Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Proposed Rules 29675

PART 1655—LOAN PROGRAM

1. The authority citation for part 1655

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8433(g) and 8474.

2. Section 1655.18 is amended by

adding paragraph (f) as follows:

§ 1655.18 Spousal rights.

* * * * *

(f)(1) By signing the Loan Application

and the Loan Agreement/Promissory

Note, the participant represents that all

information provided to the TSP during

the loan process is true and correct,

including statements concerning the

participant’s marital status and spouse’s

address at the time the application is

filed and documentation that the

current spouse has consented to the

loan.

(2) If the Board receives a written

allegation from the spouse that the

participant may have misrepresented

his/her marital status or the spouse’s

address (in the case of a CSRS

participant), or that the signature of the

spouse of a FERS participant was

forged, the Board will submit the

questioned document to the spouse and

request that he or she state in writing

that the information is false or that the

spouse’s signature has been forged. In

the event of an alleged forgery, the

Board will also request the spouse to

provide at least three signature samples.

(3) If the spouse affirms the allegation

in accordance with the procedure set

forth in paragraph (f)(2) of this section

and the loan has been disbursed, the

Board will give the participant an

opportunity to repay, within 60 days,

the unpaid loan principal, plus unpaid

interest. If the loan is repaid, the Board

will not investigate the spouse’s

allegation.

(4) Paragraph (f)(3) of this section will

not apply where the participant has

received a final divorce decree before

the funds are received by the Thrift

Savings Plan.

(5) If the unpaid loan principal, plus

unpaid interest, is not repaid to the Plan

in full within the time period provided

in paragraph (f)(3) of this section, the

Board will conduct an investigation into

the allegation. If the participant has

received a final divorce decree before

the funds are received by the Thrift

Savings Plan, the Board will begin its

investigation immediately.

(6) If, during its investigation, the

Board finds evidence to suggest that the

participant misrepresented his/her

marital status or spouse’s address (in the

case of a CSRS participant), or

submitted the Loan Agreement/

Promissory Note with a forged

signature, the Board will refer the case

to the Department of Justice for criminal

prosecution and, if the participant is

still employed, to the Inspector General

or other appropriate authority in the

participant’s employing agency for

administrative action.

(7) Upon receipt of an allegation

described in paragraph (f)(2) of this

section, the participant’s account will be

frozen and no withdrawal or loan will

be permitted until after:

(i) Thirty days have elapsed since the

participant’s spouse was sent a copy of

the questioned document and no

written affirmation of the alleged false

information or forgery (together with

signature samples in the case of an

alleged forgery) has been received by the

Board;

(ii) The loan is repaid pursuant to

paragraph (f)(3) of this section;

(iii) The Executive Director concludes

that the Board’s investigation did not

yield persuasive evidence that supports

the spouse’s allegation;

(iv) The Executive Director has been

assured in writing by the spouse that

any future request for a loan or

withdrawal comports with the

applicable requirement of notice or

consent; or

(v) The participant is divorced.

[FR Doc. 98–14360 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6760–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

7 CFR Part 319

[Docket No. 89–154–4]

Importation of Rhododendron

Established in Growing Media

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of extension of comment

period.

SUMMARY: We are extending the

comment period on a proposal to allow

the importation of Rhododendron

established in growing media. Final

action on that proposal had been

deferred to allow consultation regarding

the action with the United States Fish

and Wildlife Service, in accordance

with the Endangered Species Act. That

consultation has been completed, and,

as a result, the proposed action has been

limited to Rhododendron imported from

Europe only. This extension of the

comment period will allow interested

groups and individuals with additional

time to prepare comments on the

proposal.

DATES: Consideration will be given only

to comments received on or before July

30, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Please send an original and

three copies of your comments to

Docket No. 89–154–3, Regulatory

Analysis and Development, PPD,

APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road,

Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. Please state

that your comments refer to Docket No.

89–154–3. Comments received may be

inspected at USDA, room 1141, South

Building, 14th Street and Independence

Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between

8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except holidays. Persons

wishing to inspect comments are

requested to call ahead on (202) 690–

2817 to facilitate entry into the

comment reading room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Pete M. Grosser, Senior Import

Specialist, PIMT, PPQ, APHIS, 4700

River Road Unit 140, Riverdale, MD

20737–1236; (301) 734–6799.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On September 7, 1993, we published

in the Federal Register a proposed rule

(58 FR 47074–47084, Docket No. 89–

154–1) to allow the importation of five

genera of plants established in growing

media. That proposal is referred to

below as ‘‘the proposed rule.’’ We

accepted comments on the proposed

rule for a period of 90 days, ending

December 6, 1993.

In a final rule published in the

Federal Register on January 13, 1995,

and effective on February 13, 1995 (60

FR 3067–3078, Docket No. 89–154–2),

the Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) finalized provisions for

the importation of Alstroemeria,

Ananas, Anthurium, and Nidularium.

The final rule postponed action on

Rhododendron established in growing

media.

On April 30, 1998, we published in

the Federal Register (63 FR 23683–

23685, Docket No. 89–154–3) a notice

reopening and extending the comment

period on the proposal to allow the

importation of Rhododendron

established in growing media. Final

action on the initial proposal had been

deferred to allow consultation regarding

the action with the United States Fish

and Wildlife Service, in accordance

with the Endangered Species Act. That

consultation has been completed, and,

as a result, the notice also announced

APHIS’s intention to limit the proposed

action to Rhododendron imported from

Europe only.
29676 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 / Proposed Rules

Comments were required to be

received on or before June 1, 1998. We

received two requests to extend the

period during which comments will be

accepted. The requests were from trade

organizations. In response, we are

extending the comment period on

Docket No. 89–154–3 until July 30,

1998. This action will allow interested

groups and individuals additional time

to prepare and submit comments.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150dd, 150ee, 150ff,

151–167, 450, 2803, and 2809; 21 U.S.C. 136

and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(c).

Done in Washington, DC, this 27th day of

May 1998.

Charles P. Schwalbe,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 98–14421 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

13 CFR Part 120

Securitization of the Unguaranteed

Portion of Section 7(a) Loans

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Proposed Rule; Correction;

Clarification of Date of Public Hearing.

SUMMARY: This Document corrects the

preamble in the Summary of a proposed

rule published in the Federal Register

on May 18, 1998, regarding a public

hearing on allowing all participating

lenders to securitize the unguaranteed

portions of 7(a) loans (63 FR 27219).

The correction date for the public

hearing is June 16, 1998. Only one

public hearing will be held. It will take

place in the Eisenhower Conference

Room on the 8th floor of the SBA

Headquarters building located at 409

3rd Street SW, Washington, DC 20416.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James W. Hammersley, (202) 205–7505.

Correction

In proposed rule, 63 FR 27219, dated

May 18, 1998, make the following

correction in the Summary section. On

page 27219, in the first column, replace

the second-to-last sentence of the first

paragraph of the Summary section with

the following:

‘‘In addition, SBA is providing notice

of a public hearing set for 2:00 p.m. on

June 16, 1998.’’

Dated: May 27, 1998.

LeAnn M. Oliver,

Acting Associate Administrator for Financial

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 98–14405 Filed 5–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD07–98–009]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulations;

Billy’s Creek, Florida

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to

create regulations governing the

operation of the State Road 80

drawbridge across Billy’s Creek, Fort

Myers, Lee County, Florida. The

proposed regulations would allow the

draw to remain closed permanently. The

bridge has not received an opening

notice since 1987. This action should

accommodate the needs of vehicle

traffic and still provide for the

reasonable needs of navigation.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 31, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be mailed

to Commander (oan) Seventh Coast

Guard District, 909 SE 1st Avenue,

Miami, Florida 33131–3050, or may be

delivered to room 406 at the above

address between 7:30 am and 4:00 p.m.

Monday through Friday, except federal

highways. The telephone number is

(305) 536–4103. Comments will become

part of this docket and will be available

for inspection or copying at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Walt Paskowsky, Project Manager,

Bridge Section, (305) 536–4103.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify the rulemaking

[CGD08–98–009] and the specific

section of this proposal to which each

comment applies, and give the reason

for each comment. The Coast Guard will

consider all comments received during

the comment period. It may change this

proposal in view of the comments

received. The Coast Guard plans no

public hearing. Persons may request a

public hearing by writing to the address

listed in ADDRESSES. The request should

include the reasons why a hearing

would be beneficial. If it determines that

the opportunity for oral presentations

will aid this rulemaking, the Coast

Guard will hold a public hearing at a

time and place announced by a notice

in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

The State Road 80 bridge over Billy’s

Creek near Fort Myers Florida currently

opens with 24 hours advance notice.

However no requests for bridge

openings have been received since 1987.

The Florida Department of

Transportation (DOT) has stated that the

bridge currently handles two lanes of

one way land traffic going into the city,

and that there is no practical way to

reroute traffic around the bridge if it

were opened.

Additionally, the Florida DOT found

that there is no boat traffic in the area

that requires an opening. Therefore, the

Coast Guard has agreed to propose

permanent regulations stating that the

draw need not be opened for the passage

of vessels.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposed rule is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

executive order 12866 and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

order. It has not been reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget under

that order. It is not significant under the

Regulatory policies and procedures of

the Department of Transportation (DOT)

(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). The

Coast Guard expects the economic

impact of this proposal to be so minimal

that a full Regulatory Evaluation under

paragraph 10 e of the regulatory policies

and procedures of DOT is unnecessary

as there has not been a demand for an

opening in the last 10 years.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this rule will

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

‘‘Small entities’’ may include small

businesses and not for profit

organizations that are independently

owned and operated and are not

dominant in their field and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

Because it expects the impact of the

proposal to be minimal, the Coast Guard

certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this

proposal will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities due to the lack

of any vessel traffic in the area that

would require the bridge to be opened.

If, however, you think that your

business or organization qualifies as a

small entity and that this proposed rule

will have a significant economic impact