4176 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of

January 2000.

Bobby R. Acord,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 00–1803 Filed 1–25–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency

12 CFR Chapter I

[Docket No. 00–04]

Debt Cancellation Contracts

AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency, Treasury.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Office of the Comptroller

of the Currency (OCC) is seeking

comment on whether it is necessary or

appropriate to issue regulations

governing bank sales of debt

cancellation contracts. Currently, no

comprehensive Federal regulations

specifically govern this activity. The

purpose of this request for comments is

to help us determine whether to issue a

proposed rule covering bank sales of

these products.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Please direct your

comments to: Docket No. [00–04],

Communications Division, Third Floor,

Office of the Comptroller of the

Currency, 250 E Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20219. You can inspect

and photocopy all comments received at

that address. In addition, you may send

comments by facsimile transmission to

FAX number (202) 874–5274, or by

electronic mail to

REGS.COMMENTS@OCC.TREAS.GOV.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Heidi M. Thomas, Senior Attorney,

Legislative and Regulatory Activities, at

(202) 874–5090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

Debt cancellation contracts (DCCs) are

bank products that are contracts with a

borrower providing for the cancellation

of the borrower’s obligation to repay an

outstanding loan upon the occurrence of

a certain event, such as the borrower’s

death or disability.

The authority of national banks to

offer DCCs is well established. In 1963,

the OCC concluded that offering DCCs

was incidental to the express authority

of a national bank to make loans, and

was therefore a permissible activity

pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 24(Seventh). We

codified this interpretation in 1971, thus

confirming a national bank’s authority

to sell DCCs. 12 CFR 7.7495 (1972). The

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld

the OCC’s interpretation in First

National Bank of Eastern Arkansas v.

Taylor, 907 F.2d 775, cert. denied, 498

U.S. 972 (1990), holding that our

construction of the statute was

reasonable and that a national bank’s

ability to sell debt cancellation contracts

was within the scope of the bank’s

powers authorized by 12 U.S.C.

24(Seventh).

In 1996, we amended the rule

governing DCCs, which was renumbered

as 12 CFR 7.1013, to provide that a

national bank may offer DCCs that will

cancel a debt obligation upon either the

death or disability of the borrower.

Current § 7.1013 states that:

A national bank may enter into a contract

to provide for loss arising from cancellation

of an outstanding loan upon the death or

disability of a borrower. The imposition of an

additional charge and the establishment of

necessary reserves in order to enable the

bank to enter into such debt cancellation

contracts are a lawful exercise of the powers

of a national bank.

We further noted that, on a case-bycase basis, we may permit DCCs where

the cancellation of the borrower’s

obligation is triggered by events other

than death or disability. 61 FR 4849,

4852 (April 1, 1996).

We have not issued any regulations

relating to DCCs since 1996, and there

is currently no comprehensive Federal

consumer protection scheme that covers

national bank offerings of DCCs. The

purpose of this advance notice of

proposed rulemaking is to request

comments on whether we should issue

regulations governing DCCs, and if so,

what specific provisions we should

include in these regulations.

Comment Solicitation

We invite you to comment on all

aspects of the issues presented in this

advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

Specifically:

1. Should we issue regulations

governing DCCs that, for example,

establish standards for the disclosure of

terms, notices, contract termination,

contract charges, and dispute

resolution?

2. Should we include debt suspension

agreements in any regulations covering

DCCs?

3. Should we address other areas or

issues by regulation? Commenters are

invited to provide specific suggestions

for provisions that would protect

consumers, prohibit abusive practices,

and ensure the safety and soundness of

national banks.

In addition, commenters are invited to

address the impact that a regulation

governing DCCs would have on

community banks. We recognize that

community banks operate with more

limited resources than larger

institutions and may present a different

risk profile. Thus, we specifically

request comment on the impact that a

regulation governing DCCs would have

on community banks’ current resources

and available personnel with the

requisite expertise, and whether the

goals of this regulation could be

achieved, for community banks, through

an alternative approach.

Dated: January 13, 2000.

John D. Hawke, Jr.,

Comptroller of the Currency.

[FR Doc. 00–1748 Filed 1–25–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810–33–P

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

13 CFR Part 121

Small Business Size Regulations; Size

Standards for Compliance With

Programs of Other Agencies

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Small Business

Administration (SBA) proposes to

amend its size regulations. The

proposed amendment requires an

agency to consult in writing with SBA

before proposing small business size

standards for use in its programs, if

those size standards are other than those

established by SBA. It removes the

requirement that the agency have the

SBA Administrator’s approval for the

contemplated size standards prior to the

proposed rule. Rather, the agency must

seek the SBA Administrator’s approval

only before it adopts size standards in

a final rule. As does the existing

regulatory text, the proposed

amendment sets forth the minimum

information agencies must furnish the

SBA Administrator to support its

request for approval of its contemplated

size standards.

DATES: SBA must receive comments on

or before March 27, 2000. SBA will

make all public comments available to

any person or entity upon request.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments

concerning this proposed rule to Gary

M. Jackson, Assistant Administrator for

Size Standards, Office of Size

Standards, 409 3rd Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20416.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules 4177

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl

Jordan, Office of Size Standards, at (202)

205–6618.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Small

Business Act (section 3(a)&(b), 15 U.S.C.

632) (Act) provides for the

establishment of small business size

standards. The Act authorizes the

Administrator of SBA to ‘‘specify

detailed definitions or standards by

which a business concern may be

determined to be a small business

concern for the purposes of this Act or

any other Act’’ (emphasis added). The

Act thereby gives the SBA

Administrator exclusive authority to

establish small business size standards

for all Federal agencies, in the absence

of other specific statutory authority.

Unless a statute specifically provides

size standards for an agency’s program

or gives an agency authority to do so,

the agency must use the applicable size

standards established by the

Administrator of SBA. However, the Act

allows an agency to ‘‘prescribe a size

standard for categorizing a business

concern as a small business concern’’

(section 3[a][2][C]) of the Act) provided

the contemplated size standard meets

certain criteria and the agency first

obtains approval of the SBA

Administrator.

Currently, Small Business Size

Regulations in 13 CFR 121.902 establish

procedures for agencies, other than

SBA, to follow before they prescribe size

standards for their own use. These

regulations require an agency

contemplating the use of size standards

different from those established by SBA

to obtain the SBA Administrator’s

approval to do so before it proposes

them for comment as part of its

rulemaking process. If an agency

believes that size standards different

from those established by SBA are

appropriate for its purposes, it must

propose the specific size standards,

explain why it believes they are

appropriate for their intended purposes

and why SBA’s are not, and seek public

comment on them. The proposed size

standards must be specific and must

meet the criteria set forth in the Act and

SBA regulations.

This proposed rule is limited to

modifying the procedure that agencies

must follow when requesting the SBA

Administrator’s approval to use special

size standards. If the rule is adopted, it

will only require the agency to consult

in writing with SBA’s Office of Size

Standards before proposing to use an

alternative size standard. The agency

will only be required to request the SBA

Administrator’s approval of the size

standard before it publishes its final rule

as part of its rulemaking process.

The written consultation must

include what size standard the agency is

proposing, to what program it will

apply, how the agency arrived at this

particular size standard for this

program, and why SBA’s existing size

standards do not satisfy their program

requirements. Such written consultation

shall take place at least fourteen (14)

calendar days before issuing the

proposed rule. SBA believes that less

than fourteen (14) calendar days is not

sufficient time for SBA to review the

proposed size standards and respond to

the agency’s consultation. The

consultation will allow SBA to review

the proposed size standards and advise

the agency as soon as practicable of

issues, such as those in conflict with the

Act or SBA’s Small Business Size

Regulations. Such issues could become

a bar to the SBA Administrator’s

approval, unless they are addressed.

SBA’s Office of Size Standards will

acknowledge receipt of an agency’s

written consultation.

SBA intends that ‘‘consultation,’’ as it

is described above, will fulfill the

requirements of this proposed rule, and

expects that there shall be no further

required discussions, except at the

option of the requesting agency. SBA is

committed to ensuring that such

consultation with the Office of Size

Standards will not delay or otherwise

interfere with the agency’s rulemaking

process.

This procedure will be a simpler one

than now exists, because, if adopted, it

will only require the SBA

Administrator’s approval before the

agency issues its final rule adopting the

contemplated size standards, rather than

before it proposes them. It also will

require the agency to furnish SBA a

copy of the proposed rule at the time the

agency publishes it for public comment.

It is important to note that this is a

procedural modification, and that SBA

is not changing any substantive

requirements.

SBA proposes to amend these

procedures in its regulations for the

following reasons:

1. It Will Streamline the Rule Making

Process

Obtaining SBA approval for

contemplated size standards prior to a

proposed rule can encumber the process

by which an agency implements

legislation or otherwise fulfills its

statutory mandates. The number of

agencies seeking the SBA

Administrator’s approval has not been

large. However, the number and

complexity of requests from a small

number of agencies, together with the

limited time within which they must

complete their actions, leads SBA to

conclude that this modification is

necessary. SBA has experienced a

number of requests for approval of

alternative small business size standards

from agencies that are required to

comply with Congressional mandates

within limited time frames. Under

SBA’s existing regulations, which this

rule amends, agencies frequently cannot

seek and obtain the SBA

Administrator’s approval within time

frames statutorily allowed.

2. The Prescribed Size Standards

Adopted in an Agency’s Final Rule May

Not Be the Same as Those the SBA

Administrator Had Approved for the

Proposed Rule, Unless SBA Amends

This Regulation

An agency may receive a large

number of comments on its proposed

size standards, and the comments may

or may not support the proposal, to

varying degrees. Comments to proposed

rules weigh heavily on agency decisions

concerning final rules. Therefore, it

sometimes happens that an agency, after

evaluating the comments it received,

could issue a final rule with small

business size standards that differ from

those in the proposed rule. The agency’s

final rule will reflect public comments

to the proposed rule. Because the

authority to approve small business size

standards resides solely with the SBA

Administrator, SBA believes that the

current procedures can have results

inconsistent with the Act and

congressional intent. It can also happen,

though infrequently, that after an agency

has reviewed and considered the

comments, it will not issue any final

rule. Rather, it may then issue another

proposed rule, taking into consideration

the comments it received. If the newly

contemplated size standards are not the

same as the agency originally proposed,

the agency must request the SBA

Administrator’s approval a second time

for this new proposal. This procedural

change, if adopted, will let an agency

determine, after considering public

comments, what size standards it

believes it should include in its final

rule, or whether it will elect to use the

SBA size standards. SBA, for its part,

will review no more than one request,

based on the agency’s decision relative

to its final rule.

4178 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules

3. An Agency That Contemplates Using

Small Business Size Standards, Other

Than Those Established by SBA, Will

Have SBA’s Input Before It Issues Its

Proposed Rule

SBA intends the written consultation

to be considerably simpler than a

request for the SBA’s approval before a

proposed rule, and will not delay the

rulemaking proceedings of the agency. It

will give SBA the background and

supporting information for the agency’s

contemplated size standards. SBA can

then, if necessary, comment on the

contemplated size standards, and

provide the agency with further advice

and direction on formulating the size

standards and its reasons for proposing

them. This can reduce future delays and

possible barriers in the administrative

process, when the agency requests the

SBA Administrator’s approval to

prescribe the size standards in its final

rule.

4. SBA Will Have, as Part of Its

Decision Making Process, the

Requesting Agency’s Proposed Rule, Its

Explanation and Justification for the

Standards, Copies of the Public

Comments to the Size Standards in the

Proposed Rule, as Well as a Draft Copy

of the Agency’s Intended Final Rule

In its final rule the agency will

address the comments and justify

adopting the size standards. Under

existing regulations, which this rule

proposes to change, after reviewing the

comments received and reaching its

final decision based on them, an agency

only notifies SBA of its intent to publish

a final rule, and furnishes this

information to SBA. SBA believes

comments can and do provide a

requesting agency with more

information to justify the size standards

it elects to implement, whether they are

the same as it proposed or not. Without

this procedural change, SBA will

continue to be asked to approve size

standards on which interested parties

have not commented. Commenters may

raise important issues regarding the size

standards that an agency needs to

consider before making its decision on

the size standards. Based on the

comments, the requesting agency may

opt for size standards that differ from

what it had proposed. Since the Act

precludes an agency from prescribing

size standards that SBA has not

approved, the agency would have to

resubmit it for SBA approval. By

simplifying these procedures, SBA will

have at hand and be able to evaluate the

same information the requesting agency

uses.

This proposal will only change the

procedures an agency must follow when

it requests the SBA Administrator’s

approval to prescribe size standards,

other than those promulgated by SBA,

for its programs. It changes no

substantive requirement or small

business criteria in connection with

requesting the Administrator’s approval.

The proposed change will, SBA

believes, simplify the rulemaking

process for other agencies and for itself,

without compromising the statutory

requirement that other agencies obtain

the SBA Administrator’s approval for

size standards they contemplate

prescribing for their use. Similarly,

when an agency contemplates using

alternative size standards for its

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, this

proposed rule does not change the

Regulatory Flexibility Act requirement

that it consult with SBA’s Office of

Advocacy before it does so.

Compliance With Executive Orders

12866, 12988, and 13132, the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.), and the Paperwork Reduction

Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35)

SBA has determined that this rule, if

adopted, would not be a significant rule

within the meaning of Executive Order

12866. It will not have an annual

economic effect in excess of $100

million, result in a major increase in

costs for individuals or governments, or

have a significant adverse effect on

competition. SBA has made this

determination for the following reasons:

1) The proposed change is procedural,

not substantive, in nature; (2) the

proposed change applies to Federal

agencies only; and (3) the proposed

change applies only when a Federal

agency contemplates categorizing an

entity as a small business concern for its

programs using standards other than

those established by SBA. SBA has also

made this determination based on the

nature, number and complexity of

requests from Federal agencies that have

made such requests. SBA does not

believe that this amendment will

increase the nature, number or

frequency of these requests.

For purposes of Executive Order

13132, SBA has determined that this

proposed rule has no federalism

implications.

For purposes of Executive Order

12988, SBA has determined that this

proposed rule is drafted, to the extent

practicable, in accordance with the

standards set forth in Section 3 of that

Order.

For purposes of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, SBA certifies that this

proposed rule, if promulgated as a final

rule, would not have a significant

economic effect on a substantial number

of small entities since the procedure

applies to the work of federal agencies

and imposes no burden on small

businesses. For purposes of the

Paperwork Reduction Act, SBA certifies

that this proposed rule, if promulgated

in final form, would not impose any

new reporting or recordkeeping

requirements.

List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121

Government procurement,

Government property, Grant programsbusiness, Loan programs-business,

Small business.

Accordingly, SBA proposes to amend

part 121 of 13 CFR as follows:

PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE

REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation of part 121

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 105–135 sec. 601 et

seq., 111 Stat. 2592; 15 U.S.C. 632(a),

634(b)(6), 637(a) and 644(c); and Pub. L. 102–

486, 106 Stat. 2776, 3133.

2. Section 121.902 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 121.902 What size standards are

applicable to programs of other agencies?

The size standards for compliance

with programs of other agencies are

those for SBA programs which are most

comparable to the programs of such

other agencies, unless the agency and

SBA agree otherwise.

3. Section 121.903 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 121.903 May an agency use size

standards for its programs that are different

than those established by SBA?

(a) Federal agencies or departments

promulgating regulations relating to

small businesses usually use SBA size

criteria. In limited circumstances, if

they decide SBA size standards are not

suitable for their programs, then agency

heads may establish more appropriate

small business definitions for the

exclusive use in such programs, but

only when:

(1) The size standards will determine

the size of a small manufacturing

concern by its average number of

employees based on the preceding

twelve calendar months, determined

according to § 121.106; the size of a

small services concern by its average

annual gross receipts over a period of at

least three years, determined according

to § 121.104; the size of other small

concerns on data over a period of at

least three years; or, other factors

approved by SBA;

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Proposed Rules 4179

(2) The agency has consulted in

writing with SBA’s Assistant

Administrator for Size Standards at least

fourteen (14) calendar days before

publishing the proposed rule which is

part of the rulemaking process. The

written consultation will include: what

size standard the agency contemplates

using; to what agency program it will

apply; how the agency arrived at this

particular size standard for this

program; and, why SBA’s existing size

standards do not satisfy the program

requirements.

(3) The agency proposes the size

standards for public comment pursuant

to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5

U.S.C. 553;

(4) The agency provides a copy of the

proposed rule, when it publishes it for

public comment as part of the

rulemaking process, to SBA’s Assistant

Administrator for Size Standards;

(5) SBA’s Administrator approves the

size standards before the agency adopts

a final rule or otherwise prescribes them

for its use;

(6) The agency’s request to SBA for

the Administrator’s approval be

accompanied by at least the following:

copies of all comments on the proposed

size standards received in response to

the proposed rule; reasons for adopting

size standards other than SBA’s; a copy

of the intended final rule, including the

preamble, or a separate written

justification for the intended size

standards followed by a copy of the

intended final rule and preamble prior

to its publication; other information

SBA may request in connection with the

request; and certification that it

complies with the Small Business Act

(§ 3[a] & [b]) and with 13 CFR part 121;

and

(b) When approving any size

standards established pursuant to this

section, SBA’s Administrator will

ensure that the size standards vary from

industry to industry to the extent

necessary to reflect the differing

characteristics of the various industries,

and consider other relevant factors.

(c) Where the agency head is

developing size standards for the sole

purpose of performing a Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis pursuant to the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, the

department or agency may, after

consultation with the SBA Office of

Advocacy, establish size standards

different from SBA’s which are more

appropriate for such analysis.

4. Section 121.904 is added to read as

follows:

§ 121.904 When does SBA determine the

size status of a business concern?

For compliance with programs of

other agencies, SBA will base its size

determination on the size of the concern

as of the date set forth in the request of

the other agency.

Dated: January 14, 2000.

Aida Alvarez,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–1438 Filed 1–25–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–67–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives Boeing Model

747SP, SR, –100, –200, and –300 Series

Airplanes Equipped with Pratt &

Whitney Model JT9D–3, –7, –7Q, and

–7R4G2 Series Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Boeing Model 747SP, SR, –100, –200,

and –300 series airplanes, that currently

requires repetitive operational tests of

the reversible gearbox pneumatic drive

unit (PDU) or the reversing air motor

PDU to ensure that the unit can restrain

the thrust reverser sleeve, and

correction of any discrepancy found.

This action would require installation of

a terminating modification, and would

add repetitive functional tests of that

installation to detect discrepancies, and

repair, if necessary. This proposal is

prompted by the results of a safety

review of the thrust reverser systems on

Model 747 series airplanes. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to ensure the integrity of the

fail safe features of the thrust reverser

system by preventing possible failure

modes in the thrust reverser control

system that can result in inadvertent

deployment of a thrust reverser during

flight.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 13, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

67–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:

Larry Reising, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2683;

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

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 99–NM–67–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.

99–NM–67–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.