18344 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

production of a producer’s milk be

physically received at a distributing

plant each month. It will maintain

orderly marketing conditions and

prevent uneconomic and inefficient

movements of milk.

Accordingly, it is appropriate to

suspend the aforesaid provision for an

indefinite period beginning with the

date of Federal Register publication of

this document.

It is hereby found and determined

that thirty days’ notice of the effective

date hereof is impractical, unnecessary

and contrary to the public interest in

that:

(a) The suspension is necessary to

reflect current marketing conditions and

to assure orderly marketing conditions

in the marketing area, in that such rule

is necessary to permit the continued

pooling of the milk of dairy farmers who

have historically supplied the market

without the need for making costly and

inefficient movements of milk;

(b) This suspension does not require

of persons affected substantial or

extensive preparation prior to the

effective date; and

(c) Notice of proposed rulemaking

was given interested parties and they

were afforded opportunity to file written

data, views or arguments concerning

this suspension. No comments were

received.

Therefore, good cause exists for

making this order effective less than 30

days from the date of publication in the

Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1050

Milk marketing orders.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the following provision in

Title 7, Part 1050, is amended as

follows:

PART 1050—MILK IN THE CENTRAL

ILLINOIS MARKETING AREA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

Part 1050 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 1–19, 48 Stat 31, as

amended; 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

§ 1050.13 [Suspended in part]

2. In § 1050.13(d)(2), the words ‘‘not’’

and ‘‘it’’ where they first appear are

suspended for an indefinite period

effective upon publication in the

Federal Register.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Patricia Jensen,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Marketing and

Regulatory Programs.

[FR Doc. 95–8852 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 2

RIN 3150–AF24

NRC Size Standards; Revision

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is amending the

NRC’s size standards used to qualify an

NRC licensee as a ‘‘small entity’’ under

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This

action is necessary to establish a

separate standard to be used to

determine whether a licensee who is a

manufacturer would qualify as a small

entity, to adjust the receipts-based

standard to account for the effects of

inflation since 1985, and to eliminate

the separate $1 million size standard for

private practice physicians and apply

the revised receipts-based size standard

of $5 million to this class of licensees.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 11, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules Review

Section, Rules Review and Directives

Branch, Division of Freedom of

Information and Publications Services,

Office of Administration, telephone

(301) 415–7163.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In 1983, the NRC surveyed its

materials licensees to create an

economic profile sufficient to consider

regulatory alternatives tailored to the

size of the licensee. After analyzing the

data and consulting with the Small

Business Administration (SBA), the

NRC developed a proposed size

standard that would be appropriate to

use in determining which of its

licensees would qualify as small entities

for the purposes of compliance with the

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The NRC

published its proposed size standard for

notice and comment in the Federal

Register of May 21, 1985 (50 FR 20913).

After considering the comments

received, the NRC adopted its final size

standards as noted in the Federal

Register of December 9, 1985 (50 FR

50241). In the Federal Register of

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56671), the

NRC restated the size standards to

include the Regulatory Flexibility Act’s

definition of small governmental

jurisdiction. To further improve clarity,

the NRC changed the presentation of the

size standards to conform to the listing

of definitions of small entities in the

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The Proposed Rule

On November 30, 1994 (59 FR 61293),

the NRC published a proposed rule to

amend the NRC’s size standards. The

NRC proposed to establish a separate

standard to be used to determine

whether a licensee who is a

manufacturer would qualify as a small

entity and to adjust the receipts-based

standard to account for the effects of

inflation since 1985. In addition, the

NRC proposed to eliminate the separate

$1 million size standard for private

practice physicians and apply the

revised receipts-based size standard of

$5 million to this class of licensees. By

amending the size standards through

rulemaking, the NRC indicated its intent

to codify NRC’s size standards in 10

CFR part 2.

As discussed in the preamble to the

proposed rule, these amendments were

developed after several factors indicated

that some adjustments to the NRC’s size

standards were desirable.

The NRC received a number of

comments concerning its size standards

and the failure of the NRC to promulgate

a size standard that differentiates

between manufacturing entities and

service providers in response to the

final rule implementing Public Law

101–508 (56 FR 31472; July 10, 1991,

and subsequent years). These

commenters indicated that applying a

gross receipts standard to a

manufacturing concern resulted in an

adverse impact on a manufacturer. The

SBA size standards for manufacturers

are prescribed in terms of a maximum

number of employees rather than in

terms of gross receipts.

The NRC conducted a survey to

update the economic profile of its

materials licensees. The purpose of this

survey was to evaluate the continued

efficacy of NRC’s size standards and to

obtain the information needed to

determine the necessity and effect of a

separate standard for manufacturers

within the context of the nuclear

industry.

The SBA adjusted its receipts-based

size standard levels to mitigate the

effects of inflation from 1984 to the

present in a final rule published in the

Federal Register of April 7, 1994 (59 FR

16513).

Public Comment

The comment period on the proposed

rule closed December 30, 1994. The

NRC received two letters of public

comment on this action.

One commenter objected to the

inclusion of a size standard based on the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 18345

number of employees for qualification

of a manufacturing concern as a small

entity in the NRC’s regulatory programs

and the assessment of reduced annual

fees. The commenter stated that the total

employee population of a manufacturer

has little bearing on revenue potential

and revenue has little bearing on the

risk to public health and safety. The

commenter believes that although

employee population may be a

consideration, it must be considered in

conjunction with revenue produced and

with the complexity of the operation in

determining size standards. The

commenter also asserts that because

manufacturers are authorized to possess

significant quantities of multiple

isotopes, both as sealed sources and

loose material for use in the

manufacture and distribution of

products, they present a much higher

risk than entities that hold a license for

possession and use of sealed sources.

The commenter states that the loss of

revenue from manufacturers categorized

as small entities will have to be made

up by small licensees who may have

only one or two devices on site.

The NRC is retaining a separate

standard based on the number of

employees for manufacturers in the final

rule because this standard is required by

the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632

(a)(2)). This provision prohibits a

Federal department or agency from

prescribing a size standard for

categorizing a business concern as a

small business concern unless the

standard provides for determining the

size of a manufacturing concern based

upon employment.

One commenter was pleased to see

that the NRC raised the size standard for

private practice physicians from $1

million to $5 million. However, the

commenter indicated that this action

did not go far enough in addressing the

assessment of user fees. The commenter

suggested that the NRC consider

evaluating the gross receipts of

departments within a medical facility

that utilize NRC services and not the

overall receipts of the facility. The

commenter contends that if the NRC

focused on the smaller entity within the

license, many licensees would qualify

for the small business exemptions and

would pay fees based on the actual

revenue generated under the license.

The NRC notes that the Small

Business Act establishes criteria for a

small business concern. To qualify as a

small business concern, the concern

must be independently owned and

operated and not dominant in its field

of operation (15 U.S.C. 632 (a)(1)). A

department of a medical facility does

not meet this criterion. The NRC has

included language in the final rule to

address this type of situation.

In response to each of the comments,

the NRC further emphasizes that the

purpose of this rule is to amend the size

standards used by the NRC to qualify an

NRC licensee as a ‘‘small entity’’ under

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The

application of these standards in the fee

schedule rulemaking, or any other

rulemaking proceeding, is beyond the

scope of this rule.

The Final Rule

The NRC is adopting a size standard

of 500 or fewer employees for business

concerns that are manufacturing

entities. This standard is the most

commonly used SBA employee standard

and would be the standard applicable to

the types of manufacturing industries

that would hold an NRC license. Under

this standard, approximately 48 percent

of the licensees who indicated that they

were manufacturers would qualify as

small entities.

The NRC is adjusting its receiptsbased size standard to accommodate

inflation and to conform to the SBA

final rule. The NRC is raising its

receipts-based small business size

standard from $3.5 million to $5

million. The NRC also is eliminating the

separate $1 million size standard for

private practice physicians and

applying the revised receipts-based size

standard of $5 million to this class of

licensees. This mirrors the revised SBA

standard of $5 million for medical

practitioners. For greater clarity, the

NRC has included a definition of the

term receipts in the final rule.

The survey of materials licensees

indicated that 26 percent qualified as

small entities under the NRC standards

being replaced by this rule. Under the

size standards adopted in this

document, 35 percent of these licensees

would qualify as small entities, an

increase of 9 percent. When NRC

adopted its size standards in 1985, the

NRC staff estimated that approximately

35 percent of the materials licensees

would qualify as small entities.

The Small Business Credit and

Business Opportunity Enhancement Act

of 1992 (Pub. L. 102–366) amended the

Small Business Act concerning the

establishment of agency-specific small

business size standards. The NRC size

standards were developed so as to meet

the criteria specified in Pub. L. 102–366.

As required by Pub. L. 102–366, the

NRC size standards were approved by

the Administrator, SBA.

This final rule also codifies NRC’s

size standards in part 2 of the

Commission’s regulations. Previously,

NRC’s size standards had been

published in the notices section of the

Federal Register.

Environmental Impact: Categorical

Exclusion

The NRC has determined that this

final rule is the type of action described

in categorical exclusion 10 CFR

51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an

environmental impact statement nor an

environmental assessment has been

prepared for this final regulation.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This final rule does not contain a new

or amended information collection

requirement subject to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.). Existing requirements were

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget, approval number 3150–

0136.

Regulatory Analysis

A regulatory analysis has not been

prepared for this final rule because the

final rule is administrative in that it

amends the criteria the NRC uses for

determining which of its licensees

qualify as small entities for the purposes

of compliance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. The amended size

standards conform to SBA’s revised

standards and result in an increase in

the number of NRC licensees that

qualify as small entities.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

As required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b),

the Commission certifies that this rule

does not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. The final rule is administrative

in that it amends the criteria the NRC

uses in determining which of its

licensees qualify as small entities for the

purposes of compliance with the

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The

amended size standards conform to

SBA’s revised standards and result in an

increase in the number of NRC licensees

that would qualify as small entities.

Backfit Analysis

The NRC has determined that the

backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does not

apply to this final rule and, therefore,

that a backfit analysis is not required for

this final rule because these

amendments do not impose any

provisions that would impose backfits

as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 2

Administrative practice and

procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct

material, Classified information,

Environmental protection, Nuclear
18346 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

materials, Nuclear power plants and

reactors, Penalties, Sex discrimination,

Source material, Special nuclear

material, Waste treatment and disposal.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble and under the authority of the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,

as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553;

the NRC is adopting the following

amendment to 10 CFR part 2.

PART 2—RULES OF PRACTICE FOR

DOMESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS

AND ISSUANCE OF ORDERS

1. The authority citation for part 2

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948,

953, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec.

191, as amended, Pub. L. 87–615, 76 Stat. 409

(42 U.S.C. 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); 5 U.S.C. 552.

Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53,

62, 63, 81, 103, 104, 105, 68 Stat. 930, 932,

933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42

U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134,

2135); sec. 114(f), Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat.

2213, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)); sec.

102, Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended

(42 U.S.C. 4332); sec. 301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42

U.S.C. 5871). Sections 2.102, 2.103, 2.104,

2.105, 2.721 also issued under secs. 102, 103,

104, 105, 183, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938,

954, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133,

2134, 2135, 2233, 2239). Section 2.105 also

issued under Pub. L. 97–415, 96 Stat. 2073

(42 U.S.C. 2239). Sections 2.200–2.206 also

issued under secs. 161b, i, o, 182, 186, 234,

68 Stat. 948–951, 955, 83 Stat. 444, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 2236, 2282); sec. 206, 88

Stat 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Sections 2.600–

2.606 also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91–

190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C.

4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued

under 5 U.S.C. 554. Sections 2.754, 2.760,

2.770, 2.780 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557.

Section 2.764 and Table 1A of Appendix C

also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97–

425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155,

10161). Section 2.790 also issued under sec.

103, 68 Stat. 936, as amended (42 U.S.C.

2133) and 5 U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and

2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553. Section

2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 and sec.

29, Pub. L. 85–256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended

(42 U.S.C. 2039). Subpart K also issued under

sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec.

134, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C.

10154). Subpart L also issued under sec. 189,

68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Appendix A

also issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91–560, 84

Stat. 1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135). Appendix B also

issued under sec. 10, Pub. L. 99–240, 99 Stat.

1842 (42 U.S.C. 2021b et seq.).

2. Section 2.810 is added to read as

follows:

§ 2.810 NRC size standards.

The NRC shall use the size standards

contained in this section to determine

whether a licensee qualifies as a small

entity in its regulatory programs.

(a) A small business is a for-profit

concern and is a—

(1) Concern that provides a service or

a concern not engaged in manufacturing

with average gross receipts of $5 million

or less over its last 3 completed fiscal

years; or

(2) Manufacturing concern with an

average number of 500 or fewer

employees based upon employment

during each pay period for the

preceding 12 calendar months.

(b) A small organization is a not-forprofit organization which is

independently owned and operated and

has annual gross receipts of $5 million

or less.

(c) A small governmental jurisdiction

is a government of a city, county, town,

township, village, school district, or

special district with a population of less

than 50,000.

(d) A small educational institution is

one that is—

(1) Supported by a qualifying small

governmental jurisdiction; or

(2) Not state or publicly supported

and has 500 or fewer employees.

(e) For the purposes of this section,

the NRC shall use the Small Business

Administration definition of receipts (13

CFR 121.402(b)(2)). A licensee who is a

subsidiary of a large entity does not

qualify as a small entity for purposes of

this section.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of March, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James M. Taylor,

Executive Director for Operations.

[FR Doc. 95–8843 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 95–AWP–4]

Alteration of Class D Airspace;

Williams Air Force Base (AFB), AZ

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: An error was discovered in a

rule that was published in the Federal

Register on March 15, 1995, Airspace

Docket No. 95–AWP–4. The correct title

description was inadvertently omitted

from the rule. The alteration of this

Class D airspace should only reflect the

renaming of the airport from Williams

AFB, AZ, to Williams Gateway Airport,

AZ. This action corrects that error.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, May 25,

1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Speer, System Management

Specialist, System Management Branch,

AWP–530, Air Traffic Division,

Western-Pacific Region, Federal

Aviation Administration, 15000

Aviation Boulevard, Lawndale,

California 90261, telephone (310) 297–

0010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

Federal Register Document 95–6380,

Airspace Docket No. 95–AWP–4,

published on March 15, 1995 (60 FR

13900), altered the Class D airspace at

Williams AFB, AZ. The correct title

description and geographic location of

this Class D airspace is Chandler, AZ,

which was inadvertently omitted from

the rule. The only alteration of this

Class D airspace area at Chandler, AZ,

is the renaming of the airport to

Williams Gateway Airport, AZ, due to

the closure of Williams AFB, AZ. This

action corrects that error.

Correction to Final Rule

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me, the

description for the Class D airspace at

Williams Air Force Base (AFB), AZ, as

published in the Federal Register on

March 15, 1995 (60 FR 13900) (Federal

Register Document 95–6380; page

13901, column 1), and the description

in FAA Order 7400.9B, which is

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR

71.1 are corrected as follows:

§ 71.1 [Corrected]

On page 13901, in column 1, under

Paragraph 5000, the first line of the

airspace designation is corrected to read

as follows:

* * * * *

AWP AZ D Chandler, AZ [Revised]

* * * * *

Issued in Los Angeles, California, on

March 27, 1995.

Dennis T. Koehler,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division,

Western-Pacific Region.

[FR Doc. 95–8767 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M