Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 105 / Wednesday, May 31, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 34587

Leasing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1667e, or provide

the member with greater protections or

benefits than the Consumer Leasing Act.

You are also subject to the lending rules

set forth in § 701.21 of this chapter,

except as provided in § 714.8 and

§ 714.9 of this part. The lending rules in

§ 701.21 address the preemption of

other state and federal laws that impact

on credit transactions.

[FR Doc. 00–13509 Filed 5–30–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 173

[Docket No. 00F–0786]

Secondary Direct Food Additives

Permitted in Food for Human

Consumption

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is amending the

food additive regulations to provide for

the safe use of chlorine dioxide

produced by treating an aqueous

solution of sodium chlorite with

hydrogen peroxide in the presence of

sulfuric acid. This action is in response

to a petition filed by Eka Chemicals, Inc.

DATES: This rule is effective May 31,

2000. Submit written objections and

requests for a hearing by June 30, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to

the Dockets Management Branch (HFA–

305), Food and Drug Administration,

5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,

MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert L. Martin, Center for Food Safety

and Applied Nutrition (HFS–215), Food

and Drug Administration, 200 C St. SW.,

Washington, DC 20204–0001, 202–418–

3074.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice

published in the Federal Register of

March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11319), FDA

announced that a food additive petition

(FAP 0A4716) had been filed by Eka

Chemicals, Inc., c/o Keller and

Heckman LLP, 1001 G St. NW., suite

500 West, Washington, DC 20001. The

petition proposed to amend the food

additive regulations in § 173.300

Chlorine dioxide (21 CFR 173.300) to

provide for the safe use of chlorine

dioxide produced by treating an

aqueous solution of sodium chlorite

with hydrogen peroxide in the presence

of sulfuric acid.

FDA has evaluated data in the

petition and other relevant material.

Based on this information, the agency

concludes that the proposed use of the

additive is safe, that the additive will

achieve its intended technical effect,

and, therefore, that the regulation in

§ 173.300 should be amended as set

forth below.

In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR

171.1(h)), the petition and the

documents that FDA considered and

relied upon in reaching its decision to

approve the petition are available for

inspection at the Center for Food Safety

and Applied Nutrition by appointment

with the information contact person

listed above. As provided in § 171.1(h),

the agency will delete from the

documents any materials that are not

available for public disclosure before

making the documents available for

inspection.

In the notice of filing, FDA gave

interested parties an opportunity to

submit comments on the petitioner’s

environmental assessment. FDA

received no comments in response to

that notice.

The agency has carefully considered

the potential environmental effects of

this action. FDA has concluded that the

action will not have a significant impact

on the human environment, and that an

environmental impact statement is not

required. The agency’s finding of no

significant impact and the evidence

supporting that finding, contained in an

environmental assessment, may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

(address above) between 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday.

This final rule contains no collection

of information. Therefore, clearance by

the Office of Management and Budget

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 is not required.

Any person who will be adversely

affected by this regulation may at any

time file with the Dockets Management

Branch (address above) written

objections by June 30, 2000. Each

objection shall be separately numbered,

and each numbered objection shall

specify with particularity the provisions

of the regulation to which objection is

made and the grounds for the objection.

Each numbered objection on which a

hearing is requested shall specifically so

state. Failure to request a hearing for

any particular objection shall constitute

a waiver of the right to a hearing on that

objection. Each numbered objection for

which a hearing is requested shall

include a detailed description and

analysis of the specific factual

information intended to be presented in

support of the objection in the event

that a hearing is held. Failure to include

such a description and analysis for any

particular objection shall constitute a

waiver of the right to a hearing on the

objection. Three copies of all documents

are to be submitted and are to be

identified with the docket number

found in brackets in the heading of this

document. Any objections received in

response to the regulation may be seen

in the Dockets Management Branch

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173

Food additives.

Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under

authority delegated to the Commissioner

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to

the Director, Center for Food Safety and

Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is

amended as follows:

PART 173—SECONDARY DIRECT

FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN

FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR

part 173 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348.

2. Section 173.300 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 173.300 Chlorine dioxide.

* * * * *

(a) The additive is generated by one

of the following methods: Treating an

aqueous solution of sodium chlorite

with either chlorine gas or a mixture of

sodium hypochlorite and hydrochloric

acid, or treating an aqueous solution of

sodium chlorate with hydrogen

peroxide in the presence of sulfuric

acid. In either case, the generator

effluent contains at least 90 percent (by

weight) of chlorine dioxide with respect

to all chlorine species as determined by

Method 4500–ClO2 E in the ‘‘Standard

Methods for the Examination of Water

and Wastewater,’’ 18th ed., 1992, or an

equivalent method. Method 4500–ClO2

E is incorporated by reference in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1

CFR part 51. Copies are available from

the Center for Food Safety and Applied

Nutrition (HFS–200), Food and Drug

Administration, 200 C St. SW.,

Washington, DC 20204–0001, and the

American Public Health Association,

1015 Fifteenth St. NW., Washington, DC

20005, or may be examined at the Office

of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol St. NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

* * * * *

34588 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 105 / Wednesday, May 31, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: May 19, 2000.

L. Robert Lake,

Director of Regulations and Policy, Center

for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

[FR Doc. 00–13477 Filed 5–30–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 270

[RIN 0790–AG67]

Compensation of Certain Former

Operatives Incarcerated by the

Democratic Republic of Vietnam

AGENCY: Office of Under Secretary of

Defense for Personnel and Readiness,

DoD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule adopts as final an

interim rule implementing section 657

of the National Defense Authorization

Act for Fiscal Year 1997, which

authorizes the Secretary of Defense to

make payments to persons captured and

incarcerated by the Democratic Republic

of Vietnam. The rule established policy

and procedures concerning the

payments to these persons. The rule

amended regulations to reflect changes

necessary as a result of new language in

section 658 of the FY99 National

Defense Authorization Act. Section 658

expands the field of beneficiaries of the

Vietnamese Commandos Compensation

Commission to parents and siblings of

deceased Commandos. It also added

words ‘‘notwithstanding any agreement

(including a power of attorney) to the

contrary, the actual disbursement’’ must

be made directly to the person who is

eligible for the payment. The rule also

amended regulations to reflect necessary

technical changes to accommodate the

new language. The Department of

Defense is adopting the Interim Final

Rule as a Final Rule without change.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective

October 17, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC

Frank Hudson, (703) 588–6570 or Mr.

Chuck Witschonke, (703) 693–1059,

Directorate of Compensation, Office of

the Secretary of Defense, 4000 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC, 20301

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Department of Defense published an

Interim Final Rule with a request for

comments on December 10, 1998 (63 FR

68194). The following comments were

received:

Comment: The Statute Requires

Prompt Payment In A Manner

Requested By The Awardee.

Section 657(d)(2) of Pub. L. 104–201,

as amended, states that ‘‘Subject to

subsection (f), if the Secretary

determines that the claimant is eligible

for the payment, the Secretary shall

promptly pay the claim.’’ (Emphasis

added.) Subsection (f) provides

notwithstanding any agreement

(including a power of attorney) to the

contrary, the actual disbursement of a

payment under this section may be

made only to the person who is eligible

for payment under subsection (a) or (b)

and only—upon the appearance of that

person, in person, at the designated

distribution office in the United States

or its territories; or as such other

location or in such manner as that

person may request in writing.

The only change made to this

subsection by the FY 99 National

Defense Authorization Act was the

addition of ‘‘[n]otwithstanding any

agreement (including a power of

attorney) to the contrary’’ at the

beginning of Subsection (f)(1).

The statutory requirements for

disbursement are clearly stated. First,

the payment must be disbursed to the

person eligible for payment. Thus, the

check must be made payable to the

intended beneficiary and not to a third

party, such as the person’s attorney or

another designee or assignee, regardless

of any agreement to the contrary.

The second condition for payment is

that it be made: (1) in person at a

designated distribution office in the

United States or its territories or, (2) if

the beneficiary requests in writing, at

such other location or in such other

manner as that person may request. The

statute recognizes that many payment

recipients may not be able to appear in

person to receive their payments. Many,

for instance, still live in Vietnam under

a repressive government that denies

them the ability to travel or even to

correspond freely. Hence the statute

allows the eligible person to request

alternative methods of payment.

The Secretary of Defense has

complete discretion in determining

whether a claim is justified and such

determinations are considered final and

conclusive. Pub. L. 104–201, section

6570). However, once DoD has

determined that a person is eligible for

payment under the provisions of the

Vietnamese Commando Compensation

Act, that discretion ends. The agency is

mandated by statute to promptly pay the

claim. DoD may not establish

unreasonable regulations that hinder

payments to those persons eligible for

the compensation established by

Congress. In fact, section 657(f)(2)

provides that DoD shall hold funds in

trust for eligible persons only until such

time as ‘‘the person makes an election’’

(emphasis added) to appear in person at

a disbursing office or to request

payment at another location or in

another manner.

Response: Section 657(f) provides that

the actual disbursement of a payment

may be made only to an eligible

claimant, not withstanding any

agreement to the contrary. The statute

does not require that payment be made

in any manner requested by a claimant;

rather, it authorizes the Department, in

its discretion, to grant requests by

eligible claimants to receive their

payments at a particular location or in

a manner other than the personal

appearance of the claimant at a

designated distribution office. This

provision does not negate the

independent requirement that only

eligible claimants may receive

payments.

Comment: The Interim Regulation

Violates The Statute And Inflicts

Hardship.

The interim regulation drastically

curtails the statutory right of eligible

persons to receive their payments in the

manner they request. As revised,

regulation states that:

The Commission [on Compensation] may,

in its discretion, require the person who is

eligible for the payment to appear at any

designated Defense Finance Accounting

Service disbursement office in the United

States to receive payment. The Commission

may, in its discretion, coordinate with other

U.S. governmental agencies to facilitate

disbursement of payments to persons eligible

for payments who reside outside the United

States. If an eligible person makes a written

request that payment be made at an alternate

location or in an alternative manner, the

Commission may, in its discretion, grant

such request, provided that the actual

payment (i.e., the physical delivery of the

payment) is made only to the eligible person.

The Commission will not disburse payment

to any person other than an eligible person,

notwithstanding any written request,

assignment of rights, power of attorney, or

other agreement.

32 CFR 270.11. (Emphasis added.)

By requiring that all payments be

made by ‘‘physical delivery of the

payment’’ only to the eligible person,

DoD has imposed an unreasonable

burden on the intended beneficiaries of

the Congressionally mandated

compensation. By imposing such an

arbitrary condition on payments, DoD

set an unnecessary hurdle which many

persons eligible for compensation will

be unable to clear. Such arbitrary action

violates DoD’s statutory obligation to