Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 9297

agency stated that the name of the

Dermatologic Drugs Advisory

Committee had been changed to the

Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Drugs

Advisory Committee. In this document,

FDA is formally changing the name and

the function of the committee.

Under the Administrative Procedure

Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3) and (d)) and

under 21 CFR 10.40(c)(4), (d), and (e),

notice and public procedure and

delayed effective date on this regulation

are unnecessary and not in the public

interest. The regulation relates to agency

organization and procedure.

Furthermore, the agency finds good

cause to proceed to an immediately

effective rule. It would be contrary to

the public interest to delay notice to the

public and embodiment in the

regulations of the administrative change

regarding review of information on

ophthalmic disorders by the

appropriately constituted advisory

committee.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 14

Administrative practice and

procedure, Advisory committees, Color

additives, Drugs, Radiation protection.

Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under

authority delegated to the Commissioner

of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 14 is

amended as follows:

PART 14—PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE

A PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR

part 14 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 201–903 of the Federal

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.

321–394; 21 U.S.C. 41–50, 141–149, 467f,

679, 821, 1034; secs. 2, 351, 354, 361 of the

Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201,

262, 263b, 264); secs. 2–12 of the Fair

Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 1451–

1461); 5 U.S.C. App. 2; 28 U.S.C. 2112.

2. Section 14.100 is amended by

revising paragraph (c)(2)(ii), the heading

of paragraph (c)(6), and paragraph

(c)(6)(ii) to read as follows:

§ 14.100 List of standing advisory

committees.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) Function: Reviews and evaluates

available data concerning the safety and

effectiveness of marketed and

investigational human drug products for

use in the treatment of infectious

diseases and disorders.

* * * * *

(6) Dermatologic and Ophthalmic

Drugs Advisory Committee.

* * * * *

(ii) Function: Reviews and evaluates

available data concerning the safety and

effectiveness of marketed and

investigational human drug products for

use in the treatment of dermatologic and

ophthalmic disorders.

* * * * *

Dated: February 14, 1995.

Linda A. Suydam,

Interim Deputy Commissioner for Operations.

[FR Doc. 95–4196 Filed 2–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Housing-Federal Housing

Commissioner

24 CFR Parts 207, 213, 221, and 236

[Docket No. R–95–1660; FR–3342–F–03]

RIN 2502–AG04

Deletion of Value Criterion in Section

223(a)(7) Refinancing

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing

Commissioner, HUD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Section 223(a)(7) of the

National Housing Act authorizes HUD

to insure mortgages given to refinance

existing HUD-insured mortgages. In the

past, HUD’s implementing regulations

have prohibited the refinanced mortgage

amount from exceeding a stated

percentage of the value of the property.

This value criterion precluded some

troubled projects from lowering their

debt service payments and gaining a

more sound financial footing. On

October 26, 1993, HUD published an

interim rule in the Federal Register

deleting the value criterion from the

HUD regulations implementing Section

223(a)(7), which was extended by a

notice published on October 26, 1994.

This rule makes final the policies

contained in the October 26, 1993,

interim rule.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 20, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane

Luton, Acting Director, Policies and

Procedures Division, Department of

Housing and Urban Development, 451

Seventh Street, SW., Room 6142,

Washington, DC 20410. Telephone

number (202) 708–2556; and TDD (202)

708–4594. (These are not toll-free

numbers.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 223(a)(7) of the National

Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715n(a)(7)) (the

Act) authorizes HUD to insure

mortgages given to refinance existing

HUD-insured mortgages under any

section or title of the Act. Due to

requirements of the Act, the HUD

regulations implementing Section

223(a)(7) limit the principal amount of

the refinanced mortgage to the amount

of the original insured mortgage.

Additionally, HUD’s implementing

regulations had prohibited the

refinanced mortgage amount from

exceeding a stated percentage of the

Federal Housing Commissioner’s

estimate of value of the project after

completion of any repairs or

improvements to the property. Unlike

the original-value limitation noted

above, this value criterion was not a

statutory requirement.

The value criterion precluded many

troubled projects from refinancing their

HUD-insured mortgages, thus

preventing them from lowering their

debt service payments and gaining a

sounder financial footing. Because

Section 223(a)(7) mortgages are already

limited by the amount of the original

insured mortgage, HUD felt the public

interest and HUD’s Insurance Fund

would be better served by allowing

these loans to be refinanced to take

advantage of lower interest rates.

Therefore, on October 26, 1993, HUD

published an interim rule (58 FR 57558)

removing the value criterion from its

regulations implementing Section

223(a)(7). The effect of the interim rule

was extended by a notice published on

October 26, 1994 (59 FR 53731). This

rule makes final the policies contained

in the October 26, 1993, interim rule.

Comments on the October 26, 1993,

Interim Rule

By the expiration of the comment

period on the October 26, 1993, interim

rule, HUD had received only two

comments, both from the same

commenter.

The first comment addressed the

backlog of applications languishing in

some HUD offices and requested that

HUD Field Offices be notified that

Section 223(a)(7) refinancing

applications already in process should

be given priority over those received

after the effective date of the interim

rule. The preamble to the interim rule

established processing priorities, in

order to better manage the increased

workload anticipated as a result of the

rule change. Supplemental instructions

were provided to HUD Field Office staff

and mortgagees through issuance of

HUD Notice H93–89 and Mortgagee

Letter 93–39, both dated November 24,

1993, addressing processing priorities

and other issues. Inasmuch as the
9298 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

priorities are no longer applicable, HUD

has not adopted the comment in this

final rule.

The interim rule’s preamble refers to

deletion of the 90 percent-of-value

criterion. The commenter noted that

Section 223(a)(7) applications

refinancing loans insured pursuant to

section 223(f) of the Act are subject to

an 85 percent-of-value limitation, in lieu

of 90 percent. The commenter believed

this could cause confusion and

recommended that the rule explicitly

eliminate the 85 percent loan-to-value

limitation. Although the specific

language of the regulatory change is

clear, HUD accepts the commenter’s

suggestion that the explanation of the

change should be clarified to avoid

confusion. Because there are also

instances (in 24 CFR 221.560(a)(1)(iii)

and 24 CFR 236.40(b)(1)(iii)) where the

value criterion limited the maximum

insurable mortgage amount to 100

percent-of-value in lieu of 90 percent or

85 percent, HUD is revising the

preamble simply to state that HUD is

deleting the value criterion in Section

223(a)(7) refinancing.

Other Matters

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Secretary, in accordance with the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), has reviewed this rule before

publication and by approving it certifies

that this rule does not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The rule

deletes a counterproductive restriction

that unnecessarily limits the refinancing

of certain HUD-insured mortgages. By

removing this restriction, HUD hopes to

avoid unnecessary defaults by viable

projects and resulting losses to HUD’s

Insurance Fund.

Environmental Review

In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of

the regulations of the Council on

Environmental Quality and 24 CFR

50.20 of the HUD regulations, the

policies and procedures contained in

this rule relate only to the establishment

of loan limits and approval of mortgage

refinancing under section 223(a)(7) of

the National Housing Act, and,

therefore, are categorically excluded

from the requirements of the National

Environmental Policy Act.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

The General Counsel, as the

Designated Official under section 6(a) of

Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has

determined that the policies contained

in this rule will not have substantial

direct effects on States or their political

subdivisions, or the relationship

between the Federal government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. As a

result, the rule is not subject to review

under the Order. The rule is limited to

removing an unnecessary restriction on

refinancing certain HUD-insured

mortgages at more favorable rates.

Executive Order 12606, The Family

The General Counsel, as the

Designated Official under Executive

Order 12606, The Family, has

determined that this rule does not have

potential for significant impact on

family formation, maintenance, and

general well-being, and, thus, is not

subject to review under the Order. No

significant change in existing HUD

policies or programs would result from

promulgation of this rule, as those

policies and programs relate to family

concerns.

Regulatory Agenda

This rule was listed as sequence 1793

in HUD’s Semiannual Agenda of

Regulations published on November 14,

1994 (59 FR 57632, 57654), under

Executive Order 12866 and the

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects

24 CFR Part 207

Manufactured homes, Mortgage

insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Solar energy.

24 CFR Part 213

Cooperatives, Mortgage insurance,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

24 CFR Part 221

Low and moderate income housing,

Mortgage insurance, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

24 CFR Part 236

Grant programs—housing and

community development, Low and

moderate income housing, Mortgage

insurance, Rent subsidies, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, the interim rule

published in the Federal Register on

October 26, 1993 (58 FR 57558),

entitled, ‘‘Parts 207, 213, 221, and 236,

Deletion of the 90–Percent-of-Value

Criterion in Section 223(a)(7)

Refinancing’’, is adopted as final with

the following change:

PART 207—MULTIFAMILY HOUSING

MORTGAGE INSURANCE

The authority citation for part 207 is

revised to read as follows:

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1701z–11(e), 1713,

and 1715b; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

Dated: February 8, 1995.

Jeanne K. Engel,

General Deputy Assistant Secretary for

Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 95–3975 Filed 2–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210–27–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Part 250

Notice of Interpretation Concerning the

Burning of Liquid Hydrocarbons

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of interpretation.

SUMMARY: This notice presents the

intention of the Minerals Management

Service (MMS) to restrict the burning of

liquid hydrocarbons. Guidance on

burning liquid hydrocarbons is

necessary because applicable

regulations do not provide specific

direction on burning liquid

hydrocarbons.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 17, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon Buffington, Engineering and

Standards Branch, telephone (703) 787–

1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests

to burn liquid hydrocarbons (crude oil

and condensate) have recently become

more prevalent in the Outer Continental

Shelf (OCS). The OCS Lands Act

requires the Secretary of the Interior to

provide for the prevention of waste and

conservation of the natural resources of

the OCS. Section 250.20(a) provides that

lessees perform all operations in a safe

and workmanlike manner and maintain

all equipment in a safe condition for the

protection of the lease and associated

facilities, the health and safety of all

persons, and the preservation and

conservation of property and the

environment. Conservation of property

and the environment requires that

lessees not burn liquid hydrocarbons.

Therefore, it is the intention of MMS

to prohibit the burning of liquid

hydrocarbons unless the lessee

demonstrates to the Regional Supervisor

that the amount of liquid hydrocarbons

to be burned is minimal or the

alternatives are infeasible or pose a

significant risk to offshore personnel or