Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 224 / Monday, November 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 69657

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7301, 7351, 7353; 5

U.S.C. App. (Ethics in Government Act of

1978); E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989

Comp., p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55

FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306.

§ 2635.204 [Amended]

6. Section 2635.204 is amended by

removing the dollar amounts ‘‘$250’’ in

paragraph (g)(2) and in Examples 1 and

2 following paragraph (g)(6) and adding

in their place in each instance the dollar

amount ‘‘$260’’, and by removing the

dollar amount ‘‘$500’’ in Example 2

following paragraph (g)(6) and adding in

its place the dollar amount ‘‘$520’’.

7. Section 2635.902 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (l), previously

reserved, to read as follows:

§ 2635.902 Related statutes.

* * * * *

(l) The prohibition against fraudulent

access and related activity in connection

with computers (18 U.S.C. 1030).

* * * * *

PART 2638—OFFICE OF

GOVERNMENT ETHICS AND

EXECUTIVE AGENCY ETHICS

PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES

8. The authority citation for part 2638

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. App. (Ethics in

Government Act of 1978); E.O. 12674, 54 FR

15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. 215, as

modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR 42547, 3 CFR,

1990 Comp., p. 306.

§ 2638.101 [Amended]

9. Section 2638.101 is amended by

removing the references to ‘‘II’’ in

paragraphs (a) and (b) and adding in

their place in each instance the

reference ‘‘I’’, and by adding the words

‘‘executive branch’’ between the words

‘‘These’’ and ‘‘regulations’’ in paragraph

(b).

10. Section 2638.104 is amended by

revising the definition of ‘‘Executive

branch’’ to read as follows:

§ 2638.104 Definitions.

* * * * *

Executive branch includes each

executive agency as defined in 5 U.S.C.

105 and any other entity or

administrative unit in the executive

branch. However, it does not include

any agency, entity, office or commission

that is defined by or referred to in 5

U.S.C. app. 109(8)–(11) of the Act as

within the judicial or legislative branch.

* * * * *

§ 2638.201 [Amended]

11. Section 2638.201 is amended by

removing the references to ‘‘II’’ and

adding in their place in each instance

the reference ‘‘I’’, and by removing the

words ‘‘11222 (relating to standards of

conduct’’ between the words ‘‘Order’’

and ‘‘for’’ in the last sentence and

adding in their place the words ‘‘12674

as modified (relating to principles of

ethical conduct’’.

[FR Doc. 00–29493 Filed 11–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6345–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Rural Utilities Service

7 CFR Part 1710

RIN 0572–AB52

General and Pre-Loan Policies and

Procedures Common to Insured and

Guaranteed Loans

AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of confirmation of direct

final rule.

SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service

(RUS) hereby gives notice that

comments were received regarding

direct final rule on General and PreLoan Policies and Procedures Common

to Insured and Guaranteed Electric

Loans, and reconfirms the effective date

of the direct final rule. This notice also

serves to address the comments

received.

DATES: The direct final rule, which was

published on May 17, 2000, at 65 FR

31246, was effective July 3, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wei

M. Moy, Chief, Power Resources &

Planning Branch, Power Supply

Division, Rural Utilities Service, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Stop 1568,

1400 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20250–1568.

Telephone: (202) 720–1438. FAX (202)

720–1401. E-mail: wmoy@rus.usda.gov.

Background

The Rural Utilities Service (RUS)

published a direct final rule on May 17,

2000, at 65 FR 31246, in the Federal

Register amending § 1710.254,

Alternative Sources of Power, to allow

flexibility in determining whether a

borrower needs to solicit bids from all

sources for new or replacement

generation. It also deleted the

requirement that borrowers seek bids if

RUS financial assistance is requested

from all sources for generation projects

of 10 megawatts or more or for

modifications to existing plants if it

results in an increase in capacity of 10

percent. RUS reserves the right to

review each project on a case-by-case

basis and determine whether there is a

need for a borrower to seek bids from all

sources for the project.

RUS received comments from three

parties on this direct final rule, two of

which were deemed adverse. According

to RUS policy, should adverse

comments be received concerning a

direct final rule, the agency would

withdraw the direct final rule and the

companion proposed rule, which was

published in the same issue of the

Federal Register, would be the ruling

action. RUS failed to issue a withdrawal

notice. As a result, the direct final rule

became effective on July 3, 2000. In lieu

of this oversight, RUS feels that this

notice of confirmation of direct final

rule serves to address the concerns of

the commentors and at the same time

confirms the effective date of the direct

final rule. If not for this oversight, this

rule would have become effective

through the normal regulatory process

though its companion proposed rule

and then as a final rule.

A summaries of these comments and

responses follows:

Comments

Comment: Tri-State is in agreement

with the amendment, and appreciates

the flexibility that RUS has written into

this amendment. However, Tri State

recommended (1) That language be

added regarding environmental issues,

and (2) that, if RUS requires an

applicant to solicit proposals for sources

of power, the applicant be allowed to

comply with the requirement by

submitting competitive bids previously

obtained by regional utilities.

Reply: RUS appreciates the support

for its efforts to modify the requirement

that borrowers must seek bids from all

sources if funding is requested for

generation projects equal to or greater

than 10 megawatt or for modifications to

existing plants if it results in an increase

in capacity of 10 percent or more.

Although the comments on

environmental issues and the timing of

competitive bid solicitations are

appreciated, RUS feels these comments

are non-responsive and do not effect

language in the regulation.

Comment: Otter Tail suggests that

competitive bidding should be a

standard imposed on any party seeking

federal financing and that the

inefficiencies in the review and

approval process should not cause

delays in an efficiently run business or

agency. Otter Tail feels that RUS

borrowers should be meeting their

power needs within the market place

and only when competitive policies

have been followed should any

69658 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 224 / Monday, November 20, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

borrower be eligible for federally

subsidized loans.

Reply: The amendment does not

abandon the practice of seeking

competitive bids. Upon an RUS review

of each project, a determination will be

made whether there is a need for a

borrower to seek competitive bids for

the project. This evaluation by RUS will

be performed on a case-by-case basis.

RUS will continue to follow good

business practice and make sound

business decisions. At the same time,

RUS will provide its borrowers with the

flexibility to make sound business

decisions to meet the power needs of

rural America.

Comment: Edison objects to the

amendment, stating that the present

regulation has been in existence for a

long time and is entirely consistent with

the nation’s transition to competitive

wholesale power markets. RUS

borrowers should seek to meet their

power needs out of these markets and

make every effort to do so before seeking

more assistance from RUS in the form

of subsidized loans.

Reply: This amendment deletes the

requirement that borrowers seek bids if

RUS financial assistance is requested

from all sources for 10 megawatts or

more or for modifications to existing

plants if it results in an increase in

capacity of 10 percent. RUS will review

each project on a case by case basis and

determine whether there is a need for a

borrower to seek competitive bids from

all sources for the project. RUS will

provide its borrowers with the

flexibility to make sound business

decisions to meet the power needs of

rural America.

The direct final rule requires RUS to

review each project on a case-by-case

basis and determine whether there is a

need for a borrower to seek bids from all

sources for the project. Following the

initial RUS review, if it is determined

that a full solicitation for bids to supply

new or replacement generation is

necessary, then RUS will require such

an evaluation process be completed.

This amendment in no way is intended

to minimize the need for all borrowers

to follow good business practice in

making economically sound business

decisions. The direct final rule provides

RUS electric borrowers with the

flexibility and tools necessary to make

prudent decisions to meet the power

needs of rural customers in the

competitive environment advanced by

industry restructuring efforts.

These amendments to § 1710.254,

provide borrowers with increased

flexibility during the new and

replacement electric power evaluation

period. The new policy requires RUS to

review each project on a case-by-case

basis and determine whether there is a

need for a borrower to seek bids from all

sources for the project. Following this

initial RUS review, if it is determined

that a full solicitation for bids to supply

new or replacement generation is

necessary, then RUS will require that

such an evaluation process be

completed.

As the electric industry moves to a

more competitive environment, it is

imperative that RUS prudently review

and revise policy when necessary. The

amendments to 7 CFR part 1710 are in

no way intended to minimize the need

for all borrowers to follow good

business practice in making

economically sound business decisions.

The direct final rule provides RUS

borrowers with the flexibility and tools

necessary to make prudent decisions to

meet the power needs of rural customers

in the competitive environment

advanced by industry restructuring

efforts.

To that effect the direct final rule

stands as published.

Confirmation of Effective Date

This is to confirm the effective date of

July 3, 2000, of the direct final rule, 7

CFR Part 1710, General and Pre-Loan

Policies and Procedures Common to

Insured and Guaranteed Electric Loans,

published in the Federal Register on

May 17, 2000, at 65 FR 31246.

Dated: November 13, 2000.

Anthony C. Haynes,

Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.

[FR Doc. 00–29499 Filed 11–17–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–345–AD; Amendment

39–11969; AD 2000–22–21]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10, Model MD–10,

and Model MD–11 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to all McDonnell Douglas

Model DC–10, Model MD–10, and

Model MD–11 series airplanes. This

action requires revising the Airplane

Flight Manual (AFM) to ensure that the

flight crew is advised of appropriate

procedures for disabling certain fuel

pump electrical circuits following

failure of a fuel pump electrical

connector. For certain airplanes, this

action also requires revising the AFM to

prohibit resetting of tripped fuel pump

circuit breakers. This action is necessary

to prevent continued arcing following a

short circuit of the fuel pump electrical

connector, which could damage the

conduit that protects the power lead

inside the fuel tank, and result in the

creation of a potential ignition source in

the fuel tank. This action is intended to

address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective December 5, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of December

5, 2000.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

January 19, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

345–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

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

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmiarcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–345–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach

Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,

Long Beach, California 90846,

Attention: Technical Publications

Business Administration, Dept. C1–L51

(2–60). This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; at

the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Philip C. Kush, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA,