longer

considered current with industrypractice. As a result of the evaluation,ComEd has elected to upgrade both theDresden and Quad Cities TS to the STScontained in NUREG–0123.

The TSUP for Dresden and QuadCities is not a complete adaption of theSTS. The TSUP focuses on (1)integrating additional information suchas equipment operability requirementsduring shutdown conditions, (2)clarifying requirements such as limitingconditions for operations and actionstatements utilizing STS terminology,(3) deleting superseded requirementsand modifications to the TS based onthe licensee’s responses to GenericLetters (GL), and (4) relocating specificitems to more appropriate TS locations.

The February 16, 1993, and May 2,1995, applications proposed to upgradeonly Section 3/4.10 (RefuelingOperations) of the Dresden and QuadCities TS.


The proposed changes do not involve asignificant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated because:

In general, the proposed amendmentrepresents the conversion of currentrequirements to a more generic format, or theaddition of requirements which are based onthe current safety analysis. Implementationof these changes will provide increasedreliability of equipment assumed to operatein the current safety analysis, or providecontinued assurance that specifiedparameters remain within their acceptancelimits, and as such, will not significantlyincrease the probability or consequences of apreviously evaluated accident.

Some of the proposed changes representminor curtailments of the currentrequirements which are based on genericguidance or previously approved provisionsfor other stations. The proposed amendmentfor Dresden and Quad Cities Station’sTechnical Specification Section 3/4.10 arebased on STS guidelines or later operatingBWR plant’s NRC accepted changes. Anydeviations from STS requirements do notsignificantly increase the probability orconsequences of any previously evaluatedaccidents for Dresden or Quad CitiesStations. The proposed amendment isconsistent with the current safety analysesand has been previously determined torepresent sufficient requirements for theassurance and reliability of equipmentassumed to operate in the safety analysis, orprovide continued assurance that specifiedparameters remain within their acceptancelimits. As such, these changes will notsignificantly increase the probability orconsequences of a previously evaluatedaccident.

The associated systems that make up theRefueling Systems are not assumed in anysafety analysis to initiate any accidentsequence for Dresden or Quad Cities Stations;therefore, the probability of any accidentpreviously evaluated is not increased by theproposed amendment. In addition, theproposed surveillance requirements for theproposed amendments to these systems aregenerally more prescriptive than the currentrequirements specified within the TechnicalSpecifications. The additional surveillancerequirements improve the reliability andavailability of all affected systems andtherefore, reduce the consequences of anyaccident previously evaluated as theprobability of the systems outlined withinSection 3/4.10 of the proposed TechnicalSpecifications, performing its intendedfunction is increased by the additionalsurveillances.

Create the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any previouslyevaluated because:

In general, the proposed amendmentrepresents the conversion of currentrequirements to a more generic format, or theaddition of requirements which are based onthe current safety analysis. Others representminor curtailments of the currentrequirements which are based on genericguidance or previously approved provisionsfor other stations. These changes do notinvolve revisions to the design of the station.Some of the changes may involve revision inthe operation of the station; however, theseprovide additional restrictions which are inaccordance with the current safety analysis,or are to provide for additional testing orsurveillances which will not introduce newfailure mechanisms beyond those alreadyconsidered in the current safety analyses.

The proposed amendment for Dresden andQuad Cities Station’s Technical SpecificationSection 3/4.10 is based on STS guidelines orlater operating BWR plants’ NRC acceptedchanges. The proposed amendment has beenreviewed for acceptability at the Dresden andQuad Cities Nuclear Power Stationsconsidering similarity of system orcomponent design versus the STS or lateroperating BWRs. Any deviations from STSrequirements do not create the possibility ofa new or different kind of accidentpreviously evaluated for Dresden or QuadCities Stations. No new modes of operationare introduced by the proposed changes,considering the acceptable operational modesin present specifications, the STS, or lateroperating BWRs. Surveillance requirementsare changed to reflect improvements intechnique, frequency of performance oroperating experience at later plants. Proposedchanges to action statements in many placesadd requirements that are not in the presenttechnical specifications or adoptrequirements that have been usedsuccessfully at other operating BWRs withdesigns similar to Dresden and Quad Cities.The proposed changes maintain at least thepresent level of operability. Therefore, theproposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any previously evaluated.

The associated systems that make up theRefueling Systems are not assumed in any


safety analysis to initiate any accidentsequence for Dresden or Quad Cities Stations.In addition, the proposed surveillancerequirements for affected systems associatedwith the Refueling Systems are generallymore prescriptive than the currentrequirements specified within the TechnicalSpecifications; therefore, the proposedchanges do not create the possibility of a newor different kind of accident from anypreviously evaluated.

Involve a significant reduction in themargin of safety because:

In general, the proposed amendmentrepresents the conversion of currentrequirements to a more generic format, or theaddition of requirements which are based onthe current safety analysis. Others representminor curtailments of the currentrequirements which are based on genericguidance or previously approved provisionsfor other stations. Some of the laterindividual items may introduce minorreductions in the margin of safety whencompared to the current requirements.However, other individual changes are theadoption of new requirements which willprovide significant enhancement of thereliability of the equipment assumed tooperate in the safety analysis, or provideenhanced assurance that specifiedparameters remain with their acceptancelimits. These enhancements compensate forthe individual minor reductions, such thattaken together, the proposed changes will notsignificantly reduce the margin of safety.

The proposed amendment to TechnicalSpecification Section 3/4.10 implementspresent requirements, or the intent of presentrequirements in accordance with theguidelines set forth in the STS. Anydeviations from STS requirements do notsignificantly reduce the margin of safety forDresden or Quad Cities Stations. Theproposed changes are intended to improvereadability, usability, and the understandingof technical specification requirements whilemaintaining acceptable levels of safeoperation. The proposed changes have beenevaluated and found to be acceptable for useat Dresden and Quad Cities based on systemdesign, safety analysis requirements andoperational performance. Since the proposedchanges are based on NRC acceptedprovisions at other operating plants that areapplicable at Dresden and Quad Cities andmaintain necessary levels of system,component or parameter (reliability), theproposed changes do not involve asignificant reduction in the margin of safety.

The proposed amendment for Dresden andQuad Cities Stations will not reduce theavailability of systems associated with theRefueling Systems when required to mitigateaccident conditions; therefore, the proposedchanges do not involve a significantreduction in the margin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on thisreview, it appears that the threestandards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) aresatisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffproposes to determine that theamendment request involves nosignificant hazards consideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: For Dresden, Morris AreaPublic Library District, 604 LibertyStreet, Morris, Illinois 60450; for QuadCities, Dixon Public Library, 221Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois61021.

Attorney for licensee: Michael I.Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, OneFirst National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois60603.

NRC Project Director: Robert A. Capra.

Duke Power Company, et al., DocketNos. 50–413 and 50–414, CatawbaNuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, YorkCounty, South Carolina

Date of amendment request:September 19, 1994, as supplementedby letter dated April 26, 1995.

Description of amendment request:The amendments would change theTechnical Specifications (TS) toincrease the enrichment limits for fuelstored in the fuel pools and establishrestricted loading patterns andassociated burnup criteria for qualifyingfuel in the spent fuel pools. In addition,several administrative changes havebeen included in order to provideclarity to the TS and bring them morein line with the Standard TechnicalSpecifications format. These changes areas follows:

(1) The TS index is changed to add TS3/4.9.12 and 3/4.9.13, Tables 3.9–1 and3.9–2 and Figure 3.9–1.

(2) TS 3/4.9.12, Spent Fuel Pool (SFP)Boron Concentration, is added toestablish a boron concentration limitand to establish a Limiting Condition forOperation (LCO) for all modes ofoperation and to allow the numericalvalue of the limit to be specified in theCore Operating Limits Report (COLR).

(3) TS 3/4.9.13, Tables 3.9–1 and 3.9–2 and Figure 3.9–1 are being added toestablish restricted loading patterns forspent fuel storage and associatedburnup criteria.

(4) Corresponding BASES for TSs 3/4.9.12 and 3/4.9.13 are added to explainthe basis for each LCO, ActionStatement, and SurveillanceRequirement covered by the subject TSs.

(5) TS 5.6, Fuel Storage, is changed toreflect limits for criticality analysis forfuel storage.

(6) TS 6.9, Reporting Requirements, ischanged to reflect the inclusion of theSFP boron concentration limit values inthe COLR as established by TS 3/4.9.12.


1. The proposed changes do not involve asignificant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

There is no increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident in the new fuelvault since the only credible accidents forthis area are criticality accidents and it hasbeen shown that calculated, worst case Keff

for this area is (less than or equal to) 0.95under all conditions.

There is no increase in the probability ofa fuel drop accident in the Spent FuelStorage Pool since the mass of an assemblywill not be affected by the increase in fuelenrichment. The likelihood of otheraccidents, previously evaluated anddescribed in Section 9.1.2 of the FSAR (FinalSafety Analysis Report), is also not affectedby the proposed changes. In fact, it could bepostulated that since the increase in fuelenrichment will allow for extended fuelcycles, there will be a decrease in fuelmovement and the probability of an accidentmay likewise be decreased. There is also noincrease in the consequences of a fuel dropaccident in the Spent Fuel Pool since thefission product inventory of individual fuelassemblies will not change significantly as aresult of increased initial enrichment. Inaddition, no change to safety related systemsis being made.

Therefore, the consequences of a fuelrupture accident remain unchanged. Inaddition, it has been shown that Keff is (lessthan or equal to) 0.95, under all conditions.Therefore, the consequences of a criticalityaccident in the Spent Fuel Pool remainunchanged as well.

2. The proposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident since fuel handling accidents (fueldrop and misplacement) are not new ordifferent kinds of accidents. Fuel handlingaccidents are already discussed in the FSARfor fuel with enrichments up to 4.0 weight %.As described in Section IV.9 of AttachmentIV, additional analyses have been performedfor fuel with enrichment up to 5.00 weight%. Worst case misloading accidentsassociated with the new loading patternswere evaluated. It was shown that thenegative reactivity provided by soluble boronmaintains Keff (less than or equal to) 0.95.

3. The proposed changes do not involve asignificant reduction in the margin of safety.

The proposed change does not involve asignificant reduction in the margin of safetysince, in all cases, a Keff [less than or equalto] 0.95 is being maintained. Criticalityanalyses have been performed which showthat the new fuel storage vault will remainsubcritical under a variety of moderationconditions, from fully flooded to optimummoderation. As discussed above, the SpentFuel Pool will remain sufficiently subcriticalduring any fuel misplacement accident.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on thisreview, it appears that the threestandards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are


satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffproposes to determine that theamendment request involves nosignificant hazards consideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: York County Library, 138 EastBlack Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina29730.

Attorney for licensee: Mr. Albert Carr,Duke Power Company, 422 SouthChurch Street, Charlotte, North Carolina28242.

NRC Project Director: Herbert N.Berkow.

Florida Power and Light Company,Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251, TurkeyPoint Plant Units 3 and 4, Dade County,Florida

Date of amendment request: March30, 1995, and supplemented May 5,1995.

Description of amendment request:The licensee proposes to change TurkeyPoint Units 3 and 4 TechnicalSpecifications (TS) by separation of the24-hour emergency diesel generator(EDG) run from the hot restart EDG test.


(1) Operation of the facility in accordancewith the proposed amendments would notinvolve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.

The proposed TS changes would revise theEDG surveillance criteria to allow the EDGhot-start test with full ESF load acceptanceto be performed separately andindependently from the 24-hour EDG run.The proposed SRs (surveillancerequirements) would continue todemonstrate that the objectives of these twotests are met. Specifically, the EDGs areshown to be: (1) Capable of starting andrunning continuously at full load capabilityfor an interval not less than 24 hours, and (2)capable of restarting from a full loadtemperature condition. The proposedchanges would not affect the EDGs’ ability tosupport mitigation of the consequences ofany previously evaluated accident.Additionally, the proposed changes to theSRs do not affect the initiating assumptionsor progression of any accident sequence.

Therefore, operation of the facility wouldnot involve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously analyzed.

(2) Operation of the facility in accordancewith the proposed amendments would notcreate the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

The proposed TS SR changes do notrequire any physical changes to the plant orequipment, and do not impact any design or

functional requirements of the EDGs. Theproposed changes do not create any plantconfigurations which are prohibited by theTS. The proposed changes continue to meetthe EDG test objectives associated withdemonstrating EDG operability.

Therefore, operation of the facility inaccordance with the proposed amendmentswould not create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

(3) Operation of the facility in accordancewith the proposed amendments would notinvolve a significant reduction in a margin ofsafety.

The proposed TS SR changes do notrequire any physical changes to the plant orequipment and do not impact any design orfunctional requirements of the EDGs.Surveillance testing in accordance with theproposed TS will continue to demonstratethe ability of the EDGs to perform theirintended function of providing electricalpower to mitigate design basis transients,consistent with the plant safety analyses.

Therefore, operation of the facility inaccordance with the proposed amendmentswould not involve a reduction in a margin ofsafety.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on thisreview, it appears that the threestandards of § 50.92(c) are satisfied.Therefore, the NRC staff proposes todetermine that the amendment requestinvolves no significant hazardsconsideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Florida InternationalUniversity, University Park, Miami,Florida 33199.

Attorney for licensee: J. R. Newman,Esquire, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, 1800M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

NRC Project Director: David B.Matthews.

Omaha Public Power District, DocketNo. 50–285, Fort Calhoun Station, UnitNo. 1, Washington County, Nebraska

Date of amendment request: April 7,1995.

Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment would revisethe technical specifications (TS) torelocate the axial power distributionlimits to the Core Operating LimitsReport (COLR).


(1) The proposed change does not involvea significant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed change relocates the cycle-specific Axial Power Distribution (APD)

limits contained in Figure 1–2 of theTechnical Specifications (TS), to the CoreOperating Limits Report (COLR). This changeis consistent with the NRC recommendationsof Generic Letter 88–16, and will not modifythe methodology used in generating thelimits nor the manner in which they areimplemented. The methodology used todetermine the APD limits is reviewed andapproved by the NRC in accordance with TS5.9.5. The APD limits will continue to bedetermined by analyzing the same postulatedevents as previously analyzed. The plant willcontinue to operate within the limitsspecified in the COLR and will take the sameremedial actions if the APD limit is exceededas required by the current TS. Therefore, theproposed change would not increase theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.

(2) The proposed change does not createthe possibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyevaluated.

There will be no physical alterations to theplant configuration, changes to setpointvalues, or changes to the implementation ofsetpoints or limits as a result of this proposedchange. The proposed change only relocatesthe APD figure from the TS to the COLRconsistent with NRC Generic Letter 88–16.Therefore, the proposed change does notcreate the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any previouslyevaluated.

(3) The proposed change does not involvea significant reduction in a margin of safety.

As indicated above, the implementation ofthe APD into the COLR, consistent with theguidance of NRC Generic Letter 88–16, makesuse of the existing safety analysismethodologies and the resulting limits andsetpoints for plant operation. Additionally,the safety analysis acceptance criteria foroperations with the proposed change havenot changed from that use in the currentreload analysis. Therefore, the margin ofsafety is not reduced due to the relocation ofthe APD from the TS and implementation inthe COLR.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: W. Dale Clark Library, 215South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska68102.

Attorney for licensee: LeBoeuf, Lamb,Leiby, and MacRae, 1875 ConnecticutAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20009–5728.

NRC Project Director: WilliamBateman.


Pacific Gas and Electric Company,Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323, DiabloCanyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County,California

Date of amendment requests: April19, 1995 (Reference LAR 95–03).

Description of amendment requests:The proposed amendments wouldrevise the combined TechnicalSpecifications (TS) for the DiabloCanyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2 to revise TS 3/4.8.1.1, ‘‘A.C.Sources, Operating.’’ The specific TSchanges proposed are as follows:

(1) TS 4.8.1.1.2b.8), emergency dieselgenerator (EDG) 24-hour load run andhot restart surveillance, would berevised to delete the requirement toperform TS 4.8.1.1.2b.5)b), loss of offsitepower (LOOP) load sequencingsurveillance within 5 minutes followingthe 24-hour test.

(2) New TS 4.8.1.1.2e. would beadded to perform an EDG hot restart testwithin 5 minutes of shutting down theEDG after the EDG has operated for atleast 2 hours at a load of greater than orequal to 2484 kW.

(3) TS 4.8.1.1.2b.8), TS 4.8.1.1.2e.,and footnote ‘‘*’’ on page 3/4 8–5 wouldbe changed to be cycle-specific with thenew TS requirements effective for Units1 and 2, Cycle 8 and after.


1. The proposed changes do not involve asignificant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

Demonstrating emergency diesel generator(EDG) hot restart capability withoutsequencing loss of offsite power (LOOP)loads does not invalidate or reduce theeffectiveness of the hot restart test, sincenormal operating temperatures are achievedprior to the hot restart test. Sequencing theLOOP loads does not contribute to verifyingthat the EDG will start from normal operatingtemperatures. The proposed TS 4.8.1.1.[2]emay be performed in any plant conditionsince performance of this new surveillancewill have no adverse effect on plantoperations. The reliability of the EDGs is notaffected by the proposed changes.

Therefore, the proposed changes do notinvolve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.

2. The proposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed changes do not involve anyphysical alterations to the plant. Theproposed changes will not have any adverse

effect on the ability of the EDGs to performtheir required safety function.

Therefore, the proposed changes do notcreate the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

3. The proposed changes do not involve asignificant reduction in a margin of safety.

The proposed changes will not alter anyaccident analysis assumptions, initialconditions, or results. Consequently, theproposed changes do not have any effect onthe margin of safety. The proposed changesto the surveillance requirements wouldcontinue to demonstrate the ability of theEDGs to perform their intended safetyfunction.

Therefore, the proposed changes do notinvolve a significant reduction in a margin ofsafety.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on thisreview, it appears that the threestandards of § 50.92(c) are satisfied.Therefore, the NRC staff proposes todetermine that the amendment requestsinvolve no significant hazardsconsideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: California Polytechnic StateUniversity, Robert E. Kennedy Library,Government Documents and MapsDepartment, San Luis Obispo, California93407.

Attorney for licensee: Christopher J.Warner, Esq., Pacific Gas and ElectricCompany, PO Box 7442, San Francisco,California 94120.


Philadelphia Electric Company, PublicService Electric and Gas Company,Delmarva Power and Light Company,and Atlantic City Electric Company,Docket No. 50–278, Peach BottomAtomic Power Station, Unit No. 3, YorkCounty, Pennsylvania

Date of application for amendment:November 21, 1994.

Description of amendment request:The proposed change would extend theType A test (i.e., Containment IntegratedLeak Rate Test (CILRT)) interval on aone-time basis.


1. The proposed Technical Specifications(TS) change does not involve a significantincrease in the probability or consequencesof an accident previously evaluated.

The accidents which are potentiallyadversely impacted by the proposed changeare any Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA)inside primary containment as described inthe PBAPS, Units 2 and 3 UFSAR.

The proposed change increases thesurveillance interval of the 10 CFR part 50,appendix J Type A test (i.e., ContainmentIntegrated Leakage Rate Test (CILRT)) from46 months to 70 months. This test isperformed to determine that the total leakagefrom containment does not exceed themaximum allowable primary containmentleakage rate (i.e., designated La) at acalculated peak containment internalpressure (Pa), as defined in 10 CFR part 50,appendix J. The primary containment limitsthe leakage of radioactive material duringand following design bases accidents in orderto comply with the offsite does limitsspecified in 10 CFR part 100. Accordingly,the primary containment is not an accidentinitiator. It is an accident mitigator. Nophysical or operational changes to thecontainment structure, plant systems, orcomponents would be made as a result of theproposed change. Therefore, the probabilityof occurrence of an accident previouslyevaluated is not increased.

The failure effects that are potentiallycreated by the proposed one-time TS changehave been considered. The relevantcomponents important to safety which arepotentially affected are the containmentstructure, plant systems, and containmentpenetrations. There are no physical oroperational changes to any plant equipmentassociated with the proposed TS change.Therefore, the probability or consequences ofa malfunction of equipment important tosafety is not increased.

The proposed change introduces thepossibility that primary containment leakagein excess of the allowable value (i.e., La)would remain undetected during theproposed 24 month extension of the intervalbetween the Type A tests. The types ofmechanisms which would cause degradationof the primary containment can becategorized into two types. These are: (1)Degradation due to work which is performedas part of a modification or maintenanceactivity on a component or system (i.e.,activity-based), or; (2) degradation resultingfrom a time-based failure mechanism.

A review of the history of the PBAPS, Unit3 CILRT results was performed to evaluatethe risk of activity-based and time-baseddegradation. This review has determined thatthe potential for a time-based and activity-based failure is minimal. The PBAPS LLRTprogram would identify most types ofpenetration leakage. The LLRT programinvolves measurement of leakage from TypeB and Type C primary containmentpenetrations as defined in 10 CFR part 50,appendix J.

The 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, Type Btests are intended to detect local leaks and tomeasure leakage across pressure containingor leakage-limiting boundaries other thanvalues, such as containment penetrationsincorporating resilient seals, gaskets,expansion bellows, flexible seal assemblies,door operating mechanism penetrations thatare part of the containment system, doors,and hatches. 10 CFR part 50, appendix J,Type C testing is intended to measure reactorsystem primary containment isolation valveleakage rates. The frequency of the Type Band Type C testing is not being altered by the


proposed TS change. The acceptancecriterion for Type B and Type C leakage is0.6 La (i.e., 0.3% wt/day) which, whencompared to the Type A test acceptancecriterion of 0.75 La (i.e., 0.375% wt/day), isa significant portion of the Type A testallowable leakage.

The proposed TS change only extends theinterval between two consecutive Type Atests. The Type B and Type C tests will beperformed as required. The Type B and TypeC tests will continue to be used to confirmthat the containment isolation valves andpenetrations have not degraded. Containmentsystem components that would not be testedare the containment structure itself andsmall-diameter instrumentation lines. Time-based degradation of any of theinstrumentation lines would not likely beidentified by faulty instrument indication orduring instrument calibrations that will beperformed during the PBAPS, Unit 3refueling outage 10. In examining thepotential for a time-based failure mechanismthat could cause significant degradation ofthe containment structure, we concluded thatthe risk, if any, of such a mechanism is smallsince the design requirements and fabricationspecifications established for thecontainment structure are in themselvesadequate to ensure containment leak tightintegrity.

Based on the above evaluation, we haveconcluded that the proposed TS change willhave a negligible impact on the consequencesof any accident previously evaluated.

Although this review concluded that therisk of undetected primary containmentdegradation is not increased, the IndividualPlan Examination (IPE) for PBAPS, Units 2and 3, was also reviewed in order to accessthe impact of exceeding the primarycontainment allowable leakage rate, if a non-mechanistic activity type (i.e., time-based)failure were to occur. The IPE included anevaluation of the effect of variouscontainment leakage sizes under differentscenarios. The IPE results showed that acontainment leakage rate of 35% wt/daywould represent less than a 5% increase inrisk to the public of being exposed toradiation. This evaluation was based on astudy performed by Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory for light water reactors thatevaluated the impact of leakage rates onpublic risk. As stated earlier, the currentvalue of La for PBAPS, Unit 3, is 0.5% wt/day, which is significantly less than the 35%wt/day discussed in the IPE evaluation.

Therefore, the proposed TS changeinvolving a one-time extension of the TypeA test interval and performing the Type Atest after the second appendix J 10-yearservice period will not involve an increase inthe probability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

2. The proposed TS change does not createthe possibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed change is an increase of asurveillance test interval and does not makeany physical or operational changes toexisting plant systems or components.Primary containment acts as an accidentmitigator not initiator. Therefore, the

possibility of a different type of accident thanany previously evaluated or the possibility ofa different type of equipment malfunction isnot introduced.

Therefore, the proposed TS change doesnot create the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

3. The proposed TS change does notinvolve a significant reduction in a margin ofsafety.

The total primary containment leakage rateensures that the total containment leakagevolume will not exceed the value assumed inthe safety analyses at the peak accidentpressure. As an added conservatism, themeasured overall leakage rate is furtherlimited to less than or equal to 0.75 La duringperformance of periodic tests to account forpossible degradation of the containmentleakage barriers between leakage tests. Thereis the potential that containment degradationcould remain undetected during theproposed 24 month surveillance intervalextension and result in the containmentleakage exceeding this allowable valueassumed in safety analysis. A review of thehistory of the PBAPS, Unit 3 CILRT resultswas performed to evaluate the risk ofactivity-based and time-based degradation.This review has determined that the potentialfor a time-based and activity-based failure isminimal. The PBAPS LLRT program wouldidentify most types of penetration leakage.The LLRT program involves measurement ofleakage from Type B and Type C primarycontainment penetrations as defined in 10CFR part 50, appendix J.

The 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, Type Btests are intended to detect local leaks and tomeasure leakage across pressure containingor leakage-limiting boundaries other thanvalves, such as containment penetrationsincorporating resilient seals, gaskets,expansion bellows, flexible seal assemblies,door operating mechanism penetrations thatare part of the containment system, doors,and hatches. 10 CFR part 50, appendix J,Type C testing is intended to measure reactorsystem primary containment isolation valveleakage rates. The frequency of the Type Band Type C testing is not being altered by theproposed TS change.

Therefore, we have concluded that theproposed extended test interval would notresult in a non-detectable PBAPS, Unit 3primary containment leakage rate in excess ofthe allowable value (i.e., 0.5% wt/day)established by the TS and 10 CFR part 50,appendix J.

Therefore, the proposed TS change doesnot involve a significant reduction in amargin of safety.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Government PublicationsSection, State Library of Pennsylvania,(REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education

Building, Walnut Street andCommonwealth Avenue, Box 1601,Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

Attorney for Licensee: J.W. Durham,Sr., Esquire, Sr. V.P. and GeneralCounsel, Philadelphia ElectricCompany, 2301 Market Street,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101.

NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz.

Public Service Electric & Gas Company,Docket No. 50–272, Salem NuclearGenerating Station, Unit No. 1, SalemCounty, New Jersey


Description of amendment request:The amendment would provide a one-time interval extension for the Type Atest required by 10 CFR part 50,appendix J. The extension would allowthe test to be conducted during thethirteenth refueling outage, rather thanthe twelfth refueling outage.


1. Will not involve a significant increase inthe probability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

The proposed change will provide a one-time exemption from 10 CFR part 50,appendix J Section III.D.1(a) leak rate testschedule requirement. This change willallow for a one-time test interval for Type AIntegrated Leak Rate Tests (ILRTs) of 65+/¥10 months.

Leak rate testing is not an initiating eventin any accident, therefore, this proposedchange does not involve a significantincrease in the probability of a previouslyevaluated accident.

Type A tests are capable of detecting bothlocal leak paths and gross containmentfailure paths. The history at SalemGenerating Station Unit 1 (SGS1)demonstrates that Type B and C Local LeakRate Tests (LLRTs) have consistentlydetected any excessive local leakages. SGS1has passed all of its ILRTs with significantmargin.

Administrtive controls govern themaintenance and testing of containmentpenetrations such that the probability ofexcessive penetration leakage due toimproper maintenance or valve misalignmentis very low. Following any maintenance thatcould affect the leakage characteristics of anycontainment penetration, an LLRT isperformed to ensure acceptable leakagelevels. Following any LLRT on a containmentisolation valve, an independent valvealignment check is performed beforedeclaring the penetration OPERABLE.Therefore, Type A testing is not necessary toensure acceptable leakage rates throughcontainment penetrations.

While Type A testing is not necessary toensure acceptable leakage rates through


containment penetrations, Type A testing isnecessary to demonstrate that there are nogross containment failures. Structural failureof the containment is considered to be a veryunlikely event, and in fact, since SGS1 hasbeen in operation, it has never failed a TypeA ILRT. Therefore, a one-time exemptionincreasing the interval for performing anILRT does not result in a significant decreasein the confidence in the leak tightness of thecontainment structure.

Therefore, this proposed change does notresult in a significant increase of theprobability or consequences of anypreviously evaluated accident.

2. Will not create the possibility of a newor different kind of accident from anyaccident previously evaluated.

This proposed change allows a one-timeinterval of 65+/¥10 months for the nextILRT. The method of performing the test isnot changed. No new accident modes arecreated by extending the testing intervals. Nosafety-related equipment or safety functionsare altered as a result of this change. A one-time extension of the ILRT test interval hasno influence on, nor does it contribute in anyway to, the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident or malfunction from thosepreviously analyzed.

3. Will not involve a significant reductionin a margin of safety.

The purpose of the existing schedule ofILRTs is to ensure that the release ofradioactive materials will be restricted tothose leak paths and leak rates assumed inaccident analyses. The relaxed schedule forILRTs does not allow for relaxation of TypeB and C LLRTs. Therefore, methods fordetecting local containment leak paths andleak rates are unaffected by this proposedchange. Given that the test history for ILRTsshows no failure during plant life, a one-timeincrease of the test interval does not lead toa significant probability of creating a newleakage path or increased leakage rates, andthe margin of safety inherent in existingaccident analyses is maintained. Therefore,this change does not involve a significantreduction kin the margin of safety.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Salem Free Public Library, 112West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey08079.

Attorney for licensee: Mark J.Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston andStrawn, 1400 L Street, NW, Washington,DC 20005–3502.


Public Service Electric & Gas Company,Docket No. 50–272, Salem NuclearGenerating Station, Unit No. 1, SalemCounty, New Jersey

Date of amendment request: May 4,1995.

Description of amendment request:The amendment would authorize a one-time extension for the Type A test(overall integrated containment leakagerate) that is required by 10 CFR part 50,appendix J. The current TechnicalSpecification would require that thistest be conducted by July 7, 1995. Theamendment would allow this test to beconducted by November 30, 1995.


1. Will not involve a significant increase inthe probability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

The proposed change involves nohardware changes, no changes to theoperation of any systems or components, andno changes to existing structures. Thischange is temporary, allowing a one-timeextension of a specific surveillancerequirement for cycle 12 to allowsurveillance testing to coincide with thetwelfth refueling outage. The proposedsurveillance interval extension is short andwill not result in any significant reduction instructural reliability nor will the extensionaffect the ability of the structure inperforming its intended functions. topreclude the possibility of an undetectedcontainment failure/leakage at a valve orpenetration seal, Type ‘‘B’’ and ‘‘C’’ tests willcontinue to be performed as required by theTechnical Specifications. Therefore, thischange will not involve a significant increasein the probability or consequences of anyaccidents previously evaluated.

2. Will not create the possibility of a newor different kind of accident from anypreviously evaluated.

Extending the surveillance interval for theperformance of specific testing will not createthe possibility of any new or different kindsof accident. No changes are required to anysystem configurations, plant equipment, oranalyses. Therefore, this change will notcreate the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

3. Will not involve a significant reductionin a margin of safety.

The proposed change will not alter anyassumptions, initial conditions, or results ofany accident analyses. The safety limitsassumed in the accident analyses and thedesign function of the structure required tomitigate the consequences of any postulatedaccidents will not be changed since only thesurveillance interval is being extended.Historical performance indicates a highdegree of reliability, and surveillance testingperformed during continued plant operationwill verify that Salem 1 will remain withinanalyzed limits. Consequently, the changedoes not involve a significant reduction in amargin of safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed thelicensee’s analysis and, based on this

review, it appears that the threestandards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) aresatisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffproposes to determine that theamendment request involves nosignificant hazards consideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Salem Free Public library, 112West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey08079.

Attorney for licensee: Mark J.Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston andStrawn, 1400 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20005–3502.


Public Service Electric & Gas Company,Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311, SalemNuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1and 2, Salem County, New Jersey


Description of amendment request:The amendments would delete thequarterly leak rate test for thecontainment pressure-vacuum reliefvalves which is presently requiredbecause of the valves’ resilient seatmaterial. The resilient valve seatmaterial will be replaced with a hardseat (metal to metal) design. The valveswould still remain in the 10 CFR part 50appendix J, Type C leak rate testprogram.


1. Do not involve a significant increase inthe probability or consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

The containment pressure/vacuum reliefvalves are normally closed, and are usedunder administrative control to maintaincontainment internal pressure within ¥1.5psig and +0.3 psig, as required by SGSTechnical Specifications. The pressure/vacuum relief valves are relied upon forcontainment isolation and automaticallyclose on high containment pressure or highcontainment atmosphere radioactivity. Thepressure/vacuum relief system does not affectthe probability of any previously evaluatedaccident.

The containment isolation function of thepressure/vacuum relief valves limits theconsequences of a radiological release insidecontainment (i.e., Loss of Coolant Accident).The proposed changes to eliminate quarterlypressure drop (leak rate) testing would notincrease the consequences of any previouslyevaluated accident. The valve flowcharacteristics and closure time requirementsare not affected. The valves will continue tobe subject to the Type C leak rate test criteriaof 10 CFR part 50, appendix J. The deletionof the augmented quarterly test requirementis justified by replacement of the resilient


valve seat material (which has a history ofdegradation and loss of leaktightness) with ametal to metal seating design.

2. Do not create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

Eliminating quarterly leak rate testingbased on improved valve design would notresult in any new or different kind ofaccident. The valves would continue toperform the containment isolation functionconsistent with the plant safety analyses, andwould not adversely affect the initiation orprogression of any accident sequence.

(3) Do not involve a significant reductionin a margin of safety.

This proposal involves replacement of theexisting pressure/vacuum relief valves,which have resilient seating material, withvalves using a hard seat (metal to metaldesign). Based on the improved design andoperating experience of the replacementvalves, augmented quarterly leak rate testingis no longer necessary or appropriate toverify leaktightness of the valves. Periodicleak rate testing will continue to beperformed in accordance with 10 CFR part450, appendix J. The pressure/vacuum reliefvalves will continue to maintain theircontainment isolation capability such that nomargin of safety is affected by the proposedchanges.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Salem Free Public library, 112West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey08079.

Attorney for licensee: Mark J.Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston andStrawn, 1400 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20005–3502.


Tennessee Valley Authority, DocketNos. 50–327 and 50–328, SequoyahNuclear Plants, Units 1 and 2, HamiltonCounty, Tennessee

Date of amendment request: May 3,1995 (TS 93–09).

Descripton of amendment request:The proposed change would revise theimplementation schedule forAmendment Nos. 182 and 174 from thatstated in the amendments when theywere approved by the Commission byletter dated May 24, 1994. As issued, theamendments reflected the licensee’splans to implement the changes for bothunits during the Unit 2 Cycle 6 refuelingoutage. However, by letter dated August19, 1994, the licensee requested thatimplementation be delayed to 1995.This request was granted byAmendment Nos. 188 and 180 for Units1 and 2 respectively by letter dated

October 17, 1994. By letter dated May 3,1995, the licensee informed the staffthat evaluation of the design changeshave concluded that significant safetyrisks would be involved withmodification activities associated withinstallation. Therefore, the licensee hasrequested that implementation of theamendment be changed to specify thatthe amendment will be implementedalong with the related plantmodifications, without specifying thedate when the modifications would beperformed. No changes to the technicalspecification pages other than thoseapproved when the amendments wereissued are needed.

Basis for proposed no significanthazards consideration determination:As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thelicensee has determined that the nosignificant hazards consideration exists.This analysis was provided in theoriginal submittal for the amendmentfrom the licensee dated October 1, 1993,and was used in the preparation of theamendments. The licensee hasdetermined that this analysis remainsvalid for the proposed revision and thatthe changes do not constitute asignificant hazard. The staff previouslyissued the proposed finding in theFederal Register (59 FR 4947 and 59 FR47182) and there were no publiccomments on the finding. This analysisis reproduced as follows:

TVA has evaluated the proposed technicalspecification (TS) change and has determinedthat it does not represent a significanthazards consideration based on criteriaestablished in 10 CFR 50.92(c). Operation ofSequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) in accordancewith the proposed amendment will not:

1. Involve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.

The proposed revision supports theimplementation of design logic and setpointchanges to the loss-of-power relaying. Thisrelaying is designed to ensure adequatevoltage is available to safety-related loads inorder to enhance their operability andsupport accident mitigation functions and toprovide for auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumpstarts. The design changes alter relay logicand delete unnecessary relaying, but do notchange the diesel generator (D/G) start andload-shedding actuations that result fromloss-of-power conditions. Therefore, no newactuations or functions have been created;and because the existing and proposedfunctions provide for accident mitigationconsiderations that are not the source of anaccident, the probability of an accident is notincreased. The deletion of the 6.9-kilovoltshutdown board normal-feeder undervoltagerelays actually reduces the potential forinadvertent shutdown board blackouts as aresult of short-duration voltage transients orinstrument failures.

The setpoints and time delays for loss-of-power functions have been modified based

on the guidelines developed by the ElectricalDistribution System Clearinghouse asevaluated and determined through detailedanalysis by TVA. This design is documentedin TVA Calculations SQN–EEB–MS–TI06–0008, 27DAT, and DS–1–2 and is availablefor NRC review at the SQN site. The assignedvalues are conservative settings that willensure adequate voltage is supplied to safety-related loads for accident mitigation andsafety functions under normal, degraded, andloss-of-offsite-power voltage conditions withappropriate time delays to prevent damage toelectrical loads and minimize premature orunnecessary actuations. The identification ofloss-of-voltage conditions is enhanced by thedesign changes to ensure the timelysequencing of loads onto the D/G and theinitiation of AFW pump starts for accidentmitigation. Because there are no reductionsin safety functions resulting from the designlogic, setpoint, and time-delay changes to theloss-of-power instrumentation and offsitedose levels for postulated accidents will notbe increased, the consequences of anaccident are not increased.

The applicable mode addition, TS 3.0.4exclusion deletion, and response timemeasurement clarification incorporated inthe proposed change do not affect plantfunctions. These changes reflect therequirements that SQN has been maintainingand serve to clarify the requirements toprovide consistency of application and easierunderstanding. The AFW footnote additionand bases revision only clarify operabilityconditions that are consistent with the plantdesign for the AFW pump and loss-of-powerinstrumentation. Because there are nochanges to plant functions or operations,these revisions have no impact on accidentprobabilities or consequences.

2. Create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from anypreviously analyzed.

As described above, the loss-of-powerinstrumentation ensures adequate voltage tosafety-related loads by initiating D/G startsand load shedding and provides for AFWpump starting, but is not considered to be thesource of an accident. Although the designlogic, setpoint, and time-delay actuationcriteria have changed, the output functions tovarious plant systems that actuate for loadshedding and D/G starts remain the same.Therefore, actuation criteria have beenaffected, but not safety functions, and theTVA evaluation has confirmed that the newdesign enhances the ability to maintainadequate voltage to support safety functions.Since safety functions have not changed andthe new loss-of-power instrumentationdesign continues to support operability ofsafety-related equipment, no new or differentaccident is created.

The applicable mode addition, TS 3.0.4exclusion deletion, and response timemeasurement clarification, as well as theAFW operability clarifications, do not affectplant functions and will not create a newaccident.

3. Involve a significant reduction in amargin of safety.

The proposed loss-of-power TS changessupport design logic, setpoint, and time-delay requirements that have been verified by


TVA analysis to provide acceptable voltagelevels for safety-related components. Indetermining the acceptability of these voltagelevels, the minimum voltage for operation aswell as detrimental component heatingresulting from sustained degraded-voltageconditions were considered. This designensures that safety-related loads will beavailable and operable for normal andaccident plant conditions. The applicablemode addition, TS 3.0.4 exclusion deletion,response time measurement clarification, andAFW operability clarifications provideenhancements to TS requirements and do notaffect plant functions. Therefore, no safetyfunctions are reduced by these changes andthere is no reduction in the margin of safety.

The NRC has reviewed the licensee’sanalysis and, based on this review, itappears that the three standards of 10CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, theNRC staff proposes to determine that theamendment request involves nosignificant hazards consideration.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Chattanooga-Hamilton CountyLibrary, 1101 Broad Street, Chattanooga,Tennessee 37402.

Attorney for licensee: GeneralCounsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11H,Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.

NRC Project Director: Frederick J.Hebdon.

The Cleveland Electric IlluminatingCompany, Centerior Service Company,Duquesne Light Company, Ohio EdisonCompany, Pennsylvania PowerCompany, Toledo Edison Company,Docket No. 50–440, Perry NuclearPower Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake County,Ohio


Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment would extendfor one more operating cycle anexception to Limiting Condition forOperation (LCO) 3.0.4 as it applies tothe Technical Specification for the mainsteam isolation valve leakage controlsystem. The existing LCO 3.0.4exception was issued by Amendment 63to the Operating License, and willexpire upon completion of the fiftycycle of plant operation. The extensionis proposed for the duration of the sixthcycle of operation to permit completionof activities necessary to implement themost appropriate permanent resolutionfor the issue of secondary containmentbypass leakage through the main steamline drains.

Basis for proposed no significanthazards consideration determination:As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thelicensee has provided its analysis of theissue of no significant hazardsconsideration which is presented below.

1. The proposed change does not involvea significant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

This License Amendment applicationproposes an extension for one operating cycleof the exception to Limiting Condition forOperation for Operation (LCO) 3.0.4 as itapplies to the Technical Specification for theMSIV [main steam isolation valve] LeakageControl system. This extension is proposedfor the duration of the sixth cycle of PNPP(Perry Nuclear Power Plant) operation, topermit completion of activities necessary toimplement the most appropriate permanentresolution for the issue of secondarycontainment bypass leakage through theMain Steam Line drains. During the sixthcycle, the drains will remain in their currentconfiguration, which seals off the bypassleakage path. The sealed drain path results ina temporary inoperability of the InboardMSIV Leakage control system (MSIV–LCS)subsystem when the plant is operated below50% power, due to condensate build-up inthe bottom of the steam lines between theMSIVs. The requested 3.0.4 exception isnecessary to permit plant startups with thistemporary inoperability, for the duration ofthe sixth operating cycle.

The probability of occurrence of apreviously evaluated accident is not affectedby the proposed extension of the LCO 3.0.4exception since no change to the plant or tothe manner in which the plant is operated isinvolved. The existing plant configurationwill be maintained for another operatingcycle, and possible concerns resulting fromthat configuration have been analyzed. Theextra weight of the water pooled between theMSIVs was analyzed with respect to pipingsupports and seismic considerations and wasfound to be acceptable, and any condensatethat is carried past the outboard MSIVs willbe drained to the condenser by drainconnections downstream of the outboardMSIVs before it can reach the turbine. Thetemporary inoperability of the InboardMSIV–LCS when below 50% power has noimpact on accident initiation probability,since LCS does not serve to preventaccidents, but is only used in mitigating theconsequences of Loss of Coolant Accidentsthat have already occurred.

The consequences of an accident are notsignificantly increased in that the OutboardMSIV–LCS will be available to perform theMSIV–LCS function by mitigating theconsequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident(LOCA) during the temporary period inwhich the Inboard MSIV–LCS is unavailable.Any condensate that is carried past theoutboard MSIVs will be drained to thecondenser by drain connections downstreamof the outboard MSIVs; therefore noimpairment of the Outboard MSIV–LCS willresult from condensed water.

The Action statement for one inoperableLCS subsystem remains the same, and thelimits plant operation to the previouslyestablished 30-day Allowable Outage Time.The Action required if both the subsystemsof MSIV–LCS were to become inoperable alsoremains the same. The MSIV function ofisolating the Main Stream Lines is alsounaffected by the existing plant

configuration, since MSIV performance willnot be affected by the existence ofaccumulated water in the bottom of the steamlines between the MSIVs during the plantoperation below 50% power. Therefore, ifnecessary, the Main Steam Lines will beisloated, and leakage past the MSIVs will berouted for filtration as in the design-basisradiological analyses, and the consequencesof previously evaluated accidents will remainunaffected.

2. The proposed change does not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any accident previouslyevaluated.

The proposed change to permitinoperability of the Inboard MSIV–LCSduring periods of startup and powerascension to 50% RTP (rated thermal power)and during shutdown below 50% RTP doesnot create the possibility of a new or differentkind of accident from any previouslyevaluated. The Inboard MSIV–LCS is onlycredited during a Recirculation Line BreakLOCA wherein Reactor Coolant Systemdepressurization occurs. The temporaryunavailability of the Inboard MSIV–LCS. theamendment to the Technical Specifications isan administrative change that does notinvolve any change to the current plantdesign or methods of operation. No newplant equipment failure modes or accidentinitiators are introduced by the extension ofthe LCO 3.0.4 exception.

3. The proposed change does not involvea significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The response to the Recirculation LineBreak LOCA will not be significantly affectedsince the Outboard MSIV–LCS can beassumed to be available. Allowing entry intoOperational Conditions 1, 2 and 3 whileutilizing the existing Action statement doesnot significantly reduce the margin of safetysince the duration of time allowed forremaining in that Action statement is notincreased. The proposed change will have noadverse impact on the reactor coolant systempressure boundary nor will any other systemprotective boundary or safety limit beaffected.


Local Public Document Room Location:Perry Public Library, 3753 Main Street, Perry,Ohio 44081.

Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq.,Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge,2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC20037.

NRC Project Director: Gail H. Marcus.


The Cleveland Electric IlluminatingCompany, Centerior Service Company,Duquesne Light Company, Ohio EdisonCompany, Pennsylvania PowerCompany, Toledo Edison Company,Docket No. 50–440, Perry NuclearPower Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake County,Ohio

Date of amendment request: May 1,1995.

Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment wouldeliminate selected response time testingrequirements, and incorporate guidanceprovided by Generic Letter 93–08,‘‘Relocation of Technical SpecificationTables of Instrument Response TimeLimits.’’

Basis for proposed no significanthazards consideration determination:As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thelicensee has provided its analysis of theissue of no significant hazardsconsideration which is presented below:

1. The changes do not involve a significantincrease in the probability or consequencesof an accident previously evaluated.

For those proposed changes dealing withthe elimination of selected response time testrequirements, the purpose of the proposedTechnical Specification change is toeliminate response time testing requirementsfor selected components in the ReactorProtection System, Isolation system, andEmergency Core Cooling System. The BWROwners’ Group has completed an evaluationwhich demonstrates that the response timetesting is redundant to other TechnicalSpecification required testing. These othertests, in conjunction with actions taken inresponse to NRC Bulletin 90–01, ‘‘Loss ofFill-Oil in Transmitters Manufactured byRosemount,’’ and Supplement 1, aresufficient to identify failure modes ordegradations in instrument response timeand ensure operation of the associatedsystems within acceptable limits. There areno known failure modes that can be detectedby response time testing that cannot also bedetected by the other required TechnicalSpecification testing. This evaluation wasdocumented in NEDO–32291, ‘‘SystemAnalyses for Elimination of SelectedResponse Time Testing Requirements,’’January 1994, and the letter from T. Green toP. Loeser dated April 15, 1994 which wereapproved by an NRC Safety Evaluation datedDecember 28, 1994. The applicability of thisevaluation to the Perry Nuclear Power Plant(PNPP) has been confirmed. In addition,PNPP will complete the additional actionsidentified in the NRC staff’s SafetyEvaluation of NEDO–32291.

Because of the continued application ofother existing Technical Specificationrequired tests such as channel calibrations,channel checks, channel functional tests, andlogic system functional tests, the responsetimes of these systems will be maintainedwithin the acceptance limits assumed inplant safety analysis and required forsuccessful mitigation of an initiating event.The proposed Technical Specification

changes do not affect the capability of theassociated systems to perform their intendedfunction within their required response time,nor do the proposed changes themselvesaffect the operation of any equipment. As aresult the proposed changes dealing withelimination of selected response time tests donot involve a significant increase in theprobability or the consequences of anaccident previously evaluated.

For those changes dealing with moving thesurveillance requirement for ECCSRESPONSE TIME testing from theinstrumentation section to the system sectionof the Technical Specifications, no change intesting requirements (other than theelimination of the instrument loopsimplemented as part of the NEDO–32291changes) has been introduced. The relaxationin Applicability does not increase theprobability or the consequences of anaccident previously evaluated, since there areno design basis events duringOPERATIONAL CONDITION 4 and 5 whereECCS systems are relied upon.

For those changes dealing with relocationof the response time limits from TechnicalSpecification Tables and into the UpdatedSafety Analysis Report (USAR), the proposedchanges are administrative in nature in thatthe test requirements and time limits are stillrequirements, but the placement of the limitshave been relocated from the TechnicalSpecifications and into the USAR. Thereforethese changes do not involve a significantincrease in the probability or theconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

2. The changes do not create the possibilityof a new or different kind of accident fromany previously evaluated.

None of the proposed TechnicalSpecification changes affect the capability ofthe associated systems to perform theirintended function within the acceptancelimits assumed in plant safety analyses andrequired for successful mitigation of aninitiating event. The proposed changes alsodo not change the manner in which any plantequipment is operated. Therefore, theproposed changes do not create thepossibility of a new or different kind ofaccident from any previously evaluated.

3. The changes do not involve a significantreduction in the margin of safety.

The current Technical Specificationresponse times are based on the maximumallowable value assumed in the plant safetyanalyses. These analyses conservativelyestablish the margin of safety. As describedabove, the proposed Technical Specificationchanges do not affect the capability of theassociated systems to perform their intendedfunction within the allowed response timeused as the basis for the plant safety analyses.Plant and system response to an initiatingevent will remain in compliance within theassumptions of the safety analyses, andtherefore the margin of safety is not affected.

Although not explicitly evaluated, theproposed Technical Specification changesdealing with response time testingelimination will provide an improvement toplant safety and operation by reducing thetime safety systems are unavailable, reducingsafety system actuation, reducing plant

shutdown risk, limiting radiation exposure toplant personnel, and eliminating thediversion of key personnel to conductunnecessary testing. Therefore, the proposedchanges do not result in a significantreduction in a margin of safety, and mayresult in an overall increase in the margin ofsafety.

The changes dealing with relocation of thetime response limits from the TechnicalSpecifications to the USAR is anadministrative change that does not affecteither the requirements to perform responsetime testing or the limits associated with theresponse time tests. Future changes to thelimits will be controlled by 10 CFR 50.59.Therefore, this portion of the change does notresult in a significant decrease in a margin ofsafety.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Perry Public Library, 3753Main Street, Perry, Ohio 44081.

Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq.,Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge,2300 N Street, NW., Washington, DC20037.


Union Electric Company, Docket No.50–483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1,Callaway County, Missouri


Description of amendment request:the proposed amendment would reviseTechnical Specification (TS)Surveillance Requirements 3/4.7.6 andassociated Bases to reduce the upperlimit on the control room filtrationsubsystem flow rate. It would also adoptASTM D–3803–1989 as the laboratorytesting standard for control roomfiltration and control buildingpressurization charcoal absorber.


The proposed revision does not involve asignificant hazards consideration becauseoperation of Callaway Plant with this changewould not:

(1) Involve a significant increase in theprobability or consequences of an accidentpreviously evaluated.

Overall protection system performance willremain within the bounds of the accidentanalysis documented in FSAR Chapter 15* * * since no hardware changes areproposed.


The Control Room Emergency VentilationSystem (CREVS) will continue to function ina manner consistent with the above analysisassumptions and the plant design basis.There will be no degradation in theperformance of or an increase in the numberof challenges to equipment assumed tofunction during an accident situation.

These Technical Specification revisions donot involve any hardware changes nor dothey affect the probability of any eventinitiators. The change to the control roomfiltration flow rate is consistent with theoriginal licensing basis and will ensure anaverage atmosphere residence time of greaterthan or equal to 0.25 sec. There will be nochange to ESF (engineered safety feature)actuation setpoints or accident mitigationcapabilities. The laboratory testing willdemonstrate the required absorberperformance after a design basis LOCA (loss-of-coolant accident).

The control room dose analyses assume atotal flow rate through the control roomfiltration units that is less than the proposedupper limit. As such, there will be nochanges required to the control room doseanalyses.

Based on the above, these TechnicalSpecification changes will not increase theprobability or consequences of an accident ormalfunction.

(2) Create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

As discussed above, there are no hardwarechanges associated with these TechnicalSpecification revisions nor are there anychanges in the method by which any safety-related plant system performs its safetyfunction.

Revisions to the Surveillance Requirementsfor the CREVS will ensure that the controlroom does analysis assumptions made insupport of OL (operating license)Amendment No. 96 are valid. Changes to thecontrol room filtration unit flow rate aremore limiting than that currently specifiedand have already been implemented byresetting the open limit switches on therespective units’ outlet dampers. This flowrate is consistent with the design basis for thefiltration units as originally licensed.

No new accident scenarios, transientprecursors, failure mechanisms, or limitingsingle failures are introduced as a result ofthese changes. There will be no adverse effector challenges imposed on any safety-relatedsystem as a result of these changes.Therefore, the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident is not created.

(3) Involve a significant reduction in amargin of safety.

There will be no margin reduction sincethese changes are in the conservativedirection and have already been approved byNRC via the approval of OL Amendment No.96. The reduced upper bound flow rate forthe control room filtration units is consistentwith their design basis and will maintain anaverage atmosphere residence time greaterthan or equal to 0.25 sec under both cleanand dirty filter conditions. The new charcoalabsorber sample laboratory testing protocol ismore stringent than the current testingpractice and more accurately demonstrates

the required performance after a design basisLOCA.

There will be no effect on the manner inwhich safety limits or limiting safety systemsettings are determined nor will there be anyeffect on those plant systems, necessary toassure the accomplishment of protectionfunctions. There will no impact on theoverpower limit, DNBR (departure fromnucleate boiling ratio) limits, FQ, F[delta]H,LOCA PCT (peak cladding temperature), peaklocal power density, or any other margin ofsafety. These changes will ensure that thecriteria of GDC 19 are met.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Callaway County PublicLibrary, 710 Court Street, Fulton,Missouri 65251.

Attorney for licensee: Gerald Charnoff,Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts &Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW,Washington, DC 20037.


Wisconsin Electric Power Company,Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, PointBeach Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, Town of Two Creeks.Manitowoc County, Wisconsin


Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment wouldmodify Technical Specification (TS)Section 15.6.2, ‘‘Organization,’’ and TSSection 15.6.3, ‘‘Facility StaffQualifications.’’ The trainingrequirements for the OperationsManager and other staff would bechanged to provide staffing flexibility.


The proposed change does not involve asignificant increase in the probability orconsequences of an accident previouslyevaluated; create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from anypreviously evaluated; or create the possibilityof a new or different kind of accident fromany previously evaluated.

1. The proposed change affects only anadministrative control, which was based onindustry guidance in ANSI N18.1–1971, thatrecommended the Operations Manager holdan SRO (senior reactor operator) license. Thisadministrative control is being updated tomeet the current guidance in ANSI/ANS 3.1–1987.

2. The proposed qualification requirementsfor the Operations Manager ensures the

individual filling the position meetsknowledge levels equivalent to the presentrequirements. It also ensures that individualsresponsible for directing the activities oflicensed operators continue to hold SROlicenses as required by 10 CFR 50.54(l).

3. Since the proposed specifications ensureregulatory requirements are met and ensuresknowledge levels equivalent to existinglicense requirements for operationsmanagement, the proposed changes areconsidered administrative. The design ofplant systems and equipment is not beingaltered. Plant operations will continue to bedirected and performed by qualifiedpersonnel. Therefore, the probability orconsequences of accidents previouslyevaluated are not affected, a new or differenttype of accident is not created, nor is amargin of safety reduced.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Joseph P. Mann Library, 1516Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Wisconsin54241.

Attorney for licensee: Gerald Charnoff,Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, andTrowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037.


Wisconsin Electric Power Company,Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, PointBeach Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, Town of Two Creeks,Manitowoc County, Wisconsin


Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment wouldmodify Technical Specification (TS)Table 15.3.5–1, ‘‘Engineered SafetyFeatures Initiation Instrument SettingLimits,’’ and TS Table 15.35–3,‘‘Engineered Safety Features.’’ Settinglimits would be modified and referenceswould be changed. The bases for TSSection 15.3.5, ‘‘InstrumentationSystem,’’ would also be changed to beconsistent with the TS changes.


1. Operation of this facility under theproposed Technical Specifications will notcreate a significant increase in the probabilityor consequences of an accident previouslyevaluated.

The probabilities of accidents previouslyevaluated are based on the probability ofinitiating events for these accidents.


Initiating events for accidents previouslyevaluated for Point Beach include: controlrod withdrawal and drops, CVCS (chemicaland volume control system) malfunction(Boron Dilution), startup of an inactivereactor coolant loop, reduction in feedwaterenthalpy, excessive load increase, losses ofreactor coolant flow, loss of externalelectrical load, loss of normal feedwater, lossof all AC power to the auxiliaries, turbineoverspeed, fuel handling accidents,accidental releases of water liquid or gas,steam generator tube rupture, steam piperupture, control rod ejection, and primarycoolant system ruptures.

This license amendment request proposesto correct some minor errors, includeappropriate operability requirements for themodification to include the safety injectionsignal in the time delay for the 4.16KVdegraded voltage protection logic, slightlylower the degraded voltage setting limit,change the format of the 4.16 KV degradedvoltage and loss of voltage setting limits, andchange the time delays associated with the4.16 KV degraded voltage, 4.16 KV loss ofvoltage and 480 V loss of voltage protectionfunctions.

These proposed changes do not cause anincrease in the probabilities of any accidentspreviously evaluated because these changeswill not cause an increase in the probabilityof any initiating events for accidentspreviously evaluated. In particular, theseproposed changes affect time delay andformat of the setting limits associated withthe 4.16 KV degraded voltage, 4.16 KV lossof voltage, and 480 V loss of voltageprotection functions. These are protectionfunctions and do not cause accidents.

The consequences of the accidentspreviously evaluated in the PBNP FSAR(Final Safety Analysis Report) are determinedby the results of analyses that are based oninitial conditions of the plant, the type ofaccident, transient response of the plant, andthe operation and failure of equipment andsystems. The changes proposed in thislicense amendment request provideappropriate limiting conditions for operation,action settlements, allowable outage times,setting limits, and time delays for the PointBeach Nuclear Plant Technical Specificationsfor the 4.16 KV degraded voltage, 4.16 KVloss of voltage, and 480 V loss voltageprotection functions.

The proposed changes affect functions thatare required to ensure the proper operationof engineered features equipment. Theproposed changes do not increase theprobability of failure of this equipment or itsability to operate as required for theaccidents previously evaluated in the PBNPFSAR.

The modifications to reduce the time delaylimit associated with the 4.16 KV degradedvoltage protection function when thedegraded voltage condition is coincidentwith a safety injection signal, have beendesigned and installed in accordance withthe requirements for PBNP. The probabilityof occurrence of degraded voltage conditionsat PBNP has not been increased. Themodifications and proposed TechnicalSpecifications will ensure the properoperation of ESF (engineered safety feature)

equipment. These changes do not increasethe possibility of failure of this equipment.

Therefore, this proposed licenseamendment does not affect the consequencesof any accident previously evaluated in thePoint Beach Nuclear Plant FSAR, because thefactors that are used to determine theconsequences of accidents are not beingchanged.

2. Operation of this facility under theproposed Technical Specifications changewill not create the possibility of a new ordifferent kind of accident from any accidentpreviously evaluated.

New or different kinds of accidents canonly be created by new or different accidentinitiators or sequences. New and differenttypes of accidents (different from those thatwere originally analyzed for Point Beach)have been evaluated and incorporated intothe licensing basis for Point Beach NuclearPlant. Examples of different accidents thathave been incorporated into the Point BeachLicensing basis include anticipated transientswithout scram and station blackout.

The changes proposed by this licenseamendment request do not create any new ordifferent accident initiators or sequencesbecause these changes to the 4.16 KVdegraded voltage, 4.16 KV loss of voltage,and 480 V loss of voltage protectionfunctions will not cause failures ofequipment or accident sequences differentthan the accidents previously evaluated.Therefore, these modifications and proposedTechnical Specification changes do notcreate the possibility of an accident of adifferent type than any previously evaluatedin the Point Beach FSAR.

3. Operation of this facility under theproposed Technical Specifications changewill not create a significant reduction in amargin of safety.

The margins of safety for Point Beach arebased on the design and operation of thereactor and containment and the safetysystems that provide their protection.

The changes proposed by this licenseamendment request provide the appropriatesetting limits and time delays for the 4.16 KVdegraded voltage, 4.16 KV loss of voltage,and 480 V loss of voltage protectionfunctions. This ensures that the safetysystems that protect the reactor andcontainment will operate as required. Thedesign and operation of the reactor andcontainment are not affected by theseproposed changes. Therefore, the margins ofsafety for Point Beach are not being reducedbecause the design and operation of thereactor and containment are not beingchanged and the safety systems that providetheir protection that are being changed arebeing modified in accordance with theapplicable design and installationrequirements for Point Beach Nuclear Plant.


Local Public Document RoomLocation: Joseph P. Mann Library, 1516Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Wisconsin54241.

Attorney for licensee: Gerald Charnoff,Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, andTrowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037.


Previously Published Notices ofConsideration of Issuance ofAmendments to Facility OperatingLicenses, Proposed No SignificantHazards Consideration Determinationand Opportunity for a Hearing

The following notices were previouslypublished as separate individualnotices. The notice content was thesame as above. They were published asindividual notices either because timedid not allow the Commission to waitfor this biweekly notice or because theaction involved exigent circumstances.They are repeated here because thebiweekly notice lists all amendmentsissued or proposed to be issued nosignificant hazards consideration.

For details, see the individual noticein the Federal Register on the day andpage cited. This notice does not extendthe notice period of the original notice.

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, etal., Docket No. 50–336, MillstoneNuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, NewLondon County, Connecticut


Description of amendment request:The proposed amendment would revisethe Technical Specifications (TS)3.1.2.4, ‘‘Charging Pumps-Operating,’’by adding a note that indicates that theprovisions of TS 3.0.4 and 4.0.4 are notapplicable for entry into MODE 4 fromMODE 5.

Date of publication individual noticein Federal Register: May 2, 1995 (60 FR21558).

Expiration date of individual notice:June 1, 1995.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Learning Resource Center,Three Rivers Community-TechnicalCollege, Thames Valley Campus, 574New London Turnpike, Norwich,Connecticut 06360.

Notice of Issuance of Amendments toFacility Operating Licenses

During the period since publication ofthe last biweekly notice, theCommission has issued the followingamendments. The Commission hasdetermined for each of theseamendments that the applicationcomplies with the standards andrequirements of the Atomic Energy Act


of 1954, as amended (the Act), and theCommission’s rules and regulations.The Commission has made appropriatefindings as required by the Act and theCommission’s rules and regulations in10 CFR Ch. 1, which are set forth in thelicense amendment.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance ofAmendment to Facility OperatingLicense, Proposed No SignificantHazards Consideration Determination,and Opportunity for A Hearing inconnection with these actions waspublished in the Federal Register asindicated.

Unless otherwise indicated, theCommission has determined that theseamendments satisfy the criteria forcategorical exclusion in accordancewith 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuantto 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmentalimpact statement or environmentalassessment need be prepared for theseamendments. If the Commission hasprepared an environmental assessmentunder the special circumstancesprovision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and hasmade a determination based on thatassessment, it is so indicated.

For further details with respect to theaction see (1) the applications foramendment, (2) the amendment, and (3)the Commission’s related letter, SafetyEvaluation and/or EnvironmentalAssessment as indicated. All of theseitems are available for public inspectionat the Commission’s Public DocumentRoom, the Gelman Building, 2120 LStreet, NW., Washington, DC, and at thelocal public document rooms for theparticular facilities involved.

Carolina Power & Light Company, etal., Docket No. 50–400, Shearon HarrisNuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake andChatham Counties, North Carolina

Date of application for amendment:August 19, 1994, as supplementedNovember 3, 1994.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment requests a line-itemimprovement to the RadiologicalEffluent Technical Specificationspursuant to the guidance of GenericLetter 89–01 and incorporates therequirements of revised 10 CFR part 20and 10 CFR 50.36a.

Date of issuance: May 1, 1995.Effective date: May 1, 1994.Amendment No.: 58.Facility Operating License No. NPF–

63: Amendment revises the TechnicalSpecifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: October 12, 1994 (60 FR51617) The Commission’s relatedevaluation of the amendment, andNRC’s response to the public comments

received, are contained in a SafetyEvaluation dated May 1, 1995.

No significant hazards considerationcomments received: Yes.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Cameron Village RegionalLibrary, 1930 Clark Avenue, Raleigh,North Carolina 27605.

Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50–269, 50–270, and 50–287, OconeeNuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3,Oconee County, South Carolina

Date of application of amendments:November 22, 1994, as supplemented byletters dated January 30, March 2, March13, and May 2, 1995.

Brief description of amendments: Theamendments revise TechnicalSpecification 3.8 to establish restrictedloading patterns and associated burnupcriteria for placing fuel in the Oconeespent fule pools. In addition, the DesignFeatures sections associated with thereactor and fuel storage are also revised.

Date of issuance: May 3, 1995.Effective date: As of the date of

issuance and shall be implementedwithin 30 days from the date ofissuance.

Amendment Nos.: 209, 209, and 206.Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

38, DPR–47, and DPR–55: Theamendments revised the TechnicalSpecifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: February 15, 1995 (60 FR8746); Re-Noticed March 29, 1995 (60FR 16185).

The May 2, 1995, letter did notchange the scope of the November 22,1994, application and the initialproposed no significant hazardsconsideration determination.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendments is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated May 3, 1995.

No significant hazards considerationcomments received: No.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Oconee County Library, 501West South Broad Street, Walhalla,South Carolina 29691.

Duquesne Light Company, et al., DocketNo. 50–412, Beaver Valley PowerStation, Unit 2, Shippingport,Pennsylvania

Date of application for amendment:April 10, 1995, as supplemented April12, 1995, and April 20, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Thisamendment revises TechnicalSpecification 4.6.2.2.d to delete thereference to the specific test acceptancecriteria for the ContainmentRecirculation Spray Pumps and replacethe specific test acceptance criteria withreference to the developed head

required by the plant’s safety analysis.In addition, the 18-month test frequencywould be replaced with the testfrequency requirements specified in theIST Program. The current footnote (1)pertaining to the performance ofrecirculation spray pump 2RSS*P21Awould be deleted.


73: Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.

Public comments requested as toproposed no significant hazardsconsideration: Yes (60 FR 19417, April18, 1995) That notice provided anopportunity to submit comments on theCommission’s proposed no significanthazards consideration determination.No comments have been received. Thenotice also provided for an opportunityto request a hearing by May 18, 1995,but indicated that if the Commissionmakes a final no significant hazardsconsideration any such hearing wouldtake place after issuance of theamendment.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment, finding of exigentcircumstances, and final determinationof no significant hazards considerationare contained in a Safety Evaluationdated May 3, 1995.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: B. F. Jones Memorial Library,663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa,Pennsylvania 15001.

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket Nos.50–313 and 50–368, Arkansas NuclearOne, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Pope County,Arkansas

Date of amendment request: August30, 1994 as supplemented January 19,1995.

Brief description of amendments: Theamendments changed requirementsrelated to the site perimeter securitysystem.

Date of issuance: April 28, 1995.Effective date: April 28, 1995.Amendment Nos.: Unit 1—

Amendment No. 180; Unit 2—Amendment No. 161

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–51 and NPF–6: Amendments revised thelicenses.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: April 12, 1995 (60 FR 18625).

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendments is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated April 28, 1995.



Local Public Document Roomlocation: Tomlinson Library, ArkansasTech University, Russellville, AR 72801.

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No.50–382, Waterford Steam ElectricStation, Unit 3, St. Charles Parish,Louisiana

Date of amendment request:December 14, 1993, as supplemented byletter dated March 3, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment changed the Appendix ATechnical Specifications by removingthe reactor vessel material specimenwithdrawal schedule and by updatingthe reactor coolant system pressure-temperature (P–T) curves.


38.: Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: January 19, 1994 (59 FR 2867).

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated May 8, 1995.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: University of New OrleansLibrary, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront,New Orleans, Louisiana 70122.

Florida Power and Light Company,Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251, TurkeyPoint Plant Units 3 and 4, Dade County,Florida

Date of application for amendments:October 20, 1994.

Brief description of amendments:These amendments change thedefinition of ‘‘core alteration’’ toexclude the movement of items notassociated with reactivity. The secondchange involves allowing the personnelairlock (PAL) doors to remain openduring fuel movement and corealterations under certain conditions.

Date of issuance: May 11, 1995.Effective date: May 11, 1995.Amendment Nos.: 173 and 167.Facility Operating License No. DPR–

31 and DPR–41: Amendments revisedthe Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: November 9, 1994 (59 FR55869).



Local Public Document Roomlocation: Florida InternationalUniversity, University Park, Miami,Florida 33199.

GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al.,Docket No. 50–219, Oyster CreekNuclear Generating Station, OceanCounty, New Jersey

Date of application for amendment:February 28, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment revises TechnicalSpecification (TS) Section 6.5.1.12 todelete the requirement to renderdeterminations in writing with regard towhether or not activities listed in TSSections 6.5.1.2 and 6.5.1.5 constitutean unreviewed safety question. Theseactivities are changes to Appendix ATechnical Specifications (6.5.1.2) andinvestigations of all violations of theTSs (6.5.1.5). This change is consistentwith NUREG–1433 Standard TechnicalSpecifications General Electric Plants,BWR/4 Revision 0, dated September 28,1992.

Date of issuance: May 1, 1995.Effective date: May 1, 1995.Amendment No.: 180.Facility Operating License No. DPR–

16.: Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16188).

The Commission’s related evaluationof this amendment is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated May 1, 1995.

No significant hazards considerationcomments received: Yes.

By letter dated April 5, 1995, Mr. KentW. Tosch, of the State of New JerseyDepartment of Environmental Protectioncommented that they concur with GPUNuclear’s rationale that theseunreviewed safety question reviewsserve no value since these activitiesspecifically require NRC review andapproval. The State official had no othercomments.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Ocean County Library,Reference Department, 101 WashingtonStreet, Toms River, NJ 08753.

Houston Lighting & Power Company,City Public Service Board of SanAntonio, Central Power and LightCompany, City of Austin, Texas, DocketDos. 50–498 and 50–499, South TexasProjects, Units 1 and 2, MatagordaCounty, Texas

Date of amendment request: February15, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment modified TechnicalSpecification 4.6.2.3.a.2 (and associatedBases) to reflect the reactor containmentfan cooler flow rate assumed in theaccident analysis and to specify that thisflow is provided by the componentcooling water system.

Date of issuance: May 2, 1995.

Effective date: May 2, 1995, to beimplemented within 30 days.

Amendment Nos.: Unit 1—Amendment No. 74; Unit 2—Amendment No. 63.

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–76 AND NPF–80. The amendmentrevised the Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16189)The Commission’s related evaluation ofthe amendments is contained in a SafetyEvaluation dated May 2, 1995.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Wharton County JuniorCollege, J.M. Hodge Learning Center,911 Boling Highway, Wharton, TX77488.

Illinois Power Company and SoylandPower Cooperative, Inc., Docket No.50–461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No.1. DeWitt County, Illinois

Date of application for amendment:February 10, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment changes TechnicalSpecification 3.3.2.1, ‘‘Control RodBlock Instrumentation,’’ to revise twosurveillance requirements and theirassociated notes for the Rod WithdrawalLimiter mode of the Rod Pattern ControlSystem. The changes are consistent withthe Clinton Power Station TechnicalSpecifications prior to implementationof the improved TechnicalSpecifications (Amendment No. 95) andeliminates the potential for unnecessarypower reductions.


62. The amendment revised theTechnical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: March 29, 1995. (60 FR 16190)


No significant hazard considerationcomments received: No.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: The Vespasian Warner PublicLibrary, 120 West Johnson Street,Clinton, Illinois 61727.

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation,Docket No. 50–410, Nine Mile PointNuclear Station, Unit 2, OswegoCounty, New York

Date of application for amendment:July 22, 1993, as supplementedFebruary 4, August 23, September 16,October 6, and December 2, 1994, andJanuary 3, January 9, March 8, and April10, 1995.


Brief description of amendment: Theamendment modified Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF–69 and the NMP–2TSs to authorize an increase in themaximum power level of NMP–2 from3323 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3467MWt. The amendment also approveschanges to the TSs to implementuprated power operation.

Date of issuance: April 28, 1995.Effective date: As of the date of

issuance to be implemented prior torestart from refueling outage number 4.

Amendment No.: 66.Facility Operating License No. NPF–

69: Amendment revises the TechnicalSpecifications and modifies FacilityOperating License No. NPF–69.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: March 16, 1994 (59 FR 12360).The letters dated February 4, August23, September 16, October 6, andDecember 2, 1994, and January 3,January 9, March 8, and April 10, 1995,provided clarifying information thatdid not change the initial proposed nosignificant hazards considerationdetermination.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated April 28, 1995.

No significant hazards considerationcomments received: No

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Reference and DocumentsDepartment, Penfield Library, StateUniversity of New York, Oswego, NewYork 13126.


Date of application for amendment:October 18, 1994, a supplementedFebruary 21, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment changes SurveillanceRequirement 4.6.1.2.a (OverallIntegrated Containment Leakage RateTests) by revising the surveillanceinterval for Type A tests from 40 plusor minus 10 months to approximatelyequal intervals during each 10-yearinservice period. The amendment alsoremoves a note that expired uponcompletion of Cycle II refueling outage.


issuance to be implemented within 30days.

Amendment No.: 187.Facility Operating License No. DPR–

65. Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.


The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated may 3, 1995.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Learning Resource Center,Three Rivers Community-TechnicalCollege, Thames Valley Campus, 574New London turnpike, Norwich, CT06360.

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, etal., Docket No. 50-423, MillstoneNuclear Power Station, Unit no. 3, NewLondon County, Connecticut

Date of application for amendment:December 23, 1994.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment changes the acceptancecriteria for the peak transient generatorvoltage from 4784 volts to 5000 voltsduring full load rejection tests of thediesel generator (DG), and also deletesthe 10-year surveillance requirement toperform a 110% pressure test of the DGfuel oil system.





Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: February 15, 1995 (60 FR8751).



Local Public Document Roomlocation: Learning Resources Center,Three Rivers Community-TechnicalCollege, Thames Valley Campus, 574New London Turnpike, Norwich, CT06360.


Date of application for amendment:September 28, 1994.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment revises SurveillanceRequirement 4.6.1.2.a of the TechnicalSpecification to eliminate therequirement to perform Type A tests onan interval of 40 plus or minus 10months while reiterating the AppendixJ requirement that the Type A tests beperformed three times, at approximatelyequal intervals, during each 10 yearservice period. In addition, a footnote isadded which states that the third TypeA test will be performed during thesixth refueling outage. This reflects anexemption to Appendix J whichseparates the third Type A test from the10 year inservice inspection.





Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: November 23, 1994 (59 FR60384)


No significant hazards considerationcomments received: NO.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Learning Resources Center,Three Rivers Community-TechnicalCollege, Thames Valley Campus, 574New London Turnpike, Norwich, CT06360.

Public Service Electric & Gas Company,Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311, SalemNuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1and 2, Salem County, New Jersey

Date of application for amendment:August 19, 1994, as supplementedMarch 15, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendments add a new actionstatement to Technical Specification3.1.3.2.1., ‘‘Position IndicationSystems—Operating’’.

Date of issuance: May 3, 1995.Effective date: May 3, 1995.Amendment No.: 166 and 148.Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

70 and DPR–75. The amendmentsrevised the Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: October 12, 1994 (59 FR51626) The March 15, 1995 supplementprovided clarifying information that didnot change the initial proposed nosignificant hazards considerationdetermination.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendments is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated may 3, 1995.


Local Public Document Roomlocation: Salem Free Public Library, 112West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey08079.

Tennessee Valley Authority, DocketNos. 50–327 and 50–328, SequoyahNuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, HamiltonCounty, Tennessee

Date of application for amendments:March 19, 1993; superseded May 16,1994; superseded February 10, 1995;supplemented February 17, 1995 (TS93–04).

Brief description of amendment: Theamendments clarify the Limiting


Conditions for Operation applicable tothe dual function of the containmentvacuum relief isolation lines byspecifying the actions that would berequired should one or more of thevacuum relief isolation lines byspecifying the actions that would berequired should one or more of thevacuum relief lines be incapable ofperforming the containment isolationfunction or incapable of performing thevacuum relief function.

Date of issuance: April 28, 1995.Effective date: April 28, 1995.Amendment No.: 197 and 188.Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

77 and DPR–79: Amendments revise thetechnical specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: May 12, 1994 (58 FR 28060);renoticed June 22, 1994 (59 FR 32237),and March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16202).

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment is contained in aSafety Evaluation dated April 28, 1995.

No significant hazards considerationcomments received: None.


Tennessee Valley Authority, DocketNos. 50–327 and 50–328, SequoyahNuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, HamiltonCounty, Tennessee

Date of application for amendment:November 15, 1994; superseded March7, 1995 (TS 94–12).

Brief description of amendments: Theamendments remove the frequenciesspecified in the TechnicalSpecifications for performing audits anddelete the requirement to perform theRadiological Emergency Plan, PhysicalSecurity Plan, and SafeguardContingency Plan reviews.

Date of issuance: May 10, 1995.Effective date: May 10, 1995.Amendment No.: 198 and 189.Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

77 and DPR–79: Amendments revise thetechnical specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: December 21, 1994 (59 FR65823); renoticed March 29, 1995 (60 FR16203)


No significant hazards considerationcomments received: None.


Toledo Edison Company, CenteriorService Company, and The ClevelandElectric Illuminating Company, DocketNo. 50–346, Davis-Besse Nuclear PowerStation, Unit No. 1, Ottawa County,Ohio

Date of application for amendment:January 30, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Thisamendment revises TechnicalSpecification (TS) 4.6.1.2.a,‘‘Containment Systems, ContainmentLeakage, Surveillance Requirements(SR)’’ and Bases 3/4.6, ‘‘ContainmentSystems,’’ to state that Type A tests foroverall integrated containment leakagerate testing shall be conducted inaccordance with the requirementsspecified in appendix J of 10 CFR part50, as modified by NRC-approvedexemptions. Additionally, TS SR4.6.1.2.a.

Date of issuance: May 3, 1995.Effective date: May 3, 1995.Amendment No.: 198.Facility Operating License No. NPF–3.

Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.




Local Public Document Roomlocation: University of Toledo Library,Documents Department, 2801 BancroftAvenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606.

Virginia Electric and Power Company,et al., Docket Nos. 50–338 and 50–339,North Anna Power Station, Units No. 1and No. 2, Louisa County, Virginia

Date of application for amendments:July 8, 1993, as supplemented by lettersdated July 12, 1994, and March 7, 1995.

Brief description of amendments: Theamendments revise the NA–1&2Technical Specifications by deleting therequirements to periodically reviewcertain administrative and technicalprocedures.

Date of issuance: May 1, 1995.Effective date: May 1, 1995.Amendment Nos.: 190 and 171.Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–

4 and NPF–7: Amendments revised theTechnical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: August 4, 1993 (58 FR 41518).



Local Public Document Roomlocation: The Alderman Library, Special

Collections Department, University ofVirginia, Charlottesville, Virginia22903–2498.

Virginia Electric and Power Company,et al., Docket Nos. 50–338 and 50–339;North Anna Power Station, Units No. 1and No. 2, Louisa County, Virginia

Date of application for amendments:December 27, 1993, as supplementedSeptember 6, 1994, and March 7, 1995.

Brief description of amendments: Theamendments revise the NA–1&2Technical Specifications regarding thereview responsibilities of the StationNuclear Safety and OperatingCommittee and the Management SafetyReview Committee.

Date of issuance: May 2, 1995.Effective date: May 2, 1995.Amendment Nos.: 191 and 172.Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–

4 and NPF–7: Amendments revised theTechnical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: February 16, 1994 (59 FR7700).

The September 6, 1994, and March 7,1995 submittals provided additionalinformation only, and did not changethe staff’s initial proposeddetermination of no significant hazardsconsideration.



Local Public Document Roomlocation: The Alderman Library, SpecialCollections Department, University ofVirginia, Charlottesville, Virginia22903–2498.

Virginia Electric and Power Company,Docket Nos. 50–280 and 50–281, SurryPower Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, SurryCounty, Virginia

Date of application for amendments:June 28, 1991.

Brief description of amendments:These amendments incorporateoperability and surveillancerequirements for power-operated reliefvalves to conform with Generic Letter90–06.

Date of issuance: May 2, 1995.Effective date: May 2, 1995.Amendment Nos.: 198 and 198.Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

32 and DPR–37: Amendments revisedthe Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in FederalRegister: October 2, 1991 (56 FR 49929).




Local Public Document Roomlocation: Swem Library, College ofWilliam and Mary, Williamsburg,Virginia 23185.

Notice of Issuance of Amendments toFacility Operating Licenses and FinalDetermination of No SignificantHazards Consideration andOpportunity for a Hearing (ExigentPublic Announcement or EmergencyCircumstances)

During the period since publication ofthe last biweekly notice, theCommission has issued the followingamendments. The Commission hasdetermined for each of theseamendments that the application for theamendment complies with thestandards and requirements of theAtomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended(the Act), and the Commission’s rulesand regulations. The Commission hasmade appropriate findings as requiredby the Act and the Commission’s rulesand regulations in 10 CFR Ch. I, whichare set forth in the license amendment.

Because of exigent or emergencycircumstances associated with the datethe amendment was needed, there wasnot time for the Commission to publish,for public comment before issuance, itsusual 30-day Notice of Consideration ofIssuance of Amendment, Proposed NoSignificant Hazards ConsiderationDetermination, and Opportunity for aHearing.

For exigent circumstances, theCommission has either issued a FederalRegister notice providing opportunityfor public comment or has used localmedia to provide notice to the public inthe area surrounding a licensee’s facilityof the licensee’s application and of theCommission’s proposed determinationof no significant hazards consideration.The Commission has provided areasonable opportunity for the public tocomment, using its best efforts to makeavailable to the public means ofcommunication for the public torespond quickly, and in the case oftelephone comments, the commentshave been recorded or transcribed asappropriate and the licensee has beeninformed of the public comments.

In circumstances where failure to actin a timely way would have resulted, forexample, in derating or shutdown of anuclear power plant or in prevention ofeither resumption of operation or ofincrease in power output up to theplant’s licensed power level, theCommission may not have had anopportunity to provide for publiccomment on its no significant hazardsconsideration determination. In suchcase, the license amendment has beenissued without opportunity for

comment. If there has been some timefor public comment but less than 30days, the Commission may provide anopportunity for public comment. Ifcomments have been requested, it is sostated. In either event, the State hasbeen consulted by telephone wheneverpossible.

Under its regulations, the Commissionmay issue and make an amendmentimmediately effective, notwithstandingthe pendency before it of a request fora hearing from any person, in advanceof the holding and completion of anyrequired hearing, where it hasdetermined that no significant hazardsconsideration is involved.

The Commission has applied thestandards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has madea final determination that theamendment involves no significanthazards consideration. The basis for thisdetermination is contained in thedocuments related to this action.Accordingly, the amendments havebeen issued and made effective asindicated.

Unless otherwise indicated, theCommission has determined that theseamendments satisfy the criteria forcategorical exclusion in accordancewith 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuantto 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmentalimpact statement or environmentalassessment need be prepared for theseamendments. If the Commission hasprepared an environmental assessmentunder the special circumstancesprovision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and hasmade a determination based on thatassessment, it is so indicated.

For further details with respect to theaction see (1) the application foramendment, (2) the amendment toFacility Operating License, and (3) theCommission’s related letter, SafetyEvaluation and/or EnvironmentalAssessment, as indicated. All of theseitems are available for public inspectionat the Commission’s Public DocumentRoom, the Gelman Building, 2120 LStreet, NW., Washington, DC, and at thelocal public document room for theparticular facility involved.

The Commission is also offering anopportunity for a hearing with respect tothe issuance of the amendment. By June23, 1995, the licensee may file a requestfor a hearing with respect to issuance ofthe amendment to the subject facilityoperating license and any person whoseinterest may be affected by thisproceeding and who wishes toparticipate as a party in the proceedingmust file a written request for a hearingand a petition for leave to intervene.Requests for a hearing and a petition forleave to intervene shall be filed inaccordance with the Commission’s

‘‘Rules of Practice for DomesticLicensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR part2. Interested persons should consult acurrent copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which isavailable at the Commission’s PublicDocument Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC andat the local public document room forthe particular facility involved. If arequest for a hearing or petition forleave to intervene is filed by the abovedate, the Commission or an AtomicSafety and Licensing Board, designatedby the Commission or by the Chairmanof the Atomic Safety and LicensingBoard Panel, will rule on the requestand/or petition; and the Secretary or thedesignated Atomic Safety and LicensingBoard will issue a notice of a hearing oran appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, apetition for leave to intervene shall setforth with particularity the interest ofthe petitioner in the proceeding, andhow that interest may be affected by theresults of the proceeding. The petitionshould specifically explain the reasonswhy intervention should be permittedwith particular reference to thefollowing factors: (1) The nature of thepetitioner’s right under the Act to bemade a party the proceeding; (2) thenature and extent of the petitioner’sproperty, financial, or other interest inthe proceeding; and (3) the possibleeffect of any order which may beentered in the proceeding on thepetitioner’s interest. The petition shouldalso identify the specific aspect(s) of thesubject matter of the proceeding as towhich petitioner wishes to intervene.Any person who has filed a petition forleave to intervene or who has beenadmitted as a party may amend thepetition without requesting leave of theBoard up to 15 days prior to the firstprehearing conference scheduled in theproceeding, but such an amendedpetition must satisfy the specificityrequirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the firstprehearing conference scheduled in theproceeding, a petitioner shall file asupplement to the petition to intervenewhich must include a list of thecontentions which are sought to belitigated in the matter. Each contentionmust consist of a specific statement ofthe issue of law or fact to be raised orcontroverted. In addition, the petitionershall provide a brief explanation of thebases of the contention and a concisestatement of the alleged facts or expertopinion which support the contentionand on which the petitioner intends torely in proving the contention at thehearing. The petitioner must alsoprovide references to those specificsources and documents of which the


1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

petitioner is aware and on which thepetitioner intends to rely to establishthose facts or expert opinion. Petitionermust provide sufficient information toshow that a genuine dispute exists withthe applicant on a material issue of lawor fact. Contentions shall be limited tomatters within the scope of theamendment under consideration. Thecontention must be one which, ifproven, would entitle the petitioner torelief. A petitioner who fails to file sucha supplement which satisfies theserequirements with respect to at lest onecontention will not be permitted toparticipate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene becomeparties to the proceeding, subject to anylimitations in the order granting leave tointervene, and have the opportunity toparticipate fully in the conduct of thehearing, including the opportunity topresent evidence and cross-examinewitnesses. Since the Commission hasmade a final determination that theamendment involves no significanthazards consideration, if a hearing isrequested, it will not stay theeffectiveness of the amendment. Anyhearing held would take place while theamendment is in effect.

A request for a hearing or a petitionfor leave to intervene must be filed withthe Secretary of the Commission, U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Washington, DC 20555, Attention:Docketing and Services Branch, or maybe delivered to the Commission’s PublicDocument Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, bythe above date. Where petitions are filedduring the last 10 days of the noticeperiod, it is requested that the petitionerpromptly so inform the Commission bya toll-free telephone call to WesternUnion 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri 1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Unionoperator should be given DatagramIdentification Number N1023 and thefollowing message addressed to (ProjectDirector): petitioner’s name andtelephone number, date petition wasmailed, plant name, and publicationdate and page number of this FederalRegister notice. A copy of the petitionshould also be sent to the Office of theGeneral Counsel, U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission, Washington,DC 20555, and to the attorney for thelicensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions forleave to intervene, amended petitions,supplemental petitions and/or requestsfor a hearing will not be entertainedabsent a determination by theCommission, the presiding officer or theAtomic Safety and Licensing Board thatthe petition and/or request should begranted based upon a balancing of the

factors specified in 10 CFR2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

Commonwealth Edison Company,Docket Nos. 50–295 and 50–304, ZionNuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2

Date of application for amendments:April 24, 1995.

Brief description of amendments: theamendments change the TechnicalSpecifications by modifying thesurveillance testing periodicityrequirements of the automatic actuationlogic of engineered safeguardsequipment.

Date of issuance: May 5, 1995.Effective date: May 5, 1995.Amendment Nos.: 162 and 150.Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR–

39 and DPR–48. The amendmentsrevised the Technical Specifications.

Public comments requested as toproposed no significant hazardsconsideration: No.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendments, finding ofemergency circumstances, and finaldetermination of no significant hazardsconsideration are contained in a SafetyEvaluation dated May 5, 1995.

Attorney for licensee: Michael I.Miller, Esquire; Sidley and Austin, OneFirst National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois60690.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Waukegan Public Library, 128N. County Street, Waukegan, Illinois60085.

NRC Project Director: Robert A. Capra.

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company,Docket No. 50–317, Calvert CliffsNuclear Power Pant, Unit No. 1, CalvertCounty, Maryland

Date of application for amendment:April 28, 1995.

Brief description of amendment: Theamendment revises the control roomemergency ventilation system TS3.7.6.1, Limiting Condition ForOperation. The revision extends theone-time increase in the allowed outagetime for loss of emergency power only,from the 30 days previously approved,to 45 days. This extension is necessaryto allow time to repair the Number 21emergency diesel generator which failedits operability tests subsequent tomodifications which have been recentlycompleted.


issuance to be implemented uponreceipt.

Amendment No.: 205.Facility Operating License No. DPR–

53: Amendment revised the TechnicalSpecifications.

Public comments requested as toproposed no significant hazardsconsideration: No.

The Commission’s related evaluationof the amendment, consultation withthe State, and final determination of nosignificant hazards consideration arecontinued in a Safety Evaluation datedMay 2, 1995.

Local Public Document Roomlocation: Calvert County Library, PrinceFrederick, Maryland 20678.

Attorney for licensee: Jay E. Silbert,Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts andTrowbridge, 2300 N. Street, NW.,Washington, DC 20037.

NRC Project Director: Ledyard B.Marsh.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 17th day ofMay, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,Elinor G. Adensam,Acting Director, Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.[FR Doc. 95–12538 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGECOMMISSION

[Release No. 34–35723; File No. SR–Amex–95–08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations;American Stock Exchange, Inc.; OrderGranting Approval to Proposed RuleChange Relating to MembershipStructure and Requirements and theExchange’s Gratuity Fund

May 16, 1995.

I. IntroductionOn February 17, 1995, the American

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Amex’’ or‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4thereunder,2 a proposed rule change toamend its Construction, Rules andMembership Lease Plan to alloworganizations, including certain pensionplans, to own memberships legally aswell as beneficially and to allowindividuals and organizations to ownmultiple memberships. The Exchangealso is proposing to revise its GratuityFund to reflect the above changes, toincrease the death benefit paidthereunder, and to allow optionsprincipal members to participatetherein.

The proposed rule change waspublished for comment in Securities


3 Letter from Sam G. Marx on behalf of S.G. Marx& Associates Inc., a member of the Amex, toBrandon Becker, Director, Division of MarketRegulation, DEC, dated May 15, 1995 (‘‘MarxLetter’’).

4 Both regular members and options principalmember are exchange members as defined inSection 3(a)(3) of the Act. A regular member mayeffect transactions in both equities and derivativeson the floor of the Exchange. In contrast, an optionsprincipal member is limited to trading as principalin options and other derivative products. Currently,the Amex has 661 regular and 203 options principalmemberships outstanding.

5 An a-b-c agreement is an arrangement betweenthe individual who nominally owns a seat and themember organization with which such individual isassociated and which is the beneficial owner of themembership. Upon termination of the a-b-cagreement, the individual must either (1) retain themembership and pay the member organization theamount necessary to purchase another membership;(2) sell the membership with the proceeds paid overto the member organization; or (3) transfer themembership to a person designated by the memberorganization.

6 The a-b-c agreement would be replaced withanother document to authorize the nominee to acton the member organization’s behalf in allExchange matters and to provide that the memberorganization is responsible for all the nominee’sExchange-related obligations. Memberorganizations, however, would be permitted tocontinue to utilize their existing a-b-c agreementsfor so long as the respective individual membersremain in their seats.

7 As discussed below, the owner would retain theright to vote seats held by nominees and certainlessees.

8 The Exchange has been advised that theprohibited transaction provisions of the EmployeeRetirement Income Security Act and the InternalRevenue Code would preclude a member frombeing the nominee or lessee of the seat owned byhis or her own pension trust.

9 ‘‘Active’’ is defined as meeting all Exchangerequirements to be active on the Floor, includingpassing any necessary examinations and beingregistered as, or associated with, a broker-dealer.See Para. 9176 of the Amex Guide (‘‘MembershipRequirements and Admissions Procedures’’).

10 See Art. I, Sec. 3(g) of the Amex Constructionfor a definition of the term ‘‘Approved Person.’’

11 This includes nominal transfers, i.e., a transferof membership within an organization.

12 Except for the above described changes ininitiation fees and, as hereafter described, changesin the Exchange’s Gratuity Fund assessment, theproposal would not effect any change to annualdues, floor facility fees, or other fees.

Exchange Act Release No. 35411 (Feb.22, 1995), 60 FR 11153 (March 1, 1995).One comment was received on theproposal.3 This order approves theproposed rule change.

II. Overview of Proposal

A. Changes to Amex MembershipStructures

At present, the Exchange’sConstitution and Rules require that eachmember 4 be a natural person who musteither own a membership (i.e., a seat onthe Exchange) outright, lease a seat fromits owner, or hold the seat under a so-called a-b-c agreement.5 Further, amembership must also be held in thename of a natural person and noindividual is permitted to hold morethan one seat. A member organizationmay own beneficially one or morememberships in which case the memberorganization would be required todesignate an individual (typically anofficer, general partner, or employee ofthe member organization) nominally toown the seat on the memberorganization’s behalf.

The Exchange proposes to eliminatethe requirements that memberships beindividually owned and instead permitboth individuals and organizations toown multiple memberships.

Organizations that own membershipscould either lease their seats directly tolessees or designate individuals asnominees to ‘‘operate’’ their seat.6Similarly, individuals who own

memberships, but who do not ‘‘operate’’their seats, would also be able to leasetheir seats or designate nominees tooperate the seats as their employees. Asa general matter, such nominees andlessees would be deemed to be memberof the Exchange and would be subject toall of the obligations and privileges ofmembership under the ExchangeConstitution and Rules except that theywould not participate in anydistribution of Exchange assets or fundsupon liquidation, dissolution, orwinding up of the affairs of theExchange and ultimate control of themembership would rest with its owner.7

The proposal also would permitcertain pension plans (generallycomprised of trusts or custodianaccounts, including Keoghs andIndividual Retirement Accounts) toacquire ownership of one or more seatsfor investment purposes and either tolease their seats or to designatenominees to operate them.8 This optionwould only be available to a pensionplan where the sponsor of the plan is amember organization and at least fiftypercent (50%) of the pension trustbeneficiaries are active members and/orfloor employees of the memberorganization or the sponsor is an‘‘active’’ member.9 The trust itselfwould be the owner of the membershipand the trustee would have to becomean approved person.10

The proposal would make a numberof additional changes to the Exchange’sRules and Constitutions to effectuate theforegoing changes. These changes aredescribed below.

Subordination of Membership toTrading Losses and Debts

Currently, in the case of a leased seat,the lessor’s liability to the Exchange forhis or her lessee’s trading losses andother debts incurred in connection withmembership is limited to the value ofthe leased seat. In the case of a seat heldpursuant to an a-b-c agreement,however, a member organization isresponsible for all such losses and debtsincurred by the a-b-c seatholder, even if

such obligations exceed the value of theseat used by the a-b-c- seatholder. Theserequirements would remain the sameunder the proposal with nominees beingtreated in the same manner as a-b-cseatholders currently are.

Claims ProceduresUnder the current rules, all transfers

of Exchange memberships must beposted on the Exchange Bulletin Boardand published in the Exchange’s WeeklyBulletin for at least seven days.11 Duringthis time, other members and memberorganizations must file their claimsagainst the seat with the Exchange.These transfer and claims procedureswould continue to be utilized under thenew membership structure. In addition,the designation of a nominee by a seatowner would be deemed to be a transferto which the posting and claimsprocedures would apply.

FeesCurrently, the Exchange imposes an

initiation fee of $2,500 for both a regularand options principal membershipwhen a seat is sold. The initiation fee ona nominal transfer (i.e., within a firmpursuant to an a-b-c agreement) is$2,500 for a regular membership butonly $500 for an options principalmembership. When a membership istransferred to a lessee, the initiation feeis $1,500 for a regular membership butagain only $500 for an options principalmembership.

The proposal would retain theinitiation fee of $2,500 for both regularand options principal membershipswhen a seat is sold but would imposean initiation fee of $1,500 on all regularand options principal memberships forall nominal transfers and transfers bylease.12 For the ninety-day period afterthese changes become effective, noinitiation fee would be charged forchanges in membership ownership,except for bona fide sales and bona fidechanges in lessees or nominees. A $250processing fee, however, would beimposed on any transfer where noinitiation fee is charged.

VotingCurrently, members subject to an a-b-

c agreement sign an irrevocable proxyauthorizing their member organizationsto vote on their behalf. The organizationthen designates an individual (typicallyan employee) who is authorized to vote


13 See note 9, supra, for a definition of the term‘‘active.’’

14 A person would not have to maintain the samestatus for the two-year period. For example, aperson who is a lessee for one and a half years andwho then buys the seat (or another seat) andremains on it for at least six months would satisfythe active requirement. In addition, a person maybe off the seat for up to sixty consecutive daysduring the two-year period without beingconsidered to have interrupted that period.

15 June 10, 1993 was the date that the Exchange’sBoard approved these proposals.

16 If that person subsequently buys a differentoptions principal membership, the decision to ‘‘opt-out’’ would apply to that seat as well.

17 An existing options principal member or lesseewho ‘‘opts-out’’ of the Fund and on some otherbasis later becomes eligible, however, wouldbecome subject to the phase-in at that time.

18 This schedule is similar to that used by theNew York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) regardingpayments from its Gratuity Fund. See Art. XV, Sec.3 of the NYSE Constitution.

19 The Fund currently maintains a reserve of$200,000, the amount necessary to pay two deathbenefits. If the benefit is increased, the reservewould be increased accordingly. The initialassessment of $300 on new participants is necessaryto allow the Fund to achieve this goal.

20 The only exception to this would be in the caseof an individual who is both the independentowner of and the user of a particular optionsprincipal membership and who ‘‘opts-out’’ of theFund under the transition provisions. For such aperson’s ‘‘opt-out’’ to be able to have any practicaleffect, his or her options principal seat would haveto be exempt entirely from the obligation to payassessments to the Fund for so long as he or sheremains the owner and user of that seat.

on behalf of the membership. In the caseof leased seats, the vote is negotiablebetween the lessor and lessee, providedthat if no specification is made, thelessee would vote the seat.

Under the new rules, organizationsand individuals would be entitled tovote all of the memberships that theyown (and do not lease out).Organizations would have to designatean individual who is authorized to voteon their behalf. With respect to leasedseats, the vote would be negotiablebetween lessor and lessee.

B. Changes to the Gratuity FundCurrently, the Exchange Gratuity

Fund (‘‘Fund’’) provides that onlyfamilies of regular members may receivethe death benefit of $100,000. To fundthe death benefit, each regular membercontributes $152 to the Fund uponbecoming a participant in the Fund andis assessed $152 each time a participantdies (subject to reduction in the firstassessment of the year to reflect incomeearned by the Fund in the previousyear). In the case of leased seats, thelessor, but not the lessee, participates inthe Fund.

The proposal would exclude fromparticipation in the Fund certain lessorswho currently participate in the Fundand would include as participants, inaddition to regular members, optionsprincipal members and both optionsprincipal and regular member lesseesand nominees. Under the new rules,lessors would only participate to theextent they were previously active 13 onthe Floor for at least two continuousyears 14 commencing on or after June 10,1993,15 or they were regular members orregular member lessors prior to suchdate. Accordingly, the proposal wouldexclude lessors who were not regularmembers or regular member lessors as ofJune 10, 1993 from participation in theFund, notwithstanding that such lessorscurrently are participants in the Fund.

An individual who satisfies the aboveactive requirement but who then ceasesto be a member, lessor, lessee, ornominee, nevertheless, once againwould become a participant in the Fundupon becoming a lessor so long as nomore than five years has elapsed since

such individual last participated in theFund. To the extent more than five yearshas elapsed, however, the individualthen would have to be active for anothertwo continuous years to participate inthe Fund as a lessor.

Individuals who currently ownoptions principal memberships wouldhave a one-time opportunity to ‘‘opt-in’’or ‘‘opt-out’’ of the Fund. A decision to‘‘opt-out’’ would be irrevocable for therest of the person’s life (unless theperson subsequently buys a regularmembership.16 Options principalmembers who ‘‘opt-in’’ would also begrandfathered for purposes of the activerequirement. Current lessees (bothregular and options principalmembership) would also have the rightto ‘‘opt-out’’ of the Fund, but suchdecisions would be effective only for theduration of their current lease, and newleases would require lesseeparticipation in the Fund. Leaserenewals by the same two parties wouldnot be considered to be new leases. Anynew options principal member seatowner (other than an individual ownerwho previously chose to ‘‘opt-out’’irrevocably) would be covered by thenew rules.

Further, under the proposal, the deathbenefit would be increased to $125,000.The Exchange, however, would phase-inthe full death benefit over a four-yearperiod. The proposed ‘‘phase-in’’schedule would be applied only on aprospective basis and would not beapplicable to persons who are alreadyparticipants or who become participantsby virtue of the proposed amendments(e.g., options principal members andlessees) regardless of whether suchpersons have been participants ormembers for four years or more.17 Forparticipants subject to the phase-in, thefull death benefit would be based uponthe length of time such person had beena participant, according to the followingschedule: 18

• Less than one year—$25,000 (20%‘‘phase-in’’)

• One year or more but less than twoyears—$50,000 (40% ‘‘phase-in’’)

• Two years or more but less thanthree years—$75,000 (60% ‘‘phase-in’’)

• Three years or more but less thanfour years—$100,000 (80% ‘‘phase-in’’)

• Four years or more—$125,000(100% ‘‘phase-in’’)

If a participant who has notcompleted the phase-in period ceases tobe a participant for a continuous periodof less than five years, and thereafteragain becomes a participant, he or shewould be able to aggregate his or herperiods of participation for purposes ofthe ‘‘phase-in.’’ For example, if anindividual is a participant for one yearand then ceases to be a participant forfour years, and thereafter again becomesa participant, such individual would becredited with the amount of timepreviously spent as a participant forpurposes of the ‘‘phase-in’’ schedule. Ifa participant ceases to be such for aperiod of five years or more, however,and thereafter becomes a participant, heor she would not be able to aggregate hisor her prior periods of participation forpurposes of the ‘‘phase-in’’ describedabove. That is, the ‘‘phase-in’’ schedulewould be applied to such participant asif he or she had never been a participantin the past.

Under the proposal, the amount ofeach assessment would fluctuatebecause the number of participants inthe Fund would vary based on who iseligible at the time of a member’s deathand because the extent to whichparticipants were ‘‘phased-in’’ wouldvary. As is currently the case,participants would have to pay both aninitial assessment upon becoming aparticipant and an assessment each timean eligible individual dies. The firstgroup of persons to become newlyeligible for the Fund upon the adoptionof these changes would be required topay an initial assessment of $300.19

Thereafter, persons who become eligiblewould be required to pay an initialassessment based on the number ofparticipants in the Fund at that time.

Each membership would pay at leastone assessment.20 In some instances,there would be one assessment per seatand on others two (i.e., when both lessorand lessee are qualified). Fundassessments would be based in all caseson the amount of the benefit payableand would be the same for all


21 Options principal members, lessees, andnominees also would be eligible to become trusteesof the Fund. For further discussion of rulesgoverning trustees of the Fund, see Art. IX of theAmex Constitution.

22 See Marx Letter, supra, note 3.23 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(2), (4), (5).24 15 U.S.C. 78f(c). Section 6(c) of the Act allows

an exchange to deny membership to certain classesof persons.

25 See e.g., Art. I, Sec. 1.1 and Sec. 2.2 of theConstitution of the Chicago Board OptionsExchange, Inc. and Art. II, Sec. 1 of the Constitutionof the Chicago Stock Exchange, Incorporated. 26 See Art. IV., Sec. 2(d) of the Amex Constitution.

memberships assessed, regardless ofwhether or to what extent a particularparticipant being assessed has already‘‘phased-in’’ to full eligibility.

No member’s beneficiaries would beentitled to receive more than one Fundbenefit upon the member’s death byvirtue of the deceased member’s statusas both lessor and lessee, or for anyother reason. The family of a memberwho owns multiple memberships wouldbe able to collect only one benefit. Amember would be eligible on only oneseat, and must designate that seat to theExchange. The lessees or nominees ofthe other seats, of course, would beeligible on those seats. The trustees ofthe Fund would have the authority toresolve disputes with respect to aperson’s eligibility to participate in theFund.21

III. Comments Received by theCommission

The Commission received onecomment letter from S.G. Marx &Associates Inc., a member of theExchange.22 The commenter alleged thatthe Exchange had delayed approval ofthe membership of one of the company’snominees until after June 10, 1993 sothat, under the proposal, such memberwould not be able to participate in theGratuity Fund. Additionally, thecommenter objected to the fact that,under the proposal, certain of itsmemberships would be required to payan assessment to the Fund,notwithstanding that no one connectedwith such membership would be aparticipant in the Fund.

IV. Discussion

The Commission believes that theproposed rule changes are consistentwith the requirements of the Act and therules and regulations thereunderapplicable to national securitiesexchanges and, in particular, therequirements of Sections 6(b) (2), (4),and (5) of the Act.23 Section 6(b)(2) ofthe Act requires the rules of anexchange, subject to the provisions ofSection 6(c) of the Act,24 to ensure thatany registered broker or dealer ornatural person associated with aregistered broker or dealer may becomea member of the exchange. Section6(b)(4) of the Act requires the rules of

an exchange to provide for the equitableallocation of reasonable dues and feesamong members and persons usingexchange facilities. Section 6(b)(5)requires, among other things, that therules of an exchange be designed topromote just and equitable principles oftrade, remove impediments to andperfect the mechanism of a free andopen market and a national marketsystem, and, in general, protectinvestors and the public interest.

A. Changes to Amex MembershipStructure

Currently, the Exchange allowsorganizations to own beneficiallymultiple memberships. As beneficialowners, member organizations are ableto vote the memberships that they own(and do not lease out) and otherwiseenjoy all of the financial advantages ofmembership. Because they are onlybeneficial holders, however, memberorganizations must designateindividuals nominally to own the seaton their behalf.

The Commission believes that theamendment of the Exchange’s rules topermit organizations to ownmemberships directly and to permitindividuals and organizations to ownmultiple memberships should not resultin any substantive changes in theoperation of the Exchange. Suchchanges should have the beneficialeffect of allowing member organizationsto simplify the arrangements that theyhave made with regard to theirownership and operation of Exchangememberships. Moreover, several otherexchanges permit organizations, as wellas individuals, to own memberships andthe Commission is not aware of anyproblems that have resulted from suchmembership structure.25

The Commission believes that theamendments to the Exchange’s rules topermit certain pension plans to acquireownership of one or more seats forinvestment purposes and either to leasetheir seats or to designate nominees tooperate them reasonably balances theExchange’s interest in having theflexibility to approve entities with neworganizational structures for Exchangemembership with the regulatoryinterests in protecting the financial andstructural integrity of the Exchange. Inthe event such an entity designated anominee to operate its seat, the pensionplan would have to be a broker or dealerregistered with the Commissionpursuant to the Act, because this is a

prerequisite to becoming an Exchangemember organization,26 and would besubject to all other membershipapproval requirements generallyapplicable to member organizations. Ifthe pension plan leased the seat, theplan would be subject to all approvalrequirements generally applicable tolessors. In either event, the pensionplan’s trustee would have to beapproved as an approved person underthe Constitution and Rules of theExchange.

The Commission believes that thechanges to the Exchange’s fees relatingto the transfer of memberships areconsistent with Section 6(b)(4) of theAct, which requires the equitableallocation of reasonable dues and feesamong members and persons usingexchange facilities. The proposedamendments would make two changesto the Exchange’s fee structure. The firstchange would equalize the initiation feefor nominal transfers, (i.e., intra-firm)and transfers by lease of regularmemberships and options principalmemberships. The Commission believesthat such equalization is proper in viewof the Exchange’s representation that theadministrative expenses attributable tothe two types of membership areidentical. The second change wouldimpose a substantially reducedprocessing fee for changes inmembership during the ninety-dayperiod following the effective date ofthese changes, except for bona fide salesand bona fide changes in leases ornominees. The Commission believesthat it is appropriate for the Exchange tooffer a reduced fee for a limited periodof time as a means of encouragingmembers to take advantage of the newalternatives available in structuringownership of Amex seats.

B. Gratuity FundThe Commission is unaware of any

reason why the Exchange’s proposal toexpand participation in the GratuityFund to all active Exchange membersand to increase the death benefitprovided thereunder should not beapproved. The Exchange’s proposal,however, also limits participation in theFund. Specifically, the proposalexcludes inactive members fromparticipation in the Fund, except forsuch members who have been active onthe Exchange for at least two years orwho were participants in the Fund (oroptions principal members) as of thedate the Exchange’s Board approvedsuch proposal. As a result, the proposalwould exclude lessors who are currentlyparticipants in the Fund but who were


27 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35411(Feb. 22, 1995), 60 FR 11153 (March 1, 1995).

28 In approving this provision, the Commissiondoes not mean to dismiss the comment of S.G. Marxand Associates Inc. regarding the Exchange’salleged delay in the approval of the membership ofone of the company’s nominees until after June 10,1993 so that, under the proposal, such memberwould not be able to participate in the GratuityFund. The Commission believes that suchallegation speaks to whether the Exchange appliedits rules in a fair and impartial manner, rather thatthe advisability of the provision in question and onthat basis is approving this order. The Commissionemphasizes that such approval should not beinterpreted as addressing the merits of the aboveallegation in any manner.

29 As discussed supra at note 17 and theaccompanying text, the phase-in schedule does notapply to persons who are already participants orwho become participants by virtue of theseamendments.

30 The Commission notes that the proposedchange, when combined with the provision thatallows current lessees to ‘‘opt-out’’ of participationin the Fund, could result in a membership beingrequired to pay an assessment to the Fund,notwithstanding that no one connected with suchmembership would be a participant in the Fund.The comment letter of S.G. Marx & Associates Inc.discussed this situation. See Marx Letter, supra,note 3.

31 See note 20, supra, for a discussion of theexception regarding certain options principalmemberships.

32 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).33 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988).

2 The Commission has modified the language inthese sections.

3 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 33023(October 6, 1993), 58 FR 52891 (adoption of Rule15c6–1) and 34952 (November 9, 1994), 59 FR59137 (change of effective date of Rule 15c6–1 fromJune 1, 1995 to June 7, 1995).

4 15 U.S.C. 78q–1 (1988).

not regular members or regular memberlessors as of June 10, 1993 fromparticipation in the Fund. With regardto these participants, the Commissionnotes that, before they become lessors,the Exchange gave them written noticethat they would no longer beparticipants in the Fund if this proposalwere approved. Further, theCommission previously published thisrule change for comment and receivedno adverse comments regarding thisdisparate treatment.27 Additionally, theCommission believes that it isreasonable for the Exchange to make adistinction in treatment betweenparticipants who became inactivemembers of the Exchange with theexpectation that they would beparticipants in the Fund and memberswho had no such expectation.28

Similarly, the Commission is unawareof any reason why the Exchange’sproposal to phase-in the full deathbenefit over a four year period for allnew members should not beapproved.29

Finally, the Commission believes thatthe changes in the Fund assessment areconsistent with Section 6(b)(4) of theAct, which requires the equitableallocation of reasonable dues and feesamong members and persons usingexchange facilities.30 The Commissionnotes that, with one exception, theassessment applies equally to allmembers31 and that there is always atleast one individual connected to each

membership who has the right toparticipate in the Fund.

IV. Conclusion

In summary, the Commission believesthat the changes relating to theExchange’s membership structure willprovide the Exchange and its memberswith increased flexibility withoutcausing any substantive changes in theoperation of the Exchange. Further, theCommission believes that the changesrelating to the Exchange’s Gratuity Fundshould provide enhanced benefits to awider range of members.

It is therefore ordered, pursuant toSection 19(b)(2) of the Act,32 that theproposed rule change (SR–Amex–95–08) is approved.

For the Commission, by the Division ofMarket Regulation, pursuant to delegatedauthority.33

Margaret H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12517 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]


[Release No. 34–35711; File No. SR–CHX–95–12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations;Chicago Stock Exchange,Incorporated; Notice of Filing ofProposed Rule Change RegardingDepository Eligibility Requirements

May 12, 1995.

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934(‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that onApril 26, 1995, the Chicago StockExchange, Incorporated (‘‘CHX’’) filedwith the Securities and ExchangeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) theproposed rule change as described inItems I, II, and III below, which itemshave been prepared primarily by CHX.The Commission is publishing thisnotice to solicit comments frominterested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Terms of Substance ofthe Proposed Rule Change

CHX proposes to amend Rule 7 ofArticle XXVIII of its rules relating to thedepository eligibility requirements forissuers that desire to list their securitieson CHX.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Purpose of, andStatutory Basis for, the Proposed RuleChange

In its filing with the Commission,CHX included statements concerningthe purpose of and basis for theproposed rule change and discussed anycomments it received on the proposedrule change. The text of these statementsmay be examined at the places specifiedin Item IV below. The self-regulatoryorganization has prepared summaries,set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C)below, of the most significant aspects ofsuch statements.2

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Purpose of, andStatutory Basis for, the Proposed RuleChange

Under the proposed rule change, CHXwill adopt a uniform depositoryeligibility rule for issuers that desire tolist their securities on the CHX. Theuniform rule has been developed by theLegal and Regulatory Subgroup of theU.S. Working Committee of the Group ofThirty in coordination with each of thenational securities exchange and theNational Association of SecuritiesDealers (‘‘NASD’’). It is anticipated thateach national securities exchange andthe NASD will file rule changesproposing adoption of depositoryeligibility standards substantiallysimilar to CHX’s proposed rule and willseek to make such changes effectivecontemporaneously with the effectivedate of the transition from a five-day(‘‘T+5’’) to a three-day (‘‘T+3’’)settlement cycle. The transition is set tooccur June 7, 19995.3

The proposed rule change will requireissuers to ensure that securities to belisted on CHX have been included in thefile of eligible issues maintained by asecurities depository registered as aclearing agency under Section 17A ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934.4This requirement will not apply to asecurity if the terms of such securitycannot be reasonably modified to meetthe criteria for depository eligibility atall securities depositories.

The proposed rule change sets forthadditional requirements that must bemet before a security will be deemed tobe ‘‘depository eligible,’’ as such term isused in Article XXII, Rule 37 of the CHXrules (‘‘Book-Entry Settlement


5 Pursuant to Article XXII, Rule 37 of the CHXrules, trades by a member in depository eligiblesecurities generally must be settled by book-entrythrough a securities depository.

6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) (1988).

7 Supra note 3 and accompanying text.8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994).

1 See letter from Craig Long, Foley & Lardner, toGlen Barrentine, Senior Counsel, SEC, dated May 4,1995. In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange requeststhat the rule filing be approved on a one-year pilotbasis and makes certain clarifying changes to thetext of Item I.

2 A limit order is an order to buy or sell a statedamount of a security at a specified price or at abetter price.

3 In the Pilot Approval Order, the Commissiondescribed its concerns with the program andrequested that the Exchange submit a reportdetailing the use of the pilot. The Exchange,however, did not submit the report becausespecialists on the Exchange made little or no useof the pilot program. Telephone conversationbetween Craig Long, Foley & Lardner, and JenniferChoi, SEC, on April 17, 1995.

4 In the original pilot program,the Auto-Ex was tooperate by comparing the size of CHX-entered limit

Requirements’’).5 The proposed rulespecifies different requirements fordepository eligibility depending uponwhether a new issue is distributed by anunderwriting syndicate before or afterthe date a securities depository systemis available for monitoring repurchasesof the distributed shares by syndicatemembers (‘‘flipping tracking system’’).

Currently, a flipping tracking systemis being developed that will include asecurities depository service that (i) canbe activated upon the request of themanaging underwriter for a period oftime that the managing underwriterspecifies, (ii) in certain circumstances,will require the delivering participant toprovide to the depository informationsufficient to identify the seller of suchshares as a precondition to theprocessing of book-entry deliveryinstructions for distributed shares, and(iii) will report to the managingunderwriter the identity of any othersyndicate member or selling groupmember whose customer(s) solddistributed shares (but will not report tothe managing underwriter the identityof such customer[s]) and, in certaincircumstances, will report to suchsyndicate member or selling groupmember the identity of suchcustomer(s). Prior to the availability ofa flipping tracking system, the managingunderwriter may delay the date asecurity is deemed ‘‘depository eligible’’for up to three months after trading hascommenced in the security. After theavailability of a flipping trackingsystem, a new issue will be deemed tobe depository eligible uponcommencement of trading on CHX.

The proposed rule change isconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) of theAct 6 in that it is designed to promotejust and equitable principals of trade.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement on Burden on Competition

CHX believes that no burden will beplaced on competition as a result of theproposed rule change.

(C) Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement on Comments on theProposed Rule Change Received fromMembers, Participants or Others

No written comments have beensolicited or received. CHX will notifythe Commission of any writtencomments received by CHX.

III. Date of Effectiveness of theProposed Rule Change and Timing forCommission Action

Within thirty-five days of the date ofpublication of this notice in the FederalRegister or within such longer period (i)as the Commission may designate up toninety days of such date if it finds suchlonger period to be appropriate andpublishes its reasons for so finding or(ii) as to which CHX consents, theCommission will:

(a) By order approve such proposedrule change or

(b) Institute proceedings to determinewhether the proposed rule changeshould be disapproved.

CHX has requested acceleratedeffectiveness of the proposed rulechange in order that the rule canbecome effective on June 7, 1995.7

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited tosubmit written data, views, andarguments concerning the foregoing.Persons making written submissionshould file six copies thereof with theSecretary, Securities and ExchangeCommission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of thesubmissions, all subsequentamendments, all written statementswith respect to the proposed rulechange that are filed with theCommission, and all writtencommunications relating to theproposed rule change between theCommission and any person, other thanthose that may be withheld from thepublic in accordance with theprovisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will beavailable for inspection and copying inthe Commission’s Public ReferenceSection, 450 5th Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of suchfilings will also be available forinspection and copying at the principaloffice of CHX. All submissions shouldrefer to the file number SR–CHX–95–12and should be submitted by June 13,1995.

For the Commission by the Division ofMarket Regulation, pursuant to delegatedauthority.8

Margaret H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12518 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]


[Release No. 34–35722; File No. SR–CHX–95–11]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Noticeof Filing of Proposed Rule Change bythe Chicago Stock Exchange,Incorporated Relating to the AutomaticExecution of Limit Orders

May 16, 1995.Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934(‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice ishereby given that on March 31, 1995,the Chicago Stock Exchange,Incorporated (‘‘CHX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (‘‘Commission’’) theproposed rule change and on May 5,1995, filed Amendment No. 1 to theproposed rule change,1 as described inItems I, II, and III below, which Itemshave been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. TheCommission is publishing this notice tosolicit comments on the proposed rulechange from interested persons.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Terms of Substance ofthe Proposed Rule Change

The Exchange proposes to reactivateits system enhancement relating to theautomatic execution of limit orders 2

with one modification. This systemenhancement was originally approvedby the Commission as a one-year pilotprogram. See Securities Exchange ActRelease No. 32124 (Apr. 13, 1993), 58FR 21325 (approving File No. SR–MSE–92–03) (‘‘Pilot Approval Order’’). Theoriginal one-year pilot program lapsedon April 15, 1994 without the Exchangefiling for an extension or permanentapproval.3

The proposed automatic executionfeature (‘‘Auto-Ex’’) will operate bycomparing the size of the CHX-enteredlimit order against the amount of stockahead of that order in the primarymarket when the issue is trading in theprimary market at the limit price.4 The


order against the amount of stock ahead of thatorder in the ‘‘consolidated market’’ rather than inthe primary market. This change is the onemodification made by the Exchange to the originalpilot program. Telephone conversation with CraigLong, Foley & Lardner, and Jennifer Choi, SEC, onApril 17, 1995.

5 For example, assume a CHX specialist receivesan agency limit order to buy 2,000 shares of ABCat 1⁄2. The primary market quotation is 1⁄2 bid, 3⁄4offered, 5,000 shares bid and 5,000 shares offered,meaning there are 5,000 shares ahead of the CHXorder. The Auto-Ex system will automaticallyexecute the entire CHX limit order after 7,000shares print at 1⁄2 in the primary market. However,when more than 5,000 but less than 7,000 sharesprint at 1⁄2 in the primary market, the order will beflagged with a flashing prompt to alert the specialistthat the order may be due at least a partial fill. SeeCHX Article XX, Rule 37(a) governing primarymarket protection of certain limit orders.

6 For example, if the primary market quotation is1⁄4 bid, 1⁄2 offered, 4,000 shares bid and 4,000 sharesoffered, and a CHX specialist receives a limit orderto buy 2,000 shares for 1⁄8, that limit order will notbe compared against the amount of stock ahead ofthe order in the primary market until such time asthe 1⁄4 bid is exhausted and the 1⁄8 bid becomes thebest bid. At that time, the size that is disseminatedwith the 1⁄8 bid is the size against which the limitorder is compared for Auto-Ex purposes.

7 The CHX specialist will be the contra-side of allAuto-Ex trades. See Securities Exchange ActRelease No. 32124 (Apr. 13, 1993), 58 FR 21325(approving File No. SR–MSE–92–03).

8 The CHX will limit a specialist’s ability toactivate and then deactivate Auto-Ex regularly by:(1) Only permitting a specialist to deactivate Auto-Ex on a certain day each month and (2) requiringthat issues remain on Auto-Ex for a minimum offive trading days.

9 Telephone conversation between Craig Long,Foley & Lardner, and Glen Barrentine and JenniferChoi, SEC, on May 3, 1995.

10 Under CHX Rule 37(b)(7), specialists generallyare required to automatically executenonmarketable agency limit orders at the limit pricewhen there is a price penetration of the limit pricein the primary market.

11 A limit order is called ‘‘marketable’’ when theprevailing best offer (bid) is equal to or less (greater)than the limit buy (sell) order price. CHX Rule37(b)(7) provides for the automatic execution at theBBO or better of all limit orders that are marketablewhen entered into the Exchange’s automatedexecution system (‘‘MAX’’) provided that suchorders are of a certain size and are eligible forexecution under CHX rule 37(a).

comparison will be made against theprimary market quotation size. TheAuto-Ex system will keep track of allprints in the primary market and willautomatically execute the limit orderonce sufficient size prints in theprimary market.5 As additional limitorders at the same price are received bythe specialist, comparisons will be madeand entered based upon the sharesahead of those limit orders at the timeof receipt, including shares ahead on theCHX. The Auto-Ex feature will notpermit a limit order to be filled out ofsequence. Limit orders will not becompared for Auto-Ex purposes untilsuch time as the limit price equals thebid or offer, as the case may be, quotedin the primary market for the first time.6

The Auto-Ex feature will execute limitorders in accordance with existing CHXrules.7 Auto-Ex will be available for alldually traded issues; however,specialists will be permitted to chooseAuto-Ex on an issue by issue basis.8Generally, the Exchange believes thatspecialists will choose to use Auto-Exfor issues that, based on experience,have demonstrated reliable and accuratequotes in the primary market.9 Limitorders not subject to Auto-Ex will be‘‘flagged’’ with a prompt to alert the

specialist that a fill may be due. Theproposal to establish an Auto-Ex featureapplies only to non-marketable limitorders.10 It is not applicable tomarketable limit orders or to marketorders.11 The text of the proposed rulechange is as follows [new text isitalicized]:

Article XX

Rule 37(b)

(12) Automatic Execution of Limit Orders.A Specialist may voluntarily choose to

activate a feature of MAX thatautomatically executes limit orders on aspecialist’s book at the limit price afterboth of the following conditions are met:(1) the issue is trading at the limit pricein the primary market, and (2) enoughtransactions in the issue are executed inthe primary market at prices which areequal to the limit price of the order suchthat the size associated with suchtransactions are, in aggregate, equal to orgreater than the sum of (a) the sizedisplayed at the limit price in theprimary market when the limit order wasentered on the specialist’s book, plus (b)the size of the limit order. This featurecan be activated on a stock-by-stockbasis only. Once activated, it mustremain activated for a minimum of fivetrading days and can only be deactivatedon a certain day (to be determined by theExchange from time to time) each month.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Purpose of andStatutory Basis for, the Proposed RuleChange

In its filing with the Commission, theself-regulatory organization includedstatements concerning the purpose ofand basis for the proposed rule changeand discussed any comments it receivedon the proposed rule change. The textof these statements may be examined atthe places specified in Item IV below.The self-regulatory organization hasprepared summaries, set forth inSections A, B, and C below, of the mostsignificant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement of the Purpose of, andStatutory Basis for, the Proposed RuleChange

1. Purpose

The purpose of the proposed rulechange is to reactivate the CHX’s Auto-Ex feature for limit orders in order tofurther automate the CHX’s trading floorfunctions and in order to improve theCHX’s performance in filling limitorders.

By providing for automatic executionof limit orders in accordance withexisting Exchange rules, the CHX iseliminating the need for the manualoperation required of specialists indetermining when and to what extentlimit orders are due fills based onprimary market prints. The manualeffort expended by specialists in fillinglimit orders that are entitled to primarymarket protection is often time-consuming and can result in errors,particularly when there is heavy tradingvolume. The present proposal will,therefore, directly benefit customersbecause it will result in more timely fillswhile eliminating errors resulting frommanual execution

The Auto-Ex feature will not changeor amend any CHX trading rules, norwill it cause or allow limit orders to befilled under different parameters thanunder existing rules. Auto-Ex will onlyautomate the manner in which limitorders are filled. The CHX will continueto monitor specialist execution of limitorders through the Market Regulation/Surveillance Department. In addition,CHX specialists will continue to beresponsible for their books to the samedegree as they are now under themanual execution system for limitorders.

2. Statutory Basis

The proposed rule change isconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) of theAct in that it is designed to preventfraudulent and manipulative acts andpractices and to perfect the mechanismof a free and open market.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe thatthe proposed rule change will imposeany inappropriate burden oncompetition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’sStatement on Comments on theProposed Rule Change Received fromMembers, Participants, or Others

No written comments were eithersolicited or received.


1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988).2 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35613

(April 17, 1995), 60 FR 19971.3 The term ‘‘next-day funds’’ refers to payment by

means of certified checks that are for value on thefollowing day.

4 The term ‘‘same-day funds’’ refers to payment infunds that are immediately available and generallyare transferred by electronic means.

5 For a description of the SDFS system, refer toSecurities Exchange Act Release Nos. 24689 (July 9,1987), 52 FR 26613 [File No. SR–DTC–87–04] (ordergranting temporary approval to DTC’s SDFSsettlement service); 26051 (August 31, 1988), 53 FR34853 [File No. SR–DTC–88–06] (order grantingpermanent approval to DTC’s SDFS settlementservice); 33958 (April 22, 1994), 59 FR 22878 [SR–DTC–93–12] (order temporarily approving DTC’sMMI settlement program through April 1, 1994);and 35655 (April 30, 1995), 60 FR 22423 [File No.SR–DTC–95–05] (order temporarily approvingDTC’s MMI settlement program through April 30,1996).

6 The Depository Trust Company and NationalSecurities Clearing Corporation, Memorandum (July1, 1992) (‘‘1992 Memorandum’’); The DepositoryTrust Company and National Securities ClearingCorporation, Memorandum (July 26, 1993) (‘‘1993Memorandum’’); The Depository Trust Companyand National Securities Clearing Corporation,Memorandum (July 29, 1994) (‘‘1994Memorandum’’).

7 The Group of Thirty was established in 1978 asan independent, nonpartisan, nonprofitorganization composed of international financialleaders whose focus is on international economicand financial issues.

8 Group of Thirty, Clearance and SettlementSystems in the World’s Securities Markets (March1989) (‘‘Group of Thirty Report’’).

9 Only one DTC Participants Fund will be neededwhen the NDFS system and the SDFS system arecombined into a new SDFS system.

10 Supra note 6 and accompanying text.11 Currently, the SDFS system Participants Fund

consists of approximately $253 million in cash and$567 million in pledged securities.

12 Under the conversion plan, the SDFS systemParticipants Fund will consist of $400 million incash. Based on current activity levels, DTC believesthat a $400 million cash-only Participants Fundwill provide sufficient protection against presentliquidity and credit risks. Pursuant to its rules, DTCmay change the formulas used to determine aparticipant’s required deposit or require a

III. Date of Effectiveness of theProposed Rule Change and Timing forCommission Action

Within 35 days of the publication ofthis notice in the Federal Register orwithin such other period (i) as theCommission may designate up to 90days of such date if it finds such longerperiod to be appropriate and publishesits reasons for so finding or (ii) as towhich the self-regulatory organizationconsents, the Commission will:

(A) By order approve the proposedrule change, or

(B) Institute proceedings to determinewhether the proposed rule changeshould be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited tosubmit written data, views, andarguments concerning the foregoing.Persons making written submissionsshould file six copies thereof with theSecretary, Securities and ExchangeCommission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of thesubmission, all subsequentamendments, all written statementswith respect to the proposed rulechange that are filed with theCommission, and all writtencommunications relating to theproposed rule change between theCommission and any person, other thanthose that may be withheld from thepublic in accordance with theprovisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will beavailable for inspection and copying atthe Commission’s Public ReferenceSection, 450 Fifth Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of suchfiling will also be available forinspection and copying at the principaloffice of the Exchange. All submissionsshould refer to File No. SR–CHX–92–11and should be submitted by June 13,1995.

For the Commission, by the Division ofMarket Regulation, pursuant to delegatedauthority.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–12519 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]


[Release No. 34–35720; File No. SR–DTC–95–06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; TheDepository Trust Company; OrderGranting Accelerated Approval of aProposed Rule Change Modifying theSame-Day Funds Settlement System toAccommodate the Overall Conversionto Same-Day Funds Settlement forSecurities Transactions

May 16, 1995.

On March 22, 1995, The DepositoryTrust Company (‘‘DTC’’) filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule change(File No. SR–DTC–95–06) pursuant toSection 19(b)(1) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’).1 Noticeof the proposal was published in theFederal Register on April 21, 1995.2 Nocomment letters were received. For thereasons discussed below, theCommission is granting acceleratedapproval of the proposed rule change.

I. Description of the Proposal

DTC currently processes the moneysettlements related to different types ofsecurities transactions in either thenext-day funds 3 settlement (‘‘NDFS’’)system or the same-day funds 4

settlement (‘‘SDFS’’) system. The NDFSsystem is used primarily for the moneysettlement of equity, corporate debt, andmunicipal debt issue transactions. TheSDFS system began operation in 1987and is used primarily for the moneysettlement of transactions in commercialpaper and other money marketinstruments (‘‘MMIs’’).5

DTC and the National SecuritiesClearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) jointlyhave issued three memoranda whichdescribe DTC’s and NSCC’s respectiveplans for converting their payment

systems to SDFS.6 DTC’s sections of thememoranda describe its plan to combineits NDFS and SDFS systems into asingle system which will be based onthe design of the current SDFS systemwith some modifications. DTC’s andNSCC’s plans are in accord with the1989 recommendation of theinternational Group of Thirty 7 that allsecurities transactions should settle insame-day funds.8

Under the conversion plan, all issuescurrently settling in DTC’s NDFS systemwill be transferred to the SDFS systemon a single day, which DTC anticipateswill occur in the fourth quarter of 1995or the first quarter of 1996.9 In order toassure an efficient conversion, certainmodifications to the current SDFSsystem will be implemented at varioustimes during 1995 prior to the overallconversion date. The purpose of thecurrent rule change is to convert DTC’scurrent SDFS system Participants Fundto an all cash fund and to modify certainrisk management controls and otherfeatures of the SDFS system. TheParticipants Fund for the NDFS systemwill not be affected by this rule change.The rule change implements a numberof the modifications described in the1994 Memorandum.10

Currently, the SDFS systemParticipants Fund consists of cash andsecurities and has separate componentsfor money market instruments and forother SDFS system securities.11 The rulechange converts DTC’s SDFS systemParticipants Fund to an all-cash fundwith no separate component for theMMI Program.12 The rule change also


participant to make additional deposits to theParticipants Fund.

13 The new SDFS system will monitor the levelsof a participant’s net settlement debits during eachday and will record the highest net debitexperienced by that participant. This measure ofliquidity is referred to as the participant’s ‘‘intradaydebit peak.’’

14 For example, assume DTC had threeparticipants, A, B, and C, and had established$400,000,000 as the size of the SDFS systemParticipants Fund. Each participant’s minimumdeposit would be $10,000 for a total of $30,000which leaves $399,970,000 as the incremental funddeposit amount needed for the Participants Fund.In order to allocate the $399,970,000 among thethree participants, their respective average intradaynet debit peaks would be used. Assume ParticipantA’s average net debit peak is $300,000,000,Participant B’s is $500,000,000, and Participant C’sis $500,000,000. Since all incurred net debit peaksof at least $300,000,000, each created liquidityneeds of $300,000,000 and would contributeequally to provide DTC’s first $300,000,000. Eachwould be responsible for a $10,000 minimumdeposit plus a $99,990,000 incremental depositbringing the total to $100,000,000 for eachparticipant and $300,000,000 in total. ParticipantsB and C would be assigned an additional$100,000,000 increment since they wereresponsible for creating liquidity needs up to$500,000,000. Together, A, B, and C would beassigned incremental amounts totaling$499,970,000. Since the goal is to create a$400,000,000 Participants Fund, the $499,970,000must be prorated downward to 399,970,000, theamount needed in addition to their minimumcontributions to achieve $400,000,000. Eachparticipant’s increments would be reduced byapplying a factor of .799988 (i.e., 399,970,000/499,970,000). Their required deposits would thenbe as follows:

A: $10,000 + ($99,990,000 ×.799988)=$80,000,800

B: $10,000 + ($199,990,000 ×.799988)=$159,999,600

C: $10,000 + ($199,990,000 ×.799988)=$159,999,600

Total: $400,000,00015 A participant’s net debit cap will be based on

an average of the participant’s three highestintraday net debit peaks over a rolling three-monthperiod multiplied by factors ranging from 1 to 2based on a sliding scale relative to the size of theparticipant’s net debit peaks. Net debit caps will bedetermined by and will be applied to a participant’s

simulated net debit balances caused by the LargestProvisional Net Credit (‘‘LPNC’’) procedure describebelow.

16 DTC will subtract the amount of a participant’slargest provisional net credit due to transactions inany single issuer’s MMIs from the participant’scollateral monitor (‘‘simulated collateral monitor’’)and net debit or credit balance (‘‘simulatedbalance’’). If a transaction will cause the simulatedcollateral monitor to turn negative (i.e., theparticipant’s collateral would be insufficient tocover its simulated net debit after the transaction)or the resulting net debit balance to exceed theparticipant’s net debit cap, the transaction will beblocked. Blocked transactions will be recycled untilcredits from other transactions in MMIs of issuersother than those of the largest provisional net creditcause the simulated collateral monitor to bepositive or the resulting net debit to be within thenet debit cap limits.

17 A reclamation is the return of a delivery orderor a payment order by a participant.

18 RAD allows participants to review and eitherapprove or cancel incoming deliveries before theyare processed in DTC’s system.

19 DTC’s Account Transfer Processor systemprovides for the recycling or pending oftransactions that cannot be completed due to aparticipant’s insufficient positions or violations ofrisk management controls (i.e., Net Debit Cap andCollateral Monitor).

20 Under Options 1 and 2, CNS deliveries arealways given the highest priority on the recyclequeue.

21 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F) (1988).

decreases the minimum deposit to theSDFS system Participants Fund from$200,000 to $10,000 and changes themethod of calculating a participant’srequired deposit.

The new SDFS Participants Fundformula bases each participant’srequired deposit on the amount ofliquidity that the participant uses in thesystem. A participant’s liquidity usewill be determined using a sixty dayrolling average of the participant’sintraday net debit peaks.13 The rulechange requires a participant to depositin the SDFS Participants Fund anamount equal to that participant’sproportional liquidity needs.14

In addition, the rule change modifiescertain risk management controls in theSDFS system. The method used tocalculate the net debit cap for eachparticipant is being changed 15 and the

maximum net debit cap for eachparticipant is being increased to$900,000,000 from approximately$580,000,000 today. The rule changealso adds the Largest Provisional NetCredit (‘‘LPNC’’) calculation controlwhich is designed to protect DTCagainst the combined failure of an issuerof MMIs and a participant. The LPNCcontrol creates a provisional net balanceby withholding a participant’s largestnet settlement credit due to transactionsin any single issuer’s MMIs. DTC’s riskmanagement controls will be applied tothe provisional net balance that iscreated by the LPNC procedure, andtransactions that cause the provisionalnet balance to violate those riskmanagement controls will not becompleted.16

The rule change also modifies certainaspects of DTC’s Participant OperatingProcedures on reclamations 17 for boththe NDFS and the SDFS system, theReceiver Authorized Delivery (‘‘RAD’’)service 18 and the recycle algorithm fordeliver orders.19 The modifiedprocedures provide for the validation ofall reclaims by DTC’s system. When aparticipant submits a reclaim forprocessing in DTC’s NDFS or SDFSsystems, DTC’s system will verify that acorresponding original delivery that wascompleted on the same day exists forevery reclaim presented for processing.

The modified procedures alsoestablish a minimum threshold of$15,000,000 for bilateral RAD limits.Participants currently are permitted toset individual dollar limits against otherpossible contra-participants so thatdeliveries with a settlement value

exceeding the specified limit will not beprocessed until the receiver-participanthas reviewed and approved thedelivery. To limit the number oftransactions subject to RAD,participants will not be able to set RADlimits at an amount less than $15million.

The new recycle algorithm for deliverorders will offer SDFS system users asecond recycle options for deliverorders. Transactions that are recycledbecause of insufficient positions orviolations of risk management controlsare currently prioritized based ontransaction type and then on transactionsize (‘‘Option 1’’). The new option(‘‘Option 2’’) provides participants withthe ability to choose whether pendingtransactions caused by an insufficientposition will be recycled in the order inwhich they were entered (i.e., first in,first out) or in the Option 1prioritization schedule.20

Most of the modifications to beimplemented by the rule change will beeffective on dates to be specified by DTCin the second quarter of 1995. Thecontrol involving the LPNC calculationand the $15,000,000 threshold forbilateral RAD limits will be madeeffective on dates to be specified by DTCin the third quarter of 1995.

II. DiscussionSection 17A(b)(3)(F) requires that the

rules of a clearing agency be designed topromote the prompt and accurateclearance and settlement of securitiestransactions and to assure thesafeguarding of securities and funds inthe custody or control of the clearingagency or for which it is responsible.21

As discussed below, the Commissionbelieves that DTC’s proposed rulechange is consistent with DTC’sobligations under the Act.

The Commission believes that DTC’sSDFS system rules and proceduresprovides certain protections for DTCand its participants from financial lossassociated with member defaults andinsolvencies. The rule change containsa number of protections designed todecrease the chance of member defaultand to limit loss in the event of adefault. Those protections include anall-cash SDFS Participants Fund, a newParticipants Fund formula based onliquidity use, a new net debit capformula, a new fixed net debit cap of$900 million, and the application of theLPNC control.

The new SDFS Participants Fund willbe comprised of approximately $400


22 The current SDFS Participants Fund consists ofapproximately $253 million in cash contributions,$50 million in internal sources, $500 million inexternal lines of credit and $500 million inadditional external lines of credit exclusivelydedicated to the MMI program.

23 ‘‘Federal Reserve Policy Statement on PrivateDelivery-Against-Payment Systems,’’ Board ofGovernors of the Federal Reserve System (June 15,1989).

24 A participant’s net debit cap currently is theleast of the following: (1) An amount which is amultiple of the participant’s mandatory andvoluntary deposits in the fund; (2) an amount equalto 75% of DTC’s lines of credit; (3) an amount, ifany, determined by the participant’s settling bank;or (4) an amount, if any, determined by DTC.

25 Because a participant’s current adjustable netdebit cap is based on the participant’s mandatoryfund deposit, it will only change on a monthly basisas the required deposit changes. However, aparticipant may choose to increase its adjustable netdebit cap at any time by making voluntary deposits.

26 Supra note 15. 27 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994).

million in cash deposit and $700million in committed line(s) of credit.22

In the event that a participant fails tosettle for any reason, the all-cash fundin most cases should provide enoughimmediate liquidity to completesettlement without causing DTC to useits lines of credit. The size of the fund,$400 million in cash, was designed toprovide sufficient liquidity to cover allbut a few of DTC’s largest participants’individual net settlement debits. The$700 million in committed lines ofcredit should provide additionalliquidity sufficient to cover the largeend-of-day net debits expected to beproduced by these few largestparticipants with the application of anew net debit cap of $900 million.

Although the minimum deposit to theParticipants Fund has been decreasedfrom $200,000 to $10,000, participantswill be required to deposit additionalamounts based on the size of theirintraday net debits weighted againstother participants’ net debits. As aresult, the cash deposits in the SDFSsystem fund will be increased from $210to $400 million. The allocation underthe new Participants Fund formula willapportion fund deposits amongparticipants in proportion to theliquidity requirements they generate inthe system. The new Participants Fundformula also will more accurately reflecteach participant’s liquidityrequirements because it is based on aparticipant’s net debit peaks for theprior sixty days. The current fundformula is based on a participant’saverage gross debits and credits only forthe prior month. While the use of grossdebits and credits reflects a participant’sactivity levels, the use of net debit peaksreflects a participants actual liquidityneeds.

The changes to DTC’s riskmanagement controls also are intendedto protect DTC and its participantsagainst the inability of one or moreparticipants to fulfill its or theirsettlement obligations. DTC’s riskmanagement controls are based on theBoard of Governors of the FederalReserve System’s guidelines for book-entry securities systems that settle overFedwire.23 The new net debit capformula establishes a single net debitcap as opposed to the several adjustable

and fixed net debit caps currently usedin the SDFS system.24 The new net debitcap will better reflect the participantsmost recent liquidity needs and not justits liquidity needs for the prior month25

because it will be calculated daily usinga 90-day rolling average.26 By requiringparticipants to have sufficient collateralto support their net debits and byensuring that their net debits do notexceed their net debit caps, the newLPNC procedure should help to ensurethat the occurrence of a combined MMIissuer’s default and a participant’sfailure to settle does not expose DTC toloss and liquidity risks. The applicationof the LPNC procedure to both the netdebit cap and the collateralizationprocedures should result in a failingparticipant’s net debit remainingcollateralized and within its net debitcap if the MMI issuer in which it has thelargest net credit also defaulted.

The rule change implements certainmodifications to DTC’s current SDFSsystem to provide for an efficientconversion to SDFS environment for allsecurities transactions. The Commissionbelieves that the overall conversion to aSDFS system will help reduce systemicrisk by eliminating overnight credit risk.The SDFS system also will reduce riskby achieving closer conformity with thepayment methods used in thederivatives markets, governmentsecurities markets and other markets.

For the reasons described above, theCommission believes that DTC’sproposed rule change fulfills therequirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) ofthe Act because the proposal assures thesafeguarding of securities and funds inthe custody and control of DTC.Furthermore, the proposed rule changefacilitates the overall conversion ofDTC’s payment system to an SDFSsystem which should facilitate theprompt and accurate clearance andsettlement of securities transactions.

DTC has requested that theCommission find good cause forapproving the proposed rule changeprior to the thirtieth day after the dateof publication of notice of the filing. TheCommission finds good cause for soapproving the proposed rule change

because the modifications implementedby the rule change are part of theplanned conversion of DTC’s entiremoney settlement system to an SDFSsystem. The Commission believes thatparticipants should have theopportunity to become familiar with theSDFS system capability and the newrisk management controls prior to thecomplete conversion to an SDFS systemfor securities transactions.

III. Conclusion

On the basis of the foregoing, theCommission finds that the proposal isconsistent with the requirements of theAct, particularly with Section17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act and the rules andregulations thereunder.

It is therefore ordered, pursuant toSection 19(b)(2) of the Act, that theproposed rule change (File No. SR–DTC–95–06) be, and hereby is,approved.

For the Commission by the Division ofMarket Regulation, pursuant to delegatedauthority.27

Margaret H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12520 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Release No. IC–21075; 812–9530]

Northern Life Insurance Company, etal.; Notice of Application

May 16, 1995.AGENCY: Securities and ExchangeCommission (‘‘SEC’’).ACTION: Notice of application for anOrder under the Investment CompanyAct of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’).

APPLICANTS: Northern Life InsuranceCompany (‘‘Northern Life’’), SeparateAccount One (the ‘‘Separate Account’’),and Washington Square Securities, Inc.(the ‘‘Distributor’’).RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Order requestedunder section 6(c) of the Act granting anexemption from sections 26(a)(2)(C) and27(c)(2) of the Act.SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicantsrequest an order permitting NorthernLife to deduct a mortality and expenserisk charge from the assets of theSeparate Account in connection withthe offering of certain flexible premiumindividual deferred variable annuitycontracts.FILING DATE: The application was filedon March 20, 1995.HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: Anorder granting the application will be


issued unless the SEC orders a hearing.Interested persons may request ahearing by writing to the SEC’sSecretary and serving applicants with acopy of the request, personally or bymail. Hearing requests should bereceived by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. onJune 13, 1995, and should beaccompanied by proof of service onapplicants in the form of an affidavit or,for lawyers, a certificate of service.Hearing requests should state the natureof the writer’s interest, the reason for therequest, and the issues contested.Persons may request notification of ahearing by writing to the SEC’sSecretary.ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 FifthStreet, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549.Applicants, c/o James E. Nelson, Esq.,ReliaStar Financial Corp., 20Washington Avenue South,Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Sarah A. Wagman, Staff Attorney, at(202) 942–0654, or Robert A. Robertson,Branch Chief, at (202) 942–0564(Division of Investment Management,Office of Investment CompanyRegulation).SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Followingis a summary of the application. Thecomplete application may be obtainedfor a fee from the SEC’s PublicReference Branch.

Applicants’ Representations

1. Northern Life, a stock life insurancecompany, is incorporated underWashington law. Northern Life is anindirect, wholly-owned subsidiary ofReliaStar Financial Corp.

2. The Separate Account wasestablished by Northern Life as afunding medium for certain flexiblepremium individual deferred variableannuity contracts (the ‘‘Contracts’’). TheSeparate Account is registered with theSEC as a unit investment trust under theAct. Units of interest in the SeparateAccount under the Contracts will beregistered under the Securities Act of1933.

3. The Separate Account currently isdivided into subaccounts which investin the series (‘‘Series’’) of VariableInsurance Products Fund, VariableInsurance Products Fund II, orNorthstar/NWNL (each, a ‘‘Fund’’). EachFund is a diversified, open-endmanagement investment company. EachSeries has separate investmentobjectives and policies.

4. The Distributor is the distributorand principal underwriter of theContracts. The Distributor is registeredunder the Securities Exchange Act of1934 as a broker-dealer, and is a

member of the National Association ofSecurities Dealers, Inc.

5. The Contracts consist of two seriesof flexible premium individual deferredvariable annuity contracts. The firstseries of Contracts consists of anindividual deferred tax-shelteredannuity contract, an individual deferredretirement annuity contract, and anindividual deferred annuity contract(the ‘‘Transfer Series Contracts’’). Thesecond series of Contracts consists of aflexible premium individual deferredtax-sheltered annuity contract and aflexible premium individual deferredretirement annuity contract (the ‘‘FlexSeries Contracts’’).

6. The minimum purchase paymentfor a Transfer Series Contract is $15,000,and subsequent payments must be atleast $5,000. The minimum purchasepayment, and minimum subsequentpayment, for a Flex Series Contract is$50. Purchase payments may beallocated to one or more of thesubaccounts of the Separate Accountwhich have been established to supportthe Contracts, or to Fixed Account A orFixed Account B, which are part of thegeneral account of Northern Life.

7. Several annuity payout options, onboth a fixed and variable basis, areavailable under the Contracts. NorthernLife also provides a guaranteed deathbenefit. If the Contract owner (or, in thecase of certain Transfer Series Contracts,the annuitant) dies prior to age 80, thedeath benefit is equal to the greater of(i) all purchase payments less anywithdrawals, amounts used to purchaseannuity payouts, any outstanding loanbalance, and the amount of previouslydeducted annual Contract charges, (ii)the Contract value less any outstandingloan balance, or (iii) the Contract valueon the most recent Contract anniversarythat is a multiple of six years, measuredfrom the Contract issue date, plus anypurchase payments since thatanniversary and minus anywithdrawals, amounts used to purchaseannuity payouts, and any previouslydeducted annual Contract charges sincethat anniversary, and less anyoutstanding loan balance. If the Contractowner (or, in the case of certain TransferSeries Contracts, the annuitant) dies onor after age 80, the death benefit is theContract value less the outstanding loanbalance. If the Contract owner of aTransfer Series individual deferredannuity Contract dies at any age, thedeath benefit will be equal to theContract value less any applicablecontingent deferred sales charge, anyoutstanding loan balance and the $30annual Contract charge.

8. Among the various charges and feesNorthern Life will deduct under the

Contracts is an annual Contract chargeof $30 designed to compensate NorthernLife for the administrative servicesprovided under the Contracts. It will bededucted pro rata from the fixedaccounts and each Separate Accountsubaccount, and is guaranteed not toincrease.

9. Northern Life also will deduct fromthe assets of the Separate Account adaily asset administration charge, equalto an annual rate of .15%. This chargeis designed to reimburse Northern Lifefor administrative services it provideswith respect to the Contracts and theSeparate Account, and is guaranteed notto increase.

10. Northern Life does not currentlyintend to impose a charge for anytransfers among the Separate Accountsubaccounts and the fixed accounts, butreserves the right to impose a charge ofup to $25 for each transfer. NorthernLife also does not currently intend toimpose a processing fee for partialwithdrawals of Contract value, butreserves the right to assess a fee not toexceed the lesser of 2% of the partialwithdrawal account, of $25.

11. These administrative charges willbe deducted in reliance on rule 26a–1under the Act, and each representsreimbursement only for administrationcosts expected to be incurred over thelife of the Contracts. Northern Life doesnot anticipate any profit from any ofthese charges. Administrative chargesmay be reduced or waived under certaincircumstances.

12. Northern Life may assess acontingent deferred sales charge(‘‘CDSC’’) in the event of any partial orfull withdrawal of Contract value underthe Transfer Series Contracts and theFlex Series Contracts. The CDSC for theTransfer Series Contracts is calculatedas a percentage of each purchasepayment. The CDSC will apply duringthe year the Contract takes effect and forthe five Contract years immediatelythereafter, according to the followingschedule:

Contract year of with-drawal minus contract year

of purchase payment

Withdrawalcharge as a per-centage of eachpurchase pay-ment (percent)

0 ........................................ 61 ........................................ 62 ........................................ 53 ........................................ 54 ........................................ 45 ........................................ 26 and later ........................ 0

For purposes of imposing the CDSC,purchase payments are considered to bewithdrawn on a first-in, first-out basis,


and purchase payments are consideredto be withdrawn before earningsthereon. No CDSC is imposed uponeither annuitization or payment of thedeath benefit, except that if the Contractowner of a Transfer Series individualdeferred annuity Contracts dies, a CDSCis deducted upon payment of the deathbenefit.

13. The CDSC for the Flex SeriesContracts is calculated as a percentageof Contract value withdrawn. The CDSCmay be assessed against any full orpartial withdrawal of Contract valueoccurring before the eleventh Contractyear, in accordance with the followingschedule:

Contract year Withdrawalcharge

1 ........................................ 82 ........................................ 83 ........................................ 84 ........................................ 75 ........................................ 66 ........................................ 57 ........................................ 48 ........................................ 39 ........................................ 210 ...................................... 111+ .................................... 0

No CDSC is imposed upon eitherannuitization or payment of the deathbenefit.

14. Under both the Transfer SeriesContracts and the Flex Series Contracts,the Contract owner may withdraw aportion of the Contract value during any12-month period after the issue date ofthe Contract without Northern Lifededucting a CDSC. The amount onwhich no CDSC will be imposed is thegreater of: (i) 10% of the Contract valueless any outstanding loan balance, or (ii)the purchase payments remainingwhich are no longer subject to a CDSC(Transfer Series Contracts) or theContract value no longer subject to aCDSC (Flex Series Contracts). Thisprivilege may only be exercised alimited number of times during any 12-month period. In addition, the CDSCmay be reduced or waived under certaincircumstances.

15. Northern Life does not anticipatethat CDSC revenues from the TransferSeries Contracts and the Flex SeriesContracts will generate sufficient fundsto pay the cost of distributing theContracts. If CDSC revenues areinsufficient to cover distributionexpenses, the deficiency will be metwith amounts from Northern Life’sgeneral account, which may includeamounts derived from the mortality andexpense risk charge.

16. Northern Life may deduct anyapplicable premium taxes levied by any

unit of government. As permitted orrequired by applicable state law,Northern Life may deduct premiumtaxes from purchase payments uponreceipt, or deduct premium taxes fromContract value at a later date.

17. Northern Life proposes to assess acharge to compensate it for bearingcertain mortality and expense risks inconnection with both Contracts. Thischarge is equal to an effective annualrate of 1.25% of the value of the assetsin the Separate Account. Of thatamount, .85% is attributable tomortality risks, and .40% is attributed toexpense risks. The rate of the mortalityand expense risk charge is guaranteednot to increase.

18. The mortality risk arises fromNorthern Life’s contractual obligation tomake annuity payments regardless ofhow long all annuitants, or anyindividual annuitant, may live. Thisobligation assures that neither anannuitant’s own longevity, nor animprovement in general liveexpectancy, will adversely affect themonthly annuity payments that anannuitant will receive under a Contract.Northern Life also incurs a mortalityrisk in connection with the deathbenefit guarantee. In addition, NorthernLife assumes the expense risk that itsactual administrative costs will exceedthe amount recovered through theadministrative charges.

19. If the mortality and expense riskcharge is insufficient to cover NorthernLife’s actual costs and assumed risks,the loss will fall on Northern Life. If thecharge is more than sufficient to covercosts, any excess will be profit toNorthern Life. Northern Life currentlyanticipates a profit from this charge.

Applicant’s Legal Analysis1. Applicants request an exemption

under section 6(c) of the Act fromsections 26(a)(2)(C) and 27(c)(2) of theAct to permit the deduction of amortality and expense risk charge fromthe assets of the Separate Account underthe Contracts.

2. Sections 26(a)(2)(C) and 27(c)(2) ofthe Act, in relevant part, prohibit aprinciple underwriter for, or depositorof, a registered unit investment trustfrom selling periodic payment plancertificates unless the proceeds of allpayments, other than sales loads, onsuch certificates are deposited with aqualified trustee or custodian, withinthe meaning of section 26(a)(1), and areheld under arrangements that prohibitany payment to the depositor orprincipal underwriter except areasonable fee, as the SEC mayprescribe, for performing bookkeepingand other administrative duties

normally performed by the trustee orcustodian. Northern Life’s deduction ofa mortality and expense risk chargefrom the assets of the Separate Accountmay be deemed to be a paymentprohibited by sections 26(a)(2)(C) and27(c)(2).

3. Section 6(c) of the Act authorizesthe SEC, by order upon application, togrant an exemption from any provisionof the Act, or any rule or regulationpromulgated thereunder, if and to theextent that such exemption is necessaryor appropriate in the public interest andconsistent with the protection ofinvestors and the purposes fairlyintended by the policy and provisions ofthe Act.

4. Applicants believe that NorthernLife is entitled to reasonablecompensation for its assumption ofmortality and expense risks. Applicantsrepresent that the proposed mortalityand expense risk charge of 1.25% isconsistent with the protection ofinvestors because it is a reasonable andproper insurance charge. The charge isa reasonable one to compensateNorthern Life for the risks that: (i)Annuitants under the Contracts will livelonger individually or as a group thanhas been anticipated in setting theannuity rates guaranteed in theContracts; (ii) the Contract value will beless than the death benefit; and (iii)administrative expenses will be greaterthan amounts derived from theadministrative charges.

5. Northern Life represents that the1.25% mortality and expense riskcharge under the Contracts is within therange of industry practice forcomparable annuity products. Thisrepresentation is based upon NorthernLife’s analysis of publicly availableinformation about similar industryproducts, taking into consideration suchfactors as current charge levels, theexistence of charge level guarantees, andguaranteed annuity rates. Northern Lifewill maintain at its administrativeoffices, and make available to the SECupon request, a memorandum settingforth in detail the products analyzed inthe course of, and the methodology andresults of, its comparative survey.

6. Applicants acknowledge that if aprofit is realized from the mortality andexpense risk charge, all or a portion ofsuch profit may be viewed as beingoffset by distribution expenses notreimbursed by CDSC revenues. NorthernLife has concluded that there is areasonable likelihood that the proposeddistribution financing arrangements forthe Contracts will benefit the SeparateAccount and the Contract owners. Thebasis for that conclusion will be setforth in a memorandum that will be


maintained by Northern Life at itsadministrative offices and will beavailable to the SEC.

7. Northern Life states that theSeparate Account will invest only inthose management investmentcompanies that undertake, in the eventsuch company should adopt a planunder rule 12b–1 under the Act tofinance distribution expenses, to have aboard of directors (or trustees), amajority of whom are not ‘‘interestedpersons’’ of such investment company,formulate and approve any such planpursuant to rule 12b–1.

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above,applicants believe that the requestedexemption is necessary or appropriatein the public interest and consistentwith the protection of investors and thepurposes fairly intended by the policyand provisions of the Act.

For the SEC, by the Division of InvestmentManagement, pursuant to delegatedauthority.Margaret H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12598 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Rel. No. IC–21079; 812–9496]

Quest for Value Distributors, et al.;Notice of Application

May 17, 1995.

AGENCY: Securities and ExchangeCommission (‘‘SEC’’).ACTION: Notice of application forexemption under the InvestmentCompany Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’).

APPLICANTS: Quest for Value’s UnitInvestment Laddered Trust Series(‘‘Quilts’’) and Quest for ValueDistributors (‘‘Quest Distributors’’ or the‘‘Sponsor’’).RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Order requestedunder sections 11(a) and 11(c).SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicantsrequest an order to permit certain offersof exchange between unit investmenttrusts.FILING DATES: The application was filedon February 23, 1995, and amended onApril 12, 1995 and May 5, 1995.HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: Anorder granting the application will beissued unless the SEC orders a hearing.Interested persons may request ahearing by writing to the SEC’sSecretary and serving applicants with acopy of the request, personally or bymail. Hearing requests should bereceived by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on

June 12, 1995, and should beaccompanied by proof of service onapplicants, in the form of an affidavit or,for lawyers, a certificate of service.Hearing requests should state the natureof the writer’s interest, the reason for therequest, and the issues contested.Persons who wish to be notified of ahearing may request notification bywriting to the SEC’s Secretary.ADDRESSES: Secretary: SEC, 450 5thStreet NW, Washington, DC 20549.Applicants: Two World Trade Center,225 Liberty Street, New York, New York10080–6116.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Elaine M. Boggs, Staff Attorney (202)942–0572, or C. David Messman, BranchChief, at (202) 942–0564 (Division ofInvestment Management, Office ofInvestment Company Regulation).SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Thefollowing is a summary of theapplication. The complete application isavailable for a fee at the SEC’s PublicReference Branch.

Applicants’ Representations

1. Quilts is a series of unit investmenttrusts registered under the Act and issponsored by Quest Distributors. Quiltsconsists of Quilts Monthly Income—U.S. Treasury Series 1, Quilts AssetBuilder—U.S. Series 3, Quilts Income—Corporate Series 1, and QuiltsMunicipal Insured Series 1. Applicantsalso request relief for future series ofQuilts and subsequently issued unitinvestment trusts sponsored by theSponsor or a sponsor controlled by orunder common control with theSponsor and registered (or to beregistered) under the Securities Act of1933 and the Act (collectively withQuilts, the ‘‘Trusts’’).

2. The sales charge for initialinvestment in the Trusts currentlyranges between .85% to 4.5% of thepublic offering price, subject todiscounts for certain volumetransactions. Quest Distributors intendsto maintain a secondary market for theunits of each series, although it is notobligated to do so. The sales chargeupon units sold in the secondary marketranges from .85% to 4.5% plus netaccrued interest.

3. Applicants propose to offer anexchange privilege to unitholders of theTrusts at a reduced sales charge (the‘‘Exchange Privilege’’). Unitholderswould be able to exchange any of theirunits for units in one or more availableseries of the Trusts (the ‘‘ExchangeTrust’’). Applicants also propose to offera rollover privilege to unitholders of theTrusts at a reduced sales charge (the‘‘Rollover Privilege’’). Unitholders

would be able to ‘‘roll over’’ their unitsin a series which is terminating for unitsof one or more new series of the Trusts(the ‘‘Rollover Trust’’).

4. To exercise the Exchange orRollover Privilege, a unitholder mustnotify the Sponsor. Exercise of theExchange or Rollover Privilege is subjectto the following conditions: (a) TheSponsor must be maintaining asecondary market in units of the Trustheld by the unitholder and units of theTrust to be acquired in the exchange, (b)at the time of the exchange, there mustbe units of the Exchange or RolloverTrust to be acquired available for sale,and (c) exchanges will be in whole unitsonly.

5. Unitholders who wish to exchangeunits under the Exchange or RolloverPrivileges within the first five months ofpurchase will not be eligible for thereduced sales charge. Such unitholderswill be charged a sales load equal to thegreater of (a) the reduced sales load or(b) an amount which, when added to thesales charge paid by the unitholderupon his or her original purchase ofunits of the Trusts, would equal thesales charge applicable to the directpurchase of the newly acquired units,determined as of the date of exchange.

Applicants’ Legal Analysis

1. Section 11(a) requires SEC approvalof an offer to exchange securitiesbetween open-end investmentcompanies if the exchange occurs onany basis other than the relative netasset values of the securities to beexchanged. Section 11(c) makes section11(a) applicable to any type of exchangeoffer of securities of registered unitinvestment trusts for the securities ofany other investment company,irrespective of the basis of exchange.

2. Applicants represent thatunitholders will not be induced orencouraged to participate in theexchange privilege through an activeadvertising or sales campaign. QuestDistributors recognizes its responsibilityto its customers against generatingexcessive commissions throughchurning and asserts that the salescharge collected will not be a significanteconomic incentive to salesmen topromote inappropriately the exchangeprivilege. Applicants further believethat the Exchange and RolloverPrivileges are appropriate in the publicinterest and consistent with theprotection of investors and the purposesfairly intended by the policy andprovisions of the Act.


Applicant’s ConditionsIf the requested order is granted,

applicants agree to the followingconditions:

1. The prospectus for each series andany sales literature or advertising thatmentions the existence of the ExchangePrivilege or the Rollover Privilege willdisclose that the Exchange and theRollover Privilege are subject totermination and that their terms aresubject to change.

2. Whenever the Exchange Privilegeor the Rollover Privilege is to beterminated or its terms are to beamended materially, any holder of asecurity subject to that privilege will begiven prominent notice of theimpending termination or amendmentat least 60 days prior to the date oftermination or the effective date of theamendment, provided that:

a. No such notice need be given if theonly material effect of an amendment isto reduce or eliminate the sales chargepayable at the time of an exchange, toadd one or more new series eligible forthe Exchange Privilege or the RolloverPrivilege, or to delete a series which hasterminated; and

b. No notice need be given if, underextraordinary circumstances, either

i. There is a suspension of theredemption of units of an ExchangeTrust or a Rollover Trust under section22(e) of the Act and the rules andregulations thereunder, or

ii. An Exchange Trust or a RolloverTrust temporarily delays or ceases thesale of its units because it is unable toinvest amounts effectively inaccordance with applicable investmentobjectives, policies and restrictions.

3. An investor who purchases unitsunder the Exchange or RolloverPrivilege will pay a lower aggregatesales charge than that which would bepaid for the units by a new investor.

For the Commission, by the Division ofInvestment Management, pursuant todelegated authority.Margatet H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12597 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

[Rel. No. IC–21068; File No. 812–9438]

Smith Barney/Travelers Series Fund, etal.

May 15, 1995.AGENCY: Securities and ExchangeCommission (the ‘‘Commission’’ or the‘‘SEC’’).ACTION: Notice of Application for anOrder under the Investment CompanyAct of 1940 (the ‘‘1940 Act’’).

APPLICANTS: Smith Barney/TravelersSeries Fund(‘‘SB/T Fund’’), SmithBarney Series Fund (‘‘Series Fund’’),and certain life insurance companiesand their separate accounts investingnow or in the future in the SB/T Fundor the Series Fund.RELEVANT 1940 ACT SECTIONS: Orderrequested under Section 6(c) of the 1940Act for exemptions from the provisionsof Section 9(a), 13(a), 15(a) and 15(b) ofthe 1940 Act and Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and6e–3(T)(b)(15) thereunder.SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicantsseek an order to the extent necessary topermit shares of the SB/T Fund, theSeries Fund and all future open-endinvestment companies for which SmithBarney Mutual Fund Management, Inc.,or any affiliate thereof, serves asinvestment adviser, manager, principalunderwriter, or sponsor and whoseshares are sold to separate accounts ofinsurance companies and qualifiedperson and retirement plans the ‘‘FutureFunds’’) (the SB/T Fund, the SeriesFund and the Future Funds collectivelyare referred to as the ‘‘Funds’’) to besold to and held by: (a) Variable annuityand variable life insurance separateaccounts of both affiliated andunaffiliated life insurance companies(‘‘Participating Insurance Companies’’);and (b) qualified pension and retirementplans outside of the separate accountcontext (‘‘Qualified Plans’’).FILING DATES: The application was filedon January 18, 1995, and amended onMay 5, 1995.HEARING AND NOTIFICATION OF HEARING:An order granting the application willbe issued unless the Commission ordersa hearing. Interested persons mayrequest a hearing by writing to the SEC’sSecretary and serving Applicants with acopy of the request, personally or bymail. Hearing requests should bereceived by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. onJune 9, 1995, and should beaccompanied by proof of service onApplicants in the form of an affidavit or,for lawyers, a certificate of service.Hearing requests should state the natureof the requester’s interest, the reason forthe request and the issues contested.Persons may request notification of ahearing by writing to the Secretary ofthe SEC.ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 FifthStreet, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549.Applicants: Christina T. Sydor, Esquire,Smith Barney, Inc., 388 GreenwichStreet, Twenty-Second Floor, New York,New York 10013.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mark C. Amorosi, Attorney, or WendyFinck Friedlander, Deputy Chief, at

(202) 942–0670, Office of InsuranceProducts, Division of InvestmentManagement.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Followingis a summary of the application. Thecomplete application is available for afee from the SEC’s Public ReferenceBranch.

Applicants’ Representations1. The SB/T Fund, a Maryland

corporation incorporated on February22, 1994, is registered under the 1940Act as an open-end, diversifiedmanagement investment company. TheSB/T Fund consists of eleven portfolios:The Smith Barney Income and GrowthPortfolio, the Alliance Growth Portfolio,the American Capital EnterprisePortfolio, the Smith BarneyInternational Equity Portfolio, the SmithBarney Pacific Basin Portfolio, the TBCManaged Income Portfolio, the PutnamDiversified Income Portfolio, the G.T.Global Strategic Income Portfolio, theSmith Barney High Income Portfolio,the MFS Total Return Portfolio, and theSmith Barney Money Market Portfolio.Additional portfolios may be added inthe future.

2. The Series Fund, a Massachusettsbusiness trust organized on May 13,1991, is registered under the 1940 Actas an open-end, diversified managementinvestment company. The Series Fundconsists of ten separate portfolios(together with the portfolios of theSB/T Fund and Future Funds, the‘‘Portfolios’’): the Money MarketPortfolio, the Intermediate High GradePortfolio, the Diversified StrategicIncome Portfolio, the Equity IncomePortfolio, the Equity Index Portfolio, theGrowth & Global Income Portfolio, theAppreciation Portfolio, the Total ReturnPortfolio, the Emerging GrowthPortfolio, and the International EquityPortfolio. Additional portfolios may beadded in the future.

3. Smith Barney Mutual FundsManagement, Inc. (‘‘SBMFM’’) is theinvestment adviser for the SB/T Fund,and is a wholly-owned subsidiary ofSmith Barney Holdings, Incorporated.Smith Barney Holdings, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Travelers Group,which is a financial services holdingcompany engaged, through itssubsidiaries, principally in fourbusiness segments: investment services,consumer finance services, lifeinsurance services, and property andcasualty insurance services.

4. SBMFM also is the investmentadviser for all the Series Fund Portfoliosexcept the Equity Index Portfolio andthe Emerging Growth Fund Portfolio.PanAgora Asset Management, Inc. is theinvestment adviser for the Equity Index


Portfolio, and is 50% owned by NipponLife Insurance Company and 50%owned by Lehman Brothers, Inc., whichis a wholly-owned subsidiary ofLehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.American Capital Asset Management,Inc., is the investment adviser for theEmerging Growth Fund Portfolio and isa wholly-owned subsidiary of AmericanCapital Management & Research, Inc.,which is an indirect wholly-ownedsubsidiary of VKM Holdings. SBMFM,PanAgora Asset Management, Inc. andAmerican Capital Asset Management,Inc. (collectively, the ‘‘Advisers’’) areregistered as investment advisers underthe Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

5. Shares of the SB/T Fund currentlyare sold to a separate account (the‘‘Travelers Separate Account’’) of TheTravelers Insurance Company (‘‘TheTravelers’’) which funds benefits undervariable contracts issued through thatseparate account. Shares of the SeriesFund currently are sold to the TravelersSeparate Account and to separateaccounts of the IDS Life InsuranceCompany and the IDS Life InsuranceCompany of New York which fundbenefits under variable contracts issuedby those companies.

6. Applicants state that, upon thegranting of the order requested in thisapplication, the Funds intend to offershares of their existing Portfolios andfuture investment portfolios to separateaccounts of Participating InsuranceCompanies (the ‘‘Separate Accounts’’) toserve as the investment vehicle forvarious types of insurance products,which may include variable annuitycontracts, single premium variable lifeinsurance contracts, scheduledpremium variable life insurancecontracts and flexible premium variablelife insurance contracts.

Applicant’s Legal Analysis1. In connection with the funding of

scheduled premium variable lifeinsurance contracts issued through aseparate account registered under the1940 Act as a unit investment trust,Rule 6e–2(b)(15) provides partialexemptions from Section 9(a), 13(a),15(a) and 15(b) of the 1940 Act. Therelief provides by Rule 6e–2 is alsoavailable to a separate account’sinvestment adviser, principalunderwriter, and sponsor or depositor.The exemptions granted by Rule 6e–2(b)(15) are available only where themanagement investment companyunderlying the unit investment trust(‘‘underlying fund’’) offers its shares‘‘exclusively to variable life insuranceseparate accounts of the life insurer, orof any affiliated life insurancecompany.’’ Therefore, the relief granted

by Rule 6e–2(b)(15) is not available withrespect to a scheduled premium variablelife insurance separate account thatowns shares of an underlying fund thatalso offers its shares to a variableannuity or a flexible premium variablelife insurance separate account of thesame company or of any other lifeinsurance company. The use of acommon management investmentcompany as the underlying investmentmedium for both variable annuity andvariable life insurance separate accountsof the same life insurance company orof any affiliate life insurance companyis referred to herein as ‘‘mixedfunding.’’

2. In addition, the relief granted byRule 6e–2(b)(15) is not available withrespect to a scheduled premium variablelife insurance separate account thatowns shares of an underlying fund thatalso offers its shares to separateaccounts funding variable contracts ofone or more unaffiliated life insurancecompanies. The use of a commonmanagement investment company as theunderlying investment medium forvariable life insurance separate accountsof one insurance company and separateaccounts funding variable contracts ofone or more unaffiliated life insurancecompanies is referred to herein as‘‘shared funding.’’

3. Applicants state that the reliefgranted by Rule 6e–2(b)(15) is notaffected by the purchase of shares of aFund by the Qualified Plans. Applicantsnote, however, that because the reliefunder Rule 6e–2(b)(15) is available onlywhere shares are offered exclusively toseparate accounts, additional exemptiverelief is necessary if shares of the Fundsalso are to be sold to Qualified Plans.

4. In connection with the funding offlexible premium variable life insurancecontracts issued through a unitinvestment trust, Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15)provides partial exemptions fromSections 9(a), 15(a), and 15(b) of the1940 Act. The relief provided by Rule6e–3(T) also is available to a separateaccount’s investment adviser, principalunderwriter, and sponsor or depositor.The exemptions granted by Rule 6e–3(T)are available only where the unitinvestment trust’s underlying fundoffers its shares ‘‘exclusively to separateaccounts of the life insurer or of anyaffiliated life insurance company,offering either scheduled contracts orflexible contracts, or both; or which alsooffer their shares to variable annuityseparate accounts of the life insurer orof an affiliated life insurancecompany * * * ’’ Therefore, Rule 6e–3(T) permits mixed funding with respectto a flexible premium variable lifeinsurance separate account subject to

certain conditions. However, Rule 6e–3(T) does not permit shared fundingbecause the relief granted by Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15) is not available with respectto a flexible premium variable lifeinsurance separate account that ownsshares of a management company thatalso offers its shares to separateaccounts (including variable annuityand flexible premium and scheduledpremium variable life insuranceseparate accounts) of unaffiliated lifeinsurance companies.

5. Applicants state that the reliefgranted by Rule 6e–3(T) is not affectedby the purchase of shares of the Fundsby the Qualified Plans. Applicants note,however, that because the relief underRule 6e–3(T) is available only whereshares are offered exclusively toseparate accounts, additional exemptiverelief is necessary if shares of the Fundsare also to be sold to Qualified Plans.

6. Applicants state that changes in thetax law have created the opportunity foreach Fund to increase its asset basethrough the sale of shares of the Fundto Qualified Plans. Applicants state theSection 817(h) of the Internal RevenueCode of 1986, as amended (the ‘‘Code’’),imposes certain diversificationstandards on the underlying assets ofthe contracts held in the Funds. TheCode provides that such contracts shallnot be treated as annuity contracts orlife insurance contracts for any periodin which the investments are not, inaccordance with regulations prescribedby the Department of the Treasury,adequately diversified. On March 2,1989, the Department of the Treasuryissued regulations which establisheddiversification requirements for theinvestment portfolios underlyingvariable contracts. Treas. Reg. § 1.817–5(1989). The regulations provide that, tomeet the diversification requirements,all of the beneficial interests in theinvestment company must be held bythe segregated asset accounts of one ormore insurance companies. Theregulations do, however, contain certainexceptions to this requirement, one ofwhich allows shares in an investmentcompany to be held by the trustee of aqualified pension or retirement planwithout adversely affecting the ability ofshares in the same investment companyalso to be held by the separate accountsof insurance companies in connectionwith their variable contracts. Treas. Reg.§ 1.817–5(f)(3)(iii).

7. Applicants state that thepromulgation of Rules 6e–2 and Rule6e–3(T) under the 1940 Act precededthe insurance of these Treasuryregulations. Applicants assert that,given the then current tax law, the saleof shares of the same investment


company to both separate accounts andqualified pension and retirement planscould not have been envisioned at thetime of the adoption of Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15).

8. Applicants therefore request thatthe Commission, under its authority inSection 6(c) of the 1940 Act, grant relieffrom Sections 9(a), 13(a), 15(a) and 15(b)of the 1940 Act and Rules 6e–2(b)(15)and 6e–3(T)(b)(15) thereunder forthemselves and for variable lifeinsurance separate accounts of theParticipating Insurance Companies, andthe principal underwriters anddepositors of such separate accounts, tothe extent necessary to permit mixedfunding and shared funding.

9. Section 9(a) of the 1940 Act makesit unlawful for any company to serve asan investment adviser to, or principalunderwriter for, any registered open-endinvestment company if an affiliatedperson of that company is subject to anydisqualification specified in Sections9(a)(1) or 9(a)(2), Rule 6e–2(b)(15)(i) and(ii) and Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(i) and (ii)provide exemptions from Section 9(a)under certain circumstances, subject tolimitations on mixed and sharedfunding. The relief provided by Rules6e–2(b)(15)(i) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(i)permits a person disqualified underSection 9(a) to serve as an officer,director, or employee of the life insurer,or any of its affiliates, so long as thatperson does not participate directly inthe management or administration ofthe underlying fund. The relief providedby Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(ii) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(ii) permits the life insurer toserve as the underlying fund’sinvestment adviser or principalunderwriter provided that none of theinsurer’s personnel who are ineligiblepursuant to Section 9(a) participate inthe management or administration ofthe fund.

10. Applicants state that the partialrelief granted in Rules 6e–2(b)(15) and6e–3(T)(b)(15) from the requirements ofSection 9(a), in effect, limits themonitoring of an insurer’s personnelthat would otherwise be necessary toensure compliance with Section 9 tothat which is appropriate in light of thepolicy and purposes of Section 9.Applicants state that Rules 6e–2 and 6e–3(T) recognize that it is not necessary forthe protection of investors or for thepurposes of the 1940 Act to apply theprovisions of Section 9(a) to the manyindividuals in an insurance companycomplex, most of whom typically willhave no involvement in matterspertaining to an investment company inthat organization. Applicants submitthat there is no regulatory reason toapply the provisions of Section 9(a) to

the many individuals in variousunaffiliated insurance companies (oraffiliated companies of ParticipatingInsurance Companies) that may utilizethe Funds as the funding medium forvariable contracts. The applicationstates that the relief requested will notbe affected by the proposed sale ofshares of the Funds to Qualified Plans.The insulation of the Funds fromindividuals disqualified under the 1940Act remains in place. Applicants assertthat, since the Qualified Plans are notinvestment companies and will not bedeemed affiliated by virtue of theirshareholdings, no additional relief isnecessary.

11. Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(iii) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii) under the 1940 Actassume the existence of a pass-throughvoting requirement with respect tomanagement investment companyshares held by a separate account. Theapplication states that the ParticipatingInsurance Companies will provide pass-through voting privileges to all contractowners so long as the Commissioninterprets the 1940 Act to require suchprivileges.

12. Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(iii) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii) provide partialexemptions from Sections 13(a), 15(a),and 15(b) of the 1940 Act to the extentthat those sections have been deemed bythe Commission to require ‘‘pass-through’’ voting with respect tomanagement investment companyshares held by a separate account, topermit the insurance company todisregard the voting instructions of itscontract owners in certain limitedcircumstances.

Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(iii)(A) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii) (A) provide that theinsurance company may disregardvoting instructions of its contractowners in connection with the voting ofshares of an underlying fund if suchinstructions would require such sharesto be voted to cause such companies tomake, or refrain from making, certaininvestments which would result inchanges in the subclassification orinvestment objectives of suchcompanies, or to approve or disapproveany contract between a Fund and itsinvestment adviser, when required to doso by an insurance regulatory authority,subject to the provisions of paragraphs(b)(5)(i) and (b)(7)(ii)(A) of each Rule.

Rules 6e–2(b)(15)(iii)(B) and 6e–3(T)(b)(15)(iii)(B) provide that theinsurance company may disregardcontract owners’ voting instructions ifthe contract owners initiate any changein such company’s investment policiesor any principal underwriter orinvestment adviser, provided thatdisregarding such voting instructions is

reasonable and subject to the otherprovisions of paragraphs (b)(5)(ii) and(b)(7)(ii) (B) and (C) of each Rule.

13. Applicants further represent thatthe sale of shares by a Fund to theQualified Plans does not impact reliefrequested in this regard. Shares of theFunds sold to Qualified Plans would beheld by the trustees of the QualifiedPlans as required by Section 403(a) ofERISA. Section 403(a) also provides thatthe trustee(s) must have exclusiveauthority and discretion to manage andcontrol the Qualified Plan with twoexceptions: (a) When the Qualified Planexpressly provides that the trustee(s) is(are) subject to the direction of a namedfiduciary who is not a trustee, in whichcase the trustee(s) is (are) subject toproper directions made in accordancewith the terms of the Qualified Plan andnot contrary to ERISA; and (b) when theauthority to manage, acquire or disposeof assets of the Qualified Plan isdelegated to one or more investmentmanagers pursuant to Section 402(c)(3)of ERISA. Unless one of the twoexceptions stated in Section 403(a)applies, Qualified Plan trustees have theexclusive authority and responsibilityfor voting proxies. Where a namedfiduciary appoints an investmentmanager, the investment manager hasthe responsibility to vote the shares heldunless the right to vote such shares isreserved to the trustees or to the namedfiduciary. In any event, there is no pass-through voting to the participants inQualified Plans. Accordingly,Applicants note that, unlike the casewith insurance company separateaccounts, the issue of the resolution ofmaterial irreconcilable conflicts withrespect to voting is not present withrespect to Qualified Plans because theyare not entitled to pass-through votingprivileges.

14. Applicants state that no increaseconflicts of interest would be presentedby the granting of the requested relief.Applicants assert that shared fundingdoes not present any issues that do notalready exist where a single insurancecompany is licensed to do business inseveral or all states. Applicants note thatwhere Participating InsuranceCompanies are domiciled in differentstates, it is possible that the stateinsurance regulatory body in a state inwhich one Participating InsuranceCompany is domiciled could requireaction that is inconsistent with therequirements of insurance regulators inone or more other states in which otherParticipating Insurance Companies aredomiciled. Applicants state that thepossibility, however, is no different andno greater than exists where a single


insurer and its affiliates offer theirinsurance products in several states.

15. Applicants argue that affiliationdoes not reduce the potential, if anyexists, for differences in state regulatoryrequirements. In any event, theconditions (adapted from the conditionsincluded in Rule 6e–3(T)(b)(15))discussed below are designed tosafeguard against any adverse effectsthat different state regulatoryrequirements may produce. If aparticular state insurance regulator’sdecision conflicts with the majority ofother state regulators, the affectedinsurer may be required to withdraw itsseparate account’s investment in therelevant Fund.

16. Applicants also argue thataffiliation does not eliminate thepotential, if any exists, for divergentjudgments as to when a ParticipatingInsurance Company properly maydisregard voting instructions of contractowners. Potential disagreement islimited by the requirement that theParticipating Insurance Company’sdisregard of voting instructions be bothreasonable and based on specified goodfaith determinations. However, if aParticipating Insurance Company’sdecision to disregard contract ownerinstructions represents a minorityposition or would preclude a majorityvote approving a particular change, suchParticipating Insurance Company maybe required, at the election of therelevant Fund, to withdraw itsinvestment in that Fund. No charge orpenalty will be imposed as a result ofsuch withdrawal.

17. Applicants state that there is noreason why the investment policies of aFund with mixed funding would orshould be materially different from whatthose policies would or should be ifsuch investment company of seriesthereof funded only variable annuity oronly variable life insurance contracts.Applicants therefore argue that there isno reason to believe that conflicts ofinterest would result from mixedfunding. Moreover, Applicantsrepresent that the Portfolios will bemanaged to attempt to achieve theinvestment objective(s) of such Portfolioand not to favor or disfavor anyparticular insurer or type of variablecontract.

18. Applicants note that no singleinvestment strategy can be identified asappropriate to a particular insuranceproduct. Each pool of variable annuityand variable life insurance contractowners is composed of individuals ofdiverse financial status, age, insuranceand investment goals. An investmentcompany supporting even one type ofinsurance product must accommodate

those diverse factors in order to attractand retain purchasers.

19. Applicants further note thatSection 817 of the Code is the onlysection in the Code where separateaccounts are discussed. Section 817(h)imposes certain diversificationstandards on the underlying assets ofvariable annuity contracts and variablelife contracts held in the portfolios ofmanagement investment companies.Treasury Regulation 1.817–5(f)(3)(iii),which established diversificationrequirements for such portfolios,specifically permits, among otherthings, ‘‘qualified pension or retirementplans’’ and separate accounts to sharethe same underlying managementinvestment company. Therefore, neitherthe Code, the Treasury regulations northe revenue rulings thereunder presentany inherent conflicts of interest ifQualified Plans, variable annuityseparate accounts and variable lifeinsurance separate accounts all invest inthe same management investmentcompany.

20. While there are differences in themanner in which distributions are taxedfor variable annuity contracts, variablelife insurance conflicts and QualifiedPlans. Applicants state that the taxconsequences do not raise any conflictsof interests with respect to the use of theFunds. When distributions are to bemade, and the separate account or theQualified Plan is unable to net purchasepayments to make the distributions, theseparate account or the Qualified Planwill redeem shares of the affected Fundat their net asset value. The QualifiedPlan will then make distributions inaccordance with the terms of theQualified Plan. The life insurancecompany will surrender values from theseparate account into the generalaccount to make distributions inaccordance with the terms of thevariable contract.

21. With respect to voting rights,Applicants state that it is possible toprovide an equitable means of givingsuch voting rights to contract ownersand to Qualified Plans. Applicantsrepresent that the transfer agent for eachFund will inform each ParticipatingInsurance Company of its shareownership in each Separate Account, aswell as inform the trustees of theQualified Plans of their holdings. EachParticipating Insurance Company willthen solicit voting instructions inaccordance with Rules 6e–2 and 6e–3(T).

22. Applicants argue that the ability ofFunds to sell their shares directly toQualified Plans does not create a‘‘senior security’’, as such term isdefined under Section 18(g) of the 1940

Act, with respect to any variableannuity or variable life contract owneras opposed to a participant under aQualified Plan. Regardless of the rightsand benefits of participants and contractowners under the respective QualifiedPlans and contracts, the Qualified Plansand the separate accounts have rightsonly with respect to their respectiveshares of the Funds. Such shares may beredeemed only at net asset value. Noshareholder of any Fund has anypreference over any other shareholder ofthat Fund with respect to distribution ofassets or payment of dividends.

23. Finally, Applicants assert thatthere are no conflicts between contractowners and participants under theQualified Plans with respect to the stateinsurance commissioners’ veto powers(direct with respect to variable lifeinsurance and indirect with respect tovariable annuities) over investmentobjectives. The basic premise ofshareholder voting is that not allshareholders may agree with aparticular proposal. The state insurancecommissioners have been given the vetopower in recognition of the fact thatinsurance companies cannot simplyredeem their separate accounts out ofone fund and invest those monies inanother fund. To accomplish suchredemptions and transfers, complex,time consuming transactions must beundertaken. Conversely, trustees ofQualified Plans can make the decisionquickly and implement redemption ofshares from a Fund and reinvest themonies in another funding vehiclewithout the same regulatoryimpediments or, as is the case with mostQualified Plans, hold cash pendingsuitable investment. Based on theforegoing, Applicants represent thateven should there arise issues where theinterests of contract owners and theinterests of Qualified Plans conflict, theissues can be resolved almostimmediately because trustees of theQualified Plans can, independently,redeem shares out of the Funds.

24. Applicants state that variousfactors have kept certain insurancecompanies from offering variableannuity and variable life insurancecontracts. These factors include the costof organizing and operating aninvestment funding medium, the lack ofexpertise with respect to investmentmanagement and the lack of publicname recognition of certain insurers asinvestment professionals. Applicantsargue that use of the Funds as commoninvestment media for the contractswould ameliorate these concerns.Applicants submit that mixed fundingand shared funding should benefitvariable contract owners by: (a)


Eliminating a significant portion of thecosts of establishing and administeringseparate funds; (b) allowing for a greateramount of assets available forinvestment by the Funds, therebypromoting economies of scale,permitting greater safety through greaterdiversification, and/or making theaddition of new portfolios more feasible;and (c) encouraging more insurancecompanies to offer variable contracts,resulting in increased competition withrespect to both variable contract designand pricing, which can be expected toresult in more product variation andlower charges. Each Fund will bemanaged to attempt to achieve itsinvestment objectives and not to favoror disfavor any particular ParticipatingInsurance Company or type of insuranceproduct.

25. Applicants assert that there is nosignificant legal impediment topermitting mixed and shared funding.Applicants state that separate accountsorganized as unit investment trusts havehistorically been employed toaccumulate shares of mutual fundswhich have not been affiliated with thedepositor or sponsor of the separateaccount. Applicants also assert thatmixed and shared funding will have noadverse federal income taxconsequences.

Applicants’ ConditionsThe Applicants have consented to the

following conditions:1. A majority of the Board of Directors

or Board of Trustees (as appropriate)(the ‘‘Board’’) of each Fund shall consistof persons who are not ‘‘interestedpersons,’’ as defined by Section 2(a)(19)of the 1940 Act and Rules thereunderand as modified by any applicableorders of the Commission, except that,if this condition is not met by reason ofdeath, disqualification, or bona fideresignation of any director or directors,then the operation of this conditionshall be suspended: (i) For a period of45 days, if the vacancy or vacancies maybe filled by the Board; (ii) for a periodof 60 days, if a vote of shareholders isrequired to fill the vacancy or vacancies;or (iii) for such longer period as theCommission may prescribe by orderupon application.

2. The Board of each fund willmonitor its Fund for the existence ofany material irreconcilable conflictbetween and among the interests of thecontract owners of all SeparateAccounts investing in the Fund. Amaterial irreconcilable conflict mayarise for a variety of reasons, including:(a) State insurance regulatory authorityaction; (b) a change in applicable federalor state insurance tax or securities laws

or regulations, or a public ruling, privateletter ruling, no-action or interpretiveletter, or any similar action byinsurance, tax, or securities regulatoryauthorities; (c) an administrative orjudicial decision in any relevantproceeding; (d) the manner in which theinvestments of any series are beingmanaged; (e) a difference in votinginstructions given by variable annuityand variable life insurance contractowners; or (f) a decision by aParticipating Insurance Company todisregard contract owner votinginstructions.

3. Participating Insurance Companies,the Advisers and any Qualified Planthat executes a fund participationagreement upon becoming an owner of10% or more of the assets of a Fund (the‘‘Participants’’) will report any potentialor existing conflicts, of which theybecome aware, to the Board.Participants will be obligated to assistthe appropriate Board in carrying out itsresponsibilities under these conditionsby providing the Board with allinformation reasonably necessary for theBoard to consider any issues raised.This responsibility includes, but is notlimited to, an obligation by eachParticipating Insurance Company toinform the Board whenever contractowner voting instructions aredisregarded. These responsibilities willbe contractual obligations of allParticipating Insurance Companies andQualified Plans investing in a Fundunder their agreements governingparticipation therein, and suchagreements shall provide that suchresponsibilities will be carried out witha view only to the interests of thecontract owners.

4. If a majority of the Board, or amajority of the disinterested members ofthe Board, determine that a materialirreconcilable conflict exists therelevant Participating InsuranceCompanies and Qualified Plans shall, attheir expense and to the extentreasonably practicable (as determinedby a majority of disinterested membersof the Board), take whatever steps arenecessary to remedy or eliminate theirreconcilable material conflict, up toand including: (a) Withdrawing theassets allocable to some or all of theSeparate Accounts from the Fund or anyseries therein and reinvesting suchassets in a different investment medium(including another series of the Fund),or submitting the question whether suchsegregation should be implemented to avote of all affected contract owners and,as appropriate, segregating the assets ofany appropriate group (i.e., annuitycontract owners, life insurance contractowners, or variable contract owners of

one or more Participating InsuranceCompany) that votes in favor of suchsegregation, or offering to the affectedcontract owners the option of makingsuch a change; (b) withdrawing theassets allocable to some or all of theQualified Plans from the affected Fundor any Portfolio of the Fund andreinvesting such assets in a differentinvestment medium, including anotherPortfolio of the Fund; and (c)establishing a new registeredmanagement investment company ormanaged separate account. If a materialirreconcilable conflict arises because ofa Participating Insurance Company’sdecision to disregard contract ownervoting instructions, and that decisionrepresents a minority position or wouldpreclude a majority vote, theParticipating Insurance Company maybe required, at the election of the Fund,to withdraw its Separate Account’sinvestment therein, and no charge orpenalty will be imposed as a result ofsuch withdrawal. The responsibility totake remedial action in the event of aBoard determination of an irreconcilablematerial conflict and to bear the cost ofsuch remedial action shall be acontractual obligation of allParticipating Insurance Companies andQualified Plans under their agreementsgoverning participation in the Fund andthese responsibilities will be carried outwith a view only to the interests of thecontract owners and participants in theQualified Plans.

For the purposes of condition (4), amajority of disinterested members of theBoard shall determine whether or notany proposed action adequatelyremedies any irreconcilable materialconflict, but in no event will the Fundor the Advisers be required to establisha new funding medium for any variablecontract. No Participating InsuranceCompany shall be required by thiscondition (4) to establish a new fundingmedium for any variable contract if anoffer to do so has been declined by avote of a majority of contract ownersmaterially affected by the irreconcilablematerial conflict.

5. The determination by the Board ofthe existence of an irreconcilablematerial conflict and its implicationsshall be made known promptly inwriting to all Participating InsuranceCompanies and Qualified Plans.

6. Participating Insurance Companieswill provide pass-through votingprivileges to all variable contract ownersso long as the Commission continues tointerpret the 1940 Act to require pass-through voting privileges for variablecontract owners. Accordingly, eachParticipating Insurance Company,where applicable, will vote shares of the


Fund held in its Separate Accounts ina manner consistent with timely votinginstructions received from contractowners. Each Participating InsuranceCompany also will vote shares of eachFund held in its Separate Accounts forwhich no timely voting instructionsfrom contract owners are received, aswell as shares it owns, in the sameproportion as those shares for whichvoting instructions are received. EachParticipating Insurance Company shallbe responsible for assuring that each oftheir Separate Accounts participating inthe Fund calculates voting privileges ina manner consistent with all otherParticipants. The obligation to calculatevoting privileges in a manner consistentwith all other Separate Accountsinvesting in the Fund shall be acontractual obligation of allParticipating Insurance Companiesunder their agreements governingparticipation in the Fund.

7. Each Fund will notify allParticipants that prospectus disclosureregarding potential risks of mixed andshared funding may be appropriate.Each Fund shall disclose in itsprospectus that: (a) Its shares are offeredto qualified pension and retirementplans and to separate accounts whichfund both annuity and life insurancecontracts of both affiliated andunaffiliated Participating InsuranceCompanies; (b) material irreconcilableconflicts may arise from mixed andshared funding; and (c) the Board willmonitor the Fund for any materialconflicts and determine what action, ifany, should be taken.

8. All reports received by the Boardregarding potential or existing conflicts,and all Board action with respect todetermining the existence of a conflict,notifying Participants of a conflict, anddetermining whether any proposedaction adequately remedies a conflict,will be properly recorded in the minutesof the Board or other appropriaterecords, and such minutes or otherrecords shall be made available to theCommission upon request.

9. If and to the extent Rule 6e–2 andRule 6e–3(T) are amended, or Rule 6e–3 is adopted, to provide exemptive relieffrom any provision of the 1940 Act orthe rules thereunder with respect tomixed and shared funding on terms andconditions materially different from anyexemptions granted in the orderrequested, then the Funds and/or theParticipants, as appropriate, shall takesuch steps as may be necessary tocomply with Rule 6e–2 and Rule 6e–3(T), as amended, the Rule 6e–3, asadopted, to the extent such rules areapplicable.

10. Each Fund will comply with allprovisions of the 1940 Act requiringvoting by shareholders (which, for thesepurposes, shall be the persons having avoting interest in the shares of theFund), and in particular each Fund willeither provide for annual meetings(except insofar as the Commission mayinterpret Section 16 of the 1940 Act notto require such meetings) or complywith Section 16(c) (although the Fundsare not within the trusts described inthis section) as well as with Sections16(a) and, if and when applicable,Section 16(b). Further, each Fund willact in accordance with theCommission’s interpretation of therequirements of Section 16(a) withrespect to periodic elections of directors(or trustees) and with whatever rules theCommission may promulgate withrespect thereto.

11. The Participants, at least annually,shall submit to the Board such reports,materials or data as the Board mayreasonably request so that the Boardmay fully carry out the obligationsimposed upon it by these statedconditions, and said reports, materials,and data shall be submitted morefrequently if deemed appropriate by theBoard. The obligations of theParticipating Insurance Companies andQualified Plans to provide these reports,materials, and data to the Board whenit so reasonably requests shall be acontractual obligation of allParticipating Insurance Companies andQualified Plans under their agreementsgoverning participation in the Funds.

12. In the event that a Qualified Planever should become an owner of 10percent or more of the assets of a Fund,such Qualified Plan will execute a fundparticipation agreement with theapplicable Fund. A Qualified Planshareholder will execute an applicationwith each of the Funds, includingFuture Funds, that contains anacknowledgement of this condition atthe time of the Qualified Plan’s initialpurchase of shares of the Fund.

Conclusion

For the reasons stated above,Applicants believe that the requestedexemptions, in accordance with thestandards of Section 6(c), as appropriatein the public interest and consistentwith the protection of investors and thepurposes fairly intended by the policyand provisions of the 1940 Act.

For the Commission, by the Division ofInvestment Management, pursuant todelegated authority.Margaret H. McFarland,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12521 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 04/05–0018]

Investor’s Equity, Inc.; Notice ofSurrender of Licensee

Notice is hereby given that Investor’sEquity, Inc., 1355 Peachtree Street,Atlanta, Georgia 30309 has surrenderedits License to operate as a smallbusiness investment company under theSmall Business Investment Act of 1958,as amended (Act). Investor’s Equity waslicensed by the Small BusinessAdministration on August 10, 1961.

Under the authority vested by the Actand pursuant to the Regulationspromulgated thereunder, the surrenderof the License was accepted on May 4,1995, and accordingly, all rights,privileges, and franchises derivedtherefrom have been terminated.(Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceProgram No. 59.011, Small BusinessInvestment Companies)

Dated: May 16, 1995.Robert D. Stillman,Associate Administrator for Investment.[FR Doc. 95–12571 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8025–01–M

[License No. 02/02–5351]

Exim Capital Corporation

Notice is hereby given that EximCapital Corporation (Exim), 241 FifthAvenue, New York, New York 10016, aFederal Licensee under the SmallBusiness Investment Act of 1958, asamended (the Act), in connection withthe proposed financing of a smallconcern is seeking an exemption underSection 312 of the Act and Section107.903 Conflicts of interest of the SBARules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.903(1994)). An exemption may not begranted by SBA until Notices of thistransaction have been published. Eximproposes to provide debt financing toKBJ Cleaners, Inc. (KBJ) located 6–01Saddle River Road, Fairlawn, NewJersey. The financing is contemplatedfor use in the expansion of KBJ’sexisting operations and additionalworking capital.

The financing is brought within thepurview of Section 107.903(b)(1) of theregulations because Mr. Byung Hyun An


and Ms. Chu Ja An, 100% shareholdersof KBJ are the brother-in-law and sisterof Mr. Victor Chun, President andshareholder of Exim.

Notice is further given that anyperson, not later than 15 days from thedate of the publication of the Notice,submit written comments on thetransaction to the AssociateAdministrator for Investment, U.S.Small Business Administration, 409Third Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.20416.

A copy of this Notice shall bepublished, in accordance with Section107.903(e) of the Regulations, in anewspaper of general circulation in NewYork, New York.(Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceProgram No. 59.011, Small BusinessInvestment Companies)

Dated: May 16, 1995.Robert D. Stillman,Associate Administrator for Investment.[FR Doc. 95–12572 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8025–01–M

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

1994–95 Advisory Council on SocialSecurity; Meeting

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: In accordance with theFederal Advisory Committee Act, thisnotice announces a meeting of the1994–95 Advisory Council on SocialSecurity (the Council).DATES: Friday, June 2, 1995, 9:00 a.m. to5:00 p.m. and Saturday, June 3, 1995,9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.ADDRESSES: The Carnegie Endowmentfor International Peace, 2400 N Street,N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037, (202)862–7900.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bymail—Dan Wartonick, 1994–95Advisory Council on Social Security,Suite 705, 1825 Connecticut Avenue,NW, Washington, DC 20009; Bytelephone—(202) 482–7117; Bytelefax—(202) 482–7123.


I. Purpose

Under section 706 of the SocialSecurity Act (the Act), the Secretary ofHealth and Human Services (theSecretary) appoints the Council every 4years. The Council examines issuesaffecting the Social Security Old-Age,Survivors, and Disability Insurance(OASDI) programs, as well as theMedicare program and impacts on the

Medicaid program, which were createdunder the Act.

In addition, the Secretary has askedthe Council specifically to address thefollowing:

• Social Security financing issues,including developing recommendationsfor improving the long-range financialstatus of the OASDI programs;

• General program issues such as therelative equity and adequacy of SocialSecurity benefits for persons at variousincome levels, in various familysituations, and various age cohorts,taking into account such factors as theincreased labor force participation ofwomen, lower marriage rates, increasedlikelihood of divorce, and higherpoverty rates of aged women.

In addressing these topics, theSecretary suggested that the Councilmay wish to analyze the relative roles ofthe public and private sectors inproviding retirement income, howpolicies in both sectors affect retirementdecisions and the economic status of theelderly, and how the disabilityinsurance program provisions and theavailability of health insurance andhealth care costs affect such matters.

The Council is composed of 12members in addition to the chairman:Robert Ball, Joan Bok, Ann Combs,Edith Fierst, Gloria Johnson, ThomasJones, George Kourpias, SylvesterSchieber, Gerald Shea, Marc Twinney,Fidel Vargas, and Carolyn Weaver. Thechairman is Edward Gramlich.

The Council met previously on June24–25 (59 FR 30367), July 29, 1994 (59FR 35942), September 29–30 (59 FR47146), October 21–22 (59 FR 51451),November 18–19 (59 FR 55272), January27 (60 FR 3416), February 10–11 (60 FR5433), March 8–9 (60 FR 10091), March10–11 (60 FR 10090), April 21–22 (60FR 18419) and May 19–20 (60 FR24961).

II. Agenda

The following topics will bepresented and discussed:

• Options for ensuring the long-termfinancing of the Social Securityprogram;

• Changes to Social Security benefitsto ensure relative equity and adequacy;and

• Relative roles of the public andprivate sectors in providing retirementincome.

The meeting is open to the public tothe extent that space is available.Interpreter services for persons withhearing impairments will be provided.A transcript of the meeting will beavailable to the public on an at-cost-ofduplication basis. The transcript can be

ordered from the Executive Director ofthe Council.(Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceProgram Nos. 93.802, Social Security-Disability Insurance; 93.803, Social Security-Retirement Insurance; 93.805, SocialSecurity-Survivors Insurance)

Dated: May 17, 1995.David C. Lindeman,Executive Director, 1994–95 Advisory Councilon Social Security.[FR Doc. 95–12620 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4190–29–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

[Treasury Directive 16–25]

Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Equity inthe Transfer of Federal Funds;Delegation of Authority

Dated: May 15, 1995.1. Delegation. By the authority

granted to the Fiscal Assistant Secretaryby Treasury Order (TO) 101–05, thisDirective delegates to theCommissioner, Financial ManagementService, the authority to perform anyduty or function of the Secretaryprescribed or required pursuant to 31U.S.C. 3335 and 6503, including theissuing of regulations which are bindingon executive agencies and govern thetimely disbursement of Federal fundsand entering into agreements withStates concerning transfers of Federalfunds to States.

2. Redelegation. The Commissioner,Financial Management Service, mayredelegate this authority in writing, andit may be exercised in the individualcapacity and under the individual titleof each official receiving such authority,except that regulations must have theapproval of the Commissioner .

3. Regulations. The issuance of anyregulations pursuant to this Directiveshall be in accordance with TreasuryDirective 28–01, ‘‘Preparation andReview of Regulations.’’

4. Authorities.a. The Cash Management

Improvement Act of 1990, Public Law101–453, 104 Stat. 1058, as amended,codified at 31 U.S.C. 3335, 6501, and6503.

b. TO 101–05, ‘‘ReportingRelationships and Supervision ofOfficials, Offices and Bureaus,Delegation of Certain Authority, andOrder of Succession in the Departmentof the Treasury.’’

5. Expiration. This Directive shallexpire three years from the date ofissuance unless superseded or cancelledprior to that date.


6. Office of Primary Interest. Office ofthe Commissioner, FinancialManagement Service.Gerald Murphy,Fiscal Assistant Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12549 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4810–25–P

Internal Revenue Service

[Delegation Order No. 175 (Rev. 3)]

Delegation of Authority

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),Treasury.ACTION: Delegation of authority.

SUMMARY: The authority to determinethat a plan amendment is reasonableand provides for only de minimisincreases in the liabilities of the plan inaccordance with section 412(f)(2)(A) ofthe Internal Revenue Code (Code) andsection 304(b)(2)(A) of the EmployeeRetirement Income Security Act of 1974(ERISA) has already been delegated tothe Director, Employee Plans Division,with authority to redelegate. There is

now delegated to the Director, EmployeePlans Division, the additional authorityto determine that a plan amendment isreasonable and provides for only deminimis increases in the liabilities ofthe plan in accordance with section401(a)(3–3)(B)(ii) of the Code andsection 204(i)(2)(A) of ERISA, withauthority to redelegate, but not belowBranch Chiefs, Employee PlansDivision.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JohnH. Turner, CP:E:EP:P:2, Room 6702,1111 Constitution Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC 20224, (202) 622–6214(not a toll-free number).

Effective Date: May 19, 1995,Authority to Determine if PlanAmendment is Reasonable and Has DeMinimis Effect on Plan Liability inAccordance with Section 412(f)(2)(A) ofthe Internal Revenue Code (Code) andSection 304(b)(2)(A) of the EmployeeRetirement Income Security Act(ERISA), or Section 401(a)(33)(B)(ii) ofthe Code and Section 204(i)(2)(A) ofERISA.

Pursuant to authority vested in theCommissioner of Internal Revenue byTreasury Department Order 150–10,there is hereby delegated to the Director,Employee Plans Division, the authorityto determine that a plan amendment isreasonable and provides for only deminimis increases in the liabilities ofthe plan in accordance with section412(f)(2)(A) of the Code and section304(b)(2)(A) of ERISA or in accordancewith section 401(a)(33)(B)(ii) of theCode and section 204(i)(2)(A) of ERISA.

The authority delegated herein maybe redelegated, but not below BranchChiefs, Employee Plans Division.

To the extent that the authoritypreviously exercised consistent withthis Order may require ratification, it ishereby affirmed and ratified.

Delegation Order No. 175 (Rev. 2),effective October 31, 1987, issuperseded.

Dated: April 13, 1995.Phil Brand,Chief Compliance Officer.[FR Doc. 95–12515 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4830–01–U

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains notices of meetings published underthe ‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (Pub.L. 94-409) 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3).

Sunshine Act Meetings Federal Register

27374

Vol. 60, No. 99


U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETYCOMMISSION

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday,May 25, 1995.LOCATION: Room 410, East West Towers,4330 East West Highway, Bethesda,Maryland.STATUS: Closed to the Public.

MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:

Compliance Status Report

The staff will brief the Commission on thestatus of various compliance matters.

For a record message containing thelatest agenda information, call (301)504-0709.CONTACT PERSON FOR ADDITIONALINFORMATION: Sadye E. Dunn, Office ofthe Secretary, 4330 East West Highway.,Bethesda, MD 20207 (301 504-0800

Dated: May 19, 1995.Sadye E. Dunn,Secretary.[FR Doc. 95-12660 Filed 5-19-95; 10:25 am]BILLING CODE 6355-01-M

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Farm Credit Administration Board;Regular Meeting

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given,pursuant to the Government in theSunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), thatthe June 8, 1995 regular meeting of theFarm Credit Administration Board(Board) will not be held and that aspecial meeting of the Board isscheduled for Thursday, June 15, 1995at 10:00 a.m. An agenda for this meetingwill be published at a later date.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Floyd Fithian, Secretary to the FarmCredit Administration Board, (703) 883–4025, TDD (703) 883–4444.ADDRESS: Farm Credit Administration,1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean,Virginia 22102–5090.

Date: May 19, 1995.Floyd Fithian,Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.[FR Doc. 95–12760 Filed 5–19–95; 3:25 pm]BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCECORPORATION

Pursuant to the provisions of the‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (5U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given thatat 2:02 p.m. on Thursday, May 18, 1995,the Board of Directors of the FederalDeposit Insurance Corporation met inclosed session to consider the following:

Recommendations regarding anadministrative enforcement proceeding.

Application of Savings Bank of MendocinoCounty, Ukiah, California, to assume theliability to pay deposits made in the Ukiah,California Branch of U.S. Bank of California,Sacramento, California.

Matters relating to the Corporation’scorporate activities.

In calling the meeting, the Boarddetermined, on motion of DirectorJonathan L. Fiechter (Acting Director,Office of Thrift Supervision), secondedby Vice Chairman Andrew C. Hove, Jr.,concurred in by Director Eugene A.Ludwig (Comptroller of the Currency),and Chairman Ricki Helfer, thatCorporation business required itsconsideration of the matters on less thanseven days’ notice to the public; that noearlier notice of the meeting waspracticable; that the public interest didnot require consideration of the mattersin a meeting open to public observation;and that the matters could beconsidered in a closed meeting byauthority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4),(c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) ofthe ‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’(5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8),(c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B)).

The meeting was held in the BoardRoom of the FDIC Building located at550–17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

Dated: May 19, 1995.Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.Patti C. Fox,Acting Deputy Executive Secretary.[FR Doc. 95–12667 Filed 5–19–95; 10:38 am]BILLING CODE 6714–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

DATE: Weeks of May 22, 29, June 5, and12, 1995.

PLACE: Commissioners’ ConferenceRoom, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,Maryland.

STATUS: Public and Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Week of May 22

Wednesday, May 24

10:00 a.m.Briefing on Part 1 Recommendations for

National Performance Review Phase II(Public Meeting)

(Contact: Jack Roe, 301–415–1354)11:30 a.m.

Affirmation/Discussion and Vote (PublicMeeting) (if needed)

Thursday, May 25

10:00 a.m.Briefing on Operator Licensing Programs

(Public Meeting)(Contact: Bruce Boger, 301–415–1004)

Friday, May 26

10:00 a.m.Briefing by Executive Branch (Closed—Ex.

1)

Week of May 29—Tentative

Thursday, June 1

10:00 a.m.Briefing on Electricity Forecast From

Energy Information Administration (EIA)Annual Energy Outlook (Public Meeting)

11:30 a.m.Affirmation/Discussion and Vote (Public

Meeting)(Please Note: This item will be affirmed

immediately following the conclusion ofthe preceding meeting.)

a. Kenneth G. Pierce (Shorewood, Illinois),Initial Decision (Vacating Staff Order),LBP–95–04, Docket Nos. 55–30662–EA,IA–94–007 (Tenative)

(Contact: Andrew Bates, 301–415–1963)1:00 p.m.

Briefing by Executive Branch (Closed—Ex.1)

2:00 p.m.Briefing on Steam Generator Issues (Public

Meeting)(Contact: Brian Sheron, 301–415–2722)

Week of June 5—Tenative

Thursday, June 8

9:30 a.m.Meeting with Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) (PublicMeeting)

(Contact: John Larkins, 301–415–7360)11:00 a.m.


Friday, June 9

9:00 a.m.Briefing by DOE on Status of Multi-

Purpose Canisters (MPC) (PublicMeeting)

10:30 a.m.

27375Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Sunshine Act Meetings

Briefing by DOE on High Level WasteProgram (Public Meeting)

Week of June 12—Tentative

Wednesday, June 1411:30 a.m.


Note: Affirmation sessions are initiallyscheduled and announced to the public on atime-reserved basis. Supplementary notice isprovided in accordance with the SunshineAct as specific items are identified and addedto the meeting agenda. If there is no specificsubject listed for affirmation, this means thatno item has as yet been identified asrequiring any Commission vote on this date.

The schedule for Commissionmeetings is subject to change on shortnotice.TO VERIFY THE STATUS OF MEETING CALLS:(Recording)—(301) 415–1292.CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Bill Hill (301) 415–1661.* * * * *

This notice is distributed by mail toseveral hundred subscribers; if you nolonger wish to receive it, or would liketo be added to it, please contact theOffice of the Secretary, Attn: OperationsBranch, Washington, D.C. 20555 (301–415–1963).

In addition, distribution of thismeeting notice over the internet systemwill also become available in the nearfuture. If you are interested in receivingthis Commission meeting scheduleelectronically, please send an electronicmessage to [email protected] or [email protected].* * * * *


William M. Hill, Jr.,SECY Tracking Officer, Office of theSecretary.[FR Doc. 95–12790 Filed 5–19–95; 3:25 pm]


fede

ral r

egiste

r

27377

TuesdayMay 23, 1995

Part II

Department of theTreasuryCustoms Service

19 CFR Part 10 et al.Rules of Origin for Textile and ApparelProducts; Proposed Rule


DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Parts 10, 12 and 102

RIN 1515–AB71

Rules of Origin for Textile and ApparelProducts

AGENCY: Customs Service, Departmentof the Treasury.ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document proposes toamend the Customs Regulations toimplement the provisions of section 334of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act(‘‘the Act’’) regarding the country oforigin of textile and apparel products.Except for the purpose of identifyingproducts of Israel, the proposed ruleswould govern the determination of thecountry of origin of imported textile andapparel products for purposes of lawsenforced by the Customs Service. Theproposed rules also implement theprovisions of section 334 of the Actregarding the treatment of componentsthat are cut to shape in the United Statesfrom foreign fabric, exported forassembly, and returned to the UnitedStates. The document also implementspreviously-enacted provisions regardingthe treatment of articles assembled orproduced in a Caribbean Basin Initiativebeneficiary country wholly from U.S.-produced components, materials oringredients.DATES: Comments must be received onor before June 22, 1995.ADDRESSES: Written comments(preferably in triplicate) may beaddressed to the Regulations Branch,U.S. Customs Service, Franklin Court,1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20229. Commentssubmitted may be inspected at theRegulations Branch, Office ofRegulations and Rulings, FranklinCourt, 1099 14th Street, N.W., Suite4000, Washington, D.C.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PhilRobins, Office of Regulations andRulings (202–482–7029).


BackgroundOn December 8, 1994, President

Clinton signed into law the UruguayRound Agreements Act (‘‘the Act’’),Public Law 103–465, 108 Stat. 4809.Subtitle D of Title III of the Act dealswith textiles and includes section 334(codified at 19 U.S.C. 3592) whichconcerns rules of origin for textile andapparel products.

Paragraph (a) of section 334 providesthat the Secretary of the Treasury shall

prescribe rules implementing theprinciples contained in paragraph (b) fordetermining the origin of ‘‘textiles andapparel products’’. Paragraph (a) furtherprovides that such rules must bepromulgated in final form not later thanJuly 1, 1995.

Paragraph (b) of section 334incorporates the following provisions:(1) For purposes of the customs lawsand the administration of quantitativerestrictions and except as otherwiseprovided for by statute, general rules fordetermining when a ‘‘textile or apparelproduct’’ originates in a country,territory, or insular possession, and isthe growth, product, or manufacture ofthat country, territory, or insularpossession; (2) special origin rules forgoods classifiable under certainspecified tariff headings andsubheadings; (3) a ‘‘multicountry rule’’for determining origin when the originof a good cannot be determined underthe preceding provisions of paragraph(b); (4) special rules governing thetreatment of components that are cut toshape in the United States from foreignfabric, exported for assembly, andreturned to the United States; and (5) anexception to the application of section334 that specifically provides for thecontinued application of theadministrative practices that wereapplied immediately before theenactment of the Act to determine theorigin of textile and apparel productsfrom Israel, unless such practices aremodified by the mutual consent of theUnited States and Israel.

Paragraph (c) of section 334 providesthat section 334 shall apply to goodsentered, or withdrawn from warehouse,for consumption on or after July 1, 1996.Paragraph (c) further provides thatsection 334 shall not apply to goodsentered or withdrawn from warehouseon or before January 1, 1998, that arecovered by contracts of sale which wereentered into, with all material termsfixed, before July 20, 1994, and whichare filed, with an accompanyingcertification, with the Commissioner ofCustoms within 60 days after the date ofthe enactment of the Act. On January 27,1995, Customs published in the FederalRegister (60 FR 5457) a notice settingforth the procedures for filing suchcontracts and certifications.

The purpose of this document is to setforth for public comment proposedregulations implementing the principlescontained in section 334(b) of the Act,with a view to promulgation of finalregulations by July 1, 1995, as mandatedby section 334(a) of the Act.

Discussion of Proposed RulesOn January 3, 1994, Customs

published T.D. 94–4 in the FederalRegister (59 FR 110) setting forthinterim regulations for determining theorigin of goods from Canada and Mexicoother than for the purposes ofdetermining eligibility for preferenceunder the North American Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA). T.D. 94–4 set forththese interim rules as a new Part 102 ofthe Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part102), entitled ‘‘Rules of Origin’’, andalso set forth consequential conforminginterim amendments to existing sectionswithin Parts 12 and 134 of the CustomsRegulations (19 CFR Parts 12 and 134).These interim regulations were madeimmediately effective for trade fromCanada and Mexico pursuant to Annex311 of the NAFTA. No final action onthese interim regulatory amendmentshas been taken.

Also on January 3, 1994, Customspublished a document in the FederalRegister (59 FR 141) that proposed toamend § 102.0 of the interim regulationspublished as T.D. 94–4 so that the Part102 provisions would also apply tocountry of origin determinations ‘‘forpurposes of the Customs and relatedlaws and the navigation laws of theUnited States’’ for goods from allcountries. This document also proposedto amend various provisions withinParts 4, 10, 12, 134 and 177 of theCustoms Regulations (19 CFR Parts 4,10, 12, 134 and 177) to ensure that therules contained in Part 102 wouldcontrol wherever language requiring acountry of origin determination appearsin those other regulatory provisions.Final action also has not been taken onthese proposed regulatory amendments.

In keeping with the intended functionof Part 102 as the repository for originrules under the uniform rules of originprinciple reflected in the January 3,1994, proposal mentioned above,Customs proposes in this document toimplement those provisions of section334(b) of the Act that have broadapplication under the terms of thestatute by amending the Part 102provisions and by amending otherregulatory provisions as necessary toconform to those Part 102 changes. Withregard to the remaining provisions ofsection 334(b) (that is, the special rulesgoverning the treatment of componentsthat are cut to shape in the United Statesfrom foreign fabric, exported forassembly, and returned to the UnitedStates) and with one exception asdiscussed further below, Customsproposes to implement those provisionsby amending that portion of Part 10 ofthe Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part


10) that concerns articles assembledabroad with United States componentsbecause the subject provisions of section334(b) are more appropriate to thatcontext. In addition, it is proposed tomake a number of amendments toexisting regulatory provisions to ensurethat those existing provisions will beconsistent with the new regulatoryproposals implementing section 334(b)of the Act. The proposed amendmentsare discussed in more detail below.

A. Proposed Amendments to Part 10

Section 334(b)(4)(A) of the Act

Section 334(b)(4)(A) of the Actprovides that the value of a componentthat is cut to shape (but not to length,width, or both) in the United Statesfrom foreign fabric and exported toanother country, territory, or insularpossession for assembly into an articlethat is then returned to the UnitedStates: (1) Shall not be included in thedutiable value of such article; and (2)may be applied toward determining thepercentage referred to in General Note7(b)(i)(B) of the Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States (HTSUS),subject to the limitation provided in thatnote.

Subheading 9802.00.80, HTSUS,provides a duty exemption forfabricated components of U.S. originthat are assembled abroad and returnedto the United States. Under currenttextile rules of origin, textilecomponents that are cut to shape in theUnited States from foreign fabric qualifyas U.S.-origin fabricated componentsunder subheading 9802.00.80, HTSUS.The effect of section 334(b)(4)(A) of theAct is to continue the duty exemptionfor those components, notwithstandingthe fact that under the origin principlesin section 334(b) of the Act suchcomponents would no longer qualify asproducts of the United States (see the‘‘cutting versus assembly’’ discussion inconnection with the proposedamendments to Part 102 below). Inaddition, section 334(b)(4)(A) in effectcontinues the present practice ofallowing the value of such cut-to-shapetextile components to be applied towardthe 35 percent value-contentrequirement, up to the 15 percentmaximum limitation for materialsproduced in the United States, forpurposes of the Caribbean BasinInitiative (CBI) duty-free programestablished by the Caribbean BasinEconomic Recovery Act, as amended (19U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), and reflected inGeneral Note 7, HTSUS.

Although section 334(b)(4)(A) of theAct is a separate statutory provision anddoes not amend or otherwise affect

subheading 9802.00.80, HTSUS,Customs believes that the references to‘‘component’’ and ‘‘assembly’’ in theAct were intended to mirror theconcepts of, including the types ofoperations traditionally permittedunder, subheading 9802.00.80, HTSUS.Accordingly, Customs believes that theappropriate place for regulatoryimplementation of this aspect of the Actwould be following the existing Part 10regulations applicable to subheading9802.00.80, HTSUS, because some ofthose existing regulatory provisionsappear to be equally relevant forpurposes of this provision of the Act.Therefore, Customs proposes to add anew § 10.25 (19 CFR 10.25) that wouldreflect the relevant terms of section334(b)(4)(A) of the Act and that wouldalso provide for the applicability ofcertain of those existing regulatorystandards and procedures (for example,the U.S. component valuationprinciples, the assembly and incidentaloperations principles, and thedocumentation requirements).

With regard to the second aspect ofsection 334(b)(4)(A) of the Act, whichallows the value of textile componentscut to shape in the United States to beapplied toward the 35 percent value-content requirement under the CBIduty-free program, Customs proposes toreflect this provision in the context ofthe CBI implementing regulations byadding a new paragraph (d) to § 10.195(19 CFR 10.195). Although modeled onpresent paragraph (c) of that section, thefollowing particular points are notedregarding this new paragraph (d): (1)The proposed text mentions thepercentage ‘‘referred to in paragraph (c)’’(that is, the 15 percent maximumattributable to U.S. materials) ratherthan the percentage referred to inparagraph (a) (that is, the overall 35percent value-content requirement), inorder to clarify that the new allowanceoperates as part of, or an alternative to,but not in addition to, the pre-existing15 percent allowance for U.S.-producedmaterials; and (2) contrary to present§ 10.195(c), which refers to materialsproduced in the ‘‘customs territory ofthe U.S. (other than the Commonwealthof Puerto Rico)’’ and thus reflects thespecific terms of the CBI statute (19U.S.C. 2703(a)(1)), the text of this new§ 10.195(d) refers to a textile componentthat is cut to shape in the ‘‘U.S.(including the Commonwealth of PuertoRico)’’, because Customs believes thatthe reference to the ‘‘United States’’ insection 334(b)(4)(A) of the Act wasintended to cover Puerto Rico.

Section 334(b)(4)(B) of the Act

Section 334(b)(4)(B) of the Actprovides that no article (except a textileor apparel product) assembled in wholeof components described in section334(b)(4)(A) of the Act, or of suchcomponents and components that areproducts of the United States, in a CBIbeneficiary country shall be treated as aforeign article, or as subject to duty, ifthe components after exportation fromthe United States, and the article itselfbefore importation into the UnitedStates, do not enter into the commerceof any foreign country other than sucha beneficiary country.

U.S. Note 2(b), Subchapter II, Chapter98, HTSUS, provides that no article(except a textile article, apparel article,or petroleum, or any product derivedfrom petroleum, provided for in heading2709 or 2710) may be treated as aforeign article or as subject to duty if thearticle is assembled or processed in aCBI beneficiary country in whole offabricated components that are aproduct of the United States or if thearticle is processed in a CBI beneficiarycountry in whole of ingredients (otherthan water) that are a product of theUnited States, provided that neither thefabricated components, materials oringredients after exportation from theUnited States, nor the article itselfbefore importation into the UnitedStates, enters the commerce of anyforeign country other than a CBIbeneficiary country. The effect ofsection 334(b)(4)(B) of the Act is tocontinue this Note 2(b) treatment fortextile and apparel articles which wouldmeet the requirements of the Note butfor the fact that, under the originprinciples in section 334(b) of the Act,components cut to shape in the UnitedStates from foreign fabric would nolonger qualify as products of the UnitedStates.

Customs notes that the provisions ofNote 2(b) discussed above have not beenimplemented in the CustomsRegulations. Accordingly, based on thesame rationale stated above regardingthe addition of new § 10.25 toimplement section 334(b)(4)(A) of theAct, Customs proposes to add a new§ 10.26 (19 CFR 10.26) which wouldcover both Note 2(b) and the provisionsof section 334(b)(4)(B) of the Act. Toreflect that these are discrete statutoryprovisions, paragraph (a) of theproposed new section covers only Note2(b) and paragraph (b) thereof coversonly the provisions of section334(b)(4)(B) of the Act. Paragraph (c)sets forth definitions or rules forpurposes of the section and includes, assubparagraph (c)(3), a rule regarding


entry into the commerce (of a non-beneficiary country) which is modeledon the ‘‘imported directly’’ principlecontained in § 10.193 of the CBIimplementing regulations.

Customs proposes to define the terms‘‘textile article’’, ‘‘apparel article’’, and‘‘textile or apparel product’’ forpurposes of new § 10.26 more narrowlythan the term ‘‘textile or apparelproduct’’ is defined for purposes of thenew Part 102 provisions (see the belowdiscussion of the proposed Part 102amendments in regard to the latter). Asnoted above, § 10.26(a) wouldimplement the provisions of U.S. Note2(b), Subchapter II, Chapter 98, HTSUS,and § 10.26(b) would implement section334(b)(4)(B) of the Act. With regard tothe scope of the terms ‘‘textile article’’and ‘‘apparel article’’ as used in Note2(b), in T.D. 91–88, 25 Cust.Bull. 226,Customs issued an interpretive rulewhich concluded that articles (otherthan footwear and parts of footwear)classifiable in HTSUS provisions thathave a textile and apparel categorynumber designation should beconsidered ‘‘textile’’ and ‘‘apparel’’articles for purposes of Note 2(b).Footwear and parts of footwear weredetermined in this interpretive rule notto constitute ‘‘textile’’ and ‘‘apparel’’articles under Note 2(b). As indicatedabove, Customs believes that theprimary purpose of section 334(b)(4)(B)of the Act is to preserve the current dutyexemption granted under Note 2(b) forarticles assembled abroad fromcomponents cut to shape in the UnitedStates from foreign fabric. For example,under Customs current interpretation ofNote 2(b), foreign fabric components cutto shape in the United States that areassembled in a CBI beneficiary countryinto a footwear upper or assembled intogloves classifiable in a provision thatdoes not have a textile quota categorynumber have been considered to beoutside the scope of the articlesexcluded from this duty exemption. If,however, the term, ‘‘textile or apparelproduct’’ as used in § 334(b)(4)(B) of theAct is interpreted to cover the samearticles covered by the term ‘‘textile orapparel product’’ as used elsewhere insection 334(b) of the Act [which includefootwear and parts thereof and manyarticles that are not classified in quotaprovisions], Customs would fail to giveeffect to the legislative purpose behindthis provision. Indeed, under such aninterpretation this provision would benullified by the exception containedtherein, since no good can be‘‘assembled in whole of components[cut to shape from foreign fabric in theUnited States] * * *’’ and still be

considered to fall outside the scope ofgoods excluded from the duty-freetreatment allowed under the provisionin question. Therefore, solely forpurposes of section 334(b)(4)(B) of theAct, it is proposed to define the term‘‘textile or apparel product’’ to reflectthe same interpretation previously givenby Customs to the terms ‘‘textile article’’and ‘‘apparel article’’ under Note 2(b).

B. Proposed Amendments to Part 102The proposed amendments to Part

102 set forth in this documentspecifically implement sections 334(b)(1)–(3) and (5) of the Act. Theseproposed changes affect Part 102 andother provisions of the CustomsRegulations.

The proposed amendments to Part102 set forth in this document representthe view of Customs on the applicationof the principles contained in sections334(b) (1)–(3) and (5) and are intendedto be used in all determinations ofwhether a textile good is the product ofa particular country, territory, orpossession, except where other statutoryauthority provides for application of adifferent origin standard. Accordingly,starting on July 1, 1996, the finalregulations resulting from theseproposed regulatory texts would takeprecedence over any other conflictingprovisions in Part 102 or elsewhere inthe Customs Regulations but would notcontrol origin determinations regardingtextile and apparel products of Israel.

Scope of ‘‘Textile or Apparel Product’’Section 334(b) of the Act sets forth

principles governing the determinationof the origin of ‘‘a textile or apparelproduct’’ for purposes of laws enforcedby Customs. However, nowhere in thelegislation is ‘‘textile or apparelproduct’’ defined. Customs believes thatthe principles in section 334(b) wereintended to be applicable to essentiallythe same goods to which Customs hasapplied the principles of § 12.130 of theCustoms Regulations (19 CFR 12.130).

Section 12.130, which Customscurrently follows in determining thecountry of origin of textile products formost purposes, specifically states thatits provisions cover textiles and textileproducts subject to section 204,Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7U.S.C. 1854), that is, merchandisewhich is the subject of an internationaltextile agreement. Customs hasinterpreted this to include all goodsclassifiable in Section XI of the HTSUSand all goods classifiable outsideSection XI under a provision that has atextile and apparel category numberdesignation. However, Customs hasruled that while the provisions of

§ 12.130 are specifically applicable onlyfor international textile agreementpurposes, the principles of § 12.130 areapplicable to all textiles and textileproducts for all purposes (i.e., quota,marking and duty assessment).

The United States is a signatory to theAgreement Establishing the WorldTrade Organization (the WTOAgreement) and to the Agreement onTextiles and Clothing annexed thereto.In the Annex to the Agreement onTextiles and Clothing, textile andclothing products are defined by meansof a listing of subheadings in theinternational Harmonized CommodityDescription and Coding System, orHarmonized System (which has beenimplemented in the United States in theHTSUS). The subheadings listed in theAnnex to the Agreement on Textiles andClothing include some provisions whichpresently do not have a textile andapparel category number currentlyassociated with them. They also do notinclude every provision contained inHarmonized System/HTSUS Section XI(which covers textiles and textilearticles).

Customs notes that sections 101(d)(4),331 and 332 of the Act specifically referto the Agreement On Textiles AndClothing of the WTO Agreement.Moreover, section 332 of the Actamended the second sentence of section204 of the Agricultural Act of 1956 tospecifically authorize the President toissue, in order to carry out a multilateralagreement (‘‘including but not limited tothe Agreement on Textiles andClothing’’ of the WTO Agreement),regulations governing the entry orwithdrawal from warehouse of articlescovered by such an agreement that arethe products of countries which are notparties to the agreement or to which theUnited States does not apply theagreement.

Customs believes that, in order toreflect the overall context in whichsection 334 of the Act was enacted, theregulations implementing the principlesof section 334(b) must, with slighttechnical modifications, have referenceto the subheadings listed in the Annexto the Agreement on Textiles andClothing of the WTO Agreement.Customs believes that, in the absence ofa specific statutory definition, Customsis required to determine the scope ofsection 334. In doing this, Customs hasconsidered the wording of section 334,its development, and the context inwhich it was enacted.

Accordingly, it is the position ofCustoms that the regulationsimplementing section 334(b) of the Actshould apply to (1) all goods classifiablein Section XI of the HTSUS and (2) with


one exception, all goods classifiableunder any subheading outside SectionXI that is listed in the Annex to theAgreement on Textiles and Clothing ofthe WTO Agreement. This will avoidany possibility of interpreting ‘‘apparelproduct’’ to include apparel productsconsisting entirely of plastic or othernontextile component parts, whichclearly are not intended to be coveredby section 334 of the Act.

The one exception to the subheadingslisted in the WTO Agreement concernssubheading 9113.90 which provides forwatch straps, watch bands, watchbracelets, and parts thereof. Thatsubheading is further broken down inthe HTSUS into two 8-digitsubheadings, only one of which,subheading 9113.90.40, provides forgoods of textile materials. Customsbelieves that it would be inappropriateto treat clearly nontextile goods asfalling within the scope of ‘‘textile orapparel article’’ as used in section334(b) of the Act. Accordingly, thedefinition of ‘‘textile or apparelproduct’’ in the proposed Part 102regulatory texts set forth in thisdocument includes a reference tosubheading 9113.90.40 but does notrefer to subheading 9113.90.80 whichcovers the remainder of the goodsfalling under subheading 9113.90.

Customs recognizes that, by referringto the Agreement on Textiles andClothing, the proposed rules of origin inthis document will cover some goodsnot presently considered to be withinthe purview of § 12.130 (for example,wadding and gauze impregnated orcoated with medicinals, umbrellas,automobile seat belts, parachutes, watchstraps, doll clothing).

General Approach in Proposed RulesCustoms proposes to implement the

section 334(b) origin principles withinPart 102 as a new § 102.21. Thisproposed new § 102.21 includes anapplicability provision (paragraph (a)) toclarify the scope of the section, variousdefinitions of terms used in the section(paragraph (b)), five general origin rules(paragraph (c)) which apply in ahierarchical and sequential manner, aspecial provision for sets (paragraph(d)), and specific change in tariffclassification rules (paragraph (e))which apply for purposes of the secondgeneral origin rule. The proposedregulatory texts, and the section 334(b)principles which they implement, arediscussed in more detail below.

Proposed § 102.21 would supersedethose provisions of §§ 102.1 through102.20 for those products that fallwithin the scope of § 102.21, except forthe purpose of identifying products of

Israel for which §§ 102.1 through 102.20will remain in effect. Customs expectsthat Part 102 will have been madeeffective for all imports prior to July 1,1996, when § 102.21 will becomeeffective.

Wholly Obtained or ProducedThe first § 102.21 general origin rule

(paragraph (c)(1)) provides that thecountry of origin of a textile or apparelproduct is the single country, territory,or insular possession in which the goodwas wholly obtained or produced. Thisrule sets forth the principle contained insection 334(b)(1)(A) of the Act. Thedefinition of ‘‘a good wholly obtained orproduced’’ contained in present§ 102.1(g) would apply for purposes ofthis proposed rule.

Change in Tariff ClassificationWhere a textile or apparel product is

not wholly obtained or produced in asingle country, territory, or insularpossession, the second general originrule (paragraph (c)(2)) provides that thecountry of origin of such a good is thesingle country, territory, or insularpossession in which each materialincorporated in the good underwent anapplicable change in tariff (HTSUS)classification specified in paragraph (e).The proposed tariff shift rules containedin paragraph (e) reflect the views ofCustoms on the results obtained whenthe principles of section 334(b) of theAct are applied to specific textile goods.Because Customs believes that the tariffshift approach represents the mosttransparent and predictable method fordetermining origin under the principlescontained in section 334(b) of the Act,an attempt has been made to reflect theapplication of those principles withinthe proposed tariff shift rules to thegreatest extent practicable.

Assembly Versus CuttingUnder the rulings presently issued by

Customs, the country of origin of sometextile products, particularly apparelproducts, is often determined on thebasis of where the components thereofwere cut to shape. Since promulgationof § 12.130 in 1984, it has beensuggested to Customs that cuttingcomponents from fabric is an extremelyminor manufacturing operation andthus should not determine origin. Theposition of Customs in regard to cutting,however, was not predicated on thetime or expense involved in thatoperation. Rather, it was based on thephysical change of the fabric and theresult of the cutting operation—a changefrom material which could be used fora number of different purposes to agarment part that was dedicated to a

specific use in a specific type ofgarment.

Under section 334(b)(1)(D) of the Act,which applies to all goods not coveredby the preceding provisions ofparagraph (b)(1) other than goodscovered by the special rules of section334(b)(2), a textile or apparel producthas its origin in the country, territory, orpossession in which it is whollyassembled from its component pieces.In addition, the ‘‘multicountry rule’’ ofsection 334(b)(3) of the Act discussedbelow refers to the place in which themost important assembly ormanufacturing process occurs or the lastplace in which important assembly ormanufacturing occurs.

In view of the overall approach takenin section 334(b) of the Act, includingthe fact that assembly is mentioned inthree contexts as a process conferringorigin while no mention whatsoever ismade of cutting, and in view of itshistorical context, Customs believes thatsection 334(b) was intended to eliminatecutting from playing any role indetermining the country of origin oftextile and apparel products.Accordingly, many of the tariff shiftrules contained in paragraph (e) ofproposed new § 102.21 have beendrafted to reflect this consideration.

Fabric-Making ProcessSection 334(b)(1)(C) of the Act

provides that if the product is a fabric,its country of origin is the country,territory, or insular possession in which‘‘the constituent fibers, filaments, oryarns are woven, knitted, needled,tufted, felted, entangled, or transformedby any other fabric-making process’’. Inview of the wording of this statutoryprovision, Customs proposes to definethe term ‘‘fabric-making process’’ forpurposes of proposed new § 102.21 asincluding only processes which advancebasic materials (fibers, yarns, etc.) intoa fabric, thereby excluding any processwhich starts with a fabric and ends upwith a different type of fabric. Becauseof the existence of spunbonded fabrics,which are produced by extrudingpolymers directly into fabric form, theterm ‘‘polymers’’ has been included inthe proposed definition. In addition,since twine, cordage, or rope may beused to make a textile fabric (forexample, a fabric of heading 5608),those terms have also been included inthe proposed definition.

Scope of ‘‘Wholly Assembled’’The ‘‘wholly assembled’’ principle of

section 334(b)(1)(D) of the Act asdiscussed above has been assimilatedinto the tariff shift rules underparagraph (e) of proposed § 102.21. In


addition, because the tariff shift ruleswill not always yield an origin result,this principle has also beenincorporated within the third generalorigin rule under paragraph (c) ofproposed § 102.21 with specificreference to goods not knit to shapewhich are not covered by the specialrules of section 334(b)(2) of the Act andthus remain subject to the section334(b)(1)(D) principle. For purposes of§ 102.21, Customs proposes a definitionof ‘‘wholly assembled’’ which wouldembody the following principles:

1. The entire good must be assembled,and the assembly must take place in asingle country, territory, or insularpossession. This is intended to reflectthe concept of ‘‘wholly’’ and to ensure,consistent with the overall aim of thesection 334(b) principles, the attributionof a good to only one country, territory,or insular possession.

2. The assembly must, at a minimum,involve two separate components thatare combined to form the good. Section334(b)(1)(D) of the Act uses theterminology ‘‘wholly assembled * * *from its component pieces.’’ Since thestatute uses the plural ‘‘pieces’’,Customs believes that Congressintended that the assembled goodincorporate more than one previouslyseparate component. Accordingly, whileit may be argued that folding a fabricover on itself and stitching that fold inplace is an assembly, Customs does notbelieve that such a process constitutesan assembly ‘‘from its componentpieces.’’ Also, Customs will notnormally consider materials used to joincomponents (for example, sewingthread, rivets) as falling within thepurview of the term ‘‘components’’ asthat term is used in this context.

3. Minor attachments andembellishments (for example, appliques,beads, spangles, embroidery, buttons)which do not appreciably affect theidentity of the good are not required tobe added to the good in the country,territory, or insular possession wherethe ‘‘component pieces’’ are assembledinto the good in order for that good toqualify as ‘‘wholly assembled’’ in asingle country, territory, or insularpossession. This principle is includedin the proposed definition because, onceassembled, the product exists whetheror not minor attachments andembellishments are attached andbecause Customs does not believe thatCongress intended that a simpleprocess, such as attaching a few buttonsor beads to a good, should be allowedto nullify the assembly rule of originprinciple. Moreover, Customs notes thatthe origin result would be the same evenif the addition of minor attachments and

embellishments were to disqualify thegood from being ‘‘wholly assembled’’ inone country, territory, or insularpossession. For example, where fabricfrom Country A is cut in Country B, allthe cut pieces are assembled into a shirtin Country C, and the buttons areattached to the shirt in Country D, evenif it were argued that the shirt does notqualify as ‘‘wholly assembled’’ inCountry C, that shirt would still have itsorigin in Country C by application of thefirst ‘‘multicountry rule’’ under section334(b)(3) of the Act because Country Cis the country in which the mostimportant assembly or manufacturingprocess occurs. For essentially the samereasons, the proposed definition of‘‘wholly assembled’’ also contains anexception for minor subassemblies (forexample, collars, cuffs, plackets,pockets).

Special Rules for Certain HTSUSHeadings and Subheadings

Section 334(b)(2)(A) of the Actprovides that the origin of a goodclassifiable under one of the HTSUSprovisions enumerated therein ‘‘shall bedetermined under subparagraph (A), (B),or (C) of paragraph (1), as appropriate’’.Subparagraph (A) provides for products‘‘wholly obtained or produced’’ in acountry, territory, or possession.Subparagraph (B) provides rules fordetermining the country of origin ofyarn, thread, twine, cordage, rope, cable,and braiding. Subparagraph (C) sets outa rule of origin for fabric.

The words ‘‘as appropriate’’ in section334(b)(2)(A) of the Act appear to havecreated some confusion regarding theapplication of that statutory provision.In this regard it has been suggested toCustoms, for example, that becauseneither a bed sheet nor a comforter(each of which is classifiable in a tariffprovision listed in section 334(b)(2)(A))is a fabric, it would not be appropriateto determine the origin of the sheet orcomforter by resorting to subparagraph(1)(C) which on its face covers onlyfabric. Customs does not agree with thissuggested interpretation because all ofthe HTSUS provisions listed in section334(b)(2)(A) cover goods that have beenadvanced beyond the form of (in otherwords, have been made from) yarn,thread, etc., or fabric. Accordingly, thesuggested interpretation would make anullity of section 334(b)(2)(A).

Customs believes that the words ‘‘asappropriate’’ in section 334(b)(2)(A) ofthe Act are simply intended to alert thereader to use common sense. Forexample, when determining the originof a bed sheet cut and finished inCountry B from fabric woven in CountryA, the appropriate rule is subparagraph

(1)(C) which concerns the origin offabrics. Subparagraph (1)(A) cannot beused because the sheet was not whollyproduced in a single country, andsubparagraph (1)(B), which concernsyarns, twine, etc., obviously is notapplicable because the sheet is madefrom a fabric. The proposed tariff shiftrules set forth in this document forgoods classified in the HTSUSprovisions enumerated in section334(b)(2)(A) of the Act have beendrafted to reflect this position.

Knit-To-Shape GarmentsSection 334(b)(2)(B) of the Act

provides that ‘‘a textile or apparelproduct which is knit to shape’’ shall beconsidered to originate in the country,territory, or insular possession in whichit is knit. This statutory provision isreflected in proposed § 102.21 bothunder the third general origin rule(paragraph (c)(3)) and in the tariff shiftrules under paragraph (e).

While § 12.130(e)(2)(iii) of theCustoms Regulations presentlyaddresses the assembly of ‘‘knit-to-shape component parts’’, section334(b)(2)(B) of the Act applies the knit-to-shape concept to the imported articleas a whole. Because of the wording usedin § 12.130, the present position ofCustoms is that if a garment contains atleast one major knit-to-shapecomponent, the presence of thatcomponent will preclude the assemblyof that garment from conferring origin.

Customs believes that the phrase‘‘knit to shape’’ should be defined forpurposes of proposed new § 102.21.Accordingly, focusing on the entirearticle (as opposed to the componentscomprising that article), Customsproposes to define the phrase ‘‘knit toshape’’ as referring to a good with anexterior surface wholly comprised offabric knitted directly to the shape usedin the good (except for neck and frontopening trim), with no considerationbeing given to minor cutting ortrimming. This means that if an articleconsists of more than one component,all exterior components (except for neckand front opening trim) must be formedby knitting into the general shape thatthey are found in the article in order forthe knitting to confer origin.

Multicountry RuleIn some cases the proposed tariff shift

rules were drafted to reflect an originresult that would be reached for specificgoods by application of the‘‘multicountry rule’’ contained insection 334(b)(3) of the Act. The‘‘multicountry rule’’ provides thatwhere the origin of a good cannot bedetermined under the general or special


rules set forth in section 334(b)(1) or (2)of the Act, the good shall be consideredto have its origin either in the country,territory, or insular possession in whichthe most important assembly ormanufacturing process occurs or (ineffect, if two or more equally importantassembly or manufacturing processesare attributable to different countries,territories or insular possessions) in thelast country, territory, or insularpossession in which important assemblyor manufacturing occurs. The two partsof this ‘‘multicountry rule’’ are also setforth separately as the proposed fourth(paragraph (c)(4)) and fifth (paragraph(c)(5)) general origin rules in recognitionof the fact that the tariff shift rules willnot always yield an origin result.

Treatment of SetsA set is two or more articles, each

classifiable under a different tariffheading, which, when packagedtogether, meet a particular need or carryout a specific activity. As such, theentire set is usually classifiable as a unitunder a single tariff subheading. In T.D.91–7, 25 Cust. Bull. 7 (1991), Customsdetermined that each component notsubstantially transformed as a result ofits inclusion in a set must beindividually marked to indicate its owncountry of origin. This markingrequirement is applicable to all goods,not just textiles. In addition, in order toprevent circumvention of internationaltextile agreements, Customs, at thedirection of the Committee for theImplementation of Textile Agreements,has for years been requiring that textilecomponents of a set be broken out on aCustoms Form 7501 (Customs Entry/Entry Summary) to meet quota/visarequirements.

Section 334(b) of the Act, and thelegislative history relating thereto, aresilent on the determination of thecountry of origin of sets. Customsbelieves that this omission was notinadvertent and that Congress intendedthat the present practice of Customscontinue for purposes of applying theorigin principles contained in section334(b). Accordingly, Customs proposesto include in new § 102.21 a paragraph(d) to provide that in the case of goodswhich are classifiable as sets and whichinclude one or more components thatare textile or apparel products, thecountry, territory, or insular possessionof origin of each such textile or apparelcomponent shall be determinedseparately under the rules set forth inparagraph (c) of § 102.21.

CommentsBefore adopting the proposed

amendments as a final rule,

consideration will be given to anywritten comments (preferably intriplicate) timely submitted to Customs.Comments submitted will be availablefor public inspection in accordance withthe Freedom of Information Act (5U.S.C. 552), § 1.4, Treasury DepartmentRegulations (31 CFR 1.4), and§ 103.11(b), Customs Regulations (19CFR 103.11(b)), on regular business daysbetween the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:30p.m. at the Regulations Branch, Office ofRegulations and Rulings, FranklinCourt, 1099 14th Street, NW., Suite4000, Washington, DC.

Executive Order 12866This document does not meet the

criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatoryaction’’ as specified in E.O. 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility ActPursuant to the provisions of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601et seq.), it is certified that, if adopted,the proposed amendments will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.Accordingly, the proposed amendmentsare not subject to the regulatory analysisor other requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603and 604.

Paperwork Reduction ActThe collection of information

requirements contained in this notice ofproposed rulemaking have beensubmitted to the Office of Managementand Budget for review in accordancewith the Paperwork Reduction Act of1980 (44 U.S.C. 3504(h)). Comments onthe collection of information should besent to the Office of Management andBudget, Attention: Desk Officer for theDepartment of the Treasury, Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs,Washington, DC. 20503. A copy shouldalso be sent to Customs at the addressset forth previously.

The collection of information in theseproposed regulations is in § 10.25. Thisinformation is used by Customs todetermine whether articles assembledabroad from textile components cut toshape in the United States from foreignfabric are entitled to reduced or duty-free treatment under section334(b)(4)(A) of the Act or under the CBI.The likely respondents are businessorganizations including importers,exporters, and manufacturers.

Estimated total annual reporting and/or recordkeeping burden: 750 hours.

Estimated average annual burden perrespondent/recordkeeper: 1.5 hours.

Estimated number of respondentsand/or recordkeepers: 500.

Estimated annual frequency ofresponses: 2,000.

Drafting Information: The principal authorof this document was Francis W. Foote,Office of Regulations and Rulings, U.S.Customs Service. However, personnel fromother offices participated in its development.

List of Subjects

19 CFR Part 10Customs duties and inspection,

Imports, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

19 CFR Part 12Customs duties and inspection,

Labeling, Marking, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements, Textilesand textile products.

19 CFR Part 102Customs duties and inspections,

Imports, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements, Rules of origin, Tradeagreements.

Proposed Amendments to theRegulations

For the reasons stated above, it isproposed to amend Parts 10, 12 and 102,Customs Regulations (19 CFR Parts 10,12 and 102), as set forth below.

PART 10—ARTICLES CONDITIONALLYFREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCEDRATE, ETC.

1. The general authority citation forPart 10 and the specific authoritycitations for §§ 10.191–10.198 continueto read, and a specific authority citationfor §§ 10.25 and 10.26 is added to read,as follows:

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (GeneralNote 20, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States), 1321, 1481, 1484, 1498, 1508,1623, 1624;

* * * * *Sections 10.25 and 10.26 also issued under

19 U.S.C. 3592;

* * * * *Sections 10.191–10.198 also issued under

19 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.;

* * * * *2. Sections 10.25 and 10.26 are added

under the heading ‘‘Articles assembledabroad with United States components’’to read as follows:

§ 10.25 Textile components cut to shape inthe United States and assembled abroad.

Where a textile component is cut toshape (but not to length, width, or both)in the United States from foreign fabricand exported to another country,territory, or insular possession forassembly into an article that is thenreturned to the United States andentered, or withdrawn from warehouse,for consumption on or after July 1, 1996,the value of the textile component shallnot be included in the dutiable value of


the article. For purposes of determiningwhether a reduction in the dutiablevalue of an imported article may beallowed under this section:

(a) The terms ‘‘textile component’’and ‘‘fabric’’ have reference only togoods covered by the definition of‘‘textile or apparel product’’ set forth in§ 102.21(b)(4) of this chapter;

(b) The operations performed abroadon the textile component shall conformto the requirements and examples setforth in § 10.16 insofar as they may beapplicable to a textile component; and

(c) The valuation and documentationprovisions of §§ 10.17, 10.18, 10.21 and10.24 shall apply.

§ 10.26 Articles assembled or processedin a beneficiary country in whole of U.S.components or ingredients; articlesassembled in a beneficiary country fromtextile components cut to shape in theUnited States.

(a) No article (except a textile article,apparel article, or petroleum, or anyproduct derived from petroleum,provided for in heading 2709 or 2710,Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States (HTSUS)) shall be treatedas a foreign article or as subject to duty:

(1) If the article is assembled orprocessed in a beneficiary country inwhole of fabricated components that area product of the United States; or

(2) If the article is processed in abeneficiary country in whole ofingredients (other than water) that are aproduct of the United States; and

(3) Neither the fabricated components,materials or ingredients after theirexportation from the United States, northe article before its importation into theUnited States, enters into the commerceof any foreign country other than abeneficiary country.

(b) No article (except a textile orapparel product) entered, or withdrawnfrom warehouse, for consumption on orafter July 1, 1996, shall be treated as aforeign article or as subject to duty:

(1) If the article is assembled in abeneficiary country in whole of textilecomponents cut to shape (but not tolength, width, or both) in the UnitedStates from foreign fabric; or

(2) If the article is assembled in abeneficiary country in whole of bothtextile components described inparagraph (b)(1) and components thatare products of the United States; and

(3) Neither the components after theirexportation from the United States, northe article before its importation into theUnited States, enters into the commerceof any foreign country other than abeneficiary country.

(c) For purposes of this section:(1) The terms ‘‘textile article’’,

‘‘apparel article’’, and ‘‘textile or apparel

product’’ cover all articles, other thanfootwear and parts of footwear, that areclassifiable in an HTSUS subheadingwhich carries a textile and apparelcategory number designation;

(2) The term ‘‘beneficiary country’’has the meaning set forth in§ 10.191(b)(1); and

(3) A component or an article shall bedeemed to have not entered into thecommerce of any foreign country otherthan a beneficiary country if:

(i) The component was shippeddirectly from the United States to abeneficiary country, or the article wasshipped directly to the United Statesfrom a beneficiary country, withoutpassing through the territory of any non-beneficiary country; or

(ii) Where the component or articlepassed through the territory of a non-beneficiary country while en route to abeneficiary country or the United States:

(A) The invoices, bills of lading, andother shipping documents pertaining tothe component or article show abeneficiary country or the United Statesas the final destination and thecomponent or article was neither sold atwholesale or retail nor subjected to anyprocessing or other operation in thenon-beneficiary country; or

(B) The component or articleremained under the control of thecustoms authority of the non-beneficiarycountry and was not subjected tooperations in that non-beneficiarycountry other than loading andunloading and activities necessary topreserve the component or article ingood condition.

3. In § 10.195, paragraphs (d) and (e)are redesignated as paragraphs (e) and(f) respectively and a new paragraph (d)is added to read as follows:

§ 10.195 Country of origin criteria.

* * * * *(d) Textile components cut to shape

in the U.S. The percentage referred to inparagraph (c) of this section may beattributed in whole or in part to the costor value of a textile component that iscut to shape (but not to length, width,or both) in the U.S. (including theCommonwealth of Puerto Rico) fromforeign fabric and exported to abeneficiary country for assembly into anarticle that is then returned to the U.S.and entered, or withdrawn fromwarehouse, for consumption on or afterJuly 1, 1996. For purposes of thisparagraph, the terms ‘‘textilecomponent’’ and ‘‘fabric’’ have referenceonly to goods covered by the definitionof ‘‘textile or apparel product’’ set forthin § 102.21(b)(4) of this chapter.* * * * *

PART 12—SPECIAL CLASSES OFMERCHANDISE

1. The authority citation for Part 12continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202(General Note 20, Harmonized TariffSchedule of the United States (HTSUS)),1624;

* * * * *Sections 12.130 and 12.131 also issued

under 7 U.S.C. 1854;

* * * * *

§ 12.130 [Amended]2. In § 12.130:a. The last sentence of paragraph (b)

is amended by adding after ‘‘Mexico’’the words ‘‘, and the origin of textileand apparel products covered by§ 102.21 of this chapter,’’;

b. The last sentence of theintroductory text of paragraph (d) isamended by adding after ‘‘Mexico’’ thewords ‘‘, and the origin of textile andapparel products covered by § 102.21 ofthis chapter,’’; and

c. The introductory text of paragraph(e)(1) is amended by adding after‘‘Mexico’’ the words ‘‘and except fortextile and apparel products’’.

PART 102—RULES OF ORIGIN

1. The authority citation for Part 102is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (GeneralNote 20, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States), 1624, 3314, 3592.

2. Section 102.0 is amended byremoving the word ‘‘This’’ at thebeginning of the first sentence andadding, in its place, the words ‘‘Exceptin the case of goods covered by § 102.21,this’’ and by adding a sentence at theend to read as follows:

§ 102.0 Scope.* * * The rules for determining the

country of origin of textile and apparelproducts set forth in § 102.21 apply forthe foregoing purposes and for the otherpurposes stated in that section.

2. Section 102.11 is amended byadding an introductory paragraph beforeparagraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 102.11 General rules.The following rules shall apply for

purposes of determining the country oforigin of imported goods other thantextile and apparel products covered by§ 102.21.* * * * *

3. Section 102.21 is added to read asfollows:

§ 102.21 Textile and apparel products.(a) Applicability. Except for purposes

of determining whether goods originate


in Israel or are the growth, product, ormanufacture of Israel, and except asotherwise provided for by statute, theprovisions of this section shall controlthe determination of the country oforigin of imported textile and apparelproducts for purposes of the Customslaws and the administration ofquantitative restrictions. The provisionsof this section shall apply to goodsentered, or withdrawn from warehouse,for consumption on or after July 1, 1996.

(b) Definitions. The following termsshall have the meanings indicated whenused in this section:

(1) Country of origin. The term‘‘country of origin’’ means the country,territory, or insular possession in whicha good originates or of which a good isthe growth, product, or manufacture.

(2) Fabric-making process. A ‘‘fabric-making process’’ is any manufacturingoperation which begins with polymers,fibers, filaments (including strips),yarns, twine, cordage, or rope, andresults in a textile fabric.

(3) Knit to shape. The term ‘‘knit toshape’’ applies to any good with anexterior surface area wholly comprisedof one or more fabrics knitted orcrocheted directly to the shape used inthe good (except for fabric used fortrimming the neck or front opening).Minor cutting or trimming of fabric willnot affect the determination of whethera good is ‘‘knit to shape.’’

(4) Textile or apparel product. A‘‘textile or apparel product’’ is any goodclassifiable in Chapters 50 through 63,Harmonized Tariff Schedule of theUnited States (HTSUS), and any goodclassifiable under one of the followingHTSUS headings or subheadings:3005.903921.12.153921.13.153921.90.25504202.12.40–804202.22.40–804202.32.40–954202.92.15–304202.92.60–906405.20.606406.10.776406.10.906406.99.15

65016502650365046505.906601.10–997019.10.157019.10.287019.208708.2188049113.90.409404.90.109404.90.80–959502.919612.10.9010

(5) Wholly assembled. The term‘‘wholly assembled’’ when used withreference to a good means that allcomponents, of which there must be atleast two, preexisted in essentially thesame condition as found in the finishedgood and were combined to form thefinished good in a single country,territory, or insular possession. Minorattachments and minor embellishments(for example, appliques, beads,spangles, embroidery, buttons) notappreciably affecting the identity of thegood, and minor subassemblies (forexample, collars, cuffs, plackets,pockets), will not affect the status of agood as ‘‘wholly assembled’’ in a singlecountry, territory, or insular possession.

(c) General rules. Subject to paragraph(d) of this section, the country of originof a textile or apparel product shall bedetermined by sequential application ofparagraphs (c) (1) through (5) of thissection and, in each case whereappropriate to the specific context, byapplication of the additionalrequirements or conditions of §§ 102.12through 102.19 of this part.

(1) The country of origin of a textileor apparel product is the single country,territory, or insular possession in whichthe good was wholly obtained orproduced.

(2) Where the country of origin of atextile or apparel product cannot bedetermined under paragraph (c)(1) ofthis section, the country of origin of thegood is the single country, territory, orinsular possession in which eachforeign material incorporated in that

good underwent an applicable change intariff classification, and/or met anyother requirement, specified for thegood in paragraph (e) of this section.

(3) Where the country of origin of atextile or apparel product cannot bedetermined under paragraph (c) (1) or(2) of this section:

(i) If the good was knit to shape, thecountry of origin of the good is thesingle country, territory, or insularpossession in which the good was knit;or

(ii) If the good was not knit to shapeand the good was wholly assembled ina single country, territory, or insularpossession, the country of origin of thegood is the country, territory, or insularpossession in which the good waswholly assembled.

(4) Where the country of origin of atextile or apparel product cannot bedetermined under paragraph (c) (1), (2)or (3) of this section, the country oforigin of the good is the single country,territory, or insular possession in whichthe most important assembly ormanufacturing process occurred.

(5) Where the country of origin of atextile or apparel product cannot bedetermined under paragraph (c) (1), (2),(3) or (4) of this section, the country oforigin of the good is the last country,territory, or insular possession in whichan important assembly or manufacturingprocess occurred.

(d) Treatment of sets. Where a goodclassifiable in the HTSUS as a setincludes one or more components thatare textile or apparel products and asingle country of origin for all of thecomponents of the set cannot bedetermined under paragraph (c) of thissection, the country of origin of eachcomponent of the set that is a textile orapparel product shall be determinedseparately under paragraph (c) of thissection.

(e) Specific rules by tariffclassification. The following rules shallapply for purposes of determining thecountry of origin of a textile or apparelproduct under paragraph (c)(2) of thissection:

HTSUS Tariff shift and/or other requirements

3005.90 ................................ If the good contains pharmaceutical substances, a change to subheading 3005.90 from any other heading; or, Ifthe good does not contain pharmaceutical substances, a change to subheading 3005.90 from any other head-ing, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through5408, 5512 through 5516, 5601 through 5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5809, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and6001 through 6002.

3921.12.15 ........................... A change to subheading 3921.12.15 from any other heading.3921.13.15 ........................... A change to subheading 3921.13.15 from any other heading.3921.90.2550 ....................... A change to subheading 3921.90.2550 from any other heading.4202.12.40–4202.12.80 ....... A change to subheading 4202.12.40 through 4202.12.80 from any other heading, provided that the change is the

result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.



4202.22.40–4202.22.80 ....... A change to subheading 4202.22.40 through 4202.22.80 from any other heading, provided that the change is theresult of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.




5001–5002 ........................... A change to heading 5001 through 5002 from any other chapter.5003 ..................................... A change to heading 5003 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of garnetting. If the

change to heading 5003 is not the result of garnetting, the country of origin of the good is the country of originof the good prior to its becoming waste.

5004–5006 ........................... (1) If the good is of staple fibers, a change to heading 5004 through 5006 from any heading outside that group,provided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

(2) If the good is of filaments, a change to heading 5004 through 5006 from any heading outside that group, pro-vided that the change is the result of an extrusion process.

5007 ..................................... A change to heading 5007 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making proc-ess.

5101–5103 ........................... A change to heading 5101 through 5103 from any other chapter.5104 ..................................... A change to heading 5104 from any other heading.5105 ..................................... A change to heading 5105 from any other chapter.5106–5110 ........................... A change to heading 5106 through 5110 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a spinning process.5111–5113 ........................... A change to heading 5111 through 5113 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a fabric-making process.5201 ..................................... A change to heading 5201 from any other chapter.5202 ..................................... A change to heading 5202 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of garnetting. If the

change to heading 5202 is not the result of garnetting, the country of origin of the good is the country of originof the good prior to its becoming waste.

5203 ..................................... A change to heading 5203 from any other chapter.5204–5207 ........................... A change to heading 5204 through 5207 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a spinning process.5208–5212 ........................... A change to heading 5208 through 5212 from any heading outside that group provided the change is the result of

a fabric-making process.5301–5305 ........................... (1) Except for waste, a change to heading 5301 through 5305 from any other chapter.

(2) For waste, a change to heading 5301 through 5305 from any heading outside that group, provided that thechange is the result of garnetting. If the change is not the result of garnetting, the country of origin of the goodis the country of origin of the good prior to its becoming waste.

5306–5307 ........................... A change to heading 5306 through 5307 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-sult of a spinning process.

5308 ..................................... (1) Except for paper yarns, a change to heading 5308 from any other heading, provided that the change is the re-sult of a spinning process.

(2) For paper yarns, a change to heading 5308 from any other heading, except from heading 4707, 4801 through4806, 4811, and 4818.

5309–5311 ........................... A change to heading 5309 through 5311 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-sult of a fabric-making process.

5401–5406 ........................... A change to heading 5401 through 5406 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of an ex-trusion process.


5501–5502 ........................... A change to heading 5501 through 5502 from any other chapter, provided that the change is the result of an ex-trusion process.

5503–5504 ........................... A change to heading 5503 through 5504 from any other chapter, except from Chapter 54.5505 ..................................... A change to heading 5505 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of garnetting. If the

change is not the result of garnetting, the country of origin of the good is the country of origin of the good priorto its becoming waste.

5506–5507 ........................... A change to heading 5506 through 5507 from any other chapter, except from Chapter 54.5508–5511 ........................... A change to heading 5508 through 5511 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a spinning process.5512–5516 ........................... A change to heading 5512 through 5516 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a fabric-making process.5601 ..................................... (1) A change to wadding of heading 5601 from any other heading, except from heading 5105, 5203, and 5501

through 5507.(2) A change to flock, textile dust, mill neps, or articles of wadding, of heading 5601 from any other heading or

from wadding of heading 5601.5602–5603 ........................... A change to heading 5602 through 5603 from any heading outside that group, provided that the change is the re-

sult of a fabric-making process.5604 ..................................... (1) If the textile component is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including

strips, to heading 5604 from any other heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5408,and 5501 through 5502, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process.

(2) If the textile component is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5604 from any other heading,except from heading 5004 through 5006, 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and5508 through 5511, and provided that the change is the result of a spinning process.



5605–5606 ........................... If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to heading5605 through 5606 from any other heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5408, and5501 through 5502, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process; or

If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5605 through 5606 from any other heading, ex-cept from heading 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, andprovided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

5607 ..................................... If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to heading5607 from any other heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5406, and 5501 through5511, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process; or

If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5607 from any other heading, except fromheading 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, and providedthat the change is the result of a spinning process.

5608 ..................................... (1) A change to netting of heading 5608 from any other heading, except from heading 5804, and provided thatthe change is the result of a fabric-making process.

(2) A change to fishing nets or other made up nets of heading 5608:(a) If the good does not contain nontextile attachments, from any other heading, except from heading 5804 and

6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process; or(b) If the good contains nontextile attachments, from any heading, including a change from another good of head-

ing 5608, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, terri-tory, or insular possession.

5609 ..................................... (1) If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to heading5609 from any heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5406, 5501 through 5502, and5604 through 5607, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process.

(2) If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5609 from any other heading, except fromheading 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, 5508 through 5511, and 5604 through5607, and provided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

5701–5705 ........................... A change to heading 5701 through 5705 from any other chapter.5801–5803 ........................... A change to heading 5801 through 5803 from any other heading, including a heading within that group, except

from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512through 5516, and 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5804.10 ................................ A change to subheading 5804.10 from any other heading, except from heading 5608, and provided that thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.

5804.21–5804.30 ................. A change to subheading 5804.21 through 5804.30 from any other heading, provided that the change is the resultof a fabric-making process.

5805 ..................................... A change to heading 5805 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, and 5512 through 5516, and provided that the change is the re-sult of a fabric-making process.

5806 ..................................... A change to heading 5806 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, and 5801 through 5803, and provided thatthe change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5807 ..................................... A change to heading 5807 from any other chapter, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, and 6001 through 6002,and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5808.10 ................................ (1) If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to sub-heading 5808.10 from any heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5406, 5501 through5502, and 5604 through 5607, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process.

(2) If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5808.10 from any other heading, exceptfrom heading 5106 through 5113, 5204 through 5212, 5306 through 5311, 5401 through 5408, 5508 through5516, and 5604 through 5607, and provided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

5808.90 ................................ (1) For ornamental fabric trimmings, a change to subheading 5808.90 from any other chapter, except from head-ing 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, and 5512 through5516, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

(2) For nonfabric ornamental trimmings:(a) If the trimming is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change to subheading 5808.90 from any other

heading, except from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5408, 5501 through 5502, and 5604 through5607, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process; or

(b) If the trimming is of staple fibers, a change to subheading 5808.90 from any other heading, except from head-ing 5106 through 5113, 5204 through 5212, 5306 through 5311, 5401 through 5408, 5508 through 5516, and5604 through 5607, and provided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

(3) For tassels, pompons and similar articles:(a) If the good has been wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession, a change to sub-

heading 5808.90 from any other heading;(b) If the good has not been wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession and the good is

of staple fibers, a change to subheading 5808.90 from any other heading, except from heading 5004 through5006, 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, and 5604 through5607, and provided that the change is the result of a spinning process; or

(c) If the good has not been wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession and the good isof filaments, including strips, a change to subheading 5808.90 from any other heading, except from heading5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5406, and 5501 through 5502, and provided that the change is the result ofan extrusion process.

5809 ..................................... A change to heading 5809 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5801 through 5802, 5804, and 5806, andprovided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5810.10 ................................ A change to subheading 5810.10 from any other heading.



5810.91–5810.99 ................. A change to subheading 5810.91 through 5810.99 from any other chapter, except from heading 5007, 5111through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through5603, 5608, 5903, 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-makingprocess.

5811 ..................................... A change to heading 5811 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5601 through 5604, 5801 through 5804,5806, 5809 through 5810, 5903, 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.

5901–5903 ........................... A change to heading 5901 through 5903 from any other heading, including a heading within that group, exceptfrom heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512through 5516, 5803, 5806, 5808, and 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making proc-ess.

5904 ..................................... A change to heading 5904 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of the good being whol-ly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

5905 ..................................... A change to heading 5905 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5603, 5803, 5806, 5808, and 6002, and pro-vided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5906–5907 ........................... A change to heading 5906 through 5907 from any other chapter, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113,5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5803, 5806, 5808, and 6002,and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5908 ..................................... (1) Except for yarns, twine, cord, and braid, a change to heading 5908 from any other heading, except fromheading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through5516, 5801 through 5802, 5806, 5808, and 6001 through 6002.

(2) For yarns, twine, cord, and braid:(a) If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change to heading 5908 from any other heading, ex-

cept from heading 5001 through 5007, 5401 through 5406, and 5501 through 5502, and provided that thechange is the result of an extrusion process; or

(b) If the good is of staple fibers, a change to heading 5908 from any other heading, except from heading 5106through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, and 5605 through 5607, andprovided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

5909 ..................................... A change to heading 5909 from any other chapter, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808, and6001 through 6002, and provided that the good does not contain armor or accessories of nontextile materialand provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process; or

A change to textile hosepiping with armor or accessories of nontextile material, of heading 5909, from any head-ing, including a change from another good of heading 5909, provided that the change is the result of the goodbeing wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

5910 ..................................... (1) For belts and belting of braid, rope, or cord:(a) If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to heading

5910 from any other heading, except from heading 5001 through 5006, 5401 through 5406, and 5501 through5502, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process; or

(b) If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to heading 5910 from any other heading, except fromheading 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, and providedthat the change is the result of a spinning process.

(2) For fabric belting and belts, not braids and not combined with nontextile components, whether or not rein-forced with metal or other material, a change to heading 5910 from any other heading, except from heading5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516,5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808 through 5809, and 6001 through 6002, and provided thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.

(3) For fabric belts, including belts of braided materials, combined with nontextile components, whether or not re-inforced with metal or other material, a change to heading 5910 from any heading, including a change from an-other good of heading 5910, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in asingle country, territory, or insular possession.

5911.10–5911.40 ................. A change to subheading 5911.10 through 5911.40 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

5911.90 ................................ (1) For goods of yarn, rope, cord, braid:(a) If the good is of continuous filaments, including strips, a change of those filaments, including strips, to sub-

heading 5911.90 from any other heading, except from heading 5001 through 5006, 5401 through 5406, and5501 through 5502, and provided that the change is the result of an extrusion process; or

(b) If the good is of staple fibers, a change of those fibers to subheading 5911.90 from any other heading, exceptfrom heading 5106 through 5110, 5204 through 5207, 5306 through 5308, and 5508 through 5511, and pro-vided that the change is the result of a spinning process.

(2) If the good is a fabric, a change to subheading 5911.90 from any other heading, except from heading 5007,5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602through 5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5809, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that the change is the re-sult of a fabric-making process.

(3) If the good is a made up article, a change to subheading 5911.90 from any heading, including a change fromanother good of heading 5911, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in asingle country, territory, or insular possession.




6101–6117 ........................... (1) If the good is not knit to shape and consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled goodof heading 6101 through 6117 from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result of thegood being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good is not knit to shape and does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to heading6101 through 6117 from any heading outside that group, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903,5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the re-sult of a fabric-making process.

(3) If the good is knit to shape, a change to heading 6101 through 6117 from any heading outside that group,provided that the knit-to-shape components are knit in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

6201–6208 ........................... (1) If the good consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled good of heading 6201through 6208 from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result of the good being whollyassembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to heading 6201 through 6208 fromany heading outside that group, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809 through5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the resultof a fabric-making process.

6209.10.0000–6209.20.5035 (1) If the good consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled good of subheading6209.10.0000 through 6209.20.5035 from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result ofthe good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to subheading 6209.10.0000 through6209.20.5035 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212,5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change isthe result of a fabric-making process.

6209.20.5040 ....................... A change to subheading 6209.20.5040 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113,5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801through 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and providedthat the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

6209.20.5045–6209.90.9000 (1) If the good consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled good of subheading6209.20.5045 through 6209.90.9000 from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result ofthe good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to subheading 6209.20.5045 through6209.90.9000 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212,5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change isthe result of a fabric-making process.


(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to heading 6210 through 6212 fromany heading outside that group, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809 through5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, 6001 through 6002, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.

6213–6214 ........................... A change to heading 6213 through 6214 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113,5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801through 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and providedthat the change is the result of a fabric-making process.


(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to heading 6215 through 6217 fromany heading outside that group, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809 through5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6217, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the resultof a fabric-making process.

6301–6306 ........................... A change to heading 6301 through 6306 from any heading outside that group, except from heading 5007, 5111through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and sub-heading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

6307.10 ................................ A change to subheading 6307.10 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through5804, 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.

6307.20 ................................ A change to subheading 6307.20 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of the goodbeing wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

6307.90 ................................ A change to subheading 6307.90 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through5804, 5806, 5807 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that thechange is the result of a fabric-making process.



6308 ..................................... A change to heading 6308 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801 through 5804,5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that the change isthe result of a fabric-making process.

6309–6310 ........................... The country, territory, or insular possession in which the good was last collected and packaged for shipment.6405.20.60 ........................... A change to subheading 6405.20.60 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of the good

being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.6406.10.77 ........................... (1) If the good consists of two or more components, a change to subheading 6406.10.77 from any other heading,

provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insu-lar possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to subheading 6406.10.77 from any otherheading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5608, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808 through 5810, 5903, 5906through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

6406.10.90 ........................... (1) If the good consists of two or more components, a change to subheading 6406.10.90 from any other heading,provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insu-lar possession.


6406.99.15 ........................... (1) If the good consists of two or more components, a change to subheading 6406.99.15 from any other heading,provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insu-lar possession.


6501 ..................................... (1) If the good consists of two or more components, a change to heading 6501 from any other heading, providedthat the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular pos-session.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to heading 6501 from any other heading,except from heading 5603, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.


(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to heading 6502 from any other heading,except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516,5602 through 5603, 5608, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808 through 5810, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.


(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to heading 6503 from any other heading,except from heading 5603, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.


(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to heading 6504 from any other heading,except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516,5602 through 5603, 5608, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808 through 5810, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

6505.90 ................................ (1) If the good consists of two or more components, a change to subheading 6505.90 from any other heading,provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insu-lar possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more components, a change to subheading 6505.90 from any otherheading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through5516, 5602 through 5603, 5608, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5808 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and6001 through 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

6601.10–6601.91 ................. A change to subheading 6601.10 through 6601.91 from any other heading, provided that the change is the resultof the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

7019.10.15 ........................... (1) If the good is of filaments, a change to subheading 7019.10.15 from any other heading, provided that thechange is the result of an extrusion process.

(2) If the good is of staple fibers, a change to subheading 7019.10.15 from any other subheading, except fromsubheading 7019.10.30 through 7019.10.90 and 7019.31 through 7019.90, and provided that the change is theresult of a spinning process.

7019.10.28 ........................... (1) If the good is of filaments, a change to subheading 7019.10.28 from any other heading, provided that thechange is the result of an extrusion process.

(2) If the good is of staple fibers, a change to subheading 7019.10.28 from any other subheading, except fromsubheading 7019.10.30 through 7019.10.90 and 7019.31 through 7019.90, and provided that the change is theresult of a spinning process.

7019.20 ................................ A change to subheading 7019.20 from any other heading, provided that the change is the result of a fabric-mak-ing process.



8708.21 ................................ (1) For seat belts not combined with nontextile components, a change to subheading 8708.21 from any otherheading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through5408, and 5512 through 5516, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

(2) For seat belts combined with nontextile components, a change to an assembled good of subheading 8708.21from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in asingle country, territory, or insular possession.

8804 ..................................... (1) If the good consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled good of heading 8804 fromunassembled components, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a sin-gle country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to heading 8804 from any other head-ing, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through5408, 5512 through 5516, 5603, 5801 through 5804, 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and6001 through 6002, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-makingprocess.

9113.90.40 ........................... (1) If the good consists of two or more component parts, a change to an assembled good of subheading9113.90.40 from unassembled components, provided that the change is the result of the good being wholly as-sembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

(2) If the good does not consist of two or more component parts, a change to subheading 9113.90.40 from anyother heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5603, 5801 through 5802, 5806, 5809, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001through 6002, and subheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

9404.90.10 ........................... A change to subheading 9404.90.10 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113,5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602 through 5603, 5801through 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, and subheading 6307.90,and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

9404.90.80–9404.90.95 ....... A change to subheading 9404.90.80 through 9404.90.95 from any other heading, except from heading 5007,5111 through 5113, 5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5602through 5603, 5801 through 5806, 5809 through 5811, 5903, 5906 through 5907, and 6001 through 6002, andsubheading 6307.90, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

9502.91 ................................ A change to an assembled good of subheading 9502.91 from unassembled components, provided that thechange is the result of the good being wholly assembled in a single country, territory, or insular possession.

9612.10.9010 ....................... A change to subheading 9612.10.9010 from any other heading, except from heading 5007, 5111 through 5113,5208 through 5212, 5309 through 5311, 5407 through 5408, 5512 through 5516, 5603, 5806, 5903, 5906through 5907, and 6002, and provided that the change is the result of a fabric-making process.

Approved: May 15, 1995.John P. Simpson,Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.George J. Weise,Commissioner of Customs.[FR Doc. 95–12655 Filed 5–22–95; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4820–02–P

fede

ral r

egiste

r

27393

TuesdayMay 23, 1995

Part III

The PresidentMemorandum of May 17, 1995—Certification Regarding Use of theExchange Stabilization Fund and FederalReserve in Relation to the EconomicCrisis in Mexico

Presidential Documents

27395

Federal Register

Vol. 60, No. 99


Title 3—

The President

Memorandum of May 17, 1995

Certification Regarding Use of the Exchange StabilizationFund and Federal Reserve in Relation to the Economic Crisisin Mexico

Memorandum for the Secretary of the Treasury

On January 31, 1995, I approved a program of assistance to Mexico, inthe form of swap facilities and securities guarantees in an amount notto exceed $20 million, using the Exchange Stabilization Fund (the ‘‘ESFprogram’’).

By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the lawsof the United States, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code,and section 406 of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Rescis-sions for the Department of Defense to Preserve and Enhance Military Readi-ness Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–6), I hereby certify that:

(1) There is no projected cost (as defined in the Federal Credit ReformAct of 1990) to the United States from the proposed swap transaction.

(2) All loans, credits, guarantees, and currency swaps to Mexico fromthe Exchange Stabilization Fund or the Federal Reserve System are adequatelybacked to ensure that all United States funds are repaid.

(3) The Government of Mexico is making progress in ensuring an independ-ent central bank.

(4) Mexico has in effect a significant economic reform effort.

(5) The Executive Branch has provided the documents requested by HouseResolution 80 adopted March 1, 1995, and described in paragraphs (1)through (28) of that Resolution. All documents identified as responsiveto the Resolution have been provided to the entire House of Representatives.Pursuant to the terms of the Resolution, the Executive Branch has notprovided those documents as to which the Executive Branch has informedthe House that it would be inconsistent with the public interest to providethe documents to the House. Pursuant to arrangements for safekeeping ofclassified materials in House facilities, classified documents have been pro-vided to the House by making them available either at designated, secureHouse facilities or at Executive Branch facilities. Each agency, includingthe Federal Reserve Board, has advised the House of the procedures employedby that agency to provide the documents requested by House Resolution80.I have been informed that the Board of Governors of the Federal ReserveSystem has provided the documents requested by House Resolution 80 anddescribed in paragraphs (1) through (28) of that Resolution.

27396 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Presidential Documents

I hereby delegate to you the reporting requirement contained in section406 of Public Law 104–6. You are authorized and requested to report thiscertification immediately to the Speaker of the House and appropriate con-gressional committees, as defined in section 407 of Public Law 104–6.

I also hereby delegate to you the reporting requirement contained in section403 of Public Law 104–6.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the FederalRegister.

œ–THE WHITE HOUSE,Washington, May 17, 1995.

[FR Doc. 95–12812

Filed 5–19–95; 4:42 pm]

Billing code 4810–25–M

fede

ral r

egiste

r

27397

TuesdayMay 23, 1995

Part IV

The PresidentProclamation 6803—National MaritimeDay, 1995


27399

Federal Register

Vol. 60, No. 99


Title 3—

The President

Proclamation 6803 of May 19, 1995

National Maritime Day, 1995

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

The United States owes much to our merchant sailors. At our Nation’sbeginning, these outstanding citizens opened new avenues of commerceand helped nurture a fledgling democracy into a beacon of freedom forpeople around the world. Since President Franklin D. Roosevelt first pro-claimed National Maritime Day 62 years ago, the U.S. Merchant Marinehas built on its legacy of patriotism. Its great tradition of courage andvalor is an inspiration to all Americans.

This year, as we honor those who served and sacrificed for our Nationduring World War II, the contributions of the U.S. Merchant Marine area special source of pride. We will always remember the heroism of thosemariners and the dangers they faced to protect our liberty.

America’s Merchant Marine and civilian seafarers have put themselves atrisk time and again to support our Armed Forces. They provided pivotalservice during OPERATION DESERT STORM, during America’s humanitarianmission in Somalia, and throughout OPERATION RESTORE DEMOCRACYin Haiti.

Today, our country remains determined to maintain a strong U.S. flag pres-ence on the high seas, a commitment central to advancing our Nation’snational and economic security. I urge Americans to join efforts in supportof maritime revitalization legislation and our ongoing shipbuilding produc-tion program. Americans’ pioneering spirit has endowed our Nation withthe most innovative maritime technologies and the most skilled maritimelabor force on Earth. Working together, we can preserve this critical advantagefor generations to come.

In recognition of the importance of the U.S. Merchant Marine, the Congress,by a joint resolution approved May 20, 1933, has designated May 22 ofeach year as ‘‘National Maritime Day’’ and has authorized and requestedthe President to issue annually a proclamation calling for its appropriateobservance.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of the United Statesof America, do hereby proclaim May 22, 1995, as National Maritime Day.I urge the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriateprograms, ceremonies, and activities and by displaying the flag of the UnitedStates at their homes and in their communities. I also request that allships sailing under the American flag dress ship on that day.

27400 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Presidential Documents

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this nineteenth dayof May, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-five, andof the Independence of the United States of America the two hundredand nineteenth.

œ–[FR Doc. 95–12847

Filed 5–22–95; 11:24 am]

Billing code 3195–01–P

Federal RegisterReader Aids

INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE

At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Registerpublishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), whichlists parts and sections affected by documents published since therevision date of each title.

Federal Register

Index, finding aids & general information 202–523–5227 Public inspection announcement line 523–5215 Corrections to published documents 523–5237 Document drafting information 523–3187 Machine readable documents 523–4534

Code of Federal Regulations

Index, finding aids & general information 523–5227 Printing schedules 523–3419

Laws

Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 Additional information 523–5230


Executive orders and proclamations 523–5230 Public Papers of the Presidents 523–5230 Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents 523–5230

The United States Government Manual

General information 523–5230

Other Services

Data base and machine readable specifications 523–4534 Guide to Record Retention Requirements 523–3187 Legal staff 523–4534 Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 Public Laws Update Service (PLUS) 523–6641 TDD for the hearing impaired 523–5229

ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD

Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Lawnumbers, Federal Register finding aids, and list ofdocuments on public inspection. 202–275–0920

FAX-ON-DEMAND

You may access our Fax-On-Demand service. You only need a faxmachine and there is no charge for the service except for longdistance telephone charges the user may incur. The list ofdocuments on public inspection and the daily Federal Register’stable of contents are available using this service. The documentnumbers are 7050-Public Inspection list and 7051-Table ofContents list. The public inspection list will be updatedimmediately for documents filed on an emergency basis.NOTE: YOU WILL ONLY GET A LISTING OF DOCUMENTS ONFILE AND NOT THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Documents onpublic inspection may be viewed and copied in our office locatedat 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 700. The Fax-On-Demandtelephone number is: 301–713–6905

i

CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MAY

Vol. 60, No. 99


FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATES, MAY

21033–21424...........................1

21425–21698...........................2

21699–21972...........................3

21973–22246...........................4

22247–22454...........................5

22455–24534...........................8

24535–24760...........................9

24761–25118.........................10

25119–25600.........................11

25601–25838.........................12

25839–25982.........................15

25983–26338.........................16

26339–26666.........................17

26667–26822.........................18

26823–26976.........................19

26977–27220.........................22

27221–27400.........................23

3 CFR

Proclamations:6778.................................252666792.................................214236793.................................216966794.................................219716795.................................222476796.................................224536797.................................258396798.................................258416799.................................263376800.................................263396801.................................269756802.................................272196803.................................27399Executive Orders:12473 (See E.O.

12960) ..........................2664712484 (See E.O.

12960) ..........................2664712550 (See E.O.

12960) ..........................2664712586 (See E.O.

12960) ..........................2664712613 (Revoked in

part by E.O.12959) ..........................24757

12708 (See E.O.12960) ..........................26647

12767 (See E.O.12960) ..........................26647

12888 (See E.O.12960) ..........................26647

12936 (See E.O.12960) ..........................26647

12957 (Revoked inpart by E.O.12959) ..........................24757

12959...............................2475712960 of May 12,

1995 .............................26647Administrative Orders:Presidential Determinations:No. 95–18 of April 21,

1995 .............................22447No. 95–19 of April 21,

1995 .............................22449No. 95–20 of May 1,

1995 .............................22245Memorandum:May 17, 1995...................27395Notices:May 10, 1995...................25599

5 CFR

Ch. XXI ............................22249185...................................22249532.......................22455, 26341630.......................22455, 26977890.......................21590, 266671603.................................24535

Proposed Rules:591...................................25150870...................................21759871...................................21759872...................................21759873...................................21759874...................................21759

7 CFR

6.......................................2142528.....................................2103352.....................................2682375.....................................21034110...................................25119354...................................24535400...................................21035404...................................26669457...................................25601704...................................22456723...................................22458911...................................24537915...................................24537958...................................24539981...................................26342989.......................26344, 26346998...................................263481036.................................222551410.................................224561464.....................21036, 224581468.................................224601494.................................210371924.................................245401980.....................26350, 26980Proposed Rules:11.....................................2704429.....................................25624278...................................256251007.................................250141099.................................256281205.................................219991910.................................256291944.................................256291951.................................256291965.................................256293200.................................255943411.................................25594

8 CFR

3.......................................26351103...................................21979208...................................21973210...................................21973212...................................26676214...................................21979240...................................21973242...................................21973245...................................26676245a.....................21039, 21973247a.................................21973248...................................26676Proposed Rules:1.......................................24573

ii Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Reader Aids

13.....................................24573103.......................24573, 25856208...................................24573235...................................26696242...................................24573299...................................25856

9 CFR78.....................................2454785.....................................2635392.........................25119, 2635594.........................21428, 2512098.........................25119, 26355113...................................24547Proposed Rules:3.......................................2704950.....................................2637751.....................................2637777.....................................2637778.....................................2637792.....................................2515198.....................................25151101...................................26381112...................................24584113 ..........24584, 26381, 26384308.......................22311, 25869310.......................22311, 25869318.......................22311, 25869320.......................22311, 25869325.......................22311, 25869326.......................22311, 25869327.......................22311, 25869381.......................22311, 25869

10 CFR2...........................22461, 2454911.....................................2635519.....................................2454920.........................24549, 2598325.....................................2635530.....................................2454932.....................................2454940.....................................2454950.....................................2454951.........................22461, 2454954.....................................2246160.....................................2454961.....................................2454970.....................................2454971.....................................2454972.....................................2454973.....................................2454974.....................................2454976.....................................24549150...................................24549Proposed Rules:50.....................................2201073.....................................24803430...................................27051

12 CFR

25.....................................22156203.......................22156, 22223228...................................22156265...................................22256308...................................24761345...................................22156563e.................................22156707.......................21699, 25121Proposed Rule:Ch. XVII ...........................25174704...................................27240741...................................272401710.................................25162

13 CFR

123...................................22495

Proposed Rule:122...................................22311

14 CFR

25.....................................2635729.....................................2682339 ...........21041, 21429, 21976,

21977, 21979, 22496, 22498,22499, 22501, 24553, 24762,25122, 25124, 25604, 25606,25608, 25610, 25611, 25985,26683, 26824, 27005, 27007,27008, 27016, 27018, 27020,

2702371 ...........21433, 21434, 21700,

24555, 24556, 2659491.....................................2598097 ............25125, 25127, 25128121...................................247651215.................................258431245.................................21042Proposed Rules:39 ...........21053, 21054, 21056,

21470, 21471, 21772, 21774,22011, 22013, 24587, 24589,25869, 26003, 26005, 26007,26697, 26700, 26702, 26846,

27054, 27056, 2705871 ...........21473, 21776, 24592,

24593, 24594, 24595, 25175,25871, 26384, 26385

91.....................................25554221...................................26848

15 CFR

730...................................25268732...................................25268734...................................25268736...................................25268738...................................25268740...................................25268742...................................25268744...................................25268746...................................25268748...................................25268750...................................25268752...................................25268754...................................25268756...................................25268758...................................25268760...................................25268762...................................25268764...................................25268766...................................25268768...................................25268770...................................25268772...................................25268774...................................25268799...................................25480Proposed Rules:292...................................25872

16 CFR

309...................................269261000.................................26824Proposed Rules:400...................................27240402...................................27241404...................................27242413...................................27243417...................................27244418...................................24245444...................................24805

17 CFR

1.......................................25988

5.......................................2598831.....................................25988202...................................26604211...................................24968228...................................26604229...................................26604230...................................26604232...................................26604239...................................26604240...................................26604270...................................26604274...................................26604

18 CFR

2...........................22257, 2250334.....................................2250335.........................22257, 2250341.....................................22503131...................................22503292...................................22503294...................................22503382...................................22503385...................................22503

19 CFR

7.......................................2104311.....................................2104312.....................................2104318.....................................2104319.....................................2104324.....................................2104354.....................................21043101...................................21043102...................................21043111...................................21043114...................................21043123...................................21043128...................................21043132...................................21043134...................................21043141...................................21043145...................................21043146...................................21043148...................................21043151...................................21043152...................................21043177...................................21043181...................................21043191...................................21043353...................................25130355...................................25130Proposed Rules:10.........................22312, 2737812.........................22312, 27378101...................................25176102.......................22312, 27378134...................................22312177...................................22312162...................................21778201...................................26851

20 CFR

217...................................21982232...................................22261344...................................22261625...................................25560641...................................26574655...................................26970Proposed Rules:416...................................26387702...................................22537703...................................22537

21 CFR

5...........................24766, 26825172...................................21700

178...................................22269436...................................27221442...................................27221520.......................26359, 26826522.......................26359, 27223Proposed Rules:146...................................26853173...................................21474201...................................26853310...................................21590500...................................24808582...................................24808589...................................24808896...................................26854

22 CFR

94.....................................25843

24 CFR

200...................................21936203...................................219363500.................................24734Proposed Rules:Ch. IX...............................2105810.....................................27058950...................................24597966...................................27058990...................................24597

26 CFR

1...........................21435, 25140Proposed Rules:1 .............21475, 21482, 21779,

26854301.......................24811, 24813

27 CFR

Proposed Rules:9.......................................27060

28 CFR

Proposed Rules:2.......................................26010

29 CFR

18.....................................2697024.....................................2697089.....................................26574100...................................222692619.................................258432676.................................25843Proposed Rules:452...................................263881926.................................225392200.................................21058

30 CFR

906...................................25846935.......................25140, 25613944...................................21435Proposed Rules:250...................................25178931...................................22332934.......................21484, 27246935...................................25660946...................................25185948...................................26855950...................................26704

31 CFR

247...................................25990

32 CFR

706 .........22505, 22507, 22508,22509, 22510, 22511, 27025,

iiiFederal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Reader Aids

27026, 27027Proposed Rules:199...................................26705

33 CFR

100.......................21982, 24557110...................................21983117...................................26686164...................................24767165 .........24557, 24558, 26687,

26688Proposed Rules:84.....................................24598100...................................25187117 ..........22014, 24599, 26710165.......................25189, 26012183...................................25191322...................................21061

34 CFR

78.....................................27223208...................................27223215...................................27223230...................................27223232...................................27223233...................................27223234...................................27223236...................................27223238...................................27223241...................................27223245...................................27223246...................................27223247...................................27223250...................................27223251...................................27223252...................................27223253...................................27223254...................................27223255...................................27223256...................................27223257...................................27223258...................................27223282...................................27223298...................................27223346...................................27223347...................................27223354...................................27223362...................................27223372...................................27223374...................................27223405...................................27223407...................................27223408...................................27223409...................................27223414...................................27223416...................................27223417...................................27223418...................................27223419...................................27223422...................................27223423...................................27223424...................................27223445...................................27223462...................................27223463...................................27223471...................................27223473...................................27223474...................................27223475...................................27223476...................................27223500...................................27223501...................................27223520...................................27223524...................................27223525...................................27223526...................................27223

537...................................27223538...................................27223548...................................27223555...................................27223561...................................27223573...................................27223574...................................27223581...................................27223629...................................27223665...................................27223671...................................27223673...................................27223690...................................21438691...................................27223698...................................27223700...................................27223706...................................27223707...................................27223708...................................27223722...................................27223750...................................27223755...................................27223757...................................27223758...................................27223760...................................27223761...................................27223762...................................27223763...................................27223768...................................27223773...................................27223778...................................27223779...................................27223790...................................27223Proposed Rules:200...................................21400201...................................21400203...................................21400205...................................21400212...................................21400

36 CFR

1258.................................26827Proposed Rules:7.......................................26857242...................................24601701...................................26392

37 CFR

1 ..............21043, 21438, 2561510.....................................21438201...................................25995202...................................21983

38 CFR

20.....................................25850Proposed Rules:3...........................22016, 2587717.....................................2519121.....................................21486

39 CFR

111...................................22270Proposed Rules:3001.................................22017

40 CFR

9...........................25492, 2651052 ...........21440, 21442, 21445,

21447, 21451, 21453, 21455,21456, 21702, 21703, 21706,21707, 21713, 21717, 22240,22241, 22274, 22277, 22283,22284, 22285, 22287, 22289,22512, 22515, 22518, 27028

70.........................21720, 25143

72.....................................2651075.........................26510, 2656080.....................................2172481 ...........21456, 22289, 25146,

2702882 ............21682, 24676, 24970131.......................22228, 22229180 .........24782, 24784, 24785,

24788, 26360, 26361, 26626185...................................26361186...................................26361228...................................25147260...................................25492261.......................25492, 25619262...................................25492264.......................25492, 26828265.......................25492, 26828266...................................25492268...................................25492270.......................25492, 26828271 ..........22524, 24790, 26828273...................................25492300...................................27041302...................................25619721...................................26690Proposed Rules:51.....................................2671052 ...........21487, 21488, 21489,

21490, 21780, 21781, 21783,22334, 22335, 22336, 22337,22540, 22541, 24813, 26858

70.........................26013, 2706472.....................................2655975.....................................2655981 ............21490, 22336, 2233782.........................21490, 25010156...................................21965170 .........21944, 21948, 21953,

21955, 21960180 .........21725, 21728, 21731,

21733, 21734, 21736, 21784185 ..........21736, 21786, 24815186...................................24815228...................................25192281...................................26859300.......................21491, 21786439...................................21592

41 CFR

201–23.............................22019201–24.............................22019

42 CFR

2.......................................222966.......................................22530406...................................22533421...................................21048

43 CFR

Public Land Orders:7138.................................219847139.................................225357140.................................245607141.................................247927142.................................25149Proposed Rules:11.........................24604, 27247

44 CFR

64.........................21739, 2722665 ...........26363, 26364, 26365,

2636767.....................................26368Proposed Rules:67.....................................26393

45 CFR

96.....................................21332205...................................26373224...................................26373233...................................26373238...................................26373239...................................26373240...................................26373282...................................263731010.................................263741050.................................263741060.................................263741061.................................263741064.................................263741067.................................263741068.................................263741069.................................263741070.................................263741076.................................263741397.................................260001355.................................268291356.................................26829Proposed Rules:1385.................................267741386.................................267741387.................................267741388.................................26774

46 CFR15.....................................2476350.....................................2476752.....................................2476756.....................................2476758.....................................2476761.....................................24767111...................................24767381...................................24560501...................................27228502...................................27228503...................................27228504...................................27228514...................................27228515...................................27228550...................................27228552...................................27228560...................................27228572...................................27228580...................................27228581...................................27228582...................................27228583...................................27228Proposed Rules:25.....................................2474828.....................................2474830.....................................2474831.....................................2474835.....................................2474837.....................................2474840.....................................2474854.....................................2474855.....................................2474856.....................................2474861.....................................2474870.....................................2474871.....................................2474872.....................................2474876.....................................2474878.....................................2474879.....................................2474890.....................................2474891.....................................2474895.....................................2474897.....................................2474899.....................................24748106...................................24748150...................................24748

iv Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 1995 / Reader Aids

154...................................24748174...................................24748188...................................24748189...................................24748514...................................27248

47 CFR

2.......................................2104815.....................................2198424.....................................2637573 ...........22298, 22535, 22536,

25851, 25852, 2704276.....................................2146490.........................21984, 2198797.....................................26000Proposed Rules:1.......................................2686020.....................................2686125.....................................2481732.....................................2640273 ...........22021, 22022, 22541,

24606, 25879, 26018, 26402,26711, 26712

90.....................................2202395.....................................2519397.........................25194, 25661

48 CFR

502...................................21467506...................................21467513...................................21467552...................................21467926...................................22298

952...................................22298970...................................222981503.................................219931505.................................219931513.................................219931514.................................219931515.................................219931522.................................219931525.................................219931542.................................219931552.................................219931852.................................220955452.................................21992Proposed Rules:32.....................................2579445.....................................2244252.....................................22442219...................................22035970...................................27069

49 CFR

107...................................27231171...................................26796172...................................26796173...................................26796178...................................26796219...................................24765382...................................24765390...................................26001552...................................26002554...................................26002571 ..........24562, 24797, 27233573...................................26002

576...................................26002577...................................26002654...................................24765821...................................256201002.................................223031011.................................223031039.................................268391160.................................223031161.................................223031162.................................223031163.................................22303Proposed Rules:214...................................22542383...................................24820571...................................258801121.................................22035

50 CFR

217 ..........21741, 25620, 26691222...................................25620227 ..........21741, 25620, 26691301...................................26840649...................................21994651.......................21994, 26841652...................................25853661...................................21746663.......................22303, 24572672 ..........24800, 25623, 26694675 .........22306, 24800, 25149,

26694, 26695, 26845676...................................22307678.......................21468, 27042

Proposed Rules:10.....................................2468617 ............25882, 26712, 2671320.....................................27249100...................................24601216...................................22345217...................................25663222...................................25663227...................................25663285...................................25665424...................................26863625...................................21491640...................................21493649...................................25194650...................................25194651...................................25194659...................................26403671.......................22542, 25677672.......................22542, 25677673...................................24822675.......................22542, 25677676.......................22542, 25677

LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS

Note: No public bills whichhave become law werereceived by the Office of theFederal Register for inclusionin today’s List of PublicLaws.Last List May 22, 1995