Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 153 / Friday, August 8, 1997 / Proposed Rules 42707

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule contains no new

information collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 92

Animal disease, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, 9 CFR part 92 would be

amended as follows:

PART 92—IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN

ANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY,

AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, AND

POULTRY PRODUCTS;

REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OF

CONVEYANCE AND SHIPPING

CONTAINERS

1. The authority citation for part 92

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;

21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b,

134c, 134d, 134f, 135, 136, and 136a; 31

U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).

§ 92.308 [Amended]

2. In § 92.308, paragraph (a)(1) would

be amended by removing the reference

to ‘‘§ 92.317’’ and adding in its place the

reference to ‘‘§§ 92.317 and 92.324’’.

§ 92.324 [Amended]

3. Section 92.324 would be amended

by removing the words ‘‘, for not less

than 7 days and’’ and by removing the

words ‘‘approved by the Administrator

and constructed so as to prevent the

entry of mosquitoes and other

hematophagous insects’’.

§ 92.326 [Amended]

4. In § 92.326, the first sentence

would be amended by removing the

words ‘‘92.323, and 92.324’’ and adding

in their place the words ‘‘and 92.323’’.

Done in Washington, DC, this 4th day of

August 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–20994 Filed 8–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 35

Medical Use of Byproduct Material;

Working Group for Revision

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Establishment of working group

and notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: A working group consisting of

representatives from the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, the

Organization of Agreement States

(OAS), and the Conference of Radiation

Control Program Directors (CRCPD) has

been established in response to

Commission approval of the staff’s

proposed plan for revising 10 CFR part

35, associated guidance documents, and

the Commission’s 1979 ‘‘Medical Policy

Statement,’’ if necessary. With this

approval, the NRC staff has begun

developing draft rule language and

alternatives, using an entirely modalitybased approach, to help focus the public

input and the discussions during

facilitated public meetings. During this

process, the staff is examining the

applicability of risk-informed,

performance-based regulations and less

prescriptive approaches to regulation of

nuclear material used for medical

purposes. The working group will meet

at NRC Headquarters in Rockville,

Maryland, on August 19 and August 20,

1997, to review the early draft staff

documents and to discuss the major

regulatory issues associated with the

medical use of byproduct material.

DATES: The Working Group will meet on

August 19 and 20, 1997, from 9:00 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, One White Flint North,

Auditorium, 11555 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, MD, 20852–2738.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cathy Haney, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards, MS T8F5,

Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301)

415–6825, e-mail cxh@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NRC has

examined the issues surrounding its

medical use program in great detail

during the last four years. This process

started with NRC’s 1993 internal senior

management review report; continued

with the 1996 independent external

review report by the National Academy

of Sciences, Institute of Medicine; and

culminated in NRC’s Strategic

Assessment and Rebaselining Project

(SA). In particular, medical oversight

was addressed in the SA DirectionSetting Issue Paper Number 7 (DSI 7)

(released September 16, 1996). In its

‘‘Staff Requirements Memorandum

(SRM)—COMSECY–96–057, Materials/

Medical Oversight (DSI 7),’’ dated

March 20, 1997, the Commission

directed staff to revise Part 35,

associated guidance documents, and, if

necessary, the Commission’s 1979

‘‘Medical Policy Statement.’’ The

Commission SRM specifically directed

the restructuring of Part 35 into a riskinformed, more performance-based

regulation.

A June 30, 1997, SRM informed the

staff of the Commission’s approval, with

comments, of the staff’s proposed

program in SECY–97–131,

Supplemental Information on SECY–

97–115, ‘‘Program for Revision of 10

CFR Part 35, ‘Medical Uses of

Byproduct Material,’ and Associated

Federal Register Notice,’’ dated June 20,

1997. After this approval, the NRC staff

initiated development of draft rule

language, using an entirely modalitybased approach. The modality approach

places all requirements for a given type

of treatment into a single section of the

regulation, including: (a) Who or what

organization is licensed; (b) what type of

license is issued; (c) the necessary

technical requirements, such as surveys

and calibration; (d) the training and

experience requirements; (e) the event

recording and reporting requirements;

and (f) the quality improvement and

management objectives.

Per NRC Management Directive 6.3,

‘‘The Rulemaking Process,’’ the

rulemaking will be conducted using a

group approach. A governmental

working group consisting of

representatives of NRC, OAS, and

CRCPD has been established to develop

rule text alternatives, including draft

guidance documents. State participation

in the process will enhance

development of corresponding rules in

State regulations, and provide an

opportunity for early State input and

will allow the State staff to assess

potential impacts of NRC draft language

on the regulation of non-Atomic Energy

Act materials used in medical diagnosis,

treatment, or research, in the States.

At the initial meeting of the working

group, on August 19–20, 1997, the

group will review the initial draft input

developed by the NRC staff, focusing its

discussion on the major regulatory

issues associated with the medical use

of byproduct material.

Committee Organization and

Operations

Cathy Haney, NRC, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, will

serve as chairman. Other members are

from the NRC’s Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards; Office

of Nuclear Regulatory Research; Office

of the General Counsel, and Office of

State Programs; and from OAS and

CRCPD.
42708 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 153 / Friday, August 8, 1997 / Proposed Rules

1Edge corporations are organized under section

25A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 611–631),

and Agreement corporations have an agreement or

undertaking with the Board under section 25 of the

Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 601–604a). For

purposes of this docket, the term ‘‘Edge

corporation’’ includes Agreement corporations.

Similarly the term ‘‘branch’’ of a foreign bank

includes both branches and agencies.

2The distinguishing characteristics of U.S.

branches of foreign banks do not necessarily apply

to Edge corporations. As a result, the legal,

supervisory, and risk management treatment of

multiple offices of the same Edge corporation

differs from that of multiple U.S. offices of foreign

banks. Unless otherwise noted, the following points

apply mainly to U.S. branches of foreign banks.

Because of the historical parallel regulatory

treatment of these entities, however, the account

structure for U.S. branches of foreign banks applies

to Edge corporations as well.

Committee Meetings

The working group will meet, as

needed, in the Washington, DC, area, or

at other locations agreed upon by the

working group members. Meetings will

be announced in advance, through the

NRC Public Meeting Notice System and,

with some exceptions, will be open for

public observation. Persons attending

working group meetings will be

welcome to provide input to the

working group for its consideration,

either in written form or orally, at times

specified by the working group chair.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day

of August 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Donald A. Cool,

Director, Division of Industrial and Medical

Nuclear Safety, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 97–20974 Filed 8–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 204

[Regulation D; Docket No. R–0980]

Reserve Requirements of Depository

Institutions

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Board is proposing to

amend its Regulation D, Reserve

Requirements of Depository Institutions,

to allow U.S. branches and agencies of

foreign banks and Edge and Agreement

corporations to choose whether to

aggregate reserves on a nationwide basis

in a single account at one Reserve Bank

or to continue to have separate accounts

on a same-state/same-District basis as

they do today. The amendments would

also update and clarify the pass-through

account rules in Regulation D for all

institutions. These amendments would

facilitate interstate banking and

eliminate certain restrictions applicable

to pass-through accounts.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before September 12, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments, which should

refer to Docket No. R–0980, may be

mailed to Mr. William W. Wiles,

Secretary, Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and

Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20551. Comments

addressed to Mr. Wiles also may be

delivered to the Board’s mail room

between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. and to

the security control room outside of

those hours. Both the mail room and the

security control room are accessible

from the courtyard entrance on 20th

Street between Constitution Avenue and

C Street, N.W. Comments may be

inspected in Room MP–500 between

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Oliver Ireland, Associate General

Counsel, (202/452–3625) or Stephanie

Martin, Senior Attorney (202/452–

3198), Legal Division. For the hearing

impaired only, contact Diane Jenkins,

Telecommunications Device for the Deaf

(TDD) (202/452–3544), Board of

Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, 20th and C Streets, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To

facilitate interstate banking, the Federal

Reserve Banks will begin to implement

a new account structure on January 2,

1998, that will provide a single Federal

Reserve account for each domestic

depository institution. This structure

will enable the Federal Reserve Banks to

establish a single debtor-creditor

relationship with each chartered entity,

thereby providing an effective means for

Reserve Banks to carry out their risk

management responsibilities, and will

improve the efficiency of account

management for depository institutions.

To determine the Federal Reserve Bank

where a bank with interstate branches

will hold an account, the Board adopted

amendments to its Regulation D (12 CFR

part 204, Reserve Requirements of

Depository Institutions) and Regulation

I (12 CFR part 209, Issue and

Cancellation of Capital Stock of Federal

Reserve Banks) (62 FR 34613, June 27,

1997). These amendments define a

domestic depository institution’s

location for purposes of Federal Reserve

membership and reserve account

maintenance.

U.S. branches and agencies of the

same foreign bank and Edge and

Agreement corporations 1 of the same

parent bank were not included in the

new single-account structure or in the

final amendments to Regulations D and

I, pending further consideration of legal

and operational issues. The Board is

now proposing amendments to

Regulation D under which the Federal

Reserve Banks will offer a single

account to these institutions on an

optional basis. Under this proposal,

foreign banks and Edge corporations

could choose either to designate one

office to hold a single account at one

Reserve Bank or to continue to have

separate accounts on a same-state/sameDistrict basis as they do today. The

Board is also proposing changes to the

pass-through account rules in

Regulation D to accommodate the

single-account option and to make other

changes applicable to all institutions

that will simplify and clarify the passthrough rules.

The Board believes making a single

account optional rather than required

for families of foreign bank branches is

reasonable in light of certain

operational, legal, and supervisory

differences between U.S. branches and

agencies of foreign banks and domestic

banks.2 For example, certain foreign

banks have historically managed their

U.S. offices as independent entities that

do not necessarily coordinate lending

and investment decisions from a central

office. Further, each office of a foreign

bank family must have a separate

license, either state or federal. The

majority of U.S. offices of foreign banks

are state-licensed and not federally

insured and are thus would be

liquidated separately based on the law

of each licensing state. In addition, U.S.

bank supervisory authorities treat U.S.

branches of foreign banks as

independent units for other purposes,

such as asset maintenance requirements.

As a result of these differences, U.S.

branches of foreign banks may be placed

at a disadvantage if they were required,

in the short term, to adopt a single

account structure.

To ensure stability in account

relationships and to move the foreign

banks and Edge corporations toward the

preferred long-run account structure,

the optional single account, where

possible, would be a one-way election.

That is, once an entity selects a single

account it would not be permitted to

switch back to multiple accounts

without the Board’s approval. The

single account would be available to

U.S. branches of foreign banks and Edge

corporations effective January 2, 1998.