Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 27861

8 62 FR 47792, 47793 (September 11, 1999).

Among other duties, the Commission authorized

NFA to receive requests for confirmation of Rule

30.10 relief on behalf of particular firms, to verify

such firms’ fitness and compliance with the

conditions of the appropriate Rule 30.10 Order and

to grant exemptive relief from registration to

qualifying firms.

The eligibility of any firm to seek

relief under this exemptive Order is

subject to the following conditions:

(1) The regulatory or self-regulatory

organization responsible for monitoring the

compliance of such firms with the regulatory

requirements described in the Rule 30.10

petition must represent in writing to the

CFTC that:

(a) Each firm for which relief is sought is

registered, licensed or authorized, as

appropriate, and is otherwise in good

standing under the standards in place in

Manitoba; such firm is engaged in business

with customers in Manitoba as well as in the

U.S.; and such firm and its principals and

employees who engage in activities subject to

Part 30 would not be statutorily disqualified

from registration under Section 8a(2) of the

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 12(a)(2);

(b) It will monitor firms to which relief is

granted for compliance with the regulatory

requirements for which substituted

compliance is accepted and will promptly

notify the Commission or NFA of any change

in status of a firm that would affect its

continued eligibility for the exemption

granted hereunder, including the termination

of its activities in the U.S.;

(c) All transactions with respect to

customers made in the U.S. will be made on

or subject to the rules of WCE and the

Commission will receive prompt notice of all

material changes to the relevant laws in

Manitoba, any rules promulgated thereunder

and WCE rules;

(d) Customers located in the U.S. will be

provided no less stringent regulatory

protection than Canadian customers under

all relevant provisions of Manitoba law; and

(e) It will cooperate with the Commission

with respect to any inquiries concerning any

activity subject to regulation under the Part

30 rules, including sharing the information

specified in Appendix A on an ‘‘as needed’’

basis and will use its best efforts to notify the

Commission if it becomes aware of any

information that in its judgment affects the

financial or operational viability of a member

firm doing business in the U.S. under the

exemption granted by this Order.

(2) Each firm seeking relief hereunder

must represent in writing that it:

(a) Is located outside the U.S., its territories

and possessions, and where applicable, has

subsidiaries or affiliates domiciled in the

U.S. with a related business (e.g., banks and

broker/dealer affiliates) along with a brief

description of each subsidiary’s or affiliate’s

identity and principal business in the U.S.;

(b) Consents to jurisdiction in the U.S.

under the Act by filing a valid and binding

appointment of an agent in the U.S. for

service of process in accordance with the

requirements set forth in Rule 30.5;

(c) Agrees to provide access to its books

and records related to transactions under Part

30 required to be maintained under the

applicable statutes and regulations in effect

in Manitoba upon the request of any

representative of the Commission or U.S.

Department of Justice at the place in the U.S.

designated by such representative, within 72

hours, or such lesser period of time as

specified by that representative as may be

reasonable under the circumstances after

notice of the request;

(d) Has no principal, or employee who

solicits or accepts orders from customers

located in the U.S., who would be

disqualified from directly applying to do

business in the U.S. under Section 8a(2) of

the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 12(a)(2), and will notify

the Commission promptly of any change in

that representation based on a change in

control as generally defined in Rule 3.32;

(e) Consents to participate in any NFA

arbitration program that offers a procedure

for resolving customer disputes on the papers

where such disputes involve representations

or activities with respect to transactions

under Part 30, even in circumstances where

the claim involves a matter arising primarily

out of delivery, clearing, settlement or floor

practices, and consents to notify customers

located in the U.S. of the availability of such

a program;

(f) Agrees to maintain, on behalf of

customers located in the U.S., funds

equivalent to the ‘‘foreign futures and foreign

options secured amount’’ described in Rule

1.3(rr), in a separate account as set forth in

Rule 30.7, and to treat those funds in the

manner described by that rule; and

(g) Undertakes to comply with the

applicable provisions of Manitoba laws and

WCE rules that form the basis upon which

this exemption from certain provisions of the

Act and rules thereunder is granted.

As set forth in the Commission’s

September 11, 1997 Order delegating to

NFA certain responsibilities, the written

representations set forth in paragraph

(2) shall be filed with NFA.8 Each firm

seeking relief hereunder has an ongoing

obligation to notify NFA should there be

a material change to any of the

representations required in the firm’s

application for relief.

This Order will become effective as to

any designated WCE member firm the

later of the date of publication of the

Order in the Federal Register or the

filing of the consents set forth in

paragraph (2). Upon filing of the notice

required under paragraph (1)(b) as to

any such firm, the relief granted by this

Order may be suspended immediately

as to that firm. That suspension will

remain in effect pending further notice

by the Commission, or the

Commission’s designee, to the firm and

WCE.

This Order is issued pursuant to Rule

30.10 based on the comparability

representations made and supporting

material provided to the Commission

and the recommendation of the staff,

and is made effective as to any firm

granted relief hereunder based upon the

filings and representations of such firms

required hereunder. Any material

changes or omissions in the facts and

circumstances pursuant to which this

Order is granted might require the

Commission to reconsider its finding

that the standards for relief set forth in

Rule 30.10 and, in particular, Appendix

A, have generally been satisfied.

Further, if experience demonstrates that

the continued effectiveness of this Order

in general, or with respect to a

particular firm, would be contrary to

public policy or the public interest, or

that the systems in place for the

exchange of information or other

circumstances do not warrant

continuation of the exemptive relief

granted herein, the Commission may

condition, modify, suspend, terminate,

withhold as to a specific firm, or

otherwise restrict the exemptive relief

granted in this Order, as appropriate, on

its own motion.

The Commission will continue to

monitor the implementation of its

program to exempt firms located in

jurisdictions generally deemed to have a

comparable regulatory program from the

application of certain of the foreign

futures and option rules and will make

necessary adjustments if appropriate.

Issued in Washington, DC on May 15,

2001.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 01–12696 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P

NATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION AND

PRIVACY COMPACT COUNCIL

28 CFR Chapter IX

[NCPPC 100–F]

Fingerprint Submission Requirements

AGENCY: National Crime Prevention and

Privacy Compact Council.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Compact Council,

established pursuant to the National

Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact

(Compact), is publishing a rule

interpreting the Compact’s fingerprintsubmission requirements as they relate

to the use of the Interstate Identification

Index (III) for noncriminal justice record

checks during an emergency situation

when the health and safety of a

specified group may be endangered.

Pursuant to the rule, the Compact

Council has approved a proposal from a

state requesting the delayed submission

27862 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

of fingerprints in connection with

criminal history records searches

conducted for the purpose of the

emergency placement of children with

temporary custodians. The Council’s

approval of such a state request is being

published in the Notice section of

today’s Federal Register.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective May 21, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Wilbur Rehmann, Compact Council

Chairman, Montana Department of

Justice, 303 North Roberts, 4th Floor,

Post Office Box 201406, Helena,

Montana 59620–1406, telephone

number (406) 444–6194.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

National Crime Prevention and Privacy

Compact, 42 U.S.C. 14611–16,

establishes uniform standards and

processes for the interstate and federalstate exchange of criminal history

records for noncriminal justice

purposes. The Compact was signed into

law on October 9, 1998, (Pub. L. 105–

251) and became effective on April 28,

1999 when ratified by the second State.

Background

The Compact requires that subject’s

fingerprints or other approved forms of

positive identification ‘‘shall be

submitted with all requests for criminal

history record checks for noncriminal

justice purposes.’’ See 42 U.S.C. 14616,

Article V (a). The Compact Council

recognizes the extreme reliability of

fingerprint-based identifications and

believes that the above quoted provision

requires that, whenever feasible,

fingerprints should be submitted

contemporaneously with search

requests. However, the Council

acknowledges that there are exigent

circumstances in which time is a critical

factor in decision making and in which

the immediate fingerprinting of the

subject is not feasible. In such

emergency circumstances, the Council

believes that the Compact permits

preliminary name searches of the III

System to be conducted for noncriminal

justice purposes, provided that subject’s

fingerprints are obtained and submitted

at the earliest time feasible. This

procedure allows access to criminal

history record information in a timely

manner in exigent circumstances with

follow-up positive identification

assured by fingerprint submissions.

The rule published herein authorizes

state criminal history record repositories

and the FBI, upon approval by the

Compact Council, to grant access to the

III System in emergency situations on a

delayed fingerprint submission basis,

predicated upon a statute approved by

the U.S. Attorney General pursuant to

Pub. L. 92–544 and Article III (c) of the

Compact. Access authorized by the rule

shall adhere to both the Criminal Justice

Information Services Security Policy

and applicable state security policies. A

noncriminal justice agency granted

access to the III must adhere to

applicable federal and state audit

protocols. Violation and/or misuse of

the authorized access granted may result

in sanctions from the Compact Council,

which may include the discontinuance

of services.

Proposals to the Compact Council for

granting of delayed fingerprint

submission under the rule should be

sent to the Compact Council Chairman

at the address set out above. Such

proposals should include information

sufficient to fully describe the

emergency nature of the situation in

which delayed submission authority is

being sought, the risk to the health or

safety of the individuals involved, and

the reasons why the submission of

fingerprints contemporaneously with

the search request is not feasible.

The rule (Sec. 901.3) provides that

once a proposal from any state has been

approved by the Compact Council, other

states may apply for delayed submission

authority consistent with that approved

proposal through application to the

FBI’s Compact Officer. For example,

applications for such authority dealing

with the emergency placement of

children, a proposal for which has been

approved by the Council in a notice

published separately in today’s Federal

Register, may be filed with the FBI’s

Compact Officer rather than with the

Council Chairman.

Administrative Procedures and

Executive Orders

Administrative Procedures Act

This rule is published by the Compact

Council as authorized by the National

Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact

(Compact), an interstate/federal compact

which was approved and enacted into

law by Congress pursuant to Pub. L.

105–251. The Compact Council is

composed of 15 members (with 11 state

and local governmental representatives),

and is authorized by the Compact to

promulgate rules and procedures for the

effective and proper use of the Interstate

Identification Index (III) System for

noncriminal justice purposes. The

Compact specifically provides that the

Council shall prescribe rules and

procedures for the effective and proper

use of the III System for noncriminal

justice purposes, and mandates that

such rules, procedures, or standards

established by the Council shall be

published in the Federal Register. See

42 U.S.C. 14616, Articles II(4) and

VI(a)(1), (e). This publication complies

with those requirements.

Executive Order 12866

The Compact Council is not an

executive department or independent

regulatory agency as defined in 44

U.S.C. 3502; accordingly, Executive

Order 12866 is not applicable.

Executive Order 13132

The Compact Council is not an

executive department or independent

regulatory agency as defined in 44

U.S.C. 3502; accordingly, Executive

Order 13132 is not applicable.

Nonetheless, this Rule fully complies

with the intent that the national

government should be deferential to the

States when taking action that affects

the policymaking discretion of the

States.

Executive Order 12988

The Compact Council is not an

executive agency or independent

establishment as defined in 5 U.S.C.

105; accordingly, Executive Order 12988

is not applicable.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Approximately 75 percent of the

Compact Council members are

representatives of state and local

governments; accordingly, rules

prescribed by the Compact Council are

not Federal mandates. Accordingly, no

actions are deemed necessary under the

provisions of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996

The Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act (Title 5,

U.S.C. 801–804) is not applicable to the

Council’s rule because the Compact

Council is not a ‘‘Federal agency’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(1). Likewise,

the reporting requirement of the

Congressional Review Act (Subtitle E of

the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act) does not

apply. See 5 U.S.C. 804.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 901

Crime, Health, Privacy, Safety.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth

above, and by the authority vested in

the National Crime Prevention and

Privacy Compact, Title 28 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended by

establishing a new chapter IX consisting

of Part 901 to read as follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 27863

CHAPTER IX—NATIONAL CRIME

PREVENTION AND PRIVACY COMPACT

COUNCIL

Part

901 Fingerprint Submission Requirements

PART 901—FINGERPRINT

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Sec.

901.1 Purpose and authority.

901.2 Interpretation of fingerprint

submission requirements.

901.3 Approval of delayed fingerprint

submission request.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 14616.

PART 901—FINGERPRINT

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

§ 901.1 Purpose and authority.

The Compact Council is established

pursuant to the National Crime

Prevention and Privacy Compact

(Compact), Title 42, U.S.C., Chapter 140,

Subchapter II, Section 14616. The

purpose of these provisions is to

interpret the Compact, as it applies to

the required submission of fingerprints,

along with requests for Interstate

Identification Index (III) records, by

agencies authorized to access and

receive criminal history records under

Public Law 92–544, and to establish

protocols and procedures applicable to

the III and its use for noncriminal

justice purposes.

§ 901.2 Interpretation of fingerprint

submission requirements.

(a) Article V of the Compact requires

the submission of fingerprints or other

approved forms of positive

identification with requests for criminal

history record checks for noncriminal

justice purposes. The Compact Council

finds that the requirement for the

submission of fingerprints may be

satisfied in two ways:

(1) The fingerprints should be

submitted contemporaneously with the

request for criminal history information,

or

(2) For purposes approved by the

Compact Council, a delayed submission

of fingerprints may be permissible

under exigent circumstances.

(b) The Compact Council further finds

that a preliminary III name based check

may be made pending the receipt of the

delayed submission of the fingerprints.

The state repository may authorize

terminal access to authorized agencies

designated by the state, to enable them

to conduct such checks. Such access

must be made pursuant to the security

policy set forth by the state’s Control

Terminal Agency.

§ 901.3 Approval of delayed fingerprint

submission request.

(a) A State may, based upon exigent

circumstances, apply for delayed

submission of fingerprints supporting

requests for III records by agencies

authorized to access and receive

criminal history records under Public

Law 92–544. Such applications must be

sent to the Compact Council Chairman

and include information sufficient to

fully describe the emergency nature of

the situation in which delayed

submission authority is being sought,

the risk to health and safety of the

individuals involved, and the reasons

why the submission of fingerprints

contemporaneously with the search

request is not feasible.

(b) In evaluating requests for delayed

submissions, the Compact Council must

utilize the following criteria:

(1) The risk to health and safety; and

(2) The emergency nature of the

request.

Upon approval of the application by

the Compact Council, the authorized

agency may conduct a III name check

pending submission of the fingerprints.

The fingerprints must be submitted

within the time frame specified by the

Compact Council.

(c) Once a specific proposal has been

approved by the Compact Council,

another state may apply for delayed

fingerprint submission consistent with

the approved proposal, provided that

the state has a related Public Law 92–

544 approved state statute, by

submitting the application to the FBI’s

Compact Officer.

Dated: May 3, 2001.

Wilbur Rehmann,

Compact Council Chairman.

[FR Doc. 01–12533 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–02–U

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

30 CFR Part 57

RIN 1219–AB11

Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure of

Underground Metal and Nonmetal

Miners; Delay of Effective Dates

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health

Administration (MSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective

dates and conforming amendments.

SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health

Administration is delaying for 45 days

the effective date of the rule entitled,

‘‘Diesel Particulate Matter Exposure of

Underground Metal and Nonmetal

Miners,’’ published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 2001 (66 FR

5706). This temporary delay will allow

the Department an opportunity to

engage in further negotiations to settle

the legal challenges to this rule.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of the

rule amending 30 CFR Part 57 published

on January 19, 2001, at 66 FR 5706 and

delayed on March 15, 2001 at 66 FR

15032, is further delayed from May 21,

2001, until July 5, 2001. The

amendment to § 57.5067 in this final

rule will become effective July 5, 2001.

However, § 57.5060(a) will continue to

apply on July 19, 2002, and § 57.5060(b)

will continue to apply on January 19,

2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David L. Meyer, Director; Office of

Standards, Regulations, and Variances;

MSHA, 4015 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, Virginia 22203–1984. Mr.

Meyer can be reached at MeyerDavid@msha.gov (E-mail), 703–235–

1910 (Voice), or 703–235–5551 (Fax).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 19, 2001, MSHA published a

final rule addressing the exposure of

underground metal and nonmetal

miners to diesel particulate matter

(dpm). The final rule establishes new

health standards for underground metal

and nonmetal mines that use equipment

powered by diesel engines and requires

operators of these underground mines to

train miners about the hazards of being

exposed to diesel particulate matter. In

accordance with the January 20, 2001,

memorandum from Andrew H. Card,

MSHA announced a 60-day delay of the

effective date of certain provisions of

the final regulations to permit the

Secretary of Labor to further consider

the provisions of the rule. An additional

delay of 45 days to July 5, 2001 is

necessary to give the parties an

opportunity to continue negotiations to

settle the legal challenge to the rule

described below.

On January 29, 2001, Anglogold

(Jerritt Canyon) Corp. and Kennecott

Greens Creek Mining Company filed a

petition for review of the rule in the

District of Columbia Circuit. On

February 7, 2001, the Georgia Mining

Association, the National Mining

Association, the Salt Institute, and

MARG Diesel Coalition filed a similar

petition in the Eleventh Circuit. On

March 14, 2001, Getchell Gold

Corporation petitioned for review of the

rule in the District of Columbia Circuit.

The three petitions have been

consolidated and are pending in the

District of Columbia Circuit. The United

Steelworkers of America (USWA) has