19382 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Department has not identified any

relevant Federal rules that duplicate,

overlap or conflict with this rule.

However, red seedless grapefruit must

meet the requirements as specified in

the U.S. Standards for Grades of Florida

Grapefruit (7 CFR 51.760 through

51.784) issued under the Agricultural

Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621

through 1627).

Further, the Committee’s October

meeting was widely publicized

throughout the citrus industry and all

interested persons were invited to

attend the meeting and participate in

Committee deliberations. Like all

Committee meetings, the October 14,

1997, meeting was a public meeting and

all entities, both large and small, were

able to express their views on this issue.

Finally, interested persons were invited

to submit information on the regulatory

and informational impacts of this action

on small businesses.

An interim final rule concerning this

action was published in the Federal

Register on January 22, 1998. Copies of

the rule were mailed by the Committee

staff to all Committee members and

grapefruit handlers. In addition, the rule

was made available through the Internet

by the Office of the Federal Register.

That rule provided for a 60-day

comment period which ended March

23, 1998. No comments were received.

In accordance with section 8e of the

Act, the United States Trade

Representative has concurred with the

issuance of this final rule.

After consideration of all relevant

material presented, including the

Committee’s recommendation, and

other information, it is found that

finalizing the interim final rule, without

change, as published in the Federal

Register (63 FR 3247, January 22, 1998)

will tend to effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 905

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements,

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.

7 CFR Part 944

Avocados, Food grades and standards,

Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit,

Limes, Olives, Oranges.

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT,

TANGERINES AND TANGELOS

GROWN IN FLORIDA

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT

REGULATIONS

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR parts 905 and 944

which was published at 63 FR 3247 on

January 22, 1998, is adopted as a final

rule without change.

Dated: April 14, 1998.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Acting Deputy Administrator, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs.

[FR Doc. 98–10259 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Part 1

[INS Order No. 1868–97]

RIN 1115–AE87

Amendment of the Regulatory

Definition of Arriving Alien

AGENCY: Immigration and Naturalization

Service, Justice.

ACTION: Interim rule with request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This rule amends the

Immigration and Naturalization Service

(Service) regulations by changing the

regulatory definition of an arriving

alien. Under section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of

the Immigration and Nationality Act

(Act), which was effective on April 1,

1997, certain arriving aliens are subject

to expedited removal procedures. The

existing regulatory definition of arriving

alien includes parolees whose parole is

terminated, without regard to the date of

parole or the circumstances under

which parole was granted. As a matter

of policy, the Service has decided that

it is appropriate to exempt from the new

expedited removal procedures aliens

who were paroled into the United States

before April 1, 1997, as well as aliens

who, either before or after April 1, 1997,

return to the United States pursuant to

a grant of advance parole that they

applied for and obtained while

physically present in and prior to their

departure from the United States. This

rule clarifies that these two types of

parolees will not be subjected to

expedited removal.

DATES: Effective Dates: The interim rule

is effective April 20, 1998.

Comment Date: Written comments

must be received on or before June 19,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Please submit written

comments in triplicate to the: Director,

Policy Directives and Instructions

Branch, Immigration and Naturalization

Service, 425 I Street, NW., Room 5307,

Washington, DC 20536. To ensure

proper handling, please reference INS

number 1868–97 on your

correspondence. Comments are

available for public inspection at the

above address by calling (202) 514–3048

to arrange for an appointment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Loveless, Assistant Chief

Inspector, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, 425 I Street NW.,

Room 4064, Washington, DC 20536,

telephone number (202) 616–7489.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Illegal

Immigration Reform and Immigrant

Responsibility Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104–

208, which was enacted on September

30, 1996, created new expedited

removal procedures for aliens

attempting to enter the United States

through fraud or misrepresentation or

without proper documents. This

provision was effective on April 1, 1997,

and is applicable to aliens who are

‘‘arriving in the United States’’ as

contained in section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of

the Act.

The existing regulatory definition of

arriving alien includes parolees, starting

that ‘‘[a]n arriving alien remains such

even if paroled pursuant to section

212(d)(5) of the Act.’’ Including certain

parolees in the definition of arriving

aliens is consistent with section

212(d)(5) of the Act, which states that

‘‘* * * such parole of such alien shall

not be regarded as an admission of the

alien and when the purpose of such

parole shall, in the opinion of the

Attorney General, have been served the

alien shall forthwith return or be

returned to the custody from which he

was paroled and thereafter his case shall

continue to be dealt with in the same

manner as that of any other applicant

for admission to the United States.’’

Existing regulations on the termination

of parole are also consistent with the

classification of certain paroled aliens as

arriving aliens, stating that ‘‘* * * he or

she shall be restored to the status that

he or she had at the time of parole.’’ 8

CFR 212.5(d)(2)(i).

The definition as currently in effect,

though consistent with the Act and

prior regulations, encompasses certain

groups not best regarded as arriving

aliens for purposes of the applicability

of expedited removal, such as aliens

initially paroled before (often well

before) the effective date of the

expedited removal provisions, and

aliens previously present in the United

States (in some cases for long periods)

who departed from and returned to the

United States pursuant to advance

parole. Because the Act does not contain

a definition of ‘‘arriving alien,’’ it is left

to the Attorney General to define the

term in a manner that conforms with
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 19383

congressional intent as embodied in the

Act. This rule clarifies that aliens who

were paroled before April 1, 1997, and

aliens who return to the United States

pursuant to advance parole that they

applied for and obtained while

physically present in and prior to their

departure from the United States, will

not be subject to expedited removal

when their parole is terminated. This

exception does not alter the legal status

of these parolees; these paroled aliens

remain applicants for admission as in

the past.

This rule also amends the arriving

alien definition by replacing the

reference to an alien who ‘‘seeks

admission to or transit through the

United States’’ with a reference to an

‘‘applicant for admission coming or

attempting to come into the United

States at a port-of-entry, or an alien

seeking transit through the United

States at a port-of-entry.’’ The new

language better conveys the intent of the

definition, which is to delineate a

particular segment of those aliens

described in section 235(a)(1) of the Act,

which defines aliens deemed to be

applicants for admission. The term

‘‘applicant for admission’’ is a term of

art under the Act as revised by IIRIRA.

Section 235(a)(1) of the Act makes clear

that an alien coming from abroad to a

port in the United States may be

considered an applicant for admission

regardless of whether he or she

subjectively desires admission. To the

extent that the word ‘‘seeks’’ in the

existing § 1.1(q) suggests that an alien

must have a subjective intent to gain

admission in order to be an arriving

alien, it may be susceptible to

interpretations that are not consistent

with the statute. Replacing the term

‘‘seeks’’ in the arriving aliens definition

with the term ‘‘coming or attempting to

come’’ prevents the possibility of such

confusion.

Finally, the rule removes the

reference to 8 CFR part 235, which deals

with inspection of persons applying for

admission. This reference is not

necessary and its removal will

streamline the definition of arriving

alien.

Good Cause Exception

This interim rule is effective on

publication in the Federal Register,

although the Service invites postpromulgation comments within a 60-

day comment period and will address

any such comments in a final rule. For

the following reasons, the Service finds

that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B) and (d)(3) for implementing

this rule as an interim rule without the

prior notice and comment period

ordinarily required under that

provision. First, in certain respects, this

rule simply clarifies issues that may

appear ambiguous in the existing

regulation defining arriving aliens.

Second, to the extent that this rule

substantively changes Service

regulations, it simply provides more

advantageous treatment for the limited

number of parolees involved by

exempting them from expedited

removal procedures. Early

implementation will be advantageous to

the intended beneficiaries of this rule.

Therefore, it is unnecessary and

contrary to the public interest to delay

the implementation of this rule until

after a notice and comment period.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Attorney General, in accordance

with 5 U.S.C. 605(b) has reviewed this

regulation and, by approving it, certifies

that this rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because of the following factors:

This rule makes two changes to the

existing § 1.1(q). First, by changing the

arriving alien definition to provide that

the expedited removal provisions will

not apply to aliens paroled into the

United States prior to April 1 or

pursuant to advance parole which the

aliens applied for and obtained in the

United States, this rule simply provides

that, where appropriate, a finite number

of aliens will be subject to removal

proceedings under section 240 of the

Act, rather than to expedited removal

under section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act.

This change will not affect small

entities. Second, this rule also changes

the arriving alien definition to use

language that is clearer and more

consistent with the Act. This change

does not alter the meaning of the

regulation and does not affect small

entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995

This rule will not result in the

expenditure by State, local and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector, of $100 million or more

in any one year, and it will not

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments. Therefore, no actions were

deemed necessary under the provisions

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996

This rule is not a major rule as

defined by section 804 of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of

1996. This rule will not result in an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, a major increase in

costs or prices, or significant adverse

effects on competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or

on the ability of United States-based

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and

export markets.

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 adopted 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.

Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice

Reform

This interim rule meets the applicable

standards set forth in sections 3(a) and

3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988.

List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 1

Administrative practice and

procedures, Aliens, Immigration,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Accordingly, part 1 of chapter I of title

8 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 1—DEFINITIONS

1. The authority citation for part 1

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 8 CFR part 2.

2. Section 1.1 is amended by revising

paragraph (q) to read as follows:

§ 1.1 Definitions.

* * * * *

(q) The term arriving alien means an

applicant for admission coming or

attempting to come into the United

States at a port-of-entry, or an alien

seeking transit through the United

States at a port-of-entry, or an alien

interdicted in international or United

States waters and brought into the

United States by any means, whether or

not to a designated port-of-entry, and
19384 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

regardless of the means of transport. An

arriving alien remains such even if

paroled pursuant to section 212(d)(5) of

the Act, except that an alien who was

paroled before April 1, 1997, or an alien

who was granted advance parole which

the alien applied for and obtained in the

United States prior to the alien’s

departure from and return to the United

States, shall not be considered an

arriving alien for purposes of section

235(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act.

* * * * *

Dated: February 13, 1998.

Doris Meissner,

Commissioner of the Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10354 Filed 4–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–10–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–CE–42–AD; Amendment 39–

10476; AD 98–08–27]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; SOCATA—

Groupe AEROSPATIALE Model TBM

700 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to certain SOCATA—Groupe

AEROSPATIALE (Socata) Model TBM

700 airplanes. This AD requires

modifying the airplane’s left-hand (LH)

front side lower panel. This AD is the

result of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information (MCAI)

issued by the airworthiness authority for

France. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to prevent interference

between the side trim of the LH front

side lower panel and the roll control

compass on the LH wheel assembly,

which could result in loss of directional

control of the airplane.

DATES: Effective May 31, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of May 31,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

SOCATA—Groupe AEROSPATIALE,

Support Client/Customer Support,

Aerodrome Tarbes-Ossun-Lourdes, B P

930, F65009 Tarbes Cedex, France;

telephone: (33) 62.41.73.00; facsimile:

(33) 62.41.76.54, or the Product Support

Manager, SOCATA-Groupe

AEROSPATIALE, North Perry Airport,

7501 Pembroke Road, Pembroke Pines,

Florida 33023; telephone: (954) 964–

6877; facsimile: (954) 964–1668. This

information may also be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 97–CE–42–AD, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW,

suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 1201

Walnut Street, suite 900, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 426–

6934; facsimile: (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the Issuance of This

AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain Socata Model TBM 700

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) on February 5, 1998

(63 FR 5898). The NPRM proposed to

require modifying the airplane’s lefthand (LH) front side lower panel.

Accomplishment of the proposed action

as specified in the NPRM would be in

accordance with SOCATA Service

Bulletin No. SB 70–061–25, dated June,

1995.

The NPRM was the result of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information (MCAI) issued by the

airworthiness authority for France.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were received on the

proposed rule or the FAA’s

determination of the cost to the public.

The FAA’s Determination

After careful review of all available

information related to the subject

presented above, the FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for minor

editorial corrections. The FAA has

determined that these minor corrections

will not change the meaning of the AD

and will not add any additional burden

upon the public than was already

proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 40 airplanes

in the U.S. registry will be affected by

this AD, that it will take approximately

4 workhours per airplane to accomplish

this action, and that the average labor

rate is approximately $60 an hour. Parts

cost approximately $15 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of this AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $10,200 or $255 per

airplane.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted 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 final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3)

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the final

evaluation prepared for this action is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained by contacting the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

98–08–27 Socata—Groupe Aerospatiale:

Amendment 39–10476; Docket No. 97–

CE–42–AD.

Applicability: Model TBM 700 airplanes,

serial numbers 24, 26, 27, 29 through 32, 34,