63612 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

PART 959—ONIONS GROWN IN

SOUTH TEXAS

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 959 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 959.236 is revised to read

as follows:

Note: This section will not appear in the

Code of Federal Regulations.

§ 959.236 Expenses and assessment rate.

Expenses of $585,250 by the South

Texas Onion Committee are authorized

and an assessment rate of $0.10 per 50-

pound container or equivalent of onions

is established for the fiscal period

ending July 31, 1996. Unexpended

funds may be carried over as a reserve.

Dated: December 6, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–30232 Filed 12–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 1004

[Docket No. AO–160–A71; DA–93–30]

Milk in the Middle Atlantic Marketing

Area; Correction

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document removes the

suspension action (DA–95–24) issued

on August 17, 1995, and published in

the Federal Register on August 24, 1995

(60 FR 43953) in effect under the

Middle Atlantic order through February

1996. The suspension is no longer

needed because an amended order for

that market became effective on

December 1, 1995 (60 FR 55309).

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 12, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gino M. Tosi, Marketing Specialist,

USDA/AMS/Dairy Division, Order

Formulation Branch, room 2971, South

Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456 (202) 690–1366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

This correction ensures that a

suspension scheduled to continue

through February 1996 will be removed.

The suspension was issued August 17,

1995, and published in the August 24,

1995, Federal Register (60 FR 43953).

The provisions affected by the

suspension (sections 1004.7 and

1004.12) have been amended, making

the suspension unnecessary.

This document removes the

suspension action (60 FR 43953) and

ensures that the Code of Federal

Regulations will reflect only the

amended language (and not the

suspended language in the two

aforementioned sections of the Middle

Atlantic order).

Therefore, under the authority of 7

U.S.C. 601–674, the suspension of

provisions of 7 CFR part 1004,

published in the Federal Register on

August 24, 1995 (60 FR 43953), is lifted

effective December 12, 1995.

Dated: December 6, 1995.

Shirley R. Watkins,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Marketing and

Regulatory Programs.

[FR Doc. 95–30231 Filed 12–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 1099

[DA–95–27]

Milk in the Paducah, KY, Marketing

Area; Termination of Certain

Provisions of the Order

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document terminates the

remaining administrative provisions of

the Paducah, Kentucky, Federal milk

marketing order (Order 99), effective

upon publication in the Federal

Register. All of the monthly operating

provisions were terminated as of

November 1, 1995, since the terms and

provisions of the order no longer

effectuated the declared policy of the

Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 22, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nicholas Memoli, Marketing Specialist,

USDA/AMS/Dairy Division, Order

Formulation Branch, Room 2971, South

Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456 (202) 690–1932.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior

documents in this proceeding:

Termination Order: Issued October 23,

1995; published October 31, 1995 (60

FR 55179).

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601–612) requires the Agency to

examine the impact of a proposed rule

on small entities. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the Administrator of the

Agricultural Marketing Service has

certified that this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

This rule terminates the remaining

administrative provisions of the

Paducah, Kentucky, order.

The Department is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12778, Civil

Justice Reform. This rule is not intended

to have a retroactive effect. This rule

will not preempt any state or local laws,

regulations, or policies, unless they

present an irreconcilable conflict with

the rule.

The Agricultural Marketing

Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7

U.S.C. 601–674), provides that

administrative proceedings must be

exhausted before parties may file suit in

court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the

Act, any handler subject to an order may

file with the Secretary a petition stating

that the order, any provisions of the

order, or any obligation imposed in

connection with the order is not in

accordance with law and request a

modification of an order or to be

exempted from the order. A handler is

afforded the opportunity for a hearing

on the petition. After a hearing, the

Secretary would rule on the petition.

The Act provides that the district court

of the United States in any district in

which the handler is an inhabitant, or

has its principal place of business, has

jurisdiction in equity to review the

Secretary’s ruling on the petition,

provided a bill in equity is filed not

later than 20 days after the date of the

entry of the ruling.

A comment period was not provided

since there were no interested parties

affected by the termination order.

It is hereby found and determined

that § 1099.1 of the Paducah, Kentucky,

order does not effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

Statement of Consideration

This rule terminates the remaining

administrative provisions of the

Paducah, Kentucky, Federal milk order.

There currently are no handlers

regulated under the Paducah, Kentucky,

order. Turner Dairies, the one handler

that was regulated under Order 99,

became regulated under the Southeast

order on September 1, 1995, because of

its greater sales into that marketing area.

Producers who ship their milk to

Turner’s Fulton, Kentucky, plant now

have their milk pooled under the

adjacent Southeast Federal milk order.

Since there were no plants regulated

under the Paducah, Kentucky, order, all

of the monthly operating provisions

were terminated as of November 1,

1995. However, the termination order

left intact certain administrative

provisions that were embodied, by

reference, in § 1099.1 of the order.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 12, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 63613

The market administrator, in his

capacity as the order’s liquidating agent,

has completed the disbursement of all of

the money remaining in the

administrative, producer-settlement,

and marketing service funds established

under the order. Hence, the remaining

provisions of the order should be

terminated.

Therefore, the aforesaid provisions of

§ 1099.1 of the order are hereby

terminated.

For good cause shown, this rule shall

be effective December 22, 1995. Neither

a comment period nor a 30-day effective

date is provided in that all other

provisions of the order were terminated

effective November 1, 1995, and no

parties are affected by this action.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1099

Milk marketing orders.

PART 1099—MILK IN THE PADUCAH,

KENTUCKY MARKETING AREA

[REMOVED]

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble and under the authority 7

U.S.C. 601–674, 7 CFR part 1099 is

removed

Dated: December 4, 1995.

Shirley R. Watkins,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Marketing and

Regulatory Programs.

[FR Doc. 95–30095 Filed 12–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION

ADMINISTRATION

12 CFR Part 701

Technical Amendments; Organization

and Operation of Federal Credit

Unions; Correction

AGENCY: National Credit Union

Administration (NCUA).

ACTION: Correction to final regulation.

SUMMARY: This document corrects an

inadvertent error in an amendatory

instruction to the final regulations

which were published Tuesday,

November 28, 1995 (60 FR 58502). The

regulations consolidated all current

regulations and requirements that apply

to federally insured state-chartered

credit unions in one place, the

regulations on requirements for

insurance. The error occurred in one of

the conforming technical amendments.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 29, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Hattie M. Ulan, Special Counsel to the

General Counsel, 1775 Duke Street,

Alexandria, VA 22314, or telephone

(703) 518–6544.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register published on

November 28, 1995, there was an

inadvertent error in an amendatory

instruction to the final regulation. The

final regulations concern requirements

for insurance. However, the error was

contained in the instruction for a

technical amendment to § 701.21—

Loans to members and lines of credit to

members. This correction is being made

in order to ensure that the final

regulation is published correctly in the

Code of Federal Regulations.

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication on

November 28, 1995 of the final

regulations which were the subject of

FR Doc. 95–28703, is corrected as

follows:

§ 701.21 [Corrected]

On page 58504, column one, the

second line of amendatory instruction

3., the word ‘‘fourth’’ is corrected to

read ‘‘fifth’’.

Becky Baker,

Secretary, NCUA Board.

[FR Doc. 95–30178 Filed 12–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7535–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–236–AD; Amendment

39–9457; AD 95–25–11]

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa

Brasileira de Aeronautica, S.A.

(EMBRAER) Model EMB–120 Series

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 all EMBRAER Model

EMB–120 series airplanes. This action

requires revising the FAA-approved

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to limit

the revolutions per minute (RPM) of the

propeller during ground operation, and

removing and installing a new placard.

This AD also requires revising the FAAapproved maintenance program to limit

the maximum RPM of the propeller

during ground operations. This

amendment is prompted by reports of

failures of in-service propellers and

subsequent testing, which revealed that

operating the propeller at or near certain

nominal propeller RPM produces high

vibration stress. The actions specified in

this AD are intended to limit exposure

to high vibration stresses during ground

operations under certain weather

conditions; this situation could

accelerate fatigue cracking if corrosion

is present in the propeller, which could

lead to the failure of the propeller and

subsequent reduced controllability of

the airplane.

DATES: Effective December 27, 1995.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

February 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

236–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Information concerning this

amendment may be obtained from or

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification

Office, Small Airplane Directorate,

Campus Building, 1701 Columbia

Avenue, Suite 2–160, College Park,

Georgia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carla J.W. Worthey, Aerospace

Engineer, Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, Small Airplane

Directorate, Campus Building, 1701

Columbia Avenue, Suite 2–160, College

Park, Georgia 30337–2748; telephone

(404) 305–7364; fax (404) 305–7348.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

has received reports of failures of inservice Hamilton Standard 14RF, 14SF,

and 6/5500/F series propellers. Result of

inspections have revealed internal

corrosion in the taper bore and external

damage to the shank section on these

propellers. Such internal corrosion or

external damage reduces the design

allowable stress levels of the propeller

material. Further inspections revealed

that the corrosion and damage is evenly

distributed amongst the subject

propellers. However, fracturing has

occurred predominately on the

Hamilton Standard 14RF series

propellers installed on EMBRAER

Model EMB–120 series airplanes. This

disparity has prompted an investigation

into operational differences between the

airplanes utilizing these propellers.

A vibration/loads survey and analysis

was conducted by Hamilton Standard

on the Hamilton Standard 14RF series

propellers installed on EMBRAER

Model EMB–120 series airplanes. The

survey and analysis results verified that

high vibration stresses could occur on