16164 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices

1995, and will remain in effect until

March 28, 1996. Re-registration

procedures become effective on March

29, 1995, and will remain in effect until

April 27, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ronald Chirlin, Senior Immigration

Examiner, Immigration and

Naturalization Service, Room 3214, 425

I Street, NW., Washington, DC 20536,

telephone (202) 514–5014.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

section 244A of the Act, as amended by

section 302(a) of Public Law 101–649

and section 304(b) of Public Law 102–

232 (8 U.S.C. 1254a), the Attorney

General is authorized to grant

Temporary Protected Status in the

United States to eligible aliens who are

nationals for a foreign state designated

by the Attorney General, or who have no

nationality and who last habitually

resided in that state. The Attorney

General may designate a state, or a part

thereof, upon finding that the state is

experiencing ongoing armed conflict,

environmental disaster, or certain other

extraordinary and temporary conditions

that prevent nationals or residents of the

country from returning in safety.

Effective on March 27, 1991, the

Attorney General designated Liberia for

Temporary Protected Status for a period

of 12 months, 56 FR 12746. The

Attorney General extended the

designation of Liberia under the

Temporary Protected Status program for

additional 12-month periods until

March 28, 1995, 59 FR 9997.

This notice extends the designation of

Liberia under the Temporary Protected

Status program for an additional 12

months, in accordance with sections

244A(b)(3) (A) and (C) of the Act. This

notice also describes the procedures

with which eligible aliens who are

nationals of Liberia, or who have no

nationality and who last habitually

resided in Liberia, must comply in

applying for continuation of Temporary

Protected Status

In addition to timely re-registrations

and late re-registrations authorized by

this notice’s extension of Liberia’s

Temporary Protected Status designation,

late initial registrations are possible for

some Liberians under 8 CFR 240.2(f)(2).

Such late initial registrants must have

been ‘‘continuously physically present’’

in the United States since March 27,

1991, and must have had a valid

immigrant or non-immigrant status

during the original registration period.

For each Application for Temporary

Protected Status, Form I–821, filed for

late initial registration, a fee of fifty

dollars ($50) is charged. An Application

for Employment Authorization, Form I–

765, must be filed together with Form I–

821 in all cases. However, the fee

prescribed in 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1) for Form

I–765, which is currently seventy

dollars ($70), is only charged if the alien

requests employment authorization.

The filing fee is required when Form

I–765 is filed as part of either a reregistration or as part of a late initial

registration for Temporary Protected

Status. This filing fee must accompany

Form I–765 unless a properly

documented fee waiver requests is

submitted to the Immigration and

Naturalization Service or the applicant

does not request employment

authorization.

Notice of Extension of Designation of

Liberia Under the Temporary Protected

Status Program

By the authority vested in me as

Attorney General under section 244A of

the Immigration and Nationality Act, as

amended, (8 U.S.C. 1254a, and pursuant

to sections 244A(b)(3) (A) and (C) of the

Act, I have had consultations with the

appropriate agencies of the Government

concerning (a) the conditions in Liberia;

and (b) whether permitting nationals of

Liberia, and aliens having no nationality

who last habitually resided in Liberia, to

remain temporarily in the United States

is contrary to the national interest of the

United States. As a result, I determine

that the conditions for the original

designation of Temporary Protected

Status for Liberia continue to be met.

Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:

(1) The designation of Liberia under

section 244A(b) of the Act is extended

for an additional 12-month period from

March 29, 1995, to March 28, 1996.

(2) I estimate that there are

approximately 4,000 nationals of

Liberia, and aliens having no nationality

who last habitually resided in Liberia,

who have been granted Temporary

Protected Status and who are eligible for

re-registration.

(3) A national of Liberia, or an alien

having no nationality who last

habitually resided in Liberia, who

received a grant of Temporary Protected

Status during the initial period of

designation from March 27, 1991, to

March 27, 1992, must comply with the

re-registration requirements contained

in 8 CFR 240.17, which are described in

pertinent part in paragraphs (4) and (5)

of this notice.

(4) A national of Liberia, or an alien

having no nationality who last

habitually resided in Liberia, who

previously has been granted Temporary

Protected Status, must re-register by

filing a new Application for Temporary

Protected Status, Form I–821, together

with an Application for Employment

Authorization, Form I–765, within the

30-day period beginning on March 29,

1995, and ending on April 27, 1995, in

order to be eligible for Temporary

Protected Status during the period from

March 29, 1995, until March 28, 1996.

Late re-registration applications will be

allowed for ‘‘good cause’’ pursuant to 8

CFR 240.17(c).

(5) There is no fee for the Form I–821

filed as part of the re-registration

application. The fee prescribed in 8 CFR

103.7(b)(1) will be charged for the Form

I–765, filed by an alien requesting

employment authorization pursuant to

the provisions of paragraph (4) of this

notice. An alien who does not request

employment authorization must file

Form I–821 together with Form I–765

for information purposes, but in such

cases both Form I–821 and Form I–765

may be submitted without fee.

(6) Pursuant to section 244A(b)(3)(A)

and (C) of the Act, the Attorney General

will review, at least 60 days before

March 28, 1996, the designation of

Liberia under the Temporary Protected

Status program to determine whether

the conditions for designation continue

to be met. Notice of that determination,

including the basis for the

determination, will be published in the

Federal Register.

(7) Information concerning the

Temporary Protected Status program for

nationals of Liberia, and aliens having

no nationality who last habitually

resided in Liberia, will be available at

local Immigration and Naturalization

Service offices upon publication of this

notice.

Dated: March 23, 1995.

Janet Reno,

Attorney General.

[FR Doc. 95–7678 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

Petitions for Modification

The following parties have filed

petitions to modify the application of

mandatory safety standards under

section 101(c) of the Federal Mine

Safety and Health Act of 1977.

1. Topper Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–21–C]

Topper Coal Company, Inc., 266

Rocky Road, Pikeville, Kentucky 41501

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1710–1

(canopies or cabs; self-propelled electric

face equipment; installation
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices 16165

requirements) to its No. 10 Mine (I.D.

No. 15–17516) located in Pike County,

Kentucky. The petitioner proposes to

use specific electric face equipment

without canopies which would include

one 16RB Joy Cutting Machine; two 21

SC Joy Shuttle Cars; two CX–2 S & S

Scoops; one Fletcher Roof Bolter; and

one Long Airdox Roof Bolter. The

petitioner states that the use of canopies

would limit the visibility of the

equipment operator, and could be a

contributing factor in any accidents

which may arise.

2. Helvetia Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–22–C]

Helvatia Coal Company, Box 729,

Indiana, Pennsylvania 15701 has filed a

petition to modify the application of 30

CFR 75.1100–2(e)(2) (quantity and

location of firefighting equipment) to its

Marshall Run Mine (I.D. No. 36–08435)

located in Indiana County,

Pennsylvania. The petitioner proposes

to use two portable fire extinguishers, or

one portable fire extinguisher with

twice the required capacity at each

temporary electrical installation. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

3. U.S. Steel Mining Company, Inc.

[Docket No. M–95–23–C]

U.S. Steel Mining Company, Inc., 600

Grant Street, Room 1580, Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 15219 has filed a petition

to modify the application of 30 CFR 75.

1101–1(b) (deluge-type water spray

systems) to its Gary No. 50 Mine (I.D.

No. 46–01816) located in Wyoming

County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner

proposes to continue its weekly

inspections and functional testing of the

complete deluge-type water spray

system and to remove blow-off dust

covers from the nozzles. The petitioner

asserts that the proposed alternative

method would provide at least the same

measure of protection as would the

mandatory standard.

4. Green Coal Company, Inc.

[Docket No. M–95–24–C]

Green Coal Company, Inc., P.O. Box

908, Owensboro, Kentucky 42302 has

filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 77.1605(d)

(loading and haulage equipment;

installations) to its K–9 Panther Mine

(I.D. No. 15–01982) located in Daviess

County, Kentucky and its Henderson

County Mine No. 1 (I.D. No. 15–16454)

located in Henderson County, Kentucky.

Instead of using tail lights on mobile

equipment, the petitioner proposes to

build a metal rack across the complete

width of the rear of the mobile

equipment; to paint the rack with

fluorescent paint, strip with fluorescent

tape, and add reflectors; and to have the

rear end of the equipment so that it can

be seen on the longest section of any

part of the mine property haulage roads.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would not result in

a diminution of safety to the miners.

5. Southern Utah Fuel Company

[Docket No. M–95–25–C]

Southern Utah Fuel Company, 397

South 800 West, Salina, Utah 84654 has

filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.380(d)(3) and

(4) (escapeways; bituminous and lignite

mines) to its SUFCo Mine (I.D. No. 42–

00089) located in Sevier County, Utah.

As an alternate escapeway from the 2

East workings to the surface, the

petitioner proposes to use the main

return to #3 crosscut where the

escapeway will then enter the #1

beltline entry. At this point the

escapeway would cross over the #1 belt

(height 4 feet) to the walkway side of the

belt and then proceed along this side of

the belt to the surface at a distance of

approximately 450 feet. The petitioner

states that because of conventional

supports and a barring wall for the

tunnel liner in the belt opening, the

escapeway width is less that 6 feet; that

the narrowest point in this escapeway is

the last 17 feet of the drift opening

where the width between the roof

supports is 2 feet; that because of the

cement barring wall and the belt

structure, this width cannot be

increased; and that an airlock with 3

feet by 7 feet doors is installed inby the

drift opening with one side of the

airlock 85 feet inby the opening and the

other side 140 feet inby. The petitioner

asserts that the proposed alternative

method would provide at least the same

measure of protection as would the

mandatory standard.

6. McElroy Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–26–C]

McElroy Coal Company, Consol Plaza,

1800 Washington Road, Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 15241 has filed a petition

to modify the application of 30 CFR

75.503 (permissible electric face

equipment; maintenance) to its McElroy

Mine (I.D. No. 46–01437) located in

Marshall County, West Virginia. The

petitioner proposes to increase the

maximum length of its trailing cables to

800 feet to supply three-phase, 480-volt

power to loading machines, shuttle cars,

roof bolters, and section ventilation fans

during development of longwall panels.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

7. Monterey Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–27–C]

Monterey Coal Company, P.O. Box 94,

Albers, Illinois 62215 has filed a

petition to modify the application of 30

CFR 75.1100–2(i)(1) (quantity and

location of firefighting equipment) to its

No. 2 Mine (I.D. No. 11–02371) located

in Clinton County, Illinois. Instead of

using the emergency materials required

in the mandatory standard, the

petitioner proposes to use the following

materials: 112 Kennedy Metal Stopping

Panels with associated head sills and

twist clamps, 24 Kennedy Stopping Rib

Angles, 2 rolls of tape, 2 twist tools, 2

rolls of brattice cloth, 2 stopping jacks,

2 picks, 2 shovels, 6 buckets of Celtite

10–12 Airtite (or equivalent material for

stoppings), and 5 tons of rock dust. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

8. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–28–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1400 (hoisting

equipment; general) to its LV No. 3

Mine (I.D. No. 36–08405) located in

Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania.

Because of steep, frequently changing

pitch and numerous curves and

knuckles in the main haulage slope, the

petitioner proposes to use a gunboat

without safety catches in transporting

persons. As an alternate, when using the

gunboat to transport persons, the

petitioner proposes to use hoisting rope

with a safety factor at least 3 times

greater than required and secondary

safety connections which are securely

fastened around the gunboat and to the

hoisting rope above the main

connection device. The petitioner

asserts that the proposed alternative

method would provide at least the same

measure of protection as would the

mandatory standard.

9. U.S. Steel Mining Co., Inc.

[Docket No. M–95–29–C]

U.S. Steel Mining Co., Inc., 67 Seal

Road, Eighty Four, Pennsylvania 15330

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 75.1002 (location of

trolley wires, trolley feeder wires, highvoltage cables and transformers) to its

Maple Creek Mine (I.D. No. 36–00970)

located in Washington County,
16166 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices

Pennsylvania. The petitioner proposes

to use high-voltage (4,160 volts) cables

to power longwall mining equipment.

The Petitioner states that all electrical

personnel would receive training before

the alternate method is implemented.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

10. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–30–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.335

(construction of seals) to its LV No. 3

Mine (I.D. No. 36–08405) located in

Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania. The

petitioner requests a modification of the

standard to permit alternative methods

of seal construction using wooden

materials of moderate size and weight

due to the difficulty in accessing

previously driven headings and breasts

containing inaccessible abandoned

workings; to accept a design criterion in

the 10 psi range; and to permit the water

trap to be installed in the gangway seal

and sampling tube in the monkey seal

for seals installed in pairs. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

11. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–31–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.340

(underground electrical installations) to

its LV No. 3 Mine (I.D. No. 36–08405)

located in Schuylkill County,

Pennsylvania. As an alternative to

removing the batteries and transporting

them in the gunboat to the surface for

charging, the petitioner proposes to

charge batteries on the mine’s

locomotive when all miners are out of

the mine and to have the intake air

which is used to ventilate the charging

station continue through its normal

route to the last open crosscut and into

the monkey airway (return). The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

12. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–32–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.360 (preshift

examination) to its LV No. 3 Mine (I.D.

No. 36–08405) located in Schuylkill

County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner

proposes to examine each seal for

physical damage from the slope gunboat

during the preshift examination after an

air quantity reading is taken in by the

intake portal and to test for the quantity

and quality of air at the intake air split

locations off the slope in the gangway

portion of the working section. The

petitioner proposes to physically

examine the entire length of the slope

once a month. The petitioner asserts

that the proposed alternative method

would provide at least the same

measure of protection as would the

mandatory standard.

13. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–33–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1100–2(a)

(quantity and location of firefighting

equipment) to its LV No. 3 Mine (I.D.

No. 36–08405) located in Schuylkill

County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner

proposes to use only portable fire

extinguishers to replace existing

requirements where rock dust, water

cars, and other water storage are not

practical. The petitioner asserts that the

proposed alternative method would

provide at least the same measure of

protection as would the mandatory

standard.

14. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–34–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1200(d) & (i)

(mine map) to its LV No. 3 Mine (I.D.

No. 36–08405) located in Schuylkill

County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner

proposes to use cross-sections instead of

contour lines through the intake slope,

at locations of rock tunnel connections

between veins, and at 1,000 feet

intervals of advance from the intake

slope and to limit the mapping of mine

workings above and below to those

present within 100 feet of the vein being

mined except when veins are

interconnected to other veins beyond

the 100 feet limit through rock tunnels.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

15. Sky High Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–35–C]

Sky High Coal Company, R.D. #4, P.O.

Box 340M, Pine Grove, Pennsylvania

17963 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1202–1(a)

(temporary notations, revisions, and

supplements) to its LV No. 3 Mine (I.D.

No. 36–08405) located in Schuylkill

County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner

proposes to revise and supplement mine

maps on an annual basis instead of the

required 6 month interval and to update

maps daily by hand notations. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

16. Consolidation Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–36–C]

Consolidation Coal Company, Consol

Plaza, 1800 Washington Road,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.503

(permissible electric face equipment;

maintenance) to its Shoemaker Mine

(I.D. No. 46–01436) located in Marshall

County, West Virginia. The petitioner

proposes to increase the maximum

length of its trailing cables to 800 feet

to supply three-phase, 480-volt power to

loading machines, shuttle cars, roof

bolters, and section ventilation fans

during development of longwall panels.

The petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

17. Cyprus Emerald Resources

Corporation

[Docket No. M–95–37–C]

Cyprus Emerald Resources

Corporation, 600 Grant Street,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–2887

has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1002 (location

of trolley wires, trolley feeder wires,

high-voltage cables and transformers) to

its Emerald Mine (I.D. No. 36–05466)

located in Greene County, Pennsylvania.

The petitioner proposes to use highvoltage (4,160 volts) cables to power

longwall mining equipment. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

18. Twentymile Coal Company

[Docket No. M–95–38–C]

Twentymile Coal Company, 600 Grant

Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219–

2887 has filed a petition to modify the

application of 30 CFR 75.1002 (location

of trolley wires, trolley feeder wires,

high-voltage cables and transformers) to

its Foidel Creek Mine (I.D. No. 05–

03836) located in Routt County,

Colorado. The petitioner proposes to use
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Notices 16167

high-voltage (4,160 volts) cables to

power longwall mining equipment. The

petitioner asserts that the proposed

alternative method would provide at

least the same measure of protection as

would the mandatory standard.

Request for Comments

Persons interested in these petitions

may furnish written comments. These

comments must be filed with the Office

of Standards, Regulations, and

Variances, Mine Safety and Health

Administration, Room 627, 4015 Wilson

Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22203.

All comments must be postmarked or

received in that office on or before April

28, 1995. Copies of these petitions are

available for inspection at that address.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

Patricia W. Silvey,

Director, Office of Standards, Regulations and

Variances.

[FR Doc. 95–7647 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

[Docket No. NRTL–3–93]

Factory Mutual Research Corporation

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration Department of Labor.

ACTION: Notice of Application for

Renewal of Recognition as a Nationally

Recognized Testing Laboratory, and

Preliminary Finding.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

application of the Factory Mutual

Research Corporation for renewal of its

recognition as a Nationally Recognized

Testing Laboratory (NRTL) under 29

CFR 1910.7, and presents the Agency’s

preliminary finding.

DATES: The last date for interested

parties to submit comments is May 30,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to: NRTL

Recognition Program, Office of Variance

Determination, Occupational Safety and

Health Administration, U.S. Department

of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue,

N.W., Room N3653, Washington , DC.

20210.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Office of Variance Determination, NRTL

Recognition Program, Occupational

Safety and Health Administration, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Room N3653,

Washington, DC 20210.

Notice of Application

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is

hereby given that the Factory Mutual

Research Corporation (FMRC) has made

application pursuant to section 6(b) of

the Occupational Safety and Health Act

of 1970, (84 Stat. 1593, 29 U.S.C. 655),

Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 1–90 (55

FR 9033), and 29 CFR 1910.7 for

renewal of its recognition of the

following facilities as a Nationally

Recognized Testing Laboratory.

The addresses of the laboratories

covered by this application are:

1151 Boston-Providence Turnpike,

Norwood, Massachusetts 02062

743 Reynolds Road, West Gloucester,

Rhode Island 02814

Background

When OSHA published its standard

for NRTLs at 29 CFR 1910.7, it

temporarily recognized Factory Mutual

Research Corporation (FMRC) and

Underwriters Laboratories Incorporated

(UL). Both organizations had already

been referenced by the Occupational

Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA) as acceptable organizations for

testing or certifying certain workplace

equipment and materials. Appendix A

of section 1907 stated, in part, that

Factory Mutual Research Corporation

was recognized temporarily as a

nationally recognized testing laboratory

by the Assistant Secretary for a five-year

period from June 13, 1988 through June

13, 1993. At the end of this five-year

period FMRC was required to apply for

renewal of that OSHA recognition

utilizing certain specified procedures.

FMRC has applied for renewal of its

recognition as an NRTL within the

specified time frame (application dated

October 8, 1992) and retains temporary

recognition pending OSHA’s final

decision in this renewal process.

Application

According to the applicant Factory

Mutual began testing products in 1886;

the first published listings of approved

fire hose appeared in 1907. As of

October 1992, FMRC approved products

and services for approximately 1900

manufacturers and service providers in

the United States and 32 foreign

countries.

Regarding the merits of the

application, the applicant contends that

it meets the requirements of 29 CFR

1910.7 for renewal of its recognition to

certify products in the area of testing

which it has specified.

Factory Mutual Research Corporation

states that its application demonstrates

that for each specified item of

equipment or material to be certified, it

has the capability (including proper

testing equipment and facilities, trained

staff, written testing procedures, quality

control and calibration programs) to

perform testing and examination of

equipment and materials for workplace

safety purposes to determine

conformance with appropriate product

test standards. In summary, it claims

that it has the experience, expertise,

personnel, organization, equipment, and

facilities suitable for renewal of its

accreditation as an OSHA Nationally

Recognized Testing Laboratory.

In support of its application, FMRC

has attached various exhibits [see

Exhibits 2A(1), 2A(2), 2A(3), and 2A(4)].

According to the applicant, it

demonstrates its capability to perform

testing and examining of equipment and

materials for workplace safety purposes

to determine conformance with

appropriate standards [see Ex. 2A(1)];

has the proper testing equipment and

facilities, trained staff, written testing

procedures, and calibration and quality

control programs [see Ex. 2A(2)]; and

has also the capability to perform

experimental testing and examining of

equipment and materials for workplace

safety purposes to determine the

conformance with appropriate test

standards or performance in a specified

manner.

FMRC further asserts that it provides

the following controls or services: A

registered certification mark [see Ex.

2A(3)]; product evaluation of samples

submitted by manufacturers to assure

conformance with the test standards;

and a facilities and procedures quality

audit program to monitor production

and use of the FMRC Approval Mark,

supplemented with periodic inspections

of user premises for monitoring product

performance and for identifying the

listed or labeled equipment or materials

[see Exs. 2A(2)] and 2A(3)].

The applicant also states that it is a

non-profit corporation and, accordingly,

is not owned, operated or controlled by

any company manufacturing, supplying

or distributing any portion of the

materials and products examined and

tested. Further, FMRC claims not to

have any financial interest in any

company manufacturing, supplying, or

distributing materials or products

examined [see Ex. 2A(3)].

If clients, FMRC personnel, users, or

other sources, file a complaint or

disagrees with a decision relating to the

standard, to engineering, use, or to

inspection, they can present and discuss

their views with the involved

Engineer(s) and Section Manager in an

effort to resolve any disagreement. If the

matter cannot be satisfactorily resolved

at that level, they are referred to the

Department Manager, then to the

Division Manager and finally if the

complaint is still unresolved it is

referred to the Chief Operating Officer