Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2000 / Proposed Rules 3165

(B) Describe the activity or activities

to be conducted in the financial

subsidiary;

(C) Cite the specific authority

permitting the activity to be conducted

by the financial subsidiary. (Where the

authority relied on is an agency order or

interpretation under section 4(c)(8) or

4(c)(13), respectively, of the Bank

Holding Company Act of 1956,

respectively, a copy of the order or

interpretation should be attached);

(D) Certify that the bank will remain

well capitalized after making the

adjustments required by paragraph

(h)(1) of this section;

(E) Demonstrate the aggregate

consolidated total assets of all financial

subsidiaries of the national bank do not

exceed the lesser of 45% of the bank’s

consolidated total assets or $50 billion;

and

(F) If applicable, certify that the bank

meets the eligible debt requirement in

paragraph (g)(3) of this section

(3) Exceptions to rules of general

applicability. Section 5.8, 5.10, 5.11,

and 5.13 do not apply to activities

authorized under this section.

(4) Community Reinvestment Act

(CRA). A national bank may not apply

under this paragraph (i) to commence a

new activity authorized under section

5136A(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Revised

Statutes, or directly or indirectly acquire

control of a company engaged in any

such activity, if the bank or any of its

insured depository institution affiliates

received a CRA rating of less than

‘‘satisfactory record of meeting

community credit needs’’ on its most

recent CRA examination prior to when

the bank would file a notice under this

section.

(j) Failure to continue to meet certain

qualification requirements—(1)

Qualifications and safeguards. A

national bank, or, as applicable, its

affiliated depository institutions, must

continue to satisfy the qualification

requirements set forth in paragraphs

(g)(1) and (2) of this section and the

safeguards in paragraphs (h)(1), (2), (3)

and (4) of this section following its

acquisition of control of, or an interest

in, a financial subsidiary. A national

bank that fails to continue to satisfy

these requirements will be subject to the

following procedures and requirements:

(i) The OCC shall give notice to the

national bank promptly upon

determining that the national bank does

not continue to meet the requirements

in paragraphs (g)(1) or (2) of this section

or the safeguards in paragraphs (h)(1),

(2), (3), or (4) of this section. The bank

shall be deemed to have received such

notice three business days after mailing

of the letter by the OCC;

(ii) Not later than 45 days after receipt

of the notice under paragraph (j)(1)(i) of

this section, or any additional time as

the OCC may permit, the national bank

shall execute an agreement with the

OCC to comply with the requirements in

paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) and (h)(1), (2),

(3), and (4) of this section;

(iii) The OCC may impose limitations

on the conduct or activities of the

national bank or any subsidiary of the

national bank as the OCC determines

appropriate under the circumstances

and consistent with the purposes of

section 5136A of the Revised Statutes;

and

(iv) The OCC may require a national

bank to divest control of a financial

subsidiary if the national bank does not

correct the conditions giving rise to the

notice within 180 days after receipt of

the notice provided under paragraph

(j)(1)(i) of this section.

(2) Eligible debt rating requirement. A

national bank that does not continue to

meet the qualification requirement set

forth in paragraph (g)(3) of this section

may not directly or through a

subsidiary, purchase or acquire any

additional equity capital of any

financial subsidiary until the bank

meets the requirement in paragraph

(g)(3) of this section. For purposes of

this paragraph (j)(2), the term ‘‘equity

capital’’ includes, in addition to any

equity investment, any debt instrument

issued by the financial subsidiary if the

instrument qualifies as capital of the

subsidiary under federal or state law,

regulation, or interpretation applicable

to the subsidiary.

Dated: January 14, 2000.

John D. Hawke, Jr.,

Comptroller of the Currency.

[FR Doc. 00–1330 Filed 1–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLIING CODE 4810–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–SW–82–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter

France Model AS–350B, BA, B1, B2, C,

D, and D1, and AS–355E, F, F1, F2 and

N Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to

Aerospatiale (Societe Nationale

Industrielle Aerospatiale) (SNIAS) (now

known as Eurocopter France) Model AS

350 and AS 355 series helicopters that

currently requires repetitive inspections

of the main rotor head components, the

main gearbox (MGB) suspension bars,

and the ground resonance prevention

system components at intervals not to

exceed 400 hours time-in-service (TIS).

This action would require the same

inspections, but at intervals not to

exceed 500 hours TIS. This proposal is

prompted by reports of confusion and

unnecessary costs associated with the

difference in the current 400 hours TIS

inspection interval and the current

manufacturer’s master service

recommendation of 500 hours TIS

inspection interval. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to eliminate confusion and

unnecessary costs and to prevent

ground resonance due to reduced

structural stiffness, which could lead to

failure of a main rotor head or MGB

suspension component and subsequent

loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 20, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–SW–82–

AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701

Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas

75053–4005, telephone (972) 641–3460,

fax (972) 641–3527. This information

may be examined at the FAA, Office of

the Regional Counsel, Southwest

Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim

Grigg, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,

Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft

Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone

(817) 222–5490, fax (817) 222–5961.

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

3166 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2000 / Proposed Rules

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 No. 98–SW–82–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, Office of the Regional Counsel,

Southwest Region, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 98–SW–82–AD, 2601

Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,

Texas 76137.

Discussion

Following the issuance of our

emergency priority letter AD on July 30,

1986, on March 3, 1987, the FAA issued

AD 86–15–10, Amendment 39–5517 (52

FR 13233, April 22, 1987), to require an

initial inspection within 10 hours timein-service and repetitive inspections of

the main rotor head components, the

MGB suspension bars, and the ground

resonance prevention system

components at intervals not to exceed

300 hours TIS. That action was

prompted by three reports of main rotor

head component damage and MGB

suspension bar damage in Model AS

355 helicopters that exhibited severe

vibrations on approach or landing. That

condition, if not corrected, could result

in failure or unacceptable deterioration

of the main rotor head, MGB

suspension, or ground resonance

prevention components which could

result in failure of a main rotor head or

MGB suspension component, and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter. On February 8, 1990, the

FAA revised AD 86–15–10 (55 FR 5833,

February 20, 1990), to require the same

actions, except the repetitive

inspections were required at intervals

not to exceed 400 hours TIS. That action

was prompted by reports of confusion

and unnecessary costs caused by the

differences in inspection intervals

between AD 86–15–10 and the

manufacturer’s service bulletins that

were incorporated by reference into that

AD.

Since the issuance of that AD, no

further incidents have occurred. The

master maintenance interval has shifted

from 400 to 500 hours TIS. Since flight

safety will not be adversely impacted,

and to alleviate any confusion between

the AD and the master maintenance

interval, the FAA proposes to revise the

AD to match the master maintenance

interval.

These helicopter models are

manufactured in France and are type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of section

21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral

airworthiness agreement, the Direction

Generale De L’Aviation Civile (DGAC)

has kept the FAA informed of the

situation described above. The FAA has

reviewed all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other Eurocopter France

AS–350B, BA, B1, B2, C, D, and D1, and

AS–355E, F, F1, F2 helicopters of the

same type design, the proposed AD

would revise AD 86–15–10 R1 to require

repetitive inspections of the main rotor

head components, the MGB suspension

bars, and the ground resonance

prevention system components at

intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is relieving in nature and

imposes no additional costs or

regulatory burden on any person.

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), 40114, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing Amendment 39–5517 (52 FR

13233, April 22, 1987) and Amendment

39–6515 (55 FR 5833, February 20,

1990), and by adding a new

airworthiness directive (AD), to read as

follows:

Eurocopter France: Docket No. 98-SW–82-

AD. Revises AD 86–15–10, Amendment

39–5517 and AD 86–15–10 R1,

Amendment 39–6515.

Applicability: Model AS–350B, BA, B1, B2,

C, D, and D1, and AS–355E, F, F1, F2

helicopters, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

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

helicopters that have been modified, altered,

or repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (f) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition, or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any helicopter

from the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent ground resonance due to

reduced structural stiffness, which could

lead to failure of a main rotor head or main

gearbox (MBG) suspension component and

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2000 / Proposed Rules 3167

subsequent loss of control of the helicopter,

accomplish the following:

(a) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS):

(1) For Model AS–350B, BA, B1, B2, C, D,

and D1 helicopters, inspect the main rotor

head components, the MGB suspension bars

(struts), and the landing gear ground

resonance prevention components (aft spring

blades and hydraulic shock absorbers) in

accordance with paragraph CC.3 of

Aerospatiale Service Bulletin (SB) No. 01.17a

(not dated).

(2) For Model AS–355E, F, F1, F2

helicopters, inspect the main rotor head

components, the MGB suspension bars

(struts), and the landing gear ground

resonance prevention components (aft spring

blades and hydraulic shock absorbers) in

accordance with paragraph CC.3 of SB No.

01.14a (not dated).

(b) Rework or replace damaged

components in accordance with SB No.

01.17a or SB No. 01.14a, as applicable.

(c) Repeat the inspections and rework

required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD

at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS.

(d) If the helicopter is subjected to a hard

landing or to high surface winds, when

parked without effective tiedown straps

installed, repeat the inspections required by

paragraph (a) of this AD for the main rotor

head star arms and the MGB suspension bars

before further flight.

(e) In the event of a landing which exhibits

abnormal self-sustained dynamic vibrations

(ground resonance type vibrations), repeat all

the inspections contained in paragraph (a) of

this AD.

(f) 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, FAA,

Regulations Group, Rotorcraft Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,

who may concur or comment and then send

it to the Manager, Regulations Group.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Regulations Group.

(g) 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 helicopter

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 11,

2000.

Eric Bries,

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–1370 Filed 1–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Part 206

RIN 1010–AC09

Establishing Oil Value for Royalty Due

on Federal Leases; Correction

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service

(MMS), Interior.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

SUMMARY: On December 30, 1999, MMS

published a ‘‘Further supplementary

proposed rule’’ (64 FR 73820)

concerning the valuation for royalty

purposes of crude oil produced from

Federal leases. This notice corrects the

email address for submitting comments

electronically.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David S. Guzy, Chief, Rules and

Publications Staff; telephone, (303)

2313432; FAX, (303) 2313385; email,

David.Guzy@mms.gov; mailing address,

Minerals Management Service, Royalty

Management Program, Rules and

Publications Staff, P.O. Box 25165, MS

3021, Denver, Colorado 802250165.

Correction

In the Federal Register of December

30, 1999, in FR Doc. 9933613, page

73838, column 2, the first sentence is

revised to read:

You may also comment via the

Internet to RMP.comments@mms.gov.

Dated: January 13, 2000.

R. Dale Fazio,

Acting Associate Director for Royalty

Management.

[FR Doc. 00–1257 Filed 1–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Logistics Agency

32 CFR Part 323

[Defense Logistics Agency Reg. 5400.21]

Defense Logistics Agency Privacy

Program

AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency

proposes to exempt a system of records

(S500.30 CAAS, Incident Investigation/

Police Inquiry Files) from certain

provisions of the Privacy Act. The

exemptions are intended to increase the

value of the system of records for law

enforcement purposes, to comply with

prohibitions against the disclosure of

certain kinds of information, and to

protect the privacy of individuals

identified in the system of records.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 20, 2000, to be

considered by this agency.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the

Privacy Act Officer, Defense Logistics

Agency, ATTN: CAAR, 8725 John J.

Kingman Road, Suite 2533, Fort Belvoir,

VA 22060–6221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Susan Salus at (703) 767–6183.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive

Order 12866, ‘Regulatory Planning and

Review’

It has been determined that 32 CFR

part 323 is not a significant regulatory

action. The rule does not:

(1) Have an annual effect to the

economy of $100 million or more; or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy; a section of the economy;

productivity; competition; jobs; the

environment; public health or safety; or

state, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another Agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof;

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in this Executive Order.

Public Law 96–354, ‘Regulatory

Flexibility Act’ (5 U.S.C. 601)

It has been certified that this rule is

not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not,

if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

Public Law 96–511, ‘Paperwork

Reduction Act’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

It has been certified that this part does

not impose any reporting or record

keeping requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

List of subjects in 32 CFR part 323

Privacy.

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 323 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 323—DEFENSE LOGISTICS

AGENCY PRIVACY PROGRAM

1. The authority citation for 32 CFR

Part 323 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat 1896 (5

U.S.C. 552a).

2. Appendix H to Part 323 is proposed

to be amended by adding paragraph f. as

follows: