Title: Fed. Register / Vol 57, No 108 / Thursday, June 4, 1992 / Notices - Committeee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00004329/00001
 Material Information
Title: Fed. Register / Vol 57, No 108 / Thursday, June 4, 1992 / Notices - Committeee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Jake Varn Collection - Fed. Register / Vol 57, No 108 / Thursday, June 4, 1992 / Notices - Committeee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (JDV Box 95)
General Note: Box 20, Folder 1 ( EPA (Federal Register) ), Item 7
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00004329
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text


Pelagic Committee-2:30 p.m. until 4
There will also be a scoping meeting
on scup & black sea bass beginning at
7:00 p.m.
The Council will begin its regular
meeting on June 24 at 8:00 a.m. and
adjourn on June 25 at approximately 1
p.m. There will also be a hearing on the
revision to the Summer Flounder Fishery
Management Plan Amendment #2 on
June 24 at 7:00 p.m.
In addition to hearing committee
reports, the Council will be making its
recommendations to the Regional
Director for bluefish management in
1993: is scheduled to adopt the
resubmsision of Amendment #2; will
hold discussion on artificial reefs and
other fishery management matters as
deemed necessary. The Council also
may go into closed session (not open to
the public) to discuss personnel and/or
national security matters.
For more information, contact John C.
Bryson, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, room
2115, Federal Building. 300 South New
Street, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302)
i Dated: June 1. 1992.
IDavid S. Crestin,
Deputy Director. Office of Fisheries
Conservation and Management. National
Marine Fisheries Service.
|FR Doc. 92-13128 Filed 6-3-92; 8:45 anim

Pacific Fishery Management Council;
Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service. NOAA, Commerce.
The Pacific Fishery Management
Council's (Council) Coastal Pelagic
Species Advisory Subpanel and Plan
Development Team will hold a public
meeting on June 30, 1992, beginning at 11
a.m. The meeting will be held at the
National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Regional office, 501 West
Ocean Boulevard, suite 4200, Long
Beach, CA.
The purpose of this meeting is to
discuss the preliminary anchovy
biomass estimate and status of the
fishery. There will not be discussions on
the draft fishery management plan being
developed to manage anchovy, Pacific
mackerel, sardines, and jack mackerel.
For more information contact Patricia
Wolf from the California Department of
Fish and Game at (213) 590-5117 or
Larry Jacobson from the National
Marine Fisheries Service at (619) 546-
7117, For those individuals planning on

attending this meeting, there is no public
parking in the building, however, public
parking is available immediately behind
the building on Magnolia Street at a cost
of $3.00 per day.
Dated: June 1. 1992.
David S. Crestin,
Deputy Director. Office of Fisheries
Conservation and Management, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
IFR Doc. 92-13127 Filed 6-3-92; 8:45 am]


Adjustment and Correction of an
Import Limit for Certain Man-Made
Fiber Textile Products Produced or
Manufactured in Indonesia
June 1, 1992.
AGENCY: Committee for the
Implementation of Textile Agreements
ACTION: Issuing a directive to the
Commissioner of Customs adjusting and
correcting a limit.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 1992.
Jennifer Tallarico, International Trade
Specialist, Office of Textiles and
Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,
(202) 377-4212. For information on the
quota status of this limit, refer to the
Quota Status Reports posted on the
bulletin boards of each Customs port or
call (202) 535-9480. For information on
embargoes and quota re-openings, call
(202) 377-3715.
Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March
3.1972. as amended; section 204 of the
Agricultural Act of 1956. as amended (7
The current limit for Category 641 is
being increased for carryforward. The
adjusted limit includes a correction to a
previous directive.
A description of the textile and
apparel categories in terms of HTS
numbers is available in the
CORRELATIOIN: Textile and Apparel
Categories with the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (see
Federal Register notice 56 FR 60101,
published on November 27, 1991). Also
see 56 FR 26392, published on June 7,
1991; and 57 FR 20250. published on May
12, 1991.
The letter to the Commissioner of
Customs and the actions taken pursuant
to it are not designed to implement all of
the provisions of the bilateral
agreement, but are designed to assist

only in the implementation of certain of
its provisions.
Auggie D. Tantillo,
Chairman. Committee for the Implementation
of Textile Agreements.
Committee for the Implementation of Textile
June 1, 1992.
Commissioner of Customs,
Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC
Dear Commissioner: This directive amends,
but does not cancel, the directive issued to
you on June 4,1991, by the Chairman.
Committee for the Implementation of Textile
Agreements. That directive concerns imports
of certain cotton, wool, man-made fiber, silk
blend and other vegetable fiber textiles and
textile products, produced or manufactured in
Indonesia and exported during the twelve-
month period which began on July 1, 1991 and
extends through June 30, 1992.
Effective on June 8, 1992, you are directed
to increase the current limit for Category 641
to 1,772,310 dozen ', as provided under the
terms of the current bilateral textile
agreement between the Governments of the
United States and Indonesia.
The Committee for the Implementation of
Textile Agreements has determined that this
action falls within the foreign affairs
exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5
U.S.C. 553(a)(1).
Auggie D. Tantillo,
Chairman. Committee for the Implementation
of Textile Agreements.
IFR Doc. 92-13130 Filed 6-3-92; 8:45 amI


Corps of Engineers, Department of
the Army

Regulatory Guidance Letters Issued
by the Corps of Engineers
AGENCY: Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is
to provide a copy of the latest
Regulatory Guidance Letter (RFL) to all
known interested parties. RGL's are-
used by the Corps of Engineers as a
means to transmit guidance on the
permit program (33 CFR 320-330) to its
division and district engineers.
Mr. Sam Collinson, Regulatory Branch,
Office of the Chief of Engineers at (202)
accordance with a notice published by
the Corps of Engineers on January 22,

SThe limit has not been adjusted to account for
any imports exported after june 30. 1991.

_ __

Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 108 / Thursday, June 4, 1992 / Notices


Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 108 / Thursday, June 4, 1992 / Notices

1991, (56 FR 2408), we will publish all
RGL's upon issuance. Accordingly, RGL
SNo. 92-1, subject: Federal Agencies
Roles and Responsibilities, is hereby
published. -
John P. Elmore, P.E.,
Chief Operations, Construction and
Readiness Division. Directorate of Civil
Regulatory Guidance Letter, RGL 92-1
Date: 13 May 1992, Expires: 31 December
Subject: Federal Agencies Roles and
1. Purpose
The purpose of this guidance is to
clarify the Army Corps of Engineers
leadership and decision-making role as
"project manager" for the evaluation of
permit applications pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act. This guidance is also intended to
encourage effective and efficient
coordination among prospective
permittees, the Corps, and the Federal
resource agencies (i.e., Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS), and National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)).
Implementation of this guidance will
,-help to streamline the permit process by
minimizing delays and ensuring more
timely decisions, while providing a
meaningful opportunity for substantive
input from all Federal agencies.
2. Background
(a) The Department of the Army
Regulatory Program must operate in an
efficient manner in order to protect the
aquatic environment and provide fair,
equitable, and timely decisions to the
regulated public. Clear leadership and a
predictable decision-making framework
will enhance the public acceptable of
the program and allow the program to
meet the important objective of
effectively protecting the Nation's
valuable aquatic resources.
(b) On August 9, 1991, the President
announced a comprehensive plan for
improving the protection of the Nation's
wetlands. The plan seeks to balance two
important objectives-the protection,
restoration, and creation of wetlands
and the need for sustained economic
growth and development. The plan,
which is designed to slow and
eventually stop the net loss of wetlands,
includes measures that will improve and
streamline the current wetlands
regulatory system. This Regulatory
uidance Letter is issued in accordance
with the President's plan for protecting

(c) The intent of this guidance is to
express clearly that the Corps is the
decision-maker and project manager for
the Department of Army's Regulatory
Program. The Corps will consider, to the
maximum extent possible, all timely,
project-related comments from other
Federal agencies when making
regulatory decisions. Furthermore, the
Corps and relevant Federal agencies
will maintain and improve as necessary
their working relationships.
(d) The Federal resource agencies
have reviewed and concurred with this
guidance and have agreed to act in
accordance with these provisions. While
this guidance does not restrict or impair
the exercise of legal authorities vested
in the Federal resources agencies or
states under the CWA or other statutes
and regulations (e.g., EPA's authority
under section 404(c), section 404(f), and
CWA geographic jurisdiction and FWS/
NMFS authorities under the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act and the
Endangered Species Act (ESA)), agency
comments on Department of the Army
permit applications must be consistent
with the provisions contained in this
regulatory guidance letter.
3. The Corps Project Management/
Decision Making Role
(a) The Corps is solely responsible for
making final permit decisions pursuant
to section 10 and section 404(a),
including final determinations of
compliance with the Corps permit
regulations, the section 404(b)(1)
Guidelines, and Section 7(a)(2) of the
ESA. As such, the Corps will act as the
project manager for the evaluation of all
permit applications. The Corps will
advise potential applicants of its role as
the project manager and decision-maker.
This guidance does not restrict EPA's
authority to make determinations of
compliance with the Guidelines in
carrying out its responsibilities under
Sections 309 and 404(c) of the Clean
Water Act.
(b) As the project manager, the Corps
is responsible for requesting and
evaluating information concerning all
permit applications. The Corps will
obtain and utilize this information in a
manner that moves, as rapidly as
practical, the regulatory process
towards a final permit decision. The
Corps will not evaluate applications as
a project opponent or advocate-but
instead will maintain an objective
evaluation, fully considering all relevant
(c) The Corps will fully consider other
Federal agencies' project-related
comments when determining
compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the

Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, the ESA,
the National Historic Preservation Act,
and other relevant statutes, regulations,
and policies. The Corps will also fully
consider the agencies' views when
determining whether to issue the permit,
to issue the permit with conditions and/
or mitigation, or to deny the permit.
4. The Federal Resources Agencies' Role
(a) It is recognized that the Federal
resource agencies have an important
role in the Department of the Army
Regulatory Program under the CWA,
NEPA, ESA. Magnuson Fisheries
Conservation and Management Act, and
other relevant statutes.
(b) When providing comments,
Federal resource agencies will submit to
the Corps only substantive, project-
related information on the impacts of
activities being evaluated by the Corps
and appropriate and practicable
measures to mitigate adverse impacts.
The comments will be submitted within
the time frames established in
interagency agreements and regulations.
Federal resource agencies will limit their
comments to their respective areas of
expertise and authority to avoid
duplication with the Corps and other
agencies and to provide the Corps with
a sound basis for making permit
decisions. The Federal resource
agencies should not submit comments
that attempt to interpret the Corps
regulations or for the purposes of
section 404(a) make determinations
concerning compliance with the Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines. Pursuant to its
authority under Section 404(b)(1) of the
CWA, the EPA may provide comments
to the Corps identifying its views
regarding compliance with the
Guidelines. While the Corps will fully
consider and utilize agency comments,
the final decision regarding the permit
application, including a determination of
compliance with the Guidelines, rests
solely with the Corps.
5. Pre-Application Consultation
(a) To provide potential applicants
with the maximum degree of relevant
information at an early phase of project
planning, the Corps will increase its
efforts to encourage pre-application
consultations in accordance with
regulations at 33 CFR 325.1(b).
Furthermore, while encouraging pre-
application consultation, the Corps will
emphasize the need for early
consultation concerning mitigation
requirements, if impacts to aquatic
resources may occur. The Corps is
responsible for initiating, coordinating,
and conducting pre-application
consultations and other discussions and

- -23575


Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 108 / Thursday, Tune 4, 1992 / Notices

meetings with applicants regarding
Department of the Army permits. This
may not apply in instances where the
consultation is associated with the
review of a separate permit or license
required from another Federal agency
(e.g., the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission or the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission) or in situations where
resource agencies perform work for
others outside the context of a specific
Department of the Army permit
application (e.g., the Conservation
Reserve Program and technical
assistance to applicants of Federal
(b) For those pre-application
consultations involving activities that
may result in impacts to aquatic
resources, the Corps will provide EPA,
FWS, NMFS (as appropriate), and other
appropriate Federal and State agencies,
a reasonable opportunity to participate
in the pre-application process. The
invited agencies will participate to the
maximum extent possible in the pre-
application consultation, since this is
generally the best time to consider
alternatives for avoiding or reducing
adverse impacts. To the extent practical,
the Corps and the Federal resource
agencies will develop local procedures
(e.g., teleconferencing) to promote
reasonable and effective pre-application
consultations within the logistical
constraints of all affected parties.
6. Applications for Individual Permits
(a) The Corps is responsible for
determining the need for, and the
coordination of, interagency meetings,
requests for information, and other
interactions between permit applicants
and the Federal Government. In this
regard, Federal resource agencies will
contact the Corps to discuss and
coordinate any additional need for
information from the applicant. The
Corps will cooperate with the Federal
resource agencies to ensure, to the
extent practical, that information
necessary for the agencies to carry out
their responsibilities is obtained. If it is
determined by the Corps that an
applicant meeting is necessary for the
exchange of information with a Federal
resource agency and the Corps chooses
not to participate in such a meeting, the
Federal resource agency will apprise the
Corps, generally in writing, of that
agency's discussions with the applicant.
Notwithstanding such meetings, the
Corps is solely responsible for permit
requirements, including mitigation and
other conditions-the Federal resource
agencies must not represent their views
as regulatory requirements. In
circumstances where the Corps meets
with the applicant and develop

information that will affect the permit
decision, the Corps will apprise the
Federal resource agencies of such
(b) Consistent with 33 CFR 325, the
Corps will ensure that public notices
contain sufficient information to
facilitate the timely submittal of project-
specific comments from the Federal
resource agencies. The resource
agencies comments will provide specific
information and/or data related to the
proposed project site. The Corps will
fully consider comments regarding the
site from a watershed or landscape
scale, including an evaluation of
potential cumulative and secondary
(c) The Corps must consider
cumulative impacts in reaching permit
decisions. In addition to the Corps own
expertise and experience, the Corps will
fully consider comments from the
Federal resource agencies, which can
provide valuable information on
cumulative impacts. Interested Federal
agencies are encouraged to provide
periodically to the Corps generic
comments and assessments of impacts
(outside the context of a specific permit
application) on issues within the
agencies' area of expertise.
7. General Permits
(a) The Corps is responsible for
proposing potential general permits,
assessing impacts of and comments on
proposed general permits, and deciding
whether to issue general permits. The
Corps will consider proposals for
general permits from other sources,
including the Federal resource agencies,
although the final decision regarding the
need to propose a general permit rests
with the Corps. Other interested Federal
agencies should provide comments to
the Corps on proposed general permits.
These Federal agency comments will be
submitted consistent with established
agreements and regulations and will
focus on the Federal agencies' areas) of
expertise. The Corps will fully consider
such agencies' comments in deciding
whether to issue general permits,
including programmatic general permits.
(b) The Corps is responsible for
initiating and conducting meetings that
may be necessary in developing and
evaluating potential general permits.
Any discussions with a State or local
Government regarding proposed
programmatic general permits will be
coordinated through and conducted by
the Corps. Prior to issuing a
programmatic general permit, the Corps
will ensure that the State or local
program, by itself or with appropriate
conditions, will protect the aquatic
environment, including wetlands, to the

level required by the section 404
8. This guidance expires 31 December
1997 unless sooner revised or rescinded.
For the Commander:
Arthur E Williams,
Major General, USA, Director of Civil Works.
[FR Doc. 92-13118 Filed 6-3-92; 8:45 aml
BILUNG COE 3710-08-M

[Recommendation 92-2]
DOE's Facility Representative Program
at Defense Nuclear Facilities
AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board.
ACTION: Notice; recommendation.
SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board has made a
recommendation to the Secretary of
Energy pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2286a
concerning DOE's facility representative
program at defense nuclear facilities.
The Board requests public comments on
this recommendation.
DATES: Comments, data, views, or
arguments concerning this
recommendation are due on or before
July 6.1992.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, data,
views, or arguments concerning this
recommendation to: Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana
Avenue NW., suite 700, Washington, DC
Kenneth M. Pusateri or Carole J. Council
at the address above or telephone (202)
Dated: May 29.1992.
John T. Conway,
DOE's Facility Representative Program
at Defense Nuclear Facilities
Dated: May 28,1992.
Department of Energy (DOE) Order
5000.3A, Occurrence Reporting and
Processing of Information, establishes a
policy "to assure that both DOE and
DOE contractor line management,
including the Office of the Secretary,
[be] kept fully and currently informed of
all events which could affect the health
and safety of the public." As a central
feature of the measures used to
implement this policy, the order defines
the position "DOE Facility
Representative" as follows:
DOE Facility Representative. For each
major facility or group of lesser facilities, an


University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs