This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

28641

Vol. 66, No. 101

Thursday, May 24, 2001

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 72

RIN 3150–AG67

List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage

Casks: HI-STAR 100 Revision;

Confirmation of Effective Date

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of

effective date.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is confirming the

effective date of May 29, 2001, for the

direct final rule that appeared in the

Federal Register of March 13, 2001 (66

FR 14483). This direct final rule

amended the NRC’s regulations by

revising the Holtec International HISTAR 100 cask system listing within the

‘‘List of approved spent fuel storage

casks’’ to include Amendment No. 2 to

the Certificate of Compliance (CoC).

DATES: The effective date of May 29,

2001 is confirmed for this direct final

rule.

ADDRESSES: Documents related to this

rulemaking, including comments

received, may be examined at the NRC

Public Document Room, 11555

Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. These

same documents may also be viewed

and downloaded electronically via the

rulemaking website (http://

ruleforum.llnl.gov). For information

about the interactive rulemaking

website, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher

(301) 415–5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stan

Turel, telephone (301) 415–6234, e-mail,

spt@nrc.gov, of the Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

13, 2001 (66 FR 14483), the NRC

published in the Federal Register a

direct final rule amending its

regulations in 10 CFR 72 to revising the

Holtec International HI-STAR 100 cask

system listing within the ‘‘List of

approved spent fuel storage casks’’ to

include Amendment No. 2 to the

Certificate of Compliance (CoC).

Amendment No. 2 revises the HI-STAR

100 cask system Appendix B of the

Technical Specifications (TS), Item

1.4.6, ‘‘Specific Parameters and Analysis

for the Storage Pad and Foundation’’ to

simplify the language of this

specification. The current 60-g limit for

cask drop and tipover events in TS Item

1.4.6 would remain unchanged. This

document confirms the effective date. In

the direct final rule, NRC stated that if

no significant adverse comments were

received, the direct final rule would

become final on the date noted above.

The NRC did not receive any comments

that warranted withdrawal of the direct

final rule. Therefore, this rule will

become effective as scheduled.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day

of May 2001.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Michael T. Lesar,

Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division

of Administrative Services, Office of

Administration.

[FR Doc. 01–13145 Filed 5–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

12 CFR Part 613

RIN 3052–AB90

Eligibility and Scope of Financing

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.

ACTION: Direct final rule with

opportunity to comment.

SUMMARY: The Farm Credit

Administration (FCA) through the FCA

Board (Board) issues a final rule

amending two regulations that govern

eligibility and scope of financing for

farm-related service businesses and nonfarm rural homeowners. The amended

rule implements the decision that the

United States Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia issued on January

19, 1999. As a result of these

amendments, Farm Credit System (FCS

or System) banks and associations that

extend long-term mortgage credit will be

able to finance only necessary capital

structures, equipment and initial

working capital for eligible farm-related

service businesses. Additionally, the

revised rule allows System banks and

associations to finance only homes that

people who live in rural areas own and

occupy as their principal residences.

DATES: Unless we receive significant

adverse comment on or before June 25,

2001, these regulations shall be effective

upon the expiration of 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register

during which either or both Houses of

Congress are in session. We will publish

notice of the effective date in the

Federal Register. If we receive

significant adverse comment on an

amendment, paragraph, or section of

this rule, and that provision may be

addressed separately from the

remainder of the rule, we will withdraw

that amendment, paragraph, or section

and adopt as final those provisions of

the rule that are not subject of a

significant comment. In such a case, we

would then tell you how we expect to

continue further rulemaking on the

provisions that were the subject of

significant adverse comment.

ADDRESSES: You may mail or deliver

written comments to Thomas G.

McKenzie, Director, Regulation and

Policy Division, Office of Policy

Analysis, Farm Credit Administration,

1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean,

Virginia 22102–5090 or send them by

facsimile transmission to (703) 734–

5784. You may also submit comments

by electronic mail to ‘‘regcomm@fca.gov’’ or through the Pending

Regulations section of our Web site at

‘‘www.fca.gov.’’ You may review copies

of all comments that we receive in the

Office of Policy and Analysis, Farm

Credit Administration.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Donnelly, Senior Accountant,

Regulation and Policy Division, Office

of Policy Analysis, Farm Credit

Administration, McLean, VA 22102–

5090, (703) 883–4450, TDD (703) 883–

4444; or Richard A. Katz, Senior

Attorney, Regulatory Enforcement

Division, Office of General Counsel,

Farm Credit Administration, McLean,

VA 22102–5090, (703) 883–4020, TDD

(703) 883–4444.

28642 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 101 / Thursday, May 24, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

1 ‘‘Custom-type services’’ are defined as tasks that

farmers and ranchers can perform for themselves,

but instead hire outside contractors to perform. See

62 FR 4429, 4438 (Jan. 30, 1997).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On January 30, 1997, we adopted new

regulations that govern eligibility and

scope of financing for FCS customers.

See 62 FR 4429. These regulations

expanded the availability of affordable

credit to farmers, ranchers, aquatic

producers and harvesters, processing

and marketing operators, farm-related

businesses, rural homeowners,

cooperatives and rural utilities.

Two commercial bank trade

associations claimed that five of the six

new customer eligibility regulations

violated the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as

amended (Act), and they filed suit in the

United States District Court for the

District of Columbia for a declaratory

judgment and an injunction against the

FCA. The United States District Court

ruled that all of the challenged

regulations complied with the Act and

it granted summary judgment to the

FCA. See Independent Bankers Ass’n of

Am. v. Farm Credit Admin., 986 F.

Supp. 633 (D.D.C. 1997).

The plaintiffs appealed, and the Court

of Appeals ruled that the regulations,

with two exceptions, are consistent with

the Act. See Independent Bankers Ass’n

of Am. v. Farm Credit Admin., 164 F.3d

661 (D.C. Cir., 1999). According to the

appellate court’s ruling, § 613.3020 did

not adequately implement section

1.11(c)(1) of the Act because it did not

specifically limit FCS banks and

associations that extend long-term

mortgage credit to financing necessary

capital structures, equipment, and

initial working capital for eligible farmrelated service businesses. The court

also ruled that § 613.3030 is

inconsistent with the Act because it

allowed System banks and associations

to finance rural homes that are not

owned and occupied by borrowers who

live in rural areas. We amend

§§ 613.3020 and 613.3030 so they

comply with the Court of Appeals’

decision.

II. Farm-Related Service Businesses

The plaintiffs challenged three

aspects of our eligibility regulation for

farm-related service businesses. They

claimed that § 613.3020 violated the Act

because it:

• Repealed provisions in the former

regulation that required System banks

and associations to finance farm-related

business that furnish only ‘‘customtype’’ services1 to farmers and ranchers.

• Failed to sufficiently restrict

lending to businesses that furnished

goods, rather than services to farmers

and ranchers.

• Did not expressly limit loans by

FCS long-term mortgage lenders to

necessary capital structures, equipment

and initial working capital.

Both the district court and appeals

court ruled in the FCA’s favor on the

first two claims. According to both

courts, eligible farm-related service

businesses are not required by the Act

to furnish only custom-type services to

farmers and ranchers. Both courts also

upheld § 613.3020(b)(1), which allows

System banks and associations to

finance eligible businesses that sell

goods to farmers and ranchers if they

derive more than 50 percent of their

income from furnishing these customers

farm-related services.

The Court of Appeals, however, ruled

that section 1.11(c)(1) of the Act

authorizes System mortgage lenders to

finance only necessary capital

structures, equipment and initial

working capital for eligible farm-related

service businesses, and that § 613.3020

failed to implement this statutory

requirement. See 164 F.3d at 667.

Accordingly, we add a new paragraph

(c) at the end of § 613.3020 so this

regulation complies with the appellate

court’s ruling. As amended, § 613.3020

explicitly states that the authority of

System long-term lenders to finance

eligible farm-related service businesses

is limited to necessary capital

structures, equipment, and initial

working capital. Consistent with the

court’s ruling, FCS associations that

extend short- and intermediate-term

credit to farm-related service businesses

under sections 1.10(b) and 2.4(a)(3) of

the Act are not subject to the limitation

in new § 613.3020(c).

III. Rural Housing

The two commercial bank trade

associations also challenged our rural

housing regulation, § 613.3030, because

it did not require eligible borrowers to

occupy rural homes that the System

finances. The Court of Appeals ruled

that § 613.3030 conflicts with the rural

housing provisions of the Act. The court

found that sections 1.11(b)(1) and

2.4(a)(2) of the Act restrict eligibility for

non-farm rural home loans to rural

residents. The court’s ruling also stated

that the legislative history of the Act

supports requiring owner-occupancy of

rural homes as a condition for receiving

credit from System institutions.

We amend § 613.3030 so it conforms

to the appellate court’s ruling. A

revision to the definition of ‘‘rural

homeowner’’ in § 613.3030(a)(1)

explicitly requires an eligible rural

homeowner to reside in a rural area.

Additionally, we modify the definition

of ‘‘rural home’’ in § 613.3030(a)(2) so

this regulation authorizes System banks

and associations to finance only rural

homes that each borrower owns and

occupies. The revised regulation also

retains the requirement that the System

will finance only a rural home that is

the principal residence of the borrower.

IV. Direct Final Rule

We are amending §§ 613.3020 and

613.3030 by a direct final rulemaking.

The Administrative Procedure Act, 5

U.S.C. 551–59, et seq. (APA), supports

direct final rulemaking, which is a

streamlined technique for Federal

agencies to enact noncontroversial

regulations on an expedited basis,

without the usual notice and comment

period. This process enables us to

reduce the time and resources we need

to develop, review, clear, and publish a

final rule while still affording the public

an adequate opportunity to comment or

object to the rule.

In a direct final rulemaking, we notify

the public that the rule will become

final on a specified future date unless

we receive significant adverse comment

during the comment period. If we

receive significant adverse comment on

an amendment, paragraph, or section of

this rule, and that provision may be

addressed separately from the

remainder of the rule, we will withdraw

that amendment, paragraph, or section

and adopt as final those provisions of

the rule that are not subject of a

significant comment. In such a case, we

would then tell you how we expect to

continue further rulemaking on the

provisions that were the subject of

significant adverse comment.

A significant adverse comment is one

where the commenter explains why the

rule would be inappropriate (including

challenges to its underlying premise or

approach), ineffective, or unacceptable

without a change. In general, a

significant adverse comment would

raise an issue serious enough to warrant

a substantive response from the agency

in a notice-and-comment proceeding.

Direct final rulemaking is justified

under section 553(b)(B) of the APA.

Section 553(b)(B) is the APA’s ‘‘good

cause’’ exemption that allows an agency

to omit notice and comment on a rule

when it finds ‘‘that notice and public

procedure thereon are impracticable,

unnecessary, or contrary to the public

interest.’’ In direct final rulemaking, the

agency finds that the rule is sufficiently

straightforward and noncontroversial to

make normal notice and comment

unnecessary under the APA. However,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 101 / Thursday, May 24, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28643

rather than eliminating public comment

altogether, which is permissible under

section 553(b)(B), the agency gives the

public an opportunity to respond to the

agency’s conclusion that public input

on the rule is unnecessary.

We believe that a direct final

rulemaking is the appropriate method

for amending the eligibility regulations

to conform to the Court of Appeals’

ruling on farm-related service

businesses and rural housing. These two

regulations should no longer be

controversial because we have

addressed the policy issues in an

extensive rulemaking that included two

comment periods and the Court of

Appeals resolved the ensuing legal

dispute. This direct final rule brings

§§ 613.3020 and 613.3030 into full

compliance with the appellate court’s

ruling. Under the circumstances, we

believe that an expedited rulemaking to

amend §§ 613.3020 and 613.3030 is in

the best interest of the FCS, the

borrowers who own System institutions,

commercial banks, and rural America.

For these reasons, we do not

anticipate significant adverse comment

on this direct final eligibility rule. If,

however, we receive significant adverse

comment during the comment period,

we will publish a notice of withdrawal

of the relevant provisions of this rule

that will also indicate how further

rulemaking will proceed. If we receive

no significant adverse comment, we will

publish our customary notice of the

effective date of the rule following the

required Congressional waiting period

under section 5.17(c)(1) of the Act.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 613

Agriculture, Banks, Banking, Credit,

Rural areas.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, part 613 of chapter VI, title 12

of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 613—ELIGIBILITY AND SCOPE

OF FINANCING

1. The authority citation for part 613

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 1.5, 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11,

2.2, 2.4, 2.12, 3.1, 3.7, 3.8, 3.22, 4.18A, 4.25,

4.26, 4.27, 5.9, 5.17 of the Farm Credit Act

(12 U.S.C. 2013, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019,

2073, 2075, 2093, 2122, 2128, 2129, 2143,

2206a, 2211, 2212, 2213, 2243, 2252).

Subpart A—Financing Under Titles I

and II of the Farm Credit Act

2. Amend § 613.3020 by adding a new

paragraph (c) to read as follows:

§ 613.3020 Financing for farm-related

service businesses.

* * * * *

(c) Limitation. The authority of Farm

Credit banks and associations operating

under section 1.7(a) of the Act to

finance eligible farm-related service

businesses under paragraphs (b)(1) and

(b)(2) of this section is limited to

necessary capital structures, equipment,

and initial working capital.

§ 613.3030 [Amended]

3. Amend § 613.3030 as follows:

a. Add the words ‘‘resides in a rural

area and’’ after the word ‘‘who’’ and

before the word ‘‘is’’ in paragraph (a)(1);

and

b. Remove the words ‘‘the occupant’s’’

in paragraph (a)(2) and add in its place

the words ‘‘owned and occupied as the

rural homeowner’s’’.

Dated: May 18, 2001.

Kelly Mikel Williams,

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.

[FR Doc. 01–13132 Filed 5–23–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6705–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–85–AD; Amendment

39–12236; AD 2001–10–10]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–81, –82, –83, and

–87 Series Airplanes, and Model MD–

88 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–81, –82, –83, and

–87 series airplanes, and Model MD–88

airplanes. This action requires an

inspection of the wiring of the primary

and alternate static port heaters for

chafing, loose connections, and

evidence of arcing, and to determine

what type of insulation blanket is

installed in the area of the static port

heaters; and corrective actions, if

necessary. This action is necessary to

ensure that insulation blankets

constructed of metallized MylarTM are

removed or protected from the area of

the static port heater. Such insulation

blankets could propagate a small fire

that is the result of an electrical short of

the static port heater and could lead to

a much larger fire and smoke in the

cabin. This action is intended to address

the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective June 8, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 8,

2001.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

85–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. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9–

anm–iarcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–85–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach

Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,

Long Beach, California 90846,

Attention: Data and Service

Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–

0024). This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elvin Wheeler, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5344;

fax (562) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of

its practice of re-examining all aspects

of the service experience of a particular

aircraft whenever an accident occurs,

the FAA has become aware of an

incident of smoke in the cabin on a

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–88

airplane. An investigation discovered