Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 93 / Friday, May 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 30553

through the rate and tax relief processes,

they are not entitled to a full and

complete rebate on ‘‘stranded

investments’’ and shortfalls that will

arise because funding targets for

decommissioning have been

underfunded. The petitioner believes

that shareholders and board members of

electric utilities and RECs, must assume

responsibility for their business

decision. The petitioner adds that to

allow artificial definitions concerning

ownership of nuclear power plants to

insulate those who cogently made

capital investments is immoral,

unethical, and an endorsement of

corporate socialism. The petitioner

asserts that shareholders profit from

imprudent investment decisions and are

accorded relief when error of

mismanagement becomes manifest. The

petitioner believes that society, the

nuclear industry, proportional owners

and RECs, must assume responsibility

for their investment strategies.

Remedies

The petitioner recommends the

following remedies:

1. RECs, and proportional partners of

nuclear generating stations that are not

specified as the power reactor licensee

must conduct a revised and updated

site-specific analysis biennially based

on prevailing realities that include a

recognition that the NRC is redefining

the concept of ‘‘electric utility’;

scientifically verifiable cost projections

for the nuclear decommissioning

‘‘target’; premature shutdowns of a

substantial number of commercial

nuclear generating stations; dry cask

storage planning and construction; the

asserted indisputable fact that Yucca

Mountain will not be available at the

time the spent fuel capacity has been

breached at many operating nuclear

generating stations; and, the asserted

reality that the concept of regional lowlevel waste facilities has been

supplanted by the extended operating

life of ‘‘low-level’’ radioactive waste

facilities.

2. Prevailing legal precedent

undermines the notion that nuclear

partnerships are entitled to full rate

relief from present ratepayers and

taxpayers for nuclear decommissioning

costs. A sense of fair play,

intergenerational equity, and risk

sharing between ratepayers and

taxpayers on one hand, and

shareholders and board members on the

other, necessitate that the NRC direct

and extend the conditions and mandates

promulgated in Section 50.75, Reporting

and Recordkeeping for

Decommissioning Planning, (a), (b), (c),

(d), (e), and (f), to include all partners

in nuclear generating stations, including

board members of RECs; and,

3. After implementing remedies (1)

and (2), NRC must compel proportional

owners of nuclear power generating

stations, including RECs, to conduct

prudency reviews.

The petition, which consists of a 37-

page brief, provides additional

justification and support for the

requested amendments not included in

this Federal Register notice. The NRC

requests that commenters consider,

among other matters raised by

petitioner, whether all of the remedies

requested by petitioner are within the

regulatory scope and jurisdiction of the

NRC. By publishing this notice, the NRC

is not concluding that it has jurisdiction

over all of petitioner’s requested

remedies. Members of the public

interested in filing comments on PRM–

50–70 are urged to obtain a copy of the

petition by writing to the address under

ADDRESSES or by viewing the petition at

the NRC website at http://

ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 8th date

of May 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette Vietti-Cook,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–11955 Filed 5–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–91–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 767 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain Boeing Model 767 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

installation of sleeving on the 90-minute

auxiliary power unit (APU) standby

power feeder cable at body station 1351.

This proposal is prompted by a report

of damage to the 90-minute APU

standby power feeder cable caused by

shifting of unrestrained cargo containers

during flight. The actions specified by

the proposed AD are intended to

prevent damage to the 90-minute APU

standby power feeder cable, which

could result in arcing between the

standby power feeder cable and the

shroud of the APU fuel line, penetration

of the fuel line shroud, and a

consequent fire in the main deck floor

above the aft cargo compartment.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 26, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

91–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Holly Thorson, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1357;

fax (425) 227–1181.

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 shall

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

summarizing 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

30554 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 93 / Friday, May 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 2000–NM–91–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, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

2000–NM–91–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The FAA has received a report

indicating that unrestrained cargo

containers shifted during flight and

caused damage on a Boeing Model 767

series airplane that is equipped with an

auxiliary power unit (APU) extended

standby power system. The cargo

containers damaged the 90-minute APU

standby power feeder cable and the

cabin floor support beam at body station

(BS) 1351 on the right side of the

airplane. Investigation revealed

evidence of arcing between the cable

and the beam. Though the reported

damage occurred on the right side of the

airplane, an unrestrained cargo

container that shifts during flight could

cause similar damage on the left side of

the airplane. On the left side of the

airplane, the 90-minute APU standby

power feeder cable is routed close to the

APU fuel line. Should damage to the 90-

minute APU standby power feeder cable

occur on the left side of the airplane, the

damaged power feeder cable could arc

against the shroud of the APU fuel line.

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in penetration of the fuel line

shroud and a consequent fire in the

main deck floor above the aft cargo

compartment.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–

24A0126, dated February 24, 2000. That

alert service bulletin describes

procedures for installation of sleeving

on the 90-minute APU standby power

feeder cable at BS 1351 on the left side

of the airplane. Installation of this

sleeving is intended to protect the cable

from being damaged in the event that an

unrestrained cargo container shifts

during flight and impacts the cable.

Accomplishment of the action specified

in the service bulletin is intended to

adequately address the identified unsafe

condition.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin

described previously.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 151

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

14 airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 1 work hour

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

action, and that the average labor rate is

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the proposed

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$840, or $60 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have a substantial direct

effect 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,

it is determined that this proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation: (1)

Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 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 is contained 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 part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Boeing: Docket 2000–NM–91–AD.

Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes;

as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

767–24A0126, dated February 24, 2000;

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent damage to the 90-minute

auxiliary power unit (APU) standby power

feeder cable, which could result in arcing

between the standby power feeder cable and

the shroud of the APU fuel line, penetration

of the fuel line shroud, and a consequent fire

in the main deck floor above the aft cargo

compartment, accomplish the following:

Installation of Sleeving

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, install sleeving on the 90-minute

APU standby power feeder cable at body

station 1351 on the left side of the airplane,

in accordance with Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 767–24A0126, dated February 24,

2000.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 93 / Friday, May 12, 2000 / Proposed Rules 30555

Special Flight Permits

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 8,

2000.

Vi L. Lipski,

Acting Manager,, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–11952 Filed 5–11–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

15 CFR Part 301

[Docket No. 000331091–0091–01]

RIN 0625–AA47

Proposed Changes in Procedures for

Florence Agreement Program

AGENCIES: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce; U.S. Customs

Service, Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This action invites public

comment on a proposal to amend the

regulations which govern duty-free

entry of scientific instruments and

apparatus, by educational and nonprofit

institutions, into the United States. The

amendments are being proposed for the

purposes of making the technical

changes required by the passage of the

Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness

Act of 1988 and by passage of the

Miscellaneous Trade and Technical

Corrections Act of 1999; updating the

regulations by specifying the correct

court of review, taking into account

terminological changes in the scientific

community, and by extending the

waiver for repair components to

maintenance tools as well; and

simplifying and clarifying the

regulations for the using community by

clarifying the commercial use

provisions and removing redundant

requirements, adding information about

procedures for obtaining duty refunds,

reducing the number of copies required

for resubmissions and permitting

performance data obtained in tests or

trials as evidence of guaranteed

specifications.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before June 12, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Address written comments

to Gerald Zerdy, Program Manager,

Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room

4211, U.S. Department of Commerce,

Washington D.C. 20230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gerald Zerdy, (202) 482–1660, same

address as above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Departments of Commerce and the

Treasury are proposing to amend Part

301, Chapter III, Subtitle B of Title 15

of the Code of Federal Regulations

relating to their responsibilities under

the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural

Materials Importation Act of 1966 (the

‘‘Act’’; Pub. L. 89–651; 80 Stat. 897).

The proposed rule would make the

necessary technical changes to reflect

the conversion from the Tariff Schedule

of the United States (TSUS) to the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS); and the

modification made by Proclamation

5978 of May 12, 1989, which was issued

pursuant to sections 1121 and 1204 of

the Omnibus Trade and

Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Pub. L.

100–418) and section 604 of the Trade

Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93–618), as

amended; and the statutory amendment

made by section 2402 of the

Miscellaneous Trade and Technical

Corrections Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 106–

36). The proposed rule would also make

editorial and administrative changes,

including updating terminology.

Specifically, we propose amending

§ 301.2(h) to provide further information

about the entry of accessories for

existing instruments.

We propose amending paragraph (r) of

§ 301.2 to permit performance data

obtained from a trial or test run of an

instrument, under conditions specified

by the applicant, to be used as evidence

for a guaranteed specification since this

is sometimes stipulated as a condition

for purchase or provides the basis for

selecting one instrument over another.

In the past, applicants have regularly

cited such ad hoc performance data to

support their justification for duty

exemption.

We propose removing the language in

§ 301.4(a)(1) that refers to specific

documentation Customs may require to

establish the applicant’s nonprofit or tax

exempt status. The proposed revision

leaves the method of this determination

to the discretion of Customs.

We propose amending § 301.4(a)(3) to

further emphasize that an applicant may

not participate in the development and

evaluation of an instrument, beyond

routine acceptance testing and

calibration, if substantial benefits accrue

to the manufacturer as a result of such

participation for which the applicant

receives a valuable consideration. The

purpose of this change is to clarify the

conditions of compliance with the

statutory prohibition of commercial use

within five years of entry (see

§ 301.1(c)(1)).

We propose amending § 301.5(a)(1) by

making copies of applications available

for public inspection within five days of

receipt from Customs instead of the ten

days currently specified in the

regulations. This amendment would

bring the rule into accord with

established practice.

The proposed rule would eliminate

§ 301.5(a)(7), which relates to the

routine sending of copies of

applications to interested domestic

manufacturers. Use of this service has

been extremely limited. While the

routine provision of copies would be

eliminated, we would continue to

provide copies on a case-by-case basis if

requested.

We propose amending § 301.5(c)(3) by

removing language requesting

consultants to provide advice within 30

days. Routine interagency procedures

do not require codification. ‘‘National

Bureau of Standards’’ would be replaced

by ‘‘National Institute of Standards and

Technology.’’

We propose to reduce the paperwork

burden on applicants by amending

§ 301.5(e)(3) to permit resubmissions by

facsimile, e-mail or other electronic

means in addition to posted mail, and

to permit resubmissions with an original

copy only instead of in quadruplicate.

We also propose amending § 301.5(e)(5)

to conform with this change.

We propose to eliminate § 301.5(e)(9),

which provides for comment by

interested parties on resubmitted

applications. Interested parties are

afforded ample opportunity to comment

on the original applications. Also,

applicants are not permitted to

introduce new purposes or other

material changes in a resubmission.

Accordingly, no useful purpose is

served by the existing procedure.

We propose to amend § 301.8(d) to

inform the applicant that estimated

duties levied by U.S. Customs at the

time of entry may be refundable, and to

instruct the applicant to contact

Customs at the port of entry for

information and claims status.

Presidential Proclamation 5978 of

May 12, 1989, issued pursuant to

sections 1121 and 1204 of the Omnibus

Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988

and section 604 of the Trade Act of

1974, as amended, added maintenance

tools for scientific instruments to the list