76174 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

1 31 U.S.C. 9701 provides, in pertinent part:

(a) It is the sense of Congress that each service

or thing of value provided by an agency * * * to

a person (except a person on official business of the

United States Government) is to be self-sustaining

to the extent possible.

(b) The head of each agency * * * may prescribe

regulations establishing the charge for a service or

thing of value provided by the agency. Regulations

prescribed by the heads of executive agencies are

subject to the policies prescribed by the President

and shall be as uniform as practicable. Each charge

shall be—

(1) fair; and

(2) based on—

(A) the costs to the Government;

(B) the value of the service or thing to the

recipient;

(C) public policy or interest served; and

(D) other relevant facts.

2Circular No. A–25, revised in 1993, no longer

contains an exception from the policy of full cost

recovery for state and local governments.

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. EPA will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and

the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of this final

rule in the Federal Register. This final

rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by

5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: November 20, 2000.

James Jones,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is

amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

§ 180.449 Avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-

isomer; tolerances for residues.

2. In § 180.449, amend paragraph (b)

by revising the Expiration/revocation

date for ‘‘celeriac’’ from ‘‘1/31/00’’ to

read ‘‘12/31/02.’’

[FR Doc. 00–31055 Filed 12–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

49 CFR Part 1002

[STB Ex Parte No. 542 (Sub–No. 6)]

Regulations Governing Fees for

Services Performed in Connection

With Licensing and Related Services—

Policy Statement

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.

ACTION: Policy Statement.

SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation

Board (Board) announces that

henceforth it will apply its rule

providing for a waiver of filing fees for

state and local government entities only

as originally intended. More

specifically, the fee waiver rule will

apply only to state and local

government entities and only when they

file on behalf of the general public. Any

state or local government entity filing as

an owner or proposed owner of a carrier

or as a shipper, as well as quasigovernmental corporations and

government-subsidized transportation

companies, will not qualify for the fee

waiver.

DATES: This policy statement is effective

January 5, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anne K. Quinlan, (202) 565–1727 [TDD/

TTY for the hearing impaired: 1–800–

877–8339].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Independent Offices Appropriations

Act, 31 U.S.C. 9701 (IOAA), agencies are

obliged to establish fees for specific

services provided to identifiable

beneficiaries.1 Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A–25

establishes a policy of full cost recovery

for government services and contains

guidelines for federal agencies to apply

in assessing and collecting those fees.

Pursuant to the IOAA and Circular

No. A–25, the Board’s predecessor, the

Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC),

undertook a thorough examination of

the fee policy in Regulations Governing

Fees for Services, 1 I.C.C.2d 60 (1984)

(Fees for Services). The ICC adopted

numerous new fee items and provided

for fee waivers in certain circumstances,

including a fee waiver for government

entities, 49 CFR 1002.2(e)(1). In so

doing, the ICC established strict

guidelines for applying the governmententity fee waiver—a policy that the

Board will henceforth follow more

strictly in applying the rule.

Rule 1002.2(e)(1) provides as follows:

(e) Waiver or reduction of filing fees. It is

the general policy of the Board not to waive

or reduce filing fees except as described

below:

(1) Filing fees are waived for an application

or other proceeding which is filed by a

federal government agency, or a state or local

government entity. For purposes of this

section the phrases ‘‘federal government

agency’’ or ‘‘government entity’’ do not

include a quasi-governmental corporation or

government subsidized transportation

company.

The fee waiver for federal government

agencies is based on the IOAA, which

excludes from its scope persons on

official business of the United States

Government. The fee waiver for state

and local government entities was based

on the provisions of former Circular No.

A–25 that allowed agencies to make

exceptions to the policy of full cost

recovery where the recipient of a service

was engaged in a non-profit activity

designed for the public safety, health, or

welfare, or if payment of the full fee by

a state, local government, or non-profit

group would not be in the interest of the

program.2

In the Fees for Services proceeding,

the ICC originally proposed to assess

50% of applicable fees to state or local

government entities. It ultimately

decided, however, to assess no fee to

state and local government entities. The

agency explained that state and local

government entities generally do not

receive direct benefits from

participation in agency proceedings and

that the benefits instead flow to the

general public residing in the area. Fees

for Services at 89. But the ICC limited

the circumstances under which the fee

waiver would apply, specifically

providing that the waiver should not

apply where a state agency owns a

carrier and is before the ICC in its

proprietary role. The ICC stated (id. at

71):

[W]e conclude here that when a

governmental agency owns or subsidizes

some transportation entity and comes before

the Commission in that capacity, it should be

required to pay the entire fee that would

otherwise be applicable. When a State-owned

transportation entity acts in the same

capacity as a privately owned transportation

entity, it should be treated as such. The

Interstate Commerce Act does not exempt

such transportation entities, and we do not

believe that those entities should be treated

differently from private transportation

entities for purposes of determining user fees.

The State-owned carrier in those situations

receives the ‘‘special benefits’’ envisioned

under the IOAA and Budget Circular A–25.

We recognize that there may be public

benefits associated with a State-owned entity.

However, those public benefits are

indistinguishable from the public benefits

that are incidental to the special benefits

conferred upon private carriers in a similar

posture. Therefore, we believe fees should be

charged to the state-owned entities.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 76175

In recent years the fee waiver for state

and local government entities rule has

been applied more broadly than

envisioned in Fees for Services. We

have waived fees in cases where the

filer has been a state or local

government entity acting in a

proprietary capacity as a carrier. For

example, the fee waiver has been

applied where states, state agencies and

local transportation authorities and

districts have submitted filings to

acquire rail lines, usually for operation

by a third party. We also have waived

fees where the filer has been a quasigovernment corporation. For example,

waivers have been granted if the filer

demonstrated that it was created

through legislation designed to meet a

public purpose.

Public corporations are created by

statute for public purposes only and the

interests of public corporations are the

exclusive property and domain of the

government. Private corporations, on

the other hand, are created for private,

rather than purely public, purposes and

their powers are exercised for the profit

or advantage of the stockholders. Quasipublic (or quasi-governmental)

corporations, commonly referred to as

public service corporations, have the

appearance of being public, but in many

respects they are private. Quasi-public

corporations are private corporations

that have special powers or privileges of

a public nature, such as the power of

eminent domain, to enable them to carry

out those functions that benefit the

public; but they also exercise their

powers to further the interests of their

stockholders. Corporations are not

considered public merely because they

are creatures of legislation or

established to promote the public

interest. In our view, only the true

public corporation should qualify for a

waiver. Whether a corporation should

be considered public or not depends on

the terms of its charter and the laws

under which it has been organized.

We are not, through this policy,

seeking to inhibit parties from using our

processes, or to undercut transactions

by which, for example, local bodies

attempt to facilitate continued rail

service. But Congress has directed us to

collect appropriate fees, and we must

make every effort to conform our fee

assessment and collection practices to

the policy of full cost recovery that

underlies the IOAA and Circular No. A–

25. Thus, filers must henceforth clearly

demonstrate that they are true public

corporations in order to qualify for the

fee waiver. Fees will be assessed to any

entity (a state or local governmental

entity, a quasi-governmental entity, or a

government-subsidized transportation

company) that owns or proposes to own

a carrier, or that is a shipper, and comes

before the Board in that capacity. See

Fees for Services at 71. Fees will also be

assessed to quasi-governmental

corporations or government-subsidized

transportation companies for any filing

submitted for which there is a fee. The

fee waiver will be available to a state or

local government entity that is not

acting in the capacity of a carrier or

shipper. Thus, for example, a state or

local entity filing an adverse (or third

party) abandonment proposal would

benefit from the waiver rule because the

filer would not be appearing as a carrier

or as a shipper.

Entities that do not qualify for the fee

waiver may request a fee waiver or

reduction in fees under 49 CFR

1002.2(e)(2), which provides that in

extraordinary situations the Board will

waive or reduce fees. The requestor

must show that the waiver or reduction

is in the best interest of the public or

that payment of the fee would impose

an undue hardship on the requestor.

As a final matter, we are clarifying the

process by which waiver requests will

be administered at the Board. Currently,

a waiver request must be submitted at

the time the related filing is submitted,

and a filing (other than a tariff) not

accompanied by the appropriate fee is

deficient. See 49 CFR 1002.2(e)(2)(i),

1002.2(b). Waiver requests are

considered only when accompanied by

the related filing; waiver requests

submitted in advance of the filing to

which they relate are not accepted.

When a waiver request is accompanied

by the related filing and the appropriate

fee, the filing is processed immediately,

the fee is deposited, and the waiver

request is acted upon in due course. If

the waiver is granted, the filer receives

a refund from the U. S. Department of

the Treasury.

We understand that some parties may

find it financially burdensome to submit

the fee and then run the risk that the

waiver will not be granted. We will

permit parties to file waiver requests

without submitting the fees; however, as

we sometimes need to review the

substantive document in order to

determine whether the waiver ought to

be granted, we will not accept a waiver

request unless the substantive document

is also filed. Moreover, if a waiver

request is filed with the related filing

but without the appropriate fee, we will

be unable to process the substantive

filing until the fee issue is resolved.

Therefore, whenever a waiver request is

filed without an appropriate fee, the

substantive filing will be processed only

after the waiver request has been

granted or, if the request is denied, upon

receipt of the appropriate fee. A filer

seeking a waiver and prompt processing

of a filing should, therefore, submit the

fee, the related filing and the waiver

request simultaneously.

The legal and policy bases underlying

rule 1002.2(e)(1) already have been

established in Fees for Services. Thus,

we do not propose a new rule or policy

here, but rather announce a stricter

adherence to a policy that has already

been established and was never formally

changed. For that reason, we do not seek

public comment on this announcement

that we will henceforth follow this

policy more literally.

Decided: November 29, 2000.

By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice

Chairman Burkes, Commissioner Clyburn.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–30965 Filed 12–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[I.D. 080900A]

RIN 0648–A028

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; Rebuilding

Overfished Fisheries

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Approval of fishery

management plan amendment.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the

approval of Amendment 15 to the

Fishery Management Plan for Bering

Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner

Crabs (FMP). This amendment is

necessary to implement a plan to

rebuild the overfished stock of St.

Matthew blue king crab. This action is

intended to ensure that conservation

and management measures continue to

be based on the best scientific

information available and is intended to

achieve, on a continuing basis, the

optimum yield from the affected crab

fisheries.

DATES: The amendment was approved

on November 29, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 15 to

the FMP, and the Environmental

Assessment (EA) prepared for the

amendment are available from the

Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska