24884 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

96–11–01 Jetstream Aircraft Limited:

Amendment 39–9626; Docket No. 95–

CE–18–AD.

Applicability: Jetstream Models 3101 and

3201 airplanes (all serial numbers),

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required within the next

1,000 hours time- in-service after the

effective date of this AD, unless already

accomplished.

To prevent excessive ice accretion on the

tail or wings of the affected airplanes, which

could result in loss of control of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

(a) Modify the automatic airframe de-ice

system in accordance with the

ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS

section of Jetstream Service Bulletin No. 30–

JK 12033, Revision No. 1, dated October 20,

1995.

(b) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Brussels Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), Europe, Africa,

Middle East office, FAA, c/o American

Embassy, B–1000 Brussels, Belgium. The

request should be forwarded through an

appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, Brussels ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Brussels ACO.

(d) The inspections required by this AD

shall be done in accordance with Jetstream

Service Bulletin No. 30–JK 12033, Revision

No. 1, dated October 20, 1995. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from

Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Manager Product

Support, Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire, KA9

2RW Scotland; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc.,

Librarian, P.O. Box 16029, Dulles

International Airport, Washington, DC,

20041–6029. Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office

of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(e) This amendment (39–9626) becomes

effective on July 2, 1996.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May

10, 1996.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–12496 Filed 5–16–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–79–AD; Amendment 39–

9627; AD 96–11–02]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Aircraft Limited (Formerly British

Aerospace, Regional Airlines Limited)

HP137 Mk1, Jetstream Series 200, and

Jetstream Model 3101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to Jetstream Aircraft Limited

(JAL) HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200,

and Jetstream Model 3101 airplanes.

This action requires repetitively

inspecting the spigot housing plate for

cracks at the wing/fuselage forward

attachment sliding joint, replacing any

cracked housing plate, repetitively

inspecting the spigots and spigot posts

for corrosion and installing improved

spigots if corrosion is found that

exceeds certain limits, and eventually

installing improved spigots if corrosion

that does not exceed certain limits is

found. For certain affected airplanes,

this action requires repetitively

inspecting the spigot bushes for

migration gaps, replacing the bushes

with modified bushes if gaps are found

that exceed 0.5 inch, and eventually

replacing the bushes with modified

bushes if migration gaps are not found.

Reports of bush migration gaps found on

three of the affected airplanes and

another report of corrosion and several

cracks found on the spigot housing plate

on a Jetstream Model 3101 airplane

prompted this action. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent structural failure of the wing/

fuselage area caused by a cracked or

corroded spigot housing assembly.

DATES: Effective July 2, 1996.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of July 2, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Prestwick

International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9

2RW, Scotland, telephone (44–292)

79888; facsimile (44–292) 79703; or

Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O.

Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, D.C. 20041–6029;

telephone (703) 406–1161; facsimile

(703) 406–1469. This information may

also be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Central

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket 95–

CE–79–AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Dorenda Baker, Program Manager,

Brussels Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, Europe, Africa, and Middle East

Office, c/o American Embassy, B–1000

Brussels, Belgium; telephone (32 2)

508.2715; facsimile (32 2) 230.6899; or

Mr. Jeffrey Morfitt, Project Officer,

Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service, FAA, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64105; telephone (816) 426–6932;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to JAL HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1996 (61 FR
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 24885

1295). The action proposed to require

repetitively inspecting the spigot

housing plate for cracks at the wing/

fuselage forward attachment sliding

joint, replacing any cracked housing

plate, repetitively inspecting the spigots

and spigot posts for corrosion and

installing improved spigots if corrosion

is found, and eventually installing

improved spigots if corrosion is not

found. For certain affected airplanes, the

proposed action would require

repetitively inspecting the spigot bushes

for migration gaps, replacing the bushes

with modified bushes if gaps are found

that exceed 0.5 inch, and eventually

replacing the bushes with modified

bushes if migration gaps are not found.

Accomplishment of the proposed

inspections would be in accordance

with BAe Jetstream Alert Service

Bulletin (ASB) 57–A–JA 920640, dated

February 19, 1993; and Jetstream

Service Bulletin (SB) 57–JA 930941,

Revision 2, dated November 11, 1994.

Accomplishment of the proposed

modifications would be in accordance

with BAe Jetstream SB 57–JM 5259,

dated February 5, 1993, and Erratum

No. 1 to SB 57–JM 5259, dated February

8, 1993; and Jetstream SB 57–JM 5326,

dated September 3, 1993.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received from two different

commenters. One of these commenters

supports the proposal as written.

Comment Resolution

JAL states that the corrosion limits

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2)

of the AD only specify the spigot posts.

JAL further states that Jetstream SB 57–

JA 930941, Revision No. 2, dated

November 11, 1994, also specifies

corrosion limits for the spigots. JAL

requests that these corrosion limits and

applicable service bulletin instructions

be added to the final rule. The FAA

concurs and has revised the AD

accordingly.

JAL also recommends that the

repetitive inspection interval be

changed to 48 calendar months instead

of 12 calendar months to coincide with

Jetstream SB 57–JA 93041. The FAA

established the initial inspection in the

proposal at 12 calendar months and

meant to establish the repetitive

inspection interval at 48 calendar

months, but inadvertently established

the repetitive inspection interval at 12

calendar months. The FAA’s analysis of

data initially submitted by JAL indicates

that repetitively inspecting the spigot

housing area for cracks and corrosion at

48 calendar month intervals provides

the level of safety necessary to correct

the unsafe condition. The final rule AD

has been revised to reflect this change.

JAL asks whether an owner/operator

who found a cracked spigot housing

plate could apply for an alternative

method of compliance to allow 150

flight hours before installation rather

than prior to further flight when a crack

is found that is shorter than 0.2 inch.

JAL states that this would allow the

owner/operator of the affected airplane

time to obtain the necessary parts, and

also states that fatigue tests have

demonstrated slow crack growth. The

FAA allows any owner/operator to

submit a request for an alternative

method of compliance, including an

extension of the compliance time. The

owner/operator should submit the

request with all substantiating data in

accordance with the provisions in the

AD. The FAA will evaluate each request

to determine whether the alternative

method of compliance establishes an

equivalent level of safety to the actions

of the AD, and then will either approve

or reject the request accordingly.

No comments were received regarding

the FAA’s estimate of the cost impact on

the public.

After careful review of all available

information related to the subject

presented above, the FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for the

changes previously discussed and minor

editorial corrections. The FAA has

determined that these changes and

minor corrections will not change the

meaning of the AD and will not add any

additional burden upon the public than

was already proposed.

Aspects of the Action

The alternative to incorporating new

modified spigots and bushes would be

to require repetitive inspections. FAA

aging commuter-class aircraft policy

states that reliance on critical repetitive

inspections carries an unnecessary

safety risk when a design change exists

that could eliminate or, in certain

instances, reduce the number of those

critical inspections. Therefore, the

required spigot and bush replacements

is consistent with the FAA’s commuterclass aircraft policy.

The compliance times of the

repetitive inspections of the spigots and

spigot posts for corrosion and

subsequent replacement, if necessary,

are presented in calendar time instead

of hours time-in-service (TIS). Corrosion

can occur on airplanes regardless of

whether the airplane is in service or in

storage. Therefore, to ensure that

corrosion is detected and corrected on

all airplanes within a reasonable period

of time without inadvertently grounding

any airplanes, a compliance schedule

based upon calendar time instead of

hours TIS is utilized.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 143 airplanes

in the U.S. registry will be affected by

this AD, that it will take approximately

61 workhours per airplane to

accomplish the inspections and

modifications, and that the average

labor rate is approximately $60 an hour.

Parts cost approximately $320 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $569,140 or

$3,980 per airplane. This figure only

takes into account the cost of initial

inspections and does not take into

account repetitive inspection costs. The

FAA has no way of determining the

number of repetitive inspections each

affected airplane owner/operator will

incur over the life of the airplane.

The approximately 61 workhours it

will take to accomplish the required

actions is based on each inspection and

modification being accomplished

separately. The FAA anticipates that

many owners/operators of the affected

airplanes will schedule all of the

required actions to be accomplished at

the same time, thereby reducing the

labor costs associated with

accomplishing these actions.

In addition, Jetstream Aircraft Limited

has informed the FAA that parts have

been distributed to equip approximately

40 airplanes. Assuming that each set of

parts is installed on an affected HP137

Mk1, Jetstream series 200, or Jetstream

Model 3101 airplane, the cost impact of

this AD upon U.S. operators is reduced

$159,200 from $569,140 to $409,940.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3)

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a
24886 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the final

evaluation prepared for this action is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained by contacting the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

96–11–02 Jetstream Aircraft Limited:

Amendment 39–9627; Docket No. 95–

CE–79–AD.

Applicability: HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series

200, and Jetstream Model 3101 airplanes (all

serial numbers), certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required as indicated in the

body of this AD, unless already

accomplished.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

To prevent structural failure of the wing/

fuselage area caused by a cracked spigot

housing assembly, accomplish the following:

(a) For all affected airplanes, upon the

accumulation of 7,200 hours time-in-service

(TIS) or within the next 1,200 hours TIS after

the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later, and thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 7,200 hours TIS, accomplish the

following:

(1) Inspect the spigot housing plate at the

wing/fuselage forward attachment sliding

joint for cracks in accordance with Part 1 of

the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS

section of Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB) 57–

JA 930941, Revision No. 2, dated November

11, 1994.

(2) If a cracked spigot housing plate is

found, prior to further flight, replace the

cracked spigot housing plate in accordance

with Part 3 of the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of Jetstream SB 57–

JA 930941, Revision No. 2, dated November

11, 1994.

(3) Replacing the spigot housing plate does

not eliminate the 7,200-hour TIS interval

repetitive inspection requirement.

(b) For all affected airplanes, within the

next 12 calendar months after the effective

date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not

to exceed 48 calendar months until

Modification No. JM 5326 and Modification

No. JM 5259 (as applicable) are incorporated

as required by paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of

this AD, inspect the spigots and spigot posts

for corrosion in accordance with Part 2 of the

ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS

section of Jetstream SB 57–JA 930941,

Revision No. 2, dated November 11, 1994.

(1) If corrosion damage is found in the

spigot post that is 0.06 inch (1.52 mm) or less

deep and does not extend to within 0.9 inch

(22.9 mm) from either end of the bore, prior

to further flight, treat the corrosion in

accordance with paragraph (8)(d) of the

ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS

section of Jetstream SB 57–JA 930941,

Revision No. 2, dated November 11, 1994.

(2) If corrosion damage in the spigot post

is found that is more than 0.06 inch (1.52

mm) or extends to within 0.9 inch (22.9 mm)

from either end of the bore, prior to further

flight, obtain a repair scheme from the

manufacturer through the Brussels Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO) at the address

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, and

incorporate this repair scheme.

(3) If corrosion damage in the spigot is

found that penetrates the protective surface

of the spigot, within four calendar months

after finding the corrosion damage, replace

both wing/fuselage spigots with new

modified spigots (Modification No. JM 5326)

in accordance with Jetstream SB 57–JM 5326,

dated September 3, 1993. Modification No.

JM 5326 incorporates a new P/N 13781B401

spigot assembly.

(c) For all affected HP137 Mk1 airplanes

and all affected Jetstream series 200

airplanes, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes with a serial number in the range

of 601 through 702 (inclusive), within the

next 1,200 hours TIS after the effective date

of this AD, inspect the wing/fuselage forward

attachment spigot bushes for migration gaps

in accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of BAe Jetstream

Alert SB 57–A–JA 920640, dated February

19, 1993.

(1) If no migration gaps are found,

reinspect at intervals not to exceed 4,500

hours TIS until Modification No. JM 5259 is

incorporated. If migration gaps are found

upon reinspection, install modified bushes as

specified in paragraph (c)(2) or (c)(3) of this

AD.

(2) If migration gaps are found that are 0.5

inch or less, reinspect at intervals not to

exceed 900 hours TIS until Modification No.

JM 5259 is incorporated. If migration gaps are

found upon reinspection that are larger than

.5 inch, accomplish paragraph (c)(3) of this

AD, as applicable.

(3) If migration gaps are found that are

larger than 0.5 inch, within 150 hours TIS

after the last inspection required by

paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD, install

modified bushes at the wing/fuselage forward

attachment spigots (Modification JM 5259) in

accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of BAe Jetstream SB

57–JM 5259, dated February 5, 1993, and

Erratum No. 1 to SB 57–JM 5259, dated

February 8, 1993.

(d) Upon accumulating 25,000 hours TIS or

within 1,000 hours TIS after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs later,

accomplish the following:

(1) For all affected HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes, replace both wing/fuselage spigots

with new modified spigots (Modification No.

JM 5326) in accordance with Jetstream SB

57–JM 5326, dated September 3, 1993; and

(2) For all affected HP137 Mk1 airplanes

and all affected Jetstream series 200

airplanes, and Jetstream Model 3101

airplanes with a serial number in the range

of 601 through 702 (inclusive), install

modified bushes at the wing/fuselage forward

attachment spigots (Modification No. JM

5259) in accordance with the

ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS

section of BAe Jetstream SB 57–JM 5259,

dated February 5, 1993, and Erratum No. 1

to SB 57–JM 5259, dated February 8, 1993.

(3) Incorporating Modification No. JM 5259

eliminates the requirement of repetitively

inspecting the wing/fuselage forward

attachment spigot bushes for migration gaps

as required by all designations of paragraph

(c) of this AD.

(e) Incorporating both Modification No. JM

5326 and Modification No. JM 5259

eliminates the repetitive inspections required

by all designations of paragraphs (b) and (c)

of this AD. This does not eliminate the

repetitive inspections of the spigot housing

plate as required by paragraph (a) of this AD.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(g) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial or repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Brussels Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), Europe, Africa, Middle East

office, FAA, c/o American Embassy, 1000

Brussels, Belgium. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Brussels ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Brussels ACO.

(h) The inspections required by this AD

shall be done in accordance with BAe

Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin 57–A–JA

920640, dated February 19, 1993; and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 97 / Friday, May 17, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 24887

Jetstream Service Bulletin 57–JA 930941,

Revision 2, dated November 11, 1994. The

modifications required by this AD shall be

done in accordance with BAe Jetstream

Service Bulletin 57–JM 5259, dated February

5, 1993, and Erratum No. 1 to Service

Bulletin 57–JM 5259, dated February 8, 1993;

and Jetstream Service Bulletin 57–JM 5326,

dated September 3, 1993. This incorporation

by reference was approved by the Director of

the Federal Register in accordance with 5

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may

be obtained from Jetstream Aircraft Limited,

Manager Product Support, Prestwick Airport,

Ayrshire, KA9 2RW Scotland; or Jetstream

Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O. Box 16029,

Dulles International Airport, Washington,

DC, 20041–6029. Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E.

12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(i) This amendment (39–9627) becomes

effective on July 2, 1996.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May

10, 1996.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–12497 Filed 5–16–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 10

[T.D. 96–41]

RIN 1515–AB04

Removal of Customs Regulations

Relating to the Steel Voluntary

Restraint Arrangement Program

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service,

Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On September 13, 1990, T.D.

90–70 was published in the Federal

Register (55 FR 37701) to set forth

interim amendments to the Customs

Regulations regarding the entry

requirements applicable to imported

steel products which are subject to

voluntary restraint arrangements

negotiated between the United States

and certain steel-exporting countries.

This document removes those interim

regulations as a consequence of the

expiration of the steel voluntary

restraint arrangement program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frank Crowe, Office of Field Operations

(202–927–0164).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On September 13, 1990, Customs

published in the Federal Register T.D.

90–70, 55 FR 37701, which amended

Part 10 of the Customs Regulations (19

CFR Part 10) by setting forth interim

regulations concerning entry

requirements applicable to imported

steel products subject to voluntary

restraint arrangements (VRAs)

negotiated between the United States

and certain steel-exporting countries

and enforced under the Steel Import

Stabilization Act (title VIII of Public

Law 98–573, codified at 19 U.S.C. 2253

note), as amended by the Steel Trade

Liberalization Program Implementation

Act (Public Law 101–221, 103 Stat.

1886). The interim regulations consisted

of new §§ 10.321–10.323 (19 CFR

10.321–10.323) and set forth, in

§ 10.323, the basic requirement that a

valid and properly executed original

export certificate or export license,

issued by the country of origin of the

products, shall be submitted at the time

of entry of each shipment of

arrangement products. The interim

regulations went into effect on the date

of publication. On October 22, 1990,

Customs published a document in the

Federal Register at 55 FR 42556 to

correct the interim regulations by

removing paragraph (d) from new

interim section 10.323, with effect from

September 13, 1990. No document was

ever published in the Federal Register

adopting the interim regulations as a

final rule.

As noted in the background

discussion set forth in T.D. 90–70,

section 3(a) of the Steel Trade

Liberalization Program Implementation

Act, cited above, extended the

President’s authority to enforce the

VRAs until March 31, 1992, and it was

for this reason that § 10.322(a) of the

interim regulations, in defining the term

‘‘arrangement’’ for purposes of § 10.323,

referred specifically to a period

extending only through that date. Thus,

in the absence of a further extension of

the President’s authority and a

consequential amendment to the interim

regulations, it was intended that those

regulations would by their own terms

cease to have effect after March 31,

1992.

Since no action was taken by

Congress to extend the President’s VRA

enforcement authority beyond March

31, 1992, that authority, and thus in

effect the VRA program itself, expired

on that date and Customs thereafter

ceased to enforce the interim regulatory

provisions. Accordingly, because those

interim regulations no longer have any

purpose or effect, Customs believes that

it is appropriate to remove them.

Inapplicability of Notice and Delayed

Effective Date Requirements

Since this amendment merely

conforms the Customs Regulations to

current legal requirements and has no

substantive effect on the public,

pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B), it is determined that notice

and public procedures thereon are

unnecessary. For the same reasons, it is

determined under the provisions of 5

U.S.C. 553(d)(3) that good cause exists

for dispensing with a delayed effective

date.

Executive Order 12866

This document does not meet the

criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory

action’’ as specified in Executive Order

12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the provisions of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.), it is certified that the

amendment will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities because the

amendment merely removes regulatory

provisions that have already ceased to

have legal effect. Accordingly, the

amendment is not subject to the

regulatory analysis or other

requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Drafting Information

The principal author of this document

was Francis W. Foote, Office of

Regulations and Rulings, U.S. Customs

Service. However, personnel from other

offices participated in its development.

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 10

Customs duties and inspections,

Imports, Steel products.

Amendments to the Regulations

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth

above, Part 10, Customs Regulations (19

CFR Part 10), is amended as set forth

below.

PART 10—ARTICLES CONDITIONALLY

FREE, SUBJECT TO A REDUCED

RATE, ETC.

1. The general authority citation for

Part 10 continues to read as follows, and

the specific authority citation for

§§ 10.321 through 10.323 is removed:

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General

Note 20, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States), 1321, 1481, 1484, 1498, 1508,

1623, 1624, 3314;

* * * * *