10338 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Grade

Percent maximum

limits of—

Contrasting

classes2

Classes

that

blend3

U.S. No. 3 .................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.0 15.0

1Beans with more than 18.0 percent moisture are graded High moisture.

2Beans with more than 2.0 percent contrasting classes are graded Mixed beans.

3Beans with more than 15.0 percent classes that blend are graded Mixed beans.

U.S. Substandard: U.S. Substandard shall be beans which do not meet the requirements for the grades U.S. No. 1 through U.S. No. 3 or U.S.

Sample grade. Beans which are not well screened shall also be U.S. Substandard, except for beans which meet the requirements for U.S. Sample grade.

U.S. Sample grade: U.S. Sample grade shall be beans which are musty, sour, heating, materially weathered, or weevily; which have any commercially objectionable odor; which contain insect webbing or filth, animal filth, any unknown foreign substance, broken glass, or metal fragments; or which are otherwise of distinctly low quality.

3. Section 68.140 is revised to read as follows:

§ 68.140 Grades and grade requirements for the classes Baby Lima and Miscellaneous Lima Beans.

Grade General appearance

Percent maximum limits of—

Moisture1

Total

defects

(DKT,

FM,

CCL, &

SP)

Badly

damaged

Foreign material

Total Stones

U.S. No. 1 ....................................................

U.S. No. 2 ....................................................

U.S. No. 3 ....................................................

The special grade off-color may be applied

after the removal of total defects.

18.0

18.0

18.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

1.0

1.5

2.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

0.2

0.3

0.6

Grade

Percent maximum limits of—

Contrasting

classes2

Blistered,

wrinkled,

and/or

broken

Splits

Classes

that

blend3

U.S. No. 1 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.5 2.0 2.0 5.0

U.S. No. 2 ................................................................................................................................................. 1.0 4.0 4.0 10.0

U.S. No. 3 ................................................................................................................................................. 2.0 6.0 6.0 15.0

1Beans with more than 18.0 percent moisture are graded High moisture.

2Beans with more than 2.0 percent contrasting classes are graded Mixed beans.

3Beans with more than 15.0 percent classes that blend are graded Mixed beans.

U.S. Substandard: U.S. Substandard shall be beans which do not meet the requirements for the grades U.S. No. 1 through U.S. No. 3 or U.S.

Sample grade. Beans which are not well screened shall also be U.S. Substandard, except for beans which meet the requirements for U.S. Sample grade.

U.S. Sample grade: U.S. Sample grade shall be beans which are musty, sour, heating, materially weathered, or weevily; which have any commercially objectionable odor; which contain insect webbing or filth, animal filth, any unknown foreign substance, broken glass, or metal fragments; or which are otherwise of distinctly low quality.

Dated: February 16, 1995.

James R. Baker,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–4495 Filed 2–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–EN–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules 10339

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Public and Indian Housing

24 CFR Chapter IX

[Docket No. N–95–3858; FR–3647–N–01]

RIN 2577–AB44

Vacancy Rule: Notice of Establishment

of a Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory

Committee and of First Meeting

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Public and Indian

Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of establishment of a

negotiated rulemaking committee and of

first meeting.

SUMMARY: The Department is

announcing the establishment of a

Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory

Committee under the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (FACA). The purpose of

the Committee is to discuss and

negotiate a proposed rule that would

change the current method of

determining the payment of operating

subsidies to vacant public housing

units. The Committee consists of

representatives with a definable stake in

the outcome of a proposed rule. A

charter for the Committee has been

approved pursuant to the FACA,

Executive Order 12838, and the

implementing regulations. This notice

also announces the time and place of

the first Committee meeting, which will

be open to the public.

DATES: The first meeting of the

Committee will take place March 7–9,

1995. On March 7, the meeting will start

at 10:00 a.m. and run until completion;

on March 8, the meeting will start at

9:00 a.m. and run until completion; and

on March 9, the meeting will start at

9:00 a.m. and run until approximately

1:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The first meeting of the

Committee will be held in the Captain’s

Room of the Channel Inn Hotel; 650

Water Street, SW., Washington, DC

20024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

T. Comerford, Director, Financial

Management Division, Public and

Indian Housing, Room 4212,

Department of Housing and Urban

Development, 431 Seventh Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20410–0500; telephone

(202) 708–1872, or (202) 708–0850

(TDD). (These telephone numbers are

not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 3, 1995, HUD published a

notice of intent to establish a Negotiated

Rulemaking Advisory Committee to

discuss and negotiate a proposed rule

that would change the current method

of determining the payment of operating

subsidies to vacant public housing units

(60 FR 304) (‘‘January 3 notice’’).

Subsequent to the publication of the

January 3 notice, a charter for the

Committee was approved pursuant to

the FACA, Executive Order 12838, and

the implementing regulations at 41 CFR

101–6.1007.

The January 3 notice requested

comment concerning the issues it

should consider and the proposed

membership of the Committee. The

Department received two comments on

the notice of intent. One commenter was

a public housing agency (PHA) from the

State of Alaska requesting Committee

membership. The other commenter was

a national association, the Council of

Large Public Housing Authorities

(CLPHA), with comments on

membership balance and the efficacy of

changing the current subsidy payment

system in light of HUD’s proposal to

transform the public housing program.

After review of the comments and for

the reasons stated in the notice of intent,

the Department has determined that

established a negotiated rulemaking

advisory committee on this subject is

necessary and in the public interest.

Facilitators

As stated in the notice of intent, the

Federal Mediation and Conciliation

Service (FMCS) will provide facilitators

for this effort.

Substantive Issues for Negotiation

The convening report identified the

following issues to be addressed by the

Committee:

• What constitutes an acceptable

level of vacancies for housing

authorities of various size

classifications?

• What criteria should be used for

providing less than full subsidy?

• What criteria should be used for

providing full subsidy despite less than

full occupancy?

CLPHA suggested that HUD delay

negotiated rulemaking on these vacancy

rule issues until HUD and Congress

resolve the broader issues concerning

HUD’s future role in the area of public

housing. While it is true that the

Department is seeking to transform

public housing and convert operating

subsidies to PHAs into rental assistance

to residents, that transformation will not

be completed for a period of at least 6

years. The Department believes that

changes are needed now to correct

inequities and inefficiencies in the

current rule and that to maintain the

status quo is not good public policy.

Committee Membership

The FMCS conveners consulted and

interviewed over 30 officials of various

organizations interested and affected by

the vacancy rule. Three national

Housing Agency (HA) associations—the

Council of Large Public Housing

Authorities (CLPHA), the National

Association of Housing and

Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO), and

the Public Housing Authority Directors

Association (PHADA)—worked together

to suggest for committee membership

executive directors of HAs that would

reflect a balance among HAs in terms of

size and number of vacant units. The

national associations committed

themselves to serving as staff support to

the HAs selected for membership.

The members of the Committee are

the following:

Housing Agencies

• Housing Authority of the city of

Houston, TX.

• Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing

Authority, Cleveland, OH.

• Birmingham, AL Housing

Authority.

• New York City, NY Housing

Authority.

• Newark, NJ Housing Authority.

• Reno, NV Housing Authority.

• Littleton, CO Housing Authority.

• Housing Authority of the city of

South Bend, IN.

Tenant Organizations and Public

Interest Groups

• National Tenants Organization, Ft.

Pierce, FL.

• Bromley Health Tenant

Management Corporation, Jamaica

Plains, MA.

• New Jersey Association of Public

and Subsidized Housing Residents,

Newark, NJ.

• National Housing Law Project,

Washington, DC.

• Housing and Development Law

Institute, Washington, DC.

• Illinois Association of Housing

Authorities.

Federal Government

• U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development

The Executive Director of the Kodiak

Island, AK, Housing Authority asked

that she or another qualified Alaska

housing representative be a member of

the committee, saying that the interests
10340 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules

of remote housing authorities

administering Indian housing programs

should be represented. However, the

Department has recognized the unique

and special circumstances of

administering public housing programs

in Alaska by not applying the

performance funding system (PFS)

regulations to housing owned by HAs in

Alaska, as well as the Virgin Islands,

Puerto Rico, and Guam. Operating

subsidy payments to these HAs are

based upon budgets approved by HUD

on a case-by-case basis. Since the

purpose of the committee is to develop

a proposed rule that would change the

current PFS approach to payment of

operating subsidies to vacant units, HAs

that use a non-PFS approach do not

have a direct interest that should be

represented on the committee.

CLPHA commented that large housing

authorities that are directly

experiencing serious vacancy problems

should constitute the majority of the

committee. The Department notes that

housing authorities now have 8 of the

14 committee memberships and that 1

of the public interest groups given

membership is an association

representing housing authorities in

Illinois. Of the eight HA members, six

are currently dealing with vacancy

problems or have done so in the recent

past. Clearly, the collective interests of

HAs are well represented, as are the

interests of those large authorities with

vacancy problems. It should also be

emphasized that the committee will try

to achieve its goals of developing a new

proposed vacancy rule through

measures that seek to achieve a

consensus among all committee

members.

Tentative Schedule

HUD will hold the first meeting of the

committee on March 7–9, 1995. On

March 7, the meeting will start at 10:00

a.m. and run until completion; on

March 8, the meeting will start at 9:00

a.m. and run until completion; and on

March 9, the meeting will start at 9:00

a.m. and run until approximately 1:00

p.m. The location of the meeting will be

the Captain’s Room of the Channel Inn

Hotel, 650 Water Street, SW,

Washington, D.C. 20024. The purpose of

the meeting will be to orient members

to the negotiated rulemaking (reg-neg)

process, establish a basic set of

understandings and ground rules

(protocols) regarding the process that

will be followed in seeking a consensus,

and begin to address the issues. This

meeting is open to the public.

Decisions with respect to future

meetings will be made at the first

meeting and from time to time

thereafter. Notices of future meetings

will be published in the Federal

Register if time permits.

To prevent delays that might

postpone timely issuance of a proposed

rule, HUD intends to terminate the

committee’s activities if it does not

reach consensus within 5 months of the

first meeting. The process may end

earlier if the FMCS conveners/

facilitators believe that sufficient

progress cannot be made or that an

impasse has developed that cannot be

resolved.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1437g, 3535(d).

Dated: February 21, 1995.

Joseph Shuldiner,

Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian

Housing.

[FR Doc. 95–4614 Filed 2–21–95; 2:31 pm]

BILLING CODE 4210–33–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 184

[DoD 4145.26–M]

Contractor’s Safety for Ammunition

and Explosives

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of

Defense, DoD.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: On December 16 1994, 59 FR

64911, the Department of Defense

published a proposed rule which

codifies its revised explosives safety

standards for ammunition and

explosives (A&E) work performed under

DoD contracts. The proposed rule is

necessary to minimize the potential for

mishaps that could interrupt DoD

operations, delay project completion

dates, adversely impact DoD production

base or capability, damage or destroy

DoD-owned material/equipment, cause

injury to DoD personnel, or endanger

the general public. Comments were

requested by February 14, 1995. The

DoD Explosives Safety Board has been

requested by several interested

contractors to extend the comment

period to provide time for a more

detailed technical review. In the interest

of all concerned parties, including the

DoD and its potential A&E contractors,

notice is hereby given of an extension of

the Comment period from February 14,

1995 through May 15, 1995.

DATES: Comments are requested by May

15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to:

Chairman, Department of Defense

Explosives Safety Board, (DDESB), 2461

Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA

22331–0600.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ray B. Sawyer, Director, Technical

Programs Division, DDESB, telephone

(703) 325–8624.

Dated: February 17, 1995.

Patricia L. Toppings,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 95–4494 Filed 2–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[SC–27–1–6735b; FRL–5145–9]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans South Carolina:

Title V, Section 507, Small Business

Stationary Source Technical and

Environmental Compliance Assistance

Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve

the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of South

Carolina for the purpose of establishing

a small business assistance program

(SBAP). In the final rules section of this

Federal Register, the EPA is approving

the State’s SIP revision as a direct final

rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

revision amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. A detailed rationale

for the approval is set forth in the direct

final rule. If no adverse comments are

received in response to that direct final

rule, no further activity is contemplated

in relation to this proposed rule. If EPA

receives adverse comments, the direct

final rule will be withdrawn and all

public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this proposed rule. The EPA

will not institute a second comment

period on this document. Any parties

interested in commenting on this

document should do so at this time.

DATES: To be considered, comments

must be received by March 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Ms. Kimberly Bingham,

Regulatory Planning and Development

Section, Air Programs Branch, Air,