Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules 9387

valuation of the wholesale power

contracts shall take into account, among

other matters, the rights of the

government, and/or third parties, to

assume the rights and obligations of the

borrower under such contracts, to

charge reasonable rates for service

provided under the contracts, and to

otherwise enforce the contracts in

accordance with their terms. In no case

will the Administrator settle a debt or

claim for less than the value (after

considering collection costs) of the

borrower’s system and other collateral

securing the debt or claim.

(2) RUS may use such methods,

analyses, and assessments as the

Administrator deems appropriate to

determine the value of the borrower’s

system.

(g) Rates. The Administrator will

consider the rates charged for electric

service by the borrower and, in the case

of a power supply borrower, by its

members, taking into account, among

other factors, the practices of the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

(FERC), as adapted to the cooperative

structure of borrowers, and, where

applicable, FERC treatment of any

investments by co-owners in projects

jointly owned by the borrower.

(h) Collection action. The

Administrator will consider whether a

settlement is favorable to the

government in comparison with the

amount that can be recovered by

enforced collection procedures.

(i) Regulatory approvals. Before the

Administrator will approve a

settlement, the borrower must provide

satisfactory evidence that it has

obtained all approvals required of

regulatory bodies that are needed to

implement rates or other provisions of

the settlement, or that are needed in any

other way for the borrower to fulfill its

obligations under the settlement.

(j) Conditions regarding management

and operations. As a condition of debt

settlement, the borrower, and in the case

of a power supply borrower, its

members, will be required to implement

those changes in structure, management,

operations, and performance deemed

necessary by the Administrator. Those

changes may include, but are not

limited to, the following:

(1) The borrower may be required to

undertake a corporate restructuring and/

or sell a portion of its plant, facilities,

or other assets;

(2) The borrower may be required to

replace senior management and/or hire

outside experts acceptable to the

Administrator. Such changes may

include a commitment by the borrower’s

board of directors to restructure and/or

obtain new membership to improve

board oversight and leadership;

(3) The borrower may be required to

agree to:

(i) Controls by RUS on the general

funds of the borrower, as well as on any

investments, loans or guarantees by the

borrower, notwithstanding any

limitations on RUS’ control rights in the

borrower’s loan documents or RUS

regulations; and

(ii) Requirements deemed necessary

by RUS to perfect and protect its lien on

cash deposits, securities, equipment,

vehicles, and other items of real or nonreal property; and

(4) In the case of a power supply

borrower, the borrower may be required

to obtain credit support from its member

systems, as well as pledges and action

plans by the members to change their

operations, management, and

organizational structure (e.g., shared

services, mergers, or consolidations) in

order to reduce operating costs, improve

efficiency, and/or expand markets and

revenues.

(k) Conveyance of assets. As a

condition of a settlement, a borrower

may be required to convey some or all

its assets to the government.

(l) Additional conditions. The

borrower will be required to warrant

and agree that no bonuses or similar

extraordinary compensation has been or

will be provided, for reasons related to

the settlement of government debt, to

any officer or employee of the borrower

or to other persons or entities identified

by RUS. The Administrator may impose

such other terms and conditions of debt

settlement as the Administrator

determines to be in the government’s

interests.

§ 1717.1205 Waiver of existing conditions

on borrowers.

Pursuant to section 331(b) of the Con

Act, the Administrator, at his or her sole

discretion, may waive or otherwise

reduce conditions and requirements

imposed on a borrower by its loan

documents if the Administrator

determines that such action will

contribute to enhancement of the

government’s recovery of debt. Such

waivers or reductions in conditions and

requirements under this section shall

not include the exercise of any of the

debt settlement measures set forth in

§ 1717.1204(c), which are subject to all

of the requirements of § 1717.1204.

§ 1717.1206 Loans subsequent to

settlement.

In considering any future loan

requests from a borrower whose debt

has been restructured (settled), it will be

presumed that credit support for the full

amount of the requested loan will be

required. Such support may be in a

number of forms, provided that they are

acceptable to the Administrator on a

case by case basis. They may include,

but need not be limited to, equity

infusions and guarantees of debt

repayment, either from the applicant’s

members (in the case of a power supply

borrower), or from a third party.

§ 1717.1207 RUS obligations under loan

guarantees.

Nothing in this subpart affects the

obligations of RUS under loan guarantee

commitments it has made to the Federal

Financing Bank or other lenders.

§ 1717.1208 Government’s rights under

loan documents.

Nothing in this subpart limits,

modifies, or otherwise affects the rights

of the government under loan

documents executed with borrowers, or

under law or equity.

Dated: February 24, 1997.

Jill Long Thompson,

Under Secretary, Rural Development.

[FR Doc. 97–5137 Filed 2–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–15–P

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Parts 92 and 130

[Docket No. 95–057–2]

Importation of Pet Birds

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: We are withdrawing a

proposed rule that would have made

several changes to the regulations for

importing pet birds into the United

States. We are withdrawing the

proposed rule after considering the

comments we received following the

publication of the proposed rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Tracye R. Butler, Staff Veterinarian,

Import-Export Animals, National Center

for Import-Export, VS, APHIS, 4700

River Road Unit 39, Riverdale, MD

20737–1231, (301) 734–5097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 21, 1996, we published in

the Federal Register (61 FR 43188–

43193, Docket No. 95–057–1) a proposal

to amend the regulations in 9 CFR part

92 by removing the requirement for

veterinary inspection at the port of entry

for all pet birds imported from Canada,

including pet birds of U.S. origin that
9388 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 1997 / Proposed Rules

have been in Canada. We also proposed

to remove the requirement that such

birds may only be imported through a

designated port. For pet birds of

Canadian origin, we proposed to add the

requirement that the birds be

accompanied by a veterinary health

certificate issued by Agriculture Canada.

We also proposed to allow pet birds

imported from countries other than

Canada to be maintained under home

quarantine for 30 days rather than be

quarantined for 30 days at a facility

operated by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture (USDA). For pet birds of

U.S. origin, we proposed to allow

microchip implants as a form of

permanent identification. We also

proposed to amend the regulations in 9

CFR part 130, concerning user fees, to

reflect our proposal that pet birds

imported from any country could now

undergo home quarantine, and should

be charged the appropriate user fee for

home quarantine services. We proposed

these actions in order to facilitate the

importation of pet birds, while

continuing to provide protection against

the introduction of communicable

diseases into the United States.

We solicited comments concerning

our proposal for 60 days ending October

21, 1996. We received 16 comments by

that date. They were from veterinarians,

humane organizations, environmental

interest groups, raptor breeders and

associations, and falconers. Ten of the

comments supported the proposed rule,

but requested minor changes, mostly

concerning special considerations in the

importation of raptors from Canada. The

remainder of the comments opposed the

proposed rule, expressing concerns

regarding allowing home quarantine for

pet birds imported from countries other

than Canada and removing the

requirement for veterinary inspection at

the port of entry for pet birds imported

from Canada. Specifically, commenters

said that most pet bird owners would

not necessarily recognize the signs of

disease in their pet birds under home

quarantine, that home quarantine would

not include any tests for disease or

precautionary medication (as is

administered when a pet bird undergoes

quarantine at a USDA-operated facility),

and that the proposal did not include

adequate provisions to ensure that pet

bird owners comply with the home

quarantine requirements. Commenters

were also concerned that removing

veterinary inspection at the port of entry

for pet birds from Canada would

increase the opportunities for exotic

birds to be smuggled illegally into the

United States.

After considering all the comments

we received, we have concluded that it

is necessary to reexamine the need for

relieving restrictions on the importation

of pet birds and the disease risks

associated with the importation of pet

birds into the United States. Therefore,

we are withdrawing the August 21,

1996, proposed rule referenced above.

The concerns and recommendations of

all the commenters will be considered if

any new proposed regulations regarding

the importation of pet birds are

developed.

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).

Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of

February 1997.

Terry L. Medley,

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 97–5161 Filed 2–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–126–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives;

Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.

(CASA) Model CN–235 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

certain CASA Model CN–235 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

a one-time inspection to detect fatigue

cracking in the area of the center wingto-fuselage attachment fitting, and

repair, if necessary. This proposal also

would require installation of a

reinforcing plate in the attachment area

of that fitting. This proposal is

prompted by a report from the

manufacturer indicating that, during

full-scale fatigue testing, fatigue cracks

were detected in this area. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent fatigue cracking,

which consequently could reduce the

structural integrity of this area.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

126–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A.,

Getafe, Madrid, Spain. This information

may be examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg

Dunn, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2799; fax (206) 227–1149

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number96–NM–126–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket

No.96–NM–126–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.