43676 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 158 / Friday, August 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Possible Benefits of This Option

1. Might facilitate additional export

transactions without increasing CCC’s

multi-year credit exposure to a country

at a time when such exposure is

approaching the maximum exposure

established by CCC. Since payment

would be due at sight, CCC’s exposure

would be reduced more quickly than in

a transaction calling for deferred

payment. As a result, more transactions

could be done with a country which

was nearing its CCC-established credit

limitations.

2. Might increase the number of

export transactions where U.S. financial

institutions could reduce their letter of

credit confirmation fees because of the

availability of CCC’s guarantee.

Possible Disadvantages of This Option

1. Might be of interest to foreign

buyers and U.S. banks and exporters

only when the risk of default by the

issuing foreign bank is considered high

and U.S. banks are unwilling to confirm

letters of credit or are willing to do so

only at very high fees. The rate of

defaults and, therefore, CCC’s costs,

might be high.

2. Might duplicate insurance or

guarantee coverage available from

private sector firms or other U.S.

Government agencies.

3. Might displace cash export sales of

U.S. agricultural commodities since no

credit is necessary to make the

transactions workable.

Option 2. Amend regulations to

permit CCC to guarantee payment of

eligible foreign bank obligations in

transactions calling for deferred

payment but not involving an

irrevocable letter of credit.

One type of transaction under this

option could involve foreign bank

guarantees of financial instruments,

including, for example, drafts drawn on,

and accepted by, foreign buyers.

However, the range of possible types of

transactions and foreign bank

guarantees could be broader than this,

and commenters are urged to be as

specific and detailed as possible in

proposing or opposing alternatives that

might be covered by this option. CCC is

aware of a bank guarantee known as an

aval. CCC is concerned, however, that

avals, although commonly used in civil

law jurisdictions, are virtually unknown

in American jurisprudence and may not

be readily enforceable in the United

States.

CCC is also especially interested in

comments on whether it should require,

as a condition of eligibility for a

guarantee, that collections of financial

and commercial documents be subject

to the Uniform Rules for Collections set

forth in the International Chamber of

Commerce Publication 522’’, or to

other requirements. In this connection,

commenters may wish to state clearly

their understanding of the extent of the

non-documentary risk that exporters

would bear in a transaction where the

importer refused to accept documents

despite conformity of the documents

with the collection instruction. In such

a case the CCC guarantee would not

appear to apply because the drawee

would not have incurred a payment

obligation to which the foreign bank

guarantee would apply. Similarly, CCC

seeks comments regarding whether it

should require any specific wording or

content in the obligation that would be

guaranteed by the foreign bank or in the

foreign bank’s guarantee itself.

Possible Benefits of This Option

1. Might increase U.S. agricultural

exports by leveraging credits made

available by the private sector.

2. New or more cost-effective export

opportunities might arise by increasing

the flexibility with which export

transactions could be structured, with

payment of credits still guaranteed by

eligible foreign banks.

3. Might enable or encourage

participation in GSM–102 and 103

programs by additional financial

institutions, resulting in a more

competitive credit environment.

Possible Disadvantage of this Option

1. Exporters might face greater

problems or risks in negotiating

documents should they choose to

participate in these types of

transactions.

Considerations Regarding Comments

CCC will consider a number of factors

in reviewing comments and determining

whether to implement one or both of the

options, or modifications thereof.

1. GSM–102/103 Criteria. As

discussed above, 7 CFR part 1493,

subpart A, contains objectives and

criteria for these programs. Some of

these, such as the requirement that

countries to which credits are to be

extended must be ‘‘creditworthy’’, are

mandated by statute. Commenters

should familiarize themselves with

subpart A and include a discussion of

relevant regulatory provisions in their

comments. They should particularly

address the issue of whether

transactions pursuant to the proposed

options would more likely be in

addition to, or would more likely

displace, unassisted private sector

transactions. Commenters should bear

in mind that, in considering options for

additional program flexibility, CCC does

not intend to relax current criteria that

serve to manage program risk or protect

the assets of CCC.

2. Government Performance and

Results Act (GPRA). In September 1997

the government-wide provisions of the

GPRA will take effect. The GPRA is a

performance-based management system

that is directly tied to the budget

process. Under the GPRA each federal

agency must present to Congress its

goals, how it spends money and

organizes its personnel to achieve these

goals, and the extent to which it

achieves its goals. Each agency must

prepare a 5-year strategic plan as part of

its budget submission. To incorporate

new programs or an expansion of

existing programs into this planning

process, agencies must address such

issues as how benefits will be measured,

why the functions or services are not

being adequately performed by the

private sector, and whether the new

activities will be cost-effective.

Commenters are invited to address

specifically these issues.

Signed at Washington, DC, on August 11,

1997.

Mary T. Chambliss,

Acting General Sales Manager,

Commodity Credit Corporation.

[FR Doc. 97–21670 Filed 8–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–10–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Part 252

[INS No. 1695–95]

RIN 1115–AD95

Inspection of Alien Crewmembers; 90-

Day Modified Inspection Procedure

AGENCY: Immigration and Naturalization

Service, Justice.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This rule proposes to amend

the Immigration and Naturalization

Service (Service) regulations by

codifying the Service’s longstanding

practice of authorizing, on a

discretionary basis, multiple landing

privileges for certain maritime

crewmembers actively serving on board

a limited number of commercial

maritime cruise ships and ferries

making regular trips to and from the

United States. This proposed rule would

codify the Service’s current procedure

of granting, in appropriate cases, certain

crewmembers’ conditional landing

permits. An alien crewmember who is
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 158 / Friday, August 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules 43677

granted a conditional landing permits

valid for multiple entries, not to exceed

an aggregate of 29 days, for the 90-day

period following the crewmember’s inperson inspection. This procedure

enables the Service to exercise its

discretionary authority to forego

subsequent in-person inspections of the

crewmember during the 90-day period.

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before October 14,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Please submit written

comments, in triplicate, to the Policy

Directives and Instructions Branch,

Immigration and Naturalization Service,

425 I Street, NW., Room 5307,

Washington, DC 20536. Please include

INS number 1695–95 on your

correspondence to ensure proper and

timely handling. Comments are

available for public inspection at the

above address by calling 202–514–3048,

to arrange for an appointment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine M. Paler-Amaya, Assistant

Chief Inspector, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, 425 I Street,

NW., Room 4064, Washington, DC

20536, telephone number (202) 514–

3019.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

For more than four decades, the

Service has applied a modified

inspection procedure with respect to

certain alien crewmembers arriving in

the United States on a limited number

of commercial maritime ferries and

cruise ships. Under this modified

inspection procedure, the Service, after

conducting a full-crew in-person

inspection, may excuse an inspected

alien crewmember from subsequent inperson inspections upon rearrival in the

United States from a foreign port during

the 90-day period following the date of

the alien’s in-person inspection. Alien

crewmembers who have not been

inspected during a full-crew in-person

inspection must be inspected in person

at the time they seek landing privileges,

and may also be granted multiple entry

conditional landing permits. An alien

crewmember who is granted a

conditional landing permit under this

procedure may not remain in this

country for an aggregate of more than 29

days during the 90-day period following

his or her in-person inspection. The Service first employed this 90-

day modified inspection procedure in

connection with the inspection of alien

crewmembers employed on ferries

operating in the Great Lakes area. The

procedure was subsequently expanded

to include the inspection of alien

crewmen employed on ferries and

maritime cruise vessels docking at U.S.

ports in the northeast and southeast

and, ultimately, to cruise vessels

operating in the Western Hemisphere

and those landing at preclearance sites

in the Caribbean. This discretionary

modified inspection procedure applies

solely to maritime ferries and cruise

ships making regularly scheduled trips

to and from the United States which

have an established record of

compliance with the immigration laws.

Legal Background

Under section 252(a)(1) of the

Immigration and Nationality Act (the

Act), the Service is required to examine

arriving alien crewmembers to

determine their eligibility for admission

as nonimmigrants under section

101(a)(15)(D) of the Act. An alien

crewmember who the Service

determines to be admissible may be

granted a conditional landing permit to

land temporarily pursuant to regulations

prescribed by the Attorney General for

‘‘the period of time (not to exceed 29

days) during which the vessel on which

the alien arrived remains in port,

provided the immigration officer is

satisfied that the crewman intends to

depart on the vessel or aircraft on which

he arrived’’ (See section 252(a)(1) of the

Act). In enacting this section of the Act,

Congress granted the Service

considerable authority to determine the

most appropriate procedure for

conducting examinations of arriving

alien crewmen. (See also current 8 CFR

252.1.) The recent amendments to the

INA Section 235 which were enacted as

part of the Illegal Immigration Reform

and Immigrant Responsibility Act of

1996, Pub. L. 104–208, 110 Stat. 3009

(1996) do not fundamentally alter the

Service’s authority in this area. Section

235(a)(3) now clearly requires the

inspection of all alien crewmen seeking

admission or readmission to or transit

through the United States. The 90-day

modified inspection procedure satisfies

this mandate because it expressly

contemplates an initial in-person

inspection of each crewman following

which the crewman may make multiple

landings under specified conditions, at

the discretion of the Service and for a

limited period of time.

Policy Basis for the 90-Day Modified

Inspection Procedure

Based on its long experience

inspecting maritime vessels, the Service

has determined that, in appropriate

cases, the 90-day modified inspection

procedure is the most appropriate

means of enforcing the immigration

laws. In developing this longstanding

policy, the Service has considered a

variety of relevant factors, including its

experience with maritime carriers at

local Ports-of-Entry, the specific nature

of the maritime activities involved, the

frequency of a particular vessel’s

arrivals from a foreign port, the vessel’s

record of compliance with the

immigration laws, the Service’s local

personnel requirements, and the needs

of operators of maritime ferry and cruise

ships and their passengers.

In instituting this procedure, the

Service has determined that, in

instances involving, among other things,

the regular hourly, daily, or weekly

arrival of alien crewmembers on ferries

and/or cruise ships known to have been

in compliance with the immigration

laws over extended periods of time, the

costs, in terms of the Service’s resources

and, therefore, the Service’s ability to

enforce the Act, substantially exceed the

marginal benefits to be gained in

requiring the constant re-examination of

such individuals. The Service believes

that the modified inspection procedure

provides the Service with ample control

over the entry of such alien

crewmembers while offering the Service

the necessary flexibility to shift more

effectively its limited personnel

resources to other areas it deems more

vital in carrying out its statutory

responsibilities.

It should be noted that invocation of

the 90-day modified inspection is

entirely discretionary; the Service is not

required to grant a multiple entry

conditional landing permit in all cases,

or to forego an in-person inspection

during the 90-day period even if it has

issued such a permit. In all instances,

the burden is on the arriving

crewmember of establish eligibility for

admission under section 101(a)(15)(D)

of the Act. Because each situation is

unique, the Service cannot give any

assurance that it will be able to provide

the carrier with advance notice that it

will require such an in-person

inspection.

Regulatory Amendments

As previously discussed, the 90-day

modified inspection procedure is fully

consistent with the current statutory

and regulatory scheme. Accordingly, the

Service is proposing to revise 8 CFR

252.1 (d), (e), and (f) to codify the

longstanding Service practice of

granting conditional landing permits to

certain maritime crewmen, without

further examination at the discretion of

the Service, during the intervening time

between 90-day full-crew inspections.

Codifying this procedure in the form of

a regulation is also necessary to ensure

complete consistency with the specific

terms of the Service’s regulations. To

this end, the Service is proposing to
43678 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 158 / Friday, August 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules

amend 8 CFR 252.1(e) to provide

specifically that, in cases involving the

90-day modified inspection procedure,

the Service need not enter a notation on

the alien crewman’s Form I–95AB

following each arrival from a foreign

port. The proposed regulation would

also require inspectors issuing

conditional landing permits pursuant to

the 90-day modified inspection

procedure to add a specific notation to

the alien crewman’s Form I–95AB, at

the time of the in-person inspection,

stating that the conditional landing

permit is valid for multiple, landings,

not to exceed an aggregate of 29 days,

during the 90-day period following the

in-person inspection.

Limited Scope of the 90-Day Modified

Inspection Procedure

Despite the codification of this 90-day

modified inspection procedure in the

limited circumstances previously

described, the Service believes that

conducting an individual in-person

examination prior to each entry is the

preferable manner in which to discharge

the responsibilities imposed on the

Attorney General in sections 235 and

252 of the Act, in most cases.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Commissioner of the Immigration

and Naturalization Service, in

accordance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has

reviewed this regulation and, by

approving it, certifies that this rule will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. This rule merely incorporates a

practice of longstanding policy into the

Code of Federal Regulations and ensures

full consistency between the procedure

and the specific language of the existing

regulations.

Executive Order 12866

This rule is not considered by the

Department of Justice, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, to be a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),

Regulatory Planning and Review, and

the Office of Management and Budget

has waived its review process under

section 6(a)(3)(A).

Executive Order 12612

The regulation proposed herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this rule does not

have sufficient federalism implications

to warrant the preparation of a

Federalism Assessment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements contained in this rule have

been cleared by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act. Clearance numbers for these

collections are contained in 8 CFR

299.5, Display of control numbers.

List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 252

Administrative practice and

procedure, Aliens, Crewmen, Vessels.

Accordingly, part 252 of chapter I of

title 8 of the Code of Federal

Regulations is proposed to be amended

as follows:

PART 252—LANDING OF ALIEN

CREWMEN

1. The authority citation for part 252

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1184, 1258, 1281,

1282; and 8 CFR part 2.

2. In § 252.1, paragraphs (d), (e), and

(f) are revised to read as follows:

§ 252.1 Examination of crewmen.

* * * * *

(d) Authorization to land. The

immigration officer in his or her

discretion may grant an alien crewman

authorization to land temporarily in the

United States for:

(1)(i) Shore leave purposes during the

period of time the vessel or aircraft is in

the port of arrival or other ports in the

United States to which it proceeds

directly without touching at a foreign

port or place, not exceeding 29

consecutive days, if the immigration

officer is satisfied that the crewman

intends to depart on the vessel or

aircraft on which he or she arrived or on

another vessel or aircraft of the same

transportation line, and the crewman’s

passport is surrendered for safekeeping

to the master of the arriving vessel or

aircraft, or

(ii) In the case of an alien crewman

serving in any capacity on board a ferry

or commercial maritime cruise ship

making regularly scheduled trips to and

from the United States, shore leave

purposes during the period of time that

the crewman’s assigned vessel is in the

port of arrival or other ports in the

United States to which the vessel

proceeds directly, provided that the

total amount of time for which the

crewman has been granted authorization

to land does not exceed 29 days in the

aggregate during the 90-day period after

the date on which the crewman has

been examined in person by an

immigration officer, or

(2) The purpose of departing from the

United States as a crewman on a vessel

other than the one on which he or she

arrived, or departing as a passenger by

means of other transportation, within a

period of 29 days, if the immigration

officer is satisfied that the crewman

intends to depart in that manner, that

definite arrangements for such

departure have been made, and the

immigration officer has consented to the

pay off or discharge of the crewman

from the vessel on which the crewman

arrived. A crewman granted a

conditional permit to land under section

252(a)(1) of the Act and paragraph

(d)(1)(i) of this section is required to

depart with his or her vessel from its

port of arrival and from each other port

in the United States to which it

thereafter proceeds coastwise without

touching at a foreign port or place.

However, he or she may rejoin his or her

vessel at another port in the United

States before it touches at a foreign port

or place if he or she has advance written

permission from the master or agent to

do so. A crewman granted a conditional

permit to land under section 252(a)(1) of

the Act and paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this

section is required to depart with his or

her vessel from its port of arrival and

from each other port in the United

States to which it thereafter proceeds

coastwise without touching at a foreign

port or place.

(3) Upon finding an alien crewman

entitled to land under paragraph (d)(1)

of this section, the examining officer

shall grant the alien ‘‘D–1’’

nonimmigrant classification. Upon

finding an alien crewman entitled to

land under paragraph (d)(2) of this

section, the examining officer shall

grant the alien ‘‘D–2’’ nonimmigrant

classification.

(e) Conditional permits to land.

Unless the crewman is in possession of

Form I–184 and is landed under

paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, the

immigration officer shall give each alien

nonimmigrant crewman permitted to

land a copy of Form I–95AB, Alien

Crewmen Landing Permit, presented by

the crewman, and endorsed by the

immigration officer to show the date

and place of examination. The

immigration officer shall also indicate

on each Form I–95AB the type of

conditional landing permit granted. In

cases where the crewman is granted

authorization to land under paragraph

(d)(1)(ii) of this section, the inspector

shall endorse the Form I–95AB with the

following legend:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 158 / Friday, August 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules 43679

Pursuant to 8 CFR 252.1(d)(1)(ii), this

conditional landing permit is valid for

multiple landings for an aggregate of no more

than 29 days during the 90-day period

following the date of your in-person

examination before an officer of the

Immigration and Naturalization Service

(Service). You must present yourself for

another in-person examination before an

officer of the Service upon expiration of this

90-day period. This landing authorization is

conditional, and you may be required to

present yourself for an in-person examination

before an officer of the Service at any time

during the 90-day period for which this

permit has been issued.

(f) Change of status. An alien

nonimmigrant crewman landed

pursuant to the provisions of this part

shall be ineligible for any extension of

stay or for a change of nonimmigrant

classification under 8 CFR part 248. A

crewman admitted under paragraph

(d)(1) of this section may, if still

maintaining status, apply for a

conditional landing permit under

paragraph (d)(2) of this section. The

application shall not be approved unless

an application on Form I–408,

Application to Pay Off or Discharge

Alien Crewman, filed pursuant to

paragraph (h) of this section, has been

approved authorizing the master or

agent of the vessel on which the

crewman arrived to pay off or discharge

the crewman and unless evidence is

presented by the master or agent of the

vessel to which the crewman will be

transferred that a specified position on

that vessel has been authorized for him

or her or that satisfactory arrangements

have been completed for the repatriation

of the alien crewman. If the application

is approved, the crewman shall be given

a new Form I–95AB endorsed to show

landing authorized under paragraph

(d)(2) of this section for the period

necessary to accomplish his or her

scheduled reshipment, which shall not

exceed 29 days from the date of his or

her landing, upon surrendering any

conditional landing permit previously

issued to him or her on Form I–95AB.

* * * * *

Dated: July 17, 1997.

Doris Meissner,

Commissioner, Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

[FR Doc. 97–21708 Filed 8–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–10–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 128–0043; FRL–5876–1]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, San

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to act on

revisions to the California State

Implementation Plan (SIP) which

concern five negative declarations from

the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air

Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD)

for the following Oxides of Nitrogen

(NOX) source categories: Nitric and

Adipic Acid Manufacturing Plants,

Cement Manufacturing Plants, Asphalt

Batch Plants, Iron and Steel

Manufacturing Plants, and Driers. The

intended effect of proposing to include

these negative declarations in the SIP is

to meet the requirements of the Clean

Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or

the Act). In the Final Rules Section of

this Federal Register, the EPA is acting

on the state’s SIP revision as a direct

final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial revision amendment

and anticipates no adverse comments. A

rationale for this action is set forth in

the direct final rule. If no adverse

comments are received in response to

this proposed rule, no further activity is

contemplated in relation to this rule. If

EPA receives adverse comments, the

direct final rule will be withdrawn and

all public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this proposed rule. The EPA

will not institute a second comment

period on this document. Any parties

interested in commenting on this action

should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received in writing by

September 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to: Julie A.

Rose, Rulemaking Office (AIR–4), Air

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the negative declarations are

available for public inspection at EPA’s

Region 9 office and at the following

locations during normal business hours.

Rulemaking Office (AIR–4), Air

Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105

Air Docket (6102), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 40l ‘‘M’’ Street,

SW., Washington, DC. 20460

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95812

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air

Pollution Control District, 1999

Tuolumne Street, Fresno, CA 93721

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie

A. Rose, Rulemaking Section, AIR–4,

Air Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 9, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105–3901, Telephone: (415) 744–

1184.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

document concerns negative

declarations for five NOX source

categories from the SJVUAPCD: (1)

Nitric and Adipic Acid Manufacturing

Plants, (2) Cement Manufacturing

Plants, (3) Asphalt Batch Plants, (4) Iron

and Steel Manufacturing Plants, and (5)

Driers. These negative declarations

certify that there are no major sources

present in the above source categories in

the SJVUAPCD. They were adopted by

the SJVUAPCD on September 14, 1994

and submitted to EPA on October 17,

1994 by the California Air Resources

Board. For further information, please

see the information provided in the

Direct Final action which is located in

the Rules Section of this Federal

Register.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: August 1, 1997.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–21693 Filed 8–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MO 033–1033; FRL–5875–6]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; State of

Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to

approve State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revisions submitted by the state of

Missouri to create a new statewide

fugitive dust rule. In addition, the EPA

is proposing to rescind four area specific