issue-1996-03-15•Federal Register proposed rules — 1996-03-15
Federal Register proposed rules — 1996-03-15
issue-1996-03-15Federal Register proposed rules — 1996-03-15Proposed Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-6380 Preemption of Local Zoning Regulations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10710-10712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6380]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 25
[IB Docket No. 95-59; FCC 96-78]
Preemption of Local Zoning Regulations
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission has proposed revisions to its rule preempting
certain local regulation of satellite earth stations. These revisions
are being proposed in response section 207 of the Telecommunications
Act of 1996. That section directs the Commission to preempt nonfederal
restrictions on certain direct-to-home video services, including Direct
Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service. In our Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 95-59, we tentatively
conclude that the final rule adopted in the Report and Order fulfills
the Commission's obligation under the new statutory provision as to
nonfederal, governmental restrictions on DBS-type satellite earth
station antennas, but ask
[[Page 10711]]
for comment on this issue. Further, we tentatively conclude that
section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires us to
promulgate a new rule prohibiting enforcement of nongovernmental
restrictions on small-antenna video reception. We therefore propose to
add a new paragraph to our preemption rule in order to implement
section 207 with regard to private, nongovernmental restrictions on
DBS-type satellite earth station antennas. The proposed rule closely
tracks the language of section 207, as amplified by the House Committee
Report.
DATES: Comments are due by April 15, 1996; reply comments are due by
May 6, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosalee Chiara, International Bureau,
Satellite and Radiocommunication Division, Satellite Policy Branch,
(202) 418-0754.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No.
95-59; FCC 96-78, adopted February 29, 1996 and released March 11,
1996. The complete text of this Report and Order and Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making is available for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and also may be purchased from the
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service,
(202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.
Summary of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. The Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is being issued to
implement section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Telecommunications Act of 1996, Public Law 104-104, 110 Stat. 56
(1996). That section directs the Commission to preempt nonfederal
restrictions that impair reception by antennas in direct-to-home video
services, including Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service. In our
Further Notice, we tentatively conclude that the final rule adopted in
this Report and Order fulfills the Commission's obligation under the
new statutory provision as to nonfederal, governmental restrictions on
DBS-type satellite earth station antennas. We ask for comment on our
conclusion. We tentatively conclude that section 207 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires us to promulgate a new rule
prohibiting enforcement of nongovernmental restrictions on small-
antenna video reception.
2. We therefore propose to add a new paragraph (f), as set forth
below, for our preemption rule in order to implement section 207 with
regard to private, nongovernmental restrictions on DBS-type satellite
earth station antennas. This proposed rule closely tracks the language
of section 207, as amplified by the House Committee Report. The per se
nature of the rule does treat private restrictions differently from
restrictions imposed by state or local governments. However, as we have
recognized throughout this proceeding, state and local land-use
regulations have traditionally been near the core of those governments'
general police powers. The presumption in favor of small antennas can
be rebutted only by health or safety concerns. Non-governmental
restrictions would appear to be directed to aesthetic considerations.
Thus, we tentatively conclude that it is appropriate to accord private
restrictions less deference on this basis. We seek comment on this
conclusion and on all aspects of our proposed rule.
Ordering Clauses
3. Accordingly, it is ordered That pursuant to the Communications
Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 303(r), 403, and 405, notice is hereby
given and comment is sought regarding the proposals, discussion, and
statement of issues in the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that
comprises paragraphs 55 through 62 of the Report and Order and Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
4. This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking
proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the
Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in
Commission rules. See generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and 1.1206(a).
5. As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
the Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) of the expected impact on small entities of the proposals
suggested in this document. The IRFA is set forth below. Written public
comments are requested on the IRFA. These comments must be filed in
accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments on the rest of
the Notice, but they must have a separate and distinct heading
designating them as responses to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis.
6. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in sections 1.415
and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested
parties may file comments on or before April 15, 1996 and reply
comments on or before May 6, 1996. To file formally in this proceeding,
you must file an original and five copies of all comments, reply
comments, and supporting comments. If you want each Commissioner to
receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file an original
plus nine copies. You should send comments and reply comments to Office
of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
20554. Comments and reply comments will be available for public
inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center of
the Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20054.
7. It is further ordered That the Secretary shall send a copy of
this Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in
accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
Pub. L. No. 95-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. Secs. 601 et seq. (1981).
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Reason for Action
The rulemaking is initiated to obtain comment on the proposed
changes to the Commission's satellite antenna preemption rule, 47 CFR
Sec. 25.104.
Objectives
The Commission seeks to evaluate whether the proposed changes to
the satellite antenna preemption rule will facilitate the installation
of antennas and assist in the development of satellite based
technologies.
Legal Basis
The proposed action is authorized under Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Secs. 154 (i) and
303 (r), Section 207 of the 1996 Telecom Act.
Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
Private restrictions on satellite antennas would be preempted.
Federal Rules that Overlap, Duplicate or Conflict With These
Requirements
None.
Description, Potential Impact and Number of Small Entities Involved
Any policies or regulations adopted in this proceeding could affect
small businesses that install or use satellite antennas.
[[Page 10712]]
Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities
Consistent With the Stated Objectives
This Notice solicits comments on any suggested alternatives.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25
Satellites.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Proposed Rules
Part 25 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 25.101 to 25.601 issued under Sec. 4, 48
Stat. 1066, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154. Interpret or apply secs. 101-
104, 76 Stat. 416-427; 47 U.S.C. 701-744; 47 U.S.C. 554.
Section 25.104 is amended by adding new paragraph (f) to read as
follows:.
Sec. 25.104 Preemption of local zoning of earth stations.
* * * * *
(f) No restrictive covenant, encumbrance, homeowners' association
rule, or other nongovernmental restriction shall be enforceable to the
extent that it impairs a viewer's ability to receive video programming
services over a satellite antenna less than one meter in diameter.
[FR Doc. 96-6380 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6357 Notice of Public Meeting on Implementing a Passenger Manifest Information Requirement
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10706-10708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6357]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
14 CFR Part 243
[Notice No. 96-4; Docket No. 47383]
RIN 2105-AB78
Notice of Public Meeting on Implementing a Passenger Manifest
Information Requirement
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.
ACTION: Announcement of public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 29, 1996, DOT will conduct a public meeting on
implementing a passenger manifest information requirement that would
require in the instance of an aviation disaster that occurs on a flight
to or from the United States on a U.S. or foreign air carrier that the
air carrier transmit rapidly to the Department of State information on
the U.S.-citizen passengers on the flight. The public meeting is being
held because it has been brought to the attention of DOT that the
Department of State encountered difficulties in securing information on
U.S.-citizen passengers in the aftermath of the recent Cali, Colombia,
aviation disaster. Since a long period of time has elapsed since this
issue arose originally in the aftermath of the 1988 Lockerbie,
Scotland, aviation disaster, and since DOT received comments in
response to its January 31, 1991, (56 FR 3810) advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on a passenger manifest information
requirement (see also the correction at 56 FR 5665), we believe that a
public meeting during which stakeholders can exchange views and update
knowledge on implementing such a requirement is necessary as a prelude
to DOT proposing a passenger manifest information requirement.
DATES: Public Meeting: Friday, March 29, 1996, at 10:00 a.m.
ADDRESSES: The Public Meeting will be held in Rooms 8236-40, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Nassif Building, 400 7th Street, SW,
Washington, D.C. 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Marvich, Senior Economist,
Office of International Transportation and Trade, DOT, (202)366-4398;
or Joanne Petrie, Senior Attorney, Office of the General Counsel, DOT,
(202)366-4723.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOT intends to propose a passenger manifest
information requirement that would require, in the instance of an
aviation disaster that occurs on a flight to or from the United States
on a U.S. or foreign air carrier, that the air carrier transmit rapidly
to the Department of State information on the U.S.-citizen passengers
on the flight. We anticipate that foreign air carriers would be
included because they account for about one half of international
passenger trips to and from the United States, and because section 319
of the DOT FY 1996 Appropriation Act states, ``None of the funds
provided in this Act shall be made available for planning and executing
a passenger manifest program by the Department of Transportation that
only applies to United States flag carriers.''
A passenger manifest information requirement was contained in
section 203 of the Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990 (ASIA),
Public Law 101-604, which was enacted in response to concerns about
difficulties that the Department of State experienced in securing
information on U.S.-citizen passengers in the aftermath of the 1988 Pan
Am 103 aviation disaster over Lockerbie, Scotland. A discussion of that
experience is found in Chapter 7 of the Report of the President's
Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism (Washington, D.C.: 1990).
The complete text of section 203 of ASIA follows:
``Sec. 203. Passenger Manifest.
(a) Mandatory Availability of Passenger Manifest.--Section 410 of
the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 [Note: Section 410 of the Federal
Aviation Act of 1958 is now recodified as 49 U.S.C. 44909] is amended
to read as follows:
``Sec. 410. Passenger Manifest.
``(a) Requirement.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Secretary of Transportation shall
require all United States air carriers to provide a passenger manifest
for any flight to appropriate representatives of the United States
Department of State--
``(1) Not later than 1 hour after any such carrier is notified of
an aviation disaster outside the United States which involves such
flight; or
``(2) If it is not technologically feasible or reasonable to
fulfill the requirement of this subsection within 1 hour, then as
expeditiously as possible, but not later than 3 hours after such
notification.
``(b) Contents.--For purposes of this section, a passenger manifest
should include the following information:
``(1) The full name of each passenger.
``(2) The passport number of each passenger, if required for
travel.
``(3) The name and telephone number of a contact for each
passenger.''
(b) Implementation.--In implementing the requirement pursuant to
the amendment made by subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of
Transportation shall consider the necessity and feasibility of
requiring United States air carriers to collect passenger manifest
information as a condition for passenger boarding of any flight subject
to such requirement.
(c) Foreign Air Carriers.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
[[Page 10707]]
consider a requirement for foreign air carriers comparable to that
imposed pursuant to the amendment made by subsection (a).
(d) Information From United States Passports.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, to the extent provided in appropriations Acts,
for each fiscal year not more than $5,000,000 in passport fees
collected by the Department of State may be credited to a Department of
State account. Amounts credited to such account shall be available only
for the costs associated with the acquisition and production of
machine-readable United States passports and visas and compatible
reading equipment. Amounts credited to such account are authorized to
remain available until expended.
(e) Conforming Amendment to Table of Contents.--The table of
contents contained in the first section of the Federal Aviation Act of
1958 is amended by striking the item relating to section 410 and
inserting the following:
``Sec. 410. Passenger Manifest.''.
Public Law 101-604 also sets forth Department of State notification
responsibilities in section 204. The complete text of Section 204
follows:
Sec. 204. Department of State Notification of Families of Victims.
(a) Department of State Policy.--It is the policy of the Department
of State pursuant to section 43 of the State Department Basic
Authorities Act to directly and promptly notify the families of victims
of aviation disasters abroad concerning citizens of the United States
directly affected by such a disaster, including timely written notice.
The Secretary of State shall insure that such notification by the
Department of State is carried out notwithstanding notification by any
other person.
(b) Department of State Guidelines.--Not later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall issue
regulations, guidelines, and circulars as are necessary to ensure that
the policy under subsection (a) is fully implemented.
In response to a January 31, 1991 (56 FR 3810), advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on a passenger manifest information
requirement (see also the correction at 56 FR 5665), DOT received
comments indicating that the costs of implementing a passenger manifest
information requirement such as the one found in section 203 would be
extremely high. Additional comments on the high costs of implementing
section 203 were received in response to President Bush's 1992
Regulatory Moratorium and Review. In light of these comments and the
fact that aviation disasters occur so rarely, DOT has scrutinized
section 203 in an effort to determine if a low-cost way to implement a
passenger manifest information requirement exists. DOT has considered
seeking repeal of section 203. Because it has been reported to DOT that
difficulties were experienced by the Department of State in securing a
list of passengers in the aftermath of the recent American Airlines
crash in Cali, Colombia, DOT now, however, intends to propose a
passenger manifest information requirement.
The Cali, Colombia, incident took place almost exactly seven years
after the passenger manifest issue first arose in connection with the
Pan Am 103 tragedy. It has been over five years since DOT received
comments in response to its ANPRM on this subject. In the interim,
issues surrounding and operational aspects regarding the best way to
implement a passenger manifest information requirement may have
changed. DOT is interested in getting up-to-date information on how it
can implement a passenger manifest requirement so that U.S. and foreign
carriers alike can achieve the most effective transmission of
information after an aviation disaster at a cost that the general
public and the aviation community will find reasonable. The purpose of
the public meeting is to gather information and allow stakeholders in
the implementation of a passenger manifest information requirement to
exchange views.
The meeting will be tape recorded. Any written submissions will be
placed in the docket, and should be submitted to: Documentary Services
Division--Docket 47383, C-55, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room
PL-40l, 400 7th Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20590. We request, but do
not require, that three copies be submitted.
DOT will seek answers to the following questions at the public
meeting. In addition, other questions may arise in the course of the
meeting.
Information Availability and Current Notification Practice
1. What information regarding the passengers on an international
flight to or from the United States does or should an air carrier have
on-hand within one hour of learning that an aviation disaster has
occurred? In what form is this information kept, electronic or
otherwise? What degree of accuracy exists with regard to a passenger
manifest that is produced quickly? Is implementing a passenger manifest
information requirement simply a matter of legally requiring, in the
instance of an aviation disaster, that this already-on-hand information
must be transmitted rapidly to the Department of State? Do answers to
these questions change if the time period is extended to three hours?
What is the process of refining or confirming initial information as
more time elapses?
2. Apart from the passenger information that is available within 1-
3 hours, does other information on the passenger exist and what does it
consist of? Who has this information, the air carrier or others? What
is involved in accessing the information, and how long is it likely to
take to access it?
3. In the event of an aviation disaster, how does an air carrier
currently compile an accurate list of passengers, respond to inquiries
from the families of passengers, and notify the families of passengers
of the fate of passengers? How long does this take from the time the
first family is notified until the time that the last family is
notified? Does the air carrier wait until the identity of all
passengers on the flight is known before making notifications, or does
the air carrier make notifications on a so-called ``rolling basis''?
What information is given to the Department of State and how quickly?
Is the information given to others, such as the news media, and how
quickly?
4. How does an air carrier respond to inquiries from families who
believe that a family member(s) may have been on a flight before the
air carrier has determined for itself whether or not this individual(s)
was on the flight? Before the air carrier has determined the fate of
the passenger(s) in question? What information is compiled by the air
carrier in order to answer inquiries/make notifications and how is it
obtained? Is all of the information that is listed in section 203 of
Public Law 101-604 (full name, passport number [if required for
travel], contact name, contact telephone number) compiled by the air
carrier for each passenger before or during this process? If so, when?
If not, what information is not compiled?
Privacy Considerations
5. Some foreign governments indicated in ANPRM comments that
privacy laws in effect in their countries would prevent collecting
passenger information in their countries. Since section 203 would only
require information to be collected from U.S.-citizen passengers, if
this information were only used in the event of an aviation disaster,
and then only disclosed to the Department of State, would any general
privacy concerns arise? If the information were allowed to
[[Page 10708]]
be shared with other U.S. Government agencies, such as U.S. Customs
Service, which collects similar information from passengers for input
into its Advance Passenger Information System (APIS), would any
additional privacy concerns arise? Are there ways to overcome these
privacy concerns?
6. We have been told that air carriers currently are reluctant to
provide passenger information to the Department of State in the absence
of a waiver of responsibility for disclosure of the information to
third parties. What falls within the ambit of this issue? To what
extent does the 1974 Privacy Act govern this issue?
Similar Information Requirements
7. The Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) of the U.S.
Customs Service requires participating air carriers (participation is
voluntary) to collect a passenger's full name, passport number, date of
birth, and other information, but not contact information. U.S. Customs
provides electronic passport readers to air carriers participating in
the program. APIS information (API) is currently collected for about 50
percent of U.S.-incoming passengers (U.S. citizens and non-U.S.
citizens). For a covered flight, API is collected on the ground and
then transmitted to the U.S. Customs Service while the flight is en
route, so, were an APIS-covered flight to end in disaster, the API
would be available for immediate transmittal to the Department of
State. API is collected by using electronic scanning devices to scan
the information on the optical character recognition (OCR) zone of U.S.
and other countries' machine-readable passports. (Emergency contact
information is not available from the magnetic strip.) Could the API
information be used to fulfill the passenger manifest information
requirement of section 203? If air carriers were required to also
collect contact information for U.S. citizens on APIS flights, how
would they likely do so? What would be the practical effects of doing
so?
8. It is our understanding that as part of the passport
application, the Department of State currently collect information on
emergency contacts. It is also our understanding that this contact
information is optional, that is, the information is not required to be
provided in order to receive a passport. Further, we understand that
the Department of State's passport information is automated and that,
if provided, contact information is maintained as part of this
automated passport information. We would like to know what role this
Department of State contact information might play in identifying the
families of passengers aboard a flight that ends in disaster? What
information is needed to access Department of State passport records?
Can these records be accurately accessed using APIS information?
Information Collection Technique
9. Some comments received by DOT said that passenger manifest
information, by necessity, would have to be collected primarily at the
time of reservation in computer reservation systems (CRSs). (It was,
however, recognized in these comments that all passengers would not
provide the information at the time of reservation, and thus that
provision would also have to be made to collect the information from
some passengers at the airport.) Others have mentioned the approach of
redesigning boarding passes so they would have a detachable stub that
could be filled out by passengers and dropped in a box just before
boarding their flight. APIS, the closest counterpart collection system
that we are aware of, usually involves, as we understand it, airport
scanning of passports with input of the information into the air
carrier's CRS. What are the pros and cons of these different collection
systems for the large scale collection of passenger manifest
information?
Elements of the Cost of Collecting Passenger Manifest Information
10. Executive order 12866 requires the Department of Transportation
to quantify the costs and benefits of regulations that it proposes and
issues. What are the cost elements that would be involved in collecting
passenger manifest information, limiting the discussion to only the
additional costs that would be incurred? How much additional time would
it take to collect passenger manifest information from a passenger?
What would one-time costs consist of? What would recurring, annual
costs consist of? Approximately what percentage of recurring, annual
costs would be for additional personnel to collect the information?
Give an approximate compensation (salary plus benefits) figure for the
additional personnel that would collect the information?
Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 12, 1996
Patrick V. Murphy,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 96-6357 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6262 Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10699-10703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6262]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 52 / Friday, March 15, 1996 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 10699]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
7 CFR Part 457
RIN 0563-AB51
Common Crop Insurance Regulations; Florida Citrus Fruit Crop
Insurance Provisions
AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Corporation., USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) hereby proposes
specific crop provisions for the insurance of Florida citrus fruit. The
provisions will be used in conjunction with the Common Crop Insurance
Policy Basic Provisions, which contain standard terms and conditions
common to most crops. The intended effect of this action is to provide
policy changes to better meet the needs of the insured, move the
current Florida Citrus Endorsement from 7 CFR 401.143 to the Common
Crop Insurance Policy (7 CFR 457) for ease of use by the public and
conformance among policy terms, and conform to the amendments to the
Federal Crop Insurance Act made by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform
Act of 1994.
DATES: Written comments, data, and opinions on this proposed rule will
be accepted until close of business April 15, 1996 and will be
considered when the rule is to be made final. The comment period for
information collections under the Paperwork Act of 1995 continues
through May 13, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments to
the Chief, Product Development Branch, Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation (FCIC), Farm Service Agency (FSA), United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA), 9435 Holmes Road, Kansas City, MO 64131. Written
comments will be available for public inspection and copying in room
0324, South Building, USDA, 14th and Independence Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, D.C., during regular business hours, Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Klein, Program Analyst,
Research and Development Division, Product Development Branch, FCIC,
FSA, at the address listed above, telephone (816) 926-2704.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866 and Departmental Regulation 1512-1
This action has been reviewed under USDA procedures established by
Executive Order 12866 and Departmental Regulation 1512-1. This action
constitutes a review as to the need, currency, clarity, and
effectiveness of these regulations under those procedures. The sunset
review date established for these regulations is May 1, 2000.
This rule has been determined to be exempt for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866, and therefore has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The information collection requirements contained in the Florida
Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions have been submitted to OMB for approval
under section 3507(j) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This
proposed rule will amend the information collection requirements under
OMB control number 0563-0003 through September 30, 1998. The Federal
Crop Insurance Corporation will be amending the information collection
to adjust the estimated reporting hours and revising the usage of FCI-
12-P, Pre-Acceptance Perennial Crop Inspection Report as it applies to
the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions.
Section 7 of the 1997 Florida Citrus Fruit Crop provisions adds
interplanting as an insurable farming practice as long as it is
interplanted with another citrus fruit crop. This practice was not
insurable under the previous Florida Citrus Endorsement 90-02 and the
General Crop Policy 88-G (REV 3-91) to which it attached. Consequently,
interplanting information will need to be collected, using the FCI-12-P
Pre-Acceptance Perennial Crop Inspection Report form for approximately
20 percent of the Florida Citrus insureds who interplant their citrus
crop. Standard interplanting language has been added to most perennial
crops. Interplanting is an insurable practice as long as it does not
adversely affect the insured crop. This is a benefit to agriculture
because insurance is now available for more citrus and fruit producers
and as a result less acreage will need to be placed into the Noninsured
Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP).
Revised reporting estimates and requirements for usage of OMB
control number 0563-0003 will be submitted to OMB for approval under
the provisions of 44 U.S.C 35. Public comments are due by May 13, 1996.
The title of this information collection is ``Catastrophic Risk
Protection Plan and Related Requirements Including Common Crop
Insurance Regulations; Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance
Provisions.'' The information to be collected includes: a crop
insurance acreage report, an insurance application and a continuous
contract. Potential respondents to this information collection are
growers of Florida citrus fruit that are eligible for Federal crop
insurance.
The estimated increase in the number of respondents and total
burden hours associated with the OMB information collection is the
result of two new parts in chapter IV of title 7 of the Code of Federal
Regulations; Part 402, Catastrophic Risk Protection Plan, and Part 404,
Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program. The Federal Crop Insurance
Reform Act of 1994 required the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation to
implement a catastrophic risk protection plan of insurance that
provides a basic level of coverage to protect producers in the event
that a covered disaster results in crop losses or prevented planting.
As a result of the implementation of the Catastrophic Risk Protection
Endorsement, increased producer participation has increased the
information collections covered under OMB control number 0563-0003. The
information requested is necessary for the reinsured companies and the
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation to provide insurance and
reinsurance, determine eligibility, determine the correct parties to
the agreement or contract, determine and collect premiums or other
monetary amounts (or fees), and pay benefits.
All information is reported annually. The reporting burden for this
collection
[[Page 10700]]
of information is estimated to average 25 minutes per response for each
of the 3.6 responses from approximately 1,755,015 respondents. The
total annual burden on the public for this information collection is
2,669,970 hours.
The comment period for information collections under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 continues through May 13, 1996, for the
following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the
accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology.
Comments should be submitted to the Desk Officer for Agriculture,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 20503 and to Bonnie Hart, Advisory and
Corporate Operations Staff, Regulatory Review Group, Farm Service
Agency, P.O. Box 2415, Ag Box 0572, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C. 20013-2415. Copies of the information collection may
be obtained from Bonnie Hart at the above address. Telephone (202) 690-
2857.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, FCIC
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures of State, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. When such a statement is needed for a rule, section 205 of the
UMRA generally requires FCIC to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, more
cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule.
This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of title II of the UMRA) for State, local, and tribal
governments or the private sector. Thus, this rule is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12612
It has been determined under section 6(a) of Executive Order 12612,
Federalism, that this rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. The
policies and procedures contained in this rule will not have a
substantial direct effect on States or their political subdivisions, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The amount of work required of the insurance
companies and FSA offices delivering these policies and procedures
therein will not increase significantly from the amount of work
currently required to deliver previous policies to which this
regulation applies. This rule does not have any greater or lesser
impact on the insured farmer. Therefore, this action is determined to
be exempt from the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 605) and no Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared.
Federal Assistance Program
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.450.
Executive Order 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
12372 which require intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. See the Notice related to 7 CFR 3015, subpart V, published
at 48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983.
Executive Order 12778
The Office of the General Counsel has determined that these
regulations meet the applicable standards provided in subsections
(2)(a) and 2(b)(2) of Executive Order 12778. The provisions of this
rule will not have a retroactive effect prior to the effective date.
The provisions of this rule will preempt State and local laws to the
extent such State and local laws are inconsistent herewith. The
administrative appeal provisions in 7 CFR part 11 and 7 CFR part 780
must be exhausted before action for judicial review may be brought.
Environmental Evaluation
This action is not expected to have a significant impact on the
quality of the human environment, health, and safety. Therefore,
neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact
Statement is needed.
National Performance Review
This regulatory action is being taken as part of the National
Performance Review initiative to eliminate unnecessary or duplicative
regulations and improve those that remain in force.
Background
FCIC proposes to add to the Common Crop Insurance Regulations (7
CFR part 457), a new section to be known as 7 CFR 457.107, Florida
Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions. The provisions will be
effective for the 1997 and succeeding crop years. The proposed Florida
Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance provisions will replace the provisions
found at 7 CFR 401.143 (Florida Citrus Endorsement). Upon publication
of 7 CFR 457.107 as a final rule, the provisions for insuring Florida
citrus fruit contained herein will supersede the current provisions
contained in 7 CFR 401.143. By separate rule, FCIC will revise
Sec. 401.143 to restrict its effect through the 1996 crop year and
later remove that section.
This rule makes minor editorial and format changes to improve the
Florida Citrus Endorsement's compatibility with the Common Crop
Insurance Policy. In addition, FCIC is proposing substantive changes in
the provisions for insuring Florida citrus fruit as follows:
Florida Citrus Endorsement
1. Section 1--Add definitions for the terms ``days'', ``freeze'',
``good farming practices'', ``hurricane'', ``interplanted'', and
``written agreement'' for clarification purposes.
2. Subsection 1(b)--Add limes to the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop
Provisions as an insurable citrus crop. Limes are added in response to
public interest in coverage and findings of FCIC's field staff and
research and development staff supporting the insurability of this
additional citrus crop. Limes are grouped with Lemons under Type VI.
Limes and lemons are often grown together and are similar in their
growth patterns, maturity, and cultivation.
3. Section 2--Describe the guidelines under which basic units may
be divided into optional units. The definition of ``unit'' under
section 1(tt) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.6) provides for the
division of units in accordance with applicable crop provisions. The
current Florida Citrus Endorsement does not
[[Page 10701]]
provide guidelines for determining optional units. Section 2 of these
crop provisions provides guidelines for optional unit division of
Florida citrus fruit basic units that are consistent with many other
perennial crop provisions. Optional units may be divided on the basis
of section, section equivalent, or FSA Farm Serial Number, or on
acreage located on non-contiguous land, or both. Consistent with the
definition of ``unit'' in the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.6), section 10
of the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions will provide that, in
settling a claim, loss will be determined on a unit basis and all
optional units for which acceptable production records were not
provided will be combined.
4. Subsection 3(a)--Specify that the insured may select only 1
percent of the maximum dollar amount of insurance for all fruit
included in each type shown in section 1 of these crop provisions or as
designated in the Special Provisions. Beginning with the 1996 crop
year, certain citrus fruit within types (IV tangerines and V murcotts)
were priced differently, as shown in the actuarial table. While it was
not encouraged, producers could choose different percentages of the
maximum amount of insurance depending on anticipated market conditions.
This created administrative problems in settling claims. Section 3 of
the Basic Provisions provides that the insured may select only one
coverage level for each insured crop. Since FCIC considers each type to
be a ``crop'', the language in these crop provisions clearly limits
producers to 1 percent of the maximum dollar amount for each fruit
within a type, regardless of variations in the maximum amount of
insurance for the fruit.
5. Subsection 3(c)--Specify that the insured must report the age of
any interplanted crop, the planting pattern, and any other information
needed to establish the amount of insurance for the interplanted
acreage. The acreage or amount of insurance, or both, may be adjusted
by us when we become aware of the situation if the insured has not
previously reported it. Interplanting is not provided under the current
Florida Citrus Endorsement. Section 7 of these crop provisions allows
interplanting a citrus fruit crop with another citrus fruit crop. The
change in policy language is based on existing practices and FCIC's
desire to insure the maximum amount of acreage. Interplanting, as
provided in these crop provisions, is limited to existing interplanting
practices, i.e., with another citrus fruit crop, and excludes other
interplanting practices which may adversely impact the insured crop.
This policy change necessitates a change in reporting requirements.
Insureds with interplanted citrus acreage must report information
needed by the insurer to establish the amount of insurance or number of
acres of the interplanted insured crop.
6. Section 4--Change the contract change date from April 15 to
March 15. This change will allow insureds more time to make insurance
decisions before the April 30 cancellation date.
7. Subsection 6(b)(2)--Change the insurable tree age requirement
from 10 years after set out to 5 years after set out based on industry
recommendations. The amounts of insurance are listed in the actuarial
documents based on tree age, and are reduced proportionately for
younger trees.
8. Section 7--Add ``interplanting'' as an insurable farming
practice if the citrus fruit crop is interplanted with another citrus
fruit crop.
9. Subsection 8(a)(1)--Clarify that if an application is accepted
by us after April 20, insurance will attach on the 10th day after the
application is received in the insurance provider's local office. Full
premium, however, will be due for the partial year.
10. Section 8(b)--Provide policy guidelines for attachment of
insurance when insurable acreage is acquired or relinquished.
Previously this language was contained in the Crop Insurance Handbook
and Catastrophic Risk Protection Handbook.
11. Section 10--Change the deductible for determining when an
indemnity is due. For limited and additional coverage the indemnity had
been computed based on the determination of the percent of damage less
10 percent. For the 1997 crop year, it will be the percent of damage
less the deductible (25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%) divided by the
coverage level percent. This change makes the Florida Citrus Fruit Crop
Provisions consistent with other crop provisions and with the way in
which other catastrophic losses were computed for the 1995 crop year.
12. Section 11--Add provisions for providing insurance coverage by
written agreement. FCIC has a long-standing policy of permitting
modification of certain provisions of insurance contracts by written
agreement. This provision is not documented in the current Florida
Citrus Endorsement. This section will provide for the application for,
and duration of, written agreements.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457
Crop insurance, Florida citrus fruit.
Proposed Rule
Pursuant to the authority contained in the Federal Crop Insurance
Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), the Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation hereby proposes to amend the Common Crop Insurance
Regulations (7 CFR 457), effective for the 1997 and succeeding crop
years, as follows:
PART 457--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 457 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(p)
2. 7 CFR 457 is amended by adding a new Sec. 457.107 to read as
follows:
Sec. 457.107 Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions.
The Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Insurance Provisions for the 1997 and
succeeding crop years are as follows:
United States Department of Agriculture; Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation; Florida Citrus Fruit Crop Provisions
If a conflict exists among the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8),
these crop provisions, and the Special Provisions, the Special
Provisions will control these crop provisions and the Basic
Provisions; and these crop provisions will control the Basic
Provisions.
1. Definitions--
(a) Box--A standard field box as prescribed in the State of
Florida Citrus Fruit Laws.
(b) Citrus fruit type--Any of the following:
(1) Type I--Early and mid-season oranges;
(2) Type II--Late Oranges;
(3) Type III--Grapefruit for which freeze damage will be
adjusted on a juice basis;
(4) Type IV--Navel Oranges, tangelos and tangerines
(5) Type V--Murcott Honey Oranges (also known as Honey
Tangerines) and Temple Oranges;
(6) Type VI--Lemons and Limes; or
(7) Type VII--Grapefruit for which freeze damage will be
adjusted on a fresh fruit basis.
(c) Days--Calendar days.
(d) Freeze--The formation of ice in the cells of the fruit
caused by low air temperatures.
(e) Good farming practices--The cultural practices generally in
use in the area for the crop to make normal progress toward maturity
and produce the expected yield for the type and age of citrus fruit
and are those generally recognized by the Cooperative Extension
Service as compatible with agronomic and weather conditions in the
area.
(f) Harvest--The severance of mature citrus fruit from the tree
by pulling, picking, or any other means, or collecting the
marketable fruit from the ground.
(g) Hurricane--A windstorm classified by the U.S. Weather
Service as a hurricane.
(h) Interplanted--Acreage on which two or more crops are planted
in any form of alternating or mixed pattern.
(i) Non-contiguous land--Any land owned by you or rented by you
for any consideration other than a share in the insured crop, whose
boundaries do not touch at any point. Land that is separated only by
a public or private right-of-way, waterway or irrigation canal will
be considered to be contiguous.
[[Page 10702]]
(j) Potential production--Includes production that would have
been produced had damage not occurred and includes citrus fruit
that:
(i) Was harvested before damage occurred;
(ii) Remained on the tree after damage occurred; and
(iii) Was lost from either an insured or uninsured cause.
Potential production does not include citrus fruit that:
(i) Was lost before insurance attached for any crop year;
(ii) Was lost by normal dropping; or
(iii) Any tangerines that normally would not, by the end of the
insurance period for tangerines, meet the 210 pack size (2 and 4/16
inch minimum diameter) under United States Standards.
(k) Written agreement--A written document that alters designated
terms of a policy.
2. Unit Division--A unit as defined in section 1 (Definitions)
of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8), will be divided into basic
units by each citrus fruit type shown in section 1 of these crop
provisions or designated in the Special Provisions. Unless limited
by the Special Provisions, a basic unit may be further divided into
optional units if, for each optional unit you meet all the
conditions of this section or if a written agreement to such
division exists. Basic units may not be divided into optional units
on any basis including, but not limited to, production practice,
type, and variety other than as described in this section. If you do
not comply fully with these provisions, we will combine all optional
units that are not in compliance with these provisions into the
basic unit from which they were formed. We may combine the optional
units at any time we discover that you have failed to comply with
these provisions. If failure to comply with these provisions is
determined to be inadvertent, and the optional units are combined,
that portion of the premium paid for the purpose of electing
optional units will be refunded to you pro rata for the units
combined. All optional units must be reflected on the acreage report
for each crop year.
(a) Each optional unit must meet one or more of the following
criteria as applicable:
(1) Optional Units by Section, Section Equivalent, or Farm
Service Agency (FSA) Farm Serial Number: Optional units may be
established if each optional unit is located in a separate legally
identified section. The trees must be planted in such a manner that
the planting does not continue into the adjacent section. In the
absence of sections, we may consider parcels of land legally
identified by other methods of measure including, but not limited to
Spanish grants, railroad surveys, leagues, labors, or Virginia
Military Lands, as the equivalent of sections for unit purposes. In
areas that have not been surveyed using the systems identified
above, or another system approved by us, or in areas where such
systems exist but boundaries are not readily discernable, each
optional unit must be located in a separate farm identified by a
single FSA Farm Serial Number; or
(2) Optional Units on Acreage Located on Non-Contiguous Land: In
addition to or instead of establishing optional units by section,
section equivalent or FSA Farm Serial Number, optional units may be
established if each optional unit is located on non-contiguous land.
3. Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for
Determining Indemnities--In addition to the requirements of section
3 (Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for Determining
Indemnities) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8):
(a) You may select only 1 percent of the maximum dollar amount
of insurance for all citrus fruit included in each type, shown in
section 1 of these crop provisions or designated in the Special
Provisions, that you elect to insure.
(b) In lieu of the production reporting date contained in
section 3 (Insurance Guarantees, Coverage Levels, and Prices for
Determining Indemnities) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8),
potential production for each unit will be determined during loss
adjustment.
(c) For the first year of insurance for acreage interplanted
with another citrus fruit crop, and anytime the planting pattern of
such acreage is changed, you must report, by the sales closing date
contained in the Special Provisions, the following:
(1) The age of the interplanted trees and type if applicable;
(2) The planting pattern; and
(3) Any other information we may need to establish your amount
of insurance. We will reduce acreage or the amount of insurance, or
both, as necessary, based on the effect of the interplanted citrus
fruit trees on the insured citrus fruit crop. If you fail to notify
us, we will reduce the acreage or amount of insurance, or both, any
time we become aware of the interplanted crop.
4. Contract Changes--The contract change date is March 15
preceding the cancellation date. (See the provisions of section 4
(Contract Changes) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8).)
5. Cancellation and Termination Dates--In accordance with
section 2 (Life of Policy, Cancellation, and Termination) of the
Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8), the cancellation date is April 30
preceding the crop year. The termination date is April 30 of the
crop year.
6. Insured Crop--
(a) In accordance with section 8 (Insured Crop) of the Basic
Provisions (Sec. 457.8), the crop insured will be all of each citrus
fruit type that you elect to insure, in which you have a share, that
are grown in the county shown on the application, and for which a
premium rate is quoted in the actuarial table. If you insure
grapefruit, you must insure all of your grapefruit under a single
type designation (type III or type VII).
(b) In addition to the citrus fruit not insurable in section 8
(Insured Crop) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8), we do not
insure any citrus fruit:
(1) That cannot be expected to mature each crop year within the
normal maturity period for the type;
(2) Produced by trees that have not reached the fifth growing
season after being set out, unless otherwise provided in the Special
Provisions or by a written agreement approved by us to insure such
citrus fruit;
(3) Of ``Meyer Lemons'' and oranges commonly known as ``Sour
Oranges'' or ``Clementines''; or
(4) Of the Robinson tangerine variety, for any crop year in
which you have elected to exclude such tangerines from insurance.
(You must elect this exclusion prior to the crop year for which the
exclusion is to be effective, except that for the first crop year
you must elect this exclusion by the later of April 30 or the time
you submit the application for insurance.)
(c) Upon our approval, you may elect to insure or exclude from
insurance for any crop year any insurable acreage in any unit that
has a potential production of less than 100 boxes per acre. If you:
(1) Elect to insure such acreage, we will consider the potential
production to be 100 boxes per acre when determining the amount of
loss;
(2) Elect to exclude such acreage, we will disregard the acreage
for all purposes related to this contract; or
(3) Do not elect to insure or exclude such acreage:
(i) We will disregard the acreage if the potential production is
less than 100 boxes per acre; or
(ii) If the potential production from such acreage is 100 or
more boxes per acre, we will determine the percent of damage on all
of the insurable acreage for the unit, but will not allow the
percent of damage for the unit to be increased by including such
acreage.
(d) We may exclude from insurance, or limit the amount of
insurance, on any acreage that was not insured the previous crop
year.
7. Insurable Acreage--In lieu of the provisions in Section 9
(Insurable Acreage) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8) that
prohibit insurance attaching to a crop planted with another crop,
citrus fruit interplanted with another citrus fruit crop is
insurable unless we inspect the acreage and determine it does not
meet insurability requirements.
8. Insurance Period--(a) In accordance with the provisions of
section 11 (Insurance Period) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8):
(1) Coverage begins on May 1 of each crop year, except that for
the first crop year, if the application is accepted by us after
April 20, insurance will attach on the 10th day after the completed
application and acreage and production reports are received in your
insurance provider's local office. Full premium is due for any
partial year.
(2) The calendar date for the end of the insurance period for
each crop year is:
(i) January 31 for tangerines and navel oranges;
(ii) April 30 for lemons, limes, tangelos, early and mid-season
oranges; and
(iii) June 30 for late oranges, grapefruit, Temple and Murcott
Honey Oranges.
(b) In addition to the provisions of section 11 (Insurance
Period) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8):
(1) If you acquire an insurable share in any insurable acreage
on or before the acreage reporting date of any crop year and if we
inspect and consider the acreage acceptable, insurance will be
considered to have attached to such acreage on the calendar date for
the beginning of the insurance period.
(2) If you relinquish your insurable interest on any acreage of
insurable citrus fruit on or
[[Page 10703]]
before the acreage reporting date of any crop year, insurance will
not be considered to have attached to such acreage for that crop
year unless:
(i) A transfer of right to an indemnity or a similar form
approved by us is completed by all affected parties; and
(ii) We are notified by you or the transferee in writing of such
transfer on or before the acreage reporting date.
9. Causes of Loss--
(a) In accordance with the provisions of section 12 (Causes of
Loss) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8), insurance is provided
only against the following causes of loss that occur within the
insurance period:
(1) Fire, unless weeds and other forms of undergrowth have not
been controlled or pruning debris has not been removed from the
grove;
(2) Freeze;
(3) Hail;
(4) Hurricane; or
(5) Tornado.
(b) In addition to the causes of loss excluded in section 12
(Cause of Loss) of the Basic Provisions (Sec. 457.8), we will not
insure against damage or loss of production due to:
(1) Any damage to the blossoms or trees; or
(2) Inability to market the citrus fruit for any reason other
than actual physical damage from an insurable cause specified in
this section. For example, we will not pay you an indemnity if you
are unable to market due to quarantine, boycott, or refusal of any
person to accept production.
10. Settlement of Claim--
(a) We will determine your loss on a unit basis. In the event
you are unable to provide production records:
(1) For any optional unit, we will combine all optional units
for which acceptable production records were not provided; or
(2) For any basic unit, we will allocate any commingled
production to such units in proportion to our liability on the
harvested acreage for each unit.
(b) In the event of loss or damage covered by this policy, we
will settle your claim for each unit by:
(1) Multiplying the number of acres by the respective dollar
amount of insurance per acre for the citrus fruit by the share;
(2) Computing the average percent of damage to the respective
citrus fruit, rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent (0.1%),
without regard to any percent of damage determined in prior
inspections. The percent of damage will be the ratio of the number
of boxes of citrus fruit considered damaged from an insured cause,
divided by the undamaged potential production. Citrus fruit will be
considered undamaged potential production if it is:
(i) Or could be marketed as fresh fruit;
(ii) Harvested prior to inspection by us; or
(iii) Harvested within 7 days after a freeze;
(3) Subtracting the insurance (level) deductible from the
respective percent of damage and, if this result is positive,
dividing this result by the coverage level percentage;
(4) Multiplying this result by the amount of insurance for the
respective citrus fruit.
(For example, if the average percent of damage is 70 percent and
the coverage level is 75 percent (the deductible is 25 percent), the
amount payable is 60 percent times the amount of insurance (70%
damage -25% level deductible)=45% (45%75%)=60% adjusted
damage X the amount of insurance); and
(5) Summing all such products to determine the amount payable
for the unit.
(c) Pink and red grapefruit of Type III, and citrus fruit of
Types IV, V, and VII, that are seriously damaged by freeze, as
determined by a fresh-fruit cut of a representative sample of fruit
in the unit in accordance with the applicable provisions of the
State of Florida Citrus Fruit laws, and are not or could not be
marketed as fresh fruit will be considered damaged to the following
extent:
(1) If less than 16 percent (16%) of the fruit in a sample shows
serious freeze damage, the fruit will be considered undamaged; or
(2) If 16 percent (16%) or more of the fruit in a sample shows
serious freeze damage, the fruit will be considered 50 percent (50%)
damaged, except that:
(i) For tangerines of Type IV, damage in excess of 50 percent
(50%) will be the actual percent of damaged fruit; and
(ii) For pink and red grapefruit of citrus Type III, and citrus
of Types IV(except tangerines), V, and VII, if it is determined that
the juice loss in the fruit exceeds 50 percent (50%), such percent
will be considered the percent of damage.
(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 11(c) as to any
pink and red grapefruit of Type III and citrus fruit of Types IV, V,
and VII, in any unit that is mechanically separated using the
specific gravity ``floatation'' method into undamaged and freeze-
damaged fruit, the amount of damage will be the actual percent of
freeze-damaged fruit not to exceed 50 percent (50%) and will not be
affected by subsequent fresh-fruit marketing. Notwithstanding the
preceding sentence, the 50 percent (50%) limitation on freeze-
damaged fruit, mechanically separated, will not apply to tangerines
of citrus fruit Type IV.
(e) Any citrus fruit of Types I, II, and VI and white grapefruit
of Type III that is damaged by freeze, but may be processed into
products for human consumption, will be considered as marketable for
juice. The percent of damage will be determined by relating the
juice content of the damaged fruit as determined by analysis to:
(1) The average juice content of the fruit produced on the unit for
the three previous crop years based on your records, if they are
acceptable to us; or
(2) The following juice content, if acceptable records are not
furnished:
(i) Type I--44 pounds of juice per box
(ii) Type II--47 pounds of juice per box
(iii) Type III--38 pounds of juice per box
(iv) Type VI--43 pounds of juice per box
(f) Any citrus fruit on the ground that is not collected and
marketed will be considered totally lost if the damage was due to an
insured cause.
(g) Any citrus fruit that is unmarketable either as fresh fruit
or as juice because it is immature, unwholesome, decomposed,
adulterated, or otherwise unfit for human consumption due to an
insured cause will be considered totally lost.
(h) Pink and red grapefruit of citrus fruit Type III and citrus
fruit of Types IV, V, and VII that are unmarketable as fresh fruit
due to serious damage from hail as defined in United States
Standards for grades of Florida fruit will be considered totally
lost.
11. Written Agreements--Designated terms of this policy may be
altered by written agreement. You must apply in writing for each
written agreement no later than the sales closing date. Each
agreement is valid for one year only. If the written agreement is
not specifically renewed the following year, insurance coverage for
subsequent crop years will be in accordance with the printed policy.
All variable terms, including, but not limited to, crop type and
variety, guarantee, premium rate, and price election must be
contained in the written agreement. Notwithstanding the sales
closing date restriction contained herein, application for a written
agreement may be made after the sales closing date, and approved if,
after physical inspection of the acreage it is determined that the
crop is insurable in accordance with policy and written agreement
provisions. Applications for written agreements submitted by the
insured must also contain all variable terms of the contract between
the company and the insured that will be in effect if the written
agreement is not approved.
Signed in Washington, D.C., on March 21, 1996.
Kenneth D. Ackerman,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 96-6262 Filed 3-12-96; 1:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-FA-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6255 Request for Comments Concerning Guides for the Mirror Industry
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10708-10709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6255]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 21
Request for Comments Concerning Guides for the Mirror Industry
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Request for public comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (the ``Commission'') is
requesting public comments on its Guides for the Mirror Industry (the
``Mirror Guides'' or ``these Guides''). The Commission is also
requesting comments about the overall costs and benefits of these
Guides and their overall regulatory and economic impact as a part of
its systematic review of all current Commission regulations and guides.
DATES: Written comments will be accepted until April 15, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be directed to: Secretary, Federal Trade
Commission, Room H-159, Sixth and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20580. Comments about the Mirror Guides should be
identified as ``16 CFR Part 21--Comment.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jessica D. Gray, Attorney, Federal Trade Commission, Boston Regional
Office, 101 Merrimac Street, Suite 810, Boston, MA 02114-4719, (617)
424-5960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission has determined, as part of
its oversight responsibilities, to review rules and guides
periodically. These reviews will seek information about the costs and
benefits of the Commission's rules and guides and their regulatory and
economic impact. The information obtained will assist the Commission in
identifying rules and guides that warrant modification or rescission.
A. Background
The Mirror Guides, promulgated by the Commission on June 30, 1962,
and amended on September 13, 1972 (16 CFR Part 118) (1972), and
February 27, 1979 (44 FR 11183 (1979)), give guidance about acceptable
and unacceptable claims made in advertising or promotional materials
used during the sale or distribution of mirrors. Specifically, these
Guides make it an unfair or deceptive act or practice for any industry
member in connection with the sale, offering for sale, or distribution
of mirrors to use any advertisement or representation that is false or
has the tendency to mislead purchasers or prospective purchasers with
respect to the type, grade, quality, quantity, use, size, design,
material,
[[Page 10709]]
finish, strength, backing, silvering, thickness, composition, origin,
preparation, manufacture, value, or distribution of any mirror.
In addition, these Guides make it an unfair or deceptive act or
practice for any member of the industry to sell, offer for sale, or
distribute any mirror under any representation or circumstance having
the capacity to mislead or deceive purchasers or prospective purchasers
with regard to the type or kind of glass contained in any mirror or the
type of backing.
B. Issues for Comment
At this time, the Commission solicits written public comments on
the following questions:
(1) Is there a continuing need for the Mirror Guides?
(a) What benefits have these Guides provided to purchasers of the
products or services affected by them?
(b) Have these Guides imposed costs on purchasers?
(2) What changes, if any, should be made to these Guides to
increase their benefits to purchasers?
(a) How would these changes affect the costs that these Guides
impose on firms subject to their requirements?
(3) What significant burden or costs, including costs of
compliance, have these Guides imposed on firms subject to their
requirements?
(a) Have these Guides provided benefits to such firms?
(4) What changes, if any, should be made to these Guides to reduce
the burden or costs imposed on firms subject to their requirements?
(a) How would these changes affect the benefits provided by these
Guides?
(5) Do these Guides overlap or conflict with other federal, state,
or local laws or regulations?
(6) What changes, if any, have been made in the technology used to
manufacture the glass used in making mirrors that may address the
issues of whether mirrors may be advertised as being ``distortion
free'' or ``shatter proof?''
(7) Have efforts been made to standardize the technology used for
``backing'' mirrors?
(8) Since the Mirror Guides were issued, what effects, if any, have
changes in relevant technology or economic conditions had on them?
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41-58.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-6255 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6205 Arecibo Coordination Zone
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10709-10710]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6205]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 5, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 73, 74, 78, 80, 87, 90, 94,
95, and 97
[ET Docket No. 96-2; RM-8165; FCC 96-12]
Arecibo Coordination Zone
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this Notice of Proposed Rule Making (``NPRM''), the
Commission proposes to designate the Puerto Rican Islands of Puerto
Rico, Desecheo, Mona, Vieques, and Culebra as a Coordination Zone, in
order that the Arecibo Radio Astronomy Observatory (Observatory) near
Arecibo, Puerto Rico may be notified of certain proposed radio
operations. This proposal would require applicants for a new station or
for a modification of facilities within the requested Coordination
Zone, to simultaneously notify the Observatory of the technical
particulars of the proposed operations at the time of filing their
applications with the Commission. The NPRM also proposes to require
applicants for short-term broadcast auxiliary services within the
Coordination Zone to notify the Observatory in advance of their
proposed operations, except in emergency situations. In addition, the
NPRM proposes to require new amateur beacon and repeater stations
within 10 miles of the Observatory to be coordinated. This NPRM would
make it possible for the Observatory and applicants to coordinate and
share information in order to avoid harmful interference to sensitive,
nationally important radio astronomy operations.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or before April 1, 1996 and reply
comments must be filed on or before April 16, 1996. Written comments by
the public on the proposed and/or modified information collections are
due April 1, 1996. Written comments
[[Page 10710]]
must be submitted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the
proposed and/or modified information collections on or before May 14,
1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments should be sent to the Office of
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In
addition to filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments
on the information collections contained herein should be submitted to
Dorothy Conway, Federal Communications Commission, Room 234, 1919 M
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to
[email protected], and to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB,
725--17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Derenge, Office of Engineering and
Technology, (202) 418-2451. For additional information concerning the
information collections contained in this NPRM contact Dorothy Conway
at (202) 418-0217, or via the Internet at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 96-2, adopted January 18, 1996,
and released February 8, 1996. The full text of this Commission
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street, NW., Room
246, or 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037. This NPRM
contains proposed or modified information collections subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). It has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under the PRA. OMB,
the general public, and other Federal agencies are invited to comment
on the proposed or modified information collections contained in this
proceeding.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This NPRM contains either a proposed or modified information
collection. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collections
contained in this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, Public Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same
time as other comments on this NPRM; OMB comments are due May 14, 1996.
Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
OMB Approval Number: N/A.
Title: Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish a Radio
Astronomy Coordination Zone in Puerto Rico.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: New Collection.
Respondents: Small Entities, Individual or households, Business or
other for profit, State, Local of Tribal Government.
Number of Respondents: 500.
Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.
Total Annual Burden: 300 hours.
Needs and Uses: The Commission believes that a Coordination Zone
would facilitate the ability of the Observatory and Commission
applicants to contact each other in order to cooperate to avoid causing
interference. The collection would enable the Observatory and
applicants to coordinate and share information in order to avoid
harmful interference to sensitive, nationally important radio astronomy
operations.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 5
Radio.
47 CFR Part 21
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 22
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 23
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 24
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 25
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 26
Communications common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 73
Radio broadcasting, Television broadcasting.
47 CFR Part 74
Radio broadcasting, Television broadcasting.
47 CFR Part 78
Cable television, Radio.
47 CFR Part 80
Marine safety, Radio.
47 CFR Part 87
Defense communications, Radio.
47 CFR Part 90
Common carriers, Radio.
47 CFR Part 94
Radio.
47 CFR Part 95
Radio.
47 CFR Part 97
Civil defense, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-6205 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6193 Foreign and Domestic Fishing; Scientific Research Activity and Exempted Fishing
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10712-10719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6193]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 611 and 620
[Docket No. 960222043-6043-01; I.D. 111595B]
RIN 0648-AC61
Foreign and Domestic Fishing; Scientific Research Activity and
Exempted Fishing
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes new and revised definitions for certain
regulatory terms to distinguish clearly among scientific research
activities, exempted fishing, and exempted educational activities; to
clarify and standardize issuance procedures for letters of
acknowledgement of notification of scientific research activity and
exempted fishing permits (EFPs); and to facilitate scientific research
activities.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 15, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Richard H. Schaefer, Director,
Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management, NMFS, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Comments regarding burden-hour
estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this rule should be sent to Richard H.
Schaefer at the above address and to the Office of Management and
Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0648-0214), Washington, DC 20503
(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William D. Chappell, Fishery
Management Specialist; 301-713-2341.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) (Magnuson Act) authorizes the
Secretary of Commerce to conserve and manage fishery resources in the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) by regulating ``fishing.'' Section 3(10)
of the Magnuson Act, 16 U.S.C. 1802(10), defines ``fishing'' as the
catching, taking, or harvesting of fish; the attempted catching,
taking, or harvesting of fish; any other activity that can reasonably
be expected to result in the catching, taking, or harvesting of fish;
or any other operations at sea in support of, or in preparation for,
any of the aforementioned activities. ``Fish'' includes finfish,
mollusks, crustaceans, and all other forms of marine life other than
marine mammals and birds.
Excluded expressly from the definition of fishing, and therefore
from the Magnuson Act's purview, is ``scientific research activity
which is conducted by a scientific research vessel.'' The Magnuson Act
does not, however, define ``scientific research activity'' or
``scientific research vessel.'' The legislative history provides little
guidance on Congress' intent in exempting scientific research conducted
from a scientific research vessel from the Magnuson Act's requirements.
The sole mention of the subject occurred during the Senate Conference
Committee's consideration of H.R. 200, which, after amendment,
ultimately became the Magnuson Act:
It should be noted that the definition of ``fishing'' in section
3(10) does not include scientific research conducted by a scientific
research vessel. The conference committee does not consider the
conducting of tests of fishing gear to be scientific research within
the meaning of the bill. (S. Conf. Rep. No. 711, 94th Cong., 2d
Sess. 43, reprinted in 1976 U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News 660, 667).
It seems clear that Congress' intent was that not all activity that
takes place on board a scientific research vessel be exempt from
provisions of the Magnuson Act. The focus of the exemption is on the
research nature of a particular activity conducted on board a
scientific research vessel, rather than on the fish taken. However,
because ``scientific research activity'' and ``scientific research
vessel'' have never been precisely defined, the potential exists for
abuse by using the exemption to obtain marketable fish outside of
established fishing seasons or areas, or to otherwise avoid applicable
regulations. Accordingly, NMFS now proposes definitions for
``scientific research activity'' and ``scientific research vessel''.
Consistent with the wording of the Magnuson Act, the proposed
definition of ``scientific research activity'' has as its focus ``pure
science,'' as opposed to general gear or market research, or scouting
for exploitable resources. Such applications would now be included
under exempted fishing. The proposed definition for ``scientific
research activity'' for the purposes of these regulations is an
activity in furtherance of a scientific fishery investigation or study
that would meet the definition of fishing under the Magnuson Act, but
for the exemption applicable to scientific research activity conducted
from a scientific research vessel. Scientific research activity
includes, but is not limited to, sampling, collecting, observing, or
surveying the fish or fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ, at sea, on
board scientific research vessels, to increase scientific knowledge of
the fishery resources or their environment, or to test a hypothesis as
part of a planned, directed investigation or study conducted according
to methodologies generally accepted as appropriate for scientific
research. At-sea scientific fishery investigations address one or more
issues involving taxonomy, biology, physiology, behavior, disease,
aging, growth, mortality, migration, recruitment, distribution,
abundance, ecology, stock structure, bycatch, and catch estimation of
fish and shellfish (invertebrate) species considered to be a component
of the fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ. Scientific research
[[Page 10713]]
activity does not include the collection and retention of fish outside
the scope of the applicable research plan, or the testing of fishing
gear. Data collection designed to capture and land quantities of fish
or invertebrates for product development, market research, and/or
public display must be permitted under exempted fishing procedures.
These proposed regulations would allow foreign vessels to conduct data
collection activities as described above, which might be considered
exempted fishing in domestic fisheries, as part of scientific research
activities when they are carried out in full cooperation with the
United States. This represents the current wording of the scientific
research rules in part 611. Full cooperation with the United States has
generally meant the research activity was conducted with a U.S.
scientist on board or invited to participate in the research and with
the data generated from the research provided to the United States.
An accepted convention of any bona fide scientific research project
is the advance preparation of a written research plan that guides the
conduct of the research. At a minimum, such a research plan or protocol
includes (1) a description of the nature and objectives of the project;
(2) the experimental design of the project, including description of
the methods to be used, the type and class of vessel(s) to be used, and
a description of sampling equipment; (3) the geographical areas in
which the project is to be conducted; (4) the expected date of first
appearance and final departure of any research vessel(s) to be
employed, and deployment and removal of equipment, as appropriate; (5)
the quantity and species of fish to be taken, and their intended
disposition, and, if significant amounts of a managed species or
species otherwise restricted by size or sex are needed, an explanation
of such need; (6) the name, address, and telephone/telex/fax number of
the sponsoring organization and its director; (7) the name, address,
telephone/telex/fax number, and curriculum vitae of the person in
charge of the project and, where different, the person in charge of the
research project on board the vessel; and (8) the identity of the
vessel(s) to be used.
To facilitate scientific research activities, NMFS proposes to
encourage researchers interested in conducting scientific research
activities in the EEZ to submit to the appropriate Director, Regional
Director, or designee, as proposed to be defined in 50 CFR 611.2, a
scientific research plan 60 days, or as far in advance as practicable,
before the start of the research. The Director, Regional Director, or
designee would acknowledge notification of a scientific research
activity by issuing a letter of acknowledgment. This letter of
acknowledgment would be separate and distinct from any permit required
by any other applicable law. Submission and acknowledgment of a
scientific research plan meeting the minimum standards listed above, in
advance of the conduct of the research, would allow a presumption that
activities within the scope of the research plan or protocol are
scientific research activities. NMFS would advise all persons
conducting scientific research in the EEZ to carry the scientific
research plan and letter of acknowledgment on board the scientific
research vessel. In the event of boarding or inspection for enforcement
purposes, presentation of an acknowledged scientific research plan
would facilitate prompt validation by enforcement officers that
activities covered by the research plan are bona fide scientific
research activities and not fishing.
NMFS proposes to define ``scientific research vessel'' as a vessel
owned or chartered by, and controlled by, a foreign government agency,
U.S. Government agency (including NOAA or institutions designated as
federally funded research and development centers), U.S. state or
territorial agency, university (or other educational institution
accredited by a recognized national or international accreditation
body), international treaty organization, or scientific institution.
The definition further provides that, if the vessel is owned or
chartered and controlled by a foreign government, that vessel would fit
within the definition only if the vessel has scientific research as its
exclusive mission during the scientific cruise in question, and the
vessel operations are undertaken pursuant to a scientific research
plan. These conditions are necessary to prevent commercial fishing
conducted from vessels controlled by foreign scientific agencies from
qualifying for the scientific research activity exemption merely
because the vessel is owned or controlled by a governmental agency. A
definition for ``scientific cruise'' is also proposed in this rule.
``Exempted fishing,'' an activity regulated under fishery
management plans (FMPs) prepared by Regional Fishery Management
Councils (Councils) or the Secretary of Commerce, would be defined in
this proposed rule for domestic vessels only. Exempted fishing is
currently referred to as ``experimental fishing'' in certain existing
regulations in 50 CFR part 285 and 50 CFR chapter VI. NMFS anticipates
that individual FMPs that currently authorize ``experimental fishing''
would be amended, as necessary, to replace existing references to
``experimental fishing'' with references to ``exempted fishing,'' and
to standardize terminology and procedures for issuance of EFPs by
replacing existing regulatory text with references to these proposed
additions to 50 CFR part 620. In the absence of specific regulations
for each fishery, these proposed procedures would be followed.
Authority to allow exempted fishing in any regulated fishery would be
established through the governing FMP and/or its implementing
regulations.
Because exempted fishing has sometimes been confused with
scientific research activity, this proposed rule would clarify NMFS'
view that these are distinct activities. If an activity is undertaken
in furtherance of exempted fishing, it would not be considered
scientific research activity. NMFS proposes that collection of fish for
display purposes, if otherwise prohibited by regulations governing that
fishery, would fall within the scope of the definition for ``exempted
fishing.'' Standard procedures for application for EFPs under FMPs,
issuance of EFPs by NMFS, and reporting requirements for persons
fishing under an EFP are proposed in this rule. Prior to issuance of an
EFP, an appropriate consideration of environmental impacts and of
consistency with applicable law would be required.
In addition, NMFS proposes to define ``exempted educational
activity'' for the domestic fishing regulations to distinguish between
commercially oriented exempted fishing and those activities of very
limited scope and duration, conducted by educational institutions, that
may involve activities that are not in accordance with regulations
implemented under authority of an FMP. Authority to allow exempted
educational activity in any regulated fishery would be established
through the governing FMP and/or its implementing regulations. Such
activities, if determined to be valid by the appropriate NMFS Director
or Regional Director, after consideration of consistency with the goals
and objectives of the FMP and with other applicable law, could be
authorized in writing by the Director or Regional Director to the
sponsoring educational institution. The authorization would be required
to be in the possession of the participant during the conduct of the
exempted educational activity.
Examples of potentially valid exempted educational activities
include:
[[Page 10714]]
(1) A small-scale trawl demonstration conducted for teaching purposes
by a university vessel at a time fishing is closed to trawl gear; and
(2) collection of a small number of fish for examination for
educational purposes, when the fish are below a minimum size standard,
in excess of bag limits, or during seasonal closures specified in
regulations. The intent is to allow bona fide educational activities to
take place, with minimal advance notice and paperwork, while still
protecting the fishery resources. Fish harvested under authorized,
exempted educational activities could not be traded, bartered, or sold.
Activities outside the scope of the authorization would be considered
``fishing'' and subject to fishing regulations. These proposed
procedures would serve as guidelines for fisheries until the
regulations governing each fishery are amended to reflect this proposed
rule.
NMFS proposes to redefine ``Center Director'' in the foreign
fishing regulations at 50 CFR part 611 to reflect the correct title of
``Fishery Science Center Director'', note that there are five centers,
and add definitions for ``Center Director'' and ``Regional Director''
to the domestic regulations at 50 CFR part 620. Appropriate tables are
proposed to be amended in 50 CFR part 611.
NMFS also proposes to define ``Director'' to clarify that, where
regulations so specify, the Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation
and Management, NMFS, may be the appropriate contact, rather than a
Regional Director. This would allow the Director, Office of Fisheries
Conservation and Management, to process requests for exempted fishing
or exempted educational activities on Atlantic highly migratory species
(sharks, billfishes, swordfish, and tunas); management of these species
is the responsibility of that office, rather than one of the NMFS
regional offices.
This proposed rule is not intended to inhibit or prevent any
scientific research activity that is conducted by a scientific research
vessel, as defined in this proposed rule, nor is it intended to prevent
exempted fishing conducted under an EFP issued under authority of an
FMP or exempted educational activities authorized by the Director or
Regional Director, consistent with the goals and objectives of an FMP.
Proposed procedures for application for, and issuance of, EFPs and
authorizations for exempted educational activities are intended to
standardize these procedures nationwide for equity, clarity, and
enforcement purposes.
Classification
This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes
of E.O. 12866.
The General Counsel of the Department of Commerce certified to the
Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities, because it serves only to define terms; clarify
distinctions between scientific research activity, exempted fishing,
and exempted educational activities; and standardize procedures for
applying for and issuing EFPs and authorizations for exempted
educational activities as allowed under FMPs. As a result, a regulatory
flexibility analysis was not prepared.
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act. This collection-of-information
requirement has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for approval. The public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated: (1) To average 1 hour per response to send
NMFS a copy of a scientific research plan and provide a copy of the
cruise report or research publication; (2) to average 1 hour per
response to complete an application for an EFP or authorization for an
exempted educational activity; and (3) to average 1 hour per response
to collect information and provide a report at the conclusion of
exempted fishing. Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any
other aspect of the data requirements, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES). Notwithstanding
any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to,
nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with
a collection of information, subject to the requirements of the PRA,
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB
Control Number.
List of Subjects
50 CFR Part 611
Fisheries, Foreign relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
50 CFR Part 620
Fisheries, Fishing.
Dated: March 7, 1996.
Rolland A. Schmitten,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 611 and 620
are proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 611--FOREIGN FISHING
1. The authority citation for part 611 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., 1361 et seq., 1801 et seq.,
and 22 U.S.C. 1971 et seq.
2. In Sec. 611.2, the definition for ``Center Director'' is revised
and definitions for ``Director'', ``Scientific cruise'', ``Scientific
research activity'', ``Scientific research plan'', and ``Scientific
research vessel'', are added, in alphabetical order, to read as
follows:
Sec. 611.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Center Director means the Director of one of the five NMFS
Fisheries Science Centers described in Table 1 of Appendix A to this
subpart, or a designee.
* * * * *
Director means the Director of the Office of Fisheries Conservation
and Management, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
* * * * *
Scientific cruise means the period of time during which a
scientific research vessel is operated in furtherance of a scientific
research project, beginning when the vessel leaves port to undertake
the project and ending when the vessel completes the project as
provided for in the applicable scientific research plan.
Scientific research activity is, for the purposes of this part, an
activity in furtherance of a scientific fishery investigation or study
that would meet the definition of fishing under the Magnuson Act, but
for the exemption applicable to scientific research activity conducted
from a scientific research vessel. Scientific research activity
includes, but is not limited to, sampling, collecting, observing, or
surveying the fish or fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ, at sea, on
board scientific research vessels, to increase scientific knowledge of
the fishery resources or their environment, or to test a hypothesis as
part of a planned, directed investigation or study conducted according
to methodologies generally accepted as appropriate for scientific
research. At-sea scientific fishery investigations address one or more
issues involving taxonomy, biology, physiology, behavior, disease,
aging, growth, mortality, migration, recruitment, distribution,
abundance, ecology, stock structure, bycatch, and catch estimation of
fish and shellfish (invertebrate) species considered to be a component
of the fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ. Scientific research
activity does not include the collection and retention of fish outside
the scope of the
[[Page 10715]]
applicable research plan, or the testing of fishing gear. Data
collection designed to capture and land quantities of fish or
invertebrates for product development, market research, and/or public
display are not scientific research activities and must be permitted
under exempted fishing procedures. For foreign vessels, such data
collection activities are considered scientific research if they are
carried out in full cooperation with the United States.
Scientific research plan means a detailed, written formulation,
prepared in advance of the research, for the accomplishment of a
scientific research project. At a minimum, a sound scientific research
plan should include:
(1) A description of the nature and objectives of the project,
including the hypothesis or hypotheses to be tested;
(2) The experimental design of the project, including a description
of the methods to be used, the type and class of any vessel(s) to be
used, and a description of sampling equipment;
(3) The geographical area(s) in which the project is to be
conducted;
(4) The expected date of first appearance and final departure of
the research vessel(s) to be employed, and deployment and removal of
equipment, as appropriate;
(5) The quantity and species of fish to be taken and their intended
disposition, and, if significant amounts of a managed species or
species otherwise restricted by size or sex are needed, an explanation
of such need;
(6) The name, address, and telephone/telex/fax number of the
sponsoring organization and its director;
(7) The name, address, and telephone/telex/fax number, and
curriculum vitae of the person in charge of the project and, where
different, the person in charge of the research project on board the
vessel; and
(8) The identity of any vessel(s) to be used including, but not
limited to, the vessel's name, official documentation number and IRCS,
home port, and name, address, and telephone number of the owner and
master.
Scientific research vessel means a vessel owned or chartered by,
and controlled by, a foreign government agency, U.S. Government agency
(including NOAA or institutions designated as federally funded research
and development centers), U.S. state or territorial agency, university
(or other educational institution accredited by a recognized national
or international accreditation body), international treaty
organization, or scientific institution. In order for a vessel that is
owned or chartered and controlled by a foreign government to meet this
definition, the vessel must have scientific research as its exclusive
mission during the scientific cruise in question and the vessel
operations must be conducted in accordance with a scientific research
plan.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 611.7, paragraphs (a)(27) and (a)(28) are redesignated
as paragraphs (a)(29) and (a)(30), respectively, and new paragraphs
(a)(27) and (a)(28) are added to read as follows:
Sec. 611.7 Prohibitions.
(a) * * *
(27) Fish in violation of the terms or conditions of any permit or
authorization issued under the Magnuson Act;
(28) On a scientific research vessel, engage in fishing other than
recreational fishing authorized by applicable state, territorial, or
Federal regulations;
* * * * *
4. Section 611.14 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 611.14 Scientific research activity.
(a) Scientific research activity. Persons planning to conduct
scientific research activities in the EEZ that may be confused with
fishing are encouraged to submit to the appropriate Regional Director,
Director, or designee, 60 days or as soon as practicable prior to its
start, a scientific research plan for each scientific cruise. The
Regional Director, Director, or designee will acknowledge notification
of scientific research activity by issuing to the operator or master of
that vessel, or to the sponsoring institution, a letter of
acknowledgment. This letter of acknowledgment is separate and distinct
from any permit required under any other applicable law. If the
Regional Director, Director, or designee, after review of a research
plan, determines that it does not constitute scientific research
activity but rather fishing, the Regional Director, Director, or
designee will inform the applicant as soon as practicable and in
writing. The Regional Director, Director, or designee may also make
recommendations to revise the research plan to make the cruise
acceptable as scientific research activity. In order to facilitate
identification of activity as scientific research, persons conducting
scientific research activities are advised to carry a copy of the
scientific research plan and the letter of acknowledgment on board the
scientific research vessel. Activities conducted in accordance with a
scientific research plan acknowledged by such a letter are presumed to
be scientific research activities. The presumption may be overcome by
showing that an activity does not fit the definition of scientific
research activity or is outside the scope of the scientific research
plan.
(b) Reports. Persons conducting scientific research are requested
to submit a copy of any cruise report or other publication created as a
result of the cruise, including the amount, composition, and
disposition of their catch, to the appropriate Center Director.
5. Table 1 to Appendix A to subpart A of part 611 is revised to
read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart A--Addresses, Areas of Responsibility and
Communications
Table 1.--Addresses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS Fisheries
NMFS regional directors Science Center U.S. Coast Guard
directors commanders
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Director, Northeast Region, Director, Northeast Commander, Atlantic
National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Science Area, U.S. Coast
Service, NOAA, One Center, National Guard, Governor's
Blackburn Drive, Marine Fisheries Island, New York,
Gloucester, MA 01930-2298; Service, NOAA, 166 NY 10004; Telex:
Telex: 940007; Telephone: Water Street, Woods 126831; Telephone:
508-281-9300; FAX: 508-281- Hole, MA 02543- 212-668-7877.
9333;. 1097, Attn:
Observer Program;
Telex: 322200;
Telephone: 508-548-
5123; FAX: 508-548-
5124.
Director, Southeast Region, Director, Southeast Commander, Atlantic
National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Science Area, U.S. Coast
Service, NOAA, 9721 Exec. Center, National Guard, New York, NY
Center Drive N., St. Marine Fisheries 10004; Telex:
Petersburg, FL 33702; Service, NOAA, 75 126831; Telephone:
Telephone: 813-570-5301; Virginia Beach 212-668-7877.
FAX: 813-570-5300. Drive, Miami, FL
33149-1003;
Telephone: 305-361-
5761; FAX: 305-361-
4219.
[[Page 10716]]
Director, Northwest Region, Director, Northwest Commander, Pacific
National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Science Area, U.S. Coast
Service, NOAA, 7600 Sand Center, National Guard, Government
Point Way, NE, BIN C15700, Marine Fisheries Island, Alameda, CA
Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115; Service, NOAA, 2725 94501; Telex:
Telex: 9104442786; Montlake Boulevard 172343; Telephone:
Telephone: 206-526-6150; East, Seattle, WA 510-437-3700; FAX:
FAX: 206-526-6426. 98112-2097; 510-437-3017
Telephone: 206-442-
1872; FAX: 206-442-
4304.
Director, Alaska Region, Director, Alaska Commander,
National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Science Seventeenth Coast
Service, NOAA, P.O. Box Center, National Guard District,
1668, Juneau, AK 99802- Marine Fisheries P.O. Box 3-5000,
1668; Telex: 09945377; Service, NOAA, 7600 Juneau, AK 99801;
Telephone: 907-586-7221; Sand Point Way, NE, Telex: 45305;
FAX: 907-586-7249. BIN C15700, Bldg. Telephone: 907-586-
4, Seattle, WA 7200 after
98115-0070; Telex: hours:907-586-7350.
329422; Telephone:
206-526-4000; FAX:
206-526-4004.
Director, Southwest Region Director, Southwest Commander,
National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Science Fourteenth Coast
Service, NOAA, 501 West Center, National Guard District, 300
Ocean Blvd, Suite 4200, Marine Fisheries Ala Moana Blvd.,
Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; Service, NOAA, P.O. Honolulu, HI 96813;
Telephone: 310-980-4001; Box 271, La Jolla, Telex: 392401;
FAX: 310-980-4018. CA 92038-0271; Telephone: 808-546-
Telephone: 619-546- 7597.
7000; FAX: 619-546-
7003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 620--GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR DOMESTIC FISHERIES
6. The authority citation for part 620 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
7. In Sec. 620.2, definitions for ``Center Director'',
``Director'', ``Exempted educational activity'', ``Exempted fishing'',
``Regional Director'', ``Scientific cruise'', ``Scientific research
activity'', ``Scientific research plan'', and ``Scientific research
vessel'', are added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows:
Sec. 620.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Center Director means the Director of one of the five NMFS
Fisheries Science Centers.
* * * * *
Director means the Director of the Office of Fisheries Conservation
and Management, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
* * * * *
Exempted educational activity means an activity, conducted by an
educational institution accredited by a recognized national or
international accreditation body, of limited scope and duration, that
is otherwise prohibited by part 285 or chapter VI of this title, but
that is authorized by the appropriate Director or Regional Director for
educational purposes.
Exempted or experimental fishing means fishing from a vessel of the
United States that involves activities otherwise prohibited by part 285
or chapter VI of this title, but that are authorized under an exempted
fishing permit (EFP). These regulations refer exclusively to exempted
fishing. References in 50 CFR part 285 and elsewhere in this chapter to
experimental fishing mean exempted fishing under this part.
* * * * *
Regional Director means the Director of one of the five NMFS
Regions.
* * * * *
Scientific cruise means the period of time during which a
scientific research vessel is operated in furtherance of a scientific
research project, beginning when the vessel leaves port to undertake
the project and ending when the vessel completes the project as
provided for in the applicable scientific research plan.
Scientific research activity is, for the purposes of this part, an
activity in furtherance of a scientific fishery investigation or study
that would meet the definition of fishing under the Magnuson Act, but
for the exemption applicable to scientific research activity conducted
from a scientific research vessel. Scientific research activity
includes, but is not limited to, sampling, collecting, observing, or
surveying the fish or fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ, at sea, on
board scientific research vessels, to increase scientific knowledge of
the fishery resources or their environment, or to test a hypothesis as
part of a planned, directed investigation or study conducted according
to methodologies generally accepted as appropriate for scientific
research. At-sea scientific fishery investigations address one or more
issues involving taxonomy, biology, physiology, behavior, disease,
aging, growth, mortality, migration, recruitment, distribution,
abundance, ecology, stock structure, bycatch, and catch estimation of
fish and shellfish (invertebrate) species considered to be a component
of the fishery resources within the U.S. EEZ. Scientific research
activity does not include the collection and retention of fish that is
outside the scope of the applicable research plan, or the testing of
fishing gear. Data collection designed to capture and land quantities
of fish or invertebrates for product development, market research, and/
or public display are not scientific research activities and must be
permitted under exempted fishing procedures.
Scientific research plan means a detailed, written formulation,
prepared in advance of the research, for the accomplishment of a
scientific research project. At a minimum, a sound scientific research
plan should include:
(1) A description of the nature and objectives of the project,
including the hypothesis or hypotheses to be tested;
(2) The experimental design of the project, including a description
of the methods to be used, the type and class of any vessel(s) to be
used (including the name and tonnage of vessel as soon as identified),
and a description of sampling equipment;
(3) The geographical area(s) in which the project is to be
conducted;
(4) The expected date of first appearance and final departure of
any research vessel(s) to be employed, and deployment and removal of
equipment, as appropriate;
(5) The quantity and species of fish to be taken and their intended
disposition, and, if significant amounts of a managed species or
species otherwise restricted by size or sex are needed, an explanation
of such need;
(6) The name, address, and telephone/telex/fax number of the
sponsoring organization and its director;
(7) The name, address, telephone/telex/fax number, and curriculum
vitae of the person in charge of the project and, where different, the
person in charge of the research project on board the vessel; and
(8) The identity of any vessel(s) to be used, including, but not
limited to, the
[[Page 10717]]
vessel's name, official documentation number or state registration
number, home port, and name, address, and telephone number of the owner
and master.
Scientific research vessel means a vessel owned or chartered by,
and controlled by, a foreign government agency, U.S. Government agency
(including NOAA or institutions designated as federally funded research
and development centers), U.S. state or territorial agency, university
(or other educational institution accredited by a recognized national
or international accreditation body), international treaty
organization, or scientific institution. To meet this definition, the
vessel must have scientific research as its exclusive mission during
the scientific cruise in question and the vessel operations must be
conducted in accordance with a scientific research plan.
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 620.7, paragraphs (i) through (l) are added to read as
follows:
Sec. 620.7 General prohibitions.
* * * * *
(i) Fish in violation of the terms or conditions of any permit or
authorization issued under the Magnuson Act.
(j) Fail to report catches as required while fishing pursuant to an
exempted fishing permit.
(k) On a scientific research vessel, engage in fishing other than
recreational fishing authorized by applicable state or Federal
regulations.
(l) Trade, barter, or sell; or attempt to trade, barter, or sell
fish possessed or retained while fishing pursuant to an authorization
for an exempted educational activity.
9. Section 620.10 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 620.10 Scientific research activity, exempted fishing, and
exempted educational activity.
(a) Scientific research activity. Nothing in this part is intended
to inhibit or prevent any scientific research activity conducted by a
scientific research vessel. Persons planning to conduct scientific
research activities in the EEZ are encouraged to submit to the
appropriate Regional Director, Director, or designee, 60 days or as
soon as practicable prior to its start, a scientific research plan for
each scientific cruise. The Regional Director, Director, or designee
will acknowledge notification of scientific research activity by
issuing to the operator or master of that vessel, or to the sponsoring
institution, a letter of acknowledgment. This letter of acknowledgment
is separate and distinct from any permit required by any other
applicable law. If the Regional Director, Director, or designee, after
review of a research plan, determines that it does not constitute
scientific research but rather fishing, the Regional Director,
Director, or designee will inform the applicant as soon as practicable
and in writing. The Regional Director, Director, or designee may also
make recommendations to revise the research plan to make the cruise
acceptable as scientific research activity or recommend the applicant
request an EFP. In order to facilitate identification of activity as
scientific research, persons conducting scientific research activities
are advised to carry a copy of the scientific research plan and the
letter of acknowledgment on board the scientific research vessel.
Activities conducted in accordance with a scientific research plan
acknowledged by such a letter are presumed to be scientific research
activity. The presumption may be overcome by showing that an activity
does not fit the definition of scientific research activity or is
outside the scope of the scientific research plan.
(b) Exempted fishing--(1) General. A NMFS Regional Director or
Director may authorize, for limited testing, public display, data
collection, and/or exploratory purposes, the target or incidental
harvest of species managed under an FMP or fishery regulations that
would otherwise be prohibited. Exempted fishing may not be conducted
unless authorized by an exempted fishing permit (EFP) issued by a
Regional Director or Director in accordance with the criteria and
procedures specified in this section. The Regional Director or Director
may charge a fee to recover the administrative expenses of issuing an
EFP. The amount of the fee will be calculated, at least annually, in
accordance with procedures of the NOAA Handbook for determining
administrative costs of each special product or service; the fee may
not exceed such costs. Persons may contact the appropriate Regional
Director or Director to find out the applicable fee.
(2) Application. An applicant for an EFP shall submit a completed
application package to the appropriate Regional Director or Director,
as soon as practicable and at least 60 days before the desired
effective date of the EFP. Submission of an EFP application less than
60 days before the desired effective date of the EFP may result in a
delayed effective date because of review requirements. The application
package must include payment of any required fee as specified by
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, and a written application that
includes, but is not limited to, the following information:
(i) The date of the application;
(ii) The applicant's name, mailing address, and telephone number;
(iii) A statement of the purposes and goals of the exempted fishery
for which an EFP is needed, including justification for issuance of the
EFP;
(iv) For each vessel to be covered by the EFP as soon as the
information is available and before operations begin under the EFP:
(A) A copy of the U.S. Coast Guard documentation, state license, or
registration of each vessel, or the information contained on the
appropriate document; and
(B) The current name, address, and telephone number of the owner
and master, if not included on the document provided for the vessel;
(v) The species (target and incidental) expected to be harvested
under the EFP, the amount(s) of such harvest necessary to conduct the
exempted fishing, the arrangements for disposition of all regulated
species harvested under the EFP, and any anticipated impacts on marine
mammals or endangered species;
(vi) For each vessel covered by the EFP, the approximate time(s)
and place(s) fishing will take place, and the type, size, and amount of
gear to be used; and
(vii) The signature of the applicant.
(viii) The Regional Director or Director, as appropriate, may
request from an applicant additional information necessary to make the
determinations required under this section. An incomplete application
or an application for which the appropriate fee has not been paid will
not be considered until corrected in writing and the fee paid. An
applicant for an EFP need not be the owner or operator of the vessel(s)
for which the EFP is requested.
(3) Issuance. (i) The Regional Director or Director, as
appropriate, will review each application and will make a preliminary
determination whether the application contains all of the required
information and constitutes an activity appropriate for further
consideration. If the Regional Director or Director finds that any
application does not warrant further consideration, both the applicant
and the affected Council(s) will be notified in writing of the reasons
for the decision. If the Regional Director or Director determines that
any application warrants further consideration, notification of receipt
of the application will be published in the Federal Register with a
brief description of the proposal, and the intent of NMFS to issue an
EFP. Interested persons will be
[[Page 10718]]
given a 15- to 45-day opportunity to comment. The notification may
establish a cut-off date for receipt of additional applications to
participate in the same, or a similar, exempted fishing activity. The
Regional Director or Director also will forward copies of the
application to the Council(s), the U.S. Coast Guard, and the
appropriate fishery management agencies of affected states, accompanied
by the following information:
(A) The effect of the proposed EFP on the target and incidental
species, including the effect on any total allowable catch;
(B) A citation of the regulation or regulations that, without the
EFP, would prohibit the proposed activity; and
(C) Biological information relevant to the proposal, including
appropriate statements of environmental impacts, including impacts on
marine mammals and threatened or endangered species.
(ii) If the application is complete and warrants additional
consultation, the Regional Director or Director may consult with the
appropriate Council(s) concerning the permit application during the
period in which comments have been requested. The Council(s) or the
Director or Regional Director shall notify the applicant in advance of
any meeting at which the application will be considered, and offer the
applicant the opportunity to appear in support of the application.
(iii) As soon as practicable after receiving responses from the
agencies identified above, and/or after the consultation, if any,
described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, the Regional
Director or Director shall notify the applicant in writing of the
decision to grant or deny the EFP, and, if denied, the reasons for the
denial. Grounds for denial of an EFP include, but are not limited to,
the following:
(A) The applicant has failed to disclose material information
required, or has made false statements as to any material fact, in
connection with his or her application; or
(B) According to the best scientific information available, the
harvest to be conducted under the permit would detrimentally affect the
well-being of the stock of any regulated species of fish, marine
mammal, or threatened or endangered species in a significant way; or
(C) Issuance of the EFP would have economic allocation as its sole
purpose; or
(D) Activities to be conducted under the EFP would be inconsistent
with the intent of this section, the management objectives of the FMP,
or other applicable law; or
(E) The applicant has failed to demonstrate a valid justification
for the permit; or
(F) The activity proposed under the EFP could create a significant
enforcement problem.
(iv) The decision of a Regional Director or Director to grant or
deny an EFP is the final action of NMFS. If the permit, as granted, is
significantly different from the original application, or is denied,
NMFS may publish notification in the Federal Register describing the
exempted fishing to be conducted under the EFP or the reasons for
denial.
(v) Terms and conditions of EFPs. The Regional Director or Director
may attach terms and conditions to the EFP consistent with the purpose
of the exempted fishing, including, but not limited to:
(A) The maximum amount of each regulated species that can be
harvested and landed during the term of the EFP, including trip
limitations, where appropriate;
(B) The number, size(s), name(s), and identification number(s) of
the vessel(s) authorized to conduct fishing activities under the EFP;
(C) The time(s) and place(s) where exempted fishing may be
conducted;
(D) The type, size, and amount of gear that may be used by each
vessel operated under the EFP;
(E) The condition that observers, a vessel monitoring system, or
other electronic equipment be carried on board vessels operated under
an EFP, and any necessary conditions, such as predeployment
notification requirements;
(F) Reasonable data reporting requirements;
(G) Other conditions as may be necessary to assure compliance with
the purposes of the EFP, consistent with the objectives of the FMP and
other applicable law; and
(H) Provisions for public release of data obtained under the EFP
that are consistent with NOAA confidentiality of statistics procedures
as set out at part 603 of this chapter. An applicant may be required to
waive the right to confidentiality of information gathered while
conducting exempted fishing as a condition of an EFP.
(4) Duration. Unless otherwise specified in the EFP or a
superseding notice or regulation, an EFP is effective for no longer
than 1 year, unless revoked, suspended, or modified. EFPs may be
renewed following the application procedures in this section.
(5) Alteration. Any permit that has been altered, erased, or
mutilated is invalid.
(6) Transfer. EFPs issued under this section are not transferable
or assignable. An EFP is valid only for the vessel(s) for which it is
issued.
(7) Inspection. Any EFP issued under this section must be carried
on board the vessel(s) for which it was issued. The EFP must be
presented for inspection upon request of any authorized officer.
(8) Sanctions. Failure of a permittee to comply with the terms and
conditions of an EFP may be grounds for revocation, suspension, or
modification of the EFP with respect to all persons and vessels
conducting activities under the EFP. Any action taken to revoke,
suspend, or modify an EFP for enforcement purposes will be governed by
15 CFR part 904, subpart D.
(c) Reports. (1) Persons conducting scientific research activity
are requested to submit a copy of any cruise report or other
publication created as a result of the cruise, including the amount,
composition, and disposition of their catch, to the appropriate Center
Director.
(2) Persons fishing under an EFP are required to report their
catches to the appropriate Regional Director or Director, as specified
in the EFP.
(d) Exempted educational activities--(1) General. A NMFS Regional
Director or Director may authorize, for educational purposes, the
target or incidental harvest of species managed under an FMP or fishery
regulations that would otherwise be prohibited. The decision of a
Regional Director or Director to grant or deny an exempted educational
activity authorization is the final action of NMFS. Exempted
educational activities may not be conducted unless authorized in
writing by a Regional Director or Director in accordance with the
criteria and procedures specified in this section. Such authorization
will be issued without charge.
(2) Application. An applicant for an exempted educational activity
authorization shall submit to the appropriate Regional Director or
Director, at least 15 days before the desired effective date of the
authorization, a written application that includes, but is not limited
to, the following information:
(i) The date of the application;
(ii) The applicant's name, mailing address, and telephone number;
(iii) A brief statement of the purposes and goals of the exempted
educational activity for which authorization is requested, including a
general description of the arrangements for disposition of all species
collected;
[[Page 10719]]
(iv) Evidence that the sponsoring institution is a valid
educational institution, such as accreditation by a recognized national
or international accreditation body;
(v) The scope and duration of the activity;
(vi) For each vessel to be covered by the authorization:
(A) A copy of the U.S. Coast Guard documentation, state license, or
registration of the vessel, or the information contained on the
appropriate document;
(B) The current name, address, and telephone number of the owner
and master, if not included on the document provided for the vessel;
(vii) The species and amounts expected to be caught during the
exempted educational activity;
(viii) For each vessel covered by the authorization, the
approximate time(s) and place(s) fishing will take place, and the type,
size, and amount of gear to be used; and
(ix) The signature of the applicant.
(x) The Regional Director or Director may request from an applicant
additional information necessary to make the determinations required
under this section. An incomplete application will not be considered
until corrected in writing.
(3) Issuance. (i) The Regional Director or Director, as
appropriate, will review each application and will make a determination
whether the application contains all of the required information, is
consistent with the goals, objectives, and requirements of the FMP or
regulations and other applicable law, and constitutes a valid exempted
educational activity. The applicant will be notified in writing of the
decision within 5 working days of receipt of the application.
(ii) The Regional Director or Director may attach terms and
conditions to the authorization, consistent with the purpose of the
exempted educational activity, including, but not limited to:
(A) The maximum amount of each regulated species that may be
harvested;
(B) The time(s) and place(s) where the exempted educational
activity may be conducted;
(C) The type, size, and amount of gear that may be used by each
vessel operated under the authorization;
(D) Reasonable data reporting requirements;
(E) Such other conditions as may be necessary to assure compliance
with the purposes of the authorization, consistent with the objectives
of the FMP or regulations; and
(F) Provisions for public release of data obtained under the
authorization, consistent with NOAA confidentiality of statistics
procedures at part 603 of this chapter. An applicant may be required to
waive the right to confidentiality of information gathered while
conducting experimental fishing as a condition of an EFP.
(iii) The authorization will specify the scope of the authorized
activity and will include, at a minimum, the duration, vessel(s),
species and gear involved in the activity, as well as any additional
terms and conditions specified under paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of this
section.
(4) Duration. Unless otherwise specified, authorization for an
exempted educational activity is effective for no longer than 1 year,
unless revoked, suspended, or modified. Authorizations may be renewed
following the application procedures in this section.
(5) Alteration. Any authorization that has been altered, erased, or
mutilated is invalid.
(6) Transfer. Authorizations issued under this paragraph (d) are
not transferable or assignable.
(7) Inspection. Any authorization issued under this paragraph (d)
must be carried on board the vessel(s) for which it was issued or be in
possession of the applicant to which it was issued while the exempted
educational activity is being conducted. The authorization must be
presented for inspection upon request of any authorized officer.
Activities that meet the definition of fishing, despite an educational
purpose, are fishing. An authorization may allow covered fishing
activities; however, fishing activities conducted outside the scope of
an authorization for exempted educational activities are illegal.
[FR Doc. 96-6193 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-W
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6192 Airworthiness Directives; JanAero Devices (formerly Janitrol, C&D, FL Aerospace, and Midland-Ross Corporation) B series combustion heaters, Models B1500, B2030, B3040, and B4050
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10703-10706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6192]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-CE-83-AD]
Airworthiness Directives; JanAero Devices (formerly Janitrol,
C&D, FL Aerospace, and Midland-Ross Corporation) B series combustion
heaters, Models B1500, B2030, B3040, and B4050
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to supersede AD 82-07-03, which
currently requires repetitively testing (pressure decay) JanAero
Devices B-Series combustion heaters, Models B1500, B2030, B3040, and
B4050, that are installed on aircraft, and overhauling any heater that
does not pass one of these pressure decay tests. The proposed action
would retain these pressure decay tests and possible heater overhaul;
and would require repetitive
[[Page 10704]]
operational testing of the combustion air pressure switch, and
replacing any combustion pressure switch that does not pass one of
these tests. Two occurrences of failure of the affected heaters
prompted the proposed action. In one case, an explosion resulted and
the baggage compartment door was blown off the airplane. In the other
case, a fire occurred in the baggage compartment while the airplane was
in flight. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to
prevent an airplane fire or explosion caused by failure of the heater
combustion tube assembly or combustion air pressure switch.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 17, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-CE-83-AD, Room 1558, 601 E.
12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments may be inspected at
this location between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
holidays excepted.
Service information that applies to the proposed AD may be obtained
from JanAero Devices, P.O. Box 273, Fort Deposit, Alabama; telephone
(334) 227-8306; facsimile (334) 227-8596. This information also may be
examined at the Rules Docket at the address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Linda Haynes, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, Campus Building, 1701
Columbia Avenue, suite 2-160, College Park, Georgia 30337-2748;
telephone (404) 305-7377; facsimile (404) 305-7348.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications should identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments,
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report that summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned
with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 95-CE-83-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-CE-83-AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
Discussion
AD 82-07-03, Amendment 39-4354, currently requires repetitively
testing (pressure decay) JanAero Devices B- Series combustion heaters,
Models B1500, B2030, B3040, and B4050, that are installed on aircraft,
and overhauling any heater that does not pass one of these pressure
decay tests.
The FAA has received reports of two occurrences of failure of the
affected heaters. In one case, an explosion resulted and the baggage
compartment door was blown off the airplane. In the other case, a fire
occurred in the nose baggage compartment while the airplane was in
flight. Investigation of these occurrences revealed malfunction of the
combustion air pressure switch on the affected heaters.
The function of this switch is to sense a minimum combustion air
differential pressure or airflow and then activate a spark ignition to
the coil and fuel solenoid valve. The problem is that with the contacts
closed, fuel flow and ignition occur without proper airflow, resulting
in a possible explosive ignition.
JanAero Devices has developed a new combustion air pressure switch,
which, when incorporated on one of the affected combustion heaters,
eliminates the electrical contact in the closed position utilized in
the old design switch. Procedures for incorporating these parts of
improved design are included in JanAero Devices Service Bulletin (SB) #
A-102, dated September 1994. In addition, JanAero devices has
incorporated improved design ceramic combustion tubes into new heater
assemblies.
After examining the circumstances and reviewing all available
information related to the incidents described above, including the
referenced service information, the FAA has determined that (1) the
repetitive inspections required by AD 82-07-03 are still needed for
JanAero Devices B-Series combustion heaters, Models B1500, B2030,
B3040, and B4050, installed on aircraft; (2) the combustion air
pressure switches of the affected combustion heaters should be
repetitively inspected until a new switch of improved design is
installed; and (3) AD action should be taken to prevent an airplane
fire or explosion caused by failure of the heater combustion tube
assembly or combustion air pressure switch.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop in other JanAero Devices B-Series combustion heaters,
Models B1500, B2030, B3040, and B4050 of the same type design installed
in aircraft, the proposed AD would supersede AD 82-07-03 with a new AD
that would (1) retain the requirements of repetitively testing
(pressure decay), and overhauling any heater that does not pass one of
these pressure decay tests; (2) require repetitive operational testing
of the combustion air pressure switch, and replacing any combustion
pressure switch that does not pass one of these tests; and (3) provide
the option of installing a combustion air pressure switch of improved
design as terminating action for the repetitive operational tests.
Accomplishment of the proposed actions would be as follows:
--the pressure decay tests, combustion air pressure switch operational
tests, and possible heater overhaul in accordance with the Overhaul and
Maintenance Manual; and
--the improved design combustion air pressure switch installation in
accordance with JanAero Devices SB # A-102, dated September 1994.
The compliance times of the proposed AD are presented in both hours
time-in-service and calendar time (with the prevalent one being
whichever occurs first). The reason for the proposed dual compliance
time is that the affected combustion heaters are susceptible to
corrosion (occurs regardless of whether the airplane is in flight or on
the ground) as well as being affected by thermodynamic and pressure
cycles accumulated through regular airplane usage.
The FAA estimates that 25,700 aircraft in the U.S. registry have
the affected heaters installed and, thus would be affected by the
proposed AD,
[[Page 10705]]
that it would take approximately 1 workhour per aircraft to accomplish
the proposed initial inspection, and that the average labor rate is
approximately $60 an hour. Based on these figures, the total cost
impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$1,542,000 or $60 per aircraft. This figure does not take into account
the number of repetitive inspections each aircraft owner/operator would
incur over the life of the aircraft, or the number of aircraft that
have an improved design combustion air pressure switch installed. The
FAA has no way of determining the number of repetitive inspections each
owner/operator would incur over the life of the aircraft. The FAA is
not aware of any affected owner/operator that has incorporated the new
design parts as of publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking.
AD 82-03-07 currently requires the pressure decay tests on aircraft
with the affected heaters installed. This action maintains these
inspections; so the only cost impact of the proposed action is that of
the combustion air pressure switch operational tests.
The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if promulgated,
will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation
prepared for this action has been placed in the Rules Docket. A copy of
it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the location
provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14
CFR part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 82-07-03, Amendment 39-4354, and by adding a new AD to read as
follows:
Janaero Devices (formerly Janitrol, C&D, FL Aerospace, and Midland-
Ross Corporation): Docket No. 95-CE-83-AD; Supersedes AD 82-07-03,
Amendment 39-4354.
Applicability: B-Series combustion heaters, Models B1500, B2030,
B3040, and B4050, marked as meeting the standards of TSO-C20, that
do not incorporate a ceramic combustion tube and a part number (P/N)
94E42 combustion air pressure switch, and are installed on, but not
limited to, the following aircraft (all serial numbers),
certificated in any category:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Models and series model
Manufacturer airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beech................................. Models 95-B55 Series, 58, 58TC,
58P, 60, A60, and 76.
Canadair.............................. Models CL-215, CL-215T, and CLT-
415.
Cessna................................ Models 208, 303, 310F, 310G,
310H, 310I, 310J, 310K, 310L,
310M, 310N, 310O, 310P, 320C,
320D, 320E, 320F, 337 series,
340 340A, 414, 414A, 421, 421A,
421B, and 421C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: This AD applies to each aircraft identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it. Compliance: Required as follows, as applicable:
--For aircraft with 450 or more heater hours time- in-service (TIS)
(see Note 2 for information on how to determine heater hours TIS)
accumulated on an installed heater since the last overhaul or new
installation, within the next 50 heater hours TIS or 12 calendar
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first,
unless already accomplished, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 100 heater hours TIS or 24 calendar months, whichever occurs
first;
--For aircraft with less than 450 heater hours TIS accumulated on an
installed heater since the last overhaul or new installation, upon
accumulating 500 heater hours TIS on the new or overhauled heater or
within the next 12 calendar months after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs first, unless already accomplished, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 heater hours TIS or 24
calendar months, whichever occurs first; and
--Upon installing one of the affected heaters, and thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 100 heater hours TIS or 24 calendar months,
whichever occurs first.
Note 2: A heater hour meter may be used to determine heater
hours TIS. Also, aircraft hours TIS may be divided in half to come
up with heater hours TIS.
To prevent an airplane fire or explosion caused by failure of
the heater combustion tube assembly or combustion air pressure
switch, accomplish the following:
(a) Test (pressure decay test) the combustion tube of the heater
and conduct an operational test of the combustion air pressure
switch in accordance with Section III, paragraph 3.3.1 through
3.3.13 (pressure decay test) and Section IV, paragraph 4.9c
(operational switch test), of the Janitrol Maintenance and Overhaul
Manual, part number (P/N) 24E25-1, dated October 1981.
(1) If any heater does not pass any of the repetitive combustion
tube pressure decay tests required by this AD, prior to further
flight, overhaul the heater and replace the combustion tube with a
serviceable tube or replace the heater assembly. If the new or
rebuilt heater assembly incorporates a ceramic combustion tube, then
the repetitive pressure decay tests are no longer required.
(2) If any heater does not pass any of the repetitive combustion
air pressure switch operational tests required by this AD, prior to
further flight, replace the switch with one of the same design or
with a P/N 94E42 switch. Replacing the combustion air pressure
switch with a P/N 94E42 switch eliminates the repetitive operational
testing requirement of this AD.
(b) As an alternative method of compliance to the requirements
of this AD, the heater may be disabled by accomplishing the
following:
(1) Cap the fuel supply line;
[[Page 10706]]
(2) Disconnect the electrical power and ensure that the
connections are properly secured to reduce the possibility of
electrical spark or structural damage;
(3) Inspect and test to ensure that the cabin heater system is
disabled;
(4) Ensure that no other aircraft system is affected by this
action;
(5) Ensure there are no fuel leaks; and
(6) Fabricate a placard with the words: ``System Inoperative''.
Install this placard at the heater control valve within the pilot's
clear view.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an equivalent level of safety may be
approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), Campus Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue, suite 2-160, College
Park, Georgia 30337-2748. The request shall be forwarded through an
appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then
send it to the Manager, Atlanta ACO.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Atlanta ACO.
(e) Alternative methods of compliance for the combustion tube
repetitive inspections required by this AD that are approved in
accordance with AD 82-07-03 (superseded by this action) are approved
as alternative methods of compliance with the applilcable portion of
paragraph (a) of this AD.
(f) All persons affected by this directive may obtain copies of
the document referred to herein upon request to The New Piper
Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; or may
examine this document at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the
Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106.
(g) This amendment supersedes AD 82-07-03, Amendment 39-4354.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 11, 1996.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-6192 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-6159 Appropriateness of Requested Single Location Bargaining Units in Representation Cases
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 52 (Friday, March 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 10709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6159]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
29 CFR Part 103
Appropriateness of Requested Single Location Bargaining Units in
Representation Cases
AGENCY: National Labor Relations Board.
ACTION: Notice of extension of time for filing comments to proposed
rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Labor Relations Board gives notice that it is
extending the time for filing comments on the proposed rulemaking on
the appropriateness of requested single location bargaining units in
representation cases because of matters raised during the March 7,
1996, hearing and a request for extension.
DATES: The comment period which presently ends at the close of business
on March 15, 1996, is extended to the close of business on April 12,
1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rulemaking should be sent to:
Office of the Executive Secretary, 1099 14th Street, NW., Room 11600,
Washington, DC 20570.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. Toner, Executive Secretary,
Telephone: (202) 273-1940.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board's notice of proposed rulemaking on
the appropriateness of requested single location bargaining units in
representation cases was published in the Federal Register on September
28, 1995 (60 FR 50146). The notice provided that all responses to the
notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before November
27, 1995. On November 20, 1995 the Board extended the time to January
22, 1996. Because of the recent shutdown of operations due to lack of
appropriated funds, the Board extended the time to February 8, 1996. In
view of public interest, the Board further extended the period for
filing responses to the notice of proposed rulemaking until the close
of business on Friday, March 15, 1996.
On March 7, 1996, the House Subcommittee on Regulation and
Paperwork of the Committee on Small Business of the U.S. House of
Representatives conducted an oversight hearing regarding the proposed
rule and on March 8, 1996, United Food & Commercial Workers
International Union, AFL-CIO, requested the Board to extend the period
for filing comments to the proposed rule to April 12, 1996. In light of
the matters raised during the March 7 hearing and the request of United
Food & Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO for an extension
of time, the Board extends the period for filing responses to the
notice of proposed rulemaking until April 12, 1996.
Dated, Washington, DC, March 11, 1996.
By direction of the Board.
John J. Toner,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-6159 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7545-01-P
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.