Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62579

complete absentee ballot simply because

the return address was missing on the

mailing envelope, and the provision in

the final rule specifying the reasons for

declaring a ballot invalid is consistent

with our intent.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found

and determined upon good cause that it

is impracticable, unnecessary, and

contrary to the public interest to give

preliminary notice prior to putting this

rule into effect and that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this rule until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register.

This action amends 7 CFR part 1230, the

Pork Promotion, Research, and

Consumer Information Program:

Procedures for the Conduct of

Referendum, to provide an additional 5-

day period to give interested persons an

opportunity to challenge all producers

who requested absentee ballots and who

were not subject to challenge during the

initial challenge period. This interim

rule also establishes new dates for

notifying challenged producers,

submitting proof of eligibility, and

resolving challenges.

Voting in the pork referendum was

completed on September 21, 2000, and

the ballots will be counted by FSA

county offices on November 29, 2000, as

provided for in § 1230.633 of the final

rule. Accordingly, the changes made in

this action should be implemented as

soon as possible. Further, for the same

reasons, a 30-day comment period is

deemed appropriate.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1230

Administrative practice and

procedure, Advertising, Agricultural

research, Marketing agreements, Pork

and pork products, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 1230 is amended

as follows:

PART 1230—PORK PROMOTION,

RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 1230 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4801–4819.

§ 1230.631 [Amended]

2. In § 1230.631 paragraph (c) is

amended by removing the sentence

‘‘Absentee ballots have to be received in

the FSA county office before a

producer’s vote can be challenged.’’

3. A new § 1230.639 is added to read

as follows:

§ 1230.639 Additional absentee voter

challenge period.

(a) Absentee Voter Request List. The

Absentee Voter Request List (Form LS–

74) will be available for inspection

during an additional challenge period of

five business days (October 23, 2000–

October 27, 2000) at county FSA offices.

The Absentee Voter Request List will be

posted daily during regular office hours

in a conspicuous public location at FSA

county offices during the additional

challenge period.

(b) Who can challenge. Any person

can challenge a producer’s vote during

the period provided in paragraph (a) of

this section. Any person who wants to

challenge shall do so in writing and

shall include the full name of the

individual or corporation or other entity

being challenged. Each challenge of a

producer vote must be made on a

separate sheet of paper and each

challenge must be signed by the

challenger. The identity of the

challenger will be kept confidential

except as the Secretary may direct or as

otherwise required by law.

(c) Who can be challenged. Any

person whose name is on the Absentee

Voter Request List who was not subject

to challenge during the September 19,

2000, through October 2, 2000,

challenge period may be challenged.

Those producers whose names were

listed on the Absentee Voter Request

List and who were subject to challenge

because the Absentee Voter Request List

indicated they had returned their ballot

are not subject to challenge during this

additional 5-day period.

(d) Notification of challenges. The

FSA County Committee or its

representative, acting on behalf of the

Administrator, AMS, will notify

challenged producers as soon as

practicable, but no later than the 2nd

business day (October 31, 2000) after the

last day of the additional challenge

period. FSA county offices will notify

all challenged persons that

documentation such as sales

documents, tax records, or other similar

documents proving that the person

owned and sold hogs or pigs during the

representative period must be submitted

or his or her vote will not be counted.

The documentation must be provided to

FSA county offices not later than

November 7, 2000.

(e) Determination of challenges. The

FSA County Committee or its

representative, acting on behalf of the

Administrator, AMS, will make a

determination concerning the challenge

based on documentation provided by

the producer and will notify challenged

producers as soon as practicable but no

later than November 9, 2000.

(f) Challenged ballot. A challenge to a

ballot shall be deemed to have been

resolved if the determination of the FSA

County Committee or its representative,

acting on behalf of the Administrator,

AMS, is not appealed within the time

allowed for appeal or there has been a

determination by the Administrator,

AMS, after an appeal.

(g) Appeal. A person declared to be

ineligible to register and vote by the

FSA County Committee or its

representative, acting on behalf of the

Administrator, AMS, can file an appeal

at the FSA county office not later than

November 17, 2000. The FSA county

office shall send a producer’s appeal by

facsimile to the Administrator, AMS, on

the date it is filed at the FSA office or

as soon as practical thereafter.

(h) Determination of appeals. An

appeal will be determined by the

Administrator, AMS, as soon as

practical, but in all cases not later than

the 45th business day (November 28,

2000) after the date of the last day of the

voting period. The Administrator, AMS,

shall send her decision on a producer’s

appeal to the FSA county office where

the producer was initially challenged.

The FSA county office shall notify the

challenged producer of the

Administrator’s, AMS, determination on

his or her appeal. The Administrator’s,

AMS, determination on an appeal shall

be final.

Dated: October 17, 2000.

Kathleen A. Merrigan,

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 00–27024 Filed 10–17–00; 1:39 pm]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Food Safety and Inspection Service

9 CFR Part 331

[Docket No. 00–038F]

Termination of Designation of the State

of North Dakota with Respect to the

Inspection of Meat and Meat Food

Products

AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection

Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the

Federal meat inspection regulations by

terminating the designation of the State

of North Dakota under Titles I, II, and

IV of the Federal Meat Inspection Act

(FMIA). The State of North Dakota has

enacted a State meat inspection program

law and regulations that impose

62580 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

inspection requirements that are at least

equal to those requirements of the

FMIA. The State of North Dakota will

remain designated under sections 1–4,

6–10, and 12–22 of the Poultry Products

Inspection Act (PPIA).

DATES: The effective date of this final

rule is October 15, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

William F. Leese, Director, Federal-State

Relations Staff, Food Safety and

Inspection Service; telephone (202)

418–8900 or fax (202) 418–8834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 301(c) of the FMIA (21 U.S.C.

661(c)) and section 5(c) of the PPIA (21

U.S.C. 454(c)), respectively, authorize

the Secretary of Agriculture to designate

a State as one in which the provisions

of Titles I and IV of the FMIA and

sections 1–4, 6–10, and 12–22 of the

PPIA will apply to operations and

transactions wholly within the State

after the Secretary has determined that

requirements at least ‘‘equal to’’ those

imposed under the Acts have not been

developed and effectively enforced by

the State.

On June 22, 1970, and January 2,

1971, the Secretary designated the State

of North Dakota under section 301(c) of

the FMIA and section 5(c) of the PPIA

respectively as a State in which the

Federal Government is responsible for

providing meat and poultry inspection

at eligible establishments and for

otherwise enforcing the applicable

provisions of the FMIA and the PPIA

with regard to intrastate activities in the

State.

In addition, on July 23, 1973, and

October 29, 1975, the Federal

Government assumed the responsibility

of administering the authorities

provided for under sections 202, 203,

and 204 of the FMIA (21 U.S.C. 642,

643, and 644) and sections 11(b) and (c)

of the PPIA (21 U.S.C. 460 (b) and (c))

respectively regarding certain classes of

operators of meat and poultry products

in North Dakota.

These designations were undertaken

by the Department when it determined

that the State of North Dakota was not

in a position to enforce requirements

that are at least ‘‘equal to’’ the

requirements of FMIA and PPIA

enforced by the Federal Government.

The Commissioner of Agriculture of

the State of North Dakota has advised

FSIS that on October 15, 2000, the State

of North Dakota will be in a position to

administer a State meat inspection

program that includes requirements at

least ‘‘equal to’’ those imposed under

the Federal meat inspection program.

The Commissioner of Agriculture of the

State of North Dakota also has advised

FSIS that the State, at this time, will

remain designated for poultry products

under the PPIA.

Section 301(c)(3) of the FMIA

provides that whenever the Secretary of

Agriculture determines that any

designated State has developed and will

enforce State meat inspection

requirements at least ‘‘equal to’’ those

imposed by the Federal Government

under Titles I and IV of the FMIA, with

regard to intrastate operations and

transactions within the State, the

Secretary will terminate the designation

of such State. The Secretary has

determined that the State of North

Dakota has developed, and will enforce,

such a State meat inspection program in

accordance with such provisions of

Titles I and IV of the FMIA. In addition,

the Secretary has determined that the

State of North Dakota is in a position to

enforce effectively the provisions of

sections 202, 203, and 204 of the FMIA.

The designation of the State of North

Dakota under sections 1–4, 6–10, and

12–22 of the PPIA will remain in effect

and is not terminated.

Since it does not appear that public

participation in this matter would make

additional relevant information

available to the Secretary under the

administrative procedure provisions in

5 U.S.C. 553, it is found upon good

cause that such public procedure is

impracticable and unnecessary.

Executive Order 12866

This final rule is issued in

conformance with Executive Order

12866 and has been determined not to

be a major rule. It will not result in an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more and will not adversely

affect the economy or any segment of

the economy. Because this final rule is

not a significant rule under Executive

Order 12866, it has not undergone

review by the Office of Management and

Budget.

Effect on Small Entities

The FSIS Administrator has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities,

as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, Pub. L. 96–354 (6 U.S.C. 601). As

stated above, the State of North Dakota

is assuming a responsibility, previously

limited to the Federal Government, of

administering the meat inspection

program for intrastate operations and

transactions. The State’s poultry

products inspection program, at this

time, will remain designated. No

additional requirements are being

imposed on small entities.

Additional Public Notification

FSIS has considered the potential

civil rights impact of this final rule on

minorities, women, and persons with

disabilities. Public involvement in all

segments of rulemaking and policy

development is important.

Consequently, in an effort to better

ensure that minorities, women, and

persons with disabilities are aware of

this rulemaking, FSIS will announce it

and provide copies of this Federal

Register publication in the FSIS

Constituent Update.

FSIS provides a weekly Constituent

Update, which is communicated via fax

to more than 300 organizations and

individuals. In addition, the update is

available on-line through the FSIS web

page located at http://

www.fsis.usda.gov. The update is used

to provide information regarding FSIS

policies, procedures, regulations,

Federal Register notices, FSIS public

meetings, recalls, and any other types of

information that could affect or be of

interest to our constituents and

shareholders. The constituent fax list

consists of industry, trade, and farm

groups, consumer interest groups, allied

health professionals, and other persons

who have requested to be included.

Through these various channels, FSIS is

able to provide information to a much

broader and diverse audience. For more

information and to be added to the

constituent fax list, fax your request to

(202) 720–5704.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 331

Meat inspection.

Part 331 of the Federal meat

inspection regulations (9 CFR Part 331

is amended to read as follows:

PART 331—[AMENDED]

The authority citation for Part 331

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601–695; 7 CFR 2.17,

2.55

§ 331.2 [Amended]

1. The table in § 331.2 of the Federal

meat inspection regulations is amended

by removing the entry for ‘‘North

Dakota.’’

§ 331.6 [Amended]

2. Section 331.6 of the Federal meat

inspection regulations is amended by

removing the entries for ‘‘North Dakota’’

each place it appears.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62581

Done in Washington, DC, on: October 12,

2000.

Thomas J. Billy,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–26658 Filed 10–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

RIN 3150–AG32

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage

Casks: NAC–UMS Addition

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is amending its

regulations to add the NAC Universal

Storage System (NAC–UMS) cask

system to the list of approved spent fuel

storage casks. This amendment allows

the holders of power reactor operating

licenses to store spent fuel in this

approved cask system under a general

license.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective on November 20, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan

Turel, telephone (301) 415–6234, e-mail

spt@nrc.gov of the Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste

Policy Act of 1982, as amended

(NWPA), requires that ‘‘[t]he Secretary

[of Energy] shall establish a

demonstration program, in cooperation

with the private sector, for the dry

storage of spent nuclear fuel at civilian

nuclear reactor power sites, with the

objective of establishing one or more

technologies that the [Nuclear

Regulatory] Commission may, by rule,

approve for use at the sites of civilian

nuclear power reactors without, to the

maximum extent practicable, the need

for additional site-specific approvals by

the Commission.’’ Section 133 of the

NWPA states, in part, ‘‘[t]he

Commission shall, by rule, establish

procedures for the licensing of any

technology approved by the

Commission under Section 218(a) for

use at the site of any civilian nuclear

power reactor.’’

To implement this mandate, the NRCapproved dry storage of spent nuclear

fuel in NRC-approved casks under a

general license, publishing a final rule

in 10 CFR part 72 entitled ‘‘General

License for Storage of Spent Fuel at

Power Reactor Sites’’ (55 FR 29181; July

18, 1990). This rule also established a

new Subpart L within 10 CFR part 72

entitled, ‘‘Approval of Spent Fuel

Storage Casks’’ containing procedures

and criteria for obtaining NRC approval

of dry storage cask designs.

Discussion

This rule will add the NAC–UMS cask

system to the list of approved spent fuel

storage casks in 10 CFR 72.214.

Following the procedures specified in

10 CFR 72.230 of subpart L, NAC

International (NAC) submitted an

application for NRC approval with the

Safety Analysis Report (SAR) entitled,

‘‘Safety Analysis Report for the NAC

UMS Universal Storage System.’’ The

NRC evaluated the NAC submittal and

issued a preliminary Safety Evaluation

Report (SER) and a proposed Certificate

of Compliance (CoC) for the NAC–UMS

cask system. The NRC published a

proposed rule in the Federal Register

(64 FR 45918; August 23, 1999) to add

the NAC–UMS cask system to the listing

in 10 CFR 72.214. The comment period

ended on April 5, 2000. Seven comment

letters were received on the proposed

rule.

Based on NRC review and analysis of

public comments, the NRC has

modified, as appropriate, its proposed

CoC and the Technical Specifications

(TS) for the NAC–UMS cask system. The

NRC has also modified its SER in

response to some of the comments.

The NRC finds that the NAC–UMS

cask system, as designed and when

fabricated and used in accordance with

the conditions specified in its CoC,

meets the requirements of 10 CFR part

72, subpart L. Thus, use of the NAC–

UMS cask system, as approved by the

NRC, will provide adequate protection

of public health and safety and the

environment. With this final rule, the

NRC is approving the use of the NAC–

UMS cask system under the general

license in 10 CFR part 72, subpart K, by

holders of power reactor operating

licenses under 10 CFR part 50.

Simultaneously, the NRC is issuing a

final SER and CoC that will be effective

on November 20, 2000. Single copies of

the final CoC and SER will be available

by November 2, 2000 for public

inspection and/or copying for a fee at

the NRC Public Document Room (PDR),

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland and electronically at http://

ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Documents created or received at the

NRC after November 1, 1999, are also

available electronically at the NRC’s

Public Electronic Reading Room on the

Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/

ADAMS/index.html. The public can

gain entry from this site into the NRC’s

Agency wide Document Access and

Management System (ADAMS), which

provides text and image files of the

NRC’s public documents. An electronic

copy of the final CoC, Technical

Specifications, and SER for the NAC–

UMS cask system can be found in

ADAMS under Accession No.

ML003737374. However, because the

NRC must incorporate the date of

publication of this Federal Register

notice into the CoC, these documents

are not yet publicly available. The NRC

will make these documents publically

available by November 2, 2000. Contact

the NRC PDR reference staff for more

information. PDR reference staff may be

reached at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–

4737, or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov.

Summary of Public Comments on the

Proposed Rule

The NRC received seven comment

letters on the proposed rule. The

commenters included two utilities, an

NAC–UMS cask users group, two States,

and two members of the public. Copies

of the public comments are available for

review in the NRC Public Document

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

MD and electronically at http://

ruleforum.llnl.gov.

Comments on the NAC–UMS Cask

System

The comments and responses have

been grouped into nine subject areas:

general, radiation protection, accident

analysis, design, welds, structural,

thermal, technical specifications (TS),

and miscellaneous issues. Several of the

commenters provided specific

comments on the draft CoC, NRC’s

preliminary SER, and TSs. To the extent

possible, all of the comments on a

particular subject are grouped together.

The NRC’s decision to list the NAC–

UMS cask system within 10 CFR 72.214,

‘‘List of approved spent fuel storage

casks,’’ has not been changed as a result

of the public comments. A review of the

comments and the NRC’s responses

follow:

A. General

Comment A–1: One commenter noted

the regulatory analysis indicates that

issuing a site-specific license would cost

the NRC and the utility more time and

money than the proposed action. The

commenter asked for proof of this

statement and suggested that a study or

evaluation should be done. The

commenter considers that in the long

run it costs the NRC more time and