10–2–01 Tuesday Vol. 66 No. 191 Oct. 2, 2001 Pages 50095–50286
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:40 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\02OCWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 2, 2001
The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 523–5243 Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ fedreg. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log in as guest with no password. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $638, or $697 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $253. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $9.00 for each issue, or $9.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 66 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:40 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\02OCWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 191
Tuesday, October 2, 2001
Arts and Humanities, National Foundation Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES Meetings: Federal Energy Management Program; Federal purchasing Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of energy-efficient standby power devices, 50177 NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Protection Agency Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, 50201 RULES Air programs; State authority delegations: Delaware, 50116–50124 Coast Guard Iowa, Missouri, and Nebraska, 50110–50116 RULES PROPOSED RULES Ports and waterways safety: Air pollution control: Cumberland City, TN to Alexandria, LA; DOD barge State operating permits programs— flotilla; security zone, 50108–50110 Arizona, 50136–50139 Kennebec River, Bath, ME; safety and security zones, Air programs; State authority delegations: 50106–50108 Delaware, 50135–50136 Station Jonesport et al., ME; safety and security zones, Air quality implementation plans: 50105–50106 Preparation, adoption, and submittal— NOTICES Regional haze standards; best available retrofit Meetings: technology determinations; implementation Great Lakes Regional Waterways Management Forum, guidelines, 50135 50242–50243 Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States: Arizona, 50251–50285 Commerce Department NOTICES See International Trade Administration Agency information collection activities: See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed collection; comment request, 50182–50183 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 50183– Copyright Office, Library of Congress 50185 NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Cable royalty funds: National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, 50185 Cable statutory license (1999); Phase I or Phase II Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: controversy ascertainment; comment request, 50219– Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund 50220 USTFields Pilots, 50194 Satellite royalty funds; 1999 funds; controversy Meetings: ascertainment, 50220–50222 Scientific Counselors Board, 50194–50195 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Recognizing completion of corrective action activities at Customs Service RCRA facilities; comment request, 50195–50197 RULES Superfund; response and remedial actions, proposed User fee airports; Customs services fees, 50103–50105 settlements, etc.: NOTICES San Gabriel Site, CA, 50197–50198 Generalized System of Preferences: Superfund program: Procedures if program expires, 50248–50249 Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket; Federal facilities; list update, 50185–50194 Energy Department See Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office Executive Office of the President See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission See Presidential Documents NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent: Farm Credit Administration Scrap metals disposition; public scoping meetings, NOTICES 50175–50176 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50198 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: University Reactor Instrumentation Program, 50176 Federal Aviation Administration Presidential permit applications: RULES GenPower New York, L.L.C., 50174–50175 Class E airspace, 50101 Radioactive waste: VOR Federal airways, 50101–50102 Yucca Mountain, NV— PROPOSED RULES Site recommendation consideration; hearings, 50176– Airworthiness directives: 50177 Dornier, 50125–50127
VerDate 11
NOTICES Interior Department Aeronautical land-use assurance; waivers: See Indian Affairs Bureau Georgetown County Airport, SC, 50245–50246 See Land Management Bureau Meetings: See Minerals Management Service RTCA, Inc., 50243–50244 See National Indian Gaming Commission Passenger facility charges; applications, etc.: See National Park Service Austin Straubel International Airport, WI, 50244–50245 See Reclamation Bureau Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, OH, 50245 Tri-Cities Airport, WA, 50246 International Trade Administration Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: NOTICES Equipment known to have high potential for interference Antidumping: when installed on rotorcraft with electronic controls Carbon and alloy steel wire rod from— providing critical functions, etc., 50246–50247 Various countries, 50164–50173 Stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from— Federal Communications Commission Germany, 50173–50174 PROPOSED RULES Common carrier services: International Trade Commission In-region interexchange services provided by incumbent NOTICES independent local exchange carriers; special affiliate Import investigations: requirements; biennial regulatory review, 50139– Welded large diameter line pipe from— 50140 Japan and Mexico, 50214 Telecommunications carriers’ use of customer proprietary network and other customer information; non- Labor Department accounting safeguards implementation, 50140–50147 See Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Land Management Bureau Proposed collection; comment request, 50198–50199 NOTICES Meetings: Oil and gas leases: North American Numbering Council, 50199–50200 Wyoming, 50205 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Legal Services Corporation NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Grant and cooperative agreement awards: Proposed collection; comment request, 50178 Civil legal services to low-income clients; list, 50215– Hydroelectric applications, 50178–50182 50219 Meetings: El Dorado Irrigation District, 50182 Library of Congress Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: See Copyright Office, Library of Congress Dominion Transmission, Inc., 50179–50180 San Diego Gas & Electric Co., 50180 Minerals Management Service Federal Reserve System NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Central and Western Gulf of Mexico OCS— Banks and bank holding companies: Oil and gas lease sales, 50205–50206 Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 50200 Financial Management Service National Aeronautics and Space Administration See Fiscal Service NOTICES Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially Fiscal Service exclusive: NOTICES Phoenix Systems International, Inc., 50222 Surety companies acceptable on Federal bonds: Profound Technologies, 50222 International Fidelity Insurance Co.; correction, 50249 Solus Refrigeration, Inc., 50222 Ticona Polymers, Inc., 50222 Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Meetings: Proposed collection; comment request, 50200 Combined Arts Advisory Panel, 50222–50223 Meetings: Vital and Health Statistics National Committee, 50200– National Indian Gaming Commission 50201 PROPOSED RULES Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: Indian Affairs Bureau Environment, public health, and safety, 50127–50135 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed collection; comment request, 50201–50202 PROPOSED RULES Liquor and tobacco sale or distribution ordinance: Endangered and threatened species: Berry Creek Rancheria, CA, 50202–50205 Sea turtle conservation requirements, 50148–50159
VerDate 11
Marine mammals: Research and Special Programs Administration Incidental taking— PROPOSED RULES Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan, 50160– Hazardous materials: 50163 Hazardous materials transportation— Loading, unloading, and storage; meetings cancelled, National Park Service 50147–50148 NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Securities and Exchange Commission Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, MA, 50206– RULES 50207 Securities: Environmental statements; notice of intent: Firm quote and trade-through disclosure rules for George Washington Boyhood Home, VA; special resource options; compliance date extension, 50103 study, 50206 Securities, etc.: Isle Royal National Park, MI, 50207 Mutual fund after-tax returns; disclosure; compliance San Juan Island National Historical Park, WA, 50208 date extension, 50102 National Register of Historic Places: NOTICES Pending nominations, 50208–50213 Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 50225 Joint industry plan: National Science Foundation National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., et al., NOTICES 50226–50237 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50223 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Depository Trust Co., 50237 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Pacific Exchange, Inc., 50237–50240 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50223–50224 Small Business Administration Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: SCA Services, 50223 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 50240– Occupational Safety and Health Administration 50241 NOTICES Disaster loan areas: Agency information collection activities: Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan Proposed collection; comment request, 50214–50215 Program; National Emergency as result of attacks on World Trade Center and Pentagon; various States, Personnel Management Office 50241–50242 NOTICES Texas, 50242 Agency information collection activities: Interest rates; quarterly determinations, 50242 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 50224– 50225 Transportation Department Meetings: See Coast Guard Federal Salary Council, 50225 See Federal Aviation Administration See Research and Special Programs Administration Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Treasury Department Special observances: See Customs Service National Hispanic Heritage Month (Proc. 7471), 50097– See Fiscal Service 50098 NOTICES National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Agency information collection activities: Week (Proc. 7472), 50099–50100 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 50247 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Meetings: Nuclear-related sanctions; waiver for India and Pakistan Debt Management Advisory Committee, 50247–50248 (Presidential Determination No. 2001-28), 50095
Public Debt Bureau See Fiscal Service Separate Parts In This Issue
Public Health Service Part II See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Environmental Protection Agency, 50251–50285
Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Reader Aids Environmental statements; notice of intent: Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Central Valley Project, CA; San Luis Unit feature phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, reevaluation, 50213–50214 and notice of recently enacted public laws.
VerDate 11
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR Proclamations: 7471...... 50097 7472...... 50099 Administrative Orders: Presidential Determinations: No. 2001–28 of September 22, 2001 ...... 50095 14 CFR 71 (2 documents) ...... 50101 Proposed Rules: 39...... 50125 17 CFR 230...... 50102 239...... 50102 240...... 50103 270...... 50102 274...... 50102 19 CFR 122...... 50103 25 CFR Proposed Rules: 580...... 50127 33 CFR 165 (3 documents) ...... 50105, 50106, 50108 40 CFR 60...... 50110 61...... 50110 63 (2 documents) ...... 50110, 50116 Proposed Rules: 51...... 50135 52...... 50252 63...... 50135 70...... 50136 47 CFR Proposed Rules: 64 (2 documents) ...... 50139, 50140 49 CFR Proposed Rules: 171...... 50147 173...... 50147 174...... 50147 175...... 50147 176...... 50147 177...... 50147 178...... 50147 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 222...... 50148 223...... 50148 229...... 50160
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCLS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCLS 50095
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 66, No. 191
Tuesday, October 2, 2001
Title 3— Presidential Determination No. 2001–28 of September 22, 2001
The President Waiver of Nuclear-Related Sanctions on India and Pakistan
Memorandum for the Secretary of State
Pursuant to section 9001(b) of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106–79), I hereby determine and certify to the Congress that the application to India and Pakistan of the sanctions and prohibitions contained in subparagraphs (B), (C), and (G) of section 102(b)(2) of the Arms Export Control Act would not be in the national security interests of the United States. Furthermore, pursuant to section 9001(a) of the Depart- ment of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106–79), I hereby waive, with respect to India and Pakistan, to the extent not already waived, the application of any sanction contained in section 101 or 102 of the Arms Export Control Act, section 2(b)(4) of the Export Import Bank Act of 1945, and section 620E(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended. You are authorized and directed to transmit this determination and certifi- cation to the appropriate committees of the Congress and to arrange for its publication in the Federal Register. W THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, September 22, 2001.
[FR Doc. 01–24721 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Billing code 4710–10–M
VerDate 11
Proclamation 7471 of September 28, 2001 National Hispanic Heritage Month, 2001
By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation For more than 30 years, the United States has annually celebrated the rich history and cultural traditions of our Nation’s Hispanic American people. National Hispanic Heritage Month provides us an opportunity to express deep appreciation to Hispanic Americans for their countless contributions to our society and to pay tribute again to America’s distinctive diversity. Since our Nation’s founding, Hispanic Americans have played an integral role in our country’s exceptional story of success. Hispanic Americans served with heroism in every major American military conflict. The Continental Army benefited from the valor of Bernardo de Ga´lvez, who led his frequently outnumbered troops to numerous victories against the British. Luis Esteves organized the first Puerto Rico National Guard and rose through the ranks of the U.S. Army to become a distinguished Brigadier General. And 38 Hispanics have earned our Nation’s highest military decoration, the Medal of Honor. The United States academic and scientific communities benefited from the contributions of Hispanic Americans like physicist Luis Walter Alvarez, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1986. Business leaders like Roberto Goizueta have had a positive effect on our Nation’s economy; and many Hispanics have greatly influenced America’s artistic, legal, and political communities. Today, Hispanic culture continues to shape the American experience. More than 30 million Americans, about 1 in 8 people in the United States, claim Hispanic origin. They contribute to every walk of contemporary American life, while simultaneously preserving the unique customs and traditions of their ancestors. All Americans, regardless of national origin, celebrate the vibrant Hispanic American spirit that influences our Nation’s art, music, food, and faiths. We also celebrate the practices of commitment to family, love of country, and respect for others, virtues that transcend ethnicity, reflect the American spirit, and are nobly exemplified in the Hispanic Amer- ican community. The strong ties that Hispanic Americans maintain with their ancestral home- land remind us that the United States must pursue robust relations with its trading partners in Latin America and the Caribbean. The future of our hemisphere is closely tied to these relationships, and improving trade will play a vital role in building important links with our Hispanic neighbors. Maintaining open and free trade creates job opportunities and promotes economic growth, improving the welfare of every citizen in every land it touches. Thus, we will negotiate for freer markets, which will allow us the opportunity to obtain better protections for our hemisphere’s environ- ment and will promote political freedom throughout the region. We have a great opportunity before us. By working together, we can achieve a fully democratic hemisphere, bound together by good will, cultural under- standing, and free trade. The many contributions of Hispanic Americans to our Nation will help us reach this important goal by helping connect our country with the Hispanic nations to our south. This month, we celebrate the talents, culture, and spirit of Hispanic Americans, which deeply enrich our country and bless our people.
VerDate 11
The Congress, by Public Law 100–402, has authorized and requested the President to issue annually a proclamation designating September 15 through October 15, as ‘‘National Hispanic Heritage Month.’’ I am proud to do so. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim September 15 through October 15, 2001, as National Hispanic Heritage Month. I call upon all the people of the United States to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies and activities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty- sixth. W
[FR Doc. 01–24771 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Billing code 3195–01–P
VerDate 11
Proclamation 7472 of September 28, 2001
National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week, 2001
By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation
For more than a century, our Nation’s Historically Black Colleges and Univer- sities (HBCUs) have played a vital role in providing opportunities for excel- lence in higher education to millions of African American students. Throughout their history, these institutions of higher learning persevered in the face of many obstacles, offering university degrees to African Ameri- cans at a time when most schools refused them admission. Some of our HBCUs began when society was deeply segregated; and some were founded when the Nation still permitted the scourge of slavery. The Civil War eradi- cated slavery in America; and the United States Supreme Court ended the racial segregation of our schools. Notwithstanding the removal of these blights from the American scene, HBCUs have remained committed to providing African American students with extraordinary educational opportunities. The HBCUs’ consistent tradition of offering high-quality, academic programs has enabled their students and graduates to prosper. The success of our HBCUs should be a source of great pride for all Americans. Almost 300,000 African Americans currently are enrolled in HBCUs, and among their graduates are Members of Congress, hundreds of elected officials, military officers, physicians, teachers, attorneys, judges, ambassadors, and business executives. Committed to excellence as well as to opportunity, our HBCUs reflect the determination and spirit that are essential to achieving my Administration’s goal of educational success at every level. All Americans should have oppor- tunities to pursue the American dream. Historically Black Colleges and Universities play an essential role in providing access to that dream for African Americans, and I salute them for their continuing commitment to serving African American students. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim September 24 through September 30, 2001, as National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week. I call upon the people of the United States, including government officials, educators, and administrators, to observe this week with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities, thereby demonstrating our appreciation of and support for these important educational institutions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand one, and of the
VerDate 11
Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty- sixth. W
[FR Doc. 01–24772 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Billing code 3195–01–P
VerDate 11
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 191
Tuesday, October 2, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on September 24, into newly established P–49. This action contains regulatory documents having general 2001. is necessary to assist the United States applicability and legal effect, most of which Robert N. Stevens, Secret Service in accomplishing its are keyed to and codified in the Code of Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, mission of providing security for the Federal Regulations, which is published under Southwest Region. 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. President of the United States. Because [FR Doc. 01–24611 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] this action is needed for the security of The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by BILLING CODE 4910–13–M the President, I find that notice and the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) new books are listed in the first FEDERAL are impracticable. Federal airways are REGISTER issue of each week. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order 7400.9J dated August 31, 2001, Federal Aviation Administration and effective September 16, 2001, which DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 14 CFR Part 71 Federal Aviation Administration 71.1. The Federal airway listed in this [Docket No. FAA–2001–9129; Airspace document will be published Docket No. 01–AWA–3] 14 CFR Part 71 subsequently in the Order. RIN 2120–AA66 This regulation is limited to an [Airspace Docket No. 2001–ASW–11] established body of technical Realignment of Federal Airway V–358; regulations for which frequent and Revision of Class E Airspace, Clinton, TX routine amendments are necessary to AR AGENCY: Federal Aviation keep them operationally current. It, Administration (FAA), DOT. therefore—(1) is not a ‘‘significant AGENCY: Federal Aviation regulatory action’’ under Executive ACTION: Final rule. Administration (FAA), DOT. Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of SUMMARY: This action realigns Federal rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies effective date. Airway 358 (V–358) Waco, TX, so as to and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February prevent instrument flight rules (IFR) 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant SUMMARY: This notice confirms the aircraft navigating on the airway from preparation of a regulatory evaluation as effective date of a direct final rule which encroaching on the newly established the anticipated impact is so minimal. revises the Class E Airspace, Clinton, Prohibited Area 49 (P–49), Crawford, Since it has been determined that this AR. TX. P–49 was established to enhance is a routine matter that will only affect security and assist the United States air traffic procedures and air navigation, EFFECTIVE DATE: The direct final rule it is certified that this rule, when published at 66 FR 36908 is effective Secret Service in accomplishing its 0901 UTC, November 1, 2001. mission of providing security for the promulgated, will not have a significant President of the United States. economic impact on a substantial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, November 1, number of small entities under the Joseph R. Yadouga, Airspace Branch, 2001. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Air Traffic Division, Southwest Region, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Aviation Administration, Fort Environmental Review Worth, TX 76193–0520, telephone: 817– Steve Rohring, Airspace and Rules The FAA has determined that this 222–5597. Division, ATA–400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal Aviation action qualifies for categorical exclusion SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Administration, 800 Independence under the National Environmental The FAA published this direct final Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Policy Act in accordance with FAA rule with a request for comments in the telephone: (202) 267–8783. Order 1050.1D, Policies and Procedures Federal Register on July 16, 2001, (66 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: for Considering Environmental Impacts. FR 36908). The FAA uses the direct This airspace action is not expected to final rulemaking procedure for a Background cause any potentially significant noncontroversial rule where the FAA On March 7, the Department of the environmental impacts, and no believes that there will be no adverse Treasury, United States Secret Service extraordinary circumstances exist that public comment. This direct final rule requested that the FAA realign V–358 to warrant preparation of an advised the public that no adverse prevent IFR aircraft navigating on the environmental assessment. comments were anticipated, and that airway from encroaching on newly unless a written adverse comment, or a established P–49. As currently aligned, List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 written notice of intent to submit such V–358 passes through the center of P– Airspace, Incorporation by reference, an adverse comment, were received 49 prohibited airspace (Airspace Docket Navigation (air). within the comment period, the No. 01–AWA–1, 66 FR 16391). regulation would become effective on Adoption of the Amendment November 1, 2001. No adverse The Rule comments were received, and, thus, this This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 In consideration of the foregoing, the action confirms that this direct final rule realigns V–358 to prevent IFR aircraft Federal Aviation Administration will be effective on that date. navigating on the airway from entering amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:
VerDate 11
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 270 and 274 published on February 5, agreement within the fund industry, as CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 2001, remains April 16, 2001. well as with the third-party providers, CLASS E, AIRSPACE AREAS; Compliance Dates: The compliance on several components of the after-tax AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING date for the amendments to rule 482 (17 return calculation. In addition, the fund POINTS CFR 230.482) under the Securities Act groups argued that the October 1, 2001 of 1933 and rule 34b–1 (17 CFR compliance date is particularly 1. The authority citation for part 71 270.34b–1) under the Investment continues to read as follows: problematic for fund supermarkets, Company Act of 1940 is extended to which must rely upon third-party Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, December 1, 2001. The compliance date providers for the after-tax returns they 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– for the amendments to Form N–1A (17 publish for non-proprietary funds.3 1963 Comp., p. 389. CFR 239.15A and 274.11A) remains February 15, 2002. Because the fund supermarkets’ § 71.1 [Amended] websites are in most cases deemed to be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katy sales literature, the after-tax numbers 2. The incorporation by reference in Mobedshahi, Attorney, or Paul G. 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation Cellupica, Assistant Director, (202) 942– that they post on their websites must Administration Order 7400.9J, Airspace 0721, Office of Disclosure Regulation, comply with the after-tax return rule by Designations and Reporting Points, Division of Investment Management, October 1, 2001. dated August 31, 2001, and effective Securities and Exchange Commission, The Commission therefore is September 16, 2001, is amended as 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC extending until December 1, 2001, the follows: 20549–0506. compliance date for the Rule Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Amendments. This extension will give Airways Commission is extending the funds and third-party providers * * * * * compliance date for certain sufficient time to resolve outstanding V–358 [Revised] amendments to rule 482 (17 CFR technical issues regarding the 230.482) under the Securities Act of From San Antonio, TX, via Stonewall, TX; appropriate methodology to be used in Lampasas, TX; INT Lampasas 041° and Waco, 1933 and rule 34b–1 (17 CFR 270.34b– calculating standardized after-tax TX, 280° radials; Waco; Glen Rose, TX; 1) under the Investment Company Act returns and perform any necessary Millsap, TX; Bowie, TX; Ardmore, OK; INT of 1940, which the Commission adopted systems changes. The extension will ° ° on January 18, 2001 (‘‘Rule Ardmore 327 and Will Rogers, OK, 195 also allow third-party providers to radials; to Will Rogers. Amendments’’).1 The Rule Amendments collect the historical tax data that they * * * * * require that fund advertisements and sales literature include standardized need to compute after-tax returns Issued in Washington, DC, on September according to the Commission’s rules. 24, 2001. after-tax returns if the sales material The Commission, for good cause, Reginald C. Matthews, either (i) includes after-tax performance information; or (ii) includes any finds that, based on the reasons cited Manager, Airspace and Rules Division. performance information together with above, notice and solicitation of [FR Doc. 01–24427 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] representations that the fund is comment regarding the extension of the BILLING CODE 4910–13–U managed to limit taxes. The compliance date for the Rule Commission had designated October 1, Amendments is impracticable, 2001, as the compliance date for the unnecessary, and contrary to the public SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Rule Amendments. interest.4 The Commission notes that COMMISSION On September 20, 2001, the October 1, 2001 compliance date is representatives of four major fund imminent, and that a limited extension 17 CFR Parts 230, 239, 270, and 274 groups requested that the Commission will give funds and third-party extend the October 1, 2001 compliance [Release Nos. 33–8010; 34–44850; IC– providers sufficient time to seek 25175; File No. S7–09–00] date for the Rule Amendments.2 In their request, these fund groups argued that clarification from the Commission staff RIN 3235–AH77 an extension is necessary to allow funds about the appropriate methodology to be used in computing after-tax returns and Disclosure of Mutual Fund After-Tax and third-party providers of to modify their systems accordingly. Returns; Extension of Compliance performance information to request and Date obtain clarification from the Dated: September 26, 2001. Commission staff on a number of By the Commission. AGENCY: Securities and Exchange technical issues about the methodology Margaret H. McFarland, Commission. for calculating after-tax returns, and to Deputy Secretary. ACTION: Final rule; extension of program their systems accordingly. The compliance date. fund groups stated that they only [FR Doc. 01–24542 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] recently became aware of a lack of BILLING CODE 8010–01–U SUMMARY: The Commission is extending the compliance date for amendments to 1 See Disclosure of Mutual Fund After-Tax rule 482 under the Securities Act of Returns, Securities Act Release No. 7941 (Jan. 18, 1933 and rule 34b–1 under the 2001) (66 FR 9002) (Feb. 5, 2001). 3 A fund supermarket is a program offered by a Investment Company Act of 1940 which 2 See Letter to Paul F. Roye, Director, Division of broker-dealer or other financial institution through require certain funds to include Investment Management, from Eric Roiter, Sr. Vice which its customers may purchase and redeem a President & General Counsel, Fidelity Management variety of funds from different providers. standardized after-tax returns in & Research Company, on behalf of Henry H. 4 See section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative advertisements and other sales material, Hopkins, Chief Legal Counsel, T. Rowe Price and which were published on February Associates, Inc.; Marguerite E.H. Morrison, Chief Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)B)) (an agency may dispense with prior notice and comment when it 5, 2001 (66 FR 9002). Legal Officer-Mutual Funds, Prudential Financial; and Heidi Stam, Principal, The Vanguard Group, finds, for good cause, that notice and comment are DATES: Effective Date: The effective date Inc., dated September 20, 2001 (placed in File No. ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the of the amendments to Parts 230, 239, S7–09–00). public interest’’).
VerDate 11
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE However, a broker-dealer is not required of the options exchanges has filed COMMISSION to disclose to its customer an proposed rule changes intended to intermarket trade-through if the broker- incorporate the requirements of the 17 CFR Part 240 dealer effects the transaction on an Linkage Plan.6 Therefore, the Commission finds that [Release No. 34–44852; File No. S7–17–00] exchange that participates in an approved linkage plan that includes good cause exists at this time to extend RIN 3235–AH96 provisions reasonably designed to limit the compliance date for six months, to customers’ orders from being executed April 1, 2002, to allow the options Firm Quote and Trade-Through at prices that trade through a better exchanges to make further Disclosure Rules for Options published price. In addition, broker- advancements towards implementing a AGENCY: Securities and Exchange dealers will not be required to provide linkage before imposing the disclosure Commission. the disclosure required by the Rule if requirements of the Rule on broker- the customer’s order is executed as part dealers. ACTION: Final rule; extension of The Commission finds, in accordance compliance date. of a block trade. In the Adopting Release, the with Section 553(b)(3)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act,7 that SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission noted that it would Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is consider granting exemptive relief to extending the compliance date relates solely to agency organization, extending the compliance date for Rule broker-dealers from the disclosure procedure, or practice, and does not 11Ac1–7 under the Securities Exchange requirements of the Rule if the options relate to a substantive rule. Accordingly, Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’). Rule exchanges continued to make notice, opportunity for public comment, 11Ac1–7 requires a broker-dealer to substantial progress towards 3 and publication prior to the extension disclose to its customer when the implementing a linkage plan. On are unnecessary. customer’s order for listed options is March 15, 2001, the Commission executed at a price inferior to a better extended the compliance date from By the Commission. published price, unless the transaction April 1, 2001 to October 1, 2001, noting Dated: September 26, 2001. was effected on a market that that while progress had been made Margaret H. McFarland, participates in an intermarket linkage toward implementing the linkage plan Deputy Secretary. plan approved by the Commission. This approved by the Commission in July,4 [FR Doc. 01–24575 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] rule was published on December 1, 2000 the exchanges’ efforts had not yet BILLING CODE 8010–01–P (66 FR 75439). resulted in a linkage that could be DATES: Effective Date: The effective date implemented before the compliance for Rule 11Ac1–7, published on date of April 1, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY December 1, 2000 (65 FR 75439), The Commission believes that the remains February 1, 2001. options exchanges have continued to Customs Service Compliance Date: On March 15, 2001, make substantial progress on the Commission extended the implementing the linkage. Specifically, 19 CFR Part 122 on March 23, 2001, the options markets compliance date for Rule 11Ac1–7 [T. D. 01–70] (§ 240.11Ac1–7) from April 1, 2001 to selected The Options Clearing October 1, 2001 (66 FR 15792). The Corporation (‘‘The OCC’’) as the linkage User Fee Airports Commission now extends the provider. The OCC has advised the Commission that it expects to have AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service, compliance date from October 1, 2001 to Department of the Treasury. April 1, 2002. finalized the technical specifications for the linkage by early November 2001. ACTION: Final rule. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Each of the options exchanges is SUMMARY: This document amends the Jennifer Colihan, Special Counsel, at currently evaluating its internal systems Customs Regulations to reflect the (202) 942–0735, Division of Market to determine the modifications, establishment of one additional user fee Regulation, Securities and Exchange development, and testing that will be airport and the cancellation of another Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., needed to accommodate the linkage. user fee airport. A user fee airport is one Washington, DC 20549–1001. In addition, on June 27, 2001, the which, while not qualifying for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Commission approved an amendment to designation as an international or November 17, 2000, the Commission the Linkage Plan proposed by the landing rights airport, has been adopted Rule 11Ac1–7 1 (‘‘Rule’’) under options exchanges that satisfies the approved by the Commissioner of the Exchange Act to require a broker- minimal requirements of the Trade- Customs to receive, for a fee, the dealer to disclose to its customer when Through Disclosure Rule and, once the customer’s order for listed options is services of a Customs officer for the implemented, would except broker- processing of aircraft entering the executed at a price inferior to a better dealers who effect transactions on any published quote (‘‘intermarket trade- United States and their passengers and of the linked markets from making the cargo. through’’), and to disclose the better required disclosures under the Trade- published quote available at that time.2 5 Through Disclosure Rule. Finally, each requires plan participants to actively surveil their This disclosure must be made in writing markets for trades executed at prices inferior to at or before the completion of the 3 Id. those publicly quoted on other exchanges; and (3) transaction, and may be provided in 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43086 makes clear that the failure of a market with a better conjunction with the confirmation (July 28, 2000), 65 FR 48023 (August 4, 2000) quote to complain within a specified period of time that its quote was traded-through may affect statement routinely sent to investors. (‘‘Linkage Plan’’). 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44482, potential liability, but does not signify that a trade- 66 FR 35470 (July 5, 2001). Specifically, the through has not occurred. 1 17 CFR 240.11Ac1–7. amendment: (1) Limits participants from trading 6 See File Nos. SR-Amex-2001–64; SR-CBOE– 2 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43591 through, not only the quotes of other linkage plan 2001–46; SR-ISE–2001–23; SR-PCX–2001–30; and (November 17, 2000), 65 FR 75439 (December 1, participants, but also, the quotes of exchanges that SR-Phlx-2001–78. 2000) (‘‘Adopting Release’’). are not participants in an approved linkage plan; (2) 7 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
VerDate 11
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2001. located approves the designation. Edinburg, Texas, to this listing of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Generally, the type of airport that would designated user fee airports and Nancy Bruner, Mission Support, Office seek designation as a user fee airport removes the Arkansas Aeroplex at of Field Operations, (202) 927–2290. would be one at which a company, such Blytheville, Arkansas from the list. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: as an air courier service, has a These actions are taken pursuant to the specialized interest in regularly landing. airports’ request. Background As the volume of business anticipated at this type of airport is insufficient to Regulatory Flexibility Act and Part 122, Customs Regulations (19 Executive Order 12866 CFR part 122), sets forth regulations that justify its designation as an are applicable to all international air international or landing rights airport, Because no notice of proposed commerce relating to the entry and the availability of Customs services is rulemaking is required for this final clearance of aircraft and the not paid for out of the Customs rule, the provisions of the Regulatory transportation of persons and cargo by appropriations from the general treasury Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do aircraft. of the United States. Instead, the not apply. Agency organization matters Under § 1644a, Title 19, United States services of Customs officers are such as this amendment are exempt provided on a fully reimbursable basis Code (19 U.S.C. 1644a), the Secretary of from consideration under Executive to be paid for by the user fee airport on the Treasury is authorized to designate Order 12866. behalf of the recipients of the services. places in the United States as ports of The fees which are to be charged at Inapplicability of Public Notice and entry for civil aircraft arriving from any user fee airports, according to the Delayed Effective Date Requirements place outside of the United States, and statute, shall be paid by each person for merchandise carried on the aircraft. Because this amendment merely using the Customs services at the airport updates the list of user fee airports These airports are referred to as and shall be in the amount equal to the international airports, and the location designated by the Commissioner of expenses incurred by the Secretary of Customs in accordance with 19 U.S.C. and name of each are listed in § 122.13, the Treasury in providing Customs Customs Regulations (19 CFR 122.13). 58b and neither imposes any additional services which are rendered to such burdens on, nor takes away any existing In accordance with § 122.33, Customs person at such airport, including the Regulations (19 CFR 122.33), the first rights or privileges from, the public, salary and expenses of those employed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 (b)(B), notice landing of every civil aircraft entering by the Secretary of the Treasury to the United States from a foreign area and public procedure are unnecessary, provide the Customs services. To and for the same reasons, pursuant to 5 must be at one of these international implement this provision, generally, the airports, unless the aircraft has been U.S.C. 553(d)(3) a delayed effective date airport seeking the designation as a user is not required. specifically exempted from this fee airport of that airport’s authority requirement or permission to land agrees to pay Customs a flat fee annually Drafting Information elsewhere has been granted. Customs and the users of the airport are to The principal author of this document officers are assigned to all international reimburse that airport/airport authority. was Janet L. Johnson, Regulations airports to accept entries of The airport/airport authority agrees to Branch, Office of Regulations and merchandise, collect duties and enforce set and periodically to review its Rulings, U.S. Customs Service. the customs laws and regulations. charges to ensure that they are in accord However, personnel from other offices Other than making an emergency or with the airport’s expenses. participated in its development. forced landing, if a civil aircraft desires Pursuant to Treasury Department to land at an airport not designated by Order No. 165, Revised (Treasury List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 122 Customs as an international airport, the Decision 53564), all the rights, Air carriers, Aircraft, Airports, pilot may request permission to land at privileges, powers and duties vested in Customs duties and inspection, Freight. a specific airport and, if granted, the Secretary of the Treasury by the Customs assigns personnel to that Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, by the Amendments to the Regulations airport for the aircraft. The airport navigation laws, or by any other laws Part 122, Customs Regulations (19 where the aircraft is permitted to land administered by Customs, are CFR part 122) is amended as set forth is called a landing rights airport (19 CFR transferred to the Commissioner of below. 122.14). Customs. Accordingly, the authority Section 236 of Public Law 98–573 (the granted to the Secretary of the Treasury PART 122—AIR COMMERCE Trade and Tariff Act of 1984), codified to designate user fee airports and to REGULATIONS at 19 U.S.C. 58b, created an option for determine appropriate fees is delegated civil aircraft desiring to land at an to the Commissioner of Customs. 1. The authority citation for part 122, airport other than an international or Under this authority, Customs has Customs Regulations, continues to read landing rights airport. A civil aircraft determined that certain conditions must as follows: arriving from a place outside of the be met before an airport can be Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66, United States may ask Customs for designated as a user fee airport. At least 1433, 1436, 1448, 1459, 1590, 1594, 1623, permission to land at an airport one full-time Customs officer must be 1624, 1644, 1644a. designated by the Secretary of the requested, and the airport must be § 122.15 User fee airports. Treasury as a user fee airport. responsible for providing Customs with Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b, an airport satisfactory office space, equipment and 2. The listing of user fee airports in may be designated as a user fee airport supplies, at no cost to the Federal section 122.15(b) is amended by if the Secretary of the Treasury Government. removing ‘‘Blytheville, Arkansas’’ from determines that the volume of Customs Thirty-six airports are currently listed the ‘‘Location’’ column and on the same business at the airport is insufficient to in § 122.15, Customs Regulations, as line ‘‘Arkansas Aeroplex’’ from the justify the availability of Customs user fee airports. This document revises ‘‘Name’’ column; and by adding, in services at the airport and the governor the list of user fee airports. It adds alphabetical order, in the ‘‘Location’’ of the state in which the airport is Edinburg International Airport, in column, ‘‘Edinburg, Texas’’ and by
VerDate 11
adding on the same line, in the ‘‘Name’’ Regulatory History sabotage or other subversive acts, column, ‘‘Edinburg International Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, a notice of accidents, or events of a similar nature. Airport’’. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) was not All persons other than those approved by the Captain of the Port or his Charles W. Winwood, published for this regulation. Good cause exists for not publishing a NPRM authorized patrol representative are Acting Commissioner of Customs. prohibited from entering into or moving Approved: September 26, 2001. and for making this regulation effective in less than 30 days after publication in within the zones without the prior Timothy E. Skud, the Federal Register. Due to the approval of the Captain of the Port. The Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of the catastrophic nature and extent of public will be notified of the safety and Treasury. damage realized from the aircraft security zones via Broadcast Notice to [FR Doc. 01–24534 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] crashes into the World Trade Center Mariners. BILLING CODE 4820–02–P towers, this rulemaking is urgently Regulatory Evaluation necessary to protect the national security interests of the United States This temporary final rule is not a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION against future potential terrorist strikes significant regulatory action under against governmental targets. Any delay section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 Coast Guard in the establishment and enforcement of and does not require an assessment of this regulation’s effective date would be potential costs and benefits under 33 CFR Part 165 unnecessary and contrary to public section 6(a)(3) of that order. The Office of Management and Budget has not [CGD01–01–164] interest and national security since immediate action is needed to protect reviewed it under that Order. It is not RIN 2115–AA97 Coast Guard Group Southwest Harbor significant under the regulatory policies Base, Southwest Harbor, Maine; Coast and procedures of the Department of Safety and Security Zones; Coast Guard Station Jonesport, Jonesport, Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040; Guard Force Protection for Station Maine; and Coast Guard Station February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard Jonesport, Jonesport, Maine; Coast Rockland, Rockland Harbor; Maine’s expects the economic impact of this Guard Group Southwest Harbor, facilities, vessels and personnel; as well proposal to be so minimal that a full Southwest Harbor, Maine; and Station as the public and maritime community, Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph Rockland, Rockland Harbor Maine from potential terrorist attacks. The 10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary for AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. public will be kept appraised of the the following reasons: These safety and ACTION: Temporary final rule. safety and security zones and respective changes via Broadcast Notice to security zones limit movement within SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is Mariners. only a portion of Southwest Harbor, Jonesport and Rockland Harbors, establishing temporary safety and Background and Purpose security zones in the waters allowing vessels to safely navigate surrounding Coast Guard facilities On September 11, 2001, both towers around the safety and security zones located in Jonesport, Maine; Southwest of the World Trade Center, New York without delay, and maritime advisories Harbor, Maine; and Rockland, Maine. City, New York, were destroyed as a will be made to advise the maritime These security and safety zones are result of two commercial airliner community of the safety and security needed to safeguard Coast Guard crashes, an act that can only be zones. facilities, vessels and personnel from explained as resulting from terrorist Small Entities potential future sabotage or other attacks. This regulation establishes three subversive acts, accidents or other safety and security zones in the waters Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act causes of a similar nature. Entry or immediately surrounding the Coast (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard movement within these zones by any Guard facilities in Southwest Harbor, must consider whether this proposal vessel of any description whatsoever, Rockland, and Jonesport Maine: (1) All will have a significant economic impact without the express authority of the the waters off of Station Jonesport, on a substantial number of small Captain of the Port, Portland, or his Jonesport, Maine, within a 75-yard entities. ‘‘Small entities’’ may include authorized patrol representative, is radius of 44° 31′ 38″ N, 067°36′ 58″ W; (1) small businesses and not-for-profit strictly prohibited. (2) all the waters of Southwest Harbor, organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not EFFECTIVE DATE: This section is effective Maine off of Coast Guard Base dominant in their fields and (2) from 6 p.m. September 19, 2001 until Southwest Harbor, (a) within a 60-yard ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ governmental jurisdictions with March 17, 2002. radius of 44 16 30 N, 068 18 45 W; and (b) within a 20-yard radius of 44° populations of less than 50,000. ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in 16′ 30″ N, 068° 18′ 47″ W; and (3) all For the reasons addressed under the this preamble are available for the waters of Rockland Harbor, Maine Regulatory Evaluation above, the Coast inspection or copying at Marine Safety off of Station Rockport (a) within a 75- Guard expects the impact of this Office Portland, Maine, 103 Commercial yard radius of 44° 06′ 16″ N, 069° 06′ regulation to be minimal and certifies Street, Portland, Maine between 8 a.m. 04″ W; and (b) within a 60-yard radius under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, of 44° 06′ 19″ N, 069° 06′ 07″ W. The will not have a significant economic except Federal Holidays. safety and security zones have identical impact on a substantial number of small FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: boundaries, and restrict entry into or entities. Lieutenant (Junior Grade) W. W. Gough, movement within the waters of Collection of Information Chief, Ports and Waterways Safety Southwest Harbor, Jonesport Harbor and Branch, Port Operations Department, Rockland Harbor. The safety and This rule contains no collection of Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine at security zones are necessary to protect information requirements under the (207) 780–3251. Coast Guard personnel, facilities, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: public and the surrounding area from U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VerDate 11
Federalism Energy Effects Captain of the Port or the designated on- scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol The Coast Guard has analyzed this The Coast Guard has analyzed this personnel. On-scene Coast Guard patrol rule under the principles and criteria rule under Executive Order 13211, personnel include commissioned, contained in Executive Order 13132 and Actions Concerning Regulations That warrant, and petty officers of the Coast have determined that this rule does not Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast have sufficient federalism implications Distribution, or Use. We have Guard Auxiliary, local, state, and federal for Federalism under that order. determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because law enforcement vessels. Emergency Unfunded Mandates Reform Act it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ response vessels are authorized to move within the zone, but must abide by The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act under Executive Order 12866 and is not restrictions imposed by the Captain of of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs likely to have a significant adverse effect the Port. the issuance of Federal regulations that on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. It has not been designated by the (3) No person may swim upon or require unfunded mandates. An below the surface of the water within Unfunded Mandate is a regulation that Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a the boundaries of the safety and security requires a state, local or tribal zones unless previously authorized by government or the private sector to significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy the Captain of the Port, Portland or his incur costs without the Federal authorized patrol representative. government’s having first provided the Effects under Executive Order 13211. Dated: September 19, 2001. funds to pay those costs. This rule will List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 not impose an Unfunded Mandate. M. P. O’Malley, Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of Taking of Private Property (water), Reporting and recordkeeping the Port. This rule will not affect a taking of requirements, Security measures, [FR Doc. 01–24538 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Waterways. private property or otherwise have BILLING CODE 4910–15–U taking implications under Executive Regulation Order 12630, Governmental Actions and For the reasons set out in the Interference with Constitutionally DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Protected Property Rights. CFR part 165 as follows: Coast Guard Civil Justice Reform 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: 33 CFR Part 165 This rule meets applicable standards in section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; [CGD01–01–175] Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. RIN 2115–AA97 minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity and reduce burden. 2. Add temporary § 165.T01–164 to Safety and Security Zones; Naval read as follows: Protection of Children Force Protection, Bath Iron Works, § 165.T01–164 Coast Guard Force Kennebec River, Bath, Maine The Coast Guard has analyzed this Protection for Coast Guard Group AGENCY: rule under Executive Order 13045, Southwest Harbor, Maine, Station Coast Guard, DOT. Protection of Children from Jonesport, Maine and Station Rockland, ACTION: Temporary final rule. Environmental Health Risks and Safety Maine. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard establishes Risks. This rule is not an economically (a) Location. The following are safety temporary safety and security zones in significant rule and does not concern an and security zones: (1) All the waters off the waters of the Kennebec River environmental risk to health or risk to of Station Jonesport, Jonesport, Maine, extending out to 400-feet into the safety that may disproportionately affect ° ′ ″ within a 75-yard radius of 44 31 38 Kennebec River from the Bath Iron children. ° ′ ″ N, 067 36 58 W; (2) all the waters of Works facility, Bath, Maine. This action Indian Tribal Governments Southwest Harbor, Maine off of Coast is necessary to ensure public safety and Guard Base Southwest Harbor, (i) within This rule does not have tribal ° ′ ″ ° prevent sabotage or terrorist acts. Entry a 60-yard radius of 44 16 30 N, 068 into these safety and security zones is implications under Executive Order 18′ 45″ W; and (ii) within a 20-yard 13175, Consultation and Coordination ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ prohibited unless authorized by the radius of 44 16 30 N, 068 18 47 W; Captain of the Port. with Indian Tribal Governments. A rule and (3) all the waters of Rockland DATES: This section is effective from with tribal implications has a Harbor, Maine off of Station Rockport (i) 12:01 a.m. September 21, 2001 to 11:59 substantial direct effect on one or more within a 75-yard radius of 44° 06′ 16″ p.m. December 31, 2001. Indian tribe, on the relationship N, 069°06′ 04″ W; and (ii) within a 60- between the Federal Government and yard radius of 44° 06′ 19″ N, 069°06′ 07″ ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in Indian tribes, or on the distribution of W. this preamble are available for power and responsibilities between the (b) Effective date. This section is inspection or copying at Marine Safety Federal Government and Indian tribes. effective from 6 p.m. September 19, Office Portland, Maine, 103 Commercial Street, Portland, Maine between 8 a.m. Environment 2001 until March 17, 2002. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, The Coast Guard has considered the the general regulations in §§ 165.23 and except Federal Holidays. environmental impact of this regulation 165.33 of this part, entry into or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and concluded that, under Figure 2–1, movement within this zone is Lieutenant (Junior Grade) W. W. Gough, paragraph 34(g) of Commandant prohibited unless previously authorized Chief, Ports and Waterways Safety Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is by the Captain of the Port Portland. Branch, Port Operations Department, categorically excluded from further (2) All persons and vessels shall Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine at environmental documentation. comply with the instructions of the (207) 780–3251.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: feet from Bath Iron Works facility. This Unfunded Mandates Reform Act safety and security zone is required to Regulatory History The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act protect the Naval personnel, facilities, of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, a the public and the surrounding area the issuance of Federal regulations that notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) from sabotage, terrorism, subversive require unfunded mandates. An was not published for this regulation. acts, accidents, or other events of a Unfunded Mandate is a regulation that Under 5 U.S.C 553(b)(B), the Coast similar nature. Guard finds that good cause exists for requires a state, local or tribal not publishing a NPRM and for making Regulatory Evaluation government or the private sector to this rule effective less than 30 days after incur costs without the Federal This temporary final rule is not a government’s having first provided the publication in the Federal Register. Due significant regulatory action under to the catastrophic nature and extent of funds to pay those costs. This rule will section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 not impose an Unfunded Mandate. damage realized from the aircraft and does not require an assessment of crashes into the World Trade Center potential costs and benefits under Taking of Private Property towers, this rulemaking is urgently section 6(a)(3) of that order. The Office This rule will not affect a taking of necessary to protect the national of Management and Budget has not private property or otherwise have security interests of the United States reviewed it under that Order. It is not taking implications under Executive against future potential terrorist strikes significant under the regulatory policies Order 12630, Governmental Actions and against governmental targets. Any delay and procedures of the Department of Interference with Constitutionally in the establishment and enforcement of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040; Protected Property Rights. this regulation’s effective date would be February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard unnecessary and contrary to public expects the economic impact of this Civil Justice Reform interest and national security since proposal to be so minimal that a full This rule meets applicable standards immediate action is needed to protect Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph in section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive the United States Naval vessels being 10e of the regulatory policies and Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to built and repaired at the Bath facility. procedures of DOT is unnecessary for minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity Any delay in implementing this the following reasons: this safety and and reduce burden. regulation would be contrary to the security zone involves only a portion of public interest since immediate action is Protection of Children the Kennebec River, allowing vessels to needed to safeguard the Naval vessels safely navigate around the safety and The Coast Guard has analyzed this moored at the Bath Iron Works, Naval security zone without delay. rule under Executive Order 13045, personnel, the maritime community and Protection of Children from the public from sabotage or other Small Entities Environmental Health Risks and Safety subversive acts, accidents, or other Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Risks. This rule is not an economically causes of a similar nature. (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard significant rule and does not concern an Background and Purpose must consider whether this proposal environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect A safety zone was established by the will have a significant economic impact children. Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine, on on a substantial number of small June 15, 2001, and published in the entities. ‘‘Small entities’’ may include Indian Tribal Governments (1) small businesses and not-for-profit Federal Register (66 FR 34367–34369). This rule does not have tribal organizations that are independently That safety zone prohibited entry into implications under Executive Order owned and operated and are not all waters of the Kennebec River within 13175, Consultation and Coordination dominant in their fields and (2) a 400-foot radius of Bath Iron Works, with Indian Tribal Governments. A rule governmental jurisdictions with Bath, Maine from 7 a.m. June 16, 2001 with tribal implications has a populations of less than 50,000. through 12 p.m. September 30, 2001. On substantial direct effect on one or more September 11, 2001, two commercial For the reasons addressed under the Indian tribe, on the relationship aircraft were hijacked from Logan Regulatory Evaluation above, the Coast between the Federal Government and Airport in Boston, Massachusetts and Guard expects the impact of this Indian tribes, or on the distribution of flown into the World Trade Center in regulation to be minimal and certifies power and responsibilities between the New York, New York inflicting under section 605(b) of the Regulatory Federal Government and Indian tribes. catastrophic human casualties and Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that property damage. A similar attack was this final rule will not have a significant Environment conducted on the Pentagon on the same economic impact on a substantial The Coast Guard has considered the day. National security and intelligence number of small entities. environmental impact of this regulation officials warn that future terrorist Collection of Information and concluded that, under Figure 2–1, attacks against civilian targets may be paragraph 34(g) of Commandant anticipated. Due to these heightened This rule contains no collection of Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is security concerns, safety and security information requirements under the categorically excluded from further zones are prudent for an additional Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 environmental documentation. period of time, and for a larger area than U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). previously covered. The safety and Energy Effects Federalism security zones will occur from 12:01 The Coast Guard has analyzed this a.m. September 21, 2001 to 11:59 p.m. The Coast Guard has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, December 31, 2001 at Bath Iron Works, rule under the principles and criteria Actions Concerning Regulations That Bath, Maine. This regulation establishes contained in Executive Order 13132 and Significantly Affect Energy Supply, safety and security zones having have determined that this rule does not Distribution, or Use. We have identical boundaries in the waters of the have sufficient federalism implications determined that it is not a ‘‘significant Kennebec River extending out to 400 for Federalism under that order. energy action’’ under that order because
VerDate 11
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast under Executive Order 12866 and is not Guard finds that good cause exists for likely to have a significant adverse effect Coast Guard making this rule effective less than 30 on the supply, distribution, or use of days after publication in the Federal energy. It has not been designated by the 33 CFR Part 165 Register. Due to security reasons and Administrator of the Office of [CCGD08–01–036] complex planning and coordination Information and Regulatory Affairs as a requirements, the Coast Guard was not significant energy action. Therefore, it RIN 2115–AA97 able to obtain details of the event thirty does not require a Statement of Energy days prior to its occurrence. Effects under Executive Order 13211. Security Zone; DOD Barge Flotilla, Cumberland City, TN to Alexandria, LA Background and Purpose List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. The Coast Guard is establishing a Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation ACTION: Temporary final rule. security zone with a 100-yard security (water), Reporting and recordkeeping perimeter around an Army barge flotilla requirements, Security measures, SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is on the waters of the Cumberland River Waterways. establishing a temporary security zone from mile 108.5 to 0.0, the Ohio River Regulation around a barge flotilla carrying military mile 923.0 to 981.0, the Lower equipment on the waters of the Mississippi River mile 953.5 to 310.5, For the reasons set out in the Cumberland River, the Ohio River, the and the Red River mile 00.0 to 85.0. The preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Lower Mississippi River, and the Red United States Army is shipping military River. The United States Army is CFR part 165 as follows: equipment onboard the barge flotilla shipping military equipment on board a 1. The authority citation for part 165 commencing in Cumberland City, TN at barge flotilla, requiring a 100-yard continues to read as follows: 6 p.m. on September 20, 2001 and security perimeter commencing in securing upon offloading at Alexandria, Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, Cumberland City, TN on and securing 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 LA. The zone will be in effect during the CFR 1.46. upon offloading of cargo at Alexandria, LA. This zone is needed to safeguard the flotilla’s entire transit and while the 2. Add temporary § 165.T01–175 to shipment from sabotage or other flotilla is moored at Alexandria, LA read as follows: subversive acts in light of recent with cargo on deck. This zone is needed to safeguard the Army shipment from § 165.T01–175 Naval Force Protection, at terrorist activity in the United States. Navigation within this zone will be sabotage or other subversive acts, Bath Iron Works, Kennebec River, Bath, accidents, or other causes of a similar Maine. prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Eighth Coast Guard nature. The protection of this Army (a) Location. The following is a safety District Commander’s on-scene shipment is a matter of national and security zone: all waters off of Bath representative. security. Therefore, the Coast Guard has Iron Works facility, Bath, Maine determined it is necessary to prevent extending 400-feet out into the DATES: This rule is effective from 6 p.m. access into this zone in order to ensure Kennebec River. (CDT) September 20, 2001 until 11:59 this equipment safely reaches its (b) Effective date. This section is p.m. (CDT) on September 30, 2001. destination. Entry into this zone will be effective from 12:01 a.m. September 21, ADDRESSES: Comments and material prohibited unless authorized by the 2001 to 11:59 p.m. December 31, 2001. received from the public, as well as Eighth Guard District Commander’s on- (c) Regulations. (1) The general documents indicated in this preamble as scene representative. The on-scene regulations contained in § 165.23, being available in the docket, are part of representative will be located on a Coast § 165.33 and the regulations specifically docket CGD08–01–036 and are available Guard vessel accompanying the flotilla relating to safety zones and security for inspection or copying at Commander and may be contacted on VHF channel zones in §§ 165.20 and 165.30 of this Eighth Coast Guard District (m), Hale 13 or 16. part apply. Boggs Federal Bldg., 501 Magazine Street, New Orleans, LA 70130, between Regulatory Evaluation (2) All persons and vessels shall 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through comply with the instructions of the Friday, except Federal holidays. This rule is not a ‘‘significant Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT designated on scene personnel. Upon Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Karrie C. Trebbe, Eighth Coast Guard being hailed by designated personnel Planning and Review, and does not District Marine Safety Division, Hale via siren, radio, flashing light, bullhorn require an assessment of potential costs Boggs Federal Bldg., 501 Magazine or other means, the operator of the and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that vessel shall proceed as directed. Street, New Orleans LA 70130, 504– 589–6271. Order. The Office of Management and (3) No person may swim upon or Budget has not reviewed it under that below the surface of the water within SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the the boundaries of the safety and security Regulatory Information regulatory policies and procedures of zone unless previously authorized by the Department of Transportation (DOT) We did not publish a notice of the Captain of the Port, Portland or his (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). authorized patrol representative. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the The Coast Guard expects the Dated: September 21, 2001. Coast Guard finds that good cause exists economic impact of this rule to be so M.P. O’Malley, for not publishing a NPRM. Publishing minimal that a full regulatory evaluation Commander, Coast Guard, Captain of the an NPRM and delaying its effective date is unnecessary. This regulation will Port. would be contrary to public interest only be in effect for a short period of [FR Doc. 01–24536 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] since immediate action is needed to time. The impacts on routine navigation BILLING CODE 4910–15–U protect military assets. are expected to be minimal.
VerDate 11
Small Entities their discretionary regulatory actions. In Environment Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act particular, the Act addresses actions We have considered the (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered that may result in the expenditure by a environmental impact of this rule and whether this rule would have a State, local, or tribal government, in the concluded that under figure 2–1, significant economic impact on a aggregate, or by the private sector of paragraph 34(g), of Commandant substantial number of small entities. $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Though this rule will not result in such categorically excluded from further small businesses, not-for-profit an expenditure, we do discuss the environmental documentation. A organizations that are independently effects of this rule elsewhere in this ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ owned and operated and are not preamble. is available for inspection or copying dominant in their fields, and Taking of Private Property where indicated under ADDRESSES. governmental jurisdictions with List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 populations of less than 50,000. This rule will not effect a taking of The Coast Guard certifies under 5 private property or otherwise have Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have taking implications under Executive (water), Reporting and recordkeeping a significant economic impact on a Order 12630, Governmental Actions and requirements, Security measures, substantial number of small entities. Interference with Constitutionally Waterways. The impact on small entities is expected Protected Property Rights. For the reasons discussed in the to be minimal, as only short delays to preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 vessel traffic will occur when the Civil Justice Reform CFR part 165 as follows: shipment meets other vessels along its This rule meets applicable standards route. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Assistance for Small Entities Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 1. The authority citation for part 165 Under section 213(a) of the Small minimize litigation, eliminate continues to read as follows: Business Regulatory Enforcement ambiguity, and reduce burden. Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Protection of Children Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, we offered to assist small entities in 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 understanding the rule so that they We have analyzed this rule under CFR 1.46. 2. A new § 165.T08–036 is added to could better evaluate its effects on them Executive Order 13045, Protection of read as follows: and participate in the rulemaking Children from Environmental Health process. Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not § 165.T08–036 Security Zone; Fort Small businesses may send comments an economically significant rule and Campbell—DOD Barge Flotilla, Cumberland on the actions of Federal employees does not create an environmental risk to City, TN to Alexandria, LA. who enforce, or otherwise determine health or risk to safety that may (a) Location. The following area is a compliance with, Federal regulations to disproportionately affect children. security zone: the waters 100 yards the Small Business and Agriculture Indian Tribal Governments around the Army barge flotilla while in Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman transit on the Cumberland River from and the Regional Small Business This rule does not have tribal mile 108.5 to 0.0, the Ohio River from Regulatory Fairness Boards. The implications under Executive Order mile 923.0 to 981.0, the Lower Ombudsman evaluates these actions 13175, Consultation and Coordination Mississippi River from mile 953.5 to annually and rates each agency’s with Indian Tribal Governments, 310.5, and the Red River from mile 00.0 responsiveness to small business. If you because it does not have a substantial to 85.0. The security zone remains in wish to comment on actions by direct effect on one or more Indian effect while the flotilla is moored in employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– tribes, on the relationship between the Alexandria, LA with cargo on deck. 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). Federal Government and Indian tribes, (b) Effective date. This section is effective from 6 p.m. September 20, Collection of Information or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 2001 to 11:59 p.m. on September 30, This rule calls for no new collection Government and Indian tribes. 2001. of information under the Paperwork (c) Regulations. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Energy Effect (1) In accordance with the general 3520). regulations in § 165.33 of this part, entry We have analyzed this rule under within 100 yards of the Army flotilla is Federalism Executive Order 13211, Actions prohibited unless authorized by the A rule has implications for federalism Concerning Regulations That Eighth Coast Guard District under Executive Order 13132, Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Commander’s on-scene representative. Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Distribution, or Use. We have (2) No vessels may enter this security effect on State or local governments and determined that it is not a ‘‘significant zone unless specifically authorized by would either preempt State law or energy action’’ under that order because the Eighth Coast Guard District impose a substantial direct cost of it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Commander’s on-scene representative. compliance on them. We have analyzed under Executive Order 12866 and is not Vessels shall contact the on-scene this rule under that Order and have likely to have a significant adverse effect representative on channel 13 or 16 for determined that it does not have on the supply, distribution, or use of closure information and passing implications for federalism. energy. It has not been designated by the instructions. The Eighth Coast Guard Administrator of the Office of District Commander will notify the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Information and Regulatory Affairs as a public of changes in the status of this The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act significant energy action. Therefore, it zone by Marine Radio Safety Broadcast of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires does not require a Statement of Energy on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 22 Federal agencies to assess the effects of Effects under Executive Order 13211. (157.1 MHz).
VerDate 11
Dated: September 20, 2001. Iowa Department of Natural Resources, for implementation and enforcement of R.J. Casto, Air Quality Bureau, 7900 Hickman the NSPS program. The NSPS standards Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard, Road, Urbandale, Iowa 50322. are codified at 40 CFR part 60. Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District. Kansas Department of Health and 2. Section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 [FR Doc. 01–24535 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Environment, Bureau of Air and CFR part 63, subpart E, authorizes EPA BILLING CODE 4910–15–U Radiation, 1000 SW Jackson, Suite to delegate authority to any state or local 310, Topeka, Kansas 66612–1366. agency which submits adequate Missouri Department of Natural regulatory procedures for Resources, Air Pollution Control implementation and enforcement of ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Program, Jefferson State Office emission standards for hazardous air AGENCY Building, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, pollutants. The hazardous air pollutant Missouri 65102. 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 standards are codified at 40 CFR parts Nebraska Department of Environmental 61 and 63, respectively. [FRL–7071–5] Quality, Air and Waste Management Division, P.O. Box 98922, Statehouse What Does Delegation Accomplish? Standards of Performance for New Station, Lincoln, Nebraska 68509. Delegation confers primary Stationary Sources (NSPS) and Lincoln-Lancaster County Air Pollution responsibility for implementation and National Emission Standards for Control Agency, Division of enforcement of the listed standards to Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS); Environmental Health, 3140 ‘‘N’’ the respective state and local air Delegation of Authority to the States of Street, Lincoln, Nebraska 68510. agencies. However, EPA also retains the Iowa; Kansas; Missouri; Nebraska; City of Omaha, Public Works authority to enforce the standards if it Lincoln-Lancaster County, Nebraska; Department, Air Quality Control so desires. and City of Omaha, NE Division, 5600 South 10th Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68510. What Is Being Delegated? AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tables I, II, and III below list the Agency (EPA). Wayne Kaiser, Environmental delegated standards. The first date in ACTION: Notice of delegation of Protection Agency, Air Planning and each block is the reference date to the authority. Development Branch, 901 North 5th CFR contained in the state rule. In Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101, (913) general, the state has adopted the SUMMARY: The states of Iowa, Kansas, 551–7603. applicable standard through this date as Missouri, Nebraska, and the local SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The noted in the table. The second date is agencies of Lincoln-Lancaster County, the most recent effective date of the Nebraska, and city of Omaha, Nebraska, supplementary information is organized in the following order: state agency rule for which EPA is have submitted updated regulations for providing or updating the delegation. delegation of the EPA authority for What does this notice do? implementation and enforcement of What is the authority for delegation? What Is Not Being Delegated? What does delegation accomplish? NSPS and NESHAPS. The submissions 1. EPA regulations effective after the cover new EPA standards and, in some What is being delegated? What is not being delegated? first date specified in each block have instances, revisions to standards not been delegated, and authority for previously delegated. EPA’s review of List of Delegation Tables implementation of these regulations is the pertinent regulations shows that Table I—NSPS, 40 CFR part 60 retained solely by EPA. they contain adequate and effective Table II—NESHAPS, 40 CFR part 61 2. In some cases, the standards Table III—NESHAPS, 40 CFR part 63 procedures for the implementation and themselves specify that specific enforcement of these Federal standards. What Does This Notice Do? provisions cannot be delegated. You This action informs the public of EPA is providing notice that it is should review the standard for this delegations to the above-mentioned information. agencies. delegating authority for implementation and enforcement of the Federal 3. In some cases, the agency rules do DATES: This rule is effective on standards shown in the tables below to not adopt the Federal standard in its November 1, 2001. The dates of the state and local air agencies in Region entirety. Each agency rule (available delegation can be found in the 7. This notice updates the delegation from the respective agency) should be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of tables most recently published at 65 FR consulted for specific information. this document. 20754 (April 18, 2000). 4. In some cases, existing delegation ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents Section 553(b)(B) of the agreements between EPA and the relevant to this action are available for Administrative Procedures Act (APA) agencies limit the scope of the delegated public inspection during normal provides that an agency may forgo standards. Copies of delegation business hours at the Environmental notice-and-comment rulemaking upon agreements are available from the state Protection Agency, Air Planning and determination of ‘‘good cause’’ agencies, or from this office. Development Branch, 901 North 5th published with the rule. EPA considers 5. With respect to 40 CFR part 63, Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. these updates to be minor changes subpart A, General Provisions (see Table Effective immediately, all which are not subject to notice-and- III), EPA has determined that sections notifications, applications, reports, and comment rulemaking procedures under 63.6(g), 63.6(h)(9), 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f), other correspondence required pursuant the APA or any other statute. 63.8(f), and 63.10(f) cannot be delegated. to the newly delegated standards and Additional information is contained in revisions identified in this notice What Is the Authority for Delegation? an EPA memorandum titled ‘‘Delegation should be submitted to the Region 7 1. Section 111(c)(1) of the Clean Air of 40 CFR Part 63 General Provisions office, and, with respect to sources Act (CAA) authorizes EPA to delegate Authorities to State and Local Air located in the jurisdictions identified in authority to any state agency which Pollution Control Agencies’ from John this notice, to the following addresses: submits adequate regulatory procedures Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
VerDate 11
Planning and Standards, dated July 10, 1998.
List of Delegation Tables
TABLE I.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 60 NSPS—REGION 7
State State State State Sub-part Source category of of of of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska
A ...... General Provisions ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 D ...... Fossil-Fuel Fired Steam Generators for Which Construction is Com- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 menced After August 17, 1971. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Da ...... Electric Utility Steam Generating Units for Which Construction is 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 Commenced After September 18, 1978. 12/31/99 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Db ...... Industrial-Commercial Institutional Steam Generating Units ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Dc ...... Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units ..... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 E ...... Incinerators ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Ea ...... Municipal Waste Combustors Constructed after December 20, 1989, 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 and on or before September 20 1994.. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Eb ...... Municipal Waste Combustors for Which Construction is Commenced 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 after September 20, 1994. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Ec ...... Hospital/medical/infectious Waste Incinerators for Which Construc- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 09/15/97 tion Commenced after June 20, 1996. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 F ...... Portland Cement Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 G ...... Nitric Acid Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 H ...... Sulfuric Acid Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 I ...... Asphaltic Concrete Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 J ...... Petroleum Refineries ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 K ...... Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquid for Which Construction, Re- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 construction, or Modification Commenced After June 11, 1973, and 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Prior to May 19, 1978. Ka ...... Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquid for Which Construction, Re- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 construction, or Modification Commenced After May 18, 1978, and 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Prior to July 23, 1984. Kb ...... Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels for Which Construction, Re- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 construction, or Modification Commenced After July 23, 1984. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 L ...... Secondary Lead Smelters ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 M ...... Brass & Bronze Production Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 N ...... Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces for Which Construction is Com- 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 menced After June 11, 1973. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Na ...... Basic Oxygen Process Steelmaking Facilities for Which Construction 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 is Commenced After January 20, 1983. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 O ...... Sewage Treatment Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 P ...... Primary Copper Smelters ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Q ...... Primary Zinc Smelters ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 R ...... Primary Lead Smelters ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 S ...... Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 T ...... Wet Process Phosphoric Acid Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 U ...... Superphosphoric Acid Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 V ...... Diammonium Phosphate Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 W ...... Triple Superphosphate Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 X ...... Granular Triple Superphosphate Storage Facilities ...... 11/24/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 07/01/97 12/23/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 12/15/98
VerDate 11
TABLE I.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 60 NSPS—REGION 7—Continued
State State State State Sub-part Source category of of of of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska
Y ...... Coal Preparation Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 Z ...... Ferroalloy Production Facilities ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 AA ...... Steel Plant Electric Arc Furnaces Constructed After October 21, 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 1974, and on or Before August 17, 1983. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 AAa ...... Steel Plant Electric Arc Furnaces & Argon-Oxygen Decarburization 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 Vessels Constructed After August 7, 1983. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 BB ...... Kraft Pulp Mills ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 CC ...... Glass Manufacturing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 DD ...... Grain Elevators ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 EE ...... Surface Coating of Metal Furniture ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 GG ...... Stationary Gas Turbines ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 HH ...... Lime Manufacturing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 KK ...... Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 LL ...... Metallic Mineral Processing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 MM ...... Auto & Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 NN ...... Phosphate Rock Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 PP ...... Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 QQ ...... Graphic Arts Industry: Publication Rotogravure Printing ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 RR ...... Pressure Sensitive Tape & Label Surface Coating Operations ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 SS ...... Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 TT ...... Metal Coil Surface Coating ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 UU ...... Asphalt Processing & Asphalt Roofing Manufacture ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 VV ...... SOCMI Equipment Leaks (VOC) ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 WW ...... Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 XX ...... Bulk Gasoline Terminals ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 AAA ...... New Residential Wood Heaters ...... 08/31/93 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 BBB ...... Rubber Tire Manufacturing Industry ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 DDD ...... Polymer Manufacturing Industry (VOC) ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 FFF ...... Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and Printing ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 GGG ...... Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refineries ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 HHH ...... Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 III ...... SOCMI AIR Oxidation Unit Processes ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 JJJ ...... Petroleum Dry Cleaners ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 KKK ...... VOC Leaks from Onshore Natural Gas Processing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 LLL ...... Onshore Natural Gas Processing: SO2 Emissions ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 NNN ...... VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation Operations ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 OOO ...... Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98
VerDate 11
TABLE I.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 60 NSPS—REGION 7—Continued
State State State State Sub-part Source category of of of of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska
PPP ...... Wool Fiberglass Insulation Manufacturing Plants ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 QQQ ...... VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Systems ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 RRR ...... VOC Emissions from SOCMI Reactor Processes ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 SSS ...... Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 TTT ...... Surface Coating of Plastic Parts for Business Machines ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 UUU ...... Calciners & Dryers in Mineral Industries ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/28/92 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 VVV ...... Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates Facilities ...... 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 WWW ...... New Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Accepting Waste On or After 11/24/98 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/96 May 30, 1991. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 AAAA ...... New Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units ...... CCCC ...... New Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units ......
TABLE II.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 61 NESHAPS—REGION 7
State State State State Lincoln-Lan- City Subpart Source category of of of of caster of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska County Omaha
A ...... General Provisions ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 B ...... Radon Emissions from Underground ...... 07/01/98 ...... Uranium Mines. 06/11/99 C ...... Beryllium ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 D ...... Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 E ...... Mercury ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 F ...... Vinyl Chloride ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 J ...... Equipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Sources) of Benzene. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 L ...... Benzene Emissions from Coke By- 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Product Recovery Plants. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 M ...... Absestos ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 N ...... Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Glass Manufacturing Plants. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 O ...... Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Pri- 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 mary Copper Smelters. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 P ...... Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from Ar- 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 senic Trioxide and Metallic Arsenic 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 Production Facilities. Q ...... Radon Emissions from Department of ...... 07/01/98 ...... Energy Facilities. 06/11/99 R ...... Radon Emissions from ...... 07/01/98 ...... Phosphogypsum Stacks. 06/11/99 T ...... Radon Emissions from the Disposal of ...... 07/01/98 ...... Uranium Mill Tailings. 06/11/99 V ...... Equipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Sources). 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 W ...... Radon Emissions from Operating Mill ...... 07/01/98 ...... Tailings. 06/11/99 Y ...... Benzene Emissions from Benzene 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Storage Vessels. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 BB ...... Benzene Emissions from Benzene 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 Transfer Operations. 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98 FF ...... Benzene Waste Operations ...... 10/14/97 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/97 07/01/92 07/01/97 12/23/98 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/04/98
VerDate 11
TABLE III.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 63 NESHAPS—REGION 7
State State State State Lincoln-Lan- City Subpart Source category of of of of caster of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska County Omaha
A ...... General Provisions ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 B ...... Requirements for Control Technology 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 12/27/96 ...... 12/27/96 Determinations for Major Sources in 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 * 12/15/98 * 04/01/98 Accordance with Clean Air Act Sec- tion 112(g) & (j). D ...... Compliance Extensions for Early Re- 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 12/29/92 11/21/94 12/29/92 ductions of Hazardous Air Pollutants. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 12/15/98 07/31/01 04/01/98 F ...... Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... the Synthetic Organic Chemical Man- 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 ufacturing Industry. G ...... Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... the Synthetic Organic Chemical Man- 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 ufacturing Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater. H ...... Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... Equipment Leaks. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 I ...... Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... Certain Processes Subject to the Ne- 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 gotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks. L ...... Coke Oven Batteries ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 M ...... Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 Cleaning Facilities. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 N ...... Chromium Emissions from Hard and 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 Decorative Chromium Electroplating 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 Anodizing Tanks. O ...... Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Facilities ... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 Q ...... Industrial Process Cooling Towers ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 R ...... Gasoline Distribution Facilities ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/98 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 S ...... Pulp and Paper Non-Combustion ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 T ...... Halogenated Solvent Cleaning ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 U ...... Polymers and Resins Group I ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 W ...... Epoxy Resins and Non-Nylon 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 Polyamides Production. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 X ...... Secondary Lead Smelting ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 Y ...... Marine Tank Vessel Loading Oper- 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... ations. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 AA/BB ...... Phosphoric Acid/Phosphate Fertilizers 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 CC ...... Petroleum Refineries ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/97 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 DD ...... Off-Site Waste Operations ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 EE ...... Magnetic Tape Manufacturing ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 GG ...... Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 Facilities. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 HH ...... Oil & Natural Gas Production ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 II ...... Shipbuilding and Ship Repair ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 ...... 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 04/1/98 JJ ...... Wood Furniture Manufacturing Oper- 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 ations. 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 KK ...... Printing and Publishing Industry ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 LL ...... Primary Aluminum Production ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 MM ...... Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, ...... and Sulfite Pulp & Paper Mills.
VerDate 11
TABLE III.—DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY—PART 63 NESHAPS—REGION 7—Continued
State State State State Lincoln-Lan- City Subpart Source category of of of of caster of Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska County Omaha
OO ...... Tanks—Level 1 ...... 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 PP ...... Containers ...... 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 QQ ...... Surface Impoundments ...... 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 RR ...... Individual Drain Systems ...... 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 SS ...... Closed Vent Systems, Control Devices, 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... Recovery Devices and Routing to a 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/00 Fuel Gas System or a Process. TT ...... Equipment Leaks—Control Level 1 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... Standards. 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 UU ...... Equipment Leaks—Control Level 2 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... Standards. 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 VV ...... Oil-Water Separators & Organic-Water ...... 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 Separators. 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/1/98 WW ...... Storage Vessel (Tanks)—Control Level 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 2. 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 YY ...... Generic MACT ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 CCC ...... Steel Pickling-HCL Process ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 DDD ...... Mineral Wool Production ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 EEE ...... Hazardous Waste Combustors ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 ...... 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 07/31/01 GGG ...... Pharmaceutical Production ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 HHH ...... Natural Gas Transmission and Storage 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 III ...... Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 JJJ ...... Polymers and Resins Group IV ...... 01/20/00 07/01/98 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 07/01/97 03/14/01 06/11/99 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 04/01/98 03/14/01 LLL ...... Portland Cement Manufacturing ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 MMM ...... Pesticide Active Ingredient Production 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 NNN ...... Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 OOO ...... Polymers & Resins III, Amino Resins/ 01/20/00 ...... 07/01/01 ...... Phenolic Resins. 03/14/01 07/31/01 PPP ...... Polyether Polyols Production ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 TTT ...... Primary Lead Smelting ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 VVV ...... Publicly Owned Treatment Works ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 XXX ...... Ferroalloys Production ...... 01/20/00 ...... 12/31/99 07/01/99 07/01/00 ...... 03/14/01 12/30/00 08/22/00 07/31/01 CCCC ...... Manufacturing Nutritional Yeast ...... GGGG ...... Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil ...... Production.
Summary of This Action You should refer to the applicable adequate and effective procedures for agreements and regulations referenced the implementation and enforcement of After a review of the submissions, the above to determine specific provisions these Federal standards. This rule Regional Administrator determined that which are not delegated. informs the public of delegations to the delegation was appropriate for the All sources subject to the above-mentioned agencies. source categories with the conditions set requirements of 40 CFR parts 60, 61, What Are the Administrative forth in the original NSPS and and 63 are also subject to the equivalent Requirements Associated With This NESHAPS delegation agreements, and requirements of the above-mentioned Document? the limitations in all applicable state or local agencies. regulations, including 40 CFR parts 60, EPA’s review of the pertinent Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 61, and 63. regulations shows that they contain 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
VerDate 11
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and The Congressional Review Act (5 regulations. EPA is not waiving its is therefore not subject to review by the U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by the notification and reporting requirements Office of Management and Budget. For Small Business Regulatory Enforcement under this approval; therefore, sources this reason, this action is also not Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides will need to send notifications and subject to Executive Order 13211, that before a rule may take effect, the reports to both DNREC and EPA. EPA is ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That agency promulgating the rule must taking this action in accordance with Significantly Affect Energy Supply, submit a rule report, which includes a the Clean Air Act (CAA). Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May copy of the rule, to each House of the DATES: This direct final rule will be 22, 2001). Because the agency has made Congress and to the Comptroller General effective December 3, 2001 unless EPA a ‘‘good cause’’ finding that this action of the United States. EPA will submit a receives adverse or critical comments by is not subject to notice-and-comment report containing this rule and other November 1, 2001. If adverse comment requirements under the APA or any required information to the U.S. Senate, is received, EPA will publish a timely other statute (see section I. of this the U.S. House of Representatives, and withdrawal of the rule in the Federal document), it is not subject to the the Comptroller General of the United Register and inform the public that the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Stats prior to publication of the rule in rule will not take effect. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 the Federal Register. This action is not incorporation by reference of certain et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. publications listed in the regulations is Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 804(2). approved by the Director of the Federal (UMRA)(Public Law 104–4). In addition, List of Subjects Register as of December 3, 2001. this action does not significantly or Environmental protection, Air ADDRESSES: Written comments on this uniquely affect small governments or action should be sent concurrently to: impose a significant intergovernmental pollution control, Intergovernmental relations. Makeba A. Morris, Chief, Permits and mandate, as described in sections 203 Technical Assessment Branch, Mail and 204 of UMRA. This rule also does Authority: This notice is issued under the Code 3AP11, Air Protection Division, not significantly or uniquely affect the authority of sections 101, 110, 112, and 301 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, communities of tribal governments, as of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7410, 7412, and 7601). Region III, 1650 Arch Street, specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029 and FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will Dated: September 21, 2001. Robert Taggart, Delaware Department of not have substantial direct effects on the William W. Rice, Natural Resources and Environmental states, on the relationship between the Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. Control, Division of Air and Waste national government and the states, or [FR Doc. 01–24599 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Management, 715 Grantham Lane, New on the distribution of power and BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Castle, DE 19720. Copies of the responsibilities among the various documents relevant to this action are levels of government, as specified in available for public inspection during Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION normal business hours at the Air August 10, 1999). This rule also is not AGENCY Protection Division, U.S. Environmental subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not 40 CFR Part 63 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania economically significant. [DE001–1001; FRL–7056–7] 19103; the Air and Radiation Docket This minor action does not involve and Information Center, U.S. technical standards; thus, the Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for Environmental Protection Agency, 401 requirements of section 12(d) of the Hazardous Air Pollutants; State of M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; National Technology Transfer and Delaware; Department of Natural and the Delaware Department of Natural Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Resources and Environmental Control Resources & Environmental Control, Division of Air and Waste Management, 272 note) do not apply. This rule also AGENCY: Environmental Protection does not involve special consideration Agency (EPA). 715 Grantham Lane, New Castle, DE 19720. of environmental justice related issues ACTION: Direct final rule. as required by Executive Order 12898 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final Dianne J. McNally, U.S. Environmental issuing this rule, EPA has taken the action to approve the Delaware Protection Agency, Region 3, 1650 Arch necessary steps to eliminate drafting Department of Natural Resources and Street (3AP11), Philadelphia, PA 19103– errors and ambiguity, minimize Environmental Control’s (DNREC’s) 2029, [email protected] potential litigation, and provide a clear request to implement and enforce its (telephone 215–814–3297). legal standard for affected conduct, as hazardous air pollutant general SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: required by section 3 of Executive Order provisions and hazardous air pollutant 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). emission standards for I. Background EPA has complied with Executive Order perchloroethylene dry cleaning The Environmental Protection Agency 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by facilities, hard and decorative (EPA) promulgated the General examining the takings implications of chromium electroplating and chromium Provisions for the National Emission the rule in accordance with the anodizing tanks, and industrial process Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental cooling towers in place of similar (NESHAPs) on March 16, 1994 (59 FR Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk Federal requirements set forth in the 12430) and subsequently amended these and Avoidance of Unanticipated Code of Federal Regulations. This regulations on April 22, 1994 (59 FR Takings’’ issued under the executive approval includes granting authority to 19453), December 6, 1994 (59 FR order. This rule does not impose an DNREC to implement and enforce any 62589), January 25, 1995 (60 FR 4963), information collection burden under the future amendments to these provisions June 27, 1995 (60 FR 33122), September provisions of the Paperwork Reduction and standards that EPA promulgates 1, 1995 (60 FR 45980), May 21, 1996 (61 Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). and DNREC adopts unchanged into its FR 25399), December 17, 1996 (61 FR
VerDate 11
66227), December 10, 1997 (62 FR Section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR (2) Redefined ‘‘permitting authority’’ 65024), May 4, 1998 (63 FR 24444), May 63.91 and 63.92 authorize EPA to to mean ‘‘Department’’; 13, 1998 (63 FR 26465), September 21, approve of State rules and programs to (3) Removed the reference to the State 1998 (63 FR 50326), October 7, 1998 (63 be implemented and enforced in place in the definition of ‘‘Administrator’’; FR 53996), December 1, 1998 (63 FR of certain CAA requirements, including (4) Replaced the terms 66061), January 28, 1999 (64 FR 4300), the NESHAP requirements in 40 CFR ‘‘Administrator,’’ ‘‘Administrator or by a February 12, 1999 (64 FR 7467), April part 63. EPA promulgated the program State with an approved permit 12, 1999 (64 FR 17562) and June 10, approval regulations on November 26, program,’’ ‘‘Administrator (or a State 1999 (64 FR 31375). 1993 (58 FR 62262) and subsequently with an approved permit program),’’ The General Provisions, located in 40 amended these regulations on ‘‘Administrator (or the State with an CFR part 63, subpart A, codify general September 14, 2000 (65 FR 55810). An approved permit program),’’ procedures and criteria to implement approvable State program must contain, ‘‘Administrator (or a State)’’ and the emission standards located in 40 among other criteria, the following ‘‘Administrator (or the State)’’ with CFR part 63 for sources of hazardous air elements: ‘‘Department’’ or ‘‘Administrator or pollutants. The amendments made by (a) A demonstration of the state’s Department,’’ where appropriate; EPA after September 21, 1998 were not authority and resources to implement (5) Replaced references to the Federal codified into the July 1, 1998 version of and enforce regulations that are at least title V permit program and approval 40 CFR part 63, subpart A which as stringent as the NESHAP dates with Delaware’s title V state DNREC used in developing its requirements; operating permit program under regulation (see section II. and III. of this (b) A schedule demonstrating Regulation 30 of the State of Delaware rulemaking). These amendments expeditious implementation of the ‘‘Regulations Governing the Control of include the incorporation by reference regulation; and Air Pollution’’ and its interim approval of test methods and other material cited (c) A plan that assures expeditious date, January 3, 1996; in the pharmaceuticals production compliance by all sources subject to the (6) Replaced Federal language with emission standard (40 CFR part 63, regulation. language more appropriate for a State subpart GGG), the flexible polyurethane On March 6, 2000, DNREC requested rule by including references to DNREC’s foam production emission standard (40 EPA’s approval of its hazardous air permit programs under Regulation 2, 25, CFR part 63, subpart III), the phosphoric pollutant general provisions and and 30, removing references to ‘‘in all acid manufacturing and phosphate hazardous air pollutant emission States,’’ ‘‘in that State’’ and ‘‘a State’’ fertilizers production plant emission standards for perchloroethylene dry throughout the text, and defining ‘‘Act’’ standards (40 CFR part 63, subparts AA cleaning facilities, hard and decorative as the Federal Clean Air Act, dated and BB) and the pulp and paper chromium electroplating and chromium November 15, 1990; industry emission standard (40 CFR part anodizing tanks, and industrial process (7) Modified the Federal language to 63, subpart S), as well as information cooling towers to be implemented and require that the owner or operator related to the approval of California’s enforced in place of 40 CFR part 63, refrain from conducting a performance drycleaner regulation and the delegation subparts A, M, N and Q, respectively. test or a performance evaluation which of emission standards to the State of On September 22, 2000, DNREC uses an alternative test method or Washington. These amendments also provided supplemental information for alternative monitoring method, include changes to 40 CFR 63.8 through its request. approved by the Administrator, until 63.10 to allow for reduced monitoring, II. DNREC’s Regulations after the Department has approved of notification, recordkeeping and the site-specific test plan or reporting requirements for owners or A. Hazardous Air Pollutant General performance evaluation plan; operators using continuous emission Provisions (8) Modified the Federal language to monitoring systems (CEMS). In 1998, DNREC adopted, with allow an extension of up to 60 calendar EPA promulgated the NESHAP for changes, the provisions of §§ 63.1 days after approval of the site-specific perchloroethylene dry cleaning facilities through 63.15 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart test plan or performance evaluation plan on September 22, 1993 (58 FR 49354) A, dated July 1, 1997. The DNREC’s rule to conduct the performance test or and subsequently amended this was established as subpart A in performance evaluation if the site- regulation on June 3, 1996 (61 FR Regulation No. 38 of the State of specific test plan or performance 27785), May 21, 1996 (61 FR 25397) and Delaware’s ‘‘Regulations Governing the evaluation plan is not approved by the December 14, 1999 (64 FR 69637). This Control of Air Pollution.’’ Regulation Department within 30 days before the regulation is located in 40 CFR part 63, No. 38 is entitled ‘‘Emission Standards test or evaluation is scheduled to begin; subpart M. for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source (9) Modified the Federal language to EPA promulgated the NESHAP for Categories.’’ In 1999, DNREC amended state that the Administrator’s chromium emissions from hard and this regulation to conform to several determination of an adequate validation decorative chromium electroplating and amendments that EPA made to §§ 63.11 of an alternative test method will occur chromium anodizing tanks on January and 63.14 of its regulation and codified upon approval of the use of the 25, 1995 (60 FR 4948) and subsequently in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, dated July alternative test method; amended this regulation on June 27, 1, 1998. The DNREC’s regulation (10) Required copies of requests for 1995 (60 FR 33122), June 3, 1996 (61 FR became effective on September 11, 1999. alternative monitoring methods, 27785), August 11, 1997 (62 FR 42918), In summary, DNREC made the following petitions for relative accuracy test and December 14, 1999 (64 FR 69637). changes from the Federal regulation: substitutions, petitions for adjustments This regulation is located in 40 CFR part (1) Added a definition for to opacity emission standards, and 63, subpart N. ‘‘Department,’’ meaning ‘‘the proposed test plans or results of testing EPA promulgated the NESHAP for Department of Natural Resources and or monitoring required for approval of industrial cooling towers on September Environmental Control, as defined in alternative nonopacity emission 8, 1994 (59 FR 46339). This regulation Title 29, Delaware Code, Chapter 80, as standards to be submitted to both the is located in 40 CFR part 63, subpart Q. amended’’; Administrator and the Department;
VerDate 11
(11) Modified the Federal language to following changes from the Federal (15) Added requirements for dry note that owners or operators subject to regulation: cleaning facilities that have existing dry- this regulation may also be required to (1) Added a definition for to-dry machines only or both existing not only obtain a permit, but also revise ‘‘Department,’’ meaning ‘‘the dry-to-dry machines and transfer or amend such permit; Department of Natural Resources and machines to notify the Department if the (12) Removed the sentence Environmental Control, as defined in perchloroethylene consumption meets referencing sources subject to 40 CFR Title 29, Delaware Code, Chapter 80, as or exceeds 530 liters (140 gallons) in part 60 or part 61 in the definition of amended’’; any 12 month period; affected source; (2) Removed the reference to the State (16) Added requirements for dry (13) Included a reference to in the definition of ‘‘Administrator’’; cleaning facilities that have transfer §§ 63.5(b)(3) in 63.5(b)(4); (3) Replaced the terms machines only to notify to notify the (14) Included references to DNREC’s ‘‘Administrator,’’ ‘‘applicable title V Department if the perchloroethylene enforcement authority under 7 Del. C., permitting authority,’’ and consumption meets or exceeds 760 liters Chapter 60, DNREC’s monitoring, ‘‘Administrator or delegated State (200 gallons) in any 12 month period; recordkeeping and reporting authority authority’’ with ‘‘Department,’’ where and under Regulation 17 of the State of appropriate; (17) Added a review procedure for the Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the (4) Replaced references to the Federal Department to follow in the event that Control of Air Pollutants,’’ and DNREC’s title V permit program with Delaware’s any dry cleaning facility exceeds its confidentiality authority under 7 Del. title V state operating permit program annual perchloroethylene consumption C., Chapter 60 and 29 Del. C. , Chapter under Regulation 30 of the State of rates, as established in the applicability 100, Section 10002(d), where Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the section of the regulation, potentially appropriate; Control of Air Pollution’’; requiring that facility to adhere to more (15) Modified the Federal language so (5) Replaced the Federal regulation’s stringent control requirements. that sources that intend to reconstruct compliance dates with the original C. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant an area source such that the source effective date of the state regulation, Emission Standards for Hard and becomes a major affected source must June 30, 1999; obtain prior written approval and are (6) Specified the date of the expiration Decorative Chromium Electroplating subject to the same notification of the title V permit deferral for area and Chromium Anodizing Tanks requirements as major sources intending sources as December 9, 2004 and the In 1999, DNREC adopted, with to reconstruct; and date by which these sources must changes, the provisions of §§ 63.340 (16) Replaced the requirement to keep submit their title V permit applications through 63.347 of 40 CFR part 63, the record of an applicability as December 9, 2005; subpart N. The DNREC’s rule was determination for a period of 5 years to (7) Required copies of requests for use established as subpart N in Regulation a period of the life of the source. of equivalent emission control No. 38 of the State of Delaware’s As stated in section I. of this technology to be submitted to both the ‘‘Regulations Governing the Control of rulemaking, DNREC’s regulation was Administrator and the Department; Air Pollution.’’ Regulation No. 38 is adopted prior to the changes that EPA (8) Removed redundant references in entitled ‘‘Emission Standards for made to its regulation on and after the applicability section of the rule, 40 Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source September 21, 1998. These changes, CFR 63.320(c); Categories.’’ In 2000, DNREC amended therefore, are not included in the (9) Added work practice (pollution this regulation to conform with an Delaware regulation. These changes, prevention), notification, recordkeeping amendment that EPA made to 40 CFR described in section I. of this and reporting requirements for coin- 63.340 of its regulation. The DNREC’s rulemaking, do not impact the operated dry cleaning machines; amended regulation became effective on stringency of DNREC’s regulation and, (10) Added title V permitting October 11, 2000. In summary, DNREC thus, do not alter EPA’s decision to requirements for coin-operated made the following changes from the approve of DNREC’s rules (see EPA’s drycleaning machines located at an Federal regulation: analysis in section III. of this affected major source; (1) Replaced the terms rulemaking). (11) Added requirements for dry ‘‘Administrator’’ and ‘‘applicable title V cleaning facilities that have existing dry- B. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant permitting authority’’ with to-dry machines only or both existing Emission Standard for ‘‘Department,’’ where appropriate; dry-to-dry machines and transfer (2) Replaced references to the Federal Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning machines and that consume less than title V permit program with Delaware’s Facilities 530 liters (140 gallons) of title V state operating permit program In 1999, DNREC adopted, with perchloroethylene per year to repair under Regulation 30 of the State of changes, the provisions of §§ 63.320 leaks within 24 hours of discovery; Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the through 63.325 of 40 CFR part 63, (12) Added requirements for dry Control of Air Pollution’’ and its minor subpart M. The DNREC’s rule was cleaning facilities that have transfer new source construction and established as subpart M in Regulation machines only and that consume less modification permitting program under No. 38 of the State of Delaware’s than 760 liters (200 gallons) of Regulation 2 of the State of Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the Control of perchloroethylene per year to repair ‘‘Regulations Governing the Control of Air Pollution.’’ Regulation No. 38 is leaks within 24 hours of discovery; Air Pollution,’’ where appropriate; entitled ‘‘Emission Standards for (13) Added requirements for sources (3) Replaced the Federal regulation’s Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source using carbon adsorbers on room compliance dates with the original Categories.’’ In 2000, DNREC amended enclosures to measure the effective date of the state regulation, this regulation to conform with an perchloroethylene concentration in the September 11, 1999 and remove amendment that EPA made to § 63.320 exhaust at least weekly; irrelevant or expired compliance dates, of its regulation. The DNREC’s amended (14) Redefined ‘‘diverter valve’’ to where appropriate; regulation became effective on October mean both a ‘‘flow control device’’ and (4) Specified the date of the expiration 11, 2000. In summary, DNREC made the ‘‘flow control devices’’; of the title V permit deferral for area
VerDate 11
sources as December 9, 2004 and the title V state operating permit program A. Hazardous Air Pollutant General date by which these sources must under Regulation 30 of the State of Provisions submit their title V permit application Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the EPA has determined that subpart A in as December 9, 2005; Control of Air Pollution’; Regulation No. 38 of the State of (5) Changed the term ‘‘part’’ in the (3) Replaced the Federal regulation’s Delaware’s ‘‘Regulations Governing the Federal rule to ‘‘regulation’’ when compliance dates with the original Control of Air Pollution’’ is more referring to subpart A (General stringent than the General Provisions in Provisions) of 40 CFR part 63; effective date of the state regulation, May 11, 1998; and 40 CFR part 63, subpart A and, (6) Changed ‘‘Table 1 to Sec. 63.432’’ therefore, can be approved as equivalent to ‘‘Table 342–1 to Sec. 63.342’’ and (4) Included references to DNREC’s to the Federal regulation in accordance changed ‘‘Table 1 to subpart N of part analysis and data collection authority with the rule substitution provisions of 63’’ to ‘‘Table 1 of subpart N of under Regulation 17 of the State of 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.92. The DNREC’s Regulation 38’’; Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the regulation incorporates most of EPA’s (7) Removed references to operations Control of Air Pollutants.’’ regulation with some changes. Most of in California; these changes meet the definition of (8) Required copies of proposed work III. EPA’s Analysis of DNREC’s ‘‘minor editorial, formatting, and other practice standards, alternative air Submittal and Regulations nonsubstantive changes,’’ as described pollution device descriptions, in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(ix). These notifications of compliance status and Based upon DNREC’s program approval request and its pertinent laws nonsubstantive changes include: performance test results to be submitted (1) Adding or modifying the to both the Administrator and the and regulations, EPA has determined that such an approval is appropriate in definitions of ‘‘Department,’’ Department; ‘‘permitting authority,’’ ‘‘Act,’’ that DNREC has satisfied the criteria of (9) Removed irrelevant language ‘‘Administrator’’ and ‘‘affected source’’; pertaining to compliance extension 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.92. In accordance (2) Replacing references to requests in both the text of the rule and with 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3)(i), DNREC ‘‘Administrator’’ with ‘‘Department’’; Table 342–1, which refers to applicable submitted a written finding by the State (3) Replacing references to the title V sections of the General Provisions; Attorney General which demonstrates program with references to Delaware’s (10) Referenced the test methods of 40 that the State has the necessary legal Regulation 30; CFR part 63, appendix A, where authority to implement and enforce its (4) Eliminating references to appropriate; regulations, including the enforcement applicability of the regulation in other (11) Clarified language to require an authorities which meet 40 CFR 70.11, states; owner or operator of an area source who the authority to request information (5) Including references to Delaware’s constructs or reconstructs a new source from regulated sources and the authority Regulation 2, 25, and 30, which are the to submit a notification to the to inspect sources and records to regulations governing permitting of Department and for an owner or determine compliance status. In sources in Delaware, where appropriate; operator of a major source who (6) Removing the general references to accordance with 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3)(ii), constructs or reconstructs a new source ‘‘States’’ in the Federal regulation; to submit an application for approval of DNREC submitted copies of its statutes, (7) Providing clarification that the construction or reconstruction to the regulations and requirements that grant application for approval of construction Department and, if appropriate, an DNREC the authority to implement and or reconstruction can be used to fulfill application under Delaware’s enforce the regulations. In accordance the notification requirements for all Regulation 2; and with 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3)(iii)–(v), DNREC facilities which are constructing a new (12) Added minor clarifying language submitted documentation of adequate major source or reconstructing any and corrected typographical errors, resources and a schedule and plan to source; where appropriate. assure expeditious State (8) Including references to DNREC’s implementation and compliance by all enforcement, monitoring, recordkeeping D. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant sources. In accordance with 40 CFR and reporting and confidentiality Emission Standards for Industrial 63.92(b)(1), DNREC submitted a authority under the relevant State Process Cooling Towers demonstration of adequate public notice statutes and regulations; In 1999, DNREC adopted, with and opportunity to submit written (9) Clarifying that owners or operators changes, the provisions of §§ 63.400 comments on its regulations. The refrain from conducting a performance through 63.406 of 40 CFR part 63, requirements of 40 CFR 63.92(b)(2)–(3), test or evaluation which uses an subpart Q. The DNREC’s rule was requiring a demonstration of regulations alternative test or monitoring method established as subpart Q in Regulation no less stringent than the Federal until after the Department has approved No. 38 of the State of Delaware’s regulations, are described in detail in of the site-specific test or performance ‘‘Regulations Governing the Control of evaluation plan; sections III.(A)–(D), below. Therefore, Air Pollution.’’ Regulation No. 38 is (10) Modifying the Federal language the DNREC program has adequate and entitled ‘‘Emission Standards for to state that the Administrator’s Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source effective authorities, resources, and determination of an adequate validation Categories.’’ The DNREC’s regulation procedures in place for implementation of an alternative test method will occur became effective on May 11, 1998. In and enforcement of sources subject to upon approval of the use of the summary, DNREC made the following the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, alternative test method; and changes from the Federal regulation: subparts A, M, N and Q. The DNREC (11) Allowing an extension of up to 60 (1) Replaced the term has the primary authority and days after the approval of a site-specific ‘‘Administrator’’ with ‘‘Department’’ responsibility to carry out all elements test or performance evaluation plan to and removed references to ‘‘delegated of these programs for all sources conduct the performance test or authority,’’ where appropriate; covered in Delaware, including on-site evaluation if the plan is not approved by (2) Replaced references to the Federal inspections, record keeping reviews, the Department within 30 days before title V permit program with Delaware’s and enforcement. the test is scheduled to begin.
VerDate 11
None of these changes decrease the plans be submitted only to EPA. The (1) Adding or modifying the stringency of the regulation when DNREC’s regulation requires the definitions of ‘‘Department,’’ ‘‘diverter compared to the Federal regulation. submission of these documents to both valve’’ and ‘‘Administrator’; These changes improve the clarity of the EPA and DNREC. The Federal (2) Replacing references to regulation by either adding terms or regulation notes that owner or operators ‘‘Administrator,’’ ‘‘applicable title V references, redefining terms, eliminating may need to obtain a permit, while permitting authority’’ and unnecessary references or slightly DNREC’s regulation notes that owners ‘‘Administrator or delegated authority’’ modifying procedures. For example, in or operators may need to obtain, revise with ‘‘Department’; the Federal regulation, a performance or amend a permit. The Federal (3) Removing redundant references in test or evaluation which uses an regulation requires that a record of the applicability section of the rule; alternative test or monitoring method applicability determination be retained (4) Replacing references to the title V cannot be conducted until after the site- for 5 years while DNREC’s regulation program with references to Delaware’s specific test or performance evaluation requires that this record be retained for Regulation 30; plan (which includes the approval of the life of the source. The Federal (5) Replacing the Federal regulation’s the alternative test method) is deemed regulation requires that major sources compliance date with the original acceptable by the Administrator. which reconstruct obtain prior written effective date of the state regulation; Because major alternative test and approval while DNREC’s regulation (6) Specifying the exact date of the monitoring methods can only be requires that both major and area title V permit deferral for area sources approved by the EPA Administrator, per sources which reconstruct obtain prior and the exact due date for permit 40 CFR 63.91(g)(2), DNREC, in its written approval. applications for these sources; and (7) Adding a review procedure for the regulation, separated the approval of the As stated earlier, DNREC’s regulation alternative test or monitoring method Department to follow in the event that does not include all of the modifications any dry cleaning facility exceeds the and the approval of the site-specific test that EPA made to its regulation since or evaluation plan into two distinct annual perchloroethylene consumption July 1, 1998. These changes, described rates established in the rule. procedures. Therefore, once the in section III. of this rulemaking, do not alternative test or monitoring method is None of these changes decrease the impact the stringency of DNREC’s stringency of the regulation when approved by either EPA, in the case of regulation and, thus, do not alter EPA’s major alternatives, or the Department, in compared to the Federal regulation. decision to approve of DNREC’s rules. These changes improve the clarity of the the case of minor or intermediate Most of these changes are not relevant alternatives, the site-specific test or regulation by either adding terms or to this rulemaking because they involve references, redefining terms, eliminating performance evaluation plan can be the incorporation of test methods and subsequently approved by the unnecessary references or providing other material which are pertinent to Department. These changes clarify the guidance on how the Department may emission standards and program intent of the regulation but do not address exceedances of the approvals which are not addressed by decrease the stringency. perchloroethylene limits established in this rulemaking. One amendment, The DNREC regulation includes the rule. The review procedure added in however, allows for reduced changes from the Federal regulation DNREC’s regulation follows EPA’s monitoring, notification, recordkeeping which meet the definition of policy memo, entitled ‘‘Guidance and reporting requirements for owners adjustments by ‘‘increasing the Concerning Implementation of National or operators using continuous emission frequency of required reporting, testing, Emission Standards for Hazardous Air monitoring systems (CEMS). Because sampling or monitoring,’’ as described Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry DNREC did not incorporate this change in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(iv). These changes Cleaning Facilities,’’ dated May 20, into its regulation, the DNREC include: 1996. The review procedure allows the (1) Requiring that copies of requests regulation is clearly more stringent than Department to evaluate the cause of an for alternative monitoring methods, the Federal regulation. exceedance of an annual petitions for relative accuracy test B. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant perchloroethylene consumption rate substitutions, petitions for adjustments Emission Standard for before requiring more stringent control to opacity emission standards and Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning requirements. Because this review proposed test plans or results of testing Facilities procedure does not exempt sources from or monitoring required for approval of more stringent control requirements if alternative nonopacity emission EPA has determined that subpart M in an exceedance occurs, but only outlines standards be submitted to both the Regulation No. 38 of the State of how the Department may evaluate these Administrator and the Department; Delaware’s ‘‘Regulations Governing the exceedances, this addition to the (2) Noting that owners and operators Control of Air Pollution’’ is more regulation is no less stringent than the may be required to not only obtain a stringent than the National Federal regulation. permit but to also revise or amend such Perchloroethylene Air Emission The DNREC regulation includes permit; Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities in changes from the Federal regulation (3) Requiring that the record of an 40 CFR part 63, subpart M and, which meet the definition of applicability determination be retained therefore, can be approved as equivalent adjustments by ‘‘increasing the for the life of the source; and to the Federal regulation in accordance frequency of required reporting, testing, (4) Requiring that reconstructed area with the rule substitution provisions of sampling or monitoring,’’ as described sources obtain prior written approval 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.92. The DNREC’s in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(iv). These changes and be subject to the same notification regulation incorporates most of EPA’s include: requirements as major sources intending regulation with some changes. Most of (1) Requiring that copies of requests to reconstruct. these changes meet the definition of for use of an equivalent emission These changes are clearly more ‘‘minor editorial, formatting, and other control technology be submitted to both stringent than the Federal regulation. nonsubstantive changes,’’ as described the Administrator and the Department; The Federal regulation requires that in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(ix). These (2) Requiring that sources using copies of certain requests, petitions and nonsubstantive changes include: carbon adsorbers on room enclosures
VerDate 11
measure the perchloroethylene facilities to repair leaks within 24 hours extension, since the compliance date concentration in the exhaust at least of discovery. has already past. weekly; The DNREC regulation includes C. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant (3) Requiring drycleaning facilities changes from the Federal regulation Emission Standards for Hard and that have only existing dry-to-dry which meet the definition of Decorative Chromium Electroplating machines or both existing dry-to-dry adjustments by ‘‘increasing the and Chromium Anodizing Tanks machines and transfer machines and frequency of required reporting, testing, that consume less than 530 liters of EPA has determined that subpart N in sampling or monitoring,’’ as described perchloroethylene per year to notify the Regulation No. 38 of the State of in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(iv). These changes Department if the perchloroethylene Delaware’s ‘‘Regulations Governing the include: consumption meets or exceeds 530 liters Control of Air Pollution’’ is more (1) Requiring that copies of requests of in any 12 month period; and stringent than the National Emission proposed work practice standards, (4) Requiring drycleaning facilities Standards for Chromium Emissions alternative air pollution device that have only transfer machines and From Hard and Decorative Chromium descriptions, notifications of that consume less than 760 liters of Electroplating and Chromium compliance status and performance test perchloroethylene per year to notify the Anodizing Tanks in 40 CFR part 63, results be submitted to both the Department if the perchloroethylene subpart N and, therefore, can be Administrator and the Department; and consumption meets or exceeds 760 liters approved as equivalent to the Federal (2) Clarifying that an owner or in any 12 month period. regulation in accordance with the rule operator of an area source who These changes are clearly more substitution provisions of 40 CFR 63.91 constructs or reconstructs a new source stringent than the Federal regulation. and 63.92. The DNREC’s regulation submit a notification to the Department The Federal regulation requires copies incorporates most of EPA’s regulation and that an owner or operator of a major of requests to use equivalent emission with some changes. Most of these source who constructs or reconstructs a control technology only be submitted to changes meet the definition of ‘‘minor new source submit an application for EPA. The DNREC’s regulation requires editorial, formatting, and other approval of construction or the submission of these documents to nonsubstantive changes,’’ as described reconstruction to the Department and, if both the Administrator and DNREC. The in 40 CFR 63.92(b)(3)(ix). These appropriate, an application under Federal regulation does not require nonsubstantive changes include: Delaware’s Regulation 2. testing of the exhaust from room (1) Replacing references to These changes are clearly more enclosure carbon adsorbers. The Federal ‘‘Administrator’’ and ‘‘applicable title V stringent than the Federal regulation. regulation does not require notification permitting authority’’ with The Federal regulation requires that of perchloroethylene consumption that ‘‘Department’’; copies of requests and notifications only exceeds the 530 and 760 liter limits. (2) Replacing references to the title V be submitted to the Administrator. The The DNREC regulation includes program with references to Delaware’s DNREC’s regulation requires the changes from the Federal regulation Regulation 30 and its minor new source submission of these documents to both which meet the definition of construction and modification the Administrator and DNREC. The adjustments by ‘‘subjecting additional permitting program under Regulation 2 Federal regulation does not clarify that emission points or sources to control of the State of Delaware ‘‘Regulations construction and reconstruction requirements,’’ as described in 40 CFR Governing the Control of Air Pollution,’’ notifications and applications be 62.92(b)(3)(vii). These changes include: where appropriate; submitted to the delegated authority. (1) Requiring coin-operated dry (3) Replacing the Federal regulation’s D. DNREC’s Hazardous Air Pollutant cleaning machines located at a major compliance date with the original Emission Standards for Industrial affected source to adhere to the same effective date of the state regulation; Process Cooling Towers work practice, notification, (4) Specifying the exact date of the recordkeeping and reporting title V permit deferral for area sources EPA has determined that subpart Q in requirements as small area sources with and the exact due date for permit Regulation No. 38 of the State of existing machines and subjecting these applications for these sources; Delaware’s ‘‘Regulations Governing the sources to title V permit requirements; (5) Removing references to operations Control of Air Pollution’’ is more (2) Requiring drycleaning facilities in California; stringent than the National Emission that have only existing dry-to-dry (6) Removing irrelevant language Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants machines or both existing dry-to-dry pertaining to compliance extension for Industrial Cooling Towers in 40 CFR machines and transfer machines and requests; part 63, subpart Q and therefore, can be that consume less than 530 liters of (7) Referencing relevant test methods approved as equivalent to the Federal perchloroethylene per year to repair in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A; and regulation in accordance with the rule leaks within 24 hours of discovery; and (8) Adding minor clarifying language substitution provisions of 40 CFR 63.91 (3) Requiring drycleaning facilities and correcting typographical errors, and 63.92. The DNREC’s regulation that have only transfer machines and where appropriate. incorporates most of EPA’s regulation that consume less than 760 liters of None of these changes decrease the with some changes. All of these changes perchloroethylene per year to repair stringency of the regulation when meet the definition of ‘‘minor editorial, leaks within 24 hours of discovery. compared to the Federal regulation. formatting, and other nonsubstantive These changes are clearly more These changes improve the clarity of the changes,’’ as described in 40 CFR stringent than the Federal requirement. regulation by either adding terms or 63.92(b)(3)(ix). These nonsubstantive The Federal regulation exempts coin- references, redefining terms, eliminating changes include: operated dry cleaning machines from unnecessary references or correcting (1) Replacing the term work practice, notification, typographical errors. The DNREC ‘‘Administrator’’ with ‘‘Department’’; recordkeeping, reporting and title V removed the language related to (2) Replacing references to the title V requirements. The Federal regulation compliance extension requests because program with references to Delaware’s does not require the aforementioned sources can no longer apply for these Regulation 30;
VerDate 11
(3) Replacing the Federal regulation’s delegation may be revoked in whole or maintenance requirements, e.g., 40 CFR compliance date with the original in part in accordance with the 63.6(e) and applicable sections of effective date of the state regulation; and procedures set out in 40 CFR 63.96(b). relevant standards; (4) Including references to DNREC’s Certain provisions of 40 CFR part 63 (3) Responsibility for determining analysis and data collection authority allow only the Administrator of EPA to compliance with non-opacity standards, under Regulation 17 of the State of take further standard setting actions. In e.g., 40 CFR 63.6(f) and applicable Delaware ‘‘Regulations Governing the addition to the specific authorities sections of relevant standards; Control of Air Pollutants.’’ retained by the Administrator in 40 CFR (4) Responsibility for determining None of these changes decrease the 63.90(d) and the ‘‘Delegation of compliance with opacity and visible stringency of the regulation when Authorities’’ section for specific emission standards, e.g., 40 CFR 63.6(h) compared to the Federal regulation. standards, EPA Region III is retaining and applicable sections of relevant These changes improve the clarity of the the following authorities, in accordance standards; regulation by either adding terms or with 40 CFR 63.91(g)(2)(ii): (5) Approval of site-specific test references, redefining terms, or (1) Approval of alternative non- plans,2 e.g. 40 CFR 63.7(c)(2)(i) and (d) eliminating unnecessary references. opacity emission standards, e.g., 40 CFR and applicable sections of relevant 63.6(g) and applicable sections of standards; IV. Terms of Program Approval and (6) Approval of minor alternatives to Delegation of Authority relevant standards; (2) Approval of alternative opacity test methods, as defined in 40 CFR In order for DNREC to receive standards, e.g., 40 CFR 63.9(h)(9) and 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.7(e)(2)(i) and delegation of future amendments to the applicable sections of relevant applicable sections of relevant Federal hazardous air pollutant general standards; standards; provisions and hazardous air pollutant (3) Approval of major alternatives to (7) Approval of intermediate emission standards for test methods, as defined in 40 CFR alternatives to test methods, as defined perchloroethylene dry cleaning 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and in 40 CFR 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR facilities, hard and decorative (f) and applicable sections of relevant 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and applicable chromium electroplating and chromium standards; sections of relevant standards; anodizing tanks, and industrial process (4) Approval of major alternatives to (8) Approval of shorter sampling cooling towers, each amendment must monitoring, as defined in 40 CFR times/volumes when necessitated by be legally adopted by the State of 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.8(f) and process variables and other factors, e.g., Delaware, with adequate opportunity for applicable sections of relevant 40 CFR 63.7(e)(2)(iii) and applicable public participation and public standards; and sections of relevant standards; comment, and DNREC must notify the (5) Approval of major alternatives to (9) Waiver of performance testing, Director, Air Protection Division, EPA recordkeeping and reporting, as defined e.g., 40 CFR 63.7 (e)(2)(iv), (h)(2), and Region III, that it has adopted additional in 40 CFR 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.10(f) (h)(3) and applicable sections of amendments and that it intends to and applicable sections of relevant relevant standards; enforce the amendments in standards. (10) Approval of site-specific conformance with the terms of this The following provisions are included performance evaluation (monitoring) 3 program approval and delegation. EPA, in this delegation, in accordance with plans, e.g., 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1) and (e)(1) upon its review and approval, in 40 CFR 63.91(g)(1)(i), and can only be and applicable sections of relevant accordance with 40 CFR 63.91(e), will exercised on a case-by-case basis. When standards; (11) Approval of minor alternatives to incorporate by reference the State of any of these authorities are exercised, monitoring methods, as defined in 40 Delaware’s revised regulations into 40 DNREC must notify EPA Region III in CFR 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.8(f) and CFR 63.14 and amend 40 CFR 63.99, as writing: applicable sections of relevant appropriate. (1) Applicability determinations for The notification and reporting sources during the title V permitting standards; (12) Approval of intermediate provisions in 40 CFR part 63 requiring process and as sought by an owner/ alternatives to monitoring methods, as the owners or operators of affected operator of an affected source through a defined in 40 CFR 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR sources to make submissions to the formal, written request, e.g., 40 CFR 63.8(f) and applicable sections of Administrator shall be met by sending 63.1 and applicable sections of relevant 1 relevant standards; such submissions to DNREC and EPA standards ; (13) Approval of adjustments to time (2) Responsibility for determining Region III. periods for submitting reports, e.g., 40 compliance with operation and If at any time there is a conflict CFR 63.9 and 63.10 and applicable between a DNREC regulation and a sections of relevant standards; and Federal regulation, the Federal 1 Applicability determinations are considered to be nationally significant when they: (14) Approval of minor alternatives to regulation must be applied if it is more recordkeeping and reporting, as defined stringent than that of DNREC. EPA is (i) Are unusally complex or controversial; (ii) Have bearign on more than one state or are in 40 CFR 63.90(a), e.g., 40 CFR 63.10(f) responsible for determining stringency multi-Regional; and applicable sections of relevant between conflicting regulations. If (iii) Appear to create a conflict with previous standards. DNREC does not have the authority to policy or determinations; enforce the more stringent Federal (iv) Are a legal issue which has not been 2 The DNREC will notify EPA of these approvals regulation, it shall notify EPA Region III previously considered; or on a quarterly basis by submitting a copy of the test in writing as soon as possible, so that (v) Raise new policy questions and shall be plan approval letter. Any plans which propose forwarded to EPA Region III prior to finalization. major alternative test methods or major alternative this portion of the delegation may be Detailed information on the applicability monitoring methods shall be referred to EPA for revoked. determination process may be found in EPA approval. If EPA determines that DNREC’s document 305–B–99–004 How to Review and Issue 3 The DNREC will notify EPA of these approvals procedure for enforcing or Clean Air Act Applicability Determinations and on a quarterly basis by submitting a copy of the implementing the 40 CFR part 63 Alternative Monitoring, dated February 1999. The performance evaluation plan approval letter. Any DNREC may also refer to the Compendium of plans which propose major alternative test methods requirements is inadequate, or is not Applicability Determinations issued by the EPA or major alternative monitoring methods shall be being effectively carried out, this and may contact EPA Region III for guidance. referred to EPA for approval.
VerDate 11
As required, DNREC and EPA Region regulations. The delegation of authority rule approves pre-existing requirements III will provide the necessary written, shall be administered in accordance under state law and does not impose verbal and/or electronic notification to with the terms outlined in section IV., any additional enforceable duty beyond ensure that each agency is fully above. that required by state law, it does not informed regarding the interpretation of EPA is publishing this rule without contain any unfunded mandate or applicable regulations in 40 CFR part prior proposal because the Agency significantly or uniquely affect small 63. In instances where there is a conflict views this as a noncontroversial governments, as described in the between a DNREC interpretation and a amendment and anticipates no adverse Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Federal interpretation of applicable comment. The adjustments and (Public Law 104–4). This rule also does regulations in 40 CFR part 63, the substitutions made in the DNREC not have a substantial direct effect on Federal interpretation must be applied if regulation are primarily non-substantive one or more Indian tribes, on the it is more stringent than that of DNREC. and relate to minor editorial and relationship between the Federal Written, verbal and/or electronic formatting changes from the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the notification will also be used to ensure rule. The substantive changes from the distribution of power and that each agency is informed of the Federal regulation relate to increasing responsibilities between the Federal compliance status of affected sources in the frequency of reporting, testing, Government and Indian tribes, as Delaware. The DNREC will comply with sampling or monitoring, and subjecting specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 all of the requirements of 40 CFR additional emission points or sources to FR 67249 November 9, 2000), nor will 63.91(g)(1)(ii). control requirements. However, in the it have substantial direct effects on the Quarterly reports will be submitted to ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s States, on the relationship between the EPA by DNREC to identify sources Federal Register, EPA is publishing a national government and the States, or determined to be applicable during that separate document that will serve as the on the distribution of power and quarter. proposal to approve the program responsibilities among the various Although DNREC has primary approval request if adverse comments levels of government, as specified in authority and responsibility to are filed. This rule will be effective on Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, implement and enforce the hazardous December 3, 2001 without further notice August 10, 1999), because it merely air pollutant general provisions and unless EPA receives adverse comment approves a state rule implementing a hazardous air pollutant emission by November 1, 2001. If EPA receives Federal standard, and does not alter the standards for perchloroethylene dry adverse comment, EPA will publish a relationship or the distribution of power cleaning facilities, hard and decorative timely withdrawal in the Federal and responsibilities established in the chromium electroplating and chromium Register informing the public that the CAA. This rule also is not subject to anodizing tanks, and industrial process rule will not take effect. EPA will Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885 cooling towers requirements, nothing address all public comments in a April 23, 1997), because it is not shall preclude, limit, or interfere with subsequent final rule based on the economically significant. the authority of EPA to exercise its proposed rule. EPA will not institute a enforcement, investigatory, and In reviewing requests for rule second comment period on this action. approval under CAA section 112, EPA’s information gathering authorities Any parties interested in commenting concerning this part of the Act. role is to approve state choices, must do so at this time. Please note that provided that they meet the criteria of V. Final Action if EPA receives adverse comment on an the CAA. In this context, in the absence EPA is approving DNREC’s Regulation amendment, paragraph, or section of of a prior existing requirement for the No. 38, subpart A, as amended, effective this rule and if that provision may be State to use voluntary consensus September 11, 1999, DNREC’s severed from the remainder of the rule, standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Regulation No. 38, subpart M, as EPA may adopt as final those provisions to disapprove requests for rule approval amended, effective October 11, 2000, of the rule that are not the subject of an under CAA section 112 for failure to use DNREC’s Regulation No. 38, subpart N, adverse comment. VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with as amended, effective October 11, 2000 VI. Administrative Requirements applicable law for EPA, when it reviews and DNREC’s Regulation No. 38, subpart a request for rule approval under CAA Q, effective April 4, 1998, as equivalent A. General Requirements section 112, to use VCS in place of a to the CAA section 112(d) requirements Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR request for rule approval under CAA set forth in 40 CFR part 63, subparts A, 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is section 112 that otherwise satisfies the M, N and Q, respectively, for affected not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and provisions of the CAA. Thus, the sources in the State of Delaware. therefore is not subject to review by the requirements of section 12(d) of the Accordingly, EPA is revising 40 CFR Office of Management and Budget. For National Technology Transfer and 63.14 and 63.99 to reflect the Federal this reason, this action is also not Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. enforceability of DNREC’s regulations. subject to Executive Order 13211, 272 note) do not apply. As required by The DNREC’s regulation adopts the ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 Federal requirements found in 40 CFR Significantly Affect Energy Supply, FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing part 63, subparts A, M, N and Q, dated Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May this rule, EPA has taken the necessary July 1, 1998, with some adjustments. 22, 2001). This action merely approves steps to eliminate drafting errors and Affected sources will need to refer to state law as meeting Federal ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, both DNREC’s regulations and 40 CFR requirements and imposes no additional and provide a clear legal standard for part 63, subparts A, M, N and Q, dated requirements beyond those imposed by affected conduct. EPA has complied July 1, 1998 to comply. This approval state law. Accordingly, the with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR also includes granting authority to Administrator certifies that this rule 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the DNREC to implement and enforce any will not have a significant economic takings implications of the rule in future amendments to these provisions impact on a substantial number of small accordance with the ‘‘Attorney and standards that EPA promulgates entities under the Regulatory Flexibility General’s Supplemental Guidelines for and DNREC adopts unchanged into its Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
VerDate 11
Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under PART 63—[AMENDED] Control of Air Pollution, Regulation No. the executive order. This rule does not 38, subpart M pertains to owners and 1. The authority citation for part 63 impose an information collection operators of perchloroethylene continues to read as follows: burden under the provisions of the drycleaning facilities and has been Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq. approved under the procedures in U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 2. Section 63.14 is amended by § 63.91 and § 63.92 to be implemented B. Submission to Congress and the adding paragraph (d)(3)(iii) to read as and enforced in place of 40 CFR part 63, Comptroller General follows: subpart M. Delaware is delegated the The Congressional Review Act, 5 § 63.14 Incorporation by Reference. authority to implement and enforce its regulation in place of 40 CFR part 63, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small * * * * * Business Regulatory Enforcement (d) * * * subpart M, in accordance with the final Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (3) * * * rule, published in the Federal Register that before a rule may take effect, the (iii) State of Delaware Regulations on October 2, 2001, effective December agency promulgating the rule must Governing the Control of Air Pollution 3, 2001. submit a rule report, which includes a (October 2000), IBR approved for (iv) Affected sources must comply copy of the rule, to each House of the § 63.99(a)(8)(ii)–(v) of subpart E of this with the State of Delaware Regulations Congress and to the Comptroller General part. Governing the Control of Air Pollution, of the United States. EPA will submit a Regulation No. 38, subpart N, effective report containing this rule and other Subpart E—Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal October 11, 2000 (incorporated by required information to the U.S. Senate, reference as specified in § 63.14). The the U.S. House of Representatives, and Authorities material incorporated in the State of the Comptroller General of the United 3. Section 63.99 is amended by Delaware Regulations Governing the States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a adding paragraphs (a)(8)(ii) through (v) Control of Air Pollution, Regulation No. ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. to read as follows: 38, subpart N pertains to owners and operators of hard and decorative 804(2). § 63.99 Delegated Federal authorities. chromium electroplating and chromium C. Petitions for Judicial Review (a) * * * anodizing tanks and has been approved (8) Delaware Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, (i) * * * under the procedures in § 63.91 and petitions for judicial review of this (ii) Affected sources must comply § 63.92 to be implemented and enforced action must be filed in the United States with the State of Delaware Regulations in place of 40 CFR part 63, subpart N. Court of Appeals for the appropriate Governing the Control of Air Pollution, Delaware is delegated the authority to circuit by December 3, 2001. Filing a Regulation No. 38, subpart A, effective implement and enforce its regulation in petition for reconsideration by the September 11, 1999 (incorporated by place of 40 CFR part 63, subpart N, in Administrator of this final rule does not reference as specified in § 63.14). The accordance with the final rule, affect the finality of this rule for the material incorporated in the State of published in the Federal Register on purposes of judicial review nor does it Delaware Regulations Governing the October 2, 2001, effective December 3, extend the time within which a petition Control of Air Pollution, Regulation No. 2001. for judicial review may be filed, and 38, subpart A pertains to owners and shall not postpone the effectiveness of (v) Affected sources must comply operators of stationary sources in the with the State of Delaware Regulations such rule or action. This action, State of Delaware that are subject to Governing the Control of Air Pollution, pertaining to the approval of Delaware’s emission standard requirements of the Regulation No. 38, subpart Q, effective regulations for hazardous air pollutant State of Delaware Regulations May 11, 1998 (incorporated by reference general provisions and hazardous air Governing the Control of Air Pollution, pollutant emission standards for Regulation No. 38, subparts M, N and Q as specified in § 63.14). The material perchloroethylene dry cleaning and 40 CFR part 63 and has been incorporated in the State of Delaware facilities, hard and decorative approved under the procedures in Regulations Governing the Control of chromium electroplating and chromium § 63.91 and § 63.92 to be implemented Air Pollution, Regulation No. 38, anodizing tanks, and industrial process and enforced in place of 40 CFR part 63, subpart Q pertains to owners and cooling towers (CAA section 112), may subpart A. Delaware is delegated the operators of industrial process cooling not be challenged later in proceedings to authority to implement and enforce its towers and has been approved under the enforce its requirements. (See section regulation in place of 40 CFR part 63, procedures in § 63.91 and § 63.92 to be 307(b)(2).) subpart A, in accordance with the final implemented and enforced in place of List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 rule, published in the Federal Register 40 CFR part 63, subpart Q. Delaware is Environmental protection, on October 2, 2001, effective December delegated the authority to implement Administrative practice and procedure, 3, 2001. and enforce its regulation in place of 40 Air pollution control, Hazardous (iii) Affected sources must comply CFR part 63, subpart Q, in accordance substances, Incorporation by reference, with the State of Delaware Regulations with the final rule, published in the Intergovernmental relations. Governing the Control of Air Pollution, Federal Register on October 2, 2001, Regulation No. 38, subpart M, effective effective December 3, 2001. Dated: September 7, 2001. October 11, 2000 (incorporated by Donald S. Welsh, reference as specified in § 63.14). The [FR Doc. 01–24202 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Regional Administrator, Region III. material incorporated in the State of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows: Delaware Regulations Governing the
VerDate 11
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 191
Tuesday, October 2, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH, Customer Discussion contains notices to the public of the proposed Support, P.O. Box 1103, D–82230 What Events Have Caused This issuance of rules and regulations. The Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany; Proposed AD? purpose of these notices is to give interested telephone: (08153) 300; facsimile: persons an opportunity to participate in the The Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA), rule making prior to the adoption of the final (08153) 304463. You may also view this rules. information at the Rules Docket at the which is the airworthiness authority for address above. Germany, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on all FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Dornier Model 228–212 airplanes Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, equipped with brake assembly part- Federal Aviation Administration Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, number 5009850–1, 5009850–2, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 5009850–3, or 5009850–4. The LBA 14 CFR Part 39 telephone: (816) 329–4146; facsimile: reports one occurrence of failure of the (816) 329–4090. [Docket No. 2001–CE–29–AD] right-hand main landing gear (MLG) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: brake housing subassembly on one of RIN 2120–AA64 the above-referenced airplanes. Failure Comments Invited of the brake housing assembly resulted Airworthiness Directives; Dornier in total loss of braking power. Luftfahrt GmbH Model 228–212 How Do I Comment on This Proposed The brake manufacturer, Aircraft Airplanes AD? Braking Systems Corporation (ABSC), AGENCY: Federal Aviation The FAA invites comments on this has developed a modification to the Administration, DOT. proposed rule. You may submit torque take-out cavity of the brake ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking whatever written data, views, or housing assembly. The incorporation of (NPRM). arguments you choose. You need to this modification on Dornier Model include the rule’s docket number and 228–212 airplanes would prevent SUMMARY: This document proposes to submit your comments to the address surface damage from developing into adopt a new airworthiness directive specified under the caption ADDRESSES. fatigue damage. (AD) that would apply to all Dornier We will consider all comments received Luftfahrt GmbH (Dornier) Model 228– What Are the Consequences if the on or before the closing date. We may Condition Is Not Corrected? 212 airplanes that have a certain brake amend this proposed rule in light of assembly installed. This proposed AD comments received. Factual information Damage to the brake housing would require you to inspect the brake that supports your ideas and suggestions assembly, if not detected and corrected, housing subassembly for cracks, nicks, is extremely helpful in evaluating the could result in failure of this assembly. or corrosion (referred to as damage). effectiveness of this proposed AD action Such failure could result in loss of This proposed AD would also require and determining whether we need to braking action on landing and possible you to replace damaged brake housing take additional rulemaking action. loss of control of the airplane. assemblies and modify the torque take- out cavity. This proposed AD is the Are There Any Specific Portions of This Is There Service Information That result of mandatory continuing Proposed AD I Should Pay Attention to? Applies to This Subject? airworthiness information (MCAI) Fairchild/Dornier has issued Dornier The FAA specifically invites issued by the airworthiness authority for 228 Service Bulletin No. SB–228–236, comments on the overall regulatory, Germany. The actions specified by this dated January 11, 2001. economic, environmental, and energy proposed AD are intended to detect and ABSC has issued Service Bulletin aspects of this proposed rule that might correct damage to the brake housing Do228–212–32–12, dated November 15, suggest a need to modify the rule. You assembly, which could result in failure 2000, and Service Bulletin Do228–212– may view all comments we receive of this assembly. Such failure could lead 32–13, dated December 15, 2000. to loss of braking action on landing and before and after the closing date of the possible loss of control of the airplane. rule in the Rules Docket. We will file a What Are the Provisions of This Service DATES: The Federal Aviation report in the Rules Docket that Information? Administration (FAA) must receive any summarizes each contact we have with The ABSC Service Bulletins include comments on this proposed rule on or the public that concerns the substantive procedures for inspecting and before November 7, 2001. parts of this proposed AD. modifying the brake housing ADDRESSES: Submit comments to FAA, How Can I Be Sure FAA Receives My assembilies as specified in the Central Region, Office of the Regional Comment? Fairchild/Dornier Service Bulletin. Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. What Action Did the LBA Take? 2001–CE–29–AD, 901 Locust, Room If you want FAA to acknowledge the 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. You receipt of your comments, you must The LBA classified these service may view any comments at this location include a self-addressed, stamped bulletins as mandatory and issued between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday postcard. On the postcard, write German AD Number 2001–164, dated through Friday, except Federal holidays. ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2001–CE–29– June 14, 2001, in order to ensure the You may get service information that AD.’’ We will date stamp and mail the continued airworthiness of these applies to this proposed AD from postcard back to you. airplanes in Germany.
VerDate 11
Was This in Accordance With the information, including the service assemblies, and modify the torque take- Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement? information referenced above; and out cavity. determined that: This airplane model is manufactured Cost Impact in Germany and is type certificated for —The unsafe condition referenced in operation in the United States under the this document exists or could develop How Many Airplanes Would This provisions of section 21.29 of the on other Dornier Model 228–212 Proposed AD Impact? Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR airplanes of the same type design; 21.29) and the applicable bilateral —The actions specified in the We estimate that this proposed AD airworthiness agreement. previously-referenced service affects 1 airplane in the U.S. registry. Pursuant to this bilateral information should be accomplished What Would Be the Cost Impact of This airworthiness agreement, the LBA has on the affected airplanes; and Proposed AD on Owners/Operators of kept FAA informed of the situation —AD action should be taken in order to the Affected Airplanes? described above. correct this unsafe condition. We estimate the following costs to The FAA’s Determination and an What Would This Proposed AD Require? Explanation of the Provisions of This accomplish the proposed inspection: Proposed AD This proposed AD would require you to inspect the brake housing What Has FAA Decided? subassembly for cracks, nicks, or The FAA has examined the findings corrosion (referred to as damage), of the LBA; reviewed all available replace damaged brake housing
Total cost Labor cost Parts cost Total cost on U.S. per airplane operators
10 workhours × $60 per hour = $600 ...... No parts required for the inspection...... $600 $600
You would not need parts or special repairs is included in the inspection results of the proposed inspection. We equipment to accomplish any necessary labor cost. have no way of determining the number repairs after the proposed inspection. We estimate the following costs to of airplanes that may need such The time necessary to accomplish any accomplish any necessary replacements replacement. that would be required based on the
Total cost Labor cost Parts cost per airplane
9 workhours × $60 per hour = $540...... $46 $586
ABSC will provide labor Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS reimbursement for the modification to FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if DIRECTIVES the torque take-out cavity of the brake promulgated, will not have a significant housing to the extent noted in Service economic impact, positive or negative, 1. The authority citation for part 39 Bulletin Do228–212–13, dated on a substantial number of small entities continues to read as follows: December 15, 2000. under the criteria of the Regulatory Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Regulatory Impact Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft § 39.13 [Amended] regulatory evaluation prepared for this Would This Proposed AD Impact action has been placed in the Rules 2. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD) to Various Entities? Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by read as follows: The regulations proposed herein contacting the Rules Docket at the would not have a substantial direct location provided under the caption Dornier Luftfahrt GMBH: Docket No. 2001– effect on the States, on the relationship ADDRESSES. CE–29–AD between the national government and (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 the States, or on the distribution of This AD affects Model 228–212 airplanes, all serial numbers, that are: power and responsibilities among the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (1) certificated in any category; and various levels of government. Therefore, safety, Safety. (2) equipped with brake assembly part- it is determined that this proposed rule number 5009850–1, 5009850–2, 5009850–3, would not have federalism implications The Proposed Amendment or 5009850–4. under Executive Order 13132. (b) Who must comply with this AD? Accordingly, under the authority Anyone who wishes to operate any of the Would This Proposed AD Involve a delegated to me by the Administrator, above airplanes must comply with this AD. Significant Rule or Regulatory Action? the Federal Aviation Administration (c) What problem does this AD address? proposes to amend part 39 of the The actions specified in this AD are intended For the reasons discussed above, I to detect and correct damage to the brake certify that this proposed action (1) is Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: housing assembly, which could result in not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ failure of this assembly. Such failure could under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not lead to loss of braking action on landing and a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT possible loss of control of the airplane.
VerDate 11
(d) What actions must I accomplish to address this problem? To address this problem, you must accomplish the following:
Actions Compliance Procedures
(1) Inspect, using both visual and eddy current Inspect within the next 300 hours time-in-serv- In accordance with Aircraft Braking Systems methods, the brake housing subassembly for ice (TIS) after the effective date of this AD. Corporation Service Bulletin Do228–212– damage (cracks, nicks, corrosion, etc.), and Repair or replace prior to further flight. 32–13, dated December 15, 2000, and Air- accomplish the following: craft Braking Systems Corporation Service Bulletin Service Bulletin Do228–212–32–12, dated November 15, 2000, as specified in Fairchild/Dornier Dornier 228 Service Bul- letin SB–228–236, issued January 11, 2001. (i) Replace the brake housing if damage is found in the torque take-out cavity in the area specified in the referenced service infor- mation; or (ii) Repair the brake housing if damage is found on the walls of the torque take-out cavity and the width exceeds the maximum limit specified in the referenced service infor- mation.
(2) Modify the torque take-out cavity of the Prior to further flight after the inspection re- In accordance with Aircraft Braking Systems brake housing assembly. quired by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD, and Corporation Service Bulletin Do228–212– thereafter prior to the installation of a brake 32–13, dated December 15, 2000, and Air- housing assembly. craft Braking Systems Corporation Service Bulletin Service Bulletin Do228–212–32–12, dated November 15, 2000, as specified in Fairchild/Dornier Dornier 228 Service Bul- letin SB–228–236, issued January 11, 2001.
(3) Do not install any brake housing assembly As of the effective date of this AD. Not applicable. (or FAA-approved equivalent part number) unless it has been inspected as required in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD and modified as required in paragraph (d)(2) of this AD
(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING way? You may use an alternative method of 4146; facsimile: (816) 329–4090. COMMISSION compliance or adjust the compliance time if: (g) What if I need to fly the airplane to (1) Your alternative method of compliance another location to comply with this AD? The 25 CFR Part 580 provides an equivalent level of safety; and FAA can issue a special flight permit under (2) The Manager, Small Airplane §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation RIN 3141–AA04 Directorate, approves your alternative. Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to Submit your request through an FAA operate your airplane to a location where you Environment, Public Health and Safety Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may can accomplish the requirements of this AD. add comments and then send it to the (h) How do I get copies of the documents AGENCY: National Indian Gaming Manager, Small Airplane Directorate. referenced in this AD? You may get copies of Commission. Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane the documents referenced in this AD from ACTION: Proposed rule. identified in paragraph (a) of this AD, Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH, Customer Support, regardless of whether it has been modified, P.O. Box 1103, D–82230 Wessling, Federal SUMMARY: The National Indian Gaming altered, or repaired in the area subject to the Republic of Germany; telephone: (08153) Commission (Commission) proposes requirements of this AD. For airplanes that 300; facsimile: (08153) 304463. You may regulations to implement a system of have been modified, altered, or repaired so view these documents at FAA, Central oversight to carry out its responsibilities that the performance of the requirements of Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 with regard to the provisions of the this AD is affected, the owner/operator must Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) request approval for an alternative method of 64106. that require tribal gaming facilities to be compliance in accordance with paragraph (e) Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed constructed, maintained and operated in of this AD. The request should include an in German AD Number 2001–164, dated June a manner which protects the assessment of the effect of the modification, 14, 2001. environment, public health and safety. alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if you have not One of the responsibilities conferred Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on upon the Commission by IGRA is the eliminated the unsafe condition, specific September 24, 2001. actions you propose to address it. approval of tribal gaming ordinances, Michael Gallagher, (f) Where can I get information about any which must contain certain enumerated already-approved alternative methods of Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft provisions. IGRA further requires the compliance? Contact Karl Schletzbaum, Certification Service. Commission ensure that these Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane [FR Doc. 01–24560 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] statutorily mandated provisions are Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas BILLING CODE 4910–13–U implemented by tribal governments.
VerDate 11
Among these mandatory provisions is the areas of environment, public health Under this regulation, tribal one that requires that the construction and safety. The statutory basis for this government(s) are encouraged to assume and maintenance of the gaming facility, responsibility is set forth in 25 U.S.C. the full responsibility for the and the operation of that gaming is 2710 (b)(2)(E) which provides that tribal development and implementation of conducted in a manner that adequately ordinances or resolutions submitted for environment, public health and safety protects the environment and the public the Chairman’s approval ensure that laws, codes, ordinances and resolutions health and safety. At present, the ‘‘the construction and maintenance of applicable to their gaming operation(s). Commission does not have in place an the gaming facility, and the operation of Compliance with this rule is met appropriate mechanism to carry out its that gaming is conducted in a manner through submission of an environment, oversight responsibility that follows which adequately protects the public health and safety plan (Plan) from the IGRA provision. It is the view environment and the public health and which sets forth the tribal government’s of the Commission that the most safety.’’ policies and programs for ensuring that effective means of ensuring that On April 27, 1999, the Commission its gaming operations do not pose a adequate programs are implemented on issued an Advance Notice of Proposed threat to the environment, public health an industry wide basis is to promulgate Rulemaking regarding the establishment and safety. Under this regulation, the a rule establishing a framework for of environment, public health and safety Plan is to contain the tribal measuring tribal compliance. procedures. After reviewing the government’s policies for the This regulation establishes the information solicited through this development, implementation, and Commission’s oversight process to notice, the Commission decided to enforcement of environmental, public ensure that the environment, public move forward with proposed health and safety standards for its health and safety are adequately regulations. In November 1999, a Tribal- gaming operation(s) and describe the protected at Indian gaming facilities in Commission Advisory Committee was tribal government’s standards, accordance with IGRA. The Commission formed to consult on the project. The regulatory structure(s), and enforcement will focus its oversight activities on Commission attempted to assemble a program(s) that ensure the environment, reviewing tribal compliance with the diverse advisory committee that public health and safety of its gaming environment, public health and safety represented the interests of a broad operation(s) are adequately protected. plans submitted by tribal governments. range of gaming tribal governments. The Plan will cover emergency Environment, public health and safety During the period from November 1999 preparedness, construction, plans will identify the policies, through May 2000, the Commission and maintenance and operation, drinking practices, and methods used by the the Tribal Advisory Committee met four water and food, use, storage and submitting tribal government to ensure times to develop a regulatory proposal. disposal of hazardous materials, and that the environment, public health and The Commission published a Notice of sanitation and waste disposal. safety are adequately protected at its The Commission will review the Proposed Rulemaking that appeared in gaming facilities. Plans to ensure that they comply with the Federal Register at Volume 65, page requirements in this rule. Thereafter, the DATES: Comments may be submitted on 45558, on July 24, 2000. In response to Commission’s role in enforcing or before October 31, 2001. the Federal Register notice, the compliance with this regulation focuses ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed Commission received a number of on the tribal government’s compliance to: Environment, Public Health and helpful comments suggesting changes to Safety Comments, National Indian with its Plan. This approach enables the the proposed rule. The Tribal- Commission to carry out its oversight Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street, Commission Advisory Committee met NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC responsibilities without creating a set of after the close of the public comment unnecessary requirements that may be 20005, delivered to that address period to discuss the comments that had between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., inconsistent with existing provisions of been submitted. Upon consideration of tribal law or tribal-state gaming Monday through Friday, or faxed to the comments submitted, and 202/632–7066 (this is not a toll-free compacts or inappropriate to the discussions with the Tribal-Commission geographic or other special conditions number). Comments received may be Advisory Committee, the Commission inspected between 9 a.m. and noon, and in a particular area. The Commission’s decided to revise the proposed rule and oversight of such Plans will provide an between 2 p.m. and 5 p.m., Monday republish the revised rule as a proposed through Friday. effective mechanism for ensuring that rule. all tribal gaming facilities are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In proposing this regulation, the constructed, maintained and operated in Christine Nagle at 202/ 632–7003; fax Commission is aware that tribal the manner required under the Act. 202/ 632–7066 (these are not toll-free governments take steps to ensure that Therefore, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 2710 numbers). their gaming facilities are constructed, (b)(2)(E), these regulations are being SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The maintained, and operated in a manner, proposed to establish the adequate Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA, or which protects the environment, and protection of the environment, public the Act), enacted on October 17, 1988, public health and safety. The health and safety at Indian gaming established the National Indian Gaming Commission notes, however, that it operations regulated by the Act. Commission (Commission). Under the lacks the appropriate mechanism to Act, the Commission is charged with carry out this aspect of its oversight Regulatory Flexibility Act regulating gaming activities on Indian responsibilities. The Commission has a The Commission certifies that this lands. The Act expressly authorizes the duty to design and implement a viable document will not have a significant Commission to ‘‘promulgate such means of determining whether tribal economic effect on a substantial number regulations and guidelines as it deems governments are in compliance with of small entities under the Regulatory appropriate to implement provisions of requirements of the Act. Moreover, the Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.). this [Act].’’ 25 U.S.C. 2706(b)(10). absence of a clear standard for Indian tribal governments are not The regulations proposed today compliance creates an impediment to considered to be small entities for would establish a system to implement effective enforcement for both tribal purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility the Commission’s oversight authority in governments and the Commission. Act.
VerDate 11
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement of this proposed rule, the Commission approve or disapprove the information Fairness Act (SBREFA) spoke at three tribal association collection, but may respond after 30 This proposed rule is not a major rule meetings and held three field days; therefore public comments should as defined by section 804 of the Small consultations with tribal governments. be submitted to OMB within 30 days in Business Regulatory Enforcement The Commission is in the process of order to assure their maximum Fairness Act of 1996. This proposed rule developing guidance materials that will consideration. will not: (1) Result in an annual effect include a model Environment, Public Health and Safety Plan. The The Commission solicits public on the economy of $100 million or comment as to: more; (2) cause a major increase in costs Commission will meet with the Tribal Advisory Committee to discuss the a. Whether the collection of or prices for consumers, individual public comments that are received as a industries, Federal, State or local information is necessary for the proper result of publication of this proposed government agencies or geographic performance of the functions of the rule. Lastly, prior to the implementation regions; and (3) have significant adverse Commission, and whether the deadline of this proposed rule, the effects on competition, employment, information will have practical utility; Commission will hold regional investment, productivity, innovation, or b. The accuracy of the Commission’s technical assistance workshops. the ability of United States-based estimate of the burden of the collection enterprises to compete with foreign- Paperwork Reduction Act of information, including the validity of based companies in domestic and The Commission is in the process of the methodology and assumptions used; export markets. obtaining clearance from the Office of c. The quality, utility, and clarity of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Management and Budget (OMB) for the the information to be collected; and information collection requirements The Commission has determined that contained in this proposed rule, as d. How to minimize the burden of the this proposed rule does not impose an required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq. The collection of information on those who unfunded mandate on State, local or information required to be submitted is are to respond, including the use of tribal governments or on the private identified in § 580.20–580.30, and will appropriate automated electronic, sector of more than $100 million per be used to determine compliance with mechanical, or other forms of year. The Commission has determined this part. information technology. that this proposed rule may have a The public reporting burden for this An agency may not conduct, and a unique effect on tribal governments, as collection of information is estimated to person is not required to respond to a this rule applies exclusively to tribal average 150 hours, to initially prepare collection of information unless it governments, whenever they undertake an Environmental, Public Health and the ownership, operation, regulation, or displays a currently valid OMB control Safety Plan, including the time for number. licensing of gaming facilities on Indian reviewing instructions, gathering and lands as defined by the Indian Gaming maintaining the data needed, and National Environmental Policy Act Regulatory Act. Thus, in accordance completing and reviewing the collection with section 203 of the Unfunded of information. The Commission The Commission has determined that Mandates Reform Act, the Commission estimates that information needed to this proposed rule does not constitute a has developed a small government maintain the Plan will require an annual major Federal action significantly agency plan that provides tribal burden of 190 hours. It is estimated that affecting the quality of the human governments with adequate notice, an additional 21 hours will be required environment and that no detailed opportunity for ‘‘meaningful’’ to prepare, and gather the data needed, statement is required pursuant to the consultation, and information, advice and to complete the collection of National Environmental Policy Act of and education on compliance. information necessary to prepare for 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et. seq). The Commission’s small government plan renewal. Plans need to be updated agency plan includes: formation of a every three years. Takings (Executive Order 12630) tribal advisory committee; discussions Public reporting burden for this The Commission has determined that with Tribal leaders and tribal collection of information is estimated to this proposed rule does not have associations; preparation of guidance average 361 hours per year including significant ‘‘takings’’ implications. material and model documents; and the time for initial Plan preparation, technical assistance. During the period monitoring, recordkeeping and Plan Thus, a takings implications assessment from November 1999 through May 2000, renewal preparation. The Commission is not required. the Commission and the Tribal estimates that approximately 198 tribal Federalism (Executive Order 12612) Advisory Committee met four times to governments will need to file an develop a regulatory proposal. In Environmental, Public Health and The Commission has determined that selecting committee members, Safety Plan for an annual burden of this proposed rule does not have consideration was placed on the current 71,478 hours. significant Federalism effects because it level of environmental, public health Send comments regarding this pertains solely to Federal-tribal relations and safety regulation exercised by the collection of information, including and will not interfere with the roles, tribal government represented, the suggestions for reducing the burden to rights and responsibilities of States. applicant’s experience in this area, as both, Environment, Public Health and well as the size of the tribe the nominee Safety Comments, National Indian Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order represented, geographic location of the Gaming Commission, 1441 L Street 12988) gaming operation and the size and type NW., Suite 9100, Washington, DC In accordance with Executive Order of gaming conducted. The Commission 20005; and to the Office of Information attempted to assemble a committee that and Regulatory Affair, Office of 12988, the Commission has determined incorporates diversity and is Management and Budget, Washington, that this proposed rule does not unduly representative of Indian gaming DC 20503. The Office of Management burden the judicial system and meets interests. Since beginning formulation and Budget (OMB) has up to 60 days to
VerDate 11
the requirements of sections 3(a) and 580.56 What happens when a tribal determine compliance with the sections 3(b)(2) of the Order. government submits its Plan to the of an approved tribal gaming ordinance Commission? on matters pertaining to the Montie R. Deer, 580.58 What happens if the initial environment, public health and safety. Chairman. evaluation does not result in a finding of compliance? § 580.3 When does this part apply? List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 580 580.60 What is the process for a formal review of the Plan? This part applies when an Indian tribe Gambling, Indians-lands, 580.62 If the Reviewing Commissioner undertakes the ownership, operation, Environment, Health and Safety, determines that the Plan does not regulation, or licensing of gaming Indians-Tribal government. comply, may the tribal government facilities on Indian lands over which it For the reasons stated in the appeal? has jurisdiction, under the provisions of 580.64 How will the Commission process the Act. preamble, the National Indian Gaming an appeal under 580.62? Commission proposes to amend 25 CFR 580.66 What is the status of the Plan if the § 580. 4 What is the scope of this part? by adding a new part 580 as follows: tribal government does not appeal the This part pertains to the development, Reviewing Commissioner’s regulation, and enforcement of PART 580—PROTECTING THE determination? ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH, environment, public health and safety Subpart D—Plan Revisions and Updates AND SAFETY standards applicable to a tribal 580.70 When must a Plan be revised? government’s gaming operation(s), and Subpart A—Requirement for an 580.72 When must a Plan be updated? covers the area(s) where gaming Environment, Public Health, and Safety Plan Subpart E—Inspections, Enforcement, and activities are conducted; parking areas Sec. Recordkeeping used primarily for gaming patrons; and 580.2 What is the purpose of this part? any other area(s) over which the tribal 580.80 When can the Commission conduct 580.3 When does this part apply? an on-site inspection? government’s gaming regulatory body 580.4 What is the scope of this part? 580.82 What procedures will the has jurisdiction under the tribal 580.5 How does a tribal government comply Commission follow in an enforcement government’s approved gaming with this part? action taken pursuant to this part? ordinance. 580.6 What is the Environment, Public 580.84 What happens if the Plan is found Health, and Safety Plan? not to be in compliance following the § 580.5 How does a tribal government 580.7 What is the effect of a tribal conclusion of a formal review? comply with this part? government’s Compliance with this part? 580.86 What are some other examples of In order to comply with this part, a Subpart B—Contents of an Environment, violations that may result in an tribal government will: Public Health and Safety Plan enforcement action? (a) Prepare an Environment, Public 580.20 What must the tribal government 580.88 If the tribal government has signed Health and Safety Plan (Plan) in include in its Plan? a Tribal-State compact, will the tribal accordance with § 580.20 of this part; 580.22 What are some examples of government have to comply with two (b) Submit the Plan to the sets of standards? information about emergency Commission in accordance with preparedness that will help meet the 580.90 Does this part affect the regulatory authority of any other governmental provisions of § 580.40 of this part; requirements of § 580.20(b)? (c) Meet all the requirements 580.24 What are some examples of entity or alter tribal-state gaming compacts? contained in this part; and information about construction, (d) Comply with the provisions maintenance and operation that will 580.92 What records must the tribal help meet the requirements of government keep? contained in its Plan. § 580.20(b)? 580.94 How long must the tribal government maintain the types of § 580.6 What is the Environment, Public 580.26 What are some examples of Health, and Safety Plan? information about drinking water and records outlined in § 580.92? food that will help meet the Authority: 25 U.S.C. 2710. The Environment, Public Health and requirements of § 580.20(b)? Safety Plan is a document that describes 580.28 What are some examples of Subpart A—Requirement for an the standards, systems, and/or processes information about use, storage, and Environment, Public Health, and Safety used by the submitting tribal disposal of hazardous materials that will Plan government to implement, monitor and help meet the requirements of enforce the tribal government’s § 580.20(b)? § 580.2 What is the purpose of this part? environment, public health and safety 580.30 What are some examples of The purpose of this part is to: standards as they pertain to the gaming information about sanitation and waste (a) Encourage tribal government(s) to operation(s) on its Indian lands. The disposal that will help meet the exercise regulatory primacy and assume Plan will be used by the Commission in requirements of § 580.20(b)? the fullest responsibility for the 580.32 May a tribal government assign its carrying out its oversight responsibility Plan compliance functions to another administration and enforcement of tribal in accordance with 25 U.S.C. entity? environmental, public health and safety § 2710(b)(2)(E). 580.38 What is a Certificate of Assurance? laws, codes, ordinances, and other tribal enactments applicable to gaming § 580.7 What is the effect of a tribal Subpart C—Plan Submission and Review government’s compliance with this Part? Process operations on Indian lands; (b) Ensure that tribal gaming facilities Once a Plan is in place, the 580.40 When must the tribal government are constructed, maintained and Commission will focus its oversight submit its Plan? operated in a manner that adequately activities on: reviewing and processing 580.42 Where is the Plan to be submitted? Plan submissions; monitoring tribal 580.44 When does a Plan become effective? protects the environment, public health 580.50 Who will review the Plan? and safety as required by the Indian compliance with its Plan; and 580.52 What factors will be considered in Gaming Regulatory Act (Act); and monitoring the tribal government’s the review of the Plan? (c) Establish the process and criteria response to conditions presenting an 580.54 What are the steps in the review used by the Commission in carrying out imminent threat to the environment, process? its statutory oversight responsibility to public health and safety. Routine
VerDate 11
oversight and enforcement will be agency and/or other entity described in Subpart B—Contents of an considered the primary responsibility of the Plan. Environment, Public Health and Safety the appropriate tribal governmental Plan
§ 580.20 What must the tribal government include in its Plan? The Plan must contain the information shown in the following table.
The Plan must address And each area must contain
(a) Part I. Identifying information ...... (1) The tribe’s name and the name(s) of the gaming operation(s); (2) The owner, operator, licensing body and/or management contractor of the gaming operation(s); (3) The contact person; and (4) A description of the gaming operation(s) including: location(s), size in square feet, days and hours of operation, and maximum occu- pancy load. (b) Part II. Substantive Areas: Emergency preparedness (accidents, in- (1) Copies or a description of the tribal government’s policies, oper- juries and medical emergencies; natural and other disasters; fire; se- ating procedures, standards, compliance monitoring system, enforce- curity threats); Construction, maintenance and operation; Drinking ment program(s) and qualified personnel. water and food; Use, storage and disposal of hazardous material; (2) The official title and responsibilities of each tribal or other entity re- and Sanitation and waste disposal. sponsible for carrying out the Plan or parts thereof. (3) A description or copy of pertinent agreements with any non-tribal entity if applicable. (c) Part III. Supporting Information: Documentation showing that the (1) Identification of the written standards the tribal government will use tribal government has an adequate program(s) to carry out the Plan. to carry out the provisions of its Plan, including either citations to or copies of the applicable tribal ordinances, resolutions, regulations, management controls, policy and procedures or other governing in- struments; (2) Identification of each tribal governing body responsible for admin- istering the Plan, or part thereof; (3) A description or copy of the procedures the tribal government will use to enforce compliance with the Plan; (4) A description or copy of the procedures the tribal government will use to monitor compliance with the Plan, which may include permit- ting processes, and inspection, license, reporting, monitoring and record keeping requirements; (5) A description of the record keeping system which may contain em- ployee/contractor training, education, certifications, licenses, work ex- perience, and continuing education requirements for each section of the Plan. (d) Part IV. Certificates of Assurance: Documents certifying that the (1) Certification that the standards identified in the Plan are at least as Plan fairly and accurately describes the standards, processes, and stringent as applicable federal or other standards commonly used in systems used by the tribal government to ensure that gaming oper- the surrounding geographic area. ation(s) on Indian lands are constructed, operated, and maintained in (2) Certification that sufficient resources are available to carryout the a manner that adequately protects the environment, public health Plan. and safety. (3) Certification that individuals responsible for oversight, planning, and implementation of the Plan have the minimum qualifications nec- essary to discharge their responsibilities. (4) Certification that the Plan contains a true and accurate description of the standards and systems in place to ensure that the gaming op- eration(s) is constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that adequately protects the environment, public health and safety; (5) Certification that adequate resources are available to carry out the Plan; and (6) Certification that the standards identified in the Plan have been duly considered by the tribal government and found to be as stringent as federal or other legally applicable standards, and consistent with en- vironment, public health and safety needs and concerns in relation to the gaming operation.
§ 580.22 What are some examples of information about emergency preparedness that will help meet the requirements contained in § 580.20(b)? The following table shows examples of information that can be included in the Plan to satisfy this requirement.
For Narrative descriptions of
(a) Accidents, injuries, and medical (1) The steps taken to prevent, prepare for, and respond to accidents, injuries, and medical emergencies; emergencies. the emergency response system in place, including the availability of trained emergency personnel, am- bulance service, medical transport and medical facilities serving the tribal government’s gaming oper- ation and identifying information; (2) Other pertinent information or documentation, such as emergency response plans, evacuation policies or procedures, or other similar documents.
VerDate 11
For Narrative descriptions of
(b) Natural and Other Disasters ..... (1) The steps taken to prepare for and respond to such natural or other disasters with a likelihood of oc- currence given the geological or climatic conditions of the area, including evacuation or other special safety procedures, incident response systems or other safety measures in place. (2) Some additional examples of information that might be included depending on the scope and com- plexity of the operation such as descriptions of back-up communications systems, mock drill schedules, equipment testing back-up power and water systems, and hazardous materials response. (c) Fire ...... (1) The steps taken to prevent, prepare for and respond to fire emergencies, including evacuation proce- dures and alarm systems; (2) Availability of fire fighting services, trained personnel, and fire suppression systems. (d) Security threats ...... (1) The steps taken to prepare for and respond to security threats, including bomb threats, unlawful intru- sions, criminal acts and other foreseeable security risks; (2) Evacuation procedures or other special precautions; and (3) The availability of law enforcement services.
§ 580.24 What are some examples of information about construction, maintenance and operation that will help meet the requirements of 580.20(b)? The following table shows examples of the information that can be included in the Plan to satisfy this requirement.
For Some examples of information that will meet this requirement include
(a) Construction standards ...... (1) The building code or standards that the tribal government follows; (2) The standard that the tribal government uses for plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems; and (3) The practices that the tribal government follows for managing sediment and stormwater. (b) Preventative Maintenance and (1) Maintenance and inspection schedules for heating and air conditioning systems, elevators, parking Repair. areas, and stormwater management facilities; and (2) Procedures and schedules in place for ensuring the safe operation of energy sources used to supply the gaming operation(s) and records systems for inspections, maintenance, and repair.
§ 580.26 What are some examples of information about drinking water and food that will help meet the requirements of § 580.20(b)? The following table shows information that can be included to satisfy this requirement.
For Some examples of information that will meet this requirement include
(a) Drinking water ...... (1) The water system that supplies the gaming operation; (2) The amount of storage maintained and/or whether a back-up source is available; (3) The inspection and testing program, including the responsible entity; and (4) An emergency plan to respond to contamination. (b) Food Preparation and Handling (1) The inspection and testing program, including the responsible entity; (2) Measures used to ensure proper temperature control of food; (3) Methods used to educate employees on proper hygienic practices; and (4) Control measures used to prevent food contamination.
§ 580.28 What are some examples of information about use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials that will help meet the requirements of § 580.20(b)? The following table shows examples of information that can be included in the Plan to satisfy this requirement. For purposes of this part hazardous material shall mean: paints, solvents, pesticides, cleaning agents, and fuels if they are used as part of the construction, operation or maintenance of the gaming operation.
For Some examples of information that will meet this requirement include...
(a) Use and handling ...... (1) Certification, licensing, or other methods used to make sure persons using or handling hazardous ma- terials have been trained appropriately; and (2) A copy of the tribal government’s written procedures for use and handling hazardous materials. (b) Storage ...... (1) The methods used to control access to hazardous materials; (2) The spill-prevention and response plan; and (3) Methods used to ensure hazardous materials are placed in proper containers and that containers are labeled properly. (c) Disposal ...... (1) The guidelines that have been adopted for the proper disposal of hazardous materials; and (2) Any agreements in place with local governments or private contractors.
§ 580.30 What are some examples of information about sanitation and waste disposal that will help meet the requirements of § 580.20(b)? The following table shows information that can be included to satisfy this requirement.
For Some examples of information that will meet this requirement include
(a) Solid waste ...... (1) The methods used to dispose of solid waste; (2) Recycling or pollution prevention plans in place; and (3) Any agreements in place with local governments or private contractors.
VerDate 11
For Some examples of information that will meet this requirement include
(b) Wastewater and Sewage Dis- (1) The treatment and/or disposal system being used; posal. (2) Any agreements in place with local government or private contractors; (3) If wastewater is treated or disposed of on-site, the maintenance program for the plant and qualification criteria for plant operators. (c) Bio-hazard disposal ...... (1) The disposal program in place; (2) Any agreements in place with local governments or private contractors.
§ 580.32 May a tribal government assign or any portion thereof. Responsibility to representations made in the Plan are its Plan compliance functions to another ensure compliance with the Plan rests true and accurate. entity? with the tribal government as the A tribal government may enter into an responsible governmental entity. Subpart C—Plan Submission and agreement with a federal, state, or local Review Process government or contract with a private § 580.38 What is a Certificate of entity to provide services or functions Assurance? § 580.40 When must the tribal government submit its Plan? necessary to carry out its Plan or any A Certificate of Assurance is a written portion thereof. However, this does not pledge from the governing body of a The tribal government must submit its relieve the tribal government of its tribe certifying that all requirements of Plan to the Commission as shown in the responsibility to comply with the Plan, § 580.20 are (or will) be met and that all following table.
If the tribal government’s gaming operation is Then the tribal government must
(a) Already in existence on the ef- Submit the tribal government’s Plan within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this part. fective date of this part. (b) Under construction on the effec- Submit the tribal government’s Plan within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this part or at least tive date of this part. sixty (60) days before the tribal government opens the gaming operation whichever is later. (c) Not in existence or under con- Submit the tribal government’s Plan at least sixty (60) days before the tribal government opens the gaming struction on the effective date of operation. this part.
§ 580.42 Where is the Plan to be found to comply with the requirements further advise the tribal government that submitted? of this part in any phase of the review the Plan will be considered in a formal The Plan is to be submitted by process and upon determination of review process if revisions are not certified mail return receipt requested compliance the review is complete. submitted within ninety (90) days. to: The National Indian Gaming Commission, Environment, Public § 580.56 What happens when a tribal § 580.60 What is the process for a formal government submits its Plan to the review of the Plan? Health, and Safety, 1441 L Street, NW., Commission? Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005. The formal review process On the intial submission the Plan is commences when the Reviewing § 580.44 When does a Plan become evaluated for completeness in Commissioner notifies the tribal effective? accordance with § 580.20. If the Plan government by certified mail that the A tribal Plan becomes effective on the complies with the requirements of this Plan does not appear to be compliant date it is mailed to the address listed in part, the Reviewing Commissioner will and has been referred for formal review. § 580.42. notify the tribal government that the During the formal review process, the Plan is compliant and that the review Reviewing Commissioner will: § 580.50 Who will review the Plan? process is concluded. As part of the (a) Examine any further submissions The Commission shall designate one initial evaluation the Reviewing from the tribal government and conduct of its members to oversee the review Commissioner may also: further consultations with the tribal process and make the initial (a) Request any additional government if such consultations appear determination on whether the tribal information needed to complete the useful; government’s Plan meets the evaluation; (b) Prepare an administrative record (b) Consult with tribal entities or requirements in § 580.20. based on the Plan; other entities identified in the Plan to § 580.52 What factors will be considered in (c) Based on the administrative record clarify information contained therein; decide whether the Plan is compliant; the review of the Plan? (c) Conduct on site inspections where (d) After considering the matter, The Commission will consider appropriate. whether the Plan meets the inform the tribal government in writing requirements of § 580.20 and contains § 580.58 What happens if the initial whether, in the opinion of the all the required certificates of assurance. evaluation does not result in a finding of Reviewing Commissioner, the Plan compliance? complies with the factors specified in § 580.54 What are the steps in the review If the initial evaluation does not result § 580.20; process? in a finding of compliance, the (e) If the Plan does not comply with The review process may include three Reviewing Commissioner will notify the these factors include with the written phases: an initial evaluation, a formal tribal government that the Plan does not determination: review by the Commissioner designated appear to address the factors specified (1) A description of those aspects in to conduct the review, and an appeal to in § 580.20 and indicate the part(s) of the Plan, which make the Plan the full Commission. A Plan may be the Plan that require revision and unsatisfactory;
VerDate 11
(2) The steps the tribal government tribal government’s ability to carryout § 580.82 What procedures will the must take for the Plan to be considered the Plan. Some examples include, but Commission follow in an enforcement satisfactory; are not limited to: action taken pursuant to this part? (3) A schedule for corrective action (a) Substantial changes in tribal codes, The Commission will follow the and resubmission of the Plan; ordinances, regulations, or compact enforcement procedures set forth in 25 (4) A statement regarding the tribal provisions; CFR part 573. government’s opportunity to appeal the matter to the full Commission. (b) Substantial changes to or § 580.84 What happens if the Plan is found (f) The formal review process will be termination of intergovernmental not to be in compliance following the conclusion of a formal review? concluded within ninety (90) days from agreements; the date of the notice. (c) Structural expansions, If a tribal government operating a renovations, or modifications of the gaming facility fails to bring its Plan § 580.62 If the Reviewing Commissioner gaming operation(s); into compliance following the determines that the Plan does not comply, Commission’s decision an enforcement may the tribal government appeal? (d) Construction of a new gaming operation; action under 25 CFR part 573 may be Yes. A tribal government may appeal initiated. the Reviewing Commissioner’s (e) Changes in the tribal regulatory determination that the Plan does not structure or enforcement programs § 580.86 What are some other examples of comply to the full Commission. Such an identified in the Plan; or violations that may result in an enforcement appeal shall be filed in writing within (f) Managerial changes that action? thirty (30) days after the Reviewing substantially affect or alter the practices, (a) Failure to submit a Plan as Commissioner serves the determination procedures, or systems contained in the required by this part; letter under part 519 of this chapter, Plan. (b) Failure to comply with the Plan unless that time is extended by the that the tribal government has adopted; § 580.72 When must a Plan be updated? Commission at the request of the tribal (d) Operation of a gaming facility government. An appeal shall state why (a) A tribal government must review without regard to a Plan approved by the tribal government believes the and update its Plan every three years. the tribal government which adequately Reviewing Commissioner’s The updated Plan should reflect any protects the environment or public determination to be erroneous, and shall changes to the Plan during the Plan health and safety; include supporting documentation, if review period and in the three-year (e) Failure to correct deficiencies any. Failure to file an appeal within the period before the review. discovered during a compliance review time provided by this section shall (b) The Commission will send a by the Commission; or result in a waiver of the opportunity for notice to the tribal government (f) Misrepresentations of any fact or an appeal. informing the tribal government that it assertion made in the Plan under needs to review and update its Plan. §§ 580.20, and 580.52 upon which the § 580.64 How will the Commission process Commission relied in granting approval an appeal under 580.62? Within 90 days, of receipt of this notice, a tribal government must submit its of a Plan. The Commission may decide the updated Plan to the Commission. If appeal based only on a review of the § 580.88 If the tribal government has none of the information contained in the record before it or may initiate further signed a Tribal-State compact, will the tribal tribal government’s Plan has changed consultation discussions if requested by government have to comply with two sets the tribal government must notify the the tribal government, before deciding of standards? Commission in writing that it has the appeal. The decision on appeal shall No. When standards are contained in completed a review of its Plan and that require a majority vote of the Tribal-State compacts those standards no changes to the Plan have been made. Commissioners. The Commission shall can be used to comply with this part. advise the tribal government of its Subpart E—Inspections, Enforcement, § 580.90 Does this part affect the decision in writing. and Recordkeeping regulatory authority of any other § 580.66 What is the status of the Plan if governmental entity or alter tribal-state § 580.80 When can the Commission gaming compacts? the tribal government does not appeal the conduct an on-site inspection? reviewing Commissioner’s determination? No. Nothing in this part is intended If a tribal government does not appeal Under its enforcement authority set to: the determination of the Reviewing forth in 25 CFR 571.5, the Commission (a) Reduce, diminish, or otherwise Commissioner, the Reviewing may conduct an on-site inspection: alter the regulatory authority of any Commissioner’s determination (a) At any time to ensure compliance other Federal, State, or tribal completes the formal review process with the Plan; governmental entity; or and that determination becomes the (b) If the Commission conducts a (b) Amend or require amendment(s) to decision of the Commission as to routine investigation not related to any tribal-state gaming compact(s). whether the Plan complies with the environmental, public health and safety § 580.92 What records must the tribal factors established under § 580.52. issues, and discovers a condition that government keep? needs investigation; Subpart D—Plan Revisions and The tribal government must keep Updates (c) If the tribal government’s Plan sufficient records to verify compliance raises concerns that an area of the with its Plan including any records the § 580.70 When must a Plan be revised? environment, public health or safety is tribal government has identified in its A tribal government should keep its not being adequately addressed; or Plan under § 580.20, or otherwise Plan current and revise its Plan (d) When an emergency situation required by federal law, to carry out whenever a material change affects the exists at a gaming operation. provisions of this part.
VerDate 11
For Such records including updates, for example
(a) Emergency Preparedness; (1) Copies of policies, procedures and standards described or identified in the tribal government’s Plan. Drinking Water and Food; Use, (2) Employee training, education, certifications, licenses, and work experience Storage & Disposal of Hazardous Monitoring and test results such as: Materials; Sanitation and Waste (i) Emergency equipment inspection; Disposal; and Maintenance and (ii) Drills; Operations.. (iii) Fire suppression systems; (iv) Water quality testing; (v) Alarm systems. (4) Inspection Reports such as: (i) Health; (ii) Fire; (iii) Sanitation; (iv) Chemical handling; (v) Insurance; (vi) Safety; (vii) Wastewater; (viii) Maintenance. (5) Enforcement records such as: (i) Notices of violations; (ii) Corrective action records; (iii) Sanctions; (iv) Personnel actions; (v) Final dispositions of enforcement actions. (6) Such environmental records relating to disposal of hazardous materials and waste, protection of the en- vironment, or otherwise required by federal law to carry out provisions of this part. (b) Construction ...... Requirements for record retention for construction may be satisfied by: certificates of occupancy, certifi- cates from independent qualified inspectors, or individual construction records.
§ 580.94 How long must the tribal 2001. We are requesting written Air Quality Strategies and Standards government maintain the types of records comments by October 5, 2001. Division, MD–15, Research Triangle outlined in § 580.92? ADDRESSES: Docket. Information related Park, North Carolina, 27711. Internet The tribal government must retain the to the BART guidelines is available for address: [email protected]. types of records identified in § 580.92 inspection at the Air and Radiation List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 for a period of three years, following the Docket and Information Center, Docket year to which they relate unless a longer No. A–2000–28. The docket is located at Environmental protection, period of time is specified by some the U.S. Environmental Protection Administrative practice and procedure, other provision of law. Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Room M– Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, [FR Doc. 01–24465 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 1500, Washington, DC 20460, telephone Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic BILLING CODE 7565–01–P (202) 260–7548. The docket is available for public inspection and copying compounds. between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Dated: September 25, 2001. Jeffrey R. Holmstead, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Monday through Friday, excluding legal AGENCY holidays. A reasonable fee may be Assistant Administrator for Air and charged for copying. Radiation. 40 CFR Part 51 You should submit comments on the [FR Doc. 01–24589 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] proposed BART guidelines and the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P [AD–FRL–7070–8] materials referenced therein (in duplicate, if possible) to the Air and Proposed Guidelines for Best Radiation Docket and Information ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Center (6102), Attention: Docket No. A– AGENCY Determinations Under the Regional 2000–28, U.S. Environmental Protection Haze Regulations Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 40 CFR Part 63 AGENCY: Environmental Protection NW, Washington, DC 20460. You may [DE001–1001; FRL–7056–8] Agency (EPA). also submit comments to EPA by electronic mail at the following address: Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of [email protected]. Hazardous Air Pollutants; State of public comment period. Electronic comments must be submitted Delaware; Department of Natural SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing the as an ASCII file avoiding the use of Resources and Environmental Control special characters and any form of extension of the public comment period AGENCY: Environmental Protection encryption. All comments and data in on the proposed guidelines for Agency (EPA). electronic form must be identified by implementation of the best available ACTION: Proposed rule. retrofit technology (BART) requirements the docket number A–2000–28. under the regional haze rule. The EPA Electronic comments on this proposed SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve originally requested comments on the rule also may be filed online at many the Delaware Department of Natural proposed rule by September 18, 2001 Federal Depository Libraries. Resources and Environmental Control’s (66 FR 38108, July 20, 2001). We are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim (DNREC’s) request to implement and extending this deadline to October 5, Smith (telephone 919-541–4718), EPA, enforce its hazardous air pollutant
VerDate 11
general provisions and hazardous air 715 Grantham Lane, New Castle, DE program submitted by ADEQ based on pollutant emission standards for 19720. the revisions submitted on August 11, perchloroethylene dry cleaning FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1998, May 9, 2001, and September 7, facilities, hard and decorative Dianne J. McNally, U.S. Environmental 2001. chromium electroplating and chromium Protection Agency, Region 3, 1650 Arch DATES: Comments on the program anodizing tanks, and industrial process Street (3AP11), Philadelphia, PA 19103– revisions discussed in this proposed cooling towers in place of similar 2029, [email protected] action must be received in writing by Federal requirements set forth in the (telephone 215–814–3297). November 1, 2001. Code of Federal Regulations. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed approval includes granting For further information on this action, action should be addressed to Gerardo authority to DNREC to implement and pertaining to the approval of Delaware’s Rios, Acting Chief, Permits Office, Air enforce any future amendments to these regulations for hazardous air pollutant Division (AIR–3), EPA Region IX, 75 provisions and standards that EPA general provisions and hazardous air Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, promulgates and DNREC adopts pollutant emission standards for California, 94105. You can inspect unchanged into its regulations. EPA is perchloroethylene dry cleaning copies of ADEQ’s submittal and other not waiving its notification and facilities, hard and decorative supporting documentation relevant to reporting requirements under this chromium electroplating and chromium this action during normal business proposed approval; therefore, sources anodizing tanks, and industrial process hours at the Air Division of EPA Region will need to send notifications and cooling towers (CAA section 112), 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, reports to both DNREC and EPA. In the please see the information provided in California, 94105. You may also see Final Rules section of this Federal the direct final action, with the same copies of the submitted title V program Register, EPA is approving the State’s title, that is located in the ‘‘Rules and at the following location: ADEQ request for rule approval as a direct final Regulations’’ section of this Federal Department of Environmental Quality, rule without prior proposal because the Register publication. 3033 North central Avenue, Phoenix, Agency views this as a noncontroversial Dated: September 7, 2001. Arizona 85012–2809. submittal and anticipates no adverse Donald S. Welsh, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments. A detailed rationale for the Ginger Vagenas, EPA Region IX, Permits approval is set forth in the direct final Regional Administrator, Region III. [FR Doc. 01–24201 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Office (AIR–3), U.S. Environmental rule. If no adverse comments are Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) BILLING CODE 6560–50–P received in response to this action, no 744–1252 or [email protected]. further activity is contemplated. If EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This receives adverse comments, the direct section provides additional information final rule will be withdrawn and all ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION by addressing the following questions: public comments received will be AGENCY addressed in a subsequent final rule I. What is the operating permit program? 40 CFR Part 70 based on this proposed rule. EPA will II. What is EPA’s proposed action? not institute a second comment period. [AZ042–OPP; FRL–7071–6] III. What are the program changes that EPA is approving? Any parties interested in commenting IV. What is the effect of this proposed action? on this action should do so at this time. Clean Air Act Proposed Full Approval of Operating Permit Programs; Arizona V. Are there other issues with the program? DATES: Written comments must be Department of Environmental Quality, I. What Is the Operating Permit received on or before November 1, 2001. Arizona Program? ADDRESSES: Written comments on this AGENCY: Environmental Protection The CAA Amendments of 1990 action should be sent concurrently to: Agency (EPA). required all state and local permitting Makeba A. Morris, Chief, Permits and ACTION: Proposed rule. authorities to develop operating permit Technical Assessment Branch, Mail programs that met certain federal Code 3AP11, Air Protection Division, SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve criteria. In implementing the operating U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revisions to the Arizona Department of permit programs, the permitting Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Environmental Quality (ADEQ or State) authorities require certain sources of air Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029 and operating permit program. The ADEQ pollution to obtain permits that contain Robert Taggart, Delaware Department of operating permit program was all applicable requirements under the Natural Resources and Environmental submitted in response to the directive in CAA. The focus of the operating permit Control, Division of Air and Waste the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) program is to improve compliance by Management, 715 Grantham Lane, New Amendments that permitting authorities issuing each source a permit that Castle, DE 19720. Copies of the develop, and submit to EPA, programs consolidates all of the applicable CAA documents relevant to this action are for issuing operating permits to all requirements into a federally available for public inspection during major stationary sources and to certain enforceable document. By consolidating normal business hours at the Air other sources within the permitting all of the applicable requirements for a Protection Division, U.S. Environmental authorities’ jurisdiction. EPA granted facility, the source, the public, and the Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 interim approval to the ADEQ operating permitting authorities can more easily Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania permit program on October 30, 1996 (61 determine what CAA requirements 19103; the Air and Radiation Docket FR 55910). The ADEQ has revised its apply and how compliance with those and Information Center, U.S. program to satisfy the conditions of the requirements is determined. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 interim approval and this action Sources required to obtain an M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; proposes approval of those revisions operating permit under this program and Delaware Department of Natural and other revisions since interim include ‘‘major’’ sources of air pollution Resources & Environmental Control, approval was granted. EPA is proposing and certain other sources specified in Division of Air and Waste Management, full approval of the operating permits the CAA or in EPA’s implementing
VerDate 11
regulations. For example, all sources III. What Are the Program Changes provision that ‘‘no permit revision shall regulated under the acid rain program, That EPA Is Approving? be required under any approved economic incentives, marketable regardless of size, must obtain permits. A. Corrections to Interim Approval permits, emissions trading and other Examples of major sources include Issues those that have the potential to emit 100 similar programs or processes for tons per year or more of volatile organic In its October 30, 1996 rulemaking, changes that are provided for in the EPA made full approval of ADEQ’s compounds, carbon monoxide, lead, permit.’’ AAC R18–2–306(A)(10) operating permit programs contingent included this exact provision but also sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides ( NOX), upon the correction of a number of included a sentence that negated this or particulate matter (PM10); those that interim approval issues. Each issue, emit 10 tons per year of any single provision. EPA required that ADEQ along with the State’s correction, is either delete or revise the negating hazardous air pollutant (specifically described below. sentence to make the rule consistent listed under the CAA); or those that 1. Rule deficiency: AAC R18–2– with part 70. emit 25 tons per year or more of a 101(61)(b) (part of the definition of Rule change: The problematic combination of hazardous air pollutants ‘‘major source’’) did not clearly require sentence has been deleted from the (HAPs). In areas that are not meeting the that fugitive emissions of HAPs be State’s rule. national ambient air quality standards included when determining a source’s 4. Rule deficiency: Section 70.4(b)(12) for ozone, carbon monoxide, or potential to emit. In order to correct the allows sources to make changes within particulate matter, major sources are deficiency, the definition needed to be a permitted facility without requiring a defined by the gravity of the revised so that it would be clear that permit revision, if the changes are not nonattainment classification. For fugitive emissions of HAPs must be modifications under any provision of example, in ozone nonattainment areas considered in determining whether the title I of the Act and the changes do not classified as ‘‘serious,’’ major sources source is major for purposes of both the exceed the emissions allowable under include those with the potential of 10 ton per year and 25 ton per year HAP the permit. The State’s rules provided emitting 50 tons per year or more of major source thresholds. See 40 CFR for such permit conditions but did not volatile organic compounds or nitrogen 70.2. restrict the allowable changes to those Rule change: The definition of major oxides. that are not modifications under title I source has been revised to correct the of the Act and those that do not exceed II. What Is EPA’s Proposed Action? deficiency. It now defines a major the emissions allowable under the source under section 112 of the CAA to permit. ADEQ was required revise AAC Because the operating permit program include, ‘‘for pollutants other than R18–2–306(A)(14) to add these originally submitted by ADEQ radionuclides, any stationary source conditions. substantially, but not fully, met the that emits, or has the potential to emit, Rule change: AAC R18–2–306(A)(14) criteria outlined in the implementing in the aggregate and including fugitive now includes the following language: regulations codified at 40 Code of emissions, 10 tons per year or more of ‘‘Changes made under this paragraph Federal Regulations (CFR) part 70, EPA any hazardous air pollutant which has (14) shall not include modification granted interim approval to the program been listed pursuant to section 112(b) of under any provision of Title I of the Act in a rulemaking published on October the CAA, 25 tons per year of any and may not exceed emissions 30, 1996 (61 FR 55910). The interim combination of such hazardous air allowable under the permit.’’ approval notice described the pollutants * * *.’’ (Emphasis added.) 5. Rule deficiency: Pursuant to 70.6(g), conditions that had to be met in order 2. Rule deficiency: EPA found that operating permit programs may only for the ADEQ program to receive full ADEQ’s regulations regarding the provide for an affirmative defense to approval. Today’s Federal Register application content and permit issuance actions brought for noncompliance with requirements for previously minor technology-based emission limits when notice describes the changes ADEQ has sources that were applying for title V such noncompliance is due to an made to its operating permit program to status to be somewhat unclear. In order emergency situation. In its original title correct conditions and obtain full to correct this problem, EPA required V program submittal, ADEQ included approval. that the State revise AAC R18 to clarify AAC R18–2–310, which established an EPA is proposing full approval of the that, when an existing source obtains a affirmative defense that was broader operating permits program submitted by significant permit revision to revise its than that allowed under part 70. ADEQ ADEQ based on the revisions submitted permit from a Class II permit to a Class was required to modify its program to on August 11, 1998, May 9, 2001, and I permit, the entire permit, and not just make it consistent with the section September 7, 2001. These revisions the portion being revised, must be 70.6(g) provision for an emergency satisfactorily address the program issued in accordance with part 70 affirmative defense. deficiencies identified in EPA’s October permit application, content, and Rule change: ADEQ has submitted a 30, 1996 rulemaking. See 61 FR 55910. issuance requirements, including program revision that, when approved EPA is also proposing to approve, as a requirements for public, affected state, by EPA, will remove R18–2–310 from title V operating permit program and EPA review. See 40 CFR 70.7. the State’s title V program. 6. Rule deficiency: In order to ensure revision, additional changes to the rules Rule changes: R18–2–320(E) and R18– that material permit conditions can be that have been made since ADEQ was 2–304(E)(1) have been revised to address the interim approval issue. contained in permits issued by the granted interim approval. The interim These provisions now clearly require county control officers as well as the approval issues, ADEQ’s corrections, that a previously minor source that is Director of ADEQ, EPA required that and the additional changes are obtaining a title V permit must submit ADEQ revise AAC R18–2–331(A)(1) to described below under the section a full title V permit application and provide under the definition of entitled, ‘‘What are the program changes undergo full public, EPA and affected ‘‘material permit condition’’ that ‘‘the that EPA is approving?’ state review. condition is in a permit or permit 3. Rule deficiency: Section 70.6(a)(8) revision issued by the Director or the requires that title V permits contain a Control Officer * * *.’’
VerDate 11
Rule change: The Rule has been threshold. This is inconsistent with part non-title V sources). A general modified as required. 70 and is not currently approvable. EPA description of the more substantive has, however, proposed a revision to the changes follows. For more detail on the B. Other Changes major source definition that will all of the changes, refer to the technical The rules the State has submitted for incorporate the 1980 cutoff date. We are support document. EPA approval incorporate changes other therefore proposing to approve the than those necessary to correct interim Several provisions implementing the State’s definition of major source compliance assurance monitoring approval deficiencies. In this action, provided that EPA finalizes revisions to EPA is also proposing to approve those requirements of 40 CFR part 64 have the part 70 program that will make the been added to ADEQ’s rules. Additional additional program changes made by change approvable. Alternatively, if ADEQ since the interim approval was changes were made to expand EPA does not finalize the changes to application processing requirements granted. We have evaluated the part 70 described above, ADEQ’s major additional changes and, with one and permit content provisions to cover source definition will conflict with the voluntarily accepted emission exception that is described in detail operative version of part 70 and we will limitations. The rules have also been below, find that they are consistent with be unable to approve it. The remedy to modified to specify that noncompliance part 70. We are including the additional one of ADEQ’s interim approval issues with any federally enforceable changes in our proposed approval. resides within that same definition, so requirement is a violation of the Clean Paragraph (c) of ADEQ’s definition of if we are barred from approving ADEQ’s Air Act and to designate terms and major source (R18–2–101(64)) lists new major source definition because of conditions that are voluntarily entered source categories that must count the 1980 date, we will be unable to grant into as federally enforceable. fugitives. Subparagraph xxvii has been full approval to ADEQ’s title V program. modified to read: ‘‘All other stationary As a result, ADEQ would lose its IV. What Is the Effect of This Proposed source categories regulated by a authority to implement its title V Action? standard promulgated as of August 7, operating permits program on December 1980 under section 111 or 112 of the 1, 2001, and part 71 would be in effect. ADEQ has adopted and submitted Act, but only with respect to those air ADEQ made a number of additional rule changes and requested program pollutants that have been regulated for changes to the rules that implement revisions that address the issues that category.’’ Emphasis added. The their part 70 program, many of which identified in EPA’s interim approval addition of this 1980 cutoff date restricts were non-substantive (e.g., and are described above. The rules the types of sources that are required to recodifications) or irrelevant (e.g., proposed for approval today listed in count fugitives towards the major source changes to requirements applying to Table 1.
TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULES
Rule No. Rule title Effective Submitted
R18–2–101(61) Definitions—definition of ‘‘Major source’’ only ...... 6/4/98 8/11/98 R18–2–304 ...... Permit application processing procedures ...... 12/20/99 5/9/01 R18–2–306 ...... Permit contents ...... 6/4/98 8/11/98 R18–2–320 ...... Significant Permit Revisions ...... 12/20/99 5/9/01 R18–2–331 ...... Material Permit Conditions ...... 6/4/98 8/11/98
In addition to proposing to approve notice in the Federal Register that notify the commenter in writing to the rules listed in Table 1, EPA is also would alert the public that they may explain our reasons for not making a proposing to approve the removal of identify and bring to EPA’s attention finding of deficiency. An NOD will not R18–2–310, Excess Emissions, from the alleged programmatic and/or necessarily be limited to deficiencies State’s title V program. implementation deficiencies in title V identified by citizens and may include As noted above, ADEQ has adopted programs and that EPA would respond any deficiencies that we have identified and submitted the required changes and to their allegations within specified time through our program oversight. periods if the comments were made has fulfilled the conditions of the Request for Public Comments interim approval granted on October 30, within 90 days of publication of the 1996 (61 FR 55910). EPA is therefore Federal Register notice. EPA requests comments on the proposing full approval of the ADEQ One citizen’s group commented on program revisions discussed in this operating permit program, contingent on what it believes to be deficiencies with proposed action. Copies of the ADEQ EPA finalizing its proposed change to respect to ADEQ’s title V program. EPA submittals and other supporting the part 70 definition of major source. takes no action on those comments in documentation used in developing the V. Are There Other Issues With This today’s action and will respond to them proposed full approval are contained in Program? by December 1, 2001. As stated in the docket files maintained at the EPA Federal Register notice published on Region 9 office. The docket is an On May 22, 2000, EPA promulgated a December 11, 2000, (65 FR 77376) EPA organized and complete file of all the rulemaking that extended the interim will respond by December 1, 2001 to information submitted to, or otherwise approval period of 86 operating permits timely public comments on programs considered by, EPA in the development programs until December 1, 2001. (65 that have obtained interim approval, of this proposed full approval. The FR 32035) The action was subsequently and EPA will respond by April 1, 2002 primary purposes of the docket are: (1) challenged by the Sierra Club and the to timely comments on fully approved To allow interested parties a means to New York Public Interest Research programs. We will publish a notice of identify and locate documents so that Group (NYPIRG). In settling the deficiency (NOD) when we determine they can effectively participate in the litigation, EPA agreed to publish a that a deficiency exists, or we will approval process, and (2) to serve as the
VerDate 11
record in case of judicial review. EPA significantly regulatory action under provision of in-region interexchange will consider any comments received in Executive Order 12866. This action will services by incumbent independent writing by November 1, 2001. not impose any collection of local exchange carriers. In this information subject to the provisions of document the Commission invites Administrative Requirements the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. comment on whether the benefits of the Under Executive Order 12866, 3501 et seq., other than those previously separate affiliate requirement for ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 approved and assigned OMB control facilities-based providers continue to FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this number 2060–0243. For additional outweigh the costs and whether there proposed action is not a ‘‘significant information concerning these are alternative safeguards that are as regulatory action’’ and therefore is not requirements, see 40 CFR part 70. An effective but impose fewer regulatory subject to review by the Office of agency may not conduct or sponsor, and costs. Management and Budget. Under the a person is not required to respond to, DATES: Comments due on or before Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 a collection of information unless it November 1, 2001 and Reply Comments et seq.) the Administrator certifies that displays a currently valid OMB control due on or before November 23, 2001. this proposed rule will not have a number. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: significant economic impact on a In reviewing State operating permit substantial number of small entities Jessica Rosenworcel, Attorney Advisor, programs submitted pursuant to Title V Policy and Program Planning Division, because it merely approves state law as of the Clean Air Act, EPA will approve meeting federal requirements and Common Carrier Bureau, (202) 418– State programs provided that they meet 1580. imposes no additional requirements the requirements of the Clean Air Act beyond those imposed by state law. This and EPA’s regulations codified at 40 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a rule does not contain any unfunded CFR part 70. In this context, in the summary of the Commission’s Notice of mandates and does not significantly or absence of a prior existing requirement Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in CC uniquely affect small governments, as for the State to use voluntary consensus Docket No. 01–175, FCC 01–261, described in the Unfunded Mandates standards (VCS), EPA has no authority adopted September 13, 2001, and Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) to disapprove a State operating permit released September 14, 2001. The because it proposes to approve pre- program for failure to use VCS. It would complete text of this Notice of Proposed existing requirements under state law thus be inconsistent with applicable law Rulemaking is available for inspection and copying during normal business and does not impose any additional for EPA, when it reviews an operating hours in the FCC Reference Information enforceable duties beyond that required permit program, to use VCS in place of Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., by state law. This rule also does not a State program that otherwise satisfies have tribal implications because it will Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. the provisions of the Clean Air Act. not have a substantial direct effect on This document may also be purchased Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) one or more Indian tribes, on the from the Commission’s duplicating of the National Technology Transfer and relationship between the Federal contractor, Qualex International, Portals Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Government and Indian tribes, or on the II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, 272 note) do not apply. distribution of power and Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202– responsibilities between the Federal List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70 863–2893, facsimile 202–863–2898, or Government and Indian tribes, as Environmental protection, via e-mail [email protected]. It is also available on the Commission’s website specified by Executive Order 13175, Administrative Practice and Procedure, at http://www.fcc.gov. ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Air pollution control, Intergovernmental Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR relations, Operating permits, Reporting Synopsis of the Notice of Proposed 67249, November 9, 2000). This rule and recordkeeping requirements. Rulemaking also does not have Federalism implications because it will not have Dated: September 17, 2001. 1. Under § 64.1903 of the substantial direct effects on the States, Jane Diamond, Commission’s rules, incumbent on the relationship between the national Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. independent local exchange carriers government and the States, or on the [FR Doc. 01–24596 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] (LECs) providing facilities-based, in- distribution of power and BILLING CODE 6560–50–P region, interexchange service must do so responsibilities among the various through a separate corporate affiliate. In levels of government, as specified in this document the Commission invites Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS interested parties to comment on (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). The COMMISSION whether application of the separate rule merely proposes to approve affiliate requirement for incumbent existing requirements under state law, 47 CFR Part 64 independent LECs continues to serve and does not alter the relationship or the public interest. The Commission the distribution of power and [CC Docket No. 00–175; FCC 01–261] first asks a series of questions intended to elicit information regarding the responsibilities between the State and 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review number of incumbent independent LECs the Federal government established in Separate Affiliate Requirements of providing in-region, interexchange the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule Independent Local Exchange Carriers also is not subject to Executive Order service on either a facilities or resale 13045, ‘‘Protection of Children from AGENCY: Federal Communications basis. In addition, the Commission asks Environmental Health Risks and Safety Commission. for comment on whether or not the Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) or ACTION: Proposed rule. benefits of this separate affiliate Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions requirement outweigh the regulatory Concerning Regulations That SUMMARY: This document institutes a and economic costs involved. Finally, Significantly Affect Energy Supply, broad-based reexamination of part 64, the Commission seeks comment on Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May subpart T of the Commission’s rules, possible alternative safeguards, 22, 2001), because it is not a which establishes safeguards for the including proposals for applying the
VerDate 11
separate affiliate requirement to a more 632, unless the Commission has Ordering Paragraphs limited category of incumbent developed one or more definitions that 5 10. Pursuant to the authority independent LECs. are appropriate to its activities. Under contained in sections 2, 4(i)–4(j), 201, the Small Business Act, a ‘‘small Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and 303(r) of the Communications Act business concern’’ is one that: (1) Is of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 152, 2. As required by the Regulatory independently owned and operated; (2) 154(i)–4(j), 201, 303(r), this NPRM is Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended,1 the is not dominant in its field of operation; adopted. Commission has prepared this Initial and (3) meets any additional criteria 11. The Commission’s Consumer Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) established by the Small Business Information Bureau, Reference of the expected economic impact on Administration (SBA).6 Consistent with Information Center, shall send a copy of small entities by the policies and rules the SBA’s Office of Advocacy’s view, this NPRM, including the Initial proposed in this NPRM. Written public the Commission has included small Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the comments are requested on this IRFA. incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis. Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Comments must be identified as The Commission emphasizes, however, Business Administration. responses to the IRFA and must be filed that this RFA action has no effect on the by the deadlines for comments on the its analyses and determinations in other, Federal Communications Commission. NPRM. The Commission will send a non-RFA contexts. William F. Caton, copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, 6. Local Exchange Carriers. The most Deputy Secretary. to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the reliable source of information regarding [FR Doc. 01–24569 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Small Business Administration. the number of LECs nationwide appears BILLING CODE 6712–01–P to be the data that the Commission Need for, and Objectives of, the collects annually in connection with the Proposed Rules Telecommunications Relay Service FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. In this NPRM, the Commission (TRS).7 According to our most recent COMMISSION seeks comment on whether or not the data, there are 1,335 incumbent LECs.8 benefits of its separate affiliate Although some of these carriers may not 47 CFR Part 64 be independently owned and operated, requirement for in-region interexchange [CC Docket No. 96–115; CC Docket No. 96– service provided by incumbent or have more than 1,500 employees, we 149; FCC 01–247] independent LECs continues to are unable at this time to estimate with outweigh the costs and whether or not greater precision the number of LECs Telecommunications Carriers’ Use of there are alternative safeguards that are that would qualify as small business Customer Proprietary Network as effective but impose fewer regulatory concerns under the SBA’s definition. Information and Other Customer costs.2 Consequently, we estimate that there are Information; Implementation of the less than 1,335 small entity incumbent Non-Accounting Safeguards of Legal Basis LECs that may be affected by the Sections 271 and 272 of the 4. The legal basis for any action that proposals in the NPRM. Communications Act of 1934, as may be taken pursuant to the NPRM is Description of Projected Reporting, Amended contained in sections 4, 201–202, 303 Recordkeeping and Other Compliance AGENCY: Federal Communications and 403 of the Communications Act of Requirements 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 201– Commission. 202, 303, and 403, and sections 1.1, 7. The Commission expects that any ACTION: Proposed rule. 1.411, and 1.412 of the Commission’s proposal it may adopt pursuant this rules, 47 CFR 1.1, 1.411, and 1.412. NPRM will decrease existing reporting, SUMMARY: In this document, the recordkeeping or other compliance Commission seeks comment on what Description and Estimate of the Number requirements. methods of customer consent would of Small Entities to Which the Proposed serve the governmental interests at issue Rules Will Apply Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and and afford informed consent in 5. The RFA directs agencies to Significant Alternatives Considered accordance with the First Amendment. provide a description of and, where The Commission also seeks comment on 8. The overall objective of this feasible, an estimate of the number of the interplay between section 222 and proceeding is to reduce existing small entities that will be affected by 272 of the Act in response to a voluntary regulatory burdens on small carriers to any rules.3 The RFA generally defines remand granted by the United States the extent consistent with the public the term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District interest. same meaning as the terms ‘‘small of Columbia. The Commission seeks to business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ and Federal Rules That May Duplicate, obtain a more complete record on ways ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 4 For Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed in which customers can consent to a the purposes of this order, the RFA Rules carrier’s use of their CPNI. defines a ‘‘small business’’ to be the 9. None. DATES: Comments due on or before same as a ‘‘small business concern’’ November 1, 2001 and Reply Comments under the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 5 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the due on or before November 16, 2001. definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 5 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 632). Marcy Greene, Attorney Advisor, Policy has been amended by the Contract With America 6 15 U.S.C. 632. and Program Planning Division, Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–121, 7 47 CFR 64.601 et seq.; Carrier Locator: Interstate 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of CWAAA Service Providers, FCC Common Carrier Bureau, Common Carrier Division, (202) 418– is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Industry Analysis Division (rel. Oct. 2000) (Carrier 2410. Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA). Locator). 2 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 47 U.S.C. 64.1901–03. 8 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. The total for This is a 3 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3), 604(a)(3). competitive LECs includes competitive access summary of the Commission’s Second 4 5 U.S.C. 601(6). providers and competitive LECs. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
VerDate 11
(Second Further Notice) in CC Docket of their CPNI. Taking into account the not narrowly tailored to promote the Nos. 96–115 and 96–149, FCC 01–247, Tenth Circuit’s opinion, the government’s asserted interests in adopted August 28, 2001, and released Commission seeks comment on what protecting privacy and promoting September 7, 2001. The complete text of methods of approval would serve the competition, we initiate this proceeding this Second Further Notice of Proposed governmental interests at issue, and to obtain a more complete record on Rulemaking is available for inspection afford informed consent, while also consent mechanisms, and the and copying during normal business satisfying the constitutional requirement Commission urges commenters to focus hours in the FCC Reference Information that any restrictions on speech be upon the concerns articulated by the Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., narrowly tailored. Specifically, the court. In addition, the Commission asks Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. Commission seeks comment on the parties to comment on whether there are This document may also be purchased interests and policies underlying section any other laws or regulatory schemes from the Commission’s duplicating 222 that are relevant to formulating an governing matters similar to CPNI that contractor, Qualex International, Portals approval requirement, including an the Commission might use as an analog. II, 445 12th Street, SW, Room CY–B402, analysis of the privacy interests that are 6. The Commission seeks comment on Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202– at issue, and on the extent to which we the interests and policies underlying 863–2893, facsimile 202–863–2898, or should take competitive concerns into section 222 that are relevant to via e-mail [email protected]. It is also account. To the extent that competition, formulating an approval requirement to available on the Commission’s website in addition to privacy, is a legitimate implement section 222(c)(1). In the at http://www.fcc.gov. government interest under section 222, CPNI Order, the Commission articulated the Commission seeks comment on the two governmental interests: Protection Synopsis of the Second Further Notice likely difference in competitive harms of customer privacy and promotion of of Proposed Rulemaking under opt-in and opt-out approvals. The competition. The court indicated that 1. In this document, the Commission Commission seeks comment on whether ‘‘[w]hile, in the abstract, these may seeks comment on the responsibilities of it is possible for the Commission to constitute legitimate and substantial carriers in obtaining consent from implement a flexible opt-in approach interests, we have concerns about the customers for the use of CPNI and, that does not run afoul of the First proffered justifications in the context of specifically, on whether we should Amendment, or whether opt-out this case.’’ Commenters should also adopt opt-in or opt-out consent under approval is the only means of discuss, with as much specificity as section 222(c)(1). Pending the resolution addressing the constitutional concerns possible, how a carrier’s use of CPNI by the Commission of the particular expressed by the 10th Circuit. could erode privacy. The Tenth Circuit method of consent, the Commission 4. At the outset, the Commission also recognized that ‘‘disclosure of CPNI offers in this document guidance to asks parties to comment on the scope of information could prove embarrassing parties on how to obtain consent during the Tenth Circuit’s opinion. If the to some,’’ but beyond that was uncertain this interim period. If carriers should Commission were to conclude that the about the government’s privacy interest. choose to obtain customer approval by court vacated additional requirements, The Commission seeks comment on that means of an opt-out approach, such which it does not believe that it did, the aspect of the court’s analysis and ask carriers will need to provide customers Commission asks parties to comment on what other privacy concerns may be with notification consistent with whether it would affect our overall implicated by access to CPNI. § 64.2007(f). Moreover, if a carrier has findings regarding ‘‘approval of the 7. The court also said that it ‘‘would already provided a customer with customer’’ in section 222(c)(1). Would prefer to see a more empirical notification premised upon an opt-in the Commission need to re-examine our explanation and justification for the mechanism, the carrier, should it so interpretation of ‘‘approval’’ as it relates government’s asserted interest [in choose, may continue to rely upon such to the uses for which a carrier may use privacy].’’ The Commission seeks notice. CPNI without customer approval, comments responsive to the court’s 2. The Commission notes that our including to market customer premises concern. The court was not persuaded current rules do not provide for any equipment and information services, that competition was a legitimate or time period after which a customer’s and to use CPNI to market to customers substantial state interest underlying implicit approval of the use or sharing who have switched to another carrier? section 222. The Commission seeks of CPNI may be reasonably assumed to 5. In the CPNI Order (63 FR 20326, comments that address those have been given to the carrier. The April 24, 1998) the Commission reservations, and on the extent to which Commission will consider that question addressed specifically the requirement competitive concerns should be taken in the Second Further Notice. In the that a carrier obtain ‘‘approval of the into account in our interpretation of the interim, however, we expect that customer’’ for use of CPNI outside the approval requirements under section carriers shall not use the CPNI based on telecommunications service from which 222(c)(1). The Commission further seeks ‘‘implicit approval’’ (through opt-out) it was derived. In light of those statutory comment about the potential until customers have been afforded objectives, it further concluded that competitive ramifications of construing some reasonable period to respond to carriers must obtain express written, section 222 without regard to the notification. Pending resolution of oral, or electronic approval by a competitive issues, and how such a the FNPRM, we will use a 30-day period customer to use a customer’s CPNI construction might affect the from customer receipt of notice as a beyond the existing service relationship. competitive goals of the 1996 Act. The ‘‘safe harbor,’’ but may permit some The Commission rejected an opt-out Commission seeks comment on the shorter period if supported by an regime, under which a carrier could use likely difference in competitive effects adequate explanation from the carrier. CPNI beyond the existing service under opt-in and opt-out approvals. It relationship as long as it has made a requests empirical or other evidence to Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking request to a customer for permission to illustrate the competitive advantages, if 3. In this Second Further Notice, the use CPNI in that manner and the any, that opt-out approval affords a Commission seeks to obtain a more customer had not expressly objected to carrier. The Commission asks whether, complete record on ways in which such use. Because the Tenth Circuit and to what extent, any such customers can consent to a carrier’s use found that the opt-in requirements were competitive advantages may undermine
VerDate 11
the goals of section 222 or, more 11. The Commission also seeks nondiscrimination requirements in generally, the goals of the 1996 Act. comment on whether modifications section 272. Adhering to these 8. The Commission seeks comment on should be made to the current requirements would mean that BOCs any potential harms that may arise from notification requirements in our rules so could share CPNI among their section adopting either an opt-out or opt-in that they are most effective in ensuring 272 affiliates only pursuant to express approach. The Commission inquires to that customers are clearly informed of approval, and CPNI sharing under whom a carrier might make CPNI their rights, and on how carriers should section 222(c)(1)(A) (based on implied available, and seeks comments about the manage later requests for privacy from approval under the total service extent to which such dissemination the customer. In sum, the Commission approach) would be precluded. would affect customer privacy interests. seeks comment on all of these approval 13. More specifically, under the terms The Commission asks parties to address and notification approaches as well as of section 272, the Commission found the relative costs and convenience of any other options for ensuring that that the nondiscrimination requirements CPNI use under both opt-in and opt-out customers receive adequate notification contained in that section would, in the approaches. Finally, the Commission of their rights under section 222 of the context of an opt-in approach, ‘‘pose a seeks comment on the court’s statement Act. potentially insurmountable burden that opt-out is a ‘‘substantially less because a BOC soliciting approval to restrictive alternative.’’ The Commission Interplay of Section 222 and 272 share CPNI with its affiliate would have seeks comment more broadly on what 12. On October 8, 1999, AT&T filed a to solicit approval for countless other methods of approval would serve the petition for review of the CPNI Order carriers as well, known or unknown.’’ governmental interests at issue, and with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Although this was only one of several afford informed consent, while also for the District of Columbia, challenging reasons supporting the Commission’s satisfying the constitutional requirement the Commission’s CPNI decisions as interpretation of the interplay between that any restrictions on speech be they relate to the interplay between sections 222 and 272, it would likely narrowly tailored. section 222 and section 272 of the have to revisit this conclusion if we 9. The Commission seeks comment on Communications Act. On July 25, 2000, adopt an opt-out approach as a final whether adoption of an opt-out the D.C. Circuit granted the rule. Under an opt-out approach, mechanism is consistent with the Commission’s motion for remand of the however, a BOC may be free to share its rationale for the total service approach AT&T appeal. The consent mechanism local customer’s CPNI with its long set forth in the CPNI Order. If the that the Commission eventually adopts distance affiliate regardless of whether Commission adopts an opt-out approach in response to the Tenth Circuit’s Order the local customer has chosen the such that a carrier need not obtain the could impact our previous findings affiliate as his or her long distance customer’s affirmative approval to regarding the interplay between these service provider. The Commission is market services not already subscribed two sections, and we therefore find it concerned about the possible to by the customer, is it necessary or necessary to raise the relevant issues competitive and customer privacy appropriate for us to adopt an here. The Commission’s finding in the ramifications of such an interpretation, alternative to the total service approach? CPNI Order, which we affirmed in the and seeks comment on whether it In particular, would there be an impact CPNI Reconsideration Order (64 FR should revisit its interpretation of the on the competitive goals of the Act if 53242, October 1, 1999), that the term interplay between sections 222 and 272 adoption of an opt-out mechanism ‘‘information’’ in section 272(c)(1) does if the Commission adopts an opt-out increased the likelihood of customer not include CPNI remains intact. approach. In particular, would the approval for the use of CPNI to market Specifically, section 272(c)(1) states that Commission have to alter its services not already subscribed to by the a Bell Operating Company (BOC), in its fundamental conclusion that BOCs may customer? Alternatively, would dealing with its section 272 separate share CPNI with their section 272 adoption of an opt-out mechanism affiliate, ‘‘may not discriminate between affiliates pursuant to section 222 achieve the appropriate balance among the company or affiliate and any other without regard to the nondiscrimination the interests of privacy, competition, entity in the provision or procurement requirements in section 272? equity, and efficiency? of goods, services, facilities, and 10. Finally, the Commission notes information, or in the establishment of Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis that in the Wireless Communications standards * * *’’ The Commission 14. As required by the Regulatory and Public Safety Act of 1999 (911 Act), found that in the context of the entire Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended,1 the Congress amended section 222 of the 1996 Act, it is not readily apparent that Commission has prepared this present Communications Act by adding the meaning of ‘‘information’’ in section Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis provisions regarding CPNI. The 272 necessarily includes CPNI, and that (IRFA) of the expected significant amendments were enacted as incentives the most reasonable interpretation of the economic impact on small entities by for greater deployment of wireless E911 interplay between sections 222 and 272 the policies and rules proposed in this services. The new CPNI provisions are is that section 272 ‘‘does not impose any Second Further Notice of Proposed intended to encourage that objective by additional CPNI requirements on BOCs’ Rulemaking (Second Further Notice). providing separate provisions to protect sharing of CPNI with their section 272 Written public comments are requested certain wireless location information, affiliates when they share information on this IRFA. Comments must be and by expressly authorizing carriers to with their section 272 affiliates identified as responses to the IRFA and release this information to specified according to the requirements of section must be filed by the deadlines for third parties for specified emergency 222.’’ The Commission found this to be comments on the Second Further purposes. The Commission seeks reasonable because if we deemed Notice. The Commission will send a comment on what affect, if any, the ‘‘information’’ to include CPNI under provisions of section 222(f) have on our section 272(c)(1), then the BOCs would 1 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., interpretation of the provisions of be unable to share CPNI with their has been amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–121, section 222(c)(1) and the customer affiliates to the extent contemplated by 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of CWAAA approval requirements that are under section 222, but would instead be is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement consideration here. subject to the more affirmative Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
VerDate 11
copy of the Second Further Notice, approval mechanism alternatives in 222, and 303(r) of the Communications including this IRFA, to the Chief light of the First Amendment.’’ 4 Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 17. Taking into account the Tenth 154(i), 222, and 303(r). Circuit’s concerns, we seek comment in Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C. c. Description and Estimate of the 603(a). In addition, the Second Further the Second Further Notice on several significant issues concerning what Number of Small Entities to Which the Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) Proposed Rules Will Apply will be published in the Federal methods of approval would serve the Register. governmental interests at issue under 21. The RFA directs agencies to section 222 of the Act, and afford provide a description of and, where a. Need for, and Objectives of, the informed consent, while also satisfying feasible, an estimate of the number of Proposed Rules the constitutional requirement that any small entities that will be affected by restrictions on speech be narrowly our rules.9 The RFA generally defines 15. The Commission is issuing the tailored. We seek comment specifically the term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the Second Further Notice to seek comment on the extent to which an opt-in or opt- same meaning as the terms ‘‘small on an appropriate method by which out method of customer approval would business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ and carriers must secure their customers’ be consistent with both the court’s ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 10 consent to use the customer’s CPNI. concerns and section 222, and on For the purposes of this order, the RFA This is necessary to respond to the whether we should make modification defines a ‘‘small business’’ to be the Tenth Circuit’s decision vacating the to our customer notification same as a ‘‘small business concern’’ opt-in consent method. Under the opt- requirements in § 64.7002 of our rules, under the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. in method, a carrier was required to 47 CFR 64.7002, based on the form of s 632, unless the Commission has notify the customer of his or her rights approval that we adopt.5 developed one or more definitions that with regard to CPNI and then obtain 18. We also ask for information on are appropriate to its activities.11 Under express written, oral or electronic any potential harms to business entities, the Small Business Act, a ‘‘small customer approval before the carrier especially smaller business entities business concern’’ is one that: (1) Is may use CPNI to market services to the within the class of companies directly independently owned and operated; (2) customer that are outside the existing affected by the proposed rule, that may is not dominant in its field of operation; service relationship that the customer arise from adopting either an opt-in or and (3) meets any additional criteria established by the Small Business has with the carrier. The opt-in method opt-out approach, including the extent to which dissemination of CPNI would Administration (SBA).12 The SBA has is distinguished from the opt-out affect a customer’s privacy.6 We also ask defined a small business for Standard method under which approval to use for comment on how we can ensure that Industrial Classification (SIC) categories the customer’s CPNI is inferred from the the consent approach we adopt balances 4812 (Radiotelephone Communications) customer-carrier relationship unless the the interests of privacy, competition, and 4813 (Telephone Communications, customer requests specifically that his equity and efficiency.7 Except Radiotelephone) to be small or her CPNI be restricted. 19. In addition, we ask parties to entities when they have no more than 16. The Tenth Circuit concluded that indicate whether or not adoption of an 1,500 employees.13 We first discuss although the Commission had asserted opt-out mechanism undermines the generally the total number of small that the opt-in method would protect total service approach. The total service telephone companies falling within both consumer privacy and promote approach is not a consent mechanism of those SIC categories. Then, we competition for telecommunications like the opt-in or opt-out approach, but discuss the number of small businesses services in accordance with the goals of instead describes the scope of services within the two subcategories, and section 222 of the Act,2 it did not for which a customer grants his or her attempt to refine further those estimates demonstrate that opt-in directly and consent for the carrier to use CPNI. to correspond with the categories of materially advanced these interests. The Specifically, under the total service telephone companies that are commonly court concluded that the Commission’s approach, the customer’s implied used under our rules. approval is limited to the parameters of determination that an opt-in 22. Although affected incumbent local the customer’s existing service, while requirement would best protect a exchange carriers (ILECs) may have no the customer must grant the carrier more than 1,500 employees, we do not consumer’s privacy interests was not affirmative approval in order for the narrowly tailored because the believe that such entities should be carrier to use the customer’s CPNI to considered small entities within the Commission had failed to adequately market other services to the customer. If meaning of the RFA because they either consider an opt-out option. The court a carrier need not obtain the customer’s are dominant in their field of operations stated that an opt-out option should affirmative approval to market services or are not independently owned and have been more fully investigated as it not already subscribed to by the operated, and are therefore by definition is inherently less restrictive of speech. customer, is it necessary or appropriate not ‘‘small entities’’ or ‘‘small business Further, the court ruled the Commission for us to adopt an alternative to the total did not adequately show that an opt-out service approach.8 9 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3), 604(a)(3). strategy would not offer sufficient 10 b. Legal Basis 5 U.S.C. 601(6). protection of consumer privacy.3 In 11 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the vacating portions of the CPNI Order, the 20. The Second Further Notice is definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in 5 U.S.C. court did not require the Commission to adopted pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 632). 12 find specifically that the opt-out option 15 U.S.C. 632. 13 13 CFR 121.201. The North American Industry 4 Id. at 1240, n. 15 (‘‘The dissent accuses us of was the correct approach. Instead, it Classification System (NAICS) has replaced the SIC ‘advocating’ an opt-out approach. We do not found fault with the Commission’s system for describing types of industries. SIC 4812 ‘advocate’ any specific approach.’’). corresponds to NAICS 513321, 513322, 51333 ‘‘inadequate consideration of the 5 See infra paragraphs 14–23. (Radiotelephone Communications). SIC 4813 6 See infra paragraph 9. corresponds to NAICS 51331, 51333, 51334 2 47 U.S.C. 222 7 See infra paragraph 21. (Telephone Communications, Except 3 Id. at 1238–39. 8 See infra paragraph 21. Radiotelephone).
VerDate 11
concerns’’ under the RFA. Accordingly, Although it seems certain that some of interexchange services.21 Although it our use of the terms ‘‘small entities’’ and these carriers are not independently seems certain that some of these carriers ‘‘small businesses’’ does not encompass owned and operated, we are unable at are not independently owned and small ILECs. Out of an abundance of this time to estimate with greater operated, or have more than 1,500 caution, however, for regulatory precision the number of wireline employees, we are unable at this time to flexibility analysis purposes, we will carriers and service providers that estimate with greater precision the separately consider small ILECs within would qualify as small business number of IXCs that would qualify as this analysis and use the term ‘‘small concerns under the SBA’s definition. small business concerns under the ILECs’’ to refer to any ILECs that Consequently, we estimate that fewer SBA’s definition. Consequently, we arguably might be defined by SBA as than 2,295 small entity telephone estimate that there are fewer than 204 ‘‘small business concerns.’’ 14 communications companies other than small entity IXCs that may be affected 23. Total Number of Telephone radiotelephone companies are small by this order. Companies Affected. The United States entities or small ILECs that may be 27. Competitive Access Providers. Bureau of the Census (the Census affected by this order. Neither the Commission nor the SBA Bureau) reports that at the end of 1992, 25. Local Exchange Carriers. Neither has developed a definition of small there were 3,497 firms engaged in the Commission nor the SBA has entities specifically applicable to providing telephone services, as defined developed a definition of small providers of competitive access services 15 therein, for at least one year. This providers of local exchange services. (CAPs). The closest applicable number contains a variety of different The closest applicable definition under definition under the SBA’s rules is for categories of carriers, including local the SBA’s rules is for telephone telephone communications companies exchange carriers, interexchange communications companies other than other than radiotelephone (wireless) carriers, competitive access providers, radiotelephone (wireless) companies. companies. The most reliable source of cellular carriers, mobile service carriers, The most reliable source of information information regarding the number of operator service providers, pay regarding the number of LECs CAPs nationwide of which we are aware telephone operators, PCS providers, nationwide of which we are aware appears to be the data that we collect covered SMR providers, and resellers. It appears to be the data that we collect annually in connection with the TRS. seems certain that some of those 3,497 annually in connection with the According to our most recent data, 349 telephone service firms may not qualify Telecommunications Relay Service companies reported that they were as small entities because they are not engaged in the provision of either (TRS).19 According to our most recent ‘‘independently owned and competitive access services or data, there are 1,335 incumbent LECs, operated.’’ 16 For example, a PCS competitive local exchange service.22 349 competitive LECs, and 87 provider that is affiliated with an Although it seems certain that some of resellers.20 Although it seems certain interexchange carrier having more than these carriers are not independently that some of these carriers are not 1,500 employees would not meet the owned and operated, or have more than independently owned and operated, or definition of a small business. It seems 1,500 employees, we are unable at this have more than 1,500 employees, we are reasonable to conclude, therefore, that time to estimate with greater precision unable at this time to estimate with fewer than 3,497 telephone service firms the number of CAPs that would qualify greater precision the number of LECs are either small entities or small as small business concerns under the that would qualify as small business incumbent LECs that may be affected by SBA’s definition. Consequently, we this order. concerns under the SBA’s definition. estimate that there are fewer than 349 24. Wireline Carriers and Service Consequently, we estimate that there are small entity CAPs that may be affected Providers. The SBA has developed a fewer than 1,335 small entity incumbent by this order. definition of small entities for telephone LECs, 349 competitive LECs, and 87 28. Operator Service Providers. communications companies other than resellers that may be affected by the Neither the Commission nor the SBA radiotelephone (wireless) companies. proposals in the Second Further Notice. has developed a definition of small The Census Bureau reports there were 26. Interexchange Carriers. Neither entities specifically applicable to 2,321 such telephone companies in the Commission nor the SBA has providers of operator services. The operation for at least one year at the end developed a definition of small entities closest applicable definition under the of 1992.17 According to the SBA’s specifically applicable to providers of SBA’s rules is for telephone definition, a small business telephone interexchange services (IXCs). The communications companies other than company other than a radiotelephone closest applicable definition under the radiotelephone (wireless) companies. company is one employing fewer than SBA’s rules is for telephone The most reliable source of information 1,500 persons.18 All but 26 of the 2,321 communications companies other than regarding the number of operator service non-radiotelephone companies listed by radiotelephone (wireless) companies. providers nationwide of which we are the Census Bureau were reported to The most reliable source of information aware appears to be the data that we have fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, regarding the number of IXCs collect annually in connection with the even if all 26 of those companies had nationwide of which we are aware TRS. According to our most recent data, more than 1,500 employees, there appears to be the data that we collect 21 companies reported that they were would still be 2,295 non-radiotelephone annually in connection with TRS. engaged in the provision of operator companies that might qualify as small According to our most recent data, 204 services.23 Although it seems certain entities or small incumbent LECs. companies reported that they were that some of these companies are not engaged in the provision of independently owned and operated, or 14 13 CFR 121.210 (SIC 4813). have more than 1,500 employees, we are 15 United States Department of Commerce, 19 47 CFR 64.601 et seq.; Carrier Locator: unable at this time to estimate with Bureau of the Census, 1992 Census of transportation Interstate Service Providers, FCC Common Carrier greater precision the number of operator Communications and Utilities: Establishment and Bureau, Industry Analysis Division (rel. Oct. 2000) Firm Size, at Firm Size 1–123 (1995) (1992 Census). (Carrier Locator). 16 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(1). 20 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. The total for 21 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. 17 1992 Census, at Firm Size 1–123. competitive LECs includes competitive access 22 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. 18 13 CFR 121.201 (SIC 4813/NAICS 51331). providers and competitive LECs. 23 Carrier Locator at Figure 1.
VerDate 11
service providers that would qualify as entity radiotelephone companies that winning bidders that qualified as small small business concerns under the may be affected by this order. entities in the Block C auctions. A total SBA’s definition. Consequently, we 31. Cellular Service and Mobile of 93 small and very small business estimate that there are fewer than 21 Service Carriers. Neither the bidders won approximately 40% of the small entity operator service providers Commission nor the SBA has developed 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. that may be affected by this order. a definition of small entities specifically Based on this information, we estimate 29. Pay Telephone Operators. Neither applicable to providers of cellular that the number of small broadband PCS the Commission nor the SBA has services. The closest applicable licenses will include the 90 winning C developed a definition of small entities definition under the SBA’s rules is for Block bidders and the 93 qualifying specifically applicable to pay telephone telephone communications companies bidders in the D, E, and F blocks, for a operators. The closest applicable other than radiotelephone (wireless) total of 183 small PCS providers as definition under the SBA’s rules is for companies. The most reliable source of defined by SBA and the Commissioner’s telephone communications companies information regarding the number of auction rules. other than radiotelephone (wireless) cellular service carriers nationwide of 33. SMR Licensees. Pursuant to 47 companies. The most reliable source of which we are aware appears to be the CFR 90.814(b)(1), the Commission has information regarding the number of data that we collect annually in defined ‘‘small entity’’ in auctions for pay telephone operators nationwide of connection with the TRS. According to geographic area 800 MHz and 900 MHz which we are aware appears to be the our most recent data, 806 companies SMR licenses as a firm that had average data that we collect annually in reported that they were engaged in the annual gross revenues of less than $15 27 connection with the TRS. According to provision of cellular services. million in the three previous calendar our most recent data, 758 companies Although it seems certain that some of years. The definition of a ‘‘small entity’’ reported that they were engaged in the these carriers are not independently in the context of 800 and 900 MHz SMR provision of pay telephone services.24 owned and operated, or have more than has been approved by the SBA. The proposed rules may apply to SMR Although it seems certain that some of 1,500 employees, we are unable at this providers in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz these carriers are not independently time to estimate with greater precision bands that either hold geographic area owned and operated, or have more than the number of cellular service and licenses or have obtained extended 1,500 employees, we are unable at this mobile service carriers that would implementation authorizations. We do time to estimate with greater precision qualify as small business concerns not know how many firms provide 800 the number of pay telephone operators under the SBA’s definition. MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR that would qualify as small business Consequently, we estimate that there are service pursuant to extended concerns under the SBA’s definition. fewer than 804 small entity cellular implementation authorizations, nor how Consequently, we estimate that there are service carriers that may be affected by many of these providers have annual fewer than 758 small entity pay this order. 32. Broadband PCS Licensees. The revenues of less than $15 million. telephone operators that may be affected Consequently, we estimate, for purposes by this order. broadband PCS spectrum is divided into six frequency blocks designated A of this IRFA, that all of the extended 30. Wireless Carriers. The SBA has through F, and the Commission has held implementation authorizations may be developed a definition of small entities auctions for each block. The held by small entities, some of which for radiotelephone (wireless) Commission defined ‘‘small entity’’ for may be affected by the rules proposed companies. The Census Bureau reports Blocks C and F as an entity that has in the Notice. that there were 1,176 such companies in average gross revenues of less than $40 34. The Commission recently held operation for at least one year at the end million in the three previous calendar auctions for geographic area licenses in of 1992.25 According to the SBA’s years.28 For Block F, an additional the 900 MHz SMR band. There were 60 definition, a small business classification for ‘‘very small business’’ winning bidders who qualified as small radiotelephone company is one was added, and is defined as an entity entities in the 900 MHz auction. Based employing no more than 1,500 that, together with its affiliates, has on this information, we estimate that the persons.26 The Census Bureau also average gross revenues of not more than number of geographic area SMR reported that 1,164 of those $15 million for the preceding three licensees that may be affected by the radiotelephone companies had fewer calendar years.29 These regulations decisions and rules proposed in the than 1,000 employees. Thus, even if all defining ‘‘small entity’’ in the context of Notice includes these 60 small entities. of the remaining 12 companies had broadband PCS auctions have been No auctions have been held for 800 more than 1,500 employees, there approved by SBA.30 No small MHz geographic area SMR licenses. would still be 1,164 radiotelephone businesses within the SBA-approved Therefore, no small entities currently companies that might qualify as small definition bid successfully for licenses hold these licenses. A total of 525 entities if they are independently owned in Blocks A and B. There were 90 licenses will be awarded for the upper are operated. Although it seems certain 200 channels in the 800 MHz that some of these carriers are not 27 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. The total for geographic area SMR auction. The independently owned and operated, we cellular carriers includes cellular, Personal Commission, however, has not yet are unable at this time to estimate with Communications Service (PCS) and Specialized determined how many licenses will be greater precision the number of Mobile Radio (SMR) carriers. awarded for the lower 230 channels in radiotelephone carriers and service 28 See Amendment of Parts 20 and 24 of the the 800 MHz geographic area SMR Commission’s Rules—Broadband PCS Competitive providers that would qualify as small Bidding and the Commercial Mobile Radio Service auction. There is no basis, moreover, on business concerns under the SBA’s Spectrum Cap, Report and Order, FCC 96–278, WT which to estimate how many small definition. Consequently, we estimate Docket No. 96–59, paras. 57–60 (June 24, 1996), 61 entities will win these licenses. Given that there are fewer than 1,164 small FR 33859 (July 1, 1996); see also 47 CFR 24.720(b). that nearly all radiotelephone 29 Id. at paragraph 60. companies have fewer than 1,000 30 Implementation of Section 309(j) of the 24 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. Communications Act—Competitive Bidding, PP employees and that no reliable estimate 25 1992 Census at Firm Size 1–123. Docket No. 93–253, Fifth Report and Order, 9 FCC of the number of prospective 800 MHz 26 13 CFR § 121.201 (SIC 4812/NAICS 513322). Rcd 5532, 5581–84 (1994). licensees can be made, we estimate, for
VerDate 11
purposes of this IRFA, that all of the recordkeeping, or other compliance until the customer revokes it.35 licenses may be awarded to small requirements. Therefore, we ask parties to comment on entities, some of which may be affected whether the burden outweighs the e. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant by the decisions and rules proposed in benefit under an opt-in scheme. Economic Impact on Small Entities, and the Notice. Significant Alternatives Considered 41. We also note that the Commission, 35. Narrowband PCS. The in response to concerns from all carriers Commission has auctioned nationwide 38. The RFA requires an agency to about the cost of compliance, has and regional licenses for narrowband describe any significant alternatives that already streamlined the ‘‘flagging’’ and PCS. There are 11 nationwide and 30 it has considered in reaching its ‘‘audit trail’’ requirements that are regional licensees for narrowband PCS. proposed approach, which may include required to protect against unauthorized The Commission does not have the following four alternatives (among access to a customer’s CPNI.36 Small sufficient information to determine others): (1) The establishment of entities may continue to take advantage whether any of these licensees are small differing compliance or reporting of these streamlined rules even if the businesses within the SBA-approved requirements or timetables that take into Commission adopts an opt-in definition for radiotelephone account the resources available to small requirement. companies. At present, there have been entities; (2) the clarification, no auctions held for the major trading consolidation, or simplification of 42. Under an opt-out approach, a area (MTA) and basic trading area (BTA) compliance or reporting requirements small entity need not obtain express narrowband PCS licenses. The under the rule for small entities; (3) the approval, but would only be required to Commission anticipates a total of 561 use of performance, rather than design, notify its customers of their CPNI rights MTA licenses and 2,958 BTA licenses standards; and (4) an exemption from and then process any requests for will be awarded by auction. Such coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, privacy after such notification. This auctions have not yet been scheduled, for small entities.32 could be less administratively onerous however. Given that nearly all 39. As noted above, we do not than obtaining opt-in approval. radiotelephone companies have no more propose a specific method for how However, we seek comment indicating than 1,500 employees and that no carriers should obtain customer consent small entities’ perception of the reliable estimate of the number of to use CPNI for marketing purposes, probable impact of this burden. rather we seek comment on ways in prospective MTA and BTA narrowband 43. We ask small entities to which carriers can obtain their licensees can be made, we assume, for particularly keep in mind these types of customers’ consent and the extent to purposes of this IRFA, that all of the requirements when they comment in the which an opt-in or opt-out approach licenses will be awarded to small Second Further Notice on any potential would satisfy both section 222 and the entities, as that term is defined by the harms that may arise from adopting Tenth Circuit’s concerns that any SBA. either form of consent,37 and overall, we restrictions on speech be no more than 36. Toll Resellers. Neither the ask for comment in response to this necessary to serve the asserted state Commission nor the SBA has developed IRFA on what competitive or economic interests. Section 222 applies to all a definition of small entities specifically impact either an opt-in or opt-out applicable to resellers. The closest telecommunications carriers, and approach would have on small entities applicable definition under the SBA’s therefore, any rules that we adopt and on whether there is any alternative rules is for all telephone regarding customer consent will be form of consent that we should consider communications companies. The most applicable to all carriers.33 Accordingly, to minimize the economic impact on reliable source of information regarding we cannot exempt small entities from them. the number of toll resellers nationwide complying with any consent rules that of which we are aware appears to be the we adopt. f. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, data that we collect annually in 40. We have, however, taken the Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed connection with the TRS. According to limited resources of small entities into Rules our most recent data, 454 companies account in promulgating certain existing reported that they were engaged in the CPNI rules,34 and intend to do so again 44. None. resale of telephone toll services.31 in addressing the customer consent Ordering Clauses Although it seems certain that some of requirements. Specifically, we recognize these carriers are not independently that an opt-in approach would require 45. Pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 222 owned and operated, or have more than small entities to have a process in place and 303(r) of the Communications Act 1,500 employees, we are unable at this to obtain express approval from their of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, time to estimate with greater precision customers to use CPNI. While such a 154(i), 222 and 303(r), the Clarification the number of toll resellers that would process could place a burden on small Order and Second Further Notice of qualify as small business concerns entities in terms of developing, tracking Proposed Rulemaking are adopted. and maintaining customer consent, it under the SBA’s definition. 46. The Commission’s Office of Public would confer a countervailing benefit by Consequently, we estimate that there are Affairs, Reference Operations Division, permitting them to gain approval to use fewer than 454 small entity resellers Shall Send a copy of this Clarification a customer’s CPNI for a broad range of that may be affected by this order. Order and Second Further Notice of service offerings with a single request Proposed Rulemaking, including the d. Description of Projected Reporting, through written, oral or electronic Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance means that remains in effect unless or Requirements to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. 37. Because we have not made any 32 5 U.S.C. 603(c). tentative conclusions or suggested 33 CPNI Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 8098–8100, 35 proposed rules, we are unable at this paragraphs 49–50. See CPNI Reconsideration Order, 14 FCC Rcd 34 See CPNI Reconsideration Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 8142–43, 8146, 8151, paragraphs 104, 109, 116. time to describe any projected reporting, at 14472–75, paragraphs 125–27 (adjusting certain 36 CPNI Reconsideration Order, 13 FCC Rcd at CPNI safeguards to ease the costs of compliance for 14472–75, paragraphs 124–27. 31 Carrier Locator at Figure 1. small carriers). 37 See supra paragraph 19.
VerDate 11
Federal Communications Commission. Building at the Department of commerce,’’ for purposes of William F. Caton, Transportation at the above address. applicability of the HMR, begins when Deputy Secretary. You can review public dockets there a carrier takes possession of a hazardous [FR Doc. 01–24570 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., material and continues until the carrier BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Monday through Friday, except federal delivers the package containing the holidays. You can also review hazardous material to its destination as comments on-line at the DOT Dockets indicated on shipping papers. In Management System Web site at http:/ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION addition, the NPRM proposes to include /dms.dot.gov/. in the HMR an indication that facilities Research and Special Programs FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: at which functions regulated by the Administration Michael Johnsen (202) 366–8553, Office HMR occur may also be subject to of Hazardous Materials Standards, applicable standards and regulations of 49 CFR Parts 171, 173, 174, 175, 176, Research and Special Programs other federal agencies and state, local, 177, and 178 Administration; or Susan Gorsky (202) and tribal governments. Finally, the 366–8553, Office of Hazardous Materials NPRM proposes to include in the HMR [Docket No. RSPA–98–4952 (HM–223)] Standards, Research and Special the statutory criteria under which non- RIN 2137–AC68 Programs Administration. federal governments may be precluded SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: from regulating in certain areas under Applicability of the Hazardous the preemption provisions of the federal Materials Regulations to Loading, Background hazardous materials transportation law Unloading, and Storage; Cancellation On June 14, 2001, the Research and (49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) of Public Meetings Special Programs Administration On August 2, 2001, we announced (RSPA, we) published a notice of that we planned to host two public AGENCY: Research and Special Programs proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (66 FR Administration (RSPA), DOT. meetings to facilitate public comment 32420) under Docket RSPA–98–4952 on the NPRM (66 FR 40174). The first ACTION: Proposed rule; cancellation of (HM–223) to clarify the applicability of public meeting was scheduled for public meetings the Hazardous Materials Regulations September 14, 2001, in Washington, (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171–180) to specific SUMMARY: D.C. The second public meeting was to On June 14, 2001, RSPA functions and activities, including published a notice of proposed be held in Diamond Bar, California, on hazardous materials loading and October 30, 2001. We also extended the rulemaking to clarify the applicability of unloading operations and storage of the Hazardous Materials Regulations to comment period for the NPRM to hazardous materials during November 30, 2001. specific functions and activities, transportation. The HM–223 rulemaking including hazardous materials loading, has four overall goals. First, we want to On September 12, 2001, we unloading, and storage operations. On maintain nationally uniform standards announced on our website (http:// August 2, 2001, we announced two applicable to functions performed in hazmat.dot.gov) and by telephone to public meetings to facilitate public advance of transportation to prepare registered participants that the comment on the proposed rule. One hazardous materials for transportation. September 14 meeting was postponed, public meeting was scheduled for Second, we want to maintain nationally but that we likely would reschedule it September 14, 2001, in Washington, uniform standards applicable to for a later date. As of September 25, D.C.; on September 12, 2001, it was transportation functions. Third, we only ten persons had indicated to us postponed. A second public meeting want to distinguish functions that are that they planned to make presentations was scheduled for October 30, 2001, in subject to the HMR from functions that at the Washington meeting; only four Diamond Bar, California. The October are not subject to the HMR. Finally, we persons had registered with us to speak 30 public meeting is cancelled; the want to clarify that facilities within at the California meeting on October 30, September 14 public meeting will not be which HMR-regulated functions are and two of them were among the ten rescheduled. performed may also be subject to Washington speakers. Therefore, we DATES: The comment period closing federal, state, or local regulations decided to cancel the California public date remains November 30, 2001. governing occupational safety and meeting. Further, we decided against ADDRESSES: Written comments. Submit health or environmental protection. rescheduling the Washington meeting. comments to the Dockets Management To achieve these goals, the NPRM The comment period for the NPRM System, U.S. Department of proposes to list in the HMR pre- remains open until November 30, 2001. Transportation, Room PL 401, 400 transportation and transportation We urge all interested persons to submit Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC functions to which the HMR apply. Pre- written comments on the NPRM. We 20590–0001. Comments should identify transportation functions are functions will consider late-filed comments to the Docket Number RSPA–98–4952 (HM– performed to prepare hazardous extent possible as we consider whether 223) and be submitted in two copies. If materials for movement in commerce by to proceed to a final rule. you wish to receive confirmation of persons who offer a hazardous material If you believe that written comments receipt of your written comments, for transportation or cause a hazardous are not sufficient to assure that your include a self-addressed, stamped material to be transported. views on the NPRM are communicated postcard. You may also e-mail Transportation functions are functions to us and that a public meeting to comments by accessing the Dockets performed as part of the actual facilitate comment on the NPRM is Management System Web site at http:/ movement of hazardous materials in necessary, please submit a statement /dms.dot.gov/ and following the commerce, including loading, explaining why a public meeting is instructions for submitting a document unloading, and storage of hazardous necessary to the HM–223 docket. If electronically. materials that is incidental to their there is sufficient interest, we will The Dockets Management System is movement. The NPRM also proposes to reconsider our decision on the public located on the Plaza level of the Nassif clarify that ‘‘transportation in meetings.
VerDate 11
Issued in Washington, DC, on September FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: more widespread use of TEDs in U.S. 26, 2001. Robert Hoffman (ph. 727–570–5312, fax waters, the total annual mortality Robert A. McGuire, 727–570–5517, e-mail (including natural mortality that cannot Associate Administrator for Hazardous [email protected]), or Therese be controlled) for coastal Kemp’s ridleys Materials Safety, Research and Special A. Conant (ph. 301–713–1401, fax 301– has been reduced by 44-50 percent Programs Administration. 713–0376, e-mail (TEWG, 2000). NMFS believes that this [FR Doc. 01–24539 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] [email protected]). demonstrates that the use of TEDs can BILLING CODE 4910–60–P have a significant impact on the survival SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and recovery of sea turtle species. Background Despite the demonstrated success of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE All sea turtles that occur in U.S. TEDs for some species of sea turtles, waters are listed as either endangered or NMFS is concerned that TEDs are not National Oceanic and Atmospheric threatened under the Endangered adequately protecting all species and Administration Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The Kemp’s size classes of turtles. There is new information showing 47 percent of ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), stranded loggerheads and 1-7 percent of 50 CFR Parts 222 and 223 leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and stranded green turtles are too large to fit hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) are [Docket No.000320077–1177–02; through the current TED openings. listed as endangered. The loggerhead I.D.062501B] Comprehensive scientific data on the (Caretta caretta) and green (Chelonia body depths of these turtles were not Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; mydas) turtles are listed as threatened, available when the original TED sizes Sea Turtle Conservation Requirements except for breeding populations of green were specified. The original TED sizes turtles in Florida and on the Pacific were also much too small to allow AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries coast of Mexico, which are listed as Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and leatherback sea turtles, the largest endangered. species, to escape. Instead, NMFS has Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), The incidental take and mortality of Commerce. attempted to address the incidental sea turtles as a result of trawling catch of leatherback turtles by trawlers ACTION: Proposed rule; request for activities, have been documented in the comments. through a regime of reactive closures Gulf of Mexico and along the Atlantic that has proven complicated and seaboard. In 1990 the National Academy SUMMARY: incomprehensive. There is also concern NMFS proposes to amend the of Sciences, in a report titled Decline of regulations protecting sea turtles to about the status of these populations the Sea Turtle: Causes and Prevention, with stable or declining nesting enhance their effectiveness in reducing estimated that between 33,000 and sea turtle mortality resulting from numbers for the northern nesting 44,000 loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley population of loggerhead sea turtles shrimp trawling in the Atlantic and Gulf sea turtles were being killed, per year, Areas of the southeastern United States. (TEWG, 2000) and dramatically as a result of shrimp trawling activities. declining nesting of leatherback sea Turtle excluder devices (TEDs) have On June 27, 1987, (52 FR 24244) NMFS proven to be effective at excluding sea turtles on their main nesting grounds required TEDs in certain areas during (NMFS SEFSC, 2001). NMFS is turtles from shrimp trawls; however, certain times and further defined and NMFS has determined that therefore proposing to modify the TED expanded the required use of TEDs in regulations to insure TEDs are capable modifications to the design of TEDs the shrimp fishery on December 4, 1992, need to be made to exclude leatherbacks of releasing large leatherback sea turtles (57 FR 57348). These rules and and adult loggerhead and green turtles. and large, sexually mature loggerhead subsequent modifications are codified and green turtles; several approved TED These modifications will extend the in 50 CFR 223.206 and 50 CFR 223.207 protection TEDs afford smaller turtle designs are structurally weak and do not and require most shrimp and summer function properly under normal fishing species to all size classes of all sea turtle flounder trawlers operating in the species. conditions; and modifications to the Southeastern U.S. (Atlantic Area, Gulf trynet and bait shrimp exemptions to Area, and summer flounder sea turtle Summary of Proposed Changes to the the TED requirements are necessary to protection area) to have a NMFS- Sea Turtle Regulations decrease lethal take of sea turtles. These approved TED installed in each net that NMFS is proposing to amend the proposed amendments are necessary to is rigged for fishing to provide for the regulations applicable to shrimp protect endangered and threatened sea escape of sea turtles. TEDs currently trawling in all inshore and offshore turtles in the Atlantic and Gulf Areas. approved by NMFS include single-grid waters of the Atlantic and Gulf Areas to: DATES: Written comments will be hard TEDs and hooped hard TEDs (a) Require all hard TEDs to have a grid accepted through November 16, 2001. conforming to a generic description, two with a minimum inside measurement of ADDRESSES: Written comments on this types of special hard TEDs, the flounder 32-inch (81-cm) by 32-inch (81-cm); (b) action, the draft Environmental TED and the Jones TED, and one type require the use of either the double Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review of soft TED, the Parker soft TED. cover flap TED or a TED opening with Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis (EA/ The use of TEDs has contributed to a minimum of 71 inch (180 cm) straight- RIR) and request for copies of the 1999 the strong population increase for line stretched mesh; (c) disallow the use TED opening evaluation report should Kemp’s ridley sea turtles. Kemp’s of the hooped hard TED; (d) disallow be addressed to the Chief, Endangered ridleys are the smallest sea turtles, and the use of weedless TEDs and Jones Species Division, Office of Protected adult size animals can pass through the TEDs; (e) disallow the use of accelerator Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West current TED opening dimensions. Once funnels; (f) require bait shrimpers to use Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. the most critically endangered sea TEDs in states where a state-issued bait Comments may also be sent via fax to turtle, their nesting levels have shrimp license holder can also fish for 301-713-0376. Comments will not be increased from 700-800 per year in the food shrimp from the same vessel; (g) accepted if submitted via e-mail or the mid-1980’s to over 6,000 nests in 2000. and require the use of tow times on Internet. Since 1990, corresponding with the small try nets. These changes are
VerDate 11
proposed to be implemented 1 year after leatherback turtle have been hard TED that would be large enough to the final rule is published in the Federal documented in inshore and offshore release leatherback turtles. Register. waters in the Atlantic and Gulf areas. Comment 4: The Florida Fish and Therefore, to protect all turtles, NMFS is Wildlife Conservation Commission Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule proposing to require the use of the agrees with the need to make TED Making double cover flap TED or a TED opening escape openings larger but feels NMFS The measures proposed in this rule with a minimum of 71-inch (180-cm) should consider the economic burden of were based, in part, on comments straight-line stretched mesh (see Florida’s inshore shrimp fishery when received on an Advanced Notice of Provisions of the Proposed Rule). considering the use of the leatherback Proposed Rule Making (ANPR) Comment 2: Environmental modification and the increase of the published April 5, 2000 (65 FR 17852). organizations, Federal agencies and standard grid size. NMFS announced in the ANPR that it state agencies recommend the Response: NMFS’ gear specialists was considering technical changes to modification of the leatherback working on the east coast of Florida the TED regulations, to effectively conservation zone regulations (60 FR reported that the majority of inshore protect all life stages and species of sea 25260, May 12, 1995; 60 FR 25663, May fishermen use grids 32 inches (81 cm) turtles. Specific changes discussed were 12, 1995) implemented as a result of the and larger. NMFS is proposing to to increase the minimum size opening Leatherback Contingency Plan. These increase the grid size to a minimum for TEDs, modify or decertify hooped commenters believe that the response inside measurement of 32 inches (81 hard TEDs and weedless TEDs, change times in implementing emergency rules cm) by 32 inches (81 cm). Based on the the requirements for the types of for closure of waters during leatherback information from the gear specialists flotation required, and modify the migrations are too slow and that the this will not affect a large number of leatherback conservation zone surveying required to support these Florida inshore fishermen. The Florida regulations. rules is frequently underfunded or too inshore fishermen who use grids smaller NMFS received 23 responses to the variable due to weather and water than 32 inches (81 cm) will have 1 year request for comments on the ANPR. clarity. Also, some of these commenters to change to the new size grid. By When appropriate, comments are believe the Gulf coast should be delaying the implementation date to 1- grouped according to general subject included in the Leatherback year after the final rule is published in matter, and references are made only to Contingency Plan. the Federal Register, fishermen would some groups or individuals, and not to Response: NMFS is proposing the use be able to buy the new size grid as part all groups or individuals who may have of either the double cover flap TED or of necessary gear replacement and made similar comments. a TED opening with a minimum of 71- thereby not add an additional cost. Comment 1: Environmental inch (180-cm) straight-line stretched Comment 5: The United States Fish organizations, Federal agencies, state mesh in all inshore and offshore waters and Wildlife Service (USFWS) agencies, state Sea Turtle Stranding and in the Atlantic and Gulf Areas. Both of recommends the decertification of the Salvage Network (STSSN) volunteers, these TEDs have openings large enough hooped hard TED and the weedless TED and unaffiliated citizens believe that the to accommodate leatherbacks as well as and the abolishment of the TED openings of the current TEDs are too large nesting loggerheads. This would exemption for bait shrimpers. small and should be enlarged to allow eliminate the need for emergency rules Response: NMFS agrees with the larger turtles to escape. Some of these and surveying. USFWS on the need to disallow the use commenters believe that the size Comment 3: Commercial Fishermen of the hooped hard TED and the specified in the ANPR of 35 inches by of Lafitte do not want NMFS to prohibit weedless TED for the reasons described 16 inches (89 cm by 41 cm) would not the use of the hooped hard TED. They in the ANPR (65 FR 17852). The hooped be adequate to protect large nesting state that the hooped TED, known as the hard TED is not widely used. NMFS’ turtles. Coulon TED, not only excludes turtles enforcement personnel report confusion Response: NMFS agrees with the need but also works well as a finfish bycatch with the differing regulatory to make TED escape openings larger and reduction device. The Coulon TED is a requirements for escape openings for is therefore proposing to increase the hooped hard TED with an escape single grid and hooped hard TEDs. escape opening size of TEDs in all opening of 34 inches (86 cm) by 27 Weedless TEDs (a TED with the inshore and offshore waters of the inches (69 cm) with the front hoop deflector bars not attached to the bottom Atlantic and Gulf areas. The size measuring 34 inches (86 cm) by 17 of the grid frame) have been proposed in the ANPR of 35 inches by inches (43 cm). The Commercial documented by NMFS enforcement 16 inches (89 cm by 41 cm) was based Fishermen of Lafitte state that the with bent bars and spacing more than 4 on information from Epperly and Teas escape opening of this TED can be inches (10 cm) apart. The bars of (1999) which used a linear regression expanded to 35 inches (89 cm) by 27 weedless TEDs appear to be easily bent formula to estimate body depth based inches (69 cm), with the front hoop during commercial use because of the on carapace width, and suggested that measuring 35 inches (89 cm) by 17 inherent weakness in the design. NMFS’ 99 percent of nesting loggerheads of the inches (43 cm). According to a net TED testing in 1996 showed that northern subpopulation had carapace maker in the area, approximately 50 weedless TEDs with the bars bent widths equal to or less than 33 inches fishing vessels are using this TED in inward (to the rear of the TED hoop) (83.2 cm) and a corresponding depth of Louisiana waters. failed to exclude any of the turtles 15.7 inches (39.8 cm). However, Response: In order to protect the exposed. NMFS is proposing to carapace measurements recently endangered leatherback and large implement a requirement that the bars collected by the South Carolina loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS must on hard TEDs be firmly attached to the Department of Natural Resources ensure that all approved TEDs are frame at both ends, 1 year after the (SCDNR) on actual nesting females of capable of releasing these large turtles. publication of the final rule in the the northern loggerhead population The expanded version of the Coulon Federal Register. showed 7 out of 90 had body depths TED is not large enough to release large NMFS also agrees with the USFWS greater than 16 inches (40.6 cm). Also loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles. that the bait shrimp exemption significant numbers of the endangered It would be impractical to use a hooped currently authorized under the sea turtle
VerDate 11
conservation regulation represents a modification (a TED opening with a western Gulf, on average, are smaller threat to sea turtles. NMFS enforcement minimum of 71-inch (180-cm) straight- than those on the Atlantic and eastern and gear specialists have seen an line stretched mesh) or the double cover Gulf coasts. increase in boats claiming to be bait flap TED in all inshore and offshore Response: In the summer of 2000, shrimpers but possessing more than 32 waters will provide protection for all sea NMFS conducted seven trips to test the lb (14.5 kg) of dead shrimp. In some turtles. The current TED opening sizes leatherback modification for shrimp loss cases, these shrimpers are using ‘‘snap- do not afford protection for large in commercial conditions. The in grids’’ on their TEDs and claim to sexually mature loggerhead and green leatherback modification was compared have used them while catching the dead turtles. Adoption of this proposed rule with TEDs currently used in the Gulf of shrimp but then taking the ‘‘snap-in also will eliminate the need for the use Mexico and the southeastern Atlantic. grid’’ out and closing the escape of inefficient emergency rules and the Four of the trips were conducted in the opening to fish for bait shrimp. Snap-in leatherback conservation plan, which Gulf of Mexico, and three were grids do not meet the regulatory does not cover all areas where conducted in the Atlantic. Shrimp loss requirement for the installation of the leatherback turtles can be found. for the four Gulf of Mexico trips showed grid into the trawl net because the grids Comment 7: The University of Georgia a 3-percent loss (trip #067), a 35-percent are attached to the outside of the grid Marine Extension Service (UGMES) loss (trip #068), a 1-percent loss (trip frame with a few strings, plastic tie requested the water depths be specified #069), and a 2-percent loss (trip #073), wraps or bolts and not sewn into the at which spongex-type floats would not while the three Atlantic trips combined trawl around the entire circumference of be allowed. showed a 3-percent shrimp loss (trips the TED with heavy twine (50 CFR Response: Upon further review of the #070-072). NMFS believes that shrimp 223.207(a)(2)). TED float requirements, NMFS has loss percentage from trip #068 is an NMFS originally authorized a bait decided not to propose amendments to error and not indicative of actual shrimp shrimp exemption, which requires tow them at this time due to the lack of loss. The 35-percent shrimp loss times to be less than 55 minutes, testing of viable alternatives to spongex- demonstrated on this trip is well above believing tow times would be self- type floats. the range of 1 to 3 percent demonstrated regulating as a bait shrimper would Comment 8: The UGMES also by the other six trips. NMFS believes want to limit tow times to ensure live requested that NMFS allow other that gear problems on trip #068 could catch. However, gear specialists have methods of hole enlargement, such as have contributed to the 35-percent loss. found increasing numbers of bait the addition of a strip of webbing in the The 1- to 3-percent loss on the other center of the forward section of the shrimpers selling shrimp for food. trips was not statistically significant extension webbing, to help maintain the Landing dead shrimp would likely from zero. result in an increase in tow times angle of the TED. NMFS cannot use live leatherback Response: The use of a strip of beyond the shorter tows used to catch turtles for testing; however, NMFS webbing in the center of the forward live bait. Tow time limits are extremely believes a 300-lb to 1,200-lb (136-kg to section of the extension webbing to difficult to enforce and have only been 545-kg) leatherback will do much less modify a TED with a leatherback size authorized in limited cases where damage to a TED and shrimp gear if it particular fishing practices limit the opening is not prohibited under current regulations. Also the double cover flap is allowed to escape. length of tows. NMFS believes that the The Epperly and Teas (1999) study TED which can be used in-lieu of the bait shrimp exemption is unenforceable has not yet been peer reviewed; leatherback modification has a smaller and represents an increased risk in however, it is being submitted for lethal take of turtles. Therefore, NMFS cut than the leatherback modification (the length of the leading edge of the publication in the scientific journal is proposing to change the bait shrimp Fishery Bulletin and, as part of that TED exemption. Since 1992, when the escape opening cut must be no less than 56 inches (142 cm)). The double cover process, will receive peer review. bait shrimp exemption was initially NMFS disagrees with the TSA’s developed, TEDs have been used flap TED is composed of two equal size rectangular panels with an overlap of no assessment that a larger size opening is successfully in small, inshore shrimp not needed in the western Gulf of nets. Many bait shrimpers already own more than 15 inches (38 cm) and each panel is no less than 58 inches (147 cm) Mexico. Stranding records from 1986 and use TEDs when not operating under through 1997 show that 36 to 66 percent their bait shrimp licences. In some wide. The panels can be sewn together only along the leading edge of the cut. of loggerhead turtles stranded in the areas, bait shrimpers use other exempt western Gulf were larger than the gear or practices (e.g., barred roller The edge of the panels may be attached 6 inches (15 cm) behind posterior edge current minimum TED escape opening trawls, hand-retrieved nets). Changes to size, and records from 1986 through the bait shrimp exemption would affect of grid; the end of each panel must not extend more than 6 inches (15 cm) past 1999 show that 170 leatherback turtles none of these other exemptions. were stranded in the western Gulf of Comment 6: Georgia Department of the center of the bottom of the grid. Mexico. Natural Resources (GADNR) These modifications make it easier to recommends the adoption of a single install TEDs on a smaller grid Provisions of the Proposed Rule TED configuration for all areas at all Comment 9: The Texas Shrimp times. The leatherback configuration Association (TSA) requested that Increase of the Minimum Size of the should be the configuration adopted. shrimp loss data be evaluated and that TED Opening in All Inshore and According to GADNR, 30 percent of NMFS determine what impact a 300-lb Offshore Waters of the Atlantic and Gulf Georgia fishermen already use the to 1,200-lb (136-kg to 545-kg) Areas leatherback modification full time leatherback turtle would have on any TEDs incorporate an opening, usually because it is good at excluding trash fish TED. TSA also asked whether the covered by a webbing flap, that allows and the long flap helps shrimp Epperly and Teas (1999) study was sea turtles to escape from trawl nets. To retention. submitted for peer review. TSA be approved by NMFS, a TED design Response: NMFS agrees with the questioned the need for a larger size must be able to exclude small sea turtles GADNR on the value of the leatherback opening in the western Gulf based on during experimental TED testing modification. The use of the leatherback the fact that stranded turtles on the conducted by NMFS. TEDs also must
VerDate 11
meet generic criteria based upon certain 47 percent of all loggerhead turtles developed the Leatherback Contingency parameters of TED design, stranded had body depths greater than Plan to reduce leatherback mortality in configuration, and installation, the minimum height of the TED shrimp trawls, and, in 1995, NMFS including height and width dimensions opening. These percentages range from established the leatherback conservation of the TED opening through which the 33-66 in the western Gulf of Mexico, to zone regulations to implement the turtles escape. In the Atlantic Area, 83-96 in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, to Leatherback Contingency Plan (60 FR these requirements are currently ≥35 23-40 in the Atlantic off the coast of the 25260, May 12, 1995; 60 FR 25663, May inches (≥89 cm) in width and ≥12 inches southeastern United States (Epperly and 12, 1995). The Leatherback Contingency (≥30 cm) in height. In the Gulf Area, the Teas, 1999). These same data also show Plan established procedures to identify requirements are ≥32 inches (81 cm) in that between 1 and 7 percent of all green when and where TEDs with large escape width and ≥10 inches (≥25 cm) in turtles stranded had body depths greater openings should be used to protect height. than the minimum height of the TED leatherbacks during their annual, spring NMFS proposes to require the use of opening. These percentages range from migration along the Atlantic seaboard. the NMFS-approved double cover flap 0-3 in the western Gulf of Mexico, to 1- The waters north of Cape Canaveral, TED (approved May 14, 2001, 66 FR 10 in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, to 3- from Florida to the North Carolina- 24287) or a standard TED opening with 10 in the Atlantic off the coast of the Virginia border, were identified as the a minimum of 71 inch (180 cm) straight- southeastern United States (Epperly and leatherback conservation zone. Within line stretched mesh measurement, with Teas, 1999). Measurements done on this zone, weekly aerial surveys for a resultant circumference of the opening South Carolina nesting beaches leatherback sightings are conducted being 142 inches (361 cm) (formerly conducted by the SCDNR in the summer from January 1 through June 30 of each called the leatherback modification; of 2000 on nesting loggerhead turtles year. If sightings, in replicate surveys, approved May 12, 1995, 60 FR 25663) showed 89 of the 90 nesting turtles had exceed 10 leatherback turtles per 50 in both the Atlantic and Gulf Areas. body depths greater than the minimum nautical miles (nm)(92.6 km) of Both of these TEDs have been tested for TED opening in the Atlantic Area. trackline, NMFS will close, for a 2-week shrimp retention (see the response to This information indicates that period, waters within 1° lat. of the comment 9 of this notice for shrimp current TED openings may be allowing trackline to shrimp trawlers unless they retention data on the new standard TED continued high incidental take of large use a TED modified with the and 66 FR 24287 for the double cover reproductive loggerhead and green leatherback exit opening. flap TED) and small turtle escapement turtles. Since this take is focused on pre- In 1999, NMFS became concerned (see 60 FR 25663 and 66 FR 24287). reproductive and reproductive turtles, it that the leatherback conservation zone The double cover flap TED and the may be precluding most, if not all, regulation was not adequate to protect proposed standard TED were shown to benefits these species may be receiving leatherbacks. In the spring of 1999, be effective at excluding a prototype from the exclusion of small juveniles NMFS implemented the 2-week closures leatherback. Because testing with live from shrimp trawls. in areas of South Carolina and North leatherbacks is impossible, NMFS The proposed use of a TED opening Carolina (64 FR 25460, May 12, 1999; 64 obtained the carapace measurements of with a minimum of 71 inch (180.3 cm) FR 27206, May 19, 1999; 64 FR 28761, 15 nesting female leatherback turtles straight-line stretched mesh or the May 27, 1999; 64 FR 29805, June 3, and used these data to construct a pipe- double cover flap TED would be large 1999). In implementing the regulation, it framed model of a leatherback turtle enough to exclude 100 percent of was determined that replicate surveys measuring 40 inches wide by 21 inches nesting loggerhead and green turtles were not always feasible due to weather, deep (102 cm by 53 cm). The based on the information in Epperly and staff, or equipment constraints and that leatherback model and a diver with full Teas (1999) and the measurements of a sighting of less than 10 leatherbacks scuba gear were able to pass through the nesting loggerhead turtles taken by the per 50 nm (92.6 km) in the replicate escape openings of these TEDs. SCDNR in the spring and summer of survey was not necessarily an indication Stranding data collected through the 2000. This is particularly important for that the turtles had moved away from STSSN indicate that the proportion of loggerhead turtles, as population models the closed area. large, mature loggerheads and greens indicate that a reduction in mortality in From October 1 through December 15, that strand on coastal beaches appears these size classes would result in the 1999, 15 leatherbacks stranded in to be greater than the proportion that greatest annual population Nassau through Brevard counties on the would be expected given the size multiplication rate (Crouse et al., 1987; east coast of Florida. Since these distribution of sea turtles found in Hopewell, 1998). strandings occurred seasonally outside nearshore waters. The disparity in size The Turtle Expert Working Group the provisions specified in the may be a result of the minimum size (TEWG 1998) identified four genetically leatherback conservation zone requirement for TED openings which separate nesting populations of regulation, NMFS issued an emergency allows only smaller turtles to escape. loggerhead turtles in the southeastern 30-day rule (64 FR 69416, December 13, NMFS (Epperly and Teas, 1999; copies United States. The health and recovery 1999), requiring shrimp trawlers to use available see ADDRESSES) evaluated the of the loggerhead turtle species is the leatherback modification in their size of TED openings in relation to the dependent on the health and recovery of TEDs. The 30-day restriction was carapace width and body depth of each of these populations. It is believed necessary because leatherbacks were stranded sea turtles and found that body that the northern nesting population expected to be present in the area depth, but not carapace width, was a may at best be stable and possibly may through that period. factor in the turtle’s ability to exit the be in decline. The leatherback conservation zone TED opening. Up to 47 percent of the Leatherback sea turtles are too large to regulation does not extend to the Gulf body depths for stranded loggerheads fit through the standard size TED area. Historical records indicate that the and 7 percent for green turtles exceeded opening; when mature, they can weigh Western Gulf is important to the minimum height requirements for between 600 and 1,300 lb (273 and 591 leatherbacks; Leary (1957) reported a TED openings. kg). To address this issue, NMFS, in large group of up to 100 leatherbacks Stranding data from 1986 through cooperation with the USFWS, South just offshore of Port Aransas, Texas 1997 show that between 33 percent and Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, associated with a dense aggregation of
VerDate 11
Stomolophus. Recent stranding data Disallow the Use of Hooped Hard TEDs, allows the licensed vessel to participate from 1986 through 1999 show an Weedless TEDs, Jones TEDs, and in the bait shrimp fishery only. average of 9 leatherbacks per year have Accelerator Funnels; Require Bait NMFS is proposing to require been killed in the Western Gulf; Shrimpers in Certain States to use TEDs; shrimpers to limit tow times when however, in the last 5 years, that average and Require Tow Time Restrictions on deploying small try nets. Sea turtles are has gone up to 14 leatherbacks stranded Small Try Nets captured in trynets. NMFS observer per year, with a high of 21 leatherbacks program from 1992 through 1995, As stated in NMFS’s response to in 1999. Leatherbacks are also killed in documented that try nets accounted for Comment 5 in this proposed rule, the the Eastern Gulf, with an average of 5 43 percent of the observed turtle structural integrity of the weedless and per year from 1986 through 1999 and captures. In 2001, shrimpers operating Jones TEDs does not hold up under with a high of 19 in 1989. In the in the Atlantic area reported capturing commercial use. Grid bars bend toward Atlantic along the southeastern United more than 20 turtles in their smaller try the back of the net. This condition has States, leatherback strandings have nets without TEDs installed. NMFS been shown to severely limit these averaged 46 per year from 1986 through required shrimpers deploying try nets TEDs’ ability to exclude turtles. 1999. Leatherbacks strand along the with head rope lengths greater than 12 Therefore, NMFS is proposing to require feet (3.6 m) or foot rope length greater Atlantic coast of Florida year-round, that TED deflector bars be securely averaging 21 strandings per year. than 15 feet (4.6 m) to have a TED attached/welded to the top and bottom installed but exempted the smaller try In French Guiana and Suriname, the of the TED frame or to a horizontal nets (61 FR 66933, December 19, 1996). largest leatherback rookery in the deflector bar (in the case of flounder NMFS initially issued this exemption western North Atlantic, nesting has TEDs), to be implemented 1 year after without tow time restrictions because it decreased at a rate of 15.0 percent - 17.3 the final rule is published in the Federal felt that this type of gear naturally lent percent per year since 1987 (NMFS Register. This will allow fishermen to itself to short tow times. SEFSC 2001). If turtles are not nesting replace this gear as part of normal gear NMFS recognizes that tow time limits elsewhere, it appears that the Western replacement due to wear and tear. are difficult to enforce, but without tow Atlantic portion of the population is As stated in NMFS’s response to time restrictions, NMFS has no being subjected to mortality beyond Comments 3 and 5 in this proposed enforcement mechanism to ensure sustainable levels, resulting in a rule, it is not feasible to construct a compliance with measures that will continued decline in numbers of nesting hooped hard TED large enough to increase protection of listed sea turtles. females. There have been increases in exclude large loggerhead and Request for Comments leatherback nesting at minor nesting leatherback turtles. The hooped hard areas such as Florida and the U.S. TED also is not widely used, and NMFS will accept written comments Virgin Islands, but those cannot account enforcement personnel report confusion (see ADDRESSES) on this proposed rule for the decreases in the Guianas, which with the differing regulatory until November 16, 2001. In addition, are in the tens of thousands. requirements for escape openings for NMFS will conduct public hearings on A steady increase in Kemp’s ridley single grid and hooped hard TEDs. this action. Hearing dates, times, and nesting, which has not leveled off to NMFS is proposing that the use of locations will be published in the date, has occurred since 1990 and accelerator funnels not be allowed. The Federal Register under separate appears to be due to increased hatchling opening in an accelerator funnel that notification. protection and a large increase in would be required to effectively release References survival rates of immature turtles large loggerhead and leatherback turtles Epperly, S.P. and W.G. Teas. 1999. beginning in 1990, coinciding with the would be too large (71 inch (180 cm)) Evaluation of TED Opening Dimensions introduction of TEDs. Adult ridley to accelerate the water through the grid Relative to Size of Turtles stranding in and would cause the unattached portion numbers have now grown from a low of the Western North Atlantic. NMFS of the funnel to extend out the escape approximately 1,050 adults producing SEFSC PRD-98/99-08 702 nests in 1985, to greater than 3,000 opening causing the loss of shrimp. Leary, T.R. 1957. A schooling of adults producing 1,940 nests in 1995, to NMFS is also proposing to change the leatherback turtles, Dermochelys greater than 9,000 adults producing exemption from TED requirements for coriacea, on the Texas coast. Copeia about 5,700 nests in 2000 (TEWG 2000). bait shrimpers. As stated in NMFS’s 1957(3):232. The increase in the Kemp’s ridley response to Comment 5, NMFS National Academy of Science, nesting population since 1989 enforcement and gear specialists have National Research Council. 1990. demonstrates that the use of TEDs can seen an increase in boats claiming to be Decline of the Sea Turtles: Causes and have a significant positive impact on the bait shrimpers but possessing more than Prevention. National Academy Press. survival and recovery of sea turtle 32 lb (14.5 kg) of dead shrimp. Landing Washington, D.C. 189 pp. species. The proposed required use of dead shrimp would likely result in an National Marine Fisheries Service either the new standard TED opening or increase in tow times beyond the shorter Southeast Fisheries Science Center the double cover flap TED in all inshore tows used to catch live bait. Longer tow (NMFS SEFSC). 2001. Stock and offshore waters in the Gulf and times would increase the likelihood of assessments of loggerhead and Atlantic Areas will provide the entangling a sea turtle and, without a leatherback sea turtles and an protection TEDs afford smaller turtle TED installed, increase the chance of assessment of the impact of the pelagic species to all size classes of all sea turtle injury or mortality. When there is no longline fishery on the loggerhead and species thereby aiding in their recovery. incentive to limit tow times as a part of leatherback sea turtles of the Western This proposal will also provide normal fishing operations, tow time North Atlantic. U.S. Department of consistency and predictability for the limits are extremely difficult to enforce. Commerce NOAA Technical industry by eliminating the disparate Therefore, NMFS is proposing to limit Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-455, 343 regulations in different areas and times the bait shrimp TED exemption to pp. and eliminating reactionary closures to shrimpers with a valid state bait-shrimp Turtle Expert Working Group protect leatherback turtles. license for which such state license (TEWG). 2000. Assessment update for
VerDate 11
the Kemp’s ridley and loggerhead sea $5,863,795 in real profits. Shrimpers the required minimum grid size turtle populations in the Western North would have an option to use the double proposed by this rule. Those that Atlantic. U.S. Department of Commerce cover flap TED instead of the TED currently use grid sizes smaller than the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS- opening with a minimum of 71 inch proposed minimum will have a year to SEFSC-444, 115pp. (180.3 cm) straight-line stretch mesh. replace them, giving fishermen the Turtle Expert Working Group. 1998. The double cover flap TED was tested opportunity to replace them as part of (Byles, R., C. Caillouet, D. Crouse, L. to determine its ability to retain shrimp scheduled gear maintenance and Crowder, S. Epperly, W. Gabriel, B. when compared to a commercial TED replacement. Thus, there should be no Gallaway, M. Harris, T. Henwood, S. with a standard flap. The double cover additional costs beyond those incurred Heppell, R. Marquex-M, S. Murphy, W. flap TED gained 0.00257 pounds (1.1 as a result of existing TED regulations. Teas, N. Thompson, and B. gram) of shrimp per tow when Modifications needed to meet the Witherington). An Assessment of the compared to the TED with the standard proposed opening sizes should impose Kemp’s ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys flap. Assuming shrimpers chose this relatively few additional costs. Most kempii) and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) option, there would be no expectation of fishermen and net shop owners can sea turtle populations in the western a 2 percent shrimp loss. make the changes needed to enlarge the North Atlantic. NOAA Technical Many shrimpers who operated in the escape openings on their own. For those Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-409. 96 pp. areas specified in the leatherback who cannot, NMFS’ gear specialists will conservation zone regulation and were be available to help them modify their Classification required to use the leatherback TEDs to meet the new requirements. This proposed rule has been modification in the past due to Although no direct out of pocket determined to be not significant for emergency rules issued by NMFS, expenses may be incurred, an purposes of Executive Order 12866. continued to use the modification after opportunity cost of the time necessary The ESA provides the statutory basis it was no longer required because they to make these modifications should still for the rule. thought it performed better than the be taken into account. Given the nature NMFS prepared a draft EA/RIR for standard TED in retaining shrimp. of the modifications, we estimate that an this proposed rule that discusses the GADNR reports that up to 60 percent of hour of the fisherman’s time will be impact on the environment as a result their shrimp fishermen still use the needed to complete this task. Assuming of this proposed rule. A copy of the leatherback modification after NMFS that the owner or captain is responsible draft EA/RIR is available from NMFS required them to use it during the spring for making such gear modifications, the (see ADDRESSES). of 1999. Nonetheless, it is not known average real hourly wage of first-line The Chief Counsel for Regulation of whether a similar percentage of shrimp supervisors/mangers in the farming, the Department of Commerce certified fishermen are using the leatherback fishing and forestry industries is the to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the modification in their TEDs in other best measure of opportunity cost. This Small Business Administration that this states/areas. figure is currently estimated to be proposed rule, if adopted, would not The leatherback modification $11.49 according to the BLS. Although have a significant economic impact on excludes large debris from the trawl some fishermen may not incur this cost a substantial number of small entities. which improves performance. as a result of already using TEDs with Fishermen may be adversely affected Fishermen can also use long flaps on larger openings, some may have to incur by this proposed rule primarily in the bottom opening TEDs in areas where the out of pocket expense of $45 to have following ways: possible shrimp loss short flaps must be used on bottom someone else do the modifications for due to the increase in the size of the opening TEDs with the standard size them. TED opening and additional costs to opening. Longer flaps will likely The disallowance of the hooped hard retrofit current TEDs in order to meet increase shrimp retention. NMFS TED is expected to affect approximately proposed minimum grid and opening believes that the use of the leatherback 50 small entities in Louisiana that sizes. modification and its possibility of currently use these TEDs. Unlike the The increase in the TED opening to a increased performance from the weedless TED, the hooped hard TED is minimum of 71 inch (180.3 cm) straight- exclusion of debris and the use of long a durable TED and one that cannot be line stretched mesh would apply to all flaps may benefit fishermen. The extent converted to another type of TED. Thus, shrimp fishermen in the known of these potential benefits is unknown. for these fishermen, even with a year to universe of shrimp trawlers (15,096). Survey data suggest that costs will be convert their TEDs, they would be This TED opening requirement would incurred by all shrimp fishermen who forced to purchase complete and new be expected to result in a 1-3 percent must acquire a larger frame to meet the TEDs. Based on the survey data, new loss which is not statistically different proposed grid size of a minimum inside TEDs in Louisiana cost approximately from zero. Assuming a 2 percent shrimp measurement of 32 in (81 cm) by 32 in $200. Assuming that these fishermen loss, the estimated annual real profits by (81 cm) and those who must refit their use quad rig trawls (i.e., 4 nets), this size category, and the number of fishing existing TEDs to the new 35 in (89 cm) part of the rule would require a one time craft per category, the estimated impacts by 20 in (51 cm) requirement. On expenditure of $800 per entity, or in terms of lost real profits per year by average, the cost of a new frame is $40,000 in the aggregate. size category would be as follows: estimated to be $85 and the cost of NMFS also proposes to disallow the $582,600 for state registered boats, refitting to the new minimum size use of weedless and Jones TEDs. Current $251,812 for vessels less than 45 feet opening is $45. However, the survey information suggests that the Jones TED (13.7 m), $205,869 for vessels between data also indicate that the smallest grid is not presently in use. The weedless 45 and 60 feet (13.7 and 18.3 m), and sold by 4 of the 7 net shops would meet TED is only known to be used in Texas. $389,844 for vessels greater than 60 feet the new requirements proposed in this Information from boardings of shrimp (18.3 m). Thus, the total annual loss of alternative. Based on this information fishing craft suggest that 15 percent of profits for the industry would be and observations by enforcement Texas shrimpers currently use the $1,430,125. Applying the standard personnel and NMFS’ gear specialists, weedless TED. Since the weedless TED discount rate of 7 percent over a 5 year NMFS believes that the majority of is known to be less durable than other time period generates a loss of shrimpers use grids that already meet TEDs, commonly needing to be replaced
VerDate 11
every year, no additional costs are met: (1) None of the potentially affected (ii) * * * expected as a result of this requirement entities have already converted to using (A) * * * since this proposed alternative would the leatherback modification; (2) none (2) Is a bait shrimper that retain all not be implemented until 1 year after chose to use the double cover flap live shrimp on board with a circulating the final rule is published in the Federal which showed no loss in shrimp. Since seawater system, if it does not possess Register. This period would give all these assumptions are unlikely to be more than 32 pounds (14.5 kg) of dead fishermen the opportunity to replace met, the true loss in profits is likely shrimp on board, if it has a valid these types of gear as part of scheduled much less and thus not significant. original state bait-shrimp license, and if gear maintenance and replacement. Dated: September 24, 2001. the state license allows the licensed The changes to the bait shrimp vessel to participate in the bait shrimp William T. Hogarth, exemption are not expected to generate fishery only; Assistant Administrator of Fisheries, National any new impacts on shrimp fishermen. * * * * * Clarification of TED requirements for Marine Fisheries Service. 5. In § 223.207: bait shrimpers is needed because, in List of Subjects a. Paragraph (a) introductory text and certain areas, many shrimp fishermen paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6) are constantly switch back and forth 50 CFR Part 222 revised; paragraphs (a)(7)(i) and (a)(8)(i) between bait and food shrimping Endangered and threatened species, are removed; paragraphs (a)(7)(ii) and operations. Since these modifications do Exports, Imports, Marine mammals, (a)(8)(ii) are re-designated as paragraphs not impose TED requirements on any Transportation. (a)(7)(i) and (a)(8)(i), respectively, and entity or operation that was not already 50 CFR Part 223 revised; and paragraphs (a)(7)(ii) and covered by the existing TED requirements, no impacts would be Administrative practice and (a)(8)(ii) are reserved; b. Paragraph (b)(2) is removed and expected. procedure, Endangered and threatened Shrimpers deploying small try nets species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and reserved; would be required to abide by existing recordkeeping requirements. c. Paragraph (c)(1)(iv) is revised; d. Paragraph (d)(2) is removed; tow time limitations, which are For the reasons set out in the paragraph (d)(3) is re-designated as typically 55 minutes, in order to be preamble, 50 CFR parts 222 and 223 are paragraph (d)(2) and revised; and exempt from existing TED requirements. proposed to be amended as follows: If try nets are truly being used as a paragraphs (d)(4) and (d)(5) are re- means to test fishing grounds for shrimp PART 222—GENERAL ENDANGERED designated as (d)(3) and (d)(4), abundance, as opposed to an additional AND THREATENED MARINE SPECIES respectively, to read as follows: device to catch shrimp, then this 1. The authority citation for part 222 § 223.207 Approved TEDs. requirement should not impose any continues to read as follows: * * * * * costs since typical tow times for try nets Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; and 16 (a) Hard TEDs. Hard TEDs are TEDs are known to be 15-20 minutes. with rigid deflector grids, considered In conclusion, the proposed changes U.S.C. 742a et seq., unless otherwise noted. single-grid hard TEDs such as the to the sea turtle conservation regulation § 222.102 [Amended] Matagorda and Georgia TED (Figures 3 would not likely impose a significant & 4 to this part). Hard TEDs complying economic impact on a substantial 2. In § 222.102, the definitions: number of small entities. The increase ‘‘Atlantic Shrimp Fishery--Sea Turtle with the following generic design in the minimum size openings and grid Conservation Area (Atlantic SFSTCA)’’, criteria are approved TEDs: sizes for TEDs potentially impacts all ‘‘Gulf Shrimp Fishery--Sea Turtle * * * * * shrimp trawlers in the Gulf of Mexico Conservation Area (Gulf SFSTCA)’’, and (3) Angle of deflector bars. (i) The and South Atlantic which is estimated ‘‘Leatherback conservation zone’’ are angle of the deflector bars must be ° ° to be approximately 15,000 fishing craft. removed. between 30 and 55 from the normal, The two criteria to be considered in horizontal flow through the interior of determining the significance of PART 223—THREATENED MARINE the trawl. economic impacts are the SPECIES AND ANADROMOUS (A) The deflector bars run from top to disproportionate effect and profitability SPECIES. bottom and are attached to the bottom of the TED frame. The angle of the between large and small businesses. 3. The authority citation for part 223 bottom most 4 inches (10 cm) of each Since all fishing trawling operations are continues to read as follows: considered small entities, the issue of a deflector bar, measured along the bars, disproportionate effect is not applicable. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. must not exceed 45° (Figures 14A and And even if differences in fishing craft 4. In § 223.206: 14B to this part). a. Paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(B)(1) is re- size are examined, in general, the (B) [Reserved] designated as paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A)(5), impacts are proportionally the same (ii) [Reserved] and paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(B)(2) and (3) across these size groups. (4) Space between bars. The space With the exception of the leatherback are re-designated as paragraphs between deflector bars and between the modification requirement and the TED (d)(2)(ii)(B)(1) and (2), respectively. deflector bars and the TED frame must b. Paragraph (d)(2)(iv) is removed, and modification costs, the components of not exceed 4 inches (10.2 cm). The paragraph (d)(5) is removed and this rule are not expected to reduce deflector bars must be firmly attached to reserved. the TED frame at both ends. profits. The combination of shrimp loss c. Paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A)(2) is revised as a result of using the TED opening to read as follows: * * * * * with a minimum of 71 inch (180.3 cm) (6) Position of the escape opening. straight-line stretched mesh and TED § 223.206 Exceptions to prohibitions The escape opening must be made by modification expenses could have a relating to sea turtles. removing a rectangular section of significant economic impact. An average * * * * * webbing from the trawl centered on and loss of 2 percent loss in profits could be (d) * * * immediately forward of the frame at expected only if several assumptions are (2) * * * either the top or bottom of the net when
VerDate 11
the net is in the deployed position. The (i) Single-grid hard TED. A single-grid along its entire forward edge forward of escape opening must be at the top of the hard TED must have a minimum inside the escape opening; it is not attached on net when the slope of the deflector bars horizontal and vertical measurement of the sides beyond the row of meshes that from forward to aft is upward, and must 32 inches (81 cm). The required inside lies 6 inches (15.2 cm) behind the be at the bottom when such slope is measurement must be at the mid-point posterior edge of the grid. The sides of downward. The passage from the mouth of the deflector grid. the flap must be sown on the same row of the trawl through the escape opening (ii) [Reserved] of meshes fore and aft. The flaps may must be completely clear of any * * * * * not overlap the escape hole cut by more obstruction or modification. (c) * * * than 3 meshes on either side. (7) * * * (1) * * * (i) Standard TED flap. The flap must (i) Single-grid hard TEDs. On a single- (iv) Escape Opening. A horizontal cut be a 133-inch (338-cm) by 58-inch (148- grid hard TED, the cut for the escape extending from the attachment of one cm) piece of webbing. The 133-inch opening cannot be narrower than the side of the deflector panel to the trawl (338-cm) edge of the flap is attached to outside width of the TED frame minus to the attachment of the other side of the the forward edge of the opening (71- 4 inches (10.2 cm) on both sides of the deflector panel to the trawl must be inch (180-cm) edge). The sides of the grid, when measured as a straight line made in a single row of meshes across flap may overlap the exit hole on either width. The overall size of the escape the top of the trawl and measure at least side by no more than 5 inches (13 cm). opening must match one of the 96 inches (244 cm) in taut width. All The flap may extend no more than 24 following specifications: trawl webbing above the deflector panel inches (61 cm) behind the posterior (A) Standard opening. The two between the 96-inch (244-cm) cut and forward cuts of the escape opening must edge of the grid (Figure 1B illustrates edges of the deflector panel must be not be less than 20 inches (51 cm) long this flap). removed. A rectangular flap of nylon from the points of the cut immediately (ii) Double cover flap TED flap. This webbing not larger than 2-inch (5.1-cm) forward of the TED frame. The resultant flap must be composed of two equal size stretched mesh may be sewn to the length of the leading edge of the escape rectangular panels of webbing. Each opening cut must be a minimum of 71 forward edge of the escape opening. The panel must be no less than 58 inches inches (180 cm). (Figure 1A of this part width of the flap must not be larger than (147 cm) wide and may overlap each illustrates the dimensions of these cuts). the width of the forward edge of the other no more than 15 inches (38 cm). A webbing flap, as described in (d)(3)(i) escape opening. The flap must not The panels may only be sewn together of this section, may be used with this extend more than 12 inches (30.4 cm) along the leading edge of the cut. The escape hole. The resultant opening with beyond the rear point of the escape edge of the panels may be attached 6 a webbing flap must have a minimum opening. The sides of the flap may be inches (15 cm) behind posterior edge of width of 71 inches (180 cm) straight-line attached to the top of the trawl but must grid, the end of each panel must not stretched mesh (Figure 1C of this part). not be attached farther aft than the row extend more than 6 inches (15 cm) past The circumference of the exit opening of meshes through the rear point of the the posterior edge of the grid (Figure must be 142 inches (361 cm) when escape opening. One row of steel chain 16). The sides of the flap must be sown stretched. not larger than 3 /16 inch (4.76 mm) on the same row of meshes fore and aft. (B) Double cover flap TED opening. may be sewn evenly to the back edge of The flaps may not overlap the escape The two forward cuts of the escape the flap. The stretched length of the hole cut by more than 3 meshes on opening must not be less than 20 inches chain must not exceed 96 inches (244 either side. Chafing webbing described (51 cm) long from the points of the cut cm). in paragraph (d)(4) of this section may immediately forward of the TED frame. * * * * * not be used with this type of flap. The resultant length of the leading edge (d) * * * * * * * * (2) Webbing flap. A webbing flap may of the escape opening cut must be no 6. In part 223: less than 56 inches (142 cm)(Figure 16 be used to cover the escape opening of this part illustrates the dimensions of under the following conditions: No a. Remove Figure 1, and remove and these cuts). A webbing flap, as described device holds it closed or otherwise reserve Figures 2, 12A, 12B, and 15. in (d)(3)(ii) of this section, may be used restricts the opening; it is constructed of b. Add Figures 1A, 1B, and 1C to part with this escape hole. webbing with a stretched mesh size no 223. (ii) [Reserved] larger than 1 5/8 inches (4.1 cm); it lies c. Revise Figure 11 to read as follows: (8) * * * on the outside of the trawl; it is attached BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
[FR Doc. 01–24521 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: use its authority under 50 CFR § 229.32 to temporarily restrict the use of lobster Electronic Access National Oceanic and Atmospheric traps and/or gillnet gear in areas where Administration Several of the background documents right whales aggregate. for the ALWTRP and the take reduction NMFS re-convened the ALWTRT 50 CFR Part 229 planning process can be downloaded twice, once in April and once in May from the ALWTRP web site at http:// [Docket No. 0011283341232–02; I.D. 2000, to develop the details of a 091401B] www.nero.nmfs.gov/whaletrp/. Copies Dynamic Area Management (DAM) of the most recent marine mammal stock process to temporarily require or RIN 0648-AN88 assessment reports may be obtained by remove restrictions in areas quickly due writing to Richard Merrick, NMFS, 166 to the unexpected presence or absence Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental Water St., Woods Hole, MA 02543 or to Commercial Fishing Operations; of right whales. At these meetings, the can be downloaded from the Internet at ALWTRT discussed and developed Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction http://www.wh.whoi.edu/psb/ Plan Regulations several models for ‘‘triggering’’ a DAM sar2000.pdf. In addition, copies of the zone based on whale density in a given AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries document entitled ‘‘Defining Triggers area. However, the ALWTRT did not Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and for Temporary Area Closures to Protect produce consensus recommendations Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Right Whales from Entanglements: on any one set of whale density criteria Commerce. Issues and Options’’ are available by and/or triggering levels. It ACTION: Proposed rule; request for writing to Gregg LaMontagne, NMFS, recommended that NMFS take into comments. Northeast Region, 1 Blackburn Dr., account ALWTRT discussions in Gloucester, MA 01930 or can be developing this proposed rule. SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to amend the downloaded from the Internet at http:/ This proposed rule would clarify regulations that implement the Atlantic /www.nero.nmfs.gov/whaletrp/. NMFS’ authority under § 229.32 to Large Whale Take Reduction Plan Background implement DAM zones, and establish (ALWTRP) to clarify its authority to criteria and procedures to implement temporarily restrict the use of lobster The ALWTRP was developed them. and gillnet fishing gear within defined pursuant to section 118 of the Marine The Northeast Fisheries Science areas to protect North Atlantic right Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) to Center (NEFSC) analyzed historic whales, and to establish criteria and reduce the level of serious injury and sighting and survey data, considered the procedures for implementing such mortality of four species of large whales ALWTRT discussions, and developed restrictions north of 40° N. latitude, in (fin, humpback, minke, and North criteria based on the analysis and order to further reduce risk of Atlantic right) in East Coast lobster trap discussions. NEFSC’s findings are entanglement of right whales by such and finfish gillnet fisheries. The contained in a document entitled gear. background for the take reduction planning process and development of ‘‘Defining Triggers for Temporary Area DATES: Comments on the proposed rule the ALWTRP is provided in the Closures to Protect Right Whales from must be received by 5 p.m. EST on preambles to the proposed (62 FR Entanglements: Issues and Options’’ (see November 1, 2001. 16519, April 7, 1997), the interim final ADDRESSES for copies). NMFS proposes ADDRESSES: Send comments on this (62 FR 39157, July 22, 1997), final (64 to use the whale density threshold and proposed rule to the Assistant Regional FR 7529, February 16, 1999), and other criteria described in the above Administrator for Protected Resources, interim final (65 FR 80368, December mentioned paper to implement DAM Protected Resources Division, NMFS, 21, 2000) rules implementing the zones under § 229.32. Northeast Region, 1 Blackburn Dr., ALWTRP. Copies of these documents A DAM zone would be triggered by a Gloucester, MA 01930. Comments will and supporting Environmental single reliable report from a qualified not be accepted if sent via e-mail or Assessments are available from the individual of 3 or more right whales Internet. Copies of the Environmental NMFS, Northeast Region (see within an area (75 nautical mils (nm2) Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review ADDRESSES). (139 km2)) such that right whale density for this action can be obtained from the The ALWTRP is a multi-faceted plan is equal to or greater than 0.04 right ALWTRP website listed under the that includes area closures, gear whales per nm2 (1.85 km2). A qualified Electronic Access portion of this requirements in areas open to fixed gear individual is an individual ascertained document. Atlantic Large Whale Take fishing, gear research to develop new by NMFS to be reasonably able, through Reduction Team (ALWTRT) meeting modifications to current practices and/ training or experience, to identify a right summaries, and progress reports on or fishing techniques, a right whale whale. Such individuals include, but implementation of the ALWTRP may be Sighting Advisory System, and a are not limited to, NMFS staff, U.S. obtained by writing Gregg LaMontagne, disentanglement program to free whales Coast Guard and Navy personnel trained NMFS, Northeast Region, 1 Blackburn caught in fishing gear. in whale identification, scientific Dr., Gloucester, MA 01930 or Katherine The ALWTRP (50 CFR 229.32) uses research survey personnel, whale watch Wang, NMFS, Southeast Region, 9721 time/area closures to protect right operators and naturalists, and mariners Executive Center Dr., St.Petersburg, FL whales in critical habitat areas. trained in whale species identification 33702–2432. For additional addresses However, recent surveys have shown through disentanglement training or and web sites for document availability that right whales also aggregate outside some other training program deemed see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. of critical habitat areas, and outside of adequate by NMFS. A reliable report FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: those areas otherwise periodically would be a credible right whale sighting Gregg LaMontagne, NMFS, Northeast closed to fishing. To protect right based upon which a DAM zone would Region, 978–281–9291; Katherine Wang, whales found in concentrations outside be triggered. Areas for consideration for NMFS, Southeast Region, 727–570– of the existing critical habitat areas and DAM are limited to areas north of 40° 5312; or Patricia Lawson, NMFS, Office areas periodically closed to certain N latitude, given animals south of this of Protected Resources, 301–713–2322. fisheries, NMFS proposes to clarify and area have not been observed feeding or
VerDate 11
otherwise grouped together for extended entanglement and mortality data. If Basin. This aggregation included several periods of time. NMFS determines restrictions are cow-calf pairs. A Federal Register Analyses of historical sighting data necessary in the zone, NMFS may notice restricting fishing for a 15-day indicate that this criterion, of at least 3 require removal of all gillnet and lobster period in the Wilkinson Basin area whales in an area with a density greater trap gear from the zone within 2 days contained the following requirements: than or equal to 0.04 right whales per of the publication of a notice in the 1. Removal of all gillnet gear within nm2 (1.85 km2), provides for a level of Federal Register. NMFS may allow 48 hours of publication of the notice in density where whales are likely to fishing within a DAM zone with the Federal Register. maintain residency in an area for at least specified gear if that gear is determined 2. Removal of at least 50 percent of 10 to 20 days. Residency indicates that to sufficiently reduce the risk of vertical lines from all lobster gear whales may be actively feeding and, entanglement to right whales. NMFS within 48 hours of publication of the therefore, more vulnerable to may identify acceptable fishing notice in the Federal Register. entanglement. Operationally, NMFS practices and gear in a Federal Register The May 2001 closure was an would use the following procedures and notice. Gear not in compliance with the important step toward responding criteria to establish a DAM zone: imposed restriction may not be set in quickly to the presence of right whales 1. A circle with a radius of at least 3 the DAM zone after the effective date of in areas where gillnet and lobster gear nm (5.6 km) would be drawn around the restriction. NMFS will publish a may present significant entanglement each individual sighting (event). This notice in the Federal Register risks. However, NMFS received public radius would be adjusted for the announcing the establishment of the comments from fishermen, number of right whales seen in the zone with restrictions imposed. It will conservationists, and state managers sighting such that the density of 4 right also announce them immediately upon regarding the DAM closure in the whales per 100 nm2 (185.3 km2) is filing the notice with the office of the Wilkinson Basin and the efficacy of maintained. The length of the radius Federal Register, which is generally 3 to DAM in general. For example, would be determined by taking the 5 days before publication of the notice representatives from the lobster fishery inverse of the 4 right whales per 100 in the Federal Register. were concerned that, as implemented, nm2 (185.3 km2) density, which is 24 If NMFS decides not to implement the DAM restrictions did not give them nm2 (44.5 km2) per whale. That figure restrictions within a DAM zone, it enough time to remove their gear from is equivalent to a radial distance of 2.77 would issue an alert to fishermen using the water and that the DAM zone nm (5.13 km) rounded up to 3 nm (5.6 appropriate media to inform them of the covered too vast an area. NMFS will km) for a single right whale sighted fact that right whale density in a certain publish a notice in the Federal Register (3.91 nm (7.25 km) rounded up to 4 nm area has triggered a DAM zone. In establishing the zone and restrictions (7.41 km) for two whales, 4.79 nm (8.88 addition, NMFS would provide detailed imposed and will announce them km) rounded up to 5nm (9.27 km) for information on the location of the DAM immediately upon filing the notice with three whales, etc). zone and the number of animals sighted the office of the Federal Register, which 2. If any circle or group of contiguous within it. Furthermore, NMFS would is generally 3 to 5 days before circles includes 3 or more right whales, request that fishermen voluntarily publication in the Federal Register. this core area and its surrounding remove lobster trap and gillnet gear In addition, conservation groups waters would be a candidate DAM zone. from a DAM zone and that no additional indicated that the requirement to Once NMFS identifies a core area gear be set inside it. remove 50-percent of vertical lines in containing 3 or more right whales, as NMFS proposes to maintain a DAM lobster gear presented significant described here, it would expand this zone for a minimum of 15 days from the enforcement problems. We agree that initial core area to provide a buffer area date NMFS issues an alert (in the case enforcement of a 50 percent removal of in which the right whales could move of a zone where no restrictions are vertical lines from lobster gear would be and still be protected. Operationally, imposed), or 15 day period from the difficult and, furthermore, do not NMFS would determine the extent of effective date of restrictions (in the case believe that it would sufficiently reduce the DAM zone as follows: where restrictions are imposed). At the the risk to right whales and have 1. A 15 NM (27.8 km) radius from the conclusion of a 15-day period, the DAM therefore proposed a complete removal event epicenter would be used to draw zone would automatically expire, unless of all lobster gear in DAM zones. a larger circular zone around each core NMFS continues the zone to further Finally, some state managers desired area encompassing a concentration of protect concentrations of right whales. more clarification regarding the role of right whales. The event epicenter is the Each extension would be for up to 15 the states when a DAM closure is geographic center of all sightings on the days unless NMFS extends the time triggered. The states were also interested first day of an event. frame based on additional sightings. in determining whether a Federal DAM 2. The DAM zone would then be NMFS may remove restrictions on the mechanism would preempt a state defined by latitude and longitude lines DAM zone or rescind an alert prior to initiated response to unusual or drawn outside but tangential to the its automatic expiration if there are unexpected sightings of right whales circular buffer zone(s). survey efforts and no confirmed within state waters. A Federal DAM Once a DAM zone is identified, NMFS sightings of right whales by qualified would preempt a state initiated would determine whether to impose, in individuals for 1 week or if other response to unusual or unexpected the zone, restrictions on fishing and/or credible evidence indicates that right sightings of right whales within state fishing gear. This determination would whales have left the designated zone. waters unless the state response was be based on a variety of factors, NMFS would notify the public by equally or more protective than the including but not limited to: the issuing a notice in the Federal Register Federal DAM. Based on the scope of the location of the DAM zone with respect and through other appropriate media. responses received, NMFS has decided to other fishery closure areas, weather On May 9, 2001, NMFS used the to issue this proposed rule to clarify its conditions as they relate to the safety of criteria developed by the NEFSC to authority to implement future DAM human life at sea, the type and amount identify a restricted area for a group of closures, and to establish criteria and of gear already present in the area, and 13 North Atlantic right whales in an procedures for implementing DAM a review of recent right whale area commonly called the Wilkinson zones.
VerDate 11
It is important to note that the agency the ALWTRP, but would not clarify The fourth alternative would trigger a is also in the process of developing NMFS’ authority to implement DAM DAM zone using the observation of one proposed rules to implement Seasonal zones and would not identify criteria right whale on a single day. In addition, Area Management (SAM) and gear and procedures to implement them. The a buffer of 15 NM (27.8 km) would be modifications to the ALWTRP for existing regulations already state that drawn around each individual animal lobster trap gear in the offshore lobster the Assistant Administrator (AA) may observed. The economic analysis of waters, southern nearshore lobster revise the existing regulations through 2000 sightings data indicates that 17 waters and changes to the lobster and notice in the Federal Register in order right whales would not be protected by gillnet take reduction technology lists. to close areas, open areas, and change the six closures under the PA plan. Under SAM, restrictions would be boundaries of a closed area, or for a Total industry costs of the lobster fleet placed in areas more predictably used similar purpose (section 229.32(g)(2)). It would be $3.5M. This includes $0.3M by right whales on a seasonal basis. is difficult to quantify the economic for the 17 right whales not protected NMFS believes that implementation of impacts of NMFS discretion in using § under the PA plan, plus $3.2M for the SAM would reduce the need for use of 229.32(g)(2) to implement DAM zones PA plan. Total industry costs of the sink DAM restricted zones to respond to since the trigger used, restricted zone gillnet fleet would be $2.9M. This observed concentrations of right whales. and restrictions implemented are all includes $0.23M for the 17 right whales unknown at this time in addition to the not protected under the PA plan, plus Classification unknowns of the particular event such $2.68M for the PA plan. NMFS prepared the following initial as the time and location of the Under the fifth alternative, the trigger regulatory flexibility analysis that restriction and the level of fishing effort and buffer would be the same as in the describes the economic impact for this at that time and location. proposed action (i.e., the observation of proposed rule, which if adopted, would The proposed action (PA) is to amend 4 right whales in a 100 nm2 (185.3 km2) have on small entities: the regulations implementing the area and the buffer would be 15 nm This proposed rule would establish ALWTRP to clarify authority for [27.8 km]), however, instead of criteria and procedures to temporarily implementing DAM zones, and to imposing a restriction requiring removal restrict fishing gear within defined areas establish criteria and procedures to of all lobster gear, a 50-percent on an expedited basis to protect temporarily restrict fishing gear within reduction in vertical lines would be concentrations of North Atlantic right defined areas on an expedited basis to required for lobster gear. The whales. The objective of this proposed protect concentrations of North Atlantic restrictions for gillnet gear would be the rule, issued pursuant to authority in right whales. The analysis showed 210 same as in the proposed action, which section 118 of the MMPA, is to reduce lobster vessels fishing in the requires complete removal. Based on the level of serious injury to and hypothetical DAM Area 1 in April and right whale sightings data in 2000, six mortality of North Atlantic right whales May, 2000. The total industry cost of areas could potentially be closed in East Coast lobster trap and finfish removing the gear was estimated at (Clapham and Pace, 2000). Total gillnet fisheries. Since DAM will be $342K and the cost per vessel ranges industry cost to remove one buoy line used to respond to unusual and between $328 and $3,011 with an from six potential closures in 2000 is unexpected sightings of right whales, it average of $1,600. The economic $0.2M. Area costs range from a high of is difficult for NMFS to predict exactly analysis of DAM Area 1 determined 42 $49.7K in DAM Area 1 to $24.3K in where DAM zones may be implemented gillnet vessels were fishing in DAM DAM Area 6. Based on the home port in the future. Therefore, providing an Area 1 between April 1 and May 31, analysis of DAM Area 1, the average accurate estimate of the number of small 2000, according to the Vessel Trip cost to remove one buoy line is $237 per entities that will be affected is Reporting data. The total industry cost vessel. The total industry cost for sink problematic. Based on the available to remove sink gillnet gear would have gillnet vessels is the same as in the PA data, a maximum of 7,539 state and been $7,081, with a cost per vessel of plan. federally permitted lobster vessels and $170. This proposed rule has been 310 gillnet vessels, which includes The third alternative considered determined to be not significant for the federally permitted vessels and may having different triggers within each purposes of Executive Order 12866. include state permitted vessels, could be respective state jurisdiction as discussed On June 14, 2001, under the affected by the proposed action. by the ALWTRT. The State of Maine Endangered Species Act (ESA), NMFS However, NMFS does not expect that proposed the use of a trigger of 8 right issued four Biological Opinions (BiOps) number of vessels to be affected by any whales in a 7.5 nm2 (13.9 km2) area on as the result of ESA section 7 one DAM closure because of the limited two consecutive observations that consultations on the three Fishery size of a DAM zone. For example, the would result in a core area of 7.5 nm2 Management Plans (FMP) for the retrospective analysis of the April-May (13.9 km2). The Commonwealth of monkfish, spiny dogfish, and 2000 DAM Area 1 estimated that 210 Massachusetts proposed the use of a multispecies fisheries, and the Federal lobster vessels and 42 gillnet vessels trigger of 5 right whales in a 15 nm2 regulations for the lobster fishery. would have been affected by the (27.8 km2) area based on two sightings. Pursuant to the consultation’s finding hypothetical closure. This proposed rule The State of Rhode Island proposed the that the FMPs and lobster regulations contains no reporting, recordkeeping, or use of a trigger of 8 whales. Under were likely to jeopardize the continued other compliance requirements. There Maine’s proposal there would have been existence of right whales, NMFS defined are no relevant Federal rules that no closures based on sightings data from a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the 2000. Under Massachusetts’ proposal, (RPA) with multiple management proposed rule. there would have been one closure components to the proposed action. Five alternatives were evaluated based on sightings data from 2000. The Among the RPA elements was a including a status quo or ‘‘no action’’ total cost of closing this one area in mechanism for the expedited closure of alternative, the proposed action, and 2000 to the lobster fleet would have areas outside designated right whale three other alternatives. The No Action been $16.3K. Total industry costs to the critical habitat, which NMFS has termed alternative would leave in place the sink gillnet fleet for closing one area in Dynamic Area Management (DAM). The existing regulations promulgated under 2000 would have been $13.7K. BiOps require NMFS to approve a rule
VerDate 11
proposing criteria and procedures for § 229.2 Definitions. (iii) Requirements and prohibitions implementing DAM by September 30, * * * * * within DAM zones. Notice of specific 2001. Qualified individual means an area restrictions will be published in the References individual ascertained by NMFS to be Federal Register and will become reasonably able, though training or effective 2 days after publication. Gear ALWTRT. 2001. Draft Atlantic Large experience, to identify a right whale. not in compliance with the imposed Whale Take Reduction Team Meeting Such individuals include, but are not restrictions may not be set in the DAM Summary. Summary prepared by limited to, NMFS staff, U.S. Coast Guard zone after the effective date. NMFS may RESOLVE, Inc. and submitted to the and Navy personnel trained in whale either: National Marine Fisheries Service July identification, scientific research survey 16, 2001. (A) Require owners of gillnet and personnel, whale watch operators and Bisack, K. 2001. Economic analysis of lobster gear set within the DAM zone to Wilkinson Basin closure. Northeast naturalists, and mariners trained in remove all such gear within 2 days after Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water whale species identification through notice is published in the Federal Street, Woods Hole, MA. 02543. disentanglement training or some other Register, or Bisack, K. 2001. (Draft) Economic training program deemed adequate by NMFS. (B) Allow fishing within a DAM zone analysis of dynamic area management with gear modifications determined by * * * * * (DAM). Northeast Fisheries Science NMFS to sufficiently reduce the risk of Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, Reliable report means a credible right entanglement to right whales. MA. 02543. whale sighting report based upon which Acceptable fishing practices and gear Clapham, P.J. and R.M. Pace, III. 2001. a DAM zone would be triggered. modifications would be identified in the Defining Triggers for Temporary Area * * * * * Closures to Protect Right Whales from Federal Register notice implementing Entanglements: Issues and Options. 3. In § 229.32, paragraph (g)(3) is the DAM zone. Northeast Fisheries Science Center added to read as follows: (C) The determination of whether Reference Document 01-06. April 2001. § 229.32 Atlantic large whale take restrictions will be imposed within a National Marine Fisheries Service. reduction plan regulations. DAM zone would be based on NMFS’ 2000. Environmental Assessment of the * * * * * review of a variety of factors, including Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction (g)*** but not limited to: the location of the Plan and Implementing Regulations. DAM zone with respect to other fishery NMFS. Northeast Region. December (3) For the purpose of reducing the risk of fishery interactions with right closure areas, weather conditions as 2000. they relate to the safety of human life at National Marine Fisheries Service. whales, NMFS may establish a temporary Dynamic Area Management sea, the type and amount of gear already 2001. Preliminary estimates of the present in the area, and a review of revenue losses to the gillnet and lobster (DAM) zone in the following manner: (i) Trigger. Upon receipt of a single recent right whale entanglement and fleet in 1999 due to potential dynamic mortality data. area closures to protect right whales. reliable report from a qualified NMFS. Northeast Region. March 2001. individual of three or more right whales (iv) Restricted period. Any DAM zone National Marine Fisheries Service. within an area NMFS will plot each will remain in effect for a minimum 2001. Endangered Species Act section 7 individual sighting (event) and draw a period of 15 days. At the conclusion of consultation. Biological opinion circle with a 3 nm (5.6 km) radius the 15-day period, the DAM zone will regarding Fishery Management Plans for around it, which will be adjusted for the expire automatically unless it is monkfish, spiny dogfish, and number of right whales sighted such extended by subsequent publication in multispecies and Federal regulations for that a density of at least 0.04 right the Federal Register. American lobster. June 14, 2001. whales per nm2 (1.85 km2) is (v) Extensions of the restricted period. Dated: September 26, 2001. maintained within the circle. If any Any 15-day period may be extended if John Oliver, circle or group of contiguous circles NMFS determines that the trigger includes 3 or more right whales, NMFS Deputy Assistant Administrator for established in paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this Operations, National Marine Fisheries would consider this core area and its section continues to be met. surrounding waters a candidate DAM Service. (vi) Reopening of restricted zone. For the reasons set out in the zone. (ii) DAM zone. Areas for NMFS may remove any gear restriction preamble, 50 CFR part 229 is proposed or prohibition and reopen the DAM to be amended as follows: consideration for DAM zones are limited to areas north of 40° N latitude. zone prior to its automatic expiration if PART 229—AUTHORIZATION FOR Having identified a group of 3 or more there are no confirmed sightings of right COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE right whales as candidates for whales for at least 1 week, or other MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT protection, NMFS will define the core credible evidence indicates that right OF 1972 zone by the latitude and longitude lines whales have left the DAM zone. NMFS tangential to the circular buffer zones will notify the public of the reopening 1. The authority citation for part 229 drawn with a 15-nm (27.8 km) radius of a DAM zone prior to the expiration continues to read as follows: around the event epicenter of each core of the 15 day period by issuing a notice Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. area identified in paragraph (g)(3)(i) of in the Federal Register and through 2. In § 229.2, a definition of this section. The event epicenter is the other appropriate media. ‘‘Qualified individual’’ and ‘‘Reliable geographic center of all sightings on the [FR Doc. 01–24541 Filed 9–26–01; 4:44 pm] report’’ are added to read as follows: first day of an event, or sighting. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate 11
Notices Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 191
Tuesday, October 2, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER The Petition more than 0.05 percent of selenium, or contains documents other than rules or On August 31, 2001, the Department more than 0.01 percent of tellurium). proposed rules that are applicable to the All products meeting the physical public. Notices of hearings and investigations, of Commerce (the Department) received a petition filed in proper form by the description of subject merchandise that committee meetings, agency decisions and are not specifically excluded are rulings, delegations of authority, filing of following parties: Co-Steel Raritan, Inc., petitions and applications and agency GS Industries, Keystone Consolidated included in this scope. The products under investigation are statements of organization and functions are Industries, Inc., and North Star Steel currently classifiable under subheadings examples of documents appearing in this Texas, Inc. (collectively, the 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3090, section. petitioners). The Department received 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, information supplementing the petition 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, from the petitioners throughout the 20- 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE day initiation period. 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0010, In accordance with section 732(b) of International Trade Administration 7227.20.0090, 7227.90.6051 and the Act, the petitioners allege that 7227.90.6058 of the HTSUS. Although [A–351–831, A–122–840, A–729–802, A–428– imports of carbon and certain alloy steel the HTSUS subheadings are provided 832, A–560–815, A–201–830, A–841–805, A– wire rod (CASWR) from Brazil, Canada, for convenience and customs purposes, 791–813, A–274–804, A–823–812, A–307– Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, the written description of the scope of 821] Moldova, South Africa, Trinidad and this proceeding is dispositive. Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela are Determination of Industry Support for Duty Investigations: Carbon and being, or are likely to be, sold in the the Petition Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From United States at less than fair value Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Germany, within the meaning of section 731 of the Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, South Act, and that such imports are the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers of a Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, materially injuring, or are threatening to domestic like product. Thus, when and Venezuela materially injure, an industry in the determining the degree of industry United States. support, the statute directs the AGENCY: Import Administration, The Department finds that the Department to look to producers and International Trade Administration, petitioners filed this petition on behalf workers who produce the domestic like Department of Commerce. of the domestic industry because they product. The International Trade ACTION: Initiation of antidumping duty are interested parties as defined in Commission (ITC), which is responsible investigations. sections 771(9)(C) and 771(9)(D) of the for determining whether ‘‘the domestic Act and have demonstrated sufficient industry’’ has been injured, must also EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2001. industry support with respect to each of determine what constitutes a domestic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the antidumping investigations that they like product in order to define the Charles Riggle (Brazil, Canada, Mexico, are requesting the Department to industry. While both the Department South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, and initiate. (See the Determination of and the ITC must apply the same Venezuela), Robert James (Germany), Industry Support for the Petition section statutory definition regarding the Steve Bezirganian ( Indonesia), Abdelali below.) domestic like product (section 771(10) Elouaradia (Egypt and Moldova), and Scope of Investigations of the Act), they do so for different James Doyle (Ukraine) at (202) 482– purposes and pursuant to separate and The merchandise covered by these distinct authority. In addition, the 0650, (202) 482–0649, (202) 482–1131, investigations is certain hot-rolled (202) 482–1374, and (202) 482–0159, Department’s determination is subject to products of carbon steel and alloy steel, limitations of time and information. respectively; Import Administration, in coils, of approximately round cross International Trade Administration, Although this may result in different section, 5.00 mm or more, but less than definitions of the like product, such U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 19.00 mm, in solid cross-sectional Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, differences do not render the decision of diameter. 1 Washington, DC 20230. either agency contrary to the law. Specifically excluded are steel Section 771(10) of the Act defines the Initiation of Investigations products possessing the above-noted domestic like product as ‘‘a product physical characteristics and meeting the The Applicable Statute and Regulations which is like, or in the absence of like, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the most similar in characteristics and uses Unless otherwise indicated, all United States (HTSUS) definitions for with, the article subject to an citations to the statute are references to (a) stainless steel; (b) tool steel; (c) high investigation under this subtitle.’’ Thus, the provisions effective January 1, 1995, nickel steel; (d) ball bearing steel; and the reference point from which the the effective date of the amendments (e) concrete reinforcing bars and rods. domestic like product analysis begins is made to the Tariff Act of 1930, as Also excluded are (f) free machining ‘‘the article subject to an investigation,’’ amended (the Act), by the Uruguay steel products (i.e., products that Round Agreements Act (URAA). In contain by weight one or more of the 1 See Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd., v. United States, addition, unless otherwise indicated, all following elements: 0.03 percent or 688 F. Supp. 639, 642–44 (CIT 1988); High citations to the Department’s regulations more of lead, 0.05 percent or more of Information Content Flat Panel Displays and Display Glass from Japan: Final Determination; are references to the provisions codified bismuth, 0.08 percent or more of sulfur, Rescission of Investigation and Partial Dismissal of at 19 CFR Part 351 (2001). more than 0.04 percent of phosphorus, Petition, 56 FR 32376, 32380–81 (July 16, 1991).
VerDate 11
i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to percent adjustment in the form of an constructed value (CV) and factors of be investigated, which normally will be affidavit from an industry representative production (FOP) are detailed in the the scope as defined in the petition. familiar with the excluded products. Initiation Checklist. Where the Moreover, the petitioners do not offer a On September 14, 2001, the petitioners obtained data from foreign definition of domestic like product Department received comments market research, we contacted the distinct from the scope of the regarding industry support from Ispat- researchers to establish their credentials investigation. Sidbec Inc., a Canadian producer of and to confirm the validity of the The petition covers carbon and steel wire rod. The petitioners information being provided. See e.g., certain steel wire rod as defined in the responded to these comments in a letter Memorandum to the File from Mike Scope of the Investigation section, to the Department dated September 18, Strollo: Contacts with Source of Market above, a single class or kind of 2001. Further, on September 21, 2001, Research for Antidumping Petition merchandise. The Department has no the petitioners submitted a letter adding Regarding Imports of CASWR from basis on the record to find the the support of Nucor Corp., a domestic Egypt (September 24, 2001) (Market petitioners’ definition of the domestic producer of steel wire rod, for the Research for Egypt). Should the need like product to be inaccurate. The petitions. arise to use any of this information as Department, therefore, has adopted the The Department has reviewed the facts available under section 776 of the domestic like product definition set comments of Ispat-Sidbec Inc., and the Act in our preliminary or final forth in the petition. petitioners. In order to estimate determinations, we may re-examine the Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires production for the domestic industry as information and revise the margin that a petition be filed on behalf of the defined for purposes of this case, the calculations, if appropriate. domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) Department has relied upon not only the The margins calculated using these of the Act provides that a petition meets petition and amendments thereto, but methodologies are as follows: Brazil, this requirement if the domestic also upon ‘‘other information’’ it 53.97 to 94.73 percent; Canada, 3.72 to producers or workers who support the obtained through research and 15.91 percent; Egypt, 14.95 to 59.64 petition account for: (1) At least 25 described in Attachment 1 of the percent; Germany, 37.79 to 99.32 percent of the total production of the Initiation Checklist. Based on percent; Indonesia, 72.96 to 122.57 domestic like product; and (2) more information from these sources, the percent; Mexico, 29.63 to 40.52 percent; than 50 percent of the production of the Department determined, pursuant to Moldova, 172.89 percent; South Africa, domestic like product produced by that section 732(c)(4)(D), that there is 13.32 percent; Trinidad and Tobago, portion of the industry expressing support for the petition as required by 60.12 to 87.27 percent; Ukraine 101.92 support for, or opposition to, the subparagraph (A). Specifically, the percent; Venezuela, 12.68 to 21.02 petition. Finally, section 732(c)(4)(D) of Department made the following percent. the Act provides that if the petition does determinations. For Brazil, Canada, Because the Department considers the not establish support of domestic Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, country-wide import statistics for the producers or workers accounting for Moldova, South Africa, Trinidad and anticipated period of investigation (POI) more than 50 percent of the total Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela, the and price quotes based on market production of the domestic like product, petitioners established industry support research used to calculate the estimated the administering agency shall: (i) Poll representing over 50 percent of total margins for the subject countries to be the industry or rely on other production of the domestic like product. sufficient for purposes of initiation, we information in order to determine if Therefore, the domestic producers or are initiating these investigations on there is support for the petition as workers who support the petition these bases, as discussed below and in required by subparagraph (A), or (ii) account for at least 25 percent of the the Initiation Checklist. total production of the domestic like determine industry support using a Period of Investigation statistically valid sampling method. product, and the requirements of section In this case, the Department has 732(c)(4)(A)(i) are met. Furthermore, The anticipated POI for the market determined that the petition (and because the Department received no economy countries is July 1, 2000, subsequent amendments) contain opposition to the petition, the domestic through June 30, 2001, while the adequate evidence of industry support; producers or workers who support the anticipated POI for Moldova and therefore, polling is unnecessary. See petition account for more than 50 Ukraine, the non-market economy Attachment I to AD Investigation percent of the production of the (NME) countries, is January 1, 2001, Initiation Checklist: Carbon and Certain domestic like product produced by that through June 30, 2001. portion of the industry expressing Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Brazil, Non-Market Economies Canada, Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, support for or opposition to the petition. Regarding an investigation involving Mexico, Moldova, South Africa, Thus, the requirements of section an NME, the Department presumes, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, and 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) are also met. based on the extent of central Venezuela (September 24, 2001) Accordingly, the Department government control in an NME, that a (Initiation Checklist). To estimate total determines that the petitions were filed single dumping margin, should there be domestic production of steel wire rod, on behalf of the domestic industry one, is appropriate for all NME the petitioners relied on data compiled within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) exporters in the given country. See, by the ITC,2 adjusted upward by five of the Act. See the Initiation Checklist. Notice of Final Determination of Sales percent to include an estimate of Export Price and Normal Value at Less Than Fair Value: Steel Concrete production of products excluded from The following are descriptions of the Reinforcing Bars from Moldova (Rebar Presidential Proclamation 7273. In a allegations of sales at less than fair value from Moldova), 66 FR 33525 (June 22, letter dated September 7, 2001, the upon which the Department has based 2001) and Notice of Final Determination petitioners provided support for the five its decision to initiate these of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Solid 2 Certain Steel Wire Rod, Inv. No. TA–204–06, investigations. The sources of data for Agricultural Ammonium Nitrate from Final Staff Report dated August 2, 2001, Table II– the deductions and adjustments relating Ukraine (Nitrate from Ukraine), 66 FR 2 at II–4. to home market price, U.S. price, 38632 (July 25, 2001). In the course of
VerDate 11
these investigations, all parties will factors as presented in the August 31, conduct a country-wide sales-below- have the opportunity to provide relevant 2001 petitions. cost investigation. information related to the issues of Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the The August 31, 2001 petitions Moldova’s and Ukraine’s NME status Act, COP consists of the cost of included factors used to adjust natural and the granting of separate rates to manufacturing (COM); selling, general, gas and electricity costs. These factors individual exporters. and administrative expenses (SG&A); were based on differences in costs Brazil and packing expenses. The petitioners between the United States and the calculated COM based on their own country in question, reflecting recent, Export Price production experience, adjusted for but pre-2000, annual data. In known differences between costs The petitioners based export price subsequent filings, petitioners incurred to produce steel wire rod in the (EP) on price quotes from Brazilian calculated revised factors through use of United States and in Brazil. To calculate producers to an unaffiliated U.S. consumer price indexes applied to the SG&A and financial expenses, purchaser for different grades and sizes pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes petitioners relied upon amounts of subject merchandise and calculated a are not specific to the factors in reported in the 2000 consolidated net U.S. price by deducting question, and do not account for other income statements of Gerdau S.A. and international freight, customs fees, and relevant variables (e.g., changes in Companhia Siderurgica Belgo Minieras, U.S. credit expenses. exchange rates), we have used the two Brazilian CASWR producers. Based factors as presented in the August 31, Normal Value upon a comparison of the prices of the 2001 petitions. As the factors for labor foreign like product in the home market rates have not changed from the August With respect to normal value (NV), to the calculated COP of the product, we the petitioners provided home market 31, 2001 petition, we have not needed find reasonable grounds to believe or to adjust labor rates. prices that were obtained from foreign suspect that sales of the foreign like market research for grades and sizes of product were made below the COP, Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the steel wire rod comparable to the within the meaning of section Act, COP consists of COM, SG&A, and products exported to the United States 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, packing expenses. The petitioners which serve as the basis for EP. The the Department is initiating a country- calculated COM based on their own petitioners state that the home market wide cost investigation. production experience, adjusted for price quotation was FOB plant and they known differences between costs The estimated dumping margin for only made an adjustment for home incurred to produce steel wire rod in the Brazil based on a comparison between market credit expenses. United States and in Canada. To EP and home market price is in the The petitioners have provided range of 53.97 to 92.53 percent. Based calculate SG&A and financial expenses, information demonstrating reasonable upon the comparison of EP to CV, we petitioners relied upon amounts grounds to believe or suspect that sales calculated an estimated dumping reported in the 2000 consolidated of steel wire rod in the home market margin in the range of 59.29 to 94.73 income statements of Sidbec-Dosco were made at prices below the fully percent for Brazil. (Ispat) Inc., a Canadian CASWR absorbed cost of production (COP), producer. Based upon a comparison of within the meaning of section 773(b) of Canada the prices of the foreign like product in the Act, and requested that the Export Price the home market to the calculated COP Department conduct a country-wide of the product, we find reasonable sales-below-cost investigation. The petitioners based EP on price grounds to believe or suspect that sales The August 31, 2001, petitions quotes from a Canadian producer to an of the foreign like product were made included factors to adjust labor costs. unaffiliated U.S. purchaser for different below the COP, within the meaning of These factors were based on the grades and sizes of subject merchandise section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. differences in labor costs between the and calculated a net U.S. price by Accordingly, the Department is U.S. and the country in question, deducting international freight, customs initiating a country-wide cost reflecting data that are recent and fees, and U.S. credit expenses. investigation. contemporaneous, but for periods prior Normal Value The estimated dumping margins for to 2000 (including U.S. data from IA’s Canada based on a comparison between website). In subsequent filings, With respect to NV, the petitioners EP and home market price range from petitioners calculated revised factors in provided home market prices that were 3.72 to 15.91 percent. Based upon the an effort to account for inflation through obtained from foreign market research comparison of EP to CV, we calculated 2000. We have used the factors from the for grades and sizes of steel wire rod an estimated dumping margin of 9.45 August 31, 2001 petitions. The petitions comparable to the products exported to percent. also included factors used to adjust the United States which serve as the natural gas and electricity costs. These basis for EP. The petitioners state that Egypt the home market price quotation was factors were based on differences in Export Price costs between the United States and the FOB plant and they only made an country in question, reflecting recent, adjustment for home market credit To calculate export price (EP), but pre-2000, annual data. In expenses. petitioners obtained a price quote for subsequent filings, petitioners The petitioners have provided CASWR produced in Egypt by calculated revised factors through use of information demonstrating reasonable Alexandria National Iron & Steel consumer price indexes applied to the grounds to believe or suspect that sales Company (Alexandria) for sale to the pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes of steel wire rod in the home market United States. The price quote obtained are not specific to the factors in were made at prices below the fully was in U.S. dollars per hundred-weight question, and do not account for other absorbed cost of production, within the ($/CWT). The terms of sale for the price relevant variables (e.g., changes in meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, quotation obtained by petitioners were exchange rates), we have used the and requested that the Department ex-works.
VerDate 11
Normal Value subsequent filings, petitioners Normal Value To calculate NV, petitioners obtained calculated revised factors through use of From a market researcher petitioners a price quote for CASWR produced by consumer price indexes applied to the obtained home market prices based Alexandria with similar specifications pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes upon a price quote for CASWR within as the U.S. quote. The price quote is on are not specific to the factors in the scope from a German manufacturer an ex-works basis and therefore does not question, and do not account for other of CASWR to an unaffiliated purchaser. include transportation charges. The relevant variables (e.g., changes in The terms of sale were delivered to petitioners adjusted this price by exchange rates), we have used the customer and payment terms were 60 subtracting home market credit factors as presented in the August 31, days. The quoted price was given in expenses and adding U.S. credit 2001 petitions. To calculate SG&A and Deutschmarks per metric ton. expenses. Petitioners calculated credit interest expenses, petitioners relied Petitioners deducted freight costs and expense using the number of days upon the most recent year-end financial home market credit expenses. Freight payment was outstanding based on the statements of Alexandria (December 31, costs were as stated in the given quote. payment terms, and the most recently 1998). The SG&A and interest expense Home market credit expenses were available monthly interest rate reported ratios were calculated by dividing total based on published IMF statistics for in the June 2001 edition of the SG&A and net financial expenses short-term lending in Germany during International Financial Statistics as (interest expense less short-term interest the specified month within the POI published by the International Monetary income) by the cost of goods sold during which petitioners obtained the Fund. reported in Alexandria’s income price quote. Petitioners also added an Although the petitioners provided statement. Based upon the comparison amount for estimated commission on information on home market prices, of the prices of the foreign like product the U.S. quote and for imputed U.S. they also provided information in the home market to the calculated credit expenses. U.S. credit expenses demonstrating reasonable grounds to COP of the product, we find reasonable were based on published IMF statistics believe or suspect that sales of carbon grounds to believe or suspect that sales for short-term lending in Germany and certain alloy steel wire rod in the of the foreign like product were made at during the month in which petitioners home market were made at prices below prices below the COP, within the obtained the quote. the fully absorbed COP, within the meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Petitioners state that they have reason meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, Act. Accordingly, the Department is to believe that CASWR is sold in and requested that the Department initiating a country-wide cost Germany at prices less than COP. To conduct a country-wide sales-below- investigation. determine COM, petitioners used a U.S. cost investigation. Given the evidence of below-cost producer’s cost of producing CASWR as Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the sales, petitioners also based NV on CV a surrogate, adjusted for known Act, COP refers to the total cost of pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) differences between the U.S. and producing the foreign like product and 773(e) of the Act. The petitioners German markets. The adjustment for which includes the COM, SG&A, calculated CV using the same COM and labor costs was based on International interest expense, and packing expenses. SG&A used to compute Egyptian home Labor Organization statistics for 1999. Because the Egyptian producer’s costs market costs. Consistent with section The August 31, 2001 petitions included are unavailable, petitioners obtained the 773(e)(2) of the Act, petitioners factors to adjust labor costs. These factors usage by a U.S. surrogate for included in CV an amount for profit. factors were based on the differences in producing a net ton of grade 1006, 5.5 The petitioners calculated a profit ratio labor costs between the U.S. and the millimeter in diameter, Industrial based on the 1998 income statements for country in question, reflecting data that Quality CASWR during the POI, Alexandria. are recent and contemporaneous, but for adjusted for known differences between The estimated dumping margin for periods prior to 2000 (including U.S. the U.S. and Egyptian markets. The Egypt based on a comparison between data from IA’s website). In subsequent adjustment for labor costs was based on EP and home market price is 14.95 filings, petitioners calculated revised International Labor Organization percent. Based upon the comparison of factors in an effort to account for statistics for 1999. The August 31, 2001 EP to CV, we calculated an estimated inflation through 2000. We have used petitions included factors to adjust labor dumping margin of 59.64 percent. the factors from the August 31, 2001 costs. These factors were based on the petitions. The adjustment for energy differences in labor costs between the Germany costs was based on International Energy U.S. and the country in question, Export Price Agency statistics. The August 31, 2001 reflecting data that are recent and petitions included factors used to adjust contemporaneous, but for periods prior Petitioners obtained a price quote for natural gas and electricity costs. These to 2000 (including U.S. data from IA’s CASWR from a German producer factors were based on differences in website). In subsequent filings, offered through a reseller to a U.S. costs between the United States and the petitioners calculated revised factors in customer. The terms of sale were FOB. country in question, reflecting recent, an effort to account for inflation through The price quote was obtained in U.S. but pre-2000, annual data. In 2000. We have used the factors from the dollars per CWT. The U.S. net price was subsequent filings, petitioners August 31, 2001 petitions. The calculated by taking the price from the calculated revised factors through use of adjustment for energy costs was based quote from the German producer of consumer price indexes applied to the on International Energy Agency CASWR and subtracting the following: pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes statistics. The August 31, 2001 petitions international freight and insurance, U.S. are not specific to the factors in included factors used to adjust natural import duty, U.S. merchandise question, and do not account for other gas and electricity costs. These factors processing fees, U.S. harbor relevant variables (e.g., changes in were based on differences in costs maintenance fees, and U.S. inland exchange rates), we have used the between the United States and the freight. Petitioners made adjustments for factors as presented in the August 31, country in question, reflecting recent, imputed U.S. credit expenses and 2001 petitions. No adjustment was made but pre-2000, annual data. In commissions. for raw material costs, believed to be
VerDate 11
comparable between Germany and the freight. Petitioners based U.S. inland Organization and the World Bank. The U.S. because of the worldwide freight on the experience of U.S. August 31, 2001 petitions included commodity nature of the raw materials. purchaser of domestic and imported factors to adjust labor costs. These U.S. producers’ overhead costs were steel wire rod. factors were based on the differences in labor costs between the U.S. and the used to establish the German COM, Normal Value SG&A, and interest expense ratios were country in question, reflecting data that based on the consolidated income Petitioners obtained a price quote for are recent and contemporaneous, but for statement of a surrogate German CASWR offered during the POI by an periods prior to 2000 (including U.S. CASWR producer which petitioners Indonesian producer to an unaffiliated data from IA’s website). In subsequent believe to be representative of CASWR home market customer for wire rod. The filings, petitioners calculated revised producers in Germany. The total SG&A price quote sale terms are FOB mill. factors in an effort to account for expenses and the net financial expenses Petitioners added U.S. imputed credit inflation through 2000. We have used were divided by the cost of goods sold expenses to normal value to account for the factors from the August 31, 2001 in order to derive these ratios. differences in imputed credit expenses. petitions. Petitioners applied the factory Petitioners’ comparisons of net home Petitioners subtracted ocean freight and overhead ratios, based on petitioners’ market prices to their calculated COP insurance, duties, import charges, U.S. experience to the total cost of did not deduct inland freight expenses inland freight, and commissions to manufacturing, labor and energy. from the home market gross price; the calculate normal value. Petitioners calculated SG&A expenses, Department did so. For CV, a profit ratio Petitioners stated that they have interest expenses, and profit using PT was derived from the surrogate German reason to believe that CASWR is sold in Jakarta Kyoei Steel Works Limited (PT CASWR producer’s 2000 income Indonesia at prices less than COP. To Jakarta) 1999 financial statements. determine cost of manufacturing, statement, which was applied to the Petitioners noted that 2000 financial petitioners used a U.S. producer’s cost COP to determine CV. A circumstance- statements for PT Jakarta are not of manufacturing CASWR as a surrogate, of-sale adjustment was made to CV for available, and that 2000 financial adjusted for known differences between credit expenses. statements for other Indonesian the U.S. and Indonesian markets. For Germany, petitioners converted producers with sufficient detail for Production cost data are for the period the cost of production and the financial expenses are also not publicly beginning July 1, 2000 through March constructed value, both calculated in available. The Department re-calculated 31, 2001. Petitioners state that the U.S. dollars, to marks. For the cost test, the SG&A ratio and the interest quantity of input materials, the cost of petitioners compared the resulting cost expenses ratio with PT Jakarta’s cost of raw materials and alloys, and the of production in marks to the home goods sold rather than the total cost of quantities and values of labor, natural market price in marks; for the gas, and electricity are based on manufacturing calculated by petitioners. constructed value-based margin petitioners’ experience. Petitioners Based upon the comparison of the calculation, petitioners then converted stated that they calculated alloy costs by adjusted prices of foreign like product the constructed value in marks back to taking the period costs for alloys, in the home market to the calculated U.S. dollars, and compared it to U.S. divided by the tons rolled. The figure COP of the product, we find reasonable price. We instead used the original cost was adjusted to account for the 1006 grounds to believe or suspect that sales of production and constructed value in and 1008 carbon grade costs used in the of the foreign like product were made U.S. dollars, and for the cost test constructed value calculation. To below the COP within the meaning of converted the home market price into calculate the scrap offset, petitioners section 773(b)(2)(A)(I) of the Act. U.S. dollars. Based upon the divided the total scrap credit (for all Accordingly, the Department is comparison of the adjusted prices of carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod) initiating a country-wide cost foreign like product in the home market by the total tons rolled (for all CASWR). investigation. to the calculated COP of the product, we Petitioners calculated a factor to The estimated dumping margins for find reasonable grounds to believe or adjust for known cost differences Indonesia based on a comparison suspect that sales of the foreign like between the Indonesian and the U.S. between EP and home market price (NV) product were made below the COP markets for energy using statistics from is 72.96 percent. Based on the within the meaning of section the International Energy Agency. The comparison of EP to CV, the petitioners 773(b)(2)(A)(I) of the Act. Accordingly, August 31, 2001 petitions included calculated the estimated dumping the Department is initiating a country- these factors used to adjust natural gas margin to be 122.57 percent. wide cost investigation. and electricity costs. These factors were Mexico The price-to-price comparison based on differences in costs between produced an estimated dumping margin the United States and the country in Export Price/Constructed Export Price of 37.79 percent. The price-to-CV question, reflecting recent, but pre-2000, The petitioners based EP on affidavits comparison produced a dumping annual data. In subsequent filings, of U.S. price offerings for carbon and margin of 99.32 percent. petitioners calculated revised factors certain steel wire rod manufactured by Indonesia through use of consumer price indexes Siderurgica Lazaro Cardenas Las applied to the pre-2000 costs. Because Truchas SA (Sicartsa) from July 1, 2000 Export Price these indexes are not specific to the to March 31, 2001. In the absence of Petitioners provided a price quote for factors in question, and do not account more definitive information, petitioners CASWR from a wire rod producer in for other relevant variables (e.g., refer to the date of the offer as the date Indonesia. The price quote reflects the changes in exchange rates), we have of sale. The affidavits with the sales price for new orders and the price that used the factors as presented in the price offers reflect the price offered to the U.S. customer currently pays for August 31, 2001 petitions. Petitioners an unaffiliated customer prior to the deliveries. The export price is the price calculated factors to adjust for known date of importation. quote, minus ocean freight and cost differences between the Indonesian The petitioners calculated a net U.S. insurance, minus import duties, minus and the U.S. markets for labor based on price by subtracting estimated costs for import charges, and minus U.S. inland data from the International Labor international freight and insurance, U.S.
VerDate 11
import duty, U.S. merchandise subsequent filings, petitioners petitioners have no information processing and harbor maintenance fees, calculated revised factors through use of regarding these charges. However, and where applicable, U.S. inland consumer price indexes applied to the according to petitioners, since the freight from the port to the first pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes omission of these costs increases export unaffiliated U.S. customer, from the are not specific to the factors in price and correspondingly reduces any sales price. question, and do not account for other dumping margin, this margin, therefore, is a conservative estimate. Normal Value relevant variables (e.g., changes in exchange rates), we have used the Normal Value Petitioners based NV on CV, alleging factors as presented in the August 31, pursuant to section 773(b) of the Act 2001 petitions. With respect to NV, petitioners that sales in the home market were The estimated dumping margins for asserted that Moldova is an NME made at prices below the fully absorbed Mexico based on comparisons between country. In previous investigations, the COP, and requested that the Department EP and home market prices are 29.63 Department determined that Moldova is conduct a country-wide sales-below- percent and 31.95 percent. Based upon an NME country. See Rebar from cost investigation. the comparison of EP to CV, we Moldova. Pursuant to section The petitioners provided information calculated estimated dumping margins 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the that demonstrated reasonable grounds to of 38.04 percent and 40.52 percent. Department’s determination of NME believe or suspect that sales of carbon status remains in effect until a contrary and steel wire rod products in the home Moldova determination is made. The market were made at prices below the Export Price presumption of NME status for the PRC fully absorbed COP. COP in the has not been revoked by the Department antidumping law refers to the total cost Petitioners identified Moldova Steel and, therefore, remains in effect for of producing the foreign like product. Works (MSW) as the only known purposes of the initiation of this Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, Moldovan producer/exporter of subject investigation. Petitioners, therefore, it includes the COM, SG&A expenses merchandise to the United States. To provided factors of production for and packing expenses. calculate EP, petitioners obtained a constructed value (CV) pursuant to The petitioners calculated COM based price quote for grade 1008, 5.5 section 773(c) of the Act. on their own production experience, millimeters in diameter, industrial For NV, the petitioners based the adjusted for known differences between quality CASWR produced in Moldova factors of production, as defined by costs incurred to produce carbon and by MSW for sale to the United States. section 773(c)(3) of the Act, on the steel wire rod in the United States and The price quote obtained was in U.S. consumption rates of one U.S. CASWR in Mexico using market research and dollars per hundred-weight ($/CWT). producer. The petitioners asserted that publicly available data. The adjustment The terms of sale were delivered to U.S. information regarding Moldovan for labor costs was based on customer. As such, the price includes producers’ consumption rates was not International Labor Organization foreign inland freight, ocean freight and available, and that the U.S. producer statistics for 1998. To calculate SG&A insurance, foreign brokerage and employs a production process which is and financial expenses, petitioners handling, U.S. import duties and fees, similar to the production process relied upon Altos Hornos De Mexico and U.S. inland freight. employed by the Moldovan producer of S.A.’s (AHMSA’s) consolidated income Petitioners calculated ocean freight CASWR in Moldova. Thus, the statement for the period ending and insurance based on the average petitioners have assumed, for purposes December 31, 1999. Based upon the import charges for subject merchandise of the petition, that the producer in comparison of the adjusted prices of the entered during the POI. Petitioners used Moldova uses the same inputs in the foreign like product in the home market import values declared to Customs (IM– same quantities as the U.S. producer in to the calculated COP of the product, we 145 data) to determine these import question. Based on the information find reasonable grounds to believe or charges. Foreign brokerage and handling provided by petitioners, we believe that suspect that sales of the foreign like costs were calculated using publicly the petitioners’ factors of production product were made below the COP available information previously used methodology represents information within the meaning of section by the Department in Steel Concrete reasonably available to the petitioners 773(b)(2)(A)(I) of the Act. Accordingly, Reinforcing Bars from Moldova: Final and is appropriate for purposes of the Department is initiating a country- Determination of Sales at Less Than initiating this investigation. wide cost investigation. Fair Value (Rebar from Moldova), 66 FR The petitioners asserted that India In light of their allegations that home 33525 (June 22, 2001). U.S. import was the most appropriate surrogate market prices were below cost, duties are based on the general rate of country for Moldova, claiming that petitioners based NV on CV. The COP duty on merchandise imported into the India is: (1) A market economy; (2) a portion of CV was calculated based on United States during the POI as significant producer of comparable U.S. producer’s cost of producing described in the Harmonized Tariff merchandise; and (3) at a level of carbon and steel wire rod, adjusted for Schedule of the United States (2001). economic development comparable to known differences between the Mexican U.S. import fees (i.e., harbor the PRC in terms of per capita GNP. and U.S. markets. The profit ratio was maintenance and merchandise Based on the information provided by based on the income statement from processing fees) are based on the U.S. the petitioners, we believe that the AHMSA for 1997, the most recent year Customs Service Regulations as codified petitioners’ use of India as a surrogate in which AHMSA earned a profit. under 19 C.F.R. 24.24(b)(1). U.S. inland country is appropriate for purposes of The August 31, 2001 petitions freight costs are based on petitioners’ initiating this investigation. included factors used to adjust labor, experience in the industry. Although In accordance with section 773(c)(4) natural gas and electricity costs. These the price quote is on a delivered basis of the Act, the petitioners valued factors factors were based on differences in and includes foreign port fees and of production, where possible, on costs between the United States and the transportation charges within Moldova, reasonably available, public surrogate country in question, reflecting recent, no amount for inland freight was data from India. Materials, with the but pre-2000, annual data. In deducted in calculating EP because exception of natural gas and alloys, and
VerDate 11
fluxes, were valued based on Indian reasonably available to the petitioners costs incurred to produce steel wire rod import values, as published in the 1998 and are acceptable for purposes of in the United States and in South Africa and 1999 Monthly Statistics of Foreign initiating this investigation. Therefore, using market research and publicly Trade of India, and inflated based on based upon comparisons of EP to CV, available data. The adjustment for labor the Indian Wholesale Price Index. we calculated an estimated dumping costs was based on IMF statistics for Petitioners valued natural gas based on margin of 172.89 percent. 1999. The August 31, 2001 petitions the value calculated in the Notice of included factors to adjust labor costs. South Africa Final Determination of Sales at Less These factors were based on the Than Fair Value; Polyvinyl Alcohol Export Price differences in labor costs between the from the People’s Republic of China, 61 The petitioners based EP on an U.S. and the country in question, FR 14057 (March 29, 1996). affidavit of U.S. price offerings for reflecting data that are recent and Additionally, petitioners submitted a products manufactured by Iscor during contemporaneous, but for periods prior U.S. price for alloys, additives and January through March 2001. The to 2000 (including U.S. data from IA’s fluxes raw material inputs. On petitioners selected a steel wire rod website). In subsequent filings, September 7, 2001, petitioners stated product with specifications commonly petitioners calculated revised factors in that these inputs were world exported to the United States. In the an effort to account for inflation through commodities and the prices don’t vary absence of more definitive information, 2000. We have used the factors from the from country to country. On September August 31, 2001 petitions. The 21, 2001, petitioners submitted petitioners refer to the date of the offer as the date of sale. The affidavit with the adjustment for energy costs was based consumption ratios for alloys, additives, on International Energy Agency and fluxes, but failed to provide sales price offer reflects the price offered to an unaffiliated customer. statistics. The August 31, 2001 petitions surrogate values for these inputs. Since included factors used to adjust natural the petitioners did not submit The petitioners calculated a net U.S. price by subtracting estimated costs for gas and electricity costs. These factors additional surrogate prices to value were based on differences in costs alloys, additives, and fluxes in international freight (from the U.S. Census Bureau), harbor maintenance, between the United States and the accordance with section 351.408 of the countries in question, reflecting recent, Department’s regulations, the and merchandise processing fees (from International Financial Statistics). but pre-2000, annual data. In Department rejected the U.S. prices subsequent filings, petitioners used by petitioners. Instead, the Normal Value calculated revised factors through use of Department valued alloys, additives and The petitioners based NV on domestic consumer price indexes applied to the fluxes using imports of limestone into prices of steel wire rod in effect during pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes India during 1998 obtained from the are not specific to the factors in United Nations Commodity Trade a month within the period for which the U.S. offer was in effect. The petitioners question, and do not account for other Statistics as a surrogate value. The relevant variables (e.g., changes in Department notes that this methodology used prices for a recent offer for sale by Iscor to unaffiliated customers in South exchange rates), we have used the was used in the recent hot-rolled steel factors as presented in the August 31, investigation from the People’s Republic Africa as the starting point in calculating NV. The petitioners adjusted 2001 petitions. The petitioners based of China. See Factors Valuation Memo: depreciation and other factory overhead Preliminary Determination of Sales at this price by subtracting home market movement charges and home market on the actual experience of one U.S. Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hot- CASWR producer. To calculate SG&A Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from credit expenses and adding U.S. credit expenses. Domestic prices were based and financial expenses, petitioners China, dated April 23, 2001. Labor was relied upon the fiscal year 2000 audited valued using the regression-based wage on findings contained in the market research report. Credit expenses were financial statements of South African rate for the PRC provided by the producer, Iscor Ltd. Based upon the Department, in accordance with 19 CFR calculated based on both findings contained in the market research report comparison of the adjusted prices of the 351.408(c)(3). Electricity was valued foreign like product in the home market using Energy Prices and Taxes, First as well as short-term lending rates to the calculated COP of the product, as Quarter 2001, published by the contained in International Financial revised by the Department, we do not Organization for Economic Cooperation Statistics. find reasonable grounds to believe or and Development (OECD) International In addition, the petitioners alleged suspect that sales of the foreign like Energy Agency. pursuant to section 773(b) of Act that For overhead, depreciation, SG&A sales in the home market were made at product were made below the COP expenses, and profit, the petitioners prices below the fully absorbed COP, within the meaning of section applied rates derived from the financial and requested that the Department 773(b)(2)(A)(I) of the Act. Accordingly, statements of TATA, an Indian steel conduct a country-wide sales-below- the Department is not initiating a producer. The petitioners calculated the cost investigation. Therefore, pursuant country-wide cost investigation. The estimated dumping margin for factory overhead, depreciation, and to sections 773(a)(4) and 773(e) of the SG&A expense ratios based on TATA’s Act the petitioners calculated a normal South Africa based on a comparison 1999–2000 consolidated income value for sales in South Africa based on between EP and home market price is statement. Petitioners calculated a profit CV. The petitioners calculated CV for 13.32 percent. ratio based on TATA’s earnings before South African producers based on Trinidad and Tobago interest and taxes also from its 1999– petitioner’s own production experience, 2000 income statement. Petitioners did adjusted for known differences between Export Price not add a value for packing because they costs incurred to produce steel wire rod The petitioners determined EP based were unable to obtain information on in the United States and in South on an offer for sale from the producer such materials. Africa. in Trinidad and Tobago, Caribbean Based on the information provided by The petitioners calculated COM based Ispat, to an unaffiliated U.S. purchaser the petitioners, we believe that the on their own production experience, for one grade with a range of sizes. The surrogate values represent information adjusted for known differences between sales information was obtained from
VerDate 11
industry sources in the United States statistics. The August 31, 2001 petitions Ukraine and supported by an affidavit in the included factors used to adjust natural Export Price petitioner’s supplemental submission of gas and electricity costs. These factors September 6, 2001. The petitioners were based on differences in costs To calculate EP, petitioners obtained calculated a net U.S. price by deducting between the United States and the U.S. pricing data from a Ukrainian wire ocean freight charges from the Trinidad country in question, reflecting recent, rod producer. The price submitted was contemporaneous with the POI and was and Tobago mill to the U.S. port, U.S. but pre-2000, annual data. In a price quote for Grade 1008 5.5 mm duties, U.S. port charges and U.S. subsequent filings, petitioners industrial quality steel wire rod. This inland freight charges from the port to calculated revised factors through use of the first unaffiliated U.S. customer. price quote was an FOB price of consumer price indexes applied to the merchandise. Normal Value pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes Petitioners deducted estimated inland With respect to NV, the petitioners are not specific to the factors in freight and brokerage and handling costs provided a home market price that was question, and do not account for other from the U.S. price to arrive at an obtained from foreign market research, relevant variables (e.g., changes in estimated ex-factory price for use in the applicable to two grades and range of exchange rates), we have used the comparison of EP and normal values for sizes of CASWR which are comparable factors as presented in the August 31, Ukraine. to the product exported to the United 2001 petitions. The petitioners based Normal Value States and serves as the basis for EP. depreciation and other factory overhead The petitioners state that the home on the actual experience of one U.S. Petitioners assert that Ukraine is an market price quotation was FOB mill CASWR producer. The petitioners NME and no determination to the and therefore no freight adjustments derived SG&A from a discussion of Ispat contrary has yet been made by the Department. See Notice of Final were made. Petitioners stated that they Caribbean’s operating income ratio in Determination of Sales at Less Than did not impute credit expenses from the the notes of the annual report of its Fair Value: Solid Agricultural reported home market price because the parent company, Ispat International. terms of sale for the home market sales Ammonium Nitrate from Ukraine, 66 FR The petitioners relied on the 38632 (July 25, 2001). Ukraine will be used were for advance cash payment. consolidated interest expense for all of Therefore, in their calculation of normal treated as an NME unless and until its Ispat International’s operating segments, value, petitioners adjusted for NME status is revoked. Pursuant to as reported in the consolidated income differences in imputed credit expenses section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, because by simply adding the U.S. credit statement, to calculate the net financial Ukraine’s status as an NME remains in expense. The petitioners stated that no expense of the Trinidad and Tobago effect, the petitioners determined the adjustments were made for differences producer. Based upon the comparison of dumping margin using an FOP analysis. in packing costs. the adjusted prices of the foreign like Petitioners based the FOP, as defined In addition, the petitioners provided product in the home market to the by section 773(c)(3) of the Act, on the information demonstrating reasonable calculated COP of the product, we find consumption rates of one U.S. wire rod grounds to believe or suspect that sales reasonable grounds to believe or suspect producer. The petitioners assert that of CASWR in the home market were that sales of the foreign like product information regarding the Ukrainian made at prices below the fully absorbed were made below the COP, within the mills’ consumption rates is not COP, within the meaning of section meaning of section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the available. The U.S. producer uses an 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Act. Accordingly, the Department is electric arc furnace mill (minimill), that Department conduct a country-wide initiating a country-wide cost produces CASWR of varying sizes, sales-below-cost investigation. investigation. while the Ukrainian producer uses Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the open-hearth furnaces to produce Act, COP consists of the COM, SG&A Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) CASWR. See Iron and Steel Works of the expenses, and packing. The petitioners and 773(e) of the Act, the petitioners World at 497. The use of electric calculated COM based on the average also based NV for sales in Trinidad and furnaces is an efficient method of wire consumption rates of one U.S. CASWR Tobago on CV. The petitioners rod production and is generally less producer. The petitioners adjusted COM calculated CV using the same COM, capital and labor intensive than the use for known differences in the production SG&A, financial expense figures and of open-hearth furnaces. According to process used in the United States and overhead used to compute Trinidad and petitioners, the derivation of Trinidad and Tobago. The adjustment Tobago home market costs. Consistent consumption rates from a minimill for labor costs was based on with section 773(e)(2) of the Act, the likely understates the normal value cost International Labor Organization petitioners included in CV, an amount of production, and therefore provides a statistics for 1999. The August 31, 2001 for profit. The profit was based on the conservative estimate on the production petitions included factors to adjust labor consolidated net income before taxes for costs in Ukraine. costs. These factors were based on the all of Ispat International’s operating The petitioners assert that Indonesia differences in labor costs between the segments taken from Ispat is the most appropriate surrogate U.S. and the country in question, International’s consolidated income country for Ukraine, claiming that reflecting data that are recent and statement. Indonesia is: (1) a market economy; (2) contemporaneous, but for periods prior a significant producer of comparable to 2000 (including U.S. data from IA’s The estimated dumping margin for merchandise; and (3) at a level of website). In subsequent filings, Trinidad and Tobago based on a economic development comparable to petitioners calculated revised factors in comparison between EP and home Ukraine in terms of per capita GNP. an effort to account for inflation through market price is 60.12 percent. Based Based on the information provided by 2000. We have used the factors from the upon the comparison of EP to CV, we the petitioners, we believe that the August 31, 2001 petitions. The calculated an estimated dumping petitioners’ use of Indonesia as a adjustment for energy costs was based margin of 87.27 percent. surrogate country is appropriate for on International Energy Agency purposes of initiating this investigation.
VerDate 11
For the major input, scrap steel, Notice of Final Determination of Sales an effort to account for inflation through petitioners used a surrogate value from at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Small 2000. We have used the factors from the Indonesia published in the (UNCTS) Diameter Carbon Alloy Seamless August 31, 2001 petitions. The petitions (1998), which was also used by the Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from also included factors used to adjust Department in a recent anti-dumping Romania, 65 FR 39125 (June 23, 2000). natural gas and electricity costs. These duty investigation on line pipe from Based on the information provided by factors were based on differences in Romania. See Factors Valuation Memo: the petitioners, we believe that the costs between the United States and the Preliminary Determination of Sales at surrogate values represent information country in question, reflecting recent, Less Than Fair Value, Certain Small reasonably available to the petitioners but pre-2000, annual data. In Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless and are acceptable for purposes of subsequent filings, petitioners Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from initiating this investigation. Therefore, calculated revised factors through use of Romania, dated January 28, 2000. based upon comparisons of EP to CV, consumer price indexes applied to the Petitioners assert that a certain we calculated an estimated dumping pre-2000 costs. Because these indexes amount of molten steel is lost during the margin for Ukraine of 101.92 percent. are not specific to the factors in melting and casting process in the question, and do not account for other production of wire rod. According to Venezuela relevant variables (e.g., changes in petitioners, minimills offset the yield Export Price exchange rates), we have used the loss by recovering the scrap and factors as presented in the August 31, The petitioners based EP on an processing it into a usable form for 2001 petitions. internal use. Therefore, petitioners have affidavit containing an offering price for Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the offset the total scrap usage by deducting products manufactured by CVG Act, COP consists of COM, SG&A, and the recovered amount of scrap in the Siderurgica Del Orinoco C.A. (Sidor) packing expenses. The petitioners normal value calculation using the same during April through June of 2001. The calculated COM based on their own surrogate value from UNCTS from 1998 petitioners selected a steel wire rod production experience, adjusted for for scrap steel. product with specifications commonly known differences between costs Since the petitioners did not submit exported to the United States. See incurred to produce steel wire rod in the additional surrogate prices to value Petition Exhibit 3. In the absence of United States and in Venezuela. To alloys, additives, and fluxes in more definitive information, petitioners calculate SG&A and financial expenses, accordance with section 351.408 of the refer to the date of the offer as the date petitioners relied upon amounts Department’s regulations, the of sale. The affidavit with the sales price reported in the 2000 consolidated Department rejected the U.S. price used offer reflects the price offered to an income statement of Siderurgica by petitioners. Instead, the Department unaffiliated customer. The petitioners Venezolana, a Venezuelan CASWR valued alloys, additives and fluxes deducted international freight and producer. Based upon a comparison of using a limestone surrogate value from insurance, U.S. import duty and U.S. the prices of the foreign like product in UNCTS (1998). The Department notes merchandise and processing fees to the home market to the calculated COP that this methodology was used in the obtain a net U.S. price. of the product, we find reasonable recent hot-rolled steel investigation Normal Value grounds to believe or suspect that sales from the People’s Republic of China. of the foreign like product were made See Factors Valuation Memo: With respect to NV, the petitioners below the COP, within the meaning of Preliminary Determination of Sales at provided home market prices that were section 773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hot- obtained from foreign market research Accordingly, the Department is Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from for grades and sizes of steel wire rod initiating a country-wide cost China, dated April 23, 2001. comparable to the products exported to investigation. Accordingly, we adjusted the price the United States which serve as the The estimated dumping margin for using the WPI from IFS. Accordingly, basis for EP. The petitioners state that Venezuela based on a comparison we adjusted the price using the the home market price quotation was between EP and home market price is appropriate inflator from IFS. See FOB plant and they only made an 12.68 percent. Based upon the Initiation Checklist at Attachment I. adjustment for home market credit comparison of EP to CV, we calculated Electricity was valued using Energy expenses. estimated dumping margins between Prices and Taxes, First Quarter 2001, The petitioners have provided 19.37 percent and 21.02 percent. published by the Organization for information demonstrating reasonable Economic Cooperation and grounds to believe or suspect that sales Fair Value Comparisons Development (OECD) International of steel wire rod steel in the home Based on the data provided by the Energy Agency. Petitioners valued market were made at prices below the petitioners, there is reason to believe natural gas using a surrogate value for fully absorbed COP, within the meaning that imports of carbon and certain alloy industrial gas costs in Indonesia from of section 773(b) of the Act, and steel wire rod from Brazil, Canada, the first quarter 2000 Gulf Indonesia requested that the Department conduct Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Quarterly Report. For overhead, SG&A a country-wide sales-below-cost Moldova, South Africa, Trinidad and expenses and profit, the petitioners investigation. Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela are applied rates derived from the 1997 The August 31, 2001, petitions being, or are likely to be, sold at less public annual reports of an Indonesian included factors to adjust labor costs. than fair value. producer of subject merchandise, PT These factors were based on the Krakatau Steel. These same financial differences in labor costs between the Allegations and Evidence of Material ratios were used in the two recent U.S. and the country in question, Injury and Causation antidumping investigations. See Notice reflecting data that are recent and The petitions allege that the U.S. of Preliminary Determination of Sales at contemporaneous, but for periods prior industry producing the domestic like Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hot- to 2000 (including U.S. data from IA’s product is being materially injured, or is Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from website). In subsequent filings, threatened with material injury, by Ukraine, 66 FR 22152 (May 3, 2001) and petitioners calculated revised factors in reason of the individual and cumulated
VerDate 11
imports of the subject merchandise sold Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Circumstances Antidumping Duty at less than NV. The petitioners contend Moldova, South Africa, Trinidad and Administrative Review, 66 FR 43183 that the industry’s injured condition is Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela. We (August 17, 2001) (Preliminary Results). evident in the stagnation of U.S. will attempt to provide a copy of the This notice concerned the specialty producers’ sales volumes and profits, public version of the petition to each stainless steel strip product known as the decline of their capacity utilization, exporter named in the petition, as Semi Vac 90, described in the ‘‘Scope of the increase of U.S. inventories and appropriate. Changed Circumstances Review’’ closures of U.S. production facilities. section, below. We gave interested The allegations of injury and causation International Trade Commission parties an opportunity to comment on are supported by relevant evidence Notification our preliminary results; no party including U.S. Customs import data, We have notified the ITC of our submitted comments on these lost sales, and pricing information. We initiations, as required by section 732(d) preliminary results. We are hereby have assessed the allegations and of the Act. revoking the order in part because supporting evidence regarding material Preliminary Determinations by the ITC domestic producers of the like product injury and causation, and have have expressed no interest in determined that these allegations are The ITC will determine, no later than continuation of the order with respect to properly supported by accurate and October 15, 2001, whether there is a this particular stainless steel product. reasonable indication that imports of adequate evidence and meet the EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2001. carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod statutory requirements for initiation (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Initiation Checklist, Material Injury from Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, South Robert M. James, Import section). In accordance with section Administration, International Trade 771(7)(G)(ii)(III) of the Act, which Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, and Venezuela are causing material Administration, U.S. Department of provides an exception to the mandatory Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution cumulation provision for imports from injury, or threatening to cause material injury, to a U.S. industry. A negative Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; any country designated as a beneficiary telephone: (202) 482–0649. country under the Caribbean Basin ITC determination for any country will THE APPLICABLE STATUTE AND Economic Recovery Act, we have result in the investigation being REGULATIONS: Unless otherwise considered the petitioners’ allegation of terminated with respect to that country; injury with respect to Trinidad and otherwise, these investigations will indicated, all citations to the statute are Tobago independent of the allegations proceed according to statutory and references to the provisions effective for each of the remaining countries regulatory time limits. January 1, 1995, the effective date of the named in the petition and found that This notice is issued and published amendments made to the Tariff Act of the information provided satisfies the pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 1930, as amended (the Tariff Act), by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In requirements (see Initiation Checklist, Dated: September 24, 2001. Material Injury section). addition, unless otherwise indicated, all Faryar Shirzad, citations to the Department’s regulations Initiation of Antidumping Investigations Assistant Secretary for Import are to the regulations as codified at 19 Administration. Based upon our examination of the CFR part 351 (2000). [FR Doc. 01–24621 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] petitions on carbon and certain alloy SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P steel wire rod, and the petitioners’ Background responses to our supplemental The Department published the questionnaires clarifying the petitions, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE as well as our conversations with the antidumping duty order on stainless foreign market researchers who International Trade Administration steel sheet and strip in coils from provided information concerning Germany on July 27, 1999. See Notice of various aspects of the petition, we have [A–428–825] Amended Final Determination of Sales found that they meet the requirements at Less Than Fair Value and Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils of section 732 of the Act. See Initiation Antidumping Duty Order, 64 FR 40557. From Germany; Final Results of Checklist. Therefore, we are initiating On May 18, 2001, Sensormatic Changed Circumstances Review antidumping duty investigations to Electronics Corporation (Sensormatic) determine whether imports of carbon AGENCY: Import Administration, requested that the Department and certain alloy steel wire rod from International Trade Administration, determine that a specialty stainless steel Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Department of Commerce. strip product known as SemiVac 90 is Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, South ACTION: Notice of final results of outside the scope of the antidumping Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, changed circumstances review, and duty order on stainless steel sheet and and Venezuela are being, or are likely to revocation, in part, of order of the strip in coils from Germany; in the be, sold in the United States at less than antidumping duty order. alternative, Sensormatic requested that fair value. Unless this deadline is the Department revoke in part the postponed, we will make our SUMMARY: On August 17, 2001, the antidumping duty order on stainless preliminary determinations no later Department of Commerce (the steel sheet and strip in coils from than 140 days after the date of this Department) published a notice of Germany on the basis of ‘‘changed initiation. initiation and preliminary results of a circumstances.’’ See Letter from changed circumstances review and Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A., May Distribution of Copies of the Petitions notice of intent to revoke in part the 18, 2001, at 2 and 4. On July 5, 2001, In accordance with section antidumping duty order on stainless producers of the domestic like product 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the steel sheet and strip in coils from (Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, public versions of the petition have Germany. See Stainless Steel Sheet and Armco, Inc., J&L Specialty Steel, Inc., been provided to the representatives of Strip in Coils From Germany; Initiation Washington Steel Division of Bethlehem the governments of Brazil, Canada, and Preliminary Results of Changed Steel Corporation, United Steelworkers
VerDate 11
of America, AFL–CIO/CLC, Butler for substantially all of the production of Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department Armco Independent Union, and the domestic like product. Therefore, in of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, Zanesville Armco Independent accordance with sections 751(b) and (d) SW., Washington, DC 20585–0350. Organization) informed the Department and 782(h)(2) of the Tariff Act, and 19 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that, consistent with the position stated CFR 351.216(d), the Department is Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202–586– during the less-than-fair-value revoking the order in part as it pertains 9624 (or by electronic mail to: investigation, they have no objection to to the permanent magnet iron- [email protected]) or Michael T. Sensormatic’s request. See Letter from chromium-cobalt stainless steel strip Skinker (Program Attorney) 202–586– Collier Shannon Scott, July 5, 2001. product known as SemiVac 90 6667. As noted, our August 17, 2001 described above. We will instruct the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Preliminary Results elicited no U.S. Customs Service to liquidate construction, operation, maintenance comment from any interested party. without regard to antidumping duties, and connection of facilities at the Scope of Changed Circumstances as applicable, all unliquidated entries of international border of the United States Review this specialty stainless product not for the transmission of electric energy subject to final results of an between the United States and a foreign The product subject to this changed administrative review, as of the date of circumstances review is a permanent country is prohibited in the absence of publication of these final results of a Presidential permit issued pursuant to magnet iron-chromium-cobalt stainless review in the Federal Register. See 19 steel strip containing, by weight, 13 Executive Order (EO) 10485, as CFR 351.222. We will also direct the amended by EO 12038. percent chromium, 6 percent cobalt, 71 Customs Service to refund any percent iron, 6 percent nickel and 4 On September 19, 2001, GenPower estimated antidumping duties collected, filed an application with the Office of percent molybdenum. The product is and to pay interest on such refunds in supplied in widths up to 1.27 cm (12.7 Fossil Energy (FE) of the Department of accordance with section 778 of the mm), inclusive, with a thickness Energy (DOE) for a Presidential permit. Tariff Act. Finally, we will instruct the between 45 and 75 microns, inclusive. GenPower proposes to install a high Customs Service to discontinue the This product exhibits magnetic voltage direct current (HVDC) suspension of liquidation and the remanence between 400 and 780 nWb, submarine cable extending from a collection of cash deposits on entries of and coercivity of between 60 and 100 proposed 820-megawatt combined Semi Vac 90 effective on the date of oersteds. This product is currently cycle, natural gas powerplant located in publication of this notice. supplied under the trade name Goldboro, Guysborough County, Nova This changed circumstances review ‘‘SemiVac 90.’’ Scotia, Canada, to New York City, New and revocation in part, and this notice, York, a distance of approximately 800 to Final Results of Review, and are published in accordance with 900 miles (1,300 to 1,450 kilometers Revocation in Part of the Antidumping sections 751(b) and (d) and 782(h) of the (km)). GenPower’s proposed terminus in Duty Order Tariff Act, and 19 CFR 351.216 and New York City is the Consolidated Pursuant to sections 751(d)(1) and 351.222(g). Edison Company’s (ConEd) West 49th 782(h)(2) of the Tariff Act, the Dated: September 20, 2001. Street substation. GenPower proposes, Department may revoke an antidumping Faryar Shirzad, based on technical and geological or countervailing duty order, in whole Assistant Secretary for Import limitations, to bury the cable to a depth or in part, based on a review under Administration. of approximately 3 feet (1 meter). section 751(b) of the Tariff Act (i.e., a [FR Doc. 01–24620 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Since the restructuring of the electric changed circumstances review) where BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P power industry began, resulting in the the Department determines that introduction of different types of producers accounting for substantially competitive entities into the marketplace, DOE has consistently all of the production of that domestic DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY like product have expressed a lack of expressed its policy that cross-border interest in continuance of an order. [FE Docket No. PP–252] trade in electric energy should be Similarly, section 351.222(g) of the subject to the same principles of Department’s regulations provides that Application for Presidential Permit; comparable open access and non- the Department will conduct a changed GenPower New York, L.L.C. discrimination that apply to transmission in interstate commerce. circumstances administrative review AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE. under 19 CFR 351.216, and may revoke DOE has stated that policy in export ACTION: an order (in whole or in part), if it Notice of application. authorizations granted to entities determines that producers accounting SUMMARY: GenPower New York, L.L.C. requesting authority to export over for substantially all of the production of (GenPower) has applied for a international transmission facilities. the domestic like product to which the Presidential permit to construct, Specifically, DOE expects transmitting order pertains have expressed a lack of operate, maintain and connect a ± utilities owning border facilities interest in the relief provided by the 500,000-volt (± 500-kV) Direct Current constructed pursuant to Presidential order, in whole or in part, or if other (DC) submarine electric transmission permits to provide access across the changed circumstances sufficient to cable across the U.S. border with border in accordance with the warrant revocation exist. Canada. principles of comparable open access The affirmative statement by the and non-discrimination contained in the domestic producers expressing no DATES: Comments, protests, or requests FPA and articulated in Federal Energy opposition to excluding Semi Vac 90 to intervene must be submitted on or Regulatory Commission Order No. 888, from the scope of the order constitutes before November 1, 2001. as amended (Promoting Wholesale changed circumstances sufficient to ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, or Competition Through Open Access warrant partial revocation of this order. requests to intervene should be Non-Discriminatory Transmission In addition, these producers, the addressed as follows: Office of Coal & Services by Public Utilities). In original petitioners in this case, account Power Import and Export (FE–27), furtherance of this policy, DOE intends
VerDate 11
to condition any Presidential permit Issued in Washington, DC, on September Otherwise, send comments via issued in this proceeding on compliance 26, 2001. facsimile to Metals Disposition PEIS at with these open access principles. Anthony J. Como, 301–903–9770 or send electronic mail to Procedural Matters: Any person Deputy Director, Electric Power Regulation, [email protected] or desiring to become a party to this Office of Coal & Power Import/Export, Office the Web site at www.em.doe.gov/smpeis. proceeding or to be heard by filing of Coal & Power Systems, Office of Fossil FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Energy. comments or protests to this application request further information about this should file a petition to intervene, [FR Doc. 01–24606 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] PEIS, the public scoping meetings, or to comment or protest at the address BILLING CODE 6450–01–P be placed on the PEIS distribution list, provided above in accordance with use any of the methods listed under ADDRESSES above. For background § 385.211 or § 385.214 of the FERC’s DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY rules of practice and procedures (18 documents in hard copy related to this CFR 385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of Public Scoping Meeting for the PEIS contact the DOE Center for each petition and protest should be filed Programmatic Environmental Impact Environmental Management with the DOE on or before the date Statement on the Disposition of Scrap Information at 800–736–3282. For listed above. Metals general information concerning the DOE Additional copies of such petitions to National Environmental Policy Act intervene or protests also should be AGENCY: Department of Energy. (NEPA) process, contact: Carol filed directly with: John O’Leary, ACTION: Notice of change of location of Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA GenPower New York, L.L.C., 1040 Great meeting. Policy and Compliance (EH–42), U.S. Plain Avenue, Needham, MA 02494. Department of Energy, 1000 SUMMARY: The Department of Energy Independence Avenue, SW, Before a Presidential permit may be (DOE) announces a change of location Washington, D.C. 20585–0119, issued or amended, the DOE must from New York City, NY to Telephone: 202–586–4600, Voice Mail: determine that the proposed action will Philadelphia, PA for a public scoping 800–472–2756, Facsimile: 202–586– not adversely impact on the reliability meeting on the programmatic 7031. of the U.S. electric power supply environmental impact statement (PEIS) Additional NEPA information is also system. In addition, DOE must consider that DOE is preparing on the policy available on the DOE website: http// the environmental impacts of the alternatives for the disposition of DOE tis.eh.doe.gov/nepa/ proposed action (i.e., granting the scrap metals that may have residual SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Presidential permit, with any conditions DOE surface radioactivity. generates surplus and scrap material and limitations, or denying the permit) DATES: On October 18, 2001, DOE will pursuant to NEPA. DOE also must during the normal course of activities, conduct a public scoping meeting in and attempts to recycle as much as obtain the concurrence of the Secretary Philadelphia, PA. All meeting dates, of State and the Secretary of Defense possible consistent with common times, and locations announced in the industrial practice. DOE is also guided before taking final action on a September 6, 2001, Federal Register (66 Presidential permit application. by several Executive Orders that provide FR 46613) remain the same except that direction to Federal Agencies on The NEPA compliance process is a DOE will not conduct a public scoping recycling practices to avoid unnecessary cooperative, non-adversarial process meeting in New York, NY. The scoping energy consumption and use of raw involving members of the public, state period ends November 9, 2001. DOE materials for the development of new governments and the Federal invites Federal agencies, Native products. Some of this material consists government. The process affords all American tribes, state and local of scrap metal that may contain residual persons interested in or potentially governments, and members of the surface radioactivity. affected by the environmental general public to comment on the scope On July 12, 2001, DOE issued a Notice consequences of a proposed action an of this PEIS. DOE will consider all of Intent (66 FR 36562) to prepare a opportunity to present their views, comments received by the close of the PEIS on the DOE policy alternatives for which will be considered in the scoping period and will consider the disposition of scrap metals that may preparation of the environmental comments received after that date to the contain residual surface radioactivity. documentation for the proposed action. extent practicable. The Philadelphia, PA On September 6, 2001, DOE issued a Intervening and becoming a party to this public scoping meeting will be at the Notice in the Federal Register (66 FR proceeding will not create any special following location: 46613) extending the public scoping status for the petitioner with regard to Meeting: Philadelphia Convention period and announcing additional the NEPA process. Notice of upcoming Center, 1101 Arch Street, public scoping meetings for the PEIS, NEPA activities and information on how Philadelphia, PA 19107; October 18, including a meeting in New York City. the public can participate in those 2001, 2–5 p.m., 8–10 p.m. The Department now believes, however, activities will appear in the Federal ADDRESSES: Comments on the scope of that given the recent terrorist attack in Register. the PEIS may be mailed to the address lower Manhattan, this subject is Copies of this application will be below or sent by facsimile or electronic inappropriate for a public meeting in made available, upon request, for public mail. Written comments may be mailed Midtown Manhattan at this time. DOE is inspection and copying at the address to the following address. Kenneth G. instead scheduling a meeting in provided above. In addition, the Picha, Jr., Office of Technical Program Philadelphia, PA, as discussed above application may be reviewed or Integration, EM–22, ATTN: Metals under DATES. The remaining public downloaded from the Fossil Energy Disposition PEIS, Office of scoping meetings announced in the Home Page at: http://www.fe.doe.gov. Environmental Management, U.S. September 6, Notice are as follows: Upon reaching the Fossil Energy Home Department of Energy, 1000 Meeting: Ken Edwards Community page, select ‘‘Electricity Regulation’’ and Independence Avenue, SW, Center,1527 Fourth Street, Santa then ‘‘Pending Proceedings’’ from the Washington, DC. 20585–0113, Monica, CA 90401, October 8, 2001, options menu. Telephone: (301)-903–7199. 8–10 p.m.
VerDate 11
Meeting: Simi Valley City Hall, 2929 Website at: http://e-center.doe.gov: The ADDRESSES: Locations for the three Tapo Canyon Road, Simi Valley, CA deadline for receipt of applications will Science Centers in Nevada are: Las 93063; October 9, 2001, 8–10 p.m. be on November 29, 2001. Applications Vegas—4101–B Meadows Lane; Meeting: Zuhrah Shrine Center, 2540 are to be submitted via the IIPS Website. Pahrump—1141 South Highway 160; Park Avenue, Minneapolis, MN Directions on how to apply and submit Beatty—100 North E Avenue. 55404; October 16, 2001, 2–5 p.m. 8– applications are detailed under the Written comments may also be 10 p.m. solicitation on the Website. addressed to Carol Hanlon, U.S. At the scoping meetings, the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Department of Energy, Yucca Mountain will have the opportunity to ask Kathleen Stallman, Contract Specialist Site Characterization Office (M/S #205), questions and to comment orally or in at [email protected]. P.O. Box 30307, North Las Vegas, Nevada, 89036–0307. writing on the scope of the PEIS, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The including the alternatives and issues solicitation will be issued in accordance FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. that DOE should consider. Also, at these with 10 CFR 600.6(b), eligibility for Department of Energy, Office of Civilian meetings, DOE plans to provide awards under this program will be Radioactive Waste Management, Yucca background information on the restricted to U.S. colleges and Mountain Site Characterization Office, proposed scope of the PEIS, issues and universities having a duly licensed, (M/S #025), P.O. Box 30307, North Las impacts proposed to be evaluated, and operating nuclear research or training Vegas, Nevada 89036–0307, 1–800–967– the PEIS preparation schedule. reactor because the purpose of the 3477. DOE has conducted public scoping University Reactor Instrumentation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the meetings on the PEIS in the following (URI) program is to upgrade and August 21, 2001, Federal Register locations: North Augusta, SC; Oak improve the U.S. university nuclear Notice (66 FR 43850–43851), the Ridge, TN; Oakland, CA; Richland, WA; research and training reactors and to Department announced the scheduling Cincinnati, OH; and, Washington, DC. contribute to strengthening the of public hearings in Las Vegas, Nevada The public scoping period originally academic community’s nuclear on September 5, 2001, in Amargosa was to continue until September 10, engineering infrastructure. Valley, Nevada on September 12, 2001, 2001. However, in response to public The statutory authority for this and in Pahrump, Nevada on September comments and to ensure that the public program is Public Law 95–91. 13, 2001. The Department decided to has ample opportunity to provide Issued in Idaho Falls on September 25, postpone the latter two hearings in light comments, DOE extended the public of the recent terrorist attacks on the scoping period by 60 days and 2001. Michael L. Adams, United States. In a notice published on scheduled additional meetings as September 27, 2001 (66 FR 49372– specified above. The schedule for Acting Director, Procurement Services Division. 49373), the latter two hearings were completion of the Draft PEIS is March, rescheduled to October 10 and October [FR Doc. 01–24608 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 2002, and for the Final PEIS is August, 12, 2001, in Amargosa Valley, Nevada 2002. Further information on this PEIS BILLING CODE 6450–01–P and Pahrump, Nevada, respectively. is contained in the July 12, 2001, Notice For those members of the public who of Intent. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY do not participate in these public Issued in Washington, D.C., on September hearings, the Department is providing 26, 2001. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste them with an opportunity to submit Steven V. Cary, Management: Site Recommendation comments at the Las Vegas Science Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Consideration Process; Las Vegas Center, prior to the end of the comment Environment, Safety and Health. Science Center To Serve as Extended period, on the possible recommendation [FR Doc. 01–24607 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Hearing Facility of the Yucca Mountain Site for BILLING CODE 6450–01–P development as a spent nuclear fuel and AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive high-level radioactive waste repository. Waste Management, Department of A Department official and court reporter DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy. will be available to provide project ACTION: Notice of an extended hearing information and receive public [Solicitation Number DE–PS07–02ID14238] facility to receive official comments. testimony from anyone wishing to provide official comments. All Idaho Operations Office; University SUMMARY: The Department of Energy Reactor Instrumentation (URI) Program comments will be considered as part of (the Department) announces that its Las the official public record. Written AGENCY: Idaho Operations Office, DOE. Vegas Science Center will be used to testimony may also be submitted as part receive public comments on the ACTION: Notice of availability of of the official record. Posters and possible recommendation of the Yucca solicitation for awards of financial relevant information materials on the Mountain Site in Nevada for assistance. Yucca Mountain project will also be development as a spent nuclear fuel and available at the Science Center. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of high-level radioactive waste geologic Citizens are encouraged to reserve Energy, Idaho Operations Office, is repository. In addition, the Science time slots to offer testimony by calling soliciting applications for special Centers in Pahrump, Nevada, and 1–800–967–3477. Oral testimony will be research grant awards that will upgrade Beatty, Nevada, will have forms limited to 10 minutes in order to and improve U.S. nuclear research and available for written comments. provide proper consideration to all training reactors. It is anticipated that DATES: Starting on September 26, 2001, individuals wishing to testify. Citizens on September 27, 2001, a full text for and continuing through October 15, are encouraged to arrive no later than 15 Solicitation Number DE–PS07– 2001, the Las Vegas Science Center will minutes prior to their scheduled 02ID14238 for the 2002 URI Program be open from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesday testimony time; citizens arriving after will be made available at the Industry through Friday, and on Saturdays, from their timeslot has passed will be Interactive Procurement System (IIPS) 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. accommodated to the extent possible.
VerDate 11
Walk-in testimony will be accepted as but no later than October 26, 2001. certify standby power levels, how to the schedule permits, with priority Please submit written comments to: Ms. create a public-domain database on such given to those who have reserved time Alison Thomas, U.S. Department of products based on voluntary data in advance. Individuals who visit the Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and submitted by federal suppliers and Las Vegas Science Center to provide Renewable Energy, Federal Energy manufacturers, and procedures for testimony will do so in the FOIA Management Program, EE–90, 1000 periodic updating of the database and (Freedom of Information Act) Reading Independence Avenue, SW., the categories of products. Room. Washington, DC 20585–0121. In addition, citizens can visit DOE Telephone: (202) 586–2099; Telefax: Background information on standby Science Centers located in Pahrump, (202) 586–3000. Please label comments power, the Executive Order, and FEMP’s Nevada, and Beatty, Nevada, to submit both on the envelope and on the ideas on implementation will be written comments until the close of the documents and submit them for DOE presented in the morning. Topics will comment period. Comments can also be receipt by October 26, 2001. Please include the relation of this new effort to submitted via e-mail through the web submit one signed copy and a computer FEMP’s other activities in support of site at www.ymp.gov. diskette (WordPerfect or Microsoft energy-efficient federal purchasing and Additional information on the Word). The Department will also accept to the Energy StarTM labeling program. comment process at the Science Centers electronically-mailed comments, e- After a lunch break, the meeting will and on the Civilian Radioactive Waste mailed to [email protected]. be open to brief presentations (up to 5 Management program may be obtained Additional information on standby minutes each) and discussion of at the Yucca Mountain web site at power, federal purchasing, and comments from the public, including www.ymp.gov or by calling 1–800–967– Executive Order 13221 can be found on federal agencies. FEMP is interested in 3477. the DOE website at: http:// receiving feedback from vendors, Issued in Washington, DC on September www.eren.doe.gov/femp/procurement. manufacturers, and other interested 26, 2001. Copies of the agenda, a list of attendees, parties. Lake H. Barrett, the public comments received, and this Acting Director. notice may be read at the Freedom of The workshop agenda includes: [FR Doc. 01–24626 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Information Reading Room, U.S. • Why are we here?—the Executive Department of Energy, Forrestal BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Order 13221, workshop objectives, Building, Room 1E–190, 1000 FEMP’s approach Independence Avenue, SW., • DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–3142, Background on standby power with between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., questions Office of Energy Efficiency and Monday through Friday, except Federal • Technical issues with questions Renewable Energy holidays. • Implementing the Executive Order FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Ms. Federal Energy Management Program; • Alison Thomas, Program Manager, U.S. Proposed approach for identifying Federal Purchasing of Energy-Efficient Department of Energy, Office of Energy products and schedule with questions Standby Power Devices Efficiency and Renewable Energy, EE– • Open for public comments AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 90, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., The meeting will be conducted in an Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 586– Renewable Energy, Department of informal, conference style. There shall 2099, email [email protected]. Energy. be no discussion of proprietary ACTION: Notice of public meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July information, costs or prices, market 31, 2001, President Bush signed shares, or other commercial matters SUMMARY: The Department of Energy Executive Order 13221, directing regulated by the U.S. antitrust laws. (DOE or Department) will hold a public government agencies to purchase After the meeting and expiration of the meeting to discuss plans for devices with minimal standby power— implementing Executive Order 13221, at or below one watt where available. He period for submitting written which directs government agencies to further ordered the Department of statements, the Department will begin purchase devices with minimal standby Energy (DOE), in consultation with the consideration of the comments received. power—at or below one watt where General Services Administration (GSA), If you would like to participate in the available. The Department is interested the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and meeting, receive meeting materials, or in receiving comments on which others, to develop a list of products that be added to the DOE mailing list to products using standby power are comply with this requirement. If no receive future notices and information purchased in significant numbers for devices with standby at or below 1 W regarding the energy conservation use in federal facilities, which of these are available within a product category, program for consumer products and have models available with low standby DOE is to recommend a standby power commercial and industrial equipment, power levels at or near 1 watt, and level that is cost-effective. please contact Ms. Alison Thomas at comments on the Department’s The DOE Federal Energy Management proposed approach for identification of (202) 586–2099 or Program (FEMP) will hold an informal [email protected]. low-standby power products. public meeting to present its proposed DATES: The public meeting will be held approach to implementing this Order Issued in Washington, DC, on September on Wednesday, October 24, 2001, from and to solicit views from the public and 26, 2001. 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. from federal agencies themselves on David K. Garman, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at practical and effective implementation Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and the Crystal City Hilton, 2399 Jefferson steps. Renewable Energy. Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia The workshop will cover initial ideas [FR Doc. 01–24605 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 22201. Written comments are welcome, on the range of low-power standby BILLING CODE 6450–01–P either before or after the public meeting, products to be included, how to test and
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Regulatory Commission, Attn: Michael Commission is empowered to prescribe Miller, Office of the Chief Information a system of accounts for jurisdictional Federal Energy Regulatory Officer, CI–1, 888 First Street NE., gas pipelines and after notice and Commission Washington, DC 20426. opportunity for hearing, may determine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the accounts in which particular outlays [Docket No. IC01–02A–000, FERC Form 2– and receipts will be entered, charged or A] Michael Miller may be reached by telephone at (202)208–1415, by fax at credited. Proposed Information Collection and (202)208–2425, and by e-mail at FERC staff uses the data in the Request for Comments [email protected]. continuous review of the financial SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The condition of jurisdictional companies, September 26, 2001. information collected under the in various rate proceedings and in the AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory requirements of FERC Form 2–A Commission’s audit program. FERC Commission. ‘‘Annual Report of Nonmajor Natural Form 2–A data are also used to compute ACTION: Notice of proposed information Gas Companies’’ (OMB No. 1902–0030) annual charges which are assessed collection and request for comments. is used by the Commission to against each jurisdictional natural gas implement the statutory provisions of pipeline and which are necessary to SUMMARY: In compliance with the the Natural Gas Act (NGA) 15 U.S.C. recover the Commission’s annual costs. requirements of Section 3506(c)(2)(a) of 717. The FERC Form 2–A is a financial The annual financial information filed the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and operating report for nonmajor with the Commission is a mandatory (Pub. L. No. 104–13), the Federal Energy natural gas pipeline owners. A requirement submitted in a prescribed Regulatory Commission (Commission) is ‘‘nonmajor’’ pipeline owner is one that format which is filed electronically and soliciting public comment on the has combined gas sales for resale and on paper. The Commission implements specific aspects of the information has gas transported or stored for a fee these filing requirements in 18 CFR collection described below. that exceeds 200,000 Dth but which is Parts 158, 201, 260.2 and 385.2011. DATES: Consideration will be given to less than 50 million Dth, in each of the Action: The Commission is requesting comments submitted within 60 days of three previous calendar years. Under the a three-year extension of the current the publication of this notice. Form 2–A, the Commission investigates, expiration date, with no changes to the ADDRESSES: Copies of the proposed collects and records data, and prescribes existing information collection. collection of information can be rules and regulations concerning Burden Statement: Public reporting obtained from and written comments accounts, records and memoranda as burden for this collection is estimated may be submitted to the Federal Energy necessary to administer the NGA. The as:
Number of responses per re- Average burden hours per re- Number of respondents Annually spondent sponse Total annual burden hours
(1) (2) (3) (1)×(2)×(3)
53 1 30 1,590
Estimated cost burden to respondents: administrative costs and the cost for DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 1,590 hours/2,080 hours per year × information technology. Indirect or $117,041 per year = $89,469. The cost overhead costs are costs incurred by an Federal Energy Regulatory per respondent is equal to $1,688. organization in support of its mission. Commission The reporting burden includes the These costs apply to activities which Notice of Application To Permit Non- total time, effort, or financial resources benefit the whole organization rather Project Use of Project Lands and expended to generate, maintain, retain, than any one particular function or Soliciting Comments, Motions To disclose, or provide the information activity. including: (1) Reviewing instructions; Intervene, and Protests (2) developing, acquiring, installing, and Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information September 26, 2001. utilizing technology and systems for the Take notice that the following purposes of collecting, validating, is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, application has been filed with the verifying, processing, maintaining, Commission and is available for public disclosing and providing information; including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of inspection: (3) adjusting the existing ways to a. Application Type: Amendment of comply with any previously applicable the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, License. instructions and requirements; (4) b. Project No.: 2146–093. including the validity of the training personnel to respond to a c. Date Filed: September 13, 2001. collection of information; (5) searching methodology and assumptions used; (3) d. Licensee: Alabama Power data sources; (6) completing and ways to enhance the quality, utility and Company. reviewing the collection of information; clarity of the information to be e. Name of Project: Coosa River and (7) transmitting, or otherwise collected; and (4) ways to minimize the Hydroelectric Project. disclosing the information. burden of the collection of information f. Location: The project is located on The cost estimate for respondents is on those who are to respond. the Coosa River, in Calhoun, St. Clair, based upon salaries for professional and and Etowah Counties, Alabama. This Linwood A. Watson, Jr., clerical support, as well as direct and project does not occupy any federal indirect overhead costs. Direct costs Acting Secretary. lands. include all costs directly attributable to [FR Doc. 01–24546 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power providing this information, such as BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r).
VerDate 11
h. Licensee Contact: Mr. Keith Bryant, also available for inspection and No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with Alabama Power Company, PO Box 2641, reproduction at the address in item h an effective date of November 1, 2001: Birmingham, Alabama 35291. (205) above. Eighth Revised Sheet No. 31 257–1403. m. Individuals desiring to be included Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 32 i. FERC Contact: Any questions on on the Commission’s mailing list should Fifth Revised Sheet No. 33 this notice should be addressed to Steve so indicate by writing to the Secretary Fifth Revised Sheet No. 34 Naugle, [email protected], or of the Commission. Seventh Revised Sheet No. 35 (202) 219–2805. n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Third Revised Sheet No. 37 j. Deadline for filing comments and or Intervene—Anyone may submit motions: (October 27, 2001). comments, a protest, or a motion to DTI states that the purpose of this All documents (original and eight intervene in accordance with the filing is to comply with Article VII, copies) should be filed with Mr. David requirements of Rules of Practice and Section G, of the August 31, 1998, P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, Stipulation and Agreement in Docket Regulatory Commission, 888 First 385.214. In determining the appropriate Nos. RP97–406, et al., approved by the Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. action to take, the Commission will Comments, protests and interventions Commission in CNG Transmission consider all protests or other comments Corporation, 85 FERC 61,261 (1998). may be filed electronically via the filed, but only those who file a motion internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR That settlement provides for the phased to intervene in accordance with the conversion of firm storage services 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Commission’s Rules may become a under Rate Schedule GSS-II, to on the Commission’s web site at party to the proceeding. Any comments, corresponding services under Rate http://www.ferc.fed.us/rfi/doorbell.htm. protests, or motions to intervene must Please reference the following number, be received on or before the specified Schedule GSS and Rate Schedule FT P–2146–093, on any comments or comment date for the particular (FT-GSS). Article VII, Section G, permits motions filed. application. DTI to implement base rate changes to k. Description of Proposal: The o. Filing and Service of Responsive reflect each phase of the conversion. licensee proposes to permit those Documents—Any filings must bear in DTI states that copies of this letter of elements of a planned residential all capital letters the title transmittal and enclosures are being development proposed by Pinnacle ‘‘COMMENTS’’, served upon DTI’s customers and Communities LLC that would be located ‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS within the project boundary. The interested state commissions. AND CONDITIONS’’, ‘‘PROTEST’’, OR proposed development is located on Lay Any person desiring to be heard or to ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE’’, as Reservoir, approximately three miles protest said filing should file a motion applicable, and the Project Number of from the City of Childersburg in the particular application to which the to intervene or a protest with the Talladega County, Alabama. The filing refers. A copy of any motion to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, elements of the development that would intervene must also be served upon each 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC occupy project lands include: A nine- representative of the Applicant 20426, in accordance with Sections hole, par-three, golf course; walking specified in the particular application. 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s trails; a waterfront park with picnic p. Agency Comments—Federal, state, Rules and Regulations. All such motions shelters, a gazebo, and a swimming and local agencies are invited to file or protests must be filed in accordance pool; tennis courts; an activities field; a comments on the described application. with Section 154.210 of the community garden; boat docks to A copy of the application may be Commission’s Regulations. Protests will accommodate up to 84 watercraft; a obtained by agencies directly from the be considered by the Commission in shoreline swimming area; a boat ramp; Applicant. If an agency does not file determining the appropriate action to be a boat storage area; and an access road comments within the time specified for taken, but will not serve to make with adjacent parking areas. The proposed development, known as filing comments, it will be presumed to protestants parties to the proceedings. RiverWalk, would occupy a total of 239 have no comments. One copy of an Any person wishing to become a party acres and has about 2,700 feet of water agency’s comments must also be sent to must file a motion to intervene. Copies frontage. Approximately 68 acres of the the Applicant’s representatives. of this filing are on file with the development are project lands (below Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission and are available for public contour elevation 407 mean sea level) Acting Secretary. inspection. This filing may also be for which the licensee holds a flood [FR Doc. 01–24549 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] viewed on the web at http:// www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, easement. The development, which BILLING CODE 6717–01–P would be completed in four phases, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the would ultimately consist of 336 instructions (call 202–208–2222 for residential lots. Approximately 90 of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assistance). Comments, protests and lots are partly within the project interventions may be filed electronically boundary. Phase I, consisting of 79 lots, Federal Energy Regulatory via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 has already been completed. Commission CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the l. Locations of the Application: A [Docket No. RP01–611–000] instructions on the Commission’s Web copy of the application is available for site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. inspection and reproduction at the Dominion Transmission Inc.; Notice of Commission’s Public Reference Room, Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Linwood A. Watson, Jr., at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Acting Secretary. Washington, DC 20426, or by calling September 26, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–24551 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 202–208–1371. The application may be Take notice that on September 21, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P viewed on-line at http:// 2001, Dominion Transmission Inc. www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call (DTI), tendered for filing as part of its 202–208–2222 for assistance). A copy is FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assistance). Comments, protests and of the Commission’s Rules of Practice interventions may be filed electronically and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Federal Energy Regulatory via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 385.214). All such motions and protests Commission CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the should be filed on or before October 15, [Docket No. RP00–632–005] instructions on the Commission’s web 2001. Protests will be considered by the site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Commission to determine the appropriate action to be taken, but will Dominion Transmission Inc.; Notice of Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Compliance Filing not serve to make protestants parties to Acting Secretary. the proceedings. Any person wishing to September 26, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–24550 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] become a party must file a motion to Take notice that on September 21, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P intervene. Copies of this filing are on 2001, Dominion Transmission Inc. file with the Commission and are (DTI), tendered for filing as part of its available for public inspection. This FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY filing may also be viewed on the No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with Commission’s web site at http:// an effective date of November 1, 2001: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Seventh Revised Sheet No. 31 select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Tenth Revised Sheet No. 32 [Docket No. ER01–3093–000] instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Fifth Revised Sheet No. 33 assistance). Comments, protests and Sixth Revised Sheet No. 35 San Diego Gas & Electric Company; interventions may be filed electronically First Revised Sheet No. 606 Notice of Filing via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Second Revised Sheet No. 1000 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the First Revised Sheet No. 1112 September 25, 2001. First Revised Sheet No. 1113 Take notice that on September 24, instructions on the Commission’s web First Revised Sheet No. 1114 2001, San Diego Gas & Electric site under the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. First Revised Sheet No. 1117 Company (SDG&E) tendered for filing Linwood A. Watson, Jr. Original Sheet No. 1117A with the Federal Energy Regulatory First Revised Sheet No. 1119 Acting Secretary. Commission (Commission), its Service [FR Doc. 01–24545 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] First Revised Sheet No. 1120 Agreements numbers 9 and 10 to its Second Revised Sheet No. 1121 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Second Revised Sheet No. 1122 FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised First Revised Sheet No. 1123 Volume No. 6, two interconnection First Revised Sheet No. 1124 agreements. Both agreements relate to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY First Revised Sheet No. 1125 the interconnection of a new generation First Revised Sheet No. 1126 plant to be owned by CalPeak Power— Federal Energy Regulatory First Revised Sheet No. 1171 Border, LLC (CalPeak Enterprise). The Commission First Revised Sheet No. 1175 plant, with a capacity of 49 MW, is Second Revised Sheet No. 1184 being constructed on an expedited basis Notice of Declaration of Intention and DTI states that the purpose of this to meet potential shortfalls in the Soliciting Comments Motions To filing is to comply with the Settlement Western states’ electric supplies. It will Intervene, and Protests that DTI filed on June 22, 2001, in the be located near the City of Escondido in September 26, 2001. captioned proceeding, which was San Diego County, California, and is approved by the Commission’s letter expected to begin service on or about Take notice that the following order issued September 13, 2001, 96 September 24, 2001. application has been filed with the FERC ¶ 61,288 (2001). Service Agreement No. 9 is an Commission and is available for public DTI states that copies of this letter of Expedited Interconnection Facilities inspection: transmittal and enclosures are being Agreement dated September 21, 2001 a. Application Type: Declaration of served upon DTI’s customers and between SDG&E and CalPeak Enterprise, Intention. interested state commissions and to the under which SDG&E will construct, b. Docket No: DI01–9–000. parties to the proceeding. operate and maintain the proposed c. Date Filed: September 10, 2001. Any person desiring to protest said interconnection facilities. Service d. Applicant: Charles Oliver. filing should file a protest with the Agreement No. 10, the Interconnection e. Name of Project: Colburn Creek. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Agreement between SDG&E and CalPeak f. Location: The Colburn Creek 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Enterprise dated September 21, 2001, Hydroelectric Project is located within 20426, in accordance with section establishes interconnection and Bonner County, Idaho, on Colburn 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and operating responsibilities and associated Creek. (T. 58 N., R. 2 W., secs. 2, 3, and Regulations. All such protests must be communications procedures between 11, Boise Meridian). The project does filed in accordance with Section the parties. SDG&E requests an effective not occupy Federal or Tribal land. 154.210 of the Commission’s date of September 21, 2001 for both g. Filed Pursuant to: Section 23(b)(1) Regulations. Protests will be considered agreements. of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. by the Commission in determining the SDG&E states that copies of the §§ 817(b). appropriate action to be taken, but will amended filing have been served on h. Applicant Contact: Bret Daugherty, not serve to make protestants parties to CalPeak Enterprise and on the California P.O. Box 558, Darby, MT 59829, the proceedings. Copies of this filing are Public Utilities Commission. telephone number and FAX (406) 363– on file with the Commission and are Any person desiring to be heard or to 4628, and E-Mail available for public inspection. This protest such filing should file a motion [email protected]. filing may also be viewed on the web at to intervene or protest with the Federal i. FERC Contact: Any questions on http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 this notice should be addressed to Diane link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, M. Murray at (202) 219–2682, or E-mail instructions (call 202–208–2222 for in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 address: [email protected].
VerDate 11
j. Deadline for filing comments and/ party to the proceeding. Any protests or Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy or motions: October 26, 2001. motions to intervene must be received Regulatory Commission, 888 First All documents (original and eight on or before the specified deadline date Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. copies) should be filed with: David P. for the particular application. Scoping comments may be filed Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy o. Filing and Service of Responsive electronically via the Internet in lieu of Regulatory Commission, 888 First Documents—Any filings must bear in paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. all capital letters the title and the instructions on the Copies of this filing are on file with the ‘‘COMMENTS’’, Commission’s web site (http:// Commission and are available for public ‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ inspection. Comments, protests and AND CONDITIONS’’, ‘‘PROTEST’’, OR link. interventions may be filed electronically ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE’’, as via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 applicable, and the Project Number of The Commission’s Rules of Practice CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the the particular application to which the and Procedure require all interveners instructions on the Commission’s web filing refers. A copy of any motion to filing documents with the Commission site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. intervene must also be served upon each to serve a copy of that document on Please include the docket number representative of the Applicant each person on the official service list (DI01–9–000) on any comments or specified in the particular application. for the project. Further, if an intervener motions filed. p. Agency Comments—Federal, state, files comments or documents with the k. Description of Project: The and local agencies are invited to file Commission relating to the merits of an proposed project consists of: (1) A small comments on the described application. issue that may affect the responsibilities dam; (2) a penstock, approximately 1 A copy of the application may be of a particular resource agency, they mile long; (3) a powerhouse containing obtained by agencies directly from the must also serve a copy of the document one 230 kW generating unit; and (2) Applicant. If an agency does not file on that resource agency. appurtenant facilities. comments within the time specified for When a Declaration of Intention is k. The Oroville facilities consist of the filing comments, it will be presumed to existing Oroville Dam and Reservoir, the filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory have no comments. One copy of an Commission, the Federal Power Act Edward Hyatt Powerplant, Thermalito agency’s comments must also be sent to Powerplant, Thermalito Diversion Dam requires the Commission to investigate the Applicant’s representatives. and determine if the interests of Powerplant, Thermalito Forebay and interstate or foreign commerce would be Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Afterbay, and associated recreational affected by the project. The Commission Acting Secretary. and fish and wildlife facilities. The also determines whether or not the [FR Doc. 01–24544 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] project has a total installed capacity of 762,000 kilowatts. project: (1) Would be located on a BILLING CODE 6717–01–P navigable waterway; (2) would occupy 1. Scoping Process or affect public lands or reservations of the United States; (3) would utilize DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DWR is using the Federal Energy surplus water or water power from a Regulatory Commission’s (Commission) government dam; or (4) if applicable, Federal Energy Regulatory alternative licensing process (ALP). has involved or would involve any Commission Under the ALP, DWR will prepare an construction subsequent to 1935 that Applicant Prepared Environmental Notice of Scoping Meeting and may have increased or would increase Assessment (APEA) and license the project’s head or generating Soliciting Scoping Comments for an Applicant Prepared Environmental application for the Oroville capacity, or have otherwise significantly Hydroelectric Project. modified the project’s pre-1935 design Assessment Using the Alternative DWR expects to file with the or operation. Licensing Process Commission the APEA and the license l. Locations of the Application: Copies September 26, 2001. of this filing are on file with the application for the Oroville a. Type of Application: Alternative Hydroelectric Project by January 2005. Commission and are available for public Licensing Process. inspection. This filing may also be b. Project No.: 2100. The purpose of this notice is to inform viewed on the web at http:// c. Applicant: Department of Water you of the opportunity to participate in www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Resources (DWR). the upcoming scoping meetings select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the d. Name of Project: Oroville identified below, and to ask for your instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Hydroelectric Project (also known as the scoping comments. assistance). Feather River Project). Scoping Meetings m. Individuals desiring to be included e. Location: On the Feather River, in on the Commission’s mailing list should Butte County, California. The project DWR and the Commission staff will so indicate by writing to the Secretary occupies federal lands within the hold two scoping meetings, one in the of the Commission. Plumas and Lassen National Forests. evening and one in the afternoon, to n. Protests or Motions to Intervene— f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Anyone may submit a protest or a help us identify the scope of issues to Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). be addressed in the APEA. motion to intervene in accordance with g. Applicant Contact: Rick Ramirez, the requirements of Rules of Practice State Water Project Analysis Office at All interested individuals, and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, (916) 653–6408. organizations, and agencies are invited 385.211, and 385.214. In determining h. FERC Contact: Jim Fargo, at (202) to attend one or both of the meetings, the appropriate action to take, the 219–2848 or [email protected]. and to assist the staff in identifying the Commission will consider all protests j. Deadline for filing scoping environmental issues that should be filed, but only those who file a motion comments: November 29, 2001. analyzed in the APEA. The times and to intervene in accordance with the All documents (original and eight locations of these meetings are as Commission’s Rules may become a copies) should be filed with: David P. follows:
VerDate 11
Evening Meeting DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit the Monday, October 29, 2001, 6 p.m. to 9 Federal Energy Regulatory following proposed Information p.m., State Theater, 1498 Myers Street Commission Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Oroville, California [Project No. 184–065 (California)] Management and Budget (OMB): Afternoon Meeting Institutional Controls Tracking Systems El Dorado Irrigation District; Notice of and Costs Survey EPA ICR No. 2043.01. Tuesday, October 30, 2001, 1 p.m. to 4 Public Meeting Before submitting the ICR to OMB for p.m., Secretary of State Building review and approval, EPA is soliciting auditorium, 1500 11th Street September 26, 2001. comments on specific aspects of the Sacramento, California The Federal Energy Regulatory proposed information collection as Commission (Commission) is reviewing described below. To help focus discussions, Scoping the application for a new license for the DATES: Comments must be submitted on Document 1 was mailed in September El Dorado Project (FERC No. 184), or before December 3, 2001. 2001, outlining the subject areas to be which was filed on February 22, 2000. ADDRESSES: Comments submitted by addressed in the APEA to the parties on The El Dorado Project, licensed to the El regular U.S. Postal Service mail should the mailing list. Copies of the SD1 also Dorado Irrigation District (EID), is be sent to: Docket Coordinator, will be available at the scoping located on the South Fork American Superfund Docket Office, Mail Code meetings. SD1 may also be viewed on River, in El Dorado, Alpine, and 5201G, U.S. Environmental Protection the web at http://www.ferc.gov using Amador Counties, California. The Agency, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 the ‘‘RIMS’’ link—select ‘‘Docket #’’ and project occupies lands of the Eldorado Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., follow the instructions (call 202–208– National Forest. Washington, DC 20460. To ensure The EID, several state and federal 2222 for assistance). proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative agencies, and several non-governmental that you identify docket control Based on all written comments agencies have agreed to ask the identifier IC–SURVEY in the subject received, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) Commission for time to work line on the first page of your comments. may be issued. SD2 will include a collaboratively with a facilitator to Comments may also be submitted revised list of issues, based on the resolve certain issues relevant to this electronically or in person. Please scoping sessions. proceeding. The purpose of this meeting follow the detailed instructions for these is to finalize and sign the request to the Objectives submission methods. Interested persons Commission for time to conduct may obtain a copy of the ICR without At the scoping meetings, the DWR collaborative discussions and to finalize charge from Michael E. Bellot at the and staff will: (1) Summarize the the protocols by which the collaborative Office of Emergency and Remedial environmental issues tentatively group would operate. We invite the Response, 5/7 Accelerated Response identified for analysis in the APEA; (2) participation of all interested Section (5202G), 1200 Pennsylvania governmental agencies, non- solicit from the meeting participants all Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460, governmental organizations, and the available information, especially telephone (703) 603–8905, e-mail general public in this meeting. quantifiable data, on the resources at [email protected], or download The meeting will be held on Tuesday, off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ issue; (3) encourage statements from October 9, 2001, from 9am until 4pm in experts and the public on issues that icr/icr.htm and refer to EPA ICR No. the Marriott Sacramento, located at 2043.01. should be analyzed in the APEA, 11211 Point East Drive, Rancho including viewpoints in opposition to, Cordova, California. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or in support of, the collaborative’s For further information, please Michael E. Bellot, telephone (703) 603– preliminary views; (4) determine the contact Elizabeth Molloy at (202) 208– 8905 or e-mail [email protected]. resource issues to be addressed in the 0771 or John Mudre at (202) 219–1208. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: APEA; and (5) identify those issues that Affected entities: Entities potentially Linwood A. Watson, Jr., require a detailed analysis, as well as affected by this action are State, Tribal, those issues that do not require a Acting Secretary. or local government agencies or detailed analysis. [FR Doc. 01–24547 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] organizations that maintain tracking BILLING CODE 6717–01–P systems, databases, or other information Procedures systems that as their primary purpose or incidentally collect and/or track The meetings will be recorded by a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION information pertaining to the selection, stenographer and will become part of AGENCY planning, design, implementation, the formal record of the Commission oversight, monitoring, and/or proceeding on the project. [FRL–7071–4] enforcement of institutional controls at Individuals, organizations, and Agency Information Collection sites or facilities under their agencies with environmental expertise Activities: Proposed Collection; jurisdiction. Title: Institutional Controls Tracking and concerns are encouraged to attend Comment Request; Institutional Systems and Costs Survey EPA ICR No. the meetings and to assist DWR in Controls Tracking Systems and Costs 2043.01. defining and clarifying the issues to be Survey Abstract: The Office of Emergency addressed in the APEA. AGENCY: Environmental Protection and Remedial Response (OERR) is Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Agency (EPA). currently researching the development Acting Secretary. ACTION: Notice. of a system for tracking institutional [FR Doc. 01–24548 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] controls at Superfund sites. Institutional SUMMARY: In compliance with the controls are non-engineered site BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. measures such as administrative and/or
VerDate 11
legal controls that minimize the the survey, and agency visits. • Approximately half the remaining potential for exposure to contamination Clarifications and updates will only be agencies will have a rudimentary by limiting land or resource use and/or necessary if EPA has follow-up tracking system or registry. It is assumed protect the integrity of a remedy. questions regarding responses or if EPA that six hours will be required to Institutional controls are employed at requires more information to research and complete the survey and sites where remedies are not yet in understand a tracking system. Up to 50 that follow-up contact will take no more place, are ongoing, and/or leave agencies may be required to submit than six hours. Each respondent will contaminant residuals on site that do more detailed descriptions. EPA respond to the survey once. If the not allow for unlimited use and proposes to visit up to 20 agencies to response rate is 100 percent, the unrestricted exposure. Proper evaluate institutional controls tracking estimated burden is 792 hours (66 implementation, monitoring, and systems. respondents x 12 hours). enforcement of institutional controls at Responding to the survey is entirely • No more than approximately 65 these sites is critical to EPA’s core voluntary. An agency may not conduct entities will have full systems. It is mission of protecting human health and or sponsor, and a person is not required anticipated that 16 hours will be the environment. Although many of to respond to, a collection of required to research and complete the these institutional control mechanisms information unless it displays a survey and eight hours to follow up. are necessary parts of the remedy, they currently valid OMB control number. Each respondent will respond to the are often implemented, monitored, and/ The OMB control numbers for EPA’s survey once. If the response rate is 100 or enforced by States, Tribes and/or regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 percent, the estimated burden is 1,560 local governments. and 48 CFR Chapter 15. hours (65 respondents x 24 hours). OERR is proposing to complete a EPA is soliciting comments to: • None of the respondents will incur study that includes: (1) Conducting (i) Evaluate whether the proposed new capital, start-up, operation, research into the types of institutional collection of information is necessary maintenance, or purchase of services controls tracking systems that are for the proper performance of the costs in responding to the survey as the currently in use and evaluating their functions of the agency, including ICR seeks information only about relative strengths and weaknesses; (2) whether the information will have existing activities and practices and developing a focused list of data practical utility; does not require respondents to collection points and definitions; (3) (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the undertake new information collection or developing and piloting a process for agency’s estimate of the burden of the tracking tasks. the collection of data to be used to proposed collection of information, • The estimated average annual hour estimate data availability and the cost including the validity of the burden is 10 hours. and time required for data acquisition; methodology and assumptions used; (4) developing a data entry process; and (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and Dated: September 24, 2001. (5) researching the feasibility of data clarity of the information to be Elaine F. Davies, sharing and/or linking Federal, State, collected; and Acting Director, Office of Emergency and Tribal and/or local institutional control (iv) minimize the burden of the Remedial Response, Office of Solid Waste tracking into a web-based system. In a collection of information on those who and Emergency Response. second phase of this study, OERR is are to respond, including through the [FR Doc. 01–24600 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] planning to develop the tracking system, use of appropriate automated electronic, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P establish data linkages, and populate the mechanical, or other technological database. It is anticipated that collection techniques or other forms of information on institutional controls information technology, e.g., permitting ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION eventually will be available to a variety electronic submission of responses. AGENCY Burden Statement: Burden means the of interested stakeholders over the EPA [FRL–7071–2] web page. total time, effort, or financial resources This proposed ICR specifies expended by persons to generate, Agency Information Collection information necessary to determine maintain, retain, or disclose or provide Activities: Submission for OMB what types of institutional controls information to or for a Federal Agency. Review; Comment Request; tracking systems are currently in use; This includes the time needed to review Underground Injection Control (UIC) their purpose, scope, and structure; the instructions; collect, validate, and verify Program (OMB Control No. 2040–0042; kinds of data they track; their data entry, information, process and maintain EPA No. 0370.18, Expiring September quality assurance, administration, and information, and disclosing and 30, 2001) access features; data querying providing information; search data capabilities; compatibility with a future sources; complete and review the AGENCY: Environmental Protection EPA system; development, population, collection of information; and transmit Agency (EPA). and operating costs; and lessons learned or otherwise disclose the information. ACTION: Notice. from developing, implementing, and The average annual burden imposed operating these systems. by the survey and other information SUMMARY: In compliance with the EPA estimates that approximately 52 collection efforts are approximated Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. States, 10 Tribes, and no more than 200 using the following assumptions: 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that local agencies (planning, zoning, and • Approximately half the agencies the following Information Collection real estate recording offices) will be surveyed will not have an institutional Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the surveyed. controls tracking system. It is assumed Office of Management and Budget If approved by OMB, respondents will that no more than 30 minutes would be (OMB) for review and approval: have 60 days from receipt of the survey required for these respondents. Each Underground Injection Control (UIC) to submit their responses. respondent will respond to the survey Program (OMB Control No. 2040–0042; In addition to the survey, this once. If the response rate is 100 percent, EPA ICR No. 0370.18), expiring proposed ICR includes EPA requests for the estimated burden is 66 hours (131 September 30, 2001. The ICR describes clarifications, questions and updates to respondents x 0.5 hours). the nature of the information collection
VerDate 11
and its expected burden and cost; where Burden Statement: The annual public ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION appropriate, it includes the actual data reporting and recordingkeeping burden AGENCY collection instrument. for this collection of information is [FRL–7071–1] DATES: Comments must be submitted on estimated to average 2.59 hours per or before November 1, 2001. response. Burden means the total time, Agency Information Collection ADDRESSES: Send comments referencing effort, or financial resources expended Activities Submission for OMB Review; EPA ICR No. 0370.18 and OMB Control by persons to generate, maintain, retain, Comment Request; Cooperative Number 2040–0042, to the following or disclose or provide information to or Agreements and Superfund Response addresses: Susan Auby, U.S. for a Federal agency. This includes the Actions time needed to review instructions; Environmental Protection Agency, AGENCY: Environmental Protection develop, acquire, install, and utilize Collection Strategies Divsion (Mail Code Agency (EPA). 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., technology and systems for the purposes ACTION: Notice. Washington DC 20460–0001; and to of collecting, validating, and verifying Office of Information and Regulatory information, processing and SUMMARY: In compliance with the Affairs, Office of Management and maintaining information, and disclosing Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer and providing information; adjust the 3501 et seq.), this document announces for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., existing ways to comply with any that the following Information Washington, DC 20503. previously applicable instructions and Collection Request (ICR) has been FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For requirements; train personnel to be able forwarded to the Office of Management a copy of the ICR contact to respond to a collection of and Budget (OMB) for review and [email protected], or download information; search data sources; approval: Cooperative Agreements and off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ complete and review the collection of Superfund Contracts for Superfund icr and refer to EPA ICR No. 0370.18. information; and transmit or otherwise Response Actions, OMB Control For technical questions about the ICR disclose the information. Number 2050–0179, expiring September 30, 2001. The ICR describes the nature contact Robert E. Smith at 202–260– Respondents/Affected Entities: 5559 in the Office of Water. of the information collection and its Entities potentially affected by this expected burden and cost; where SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: action are owners and operators of Title: Underground Injection Control appropriate, it includes the actual data underground injection wells and UIC collection instrument. Program (OMB Control No. 2040–0042; Primacy agencies in the States EPA ICR No. 0370.18.), expiring DATES: Comments must be submitted on including, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Trust or before November 1, 2001. September 30, 2001. This is an Territories, Indian Tribes, and Alaska’s ADDRESSES: Send comments, referencing extension of a previously approved Native Villages and, in some instances, EPA ICR No. 1487.07 and OMB Control collection. U.S. EPA Regional Offices. Abstract: The Underground Injection No. 2050–0179, to the following Control (UIC) Program under the Safe Respondents/Affected Entities: addresses: Sandy Farmer, U.S. Drinking Water Act established a 422,287. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal and State regulatory system to Estimated Number of Respondents: Collection Strategies Division (Mail protect underground sources of drinking 52,967. Code 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, water (USDWs) from contamination by NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; and Frequency of Response: Operators of to Office of Information and Regulatory injected fluids. Owners/operators of Class I, III and some Class V wells must underground injection wells must Affairs, Office of Management and report monitoring results quarterly; obtain permits, conduct environmental Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer Class II operators report annually. monitoring, maintain records, and for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, report results to EPA or the State UIC Estimated Total Annual Burden: Washington, DC 20503. primacy agency. States must report to 1,091,945. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For EPA on permittee compliance and Estimated Total Annualized Cost a copy of the ICR contact Sandy Farmer related information. The information is Burden: $66,904,505. at EPA by phone at (202) 260–2740, by reported using standardized forms, and e-mail at [email protected], or regulations are codified at 40 CFR parts Send comments on the Agency’s need download off the Internet at http:// 144 through 148. The data are used to for this information, the accuracy of the www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR ensure the protection of underground provided burden estimates, and any No. 1487.07. For technical questions sources of drinking water from UIC suggested methods for minimizing about the ICR contact Kirby Biggs at authorities. An agency may not conduct respondent burden, including through 703–573–8717. or sponsor, and a person is not required the use of automatic collection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to respond to, a collection of techniques to the following addresses. Title: Cooperative Agreements and information unless it displays a Please refer to EPA ICR No. 0370.18 and Superfund Contracts for Superfund currently valid OMB control number. OMB Control No. 2040–0042 in any Response Actions, OMB Control number The OMB control numbers for EPA’s correspondence. 2050–0179, EPA ICR number 1487.07, regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 Dated: September 25, 2001. expiring September 30, 2001. This is an and 48 CFR Chapter 15. The Federal extension of a currently approved Oscar Morales, Register document required under 5 information collection. CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on Director, Collection Strategies Division. Abstract: This ICR authorizes the this collection of information, was [FR Doc. 01–24592 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] collection of information under 40 CFR published on May 3, 2001 (66 FR BILLING CODE 6560–50–M part 35, subpart O, which establishes 22225). No comments were received by the administrative requirements for EPA on or before the close of the cooperative agreements funded under comment period. the Comprehensive Environmental
VerDate 11
Response, Compensation, and Liability Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Act (CERCLA) for State, political 5115 hours. AGENCY subdivisions, and Federally recognized Estimated Total Annualized Capital, [FRL–7070–9] Indian tribal government response O&M Cost Burden: $0. actions. This regulation also codifies the Send comments on the Agency’s need Federal Agency Hazardous Waste administrative requirements for for this information, the accuracy of the Compliance Docket Superfund State Contracts for non-State- provided burden estimates, and any lead remedial responses. This regulation AGENCY: Environmental Protection suggested methods for minimizing includes only those provisions Agency. respondent burden, including through mandated by CERCLA, required by ACTION: Notice of fourteenth update of the use of automated collection OMB Circulars, or added by EPA to the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste techniques to the addresses listed above. ensure sound and effective financial Compliance Docket, pursuant to Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1487.07 and assistance management. The CERCLA section 120(c). information is collected from applicants OMB Control No. 2050–0179 in any and/or recipients of EPA assistance and correspondence. SUMMARY: Section 120(c) of the is used to make awards, pay recipients, Dated: September 24, 2001. Comprehensive Environmental and collect information on how Federal Oscar Morales, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by funds are being spent. EPA requires this Director, Collection Strategies Division. information to meet its Federal the Superfund Amendments and [FR Doc. 01–24597 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), stewardship responsibilities. Recipient BILLING CODE 6560–50–P responses are required to obtain a requires the Environmental Protection benefit (federal funds) under 40 CFR Agency (EPA) to establish a Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance part 31, Uniform Administrative ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Docket. The docket is to contain certain Requirements for Grants and AGENCY Cooperative Agreements to State and information about Federal facilities that manage hazardous waste or from which Local Governments’ and under 40 CFR [FRL–7070–7] part 35, State and Local Assistance. hazardous substances have been or may be released. (As defined by CERCLA An agency may not conduct or National Environmental Justice sponsor, and a person is not required to section 101(22), a release is any spilling, Advisory Council; Notice of Charter leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, respond to, a collection of information Renewal unless it displays a currently valid OMB emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or control number. The OMB control AGENCY: Environmental Protection disposing into the environment.) numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed Agency. in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. CERCLA requires that the docket be The Federal Register document ACTION: Notice of charter renewal. updated every six months, as new required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), facilities are reported to EPA by Federal soliciting comments on this collection The Charter for the Environmental agencies. The following list identifies of information was published on May Protection Agency’s (EPA) National the Federal facilities to be included in 10, 2001 (66 FR 23921); no comments Environmental Justice Advisory Council this fourteenth update of the docket and were received. (NEJAC) will be renewed for an includes facilities not previously listed Burden Statement: The annual public additional two-year period, as a on the docket and reported to EPA since reporting and record keeping burden for necessary committee which is in the the last update of the docket, 65 FR this collection of information is public interest, in accordance with the 83222, December 29, 2000, which was estimated to average 8.8 hours per provisions of the Federal Advisory current as of August 28, 2000. SARA, as response. Burden means the total time, Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. II amended by the Defense Authorization effort, or financial resources expended section 9(c). The purpose of the NEJAC Act of 1997, specifies that, for each by persons to generate, maintain, retain, is to provide advice and Federal facility that is included on the or disclose or provide information to or recommendations to the Administrator docket during an update, evaluation for a Federal agency. This includes the on issues associated with integrating shall be completed in accordance with time needed to review instructions; environmental justice concerns into a reasonable schedule. Such site develop, acquire, install, and utilize EPA’s outreach activities, public evaluation activities will help determine technology and systems for the purposes policies, science, regulatory, whether the facility should be included of collecting, validating, and verifying enforcement, and compliance decisions. on the National Priorities List (NPL) and information, processing and It is determined that NEJAC is in the will provide EPA and the public with maintaining information, and disclosing public interest in connection with the valuable information about the facility. and providing information; adjust the performance of duties imposed on the In addition to the list of additions to the existing ways to comply with any Agency by law. docket, this notice includes a section that comprises revisions (that is, previously applicable instructions and Inquiries may be directed to Charles corrections and deletions) of the requirements; train personnel to be able Lee, NEJAC Designated Federal Officer, previous docket list. This update to respond to a collection of U.S. EPA, (mail code 2201A), 1200 contains eleven additions and twenty- information; search data sources; Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., three deletions since the previous complete and review the collection of Washington, DC 20460. information; and transmit or otherwise update, as well as numerous other Dated: July 18, 2001. disclose the information. corrections to the docket list. At the Respondents/Affected Entities: State, Sylvia K. Lowrance, time of publication of this notice, the Local or Tribal Government. Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of new total number of Federal facilities Estimated Number of Respondents: Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. listed on the docket is 2,214. 581. [FR Doc. 01–24601 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] DATES: This list is current as of May 1, Frequency of Response: As needed. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 2001.
VerDate 11
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The initial list of Federal facilities to D. Karla Asberry (FFSC) US EPA Region Electronic versions of the docket may be be included on the docket was 7, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas obtained at http://www.epa.gov/oeca/ published on February 12, 1988 (53 FR City, KS 66101, (913) 551–7595 fedfac/oversight/oversight.html. 4280). Updates of the docket have been Stan Zawistowski (EPR–F), US EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: published on November 16, 1988 (54 FR Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, 46364); December 15, 1989 (54 FR Table of Contents Denver, CO 80202–2466, (303) 312– 51472); August 22, 1990 (55 FR 34492); 6255 1.0 Introduction September 27, 1991 (56 FR 49328); Avonda D. East (SFD–8), US EPA 2.0 Revisions of the Previous Docket December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64898); July 3.0 Process for Compiling the Updated Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Docket 17, 1992 (57 FR 31758); February 5, Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 744–2468 4.0 Facilities Not Included 1993 (58 FR 7298); November 10, 1993 (58 FR 59790); April 11, 1995 (60 FR Deborah Leblang (ECL–115), US EPA 5.0 Facility Status Reporting Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 6.0 Information Contained on Docket 18474); June 27, 1997 (62 FR 34779); Listing November 23, 1998 (63 FR 64806); June Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553–0115 Monica Lindeman (ECL, SACU2), US 1.0 Introduction 12, 2000 (65 FR 36994); and December 29, 2000 (65 FR 83222). This notice EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Section 120(c) of the Comprehensive constitutes the fourteenth update of the Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553–5113 Environmental Response, docket. 2.0 Revisions of the Previous Docket Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 Today’s notice is divided into three (CERCLA), 42 United States Code sections: (1) Additions, (2) deletions, Following is a discussion of the (U.S.C.) 9620(c), as amended by the and (3) corrections. The additions revisions of the previous docket, Superfund Amendments and section lists newly identified facilities including additions, deletions, and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), that have been reported to EPA since the corrections. required the establishment of the last update and that now are being 2.1 Additions Federal Agency Hazardous Waste included on the docket. The deletions Compliance Docket. The docket section lists facilities that EPA is Today, eleven facilities are being contains information on Federal deleting from the docket. The added to the docket, primarily because facilities that is submitted by Federal corrections section lists changes in of new information obtained by EPA (for agencies to the U.S. Environmental information about facilities already example, recent reporting of a facility Protection Agency (EPA) under sections listed on the docket. pursuant to RCRA sections 3005, 3010, 3005, 3010, and 3016 of the Resource The information submitted to EPA on or 3016 or CERCLA section 103). SARA, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), each Federal facility is maintained in as amended by the Defense 42 U.S.C. 6925, 6930, and 6937, and the docket repository located in the EPA Authorization Act of 1997, specifies under section 103 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. Regional office of the Region in which that, for each Federal facility that is 9603. Specifically, RCRA section 3005 the facility is located (see 53 FR 4280 included on the docket during an establishes a permitting system for (February 12, 1988) for a description of update, evaluation shall be completed certain hazardous waste treatment, the information required under those in accordance with a reasonable storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities; provisions). Each repository contains schedule. RCRA section 3010 requires waste the documents submitted to EPA under Of the eleven facilities being added to generators and transporters and TSD the reporting provisions and the docket, none are facilities that have facilities to notify EPA of their correspondence relevant to the reporting reported to the NRC the release of a hazardous waste activities; and RCRA provisions for each facility. Contact the reportable quantity (RQ) of a hazardous section 3016 requires Federal agencies following docket coordinators for substance. Under section 103(a) of to submit biennially to EPA an information on Regional docket CERCLA, a facility is required to report inventory of hazardous waste sites that repositories: to the NRC the release of a hazardous the Federal agencies own or operate. Gerardo Mill(a`)n-Ramos (HBS), US EPA substance in a quantity that equals or CERCLA section 103(a) requires that the Region 1, #1 Congress St., Suite 1100, exceeds the established RQ. Reports of National Response Center (NRC) be Boston, MA 02114–2023, (617) 918– releases received by the NRC, the U.S. notified of a release. CERCLA section 1377 Coast Guard (USCG), and EPA are 103(c) requires reporting to EPA the Helen Shannon (ERRD), US EPA Region transmitted electronically to the existence of a facility at which 2, 290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New Transportation Systems Center at the hazardous substances are or have been York, NY 10007–1866, (212) 637– U.S. Department of Transportation stored, treated, or disposed of and the 4260 (DOT), where they become part of the Emergency Response Notification existence of known or suspected Alida Karas (ERRD), US EPA Region 2, System (ERNS) database. ERNS is a releases of hazardous substances at such 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007– national computer database and facilities. 1866, (212) 637–4276 The docket serves three major retrieval system that stores information purposes: (1) To identify all Federal Cesar Lee (3HS50), US EPA Region 3, on releases of oil and hazardous facilities that must be evaluated to 841 Chestnut Bg., Philadelphia, PA substances. Facilities being added to the determine whether they pose a risk to 19107, (215) 814–3205 docket and facilities already listed on human health and the environment Gena Townsend (42D–FFB), US EPA the docket for which an ERNS report sufficient to warrant inclusion on the Region 4, 61 Forsyth St., SW, Atlanta, has been filed are identified by the National Priorities List (NPL); (2) to GA 30303, (404) 562–8538 notation ‘‘103(a)’’ in the ‘‘Reporting compile and maintain the information Laura Ripley (SE–5J), US EPA Region 5, Mechanism’’ column. submitted to EPA on such facilities 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL It is EPA’s policy generally not to list under the provisions listed in section 60604, (312) 886–6040 on the docket facilities that are small- 120(c) of CERCLA; and (3) to provide a Philip Ofosu (6SF–RA), US EPA Region quantity generators (SQG) and that have mechanism to make the information 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX never generated more than 1,000 available to the public. 75202–2733, (214) 665–3178 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste in
VerDate 11
any single month. If a facility has Federal government. That terminology Extensive computer checks compared generated more than 1,000 kg of clearly includes facilities that are the current docket list with the hazardous waste in any single month operated by the Federal government, information obtained from the databases (that is, if the facility is an episodic even if they are not owned by it. identified above to determine which generator), it will be added to the Specifically, CERCLA section 120(e), facilities were, in fact, newly reported docket. In addition, facilities that are which sets forth the duties of the and qualified for inclusion on the SQGs and have reported releases under Federal agencies after a facility has been update. In spite of the quality assurance CERCLA section 103 or hazardous waste listed on the NPL, refers to the Federal efforts EPA has undertaken, state-owned activities pursuant to RCRA section agency that ‘‘owns or operates’’ the or privately owned facilities that are not 3016 will be listed on the docket and facility. In addition, the primary basis operated by the Federal government will undergo site evaluation activities, for assigning responsibility for may have been included. Such problems such as a PA and, when appropriate, an conducting PAs and SIs, as required are caused by procedures historically SI. All such facilities will be listed on when a facility is listed on the docket, used to report and track data on Federal the docket, whether or not they are is Executive Order 12580, which assigns facilities; EPA is working to resolve SQGs pursuant to RCRA. As a result, that responsibility to the Federal agency them. Representatives of Federal some of the facilities that EPA is adding having ‘‘jurisdiction, custody, or agencies are asked to write to EPA’s to the docket today are SQGs that had control’’ over a facility. An operator may docket coordinator at the following not been listed on the docket but that be deemed to have jurisdiction, custody, address if revisions of this update have reported releases or hazardous or control over a facility. information are necessary: Augusta K. waste activities to EPA under another Wills, Federal Agency Hazardous Waste 2.2 Deletions reporting provision. Compliance Docket Coordinator, In the process of compiling the Today, twenty-three facilities are Federal Facilities Enforcement Office documents for the Regional repositories, being deleted from the docket for (Mail Code 2261A), U.S. Environmental EPA identified a number of facilities various reasons, such as incorrect Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania that had previously submitted PA reporting of hazardous waste activity, Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. reports, SI reports, Department of change in ownership, and exemption as Defense (DoD) Installation Restoration an SQG under RCRA (40 CFR 262.44). 4.0 Facilities Not Included Program (IRP) reports, or reports under Facilities being deleted no longer will As explained in the preamble to the another Federal agency environmental be subject to the requirements of original docket (53 FR 4280), the docket restoration program, but do not appear CERCLA section 120(d). does not include the following categories of facilities (note, however, to have notified EPA under CERCLA 2.3 Corrections section 103. Section 120(c)(3) of that any of these types of facilities may, CERCLA requires that EPA include on Changes necessary to correct the when appropriate, be listed on the NPL): the docket, among other things, previous docket were identified by both • Facilities formerly owned by a information submitted under section EPA and Federal agencies. The changes Federal agency and now privately 103. In general, section 103 requires needed varied from simple changes in owned will not be listed on the docket. persons in charge of a facility to provide addresses or spelling to corrections of However, facilities that are now owned notice of certain releases of hazardous the recorded name and ownership of a by another Federal agency will remain substances. The reports under various facility. In addition, some changes in on the docket and the responsibility for Federal agency environmental the names of facilities were made to conducting PAs and SIs will rest with restoration programs may contain establish consistency in the docket. the current owner. information regarding releases of Many new entries are simply • SQGs that have never produced hazardous substances similar to that corrections of typographical errors. For more than 1,000 kg of hazardous waste provided pursuant to section 103. EPA each facility for which a correction has in any single month and that have not believes that CERCLA section 120(c) been entered, the original entry reported releases under CERCLA section authorizes the agency to include on the (designated by an ‘‘O’’), as it appeared 103 or hazardous waste activities under docket a facility that has provided in the February 12, 1988 notice or RCRA section 3016 will not be listed on information to EPA through documents subsequent updates, is shown directly the docket. such as a report under a Federal agency below the corrected entry (designated by • Facilities that are solely environmental restoration program, a ‘‘C’’) for easy comparison. transporters, as reported under RCRA section 3010, will not be listed on the regardless of the absence of section 103 3.0 Process for Compiling the Updated reporting. Therefore, some of the docket. Docket facilities that EPA is adding today are 5.0 Facility Status Reporting being placed on the docket because they In compiling the newly reported have submitted the documents facilities for the update being published EPA has expanded the docket described above that contain reports of today, EPA extracted the names, database to include information on the releases of hazardous substances. addresses, and identification numbers of NFRAP status of listed facilities. EPA also includes privately owned, facilities from four EPA databases— Indicating NFRAP status allows easy government-operated (POGO) facilities ERNS, the Biennial Inventory of Federal identification of facilities that, after on the docket. CERCLA section 120(c) Agency Hazardous Waste Activities, the submitting all necessary site assessment requires that the docket contain Resource Conservation and Recovery information, were found to warrant no information submitted under RCRA Information System (RCRIS), and the further involvement on the part of EPA sections 3005, 3010, and 3016 and Comprehensive Environmental at the time of the status change. CERCLA section 103, all of which Response, Compensation, and Liability Accordingly, the docket database impose duties on operators as well as Information System (CERCLIS)—that includes the following facility status owners of facilities. In addition, other contain information about Federal codes: subsections of CERCLA section 120 refer facilities submitted under the four U = Undetermined to facilities ‘‘owned or operated’’ by an provisions listed in CERCLA section N = No further remedial action planned agency or other instrumentality of the 120(c). (NFRAP)
VerDate 11
NFRAP is a term used in the 6.0 Information Contained on Docket http://www.epa.gov/oeca/fedfac/ Superfund site assessment program to Listing oversight/oversight.html or by calling identify facilities for which EPA has As discussed above, the update the HQ Docket Coordinator at (202) found that currently available information below is divided into three 564–2468. As of today, the total number information indicates that listing on the separate sections. The first section is a of Federal facilities that appear on the NPL is not likely and further assessment list of new facilities that are being added docket is 2,214. is not appropriate at the time. NFRAP to the docket. The second section is a Dated: September 26, 2001. status does not represent an EPA list of facilities that are being deleted Craig E. Hooks, determination that no environmental from the docket. The third section Director, Federal Facilities Enforcement threats are present at the facility or that comprises corrections of information Office. no further environmental response included on the docket. Each facility Docket Revisions action of any kind is necessary. NFRAP listed for the update has been assigned status means only that the facility does a code(s) that indicates a more specific Categories of Revisions for Docket not appear, from the information reason(s) for the addition, deletion, or Update by Correction Code available to EPA at this time, to warrant correction. The code key precedes the Categories for Deletion of Facilities listing on the NPL and that, therefore, lists. EPA anticipates no further involvement SARA, as amended by the Defense (1) Small-Quantity Generator by EPA in site assessment or cleanup at Authorization Act of 1997, specifies (2) Not Federally Owned the facility. However, additional that, for each Federal facility that is (3) Formerly Federally Owned CERCLA response actions by the included on the docket during an (4) No Hazardous Waste Generated (5) (This correction code is no longer Federal agency that owns or operates update, evaluation shall be completed used.) the facility, whether remedial or in accordance with a reasonable schedule. Therefore, all facilities on the (6) Redundant Listing/Site on Facility removal actions, may be necessary at a (7) Combining Sites Into One Facility/ facility that has NFRAP status. The additions list to this fourteenth docket update must submit a PA and, if Entries Combined status information contained in the (8) Does Not Fit Facility Definition docket database is the result of Regional warranted, an SI to EPA. The PA must include existing information about a site (9) (This correction code is no longer evaluation of information taken directly and its surrounding environment, used.) from CERCLIS. (CERCLIS is a database including a thorough examination of (10) (This correction code is no longer that helps EPA Headquarters and human, food-chain, and environmental used.) (11) (This correction code is no longer Regional personnel manage sites, targets, potential waste sources, and used.) programs, and projects. It contains the migration pathways. From information (12) (This correction code is no longer official inventory of all CERCLA (NPL in the PA or other information coming used.) and non-NPL) sites and supports all site to EPA’s attention, EPA will determine (13) (This correction code is no longer planning and tracking functions. It also whether a follow-up SI is required. An used.) integrates financial data from SI augments the data collected in a PA. preremedial, remedial, removal and (14) (This correction code is no longer An SI may reflect sampling and other used.) enforcement programs.) The status field data that are used to determine information was taken from CERCLIS whether further action or investigation Categories for Addition of Facilities and sent to the Regional docket is appropriate. This policy includes any (15) Small-Quantity Generator With coordinators for review. The results of facility for which there is a change in Either a RCRA 3016 or CERCLA 103 those reviews were incorporated into the identity of the responsible Federal Reporting Mechanism the status field in the docket database. agency. The reports should be submitted (16) One Entry Being Split Into Two/ Subsequently, an updated list of to the Federal facilities coordinator in Federal Agency Responsibility Being facilities having NFRAP status (those for the appropriate EPA Regional office. Split which an ‘‘N’’ appears in the status The facilities listed in each section are (17) New Information Obtained field) was generated; the list of updates organized by state and then grouped Showing That Facility Should Be since the previous publication of the alphabetically within each state by the Included docket is being published today. Federal agency responsible for the (18) Facility Was a Site on a Facility Important limitations apply to the list facility. Under each state heading is That Was Disbanded; Now a Separate of facilities that have NFRAP status. listed the name and address of the Facility First, the information is accurate only as facility, the Federal agency responsible (19) Sites Were Combined Into One of May 1, 2001. Second, a facility’s for the facility, the statutory provision(s) Facility status may change at any time because under which the facility was reported to (19A) New Facility EPA, and the correction code(s). of any number of factors, including new Categories for Corrections of site information or changing EPA The statutory provisions under which a facility reported are listed in a column Information About Facilities policies. Finally, the list of facilities that titled ‘‘Reporting Mechanism.’’ have NFRAP status is based on Regional (20) Reporting Provisions Change Applicable mechanisms are listed for (20A) Typo Correction/Name Change/ review of CERCLIS data, is provided for each facility: for example 3010, 3016, Address Change information purposes only, and should and 103(c). (21) Changing Responsible Federal not be considered binding upon either The complete list of Federal facilities Agency (New Responsible Federal the Federal agency responsible for the that now make up the docket and the Agency Must Submit proof of facility or EPA. complete list of facilities classified as no previously performed PA, which is The status information in the docket further remedial action planned subject to approval by EPA) database will be reviewed and a new list (NFRAP) are not being published today. (22) Changing Responsible Federal of facilities classified as NFRAP will be However, the lists are available to Agency and Facility Name (New published at each docket update. interested parties and can be obtained at Responsible Federal Agency Must
VerDate 11
Submit proof of previously performed (24) Reporting Mechanism Determined Note: Further information on definitions of PA, which is subject to approval by to Be Not Applicable After Review of categories can be obtained by calling the HQ EPA) Regional Files Docket Coordinator at (202) 564–2468. (23) New Reporting Mechanism Added at Update FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 ADDITIONS
Reporting Addition Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism code
ALASKA TOK FUEL TERMINAL ... 7 MI W OF TAK ALASKA HWY 2 TOK ...... AK 99780 ARMY ...... 3010 19A USARMY PARKS R F T A ...... 5TH ST BLDG. 790 ...... DUBLIN ...... CA 94568–5201 ARMY ...... 3010 19A FORMER LOWRY AFB TITAN 5 MILES SOUTH OF EAST QUIN- AURORA ...... CO 80137 AIR FORCE ...... 103c 19A MISSILE SITE 1 COMPLEX 2A. CY AV AND. ATLAS ‘‘E’’ MISSILE SITE #10 ...... 31⁄2 MILES NORTHWEST OF BRIGGS DALE CO 80611 AIR FORCE ...... 103c 19A BRIGGSDALE. NATIONAL GUARD STONE’S ROUTE 1 (BOSTON POST EAST LYME .... CT ...... ARMY ...... 103c 19A RANCH MILITARY RESERVA- ROAD) AND STONE’S RANCH TION. ROAD. ST LOUIS (EX) ORDNANCE 4300 GOODFELLOW BLVD ...... ST LOUIS ...... MO 63120 ARMY ...... 103c 19A PLANT. FWS–BOZEMAN FISH TECH 4050 BRIDGER CANYON ROAD BOZEMAN ...... MT 59715–4050 INTERIOR ...... 3010 19A CENTER. ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT FA- 624 MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ...... LINCOLN ...... NE 68524 ARMY ...... 103c 17 CILITY. DESCHUTES NF: DELL SPRINGS 11 AIR MI WNW OF CRESCENT CRESCENT .... OR 97733 AGRICULTURE .... 103c 19A FORMER FS WORK CAMP. T23S R7E S35 SW SE. BLM–GLASS BUTTES RETORTS 3 MI S OF MILEPOST 82 OFF BROTHERS .... OR 97712 INTERIOR ...... 103a 19A HWY 20, 20 MI SE OF HAMP- TON, T 23 S, R 23 E. BLM–RAWLINGS LANDFILL ...... P.O. BOX 953 ...... RAWLINS ...... WY 82301 INTERIOR ...... 103c 19A
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 DELETIONS
Reporting Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism Code
NEAL SMITH PROPERTY ...... RT #1 ...... ASHDOWN ...... AR 71822 ...... 3016 ...... 2 928TH TACTICAL UNIT ...... CHICAGO O’HARE AIRPORT ...... CHICAGO ...... IL 60666 AIR FORCE ...... 3010, 3016, 2 103a. TALLEY DEFENSE SYSTEMS 6 MILES S OF ELWOOD OFF RT ELWOOD ...... IL 60421 DEFENSE ...... 3010, 3005 ..... 6 JAAPGP64 53. LAKESHORE TERMINAL COM- US HWY 23 ...... HARRISVILLE .... MI 48740 DEFENSE ...... 103c, 3010 ..... 2 PANY, HARRISVILLE DFSP. BAY CITY CERT SITE ...... 9TH ST & 18TH ST W OF SAGI- BAY CITY ...... MI 48708 EPA ...... 3010 ...... 3 NAW ST & WATER ST. ELECTRO VOICE ...... 600 CECIL ST ...... BUCHANAN ...... MI 49107 EPA ...... 3010 ...... 2 DETROIT POSTAL SERVICE ...... 1365 W FORT ST ...... DETROIT ...... MI 48233 POSTAL SERVICE ...... 3010 ...... 1 HIGHLAND PARK POST OFFICE 13215 WOODWARD ...... HIGHLAND MI 48203 POSTAL SERVICE ...... 3010 ...... 4 PARK. ROSEVILLE POST OFFICE ...... 30550 GRATIOT AVE ...... ROSEVILLE ...... MI 48066 POSTAL SERVICE ...... 3010 ...... 1 YELLOW CREEK PRODUCTION 1 NASA DRIVE ...... IUKA ...... MS 38852 NASA ...... 103c, 3010, 2 FACILITY. 3005. CARLSBAD WASTE ISOLATION PO BOX 207 ...... CARLSBAD ...... NM ...... ENERGY ...... 103a ...... 7 PLANT. BR–MONTEREY CONSTRUC- 12 MI. N OF CARLSBAD OFF CARLSBAD ...... NM 88220 INTERIOR ...... 3010, 103c ..... 2 TION COMPANY. HWY 285. BAINBRIDGE SITE ...... 504 RESERVOIR RD ...... BAINBRIDGE ..... OH 45612 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 NEERS, CIVIL. WEST FORK LAKE BRIDGE ...... BRIDGE AT WEST FORK LAKE .. CINCINNATI ...... OH 45240 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 4 NEERS, CIVIL. DELAWARE SITE ...... 3920 US 23 NORTH ...... DELAWARE ...... OH 43015 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 NEERS, CIVIL. MARIETTA SITE ...... OHIO AND POST ST ...... MARIETTA ...... OH 45740 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 NEERS, CIVIL. MOUNT STERLING SITE ...... 21897 DEER CREEK LAKE ...... MT STERLING ... OH 43143 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 NEERS, CIVIL. CAESAR CREEK LAKE BRIDGE BRIDGE AT CAESAR CREEK WAYNESVILLE .. OH 45068 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 LAKE. NEERS, CIVIL. ZANESVILLE SITE ...... 4969 DILLON DAM RD ...... ZANESVILLE ...... OH 43701 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 1 NEERS, CIVIL. LONE MOUNTAIN POLLUTION JUNCTION HWY 281 & 412 ...... WAYNOKA ...... OK ...... 103a ...... 2 CONTROL FACILITY. SPATZ AIRBASE ...... 902 CARTER ...... HONDO ...... TX 78861 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010 ...... 2 NEERS, CIVIL. PERRIN AIR FORCE BASE ...... GRAYON CNTY ...... SHERMAN ...... TX 75090 AIR FORCE ...... 103c ...... 2 OFF–SPECIFICATION FER- RURAL WALKER COUNTY ...... TX ...... 103c ...... 2 TILIZER SITE.
VerDate 11
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 CORRECTIONS
Reporting Correction Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism code
c ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT 7 FRANKFORD AVENUE ... ANNISTON ...... AL 36201– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A 4199 3016, 3103C. o ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT SDSAN–DS–FE ...... ANNISTON ...... AL 36201– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 5080 3016, 103c
c BLM–TANACROSS AIR- 1 MI S OF TANACROSS TANACROSS ...... AK 99776 INTERIOR ...... 103c ...... 20A FIELD. ON AK HWY 63° 22′00″ N, 143° 20′ 00″ W. o BLM–TANACROSS AIR- 63D22MOOS2 ...... TANACROSS ...... AK 99776 INTERIOR ...... 103C FIELD.
c LUKE AIR FORCE RANGE BOUNDED BY I–8 & MEXI- GILA BEND ...... AZ 85337 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20a CAN BORDER. 3016, 103c. o LUKE AIR FORCE BASE ... 832 CSG/DE ...... LUKE AIR FORCE AZ 85309 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, BASE. 3016, 103c
c MARCH AIR FORCE BASE OLDB MARCH 3430 MARCH AFB ...... CA 92518– AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20A BUNDY AVENUE. 1504 3016, 103c, 103a. o MARCH AIR FORCE BASE 22CSG/CC ...... MARCH AFB ...... CA 92518 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 3016, 103c, 103a
c SHAVER LAKE LANDFILL DINKEY CREEK ROAD ...... SHAVER LAKE .... CA 93664 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c ...... 21 o SHAVER LAKE LANDFILL DINKEY CREEK ROAD ...... SHAVER LAKE .... CA 93664 INTERIOR ...... 103c
c SISKON MINE ...... T14N, R5E, SECS. 20–29 .. SOMES BAR ...... CA 95568 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c ...... 21 o SISKON MINE ...... T14N, R5E, SECS. 20–29 .. SOMES BAR ...... CA 95568 INTERIOR ...... 103c
c HERLONG MUNITIONS ..... 705 HALL STREET ...... SUSANVILLE ...... CA 96130 DEFENSE ...... 3016 ...... 21 o HERLONG MUNITIONS ..... 705 HALL STREET ...... SUSANVILLE ...... CA 96130 INTERIOR ...... 3016
c USNASA BOEING SSFL SANTA SUSANA FIELD SIMI HILLS ...... CA 91311 NASA ...... 3005, 3010, 20A AREA II. LAB NASA. 3016, 103c. o ROCKWELL INTER- WOOLSEY CANYON RD. .. SIMI HILLS ...... CA 93063 NASA ...... 3005, 3010, NATIONAL- 3016, 103c ROCKETDYNE DIV (NASA).
c NAVAL AIR WEAPONS 1 ADMINISTRATION CIR- CHINA LAKE ...... CA 93555– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A STATION CHINA LAKE. CLE. 6001 3016, 103c. o CHINA LAKE NAVAL CODE 2632 ...... CHINA LAKE ...... CA 93555 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, WEAPONS STATION. 3016, 103c.
c HQ FORT CARSON 7TH ID 801 TEVIS STREET BLDG. FORT CARSON ... CO 80913– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A DECAM. 302. 4000 3016, 103c. o FORT CARSON ...... DFAE BLDG. 304, AFZC– FT. CARSON ...... CO 80913 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, FE–EQ. 3016, 103c.
c PUEBLO CHEMICAL 45825 HWY 96 EAST ...... PUEBLO ...... CO 81006– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A DEPOT. 9330 3016, 103c. o PUEBLO ARMY DEPOT ..... I–50, 13 MI. E. OF PUEBLO PUEBLO ...... CO 81002 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 3016, 103c
c WASHINGTON, HEAD- 600 INDEPENDENCE AVE WASHINGTON ..... DC 20546 GENERAL SERV- 3010 ...... 21 QUARTERS. SW. ICES ADMINIS- TRATION. o WASHINGTON, HEAD- 600 INDEPENDENCE AVE WASHINGTON ..... DC 20546 NASA ...... 3010 QUARTERS. SW.
c WASHINGTON NAVY 1014 N STREET SE SUITE WASHINGTON ..... DC 20374– NAVY ...... 3010, 103c, 20A YARD. 3207. 5001 3016. o WASHINGTON NAVY 7TH & M STREETS, S.W. .. WASHINGTON ..... DC 20374 NAVY ...... 3010, 103c, YARD. 3016
c ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE 455 BYRON STREET, ROBINS AFB ...... GA 31098– AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20A SUITE 465. 1860 3016, 103c, 103a. o ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE WR–ALC/EM ...... WARNER ROBINS GA 31098 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, BASE. 3016, 103c, 103a
c NAVAL AIR STATION 7550 USS ESSEX STREET MILTON ...... FL 32570– NAVY ...... 3010, 103c ..... 20A WHITING FIELD. SUITE 200. 6155 o WHITING FIELD NAVAL FL HWY 87 A ...... MILTON ...... FL 32570 NAVY ...... 3010, 103c AIR STATION.
c IDAHO NATIONAL ENGI- US HWY 20/26, 40 MI SCOVILLE ...... ID 83401 ENERGY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A NEERING AND ENVI- WEST OF IDAHO FALLS. 3016, 103c, RONMENTAL LABORA- 103a. TORY.
VerDate 11
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 CORRECTIONS—Continued
Reporting Correction Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism code
o IDAHO NATIONAL ENGI- US HWY 20/26, 40 MI SCOVILLE ...... ID 83401 ENERGY ...... 3005, 3010, NEERING LABORATORY. WEST OF IDAHO FALLS. 3016, 103c, 103a
c BLM–COURIER GULCH ..... 0.3 MI N OF CITY, T4N TRIUMPH ...... ID 83333 INTERIOR ...... 3010, 103c ..... 20, 20A R18E S25 NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4. o BLM–COURIER GULCH ..... 0.3 MI N OF CITY ...... TRIUMPH ...... ID 83333 INTERIOR ...... 103c
c CHANUTE AIR FORCE OL–B AFBCA 1 AVIATION RANTOUL ...... IL 61866 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20A BASE. CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 3016, 103c. 101. o CHANUTE AIR FORCE 3345 ABG/DE ...... RANTOUL ...... IL 61868 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, BASE. 3016, 103c
c AURORA POST OFFICE N BROADWAY (RT. 25) AURORA ...... IL 60505 POSTAL SERVICE .. 103c ...... 20A SITE (NEW). AND INDIANA CIRCLE. o AURORA POST OFFICE .... N BROADWAY (RT. 25) AURORA ...... IL 60505 POSTAL SERVICE .. 103c AND INDIANA CIRCLE.
c US GSA FPRS CASAD STATE RT. 14 ...... NEW HAVEN ...... IN 46744 DEFENSE LOGIS- 3010, 301c ..... 20A DEPOT. TICS AGENCY. o NEW HAVEN DEFENSE STATE RT. 14 ...... NEW HAVEN ...... IN 46744 DEFENSE LOGIS- 3010, 103c LOGISTICS AGENCY TICS AGENCY. DEPOT.
c US ARMY COMBINED 853 W WAREHOUSE ...... FORT LEAVEN- KS 66027 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A ARMS CENTER. WORTH. 3016, 103c. o COMBINED ARMS CEN- FT. LEAVENWORTH RES- FT. LEAVEN- KS 66027 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, TER & FORT LEAVEN- ERVATION DEH–BLDG WORTH. 3016, 103c WORTH. 85.
c HQ. 101ST AIRBORNE HWY 41–A N AT STATE FORT CAMPBELL KY 42223 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A DIV. (AASLT) FT. CAMP- LINE. 3016, 103c. BELL. o HQ. 101ST AIRBORNE ATTN AFZB–DPW–E–P ..... FORT CAMPBELL KY 42223 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, DIV. (AASLT) FT. CAMP- 3016, 103c BELL.
c USAARMC & FORT KNOX US HWY 31 WEST ...... FORT KNOX ...... KY 40121 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A 3016, 103a, 103c. o USAARMC & FORT KNOX US HWY 32 WEST ...... FORT KNOX ...... KY 40121 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 3016, 103a, 103c
c USPFO FOR KENTUCKY .. 120 MINUTEMAN PKWY FRANKFORT ...... KY 40601– ARMY ...... 3010, 103c ..... 20A (BLDG120). 6192 o USPFO FOR KENTUCKY .. BOONE NATIONAL FRANKFORT ...... KY 40601 ARMY ...... 3010, 103c GUARD CENTER, P*.
c BLUE GRASS ARMY 2091 KINGSTON HWY ...... RICHMOND ...... KY 40475 ARMY ...... 3005, 103c, 20A DEPOT, RICHMOND. 3010. o LEXINGTON BLUEGRASS US HWY 421 ...... RICHMOND ...... KY 40475 ARMY ...... 3005, 103c, DEPOT ACTIVITY. 3010
c ENGLAND AIR FORCE 1719 CHAPPIE JAMES ...... ALEXANDRIA ...... LA 71303 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20A BASE. 3016, 103c. o ENGLAND AIR FORCE 23 CSG/DE ...... ENGLAND AFB .... LA 71311 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, BASE. 3016, 103c
c NAVAL AIR STATION PA- 22268 CEDAR POINT PATUXENT MD 20670– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A TUXENT RIVER. ROAD. RIVER. 5409 3016, 103c, 103a. o PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL NE OF ROUTE 235 ...... PATUXENT MD 20670 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, AIR STATION. RIVER. 3016, 103c, 103a
c LT JOHN A. FERRA US NORTH ST ...... DANVERS ...... MA 01923 ARMY ...... 103c ...... 20A ARMY RESERVE CEN- TER. o DANVERS ARMY RE- NORTH ST ...... DANVERS ...... MA 01923 ARMY ...... 103c SERVE CENTER.
c NAVAL AIR STATION 1251 ORION STREET ...... BRUNSWICK ...... ME 04011– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A BRUNSWICK. 5009 3016, 103c, 103a. o BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR BOUNDED BY ROUTES 24 BRUNSWICK ...... ME 04011 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, STATION. & 123. 3016, 103c, 103a
VerDate 11
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 CORRECTIONS—Continued
Reporting Correction Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism code
c PHELPS/COLLINS ANG AIRPORT ROAD ...... ALPENA ...... MI 49704 AIR FORCE ...... 3010, 3016, 20A BASE. 103a, 103c. o PHELPS/COLLINS AIR- AIRPORT ROAD ...... ALPENA ...... MI 49707 AIR FORCE ...... 3010, 3016, PORT. 103a, 103c
c BIA–SHAKOPEE DUMP ..... SECTION 1 T115N R23W .. SHAKOPEE ...... MN 55379 INTERIOR ...... 103c ...... 20A o BIA–SHAKOPEE DUMP ..... T115NR23W ...... SHAKOPEE ...... MN INTERIOR ...... 103c
c MINOT AIR FORCE BASE 5 CES CE 320 PEACE- MINOT AIR ND 58705– AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 20A KEEPER PLACE. FORCE BASE. 5006 3016, 103c. o MINOR AIR FORCE BASE 41 CSG/CC ...... MINOT AFB ...... ND 58705 AIR FORCE ...... 3005, 3010, 3016, 103c
c WASTE ISOLATION PILOT 30 MILES E OF CARLS- CARLSBAD ...... NM 88221 ENERGY ...... 3005, 3010, 23 PLANT. BAD/JAL HWY. 103a, 3016. o WASTE ISOLATION PILOT 30 MILES E OF CARLS- CARLSBAD ...... NM 88221 ENERGY ...... 3016 PLANT. BAD/JAL HWY.
c GLENN RESEARCH CEN- 6100 BROOKPARK ROAD CLEVELAND ...... OH 44135 NASA ...... 3010, 3016, 20A TER AT LEWIS FIELD. 103a, 103c. o LEWIS RESEARCH CEN- 2100 BROOKPARK ROAD CLEVELAND ...... OH 44135 NASA ...... 3010, 3016, TER CLEVELAND. 103a, 103c
c MCALESTER ARMY AM- 1 C TREE RD ...... MCALESTER ...... OK 74501– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A MUNITION PLANT. 9002 3016, 103c. o MCALESTER ARMY AM- HIGHWAY 69 ...... MCALESTER ...... OK 74501 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, MUNITION PARK. 3016, 103c
c NORTH PACIFIC DIVISION 1491 NW GRAHAM AVE .... TROUTDALE ...... OR 97060 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010, 103c ..... 20A MATERIALS LABORA- NEERS, CIVIL. TORY. o NORTH PACIFIC DIVISION 1491 NW GRAHAM AVE .... TROUTDALE ...... OR 97050 CORPS OF ENGI- 3010, 103c MATERIALS LABORA- NEERS, CIVIL. TORY.
c FWS–SACHUEST POINT P.O. BOX 307 ...... MIDDLETOWN ..... RI 02813 INTERIOR ...... 103c ...... 20A NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE. o FWS–SACHUEST POINT P.O. BOX 307 ...... CHARLESTOWN RI 02813 INTERIOR ...... 103c NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.
c NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIV- 5722 INTEGRITY DRIVE .... MILLINGTON ...... TN 38054– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A ITY MID-SOUTH (BRAC 5045 3016, NAS MEMPHIS). 103c,103a. o MEMPHIS NAVAL AIR MILLINGTON–ARLINGTON MILLINGTON ...... TN 38054 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, STATION. ROAD. 3016, 103c, 103a
c US NAVY 8100 W JEFFERSON AVE- DALLAS ...... TX 75211 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A SOUTHNAVFACENG NUE. 3016, 103c. COM (BRAC NAS DAL- LAS). o DALLAS NAVAL AIR STA- JEFFERSON AVENUE ...... GRAND PRAIRIE TX 75222 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, TION. 3016, 103c
c VERMONT AIR NATIONAL 10 FALCON STREET, SOUTH BUR- VT 05403– AIR FORCE ...... 3010, 103c, 20A GUARD. SUITE A. LINGTON. 5873 3016. o VERMONT AIR NATIONAL BURLINGTON IAP ...... BURLINGTON ...... VT 05401 AIR FORCE ...... 3010, 103c, GUARD. 3016
c US ARMY ENGINEERING 9430 JACKSON LOOP ...... FORT BELVOIR ... VA 22060– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A CENTER FORT 5130 3016, 103c. BELVOIR. o FORT BELVOIR ...... ATZA–DEH–EN BLDG FORT BELVOIR ... VA 22060– ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 1442, WILLIAMS HALL. 5113 3016, 103c
c MARINE CORPS COMBAT 3250 CATLIN AVENUE ...... QUANTICO ...... VA 22134– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A DEVELOPMENT COM- 5001 3016, 103c. MAND QUANTICO. o QUANTICO MARINE N/A ...... QUANTICO ...... VA 22134– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, CORPS COMBAT DE- 5001 3016, 103c VELOPMENT CENTER.
cFS–OKANOGAN– 19284 HWY 20, 300 FT W WINTHROP ...... WA 98862 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c ...... 20A WENATCHEE NF:. OF DOWNTOWN. LOWER WINTHROP COM- WINTHROP POUND.
VerDate 11
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET UPDATE #14 CORRECTIONS—Continued
Reporting Correction Facility name Facility address City State ZIP Agency mechanism code
oFS–OKANOGAN– HWY 20, 300 FT W OF WINTHROP ...... WA 98862 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c WENATCHEE NF: WIN- DOWNTOWN WIN- THROP LOWER COM- THROP. POUND.
cFS–OKANOGAN– 23 INTERCITY AIRPORT WINTHROP ...... WA 98862 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c ...... 20A WENATCHEE NF: RD, 3 MI SE OF WIN- NORTH CASCADES THROP. SMOKEJUMPER BASE. oFS–OKANOGAN– 23 INTERCITY AIRPORT TWISP ...... WA 98862 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c WENATCHEE NF: RD 5 MI N OF TWISP. NORTH CASCADES SMOKE JUMPER BASE.
c BLACKWELL SANITARY SECTION 11 T35N R15E ... BLACKWELL ...... WI 54541 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c, 103a, 20A LANDFILL/NICOLET NA- 3016. TIONAL FOREST. o NICOLET NF: LAONA SAN- SECTION 11 T35N R15E ... BLACKWELL ...... WI 54541 AGRICULTURE ...... 103c, 103a, ITARY LANDFILL. 3016
c VANCOUVER NATIONAL HQ. VANCOUVER BAR- VANCOUVER ...... WA 98661 ARMY ...... 3010, 3016, 20 GUARD BARRACKS. RACKS B–638. 103c. o VANCOUVER NATIONAL HQ. VANCOUVER BAR- VANCOUVER ...... WA 98661 ARMY ...... 3016, 103c GUARD BARRACKS. RACKS B–638.
c YAKIMA FIRING CENTER I–82, 4 MI N OF CITY ...... YAKIMA ...... WA 98901 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A 3016, 103c. o YAKIMA FIRING CENTER 182 4 MI N OF CITY ...... YAKIMA ...... WA 98901 ARMY ...... 3005, 3010, 3016, 103c
c CAMP WESLEY HARRIS SEABECK HWY 3 MI W OF BREMERTON ...... WA 98310 NAVY ...... 3010, 103c ..... 20 MARINE FACILITY. CY. o CAMP WESLEY HARRIS SEABECK HWY 3 MI W OF BREMERTON ...... WA 98310 NAVY ...... 103c MARINE FACILITY. CY.
c JACKSON PARK HOUSING AUSTIN DRIVE AT SHORE BREMERTON ...... WA 98312 NAVY ...... 3010, 3016, 20A COMPLEX. DRIVE. 103c. o JACKSON PARK HOUSING AUSTIN DRIVE AT SHORE BREMERTON ...... WA 98312 NAVY ...... 3010, 3016, DRIVE. 103c
c PUGET SOUND NAVAL 1ST STREET CODE 106 .... BREMERTON ...... WA 98314– NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A SHIPYARD. 5000 3016, 103c, 103a. o PUGET SOUND NAVAL 1ST STREET CODE 106 .... BREMERTON ...... WA 98314 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, SHIPYARD. 3016, 103c, 103a
c NAVAL UNDERSEA WAR- HWY 308, E END ...... KEYPORT ...... WA 98345 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, 20A FARE ENGINEERING 3016, 103c, STATION (4 AREAS). 103a. o KEYPORT NAVAL UNDER- HWY 306, E END ...... KEYPORT ...... WA 98345 NAVY ...... 3005, 3010, SEA WARFARE ENG 3016, 103c, STATION. 103a
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET NFRAP STATUS FACILITIES UPDATE
Reporting Facility name Facility address City State Zip Agency mechanism
EAKER AIR FORCE BASE ...... 97 CSG/DEEV ...... EAKER AFB ...... AR 72315– AIR FORCE ...... 3005 3010 5000 3016 103c PINE BLUFF ARSENAL ...... HIGHWAY 65 ...... PINE BLUFF ...... AR 71602 ARMY ...... 3005 3010 3016 103c 103a FDA NATIONAL CENTER FOR TOXI- 3900 NCTR RD ...... JEFFERSON ...... AR 72079 HEALTH AND 3010 COLOGICAL RESEARCH. HUMAN SERV- ICES. BLM-KAISER EAGLE MOUNTAIN ...... N OF HWY 10 8M OFF KAISER RD .... DESERT CENTER CA 92239 INTERIOR ...... 103c IDAHO SPRINGS MERCURY SITE ...... T35 R73W S36 ...... IDAHO SPRINGS CO 80452 INTERIOR ...... 3016 103c CLAIBORN RANGE, ENGLAND AIR LA HWY 488 13M SW OF ALEXAN- ALEXANDRIA ...... LA 71301 AGRICULTURE ...... 3010 FORCE BASE. DRIA. MARTIN MARIETTA AEROSPACE ...... 13800 OLD GENTILLY ROAD ...... NEW ORLEANS ... LA 70129 NASA ...... 3005 3010 3016 103c BIA-SHAKOPEE DUMP ...... SECTION 1 T115N R23W ...... SHAKOPEE ...... MN 55379 INTERIOR ...... 103c CONSTRUCTION BATTALION CEN- 5200 CBC 2ND STREET ...... GULFPORT ...... MS 39501 NAVY ...... 3010 103c TER GULFPORT. 103a BLM-DUVAL CORPORATION ...... 20 MILES EAST OF CARLSBAD ...... CARLSBAD ...... NM 88220 INTERIOR ...... 103c 3016 BLM-I&W HOT OIL SERVICE ...... T17S, R31E, SEC21 ...... LOCO HILLS ...... NM 87415 INTERIOR ...... 103c 3016 BLM-MARATHON OIL CO., INDIAN NM INTERIOR ...... 103c BASIN PLANT.
VerDate 11
FEDERAL AGENCY HAZARDOUS WASTE COMPLIANCE DOCKET NFRAP STATUS FACILITIES UPDATE—Continued
Reporting Facility name Facility address City State Zip Agency mechanism
BLM-TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES T13SR4WSEC22NMPH ...... TRUTH OR CON- NM INTERIOR ...... 103c 3016 LANDFILL. SEQUENCES. AMERICAN ANTIMONY CORPORA- T 26N R. 34E SECTION 28 ...... LOVELOCK ...... NV 89419 INTERIOR ...... 103c TION. INDIAN SPRINGS LANDFILL ...... CLARK COUNTY NV INTERIOR ...... 103c NIAGARA STATION ...... YOUNGSTOWN ... NY 14174 GENERAL SERV- 103c ICES ADMINIS- TRATION. PLANT #3 (MCDONNELL-DOUGLAS 2000 N. MEMORIAL AVENUE ...... TULSA ...... OK 74101 AIR FORCE ...... 3005 3010 CORP). 3016 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #2 ... S2 SE4 SEC4 T7N R13W ...... CARNEGIE ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #3 ... NE/4 NE4 SEC10 T7N R13W ...... CARNEGIE ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #4 ... W2 NW4 SEC35 T8N R13W ...... CARNEGIE ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #5 ... W/2 SW/4 SEC 16 T6N R11 ...... APACHE ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #6 ... SE4 SE4 SEC34 T9N R12 ...... FORT COBB ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #7 ... SW4 NE4 SEC14 T9N R12W ...... FORT COBB ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c BIA-CADDO COUNTY LANDFILL #8 ... NE4 NE4 SEC22 T9N R12W ...... FORT COBB ...... OK INTERIOR ...... 103c NEW ARMY AVIATION SUPPORT...... ISLA GRANDE ROAD OFF HACIA SAN JUAN ...... PR ARMY ...... 103c FERNANDEZ. LA PORTE AIR NATIONAL GUARD .... HIGHWAY 225 ...... LAPORTE ...... TX 77571 AIR FORCE ...... 103c RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE ...... 12 ABG/DE ...... SAN ANTONIO .... TX 78150 AIR FORCE ...... 3005 3010 3016 103c 103a FORT SAM HOUSTON ...... BLDG 1183 TAYLOR ROAD ...... SAN ANTONIO .... TX 78234 ARMY ...... 3005 3010 3016 103c GALVESTON FEDERAL ARMORY ...... 5301 AVENUE SOUTH ...... GALVESTON ...... TX 77550 ARMY ...... 3016 103c SAGINAW (CSMS #1) ...... 855 E. INDUSTRIAL ...... SAGINAW ...... TX 76131 ARMY ...... 3016 SPR-BIG HILL ...... 23 MI SW OF PT. ARTHUR ...... PORT ARTHUR ... TX 77641 ENERGY ...... 103c FORT WORTH FEDERAL SUPPLY 501 FELIX STREET ...... FORT WORTH ..... TX 76101 GENERAL SERV- 3010 103c CENTER. ICES ADMINIS- TRATION. NAVAL AIR STATION KINGSVILLE ..... 554 MCCAIN ST STE 310 ...... KINGSVILLE ...... TX 78363 NAVY ...... 3010 103c 103a 3005 CUSTOMS-MILLINGTON ADDITION ... 4 BL EAST OF FM 170 ...... PRESIDIO ...... TX 79845 TREASURY ...... 103c GENERAL BILLY MITCHELL FIELD .... 440 CSG/DE 300 E. COLLEGE AVE. .. MILWAUKEE ...... WI 53207 AIR FORCE ...... 3010 103c 3016 WYOMING ARNG OMS NO. 4 ...... 5500 BISHOP BOULEVARD ...... CHEYENNE ...... WY 82009– ARMY ...... 103c 3320
[FR Doc. 01–24595 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] registered or tracked mail. (EPA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Regional Office contact information is AGENCY provided in the Proposal Guidelines.) [FRL–7070–4] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADDRESSES: Besides obtaining the AGENCY Proposal Guidelines on EPA’s website at Office of Research and Development, www.epa.gov/oust, interested persons National Center for Environmental [FRL–7070–3] can also obtain a copy by contacting Assessment, Board of Scientific Counselors’ Subcommittee Meeting Leaking Underground Storage Tank their EPA Regional office or by calling the RCRA, Superfund, and EPCRA Call (LUST) Trust Fund Cooperative AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agreements—USTfields Pilots; Center at the following numbers: Callers Agency (EPA). Announcement of Deadline Extension outside the Washington, DC metro area ACTION: Notice, revised meeting times at 1–800–424–9346; callers in the on October 10–11, 2001. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Washington, DC metro area at (703) Agency (EPA). 412–9810; TDD for the hearing impaired SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal ACTION: Request for proposals; notice of at 1–800–553–7672. Advisory Committee Act, Public Law deadline extension. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C., App. 2) SUMMARY: Due to the recent national Steven McNeely, EPA Office of notification is hereby given that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, events, EPA is extending the deadline Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) at Office of Research and Development for submitting proposals for USTfields (703) 603–7165, (ORD), National Center for Pilots from October 22, 2001 to [email protected], or Tim R. November 19, 2001. Refer to Federal Environmental Assessment (NCEA), Smith, EPA OUST at (703) 603–7158, Register, 66 FR 44345, August 23, 2001 Board of Scientific Counselors [email protected]. for more information. Subcommittee (BOSC), will hold a DATES: The deadline for submitting Dated: September 25, 2001. public meeting. proposals for the USTfields Pilots is Devereaux Barnes, DATES: The meeting will be held on extended to November 19, 2001. All Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of October 10 and 11, 2001. The meeting proposals must be postmarked by that Solid Waste and Emergency Response. will begin at 8:30 am on October 10 and date. States, tribes, and intertribal [FR Doc. 01–24598 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] adjourn at approximately 6:00 pm. On consortia must send their proposals to BILLING CODE 6560–50–P October 11 the meeting will begin at their respective EPA Regional office via 8:00 am for approximately one and one
VerDate 11
quarter hour. The Sub Committee recommendations of the Subcommittee ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Members will then have a writing and in the context of the EPA and ORD AGENCY session for three hours. The Members Strategic Plans. As a next step, standing [FRL–7070–6] will need to leave no later than noon BOSC Subcommittees have been due to the increased security at the developed that will work closely with Announcement of Availability and airports. All times noted are Eastern the individual ORD laboratories and Request for Comment on Time. centers. The membership of each of the ‘‘Recognizing Completion of ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at standing subcommittees have been Corrective Action Activities at RCRA the Charles Glover Building, 808 17th selected to reflect the missions of each Facilities’’ Guidance Street, NW, 4th Floor Conference Room, ORD component within the risk AGENCY: Environmental Protection Washington, DC 20006. Seating is assessment paradigm. The upcoming Agency (EPA). limited; therefore, you must notify meeting is the first step in this working Joanna Foellmer, Designated Federal partnership between the NCEA-BOSC ACTION: Notice. Official, Board of Scientific Counselors Subcommittee and NCEA management SUMMARY: The intent of this notice is to Subcommittee, to confirm attendance no and staff. later than October 4 (address listed announce the availability of the below). NCEA is in process of developing a ‘‘Recognizing Completion of Corrective response to a series of questions that Action Activities at RCRA Facilities’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: were submitted by the BOSC to help the draft guidance memorandum, and invite Joanna Foellmer at (202) 564–3208. NCEA-BOSC Subcommittee gauge the public comment. By inviting comment, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board progress of the Center since its 1997 we hope to encourage greater of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) was review and to evaluate science and involvement by States the regulated established to provide objective and planning activities that NCEA has community, members of the public, and independent counsel to the Office of other stakeholders. Research and Development (ORD) on developed to address the priorities and DATES: Comments may be submitted the management and operation of ORD’s directions included in the EPA and ORD until November 1, 2001. research programs. The primary Strategic Plans. The October meeting functions of BOSC are: (1) to evaluate will include a discussion of the NCEA ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on science and engineering research responses to the questions and the draft guidance, you should send an programs, laboratories, and research- opportunities for public comment. original and two copies of your comments, referencing docket number management practices of ORD and Anyone desiring a draft agenda may F–2001–CCAA–FFFFF. If using regular recommend actions to improve their fax their request to Joanna Foellmer at U.S. Postal Service mail to: RCRA quality and/or strengthen their Fax Number 202–565–0061. If you Docket Information Center, U.S. relevance to the mission of the EPA; and would prefer to e-mail your request, the (2) to evaluate and provide advice Environmental Protection Agency address is: [email protected]. Headquarters (EPA HQ), Office of Solid concerning the use of peer review Any member of the public wishing to within ORD to sustain and enhance the Waste, Ariel Rios Building (5305G), make a presentation at the meeting quality of science in EPA. 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., In September 1997, a programmatic should contact Joanna Foellmer, U.S. Washington, DC 20460–0002. If using review of ORD’s National Center of Environmental Protection Agency, special delivery such as overnight Environmental Assessment (NCEA) by Office of Research and Development, express service send to: RCRA Docket an Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the BOSC National Center for Environmental Information Center (RIC), Crystal provided an opportunity for NCEA to Assessment, (Mail Code: 8601D), 1200 Gateway I, 1235 Jefferson Davis look at its past, present, and future. As Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Highway, First Floor, Arlington, VA part of the review, the staff and Washington, DC 20460; or by telephone 22202. Hand deliveries of comments management of NCEA prepared a ‘‘Self- at (202) 564–3208. In general, each should be made to the Arlington, VA Study Report,’’ which was submitted to individual making an oral presentation address above. You may also submit the BOSC Subcommittee for pre-meeting will be limited to a total of three comments electronically through the review. During the meeting, the minutes. Requests for oral comments internet to: [email protected]. Subcommittee discussed the Self-Study must be in writing (e-mail, fax or mail) Comments in electronic format must Report responses with NCEA and received by Joanna Foellmer no also reference the docket number F– management and staff. They gathered later than noon Eastern Time one week 2001–CCAA–FFFFF. If you choose to additional comments from the staff prior to the meeting. E-mail must be in submit your comments electronically, regarding the organization, WordPerfect formats suitable for you should submit them as an ASCII file management, human resources, and Windows 95/98. The draft report will be and should avoid the use of special their professional relationships with the available mid September. Anyone characters and any form of encryption. You should not submit electronically Agency and with external users of interested in a copy can download the confidential business information (CBI). NCEA products. A final report from the file off the internet. Please contact BOSC Ad Hoc Subcommittee, dated You must submit an original and two Joanna Foellmer for the correct internet April 1998, was submitted to NCEA. copies of CBI under separate cover to: address. The final report included the RCRA CBI Document Control Officer, conclusions and recommendations of Dated: September 25, 2001. Office of Solid Waste, U.S. EPA, Ariel the Subcommittee based on the input Art Payne, Rios Building (5303W), 1200 from the meeting, the Self Study Report, Director, National Center for Environmental Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington and the experience of the Assessment. DC 20460–0002. Subcommittee. [FR Doc. 01–24602 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Any public comment we receive and Since the 1998 report, NCEA has supporting materials will be available worked to refocus some of its activities BILLING CODE 6560–50–P for viewing in the RCRA Information and directions in response to the Center (RIC), located at Crystal Gateway
VerDate 11
I, First Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis commenters electronically other than to or operator of a facility that RCRA Highway, Arlington, VA. The RIC is seek clarification of electronic corrective action is complete at the open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday comments that my be garbled in facility. This information can promote through Friday, excluding federal transmission or during conversion to transfer of ownership of the property holidays. To review docket materials, paper form, as discussed above. and, in some cases, can help return we recommend that you make an Dated: September 25, 2001. previously used commercial and appointment by calling 703–603–9230. Elizabeth Cotsworth, industrial properties, or ‘‘brownfields,’’ to productive use. Further, once the You may copy a maximum of 100 pages Director, Office of Solid Waste. from any regulatory docket at no charge. regulatory agency implementing Additional copies cost $0.15 per page. Memorandum corrective action makes a determination The index and some supporting Subject: Recognizing Completion of that corrective action is complete, it can materials are available electronically. Corrective Action Activities at RCRA remove that facility from its workload See the Supplementary Information Facilities universe and focus agency resources on section of this Federal Register notice From: OSWER OECA other facilities. Finally, because for information on accessing the index To: RCRA Division Directors, Regions completion determinations should be and these supporting materials. I–X Enforcement Division Directors, made through a process that provides The Agency is posting this document Regions I–X Regional Counsel adequate public involvement, the on the Corrective Action website: http:/ This memorandum provides guidance process of making a formal completion /www.epa.gov/correctiveaction. If you to the Regions and the authorized States determination assures the public an would like to receive a hard copy, on acknowledging completion of opportunity to review and comment on please call the RCRA Hotline at 800– corrective action activities at RCRA the cleanup, and to pursue available 424–0346 or TDD 800–553–7672 treatment, storage and disposal administrative and judicial challenges (hearing impaired). In the Washington, facilities.1 It provides guidance on when to the agency’s decision.4 DC, metropolitan area, call 703–412– completion determinations should be When Should an Agency Make a 9810 or TDD 703–412–3323. made, and the appropriate procedures Determination That Corrective Action Is For more detailed information on EPA and the authorized States should Complete? specific aspects of the draft guidance follow when making completion of document, contact Barbara Foster, corrective action determinations.2 At some facilities, EPA or the Office of Solid Waste 5303W, U.S. authorized State will determine that no Why Recognize Completion of corrective action is necessary. At Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Corrective Action? Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, facilities where corrective action is DC 20460, (703–308–7057), An official determination that necessary, the regulatory agency should ([email protected]). corrective action is complete, made make a determination that corrective through appropriate procedures, action is complete when a review of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The draft benefits the owner or operator of the remedy indicates that releases have guidance document will be available on facility, the regulatory agency been addressed as necessary to protect the Internet at: http://www.epa.gov/ implementing the corrective action, and human health and the environment (see correctiveaction.completion of the public. By making a formal 40 CFR 264.101). Compliance with corrective action activities. This completion determination, the corrective action requirements should guidance will take the form of a regulatory agency (EPA or the be evaluated against applicable memorandum from EPA headquarters to 3 authorized State ) can inform the owner requirements, e.g., the permit, a RCRA the Regional offices. EPA developed this section 3008(h) order, or 40 CFR Part memorandum to provide guidance to 1 The RCRA statutory provisions and EPA 264, Subart F. Regulatory agencies EPA and State regulators in recognizing regulations referenced in this document contain should consider the May 1, 1996 completion determinations at RCRA legally binding requirements. This document does Advance Notice of Proposed treatment, storage, and disposal not substitute for those provisions or regulations, nor is it a regulation itself. Thus, it does not impose Rulemaking (ANPR) and other Agency facilities. By recognizing completion of legally-binding requirements on EPA, States, or the guidance, in making completion corrective action activities, the agency regulated community, and may not apply to a determinations (see 61 FR 19432). can inform the owner or operator that particular situation based upon the circumstances. EPA and State decisionmakers retain the discretion RCRA corrective action is complete at to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that What Procedures Should an Agency the facility. This information can differ from this guidance where appropriate. Any Follow to Recognize Completion of promote transfer of ownership of the decisions regarding a particular facility will be Corrective Action? property and, in some cases, can help made based on the applicable statutes and regulations. Therefore, interested parties are free to The regulations do not have explicit return previously used commercial and raise questions and objections about the procedures for recognizing completion industrial properties, or ‘‘brownfields,’’ appropriateness of the application of this guidance of corrective action, so the regulators to productive use. to a particular situation, and EPA will consider have considerable flexibility in The official record for this notice will whether or not the recommendations or interpretations in the guidance are appropriate in developing procedures for making be kept in paper form. Accordingly, we that situation. EPA may change this guidance in the completion determinations. The will transfer all comment and input future. regulatory agency implementing the received electronically into paper form 2 ‘‘Completion of corrective action’’ refers, for the corrective action program in that State and place them in the official record, purposes of this memorandum, to the satisfaction (i.e., the authorized State program or, in which also will include all comments of obligations pertaining to past releases. Nothing in this memorandum is meant to address submitted directly in writing. The obligations regarding future releases at a facility. program. It should be noted that in authorized official record is the paper record For example, the fact that the Agency has States, EPA may be the lead Agency implementing maintained at the RCRA Information determined, at a permitted facility, that cleanup of corrective action at a facility under the authority of Center. past releases is ‘‘complete,’’ would not affect the RCRA section 3008(h). facility’s permitting obligation to report and clean 4 The Agency anticipates that at facilities where All input will be considered up future releases at the facility. meaningful public involvement begins early in the thoroughly and seriously by EPA. EPA 3 Authorized State for purposes of this memo corrective action process, challenges at this point will not immediately reply to refers to a State with an authorized corrective action are less likely.
VerDate 11
unauthorized States, EPA) should agencies may choose to use alternate By following appropriate procedures ensure that a completion determination terminology (e.g., a ‘‘no permit the authorized agency can make a has been made through appropriate necessary determination’’) to refer to sound, well informed completion procedures. Providing meaningful this decision, though it is issued determination. However, EPA notes opportunities for public participation in through the permit denial process or that, whether at a permitted or non- the decisionmaking process should be a authorized equivalent. Regardless of the permitted facility and regardless of the crucial component of a completion terminology used, the basis for the completion determination procedure determination procedure. The Agency decision should be stated clearly, used, if EPA or the authorized state believes that the following generally are generally that: (1) There are no ongoing discovers unreported or misrepresented appropriate procedures for making treatment, storage, or disposal activities releases subsequent to the completion completion determinations.5 that require a permit; (2) all closure and determination, then EPA and the At permitted facilities, the agency post-closure requirements applicable at authorized State may conclude that (EPA or the authorized States) should the regulated units have been fulfilled; additional cleanup is needed.7 modify the permit to reflect the agency’s and (3) all corrective action obligations Where Can I Obtain Additional determination that corrective action is have been met. complete. The current regulations in 40 Information About Completion of EPA and the authorized States may Corrective Action? CFR 270.42 provide procedural develop procedures for recognizing requirements for facility requested completion of corrective action at non- For further information on completion permit modifications. In most cases, permitted facilities other than the of corrective action, please contact completion of corrective action will be permit decision process described Barbara Foster at 703–308–7057 or Peter a Class 3 permit modification, and the above. For example, an agency may Neves at 202–564–6072. agency should follow those procedures have procedures for issuing a notice [FR Doc. 01–24603 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] (or authorized State equivalent), informing the facility and the public BILLING CODE 6560–50–P including the procedures for public that the facility has met its corrective involvement. In cases where no other action obligations, rather than issuing a permit conditions remain, the permit final permit decision. EPA believes the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION could be modified not only to reflect the alternative procedures should provide AGENCY completion determination, but also to procedural protections equivalent to, [FRL–7070–5] change the expiration date of the permit although not necessarily identical to, to allow earlier permit expiration (see those required by EPA’s 40 CFR part 124 San Gabriel Superfund Site; Notice of 40 CFR 270.42 (Appendix I(A)(6)). requirements (or the authorized State At non-permitted facilities where Administrative Settlement facility-wide corrective action is equivalent). Owners and operators should be aware that informal AGENCY: Environmental Protection complete, and all other RCRA Agency (EPA). obligations at the facility have been communications regarding the current ACTION: Notice. satisfied, EPA or the authorized State status of cleanup activities at the site are not the same as completion may acknowledge completion of SUMMARY: determinations. In accordance with the corrective action by terminating interim Comprehensive Environmental Use of an alternative procedure might status through final administrative Response, Compensation and Liability be especially useful in acknowledging disposition of the facility’s permit Act of 1980, as amended by the completion of a corrective action application (see 40 CFR 270.73(a)). To Superfund Amendments and remedy (or a determination that no do so, the permitting authority at the Reauthorization Act of 1986 (CERCLA), corrective action is necessary) that facility (EPA or the authorized State or 42 U.S.C. 9600 et seq., notice is hereby covers only a portion of the facility. A both, depending on the authorization given that an Agreement and Covenant partial completion determination might status of the State) should process a Not to Sue (Prospective Purchaser be used at a facility that has cleaned up final decision following the procedures Agreement, or PPA) associated with the a portion of a facility and where a for permit denial in 40 CFR part 124, or San Gabriel Superfund Site Superfund 6 partial completion determination will authorized equivalent. Site was executed by the U.S. facilitate the productive reuse of that EPA recognizes that referring to this Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) portion of the facility. An alternative decision as a ‘‘permit denial’’ can be on September 25, 2001. The Prospective approach could also acknowledge confusing to the public and problematic Purchaser Agreement resolves potential completion of corrective action at a to the facility when the facility is in claims of the United States under facility with ongoing RCRA activities. compliance, is not seeking a permit, and sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 For example, a facility may be does not have an active permit U.S.C. 9606 and 9607(a) against conducting post-closure care at a ‘‘application.’’ Therefore, regulatory Northrop Grumman Systems regulated unit under an alternate non- Corporation, a Delaware corporation, 5 Of course, if a facility’s permit provides permit authority, as allowed under the (the Purchaser). The Purchaser plans to otherwise, these procedures would not be October 22, 1998 Post-Closure rule (see acquire Aerojet-General Corporation’s appropriate at that facility. 63 FR 56710), yet may have completed 6 Under EPA permit denial procedures in 40 CFR electronics plant, comprising corrective action at its solid waste part 124, EPA must issue, based on the approximately 70, located at 1100 West administrative record, a notice of intent to deny the management units. In this case, interim Hollyvale Avenue, Azusa, California facility permit (see 40 CFR 124.6(b) and 124.9). The status generally should not be notice must be publicly distributed, accompanied terminated because all RCRA by a statement of basis or fact sheet, and there must 7 Of course, if EPA subsequently discovers a be an opportunity for public comment, including an obligations have not been met, but it situation that may present an imminent and opportunity for a public hearing, on EPA’s may be appropriate to issue a letter (as substantial endangerment to human health or the proposed permit denial (see 40 CFR 124.7, 124.8, described above) recognizing environment, EPA may elect to use its RCRA 124.10, 124.11, and 124.12). In making a final section 7003 imminent and substantial permit determination, EPA must respond to any completion of the corrective action endangerment authority, or other applicable public comments (see 40 CFR 124.17). Under 40 obligations to bring finality to that authorities, to require additional work at the CFR 124.19, final decisions are subject to appeal. process. facility.
VerDate 11
within the Baldwin Park Operable Unit A copy of the Agreement may be invites the general public and other (BPOU) of the San Gabriel Valley obtained from Lewis Maldonado, Senior Federal agencies to take this Superfund Site. The Purchaser intends Counsel (ORC–3), Office of Regional opportunity to comment on the to use the plant for the design and Counsel, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 following information collection(s), as manufacture of space-based sensors and Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA required by the Paperwork Reduction smart weapons. 94105. Comments should reference Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An A notice of the proposed PPA and ‘‘Northrop Grumman PPA, San Gabriel agency may not conduct or sponsor a opportunity for public comment was Superfund Site’’ and ‘‘Docket No. 2001– collection of information unless it published August 10, 2001 at 66 FR 15’’ and should be addressed to Lewis displays a currently valid control 42227. Based on a review of the public Maldonado at the above address. number. No person shall be subject to comments and EPA’s independent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: any penalty for failing to comply with analysis of the facts and circumstances Lewis Maldonado, Senior Counsel a collection of information subject to the concerning this matter, EPA has (ORC–3), Office of Regional Counsel, Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that modified the proposed PPA. U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne does not display a valid control number. The primary modification is that EPA Street, San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: Comments are requested concerning (a) has significantly increased the amount (415) 744–1342; fax (415) 744–1041; e- whether the proposed collection of of consideration required in exchange mail: [email protected]. information is necessary for the proper for the liability release granted to the performance of the functions of the Dated: September 25, 2001. Purchaser. Specifically, the PPA now Commission, including whether the requires Aerojet to provide an John Kemmerer, information shall have practical utility; additional $40 million in cash for Acting Director, Superfund Division, Region (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s deposit into a third-party escrow IX. burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance account. [FR Doc. 01–24593 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] the quality, utility, and clarity of the The settlement now provides the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P information collected; and (d) ways to following benefits to EPA: the Purchaser minimize the burden of the collection of will pay EPA $325,000 in cash, to be information on the respondents, held in reserve in a special account for FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION including the use of automated future cleanup work at the BPOU; collection techniques or other forms of Aerojet, a potentially responsible party Farm Credit Administration Board; information technology. Regular Meeting at the BPOU, will pay EPA $9 million DATES: Written comments should be as partial reimbursement of its past AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. submitted on or before December 3, costs to be held in the same special SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, 2001. If you anticipate that you will be account for the same purposes; Aerojet submitting comments, but find it will pay $40 million into a third-party pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), that difficult to do so within the period of escrow account that may, with EPA time allowed by this notice, you should approval, be used to fund construction the November 8, 2001 regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board advise the contact listed below as soon of the groundwater remedy at the BPOU; as possible. and Aerojet’s parent company, GenCorp (Board) will not be held. The Board will ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Les Inc., will provide a written guaranty of hold a special meeting at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, November 6, 2001. An agenda Smith, Federal Communications $25 million to assure Aerojet’s Commission, Room 1–A804, 445 12th performance of future cleanup activities. for that meeting will be published at a later date. Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554 or DATES: This Prospective Purchaser via the Internet to [email protected]. Agreement, as modified, is effective FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Mikel Williams, Secretary to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For September 25, 2001. additional information or copies of the Public Comments: The public Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883–4025, TDD (703) 883–4444. information collection(s), contact Les comment period on the proposed Smith at 202–418–0217 or via the ADDRESSES: Farm Credit Prospective Purchaser Agreement closed Internet at [email protected]. on September 10, 2001. EPA received Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, 100 comments from various entities and McLean, Virginia 22102–5090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: individuals. Responses to these OMB Control Number: 3060–0057. Dated: September 28, 2001. Title: Application for Equipment comments have been prepared and are Jeanette C. Brinkley, Authorization, 47 CFR Sections 2.911, available for public inspection at the Acting Secretary, Farm Credit Administration 2.925, 2.932, 2.944, 2.960, 2.1033(a), address below. Board. and 2.1043. ADDRESSES: The Prospective Purchaser [FR Doc. 01–24774 Filed 10–01; 8:45 am] Form Number: FCC 731. Agreement, as modified, the Response BILLING CODE 6705–01–M Type of Review: Revision of currently to Public Comments and additional approved collections. background documents relating to the Respondents: Business or other for- settlement are available for public FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS profit entities. inspection in the Superfund Records COMMISSION Number of Respondents: 5,600. Center, San Gabriel Valley Superfund Estimate of Time Per Response: 18 to Site file, at the U.S. Environmental Notice of Public Information 30 hrs. (avg. 24 hrs.). Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Frequency of Response: Record- Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. The Federal Communications Commission keeping; On occasion reporting modified Prospective Purchaser requirements. Agreement can be accessed through the September 24, 2001. Total Annual Burden: 134,400. Internet on EPA Region 9’s Website SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Total Annual Costs: $1,120,000. located at: http://www.epa.gov/ Commission, as part of its continuing Needs and Uses: Under sections of 47 region09/waste/brown/ppa.html. effort to reduce paperwork burden CFR parts 15 and 18 of FCC Rules,
VerDate 11
regulated equipment must comply with ‘‘software defined radios’’ without Such statements will be limited to five the Commission’s technical standards having to file a new equipment minutes in length by any one party or before it is approved for marketing. authorization application. The entity, and requests to make an oral Rules governing certain equipment manufacturer must submit a description statement must be received two operating in the licensed service also of the software changes to the FCC or a business days before the meeting. require equipment authorization under designated TCB. The FCC will also Requests to make an oral statement or 47 CFR part 2. In ET Docket No. 00–47, permit ‘‘electronic labeling’’ to be used provide written comments to the NANC the FCC established a Class III on software defined radio transmitters. should be sent to Deborah Blue at the ‘‘permissive change’’ to permit Federal Communications Commission. address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT manufacturers to make changes that Magalie Roman Salas, , stated above. affect the frequency, power, and Secretary. Proposed Agenda modulation parameters of software defined radios without having to file a [FR Doc. 01–24571 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 1. Announcements and Recent News new equipment authorization BILLING CODE 6712–01–P —NANC meeting schedule application. However, new software can 2. Approve Minutes not be loaded into radios until the FCC FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS —Conference Call Meeting of September or a designated Telecommunications COMMISSION 25, 2001 Certification Body (TCB) approves the 3. Report of the North American manufacturer’s software changes and [CC Docket No. 92–237; DA 01–2246] Numbering Plan Administrator test data showing compliance with FCC —Response to 2000 Performance technical standards with the new Next Meeting of the North American Appraisal software loaded. The FCC will also Numbering Council allow ‘‘electronic labeling’’ for software —NANP Exhaust Analysis AGENCY: Federal Communications —Regular NANPA Report defined radio transmitters—a liquid Commission. crystal display or similar screen —Unavailable Code project status ACTION: Notice. displays the FCC identification number, —Assessment of August NRUF and since the new technology replaces SUMMARY: On September 27, 2001, the problems existing technology, the basic Commission released a public notice 4. Report of NANPA Oversight Working authorization process will not change. announcing the October 16–17, 2001 Group OMB Control Number: 3060–0934. meeting and agenda of the North —NANPA Contract Technical Title: Application for Equipment American Numbering Council (NANC). Requirements Authorization, 47 CFR Sections 2.925, The intended effect of this action is to —Regular NOWG Report 2.932, 2.944, 2.960, 2.962, 2.1043, make the public aware of the NANC’s 5. Presentation by National Thousands- 68.160, and 68.162. next meeting and its agenda. Block Pooling Administrator Form Number: FCC TCB 731. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Type of Review: Revision of currently —Initial projection of pooling rollout approved collection. Deborah Blue, Special Assistant to the schedule Respondents: Business or other for Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at —Access to details of PA–FCC contract profit. (202) 418–2320 or [email protected]. The terms Number of Respondents: 1,600. address is: Network Services Division, 6. Report of NANP Expansion/ Estimated Time Per Response: 4 hrs. Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Optimization IMG Total Annual Burden: 6,400 hrs. Communications Commission, The 7. Status of Industry Numbering Total Annual Cost: $175,000. Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW, Suite Committee activities Needs and Uses: Under 47 CFR parts 6A207, Washington, DC 20554. The fax —Status of ‘‘orphaned code’’ guidelines 15 and 18 of FCC Rules, certain number is: (202) 418–2345. The TTY 8. Report of the Local Number equipment must comply with FCC number is: (202) 418–0484. Portability Administration (LNPA) technical standards before it can be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Released: Working Group marketed. Equipment that operates in September 27, 2001. —Wireless Number Portability the licensed service requires FCC The North American Numbering Operations (WNPO) Subcommittee authorization under 47 CFR Parts 2 and Council (NANC) has scheduled a 68. In the 1998 R&O, General Docket No. meeting to be held Tuesday, October 16, 9. Report of NAPM LLC 98–68, the FCC permits a private sector 2001, from 8:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., 10. Report from NBANC firm, a ‘‘Telecommunications and on Wednesday, October 17, 2001, 11. Report of Cost Recovery Working Certification Body’’ or TCB, to approve from 8:30 a.m., until 12:00 noon (if Group equipment for marketing and also required). The meeting will be held at 12. Steering Committee established guidelines for ‘‘Mutual the Federal Communications —Table of NANC Projects Recognition Agreements’’ with foreign Commission, Portals II, 445 12th Street, 13. Report of Steering Committee trade partners. Once approved by the SW, Room TW–C305, Washington, DC. 14. Action Items accrediting body and ‘‘designated’’ by This meeting is open to members of 15. Public Participation (5 minutes each, the FCC, TCBs may accept Form 731 the general public. The FCC will if any) filings and evaluate the equipment’s attempt to accommodate as many 16. Other Business compliance with FCC Rules and participants as possible. technical standards. The TCB submits The public may submit written Adjourn (5 PM) this information to the FCC via the statements to the NANC, which must be Wednesday, October 17, 2001 (if Internet. In ET Docket No. 00–47, the received two business days before the required) FCC established a Class III ‘‘permissive meeting. In addition, oral statements at change’’ to permit manufacturers to the meeting by parties or entities not 17. Complete any unfinished Agenda make changes affecting frequency, represented on the NANC will be Items power, and modulation parameters of permitted to the extent time permits. 18. Other Business
VerDate 11
Federal Communications Commission. 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, proposed collection of information; (c) Diane Griffin Harmon, Illinois 60690–1414: ways to enhance the quality, utility and Acting Chief, Network Services Division, 1. Piper Holdings, Inc., Covington, clarity of the information to be Common Carrier Bureau. Indiana; to acquire 100 percent of the collected; and (d) ways to minimize the [FR Doc. 01–24627 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] voting shares of Heritage Bancshares, burden of the collection of information BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Inc., Darlington, Indiana, and thereby on respondents, including through the indirectly acquire Heritage Bank & Trust use of automated collection techniques Company, Darlington, Indiana. or other forms of information 2. Sturgis Bancorp, Inc., Sturgis, technology. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Michigan; to become a bank holding Proposed Project 1. Applicant company by acquiring 100 percent of Background Survey—0990–0208— Formations of, Acquisitions by, and the voting shares of Sturgis Bank & Extension—This form will be used to Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Trust Company, Sturgis, Michigan. ask applicants for employment how The companies listed in this notice C. Federal Reserve Bank of St. they learned about a vacancy, to make have applied to the Board for approval, Louis(Randall C. Sumner, Vice sure that recruitment sources yield pursuant to the Bank Holding Company President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, qualified women, minority and Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Missouri 63166–2034: handicapped applicants in compliance 1. Henderson Bancshares, Inc., (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part with EEOC Management Directives. Lexington, Tennessee; to become a bank 225), and all other applicable statutes Respondents: Individuals; Annual holding company by acquiring 100 and regulations to become a bank Number of Respondents: 310,000; percent of the voting shares of First holding company and/or to acquire the Annual Frequency of Response: one State Bank, Henderson, Tennessee. time; Average Burden per Response: 2 assets or the ownership of, control of, or D. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas the power to vote shares of a bank or minutes; Total Annual Burden: 10,333 City(Susan Zubradt, Assistant Vice hours. bank holding company and all of the President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas banks and nonbanking companies Send comments to Cynthia Agens City, Missouri 64198–0001: Bauer, OS Reports Clearance Officer, owned by the bank holding company, 1. American National Corporation, Room 503H, Humphrey Building, 200 including the companies listed below. Omaha, Nebraska; to acquire 100 Independence Avenue, SW, The applications listed below, as well percent of the voting shares of Quick Washington, DC 20201. Written as other related filings required by the Bancorp, Inc., Council Bluffs, Iowa, and comments should be received within 60 Board, are available for immediate thereby indirectly acquire Peoples days of this notice. inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank National Bank, Council Bluffs, Iowa. indicated. The application also will be Dated: September 21, 2001. available for inspection at the offices of Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 26, 2001. Kerry Weems, the Board of Governors. Interested Robert deV. Frierson, Acting, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Budget. persons may express their views in [FR Doc. 01–24583 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] writing on the standards enumerated in Deputy Secretary of the Board. BILLING CODE 4150–24–M the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the [FR Doc. 01–24540 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] proposal also involves the acquisition of BILLING CODE 6210–01–S a nonbanking company, the review also DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND includes whether the acquisition of the HUMAN SERVICES nonbanking company complies with the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND standards in section 4 of the BHC Act HUMAN SERVICES National Committee on Vital and Health (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Statistics: Meeting noted, nonbanking activities will be Office of the Secretary conducted throughout the United States. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Agency Information Collection Additional information on all bank Committee Act, the Department of Activities: Proposed Collections; holding companies may be obtained Health and Human Services announces Comment Request from the National Information Center the following advisory committee website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. The Department of Health and Human meeting. Unless otherwise noted, comments Services, Office of the Secretary will Name: National Committee on Vital and regarding each of these applications periodically publish summaries of Health Statistics (NCVHS), Subcommittee on must be received at the Reserve Bank proposed information collections Standards and Security. indicated or the offices of the Board of projects and olicit public comments in Time and Date: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October Governors not later than October 26, 9, 2001; 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., October 10, compliance with the requirements of 2001. 2001. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Place: Hubert H. Humphrey Building, A. Federal Reserve Bank of New Reduction Act of 1995. To request more Room 705A, 200 Independence Avenue S.W., York (Betsy Buttrill White, Senior Vice information on the project or to obtain Washington, DC. President) 33 Liberty Street, New York, a copy of the information collection Status: Open. New York 10045–0001: plans and instruments, call the OS Purpose: The Subcommittee is evaluating 1. Greater Community Bancorp, Reports Clearance Officer on (202) 690– Patient Medical Record Information (PMRI) Totowa, New Jersey; to acquire 9.9 6207. message format standards from ASTM, percent of the voting shares of 1st Comments are invited on: (a) Whether DICOM, HL7, IEEE, NCPDP Script, and Constitution Bancorp, Cranbury, New the proposed collection of information Object Management Group. The Subcommittee will be receiving testimony Jersey, and thereby indirectly acquire is necessary for the proper performance from vendors, consultants and users of these 1st Constitution Bank, Cranbury, New of the functions of the agency, including standards with a possible outcome being the Jersey. whether the information shall have formulation of recommendations to the HHS B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Secretary about their use as HIPAA (Phillip Jackson, Applications Officer) agency’s estimate of the burden of the standards.
VerDate 11
Notice: In the interest of security, HHS has periodic updating of guidelines and the Paper Reduction Act of 1995. The instituted stringent procedures for entrance other policy statements regarding Bureau is soliciting public comments on to the Hubert H. Humphrey building by non- prevention of healthcare associated the subject proposal. government employees. Persons without a infections and healthcare-related government identification card may need to DATES: Written comments must be have the guard call for an escort to the conditions. submitted on or before December 3, meeting. Matters to be Discussed: Agenda items 2001. Contact Person for more Information: will include a review of the Draft Substantive program information as well as Guideline for Hand Hygiene in ADDRESSES: Interested parties are summaries of meetings and a roster of Healthcare Settings, the Draft Guideline invited to submit written comments committee members may be obtained from J. for Preventing Transmission of regarding this proposal. Comments Michael Fitzmaurice, Ph.D., Senior Science Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settings should refer to the proposal by name Advisor for Information Technology, Agency (formerly Guideline Isolation and/or OMB Control Number and for Health Care Research and Quality, 2101 Precautions in Hospitals), the Draft should be sent to Larry Blair, Bureau of East Jefferson Street, #600, Rockville, MD Guideline for Prevention of Indian Affairs, Department of the 20852, phone: (301) 594–3938; or Marjorie S. Interior, 1849 C Street, NW., MS–4660– Greenberg, Executive Secretary, NCVHS, Intravascular Catheter-related National Center for Health Statistics, Centers Infections; and updates on CDC MIB, Washington, DC, 20240. for Disease Control and Prevention, Room activities of interest to the committee. Telephone (202) 208–2479. 1100, Presidential Building, 6525 Belcrest Agenda items are subject to change as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Road, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, priorities dictate. Requests for additional information or telephone (301) 458–4245. Information also Contact Person for More Information: copies of the information collection is available on the NCVHS home page of the Michele L. Pearson, M.D., Executive instructions should be directed to Larry HHS website: http://www.ncvhs.hhs.gov/ Secretary, HICPAC, Division of where an agenda for the meeting will be Blair, (202) 208–2479. Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCID, posted when available. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, M/S A–07, Dated: September 21, 2001. Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone 404/ I. Abstract James Scanlon, 498–1182. The information collection required Director, Division of Data Policy, Office of The Director, Management Analysis by the use of this form is necessary to the Assistant Secretary for Planning and and Services Office, has been delegated comply with Public Law 95–608, ‘‘The Evaluation. the authority to sign Federal Register Indian Child Welfare Act’’ and as [FR Doc. 01–24584 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] notices pertaining to announcements of codified in 25 CFR Part 23—Indian BILLING CODE 4151–05–M meetings and other committee Child Welfare Act. This information is management activities, for both the collected through the use of a Centers for Disease Control and consolidated caseload form by tribal DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Indian Child Act program directors who HUMAN SERVICES Substances and Disease Registry. are the providers of ICWA services. The Centers for Disease Control and Dated: September 26, 2001. information is used to determine the Prevention John Burckhardt, extent of service needs in local Indian Acting Director, Management Analysis and communities, assessment of the Indian Healthcare Infection Control Practices Services Office, Centers for Disease Control Child Welfare Act program Advisory Committee (HICPAC): and Prevention. effectiveness, and to provide data for the Meeting [FR Doc. 01–24568 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] annual program budget justification. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P The responses of this collection of In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of information are voluntary and the the Federal Advisory Committee Act aggregated report is not considered (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease confidential. The public is not required Control and Prevention (CDC) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR to respond unless a currently valid OMB announces the following meeting. Bureau of Indian Affairs Name: Healthcare Infection Control control number is displayed. Practices Advisory Committee. Proposed Agency Information II. Request for Comments Times and Dates: 8:30 a.m.–5 p.m., Collection Activities; Comment Please note that all comments November 13, 2001; 8:30 a.m.–4 p.m., Request November 14, 2001. received will be available for public Place: CDC, Auditorium A, 1600 AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, review two weeks after publication in Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia Interior. the Federal Register. If you wish to have your name and address withheld from 30333. ACTION: Notice. Status: Open to the public, limited review, please make that known at the only by the space available. SUMMARY: This notice announces that start of your comments. We specifically Purpose: The Committee is charged the Information Collection Request for request your comments be submitted to with providing advice and guidance to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) the address provided in the ADDRESSES the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Annual Report requires renewal. The section within 60 days on the following: Health, the Director, CDC, and the Indian Child Welfare Act Annual Report 1. Whether the collection of Director, National Center for Infectious is required to ensure effectiveness of information is necessary for the proper Diseases (NCID), regarding (1) the Indian Child Welfare Act programming. performance of the functions of the BIA, practice of hospital infection control; (2) The proposed information collection including whether the information will strategies for surveillance, prevention, requirement, with no appreciable have practical utility; and control of infections (e.g., changes, described below will be 2. The accuracy of the BIA’s estimate nosocomial infections), antimicrobial submitted to the Office of Management of the burden of the information resistance, and related events in settings and Budget (OMB) for review after a collection, including the validity of the where healthcare is provided; and (3) public comment period, as required by methodology and assumptions used;
VerDate 11
3. The quality, utility and clarity of Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 government and the delivery of tribal the information to be collected; and (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall government services. 4. How to minimize the burden of the certify and publish in the Federal Chapter II—Definitions information collection on those who are Register notice of adopted liquor to respond, including the use of ordinances for the purpose of regulating Section 201. As used in this appropriate automated electronic, liquor transactions in Indian country. ordinance, the following words shall mechanical or other forms of The Berry Creek Rancheria Liquor have the following meanings unless the information technology. Ordinance No. 00–02 was duly adopted context clearly requires otherwise. Section 202. Alcohol. Means that III. Data by the General Council of the Berry Creek Rancheria on July 8, 2001. The substance known as ethyl alcohol, Title of the Collection of Information: Berry Creek Rancheria, in furtherance of hydrated oxide of ethyl, or spirit of Department of the Interior, Bureau of its economic and social goals, has taken wine, which is commonly produced by Indian Affairs, Indian Child Welfare Act positive steps to regulate sales of the fermentation, or distillation of grain, Annual Report. alcohol and use revenues to combat starch, molasses, or sugar, or other OMB Number: 1076–0131. alcohol abuse and its debilitating effects substances including all dilutions of Affected Entities: Individual members among individuals and family members this substance. of Indian tribes who are living on or within the reservation of the Berry Section 203. Alcoholic Beverage. Is near a tribally or legally defined service Creek Rancheria. synonymous with the term Liquor as area. This notice is published in defined in Section 207 of this Chapter. Frequency of Response: Annually. Section 204. Bar. Means any Estimated Number of Annual accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the establishment with special space and Responses: 554. accommodations for sale by the glass, Estimated Time per Application: One- Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs by 209 Departmental Manual 8.1. can or bottle and for consumption on half hour. the premises of liquor, as herein I certify that the General Council of Estimated Total Annual Burden defined. the Berry Creek Rancheria duly adopted Hours: 277 hours. Section 205. Beer. Means any Ordinance No. 00–02 on July 8, 2001. Dated: September 24, 2001. beverage obtained by the alcoholic Neal A. McCaleb, Dated: August 29, 2001. fermentation of an infusion or decoction Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. Neal A. McCaleb, of pure hops, or pure extract of hops [FR Doc. 01–24581 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. and pure barley malt or other wholesome grain of cereal in pure water BILLING CODE 4310–02–P The Berry Creek Rancheria Liquor Ordinance reads as follows: containing not more than four percent of alcohol by volume. For the purposes of The Berry Creek Rancheria Liquor DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR this title, any such beverage, including Ordinance No. 00–02 ale, stout, and porter, containing more Bureau of Indian Affairs Chapter I—Introduction than four percent of alcohol by weight shall be referred to as ‘‘strong beer.’’ Berry Creek Rancheria Liquor Section 101. Title. This ordinance Section 206. General Membership. Ordinance shall be known as the Berry Creek Means as prescribed and defined by the Rancheria Liquor Ordinance No. 00–02. Articles of Association of the Berry AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Section 102. Authority. This Creek Rancheria, Article II Membership, Interior. ordinance is enacted pursuant to the Act Sections I, II and III. ACTION: Notice. of August 15, 1953 (Public Law 83–277, Section 207. Liquor. Includes the four 67 Stat. 588, 18 U.S.C. 1161) and the SUMMARY: This Notice publishes the varieties of liquor herein defined Articles of Association of The Berry (alcohol, spirits, wine and beer), and all Berry Creek Rancheria Liquor Creek Rancheria adopted February 5, Ordinance. The Ordinance regulates the fermented spirituous, vinous, or malt 1977, and approved May 5, 1977, and as liquor or combination thereof, and control, possession, and sale of liquor amended in accordance with on the Berry Creek Rancheria trust mixed liquor, or otherwise intoxicating amendments 1,11,111, IV, V and VI, beverages; and every liquid or solid or lands, in conformity with the laws of ratified by the Berry Creek Rancheria on the State of California, where applicable semisolid or other substance, patented December 16, 1979, and approved by or not, containing alcohol, spirits, wine and necessary. Although the Ordinance the Area Director on October 15, 1980, was adopted on July 8, 2001, it does not or beer, and all drinks or drinkable and in accordance with amendments liquids and all preparations or mixtures become effective until published in the VII, VIII and IX ratified by the Berry Federal Register because the failure to capable of human consumption and any Creek Rancheria on March 17, 1983, and liquid, semisolid, solid, or other comply with the Ordinance may result approved by the Area Director on June in criminal charges. substances, which contain more than 24, 1983. one percent of alcohol by weight shall DATES: This Ordinance is effective on Section 103. Purpose. The purpose of be conclusively deemed to be October 2, 2001. this ordinance is to regulate and control intoxicating. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the possession and sale of liquor on the Section 208. Liquor Store. Means any Kaye Armstrong, Branch of Tribal Berry Creek Rancheria. The enactment store at which liquor is sold and, for the Relations, Division of Tribal of a tribal ordinance governing liquor purposes of this ordinance, includes Government Services, 1849 C Street possession and sale on the Rancheria stores only a portion of which are NW., MS 4631–MIB, Washington, DC will increase the ability of the tribal devoted to sale of liquor or beer. 20240–4001; Telephone (202) 208–4400. government to control Rancheria liquor Section 209. Malt Liquor. Means beer, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant distribution and possession, and at the strong beer, ale stout, and porter. to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public same time will provide an important Section 210. Package. Means any Law 83–277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. source of revenue for the continued container or receptacle used for holding 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme operation and strengthening of the tribal liquor.
VerDate 11
Section 211. Rancheria. Means land (d) Hold hearings on violations of this Chapter V—Licensing held in trust by the United States ordinance or for the issuance or Section 501. Application for Tribal Government for the benefit of the revocation of licenses hereunder; Liquor License Requirements. No tribal Indians of the Berry Creek Rancheria (e) Bring suit in the appropriate court license shall be issued under this (see also Section 216, Tribal Land). to enforce this ordinance as necessary; ordinance except upon a sworn Section 212. Sale and Sell. Includes (f) Determine and seek damages for application filed with the General exchange, barter, and traffic; and also violation of this ordinance; Council containing a full and complete includes the selling or supplying or (g) Make such reports as may be showing of the following: distributing by any means whatsoever, required by the General Membership; (a) Satisfactory proof that the of liquor, or of any liquid known or (h) Collect taxes and fees levied or set applicant is or will be duly licensed by described as beer or by any name by the General Council and to keep the State of California. whatsoever commonly used to describe accurate records, books, and accounts; (b) Satisfactory proof that the malt or brewed liquor or wine by any and applicant is of good character and person to any person. (i) Exercise such powers as are reputation among the people of the Section 213. Spirits. Means any delegated by the General Council. Rancheria and that the applicant is beverage, which contains alcohol Section 302. Limitation on Powers. In financially responsible. obtained by distillation, including the exercise of its powers and duties (c) The description of the premises in wines exceeding 17 percent of alcohol under this ordinance, the General which the intoxicating beverages are to by weight. Council and its individual members be sold, proof that the applicant is the Section 214. Tribal Council. Means shall not accept any gratuity, owner of such premises, or lessee of the Tribal Council of the Berry Creek compensation or other thing of value such premises for at least the term of the Rancheria. from any liquor wholesaler, retailer, or license. Section 215. Tribal Land. Means any distributor or from any licensee. (d) Agreement by the applicant to land within the exterior boundaries of Section 303. Inspection Rights. The accept and abide by all conditions of the the Rancheria, which is held in trust by premises on which liquor is sold or tribal license. the United States for the Tribe as a distributed shall be open for inspection (e) Payment of $250 fee as prescribed whole, including such land leased to by the General Council or its designee by the General Council. other parties. at all reasonable times for the purposes (f) Satisfactory proof that neither the Section 216. Tribe. Means the Berry of ascertaining whether the rules and applicant nor the applicant’s spouse has Creek Rancheria. regulations of this ordinance are being ever been convicted of a felony. Section 217. Wine. Means any complied with. (g) Satisfactory proof that notice of the alcoholic beverage obtained by application has been posted in a Chapter IV—Sales of Liquor fermentation of fruits (grapes, berries, prominent, noticeable place on the apples, etc.) or other agricultural Section 401. Licenses Required. No premises where intoxicating beverages product containing sugar, to which any sales of alcoholic beverages shall be are to be sold for at least 30 days prior saccharine substances may have been made within the exterior boundaries of to consideration by the General Council added before, during or after the Rancheria, except at a tribally and has been published at least twice in fermentation, and containing not more licensed or tribally owned business such local newspaper serving the than 17 percent of alcohol by weight, operated on tribal land within the community that may be affected by the including sweet wines fortified with exterior boundaries of the Rancheria. license the General Council may wine spirits such as port, sherry, Section 402. Sales Only on Tribal authorize. The notice shall state the muscatel, and angelica, not exceeding Land. All liquor sales within the date, time and place when the 17 percent of alcohol by weight. exterior boundaries of the Rancheria application shall be considered by the Section 218. Trust Account. Means shall be on tribal land, including leases General Council pursuant to Section 502 the account designated by the General thereon. of this ordinance. Council for deposit of proceeds from the Section 403. Sales for Cash. All liquor Section 502. Hearing on Application tax from the sale of alcoholic beverages. sales within the Rancheria boundaries for Tribal Liquor License. All Section 219. Trust Agent. Means the shall be on a cash only basis and no applications for a tribal liquor license Tribal Chairperson or other designee of credit shall be extended to any person, shall be considered by the General the General Council. organization, or entity, except that this Council in open session at which the provision does not prevent the use of applicant, his attorney, and any person Chapter III—Powers of Enforcement major credit cards such as Visa, protesting the application shall have the Section 301. Powers. The General American Express, etc. right to be present, and to offer sworn Council, in furtherance of this Section 404. Sale for Personal oral or documentary evidence relevant ordinance, shall have the powers and Consumption. All sales shall be for the to the application. After the hearing, the duties to: personal use and consumption of the General Council shall determine (a) Publish and enforce the rules and purchaser. Resale of any alcoholic whether to grant or deny the application regulations governing the sale, beverage purchased within the exterior based on: manufacture, and distribution of boundaries of the Rancheria is (1) Whether the requirements of alcoholic beverages on the Rancheria; prohibited. Any person who is not Section 501 have been met; and (b) Employ managers, accountants, licensed pursuant to this ordinance who (2) Whether the General Council, in security personnel, inspectors, and such purchases an alcoholic beverage within its discretion, determines that granting other persons as shall be reasonably the boundaries of the Rancheria and the license is in the best interests of the necessary to allow the General Council sells it, whether in the original Tribe. to perform its functions; container or not, shall be guilty of a In the event that the applicant is a (c) Issue licenses permitting the sale violation of this ordinance and shall be member of the General Council, or a or manufacture or distribution of liquor subjected to paying damages to the member of the immediate family of a on the Rancheria; Tribe as set forth herein. General Council member, such members
VerDate 11
shall not vote on the application or beverages in the licensed establishment person who shall sell or provide liquor participate in the hearings as a General and/or area. to any person under the age of 21 years Council member. Section 505. License Not a Property shall be guilty of a violation of this Section 503. Temporary Permits. The Right. Notwithstanding any other ordinance for each sale or drink General Council or its designee may provision of this ordinance, a Tribal provided. grant a temporary permit for the sale of liquor license is a mere permit for a Section 607. Transfer of Identification intoxicating beverages for a period not fixed duration of time. A Tribal liquor to Minor. Any person who transfers in to exceed 3 days to any person applying license shall not be deemed a property any manner an identification of age to for the same in connection with a tribal right or vested right of any kind, nor a minor for the purpose of permitting or community activity, provided that shall the granting of a tribal liquor such minor to obtain liquor shall be the conditions prescribed in Section 504 license give rise to a presumption of guilty of an offense; provided, that of this ordinance shall be observed by legal entitlement to the granting of such corroborative testimony of a witness the permittee. Each permit issued shall license for a subsequent time period. other than the minor shall be a specify the types of intoxicating Section 506. Assignment or Transfer. requirement of finding a violation of beverages to be sold. Further, a fee of No tribal license issued under this this ordinance. $25 will be assessed on temporary ordinance shall be assigned or Section 608. Use of False or Altered permits. transferred without the written approval Identification. Any person who attempts Section 504. Conditions of the Tribal of the General Council expressed by to purchase an alcoholic beverage License. Any tribal license issued under formal resolution. through the use of false or altered identification, which falsely purports to this title shall be subject to such Chapter VI—Rules, Regulations, and show the individual to be over the age reasonable conditions as the General Enforcement Council shall fix, including, but not of 21 years, shall be guilty of violating limited to the following: Section 601. Sales or Possession With this ordinance. Intent to Sell Without a Permit. Any (a) The license shall be for a term not Section 609. Violations of This person who shall sell or offer for sale or to exceed 1 year. Ordinance. Any person guilty of a distribute or transport in any manner, (b) The licensee shall at all times violation of this ordinance shall be any liquor in violation of this ordinance, maintain an orderly, clean and neat liable to pay the Tribe a penalty not to or who shall operate or shall have liquor establishment, both inside and outside exceed $500 per violation as civil in his possession with intent to sell or the licensed premises. damages to defray the Tribe’s cost of distribute without a permit, shall be (c) The licensed premises shall be enforcement of this ordinance. In guilty of a violation of this ordinance. addition to any penalties so imposed, subject to patrol by the tribal Section 602. Purchases From Other enforcement department, and such other any license issued hereunder may be Than Licensed Facilities. Any person suspended or canceled by the General law enforcement officials as may be within the boundaries of the Rancheria authorized under tribal law. Council after 10 days notice to the who buys liquor from any person other licensee. The decision of the General (d) The licensed premises shall be than at a properly licensed facility shall open to inspection by duly authorized Council shall be final. be guilty of a violation of this ordinance. Section 610. Acceptable tribal officials at all times during the Section 603. Sales to Persons Under Identification. Where there may be a regular business hours. the Influence of Liquor. Any person who question of a persons right to purchase (e) Subject to the provisions of sells liquor to a person apparently under liquor by reason of his age, such person subsection (f) of this section, no the influence of liquor shall be guilty of shall be required to present any one of intoxicating beverages shall be sold, a violation of this ordinance. the following issued cards of served, disposed of, delivered or Section 604. Consuming Liquor in identification which shows his correct consumed on the licensed premises Public Conveyance. Any person engaged age and bears his signature and except in conformity with the hours and wholly or in part in the business of photograph: days prescribed by the laws of the State carrying passengers for hire, and every (1) Driver’s license of any state or of California, and in accordance with agent, servant or employee or such identification card issued by any State the hours fixed by the General Council, person who shall knowingly permit any Department of Motor vehicles; provided that the licensed premise shall person to drink any liquor in any public (2) United States Active Duty Military not operate or open earlier or operate or conveyance shall be guilty of an offense. identity card; or close later than is permitted by the laws Any person who shall drink any liquor (3) Passport. of the State of California. in a public conveyance shall be guilty Section 611. Possession of Liquor (f) No liquor shall be sold within 200 of a violation of this ordinance. Contrary to This Ordinance. Alcoholic feet of a polling place on Tribal election Section 605. Consumption or beverages which are possessed contrary days, or when a referendum is held of Possession of Liquor by Persons Under to the terms of this ordinance are the people of the Tribe, and including 21 Years of Age. No person under the declared to be contraband. Any tribal special days of observation as age of 21 years shall consume, acquire agent, employee, or officer who is designated by the General Council. or have in his possession any alcoholic authorized by the General Council to (g) All acts and transactions under beverage. No person shall permit any enforce this section shall have the authority of the tribal liquor license other person under the age of 21 to authority to, and shall seize, all shall be in conformity with the laws of consume liquor on his premises or any contraband. the State of California, and shall be in premises under his control except in Section 612. Disposition of Seized accordance with this ordinance and any those situations set out in this section. Contraband. Any officer seizing Tribal license issued pursuant to this Any person violating this section shall contraband shall preserve the ordinance. be guilty of a separate violation of this contraband in accordance with the (h) No person under the age permitted ordinance for each and every drink so appropriate California law code. Upon under the laws of the State of California consumed. being found in violation of the shall be sold, served, delivered, given, Section 606. Sales of Liquor to ordinance by the Tribal Council, the or allowed to consume alcoholic Persons Under 21 Years of Age. Any party shall forfeit all right, title and
VerDate 11
interest in the items seized which shall which are inconsistent with the increased rental and royalty rates cited become the property of the Tribe. provisions of this ordinance, are hereby above. Chapter VII—Taxes rescinded. Pamela J. Lewis, Section 903. Conformance with Section 701. Sales Tax. There is Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication. hereby levied and shall be collected a California Laws. All acts and [FR Doc. 01–24561 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] tax on each sale of alcoholic beverages transactions under this ordinance shall BILLING CODE 4310–22–M on the Rancheria in the amount of 1 be in conformity with the laws of the percent of the amount actually State of California as that term is used collected, including payments by major in 18 U.S.C.1161. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR credit cards. The tax imposed by this Section 904. Effective Date. This Bureau of Land Management section shall apply to all retail sales of ordinance shall be effective on such liquor on the Rancheria and shall date as the Secretary of the Interior [WY–920–1310–01; WYW 149985] preempt any tax imposed on such liquor certifies this ordinance and publishes Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of sales by the State of California. the same in the Federal Register. Section 702. Payment of Taxes to Terminated Oil and Gas Lease Tribe. All taxes from the sale of Chapter X—Amendment Pursuant to the provisions of 30 alcoholic beverages on the Rancheria Section 1001. This ordinance may U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR shall be paid over to the trust agent of 3108.2–3(a) and (b)(1), a petition for the Tribe. only be amended by a majority vote of the General Council. reinstatement of oil and gas lease Section 703. Taxes Due. All taxes for WYW149985 for lands in Johnson the sale of alcoholic beverages on the Chapter XI—Sovereign Immunity County, Wyoming, was timely filed and Rancheria are due within 30 days at the was accompanied by all the required end of the calendar quarter for which Section 1101. Nothing contained in rentals accruing from the date of the taxes are due. this ordinance is intended to, nor does termination. The lessee has agreed to Section 704. Reports. Along with in any way limit, alter, restrict, or waive the amended lease terms for rentals and payment of the taxes imposed herein, the Tribe’s sovereign immunity from royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre, or the taxpayer shall submit an accounting unconsented suit or action. fraction thereof, per year and 162⁄3 for the quarter of all income from the [FR Doc. 01–24582 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] percent, respectively. sale or distribution of said beverages as BILLING CODE 4310–02–P The lessee has paid the required $500 well as for the taxes collected. administrative fee and $158 to Section 705. Audit. As a condition of reimburse the Department for the cost of obtaining a license, the licensee must DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR this Federal Register notice. The lessee agree to the review or audit of its books has met all the requirements for and records relating to the sale of Bureau of Land Management reinstatement of the lease as set out in alcoholic beverages on the Rancheria. Section 31 (d) and (e) of the Mineral Said review or audit may be done [WY–920–1310–01; WYW 151006] Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. annually by the Tribe through its agents 188), and the Bureau of Land or employees whenever, in the opinion Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Management is proposing to reinstate of the General Council, such a review or Terminated Oil and Gas Lease lease WYW149985 effective May 1, audit is necessary to verify the accuracy 2001, subject to the original terms and of reports. Pursuant to the provisions of 30 conditions of the lease and the Chapter VIII—Profits U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR increased rental and royalty rates cited above. Section 801. Disposition of Proceeds. 3108.2–3(a) and (b)(1), a petition for The gross proceeds collected by the reinstatement of oil and gas lease Pamela J. Lewis, General Council from all licensing WYW151006 for lands in Carbon Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication. provided from the taxation of the sale of County, Wyoming, was timely filed and [FR Doc. 01–24562 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] alcoholic beverages on the Rancheria was accompanied by all the required BILLING CODE 4310–22–M shall be distributed as follows: rentals accruing from the date of (a) For the payment of all necessary termination. The lessee has agreed to personnel, administrative costs, and the amended lease terms for rentals and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR legal fees for the operation and its royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre, or Minerals Management Service (MMS) activities. fraction thereof, per year and 162⁄3 (b) The remainder shall be turned percent, respectively. Outer Continental Shelf, Central and over to the Trust Account of the Tribe. The lessee has paid the required $500 Western Gulf of Mexico, Oil and Gas Chapter IX—Severability and administrative fee and $158 to Lease Sales for Years 2002–2007 Miscellaneous reimburse the Department for the cost of AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, this Federal Register notice. The lessee Section 901. Severability. If any Interior. has met all the requirements for provision or application of this ACTION: Notice of dates and locations of ordinance is determined by review to be reinstatement of the lease as set out in Section 31 (d) and (e) of the Mineral scoping meetings for the Environmental invalid, such adjudication shall not be Impact Statement (EIS). held to render ineffectual the remaining Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. portions of this title or to render such 188), and the Bureau of Land SUMMARY: The MMS is proposing to provisions inapplicable to other persons Management is proposing to reinstate prepare a single EIS (multisale EIS) for or circumstances. lease WYW151006 effective April 1, the nine areawide oil and gas lease sales Section 902. Prior Enactments. All 1998, subject to the original terms and in the Central and Western Planning prior enactments of the General Council, conditions of the lease and the Areas (CPA and WPA) scheduled for
VerDate 11
2003–2007 in the draft proposed Outer determination of whether or not the appropriate management framework to Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing information and analyses in the original achieve resource protection and public Program: 2002–2007. The MMS will be multisale EIS are still valid. These use goals. Leadership for the study soliciting information from States, local consultations and NEPA reviews will be project is being provided by the governments, the oil and gas industry, completed before decisions are made on Superintendent of Fredericksburg and Federal Agencies, environmental and the subsequent sales. Comments are Spotsylvania National Military Park. other interested organizations, and the sought from all interested parties about A Notice of Intent to prepare an public regarding issues and alternatives particular geological, environmental, Environmental Impact Statement was that should be evaluated in the EIS. The biological, archaeological and published in the Federal Register on scoping meetings will provide socioeconomic conditions or conflicts, August 14, 2000. The scoping process information for the development of or other information that might bear has been completed and draft appropriate alternatives and mitigating upon the potential leasing and alternatives developed in outline form. measures, as well as to identify development in the CPA and WPA. The recommended alternative will not significant issues, to be considered in Comments are also sought on possible involve new legislation. There is no the draft EIS. Respondents are requested conflicts between future OCS oil and gas potential for significant environmental to focus their comments on the activities that may result from the effects. significant environmental issues proposed sales and State Coastal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: attendant to OCS oil and gas leasing and Management Programs (CMP). If Contact the Superintendent, development in the CPA and WPA and possible, these comments should Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania on alternative options for the size, identify specific CMP policies of National Military Park, 540–373–4510 timing, and location of sales. concern, the nature of the conflict or at [email protected]. foreseen, and steps that the MMS could DATES: The scoping meetings will be Dated: April 6, 2001. held on the following dates and at the take to avoid or mitigate the potential Leonard C. Emerson, times and locations indicated. Monday, conflict. Acting, Regional Director, Northeast Region. October 15, 2001, The Victorian Condo- Dated: September 10, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–24637 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Hotel and Conference Center, 6300 Chris C. Oynes, BILLING CODE 4310–70–M Seawall Boulevard, Galveston, Texas, Regional Director, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region. 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Tuesday, October [FR Doc. 01–24585 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 16, 2001, Houston Airport Marriott, BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 18700 Kennedy Boulevard, Houston, Texas, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Thursday, National Park Service October 18, 2001, Ramada Plaza Hotel, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 600 S. Beltline Highway, Mobile, Draft General Management Plan/ Alabama, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. National Park Service Environmental Assessment, Saugus Monday, October 22, 2001, Minerals Iron Works National Historic Site, Management Service, 1201 Elmwood George Washington Boyhood Home Essex County, MA Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Special Resource Study AGENCY: Louisiana, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. National Park Service, Interior. AGENCY: National Park Service, ACTION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Notice of availability of Draft For Department of the Interior. information on the scoping meetings or General Management Plan/ ACTION: the multisale EIS, please contact Mr. Notice of termination of the Environmental Assessment. Environmental Impact Statement Joseph Christopher, Minerals SUMMARY: Pursuant to Council on Management Service, Gulf of Mexico process for the George Washington Boyhood Home Special Resource Study. Environmental Quality regulations and OCS Region, 1201 Elmwood Park National Park Service Policy, this notice Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the announces the availability for public 70123–2394, telephone (504) 736–2774. National Environmental Policy Act, the review of a Draft General Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal National Park Service will terminate the Pan/Environmental Assessment for regulations allow for several proposals Environmental Impact Statement Saugus Iron Works National Historic to be analyzed in one EIS (40 CFR process for this study and prepare an Site, Essex County, Massachusetts. In 1502.4). Since each sale proposal and Environmental Assessment. accordance with the National projected activities are very similar each The U.S. Congress authorized the Environmental Policy Act 102(2)(C) of year for each planning area, the MMS is special resource study in Section 1969, the environmental assessment was preparing a multisale EIS for the nine 509(c)(3) of Pub. L. 105–355 to examine prepared to assess the impacts of CPA and WPA lease sales. The multisale how the cultural and natural resources implementing the general management approach is intended to focus the of the property can be protected and plan. NEPA/EIS process on new issues and public use of the site furthered. The The Draft General Management Plan/ information for the annual lease sales. George Washington boyhood Home Environmental Assessment presents a At the completion of this EIS process, property, also known as Ferry Farm, is Proposal and two Management decisions will be made only for located in Stafford County, Virginia. Alternatives, then assesses the potential proposed Sales 185 and 187, scheduled The property, part of the 18 century environmental, cultural and to be held in 2003. Subsequent to these plantation where George Washington socioeconomic effects of the actions first sales in the planning areas, a NEPA spent his youth, is now owned by the presented on site resources, visitor review will be conducted for each of the George Washington’s Fredericksburg experience, and the surrounding area. other proposed lease sales in the 2002– Foundation. Congress also authorized The Proposal and the Alternatives differ 2007 Leasing Program. Formal the Department of the Interior, through in their approaches to achieving the consultation with other Federal the National Park Service, to acquire site’s management goals and resolving Agencies, the affected States, and the easements on the property. The overall planning issues associated with those public will be carried out to assist in the purpose of the study is to identify an goals. Alternative 1 (The Preferred
VerDate 11
Alternative) involves (a) rehabilitating 8:30 a.m. until noon. The library is previous comments are welcome to do the interior of the museum building to closed on weekends. so. Additional input also is invited. allow for compliance with NPS museum To request a copy of the document, ADDRESSES: Written comments and exhibit standards and consolidating the please call (781) 233–0050, fax (781– information concerning the scope of the museum collections and archival 231–7345), or write Superintendent, EIS and other matters, or requests to be materials in existing residences that Saugus Iron Works National Historic added to the project mailing list should would be adaptively reused to house Site 244 Central Street, Saugus, MA be directed to: Superintendent, Isle these resources under appropriate 01906. climate controlled and protective Royale National Park, 800 East systems, (b) removing existing Marie Rust, Lakeshore Drive, Houghton, Michigan Regional Director, Northeast Region. 49931–1895. Telephone: 906–487–7140. maintenance facilities, restoring their _ current locations and consolidating [FR Doc. 01–24636 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] E-mail: isro [email protected] them into a single facility, (c) adaptively BILLING CODE 4310–70–M FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: reusing the Iron Works House Annex Superintendent, Isle Royale National and Lean-to into a visitor contact Park, at the address or telephone above. facility, and (d) improving access DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress through the iron works structures and National Park Service designated more than 99 percent of the between those structures and the Iron 133,000 acres landmass of Isle Royale Works House and Museum for persons Isle Royale National Park, MI National Park as wilderness in 1976. with disabilities and special needs. However, NPS never prepared a Alternative 2 (Enhanced Facility AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. wilderness management plan to help Development) involves (a) constructing ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a guide decision making on wilderness- a new collections storage facility wilderness management plan and related matters. Comprehensive, long- adjacent to the existing museum environmental impact statement for Isle term planning for the park’s wilderness building, (b) acquiring or leasing Royale National Park, Michigan. is needed to address: existing commercial or industrial space off-site for use as maintenance facilities, SUMMARY: The National Park Service (1) The management of visitor use, along with restoring the locations where (NPS) will prepare a wilderness which during the peak season such facilities are currently sited, (c) management plan and an environmental overwhelms facility capacities in constructing a new visitor center at the impact statement (EIS) for Isle Royale campgrounds. site of the existing maintenance facility National Park, Michigan in accordance (2) The adoption, implementation, on the west bluff, and (d) implementing with section 102(2)(C) of the National and refinement of resource and visitor one of two alternative scenarios for Environmental Policy Act of 1969 experience indicators and related providing improved access for visitors (NEPA). This notice is being furnished monitoring to ensure wilderness from the bluff to the industrial area: as required by NEPA Regulations 40 resources, values, and experiences are either a switchback trail or a long CFR 1501.7. not being compromised. straight trail. Alternative 3 (The No To facilitate sound planning and (3) The adoption of a ‘‘minimum tool’’ Action Alternative) involves no changes environmental analysis, NPS intends to decision framework for park operations to existing conditions. gather information necessary for the within wilderness. DATES: The Draft General Management preparation of the EIS, and to obtain (4) Development of a new Plan/Environmental Assessment will be suggestions and information from other computerized permit/reservation system made available on July 9, 2001. agencies and the public on the scope of for camping permits. Following a 60-day comment period, the issues to be addressed in the EIS. environmental analysis, along with Comments and suggestions in this (5) Specific directions for such public and agency comments, will form scoping process are invited. diverse issues as campfires, trail the basis for the selection, by the This project was initiated in the maintenance, backcountry sanitation, Regional Director of a single plan for autumn of 1999. The planning process interpretation and education in the implementation. The Final General originally included preparation of an wilderness, campground design, Management Plan/Environmental environmental assessment. However, as wildlife protection, acceptable signing, Assessment will then be issued and planning has progressed NPS now etc. made available to the public for an believes it is appropriate to prepare an (6) Development of an additional 60 days. If at the end of that EIS. Public involvement during the first implementation schedule to proactively second review period, no significant phases of planning has been facilitated plan for future projects in the issues or public controversy have arisen, through a series of newsletters with wilderness. mail-back input forms. the Regional Director will issue a The environmental review of the Finding Of No Significant Impact DATES: Written comments and wilderness management plan for Isle (FONSI). information concerning the scope of the Royale National Park will be conducted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of EIS should be directed to the in accordance with requirements of the document will be available for Superintendent, Isle Royale National NEPA (42 U.S.C. section 4371 et seq.), review at the following locations: Park, at the address below before NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), Saugus Iron Works National Historic November 2, 2001. other appropriate Federal regulations, Site-Visitor Kiosk, 244 Central Street, Persons who already have provided and NPS procedures and policies for Saugus, MA 01906. The visitor kiosk is information through responses to compliance with those regulations. open everyday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. project newsletters need not re-send that The Saugus Public Library, 295 information. NPS will consider these James A. Loach, Central Street Saugus, MA. The library comments in preparation of the EIS. Acting Regional Director. is open Monday through Thursday from However, persons who wish to [FR Doc. 01–24629 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.; Friday hours are reemphasize or expand on their BILLING CODE 4310–70–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR comment opportunity. Locations, dates, properties under the National Register and times of these meetings will be criteria for evaluation may be forwarded San Juan County Cattle Point Road provided in local and regional to the National Register, National Park Failure Environmental Impact newspapers, and via the Internet at Service, 1849 C St. NW, NC400, Statement, San Juan Island National www.nps.gov/sajh or www.co.san- Washington, DC 20240. Written Historical Park, WA juan.wa.us. Inquiries regarding public comments should be submitted by meetings may be directed to the contacts October 17, 2001. AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. listed below. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an All comments received will become Carol D. Shull, environmental impact statement (EIS) to part of the public record and copies of Keeper of the National Register of Historic address the impending failure of the San comments, including any names and Places. Juan County Cattle Point Road in San home addresses of respondents, may be ARIZONA Juan Island National Historical Park, released for public inspection. Maricopa County Washington. Individual respondents may request that their home addresses be withheld from Lehi School, 2345 No. Home, Mesa, SUMMARY: In Accordance with 01000906 the public record, which will be § 102(2)(C) of the National honored to the extent allowable by law. Mohave County Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Requests to withhold names and/or Hardyville Cemetery, 1776 AZ 95, Bullhead (Public Law 91–190), San Juan County addresses must be stated prominently at City, 01000905 (County) and the San Juan Island the beginning of the comments. Pinal County National Historical Park (SAJH) are Anonymous comments will not be initiating an environmental impact Verdugo Homestead Historic District, considered. Submissions from Address Restricted, Randolph, 01000904 analysis process to address the organizations or businesses, and from impending failure of a portion of the individuals identifying themselves as IOWA County’s Cattle Point Road, located representatives or officials of Clayton County within the boundaries of SAJH. organizations or businesses, will be The portion of road that is of concern American House, 116 Main St., McGregor, made available for public inspection in is a curve that extends for 01000913 their entirety. approximately 1,750 ft. in a generally Because the responsibility for Clinton County east-west orientation along an approving the EIS has been delegated to Dugan’s Saloon, 516 Smith St., Grand engineered bench approximately the National Park Service, the EIS is a Mound, 01000908 halfway up a predominantly sand slope. ‘‘delegated’’ EIS. The responsible Farmers and Merchants Savings Bank, 601 The slope rises from the Strait of Juan Smith St., Grand Mound, 01000909 official for the National Park Service is Grand Mound Town Hall and Waterworks de Fuca about 500 ft. to the south of the John J. Reynolds, Regional Director, area where the road’s stability is Historic District, 613–615 Clinton St., Pacific West Region, National Park Grand Mound, 01000910 threatened to a height of up to 295 ft. Service. The responsible official for San above Mean Sea Level (MSL). The road Juan County is Laura Arnold, San Juan Johnson County traverses the slope at an elevation of County Planning Director. Englert Theatre, 221 E. Washington St., Iowa approximately 140 to 150 ft. MSL. The City, 01000911 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: lower portion of the slope, extending to Thomas Huse, Director, San Juan Louisa County within 50 ft. of the road, has been County Public Works Department, P.O. heavily eroded. According to estimates, Commercial Hotel, 227 N. Main St., Wapello, Box 729, Friday Harbor, WA 98250, 01000912 the erosion appears to be at a rate that (360) 378–2114 or Cicely Muldoon, suggests failure of the roadbed may Polk County Superintendent, San Juan Island occur within a few years. National Historical Park, P.O. Box 429, Crane Building, 1440 Walnut, Des Moines, The EIS will identify and assess 01000914 Friday Harbor, WA 98250, (360) 378– potential impacts of various alternatives 2240. MASSACHUSETTS to the existing Cattle Point Road to provide access to Cattle Point, a scenic Dated: June 29, 2001. Bristol County area of San Juan Island that supports Rory D. Westberg, Barrows, H.F., Manufacturing Company recreational use and a number of single- Superintendent, Columbia Cascades Support Building, 102 S. Washington St., N. family residences. Notice is hereby Office, Pacific West Region. Attleborough, 01000907 given that the National Park Service and [FR Doc. 01–24628 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Essex County San Juan County will jointly prepare the BILLING CODE 4310–70–P Georgetown Central School, 1 Library St., EIS. Georgetown, 01000915 Comments: All interested persons, organizations, and agencies wishing to DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MISSISSIPPI provide initial scoping comments about De Soto County National Park Service issues or concerns that should be Hernando Commercial Street Historic addressed during the EIS process may National Register of Historic Places; District, Roughly along Commerce St., W of send such information to Thomas Huse, Notification of Pending Nominations West St. S, Hernando, 01000918 Director, San Juan County Public Works Hernando North Side Historic District, N of Department, P.O. Box 729, Friday Nominations for the following Holly Springs St., E of US 51, W of Harbor, WA 98250. Written comments properties being considered for listing Northview St., on W. Northern St., W. in the National Register were received Valley St., Shady Ln. & Holly Springs St, should be postmarked no later than Hernando, 01000916 August 31, 2001. by the National Park Service before July Hernando South Side (Magnolia) Historic In addition, public scoping sessions 21, 2001. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 District, Roughly bounded by Oak Grove will be held after publication of this CFR part 60 written comments Rd., Magnolia Dr., W. Center St., and Notice, affording an additional early concerning the significance of these Church St., Hernando, 01000917
VerDate 11
Marshall County TENNESSEE 7 mi. NW of central business district of Atlanta, Atlanta, 01000972 Bailey, Dr. Isham G., House, 1577 Early Montgomery County: Grove Rd., Lamar, 01000919 First Presbyterian Church Manse, 305 Main McIntosh County Warren County St., Clarksville, 01000929 West Darien Historic District, Bounded by 8th St., US 17, Darien River, and Cathead Hyland Mound Archeological Site, Address WYOMING Restricted, Vicksburg, 01000920 Creek, Darien, 01000975 Weston County MONTANA Newton County Weston County Courthouse, 1 West Main, Porterdayle Historic District, Roughly the city Lewis and Clark County Newcastle, 01000930 limits of Porterdale north of Elm St., Hilger, Joe and Carrie, Ranch, Sleeping Giant [FR Doc. 01–24630 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Porterdale, 01000974 Ranch, 20 mi. N of Helena, Helena, BILLING CODE 4310–70–P Troup County 01000922 Lagrange Commercial Historic District, Stillwater County (Georgia County Courthouses TR) Main Torgrimson Place, West Rosebud Rd., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR St.—Ridley Ave., Bull St.—Church St., Fishtail, 01000921 Broad and Greenville Sts., Vernon Rd.— National Park Service LaFayette Pkwy, Haralson St., LaGrange, NORTH DAKOTA 01000971 Ramsey County National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations IDAHO Devils Lake Masonic Temple, 403 Sixth St., Devils Lake, 01000923 Ada County Nominations for the following Ninth Street Bridge, (Metal Truss Highway OREGON properties being considered for listing Bridges of Idaho MPS) E of new 9th Street Deschutes County in the National Register were received bridge, over Boise R., Boise, 01000980 First Presbyterian Church of Redmond, 641 by the National Park Service before Idaho County August 4, 2001. Pursuant to section SE Cascade Ave., Redmond, 01000931 Riggins Motel, 615 S ID 95, Riggins, 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written 01000979 Multnomah County comments concerning the significance Hughes, Dr. Herbert H., House, 1229 W. of these properties under the National ILLINOIS Powell Blvd., Gresham, 01000932 Register criteria for evaluation may be Vermilion County Kenton Commercial Historic District, (Kenton forwarded to the National Register, Fischer Theater, 158–164 N. Vermillion St., Neighborhood of Portland, Oregon MPS) National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, Roughly along Denver Ave., from N. Willis Danville, 01000978 NC400, Washington, DC 20240. Written St. to N. Watts St., Portland, 01000934 INDIANA McGraw, Donald and Ruth, House, 01845 SW comments should be submitted by Military Rd., Portland, 01000935 October 17, 2001. Delaware County Meier and Frank Delivery Depot, 1417 NW Carol D. Shull, Wilson Junior High School, (Indiana’s Public Everett, Portland, 01000936 Common and High Schools MPS) 2000 S. Van Vleet, Lewis and Elizabeth, House, (Eliot Keeper of the National Register of Historic Franklin St., Muncie, 01000992 Neighborhood MPS) 202 NE Graham St., Places. Portland, 01000937 Hamilton County ALASKA Catherine Street Historic District, Roughly Union County Fairbanks North Star Borough—Census Area bounded by Harrison, Clinton, west side of La Grande Commercial Historic District, 9th and east side of 10th, Noblesville, Roughly bounded by UP RR tracts along Illinois Street Historic District, 300–700 01000988 Jefferson St., Greenwood and Cove Sts., Illinois St., Fairbanks, 01000966 South 9th Street Historic District, Roughly Washington St., & Fourth St., La Grande, Haines Borough—Census Area bounded by Maple, Division, 10th, and the 01000933 west side of 9th St., Noblesville, 01000982 Anway, Charlie, Cabin, Mile 1.5 Haines PENNSYLVANIA Hwy., Haines, 01000967 Johnson County Bucks County CALIFORNIA Furnas Mill Bridge, Pisgah Rd. over Sugar Creek—Atterbury Fish and Wildlife Area, Waldenmark, 1280 & 1300 Wrightstown Rd., Plumas County Edinburgh, 01000985 Wrightstown Township, 01000924 Red Dog Townsite, Address Restricted, Lagrange County Chester County Nevada City, 01000968 St. James Memorial Chapel, IN 9, just S of Cty Pottstown Landing Historic District, Roughly COLORADO Rd. 600 N., Howe, 01000989 bounded by US 422 By-Pass, Whartnaby St. 633 Laurelwood Rd. and Reiff St., North Boulder County Marion County Coventry, 01000927 Boulder County Poor Farm, Address Jamieson—Bennett House, 8452 Green Braces Philadelphia County Restricted, Boulder, 01000969 North Dr., Indianapolis, 01000984 Harris Building, 2121–41 Market St., Larimer County Marshall County Philadelphia, 01000928 Livermore Hotel and General Store, 2160 Red Argos Downtown Historic District, W side of Wayne County Feather Lakes Rd., Livermore, 01000970 Michigan St, bet. Smith and Williams, E side bet. Smith and Walnut, Argos, Starlight Station, New York, Ontario, and GEORGIA 01000991 Western Railway, O & W Rd. NE of Depot Fulton County Hill Rd, Starlight, Buckingham Township, Montgomery County 01000925 Inman Park Historic District (Boundary Bethel AME Church of Crawfordsville, 213 Increase and Decrease), Roughly bounded W. North St., Crawfordsville, 01000990 York County by Lake, Hurt, and DeKalb Aves., and Krog Springdale Historic District, Bounded by S. St., Atlanta, 01000973 Morgan County George St., Lombardy Alley, S. Queen St., Whittier Mills Historic District, Roughly the Elm Spring Farm, 1 mi. N of Bain Rd. on and Rathon Rd., York, 01000926 jct. of Bolton Rd. and Parrot Ave., approx. Goose Creek Rd., Martinsville, 01000981
VerDate 11
Lake Ditch Bridge, Jct. of Lake Ditch and in the National Register were received OKLAHOMA Lake Ditch Rd., Monrovia, 01000986 by the National Park Service before July Grady County Orange County 28, 2001. Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR Part 60 written comments Oklahoma College for Women Historic Dixie Garage, IN 56 and Sinclair Ave., West District, Roughly bounded by Grand Ave., concerning the significance of these Baden Springs, 01000983 19th St., Alabama Ave., and alley west of Oxford Hotel, In 56, West Baden Springs, properties under the National Register 15th St., Chickasha, 01000950 01000977 criteria for evaluation may be forwarded Nowata County St. Joseph County to the National Register, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, NC400, Cemetery Patent 110, Cty Rd. 412, 3.25 mi. South Bend Brewing Association, 1636 N of jct. with US 60, Delaware, 01000951 Lincolnway West, South Bend, 01000987 Washington, DC 20240. Written South Bend Remedy Company Building, 501 comments should be submitted by Oklahoma County W. Colfax, South Bend, 01000993 October 17, 2001. First Church of Christ, Scientist, 1200 N. Tippecanoe County Carol D. Shull, Robinson Ave., Oklahoma City, 01000949 Jefferson Historic District, Roughly bounded Keeper of the National Register of Historic PENNSYLVANIA by 9th, Erie, Elizabeth, and Ferry Sts., Places. Berks County Lafayette, 01000976 ALASKA IOWA Trexler Historic District, 375–424 Old Anchorage Borough—Census Area Philadelphia Pike, Albany Township, Linn County Spring Creek Lodge, 18939 Old Glen Hwy., 01000957 Redmond Park—Grande Avenue Historic Chugiak, 01000938 Centre County District, (Cedar Rapids, Iowa MPS) COLORADO Roughly bounded by US 151, Nineteenth Pennsylvania Match Company, 367 Phoenix St., and Washington Ave., Cedar Rapids, Denver County Ave., Bellefonte, 01000954 01000994 Denver Tramway Powerhouse, 1416 Platte Chester County LOUISIANA St., Denver, 01000940 Welkinweir, 1368 Prizer Rd., East Nantmeal Bienville Parish CONNECTICUT Township, 01000953 Conly Site, Address Restricted, Ringgold, Windham County Lancaster County 01000995 Cady—Copp House, 115 Liberty Hwy, Lancaster City Historic District, Roughly NEW YORK Putnam, 01000939 bounded by Liberty St., Broad St., Greenwood Ave., Race Ave., Lancaster, Livingston County GEORGIA 01000956 Caledonia House Hotel, 3141 State St., Madison County Caledonia, 01000997 York County Colbert School, Jct. of Fourth St. and First Chestnut Hill, 1105 Windsor Rd., Windsor Schuyler County Ave., Colbert, 01000942 Township, 01000952 First Baptist Church of Watkins Glen, Fifth Taylor County St. and Porter St., Watkins Glen, 01000996 TENNESSEE Union Methodist Church Cemetery—Hays SOUTH DAKOTA Campground Cemetery, Union Church Rd., Obion County Brule County Butler, 01000941 Washington Avenue and Florida Avenue Historic District, Located along Chamberlain Bridge, (Historic Bridges in LOUISIANA Washington and Florida Aves., bet. 3rd and South Dakota MPS) I–90 Loop over St. Mary Parish Missouri R, Chamberlain, 01000999 5th Sts., Union City, 01000955 Boy Scout Troop #1 Log Cabin, 601 Adams, UTAH Clay County Franklin, 01000944 Linden House, 509 Linden Ave., Vermillion, Millard County Terrebonne Parish 01001001 Robins, Merien, and Rosabelle, House, 110 Residence Plantation House, 8951 Park Ave., West 200 North, Scipio, 01000962 Lincoln County Houma, 01000943 Rudolph—Parke House, 412 E. First St., Salt Lake County MINNESOTA Canton, 01001000 Centennial Home, 307 Virginia St., Salt Lake Rice County TEXAS City, 01000960 Trondhjem Norwegian Lutheran Church, Holt, Samuel and Geneva, Farmstead, 10317 Dallas County 8501 Garfield Ave., Webster, 01000945 South 1300 West, South Jordan, 01000963 Strain Farm—Strain, W.A., House (Boundary MISSISSIPPI Iris Theater, Apartments and Commercial Increase), 400 Lancaster-Hutchins Rd., Building, (Murray City, Utah MPS) 4861 S. Lancaster, 01001002 Oktibbeha County State St., Murray, 01000959 [FR Doc. 01–24631 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Meadow Woods Plantation House, 2479 Westminster College President’s Jpise, 1733 Oktoc Rd., Starkville, 01000946 South 1300 East, Salt Lake City, 01000961 BILLING CODE 4310–70–P MISSOURI Summit County St. Louis Independent City Beech, Thomas and Jane, House, 47 West 50 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR South, Coalville, 01000958 St. Boniface Neighborhood Historic District, National Park Service Roughly bounded by Koeln and Tesson WISCONSIN Sts., Broadway, and Alabama Ave., St. Milwaukee County National Register of Historic Places; Louis (Independent City), 01000948 Notification of Pending Nominations Tower Grave Heights Historic District, Lawson Airplane Company—Continental Bounded by Arsenal St., Grant Ave., Faience and Tile Company, 909 Nominations for the following McDonald Ave., and Gustine Ave., St. Menomonee Ave., South Milwaukee, properties being considered for listing Louis (Independent City), 01000947 01000964
VerDate 11
WYOMING Seminole County Hamilton County Converse County Browne—King House, 322 King St., Oviedo, Blue Mountain Fire Observation Station, 01001023 (Fire Observation Stations of New York Officer’s Club, Douglas Prisoner of War, Estes, R.W. Celery Company Precooler State Forest Preserve MPS) Blue Mountain, 115 S. Riverbend Dr., Douglas, 01000965 Historic District, 159 N. Central Ave., Indian Lake, 01001035 A correction has been requested for Oviedo, 01001022 Snowy Mountain Fire Observation Station, the following resource: Nelson and Company Historic District, 110– (Fire Observation Stations of New York 166 E Broadway St. and 30–110 Station St., State Forest Preserve MPS) Snowy MASSACHUSETTS Oviedo, 01001010 Mountain, Indian Lake, 01001031 Hampshire County Wheeler—Evans House, 340 S. Lake Jesup Saratoga County Ave., Oviedo, 01001024 Parsons, Shepherd and Damon Houses Hadley Mountain Fire Observation Station, Historic District 46, 58, and 66 Bridge St. IOWA (Fire Observation Stations of New York Northampton, 01000627 State Forest Preserve MPS) Hadley Muscatine County Mountain, Hadley, 01001037 [FR Doc. 01–24632 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Greenwood Cemetery Chapel, 1814 Lucas, BILLING CODE 4310–70–P Muscatine, 01001013 St. Lawrence County Arab Mountain Fire Observation Station, MICHIGAN (Fire Observation Stations of New York DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Calhoun County State Forest Preserve MPS) Arab Mountain, Piercefield, 01001039 National Park Service Marshall Avenue Bridge, Marshall Ave. over Rice Cr., Marshall, 01001021 Ulster County National Register of Historic Places; Crawford County Balsam Lake Mountain Fire Observation Notification of Pending Nominations Station, (Fire Observation Stations of New Douglas House, 6122 E Cty Rd. 612, Lovells York State Forest Preserve MPS) Balsam Nominations for the following Township, 01001017 Lake Mountain, Hardenburgh, 01001038 properties being considered for listing Huron County Mount Tremper Fire Observation Station, in the National Register were received (Fire Observation Stations of New York Smith—Culhane House, 8569 Lake St., Port State Forest Preserve MPS) Mount by the National Park Service before Austin, 01001015 August 11, 2001. Pursuant to section Tremper, Shandaken, 01001032 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written Ionia County Red Hill Fire Observation Station, (Fire Observation Stations of New York State comments concerning the significance St. John the Baptist Catholic Church Forest Preserve MPS) Red Hill, Denning, Complex, 324 S. Washington Ave., of these properties under the National 01001030 Register criteria for evaluation may be Hubbardston, 01001019 NORTH CAROLINA forwarded to the National Register, Iosco County National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, Five Channels Dam Archeological District, Alamance County NC400, Washington, DC 20240. Written Address Restricted, Oscoda, 01001016 Cates, Charles F. and Howard, Farm, 4870 comments should be submitted by Mebane Rogers Rd., Mebane, 01001025 October 17, 2001. Kent County Ashe County Carol D. Shull, Porter Hollow Embankment and Culvert, White Pine Strail at Stegman Creek, W of Cooper, A.S., Farm, Cranberry Springs Rd., Keeper of the National Register Of Historic Summit Ave., Algoma Township, approx. 0.2 mi. SE of jct. with Todd RR Places. 01001018 Grade Rd., Brownwood, 01001028 DELAWARE Miller Homestead, 324 Miller Dr., Lansing, Lenawee County 01001029 Kent County Keeney, John W. and Erena Alexander Buncombe County Durham—Shores House, (House and Garden Rogers, Farm, 5300 Monroe, Franklin in Central Delaware MPS) E side of DE 15, Township, 01001020 Engadine, US 19/23, 0.3 mi. E of Haywood, Chandler, 01001027 Dupont Station, 01001005 MONTANA White—Warren Tenant House, (House and Cabarrus County Garden in Central Delaware MPS) NE side Missoula County of DE 261, Sandtown, 01001009 Meek House, NC 1624, 0.3 mi. NE of jct. with Eagle Guard Station, 11 mi. W of Townsend, NC 1622, Kannapolis, 01001026 New Castle County Townsend, 01001014 OHIO Grose, Robert, House, (House and Garden in NEW YORK Central Delaware MPS) 1000 Port Penn Franklin County Essex County Rd., Port Penn, 01001006 Westminster Church, 77 S. 6th St., DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Poke-O-Moonshine Mountain Fire Columbus, 01001043 Observation Station, (Fire Observation District of Columbia Stations of New York State Forest Preserve Mahoning County Downtown Historic District, Roughly, MPS) Poke-O-Moonshine Mountain, Wick Park Historic District (Boundary Seventh St. from Pennsylvania Ave. to Mt. Chesterfield, 01001034 Increase), Roughly bounded by Broadway Vernon Sq., and F St. bet. Eleventh and Ave., Wick Ave., Madison Ave., and Elm Seventh Sts., NW, Washington, 01001004 Franklin County St., Youngstown, 01001041 FLORIDA Azure Mountain Fire Observation Station, (Fire Observation Stations of New York Richland County Collier County State Forest Preserve MPS) Azure Richland County Infirmary, 3220 Mansfield- Everglades Laundry, 105 W. Broadway, Mountain, Waverly, 01001036 Olivesburg Rd., Mansfield, 01001042 Everglades City, 01001012 Fulton County Washington County Palm Beach County Kane Mountain Fire Observation Station, Marietta Historic District (Boundary Historic Old Town Commercial District, (Fire Observation Stations of New York Decrease), Roughly bounded by the Bounded by FEC, M St., Lucerne Ave., and State Forest Preserve MPS) Kane Mountain, Muskingum and Ohio Rivers, and Warren, 1st Ave. S, Lake Worth, 01001011 Caroga, 01001033 3rd, 5th, and 6th Sts., Marietta, 01001040
VerDate 11
WISCONSIN IOWA of these properties under the National Dane County Polk County Register criteria for evaluation may be forwarded to the National Register, Fort Blue Mounds, Address Restricted, Blue Syndicate Block, 501 E. Locust, Des Moines, 01001059 National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, Mounds, 01001044 NC400, Washington, DC 20240. Written A request for REMOVAL has been MASSACHUSETTS comments should be submitted by made for the following resource: Dukes County October 17, 2001. ALABAMA Gay Head—Aquinnah Town Center Historic Beth Savage, District (Boundary Increase), South Rd., Acting, Keeper of the National Register Of Coosa County Totem Pole Way and Jeffers Way, Historic Places. Oakachoy Covered Bridge Over Oakachoy Cr. Aquinnah, 01001060 MICHIGAN W of SR 259 Nixburg, 90000928 Middlesex County [FR Doc. 01–24633 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Pleasand Street Historic District, 187–235 Lenawee County Pleasant St., Marlborough, 01001061 BILLING CODE 4310–70–P Palmer, Lorenzo and Ruth Wells, House, 760 OHIO Maple Grove Ave., Hudson, 01001070 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Lawrence County Burlington 37 Cemetery, (Underground Buncombe County National Park Service Railroad in Ohio MPS) Center St., Adams, Judge Junius G., House, 11 Burlington, 01001064 Stuyvesant Rd., Biltmore Forest, 01001077 National Register of Historic Places; Preble County Caswell County Notification of Pending Nominations Bunker Hill House, 7919 OH 177, Fairhaven, Wildwood, 5680 Stephenton Rd., Semora, 01001062 Nominations for the following 01001076 properties being considered for listing Seneca County Chowan County in the National Register were received Fostoria Downtown Historic District, Edenton Historic District (Boundary by the National Park Service before Roughly bounded by North St., South St. Increase), Both sides 300 block E. King St., August 18, 2001. Pursuant to section and the alleys E and W of Main St. Edenton, 01001075 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written Fostoria, 01001065 Davidson County comments concerning the significance Summit County Mor-Val Hosiery Mill, N. Main and E. First of these properties under the National Glendale Cemetery, 150 Glendale Ave., Sts., Denton, 01001074 Register criteria for evaluation may be Akron, 01001063 Davie County forwarded to the National Register, OREGON National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, Cana Store and Post Office, NC 1411, 0.2 mi. NC400, Washington, DC 20240. Written Linn County N of NC 1406, Mocksville, 01001073 comments should be submitted by Moore, John and Mary, House, 320 Kirk Ave., Forsyth County October 17, 2001. Brownsville, 01001066 Clayton Family Farm, 5809 Stanley Dr., Carol D. Shull, Marion County Stanleyville, 01001072 Salem Downtown State Street—Commerical Keeper of the National Register of Historic Macon County Places. Street Historic District, Roughly bounded by Ferry, High, Chemeketa, and Fronts Sts., Playmore—Bowery Road Historic District, ALASKA Salem, 01001067 1309–1311 Horse Cove Rd., 7,215,225,369,455 and 172–176,200,462 Southeast Fairbanks Borough-Census Area Multnomah County Bowery Rd., and 375–471 Upper Lake Rd., Chicken Historic District, Mi. 66.5 Taylor Costello, James C. and Mary A., House, 2043 Highlands, 01001071 Hwy., Eagle, 01001053 NE Tillamook, Portland, 01001068 SOUTH DAKOTA PUERTO RICO COLORADO Bon Homme County Denver County San Juan Municipality Metzgers, William, New Emporium, 1610 Leeman Auto Company Building, 550 Edificio Aboy, 603 Aboy St., San Juan, Main St., Tyndall, 01001079 01001069 Broadway, Denver, 01001054 Yankton County [FR Doc. 01–24634 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Kiowa County Our Savior’s Lutheran Church, 29219 431st BILLING CODE 4310–70–P Ave., Menno, 01001078 Sand Creek Massacre Site, Near jct. of Cty Rd. 54 and Cty Rd. W, Eads, 01001055 TENNESSEE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR McMinn County Duval County National Park Service Chesnutt, James W., House, 105 A S. Niota Rd., Englewood, 01001081 Mandarin Store and Post Office, 12471 Mandarin Rd., Jacksonville, 01001056 National Register of Historic Places; UTAH Notification of Pending Nominations Pasco County Salt Lake County Nominations for the following Zephyrhills Downtown Historic District, Salt Lake Hardware Company Warehouse, Roughly bounded by South Ave., 9th Ave., properties being considered for listing 155 N 400 W, Salt Lake City, 01001082 in the National Register were received 7th St. and 11th St., Zephyrhills, 01001058 WASHINGTON by the National Park Service before Pinellas County August 25, 2001. Pursuant to section King County Kress, S.H., and Company Building, 475 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60 written Olson, Mary, Farm, 28728 Green River Rd. S., Central Ave., St. Petersburg, 01001057 comments concerning the significance Kent, 01001080
VerDate 11
A request for Removal has been made 487–5039; or faxed to (559) 487–5130 announced that Kesterson would be for the following Resource: (TDD 559–487–5933). closed, and a phased elimination of SLD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. discharges was completed by June 1986. MISSOURI Jason Phillips, Bureau of Reclamation, In 1990, the San Joaquin Valley Greene County Division of Planning, 2800 Cottage Way, Drainage Program (SJVDP) published A Sacramento, CA 95825 or by telephone Management Plan For Agricultural Second Baptist Church (Washington Avenue Subsurface Drainage and Related Baptist), 729 North Washington, at (559) 487–5070 (TDD 916–978–5608). Springfield, 00001620 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act of Problems on the Westside San Joaquin Valley. This report, which was prepared [FR Doc. 01–24635 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] June 3, 1960 (Pub. L. No. 88–488), which authorized the construction, based on a major State-Federal BILLING CODE 4310–70–P operation, and maintenance of the SLU, interagency investigation of the drainage provided for the construction of San problems, recommended a series of ‘‘in- valley’’ drainage management actions. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Luis Dam, San Luis Canal, Coalinga Canal, San Luis Drain (SLD), In 1991, pursuant to a stipulated judgment in a lawsuit regarding the Bureau of Reclamation distribution systems, drains, pumping facilities, and other appurtenant works. rights and responsibilities of CVP water San Luis Unit Feature Reevaluation, The authorization provided for joint users in Westlands Water District, Central Valley Project, CA development with the State of Reclamation published a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on a California. The State agreed to provide AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, proposed drainage plan for the SLU that 55 percent of the construction, Interior. was based on and consistent with the operation, and maintenance costs of the ACTION: SJVDP report recommendations. That Notice of intent to prepare an main project facilities and agreed to plan, however, was not finalized. In a environmental impact statement (EIS). operate those facilities as a part of both subsequent lawsuit, (Sumner Peck the CVP and the California State Water SUMMARY: The Department of the Ranch v. Bureau of Reclamation), the Project. SLU construction started in Interior, Bureau of Reclamation Court directed Reclamation to apply to 1963 and the first significant water (Reclamation), will prepare an EIS, the California State Water Resources deliveries began in 1968. SLU facilities pursuant to the National Environmental Control Board for a discharge permit in Policy Act (NEPA), to evaluate proposed can provide about 1.4 million acre-feet order to complete the SLD to the actions to provide long-term drainage of water annually to CVP water users. Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta as was service to the San Luis Unit (SLU) of the With the implementation of the Central contemplated in Pub. L. No. 88–488. Central Valley Project (CVP). Proposed Valley Project Improvement Act and Upon appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of drainage service alternatives will be Endangered Species Act protections, the Appeals, the Appellate Court affirmed selected on the basis of criteria adopted actual average deliveries have been the District Court’s conclusion that the to maintain environmental quality and reduced by nearly 50 percent. Initial United States must act promptly to provide for continued agricultural SLU project planning recognized the provide drainage service, but reversed production in a manner consistent with need to provide drainage service to that part of the District Court judgment the Plan of Action filed April 18, 2001, protect lands from rising water tables that foreclosed non-interceptor drain in Sumner Peck Ranch, Inc., et al., v. and accumulation of salts which would solutions. Bureau of Reclamation, et al. otherwise render the soil unsuitable for Reclamation has been engaged for DATES: Two scoping meetings will be farming. The authorizing legislation many years with other State and Federal held to solicit comments from interested provided for the construction of an agencies as well as farmers, water parties to assist in determining the interceptor drain that would serve the districts, and stakeholders, to develop scope of the environmental analysis and SLU area and discharge to the effective, affordable, and implementable to identify the significant issues related Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. drainage service and drainage to this proposed action. The meeting Reclamation began construction of the management solutions. Several of these dates are: SLD in 1968. By 1975, 83 miles of the efforts have resulted in innovative and • Wednesday, November 14, 2001, 10 planned 188-mile SLD had been promising drainage management a.m. to 12 p.m., Fresno, California completed, and 1,283 acres of shallow techniques, and Reclamation is • Thursday, November 15, 2001, 1:30 ponds (later named Kesterson Reservoir) committed to continuing to support p.m. to 3:30 p.m., Concord, California were constructed about 80 miles south development of those approaches. Written comments on the scope of the of the Delta to provide temporary However, the only proven technologies environmental document should be storage to facilitate future control of the that have been identified to date to mailed to Reclamation at the address SLD flow into the Delta. Construction provide long-term drainage service and below by November 30, 2001. was then suspended pending achieve sustainable salt balance on ADDRESSES: The meeting locations are as determination of the final point of drainage-affected, irrigated lands in follows: discharge for the SLD. During the Westlands Water District are disposal of • Fresno at Piccadilly Inn University, ensuing years, Kesterson Reservoir salts out of valley via completion and Broadmoor Room, 4961 N. Cedar received drain water and functioned as operation of the SLD or disposal to Avenue an evaporation facility while studies evaporation ponds. Therefore, • Concord at Hilton Hotel, Seminar 4 and investigations continued alternatives incorporating those Room, 1970 Diamond Boulevard concerning a final point of discharge. In technologies, as well as other Written comments on the scope of the 1984, waterfowl deaths and deformities approaches identified during scoping, alternatives and impacts to be at Kesterson were linked to elevated will be considered in the analysis. considered should be sent to Mr. levels of selenium in the food chain. In The environmental review will be Michael Delamore, Bureau of 1985, the State Water Resources Control conducted pursuant to NEPA, the Reclamation, South-Central California Board directed Reclamation to clean up Endangered Species Act and other Area Office, 1243 N Street, Fresno CA and abate the conditions at Kesterson. applicable laws, to analyze the potential 93721–1813; or by telephone at (559) The Department of the Interior environmental impacts of implementing
VerDate 11
each of the feasible alternative means of on October 9, 2001; the deadline for SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments providing drainage service to lands filing posthearing briefs is October 15, concerning its proposal to increase the within the SLU. All reasonable 2001; the Commission will make its total burden-hour estimate for, and to alternatives as required by NEPA and its final release of information on October extend OMB approval of, the collection- implementing regulations will be 19, 2001; and final party comments are of-information requirements specified examined. Draft EISs prepared in the due on October 23, 2001. by the standard entitled ‘‘Occupational early 1980’s and in 1991 for drainage EFFECTIVE DATE: September 26, 2001. Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in 1 solutions to the SLU will provide a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Laboratories’’ (29 CFR 1910.1450). useful beginning, thus allowing Timberlake (202–205–3188), Office of DATES: Submit written comments on or Reclamation to expedite completion of Investigations, U.S. International Trade before December 3, 2001. the analysis. Alternatives, with their Commission, 500 E Street SW, ADDRESSES: Submit written comments related designs and cost estimates Washington, DC 20436. Hearing- to the Docket Office, Docket No. ICR– identified in these earlier efforts, will be impaired persons can obtain 1218–0131 (2001), OSHA, U.S. re-evaluated and updated to reflect information on this matter by contacting Department of Labor, Room N–2625, current conditions. Public input on the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, additional alternatives, or combinations 205–1810. Persons with mobility Washington DC 20210; telephone (202) of alternatives, that should be impairments who will need special 693–2350. Commenters may transmit considered will be sought through the assistance in gaining access to the written comments of 10 pages or less by initial scoping meetings. In addition, Commission should contact the Office facsimile to (202) 693–1648. public input will be sought on the of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. Media FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: criteria that should be used to carry should contact Peg O’Laughlin (202– forward alternatives, or combination of Todd Owen, Directorate of Policy, 205–1819), Office of External Relations. OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room alternatives, for further consideration. General information concerning the Our practice is to make comments, N–3641, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Commission may also be obtained by including names and home addresses of Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) accessing its internet server (http:// respondents, available for public 693–2444. A copy of the Agency’s www.usitc.gov). The public record for review. Individual respondents may Information-Collection Request (ICR) these investigations may be viewed on request that we withhold their home supporting the need for the information the Commission’s electronic docket address from public disclosure, which collections specified by the standard (EDIS-ON-LINE) at http:// we will honor to the extent allowable by entitled ‘‘Occupational Exposure to dockets.usitc.gov/eol/public. law. There also may be circumstances in Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories’’ For further information concerning which we would withhold a is available for inspection and copying these investigations see the respondent’s identity from public in the Docket Office, or by requesting a Commission’s notice cited above and disclosure, as allowable by law. If you copy from Todd Owen at (202) 693– the Commission’s Rules of Practice and wish us to withhold your name and/or 2444. For electronic copies of the ICR Procedure, part 201, subparts A through address, you must state this contact OSHA on the Internet at http:/ E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, prominently at the beginning of your /www.osha.gov/comp-links.html, and subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207). comment. We will make all submissions select ‘‘Information Collection from organizations or businesses, and Authority: These investigations are being Requests.’’ from individuals identifying themselves conducted under authority of title VII of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: as representatives or officials of Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.21 of the Commission’s I. Background organizations or businesses, available rules. for public disclosure in their entirety The Department of Labor, as part of its Issued: September 26, 2001. Dated: September 14, 2001. continuing effort to reduce paperwork By order of the Commission. and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, Laura Allen, Donna R. Koehnke, conducts a preclearance consultation Deputy Regional Environmental Officer. Secretary. program to provide the public with an [FR Doc. 01–24564 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–24625 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] opportunity to comment on proposed BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P BILLING CODE 7020–02–P and continuing information-collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 INTERNATIONAL TRADE (PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This DEPARTMENT OF LABOR COMMISSION program ensures that information is in [Investigations Nos. 731–TA–919–920 Occupational Safety and Health the desired format, reporting burden (Final)] Administration (time and cost) is minimal, collection instruments are understandable, and Certain Welded Large Diameter Line [Docket No. ICR–1218–0131 (2001)] OSHA’s estimate of the information- Pipe from Japan and Mexico collection burden is correct. Standard Entitled ‘‘Occupational The standard entitled ‘‘Occupational AGENCY: United States International Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Exposure to Hazardous Chemicals in Trade Commission. Laboratories’’; Extension of the Office ACTION: Revised schedule for the subject of Management and Budget’s (OMB) 1 Based on its assessment of the paperwork investigations. Approval of the Information-Collection requirements contained in this standard, the Agency estimates that the total burden hours SUMMARY: The Commission is revising (Paperwork) Requirements increased compared to its previous burden-hour its schedule for the subject estimate. Under this notice, OSHA is not proposing AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health to revise these paperwork requirements in any investigations as follows: the hearing Administration (OSHA), Labor. substantive manner, only to increase the burden will be held at the U.S. International ACTION: Request for comments. hours imposed by the existing paperwork Trade Commission Building at 9:30 a.m. requirements.
VerDate 11
Laboratories’’ (§ 1910.1450; the among employees exposed to such Estimated Total Burden Hours: ‘‘Standard’’) applies to laboratories that chemicals. 269,273. use hazardous chemicals in accordance II. Special Issues for Comment Estimated Cost (Operation and with the Standard’s definitions for Maintenance): $18,235,000. ‘‘laboratory use of hazardous OSHA has a particular interest in chemicals’’ 2 and ‘‘laboratory scale.’’ 3 comments on the following issues: IV. Authority and Signature The Standard requires these laboratories • Whether the proposed information- John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary to maintain employee exposures at or collection requirements are necessary of Labor for Occupational Safety and below the permissible exposure limits for the proper performance of the Health, directed the preparation of this specified for the hazardous chemicals in Agency’s functions, including whether notice. The authority for this notice is 29 CFR part 1910, subpart Z. They do the information is useful; the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 • so by developing a written Chemical The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of (44 U.S.C. 3506) and Secretary of Hygiene Plan (CHP) that describes: the burden (time and cost) of the Labor’s Order No. 3–2000 (65 FR Standard operating procedures for using information-collection requirements, 50017). including the validity of the hazardous chemicals; hazard-control Signed at Washington, DC on September techniques; equipment-reliability methodology and assumptions used; • The quality, utility, and clarity of 26, 2001. measures; employee information-and- John L. Henshaw, training programs; conditions under the information collected; and • Assistant Secretary of Labor. which the employer must approve Ways to minimize the burden on operations, procedures, and activities employers who must comply; for [FR Doc. 01–24559 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] before implementation; and medical example, by using automated or other BILLING CODE 4510–26–M consultations and examinations. The technological information-collection CHP also designates personnel and -transmission techniques. responsible for implementing the CHP, III. Proposed Actions LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION and specifies the procedures used to OSHA proposes to increase the provide additional protection to existing burden-hour estimate, and to Notice of Intent to Award—Grant employees exposed to particularly extend the Office of Management and Awards for the Provision of Civil Legal hazardous chemicals. Budget’s (OMB) approval, of the Services to Eligible Low-Income Other information-collection collection-of-information requirements Clients Beginning January 1, 2002. requirements of the Standard include: specified by the Standard. In this regard, AGENCY: Documenting exposure-monitoring the Agency is requesting to increase the Legal Services Corporation. results; notifying employees in writing current burden-hour estimate from ACTION: Announcement of intention to of these results; presenting specified 107,842 hours to 269,273 hours, a total make FY 2002 Competitive Grant information and training to employees; increase of 161,431 hours. This increase Awards. establishing a medical-surveillance largely occurred because OSHA program for overexposed employees; increased the number of laboratories SUMMARY: The Legal Services providing required information to the and employees covered by the Standard. Corporation (LSC) hereby announces its physician; obtaining the physician’s The Agency will summarize the intention to award grants and contracts written opinion; using proper comments submitted in response to this to provide economical and effective respiratory equipment; and establishing, notice, and will include this summary delivery of high quality civil legal maintaining, transferring, and disclosing in its request to OMB to extend the services to eligible low-income clients, exposure-monitoring and medical approval of these information-collection beginning January 1, 2002. records. These collection-of-information requirements. DATES: All comments and requirements, including the CHP, Type of Review: Extension of recommendations must be received on control employee overexposure to currently approved information- or before the close of business on hazardous laboratory chemicals, thereby collection requirements. November 1, 2001. preventing serious illnesses and death Title: Occupational Exposure to ADDRESSES: Legal Services Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories Corporation—Competitive Grants, Legal 2 ‘‘Laboratory use of hazardous chemicals’’ means (29 CFR 1910.1450). Services Corporation, 750 First Street handling or use of hazardous chemicals in a manner OMB Number: 1218–0131. NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20002– such that: (i) Chemical manipulations are on a Affected Public: Business or other for- ‘‘laboratory scale’’; (ii) multiple chemical 4250. profit; not-for-profit institutions; Federal procedures or chemicals are used; (iii) the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: procedures involved are not part of a production government; State, local, or tribal process nor in any way simulate a production governments. Reginald Haley, Office of Program process; and (iv) protective laboratory practices and Number of Respondents: 41,900. Performance, (202) 336–8827. equipment are available and in common use to Frequency of Response: Annually; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant minimize the potential for employee exposure to hazardous chemicals. (See § 1910.1450(b), monthly; occasionally. to LSC’s announcement of funding ‘‘Definitions.’’) Average Time per Response: Ranges availability on April 19, 2001 (66 FR 3 ‘‘Laboratory scale’’ means work with substances from five minutes (.08 hour) for a 20165), July 13, 2001 (66 FR 36807), and in which the containers used for reactions, variety of requirements (e.g., for an Grant Renewal applications due on transfers, and other handling of substances are office clerk to develop and post August 13, 2001, LSC will award funds designed to be easily and safely manipulated by one person. Laboratory scale excludes those workplaces exposure-monitoring results) to eight (8) to one or more of the following whose function is to produce commercial quantities hours for an employer to develop a organizations to provide civil legal of materials. (See § 1910.1450(b), ‘‘Definitions.’’) Chemical Hygiene Plan. services in the indicated service areas.
VerDate 11
Anticipated FY Service area Applicant name 2002 award
AL–1 ...... Legal Services Corporation of Alabama, Inc ...... $4,831,192 AL–2 ...... Legal Services of North-Central Alabama, Inc ...... 549,609 AL–3 ...... Legal Services of Metro Birmingham, Inc ...... 977,006 MAL ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 29,695 AK–1 ...... Alaska Legal Services Corporation ...... 587,522 NAK–1 ...... Alaska Legal Services Corporation ...... 488,688 AZ–2 ...... DNA-Peoples Legal Services, Inc ...... 549,786 AZ–3 ...... Community Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,655,476 AZ–5 ...... Southern Arizona Legal Aid, Inc ...... 1,642,490 MAZ ...... Community Legal Services, Inc ...... 133,997 NAZ–5 ...... DNA-Peoples Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,357,944 NAZ–6 ...... Southern Arizona Legal Aid, Inc ...... 575,978 AR–6 ...... Ozark Legal Services ...... 1,529,150 AR–7 ...... Center for Arkansas Legal Services ...... 2,265,833 MAR ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 63,300 CA–1 ...... California Indian Legal Services, Inc ...... 26,923 CA–2 ...... Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 595,811 CA–12 ...... Inland Counties Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,503,568 CA–14 ...... Legal Aid Society of San Diego, Inc ...... 2,217,381 CA–19 ...... Legal Aid Society of Orange County, Inc ...... 2,818,744 CA–26 ...... Central California Legal Services ...... 2,176,387 CA–27 ...... Legal Services of Northern California, Inc ...... 2,698,853 CA–28 ...... Bay Area Legal Aid ...... 3,612,603 CA–29 ...... Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles ...... 6,314,739 CA–30 ...... Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County ...... 3,196,664 CA–31 ...... California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 3,477,326 MCA ...... California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 2,382,503 NCA–1 ...... California Indian Legal Services, Inc ...... 798,333 CO–6 ...... Colorado Legal Services ...... 3,178,056 MCO ...... Colorado Legal Services ...... 134,041 NCO–1 ...... Colorado Legal Services ...... 86,780 CT–1 ...... Statewide Legal Services of Connecticut, Inc ...... 1,903,538 NCT–1 ...... Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 14,147 DE–1 ...... Legal Services Corporation of Delaware, Inc ...... 473,889 MDE ...... Legal Aid Bureau, Inc ...... 22,403 DC–1 ...... Neigh. Legal Services Prog. of the Dist. of Columbia ...... 849,867 FL–1 ...... Central Florida Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,029,969 FL–2 ...... LA Service of Broward County ...... 1,051,155 FL–3 ...... Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,081,636 FL–4 ...... Jacksonville Area Legal Aid, Inc ...... 823,218 FL–5 ...... Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc ...... 2,908,208 FL–6 ...... Legal Services of North Florida, Inc ...... 882,872 FL–7 ...... Greater Orlando Area Legal Services, Inc ...... 832,698 FL–8 ...... Bay Area Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,171,381 FL–9 ...... Withlacoochee Area Legal Services, Inc ...... 467,966 FL–10 ...... Three Rivers Legal Services, Inc ...... 656,525 FL–11 ...... Northwest Florida Legal Services, Inc ...... 452,589 FL–12 ...... Gulfcoast Legal Services, Inc ...... 991,730 MFL ...... Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc ...... 810,560 GA–1 ...... Atlanta Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 1,880,428 GA–2 ...... Georgia Legal Services Program ...... 5,914,001 MGA ...... Georgia Legal Services Program ...... 353,848 GU–1 ...... Guam Legal Services Corporation ...... 167,338 HI–1 ...... Legal Aid Society of Hawaii ...... 895,875 MHI ...... Legal Aid Society of Hawaii ...... 62,197 NHI–1 ...... Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation ...... 206,990 ID–1 ...... Idaho Legal Aid Services, Inc ...... 984,032 MID ...... Idaho Legal Aid Services, Inc ...... 168,697 NID–1 ...... Idaho Legal Aid Services, Inc ...... 58,706 IL–3 ...... Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc ...... 2,769,444 IL–6 ...... Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago ...... 6,174,934 IL–7 ...... Prairie State Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,541,676 MIL ...... Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago ...... 225,297 IN–5 ...... Indiana Legal Services, Inc ...... 4,960,961 MIN ...... Indiana Legal Services, Inc ...... 102,616 IA–1 ...... Legal Services Corporation of Iowa ...... 2,423,664 IA–2 ...... Legal Aid Society of Polk County ...... 255,945 MIA ...... Legal Services Corporation of Iowa ...... 34,055 KS–1 ...... Kansas Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,413,433 MKS ...... Kansas Legal Services, Inc ...... 10,725 KY–2 ...... Legal Aid Society ...... 1,231,133 KY–5 ...... Appalachian Research & Defense Fund of KY ...... 2,159,298 KY–9 ...... Cumberland Trace Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,280,662
VerDate 11
Anticipated FY Service area Applicant name 2002 award
KY–10 ...... Northern Kentucky Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 1,309,139 MKY ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 38,407 LA–10 ...... Southwest Louisiana Legal Services Society, Inc ...... 2,206,947 LA–10 ...... Acadiana Legal Service Corporation ...... 2,206,947 LA–11 ...... Kisatchie Legal Services Corporation ...... 2,092,899 MLA ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 24,849 ME–1 ...... Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 1,069,215 MMX–1 ...... Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 112,715 NME–1 ...... Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Inc ...... 58,242 MD–1 ...... Legal Aid Bureau, Inc ...... 3,319,036 MMD ...... Legal Aid Bureau, Inc ...... 82,058 MA–1 ...... Volunteer Lawyers Project of the Boston Bar Assoc ...... 1,581,988 MA–2 ...... South Middlesex Legal Services, Inc ...... 171,098 MA–3 ...... Legal Services for Cape Cod and Islands, Inc ...... 208,932 MA–4 ...... Merrimack Valley Legal Services, Inc ...... 765,859 MA–5 ...... New Center for Legal Advocacy ...... 558,445 MA–10 ...... Massachusetts Justice Project, Inc ...... 1,282,984 MI–1 ...... Legal Services of Southern Michigan, Inc ...... 579,198 MI–1 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 579,198 MI–2 ...... Legal Services of Southern Michigan, Inc ...... 249,678 MI–3 ...... Legal Aid and Defender Association, Inc ...... 3,501,300 MI–3 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 3,501,300 MI–4 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,381,151 MI–4 ...... Legal Services of Eastern Michigan ...... 1,381,151 MI–5 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 543,413 MI–5 ...... Legal Services of Southern Michigan, Inc ...... 543,413 MI–6 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 589,508 MI–6 ...... Lakeshore Legal Aid ...... 589,508 MI–7 ...... Wayne County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 581,229 MI–7 ...... Oakland Livingston Legal Aid ...... 581,229 MI–8 ...... Western Michigan Legal Services ...... 194,887 MI–9 ...... Legal Services of Northern Michigan, Inc ...... 836,388 MI–10 ...... Western Michigan Legal Services ...... 1,078,616 MI–11 ...... Western Michigan Legal Services ...... 431,925 MMI ...... Legal Services of Southern Michigan, Inc ...... 543,263 NMI–1 ...... Michigan Indian Legal Services, Inc ...... 148,750 MP–1 ...... Micronesian Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,481,411 MN–1 ...... Legal Aid Service of Northeastern Minnesota ...... 495,225 MN–2 ...... Judicare of Anoka County, Inc ...... 107,807 MN–3 ...... Central Minnesota Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,299,200 MN–4 ...... Legal Services of Northwest Minnesota Corporation ...... 485,427 MN–5 ...... Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,274,536 MMN ...... Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services, Inc ...... 180,570 NMN–1 ...... Anishinabe Legal Services, Inc ...... 215,947 MS–2 ...... North Mississippi Rural Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,359,314 MS–3 ...... South Mississippi Legal Services Corporation ...... 615,310 MS–7 ...... Central Mississippi Legal Services ...... 1,484,475 MS–8 ...... Southeast Mississippi Legal Services Corporation ...... 1,059,629 MMS ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 51,507 NMS–1 ...... Southeast Mississippi Legal Services Corporation ...... 75,113 MO–3 ...... Legal Aid of Western Missouri ...... 1,792,421 MO–4 ...... Legal Services of Eastern Missouri, Inc ...... 1,883,685 MO–5 ...... Mid-Missouri Legal Services Corporation ...... 367,610 MO–7 ...... Legal Services of Southern Missouri ...... 1,735,873 MMO ...... Legal Aid of Western Missouri ...... 73,522 MT–1 ...... Montana Legal Services Association ...... 1,052,841 MMT ...... Montana Legal Services Association ...... 49,265 NMT–1 ...... Montana Legal Services Association ...... 143,880 NE–4 ...... Nebraska Legal Services ...... 1,467,905 MNE ...... Nebraska Legal Services ...... 38,160 NNE–1 ...... Nebraska Legal Services ...... 29,869 NV–1 ...... Nevada Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,053,997 MNV ...... Nevada Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,269 NNV–1 ...... Nevada Legal Services, Inc ...... 120,157 NH–1 ...... Legal Advice & Referral Center, Inc ...... 601,019 NJ–1 ...... Cape-Atlantic Legal Services, Inc ...... 242,996 NJ–2 ...... Warren County Legal Services, Inc ...... 42,432 NJ–3 ...... Camden Regional Legal Services, Inc ...... 902,363 NJ–4 ...... Union County Legal Services Corporation ...... 304,204 NJ–5 ...... Hunterdon County Legal Service Corporation ...... 23,895 NJ–6 ...... Bergen County Legal Services ...... 275,798 NJ–7 ...... Hudson County Legal Services Corporation ...... 701,093 NJ–8 ...... Essex-Newark Legal Services Project, Inc ...... 940,938
VerDate 11
Anticipated FY Service area Applicant name 2002 award
NJ–9 ...... Middlesex County Legal Services Corporation ...... 286,488 NJ–10 ...... Passaic County Legal Aid Society ...... 384,840 NJ–11 ...... Somerset-Sussex Legal Services Corporation ...... 90,735 NJ–12 ...... Ocean-Monmouth Legal Services, Inc ...... 456,306 NJ–13 ...... Legal Aid Society of Mercer County ...... 199,381 NJ–14 ...... Legal Aid Society of Morris County ...... 98,971 MNJ ...... Camden Regional Legal Services, Inc ...... 108,901 NM–1 ...... DNA-Peoples Legal Services, Inc ...... 220,345 NM–5 ...... Southern New Mexico Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,401,375 MNM ...... Southern New Mexico Legal Services, Inc ...... 78,827 NNM–2 ...... DNA-Peoples Legal Services, Inc ...... 20,530 NNM–4 ...... Southern New Mexico Legal Services, Inc ...... 419,855 NY–1 ...... LAS of Northeastern New York, Inc ...... 732,342 NY–3 ...... Legal Aid for Broome/Chenango ...... 239,491 NY–4 ...... Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,007,857 NY–6 ...... Chemung County Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc ...... 285,799 NY–7 ...... Nassau/Suffolk Law Services Committee, Inc ...... 946,561 NY–8 ...... Legal Aid Society of Rockland County, Inc ...... 577,618 NY–9 ...... Legal Services for New York City ...... 12,073,717 NY–10 ...... Niagara County Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 202,911 NY–13 ...... Legal Services of Central New York, Inc ...... 750,314 NY–14 ...... Legal Aid Society of Mid-New York, Inc ...... 661,159 NY–15 ...... Westchester/Putnam Legal Services, Inc ...... 646,885 NY–16 ...... North Country Legal Services, Inc ...... 346,742 NY–18 ...... Monroe County Legal Assistance Corporation ...... 944,892 NY–19 ...... Southern Tier Legal Services ...... 436,091 MNY ...... Legal Aid Society of Mid-New York, Inc ...... 249,819 NC–5 ...... North Carolina Legal Services Transition Board ...... 6,841,627 MNC ...... North Carolina Legal Services Transition Board ...... 483,714 NNC–1 ...... North Carolina Legal Services Transition Board ...... 197,210 ND–1 ...... Legal Assistance of North Dakota, Inc ...... 665,776 ND–2 ...... North Dakota Legal Services, Inc ...... 8,845 MND ...... Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services, Inc ...... 104,611 NND–1 ...... Legal Assistance of North Dakota, Inc ...... 114,960 NND–2 ...... North Dakota Legal Services, Inc ...... 128,449 OH–5 ...... The Legal Aid Society of Columbus ...... 1,232,342 OH–17 ...... Ohio State Legal Services ...... 1,960,579 OH–18 ...... Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati ...... 1,460,605 OH–19 ...... Western Ohio Legal Services Association ...... 1,500,857 OH–20 ...... Community Legal Aid Services, Inc ...... 2,083,039 OH–21 ...... The Legal Aid Society of Cleveland ...... 2,204,828 OH–22 ...... Legal Services of Northwest Ohio, Inc ...... 1,146,912 MOH ...... Legal Services of Northwest Ohio, Inc ...... 113,686 OK–3 ...... Legal Services of Eastern Oklahoma, Inc ...... 4,444,118 MOK ...... Legal Services of Eastern Oklahoma, Inc ...... 56,477 NOK–1 ...... Oklahoma Indian Legal Services, Inc ...... 739,870 OR–2 ...... Lane County Legal Aid Service, Inc ...... 293,585 OR–4 ...... Marion-Polk Legal Aid Service, Inc ...... 258,770 OR–5 ...... Legal Aid Services of Oregon ...... 1,989,135 MOR ...... Legal Aid Services of Oregon ...... 502,728 NOR–1 ...... Legal Aid Services of Oregon ...... 166,808 PA–1 ...... Philadelphia Legal Assistance Center ...... 2,729,704 PA–5 ...... Laurel Legal Services, Inc ...... 862,772 PA–8 ...... Neighborhood Legal Services Association ...... 1,759,398 PA–11 ...... Southwestern Pennsylvania Legal Services, Inc ...... 554,226 PA–23 ...... Legal Aid of Southeastern PA ...... 863,982 PA–24 ...... North Penn Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,581,900 PA–25 ...... MidPenn Legal Services, Inc ...... 2,059,453 PA–26 ...... Northwestern Legal Services ...... 769,857 MPA ...... Philadelphia Legal Assistance Center ...... 149,586 PR–1 ...... Puerto Rico Legal Services, Inc ...... 17,565,821 PR–2 ...... Community Law Office, Inc ...... 332,707 MPR ...... Puerto Rico Legal Services, Inc ...... 262,398 RI–1 ...... Rhode Island Legal Services, Inc ...... 816,421 SC–8 ...... Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc ...... 4,392,152 MSC ...... Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc ...... 178,522 SD–1 ...... Black Hills Legal Services, Inc ...... 169,968 SD–2 ...... East River Legal Services ...... 457,436 SD–3 ...... Dakota Plains Legal Services, Inc ...... 307,390 MSD ...... Black Hills Legal Services, Inc ...... 3,584 NSD–1 ...... Dakota Plains Legal Services, Inc ...... 843,707 TN–4 ...... Memphis Area Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,447,100 TN–7 ...... West Tennessee Legal Services, Inc ...... 688,232
VerDate 11
Anticipated FY Service area Applicant name 2002 award
TN–9 ...... Knoxville Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 2,045,356 TN–10 ...... Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee ...... 2,337,828 MTN ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 57,244 TX–13 ...... East Texas Legal Services, Inc ...... 8,702,089 TX–14 ...... West Texas Legal Services, Inc ...... 6,826,939 TX–15 ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 9,703,546 TX–15 ...... Legal Aid of Central Texas ...... 9,703,546 TX–15 ...... El Paso Legal Assistance Society ...... 9,703,546 TX–15 ...... Bexar County Lgl Aid Assoc ...... 9,703,546 MTX ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 1,261,675 NTX–1 ...... Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc ...... 28,281 UT–1 ...... Utah Legal Services, Inc ...... 1,637,273 MUT ...... Utah Legal Services, Inc ...... 61,217 NUT–1 ...... Utah Legal Services, Inc ...... 74,340 VT–1 ...... Legal Services Law Line of Vermont, Inc ...... 463,791 VI–1 ...... Legal Services of the Virgin Islands, Inc ...... 297,407 VA–15 ...... Southwest Virginia Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 847,729 VA–16 ...... Legal Services of Eastern Virginia, Inc ...... 1,326,167 VA–17 ...... Virginia Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 810,631 VA–18 ...... Central Virginia Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 886,774 VA–19 ...... Blue Ridge Legal Services, Inc ...... 600,693 VA–20 ...... Potomac Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 753,854 MVA ...... Central Virginia Legal Aid Society, Inc ...... 142,348 WA–1 ...... Northwest Justice Project ...... 3,913,143 MWA ...... Northwest Justice Project ...... 658,767 NWA–1 ...... Northwest Justice Project ...... 257,410 WV–5 ...... Legal Aid of West Virginia, Inc ...... 3,013,217 MWV ...... Legal Aid of West Virginia, Inc ...... 32,996 WY–4 ...... Wyoming Legal Services, Inc ...... 451,786 MWY ...... Wyoming Legal Services, Inc ...... 11,228 NWY–1 ...... Wyoming Legal Services, Inc ...... 156,148
These grants and contracts will be ACTION: Notice with request for (202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 252– awarded under the authority conferred comments and notices of intention to 3423. on LSC by the Legal Services participate. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year Corporation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. SUMMARY: The Copyright Office of the cable systems submit royalties to the 2996e(a)(1)). Awards will be made so Copyright Office for the retransmission that each service area indicated is Library of Congress directs all claimants to royalty fees collected under the to their subscribers of over-the-air served by one of the organizations listed broadcast signals. These royalties are, in above, although none of the listed section 111 cable statutory license in 1999 to submit comments as to whether turn, distributed in one of two ways to organizations are guaranteed an award copyright owners whose works were or contract. This public notice is issued a Phase I or Phase II controversy exists as to the distribution of those fees, and included in a retransmission of an over- pursuant to the LSC Act (42 U.S.C. the-air broadcast signal and who timely 2996f(f)), with a request for comments a Notice of Intention to Participate in a royalty distribution proceeding. filed a claim for royalties with the and recommendations concerning the Copyright Office. The copyright owners DATES: potential grantees within a period of Comments and Notices of may either negotiate the terms of a thirty (30) days from the date of Intention to Participate are due on settlement as to the division of the publication of this notice. Grants will October 16, 2001. royalty funds, or the Librarian of become effective and grant funds will be ADDRESSES: If sent by mail, an original Congress may convene a Copyright distributed on or about January 1, 2002. and five copies of written comments Arbitration Royalty Panel (‘‘CARP’’) to Dated: September 26, 2001. and a Notice of Intention to Participate determine the distribution of the royalty Michael A. Genz, should be addressed to: Copyright fees that remain in controversy. See 17 Director, Office of Program Performance. Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP), P.O. U.S.C. chapter 8. Box 70977, Southwest Station, [FR Doc. 01–24572 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] During the pendency of any Washington, DC 20024. If hand proceeding, the Librarian of Congress BILLING CODE 7050–01–P delivered, an original and five copies may distribute any amounts that are not should be brought to the Office of the in controversy, provided that sufficient General Counsel, James Madison LIBRARY OF CONGRESS funds are withheld to cover reasonable Memorial Building, Room 403, First and administrative costs and to satisfy all Copyright Office Independence Ave., SE., Washington, claims with respect to which a DC 20540. controversy exists under his authority [Docket No. 2001–6 CARP CD 99] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: set forth in section 111(d)(4) of the Ascertainment of Controversy for the David O. Carson, General Counsel, or Copyright Act, title 17 of the United 1999 Cable Royalty Funds Tanya M. Sandros, Senior Attorney, States Code. See, e.g., Orders, Docket Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels, No. 2000–6 CARP CD 98 (dated October AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station, 12, 2000) and Docket No. 99–7 CARP Congress. Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: CD 97 (dated October 18, 1999).
VerDate 11
However, the Copyright Office must, religious programming, music if the joint Notice is filed by counsel or prior to any distribution of the royalty programming, and Canadian a representative of one or more of the fees, ascertain who the claimants are programming. The Office seeks claimants identified in the joint Notice, and the extent of any controversy over comments as to controversies between the joint Notice shall contain a the distribution of the royalty fees. these categories for royalty distribution. statement from such counsel or The CARP rules provide that: In Phase II of a cable royalty representative certifying that, as of the In the case of a royalty fee distribution distribution, royalties are distributed to date of submission of the joint Notice, proceeding, the Librarian of Congress shall, claimants within a program category. If such counsel or representative has the after the time period for filing claims, publish a claimant anticipates a Phase II authority and consent of the claimants in the Federal Register a notice requesting controversy, the claimant must state to represent them in the CARP each claimant on the claimant list to each program category in which he or proceeding. negotiate with each other a settlement of she has an interest that has not, by the Notices of Intention to Participate are their differences, and to comment by a date end of the comment period, been due no later than October 16, 2001. certain as to the existence of controversies satisfied through a settlement Failure to file a timely Notice of with respect to the royalty funds described in agreement. the notice. Such notice shall also establish a Intention to Participate may preclude a The Copyright Office must be advised claimant or claimants from participating date certain by which parties wishing to of the existence and extent of all Phase participate in the proceeding must file with in a CARP proceeding. I and Phase II controversies by the end the Librarian a notice of intention to 3. Motion of Phase I Claimants for participate. of the comment period. It will not consider any controversies that come to Partial Distribution 37 CFR 251.45(a). The Copyright Office our attention after the close of that A claimant who is not a party to the may publish this notice on its own period. motion, but who files a Notice of initiative, see, e.g., 64 FR 23875 (May 4, Intention to Participate, may file a 1999); in response to a motion from an 2. Notice of Intention To Participate response to the motion no later than the interested party, see, e.g., 65 FR 54077 Section 251.45(a) of the rules, 37 CFR, due date set forth in this notice for (September 6, 2000), or in response to requires that a Notice of Intention to comments on the existence of a petition requesting that the Office Participate be filed in order to controversies and the Notices of declare a controversy and initiate a participate in a CARP proceeding, but it Intention to Participate. The Motion of CARP proceeding. In this case, the does not prescribe the contents of the Phase I Claimants for Partial Office has received a motion for a Notice. Recently, in another proceeding, Distribution is available for inspection partial distribution of the 1999 cable the Library has been forced to address and copying in the Office of the General royalty fees. the issue of what constitutes a sufficient Counsel. On September 26, 2001, Notice and to whom it is applicable. See representatives of the Phase I claimant 65 FR 54077 (September 6, 2000); see Dated: September 27, 2001. categories to which royalties have been also Orders in Docket No. 2000–2 CARP David O. Carson, allocated in prior cable distribution CD 93–97 (June 22, 2000, and August 1, General Counsel. proceedings filed a motion with the 2000). These rulings will result in a [FR Doc. 01–24672 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Copyright Office for a partial future amendment to § 251.45(a) to BILLING CODE 1410–33–P distribution of the 1999 cable royalty specify the content of a properly filed fund. The Office will consider this Notice. In the meantime, the Office motion after each interested party has advises those parties filing Notices of LIBRARY OF CONGRESS been identified by filing the Notice of Intention to Participate in this Intention to Participate requested herein proceeding to comply with the Copyright Office and had an opportunity to file responses following instructions. [Docket No. 2001–5 CARP SD 99] to the motion. Each claimant that has a dispute over the distribution of the 1999 cable Ascertainment of Controversy for the 1. Comments on the Existence of royalty fees, either at Phase I or Phase 1999 Satellite Royalty Funds Controversies II, shall file a Notice of Intention to Before commencing a distribution Participate that contains the following: AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of proceeding or making a partial (1) the claimant’s full name, address, Congress. distribution, the Librarian of Congress telephone number, and facsimile ACTION: Notice with request for must first ascertain whether a number (if any); (2) identification of comments and notices of intention to controversy exists as to the distribution whether the Notice covers a Phase I participate. of the royalty fees and the extent of proceeding, a Phase II proceeding, or SUMMARY: those controversies. 17 U.S.C. 803(d). both; and (3) a statement of the The Copyright Office of the Therefore, the Copyright Office is claimant’s intention to fully participate Library of Congress directs all claimants requesting comment on the existence in a CARP proceeding. to royalty fees collected under the and extent of any controversies, at Phase Claimants may, in lieu of individual section 119 satellite statutory license in I and Phase II, as to the distribution of Notices of Intention to Participate, 1999 to submit comments as to whether the 1999 cable royalty fees. submit joint Notices. In lieu of the a Phase I or Phase II controversy exists In Phase I of a cable royalty requirement that the Notice contain the as to the distribution of those fees, and distribution, royalties are distributed to claimant’s name, address, telephone a Notice of Intention to Participate in a certain categories of broadcast number and facsimile number, a joint royalty distribution proceeding. programming that has been Notice shall provide the full name, DATES: Comments and Notices of retransmitted by cable systems. The address, telephone number, and Intention are due on October 16, 2001. categories have traditionally been facsimile number (if any) of the person ADDRESSES: If sent by mail, an original syndicated programming and movies, filing the Notice and it shall contain a and five copies of written comments sports, commercial and noncommercial list identifying all the claimants that are and a Notice of Intention to Participate broadcaster-owned programming, parties to the joint Notice. In addition, should be addressed to: Copyright
VerDate 11
Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP), PO the Librarian a notice of intention to consider any controversies that come to Box 70977, Southwest Station, participate. our attention after the close of that Washington, DC 20024. If hand 37 CFR 251.45(a). The Copyright Office period. delivered, an original and five copies may publish this notice on its own 2. Notice of Intention To Participate should be brought to the Office of the initiative, see, e.g., 64 FR 23875 (May 4, General Counsel, James Madison 1999); in response to a motion from an Section 251.45(a) of the rules, 37 CFR, Memorial Building, Room 403, First and interested party, see, e.g., 65 FR 54077 requires that a Notice of Intention to Independence Ave., SE., Washington, (September 6, 2000), or in response to Participate be filed in order to DC 20540. a petition requesting that the Office participate in a CARP proceeding, but it FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: declare a controversy and initiate a does not prescribe the contents of the David O. Carson, General Counsel, or CARP proceeding. In this case, the Notice. Recently, in another proceeding, Tanya M. Sandros, Senior Attorney, Office has received a motion for a the Library has been forced to address Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels, partial distribution of the 1999 satellite the issue of what constitutes a sufficient PO Box 70977, Southwest Station, royalty fees. Notice and to whom it is applicable. See Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: On September 26, 2001, 65 FR 54077 (September 6, 2000); see (202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 252– representatives of the Phase I claimant also Orders in Docket No. 2000–2 CARP 3423. categories to which royalties have been CD 93–97 (June 22, 2000, and August 1, allocated in prior satellite distribution 2000). These rulings will result in a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year proceedings filed a motion with the future amendment to § 251.45(a) to satellite carriers submit royalties to the Copyright Office for a partial specify the content of a properly filed Copyright Office for the retransmission distribution of the 1999 satellite royalty Notice. In the meantime, the Office to their subscribers of over-the-air fund. The Office will consider this advises those parties filing Notices of broadcast signals. These royalties are, in motion after each interested party has Intention to Participate in this turn, distributed in one of two ways to been identified by filing the Notice of proceeding to comply with the copyright owners whose works were Intention to Participate requested herein following instructions. included in a retransmission of an over- and had an opportunity to file responses the-air broadcast signal and who timely to the motion. Each claimant that has a dispute over filed a claim for royalties with the the distribution of the 1999 satellite 1. Comments on the Existence of Copyright Office. The copyright owners royalty fees, either at Phase I or Phase Controversies may either negotiate the terms of a II, shall file a Notice of Intention to settlement as to the division of the Before commencing a distribution Participate that contains the following: royalty funds, or the Librarian of proceeding or making a partial (1) The claimant’s full name, address, Congress may convene a Copyright distribution, the Librarian of Congress telephone number, and facsimile Arbitration Royalty Panel (‘‘CARP’’) to must first ascertain whether a number (if any); (2) identification of determine the distribution of the royalty controversy exists as to the distribution whether the Notice covers a Phase I fees that remain in controversy. See 17 of the royalty fees and the extent of proceeding, a Phase II proceeding, or U.S.C. chapter 8. those controversies. 17 U.S.C. 803(d). both; and (3) a statement of the During the pendency of any Therefore, the Copyright Office is claimant’s intention to fully participate proceeding, the Librarian of Congress requesting comment on the existence in a CARP proceeding. may distribute any amounts that are not and extent of any controversies, at Phase Claimants may, in lieu of individual in controversy, provided that sufficient I and Phase II, as to the distribution of Notices of Intention to Participate, funds are withheld to cover reasonable the 1999 satellite royalty fees. submit joint Notices. In lieu of the In Phase I of a satellite royalty administrative costs and to satisfy all requirement that the Notice contain the distribution, royalties are distributed to claims with respect to which a claimant’s name, address, telephone certain categories of broadcast controversy exists under his authority number and facsimile number, a joint programming that has been set forth in section 119(b)(4)(C) of the Notice shall provide the full name, retransmitted by satellite carriers. The Copyright Act, title 17 of the United address, telephone number, and categories have traditionally been States Code. See, e.g., Orders, Docket facsimile number (if any) of the person syndicated programming and movies, No. 2000–7 CARP SD 96–98 (dated filing the Notice and it shall contain a sports, commercial and noncommercial October 12, 2000) and Docket No. 97– list identifying all the claimants that are broadcaster-owned programming, 1 CARP 92–95 (dated March 17,1997). parties to the joint Notice. In addition, religious programming, and music However, the Copyright Office must, if the joint Notice is filed by counsel or programming. The Office seeks prior to any distribution of the royalty a representative of one or more of the comments as to controversies between fees, ascertain who the claimants are claimants identified in the joint Notice, these categories for royalty distribution. and the extent of any controversy over In Phase II of a satellite royalty the joint Notice shall contain a the distribution of the royalty fees. distribution, royalties are distributed to statement from such counsel or The CARP rules provide that: claimants within a program category. If representative certifying that, as of the In the case of a royalty fee distribution a claimant anticipates a Phase II date of submission of the joint Notice, proceeding, the Librarian of Congress shall, controversy, the claimant must state such counsel or representative has the after the time period for filing claims, publish each program category in which he or authority and consent of the claimants in the Federal Register a notice requesting she has an interest that has not, by the to represent them in the CARP each claimant on the claimant list to end of the comment period, been proceeding. negotiate with each other a settlement of Notices of Intention to Participate are their differences, and to comment by a date satisfied through a settlement certain as to the existence of controversies agreement. due no later than October 16, 2001. with respect to the royalty funds described in The Copyright Office must be advised Failure to file a timely Notice of the notice. Such notice shall also establish a of the existence and extent of all Phase Intention to Participate may preclude a date certain by which parties wishing to I and Phase II controversies by the end claimant or claimants from participating participate in the proceeding must file with of the comment period. It will not in a CARP proceeding.
VerDate 11
3. Motion of Phase I Claimants for NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Partial Distribution SPACE ADMINISTRATION James Cate, Patent Attorney, NASA Johnson Space Center, Mail Stop HA, A claimant who is not a party to the [Notice (01–114)] motion, but who files a Notice of Houston, TX 77058–8452; telephone (281) 483–1001. Intention to Participate, may file a Notice of Prospective Patent License response to the motion no later than the Dated: September 25, 2001. due date set forth in this notice for AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Edward A. Frankle, comments on the existence of Space Administration. General Counsel. controversies and the Notices of ACTION: Notice of prospective patent [FR Doc. 01–24531 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Intention to Participate. The Motion of license. BILLING CODE 7510–01–P Phase I Claimants for Partial Distribution is available for inspection SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice and copying in the Office of the General that Profound Technologies, a Georgia NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Counsel. corporation, has applied for a partially SPACE ADMINISTRATION exclusive license to practice the Dated: September 27, 2001. invention described and claimed in U.S. [Notice (01–115)] David O. Carson, Patent No. 6,261,844, entitled ‘‘Urine General Counsel. Preservative,’’ which is assigned to the Notice of Prospective Patent License [FR Doc. 01–24671 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] United States of America as represented AGENCY: National Aeronautics and BILLING CODE 1410–33–P by the Administrator of the National Space Administration. Aeronautics and Space Administration. Written objections to the prospective ACTION: Notice of prospective patent grant of a license should be sent to license. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Johnson Space Center. SPACE ADMINISTRATION SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice DATE(S): Responses to this notice must that Ticona Polymers, Inc of Summit, NJ [Notice (01–117)] be received by November 16, 2001. 07901–3914, has applied for an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: exclusive license to practice the Notice of Prospective Patent License James Cate, Patent Attorney, NASA invention described and claimed in Johnson Space Center, Mail Stop HA, NASA Case No. LAR–16079–1, entitled AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Houston, TX 77058–8452; telephone ‘‘LIQUID CRYSTALLINE THERMOSETS Space Administration. (281) 483–1001. FROM ESTER, ESTER–IMIDE, AND ACTION: Notice of Prospective Patent Dated: September 25, 2001. ESTER–AMIDE OLIGOMERS,’’ for License. which a U.S. Patent Application was Edward A. Frankle, filed and assigned to the United States SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice General Counsel. of America as represented by the that Phoenix Systems International, Inc. [FR Doc. 01–24529 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Administrator of the National of Pinebrook, NJ, has applied for an BILLING CODE 7510–01–P Aeronautics and Space Administration. exclusive license to practice the Written objections to the prospective invention described and claimed in U.S. grant of a license should be sent to Patent Number 6,039,783 entitled NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Langley Research Center. ‘‘Process and Equipment for Nitrogen SPACE ADMINISTRATION Oxide Waste Conversion to Fertilizer,’’ DATE(S): Responses to this notice must which is assigned to the United States [Notice (01–116)] be received by October 17, 2001. of America as represented by the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Notice of Prospective Patent License Administrator of the National Robin W. Edwards, Patent Attorney, Aeronautics and Space Administration. AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Langley Research Center, Mail Stop 212, Written objections to the prospective Space Administration. Hampton, VA 23061–2199. grant of a license should be sent to Mr. ACTION: Notice of prospective patent Dated: September 25, 2001. Randy Heald, Assistant Chief Counsel/ license. Edward A. Frankle, Patent Counsel, John F. Kennedy Space General Counsel. Center, Kennedy Space Center, FL SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice [FR Doc. 01–24530 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 32899. that Solus Refrigeration, Inc. of Sparks, BILLING CODE 7510–01–P DATE(S): Responses to this notice must Nevada, has applied for a partially be received within 15 days from date of exclusive license to practice the publication in the Federal Register. inventions described and claimed in U.S. Patent No. 6,253,563, NASA Case NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. No. MSC-22970–2, and NASA Case No. ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Randy Heald, Assistant Chief Counsel/ MSC22970–3, all three inventions Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, entitled ‘‘Solar Powered Refrigeration National Endowment for the Arts; John F. Kennedy Space Center, Mail System,’’ which are assigned to the Combined Arts Advisory Panel— Code: CC–A, Kennedy Space Center, FL United States of America as represented Agenda Changes 32899. Telephone (321) 867–7214, e- by the Administrator of the National mail: [email protected]. Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Aeronautics and Space Administration. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. Dated: September 25, 2001. Written objections to the prospective L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby Edward A. Frankle, grant of a license should be sent to given of changes in the agendas for two General Counsel. Johnson Space Center. meetings of the Combined Arts [FR Doc. 01–24532 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] DATE(S): Responses to this notice must Advisory Panel to the National Council BILLING CODE 7510–01–P be received by November 16, 2001. on the Arts (Arts Learning sections A1
VerDate 11
and B) to be held at the Nancy Hanks NUCLEAR REGULATORY In addition to meeting other Center, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, COMMISSION applicable requirements of 10 CFR part NW., Washington, DC, 20506 as follows: 2 of the NRC’s regulations, a request for Arts Learning Panel A1: October 15– [Docket No.: 040–09022] a hearing filed by a person other than 19, 2001, Room 716. The open session an applicant must describe in detail: of this meeting will be held from 9:30 Consideration of License Amendment Request for the SCA Services Site in 1. The interest of the requester in the a.m. to 10:30 a.m. on October 19th, proceeding; instead of from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. as Bay County, MI, and Opportunity for a Hearing 2. How that interest may be affected previously announced. The meeting will by the results of the proceeding, end at 12:30 p.m. on the 19th. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory including the reasons why the requester Arts Learning Panel B: October 9–12, Commission. should be permitted a hearing, with 2001, Room 716. The open session of ACTION: Notice of consideration of particular reference to the factors set out this meeting will be held from 9 a.m to license amendment request for the SCA in Section 2.1205(h); 10 a.m on October 12th instead of 10:30 Services site in Bay County, Michigan, a.m. to 12 p.m. as previously 3. The requester’s area of concern and Opportunity for a Hearing. announced. The meeting will end at 1 about the licensing activity that is the subject matter of the proceeding; and p.m. on the 12th. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 4. The circumstances establishing that Dated: September 28, 2001. Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to the request for a hearing is timely in Kathy Plowitz-Worden, accordance with Section 2.1205(d). Panel Coordinator. Materials License No. SUC–1565 (SUC– In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(f), [FR Doc. 01–24698 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 1565) (the license), issued to SCA Services, 700 56th Avenue, Zeeland, each request for a hearing must also be BILLING CODE 7537–01–U Michigan 49464, to amend condition served by delivering it personally or by 11A for an alternative schedule for mail, to: submitting a decommissioning plan 1. The applicant, SCA Services, Inc., NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION (DP) for the SCA Services (Hartley & 700 56th Avenue, Zeeland, MI 49464; Hartley Landfill) Site Decommissioning and Sunshine Act Meeting Management Plan (SDMP) site in Bay 2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the County, Michigan. Condition 11A of the General Counsel, One White Flint AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: National current license requires the DP to be North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Science Foundation, National Science submitted by October 1, 2000. The MD 20852–2738, or by mail to the Board. licensee failed to comply with this General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear DATE AND TIME: October 11, 2001: 11 condition. A Notice of Violation (NOV) Regulatory Commission, Washington, a.m.–11:30 a.m., Closed Session; was issued on December 21, 2000. On DC 20555. September 5, 2001, the licensee October 11, 2001: 11:30 a.m.–1 p.m., For further details with respect to this requested that the due date for the Open Session. action, the licensee request is available submission of the DP be extended to PLACE: The National Science for inspection at the NRC’s Public September 30, 2003. The requested Foundation, Room 1235, 4201 Wilson Document Room, One White Flint amendment is part of the corrective Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, action resulting from the NOV. www.nsf.gov/nsb. MD, 20852–2738. The NRC hereby provides notice that STATUS: Part of this meeting will be this is a proceeding on request for Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th close to the public; part of this meeting amendment of a license falling within Day of September, 2001. will be open to the public. the scope of subpart L ‘‘Informal For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Hearing Procedures for Adjudication in M. (Sam) Nalluswami, Thursday, October 11, 2001 Materials Licensing Proceedings,’’ of Project Manager, Facilities Decommissioning NRC’s rules of practice for domestic Section, Decommissioning Branch, Division Closed Session (11 a.m.–11:30 p.m.) licensing proceedings in 10 CFR part 2. of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. —Closed Session Minutes, August, 2001 Pursuant to Section 2.1205(a), any —NSF Budget person whose interest may be affected [FR Doc. 01–24579 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] by this proceeding may file a request for BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Open Session (11:30 a.m.–1 p.m.) a hearing in accordance with Section —Open Session Minutes, August, 2001 2.1205(d). A request for a hearing must NUCLEAR REGULATORY —Closed Session Items for November, be filed within thirty (30) days of the COMMISSION 2001 date of publication of this Federal Register notice. —Chairman’s Report Sunshine Act Meeting —Director’s Report The request for a hearing must be —SPI Report—Approval filed with the Office of the Secretary AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear —SEI 2002—Approval either: Regulatory Commission. —Merit Review Criterion—Broader 1. By delivery to the Secretary, U.S. DATE: Impacts Nuclear Regulatory Commission, One Weeks of October 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, —Committee Reports White Flint North, 11555 Rockville November 5, 2001. —Other Business Pike, Rockville, MD 20852–2738; or PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference 2. By mail or telegram addressed to Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Marta Cehelsky, the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Maryland. Executive Officer. Commission, Washington, DC 20555. STATUS: [FR Doc. 01–24773 Filed 9–28–01; 3:02 pm] Attention: Rulemakings and Public and Closed. BILLING CODE 7555–01–M Adjudications Staff. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
VerDate 11
Week of October 1, 2001 ACTION: Notice. expected to complete the SF 86 and SF 86A is 200,000, the form requires an Thursday, October 4, 2001 SUMMARY: In accordance with the average of 90 minutes to complete, and 9:25 a.m.—Affirmation Session (Public Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the annual burden is estimated at Meeting) (if needed) (Public Law 104–13, May 22, 1995), this 300,000 hours. notice announces that the Office of Week of October 8, 2001—Tentative For copies of this request, please Personnel Management (OPM) has contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey, by submitted to the Office of Management There are no meetings scheduled for phone at: (202) 606–8358, by FAX at: and Budget (OMB) a request for the Week of October 8, 2001. (202) 418–3251, or by e-mail at: reclearance of five (5) information Week of October 15, 2001—Tentative [email protected]. Please include a collections. mailing address with your request. Thursday, October 18, 2001 Executive Orders 10450 and 12968 DATES: Comments on this proposal 9 a.m.—Meeting with NRC require that investigations be conducted on all persons entering Federal service, should be received on or before Stakeholders—Progress of Regulatory November 1, 2001. Reform (Public Meeting) (Location— or assigned to Federal positions Two White Flint North Auditorium) affecting the public trust or requiring a ADDRESSES: Send or deliver written security clearance. The Standard Form comments to: Week of October 22, 2001—Tentative 85, Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive Richard A. Ferris, Associate Director, There are no meetings scheduled for Positions, is completed by appointees to Investigations Service, U.S. Office of the Week of October 22, 2001. non-sensitive positions in the Federal Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, government, and is used by OPM to NW., room 5416, Washington, DC Week of October 29, 2001—Tentative conduct National Agency Checks and 20415–4000 There are no meetings scheduled for Inquiries investigations. The Standard and the Week of October 29, 2001. Form 85P, Questionnaire for Public Trust Positions, is completed by persons Joseph Lackey, OPM Desk Officer, Week of November 5, 2001—Tentative seeking placement in positions Office of Information and Regulatory There are no meetings scheduled for designated as low, moderate or high risk Affairs, Office of Management and the Week of November 5, 2001. to the public trust because of their Budget, New Executive Office sensitive duties. This information Building, NW., room 10235, * The schedule for Commission meetings is Washington, DC 20503 subject to change on short notice. To verify collection also includes the Standard the status of meetings call (recording)—(301) Form 85P-S, Supplemental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 415–1292. Contact person for more Questionnaire for Selected Positions, Rasheedah I. Ahmad, Program Analyst, information: David Louis Gamberoni (301) which is requested for selected Investigations Service, OPM, (202) 606– 415–1651. positions at the high risk level. 7983. The NRC Commission Meeting Information collected on the SF 85P and Office of Personnel Management. Schedule can be found on the Internet SF 85P-S is used by OPM and other Kay Coles James, Federal agencies to initiate background at: http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/ Director. schedule.htm. investigations required to determine This notice is distributed by mail to suitability for placement in public trust [FR Doc. 01–24565 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] several hundred subscribers; if you no or other sensitive, non-access positions. BILLING CODE 6325–38–P longer wish to receive it, or would like The Standard Form 86, Questionnaire to be added to the distribution, please for National Security Positions, is OFFICE OF PERSONNEL contact the Office of the Secretary, completed by persons performing or MANAGEMENT Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969), seeking to perform national security In addition, distribution of this meeting duties for the Federal government, and Submission for OMB Review; notice over the Internet system is is used by OPM and other Federal Comment Request for Review of available. If you are interested in agencies to initiate national security Expiring Information Collection Form: receiving this Commission meeting investigations. These information OPM–1386B schedule electronically, please send an collections include Standard Form 86A, electronic message to [email protected]. Continuation Sheet for Questionnaires AGENCY: Office of Personnel Dated: September 27, 2001. SF 86, SF 85P and SF 85, which Management. David Louis Gamberoni, provides formatted space to continue ACTION: Notice. answers to questions on the other forms. Technical Coordinator, Office of the SUMMARY: Secretary. We estimate 10 respondents who are In accordance with the not Federal employees will complete Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [FR Doc. 01–24697 Filed 10–01–01; 8:45 am] the SF 85 annually, that the burden for (Public Law 104–13, May 22 1995), this BILLING CODE 7590–01–M each response is 30 minutes, and that notice announces that the Office of the total annual burden is five hours. Personnel Management (OPM) has The number of non-Federal employees submitted to the Office of Management OFFICE OF PERSONNEL expected to complete the SF 85P is and Budget a request for review of an MANAGEMENT 2,000, each form requires approximately expiring information collection form, Submission for OMB Review: 60 minutes to complete, and the annual OPM–1386B, Applicant Race and Comment Request for Reclearance of burden is estimated at 2,000 hours. The National Origin Questionnaire. This Previously Approved Collections: number of non-Federal employees form is used to gather information Standard Forms 85, 85P, 85P–S, 86, expected to complete the SF 85P-S is concerning the race and national origin and 86A 300, each form requires approximately of applicants for employment under the 10 minutes to complete, and the annual Outstanding Scholar provision of the AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel burden is estimated at 50 hours. The Luevano Consent Decree, 93 F.R.D. 68 Management. number of non-Federal employees (1981).
VerDate 11
During the sixty-day comment period, advisory body composed of Act for certain limited securities OPM received two comments. The first representatives of Federal employee offerings by issuers who do not comment stated that OPM should organizations and experts in the fields otherwise file reports with the provide the OPM–1386B form of labor relations or pay policy. The Commission. Form 1–A is an offering electronically on OPM’s website for Council makes recommendations to the statement filed under Regulation A. applicants to complete and e-mail to the President’s Pay Agent (the Secretary of Form 2–A is used to report sales and use proper agency. It is our intent to provide Labor and the Directors of the Office of of proceeds in Regulation A offerings. the form electronically on the OPM Management and Budget and the Office All information is provided to the website for agencies to download and of Personnel Management) about the public for review. The information is locality pay program for General distribute. The second stated that filed on occasion and is mandatory. Schedule employees under section 5304 applicants should submit their Approximately 186 issuers annually file of title 5, United States Code. The information directly to OPM. In the Forms 1–A and 2–A. It is estimated that section titled ‘‘Monitoring, Council’s recommendations cover the Form 1–A takes 608 hours to prepare, Recordkeeping and Reporting,’’ of the establishment or modification of locality Form 2–A takes 12 hours to prepare and Luevano Consent Decree it specifically pay areas, the coverage of salary states that agencies will be responsible surveys, the process of comparing Regulation A takes one administrative for collecting, maintaining, and Federal and non-Federal rates of pay, hour to review for a total of 621 hours compiling statistics on the special and the level of comparability payments per response. The total burden is programs. that should be paid. This meeting is to 115,506 hours. It is estimated that 75% Approximately 100,000 OPM–1386B formulate the Council’s of the 115,506 total burden hours forms are completed annually. The 60- recommendations for locality payments (86,630 burden hours) would be day Federal Register Notice reported an in 2003. The meeting is open to the prepared by the company. Finally, incorrect response time of 8 minutes. public. persons who respond to the collection The correct estimated response time is DATES: October 22, 2001, at 10 a.m. of information prescribe to in 5 minutes with an annual public burden LOCATION: Office of Personnel Regulation A and its offering statements of 8,333 hours. Management, 1900 E Street NW., Room are not required to respond unless the For copies of this proposal, contact 5303 (Pendleton Room), Washington, collection of information displays a Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on (202) 606– DC. currently valid control number. 8358, FAX (202) 418–3251 or e-mail to Written comments regarding the [email protected]. Please include a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: mailing address with the request. Donald J. Winstead, Assistant Director above information should be directed to for Compensation Administration, the following persons: (i) Desks Officer DATES: Comments on this proposal Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E for the Securities and Exchange should be received within 30 calendar Street NW., Room 7H31, Washington, days from the date of this publication. Commission, Office of Information and DC 20415–8200. Phone (202) 606–2838; Regulatory Affairs, Office of ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments FAX (202) 606–0824; or e-mail at Management and Budget, Room 10102, to: [email protected]. New Executive Office Building, Suzy M. Barker, Director, Examining & Washington, D.C. 20503; and (ii) Qualifications Policy Division, For the President’s Pay Agent Michael E. Bartell, Associate Executive Employment Service, U.S. Office of Kay Coles James, Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, Director. Director, Office of Information NW., Room 6500, Washington, DC [FR Doc. 01–24567 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Technology, Securities and Exchange 20415 BILLING CODE 6325–39–P Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., and Washington, D.C. 20549. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 Joseph Lackey, OPM Desk Officer, days of this notice. Office of Information and Regulatory SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Affairs, Office of Management and COMMISSION Dated: September 25, 2001. Budget, New Executive Office Submission for OMB Review; Margaret H. McFarland, Building, NW., Room 10235, Comment Request Deputy Secretary. Washington, DC 20503 [FR Doc. 01–24543 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Upon Written Request; Copies Office of Personnel Management. BILLING CODE 8010–01–M Available From: Securities and Kay Coles James, Exchange Commission, Office of Filings Director. and Information Services, Washington, [FR Doc. 01–24566 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] DC 20549. BILLING CODE 6325–38–P Extension: Regulation A and Forms 1– A and 2–A, OMB Control No. 3235– 0286, SEC File No. 270–110. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL Notice is hereby given that, pursuant MANAGEMENT to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities Federal Salary Council and Exchange Commission AGENCY: Office of Personnel (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Management. Office of Management and Budget ACTION: Notice of meeting. request for extension of the previously approved collection of information SUMMARY: The Federal Salary Council discussed below. will meet at the time and location Regulation A provides an exemption shown below. The Council is an from registration under the Securities
VerDate 11
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE II. Background III. Description and Purpose of the COMMISSION The Plan governs the collection, Amendment consolidation, and dissemination of [Release No. 34–44822; File No. S7–24–89] The complete text of the Plan, as quotation and transaction information amended, is attached as Exhibit A. The Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing of for Nasdaq/National Market (‘‘Nasdaq/ following is a summary of the proposed Amendment No. 12 to the Reporting NM’’) securities listed on an exchange changes to the Plan prepared by the Plan for Nasdaq/National Market or traded on an exchange pursuant to Participants. unlisted trading privileges (‘‘UTP’’).6 Securities Traded on an Exchange on A. Rule 11Aa3–2 10 an Unlisted or Listed Basis, Submitted The Plan provides for the collection by the National Association of from Plan Participants, and the 1. The Participants propose to change Securities Dealers, Inc., the Pacific consolidation and dissemination to the Plan name to the ‘‘Joint Self- Exchange, Inc. and the Boston, vendors, subscribers and others, of Regulatory Organization Plan Governing Chicago, Philadelphia, and Cincinnati quotation and transaction information The Collection, Consolidation And 7 Stock Exchanges in ‘‘eligible securities.’’ The Plan Dissemination Of Quotation And contains various provisions concerning Transaction Information For Nasdaq- September 20, 2001. its operation, including: Implementation Listed Securities Traded On Exchanges of the Plan; Manner of Collecting, I. Introduction On An Unlisted Trading Privilege Processing, Sequencing, Making Basis.’’ Pursuant to Rule 11Aa3–2 1 and Rule Available and Disseminating Last Sale 2 2. Section I.A. of the Plan provides 11Aa3–1 under the Securities Information; Reporting Requirements that a national securities exchange in Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’), notice is (including hours of operation); whose market Eligible Securities 11 hereby given that on August 29, 2001, Standards and Methods of Ensuring become traded, may become a the Cincinnati Stock Exchange Inc. Promptness, Accuracy and Participant,12 provided that said (‘‘CSE’’) on behalf of itself and the Completeness of Transaction Reports; organization executes a copy of the Plan National Association of Securities Terms and Conditions of Access; and pays its share of development costs Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’), the Boston Description of Operation of Facility as specified in Section XIV of the Plan. Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’), the Contemplated by the Plan; Method and Accordingly, the BSE, previously a Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’), Frequency of Processor Evaluation; Limited Participant in the Plan, and the the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PCX’’), and Written Understandings of Agreements Amex have, consistent with Section I.B. the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. Relating to Interpretation of, or of the Plan, executed a copy of the Plan, (‘‘PHLX’’) (hereinafter referred to as Participation in, the Plan; Calculation of 3 and have previously satisfied their ‘‘Participants’’), as members of the the Best Bid and Offer (‘‘BBO’’); Dispute respective shares of the development operating committee (‘‘Operating Resolution; and Method of 4 costs as specified in Section XIV of the Committee’’ or ‘‘Committee’’) of the Determination and Imposition, and Plan. The 12th Amendment is proposed Nasdaq/UTP Plan submitted to the Amount of Fees and Charges. to reflect both the Amex and the BSE as The Commission originally approved Securities and Exchange Commission full Participants of the Plan. (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) a proposal to the Plan on a pilot basis on June 26, 3. The Participants propose to amend amend the Plan. The proposal 1990.8 The parties did not begin trading the Plan to reflect that the status of a represents the 12th amendment (‘‘12th until July 12, 1993, accordingly, the Amendment’’) made to the Plan and pilot period commenced on July 12, reflects several changes unanimously 1993. The Plan has since been in (December 13, 1995), 60 FR 65696 (December 20, 9 1995); 36650 (December 28, 1995), 61 FR 358 adopted by the Committee. On operation on an extended pilot basis. (January 4, 1996); 36934 (March 6, 1996), 61 FR September 18, 2001, the Committee 10408 (March 13, 1996); 36985 (March 18, 1996), submitted an amendment to the 6 Section 12 of the Act generally requires an 61 FR 12122 (March 25, 1996); 37689 (September 5 exchange to trade only those securities that the 16, 1996), 61 FR 50058 (September 24, 1996); 37772 proposed 12th Amendment. The exchange lists, except that Section 12(f) of the Act (October 1, 1996), 61 FR 52980 (October 9, 1996); Commission is publishing this notice to permits UTP under certain circumstances. For 38457 (March 31, 1997), 62 FR 16880 (April 8, solicit comments from interested example, Section 12(f) of the Act, among other 1997); 38794 (June 30, 1997) 62 FR 36586 (July 8, persons on the 12th Amendment. things, permits exchanges to trade certain securities 1997); 39505 (December 31, 1997) 63 FR 1515 that are traded over-the-counter (‘‘OTC/UTP’’), but (January 9, 1998); 40151 (July 1, 1998) 63 FR 36979 only pursuant to a Commission order or rule. For (July 8, 1998); 40896 (December 31, 1998), 64 FR 1 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. a more complete discussion of the Section 12(f) 1834 (January 12, 1999); 41392 (May 12, 1999), 64 2 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–1. requirement, see November 1995 Extension Order, FR 27839 (May 21, 1999) (‘‘May 1999 Approval 3 The CSE was elected chair of the Operating infra note 9. Order’’); 42268 (December 23, 1999), 65 FR 1202 Committee for the Joint Self-Regulatory 7 Currently, the Plan defines ‘‘Eligible Securities’’ (January 6, 2000); 43005 (June 30, 2000), 65 FR Organization Plan Governing the Collection, as any Nasdaq/NM security as to which UTP have 42411 (July 10, 2000); 44099 (March 23, 2001), 66 Consolidation, and Dissemination of Quotation and been granted to a national securities exchange FR 17457 (March 30, 2001); and 44348 (May 24, Transaction Information for Exchange-Listed pursuant to Section 12(f) of the Act or that is listed 2001), 66 FR 29610 (May 31, 2001); 44552 (July 13, Nasdaq/National Market System Securities and for on a national securities exchange. The Participants 2001), 66 FR 37712 (July 19, 2001); 44694 (August Nasdaq/National Market System Securities Traded propose to amend the definition of ‘‘eligible 14, 2001), 66 FR 43598 (August 20, 2001). on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privileges security’’ in this amendment to include Nasdaq 10 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. Basis (‘‘Nasdaq UTP Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’) by the SmallCap securities. 11 As proposed under the 12th Amendment, the Participants. 8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28146, Plan will define ‘‘Eligible Security’’ as ‘‘any Nasdaq 4 Among other things, the 12th Amendment shall 55 FR 27917 (July 6, 1990) (‘‘1990 Plan Approval National Market or Nasdaq SmallCap security, as add the American Stock Exchange LLC (‘‘Amex’’) as Order’’). defined in NASD Rule 4200: (i) as to which unlisted a Participant and shall remove the Chicago Board 9 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 34371 trading privileges have been granted to a national Options Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’) from the Plan. The (July 13, 1994), 59 FR 37103 (July 20, 1994); 35221 securities exchange pursuant to Section 12(f) of the Committee is made up of all the Participants. (January 11, 1995), 60 FR 3886 (January 19, 1995); Exchange Act or which become eligible for such 5 See letter from Jeffrey T. Brown, Committee 36102 (August 14, 1995), 60 FR 43626 (August 22, trading pursuant to order of the Securities and Chairman, CSE, to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, SEC, 1995); 36226 (September 13, 1995), 60 FR 49029 Exchange Commission; or (ii) which also is listed dated August 29, 2001. In the amendment, the (September 21, 1995); 36368 (October 13, 1995), 60 on a national securities exchange.’’ Committee clarified a portion of the description of FR 54091 (October 19, 1995); 36481 (November 13, 12 The Plan defines ‘‘Participant’’ as ‘‘a registered the 12th Amendment but did not change any of the 1995), 60 FR 58119 (November 24, 1995) national securities exchange or national securities proposed Plan text. (‘‘November 1995 Extension Order’’); 36589 association that is a signatory to this Plan.’’
VerDate 11
Limited Participant 13 is no longer securities traded on exchanges on an The proposal contemplates that all recognized in the Plan and such UTP basis.16 Eligible Securities will be phased-in by terminology has been omitted where 7. The Committee proposes to re-title the end of the fifth calendar quarter referenced throughout the Plan. Section VI to ‘‘Functions of the following the phase-in commencement 4. Section III.B. The Participants Processor.’’ date of September 30, 2001, or such date propose to amend the definition of 8. Section VI.C.1. Best Bid and Offer. established by the Commission. ‘‘Eligible Security’’ to include Nasdaq The Participants propose to clarify the However, in no case shall the number of SmallCap Market security.14 The priority rules. Specifically, the Eligible Securities exceed the number of Participants propose this amendment in Participants propose that if an Exchange securities the Commission deems a response to the PCX’s petition to the Participant or Nasdaq market eligible for trading under the Plan. The Commission to expand the Plan’s participant changes its quote, it will lose Participants propose the phase-in definition of Eligible Security.15 ranking within the price/time priority. schedule to minimize any threats to the The Committee, in agreeing with However, a change to only bid size and/ SIP’s capacity, and as such, the proposal PCX’s position and also in the event that or ask size will not change the time provides that Nasdaq, acting as the SIP, the Commission approves Nasdaq’s priority of the quote. can suspend the phase-in schedule and application for registration as a national The Participants propose that Section delay the expansion of the number of securities exchange, voted to make VI.C.1. also provide for rules governing Eligible Securities that may be traded SmallCap securities eligible for trading the carrying over of Participant quotes under the Plan in the event that system under the Plan. The Committee believes from one trading day to the next, capacity and operational concerns arise. that requirements under the Act including the use of previous day quotes Specifically, the Committee’s primary notwithstanding, the decision to include in the calculation of the consolidated concern is that members of the various SmallCap securities within the Plan also BBO. Participant exchanges who partake in eliminates confusion to potential users Finally, the Participants propose, in the practice of auto-quoting—the as to which Nasdaq securities are Section VI.C.1., to establish procedures practice of tracking by automated means eligible for trading pursuant to UTP. for the Processor to follow when the the changes to the best bid or best ask 5. Section IV.D. Operating BBO results in a locked or crossed quotation and responding by generating Committees: Meetings. The Participants market and that the Processor shall another quote change to keep that propose to establish the voting and cease calculation of the BBO at 6:30 Participant away from the best bid or quorum requirements for Committee p.m. Eastern Standard Time (‘‘EST’’). ask quotation, with certain meetings and the manner in which 9. Section VI.C.2 Eligible Securities. exceptions 18—will create undue formal actions may be taken on behalf The Participants propose to include in capacity strains upon Nasdaq, both as of the Committee. the Plan a suggestion to the Commission the SIP and as a market Participant. 6. Section V.E. The Committee of a ‘‘phase-in’’ schedule, which was The Committee, therefore, proposes to proposes to establish a process for agreed to by all Plan Participants, for the establish certain limitations upon the selecting a new Securities Information addition of Nasdaq securities that will practice of auto-quoting to which Processor (‘‘SIP’’) for Nasdaq listed be eligible for trading pursuant to UTP Participants must adhere. In the event by Plan Participants. The purpose of that a Participant should exceed the 13 Section III had defined a Limited Participant to phasing-in the number of eligible auto-quoting limitations, the SIP shall mean a registered national securities exchange securities over a period of time, as have the ability to initiate proceedings, whose participation in the Plan is restricted to opposed to granting immediate reporting to the Processor Quotation Information before the entire Committee, which will and Transaction Reports in NASDAQ/NMS eligibility to all Nasdaq securities, is to put the Participant on notice of the securities listed on that exchange Upon minimize the threat to available SIP violation and afford ample time and Effectiveness of the Plan. capacity that may arise as Participants procedure to rectify the situation.19 14 NASD Rule 4200 defines Nasdaq SmallCap trade additional Eligible Securities Finally, in Section VI.C.2., the Market security as ‘‘any authorized security in The pursuant to UTP. The Committee has Nasdaq SmallCap Market which (1) satisfies all Participants also propose to include a applicable requirements of the Rule 4300 Series agreed that the phase-in period will provision for the termination of the other than a Nasdaq National Market security; (2) allow the SIP to monitor the effects, if auto-quoting limitations upon the is a right to purchase such security; or (3) is a any, that the increased quote traffic and implementation of a new Processor by warrant to subscribe to such security.’’ trading have upon SIP capacity. It the Committee, as well as a proposed 15 See letter to Mr. Robert L.D. Colby, Deputy should be noted that the phase-in Director, Division of Market Regulation, SEC and ‘‘grandfather clause’’ exempting from Mr. Robert E. Aber, Nasdaq from Thomas E. schedule does not apply to Nasdaq, the auto-quoting limitations and the Connaghan, PCX, dated October 16, 2000. In its Nasdaq market participants acting in October 16, 2000 letter, the PCX requested that the that capacity, or to any Participant that 18 The limitations on the practice of auto-quoting Commission issue a directive that would expand does not engage in auto-quoting as would not apply to situations in which: (a) an the number of Eligible Securities traded under the described below.17 update is in response to an execution in the security Plan from 1,000 to ‘‘all’’ Nasdaq/NM securities. by that auto-quoting Participant; (b) an update Among other reasons, PCX argued that such an requires a physical entry; (c) an update reflects the expansion would ‘‘help improve competition and 16 The Committee included this section to the receipt, execution, or cancellation of a customer increase transparency and order interaction in the Plan pursuant to a Commission mandate set forth order; or (d) the practice of automatically generating market for those additional securities by increasing in the order approving the proposed rule change by quote changes is at a rate less than 35% of all price the number of market centers in which they may the NASD relating to the establishment of the changes to the national best bid or ask quotation. be traded.’’ Nasdaq Order Display Facility and Order Collector See proposed Section VI.C.2.b (i–iv). Also, the In a subsequent letter to Messrs. Colby and Aber Facility and modifications of the Nasdaq Trading limitations would not apply to any Participant from Mr. Connaghan, dated November 20, 2000, the Platform (‘‘SuperMontage Order’’). See Securities whose aggregated quoting activity in Eligible PCX amended its October 16, 2000 petition with a Exchange Act Release No. 43863 (January 19, 2001), Securities does not exceed 1% of the total quotation request to include all Nasdaq SmallCap Market 66 FR 8020 (January 26, 2001). In the SuperMontage traffic across all Nasdaq securities. Securities in the definition of Eligible Securities for Order, the Commission required that the Plan 19 The Participants propose a notice and cure the same reasons expressed in the October 16, 2000 Participants negotiate a revised Plan that provides period in which a Participant may rectify the letter. PCX also noted that an inclusion of the for either a fully viable alternative exclusive SIP for situation on its own accord, as well as providing for Nasdaq SmallCap stocks could lead to better all Nasdaq securities, or a fully viable alternative formal proceedings to be held before the Committee executions in those securities for investors. non-exclusive SIP. before any remedial action may be taken against a As of the date of this filing, the Commission has 17 See proposed Section VI.C.2(a)(v) and proposed violating Participant. See proposed Section not formally responded to PCX’s petition. Section VI.C.2(b). VI.C.2(e).
VerDate 11
phase-in schedule any Participant for In addition, the amendments to mandates and recommendations made the number of securities in which the Exhibit 1 include eligibility criteria and by the Commission and serves to (1) Participant posted quotes as of May 1, schedules for determining Participant Remove provisions that previously 2001.20 eligibility for receiving distributions of served to differentiate Participants from 10. Section VIII.C. is proposed to be gross operating revenue. Finally, the each other; (2) provide for the inclusion amended to reflect the inclusion of the amendments to Exhibit 1 establish of all Nasdaq securities in the Plan; (3) BSE and the Amex into the Plan, as well procedures and cost allocations for provide for a unified system of revenue as reflecting the official removal of the retaining an independent auditor for the sharing for all Participants; and (4) CBOE from the Plan. purpose of auditing the Processor’s costs lessen the burden to entry for new 11. Section X Regulatory Halts. The or other calculations used in the Participants joining the Plan. Participants propose to amend this determination of operating expenses, The proposed Amendment removes section to provide procedures that the operating revenues, and distribution all previous distinctions that the Plan Processor must follow to notify shares, among other calculations. made between ‘‘Limited Participants’’ Participants when regulatory halts 15. Within the body of the 12th and ‘‘Participants.’’ 22 Under the occur. Amendment, the Participants propose proposed Amendment, once a party 12. Section XI. Hours of Operation. numerous ‘‘house-keeping’’ corrections, becomes a Participant, it immediately The Participants propose to establish such as changing the term ‘‘NASDAQ’’ shares all rights and obligations equally reporting procedures for Participants to ‘‘Nasdaq’’ and ensuring that with all other Participants, including who execute transactions in Eligible references to amended sections are the sharing of eligible Plan revenues. Securities outside of the normal trading consistent with the amendments The only requirement is that the new hours of 9:30 a.m. EST to 4:01:30 p.m. discussed above. Participant contribute an equal share of EST. the original development costs 13. Section XIX. Operational Issues. B. Governing or Constituent Documents previously paid by the current The Participants propose this new Not applicable. Participants.23 section to establish Participant The proposed Amendment eliminates C. Implementation of Amendment responsibilities in the collection, the ‘‘minimum’’ and ‘‘maximum’’ validation, and transmission of data to The changes proposed in the limitations on revenue distributions to the Processor. In addition, Section XIX Amendment are intended to be the Participants and implements a would establish operational procedures implemented immediately upon program that the Participants believe is that the Processor must follow in the approval by the Commission. All consistent with the fair competition collection of data from Participants; Participants have executed a copy of the requirements of Section 11A of the such as performing gross validation 12th Amendment and there are no Act.24 Section B to Exhibit 1 of the Plan processing for quotes and last sale contingencies that shall delay the previously limited the amount of messages and consolidation and effectiveness of the Amendment other eligible revenue that some Participants dissemination of trade and quote than the proposed phase-in schedule of were entitled to receive, as well as information from each Participant. Eligible Securities.21 established a minimum amount that 14. In the 12th Amendment to the Participants would receive. Although Plan, the Participants also propose to D. Development and Implementation the ‘‘minimum-maximum’’ provisions amend Exhibit 1 to the Plan. Currently, Phase were originally included to provide a Exhibit 1 contains, in part, the As noted supra, Section VI.C.2, mechanism to compensate certain provisions for distributing revenue Eligible Securities, would establish a original Plan Participants for generated by the dissemination of trade schedule in which all Nasdaq securities development costs incurred in the data to participating Vendors. The will become eligible for trading implementation of the Plan, the Participants propose to amend Exhibit 1 pursuant to UTP. The proposed phase- Committee believes that a more to delete Sections B and C, which in will commence by September 30, equitable method than the ‘‘minimum- related to the making of fixed payments 2001, or on such date as determined by maximum’’ formula should be to the CHX (Section B) and the payment the Commission, with the suggested employed. Therefore, the Amendment to all other Exchange Participants of inclusion of 1,000 Nasdaq securities, in now provides for the distribution of operating income based upon certain addition to the securities currently Plan revenue pro rata to each ‘‘minimum-maximum’’ payment eligible for trading pursuant to UTP. Participant based on each Participant’s formulae. The ‘‘minimum-maximum’’ The proposal then would permit respective contribution to total Plan provisions established a means for Participants to trade an additional 500 revenues. distributing revenue, as well as securities at the end of each of the The proposed Amendment also reimbursing the original Plan following four calendar quarters. At the extends the definition of Eligible Participants for start-up costs incurred end of the fifth calendar quarter Security to include Nasdaq SmallCap 25 in the original formulation of the SIP following September 30, 2001, all securities. In the event the Commission and the Plan (Section C). remaining Nasdaq securities shall approves Nasdaq’s registration as a The amendments to Exhibit 1 include become eligible for trading under the national securities exchange, pursuant new formulae for determining Plan. to the Act, all Nasdaq SmallCap Participants’ total trades, total share volume, operating expenses, and E. Analysis of Impact on Competition 22 ‘‘Limited Participant’’ referred to a registered operating income for the purposes of The signatories to the Plan believe national securities exchange whose participation in distribution of gross operating revenue that the amendment will impose no the Plan was restricted to reporting to the Processor to the Participants, as well as a burden on competition. On the contrary, quotation information and transaction reports in provision for reimbursing the Processor Nasdaq/NM securities listed on that exchange upon the Participants believe that the effectiveness of the Plan. See Previous Section III(E) in the event that operating expenses proposed Amendment stems much from of the Plan. exceed operating revenues. 23 See proposed Section XIV.A. of the Plan. 21 See Section D of this filing for an explanation 24 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. 20 See proposed Section VI.C.2(f). of the proposed ‘‘phase-in’’ schedule. 25 As defined by NASD Rule 4200.
VerDate 11
securities will be eligible for trading E. Standards and Methods Ensuring whether the phase-in proposal is pursuant to UTP. This inclusion Promptness, Accuracy and appropriate. anticipates compliance with the Completeness of Transaction Reports Interested persons are invited to securities laws and, concurrently, gives Not applicable. submit written data, views, and access to the trading of Nasdaq arguments concerning the foregoing, SmallCap securities to all Participants F. Rules and Procedures Addressed to including whether the proposal is equally. Fraudulent or Manipulative consistent with the Act. Persons making Dissemination written submissions should file six F. Written Understandings or copies thereof with the Secretary, Agreements Relating to Interpretation Not applicable. Securities and Exchange Commission, of, or Participation in, the Plan G. Terms of Access to Transaction 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC Not applicable. Reports 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, G. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance Not applicable. all subsequent amendments, all written with the Plan H. Identification of Marketplace of statements with respect to the proposed Execution amendment that are filed with the Under Section XVII, Modifications to Commission, and all written Plan, any amendment to the Plan Not applicable. communications relating to the proposal requires the unanimous execution of the between the Commission and any Plan by each Plan Participant. Each V. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Amendment person, other than those that may be Voting Participant has executed a copy withheld from the public in accordance The Commission has determined that of this Amendment and copies of such with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will the addition of Amex and BSE as full documents will be maintained by the be available for inspection and copying Participants under the Plan is technical Secretary of the Committee. in the Commission’s Public Reference in nature, and thus has become effective Room. The 12th Amendment is being H. Description of Operation of Facility upon filing with the Commission.27 In published as Exhibit A to this proposal. Contemplated by the Proposed addition, the Commission has decided, Copies of the amendment will also be Amendment pursuant to Rule 11Aa3–2(c)(4) under available for inspection and copying at Not applicable. the Act to put Exhibit 1 to the 12th the office of the Secretary of the Amendment, which, among other I. Terms and Conditions of Access things, governs the calculation and Committee, currently located at the CSE, Not applicable. distribution of revenues generated One Financial Place, 440 South LaSalle St., Suite 2600, Chicago, IL 60126. All J. Method of Determination and under the Plan, into effect summarily upon publication of this notice of submissions should refer to File No S7– Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and 24–89 and be submitted by October 23, Charges amendment in the Federal Register on a temporary basis not to exceed 120 2001. The proposed Amendment does not days. The Commission believes that it is For the Commission, by the Division of effect a change to the determination, appropriate to put Exhibit 1 to the 12th Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated imposition, or amount of fees and Amendment into effect summarily authority.30 charges. because it contains more equitable Margaret H. McFarland, K. Method and Frequency of Processor formulas for the calculation and Deputy Secretary. Evaluation allocation of revenues than are currently Exhibit A used, which the Commission believes Not applicable. should remove impediments to and, Amendment No. 12: Joint Self-Regulatory L. Dispute Resolution perfect the mechanism of, a national Organization Plan Governing The Collection, Consolidation and Dissemination of Not applicable. market system. The Commission, as described further Quotation and Transaction Information for IV. Rule 11Aa3–1 26 below, requests comment on the Nasdaq-Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privilege A. Nasdaq Securities for Which remaining provisions of 12th Basis Amendment. Transactions Reports Shall Be Required The undersigned registered national by the Plan VI. Solicitation of Comments securities association and national securities The Plan will govern trading in both In addition to general comments on exchanges (collectively referred to as the ‘‘Participants’’), have jointly developed and Nasdaq/NM securities and, is proposed 12th Amendment, the Commission hereby enter into this Nasdaq Unlisted to govern transaction reporting of all specifically requests comment on Trading Privileges Plan (‘‘Nasdaq UTP Plan’’ Nasdaq SmallCap securities. whether SmallCap securities should be or ‘‘Plan’’). considered Eligible Securities under the B. Reporting Requirements With Respect Plan. Further, the Commission I. Participants. to Transactions in Nasdaq Securities for continues to request comment on The Participants include the following: any Broker or Dealer Subject to the Plan whether the Commission should expand A. Participants Not applicable. the number of securities considered 1. American Stock Exchange, Inc., 86 Trinity C. Manner of Collecting, Processing, eligible under the Plan, pursuant to Place, New York, New York 10006 Sequencing, Making Available and Section 12 of the Act,28 and if so, by 2. Boston Stock Exchange, 100 Franklin Disseminating Last Sale Information how many.29 In addition, the Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Commission requests comment on 3. Chicago Stock Exchange, 440 South Not applicable. LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60605 4. Cincinnati Stock Exchange, 440 South D. Manner of Consolidation 27 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2(c)(3)(iii). 28 15 U.S.C. 78l. LaSalle Street, 26th Floor, Chicago, Illinois Not applicable. 29 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43545 60605 (November 9, 2000), 65 FR 69581 (November 17, 26 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–1. 2000). 30 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(27).
VerDate 11
5. National Association of Securities Dealers, reporting of transactions in Nasdaq basis, other than in connection with its Inc., 1735 K Street, NW., Washington, DC securities. activities as a Vendor. 20006 H. ‘‘Nasdaq Level 1 Service’’ means the V. ‘‘Transaction Reports’’ means reports 6. Pacific Exchange, Inc., 301 Pine Street, San service that provides Subscribers with the required to be collected and made available Francisco, CA 94104 best bid and asked quotations and size in pursuant to this Plan containing the stock 7. Philadelphia Stock Exchange, 1900 Market Eligible Securities from all Participants. symbol, price, and size of the transaction Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 I. ‘‘Nasdaq Level 2 Service’’ means the executed, the Market in which the Nasdaq service that provides Subscribers B. Additional Participants transaction was executed, and related with query capability with respect to information, including a buy/sell/cross Any other national securities association or quotations and sizes in securities included in indicator and trade modifiers, reflecting national securities exchange, in whose the Nasdaq System, best bid and asked market Eligible Securities become traded, quotations, and Transaction Reports. completed transactions in Eligible Securities. may become a Participant, provided that said J. ‘‘Nasdaq Level 3 Service’’ means the W. ‘‘Upon Effectiveness of the Plan’’ means organization executes a copy of this Plan and Nasdaq service that provides Nasdaq market July 12, 1993, the date on which the pays its share of development costs as participants with input and query capability Participants commenced publication of specified in Section XIV. with respect to quotations and sizes in Quotation Information and Transaction securities included in the Nasdaq System, Reports on Eligible Securities as II. Purpose of Plan best bid and asked quotations, and contemplated by this Plan. The purpose of this Plan is to provide for Transaction Reports. X. ‘‘Vendor’’ means a person that receives the collection, consolidation and K. ‘‘Nasdaq System’’ means the automated Current Quotation Information or dissemination of Quotation Information and quotation system operated by Nasdaq. Transaction Reports provided by the Transaction Reports in Eligible Securities L. ‘‘Nasdaq Last Sale Information Service’’ Processor or provided by a Vendor, in from the Participants in a manner consistent means the service of Nasdaq that provides connection with such person’s business of with the Exchange Act. Vendors and Subscribers with Transaction distributing, publishing, or otherwise It is expressly understood that each Reports. furnishing such information on a Current Participant shall be responsible for the M. ‘‘Nasdaq Security’’ or ‘‘Nasdaq-listed basis to Subscribers, News Services or other collection of Quotation Information and Security’’ means any security listed on the Vendors. Transaction Reports within its market and Nasdaq National Market or Nasdaq SmallCap that nothing in this Plan shall be deemed to Market. IV. Administration of Plan govern or apply to the manner in which each N. ‘‘News Service’’ means a person that A. Operating Committee: Composition Participant does so. receives Transaction Reports or Quotation Information provided by the Systems or The Plan shall be administered by the III. Definitions provided by a Vendor, on a Current basis, in Participants through an operating committee A. ‘‘Current’’ means, with respect to connection with such person’s business of (‘‘Operating Committee’’), which shall be Transaction Reports or Quotation furnishing such information to newspapers, composed of one representative designated Information, such Transaction Reports or radio and television stations and other news by each Participant. Each Participant may Quotation Information during the fifteen (15) media, for publication at least fifteen (15) designate an alternate representative or minute period immediately following the minutes following the time when the representatives who shall be authorized to initial transmission thereof by the Processor. information first has been published by the act on behalf of the Participant in the absence B. ‘‘Eligible Security’’ means any Nasdaq Processor. of the designated representative. Within the National Market or Nasdaq SmallCap O. ‘‘NQDS’’ means the Nasdaq Quotation areas of its responsibilities and authority, security, as defined in NASD Rule 4200: (i) Dissemination Service, a data stream of decisions made or actions taken by the As to which unlisted trading privileges have information that provides Vendors and Operating Committee, directly or by duly been granted to a national securities Subscribers with quotations and sizes from delegated individuals, committees as may be exchange pursuant to Section 12(f) of the all Participants and Nasdaq market established from time to time, or others, shall Exchange Act or which become eligible for participants. be binding upon each Participant, without such trading pursuant to order of the P. ‘‘Participant’’ means a registered prejudice to the rights of any Participant to Securities and Exchange Commission; or (ii) national securities exchange or national seek redress from the SEC pursuant to Rule which also is listed on a national securities securities association that is a signatory to 11Aa3–2 under the Exchange Act or in any exchange. this Plan. other appropriate forum. C. ‘‘Commission’’ and ‘‘SEC’’ shall mean Q. ‘‘Plan’’ means this Nasdaq UTP Plan, as the U.S. Securities and Exchange from time to time amended according to its B. Operating Committee: Authority Commission. provisions, governing the collection, The Operating Committee shall be D. ‘‘Exchange Act’’ means the Securities consolidation and dissemination of responsible for: Exchange Act of 1934. Quotation Information and Transaction 1. Overseeing the consolidation of E. ‘‘Market’’ shall mean (i) when used with Reports in Eligible Securities. Quotation Information and Transaction respect to Quotation Information, the NASD R. ‘‘Processor’’ means the entity selected by Reports in Eligible Securities from the in the case of a Nasdaq market maker or a the Participants to perform the processing Participants for dissemination to Vendors, Nasdaq-registered electronic communications functions set forth in the Plan. Subscribers, News Services and others in network/alternative trading system (hereafter S. ‘‘Quotation Information’’ means all bids, accordance with the provisions of the Plan; collectively referred to as ‘‘Nasdaq market offers, quotation sizes, the Market and, in the 2. Periodically evaluating the Processor; participants’’) acting in such capacity, or the case of Nasdaq, the Nasdaq market Participant on whose floor or through whose participant that entered the quotation, 3. Setting the level of fees to be paid by facilities the quotation was disseminated; withdrawals and other information Vendors, Subscribers, News Services or and (ii) when used with respect to pertaining to quotations in Eligible Securities others for services relating to Quotation Transaction Reports, the Participant through required to be collected and made available Information or Transaction Reports in whose facilities the transaction took place or to the Processor pursuant to this Plan. Eligible Securities, and taking action in was reported, or the Participant to whose T. ‘‘Regulatory Halt’’ means a trade respect thereto in accordance with the facilities the order was sent for execution. suspension or halt called for the purpose of provisions of the Plan; F. ‘‘NASD’’ means the National Association dissemination of material news, as described 4. Determining matters involving the of Securities Dealers Inc. at Section X hereof. interpretation of the provisions of the Plan; G. ‘‘NASD Transaction Reporting System’’ U. ‘‘Subscriber’’ means a person that 5. Determining matters relating to the means the System provided for in the receives Current Quotation Information or Plan’s provisions for cost allocation and NASD’s Transaction Reporting Plan filed Transaction Reports provided by the revenue-sharing; and with and approved by the Commission Processor or provided by a Vendor, for its 6. Carrying out such other specific pursuant to SEC Rule11Aa3–1, governing the own use or for distribution on a non-Current responsibilities as provided under the Plan.
VerDate 11
C. Operating Committee: Voting D. Operating Committee: Meetings functions under the Plan shall be subject to Each Participant shall have one vote on all Regular meetings of the Operating review by the Operating Committee during matters considered by the Operating Committee may be attended by each the fifth year of the initial five (5) year term Committee. Participant’s designated representative and/ and periodically (at least every two years, or 1. With respect to: or its alternate representative(s), and may be from time to time upon the request of any a. amendments to the Plan; attended by one or more other two Participants but not more frequently than b. amendments to contracts between the representatives of the parties. Meetings shall once each year) thereafter. Based on this Processor and Vendors, Subscribers, News be held at such times and locations as shall review, the Operating Committee may choose Services and others receiving Quotation from time to time be determined by the to make a recommendation to the Information and Transaction Reports in Operating Committee. Participants with respect to the continuing Eligible Securities; Quorum: Any action requiring a vote only operation of the Processor. The Operating c. replacement of the Processor, except for can be taken at a meeting in which a quorum Committee shall notify the SEC of any termination for cause, which shall be of all Participants is present. For actions recommendations the Operating Committee governed by Section V(B) hereof; requiring a simple majority vote of all shall make pursuant to the Operating d. reductions in existing fees relating to Participants, a quorum of greater than 50% Committee’s review of the Processor and Quotation Information and Transaction of all Participants entitled to vote must be shall supply the Commission with a copy of Reports in Eligible Securities; and present at the meeting before such a vote may any reports that may be prepared in e. except as provided under Section be taken. For actions requiring a 2/3rd connection therewith. IV(C)(3) hereof, requests for system changes majority vote of all Participants, a quorum of B. Termination of the Processor for Cause submitted after the expiration of 12 months at least 2/3rd of all Participants entitled to from the beginning of the Plan’s operation; vote must be present at the meeting before If the Operating Committee determines that and such a vote may be taken. For actions the Processor has failed to perform its f. all other matters not specifically requiring a unanimous vote of all functions in a reasonably acceptable manner addressed by the Plan, the affirmative and Participants, a quorum of all Participants in accordance with the provisions of the Plan unanimous vote of all Participants entitled to entitled to vote must be present at the or that its reimbursable expenses have vote shall be necessary to constitute the meeting before such a vote may be taken. become excessive and are not justified on a action of the Operating Committee. A Participant is considered present at a cost basis, the Processor may be terminated 2. With respect to the establishment of new meeting only if a Participant’s designated at such time as may be determined by a fees or increases in existing fees relating to representative or alternate representative(s) is majority vote of the Operating Committee. Quotation Information and Transaction either in physical attendance at the meeting C. Factors To Be Considered in Termination Reports in Eligible Securities, the affirmative or is participating by conference telephone, for Cause vote of two-thirds of the Participants entitled or other acceptable electronic means. Among the factors to be considered in to vote shall be necessary to constitute the Any action sought to be resolved at a evaluating whether the Processor has action of the Operating Committee. meeting must be sent to each Participant performed its functions in a reasonably 3. With respect to requests for system entitled to vote on such matter at least one acceptable manner in accordance with the changes reasonably related to the function of week prior to the meeting via electronic mail, provisions of the Plan shall be the the Processor as defined under the Plan and regular U.S. or private mail, or facsimile reasonableness of its response to requests submitted after the expiration of 12 months transmission. from Participants for technological changes from the beginning of the Plan’s operation, Any action may be taken without a meeting or enhancements pursuant to Section IV(C)(3) the affirmative vote of a majority of the if a consent in writing, setting forth the Participants entitled to vote shall be action so taken, is sent to and signed by all hereof. The reasonableness of the Processor’s necessary to constitute the action of the Participant representatives entitled to vote response to such requests shall be evaluated Operating Committee. All other requests for with respect to the subject matter thereof. All by the Operating Committee in terms of the system changes shall be governed by Section the approvals evidencing the consent shall be cost to the Processor of purchasing the same IV(C)(1)(e) hereof. It is expressly agreed and delivered to the Chairman of the Operating service from a third party and integrating understood that no system changes shall be Committee to be filed in the Operating such service into the Processor’s existing made during the first 12 months after the Committee records. The action taken shall be systems and operations as well as the extent beginning of the Plan’s operation. effective when the minimum number of to which the requested change would 4. With respect to: Participants entitled to vote have approved adversely impact the then current technical a. interpretive matters and decisions of the the action, unless the consent specifies a (as opposed to business or competitive) Operating Committee arising under, or operations of the Processor. specifically required to be taken by, the different effective date. provisions of the Plan as written; The Chairman of the Operating Committee D. Processor’s Right to Appeal Termination b. interpretive matters arising under shall be elected annually by and from among for Cause Exchange Act Rules 11Aa3–1 and 11Acl–1; the Participants by a majority vote of all The Processor shall have the right to and Participants entitled to vote. The Chairman appeal to the SEC a determination of the c. denials of access (other than for breach shall designate a person to act as Secretary Operating Committee terminating the of contract, which shall be handled by the to record the minutes of each meeting. The Processor for cause and no action shall Processor), location of meetings shall be rotated among become final until the SEC has ruled on the The affirmative vote of a majority of the the locations of the principal offices of the matter and all legal appeals of right therefrom Participants entitled to vote shall be Participants, or such other locations as may have been exhausted. necessary to constitute the action of the from time to time be determined by the E. Process for Selecting New Processor Operating Committee. Operating Committee. Meetings may be held 5. It is expressly agreed and understood by conference telephone and action may be At any time following effectiveness of the that the Operating Committee shall have no taken without a meeting if the representatives Plan, but no later than upon the termination authority in any respect over the collection of all Participants entitled to vote consent of the Processor, whether for cause pursuant and dissemination of quotation or transaction thereto in writing or other means the to Section IV(C)(1)(c) or V(B) of the Plan or information in Eligible Securities from and to Operating Committee deems acceptable. upon the Processor’s resignation, the Nasdaq market participants within, or to, the V. Selection and Evaluation of the Processor Operating Committee shall establish Nasdaq marketplace, e.g., the fees to be procedures for selecting a new Processor (the charged therefore or the format in which A. Generally ‘‘Selection Procedures’’). The Operating displays shall be made. Nor shall the Subject to the provisions of paragraph Committee, as part of the process of Operating Committee have any authority over (V)(B) hereof, Nasdaq shall be the Processor establishing Selection Procedures, may the collection and dissemination of quotation under the Plan and shall function as such for solicit and consider the timely comment of or transaction information in Eligible an initial term of five (5) years, such term any entity affected by the operation of this Securities in any other Participant’s Commencing Upon the Effectiveness of the Plan. The Selection Procedures shall be marketplace. Plan. The Processor’s performance of its established by a two-thirds majority vote of
VerDate 11
the Plan Participants, and shall set forth, at marketplace concerning Eligible Securities in a. Number of Eligible Securities—If the a minimum: accordance with its own format. If a Commission by order expands the number of 1. The entity that will: Participant requests, the Processor shall make Eligible Securities beyond 1,000, the number (a) Draft the Operating Committee’s request information about Eligible Securities in the of Eligible Securities that Participants may for proposal for bids on a new processor; Participant’s marketplace available to a trade shall be phased in (added) according to (b) Assist the Operating Committee in foreign marketplace on behalf of the the schedule set out below: evaluating bids for the new processor; and requesting Participant, in which event the (i) at the end of the first calendar quarter (c) Otherwise provide assistance and cost shall be borne by that Participant. following the Commission’s order expanding guidance to the Operating Committee in the Nothing herein shall be construed to affect the number of Eligible Securities beyond selection process. in any way the existing agreements between 1,000 but in no case before September 30, 2. The minimum technical and operational the NASD and the London Stock Exchange 2001, Participants may commence trading requirements to be fulfilled by the Processor; (now the International Stock Exchange of the 500 additional securities; 3. The criteria to be considered in selecting United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland) (ii) at the end of each of the four calendar the Processor; and entered into on April 22, 1986, and between quarters following the date established under 4. The entities (other than Plan the Singapore Stock Exchange and the NASD provision VI.C(2)(a)(i) of the Plan, Participants) that are eligible to comment on executed on June 26, 1987, or the right to Participants may commence trading an the selection of the Processor. amend, modify, or change these agreements additional 500 securities, and at the end of Nothing in this provision shall be in such a manner as is mutually agreed to by the fifth calendar quarter following the date interpreted as limiting Participants’ rights them, or to enter into other agreements established under provision VI.C(2)(a)(i) of under Section IV or Section V of the Plan or mutually agreeable to them; provided that the Plan, Participants shall be permitted to other Commission order. such agreements shall not permit the trade all Eligible Securities. International or Singapore Exchanges to enter (iii) in no case shall the number of Eligible VI. Functions of the Processor into any agreement with a Vendor not Securities exceed the number of securities A. Generally affiliated with any such Exchange to that the Commission deems are eligible for The Processor shall collect from the redistribute information with respect to trading pursuant to this Plan. Participants, and consolidate and Eligible Securities to persons not otherwise (iv) after each of the aforementioned phase disseminate to Vendors, Subscribers and receiving such information pursuant to the in periods (i.e., calendar quarters), the News Services, Quotation Information and agreement with such Exchange, except on Processor shall evaluate its performance to Transaction Reports in Eligible Securities in terms and conditions approved by the determine whether it is prudent, in light of a manner designed to assure the prompt, Processor. system capacity and any other operational accurate and reliable collection, processing 1. Best Bid and Offer factors, to continue to add additional and dissemination of information with The Processor shall disseminate on Level securities pursuant to the phase in schedule. respect to all Eligible Securities in a fair and 1 a consolidated best bid and asked quotation If the Processor determines, in light of system non-discriminatory manner. The Processor with size based upon Quotation Information capacity and any other operational factors, shall commence operations upon the for Eligible Securities received from that it is not prudent to continue to expand Processor’s notification to the Participants Participants and Nasdaq market participants. the number of Eligible Securities, the that it is ready and able to commence such The Market responsible for each side of the Processor upon notice to the Participants operations. best bid and asked quotation making up the immediately may suspend the phase-in B. Collection and Consolidation of consolidated quotation shall be identified by schedule and delay the expansion of the Information an appropriate symbol. If the quotations of number of Eligible Securities that may be more than one Participant are the same, the traded under the Plan. The Processor shall The Processor shall be capable of receiving earliest measured by the time reported shall commence adding securities pursuant to a Quotation Information and Transaction be deemed to be the best. The consolidated revised phase-in schedule, when the Reports in Eligible Securities from size shall be the size of the Participant that Processor determines it is prudent to do so, Participants by computer-to-computer is at the best. If a Nasdaq market participant in light of system capacity and any other interface, and from Nasdaq market is at the best, the consolidated size for NASD operational factors. participants by Nasdaq-approved devices, shall be the largest size among those Nasdaq (v) This provision shall not apply to The and shall consolidate and disseminate such participants whose quotations are earlier in Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc., or Nasdaq market information to Vendors, Subscribers and time than the first Participant at that price. participants acting in such capacity, nor shall News Services. If an Exchange or individual Nasdaq market it apply to any Participant that does not C. Dissemination of Information participant changes its quote (i.e. bid quote engage in auto-quoting, as described in The Processor shall disseminate and/or ask quote), it will lose its ranking paragraph VI.C.(2)(b) below. consolidated Quotation Information and within the price/time priority. A change to b. Limitation on Auto-Quoting—Except as Transaction Reports in Eligible Securities to only bid size and/or ask size will not change provided in sub-paragraph VI.C(2)(c) of this authorized Vendors, Subscribers and News the time priority of an Exchange’s or Nasdaq Plan, Participants shall be prohibited from Services in a fair and non-discriminatory market participant’s quote. The Processor the practice of ‘‘auto-quoting.’’ ‘‘Auto- manner. The Processor shall specifically be will carry over Participant quotes from the quoting’’ means the practice of tracking, by permitted to enter into agreements with previous day to alleviate the need for each automated means, the changes to the best bid Vendors, Subscribers and News Services for Participant to re-enter a quote when there is or best ask quotation and responding by the dissemination of quotation or transaction no change from its previous day’s quote. The generating another quote change to keep that information on Eligible Securities to foreign Processor shall also retain the quotations of Participant away from the best bid or ask (non-U.S.) marketplaces or in foreign all Participants (Exchange Participants and quotation, but for purposes of this Plan, shall countries. Nasdaq market participants) from the not include: The Processor shall, in such instance, previous day. These previous day quotes (i) An update that is in response to an disseminate consolidated quotation or shall be used in the calculation of the execution in the security by that Participant; transaction information on Eligible Securities consolidated best bid/best offer until an (ii) An update that requires a physical from all Participants. updated quote is received by the Processor. entry; Nothing herein shall be construed so as to If the best bid/best offer results in a locked (iii) An update that is to reflect the receipt, prohibit or restrict in any way the right of or crossed quotation, the Processor shall execution, or cancellation of a customer limit any Participant to distribute quotation, forward that locked or crossed quote on the order; or transaction or other information with respect appropriate output lines (i.e. a crossed quote (iv) The practice of automatically to Eligible Securities quoted on or traded in of bid 12, ask 117⁄8 shall be disseminated). generating quote changes at a rate of less than its marketplace to a marketplace outside the The Processor shall normally cease the 35% of all price changes to the national best United States solely for the purpose of calculation of the best bid/best offer after bid or ask quotation. The Processor shall supporting an intermarket linkage, or to 6:30 p.m., Eastern Time. calculate this rate using quoting activity distribute information within its own 2. Eligible Securities during the preceding calendar month.
VerDate 11
c. Applicability of Auto-Quoting Processor, shall conduct a hearing within five such statistics available in a form agreed Limitation—The Limitation on Auto-Quoting (5) business days after expiration of the 15- upon by the Operating Committee, such as a contained in subparagraph VI.C(2)(b) of this day response period to determine whether to secure website. Plan shall only apply if the Processor deems grant or deny the Processor’s claim for it necessary to maintain adequate capacity for remedial action. At the hearing, the VII. Administrative Functions of the the normal and efficient operation of the Operating Committee may consider, among Processor Processor and the Processor provides at least other information, the request of the Subject to the general direction of the 30 calendar days notice to the Participants Processor, the response (if any) of the Operating Committee, the Processor shall be and the basis thereof of such determination. Participant and any other evidence (written responsible for carrying out all The Processor shall lift the limitation on or oral) that is presented at the hearing. At administrative functions necessary to the auto-quoting when the Processor determines the conclusion of the hearing, the Operating operation and maintenance of the it is prudent to do so, in light of system Committee shall grant or deny the Processor’s consolidated information collection and capacity and any other operational factors. request. An affirmative vote of two-thirds of dissemination system provided for in this Additionally, the Limitation on Auto- the Operating Committee members entitled to Plan, including, but not limited to, record Quoting set forth in subparagraph VI.C(2)(b) vote (excluding the subject Participant) shall keeping, billing, contract administration, and of this Plan will not apply to a Participant be required for any decision of the Operating the preparation of financial reports. whose aggregated quoting activity in eligible Committee. The decision of the Operating Nasdaq securities does not exceed 1% of the Committee shall be final and therefore VIII. Transmission of Information to total quotation traffic across all Nasdaq reviewable by the Commission; provided, Processor by Participants securities by all Nasdaq market participants however, that any decision of the Operating A. Quotation Information and Exchange Participants. The Processor Committee shall not become effective until shall calculate this rate using quoting activity Each Participant shall, during the time it is five business days after the date of the open for trading be responsible promptly to during the preceding calendar month. decision. d. Obligations of Participants Regarding collect and transmit to the Processor accurate f. Limitation on Applicability of Rule—The Quotation information in Eligible Securities Capacity—Each Participant shall exercise phase-in schedule contained in of VI.C(2)(a) due diligence to promote quotation through any means prescribed herein. and the Limitation on Auto-Quoting Quotation Information shall include: generation practices that mitigate quotation contained in VI.C(2)(c) shall not apply : traffic so as to ensure prudential excess 1. Identification of the Eligible Security, (i) to any Participant upon the designation using the Nasdaq Symbol; capacity within the Processor. The Operating and the operation of a new Processor; and Committee shall periodically review the 2. The price bid and offered, together with (ii) to a Participant for the number of size; performance of Participants and take such securities that the Participant quoted as of action as necessary to maintain prudential 3. The Nasdaq market participant or May 1, 2001; provided, however the excess capacity. Participant from which the quotation exemption contained herein shall expire a e. Procedures for Ensuring Acceptable emanates; year from the end-date of the phase-in Quote Generation Practices—The following 4. Identification of quotations that are not schedule contained in VI.C(2)(a). procedures shall apply if, in accordance with firm; and 3. Full Quotation Data Stream Section VI.C.2(c) of the Plan, the Processor 5. Through appropriate codes and determines that a capacity concern exists. The Processor shall disseminate on NQDS messages, withdrawals and similar matters. a data stream of all Quotation Information (i) On a monthly basis, each Participant B. Transaction Reports shall provide the Processor with a good faith regarding Eligible Securities received from estimate of the Participant’s previous Participants. Each quotation shall be Each Participant shall, during the time it is month’s daily average number of quote designated with a symbol identifying the open for trading, be responsible promptly to updates to permit the Processor to determine Participant or Nasdaq market participant collect and transmit to the Processor compliance with the auto-quoting limitation from which the quotation emanates. Transaction Reports in Eligible Securities referenced in Section VI.C.2.(b) of the Plan. 4. Transaction Reports executed in its Market by means prescribed (ii) If the Processor determines, from the The Processor shall disseminate on the herein. With respect to orders sent by a Participant’s data or otherwise, that the Nasdaq Last Sale Information Service a data Participant Market to another Participant Participant has not complied with the stream of all Transaction Reports in Eligible Market for execution, each Participant shall limitations of Section VI.C.2.(b), the Securities received from Participants. Each adopt procedures governing the reporting of Processor shall give the Participant written transaction report shall be designated with a transactions in Eligible Securities specifying notice of such condition. The Participant symbol identifying the Participant in whose that the transaction will be reported by the shall have 30 calendar days after receipt of Market the transaction took place. Participant whose member sold the security. the written notice to remedy the condition. D. Immediate Hard-Copy Confirmations Transaction Reports shall include: (iii) If, after the aforementioned 30-day 1. Identification of the Eligible Security, At the expense of any requesting using the Nasdaq Symbol; period has expired, the condition has not Participant(s), the Processor will provide been remedied to the reasonable satisfaction 2. The number of shares in the transaction; Participants with the ability to obtain 3. The price at which the shares were of the Processor, then the Processor shall immediate hard-copy confirmations of submit to the Operating Committee a written purchased or sold; transactions in Eligible Securities. request for relief together with supporting 4. The buy/sell/cross indicator; documentation evidencing the alleged E. Closing Reports 5. The Market of execution; and, condition (i.e., failure to comply with the At the conclusion of each trading day, the 6. Through appropriate codes and limitations of Section VI.C.2.(b)) and Processor shall disseminate a ‘‘closing price’’ messages, late or out-of-sequence trades, quantifying the impact of the violation on for each Eligible Security. Such ‘‘closing corrections and similar matters. overall capacity of the Processor. The price’’ shall be the price of the last All such Transaction Reports shall be Processor’s request for relief shall be limited Transaction Report in such security received transmitted to the Processor within 90 to such remedial action (including but not prior to dissemination. The Processor shall seconds after the time of execution of the limited to the termination of service to the also tabulate and disseminate at the transaction. Transaction Reports transmitted subject Participant) as is necessary to modify conclusion of each trading day the aggregate beyond the 90-second period shall be the subject Participant’s quote generation volume reflected by all Transaction Reports designated as ‘‘late’’ by the appropriate code practices on a prospective basis, for such in Eligible Securities reported by the or message. If a shared computer-to-computer period as is necessary to resolve the Participants. interface line is used, each transaction report condition that gave rise to the Processor’s shall include an appropriate exchange request for relief. The Participant shall have F. Statistics identifier that is acceptable for processing by 15 calendar days to respond in writing to the The Processor shall maintain quarterly, the Processor. Processor’s request for relief. semi-annual and annual transaction and The following types of transactions are not (iv) The Operating Committee, following volume statistical counts. The Processor required to be reported to the Processor written notice to the Participant and the shall, at cost to the user Participant(s), make pursuant to the Plan:
VerDate 11
1. Transactions that are part of a primary access. No Participant shall permit the of such information because of a delayed distribution by an issuer or of a registered imposition of any access or execution fee, or opening, imbalance of orders or other market- secondary distribution or of an unregistered any other fee or charge, with respect to related problems involving such security. secondary distribution; transactions in Eligible Securities effected D. For purposes of this Section X, ‘‘Primary 2. Transactions made in reliance on with Nasdaq market participants which are Market’’ for an Eligible Security means Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933; communicated to the floor by telephone Nasdaq; provided, however, that if for any 3. Transactions in which the buyer and the pursuant to the provisions of this Plan. A 12-month period the number of reported seller have agreed to trade at a price Participant shall be free to charge for other transactions and the reported share volume unrelated to the Current Market for the types of access to its floor or facilities. in an Eligible Security in any other security, e.g., to enable the seller to make a B. The NASD shall assure that each Participant’s Market exceeds 50% of the gift; Participant, and its members shall have aggregate reported transactions and reported 4. Odd-lot transactions; direct telephone access to the trading desk of share volume of all Participants in such 5. The acquisition of securities by a broker- each Nasdaq market participant in each security, then that Participant’s Market shall dealer as principal in anticipation of making Eligible Security in which the Participant be the Primary Market for such Eligible an immediate exchange distribution or displays quotations, and to the Nasdaq Security. exchange offering on an exchange; Supervisory Center. Such access shall XI. Hours of Operation 6. Purchases of securities pursuant to a include appropriate procedures or tender offer; and requirements to assure the timely response of A. Quotation Information may be entered 7. Purchases or sales of securities effected each Nasdaq market participant to by Participants as to all Eligible Securities in upon the exercise of an option pursuant to communications received through telephone which they make a market between 9:30 a.m. the terms thereof or the exercise of any other access. Neither the NASD nor any Nasdaq and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (‘‘ET’’) on all right to acquire securities at a pre-established market participant shall impose any access or days the Processor is in operation. consideration unrelated to the Current execution fee, or any other fee or charge, with Transaction Reports shall be entered between Market. respect to transactions in Eligible Securities 9:30 a.m. and 4:01:30 p.m. ET by Participants C. Symbols for Market Identification for effected with a member of a Participant as to all Eligible Securities in which they Quotation Information and Transaction which are communicated by telephone execute transactions between 9:30 a.m. and 4 Reports pursuant to the provisions of this Plan. p.m. ET on all days the Processor is in operation. The following symbols shall be used to X. Regulatory Halts B. Participants that execute transactions in denote the Participant marketplaces: A. Whenever, in the exercise of its Eligible Securities outside the hours of 9:30 Code and Participant regulatory functions, the Primary Market for a.m. ET and 4:00 p.m., ET, shall be reported A: American Stock Exchange an Eligible Security determines that a as follows: B: Boston Stock Exchange Regulatory Halt is appropriate, all other (i) transactions in Eligible Securities C: Cincinnati Stock Exchange Participants shall also halt or suspend executed between 8 a.m. and 9:29:59 a.m. ET M: Chicago Stock Exchange trading in that security until notification that and between 4:01:30 and 6:30 p.m. ET, shall Q: NASD the halt or suspension is no longer in effect. be designated as ‘‘.T’’ trades to denote their P: Pacific Exchange The Primary Market shall immediately notify execution outside normal market hours; X: Philadelphia Stock Exchange the Processor of such Regulatory Halt as well (ii) transactions in Eligible Securities D. Whenever a Participant determines that as notice of the lifting of a Regulatory Halt. executed after 6:30 p.m. and before 12 a.m. a level of trading activity or other unusual The Processor, in turn, shall disseminate to (midnight) shall be reported to the Processor market conditions prevent it from collecting Participants notice of the Regulatory Halt (as as ‘‘.T’’ trades between the hours of 8 a.m. and transmitting Quotation Information or well as notice of the lifting of a regulatory and 6:30 p.m. ET on the next business day Transaction Reports to the Processor, or halt) through the Level 1 data vendor feed. on an ‘‘as/of’’ basis; where a trading halt or suspension in an This notice shall serve as official notice of a (iii) transactions in Eligible Securities Eligible Security is in effect in its Market, the regulatory halt for purposes of the Plan only, executed between 12:00 a.m. (midnight) and Participant shall promptly notify the and shall not substitute or otherwise 8 a.m. ET shall be transmitted to the Processor of such condition or event and supplant notice that a Participant may Processor between 8 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. ET, shall resume collecting and transmitting recognize or require under its own rules. on trade date, shall be designated as ‘‘.T’’ Quotation Information and Transaction Nothing in this provision shall be read so as trades to denote their execution outside Reports to it as soon as the condition or event to supplant or be inconsistent with a normal market hours, and shall be is terminated. In the event of a system Participant’s own rules on trade halts, which accompanied by the time of execution; malfunction resulting in the inability of a rules apply to the Participant’s own (iv) transactions reported pursuant to this Participant or its members to transmit members. The Processor will reject any provision of the Plan shall be included in the Quotation Information or Transaction quotation information or transaction reports calculation of total trade volume for purposes Reports to the Processor, the Participant shall received from any Participant on an Eligible of determining net distributable operating promptly notify the Processor of such event Security that has a Regulatory Halt in effect. revenue, but shall not be included in the or condition. Upon receiving such B. Whenever the Primary Market calculation of the daily high, low, or last sale. notification, the Processor shall take determines that an adequate publication or C. Late trades shall be reported in appropriate action, including either closing dissemination of information has occurred so accordance with the rules of the Participant the quotation or purging the system of the as to permit the termination of the Regulatory in whose Market the transaction occurred. affected quotations. Halt then in effect, the Primary Market shall D. The Processor shall collect, process and promptly notify the Processor and each of the disseminate Quotation Information in IX. Market Access other Participants that conducts trading in Eligible Securities at other times between 8 A. Each Participant shall permit each such security. Except in extraordinary a.m. and 9:30 a.m. ET, and after 4 p.m. ET, Nasdaq market participant, acting in its circumstances, adequate publication or when any Participant or Nasdaq market capacity as such, direct telephone access to dissemination shall be presumed by the participant is open for trading, until 6:30 the specialist, trading post, and supervisory Primary Market to have occurred upon the p.m. ET (the ‘‘Additional Period’’); provided, center in each Eligible Security in which expiration of one hour after initial however, that the best bid and offer quotation such Nasdaq market participant is registered publication in a national news dissemination will not be disseminated before 9:30 a.m. or as a market maker or electronic service of the information that gave rise to after 6:30 p.m. ET. Participants that enter communications network/alternative trading the Regulatory Halt. Quotation Information or Transaction system with Nasdaq. Such access shall C. Except in the case of a Regulatory Halt, Reports to the Processor during the include appropriate procedures or the Processor shall not cease the Additional Period shall do so for all Eligible requirements by each Participant or dissemination of quotation or transaction Securities in which they enter quotations. employee to assure the timely response to information regarding any Eligible Security. E. The NASD shall have the right to modify communications received through telephonic In particular, it shall not cease dissemination its hours of operation upon notification to
VerDate 11
other Participants and approval by the SEC, condition on a quarterly basis; and (b) an which it may be responsible pursuant to in which event the hours of operation of the audited statement of financial and Section XIV hereof. Except as aforesaid, a Processor shall be changed to conform to the operational condition on an annual basis. withdrawing Participant shall have no hours of operation of the NASD. further obligation under the Plan or to any of XV. Indemnification the other Participants with respect to the XII. Undertaking by All Participants Each Participant agrees, severally and not period following the effectiveness of its The filing with and approval by the jointly, to indemnify and hold harmless each withdrawal. Commission of this Plan shall obligate each other Participant, Nasdaq, and each of its Participant to enforce compliance by its directors, officers, employees and agents XVII. Modifications to Plan members with the provisions thereof. In all (including the Operating Committee and its The Plan may be modified from time to other respects not inconsistent herewith, the employees and agents) from and against any time when authorized by the agreement of all rules of each Participant shall apply to the and all loss, liability, claim, damage and of the Participants, subject to the approval of actions of its members in effecting, reporting, expense whatsoever incurred or threatened the SEC. honoring and settling transactions executed against such persons as a result of any through its facilities, and the entry, Transaction Reports, Quotation Information XVIII. Applicability of Securities Exchange maintenance and firmness of quotations to or other information reported to the Act of 1934 ensure that such occurs in a manner Processor by such Participant and The rights and obligations of the consistent with just and equitable principles disseminated by the Processor to Vendors. Participants and of Vendors, News Services, of trade. This indemnity agreement shall be in Subscribers and other persons contracting XIII. Undertaking by NASD addition to any liability that the with the NASD or its subsidiaries (including indemnifying Participant may otherwise Nasdaq) in respect of the matters covered by The NASD shall maintain a database of have. the Plan shall at all times be subject to any consolidated quotation, last sale and clearing Promptly after receipt by an indemnified applicable provisions of the Act, as amended, data in Eligible Securities as part of its Participant of notice of the commencement of and any rules and regulations promulgated normal surveillance function with respect to any action, such indemnified Participant thereunder. the Nasdaq Market. Such information as is will, if a claim in respect thereof is to be maintained and appropriate for the foregoing made against an indemnifying Participant, XIX. Operational Issues purposes will be made available to notify the indemnifying Participant in A. Each Exchange Participant shall be Participants upon request for investigatory writing of the commencement thereof; but responsible for collecting and validating and surveillance purposes. It is anticipated the omission to so notify the indemnifying quotes and last sale reports within their own that a formalized procedure will be Participant will not relieve the indemnifying system prior to transmitting this data to the developed for the monitoring of information Participant from any liability which it may Processor. and sharing of surveillance information have to any indemnified Participant. In case B. Each Exchange Participant may utilize a analogous to those procedures applicable to any such action is brought against any dedicated Participant line into the Processor the Intermarket Surveillance Group for listed indemnified Participant and it promptly to transmit trade and quote information in securities. Pending such agreement, the notifies an indemnifying Participant of the Eligible Securities to the Processor. The Participants shall cooperate to the fullest commencement thereof, the indemnifying Processor shall accept from Exchange extent possible to facilitate joint utilization of Participant will be entitled to participate in, Participants input for only those issues that available information for market surveillance and, to the extent that it may wish, jointly are deemed Eligible Securities. and regulatory purposes. with any other indemnifying Participant C. The Processor shall consolidate trade The NASD shall also make available to the similarly notified, to assume and control the and quote information from each Participant Participants, upon request, nonproprietary information pertaining to Eligible Securities defense thereof with counsel chosen by it. and disseminate this information on the on a cost basis. After notice from the indemnifying Nasdaq existing vendor lines. Participant of its election to assume the D. The Processor shall perform gross XIV. Financial Matters defense thereof, the indemnifying Participant validation processing for quotes and last sale A. Development Costs will not be liable to such indemnified messages in addition to the collection and Participant for any legal or other expenses dissemination functions, as follows: Any Participant becoming a signatory to subsequently incurred by such indemnified 1. Basic Message Validation this Plan after June 26, 1990, shall, as a Participant in connection with the defense (a) The Processor may validate format for condition to becoming a Participant, pay to thereof but the indemnified Participant may, each type of message, and reject non- the other Plan Participants a proportionate at its own expense, participate in such conforming messages. share of the aggregate development costs defense by counsel chosen by it without, (b) Input must be for an Eligible Security. previously paid by Plan Participants to the however, impairing the indemnifying 2. Logging Function—The Processor shall Processor, which aggregate development Participant’s control of the defense. The return all Participant input messages that do costs totaled $439,530, with the result that indemnifying Participant may negotiate a not pass the validation checks (described each Participant’s share of all development compromise or settlement of any such action, above) to the inputting Participant, on the costs is the same. provided that such compromise or settlement entering Participant line, with an appropriate Each Participant shall bear the cost of does not require a contribution by the reject notation. For all accepted Participant implementation of any technical indemnified Participant. input messages (i.e., those that pass the enhancements to the Nasdaq system made at validation check), the information shall be its request and solely for its use, subject to XVI. Withdrawal retained in the Processor system. reapportionment should any other Any Participant may withdraw from the 3. Price Checks—Once the quotes and Participant subsequently make use of the Plan at any time on not less than 30 days trades are accepted and disseminated by the enhancement, or the development thereof. prior written notice to each of the other Processor, the Processor shall perform gross B. Cost Allocation and Revenue Sharing Participants. Any Participant withdrawing price checks to ensure that: The provisions governing cost allocation from the Plan shall remain liable for, and (a) Participant quotes are within the and revenue sharing among the Participants shall pay upon demand, any fees for established range of the current market; and are set forth in Exhibit 1 to the Plan. equipment or services being provided to such (b) Participant last sale reports are within Participant pursuant to the contract executed the established range of the current market. C. Maintenance of Financial Records by it or an agreement or schedule of fees The Processor shall maintain records of covering such then in effect. XX. Headings revenues generated and development and A withdrawing Participant shall also The section and other headings contained operating expenditures incurred in remain liable for its proportionate share, in this Plan are for reference purposes only connection with the Plan. In addition, the without any right of recovery, of and shall not be deemed to be a part of this Processor shall provide the Participants with: administrative and operating expenses, Plan or to affect the meaning or interpretation (a) A statement of financial and operational including start-up costs and other sums for of any provisions of this Plan.
VerDate 11
XXI. Counterparts 3. For purposes of this Exhibit 1, net and trade report collection costs reported This Plan may be executed by the distributable operating income for any through a Nasdaq service, as such services Participants in any number of counterparts, particular calendar year shall be calculated are market functions for which Participants no one of which need contain the signature by adding all revenues from Level 1, Level electing to use such services pay market rate. of all Participants. As many such 2 (non-market maker revenues only), Nasdaq f. For the purposes of this provision, the counterparts as shall together contain all Last Sale Information Service, and NQDS, following definitions shall apply: such signatures shall constitute one and the including revenues from the dissemination of 1. ‘‘quote engine’’ shall mean the Nasdaq’s same instrument. information among Eligible Securities to UNISYS system that is operated by Nasdaq In Witness Whereof, this Plan has been foreign marketplaces (collectively, ‘‘the Data to collect quotation information for Eligible executed as of the l day of l, 200l, by Feeds’’), and subtracting from such revenues Securities; each of the Signatories hereto. the costs incurred by the Processor, set forth 2. ‘‘trade engine’’ shall mean the Nasdaq below, in collecting, consolidating, Tandem system that is operated by Nasdaq AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. validating, and disseminating the Data Feeds. for the purpose of collecting last sale lllllllllllllllllll BY: These costs include, but are not limited to, information in Eligible Securities. BOSTON STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. the following: 4. At the time a Participant implements a lllllllllllllllllll BY: a. The Processor costs directly attributable computer-to-computer-interface or other CINCINNATI STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. to creating NQDS, including: Processor-approved electronic interface with lllllllllllllllllll BY: 1. proportional cost of collecting the Processor, the Participant will become PACIFIC EXCHANGE, INC. Participant quotes into the Processor’s quote eligible to receive revenue for the year in lllllllllllllllllll BY: engine; which the interface is implemented CHICAGO STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. 2. cost of processing quotes and creating (implementation year). BY: lllllllllllllllllll NQDS messages within the Processor’s quote 5. From the date a Participant is eligible to NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITIES engine; receive revenue (implementation date) until DEALERS, INC. 3. cost of the Processor’s communication December 31 of the implementation year, BY: lllllllllllllllllll management subsystem that distributes Nasdaq shall pay the Participant a pro rata PHILADELPHIA STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. NQDS to the market data vendor network for amount of its payment or bill the Participant BY: lllllllllllllllllll further distribution. for a pro rata amount of its losses for the Exhibit 1 b. The costs directly attributable to creating implementation year (as calculated in 1. Each Participant eligible to receive the Level 1 Data Feed, including: Paragraph 1 above). This calculation and revenue under the Plan will receive an 1. cost of calculating the national best bid resultant payment (or bill) will be made (or annual payment for each calendar year to be and offer price within the Processor’s quote due) within ninety (90) days after the twelfth determined by multiplying (i) that engine; month following the implementation date. Participant’s percentage of total volume in 2. cost of creating the Level 1 Data Feed For the calendar year subsequent to the Nasdaq securities reported to the Processor message within the Processor’s quote engine; implementation year, and continuing and disseminated to Vendors for that 3. cost of the Processor’s communication thereafter, the calculation of the Participant’s calendar year by (ii) the total distributable management subsystem that distributes the annual payment or loss will be performed net operating income (as defined below) for Level 1 Data Feed to the market data vendors’ and the payment made or bill delivered by that calendar year provided, however, that networks for further distribution. March 31 of the following year. Estimated for the implementation year (as defined in c. The costs directly attributable to creating quarterly payments or billings shall be made Paragraph 4 below), a Participant’s payment the Nasdaq Last Sale Information Service to each eligible Participant within 45 days shall be multiplied by the number of months Data Feed, including: following the end of each calendar quarter in during the implementation year the interface 1. cost of determining the appropriate last which the Participant is eligible to receive was in operation divided by twelve. In the sale price and volume amount within the revenue, provided that the total of such event that total distributable net operating Processor’s trade engine; estimated payments or billings shall be income is negative, each Participant eligible 2. cost of utilizing the Processor’s trade reconciled at the end of each calendar year to receive revenue under the Plan will engine to distribute the Nasdaq Last Sale and, if necessary, adjusted by March 31st of receive an annual bill for each calendar year Information Service for distribution to the the following year. Interest shall be included to be determined according to the same market data vendors. in quarterly payments and in adjusted formula (described in this paragraph) for d. The additional costs that are shared payments made on March 31st of the determining annual payments to eligible across all Data Feeds, including: following year. Such interest shall accrue Participants. 1. Telecommunication Operations costs of monthly during the period in which revenue 2. A Participant’s percentage of total supporting the Participant lines into the was earned and not yet paid and will be volume in Nasdaq securities will be Processor’s facilities; based on the 90-day Treasury bill rate in calculated by taking the average of (i) the 2. Telecommunications Operations costs of effect at the end of the quarter in which the Participant’s percentage of total trades in supporting the external market data vendor payment is made. Interest shall not accrue Nasdaq securities reported to the Processor network; during the period of up to 45 days between and disseminated to Vendors for the year and 3. Data Products account management and the end of each calendar quarter and the date (ii) the Participant’s percentage of total share auditing function with the market data on which an estimated quarterly payment or volume in Nasdaq securities reported to the vendors; billing is made. Processor and disseminated to Vendors for 4. Market Operations costs to support In conjunction with calculating estimated the year (trade/volume average). For any symbol maintenance, and other data integrity quarterly and reconciled annual payments given year, a Participant’s percentage of total issues; under this Exhibit 1, the Processor shall trades shall be calculated by dividing the 5. costs associated with surveillance submit to the Participants an itemized total number of trades that that Participant activities to validate data on a real-time basis statement setting forth the basis upon which reports to the Processor as the selling party and to ensure a high level of integrity of Data net operating income was calculated, for that year by the total number of trades in Feeds, provided however that costs including an itemized statement of the Nasdaq securities reported to the Processor associated with monitoring for trade halts in Processor costs set forth in Paragraph 3 of and disseminated to Vendors for the year. A Eligible Securities shall not be included this Exhibit. Such Processor costs shall be Participant’s total share volume shall be herein; reconciled annually based solely on the calculated by multiplying the total number of 6. overhead costs, including management Processor’s audited annual financial trades in Nasdaq securities in that year that support of the Processor, Human Resources, information. By majority vote of the that Participant reports to the Processor as Finance, Legal, and Administrative Services. Operating Committee, the Processor shall the selling party multiplied by the number of e. Processor costs excluded from the engage an independent auditor to audit the shares for each such trade. Unless otherwise calculation of net distributable operating Processor’s costs or other calculation(s), the stated in this agreement, a year shall run income include trade execution costs for cost of which audit shall be shared equally from January 1 to December 31. transactions executed using a Nasdaq service by all Participants. The Processor agrees to
VerDate 11
cooperate fully in providing the information respective estimated service costs for Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of necessary to complete such audit. 2001. The revised fees and new fees will the submission, all subsequent [FR Doc. 01–24576 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] be effective with respect to services amendments, all written statements BILLING CODE 8010–01–P provided on and after May 1, 2001. with respect to the proposed rule The revised 2001 fee schedule change that are filed with the includes five new fees for existing Commission, and all written SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE services, which are being employed to communications relating to the COMMISSION recover processing costs with regard to proposed rule change between the reorganizations and underwritings. The Commission and any person, other than [Release No. 34–44843; File No. SR–DTC– revised and new fees are set forth in those that may be withheld from the 2001–06] Exhibit 1 to the proposed rule change. public in accordance with the Self-Regulatory Organizations; The DTC believes that the proposed rule provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Depository Trust Company; Notice of change is consistent with the available for inspection and copying in Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of requirements of the Act and the rules the Commission’s Public Reference a Proposed Rule Change Revising the and regulations thereunder applicable to Section, 450 Fifth Street NW, Fee Schedule for Services of The DTC because fees will be allocated more Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such Depository Trust Company equitably among DTC participants based filings will also be available for on respective estimated 2001 unit inspection and copying at the principal September 25, 2001. service costs. office of DTC. All submissions should Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the refer to the File No. SR–DTC–2001–06 (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and should be submitted by October 23, Statement on Burden on Competition (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on 2001. April 25, 2001, The Depository Trust DTC does not believe that the For the Commission by the Division of Company (‘‘DTC’’) filed with the proposed rule change will impose any Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Securities and Exchange Commission burden on competition that is not authority.5 (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule necessary or appropriate in furtherance Margaret H. McFarland, change as described in Items I, II, and of the purposes of the Act. Deputy Secretary. III below, which items have been (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s [FR Doc. 01–24578 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] prepared primarily by DTC. The Statement on Comments on the BILLING CODE 8010–01–M Commission is publishing this notice to Proposed Rule Change Received From solicit comments on the proposed rule Members, Participants, or Others change from interested persons. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE No written comments from COMMISSION I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s participants or others have been Statement of the Terms of Substance of solicited or received in respect of this [Release No. 34–44847; File No. SR–PCX– the Proposed Rule Change proposed rule change. 2001–05] DTC is filing a revised fee schedule III. Date of Effectiveness of the Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice for DTC services associated with the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for of Filing and Order Granting processing of registered securities. Commission Action Accelerated Approval of Proposed II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s DTC has designated the proposed rule Rule Change and Amendments No. 1 Statement of the Purpose of, and change as a fee change in accordance and No. 2 Thereto by the Pacific Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule with Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 3 Exchange, Inc. Relating to Its Auto-Ex Change and Rule 19b–4(f)(2) 4 thereunder. Incentive Program for Market Makers In its filing with the Commission, Accordingly, the proposal will take September 25, 2001. DTC included statements concerning effect upon filing with the Commission. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the the purpose of and basis for the At any time within sixty days of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 proposed rule change and discussed any filing of the proposed rule change, the (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 comments it received on the proposed Commission may summarily abrogate notice is hereby given that on January rule change. The text of these statements such rule change if it appears to the 11, 2001, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. may be examined at the places specified Commission that such action is (‘‘PCX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the in Item IV below. DTC has prepared necessary or appropriate in the public Securities and Exchange Commission summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), interest, for the protection of investors, (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed and (C) below, of the most significant or otherwise in furtherance of the rule change as described in Items I and aspects of such statements.2 purposes of the Act. II below, which Items have been (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Solicitation of Comments prepared by the Exchange. On March 20, 2001, the PCX submitted Statement of the Purpose of, and Interested persons are invited to Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule submit written data, views, and change.3 On May 17, 2001, the PCX Change arguments concerning the foregoing, The purpose of the proposed rule including whether the proposed rule 5 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). change is to adjust the fees DTC charges change is consistent with the Act. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). for various services and to initiate Persons making written submissions 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. several new fees for existing services so should file six copies thereof with the 3 See letter from Cindy Sink, Senior Attorney, that DTC’s fees may be aligned with the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Regulatory Policy, PCX, to Nancy Sanow, Assistant Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW, Director, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, dated March 19, 2001. In Amendment 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). No. 1, the PCX deleted from its proposed rule text 2 The Commission has modified parts of these 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). the provision permitting guaranteed participation statements. 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). Continued
VerDate 11
submitted Amendment No. 2 to the (2) The OFTC will ordinarily seek to (i) The substitute must notify the OBO proposed rule change.4 The Commission assure that each Market Maker of the substitution; is publishing this notice to solicit participating on Auto-Ex in a particular (ii) The substitute must log on to the comments on the proposed rule change option issue will be assigned up to the same option issues that the original from interested persons. same maximum number of option trader was logged-on to; and contracts per Auto-Ex trade. The OFTC (iii) The agency trades of the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s may permit exceptions to this procedure substitute will count toward the Statement of the Terms of Substance of only in unusual situations where the calculation of the participation the Proposed Rule Change OFTC finds good cause for permitting percentage of the original participant for The PCX proposed to provide differences in the maximum number of the subsequent review period. assignment of Auto-Ex orders to logged- contracts executed by individual Market (D) Minimum Participation. The on Market Makers according to the Makers.] Exchange will determine the number of percentage of their in-person agency contracts that make up one percent of Auto-Ex Incentive Program contracts by adopting a new Auto-Ex the rotation. Market Makers logged onto Incentive Program. Proposed new (1) Auto-Ex orders are assigned to Auto-Ex in an issue, regardless of their language is in italics; proposed Market Makers who are logged-on Auto- participation percentage, will be entitled deletions are in brackets. Ex according to the percentage of their to at least one percentage of the rotation * * * * * in-person agency contracts traded in on every rotation. Rule 6.87(a)–(j)—No change. that issue (excluding Auto-Ex contracts (E) Rotation. Generally, one rotation 6.87(k) Allocation of Auto-Ex Trades traded) compared to all of the Market consists of the number of contracts to Individual Market Makers. The OFTC Maker in-person agency contracts replicating the cumulative percentage of will determine the manner in which traded (excluding Auto-Ex contracts) all Market Makers logged onto Auto-Ex orders entered through the Auto-Ex during the review period. The review who have a participation percentage system will be assigned to individual period will be determined by the plus one percentage for each Market Market Makers for execution, on an Options Floor Trading Committee Maker that does not have a specific issue-by-issue basis, [subject to the (‘‘OFTC’’) and may be for any period of participation percentage. (F) Maximum assignment. The following restrictions:] as follows: time not in excess of two weeks. The maximum number of contracts that a [(1) Each Market Maker who is percentage distribution determined for a Market Maker may be consecutively participating on the Auto-Ex system will review period will be effective for the assigned at any one time during a be to execute a maximum of ten option succeeding review period. rotation will be variable and may be contracts per Auto-Ex trade, except that: (A) Participation Percentage different for different issues or the same (A) The OFTC may permit individual Calculation. Each Auto-Ex order in an for all issues. Because the maximum Market Makers and Lead Market Makers issue will be allocated to Market Makers number of contracts permitted may be (‘‘LMMs’’) to be allocated a number of on Auto-Ex on a rotating basis. On each smaller than the number of contracts to contracts greater then ten and no more rotation (subject to the exceptions which a particular Market Maker is than fifty, but may do so only upon the described below) each participating entitled during one rotation, that Market request of the individual Market Maker Market Maker logged onto Auto-Ex will Maker will receive more than one turn or LMM. be assigned the number of Auto-Ex during one rotation. (B) In accordance with the provision contracts that reflects the percentage of on LMMs’ guaranteed participation in agency contracts that the Market Maker * * * * * Rule 6.82(d)(2), the LMM in an issue traded in-person in that issue during the II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s will be required either (i) to participate review period. A participation Statement of the Purpose of, and in every other trade executed on Auto- percentage will be calculated for each Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Ex in that issue or (ii) to participate in Market Maker for each issue that the Change a percentage of every trade consistent Market Maker trades. For this purpose, In its filing with the Commission, the with the amount of the LMM’s amount all transactions on behalf of the same Exchange included statements of guaranteed participation. LMM will be aggregated into a single concerning the purpose of and basis for (C) The OFTC may require Market percentage for the LMM. (B) Assignment of Contracts. Once a the proposed rule change and discussed Makers or an LMM who is participating any comments it received on the on Auto-Ex in a particular option issue Market Maker has logged onto Auto-Ex, the Market Maker will be assigned proposed rule change. The text of these to execute a number of contracts greater statements may be examined at the than ten, but before doing so, the OFTC contracts during the Auto-Ex rotation until that Market Maker’s participation places specified in Item III below. The must take into account whether doing so Exchange has prepared summaries, set would place a Market Maker at undue percentage has been met. This may mean that multiple orders (or an order forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of risk based on that Market Maker’s the most significant aspects of such capitalization. and a part of the succeeding order) will be assigned to the same Market Maker statements. by Lead Market Makers (‘‘LMMs’’). In addition, in during the rotation. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Amendment No. 1, PCX renumbered certain (C) Joint Accounts. A joint account Statement of the Purpose of, and sections of its proposed rule text. Finally, PCX participant may substitute on the Auto- Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule corrected certain typographical errors contained in Ex wheel for another participant who is its original filing. Change registered to trade the same joint 4 See letter from Cindy Sink, Senior Attorney, 1. Purpose Regulatory Policy, PCX, to Nancy Sanow, Assistant account and may receive the same Director, Division of Market Regulation, participation percentage that has been The Exchange proposes a rule change Commission, dated May 16, 2001. In Amendment established for the participant for which that will allow the Exchange to assign No. 2, the PCX made a technical change to its filing. Specifically, the PCX redesignated paragraph (1) of the replacement is substituting, Auto-Ex orders to Market Makers Rule 6.87, as set forth in Amendment No. 1, as provided that the following conditions logged-on to Auto-Ex according to their paragraph (k). are met: percentage of in-person agency
VerDate 11
contracts 5 traded in an issue during the of two weeks.9 The percentage regardless of their participation review period.6 The Exchange proposes distribution determined for a review percentage, will be entitled to at least to delete the current method of period will be effective for the one percent of the rotation on every assigning Auto-Ex contracts, which succeeding review period. rotation. consists of assigning a minimum of ten The proposed rule provides the (E) Rotation. contracts and a maximum of one following: Generally, one rotation consists of the hundred 7 contracts to each (A) Participation Percentage number of contracts replicating the participating Market Maker per Auto-Ex Calculation. cumulative percentage of all Market trade, and adopt a new Auto-Ex Each Auto-Ex order in an issue will be Makers logged onto Auto-Ex who have Incentive Program. Currently the LMM allocated to Market Makers on Auto-Ex a participation percentage plus one receives its guaranteed participation on a rotating basis. On each rotation percentage for each Market Maker that percentage under Rule 6.82(d)(2) and (subject to the exceptions described does not have a specific participation the remaining contracts are allocated below) each participating Market Maker percentage. according to a rotation system to the logged-on to Auto-Ex will be assigned (F) Maximum assignment. remaining Market Makers in the crowd. the number of Auto-Ex contracts that The maximum number of contracts The proposed Auto-Ex Incentive reflects the percentage of agency that a Market Maker may be Program will replace the current system contracts that the Market Maker traded consecutively assigned at any one time of Auto-Ex contract assignment in its in-person in that issue during the during a rotation will be variable and entirety and will be implemented on a review period. A participation may be different for different issues or floor-wide basis.8 percentage will be calculated for each the same for all issues. Because the The proposed rule provides for Auto- Market Maker for each issue that the maximum number of contracts Ex orders to be assigned to Market Market Maker trades. For this purpose, permitted may be smaller than the Makers who are logged-on to Auto-Ex all transactions on behalf of the same number of contracts to which a according to the percentage of their in- LMM will be aggregated into a single particular Market Maker is entitled person agency contracts traded in that percentage for the LMM. during one rotation, that Market Maker issue (excluding Auto-Ex contracts (B) Assignment of Contracts. will receive more than one turn during traded) compared to all of the Market Once a Market Maker has logged-on to one rotation. Maker in-person agency contracts traded Auto-Ex, the Market Maker will be (excluding Auto-Ex contracts) during assigned contracts during the Auto-Ex 2. Statutory Basis the review period. The review period rotation until that Market Maker’s The Exchange believes that the will be determined by the Options Floor participation percentage has been met. proposed rule change is consistent with Trading Committee (‘‘OFTC’’) and may This may mean that multiple orders (or Section 6(b) 10 of the Act, in general, and be for any period of time not in excess an order and a part of the succeeding furthers the objectives of Section order) will be assigned to the same 6(b)(5),11 in particular, in that it is 5 Agency contracts are those contracts that are Market Maker during the rotation. designed to facilitate transactions in represented by an agent and do not include (C) Joint Accounts. securities, to promote just and equitable contracts traded between market makers in-person A joint account participant may in the trading crowd. principles of trade, to enhance 6 The proposed rule changes were based in part substitute on the Auto-Ex wheel for competition and to protect investors and on Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’) another participant who is registered to the public interest. Rule 6.8 Interpretations and Policies .06(c) ‘‘100 trade the same joint account and may Spoke RAES Wheel.’’ In addition, the Exchange receive the same participation B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s notes that the Commission has directed that the Statement on Burden on Competition options markets adopt new, or amend existing, percentage that has been established for rules concerning its automated quotation and the participant for which the The Exchange does not believe that execution systems which substantially enhance replacement is substituting, provided the proposed rule change will impose incentives to quote competitively and reduce that the following conditions are met: disincentives for market participants for market any inappropriate burden on participants to act competitively. See Section (i) the substitute must notify the competition. IV.B.h.(i), Order Instituting Public Administrative Order Book Official of the substitution; Proceedings Pursuant to Section 19(h)(1) of the (ii) the substitute must log-on to Auto- C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings Ex for the same option issues for which Statement on Comments on the and Imposing Remedial Sanctions, Securities Proposed Rule Change Received From Exchange Act Release No. 43268 (September 11, the original trader was logged-on; and 2000) and Administrative Proceeding File 3–10282 (iii) the agency trades of the substitute Members, Participants or Others (the ‘‘Order’’). Telephone conversation between will count toward the calculation of the Written comments were neither Cindy Sink, Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, participation percentage of the original solicited nor received. PCX and Gordon Fuller, Counsel to the Assistant participant for the subsequent review Director, Division of Market Regulation, III. Solicitation of Comments Commission (September 24, 2001). period. 7 The maximum order size for execution through (D) Minimum Participation. Interested persons are invited to Auto-Ex is now one hundred contracts pursuant to The Exchange will determine the submit written data, views, and Rule 6.87(b)(1). See Securities Exchange Act number of contracts that make up one arguments concerning the foregoing, Release No. 43887 (January 25, 2001), 66 FR 8831 percent of the rotation. Market Makers (February 2, 2001). The PCX has confirmed that including whether the proposed rule some of the options traded on its floor currently are logged onto Auto-Ex in an issue, change is consistent with the Act. subject to the one hundred contract maximum order Persons making written submissions size. Telephone conversation between Cindy Sink, 9 The Exchange represents that the review period should file six copies thereof with the Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, PCX and will be set at two weeks for all options classes and Geoffrey Pemble, Attorney, Division of Market that the Options Floor Trading Committee Secretary, Securities and Exchange Regulation, Commission (September 25, 2001). (‘‘OFTC’’) will not vary the term of the review Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, 8 Telephone conversation among Cindy Sink, period except in the case of exigent circumstances. Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, PCX, Gordon Telephone conversation between Cindy Sink, the submission, all subsequent Fuller, Counsel to the Assistant Director, Division Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, PCX and of Market Regulation, Commission, and Geoffrey Gordon Fuller, Counsel to the Assistant Director, Pemble, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, Division of Market Regulation, Commission 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). Commission (September 7, 2001). (September 24, 2001). 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate 11
amendments, all written statements proposal does not reward a Market The Commission is approving this with respect to the proposed rule Maker for improving the Exchange’s proposal on a nine-month pilot basis, change that are filed with the displayed quotation, it does reward a through June 25, 2002. As indicated Commission, and all written Market Maker for providing liquidity to above, the Commission anticipates that communications relating to the orders in the trading crowd by linking the proposed Auto-Ex Incentive proposed rule change between the the Market Maker’s percentage of Auto- Program for Market Makers will Commission and any person, other than Ex contracts to the percentage of agency encourage Market Makers to compete those that may be withheld from the contracts it executed in the trading effectively for order flow in the trading public in accordance with the crowd. The Commission finds that it is crowds, thus benefiting investors and provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be consistent with the purposes of Section promoting the public interest. The available for inspection and copying at 6(b)(5) of the Act for PCX to revise its Commission, however, intends to the Commission’s Pubic Reference Auto-Ex contract assignment method in review the Exchange’s experience with Room. Copies of such filing will also be this way. The Commission believes that, its new allocation system during the available for inspection and copying at because the PCX’s proposed Auto-Ex course of the pilot program. the principal office of the Exchange. All incentive system for Market Makers will The Exchange has requested that the submissions should refer to File No. more closely allocate the percentage of Commission approve this proposed rule SR–PCX–2001–05 and should be contracts that a particular Market Maker change on an accelerated basis. The submitted by October 23, 2001. can receive on a single revolution of the Commission notes that PCX’s proposal IV. Commission’s Findings and Order wheel to the percentage of in-person is virtually identical to a proposed rule Granting Accelerated Approval of agency contracts traded on the floor by change by CBOE (SR–CBOE–99–40) that Proposed Rule Change that Market Maker, Market Makers will was approved on a nine-month pilot have a greater incentive to compete basis by the Commission,18 and was After careful review, the Commission effectively for orders in the crowd. This extended by the Commission for an finds that implementation of the result, in turn, should benefit investors additional six months and four months, proposed rule change on a pilot basis is and promote the public interest. respectively, in two subsequent consistent with the requirements of 19 12 The Commission further finds that the orders. Thus, the proposed rule Section 6 of the Act and the rules and change concerns issues that previously regulations thereunder applicable to a proposed Auto-Ex Incentive Program, in 13 general, does not impose any have been the subject of a full comment national securities exchange. period pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Specifically, the Commission believes unnecessary burden on competition, 16 Act.20 Accordingly, the Commission that the proposal is consistent with consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the finds good cause for approving the Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(8) of the Act.14 Act. In fact, the proposed rule change proposed rule change (SR–PCX–2001– Section 6(b)(5) requires, among other should help foster competition because 05) prior to the thirtieth day after the things, that the rules of an exchange be Auto-Ex allocations to Market Makers date of publication of notice thereof in designed to prevent fraudulent and will be based on the number of in- the Federal Register. manipulative acts and practices, to person agency contracts that they It is therefore ordered, pursuant to promote just and equitable principles of execute on the floor, rather than on the Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,21 that the trade, to facilitate transactions in same number of Auto-Ex contracts being proposed rule change (SR–PCX–2001– securities, to remove impediments to allocated to each logged-on Market and perfect the mechanisms of a free Maker during each wheel rotation. In 05) is hereby approved on an and open market and a national market addition, the Commission finds that the accelerated basis, as a pilot program system, and, in general, to protect maximum assignment provision set through June 25, 2002. investors and the public interest.15 forth in the proposed rule change, For the Commission, by the Division of Section 6(b)(5) also requires that those which limits the number of contracts Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated rules not be designed to permit unfair each Market Maker can be assigned authority.22 discrimination between customers, consecutively at any one time during a Margaret H. McFarland, issuers, brokers, or dealers. Section rotation, does not impose any Deputy Secretary. 6(b)(8) of the Act requires that the rules unnecessary burden on competition, [FR Doc. 01–24577 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] 17 of an exchange not impose any burden consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the BILLING CODE 8010–01–M on competition not necessary or Act. This maximum assignment appropriate in furtherance of the provision will not affect the number of purposes of the Act. contracts that each Market Maker is The proposed rule would provide for entitled to receive during each SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION the assignment of Auto-Ex orders to revolution of the Auto-Ex wheel, but Market Makers who are logged-on Auto- only the timing of the allocation of Reporting and Recordkeeping Ex according to the percentage of their contracts to each Market Maker. This Requirements Under OMB Review in-person agency contracts traded in provision ensures that each Market AGENCY: Small Business Administration. that issue (excluding Auto-Ex contracts Maker logged-on to Auto-Ex will receive ACTION: traded) compared to all of the Market at least some contracts before Market Notice of reporting requirements Maker in-person agency contracts traded Makers with a greater participation submitted for OMB review. (excluding Auto-Ex contracts) during percentage are assigned all of their the review period. Although the PCX’s contracts in a given revolution. This 18 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42824 provision also reduces the exposure of (May 25, 2000), 65 FR 37442 (June 14, 2000). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f. Market Makers to market risk by 19 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44020 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). breaking up the distribution of contracts (February 28, 2001), 66 FR 13985 (March 8, 2001); 14 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44749 (August 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and (b)(8). into smaller groupings. 15 In approving this rule, the Commission notes 28, 2001); 66 FR 46487 (September 5, 2001). that it has considered the proposed rule’s impact on 20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate 11
SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the are called up to active duty during a period of military conflict existing on or Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. period of military conflict existing on or after September 11, 2001, those Chapter 35), agencies are required to after September 11, 2001, those employees are essential to the success of submit proposed reporting and employees are essential to the success of the small business daily operations and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for the small business daily operations and the business has suffered or is likely to review and approval, and to publish a the business has suffered or is likely to suffer substantial economic injury as a notice in the Federal Register notifying suffer substantial economic injury as a result of the absence of the essential the public that the agency has made result of the absence of the essential employee. The filing period for small such a submission. employee. The filing period for small businesses to apply for economic injury DATES: Submit comments on or before businesses to apply for economic injury loan assistance under the Military November 1, 2001. If you intend to loan assistance under the Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan comment but cannot prepare comments Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program begins on the date the essential promptly, please advise the OMB Program begins on the date the essential employee is ordered to active duty and Reviewer and the Agency Clearance employee is ordered to active duty and ends on the date 90 days after the Officer before the deadline. ends on the date 90 days after the essential employee is discharged or released from active duty. COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83– essential employee is discharged or This Declaration includes the States 1), supporting statement, and other released from active duty. of: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, documents submitted to OMB for This Declaration includes the States Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, review may be obtained from the of Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Agency Clearance Officer. Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and ADDRESSES: Address all comments Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, West Wisconsin. concerning this notice to: Agency Virginia; The District of Columbia; The Applications for loans for military Clearance Officer, Jacqueline White, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and The reservist economic injury loans may be Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Virgin Islands. obtained and filed at the address listed Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC Applications for loans for military below: U.S. Small Business 20416; and OMB Reviewer, Office of reservist economic injury loans may be Administration, Disaster Area 2 Office, Information and Regulatory Affairs, obtained and filed at the address listed One Baltimore Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, Office of Management and Budget, New below: U.S. Small Business GA 30308, 1–800–359–2227. Executive Office Building, Washington, Administration, Disaster Area 1 Office, The interest rate for eligible small DC 20503. 360 Rainbow Blvd., South 3rd Fl., businesses is 4 percent. The number FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Niagara Falls, NY 14303, 1–800–659– assigned for economic injury is T20100. Jacqueline White, Agency Clearance 2955. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Officer, (202) 205–7044. The interest rate for eligible small Program No. 59002.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: businesses is 4 percent. The number Dated: September 25, 2001. Title: Personal Financial Statement. assigned for economic injury is T10100. Herbert L. Mitchell, No: 413. Frequency: On occasion. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Associate Administrator for Disaster Description of Respondents: Small Program No. 59002.) Assistance. [FR Doc. 01–24554 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Business Loan Applicants. Dated: September 25, 2001. Responses: 187,027. BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Annual Burden: 280,608. Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Jacqueline White, Assistance. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Chief, Administrative Information Branch. [FR Doc. 01–24553 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–24557 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Declaration of Military Reservist BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Economic Injury Disaster Loan #T301 As a result of the Declaration of SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION National Emergency by Reason of SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Declaration of Military Reservist Certain Terrorist Attacks at the World Declaration of Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan #T201 Trade Center, New York, New York, and Economic Injury Disaster Loan #T101 the Pentagon, and the continuing and As a result of the Declaration of immediate threat of further attacks on As a result of the Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of the United States, President George W. National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks at the World Bush declares that the national Certain Terrorist Attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, and emergency has existed since September Trade Center, New York, New York, and the Pentagon, and the continuing and 11, 2001. This notice establishes the the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on application filing period for the Military immediate threat of further attacks on the United States, President George W. Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan the United States, President George W. Bush declares that the national program. Effective September 11, 2001, Bush declares that the national emergency has existed since September small businesses employing military emergency has existed since September 11, 2001. This notice establishes the reservists may apply for economic 11, 2001. This notice establishes the application filing period for the Military injury disaster loans if those employees application filing period for the Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan are called up to active duty during a Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan program. Effective September 11, 2001, period of military conflict existing on or program. Effective September 11, 2001, small businesses employing military after September 11, 2001, those small businesses employing military reservists may apply for economic employees are essential to the success of reservists may apply for economic injury disaster loans if those employees the small business daily operations and injury disaster loans if those employees are called up to active duty during a the business has suffered or is likely to
VerDate 11
suffer substantial economic injury as a Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION result of the absence of the essential Program begins on the date the essential employee. The filing period for small employee is ordered to active duty and Interest Rates businesses to apply for economic injury ends on the date 90 days after the The Small Business Administration loan assistance under the Military essential employee is discharged or publishes an interest rate called the Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan released from active duty. optional ‘‘peg’’ rate (13 CFR 120.214) on Program begins on the date the essential This Declaration includes the States a quarterly basis. This rate is a weighted employee is ordered to active duty and of: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, average cost of money to the ends on the date 90 days after the Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington; government for maturities similar to the essential employee is discharged or The Islands of American Samoa, average SBA direct loan. This rate may released from active duty. Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Guam. be used as a base rate for guaranteed This Declaration includes the States Applications for loans for military of: Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. This reservist economic injury loans may be 1 Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North rate will be 5.250 (5 ⁄4) percent for the obtained and filed at the address listed October–December quarter of FY 2002. Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, South below: U.S. Small Business Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Administration, Disaster Area 4 Office, LeAnn M. Oliver, Wyoming. P. O. Box 13795, Sacramento, CA Deputy Associate Administrator for Financial Applications for loans for military 95853–4795, 1–800–488–5323. Assistance. reservist economic injury loans may be The interest rate for eligible small [FR Doc. 01–24552 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] obtained and filed at the address listed businesses is 4 percent. The number BILLING CODE 8025–01–P below: U.S. Small Business assigned for economic injury is T40100. Administration, Disaster Area 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., Suite 102, FT. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Worth, TX 76155, 1–800–366–6303. Program No. 59002.) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The interest rate for eligible small Dated: September 25, 2001. businesses is 4 percent. The number Herbert L. Mitchell, Coast Guard assigned for economic injury is T30100. Associate Administrator, for Disaster [CGD09–01–123] (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Assistance. Program No. 59002.) [FR Doc. 01–24556 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Great Lakes Regional Waterways Dated: September 24, 2001. BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Management Forum Herbert L. Mitchell, AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION ACTION: Notice of meeting. [FR Doc. 01–24555 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: ‘‘The Great Lakes Regional BILLING CODE 8025–01–P [Declaration of Economic Injury Disaster #9M86] Waterways Management Forum’’ will hold a meeting to discuss various SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION State of Texas waterways management issues. Agenda items will include updates on Great Cameron County and the contiguous Declaration of Military Reservist Lakes dredging and No Ballast On Board counties of Hidalgo and Willacy in the Economic Injury Disaster Loan #T401 (NOBOB) research; progress reports State of Texas constitute an economic from Forum Subcommittees on As a result of the Declaration of injury disaster loan area as a result of Communications, Navigation National Emergency by Reason of the catastrophic collapse of the Queen Technologies, Outreach, Cruise Ships Certain Terrorist Attacks at the World Isabella Causeway on September 15, and Ballast Water; and discussions Trade Center, New York, New York, and 2001. Eligible small businesses and about the agenda for the next meeting. the Pentagon, and the continuing and small agricultural cooperatives without The meeting will be open to the public. immediate threat of further attacks on credit available elsewhere may file DATES: The meeting will be held the United States, President George W. applications for economic injury October 9, 2001 from 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Bush declares that the national assistance as a result of this disaster Comments must be submitted on or emergency has existed since September until the close of business on June 16, before October 5, 2001 to be considered 11, 2001. This notice establishes the 2002 at the address listed below or other at the meeting application filing period for the Military locally announced locations: U.S. Small Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan Business Administration, Disaster Area ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in program. Effective September 11, 2001, 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., Suite the U.S. Coast Guard Club located on small businesses employing military 102, FT. Worth, TX 76155. the U. S. Coast Guard Moorings, 1055 reservists may apply for economic The interest rate for eligible small East Ninth Street, Cleveland, OH 44199. injury disaster loans if those employees businesses and small agricultural Any written comments and materials are called up to active duty during a cooperatives is 4 percent. The number should be submitted to Commander period of military conflict existing on or assigned for economic injury for this (map), Ninth Coast Guard District, 1240 after September 11, 2001, those disaster is 9M8600. E. 9th Street, Room 2069, Cleveland, OH 44199. employees are essential to the success of (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance the small business daily operations and Program No. 59002.) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR the business has suffered or is likely to Michael Gardiner (map), Ninth Coast suffer substantial economic injury as a Dated: September 26, 2001. Guard District, OH 44199, telephone result of the absence of the essential Hector V. Barreto, (216) 902–6049. Persons with employee. The filing period for small Administrator. disabilities requiring assistance to businesses to apply for economic injury [FR Doc. 01–24558 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] attend this meeting should contact CDR loan assistance under the Military BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Gardiner.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Great • Opening Session (Welcome and Attendance is open to the interested Lakes Waterways Management Forum Introductory Remarks, Review/ public but limited to space availability. identifies and resolves waterways Approve Summary of Previous With the approval of the chairmen, management issues that involve the Meeting) members of the public may present oral Great Lakes region. The forum meets • Publication Consideration/Approval: statements at the meeting. Persons twice a year to assess the Great Lakes • Final Draft, Minimum Aviation wishing to present statements or obtain region, assign priorities to areas of System Performance Standards information should contact the person concern and identify issues for (MASPS) of the Aeronautical listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION resolution. The forum membership has Mobile-Satellite (R) Service CONTACT section. Members of the public identified agenda items for this meeting (AMS(R)S) as Used in Aeronautical may present a written statement to the that include: updates on Great Lakes Data Links, RTCA Paper No. 194– committee at any time. dredging and No Ballast On Board 01/PMC–156, prepared by SC–165 • Final Draft, Minimum Operational Issued in Washington, DC, on September (NOBOB) research; progress reports 24, 2001. from Forum Subcommittees on Performance Standards (MOPS) for Aircraft VDL Mode 3 Transceiver Janice L. Peters, Communications, Navigation FAA Special Assistant, RTCA Advisory Technologies, Outreach, Cruise Ships Operating in the Frequency Range 117.975–137.000 MHz, prepared by Committee. and Ballast Water; and discussions [FR Doc. 01–24616 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] about the agenda for the next meeting. SC–172, RTCA Paper No. 190–01/ BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Additional topics of discussion are PMC–154 • Final Draft, Change 1, DO–224A, solicited from the public. Signal-in-Space Minimum Aviation Dated: September 11, 2001. System Performance Standards DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION James D. Hull, (MASPS) for Advanced VHF Digital Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Data Communication Including Federal Aviation Administration Ninth Coast Guard District, Cleveland, Ohio. Compatibility with Digital Voice Final Meeting of the RTCA Future [FR Doc. 01–24537 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Techniques, RTCA Paper No. 212– Flight Data Collection Committee BILLING CODE 4910–15–U 01/PMC–160, prepared by SC–172 • Final Draft DO–248B, Final Annual AGENCY: Federal Aviation Report for Clarification of DO–178B Administration (FAA), DOT. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Software Considerations in ACTION: Notice of RTCA Future Flight Airborne Systems and Equipment Data Collection Committee final Federal Aviation Administration Certification, RTCA Paper No. 224– meeting. 01/PMC–162, prepared by Joint Change Notice for RTCA Program Committee SC–190/WG–52 SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice Management Committee • Final Draft, User Requirements for to advise the public of the final meeting Aerodrome Mapping Information, AGENCY: Federal Aviation of the RTCA Future Flight Data RTCA Paper No. 191–01/PMC–155, Administration (FAA), DOT. Collection Committee. prepared by Joint Committee SC– DATES: ACTION: Notice of change to RTCA The meeting will be held 193–WG–44 October 15, 2001 starting at 1 pm. Program Management Committee • Final Draft, Response to the Report meeting. of the RTCA Chairman’s Committee ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at on NEXCOM, RTCA Paper No. 243– RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice 01/PMC–166, prepared by SC–198 805, Washington, DC 20036. to advise the public of a change to a • Final Draft, Minimum Operational FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meeting of the RTCA Program Performance Standards for RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., Management Committee. Integrated Night Vision Imaging Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036; DATES: The September 13, 2001 meeting System Equipment, RTCA Paper telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) announced in the Federal Register No. 238–01/PMC–164, prepared by 833–9434; web site http://www.rtca.org. Volume 66 FR 43951 (Tuesday, August SC–196 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 21, 2001), 3rd column, has been • Discussion: • to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal changed. The meeting will now be held Special Committee 188, High Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– on October 12, 2001, starting at 8:30 am. Frequency Data Link; Request for 463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is Extension of due date hereby given for the Future Flight Data ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at • Special Committee 189, NEXCOM; Collection Committee final meeting. The RTCA, Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite Update to Terms of Reference 850, Washington, DC 20036. • Special Committee 147, TCAS; agenda will include: • October 15: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Proposed Additional Tasking • RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., • Special Committee Chairman’s Opening Session (Welcome, Suite 850, Washington, DC 20036; Report. Introductions, Administrative telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) • Action Item Review: Remarks, Agenda Review, Review/ • 833–9434; web site http://www.rtca.org. Action Item 05–01, Approve Summary of Previous Recommendation for a Multi- Meeting) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Function Display • Review and Discuss Comments to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal • Action Item 06–01, Modular Submitted on the Final Report; Advisory Committee (Pub. L. 92–463, 5 Avionics Special Committee to Establish Final Changes based on U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby work jointly with EUROCAE Accepted Comments; Consider the given for a change to a Program Working Group Document for Approval to Forward Management Committee meeting. The • Closing Session (Other Business, to the RTCA Policy Board revised agenda will include: Document Production, Date and • Closing Session (Other Business, • October 12: Place of Next Meeting, Adjourn) Adjourn)
VerDate 11
Attendance is open to the interested • Working Group 3 [AMS(R)S ADDRESSES: Comments on this public but limited to space availability. Minimum Aviation Performance application may be mailed or delivered With the approval of the chairmen, Standard (MASPS)] in triplicate to the FAA at the following members of the public may present oral • Complete Final Review and Comment address: Minneapolis Airports District statements at the meeting. Persons (FRAC) Process for: Office, 6020 28th Avenue South, Room wishing to present statements or obtain • Change No. 2 to DO–210D 102, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450. information should contact the person • Change No. 1 to DO–262 In addition, one copy of any • listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Brief Overview of Related Activities comments submitted to the FAA must • CONTACT section. Members of the public AEEC 741 and 761 Characteristics be mailed or delivered to Mr. Thomas • EUROCAE Working Group 55 may present a written statement to the • W. Miller, Interim Airport Director, committee at any time. AMS(R)S Spectrum Issues; Austin Straubel International Airport at International Telecommunications Issued in Washington, DC on September the following address: 2077 Airport Union and European Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54313– 24, 2001. Telecommunication Standards Janice L. Peters, 5596. Institute Air carriers and foreign air carriers FAA Special Assistant, RTCA Advisory • ICAO Aeronautical Mobile Committee. may submit copies of written comments Communications Panel previously provided to brown County, [FR Doc. 01–24617 Filed 10–01–01; 8:45 am] • Industry, Users, Government Wisconsin under § 158.23 of part 158. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M • Closing Session (Other Business, Date and Place of Next Meeting, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Adjourn) Daniel J. Millenacker, Program Manager, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Attendance is open to the interested Federal Aviation Administration, public but limited to space availability. Airports District Office, 6020 28th Federal Aviation Administration With the approval of the chairmen, Avenue South, Room 102, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450, (612) 713–4350. The RTCA Special Committee 165: members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons application may be reviewed in person Minimum Operational Performance at this same location. Standards for Aeronautical Mobile wishing to present statements or obtain SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Satellite Services information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION proposes to rule and invites public AGENCY: Federal Aviation CONTACT section. Members of the public comment on the application to impose Administration (FAA), DOT. may present a written statement to the and use the revenue from a PFC at ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special committee at any time. Austin Straubel International Airport under provisions of the Aviation Safety Committee 165 meeting. Issued in Washington, DC on September 24, 2001. and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget Janice L. Peters, to advise the public of a meeting of Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. RTCA Special Committee 165: FAA Special Assistant, RTCA Advisory 101–508) and part 158 of the Federal Committee. Minimum Operational Performance Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). Standards for Aeronautical Mobile [FR Doc. 01–24618 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] On September 13, 2001, the FAA Satellite Services. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M determined that the application to DATES: The meeting will be held impose and use the revenue from a PFC submitted by Brown County, Wisconsin October 3, 2001 starting at 9 am. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION was substantially complete within the ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the RTCA Inc., 1828 L Street, NW., Suite Federal Aviation Administration requirements of § 158.25 of part 158. 805, Washington, DC 20036. The FAA will approve or disapprove the Notice of Intent To Rule on Application application, in whole or in part, no later FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to Impose and Use the Revenue From than January 5, 2002. RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at The following is a brief overview of Washington, DC 20036; telephone (202) Austin Straubel International Airport, the application. 833–9339; fax (202) 833–9434; web site Green Bay, WI PFC application number: 01–03–C– http://www.rtca.org. 00–GRB. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant AGENCY: Federal Aviation Level of the proposed PFC: $4.50. to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Administration (FAA), DOT. Proposed charge effective date: March Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on 1, 2002. 463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is application. Proposed charge expiration date: hereby given for a Special Committee October 1, 2002. 165 meeting. The agenda will include: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Total estimated PFC revenue: • October 3: invites public comment on the $1,023,400.00. • Opening Session (Welcome and application to impose and use the Brief description of proposed projects: Introductory Remarks, Review/ revenue from a PFC at Austin Straubel Parallel taxiway ‘‘D’’ and ‘‘M’’ Approve Summary of Previous International Airport under provisions construction and PFC administrative Meeting, Chairman’s Remarks) of the Aviation Safety and Capacity costs. Class or classes of air carriers • Review of SC–165 Working Group Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the which the public agency has requested Activities Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of not be required to collect PFCs: Part 135 • Working Group 1 [Aeronautical 1990) (Pub. L. 101–5–8) and part 158 of air taxi/commercial operators (ATCO). Mobile-Satellite (R) Service the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 Any person may inspect the (AMS(R)S) Avionics Equipment CFR part 158). application in person at the FAA office Minimum Operational Performance DATES: Comments must be received on listed above under FOR FURTHER Standard (MOPS)] or before November 1, 2001. INFORMATION CONTACT.
VerDate 11
In addition, any person may, upon Federal Aviation Administration, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION request, inspect the application, notice Detroit Airports District Office, Willow and other documents germane to the Run Airport, East, 8820 Beck Road Federal Aviation Administration application in person at the Austin Belleville, Michigan 48111 (734–487– Notice of Opportunity for Public Straubel International Airport, 2077 7282). The application may be reviewed Comment on Surplus Property Release Airport Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin in person at this same location. 54313–5596. at Georgetown County Airport, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Georgetown, SC Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on September 17, 2001. proposes to rule and invites public comment on the application to impose AGENCY: Federal Aviation Gary E. Nielsen, and use the revenue from a PFC at Administration (FAA), DOT. Acting Manager, Planning and Programming Branch, Airports Division, Great Lakes Cleveland Hopkins International Airport ACTION: Notice. Region. under the provisions of the Aviation [FR Doc. 01–24614 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of SUMMARY: Under the provisions of Title BILLING CODE 4910–13–M 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget 49, U.S.C. 47153(c), notice is being Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Public Law given that the FAA is considering a 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal request from the Georgetown County DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). Airport Commission to waive the requirement that a 12.43—acre parcel of On September 6, 2001, the FAA Federal Aviation Administration surplus property, located at the determined that the application to Georgetown County Airport, be used for Notice of Intent to Rule on Application impose and use the revenue from a PFC aeronautical purposes. To Impose and Use the Revenue From submitted by Cleveland Hopkins a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at International Airport was substantially DATES: Comments must be received on Cleveland Hopkins International complete within the requirements of or before November 1, 2001. Airport, Cleveland, OH § 158.25 of part 158. The FAA will ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice approve or disapprove the application, AGENCY: Federal Aviation may be mailed or delivered in triplicate in whole or in part, not later than Administration (FAA), DOT. to the FAA at the following address: December 29, 2001. Atlanta Airports District Office, Attn: ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on Anthony L. Cochran, Program Manager, application. The following is a brief overview of the application. 1701 Columbia Ave., Suite 2–260, SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Atlanta, GA 30337–2747. PFC application number: 01–08–C– invites public comment on the 00–CLE. In addition, one copy of any application to impose and use the comments submitted to the FAA must revenue from a PFC at Cleveland Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00. be mailed or delivered to A.J. Rigby, Hopkins International Airport under the Proposed charge effective date: Chairman of the Georgetown County provisions of the Aviation Safety and October 1, 2004. Airport Commission at the following Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title Proposed charge expiration date: address: 302 Sundial Drive, PO Box IX of the Omnibus Budget 3757, Pawley’s Island, SC 29585 Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. November 1, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 101–508) and part 158 of the Federal Total estimated PFC revenue: Anthony Cochran, Program Manager, Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). $82,106,000.00. Atlanta Airports District Office, 1701 DATES: Comments must be received on Brief description of proposed project: Columbia Ave., Suite 2–260, Atlanta, or before November 1, 2001. Construct Runway 6L/23R. GA 30337–2747, (404) 305–7144. The ADDRESSES: Comments on this Class or classes of air carriers which application may be reviewed in person application may be mailed or delivered the public agency has requested to be at this same location. in triplicate to the FAA at the following required to collect PFCs: air taxis. address: Federal Aviation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Administration, Detroit Airports District Any person may inspect the is reviewing a request by the Office, Willow Run Airport, East, 8820 application in person at the FAA office Georgetown County Airport Beck Road Belleville, Michigan 48111 listed above under FOR FURTHER Commission to release 12.43 acres of (734–487–7282). The application may INFORMATION CONTACT. surplus property at the Georgetown County Airport. The property will be be review in person at this location. In addition, any person may, upon purchased by Marhaygue, LLC and used In addition, one copy of any request, inspect the application, notice to expand an existing adjacent comments submitted to the FAA must and other documents germane to the be mailed or delivered to Mr. Reuben manufacturing plant. The net proceeds application in person at the Cleveland from the sale of this property will be Sheperd, Director, Cleveland Hopkins Hopkins International Airport, 5300 International Airport at the following used for airport purposes. The proposed Riverside Drive, Cleveland, Ohio 44135. address: Cleveland Hopkins use of this property is compatible with International Airport, 5300 Riverside Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on airport operations. Drive, Cleveland, Ohio 44135. September 17, 2001. Any person may inspect the request Air carriers and foreign air carriers Gary E. Nielsen, in person at the FAA office listed above may submit copies of written comments Acting Manager, Planning and Programming under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION previously provided to the Cleveland Branch, Airports Division, Great Lakes CONTACT. In addition, any person may, Hopkins International Airport under Region. upon request, inspect the request, notice § 158.23 of part 158. [FR Doc. 01–24613 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] and other documents germane to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M request in person at the Georgetown Arlene B. Draper, Program Manager, County Airport Commission.
VerDate 11
Issued in Atlanta, Georgia on September On September 21, 2001, the FAA ACTION: Notice of proposed policy 20, 2001. determined that the application to statement; request for comments. Scott L. Seritt, application impose and use the revenue Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office, from a PFC submitted by Port of Pasco, SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Southern Region. Tri-Cities Airport, Pasco, Washington, Administration (FAA) announces the [FR Doc. 01–24612 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] was substantially complete within the availability of a proposed policy for BILLING CODE 4910–13–M requirements of § 158.25 of part 158. conducting EMC testing on rotorcraft The FAA will approve or disapprove the equipped with Electrical/Electronic application, in whole or in part, no later Controls that provide critical functions, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION than December 25, 2001. such as Full Authority Digital Engine The following is a brief overview of Controls (FADEC) Systems and Fly-By- Federal Aviation Administration the application. Wire Flight Controls Systems. This Level of the proposed PFC: $4.50. proposed policy would revise the Notice of Intent to Rule on Application Proposed charge effective date: current policy by eliminating certain 01–04–C–00–PSC to impose and use December 1, 2002. types of equipment from the the revenue from a passenger facility Proposed charge expiration date: requirement to undergo special charge (PFC) at Tri-Cities Airport, April 1, 2004. installation Electromagnetic Interference submitted by the Port of Pasco, Tri- Total requested for use approval: testing. Cities Airport, Pasco, WA $1,059,136. DATES: Comments must be received by AGENCY: Federal Aviation Brief description of proposed project: October 28, 2001. Snow Removal Equipment; Navigation Administration (FAA), DOT. ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the Aids; Runway Safety Area ACTION: Notice of Intent to Rule on proposed policy to the individual Improvements; Security Access Control Application. identified under FOR FURTHER System; Runway Reconstruction; INFORMATION CONTACT. SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Class or classes of air carriers, which FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: invites public comment on the the public agency has requested not be application to impose and use PFC required to collect PFC’s: None Jorge Castillo, FAA, Rotorcraft revenue at Tri-Cities Airport under the Any person may inspect the Directorate Standards Staff, ASW–110, provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117 and Part application in person at the FAA office 2601 Meacham Blvd., Ft. Worth, TX 158 of the Federal Aviation Regulations listed above under FOR FURTHER 76193–0110; email address: (14 CFR part 158). INFORMATION CONTACT and at the FAA
VerDate 11
Issued in Ft. Worth, Texas, on September Form Number: IRS Form 8817. to a selected community development 24, 2001. Type of Review: Extension. corporation (CDC). David A. Downey, Title: Allocation of Patronage and Respondents: Individuals or Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Nonpatronage Income and Deductions. households, Business or other for-profit. Certification Service. Description: Form 8817 is filed by Estimated Number of Respondents/ [FR Doc. 01–24615 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] taxable farmers cooperatives to report Recordkeepers: 34. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M their income and deductions by Estimated Burden Hours Per patronage and nonpatronage sources. Respondent/Recordkeeper: The IRS uses the information on the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY form to ascertain the amounts of Recordkeeping ...... 6 hr., patronage and nonpatronage income or 42 min. Submission for OMB Review; loss were properly computed. Learning about the law or the 24 min. Comment Request Respondents: Business or other for- form. Preparing and sending the form 31 min. profit. to the IRS. September 26, 2001. Estimated Number of Respondents/ The Department of Treasury has Recordkeepers: 1,650. submitted the following public Frequency of Response: Annually. Estimated Burden Hours Per Estimated Total Reporting/ information collection requirement(s) to Respondent/Recordkeeper: OMB for review and clearance under the Recordkeeping Burden: 260 hours. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Recordkeeping ...... 16 hr., Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear, Public Law 104–13. Copies of the 44 min. Internal Revenue Service, Room 5244, submission(s) may be obtained by Learning about the law or the 36 min. 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance form. Washington, DC 20224. Officer listed. Comments regarding this Preparing, copying, assembling, 52 min. OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt information collection should be and sending the form to the (202) 395–7860, Office of Management addressed to the OMB reviewer listed IRS. and Budget, Room 10202, New and to the Treasury Department Executive Office Building, Washington, Frequency of Response: Annually. Clearance Officer, Department of the DC 20503. Estimated Total Reporting/ Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York Recordkeeping Burden: 22,006 hours. Lois K. Holland, Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. Departmental Reports, Management Officer. Dates: Written comments should be OMB Number: 1545–1352. [FR Doc. 01–24610 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] received on or before November 1, 2001 Regulation Project Number: PS–276– to be assured of consideration. 76 Final. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Type of Review: Extension. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Title: Treatment of Gain From DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY OMB Number: 1545–0803. Disposition of Certain Natural Resource Recapture Property. Form Number: IRS Form 5074. Departmental Offices; Debt Type of Review: Extension. Description: This regulation Management Advisory Committee Title: Allocation of Individual Income prescribes rules for determining the tax Meeting Tax to Guam or the Commonwealth of treatment of gain from the disposition of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). natural resource recapture property in Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 5 Description: Form 5074 is used by accordance with Internal Revenue Code U.S.C. App. § 10(a)(2), that a meeting U.S. citizens or residents as an section 1254. Gain is treated as ordinary will be held at the U.S. Treasury attachment to Form 1040 when they income in an amount equal to the Department, 15th and Pennsylvania have $50,000 or more in adjusted gross intangible drilling and development Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, on income from U.S. sources and $5,000 or costs and depletion deductions taken October 30, 2001, of the following debt more in gross income from Guam or the with respect to the property. The management advisory committee: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana information that taxpayers are required Treasury Borrowing Advisory Islands (CNMI). The data is used by IRS to retain will be used by the IRS to Committee of The Bond Market to allocate income tax due to Guam or determine whether a taxpayer has Association. CNMI as required by 26 U.S.C. 7654. properly characterized gain on the The agenda for the meeting provides Respondents: Individuals or disposition of section 1254 property. for a technical background briefing by households, Not-for-profit institutions. Respondents: Individuals or Treasury staff, followed by a charge by Estimated Number of Respondents/ households, Business or other for-profit. the Secretary of the Treasury or his Recordkeepers: 50. Estimated Number of Respondents/ designate that the Committee discuss Estimated Burden Hours Per Recordkeepers: 400. particular issues, and a working session. Respondent/Recordkeeper: Estimated Burden Hours Per Following the working session, the Respondent/Recordkeeper: 5 hours. Committee will present a written report Recordkeeping ...... 2 hr., Frequency of Response: On occasion. of its recommendations. 57 min. Estimated Total Reporting/ Learning about the law or the 8 min. The background briefing by Treasury form. Recordkeeping Burden: 2,000 hours. staff will be held at 9 a.m. Eastern time Preparing the form ...... 49 min. OMB Number: 1545–1416. and will be opened to the public. The Copying, assembling, and send- 17 min. Form Number: IRS Form 8847. remaining sessions and the committee’s ing the form to the IRS. Type of Review: Extension. reporting session will be closed to the Title: Credit for Contributions to public, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 10(d). Frequency of Response: Annually. Selected Community Development This notice shall constitute my Estimated Total Reporting/ Corporations. determination, pursuant to the authority Recordkeeping Burden: 209 hours. Description: Form 8847 is used to placed in heads of departments by 5 OMB Number: 1545–1135. claim a credit for qualified contributions U.S.C. App. 10(d) and vested in me by
VerDate 11
Treasury Department Order No. 101–05, treatment under the GSP will not be If legislation extending that GSP that the closed portions of the meeting processed by Customs for merchandise expiration date is enacted after the GSP are concerned with information that is entered or withdrawn from a warehouse expires under section 505, language may exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. for consumption on or after October 1, be included that would make the GSP 552b(c)(9)(A). The public interest 2001, if the program is not extended effective back to that expiration date. requires that such meetings be closed to before that date. This document also Recognizing the effect that renewing the public because the Treasury sets forth the mechanisms that will GSP duty treatment with retroactive Department requires frank and full facilitate refunds, should the GSP be effect has on both importers, who must advice from representatives of the renewed with retroactive effect. request refunds of duties deposited, and financial community prior to making its DATES: The plan set forth in this Customs, which must liquidate or final decision on major financing document will become effective as of reliquidate eligible entries, Customs operations. Historically, this advice has October 1, 2001, if Congress does not developed a mechanism to facilitate been offered by debt management extend the GSP program before that certain refunds. Set forth below is advisory committees established by the date. Customs plan that will be implemented several major segments of the financial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For on October 1, 2001, in the case of all community. When so utilized, such a specific questions relating to the GSP beneficiary countries other than committee is recognized to be an Automated Commercial System: AGOA beneficiary countries, if the advisory committee under 5 U.S.C. App. James MacDonald, Office of section 505 expiration date has not been § 3. Information and Technology, 703–921– extended by September 30, 2001. Although the Treasury’s final 1027. announcement of financing plans may Formal Entries For general operational questions: not reflect the recommendations Formal entries Arlene Lugo, 202– Claims—Duties Must Be Deposited provided in reports of the advisory 927–4183; committee, premature disclosure of the Informal entries Dan Norman, 202– Although Customs will accept claims committee’s deliberations and reports 927–0542; for GSP duty-free treatment, as specified would be likely to lead to significant Mail entries Robert Woods, 202– below, Customs will not process the financial speculation in the securities 927–1236; claim as duty free under the GSP for market. Thus, these meetings fall within Passenger claims Wes Windle, 202– merchandise entered, or withdrawn the exemption covered by 5 U.S.C. 927–0167. from warehouse for consumption on or § 552b(c)(9)(A). after October 1, 2001. Further, duties at SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of Financial Markets is the normal-trade-relations rate must be responsible for maintaining records of Background deposited, unless an alternate claim is debt management advisory committee Section 501 of the Trade Act of 1974, made under another preferential meetings and for providing annual as amended (19 U.S.C. 2461), authorizes program for which the merchandise reports setting forth a summary of the President to establish a Generalized qualifies (for example, the Andean committee activities and such other System of Preferences (GSP) to provide Trade Preference Act or the Caribbean matters as may be informative to the duty-free treatment for eligible articles Basin Economic Recovery Act). public consistent with the policy of 5 imported directly from designated On or after October 1, 2001, for all U.S.C. 552b. beneficiary countries. Beneficiary merchandise that would qualify for the Dated: September 25, 2001. developing countries and articles GSP were the GSP still in effect, Brian C. Roseboro, eligible for duty-free treatment under Automated Broker Interface (ABI) filers Assistant Secretary, Financial Markets. the GSP are designated by the President must deposit duties at the normal-trade- [FR Doc. 01–24591 Filed 10–01–01; 8:45 am] by Presidential Proclamation in relations rate with their entry BILLING CODE 4810–25–M accordance with sections 502(a) and summaries, but may continue to claim 503(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as GSP duty-free treatment by using the amended (19 U.S.C. 2462(a) and Special Program Indicator (SPI) ‘‘A’’ as DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 2463(a)). Pursuant to section 505 of the a prefix to the tariff number. Customs Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 Automated Commercial System (ACS) Customs Service U.S.C. 2465), duty-free treatment under will accept the SPI ‘‘A’’ transmission the GSP is scheduled to expire on with the payment of duty. If the GSP is Procedyres if the Generalized System September 30, 2001. However, this renewed with retroactive effect, the of Preferences Program Expires expiration date does not apply to duties deposited will be refunded by AGENCY: Customs Service, Treasury. African Growth and Opportunity Act Customs without further action by the ACTION: General notice. (AGOA) beneficiary countries, for whom ABI filer. In effect, use of the SPI ‘‘A’’ GSP duty-free treatment will remain in will constitute an ABI filer’s request for SUMMARY: The Generalized System of effect through September 30, 2008, a refund of duties paid for GSP line Preferences (GSP) is a renewable pursuant to section 506B of the Trade items if GSP is renewed with retroactive preferential trade program that allows Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. effect. It is noted that for ABI filers to the eligible products of designated 2466b). take advantage of this system for developing countries to directly enter Congress is currently considering receiving an automatic refund if GSP is the United States free of duty. Except for whether to extend the section 505 GSP renewed retroactively, the filers will beneficiary countries designated under expiration date. If Congress does not have to reprogram their software to the African Growth and Opportunity pass legislation extending that date allow for the submission of estimated Act, the GSP will expire at midnight on before midnight, September 30, 2001, no duties with the SPI ‘‘A’’ designation on September 30, 2001, unless its claims for duty-free treatment under the entries. ABI filers who do not wish to provisions are extended by Congress. program for non-AGOA beneficiary reprogram their software will be This document provides notice to country exports will be processed by required to request refunds in writing to importers that claims for duty-free Customs on entries made after that time. the appropriate port director identifying
VerDate 11
the affected entry numbers if the GSP is issued if the GSP is renewed with DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY renewed with retroactive effect. retroactive effect. While reprogramming is strictly Fiscal Service voluntary, continued use of the SPI ‘‘A’’ Informal Entries has some benefits: one already Surety Companies Acceptable on Refunds on informal entries filed Federal Bonds: Correction— mentioned is that the filer will not have through the ABI with the SPI ‘‘A’’ to request a refund of deposited duties International Fidelity Insurance designation will be processed in Company in writing should the GSP be renewed accordance with the automatic refund with retroactive effect; another is that procedure outlined above. AGENCY: Financial Management Service, ACS will perform its usual edits on the Fiscal Service, Department of the information transmitted by the filer, Baggage declarations and non-ABI Treasury. thereby ensuring that GSP claims are for informals ACTION: Notice. acceptable country/tariff combinations When merchandise is presented for and eliminating the need for statistical SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 3 to clearance, travelers and importers will corrections. the Treasury Department Circular 570; be advised verbally that they may be Importers may not use the SPI ‘‘A’’ if 2001 Revision, published July 2, 2001, eligible for a refund of GSP duties. they intend to later claim drawback, at 66 FR 35024. because claiming both the refund of Travelers/importers desiring such FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: duties deposited and drawback would refund should request the Customs Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874–6765. be to request a refund in excess of duties Officer to annotate the receipt of actually deposited. Importers who are payment to indicate that the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The unsure as to whether they will claim merchandise would be eligible for GSP underwriting limitation for International drawback are advised not to use the SPI duty-free treatment. Then, should the Fidelity Insurance Company, which was ‘‘A’’. If the GSP is renewed with GSP be renewed with retroactive effect, last listed in Treasury Department retroactive effect, and the importer has the traveler/importer must request the Circular 570, July 2, 2001 revision at 66 not claimed drawback or enabled GSP duty refund in a letter that includes FR 35044 as $3,402,000, is hereby another person to claim drawback, then the copy of the receipt of payment and corrected to read $3,600,000, effective the importer may request a refund of submit the request to the appropriate today. duties deposited by writing to the port Customs port of entry. Federal bond-approving officers director at the port of entry. Also, should annotate their reference copies Mail entries importers may not use the SPI ‘‘A’’ if of the Treasury Circular 570, 2001 Revision, at page 35044 to reflect this they have made an alternative duty-free Should the GSP be renewed with change. The Circular may be viewed treatment claim to GSP (for example, the retroactive effect, those addressees who and downloaded through the Internet at Andean Trade Preference Act or the received GSP eligible merchandise http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/ Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery (identified on the CF 3419A, (Mail index.html. A hard copy may be Act). Entry)) may be eligible for a refund of purchased from the Government Refunds GSP duties and should submit a Printing Office (GPO), Subscription separate written claim for a refund. The 1. Automatic Service, Washington, DC, telephone request for the refund and a copy of the (202) 512–1800. When ordering the If an ABI entry summary was filed CF 3419A should be submitted to the Circular from GPO, use the following with the SPI ‘‘A’’, should the GSP be appropriate International Mail Branch stock number: 769–004–04067–1. renewed with retroactive effect, then identified at the bottom right-hand Questions concerning this notice may be Customs will liquidate or reliquidate all corner of the CF 3419A. (The copy of directed to the U.S. Department of the affected ABI entry summaries with a the CF 3419A must be included with the Treasury, Financial Management refund for the GSP line items with no request, as the information contained on Service, Financial Accounting and further action needed to be taken by the the form will be the only record of the Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, filer to request a refund. GSP merchandise entered and whether 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6A04, the duties and fees were paid). 2. Need for written request Hyattsville, MD 20782. Dated: September 26, 2001. If an ABI entry summary was filed Dated: September 20, 2001. without the SPI ‘‘A’’, then the request John H. Heinrich, Wanda J. Rogers, for a refund must be in writing. Further, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Field Director, Financial Accounting and Services all non-ABI filers must request refunds Operations. Division, Financial Management Service. in writing. Instructions on how to [FR Doc. 01–24533 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–24609 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] request a refund in writing will be BILLING CODE 4820–02–P BILLING CODE 4810–35–M
VerDate 11
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 52 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona—Maricopa County PM–10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for Attainment of the 24-Hour PM–10 Standard and Contingency Measures; Proposed Rule
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION available as electronic files on EPA’s 6. Other factors that EPA may consider AGENCY Region 9 Web Page at http:// a. Nature and extent of nonattainment www.epa.gov/region09/air. b. Types and number of sources or other 40 CFR Part 52 emitting activities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: c. Population exposure to concentrations [AZ092–002; FRL–7067–5] Frances Wicher, Office of Air Planning above the standard (AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection d. Presence and concentration of Approval and Promulgation of Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, potentially toxic substances in the Implementation Plans; Arizona— San Francisco, California 94105. (415) particulate Maricopa County PM–10 744–1248, email: e. Technological and economic feasibility Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan [email protected]. of controls for Attainment of the 24-Hour PM–10 7. Conclusion on the extension request Standard and Contingency Measures SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: H. Reasonable Further Progress and Table of Contents Quantitative Milestones AGENCY: Environmental Protection 1. Reasonable further progress Agency (EPA). I. Summary of Today’s Proposals 2. Quantitative milestones II. Background to Today’s Proposals ACTION: Proposed rule. I. Contingency Measures A. PM–10 Air Quality in the Phoenix Area J. General SIP Requirements B. Description of the MAG Plan’s SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve V. CAA Requirements for BACM and Provisions for Attaining the 24-Hour Attainment Date Extension and EPA’s provisions of the Revised MAG 1999 PM–10 Standard Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM–10 Guidance on Meeting these C. Previous Actions on the Phoenix Serious Requirements for the Maricopa County (Phoenix) Area PM–10 Plan A. Implementation of Best Available Nonattainment Area, February 2000, 1. Annual Standard Proposal Control Measures including the revisions submitted in 2. Microscale Plan Partial Approval/Partial B. Extension of the Attainment Date June 2001 that address attainment of the Disapproval beyond 2001 24-hour PM–10 national ambient air 3. Arizona’s Agricultural BMP General 1. Apply for an attainment date extension quality standard. We also propose to Permit Rule Approval 2. Demonstrate that attainment by 2001 is grant Arizona’s request to extend the III. The CAA’s Planning Requirements for impracticable Serious PM–10 Nonattainment Areas 3. Complied with all requirements and Clean Air Act deadline for attaining the IV. The MAG Plan’s Compliance with the 24-hour PM–10 standard in the Phoenix commitments in its implementation plan CAA’s Requirements for Serious PM–10 4. Demonstrate the inclusion of the most area from 2001 to 2006. Finally, we Nonattainment Areas stringent measures propose to find that the plan provides A. Completeness of the SIP Submittals 5. Demonstrate attainment by the most for the implementation of contingency B. Adequacy of the Transportation expeditious alternative date practicable measures for both the 24-hour and Conformity Budget VI. Administrative Requirements annual PM–10 standards and to make C. Emissions Inventory several revisions to our previous D. Adequate Monitoring Network I. Summary of Today’s Proposals proposal on the MAG plan’s provisions E. Contribution to PM–10 Exceedances of Major Sources of PM–10 Precursors First, we propose to approve the for the annual standard and our F. Implementation of Reasonably Available provisions in the Revised MAG 1999 proposed policy on attainment date and Best Available Control Measures Serious Area Particulate Plan for PM–10 extensions for serious PM–10 1. Steps 1 and 2: Determination of for the Maricopa County Nonattainment nonattainment areas. significant sources Area, February 2000, (‘‘MAG plan’’) DATES: Comments on this proposal must 2. Step 3: Identification of potential BACM including revisions to that plan be received in writing by November 1, 3. Step 4: Implementation of RACM and submitted in Maricopa County PM–10 2001. Comments should be addressed to BACM and inclusion of MSM for each Serious Area State Implementation Plan the contact listed below. significant source category a. Technology controls for on-road motor Revision, Agricultural Best Management ADDRESSES: Comments should be vehicle exhaust Practices, June 2001, (collectively, ‘‘the mailed to: Frances Wicher, Office of Air b. Transportation control measures (TCMs) Maricopa County serious area plan’’ or Planning (AIR–2), EPA Region 9, 75 for on-road motor vehicle exhaust and ‘‘the plan’’) that address attainment of Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA paved road dust the 24-hour PM–10 standard.1 Our 94105–3901. c. Nonroad engines proposed actions are based on our A copy of docket No. AZ–MA–00– d. Paved road dust initial determination that the Maricopa 001, containing the EPA technical e. Unpaved parking lots County serious area plan complies with support document (EPA TSD) and other f. Disturbed vacant lands the Clean Air Act’s (CAA) requirements material relevant to this proposed g. Unpaved roads h. Construction sites and activities for serious PM–10 nonattainment area action, is available for public inspection i. Agricultural sources plans. at EPA’s Region 9 office during normal j. Residential wood combustion Specifically, we propose to approve business hours. k. Secondary ammonium nitrate the following elements of the plan as A copy of the docket is also available l. MCESD’s commitments to improve they pertain to the 24-hour standard: for inspection at: compliance and enforcement of its • Arizona Department of Environmental fugitive dust rules The demonstration that the plan Quality, Library, 3033 N. Central G. Attainment Date Extension provides for implementation of Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85012. 1. Apply for an extension reasonably available control measures 2. Demonstrate the impracticability of (602) 207–2217 (RACM) and best available control attainment by December 31, 2001 measures (BACM), Maricopa Association of Governments, 3. Complied with the commitments and 302 North 1st Street, Phoenix, requirements in the SIP 1 Arizona 85003. (602) 254–6300 4. Include the most stringent measures There are two separate national ambient air quality standards for PM–10, an annual standardd Electronic Availability 5. Demonstrate expeditious attainment of 50 µg/m3 and a 24-hour standard of 150 µg/m3. a. Air quality modeling We proposed approval of the MAG plan’s annual This document and the Technical b. Control measures relied on for standard provisions on April 13, 2000 at 65 FR Support Document (TSD) are also attainment 19964.
VerDate 11
• The demonstration that attainment TSD). The EPA TSD is an integral part Microscale plan,4 the 2000 MAG plan, by the CAA deadline of December 31, of this proposal and should be reviewed and the 2001 Best Management 2001 is impracticable, prior to making comments. A copy of Practices (BMP) submittal.5 The latter • The demonstration that attainment the EPA TSD can be downloaded from two documents are the subject of this will occur by the most expeditious our website or obtained by calling or proposal and are described in more alternative date practicable, in this case, writing the contact person listed above. detail below. We have already acted on December 31, 2006, the Microscale plan, see 62 FR 41856 • The demonstration that the plan II. Background to Today’s Proposals (August 4, 1997). We describe this plan provides for reasonable further progress A. PM–10 Air Quality in the Phoenix and explain its relationship to today’s and quantitative milestones, Area proposal in the next section. • The demonstration that major The first submittal is the Revised sources of PM–10 precursors such as The Maricopa County (Phoenix) PM– Maricopa Association of Governments nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide do 10 nonattainment area is located in the 1999 Serious Area Particulate Plan for not contribute significantly to air quality eastern portion of Maricopa County and PM–10 for the Maricopa County standard violations, and encompasses the cities of Phoenix, Nonattainment Area, February 2000. • The transportation conformity Mesa, Scottsdale, Tempe, Chandler, This plan was developed by the budget. Glendale as well as 17 other Maricopa Association of Governments Second, we are proposing to grant jurisdictions and considerable (MAG), the lead air quality planning 3 Arizona’s request to extend the unincorporated County lands. 40 CFR agency in Maricopa County. The attainment date for the 24-hour PM–10 81.303. The area is home to almost 3 Arizona Department of Environmental standard from December 31, 2001 to million people. Quality (ADEQ) submitted this plan as December 31, 2006. We make this The area violates both the annual and a revision to the Arizona State proposal based on our determination 24-hour PM–10 standards. In 1990, the Implementation Plan (SIP) on February that the State has met the CAA’s criteria area was designated nonattainment for 16, 2000. We refer to this plan in this for granting such extensions. PM–10 and classified as moderate. In document as the MAG plan or the Third, we propose to find that the 1996, because of continuing violations revised MAG plan; however, we plan provides for the implementation of of both PM–10 standards, the area was occasionally use these terms to refer to contingency measures for both the 24- reclassified to serious and required to the set of documents that collectively hour and annual standards as required submit a serious area plan by December comprise the Maricopa County serious by the CAA. 10, 1997. 61 FR 21372 (May 10, 1996). area PM–10 plan. Finally, we make several revisions to The principal contributors to elevated The second document is the Maricopa our April 13, 2000 proposed approval of PM–10 levels in the Phoenix area are County PM–10 Serious Area State the annual standard provisions in the fugitive dust sources such as Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County serious area plan. construction sites, unpaved roads, Agricultural Best Management These revisions involve: vacant lots, agricultural sources, and Practices, (BMP) June 2001, submitted • Clarifications to our proposed paved road dust. Also contributing to in draft on April 26, 2001 and final on policy on granting attainment date the PM–10 problem, but to a much June 13, 2001. This SIP revision was extensions under CAA section 188(e), lesser degree than fugitive dust, are developed by ADEQ. We refer to this • Changes to Maricopa County internal and external combustion submittal as the BMP TSD. Environmental Services Department’s sources including directly-emitted PM– The MAG plan contains a 1994 (MCESD) commitments to further 10 from automobiles, trucks, inventory and uses the urban airshed improve its fugitive dust rule, Rule 310, construction equipment, buses, model/limited chemistry version (UAM/ • Changes to several other control residential woodburning and industrial, LC) to model regional air quality in 1995 measures, and commercial, and residential use of as a base year and in 2006 as the • Evaluation of the plan’s compliance natural gas and fuel oil. See MAG plan, attainment year for both the annual and with the BACM requirement and most p. 3–5. 24-hour standards. The MAG plan, stringent measure requirement in CAA There is a long and complex history however, relies primarily on air quality section 188(e) for the agriculture source to PM–10 air quality planning in the modeling performed in the Microscale category based on the State’s Phoenix area. A summary of this history plan to evaluate localized 24-hour Agricultural Best Management Practices can be found in the annual standard exceedances. The MAG plan, as revised by the BMP General Permit Rule.2 proposal at 65 FR 19964, 19965. A more TSD, includes a BACM analysis and a This preamble describes our proposed detailed history can be found in section demonstration that attainment by 2001 actions on the Phoenix area plan and 1 of the EPA TSD. is impracticable for both the 24-hour provides a summary of our evaluation of and annual PM–10 standards. It also the plan. Our detailed evaluation of the B. Description of the MAG Plan’s plan can be found in the technical Provisions for Attaining the 24-Hour PM–10 Standard 4 The 1997 Microscale plan is the Plan for support document that accompanies Attainment of the 24-hour PM–10 Standard— this proposal. See ‘‘Technical Support Arizona has made several submittals Maricopa County PM–10 Nonattainment Area, Document, Notice of Proposed to address the CAA requirements for Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Rulemaking on the Serious Area PM–10 serious PM–10 nonattainment area May, 1997. 5 The other submittals contain rules and other State Implementation Plan for the plans for the Phoenix area. The control measures relied on to provide for RACM, Maricopa County PM–10 Nonattainment provisions for attainming the 24-hour BACM, reasonable further progress an attainment. Area Provisions for Attaining the 24- PM–10 standard are found mainly in These submittals include the commitments by local Hour Standard and Contingency three of these submittals: the 1997 jurisdictions to PM–10 control measures submitted in December 1997, revised MCESD Rules 310 and Measures,’’ September 14, 2001 (EPA 310.01 submitted in March 2000, Maricopa 3 The Maaricopa nonattainment area also includes County’s Residential Wood Burning Ordinance 2 Except for these limited number of revisions, we the town of Apache Junction in Pinal County. submitted in January 2000, and the Agricultural are not reopening the comment period and are not Apache Junction is covered by a separate air quality Best Management Practices (BMP) General Permit soliciting comments on our April 13, 2000 proposal. plan and will be addressed in a later action. Rule submitted in July 2000.
VerDate 11
includes, again for both PM–10 had met the CAA criteria for granting work to developing approvable standards, the State’s request for a five- such an extension. demonstrations for the Gilbert and West year extension of the attainment date, a In April 2000 preamble, we also Chandler sites. Our proposal today is demonstration that the plan includes for proposed to approve the base year also limited to these two sites. the most stringent measures found in regional emissions inventory required To evaluate the provisions for the 24- other states’ plans, and a demonstration by CAA section 172(c)(3), MCESD’s hour PM–10 standard in the MAG plan, of attainment by December 31, 2006. Rules 310 and 310.01, Maricopa we are relying to a large extent on our County’s Residential Woodburning previous evaluation of the Microscale The BMP TSD updates the MAG plan Ordinance, and the commitments by the plan. Except for the findings related to to reflect the State’s adoption of the cities, towns, and County of Maricopa, the implementation of BACM, we have Agricultural General Permit rule to ADEQ, MAG, and other State and local not reevaluated the 24-hour standard control PM–10 from agricultural sources agencies to implement various PM–10 provisions that we have already found in Maricopa County. It includes a control measures. These proposals were adequate or approved as part of our background document which provides applicable to both the annual and 24- actions on the Microscale plan. the BACM demonstration for hour PM–10 standards and thus are not More information on the Microscale agricultural sources for both standards, being repeated today. plan can be found in section 1 of the a revised demonstration of attainment EPA TSD and our proposed and final and reasonable further progress (RFP) 2. Microscale Plan Partial Approval/ Partial Disapproval rulemakings on it. 62 FR 31025 (June 6, for the 24-hour standard at two 1997) and 62 FR 41856 (August 4, 1997). monitoring sites, and revisions to the The attainment demonstration for the contingency measure provisions for 24-hour standard in the Maricopa 3. Arizona’s Agricultural BMP General both standards. It also includes County serious area plan has both a Permit Rule Approval documentation quantifying emission local modeling component and a The analysis done for the Microscale reductions from the Agricultural regional modeling component. Portions plan revealed for the first time how General Permit rule and documentation of the local or microscale component are significant a contribution agricultural related to implementing this rule. found in the Microscale plan, the 2000 sources make to exceedances of the 24- MAG plan, and the BMP TSD. The hour PM–10 standard in the Phoenix C. Previous Actions on the Phoenix regional component is contained area. See Microscale plan, pp. 18–19. In Serious Area PM–10 Plan completely within the 2000 MAG plan. order to develop adequate controls for Most of the technical evaluation for We have taken three actions related to this source, Arizona passed legislation the microscale component is contained in 1997 establishing an Agricultural the Phoenix Serious Area PM–10 plan: in the Microscale plan which was the proposed approval of the MAG Best Management Practices (BMP) submitted to us in May 1997. It Committee and directing the Committee plan’s provisions for the annual evaluates exceedances of the 24-hour standard, the partial approval/ partial to adopt by rule by June 10, 2000, an PM–10 standard at four Phoenix area agricultural general permit specifying disapproval of the 1997 Microscale monitoring sites: Salt River, Maryvale, plan, and the approval of Arizona’s best management practices for reducing Gilbert, and West Chandler. PM–10 from agricultural activities. The Agricultural BMP General Permit rule. This evaluation involved developing legislation also required that With today’s proposal, we have now local, day-specific inventories and implementation of the agricultural proposed action on all elements of the dispersion modeling to determine controls begin by June 10, 2000 with an Maricopa County serious area PM–10 source contributions to exceedances at education program and full compliance plan. each site. The evaluation showed that with the rule be achieved by December the primary contributors to 24-hour 1. Annual Standard Proposal 31, 2001. See Arizona Revised Statutes exceedances in the Phoenix area are (A.R.S.) 49–457. On April 13, 2000, we proposed to local fugitive dust sources such as In September 1998, the State approve the MAG plan’s provisions for construction sites, agricultural fields submitted the legislation. On June 29, attainment of the annual PM–10 and aprons, vacant lots, unpaved roads 1999, we approved it as meeting the 6 standard. See 65 FR 19964. and parking lots, and earthmoving RACM requirements of the CAA.7 64 FR Specifically, we proposed to approve for operations. The Microscale plan also 34726. the annual standard the provisions for described the type of controls necessary While we approved the legislation as implementation of RACM and BACM, to show attainment at each site although RACM, it was the State’s intent that it the demonstration that attainment by the plan only assured the also serve as BACM and MSM for 2001 is impracticable, the implementation of such controls on agricultural sources in the serious area demonstration that attainment will construction-related sources. occur by the most expeditious We approved the Microscale plan in 7 In 1998, we promulgated a moderate area PM– alternative date, the RFP demonstration, part and disapproved it in part on 10 federal implementation plan (FIP) for the the quantitative milestones, and the August 4, 1997 (62 FR 41856). We Phoenix area. 63 FR 41326 (August 3, 1998). One approved the attainment and RFP of the measures in this FIP was our commitment to conformity budget. We also proposed to adopt RCM for agricultural sources, RACM being grant an extension of the attainment demonstrations for the Salt River and the primary control requirement for moderate PM– date from 2001 to 2006 based on our Maryvale sites because the plan 10 nonattainment areas. Arizona submitted the proposed determination that Arizona demonstrated expeditious attainment at BMP legislation in 1998 as, among other things, a these sites; however, we disapproved substitute for our FIP RACM commitment. Before we could withdraw our FIP RACM commitment 6 In the annual standard propsoal and in the EPA these demonstrations for the West and replace it with the State’s legislation, we had TSD for today’s proposal, we discuss the legal basis Chandler and Gilbert sites because the to first find that the legislation was at least RACM, for separating the proposed approvals for the 24- plan did not demonstrate attainment at hence our initial determination that it was at least hour and annual standards and the practical them. Because attainment RCM. For further information on this legislation reasons we chose to do so. See 65 FR 19964, 19969 and its relationship to the history of PM–10 and section 3 of the EPA TSD. We intent, however, demonstrations at the Salt River and planning in the Phoenix area, see the to finalize actions on both standards in a single Maryvale sites were already approved, ‘‘Implementation of BACM and Inclusion of MSM rulemaking in early 2002. ADEQ limited its subsequent microscale for Agricultural Sources’’ section in the EPA TSD.
VerDate 11
PM–10 plan. Therefore, in our annual after the area is reclassified (CAA views on how the Agency intends to standard proposal, we evaluated and section 189(b)(1)(B)); 8 review SIPs submitted to meet the proposed to find that the legislation met (b) assurances that BACT on major CAA’s requirements for PM–10 plans. the CAA BACM and MSM requirements stationary sources of PM–10 precursors The General Preamble mainly addresses for the agricultural source category. 65 shall be implemented no later than 4 the requirements for moderate areas and FR 19964, 19981. years after the area is reclassified except the Addendum, the requirements for After a series of meetings during 1999 where EPA has determined that such serious areas. sources do not contribute significantly and 2000, the Agricultural BMP IV. The MAG Plan’s Compliance with to exceedances of the PM–10 standards Committee adopted the agricultural the CAA’s Requirements for Serious (CAA section 189(e)); general permit rule and associated PM–10 Nonattainment Area (c) a demonstration (including air definitions, effective May 12, 2000, at quality modeling) that the plan will The following sections present a Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) provide for attainment as expeditiously condensed discussion of our evaluation R18–2–610, ‘‘Definitions for R18–2– as practicable but no later than of the MAG plan’s compliance with the 611,’’ and 611, ‘‘Agricultural PM–10 December 31, 2001 or where the State is applicable CAA requirements for General Permit; Maricopa PM10 seeking an extension of the attainment attaining the 24-hour PM–10 standard. Nonattainment Area’’ (collectively, date under section 188(e), a Our complete evaluation is found in the general permit rule). The State demonstration that attainment by EPA TSD for this proposal. We strongly submitted the general permit rule in December 31, 2001 is impracticable and urge anyone wishing to comment on July 2000 and its analysis quantifying that the plan provides for attainment by this proposal to first review the TSD the emission reductions expected from the most expeditious alternative date before preparing comments. A copy of the rule and the demonstration that the practicable (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and the TSD can be downloaded from our rule meets the CAA’s RACM, BACM and 189(b)(1)(A)); website or obtained by calling or writing MSM requirements in the June 2001 (d) quantitative milestones which are the contact person listed above. BMP TSD. We proposed to approve the to be achieved every 3 years and which A. Completeness of the SIP Submittals rule as meeting the CAA requirement for demonstrate reasonable further progress RACM on June 29, 2001 and signed the toward attainment by the applicable CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires us final approval on September 10, 2001. attainment date (CAA sections 172(c)(2) to determine if a SIP submittal is See 66 FR 34598. and 189(c)); and complete within 60 days of its receipt. We are today withdrawing our (e) a comprehensive, accurate, current This completeness review allows us to quickly determine if the submittal proposed finding in the annual standard inventory of actual emissions from all includes all the necessary items and proposal that the State legislation sources of PM–10 (CAA section information we need to take action on provides for the implementation of 172(c)(3)). it. We make completeness BACM and MSM for agricultural Serious area plan must also provide determinations using criteria we have sources for the annual standard. 66 FR for the implementation of contingency established in 40 CFR part 51, appendix 19964, 19981. In its place we are measures if the area fails to make RFP or attain by its attainment deadline. V. proposing to find that the General We found ADEQ’s February 16, 2000 Permit rule provides for the These contingency measures are to take effect without further action by the State submittal of the final revised MAG implementation of BACM and MSM for serious area PM–10 plan complete on agricultural sources for the annual or the Administrator. CAA section 172(c)(9). February 25, 2000. See letter, David P. standard. This proposal is based on our Howekamp, EPA, to Jacqueline Schafer, analysis, summarized later, of the rule Serious area PM–10 plans must also meet the general requirements ADEQ. and the State’s demonstrations in the We also found ADEQ’s June 13, 2001 applicable to all SIPs including BMP TSD and is in addition to our submittal of the BMP TSD complete on reasonable notice and public hearing proposed finding that the rule provides August 10, 2001. See letter, Jack under section 110(l), necessary for the implementation of BACM and Broadbent, EPA, to Jacqueline Schafer, assurances that the implementing MSM for the 24-hour standard. ADEQ. agencies have adequate personnel, III. The CAA’s Planning Requirements funding and authority under section B. Adequacy of the Transportation for Serious PM–10 Nonattainment 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and 40 CFR 51.280; and Conformity Budgets Areas the description of enforcement methods CAA Section 176(c) requires that as required by 40 CFR 51.111. federally-funded or approved The Phoenix area is a PM–10 We have issued a General Preamble9 nonattainment area that has been transportation plans, programs, and and Addendum to the General projects in nonattainment areas reclassified to serious because it failed Preamble10 describing our preliminary to attain by the moderate area ‘‘conform’’ to the area’s air quality implementation plans. Conformity attainment date of December 31, 1994. 8 When a moderate area is reclassified to serious, Such an area must submit, within 18 the requirement to implement RACM in section ensures that federal transportation months of the reclassification, revisions 189(a)(1)(C) remains and is augmented by the actions do not worsen an area’s air to its implementation plan that address requirement to implement BACM. Thus, a serious quality or interfere with its meeting the area PM–10 plan must, in addition to BACM, air quality standards. We have issued a the CAA requirements for serious PM– provide for the implementation of RACM as 10 nonattainment areas. CAA section expeditiously as practicable to the extent that the conformity rule that establishes the 189(b)(2). These requirements are: RACM requirement has not been satisfied in the criteria and procedures for determining area’s moderate area plan. (a) assurances that the BACM, 9 ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble Waivers for PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, and including best available control for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 Nonattainment technology (BACT) for stationary Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, Areas Generally; Addendum to the General sources, for the control of PM–10 shall 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 10 ‘‘State Implementation Plans for Serious PM– Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 41998 be implemented no later than 4 years 10 Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date (August 16, 1994)
VerDate 11
whether or not transportation plans, meet this requirement Arizona D. Adequate Monitoring Network programs, and projects conform to a SIP. submitted a 1994 base year inventory as We discuss the adequacy of the See 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. part of the MAG plan. See MAG plan, monitoring network in this preamble One of the primary tests for Appendix A, Exhibit 6. We proposed to solely to support our finding that the conformity is to show transportation approve this inventory as meeting the plan appropriately evaluates the PM–10 plans and improvement programs will requirements of section 172(c)(3) in our problem in the Phoenix area. Reliable not cause motor vehicle emissions proposal on the annual standard ambient data is necessary to validate the higher than the levels needed to make provisions. See 65 FR 19964, 19970. base year air quality modeling which in progress toward and meet the air quality In the Phoenix nonattainment area, turn is necessary to assure sound standards. The motor vehicle emissions both regional and microscale modeling attainment demonstrations. levels needed to make progress toward inventories are needed to accurately The CAA requires states to establish and meet the air quality standards are reflect the sources that are contributing and operate air monitoring networks to set in an area’s attainment and/or RFP to 24-hour PM–10 ambient levels. The compile data on ambient air quality for plans and are known as the ‘‘emissions regional modeling inventories were all criteria pollutants. Section budget for motor vehicles.’’ Emissions derived from the 1994 base year 110(a)(2)(B)(i). Our regulations in 40 budgets are established for specific inventory and are the same for the CFR 58 establishes specific regulatory years and specific pollutants. See 40 annual and 24-hour standards. We CFR 93.118(a). proposed to find these regional requirements for operating air quality Before an emissions budget in a modeling inventories to be acceptable as surveillance networks to measure submitted SIP revision can be used in a part of annual standard provisions. See ambient concentrations of PM–10, conformity determination, we must first 65 FR 19964, 19985–19986. including measurement method determine that it is adequate. The ADEQ developed microscale and requirements, network design, quality criteria by which we determine subregional inventories for 1995 (the assurance procedures, and in the case of adequacy of submitted emission budgets modeling base year) for the West large urban areas, the minimum number are outlined in our conformity rule in 40 Chandler and Gilbert microscale sites. of monitoring sites designated as CFR 93.118(e)(4). A finding of adequacy See Microscale plan, Appendix A, National Air Monitoring Stations does not approve an emissions budget, Chapter 4 and MAG plan, Appendix C, (NAMS). it simply allows states to begin to use Exhibit 3, Chapter 3. In the 1997 Ambient networks, however, do not the budget in conformity determinations Microscale plan, ADEQ also developed need to meet all our regulations to be pending our action on the overall SIP. 1995 inventories for the two other found adequate to support air quality The MAG plan establishes a mobile microscale sites, Maryvale and Salt modeling. A good spatial distribution of source emissions budget of 59.7 mtpd. River. See Microscale plan, Appendix sites, correct siting, and quality-assured This regional budget is applicable to A, Chapters 4 and 6. We evaluated the and quality-controlled data are the most both the annual and 24-hour PM–10 1995 inventories for all four sites as part important factors we consider when standards. The on-road mobile source of our action on the overall Microscale evaluating the monitoring network for portion of the budget, which includes plan. See 62 FR 31025, 31030 (June 6, air quality modeling. Nonattainment emissions from reentrained road dust, 1997). These microscale inventories are area plans developed under title I, part vehicle exhaust, and travel on unpaved specialized modeling inventory and is D of the Clean Air Act are not, in roads, is 58.6 mtpd. The road not intended to satisfy the CAA section general, required to address how the construction dust portion of the budget 172(c)(3) requirement.11 area’s air quality network meets our is 1.1 mtpd. MAG plan, p. 8–13. We discuss emissions inventories in monitoring regulations. These plans are On March 30, 2000, we found this preamble and in the EPA TSD in submitted too infrequently to serve as adequate for transportation conformity order to present a complete technical the vehicle for assuring that monitoring purposes this motor vehicle emissions review of the Maricopa County serious networks remain current. budget. Our adequacy finding is area plan’s provisions for attainment of The base year for the MAG plan is documented in section II of the EPA the 24-hour standard. Emissions 1995. In 1995, there were 16 monitoring TSD for the annual standard. As a result inventories play a fundamental role in sites operated by either MCESD or of our adequacy finding, MAG and the air quality modeling, and CAA section ADEQ that collected PM–10 data in the Federal Highway Administration are 189(b)(1)(A) requires attainment Phoenix area, three designated as now required to use this budget in all demonstrations in PM–10 serious area NAMS, five designated as state/local conformity analyses. plan to be based on modeling. We monitoring stations, and eight As discussed later in this preamble, cannot find this modeling, or the designated as special purpose monitors. we are proposing to approve both the attainment demonstrations that are All of the sites were operated in attainment and reasonable further derived from it, approvable without first accordance with our regulations in progress demonstrations for the 24-hour finding that the underlying emissions 1995. Figure 3–2 in the MAG plan lists standard in the Maricopa County inventories are adequate. We are not, the names of the sites and their serious area PM–10 plan. The 59.7 mtpd however, proposing any actions today locations in the Phoenix area as of April budget is consistent with these on the inventories relied on in the 1999. Most of these PM–10 monitoring demonstrations. We, therefore, propose Maricopa County serious area plan for sites were sited as neighborhood scale to approve it as the motor vehicle demonstrating attainment of the 24-hour with an objective of assessing emissions budget for the 24-hour PM–10 standard because, as discussed above, population exposure. Given the nature standard under CAA section 176(c). we have already either proposed to of the emission sources in the Phoenix approve them or found them to be area, which are mostly local fugitive C. Emissions Inventory acceptable. dust sources, we believe this is an CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that appropriate focus of the network. nonattainment area plans include a 11 The microscale inventories include only The 24-hour attainment comprehensive, accurate, and current sources within a small area surrounding each demonstration in the MAG plan relies, monitor rather than all sources within the entire inventory of actual emissions from all nonattainment area as requirement in CAA section in part, on showing attainment at four sources in the nonattainment area. To 172(c)(3). specific monitoring sites. These sites
VerDate 11
were chosen to evaluate the type and in Phoenix. Moreover, secondary source categories to determine which mix of sources thought to be particulate takes hours to form in are significant. contributing to elevated 24-hour PM–10 ambient air from its precursors. By the The development of the detailed levels: Salt River for its proximity to time secondary particluate is formed, emissions inventories is discussed in a industrial sources; West Chandler for its the precursors are well mixed in the preceding section. The MAG plan uses nearby highway construction; Maryvale ambient air, so localized, three modeling studies of PM–10 for its residential area coupled with disproportionate impacts by major sources in the Phoenix area to identify land disturbing activities due to the sources of PM–10 precursors are very significant source categories. One of construction of a park, and Gilbert for unlikely. these studies evaluated significant its proximity to agricultural land. In This contribution is well below our sources using chemical mass balance 1995 these sites recorded the highest proposed 5 µg/m3 significance level.12 (CMB) modeling performed on and most frequent exceedances of the However, independent of this fact, we monitoring samples collected at 6 sites 24-hour PM–10 standard. They are also believe that so small a contribution— in 1989–1990. The two other studies representative of similar areas in the less than 0.4 percent of the 24-hour PM– evaluated significant sources using Phoenix area that may not have 10 standard of 150 µg/m3—is truly dispersion modeling of sources around monitoring sites. insignificant by any measure for the 6 monitoring sites using data from 1992 Based on our evaluation, we have Phoenix area. PM–10 levels above the through 1995.13 concluded that the monitoring network 24-hour standard in Phoenix are almost From these evaluations, the MAG operated by the MCESD and ADEQ in exclusively caused by a few large source plan identifies 8 significant source 1995 was adequate to support the air categories of fugitive dust. It is controls categories and 12 insignificant source quality modeling in the MAG plan. The on these sources that are the key to categories. MAG plan, p. 9–6. network utilized EPA reference or expeditious attainment and not controls The final list of significant source equivalent method monitors and both on trivial contributors such as major categories in the MAG plan does not agencies have EPA-approved quality stationary sources of PM–10 precursors. distinguish between those categories assurance plans in place. Based on their negligible impact on that are significant for the 24-hour ambient PM–10 levels, we propose to standard and those that are significant E. Contribution to PM–10 Exceedances determine that major sources of PM–10 of Major Sources of PM–10 Precursors for the annual standard; although precursors do not contribute previous studies have shown that some CAA section 189(e) requires a state to significantly to PM–10 levels which source categories are significant only for apply the control requirements exceed the 24-hour standard in the one or the other standard. Because the applicable to major stationary sources of Phoenix area; therefore, pursuant to MAG plan does not distinguish PM–10 to major stationary sources of CAA section 189(e), BACT need not be significant source categories between PM–10 precursors, unless we determine applied to major sources of PM–10 the two standards, we treat each of the such sources do not contribute precursors. listed significant source categories as significantly to PM–10 levels in excess significant for the 24-hour standard. of the NAAQS in the area. For the F. Implementation of Reasonably For the 24-hour standard, the MAG serious area plan, a major source is one Available and Best Available Control plan demonstrates that its selection of that emits or has the potential to emit Measures significant source categories is over 70 English tons per year (tpy) of CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) requires that appropriate by showing that controls on sulfur oxides (SO ), nitrogen oxides a serious area PM–10 plan provide for X the de minimis source categories would (NOX), or ammonium. the implementation of BACM within PM–10 precursors react in the four years of reclassification to serious. not result in attainment of the 24-hour atmosphere to form secondary For Phoenix, this deadline is June 10, standard by 2001. For a detailed particulate, secondary because it is not 2000. Under our applicable guidance, description of this demonstration, see directly emitted from the source. The BACM must be applied to each MAG plan, pp. 9–12 to 9–15 and the MAG plan does not provide specific significant area-wide source category. EPA TSD section ‘‘BACM Analysis— information on the impact of major Addendum at 42011. As discussed in Step 2, Model to Identify Significant 14 precursor sources on Phoenix PM–10 section V of this preamble, we have Sources.’’ levels; however, it does provide established a four-step process for 13 These studies are ‘‘The 1989–90 Phoenix PM– sufficient information on the evaluating BACM in serious area PM–10 10 Study’’, Desert Research Institute, April 1991; contribution of total secondary plans. ‘‘Particulate Control Measure Feasibility Study,’’ particulates to PM–10 levels and the Sierra Research, January 1997; and the Microscale 1. Steps 1 and 2: Determination of emissions from major precursor sources plan. Significant Sources 14 to estimate the impact. In this de minimus demonstration, certain The first step in the BACM analysis is source categories vacant land, unpaved roads, We estimate that major stationary agricultural sources, and unpaved parking—were sources contribute at most 0.61 µg/m3 to to develop a detailed emissions assumed to be uncontrolled at the end of 2001. See 24-hour PM–10 levels in the Phoenix inventory of PM–10 sources and source MAG plan, Tables 9–b and 9–c. These categories area. See EPA TSD section, ‘‘BACT for categories that can be used in modeling will in fact be subject to BACM by then. By not to determine their impact on ambient air including controls on these categories in the de Major Stationary Sources of PM–10 minimis demonstration, the gap between Precursors.’’ We estimated this quality. Addendum at 42012. The nonattainment and attainment of the 24-hour contribution by assuming that the major second step is use this inventory in air standard in 2001 is much larger than it should be stationary sources’ contribution to quality modeling to evaluate the impact and thus, the de minimis determination for the 24- on PM–10 concentrations over the hour standard is suspect. secondary levels is proportional to their To check if the selected de minimis categories are presence in the inventory. We believe standards of the various sources and truly de minimis under the correct control that this assumption is reasonable given assumptions, we redid the determination the very small presence of major 12 The MAG plan demonstrates that the 5µg/m3 is incorporating the appropriate level of control for the appropriate level for determining which each source category. We concluded from this stationary sources in the precursor categories are significant for the BACM requirement reanalysis that the MAG plan’s selected de minimis inventory and the small contribution for the 24-hour standard; therefore, we believe that threshold is in fact appropriate and the identified total secondaries make to PM–10 levels it is an appropriate level for us to adopt here. Continued
VerDate 11
The 8 significant source categories January 31, 2000 Public Hearing’’; and 310.01. MCESD has made extensive are: BMP TSD, pp. 9 through 27. commitments to improve compliance 1. Paved road travel The MAG plan appropriately screened and enforcement of these rules to assure 2. Unpaved road travel (includes the list of candidate BACM to eliminate that they achieve the emission unpaved parking lots) measures that did not apply to reductions necessary for expeditious 3. Industrial paved road travel (paved significant source categories in the area, attainment. These commitments are an and unpaved) were technologically infeasible for the important component of our proposed 4. Construction site preparation area because they would not reduce finding that the MAG plan provides for (includes disturbed vacant lots that are PM–10 emissions, or duplicated other implementation of RACM and BACM not undergoing construction) measures on the list. The plan also and inclusion of MSM. We discuss them 5. Agricultural tilling (includes all provides cost effectiveness estimates for at the end of this section. agricultural sources) each of the candidate BACM. MAG As discussed above, the MAG plan 6. Residential wood combustion plan, pp. 9–30 through 9–39; and BMP made no distinction between significant 7. On-road and non-road motor TSD, pp. 9 through 27. sources for the annual standard and vehicle exhaust We propose to find that the Maricopa those for the 24-hour standard and, as 8. Secondary ammonium nitrate MAG County serious area PM–10 plan a result, it made no distinction between Plan, Table 9–1. identified and evaluated potential BACM and MSM for the annual The 12 de minimis source categories BACM for the Maricopa area consistent standard and those for the 24-hour are: with our guidance. As we will discuss standard. We have already extensively 1. Stationary point sources below in our evaluations of the reviewed the MAG plan’s BACM and 2. Fuel combustion (excluding implementation of BACM for each MSM provisions for the annual standard residential wood combustion) significant source category, we do not and these reviews are applicable to the 3. Waste/open burning believe that the plan left out any 24-hour standard. Thus, except for 4. Agricultural harvesting candidate BACM. Overall, the plan clarifying and/or updating information 5. Cattle feedlots presents one of the most comprehensive on a few measures, we have not revised 6. Structural/vehicle fires lists of potential BACM ever produced. our evaluations of BACM and MSM for 7. Charbroiling/frying meat most of the significant source categories. 3. Step 4: Implementation of RACM and 8. Marine vessel exhaust Four categories—on-road engines BACM and inclusion of MSM for Each 9. Airport ground support exhaust (technology controls), nonroad engines, Significant Source Category 10. Railroad locomotive exhaust unpaved roads and construction dust— 11. Windblown from fluvial channels In the following sections, we review have undergone moderate changes. 12. Wild fires the results of the Maricopa County Our analysis of the agricultural source category has changed substantially from MAG plan, Table 9–a. The plan notes serious area plan’s BACM analysis. To the annual standard proposal. As that several de minimis source present these results, we have grouped discussed above, we based our review in categories (e.g., stationary point sources, the emission generating activities that the annual standard proposal on the waste/open burning, agricultural comprise the MAG plan’s significant State’s legislation requiring the adoption harvesting, charbroiling) are already categories slightly differently from the of measures for agriculture. Since then, subject to control or will be controlled plan, e.g., we have addressed separately the State has adopted the agricultural in the future. MAG plan, p. 9–12. construction activities and disturbed general permit rule and has submitted We propose to find that the MAG plan vacant lands which are both included in revisions to the Maricopa County has not excluded any source categories the MAG plan’s significant category of serious area plan containing the that should be considered significant construction site preparation.15 We have demonstration that the general permit from its list of significant source done this to make our evaluations of the rule represents BACM and MSM. For categories. The plan presents acceptable plan’s provisions for the today’s proposal, we have based our modeling to evaluate the impact of implementation of BACM and inclusion review of BACM and MSM for the various PM–10 sources and source of MSM clearer and thus, we believe, agricultural sources on the general categories on PM–10 levels and to more understandable. However, despite permit rule and the State’s additional derive a comprehensive and the method of presentation, we have documentation. Our revised analysis conservative list of significant source addressed the MAG plan’s provisions applies to both the annual and 24-hour categories. for implementing RACM and BACM for each of the plan’s significant source standards. 2. Step 3: Identification of Potential categories. a. Technology Controls for On-road BACM Also, because of the substantial Motor Vehicle Exhaust In preparing the list of candidate overlap in the source categories and This category includes tailpipe and BACM, MAG reviewed our guidance controls evaluated for BACM and those tire wear emissions of primary PM–10 documents on BACM, other EPA evaluated for MSM, we present our from on-road motor vehicles. On-road documents on PM–10 control, as well as evaluation of the MAG plan’s provisions motor vehicles include both gasoline PM–10 plans from other serious PM–10 for including MSM alongside our and diesel-powered passenger cars, nonattainment areas in the western evaluation of the provisions for light, medium, and heavy duty trucks, United States. MAG also evaluated implementing RACM and BACM for buses, and motorcycles. controls proposed during public each significant source category. The suggested technology-based comment. MAG plan, pp. 9–24 through Controls on a number of significant measures for controlling emissions from 9–29; MAG Plan, Appendix D, Exhibit source categories are in MCESD’s on-road motor vehicle exhaust fall into 1, ‘‘Response to Public Comments, fugitive dust rules, Rule 310 and Rule one of five categories: new emission standards, inspection and maintenance de minimis categories are indeed de minimis and 15 MAG plan uses this grouping despite the fact are appropriately excluded from the BACM that disturbed vacant lands include lands that are (I/M) programs, fuels, programs to analysis. See EPA TSD, section ‘‘BACM Analysis— disturbed for reasons other than construction encourage alternative fueled vehicle Step 2, Model to Identify Significant Sources.’’ activity. usage, and programs to accelerate fleet
VerDate 11
turnover. In total, the MAG plan controls not adopted by the State.16 The In 2000, the Arizona legislature considers 22 technology-based control plan identifies this measure as a converted the RSD program from a measures. See MAG plan, Table 5–2. We potential MSM. MAG plan, Table 10–7. regulatory program to a pilot program believe this list is complete and propose The MAG plan claims that the measure because of its high cost per ton of to find that the MAG plan evaluates a is unreasonable on a cost basis. MAG emissions reduced 17 In July 2001, comprehensive set of potential plan, p. 9–46. Arizona submitted a SIP revision that technology-based controls for on-road Based on information in the included all changes to State’s VEIP motor vehicle exhaust emissions Microscale plan, emissions from on- program that had been made since we including the potentially most stringent road motor vehicle are not implicated in last approved it in 1995, including the measures from other states. 24-hour exceedances in the Phoenix changes to the RSD program. 2001 I/M For gasoline vehicles, Arizona has area. Microscale plan, pp. 17–19. All SIP submittal, p. 26. We consider this I/ implemented one of the nation’s best currently available evidence is that 24- M program submittal to be Arizona’s and most comprehensive enhanced I/M hour exceedances are caused by local current statement of what elements programs including expanding the fugitive dust sources and controls on constitute its VEIP. program to areas surrounding Phoenix; these sources alone will result in the The RSD program is not credited in has adopted its own Cleaner Burning earliest practicable date for attainment the RFP or attainment demonstrations Gasoline program which mandates the of the 24-hour PM–10 standard in the for the annual standard. The State use of either Phase II federal Phoenix area. Microscale plan, pp. 17– justifies its revision to this program reformulated gasoline or California 19. Because implementation of CARB based on the implementation cost of the diesel would not result in earlier reformulated gasoline; and mandates unrevised program, that is, they have attainment and thus unnecessary for federal, state, county, and municipal determined that the unrevised program expeditious attainment, we propose to governments to convert their fleets to was economically infeasible. We believe find that the MAG plan provides for the alternative fuels. MAG plan, pp. 7–2 that this change to the overall on-road inclusion of MSM to our satisfaction through 7–24. motor vehicle control program in the absent the adoption and implementation MAG plan do not adversely affect our Arizona has instituted a heavy-duty of CARB diesel. diesel I/M program, will require pre- previously proposed finding that the Except for one, all the adopted BACM plan provides for the implementation of 1988 HDDV registered in the Phoenix and MSM were implemented by June nonattainment area to meet 1988 federal RACM and BACM and the inclusion of 10, 2000, the BACM implementation MSM for this source category for the emission standards starting in 2004, has deadline for the Phoenix area. The established a voluntary vehicle repair annual standard found at 65 FR 19964, exception is the requirement that pre- 19972. and retrofit program to encourage 1988 heavy duty diesel vehicles retrofitting and overhaul of heavy duty registered in the nonattainment area b. Transportation Control Measures diesel engines to reduce emissions, and meet 1988 federal emission standards. (TCMs) for On-road Motor Vehicle has limited diesel sulfur content to 500 This measure will not be fully Exhaust and Paved Road Dust parts per million (ppm). MAG plan, implemented until January 1, 2004 in TCMs can reduce PM–10 emissions in Chapter 7. order to provide sufficient lead time for both the on-road motor vehicle exhaust As noted before, Arizona has in place modification or replacement of the non- and paved road dust source categories a comprehensive programs to address complying heavy duty diesel vehicles. by reducing vehicle miles traveled We, therefore, propose to find that the on-road motor vehicle emissions. With (VMT) and vehicle trips (VT). They can combination of on-road motor vehicle the additional measures in the MAG also reduce vehicle exhaust emissions technology controls and transportation plan (including a more stringent diesel through relieving congestion. Our control measures (described in the next I/M program and measures both serious area PM–10 guidance requires section) in the MAG plan provides for encouraging and requiring diesel fleet that plans identifying on-road motor turnover), the overall mobile source the implementation of RACM and BACM and the inclusion of MSM for on- vehicles as a significant sources must program is strengthened and goes also evaluate the TCMs listed in section beyond the existing program. Both road motor vehicle exhaust for the 24- hour standard. 108(f) of the CAA. Addendum at 42013. strengthening and expanding existing In our review, we have primarily programs are key criteria for Since the annual standard proposal was published in April 2000, changes assessed the MAG plan’s provisions for demonstrating the implementation of implementing RACM and BACM and BACM. See Addendum at 42013. Where have been made to two on-road motor vehicle controls that were included in including MSM through TCMs based on the MAG plan has rejected potential the measures’ effectiveness in BACM, it provides a reasoned and that proposal: the remote sensing (RSD) program in the State’s vehicle emissions controlling directly-emitted PM–10 from acceptable justification for the rejection. vehicle exhaust. We have not assessed See EPA TSD, Table ORM–3 in the inspection program (VEIP) and changes to the State’s incentives for purchase of the plan based on the TCMs’ potential section ‘‘Implementation of BACM and benefit in controlling PM–10 precursors MSM for On-Road Motor Vehicle alternatively-fueled vehicles or such as NOX and SOX because (1) from Exhaust and Paved Road Dust conversions to alternatively-fueled vehicles. available ambient measurements, (Technology Standards and Fuels).’’ neither nitrates nor sulfates are The MAG plan identified just a few 16 Arizona has already adopted half of the CARB important to overall 24-hour PM–10 measures from other areas as potential diesel standards, the 500 ppm sulfur limit. The concentrations in the Phoenix area (See MSM. These measures have either been other CARB diesel standard is a limit on the EPA TSD section, ‘‘BACT for Major adopted or we have concluded that the aromatic hydrocarbon content of no more than 10 Stationary Sources of PM–10 percent by volume. CARB, Fact Sheet on California measure need not be included to assure Diesel Fuel, March 1997. Also, in January 2001, we Precursors’’ which shows that total the inclusion of MSM. established a new diesel fuel sulfur limit of 15 ppm The California Air Resources Board’s as part of our overall program to control emissions 17 ADEQ, Final Arizona State Implementation from heavy duty diesel vehicles. They new limit Plan Revision, Basic and Enhanced Vehicle diesel fuel standards (CARB diesel) is which will apply to Arizona will be fully in place Emissions Inspection/Maintenance Program, June one of the few identified motor vehicle by September, 2006. 66 FR 5002 (January 8, 2001). 2001 (‘‘2001 I/M SIP submittal’’), p. 26.
VerDate 11
secondary particulates from all sources improvement program (e.g., signal adoption of the California ones would. have a maximum impact of 9.2 µg/m3 in synchronization). As a result, Arizona determined that 1995) and (2) Arizona has already We propose to find that the adoption of the California standards targeted mobile source NOX and SOX combination of on-road motor vehicle would not justify the resources ADEQ through an aggressive set of mobile technology controls (described in the would need to expend to adopt, source controls which we believe cover previous section) and TCMs in the MAG implement, and enforce them and has the implementation of RACM and plan provides for the implementation of now withdrawn its commitment. See BACM and inclusion of MSM RACM and BACM and inclusion of letter, Jacqueline E. Schafer, ADEQ, to requirements for tailpipe NOX and SOX. MSM for on-road motor vehicle exhaust. Laura Yoshii, EPA, ‘‘Justification for not See discussion immediately above on We also propose to find that the implementing CARB Off-road engine technology controls for on-road motor combination of TCMs and paved road standards for the Maricopa County PM– vehicle exhaust. dust measures (described in the paved 10 SIP,’’ September 7, 2001 (‘‘ADEQ Off- In total, the MAG plan identifies 19 road section later in this preamble) Road Letter’’). TCMs for consideration, including the provides for the implementation of Arizona has adopted and CAA section 108(f) measures. The plan RACM and BACM and the inclusion of implemented a year-round Cleaner does not identify any potential most MSM for paved road dust. Burning gasoline program and limits on the sulfur content of diesel fuels. With stringent TCMs from other areas. See c. Nonroad Engines EPA TSD section ‘‘Implementation of the addition of these measures, the BACM and MSM for On-Road Motor The nonroad engine category covers a overall nonroad engine program is Vehicle Exhaust and Paved Road Dust diverse collection of engines, equipment strengthened and goes beyond the (TCMs).’’ We believe that this list is and vehicles fueled by gasoline, diesel, existing federal program. See EPA TSD complete and propose to find that the electric, natural gas, and other section ‘‘Implementation of BACM and MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive alternative fuels, including outdoor Inclusion of MSM for Nonroad set of potential TCMs for on-road motor power equipment, recreational Engines.’’ Both strengthening and vehicle exhaust emissions and the equipment, farm equipment, expanding existing programs are key potential MSM from other States. construction equipment, lawn and criteria for demonstrating the Arizona has a long history of adopting garden equipment, and marine vessels. implementation of BACM. See and then enhancing programs to reduce The suggested measures for Addendum at 42013. Where the MAG emissions from on-road motor vehicles controlling emissions from nonroad plan has rejected potential BACM, it by reducing VMT, VT, and/or engines fall into one of four categories: provides a reasoned justification for the congestion.18 The area has an employer new emission standards, programs to rejection. trip reduction ordinance which applies accelerate fleet turnover, programs The MAG plan identifies CARB diesel to employers of 50 or more, a public affecting usage, or fuels. In total, the as a potential MSM for nonroad engines MAG plan evaluates 8 measures in outreach program to encourage people but does not adopt it. MAG plan, Table addition to clean fuels measures for to reduce driving, programs to improve 10–7. The plan identifies this measure reducing PM–10 emissions from bicycling and pedestrian travel, and an as a potential MSM. MAG plan, Table nonroad engines. We believe that this extensive program to synchronize traffic 10–7. The MAG plan claims that the list is complete and propose to find that lights. In most instances, these programs measure is unreasonable on a cost basis. the MAG plan evaluates a were adopted and implemented as part MAG plan, p. 9–46. comprehensive set of potential measures of carbon monoxide and ozone control Based on information in the for nonroad engines including the programs, but they also reduce PM–10. Microscale plan, emissions from With the additional measures in the potential most stringent measures from nonroad engines are not implicated in MAG plan (including additional traffic other States. 24-hour exceedances in the Phoenix We have adopted national emission light synchronization, transit area. Microscale plan, pp. 17–19. All standards for a broad range of nonroad improvements, and bicycle and currently available evidence is that 24- engines. We consider that these pedestrian facility improvements), the hour exceedances are caused by local standards, which apply to nonroad overall TCM program is strengthened fugitive dust sources and controls on engines sold in Arizona constitute at and goes beyond the existing program. these sources alone will result in the minimum a RACM-level program for See EPA TSD, Table TCM–3 in section earliest practicable date for attainment controlling emissions from nonroad ‘‘Implementation of BACM and MSM of the 24-hour PM–10 standard in the engines. The CAA preempts all states, for On-Road Motor Vehicle Exhaust and Phoenix area. Microscale plan, pp. 17– except for California, from setting Paved Road Dust (TCMs).’’ Both 19. Because implementation of CARB independent nonroad emission strengthening and expanding existing diesel would not result in earlier standards. CAA section 209(e). Other programs are key criteria for attainment and thus unnecessary for states, however, may adopt regulations demonstrating the implementation of expeditious attainment, we propose to identical to California’s regulations, BACM. See Addendum at 42013. Where find that the MAG plan provides for the provided they notify us and give the MAG plan has rejected potential inclusion of MSM to our satisfaction appropriate lead time, 2 years, for BACM, it provides a reasoned and absent the adoption and implementation implementation. CAA section acceptable justification for the rejection. of CARB diesel. All the adopted TCM BACM were 209(e)(2)(B). We, therefore, propose to find that Arizona legislation allows ADEQ to implemented by June 10, 2000, the MAG plan provides for the adopt certain California nonroad engine BACM implementation date for the implementation of RACM and BACM standards. MAG plan, p. 7–42. ADEQ Phoenix area, or have on-going and inclusion of MSM for nonroad originally committed to adopt these implementation schedules because they engines. California nonroad standards; however, are part of an on-going capital subsequently, we adopted federal d. Paved Road Dust 18 These plans include the MAG moderate and nonroad engine standards that will Paved road dust is the largest source serious area carbon monoxide plans and MAG achieve essentially the same PM–10 of PM–10 in the Maricopa area. It is moderate area ozone plan. reductions in the Phoenix area that fugitive dust that is deposited on a
VerDate 11
paved roadway and then is re-entrained We, therefore, propose to find that the track out extends less than 50 feet, to into the air by the action of tires MAG plan provides for the clean it up at the end of the work day. grinding on the roadway. Dust is implementation of RACM and BACM The MAG plan identifies, as a deposited on the roadway from being and for the inclusion of MSM for paved potential MSM for track out, South blown onto the road from disturbed road dust. Coast (Los Angeles area) Air Quality areas; tracked onto the road from Management District’s (South Coast Preventing Deposition of Material Onto unpaved shoulders, unpaved roads, or AQMD) Rule 403. MAG plan, Table 10– a Roadway other unpaved access points; stirred up 7. The plan concludes that the two rules from unpaved shoulders by wind Measures aimed at preventing track are reasonably similar in several currents created from traffic movement; out on a paved road include treating respects, and where differences exist, spilled onto the road by haul trucks; and unpaved access points, preventing track the relative impacts on control roughly carried onto the road by water runoff or out from construction/industrial sites, balance each other out. MSM Study, p. erosion. treating shoulders on paved roads, C–4.19 We agree. Both rules emphasize The suggested measures for controlling emissions during material prevention and rapid removal of track controlling emissions from paved road transport (e.g., truck covers, freeboard out. See EPA TSD section dust fall into one of three categories: requirements), and preventing erosion ‘‘Implementation of BACM and reductions in VMT and VT, preventing onto paved roads. Inclusion of MSM for Paved Roads deposition of material onto a roadway, The MAG plan includes each of these Dust,’’ Note 2. and cleaning material off the roadway. measures. Unpaved Road Shoulders. As with We have already discussed measures for Unpaved access points: In the MAG unpaved access points, the MAG plan reducing VMT and VT in the section on moderate area plan, local jurisdictions demonstrates a shift to dealing with TCMs above. focused on requiring new connections existing unpaved shoulders from simply The MAG plan lists several potential to public paved streets to be paved. preventing new ones. MAG plan, Table BACM for paved road dust. It also lists MAG plan, p. 9–74. In the serious area 9–11. Maricopa County has committed a number of potential MSM from other plan, the focus has shifted to addressing to treat 100 miles of shoulders along areas. We believe these lists are existing unpaved access points in existing paved arterial and collector complete and propose to find that the addition to preventing new unpaved roadways with high volume truck traffic MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive access points while maintaining the by 2003, in addition to its annual capital set of potential controls for paved road previous programs. Most public entities improvement projects for paving or dust including the potential MSM from committed to stabilize unpaved access treating unpaved shoulders. Maricopa other States. points when a connecting road is built, County commitment, 1999 revised Prior to the MAG plan, the cities and improved or reconstructed. See, for measure 5. Other jurisdictions have also towns in the Phoenix area and Maricopa example, Glendale Commitment, made commitments to treat shoulders. County implemented a number of ‘‘Reduce Particulate Emissions from The commitments are set depending on measures addressing paved road dust. Unpaved Shoulders and Unpaved the resources available to each See MAG plan, Table 10–5. With the Access Points on Paved Roads.’’ Some jurisdiction to implement them. additional measures in the MAG plan cities have made explicit commitments A.R.S. 9–500.04(3) and 49–474.01(4), (described below), the overall control for stabilizing existing access points adopted by the State legislature in 1998, program to reduce paved road dust is without this prerequisite, such as require the cities, towns and County of both strengthened and expanded Gilbert and Mesa. We also anticipate Maricopa to develop and implement beyond the existing program. See EPA that routine city/town/County road plans to stabilize targeted unpaved TSD section ‘‘Implementation of BACM paving and stabilization projects will roads and alleys and to stabilize and Inclusion of MSM for Paved Road result in controlling a number of unpaved shoulders on targeted arterials Dust.’’ Both strengthening and existing unpaved access points. These beginning January 1, 2000. Although expanding existing programs are key projects combined with increased this legislation does not specify how criteria for demonstrating the enforcement of track-out restrictions many shoulder miles to be controlled, implementation of BACM. See and additional PM–10 efficient street we believe that the local jurisdictions’ Addendum at 42013. sweeping efforts should reduce paved efforts to meet this new legislation will For the potential MSM, the MAG plan road emissions attributable to unpaved result in the control of unpaved shows that these measures are either access points. shoulders where it is most needed. adopted or are not in fact more stringent The only potential MSM that the Material Transport. Requirements for than existing Phoenix area programs. MAG plan identifies for unpaved access the control of PM–10 emissions during With the exception of the PM–10- points are track out control material transport are found in MCESD efficient street sweepers measure requirements for construction sites. See Rule 310, sections 308.1 and 308.2. described below, all the adopted BACM MAG plan, Table 10–7. We discuss When hauling material off-site onto for paved roads were implemented by these measures in the next section. paved public roadways, sources are June 10, 2001, the BACM Track out. MCESD Rule 310, sections required to: 1) load trucks such that the implementation deadline for the 308.2(c) and 308.3 address dirt track out freeboard is not less than three inches; Phoenix area, or have on-going from construction/industrial sites 2) prevent spillage; 3) cover trucks with implementation schedules because they requiring all work sites that are five a tarp or suitable enclosure; and 4) clean are part of an on-going capital acres or larger and all work sites where or cover the interior cargo compartment improvement program, e.g., curbing. For 100 cubic yards of bulk materials are before leaving a site with an empty the reasons discussed below, we hauled on-site or off-site each day to truck. propose to find that the MAG plan control and prevent track out by The MAG plan identifies provides for the implementation of the installing a track out control device. The requirements for bulk material transport PM–10 efficient street sweeper rule also requires all work sites to clean measures, a MSM, as expeditiously as up spillage or track out immediately 19 The ‘‘MSM Study’’ is the ‘‘Most Strigent PM– 10 Control Measure Analysis,’’ Sierrra Research, practicable, consistent with our when it extends a cumulative distance May 13, 1998 found in Appendix C, Exhibit 4 of proposed MSM policy. of 50 linear feet or more and, where the MAG plan.
VerDate 11
in Imperial County (California) is likely to make an appreciable 10 efficient street sweepers to be Regulation VIII as a potential MSM. difference in PM–10 emissions. Because purchased and distributed, but whether MAG plan, Table 10–7. The plan sweeping frequency is among the the program incorporates use factors concludes that MCESD’s rule is equally criteria included in MAG’s PM–10 that influence emissions reductions. stringent. We agree because Rule 310’s efficient street sweeper solicitation (see The greatest emissions reduction benefit requirements for bulk material below), we believe this measure is for this mitigative measure will be transport/hauling are essentially the largely incorporated into MAG’s new achieved if the sweepers are used on a same as Imperial County’s requirements. program. frequent basis on-roads with high silt The MAG plan identifies as a MSM loadings or significant visible Cleaning Material Off the Roadway the PM–10 efficient street sweeping accumulations. Measures for cleaning material off provisions in South Coast Rule 1186. Each public entity has a monetary roadways are track out, erosion, and MAG plan, Table 10–7. However, the incentive to compete for the PM–10 spill removal requirements and road plan’s analysis pre-dates MAG’s efficient street sweepers, as the program sweeping. commitment for the purchase and is funded by MAG with a low cost share The MAG plan includes each of these distribution of PM–10 efficient street (5.7 percent) requirement. Also, the new measures: sweepers and is no longer current. street sweepers will either replace Material spillage, erosion, or The MAG plan includes commitments existing city-owned street sweeping accumulation. MCESD Rule 310, section by MAG, cities, towns and the County equipment or contracted out services, or 308.2 and 308.3 address rapid clean up for the purchase and use of PM–10 be added to existing street sweeper of track out from construction/industrial efficient street sweepers. This equipment/services. MAG’s selection sites. Rule 310.01, section 306 requires commitment involves the allocation of process includes PM–10 emissions property owners/operators to remediate $3.8 million in Congestion Mitigation reduction potential, based on the types erosion-caused deposits of bulk and Air Quality (CMAQ)20 funds for the of roads each jurisdiction is targeting for materials onto paved surfaces. Erosion- FY 2000–2004 Transportation sweeping and how frequently they will caused deposits are to be removed Improvement Program (TIP) to purchase be swept. This data will assist MAG in within 24 hours of their identification or PM–10 certified street sweepers for the distributing the street sweepers to local prior to resumption of traffic on the local jurisdictions to use. MAG has jurisdictions in a way that maximizes pavement. recommended an additional $1.9 the regional air quality benefits of the The MAG plan identifies South Coast million in CMAQ funds be allocated to program. In addition, when the cities/ AQMD’s Rule 1186 and Mojave Desert purchase PM–10 certified street towns/County are awarded PM–10 (San Bernadino, California) AQMD’s sweepers in the FY 2001–2005 TIP. See efficient street sweepers, their Rule 403 as potential MSMs for material MAG commitment, ‘‘PM–10 Efficient submittals will incorporate use factors spillage, erosion, and accumulation onto Street Sweepers.’’ that maximize emission reductions from roadways. MAG plan, Table 10–7. In The funds allocated by MAG for this this measure. both cases, the plan concludes that program should be sufficient to replace We believe that implementation of the MCESD’s rules are more stringent. We approximately two-thirds of the 72 PM–10 efficient street sweeper program agree. MCESD’s rules require the clean existing city/town/County street will be implemented as expeditious as up of more incidences of spillage, etc. sweepers.21 Each fiscal year in which practicable. The funding necessary to than does either the South Coast or CMAQ funds are allocated for street purchase this equipment is available Mojave Desert rule. See EPA TSD, sweepers, MAG will solicit requests for only over the course of several fiscal ‘‘Implementation of BACM and funding from cities, towns and the years and the purchase of the PM–10 Inclusion of MSM for Paved Roads,’’ County in the PM–10 nonattainment efficient street sweepers can only Note 5. area. Funding requests must identify by proceed at the rate these funds become Street sweeping. Most cities/towns facility type (i.e. freeway, arterial/ available. and the County have on-going street collector, local) the number of South Coast’s Rule 1186 requires any sweeping programs with variable centerline miles to be swept with the government or government agency sweeping frequencies. With some PM–10 certified units, expected which contracts to acquire street exceptions, public entities frequency of sweeping, and average sweeping equipment or services for implementing this measure have not daily traffic (if available).22 MAG will routine street sweeping on public roads explicitly committed to increase their use this information to estimate the that it owns and/or maintains, where existing sweeping frequencies. Phoenix, emission reductions associated with the contract date or purchase or lease for example, approved a program in each sweeper request and rank the date is January 1, 2000 or later, to 1996 to increase the frequency of requests in priority order of acquire or use only certified street residential street sweeping to match the effectiveness for consideration in the sweeping equipment. The rule uncontained trash pick-up schedule. allocation of CMAQ funds. See MAG establishes street sweeper testing and Phoenix commitment, measure 97–DC– commitment, ‘‘PM–10 Efficient Street certification procedures. Unlike 5. However, sweeping frequency is Sweepers.’’ Maricopa’s strategy, Rule 1186 requires appropriately evaluated in combination In evaluating this program, we that PM–10 efficient street sweepers be with other paved road measures because considered not only the number of PM– used whenever street sweeping is the emission-reducing potential of contracted out as of January 2000, and increased sweeping frequency is closely 20 CMAQ funds are federal transportation funds it requires public agencies to replace associated with other factors. These awarded to certain nonattainment areas for congestion management of air quality- their existing street sweeping equipment factors include whether the sweepers transportation projects such as paving unpaved with PM–10 efficient equipment only as currently in use are PM–10 efficient roads. they replace existing equipment. (such that the act of sweeping does not 21 Some street sweepers may be additions to, as MAG’s PM–10 efficient street sweeper cause increased emissions) and whether opposed to replacements of, existing equipment. program is being funded over the next 22 the public entity has identified roads See MAG, ‘‘Methodology for Evaluating Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 4 to 5 fiscal years, which may result in that tend to experience higher silt Improvement Projects,’’ Draft Revised, June 21, a greater number of street sweepers loadings where more frequent sweeping 2001, pp. 18–22. being purchased and placed in
VerDate 11
operation in a shorter time frame than 310, section 302.1 applies the same the eastern third of the County). Rule could be expected using South Coast’s stabilization requirements to parking 310.01 requirements became effective natural attrition approach. While it is lots on permitted facilities. Finally, when the rule was adopted on February possible that some cities/towns in many cities/towns have treated their 2000. In light of the fact that Rule Maricopa may continue to contract out own parking lots or required treatment 310.01 requirements are the same as the for street sweeping services where PM– of private lots below MCESD’s FIP rule requirements and MCESD has 10 efficient sweepers may not be used, thresholds. made enforceable commitments to most do not contract for street sweeping. In determining whether the MAG plan improve compliance and enforcement of Furthermore, due to the fact that public provides for the implementation of Rule 310.01, we propose that the MAG entities will be competing for PM–10 BACM for unpaved parking lots, we are plan provides for the implementation of efficient street sweepers funded by first specifically considering whether RACM. Given the additional city/town CMAQ dollars with only a low cost the plan provides for the commitments in the MAG plan that share requirement, we believe that the implementation of RACM for these collectively increase the stringency of already limited reliance on contracted sources.23 In our 1998 moderate area control on unpaved parking lots, we out services in Maricopa County will be PM–10 FIP for the Phoenix area, we propose that the MAG plan also reduced as new PM–10 efficient promulgated a RACM fugitive dust rule provides for the implementation of equipment becomes available and that applicable to unpaved parking lots in BACM. Both Rule 310.01 and the city/ contractors will switch to PM–10 the Phoenix PM–10 nonattainment area. town commitments were implemented efficient equipment to meet new 40 CFR 52.128(d)(3). This rule provides prior to June 10, 2000, the BACM demand. In addition, MAG’s program a starting point for determining whether implementation deadline for the ensures that the cities/town/County the MAG plan’s measures for unpaved Phoenix area. develop plans for how the street parking lots meet RACM. It is not As the only potential MSM, the MAG sweepers will be used to maximize their necessary for them to be identical to the plan identifies South Coast’s Rule 403 emissions reduction potential. We, FIP rule in order to meet the CAA’s which requires sources to apply dust therefore, believe that overall the RACM requirement, but only that they suppressants to stabilize at least 80 Maricopa program is equivalent to provide for the implementation of percent of unstabilized surface area and South Coast’s Rule 1186. RACM. However, if the submitted to comply with a 0 percent opacity measures for a particular source are property line limit. The MAG plan e. Unpaved Parking Lots identical to the FIP rule, we can deems the respective requirements This category includes emissions from determine without further analysis that roughly equivalent to Rule 310. MAG re-entrained road dust from vehicle the MAG plan has provided for RACM plan, p. 10–29. We believe that the traffic on unpaved parking lots and for that source. addition of a silt loading/content windblown dust entrained from the MCESD requirements for unpaved standard for unpaved parking lots for disturbed surface of unpaved parking parking lots found in Rule 310.01, sources covered under Rule 310 lots. section 303 are the same in terms of increases the rule’s stringency such that There are two principal ways to source coverage and applicable it is at least equivalent to that of South control emissions from unpaved parking standards/test methods for unpaved Coast Rule 403. We, therefore, propose lots: prohibit unpaved parking lots or parking lots as the FIP rule, with the to find that the MAG plan correctly treat existing lots. MAG plan identified only difference being that Rule 310.01 concludes that there are no MSM in both: a prohibition on unpaved haul applies county-wide while the FIP rule other State plans or used in practice road and parking or staging areas and applies strictly to sources located in the elsewhere that are applicable to the surface treatment to reduce dust from PM–10 nonattainment area (located in Phoenix area. unpaved driveways and parking lots. MAG plan, Table 5–2. The MAG plan 23 While a serious area PM–10 plan must provide f. Disturbed Vacant Lands identified one potential MSM, South for both the implementation of RACM (to the extent This category includes windblown Coast’s Rule 403 which controls fugitive that it has not already satisfied the requirement in fugitive dust emissions from disturbed its moderate area plan) and BACM, in determining dust from parking areas on construction whether such a plan provides for BACM surfaces of vacant lands. On vacant sites. MSM Study, p. C–9 and 10. It did implementation, we do not normally conduct a land, fugitive dust emissions are caused not identify any potential MSM for non- separate evaluation to determine if the measures by virtually any activity which disturbs construction site unpaved parking lots. also meet the RACM requirements of the CAA as an otherwise naturally stable parcel of interpreted by EPA in its General Preamble. See 57 We believe this list is complete and FR 13540. This is because in our serious area land, including earth-moving activities, propose to find that the MAG plan guidance (Addendum at 42010), we interpret the material dumping, weed abatement, and evaluates a comprehensive set of BACM requirement as generally subsuming the vehicle traffic. 63 FR 15919, 15937 potential BACM and MSM for unpaved RACM requirement (i.e., if we determine that the (April 1, 1998). measures are indeed the ‘‘best available,’’ we have parking lots. necessarily concluded that they are ‘‘reasonably The MAG plan includes three Most local jurisdictions in Maricopa available’’). See Addendum at 42012–42014. suggested measures for controlling County identified ordinances that Therefore, a separate analysis to determine if the fugitive dust from vacant disturbed require paving of new parking lots. In measures also represent a RACM-level of control is lands. MAG plan, Table 5–2. The plan not generally necessary. However, in this particular addition, MCESD Rule 310.01, section case, we have already established through our FIP also identified controls on weed 303 requires owners/operators of an rule what we consider to be a RACM-level of abatement operations and off-road unpaved parking lot larger than 5,000 control for this source category. Thus our FIP rule racing as potential MSM. MAG plan, square feet to pave, apply dust provides us with a baseline against which we can Table 10–7. We believe this list is review whether the MAG plan provides not only for suppressants, or apply gravel, according RACM but also goes beyond that for BACM. We also complete and propose to find that the to the applicable rule’s standards/test intend to eventually withdraw the FIP rule in favor MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive methods. Applicable standards include of local controls. In order to do this, we must set of potential BACM and MSM for a 20 percent opacity standard, and an 8 determine under CAA section 110(1), that, among disturbed vacant lands. other things, withdrawing the FIP rule does not percent silt content standard and/or a interfere with the RACM requirements in the CAA. Both MCESD rules 301 and 301.01 0.33 oz/square foot silt loading An explicit determination now simplifies this address vacant lots. Rule 310 standard. Section 303.2. MCESD Rule future action. requirements apply to vacant lots
VerDate 11
located at permitted facilities (including that Rule 310’s threshold for coverage is unpaved roads in the Maricopa construction sites) and Rule 310.01 lower.25 nonattainment area: public roads, requirements apply to nonpermitted Vacant lots and open areas subject to private roads that are publicly sources.24 Rule 310 and Rule 310.01 Rule 310 and Rule 310.01 are required maintained (also referred to as requirements apply to both publicly and to meet the same surface stabilization minimally-maintained or courtesy privately owned lots. Rule 310, section standards/test methods as required in grade), and private roads that are 302.3 and Rule 310.01, section 301 and the Phoenix FIP rule. privately maintained. 302. In addition to requirements in Rule The MAG plan includes three In determining whether the MAG plan 310 and Rule 310.01, the MAG plan suggested measures for controlling provides for the implementation of contains commitments by several cities fugitive dust from unpaved roads: BACM for disturbed vacant land, we are and towns to address vacant disturbed Surface treatment to reduce dust from also specifically considering whether lots. For example, seven jurisdictions unpaved roads and alleys, traffic the plan provides for the require or will require stabilization of reduction/speed control plans for implementation of RACM for this source disturbed vacant lots after 15 days of unpaved roads; and prohibition of unpaved haul roads. MAG plan, Table category. See Footnote 23. In our FIP, inactivity (as compared to Rule 310.01’s 5–2. The MAG plan does not identify we promulgated a RACM fugitive dust 60-day compliance period); two (2) any other State’s measures that are more rule applicable to disturbed vacant land prohibit dumping of materials on vacant stringent than the ones already in the in the Phoenix PM–10 nonattainment land; and two (2) will stabilize all city- plan. We believe this list is complete area. 40 CFR 52.128(d)(3). This rule owned vacant lots. See EPA TSD section and propose to find that the MAG plan provides a starting point for determining ‘‘Implementation of BACM and evaluates a comprehensive set of whether the MAG plan’s measures for Inclusion of MSM for Disturbed Vacant potential BACM and MSM for unpaved disturbed vacant lands meet the RACM Land.’’ Because Rules 310 and 310.01 roads. requirement. It is not necessary for them requirements are at least as stringent as In determining whether the MAG plan to be identical to the FIP rule in order the FIP rule requirements and MCESD provides for the implementation of to meet the CAA’s RACM requirement, has committed to improve compliance BACM for unpaved roads, we are also but only that they provide for and enforcement of these rules (as considering whether the Plan provides implementation of RACM. However, if discussed below), we propose that the for the implementation of RACM for the submitted measures for a particular MAG plan provides for the these sources. See Footnote 23. In our source are identical to the FIP rule, we implementation of RACM on disturbed FIP, we promulgated a RACM fugitive can determine without further analysis vacant land. Because these rules dust rule applicable to unpaved roads in that the MAG plan has provided for increase the number of lots subject to the Phoenix PM–10 nonattainment area. RACM for that source. control which collectively increase the 40 CFR 52.128(d)(3). This rule provides Rule 310.01 requirements for vacant stringency of control on vacant a starting point for determining whether lots and open areas are virtually disturbed lands, we propose that the the MAG plan’s measures for unpaved identical to the Phoenix FIP rule’s MAG plan also provides for the roads meet the RACM requirement. It is requirements for these sources. Rule implementation of BACM. All measures not necessary for them to be identical to 310.01, however, is more broadly for vacant disturbed lands were the FIP rule in order to meet the CAA’s applicable. It covers vacant lots and implemented prior to the June 10, 2000 RACM requirement, but only that they open areas located anywhere in BACM implementation deadline for the provide for implementation of RACM. Maricopa County, in contrast to the Phoenix area. However, if the submitted measures for Phoenix FIP rule, which only applies to For its MSM analysis, the MAG plan a particular source are identical to the lots in the Maricopa County portion of identifies measures in Clark County (Las FIP rule, we can determine without PM–10 nonattainment area. Rule 310.01, Vegas, Nevada) Rule 41 and South Coast further analysis that the MAG plan has sections 301 and 302. Unlike the FIP Rule 403. See MSM Study, pp. C–11 and provided for RACM for that source. rule, Rule 310.01 also applies to C–16, 17. The plan concludes that As discussed below, we propose to partially developed residential, neither measure is more stringent than find that the MAG plan provides for the industrial, institutional, governmental, the Maricopa measures because Rule implementation of RACM and BACM or commercial lots in Maricopa County, 310 and 310.01 contain similar and and the inclusion of MSM for unpaved and any tract of land in the Maricopa equally or more stringent requirements. roads. County portion of the nonattainment We agree that the MCESD’s rules are Surface treatment to reduce dust from area adjoining agricultural property. equally or more stringent. unpaved roads and alleys. The principal Rule 310.01, section 211. We, therefore, propose to find that the control measure for public unpaved Rule 310 requirements for vacant lots MAG plan correctly concluded that roads and alleys is Rule 310.01, section and open areas on permitted sources are there are no MSM in other State plans 304, which requires all publicly-owned more stringent than those in Rule or used in practice elsewhere that are unpaved roads and alleys with 250 310.01, in that Rule 310 requires applicable to the Phoenix area. vehicles per day (VPD) or more to be stabilized by June 10, 2000 and those stabilization of all inactive disturbed g. Unpaved Roads surface areas on permitted facilities, with 150 vehicles per day or more to be regardless of their size. Rule 310, This category includes re-entrained stabilized by June 10, 2004. Several cities have commitments that section 302.3. Rule 310 also contains dust from vehicle travel on unpaved go beyond the requirements of Rule requirements for weed abatement that roads. There are three classes of 310.01 for publicly-owned unpaved closely resemble the Phoenix FIP rule’s 25 roads. For example, the City of Phoenix weed abatement requirements, except Rule 310 requires any earthmoving operation that disturbs 0.1 acre or more to have a dust control committed to—and accomplished before plan, including weed abatement by discing or June 10, 2000—paving all 80 miles of its 24 Permitted sources include any facility blading, whereas the Phoenix FIP rule weed permitted by MCESD and are not limited solely to abatement requirements only apply to disturbances publicly-owned unpaved roads those facilities with earthmoving permits, Rule 310, equal to or greater than 0.5 acres. Rule 310, section regardless of the level of vehicle travel. section 102. 303 and 40 CFR 52.129(c)(3) and (d)(3)(i). Phoenix Commitment, Measure 98-DC–
VerDate 11
7. Other cities, such as Tempe and recommend that the Board of public unpaved roads and access ways; Gilbert, have very few remaining miles Supervisors open and declare the road one jurisdiction has posted 15 mph of public unpaved roads/alleys. See a public highway.28 speed limits in all alleys. See MAG Tempe Commitments, Measure 98-DC–7 Because BACM implementation plan, Table 10–9. Also, under Rule 310, and Gilbert Commitments, Measure 98- properly takes costs into account, we owners/operators of unpaved haul roads DC–7. believe that MCDOT’s criteria for and utility roads who comply with the For private roads, Rule 310, section selecting private roads to pave are rule by limiting vehicle trips to 20 per 308.6, requires that easements, rights-of- suitable in the context of a strategy to day, must also limit vehicle speeds to 15 way, and access roads for utilities implement BACM and will result in mph. While speed limit controls are (electricity, natural gas, oil, water, and control of the great majority of high only being implemented to a limited gas transmission) that receive 150 or traffic unpaved roads. Although extent, we believe the plan’s measures more VPD must be paved, chemically available information on private roads to pave or otherwise stabilize unpaved stabilized, or graveled in compliance in city jurisdictions is limited, our roads in the Phoenix PM–10 with the rule’s standards. existing information suggests that a nonattainment area establish the critical Private unpaved roads are scattered typical privately-owned unpaved road commitments for the implementation of throughout Maricopa County, within has little traffic on it.29 As a result, we RACM and BACM because road both County and city jurisdictions. A believe that the vast majority of private stabilization ensures emission survey performed for us of unpaved unpaved roads do not need to be reductions whereas speed limits may or roads in Maricopa County determined controlled in order for us to determine may not be observed. that the great majority of identified that the MAG plan provides for the Prohibition of unpaved haul roads. unpaved road mileage consists of implementation of BACM for unpaved Rule 310 requires that unpaved haul privately-owned roads that receive roads for the 24-hour standard. roads meet both a 20 percent opacity minimal maintenance by the Maricopa Traffic reduction/speed control plans standard and a silt content or silt County Department of Transportation for unpaved roads. Some jurisdictions loading standard. Rule 310, section (MCDOT).26 committed to evaluate this measure. 302.2. We propose to find that this MAG and MCDOT have committed to Two jurisdictions committed to posting requirement is sufficient for the pave County minimal maintenance 15 mph speed limit signs on private and implementation of BACM for these roads within the nonattainment area roads. We believe requiring compliance that currently exceed 150 VDT and meet 28 Maricopa County provided an update to us of with both of these standards ensures criteria to become public highways, their efforts to identify and pave County minimal that these roads will be stabilized. maintenance roads. Kelly McMullen, MCDOT, via using $22 million in CMAQ and email on May 4, 2001. The County identified Evaluation of unpaved road measures MCDOT funds. MAG Commitment; approximately 68 miles of minimal maintenance in other areas found none that are more Maricopa County Commitment, 1999 roads (courtesy grading only) that potentially could stringent than the measures for unpaved Revised Measure 17. This program will have over 150 VPD traffic. Of those roads, the roads in the MAG plan. MAG plan, County was unable to gather traffic count pave an estimated 60 miles of unpaved information for approximately 3 miles due to Table 10–7. We agree and propose to roadways in fiscal years 2001–2003 repeated counter vandalism or theft. The County find that there are no other MSM for which is approximately 20 percent of included remaining roads with traffic counts over unpaved roads than are already 130 VPD (allowing for short term growth seasonal included in the MAG plan. the privately-owned, publicly- variation, etc.) in its program to pave, totaling maintained County-jurisdiction roads approximately 65 miles, consisting of Please see the TSD section and account for 40 percent of all VMT approximately 186 segments. The first group of ‘‘Implementation of BACM and on these roads. Maricopa County has these roads was expected to have a bid awarded in Inclusion of MSM for Unpaved Roads’’ June 2001 and be paved by Fall 2001. Design work for a more detailed discussion of our also committed to continue to evaluate for the second group was expected to begin in other roads for funding when traffic Summer 2001 and is expected to go to bid for proposed findings. levels increase above 150 vehicle trips construction within the next twelve months. Design h. Construction Sites and Activities per day. Maricopa County Commitment, work for the third group also expected to begin in 1999 Revised Measure 17. We interpret Summer 2001 and is expected to be bid Sources of fugitive dust emissions at approximately 10–12 months following the second construction sites include land clearing, this commitment to apply to any private group. This third group reflects the most difficult roads within County jurisdiction, engineering and environmental issues. Based on earthmoving, excavating, construction, whether they currently receive minimal project engineer estimates at this time, the County demolition, material handling, bulk believes that six segments totaling approximately material storage and/or transporting maintenance or not. 3.0 miles may exceed the reasonable cost threshold As the County evaluates roads for of $500,000 per mile, or have issues with adjoining operations, material track out or spillage paving, it may make exceptions to its property owners that are not possible to resolve onto paved roads (which we have commitment to pave roads with vehicle within the SIP time frames. The County will addressed in the paved road section), evaluate whether another method of dust trips that exceed 150 VDT. The County’s and vehicle use and movement on site suppression may be viable for those segments. (e.g., the operation of any equipment on evaluation process takes into account 29 Through MAG, we requested additional whether estimated costs of paving are information on private unpaved roads from the unpaved surfaces, unpaved roads and excessive (greater than $500,000 per cities of Chandler, Scottsdale, Gilbert, Glendale, unpaved parking areas). Windblown 27 Mesa, Phoenix, Tempe, Peoria, Avondale, Carefree, emissions from disturbed areas on mile). When MCDOT identifies a road Cave Creek, El Mirage, Goodyear, and Surprise. that meets these criteria (i.e. the road Letter Colleen McKaughan, EPA, to Lindy Bauer, construction sites are also a source of can be declared a public highway and MAG, March 21, 2001. All but three cities PM–10. Construction operations, which costs are not excessive), it will responded to the survey. Five cities state that they are mostly earthmoving, represent some currently have no private unpaved roads with 90 percent of the emissions in this greater than 150 VPD. Three cities indicate they do 26 Pacific Environmental Service, ‘‘Survey for not believe there are private unpaved roads with source category. Fugitive Dust Emission Sources’’, April 15, 1999. greater than 150 VPD in their jurisdictions. The The suggested measure in the MAG 27 A private road begins to bear other than local remaining cities either have a small number of plan for controlling emissions from traffic through extensions of other nearby public private road miles identified with greater than 150 construction sites are actually various roads or the construction of an indirect source that VPD or make no statement regarding the number of attracts external drivers using the road as a short private road miles with greater than 150 VPD in means of improving compliance with cut. See Maricopa County Commitments, 1999 their jurisdictions. Letter Lindy Bauer, MAG, to controls rather than new control Revised Measure 17. Colleen McKaughan, EPA, June 29, 2001. requirements for construction sites. See
VerDate 11
MAG plan, Table 5–2. MCESD had • unpaved haul/access roads September 13, 2001 (MCESD already adopted controls for • disturbed open areas and vacant commitment letter). The commitments construction sites in its fugitive dust lots are to: rule, Rule 310. The plan also identifies • bulk material hauling 1. Research and develop a standard(s) • several potential MSM. See MAG plan, bulk material spillage, carry-out, and test method(s) for earth moving Table 10–7. We propose to find that the erosion and track out sources, designed to be enforceable and • open storage piles meet BACM requirements as to MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive • set of potential controls for construction weed abatement by blading or stringency and the number of sources sites emissions including the potentially discing that it applies to. Revise Rule 310 and/ • a requirement in dust control plans MSM from other states. or Appendix C by no later than for at least one primary and one Rule 310’s requirements, effective on December 2002 to modify the existing contingency control for all fugitive dust February 16, 2000, apply to any source opacity standard/test method or add an sources; the contingency measure is to required to obtain a permit under additional opacity standard(s)/test be immediately implemented if the Maricopa County rules, which includes method(s), tailored to non-process primary control proves ineffective fugitive dust sources that create earthmoving operations of 0.10 acre or In order to comply with the rule’s 20 30 intermittent plumes. This commitment more and sources subject to title V percent opacity standard and dust 31 will be met in its entirety only if the permits, non-title V permits, or control plan requirements for general permits. In addition to rule standard(s)/test method(s) is approved implementing primary and/or by EPA. The County is also proposing requirements for fugitive dust sources contingency controls for earthmoving located at any permitted source, Rule to support and coordinate with Clark activities, sources need to apply one or County, Nevada in the ongoing research 310 requires that a Dust Control Plan more controls, which in most cases (DCP) be submitted for any earthmoving to develop fugitive dust test methods includes applying water or another dust through the appropriation of $25,000. operations of 0.10 acre or more, and that suppressant before and during the DCP be approved prior to operations. Inactive disturbed surfaces 2. Part 1: Onsite Implementation of Dust commencing any dust generating must be stabilized to meet at least one Control Plan operation. The rule’s definition of a dust of the rule’s stabilization standards (e.g. Raise awareness of onsite project generating operation includes any visible crusting, 10 percent rock cover, supervisors to acquire and read activity capable of generating fugitive etc.). Unpaved roads and unpaved approved site dust control plans thereby dust including land clearing, parking lots must also be stabilized to improving the implementation of the earthmoving, weed abatement by meet both a 20 percent opacity standard dust control plan at the construction discing or blading, excavating, 33 and a silt content/loading standard. site. This objective will be achieved construction, demolition, material Test methods associated with through one-on-one contact at the time handling, storage and/or transporting stabilization and opacity standards are of inspection and through the operations, vehicle use and movement, contained in Appendix C, which was development of a revised training the operation of any outdoor equipment submitted with Rule 310. curriculum and supporting materials for or unpaved parking lots. The 1999 revisions to Rule 310 that For other permitted sources, Rule 310 both a classroom setting and onsite aids have increased the rule’s stringency for improved project management. requires that a DCP be submitted and include the addition of specific work approved prior to commencing any Maricopa County inspectors will practice standards, the addition of continue to go over dust control plans routine dust generating activity, defined stabilization standards and test methods as any dust generating operation which with construction site personnel during for unpaved surfaces, and modifications the initial site inspection and whenever occurs more than 4 times per year or to the opacity test method (adding an lasts 30 cumulative days or more per issues arise during subsequent alternative opacity test method for inspections. The training curriculum year.32 unpaved roads and unpaved parking Specific Rule 310 requirements being developed by the Arizona lots and modifying the opacity test Department of Transportation (ADOT) is include: method for other sources). We believe • a 20 percent opacity requirement scheduled for completion in winter of that the new and/or revised standards/ 2002 and implementation of the second for any dust generating operation test methods provide for a greater degree • wind event controls level of dust control education will • of control than under the previous SIP- begin March—June 2003. implementation of controls before, approved version of Rule 310. after and while conducting any dust In addition to these Rule 310 Part 2: Dust Control Plan Improvements generating operation, including revisions, MCESD made three Research, develop and incorporate weekends, after work hours and enforceable commitments to further additional requirements for dust holidays • strengthen requirements for suppression practices/equipment into required controls and standards for: construction sites in 1999. See Maricopa • unpaved parking lots dust control plans and/or Rule 310 by County Commitments, Revised Measure March—December 2002. Based on the 6. MCESD has recently revised these 30 Earthmoving operations include cutting and ADOT research, MCESD research or filling, grading, leveling, excavating, trenching, commitments and will take the other alternative research, Maricopa loading or unloading of bulk materials, revisions to the Maricopa County Board County will develop a growing list of demolishing, blasting, drilling, adding to or of Supervisors in December, 2001 for criteria for effective versus ineffective removing bulk materials from open storage piles, formal adoption as enforceable back filling, soil mulching, landfill operations, or dust suppression practices that address weed abatement by discing or blading. commitments. See Letter, Al Brown, various site circumstances. 31 Title V permits are operating permits required MCESD to Jack Broadbent, EPA, 3. Revise the sample daily by Title V of the Clean Air Act for major stationary recordkeeping logs for new and renewed sources and certain other stationary sources. 33 Unpaved roads must meet a 6 percent silt Rule 310 permits to be consistent with 32 This is in addition to the requirement to submit content standard or, alternatively, a 0.33 oz/ft2 silt a DCP for any earthmoving operation that disturbs loading standard, while unpaved parking lots must rule revisions and to provide sufficient 0.10 acre or more even if the operation is subject meet an 8 percent silt content standard or, detail documenting the implementation to Title V or other permitting requirements. alternatively, a 0.33 oz/ft2 silt loading standard. of dust control measures required by
VerDate 11
Rule 310 and the dust control plan. MCESD has also expanded its original Most of the potential MSMs are Distribute sample log sheets with issued commitment to include a program to provisions in South Coast fugitive dust permits and conduct outreach to sources work with on-site supervisors to assure rule, Rule 403. The MAG plan indicates by December 2001. that they obtain and review the DCP for that each of the South Coast and The first commitment addresses our their sites. In implementing Rule 310 MCESD’s rules are more stringent than concern that the existing opacity during the last year, it found that site the other in certain respects. MAG plan, standard and test method for supervisors do not have or do not know p. 10–35. The MAG plan acknowledges earthmoving operations may not always what is in their DCPs and thus may not that Rule 403 contains more stringent be sufficient to control construction site be implementing appropriate dust control measure requirements than dust to BACM levels. MCESD has control methods. those imposed by Rule 310. For already revised the opacity test method The third commitment addresses our example, Rule 403 requires that water to deal partially with this concern (see concern that while Rule 310 currently be applied to soil not more than 15 Rule 310, Appendix C), but we believe contains an acceptable recordkeeping minutes prior to moving the soil and that additional standards/test methods requirement, a more specific requires open storage piles to be are needed to fully assure that sources recordkeeping requirement would help watered twice per hour or covered. are effectively controlled. improve compliance. Currently neither However, the MAG plan indicates that Field research is needed to identify an the rule nor DCPs specify what Rule 310’s 20 percent opacity limit is appropriate standard(s) and test information should be included in a generally more restrictive than Rule method(s) to meet this commitment. daily log. MCESD has revised its 403’s property line standard because a MCESD originally committed to original commitment to allow additional 20 percent opacity fugitive dust plume complete this research and revise the time to work with its stakeholders to typically disperses to zero visibility opacity method by July 2001 but was develop daily recordkeeping log sheets within 50 feet downwind of a source. unable to do so. It now intends to work to provide sufficient detail documenting MSM Study, p. C–12. The MAG plan with Clark County which has recently the implementation of dust controls. concludes that, on balance, Rule 310 is conducted research on test methods for We propose to find that Rule 310 as equally stringent compared to Rule earthmoving sources and is planning to adopted on February 16, 2000 and 403’s construction site requirements. conduct a second phase of research. combined with the commitments by We agree with this conclusion with the MCESD will contribute funding to these MCESD to make certain additional caveat that we believe Rule 310 and/or efforts. MCESD has requested a one-year changes to the Rule, provide for the dust control plans require additional extension of the deadline in its original implementation of RACM and BACM on controls for dust suppression. This commitment in order to monitor, construction sites for the 24-hour PM– caveat is addressed in the MAG plan’s validate and verify the resulting test 10 standards.34 We have also commitment to research, develop and method(s) performance in Maricopa determined that the revised incorporate additional requirements for County. commitments do not affect our previous dust suppression practices/equipment The second commitment addresses proposed finding that Rule 310 for construction activities into dust our concern that DCPs lack specific combined with the commitments control plans and/or Rule 310. criteria for dust suppressant application. provide for the implementation of The MAG plan does not discuss any For example, a source engaged in RACM and BACM on construction sites construction site measures from other grading or cut-and-fill earthmoving for a for the annual standard. 65 FR 19964, areas as potential most stringent multi-acre project may choose to 19980. The rule is comprehensive in measures. Based on our work with the comply with Rule 310 by applying scope in that each dust source is subject Las Vegas area, we have identified water. However, neither the rule nor to a set of requirements under Rule 310 requirements in Clark County Health DCPs establishes minimum criteria for (e.g. storage piles, dirt trackout, haul District permits that are potentially the number of water trucks/water truck loads, disturbed areas, more stringent than Maricopa County’s 35 application systems and water truck earthmoving operations). measures. These requirements include capacity for any given size construction The MAG plan identifies several stand tanks on projects that are 10 acres site or a ratio of earthmoving equipment potential most stringent construction or more in size, an additional, separate to water trucks. Also, for effective dust site fugitive dust measures either in or water truck when using a trencher or control, certain soil types may require under consideration for inclusion in when screening, a separate water truck substantial pre-wetting, thorough others SIPs. See MSM Study, Table 1– or pull during landscaping, maintaining mixing of water into the soil for uniform 2 and Table 3–1. all stockpiles in a moist condition, etc. penetration, and/or dust surfactant or We propose to find that Rule 310’s tackifyer combined with water; neither 34 These revised commitments are currently existing provisions and Maricopa Rule 310 nor DCPs currently require unenforceable because they have not been adopted County’s second commitment to by Maricopa County’s Board of Supervisors. We are, such measures for any sites. research, develop and incorporate however, proposing to approve these commitments additional requirements for dust Establishing criteria for dust control is under CAA section 110(k)(3) as an enforceable suppression practices/equipment into complicated by variations in soils, element of the Arizona SIP because we fully expect Rule 310 and/or DCPs are consistent meteorological conditions, equipment that the Board will adopt these commitments as enforceable SIP commitments and the State will with Clark County’s requirements. size/use, project phase, and level of submit them as a complete SIP revision prior to our We have also identified a requirement activity. All these factors can impact the final action. However, if we do not receive the in Imperial County Regulation VIII that amount of water (or other controls) adopted commitments by the time we must take is potentially more stringent than needed to control fugitive dust on a final action, we propose to conditionally approve them under CAA section 110(k)(4). If we take final Maricopa County’s measures. Imperial particular site on a particular day and action to conditionally approve these commitments, County Regulation VIII requires that has made it difficult to establish these MCESD will have one year to fulfill the water be applied 15 minutes prior to criteria. Because of this difficulty commitment or the approval will turn into a disapproval and we would no longer be able to find MCESD has revised its original that the MAG plan provides for the implementation 35 These requirements are not in Clark County’s commitment to allow additional time to of BACM and the inclusion of MSM on construction fugitive dust rule but rather are required practices develop them. sites for either the annual or 24-hour standards. in dust control permits.
VerDate 11
handling or transferring bulk material, R18–2–610, ‘‘Definitions for R18–2– Practices to provide information and chemical/physical stabilization, or 611,’’ and 611, ‘‘Agricultural PM–10 guidance on how to effectively sheltering/enclosure of the operation General Permit; Maricopa PM10 implement BMPs.36 Farmers must be in and transfer line. While Maricopa Nonattainment Area’’ (collectively, compliance with the general permit rule County Rule 310 requires owners/ general permit rule). The State by December 31, 2001. operators to comply with a 20 percent submitted the general permit rule in For the reasons discussed below and opacity standard for any dust generating July 2000 and its analysis quantifying more extensively in the section operation and DCP must include a the emission reductions expected from ‘‘Implementation of BACM and control measure for every fugitive dust the rule and the demonstration that the Inclusion of MSM for Agricultural source (including bulk material rule meets the CAA’s RACM, BACM and Sources’’ in the EPA TSD, we propose handling/transfer), it does not contain MSM requirements in June 2001. We to find that the State’s general permit specific requirements as Imperial proposed to approve it as meeting the rule meets the CAA’s requirements to County does for this activity. However, CAA requirement for RACM on June 29, provide for the implementation of watering 15 minutes prior to handling 2001 and signed the approval on BACM by June 10, 2000 in CAA section may be overly prescriptive and not September 10, 2001. See 66 FR 34598. 189(b)(1)(B) and to include MSM in necessary in all cases to meet the rule’s The general permit rule requires a section 188(e). Our proposed finding is performance standards. We propose to commercial farmer to implement by applicable to both the annual and 24-hr find that Maricopa County’s second December 31, 2001 at least one BMP for standards. It revises our previously commitment to research, develop and three categories of emission sources on proposed finding in the annual standard incorporate additional requirements for a farm: tillage and harvest, non- proposal that the State’s commitment in dust suppression practices/equipment cropland, and cropland. R18–2–610 the MAG plan to adopt and implement into Rule 310 and/or DCPs is consistent defines commercial farmer as ‘‘an agricultural best management practices with Imperial County’s requirements. individual, entity, or joint operation in meets the CAA’s requirements for For these reasons, we propose to find general control of 10 or more BACM and MSM by substituting the that the MAG plan provides for the continuous acres of land used for BMP general permit rule. 65 FR 19964, inclusion of the MSM applicable to the agricultural purposes within the 19981. Phoenix area for construction sites and boundary of the Maricopa County PM10 In September 1998, the Agricultural activities. See Footnote 34. nonattainment area.’’ R18–2–610 BMP Committee appointed an Ad-hoc defines tillage and harvest as ‘‘any Technical Group to develop a i. Agricultural Sources mechanical practice that physically comprehensive list of potential BMPs The agriculture source category covers disturbs cropland or crops on a for regulated sources in the Maricopa all dust generating activities and sources commercial farm.’’ R18–2–610 defines County nonattainment area. Participants on farms and ranches. These activities non-cropland as ‘‘any commercial farm on the Ad-hoc Group included the and sources include land planning, land that: is no longer used for USDA NRCS, USDA Agricultural tilling, harvesting, fallow fields, agricultural production; is no longer Research Service, University of Arizona prepared fields, field aprons, and suitable for production of crops; is College of Agriculture, ADEQ, unpaved roads. This source category is subject to a restrictive easement or University of Arizona College of a very significant contributor to 24-hour contract that prohibits use for the Agriculture and Cooperative Extension, PM–10 standard exceedances in the production of crops; or includes a Western Growers Association, Arizona Phoenix area. At the West Chandler site, private farm road, ditch, ditch bank, Cotton Growers Association, Arizona 55 percent of the modeled exceedance equipment yard, storage yard, or well Farm Bureau Federation, and EPA. BMP was due to agricultural sources (a cotton head.’’ R18–2–610 defines cropland as TSD, p. 15. field and its apron). At the Gilbert site, ‘‘land on a commercial farm that: is The Ad-hoc Technical Group 26 percent of the modeled exceedance within the time frame of final harvest to reviewed available dust control was due to an agricultural source (a plant emergence; has been tilled in a regulations, literature, and technical field apron). See Microscale plan, pp. prior year and is suitable for crop documents, and developed a list of 65 18–19. production, but is currently fallow; is a conservation practices potentially In order to develop adequate controls turn-row.’’ R18–2–610 defines a BMP as suitable to agricultural sources in the for this source category, Arizona passed ‘‘a technique verified by scientific Maricopa County nonattainment area for legislation in 1997 establishing an research, that on a case-by-case basis is further consideration. BMP TSD, p. 16. Agricultural Best Management Practices practical, economically feasible and These 65 measures represented a broad (BMP) Committee and directing the effective in reducing PM–10 particulate spectrum of potential BMPs, many of Committee to adopt by rule by June 10, emissions from a regulated agricultural which related to conservation practices 2000, an agricultural general permit activity.’’ used in the western United States that specifying best management practices For enforcement purposes, a had never been evaluated in the context for reducing PM–10 from agricultural commercial farmer is required to of reducing PM–10. activities. The legislation also required maintain a record demonstrating The Agricultural BMP Committee that the implementation of agricultural compliance with the general permit. A thoroughly reviewed the potential controls begin with an education commercial farmer not in compliance practices presented by the Ad-hoc program starting by June 10, 2000 with with the general permit is subject to a Technical Group and evaluated the full implementation by December 31, series of compliance actions described potential BMPs using available 2001. See Arizona Revised Statutes in A.R.S. 49–457.I–K. information on technological feasibility, (A.R.S.) 49–457. The BMP Committee began costs, and energy and environmental After a series of meetings during 1999 implementing the general permit rule in impacts. After an analysis of the limited and 2000, the Agricultural BMP June 2000 by means of an extensive Committee adopted the agricultural educational outreach program informing 36 ‘‘Guide to Agricultural PM–10 Best general permit and associated growers about the BMPs. In addition, Management Practices, Maricopa County, Arizona PM–10 Nonattainment Area,’’ Governor’s definitions, effective May 12, 2000, at the BMP Committee developed a Guide Agricultural BMP Committee, First edition, Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) to Agricultural PM–10 Best Management February, 2001.
VerDate 11
information available and numerous The general permit rule, as finally Allowing sources the discretion to public discussions, the Committee adopted by the BMP Committee in May choose from a range of specified options decided to include 34 of the 65 BMPs 2000 as BACM and MSM, requires that is particularly important for the in the general permit rule and divided commercial farmers implement at least agricultural sector because of the these 34 BMPs into the three categories one BMP for the tillage and harvest, variable nature of farming. As a of farm activities specified in A.R.S. 49– cropland, and non-cropland categories technical matter, neither we nor the 457.N.: 10 BMPs applicable to the tillage by December 31, 2001. State is in a position to dictate what and harvest category; 10 BMPs We define a BACM-level of control to precise control method is appropriate applicable to the non-cropland category; be, among other things, the maximum for a given farm activity at a given time and 14 BMPs applicable to the cropland degree of emission reduction achievable in a given locale. The decision as to category. See BMP TSD, 17. In selecting from a source or source category which which control method from an array of these BMPs, the Committee deemed is determined on a case-by-case basis, methods is appropriate is best left to the them to be feasible, effective and considering energy, economic and individual farmer. Moreover, the common sense practices for the Phoenix environmental impacts. Addendum at economic circumstances of farmers vary area which minimized potential 42010. Based on the BMP committee’s considerably. As a result, it is negative impacts on local agriculture. findings regarding technological imperative that flexibility be built into Of the 31 potential BMPs eliminated, feasibility and economic effects of any PM–10 control measure for the the majority were dropped because they requiring more than one BMP per agricultural source category whether either duplicated another BMP or did category, we believe that the BMP rule that measure is required to meet the not reduce PM–10. Other reasons for provides the maximum degree of RACM or BACM requirements of the elimination included the emission reductions achievable from the Act. impracticability of a BMP for the agriculture source category in the We believe that the work of the BMP Maricopa County Area, lack of cost Phoenix area and, therefore, meets the Committee resulted in the timely effectiveness, or infeasibility of BACM requirement in section adoption of the general permit and implementation. See June 13, 2001 BMP 189(b)(1)(B).37 educational programs that requires submittal, Enclosure 3, Attachment 8. A requirement that an individual BACM implementation on a schedule At the time the BMP Committee was source select one control method from that will allow time for the agricultural developing the general permit rule, a list, but allowing the source to select community to understand and select there was very limited available which is most appropriate for its appropriate BMPs and to transition to information concerning the situation, is a common and accepted new practices, some of which may technological feasibility, costs, and practice for the control of dust. For involve the purchase of new equipment. energy and environmental impacts of example, in its PM–10 FIP for Phoenix, Based on these factors, we believe that these BMPs. Although the Committee we promulgated a RACM rule the BMP implementation schedule is as determined that all the selected BMPs applicable to, among other things, expeditious as practicable and meets the were technologically feasible control unpaved parking lots, unpaved roads BACM implementation deadline for the requirements, it found that calculating and vacant lots. The rule allows owners Phoenix area of June 10, 2000. the other impacts on a commercial and operators to choose one of several The MAG plan identified two farmer was difficult. Because of the listed control methods (pave, apply potentials MSM for agricultural sources variety, complexity, and uniqueness of chemical stabilizers or apply gravel). 40 (1) cessation of tilling on high winds farming operations in Maricopa County, CFR 52.128(d). In the case of the FIP, days in South Coast’s Rule 403.1 and (2) the Committee concluded that farmers those subject to the fugitive dust rule soil erosion plans in South Coast’s Rule need a variety of BMPs in each of the were given a choice of control methods 403. MAG plan, Table 10–8. The plan three categories of agricultural activities in order to accommodate their financial concluded that neither is, by itself, to choose from in order to tailor PM–10 circumstances.38 MSM for the Phoenix area. controls to their individual South Coast’s 403.1, ‘‘Wind circumstances. Further, the BMP 37 We also considered a BACM-level control as Entrainment of Fugitive Dust,’’ applies Committee acknowledged that there is a going beyond existing RACM-level controls, such as only in the Coachella Valley (Palm limited amount of scientific information expanding use of RACM (e.g., paving more miles of Springs) portion of the South Coast Air available concerning the emission unpaved roads). Addendum at 42013. As noted Basin and requires that, when wind previously, we have proposed to approve the reduction and cost effectiveness of some general permit rule as meeting the RACM speeds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph), BMPs, especially in relation to Maricopa requirement in CAA section 189(a)(1)(C). 66 FR agricultural tilling and soil mulching County. The BMP Committee balanced 34598. In that proposal, we stated our belief ‘‘that activities should cease. While the the limited scientific cost effectiveness the general permit rule represents a comprehensive, measure applies throughout the year, sensible approach that meets, and in fact far the high wind days tend to occur during information with the common sense exceeds, the RACM requirements of CAA section recognition that the BMPs would reduce 189(a)(1)(C) and EPA guidance interpreting those a high-wind season that extends wind erosion and the entrainment of requirements.’’ 66 FR 34598, 34602. Moreover, we between April and June. The Coachella agricultural soils, thereby reducing PM– explained that the State also intended the general Valley typically experiences high winds 10. As a result, and given the myriad permit rule and its enabling legislation to meet the on 47 days of the year. MAG estimated CAA’s serious area requirements. 66 FR 34598, factors that affect farming operations, 34599. Thus today’s proposal that the general that there were a total of 37 hours, the BMP Committee concluded that permit rule meets the BACM and MSM requiring more than one BMP for each requirements of the Act is consistent with our prior SCAQMD rules as meeting the RACM and/or BACM of the three agricultural categories could action. requirements of the CAA on August 11, 1998 (63 38 See, as examples, SCAQMD Rule 403 FR 42786) and took final action approving them on not be considered technically justified (providing for alternative compliance mechanisms December 9, 1998 (63 FR 67784). See also the and could cause an unnecessary for the control of fugitive dust from earthmoving, approval of Maricopa County Environmental economic burden to farmers. Instead, disturbed surface areas, unpaved roads etc.); and Services Department (MCESD) Rule 310 as meeting the BMP Committee and ADEQ agreed SCAQMD Rule 1186 (requiring owners/operators of the RACM/BACM requirements (62 FR 41856, certain unpaved roads the option to pave, August 4, 1997) and the proposal to approve to monitor the effectiveness of the BMPs chemically stabilize, or install signage, speed updated Rule 310 and MCESD Rule 310.01 as and adjust the program, if needed, in the bumps or maintain roadways to inhibit speeds meeting the same requirements (65 FR 19964, April future. BMP TSD, p. 18. greater than 15 mph). We proposed to approve these 13, 2000).
VerDate 11
representing 11 days, with wind speeds For a variety of reasons, it is difficult effectiveness of some BMPs, especially greater than 15 mph in 1995 in to directly compare the requirements in in relation to Maricopa County. The Maricopa County. the general permit with the BMP Committee balanced these The BMP general permit rule includes requirements in the Handbook. First, the limitations with the common sense ‘‘limited activity during high wind South Coast did not attempt to estimate recognition that the BMPs would reduce event’’ as one of ten BMPs that a grower the reductions and cost from each wind erosion and the entrainment of can choose for the Tillage and Harvest conservation practice. Second, the types agricultural soils, thereby reducing PM– category. According to an analysis in the of crops grown in Maricopa County and 10. MAG plan, postponing tilling on high the South Coast area differ significantly. While the Committee surveyed wind days would reduce emissions by For example, cotton is a dominant crop measures adopted in other geographic 72 percent on high-wind days. MSM in Maricopa County but is not grown in areas, these measures were of limited study, p. 4–23. However, because only the South Coast Air Basin. Third, the utility in determining what measures 15 percent of the Maricopa County PM– Handbook allows a grower to substitute are available for the Maricopa County 10 nonattainment area tilling occurs a local ordinance for the three area. Given the limited scientific during the high wind season (March conservation practices required for information available and the myriad through September) and because less ‘‘inactive’’ agricultural land; however, factors that affect farming operations, than 4 percent of the days during this the minimum requirements for the local the BMP Committee concluded that period experience winds greater than 15 ordinance are not specified. Handbook, requiring more than one BMP could not mph, the air quality benefits of the section II, p.4. Fourth, the general be considered technically justified and measure would be small (i.e, 0.08 metric permit rule and the Handbook also could cause an unnecessary economic tons per average annual day in 1995) for differ in terms of exemption and burden to farmers. Adding to concerns about the the annual standard. MSM study, p. 4– waivers. The general permit rule does economic feasibility of requiring more 23. Emissions from tilling are a very not exempt any crop types or provide a BMPs per farming activity is the general small contributor to total agricultural waiver option, but the Handbook uncertainty regarding the cost of the emissions on the 1995 design day exempts orchards, vine crops, nurseries, BMPs and continued viability of (which was a high-wind day), range land, and irrigated pastures from agriculture in Maricopa County. representing just 1.6 percent of all requiring a practice for the active and Between 1987 and 1997, the number of agricultural emissions and are not inactive categories. Finally, the farms operating in Maricopa County implicated in 24-hour exceedances. Handbook also allows farmers to request declined by approximately 30 percent URS, Technical Support Document for a waiver if the farmer cannot apply the required practices or a verifiable and the amount of land farmed declined Quantification of Agricultural Best by approximately 50 percent. This trend Management Practices, June 8, 2001 (Ag alternative. While the general permit rule divides is expected to continue. Finally, in Quantification TSD), p. 3–11 and agricultural activities into three order to justify additional requirements Microscale plan, pp. 18–19. Moreover, categories and the Handbook divides for farming operations in the area based on the limited amount of them into six, and the terminology used beyond those in the general permit rule, information available regarding the is different, the categories of activities the BMP Committee determined that a control efficiencies for the ten BMPs in covered are essentially coterminous. Cf. significant influx of money and the Tillage and Harvest category, the Handbook, section I and ACC R18–2– additional research would be needed. control efficiency for ‘‘limited activity 610.7, .12, .22, .33. However, depending BMP TSD, p. 18. during high-wind event’’ is on average on the type of farming operation, the Based on all of these factors, the BMP as effective or less effective than the general permit rule would require Committee concluded that the other BMPs in this category. Ag implementation of at least one BMP for Handbook’s practices were neither Quantification TSD, pp. 2–8 to 2–10. each of the Tillage and Harvest, technologically nor economically South Coast’s Rule 403, ‘‘Fugitive Cropland, and Non-Cropland categories feasible for agricultural sources in Dust,’’ requires the implementation of and the Handbook requires from one to Maricopa County. BMP TSD, p. 18. conservation practices to reduce PM–10 three practices for its six agricultural We agree with the analysis of the BMP from agricultural sources in the South categories. Committee. As noted previously, the Coast PM–10 nonattainment area. Under As discussed above, in the BACM development of the general permit rule Rule 403(h), agricultural operations section of this TSD, the BMP Committee was a multi-year endeavor involving an exceeding 10 acres within the South concluded that, because of the variety, array of agricultural experts familiar Coast Air Basin are exempt from the complexity, and uniqueness of farming with Maricopa County agriculture. rule’s requirements for fugitive dust if operations and because agricultural Maricopa County is only the second the farmer implements the conservation sources vary by factors such as regional area in the country where formal practices in the most recent Rule 403 climate, soil type, growing season, crop regulation of PM–10 emissions from the Agricultural Handbook. See ‘‘Rule 403 type, water availability, and relation to agricultural sector has ever been Agricultural Handbook: Measures to urban centers, agricultural PM–10 attempted. For the reasons discussed Reduce Dust from Agricultural strategies must be based on local factors. above, we propose to conclude that the Operations in the South Coast Air Therefore, the general permit rule, as BMP general permit rule meets or Basin,’’ South Coast AQMD, December finally adopted by the BMP Committee exceeds the stringency of South Coast 1998 (the Handbook). Because the in May 2000, reflects the conclusion of Rule 403.1’s requirement for cessation requirements of Rule 403 are more the BMP Committee that farmers need a of tilling during high winds. Based on stringent than the requirements for variety of BMPs to choose from in order the forgoing analysis of the Handbook, conservation practices in the Handbook, to tailor PM–10 controls to their we also propose to conclude that the it is assumed that farmers will always individual circumstances. Further, the Handbook’s requirements are neither choose to comply with the latter’s BMP Committee acknowledged that technologically nor economically provisions. Thus the Handbook, rather there is a limited amount of scientific feasible for Maricopa County. Because than Rule 403 itself, is effectively the information available concerning the all the identified potential MSM have potential MSM. emission reduction and cost either not been demonstrated to be more
VerDate 11
stringent than existing Maricopa County ordinance. See MAG Plan, pp, 7–55 to MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive controls or found to be infeasible for the 7–64. set of potential controls for ammonium area, we propose to find that the MAG With these additional controls, the nitrate. plan provides for the inclusion of MSM overall residential woodburning Data from earlier studies indicate that as required by CAA section 188(e) to our restriction program is strengthened and ammonia emissions would need to be satisfaction. goes beyond the existing RACM-level reduced by 80 percent to have an program. Both strengthening and appreciable impact on ambient j. Residential Wood Combustion expanding existing programs are key concentrations of ammonium nitrate. The residential wood combustion criteria for demonstrating the MAG plan, Appendix B, Exhibit 5, p. C– (RWC) category includes emissions from implementation of BACM. See 1. Essentially all ammonia emissions in the burning of solid fuel in residential Addendum at 42013. Where the MAG the inventory are from livestock and not fireplaces and woodstoves as well as plan has rejected potential BACM, it from the application of manure to barbecues and firepits. provides a reasoned justification for the agricultural fields. As result, controls on Measures to control PM–10 from rejection. All measures were the application of manure are very residential woodburning include a implemented by June 10, 2000, the unlikely to have any impact on PM–10 public education program, woodburning BACM implementation deadline for the levels in the Phoenix area and therefore curtailment programs, retrofit Phoenix area. We, therefore, propose to are not technologically feasible. 39 The requirements and restrictions or bans on find that the MAG plan provides for the estimated reduction in ammonia from the installation of woodburning stoves implementation BACM for residential implementing waste management plans and/or fireplace. In total the MAG plan wood combustion. is 30 percent, far short of the 80 percent lists 11 potential BACM and 10 The MAG plan identified a number of needed to show impact on PM–10 levels potential MSM. MAG plan Tables 5–2 potential MSM for residential wood (MAG plan, Appendix B, Exhibit 5, p. and 1–7. We believe these list are combustion. Except for the adoption of 5–72), so we also believe that this complete and propose to find that the a lower threshold for calling no burn measure is currently not technologically MAG plan evaluates a comprehensive episodes, the plan does not provide for feasible. set of residential woodburning the adoption of any of these measures Other than the on-road vehicle and but provides reasoned and acceptable measures. nonroad engine categories, we do not justifications for their rejection. MCESD Rule 318, Approval of believe that there are any other sources Therefore, we propose to find that the Residential Woodburning Devices, of NOX that should be called significant MAG plan provides for the inclusion of in terms of contributing to ammonium establishes standards for the approval of MSM. residential woodburning devices that nitrate levels. See MAG plan, Table 3– can be used during restricted-burn k. Secondary Ammonium Nitrate 1. periods. Maricopa County’s Residential Secondary ammonium nitrate is Arizona has adopted a number of Woodburning Restriction Ordinance formed by a chemical reaction in the measures for controlling NOX emissions provides that restricted-burn periods are atmosphere between oxides of nitrogen from motor vehicles and nationally, we 3 have established emission standards for declared by the Control Officer when (NOX) and ammonia (NH ). Ninety control of NOX from both on- and the Control Officer determines that air percent of NOX comes from motor pollution levels could exceed the CO vehicle exhaust (both on and off road) nonroad engines. The MAG plan does standard and/or the PM standard (150 and 99.9 percent of NH3 comes from not identify any technologically feasible µg/m3). We approved Rule 318 and an animal wastes. See MAG plan, Table 3– measures for the control of ammonia. earlier version of the ordinance (revised 1. For these reasons, we propose to find April 21, 1999) as providing for the Two potential BACM were identified that the MAG plan provides for the implementation of RACM. See 64 FR for ammonia nitrate control: reduce implementation of RACM and BACM 60678 (November 8, 1999). emissions of ammonia and nitrates from and for the inclusion of MSM for MCESD revised the ordinance on agricultural operations and require secondary ammonium nitrates. November 17, 1999 to allow the Control animal waste management plans for 1. MCESD’s Commitments to Improve Officer to declare restricted-burn farms/ranches with more than 50 Compliance and Enforcement of its periods when the particulate matter animals. The first measure involves Fugitive Dust Rules pollution levels could exceed the tilling in of manure used as fertilizer ‘‘particulate matter no-burn standard’of within 48 hours of application. MAG MCESD has committed to expanding 120 µg/m3. We proposed to approve the plan, Table 6–1, measure 97–AG–3. The and improving the compliance and revised ordinance as part of the annual second measure would focus on enforcement program for its fugitive standard proposal. 65 FR 19964, 19990. reducing ammonia emissions from dust rules. These enforceable In addition, A.R.S. section 9–500.16 and livestock waste during the winter commitments are found in Maricopa A.R.S. section 11–875 (1998) required months when conditions are most County, 1999 Revised Measure 6, cities and the County to adopt by conducive to ammonium nitrate adopted December 15, 1999. A narrative December 31, 1998, an ordinance that formation. MAG plan, Appendix B, description of them and other program prohibits the installation or construction Exhibit 5, p. 5–70. For MSM, no changes are found in Appendix IV, of a fireplace or wood stove unless it is measures were found that required Exhibit 3 to the MAG plan’s modeling a fireplace with a permanently installed animal waste management plans for TSD. MCESD has also committed to gas or electric log insert, a fireplace or farms or ranches and no other measures continuing to improve Rule 310 and wood stove that meets EPA’s Phase II were identified. See MAG plan, Table Rule 310.01. These commitments are wood stove requirements, or a fireplace 10–7. A large number of measures that described in Section E.3.h. ‘‘Construction Sites and Activities.’’ with a wood stove insert that meets could reduce NOX emissions were EPA’s Phase II stove requirements. Most identified and have been evaluated for 39 We consider a measure technologically feasible jurisdictions have adopted or have on-road motor vehicles and nonroad for an area only if it has the potential to reduce committed to or indicated that State law engines. We believe this list of measures emissions in a manner that reduces ambient requires them to adopt the required is complete and propose to find that the concentrations in the area.
VerDate 11
These improvements to the Control Officer (APCO). This position check for records and inspect fugitive compliance and enforcement programs streamlines enforcement by reducing dust sources at permitted stationary include increased public outreach and senior management review and approval sources. education, increased funding and of enforcement actions and allows MCESD did develop by April, 2000 staffing, increased inspection frequency, enforcement officers to submit directly inspection priorities for vacant lots and revised enforcement policies, and to the APCO’s desk all enforcement unpaved parking lots considering lot commitments to program evaluations actions requiring APCO approval. size and number of sources with larger and improvements. They address many In addition, MCESD committed to lots being inspected first and smaller of the program areas that are key to locate inspectors in two new regional lots in succeeding years. EPA and improving compliance and we believe offices to provide quicker response MCESD initially attempted, but were form a solid program for increasing the times to dust-related complaints and unsuccessful, to convert an Assessor’s effectiveness of the County’s fugitive allow more time in the field. It has in Office database of vacant lots into a dust program. fact located inspectors in four regional user-friendly format for identifying We review these enforceable offices. priority lots. Now, MCESD inspectors commitments and their current status Funding are assigned geographical districts and below: are compiling notes on the vacant lots For FY 1999–2000, revenue for Staffing and unpaved parking lots in each fugitive dust program was projected to district during their routine surveillance Maricopa County committed to be $1.12 million from annual earth activities. Under current MCESD policy, increasing its inspection staff to 8 moving permit fees, a $772,000 increase the inspectors are first directed to inspectors, 1 supervisor, 1 aide and 2 over the previous level. The increase handle all complaints and then to begin enforcement officers by the end of was due to the 1998 fee increase for to address the larger sites on the January 2000 and to add a coordinator earth moving permits. individual district lists. In 2000, the to the Small Business Environmental For FY 2000–2001, anticipated inspectors made 499 inspections on Assistance Program to assist smaller revenue for the fugitive dust program is vacant lots, unpaved parking lots, and builders and construction companies approximately $1.7 million, generated unpaved roads. and to help develop and implement from annual earth moving permit fees. education programs. It also committed This is a $1.35 million increase over the Enforcement Program to hire an attorney in the County previous level. To meet its commitment to revise its Attorney’s office to expedite civil enforcement program, MCESD issued a litigation and to assist with prosecuting Inspection Program revised air quality enforcement policy Class One Misdemeanor cases by April MCESD committed to develop by on April 28, 2000. See Air Quality 2000. Total resources devoted to the April, 2000 inspection priorities for Violation Reporting and Enforcement fugitive dust program were to be vacant lots and unpaved parking lots Policy and Procedure, MCESD, April 28, increased to 15 positions, a 25 percent that consider lot size and number of 2000. This policy: increase over previous levels. After sources, with larger lots being inspected • Includes guidelines for initiating reaching the committed staffing level, first and smaller lots in succeeding various enforcement actions MCESD was to review the program in years. A number of cities have • Includes guidelines for reinspecting March 2000 to evaluate its effectiveness municipal programs to address these • Defines timely and appropriate and the potential need to add more staff. sources; therefore, the Department action by laying out guidelines for By the end of January 2000, committed to initially direct its which type of violation is appropriate inspection unit staffing increased to 8 inspections to cities lacking such for specific enforcement actions and for inspectors, 1 supervisor, 1 coordinator programs and to track the city plans that the time frames for escalating (to oversee permit issuance and track are required by State statute to stabilize notices of violations), 2 aides and 2 enforcement actions when appropriate target unpaved roads, alleys and • enforcement officer. By May 2000, the Identifies priority violations unpaved shoulders. • County Attorney’s office hired an Prior to its adopting additional Includes guidelines for when to attorney, paralegal, and support staff. In commitments in December 1999, seek penalties reflecting the economic 2000, the Department found that the benefit of noncompliance, if feasible MCESD had already increased • existing staff in the Small Business inspection rates and improved Includes guidelines for seeking and Environmental Assistance Program was procedures for permitted sources such determining higher penalties for repeat able to handle the workload for assisting violators as construction sites including: • smaller builders and construction • Proactively inspecting sites larger Includes guidelines for inspectors companies and for helping to develop than 10 acres, 3 to 6 times per year and to handle predetermined citation and implement education programs. inspect smaller sites once within 30 categories form observation to justice MCESD will re-evaluated the need for days of project start date. court an additional coordinator in the small • Scheduling weekend inspections Enforcement action options include business assistance program when the randomly once per month. issuing an Order of Abatement, filing a second generation outreach and • Providing a shortened complaint Misdemeanor Complaint in Justice education materials are completed. In response time with a goal of 8 hours for court, or asking the County Attorney to total, resources devoted to the fugitive high priority complaints and seek a civil penalty in Superior Court. dust program during the past year were maintaining the current goal of 24 hours Inspectors handle certain 17 positions, a 42 percent increase over for others predetermined citation category previous levels. • Revising standard operating violations and will be responsible for procedures and checklists for fugitive case development from observance of a Organization dust inspections to be consistent with violation to filing of the actual citation MCESD created a new enforcement the revised rules. in the justice court. Having the section under the direct supervision of • Revising inspection standard inspectors handle routine cases enables the MCESD Director/Air Pollution operating procedures to have inspectors the enforcement officers to work on
VerDate 11
resolving cases involving more serious G. Attainment Date Extension evaluated the impact of BACM on and complicated violations. Section 188(e) of the Act allows us to sources at both the West Chandler and Gilbert sites in 2001. The evaluation Public Outreach/Education extend the attainment date for a serious showed these BACM-level controls left Public outreach and education area for up to five years beyond 2001 if attainment by 2001 is impracticable. 24-hour PM–10 levels well above the consists of staff training, educating the 24-hour standard at both sites in 2001, However, before we may grant an regulated parties, developing good thus demonstrating attainment is extension of the attainment date, the working relationships with other impracticable by then. MAG plan, State must first: involved parties such as the cities, and Appendix C, Exhibit 3, pp. 3–10 and 3– 1. apply to us for an extension of the making the program more 11. understandable. Increased education of PM–10 attainment date beyond 2001, In this demonstration, the MAG plan both inspectors and the regulated 2. demonstrate that attainment by assumes controls only on the industry increases compliance. 2001 is impracticable, ‘‘permitted’’ sources, that is, only on Among the public outreach and 3. have complied with all those sources that receive permits from education efforts will be: requirements and commitments MCESD. The plan assumes that all • Inspector training on case applying to the area in its ‘‘nonpermitted’’ sources—unpaved development. implementation plan, roads, vacant lots, and unpaved parking • Inspector training on revised test 4. demonstrate to our satisfaction that lots—are uncontrolled in 2001. MAG methods. its serious area plan includes the most plan, Appendix C, Exhibit 3, pp. 3–10 • City staff training on preparing stringent measures that are included in and 3–11. This latter assumption does inspection reports and notices of the implementation plan of any state not reflect the efforts by MCESD to violation. and/or are achieved in practice in any assure the implementation of BACM on • On-going training at the local state and are feasible for the area, and these sources and is inconsistent with community college. 5. submit SIP revisions containing a the assumptions made for these sources • Making information available on demonstration of attainment by the most in the annual standard impracticability MCESD website. expeditious alternative date practicable. demonstration. • Distribution of information through We evaluate the Maricopa County To check to see if using consistent city building departments and other serious area plan’s compliance with assumptions between the annual sources. each of these requirements below. standard and 24-hour standard In 2000, MCESD revised its dust 1. Apply for an Extension demonstrations would show that control guidelines with its partners attainment of the 24-hour standard is ADOT and Arizona State University. A state must apply for an extension practicable by 2001, we recalculated the This year ADOT secured a research and concurrently submit a SIP revision 2001 impacts at each monitor using the grant directed towards developing containing a demonstration that the area control assumptions from the annual educational tools and outreach will attain by the most expeditious standard demonstrations and additional programs. This product will enhance alternative date practicable. The state control information from the BMP TSD. the current guidelines, add information must provided the public reasonable In these recalculations, we assume that on the life cycle costs of controls and notice and a hearing on the application the sources at the microscale site are in controls’ impact on the construction before it is sent to EPA. full compliance with the applicable process, and develop additional MAG, as the lead air quality planning rule. See the ‘‘Extension Request— outreach tools. In addition, MCESD is agency for the Phoenix metropolitan Demonstrate the Impracticability of currently working with two contractors area, formally requested an extension of Attainment by December 31, 2001’’ in to develop a model environmental the PM–10 nonattainment deadline to the EPA TSD. management system for construction. December 31, 2006. The documentation Our recalculations show that These two efforts will add to the supporting this request is found in attainment of the 24-hour standard at technical knowledge on dust control Chapter 10 of the MAG plan and the West Chandler site remains and offer additional tools for companies Appendix C, Exhibit 5 of the MAG plan. impracticable by 2001. The principal to increase compliance with regulations. MAG plan, p. 10–2. This extension sources at this site are an agricultural request is an integral part of the MAG field, its apron, and a construction site. Program Evaluation and Tracking plan and was subject to public hearing The site needs substantial reductions, in MCESD committed to track the along with the rest of the plan, excess of 50 percent, in agricultural number of inspections, number and type including the demonstration that the emissions in addition to controls on the of enforcement actions, amount of area will attain the 24-hour standard by construction site before the 24-hour penalties assessed, and amount of the earliest alternative date practicable. standard can be attained. This level of penalties collected. It also committed to 2. Demonstrate the Impracticability of emission reduction from agricultural conduct mid-year reviews of the Attainment by December 31, 2001 sources is not expected until 2006. program in September, 2000 and again However, our recalculations show in March 2001 to evaluate progress and CAA section 189(b)(1)(a)(ii) and our that attainment of the 24-hour standard future needs. proposed policy on extension requests at the Gilbert site is practicable by 2001. MCESD conducted its reviews and require that the serious area plan must The site’s primary source, an unpaved will conduct then again in September, show that the implementation of BACM parking lot, is subject to full control 2001 and again in March 2002 to (as determined by our guidance) on under Rule 310.01 by 2001 and controls evaluate progress and future needs. In significant sources categories will not on this source together with controls on 2000, MCESD conducted 6625 bring the area into attainment by the other major source at Gilbert, a inspections. In the first year of operation December 31, 2001 in order to claim vacant lot (also required by Rule 310.01) under the new enforcement process, it that attainment by that date is result in the site showing attainment by issued 189 violations, processed 145 impracticable. 2001. settlement cases and netted $425,000 in To evaluate the impracticability of In order to show attainment, a plan fines (May 1, 2000 to April 30, 2001). attainment by 2001, the MAG plan must show attainment at each location
VerDate 11
within the nonattainment area. Because therefore, propose to find that the State cannot be feasibly implemented in the the West Chandler site is still unable to has complied with the requirements and area. In the MAG plan, MSM that show attainment of the 24-hour commitments in its implementation remained after the screening in step 4 standard by 2001, the Phoenix plan. were grouped by source category and nonattainment area as a whole is unable were either included in the plan or a 4. Include the Most Stringent Measures to show attainment by that date. Thus reasoned justification for rejecting the the MAG plan’s conclusion that In our proposed policy for granting measure was provided. MSM study, attainment of the 24-hour standard in extension requests under CAA section Table 3–1, MAG plan, p. 10–46, and the Phoenix area is impracticable by 188(e), we suggest a 5-step process for BMP TSD, pp. 19 to 27. December 31, 2001 is correct. We, identifying and adopting MSM. See Based on our analysis of the MAG therefore, propose to find that section V.B.4. of this preamble. This plan’s provisions for identifying and attainment of the 24-hour standard is process is similar to the one we have adopting MSM, we propose to find that impracticable by December 31, 2001. established for determining BACM, but the MAG plan demonstrates to our with one additional step, to compare the satisfaction that it includes the most 3. Complied With Commitments and potential MSM against measures already stringent measures that are included in Requirements in the SIP adopted in the area to determine if the the implementation plan of any State, or We interpret this criterion to mean existing measures are most stringent. are achieved in practice in any State, that the state has implemented the The first two steps in our proposed and can be feasibly be implemented in emissions reducing measures in the MSM policy are to develop a detailed the Phoenix area. plan revisions it has submitted to emissions inventory of PM–10 sources We have discussed identification and address the CAA requirements in and source categories and to model to adoption of MSM and the rejection of sections 172 and 189 for PM–10 evaluate the impact on PM–10 any MSM for each category deemed nonattainment areas. concentrations over the standards of the significant for BACM earlier in this The two SIP revisions that Arizona various source categories to determine preamble. The MAG plan identifies has submitted to address PM–10 are the which are significant for the purposes of three MSMs for categories considered de 1991 MAG moderate area plan and the adopting MSM. The MAG plan, minimis in the BACM analysis. These 1997 Microscale plan. however, excludes no source categories categories are cattle feed lots, The 1991 MAG plan includes a broad of directly-emitted PM–10 from its MSM incinerators, and charbroilers. range of measures to address PM–10 analysis and moves directly to the third Cattle feed lots: MCESD Rule 310.01 including controls for constructions step in the MSM determination, requires that owners/operators of sites, paved road, unpaved roads, identifying potential MSM in other commercial feedlots and/or livestock unpaved parking areas, vacant lots, and implementation plans or used in areas apply dust suppressants, apply woodburning. The principal controls in practice in other states for each source gravel, or install shrubs and/or trees this plan were Rule 310 and the County categories present in the Phoenix area. within 50 to 100 feet of animal pens. woodburning ordinances. The 1991 plan MAG plan, p 10–25. The MAG plan identifies South Coast also included reasonably available To identify candidate MSM, MAG’s Rule 1186 requirements for livestock control technology for stationary contractor Sierra Research interviewed operations as a potential MSM for sources and a wide range of people knowledgeable about PM–10 commercial feedlots/livestock areas. transportation control measures. The controls, reviewed the documents used However, the two rules control different implementation of the measures in this to develop the candidate list of BACM emission activities at commercial plan are described in the MAG plan at and obtained copies of current air feedlots/livestock areas. South Coast pp. 10–10 to 10–25. The plan also quality control measures from most Rule 1186 requires controlling unpaved contained a large number of other States including both SIP and non- roads and hay grinding at dairy and commitments from the local SIP measures. MSM Study, p. 1–2. horse farms but does not address jurisdictions to implement various The fourth step in our proposed fugitive dust emissions from disturbed measures. Most of the measures policy for MSM is to compare the open areas. MCESD Rule 310.01 represented ‘‘business as usual’’ actions potential MSM for each significant controls fugitive dust emissions from by the jurisdictions to do infrastructure source category against the measures, if disturbed open areas at dairies and (e.g., road) improvements, to implement any, already adopted for that source cattle lots but not unpaved roads and existing building codes or take actions category in the local area. In the MAG hay grinding. already underway for the carbon plan, after a comprehensive list of In the Maricopa County PM–10 monoxide plan. MAG plan, pp. 10–13 candidate MSM was developed, each nonattainment area, there is only one through 10–24. measure was screened against the cattle feedlot and fewer than 80 dairies The 1997 Microscale plan focused on corresponding Maricopa measure to (most of which are actually outside the fugitive dust sources such as identify those with more restrictive nonattainment area). Unpaved roads at construction sites, vacant lots, unpaved emission limitations, more extensive dairies are low travel (10 to 20 ADT) roads, unpaved parking lots, and lists of affected sources, fewer and represent a very small source of agriculture. The principal controls in exemptions, and/or one or more emissions in the Phoenix area and this plan were improvements to the substantive regulatory provisions not controls on them would not advance the implementation of Rule 310 and found in the Maricopa measure. attainment date and are not necessary coordination with the cities to improve The final step in our proposed policy for expeditious attainment. We, fugitive dust control. Implementation of for MSM is to provide for the adoption therefore, propose to find that the MAG the measures in the Microscale plan are of any MSM that is more stringent than plan provides for the implementation of discussed in Maricopa County existing similar local measures and MSM to our satisfaction without Rule commitments, 1998 Revised Measure 6. provide for implementation as 1186 provisions for unpaved roads at From available information in the expeditiously as practicable or, in lieu cattle feed lots. MAG plan, we believe that the of providing for adoption, provide a In Maricopa County, hay grinding commitments and requirements in these reasoned justification for rejecting the activities occur primarily at feed mills earlier plans have been met. We, potential MSM, i.e., why such measures (as opposed to dairies) which are
VerDate 11
permitted sources and thus already emissions estimates credited to these and 20 percent at the Gilbert site.41 subject to control requirements. measures in the attainment However, at the time of its submittal, Incinerators: The MAG plan identifies demonstration are reasonable; and the Arizona had not yet completed adoption Clark County’s Rule 26 as having a more measures are being implemented on a of its BMP general permit rule and also stringent opacity limit than MCESD’s schedule that is as expeditious as had not yet quantified the expected Rule 313. Clark County limits opacity practicable and will result in attainment reductions from rule and thus was from existing incinerators to 5 percent by the earliest practicable date. unable to model the impact of the rule while Maricopa’s limit is 20 percent. The following is a brief summary of at these two sites. MAG plan, Table 10–7. Incinerators are our evaluation of the modeling in the The third submittal, the 2001 BMP a very small source in the Phoenix MAG plan. Our full evaluation is in the TSD, documents the expected emission nonattainment area. In 1994 there were EPA TSD section ‘‘Extension Request- reductions from the BMP general permit 32 incinerators that together emitted Demonstrate Attainment by the Most rule. This submittal does not contain 2.56 metric tons per year (7.1 kg per Expeditious Alternative Date Practicable new modeling but rather shows that the day). 1994 Regional PM–10 Inventory, after December 31, 2001.’’ rule’s emission reductions, together p. 4–17. Since then, the medical waste with a reasonable estimate of land use incinerators in this category have shut a. Air Quality Modeling change, provide greater reductions than down and today there are even fewer The attainment demonstration for the needed for attainment at the Gilbert and emissions. Because incinerators are a 24-hour standard is divided into two West Chandler sites. trivial source and controls on them parts, a microscale analysis and a 1. Modeling Approach to the 24-Hour would not advance the attainment date regional analysis. The microscale part PM–10 Standard Attainment and are not necessary for expeditious evaluates 24-hour exceedances at four Demonstration attainment, we propose to find that the monitoring sites in the Phoenix area MAG plan provides for the inclusion of using a version of the industrial source Our guidance on attainment MSM to our satisfaction without complex (ISC) model. The regional part demonstrations generally assumes that including Clark County’s opacity limit evaluates 24-hour levels throughout the the entire nonattainment area will be 42 for incinerators. rest of the Maricopa County modeled using a dispersion model. Charbroiling: Emissions from nonattainment area using the Urban However, emissions inventory charbroiling and frying meat are Airshed Model-Linear Chemistry development and modeling for areas estimated to be 0.6 mtpd or 227 mtpy. version (UAM–LC). with substantial fugitive dust problems, 1994 Regional PM–10 Inventory, p. 4– As discussed previously, Arizona has such as the Phoenix area, have proved 25. This is 0.4 percent of the daily made three submittals that contain difficult, because of fugitive dust directly-emitted PM–10 inventory in elements of the attainment emissions’ marked uncertainty and their 1994 and 0.4 percent of the annual demonstration for the 24-hour PM–10 temporal and spatial variability. inventory in 1994. MCESD has standard: the 1997 Microscale plan, the Accurately estimating emissions for committed to develop a new rule to 2000 revised MAG plan, and the 2001 input to dispersion modeling of fugitive require existing and new chain-driven BMP TSD. A more complete description dust over a large area is much more and underfired charbroilers, typically of these submittals can be found in difficult than for point sources of found in restaurants specializing in section 2 of this preamble and in section gaseous pollutants, which were the grilled meat products, to be equipped 1 of the EPA TSD. We briefly describe archetypes for development of much of with emission control equipment. South here how these submittals fit together to our modeling guidance. Thus, in areas dominated by fugitive Coast AQMD is developing a new rule create the overall attainment dust sources, the approach of to deal with underfired charbroilers and demonstration for the 24-hour standard. MCESD will wait until South Coast intensively inventorying and modeling a The first of the three submittals, the completes its rulemaking, now small area is a reasonable one. This 1997 Microscale plan, contains a scheduled for late 2001, to adopt this approach is also more reflective of the microscale, or localized, inventory and measure. Maricopa County nature of fugitive dust. Fugitive dust modeling analysis using the ISCST commitments, Revised Measure 23. We PM–10 is emitted near ground level and model of 24-hour standard exceedances propose to find that implementation of has relatively sharp spatial gradients as at four monitoring sites in the Phoenix this rule is expeditious. Waiting on dust settles out with distance from the area: Maryvale, Salt River, West South Coast to complete its rulemaking, source, and hence has more localized Chandler and Gilbert. It shows which will establish control effects than the other criteria pollutants, attainment of the standard at the requirements for underfired which are typically buoyant and Maryvale and Salt River sites but does charbroilers, is appropriate given that gaseous. not demonstrate attainment for the the South Coast rule when adopted will Under the microscale approach used Gilbert and West Chandler sites, both of establish MSM for controls on these in the MAG plan, the areas around the which were substantially affected by types of charbroilers. exceeding monitors are deemed to be agricultural sources.40 representative of locations throughout 5. Demonstrate Expeditious Attainment The second submittal, the 2000 the nonattainment area. Attainment is For the reasons discussed below, we revised MAG plan contains a regional propose to find that the MAG plan modeling analysis of 24-hour standard 41 See p. 3–9 in ADEQ, ‘‘Evaluation for demonstrates attainment by the earliest exceedances using UAM–LC. It also Compliance with the 24-hour PM–10 Standard for date practicable after December 31, 2001 uses the ISCST model to determine that the West Chandler and Gilbert Microscale Sites,’’ June 1999 (ADEQ TSD), found in Appendix C, as required by CAA section a 58 percent reduction in agricultural emissions is needed to attain the 24- Exhibit 3 of the MAG plan. 189(b)(1)(A)(ii). We also propose to find 42 A dispersion model models how emissions that the attainment demonstration relies hour standard at the West Chandler site from sources are dispersed into the atmosphere on control measures that either are based on local wind patterns and speeds and other 40 Because we have already approved the meteorological parameters. The two principal approved or have been proposed for attainment demonstrations at the Maryvale and Salt inputs into a dispersion model are temporally- and approval and meet our SIP River sites, we do not further discuss these sites in spatially-distributed emissions and meteorological enforceability criteria; that the this proposal. See 62 FR 41856, 41863. information.
VerDate 11
demonstrated at locations representing and found them acceptable. See our reasonable estimate of land use changes, the various mixes of emission sources proposal on the Microscale plan at 62 provide a 60.3 percent reduction by that occur in the area. Although a FR 31025, 31029 and the proposal on 2006. This reduction is sufficient to specific emitting activity, such as new the annual standard at 65 FR 19964, demonstrate attainment by 2006 at West housing construction, will eventually 19985.43 See also the EPA TSD section Chandler. For the Gilbert site, the rule decline in a given location, it will on ‘‘Extension Request-Demonstrate provides more than the 20 percent reappear elsewhere as the metropolitan Attainment by the Most Expeditious needed for attainment by 2006. BMP area grows. A location that is currently Alternative Date Practicable after TSD, p. 9. experiencing a lot of construction can December 31, 2001.’’ This 60.3 percent reduction at the thus be used to represent locations The approach used for the West Chandler site is a combination of where construction will occur in the supplemental modeling in the ADEQ a 36.6 percent emissions reduction from future. Moreover, in the MAG plan all TSD is essentially the same approach the BMP general permit and a 37 locations exceeding the 24-hour PM–10 used in the Microscale plan. They differ percent emissions from the conversion standard in 1995 were subjected to in just three ways. First, the ADEQ TSD of agricultural land to residential and analysis. A demonstration of attainment uses a new calculation of background commercial use.44 This land use at these locations will show that the concentrations (that is, the impact on conversion rate is derived from a land mixes of sources that caused ambient PM–10 levels in the microscale use model for the overall nonattainment exceedances in the Phoenix area will be area of sources outside the microscale area and represents the reduction controlled sufficiently to meet the area). Second, it evaluates PM–10 regionally in agricultural lands between standard. concentrations at multiple locations 1995 and 2006. BMP TSD p. 28. Although there is solid reasoning within the microscale domain. Finally, Under the microscale approach, the underpinning the microscale approach it evaluated various levels of reductions areas around the exceeding monitors are in a fugitive dust-dominated area such from agricultural controls, in order to deemed to be representative of locations as Phoenix, there is concern that for a determine the emission reductions throughout the nonattainment area. large urban area the sheer number of needed for attainment. Thus, applying regionally the controls sources, especially fugitive dust area New background values were needed for attainment at these sources, could make for a pervasive calculated in order to reflect the representative sites is assumed to assure regional component of PM–10 in regional implementation of controls. attainment at similar sites throughout addition to the more localized or These controls reduce the contribution the nonattainment area. One aspect of microscale component. Additionally, a to ambient PM–10 levels in the this approach, which was not portion of PM–10 is fine particles, microscale area of sources outside the adequately explored in earlier which can stay suspended longer and so microscale area. To recalculate the submittals, is to how to treat the can be transported greater distances background values, ADEQ split the inevitable changes in land uses and than coarse particulate. background between windblown and activities within the microscale Fine particulate includes secondary non-windblown contributions, applying domains. For example, construction particulate, which forms chemically in controls only to the windblown activity, like that at the West Chandler the air from precursors like ammonia contribution. See ADEQ TSD, p. 3–7. site, will eventually be completed and and oxides of sulfur and nitrogen. The evaluation of PM–10 no longer contribute to emissions in the Secondary particulate is formed by concentrations at multiple locations area.45 chemical reactions in a mixture of within the microscale area is an A land use and socioeconomic model, emissions from various sources, spread improvement to the previous microscale in conjunction with a dispersion model, over hours and a spatial scale of 10’s of modeling. In the Microscale plan, the kilometers. Like ozone, it is a regional could legitimately show that evaluation was limited to the actual exceedances no longer occur in the area pollutant, and so needs to be modeled location of the ambient air quality on a larger scale. Although only a small simply based on this change in land use. monitor within the microscale domain. However, just waiting for land use fraction (4 percent) of the total PM in The evaluation of the emissions changes alone to reduce emissions is not the Maricopa area, secondary particulate reductions needed for attainment in an acceptable method of demonstrating is present. While this regional 2006 at the West Chandler site attainment at the individual microscale component could partly be addressed by (assuming a 90 percent level of control sites because once again, the premise adding a background concentration to on the construction site) showed that a underlying the microscale approach is microscale modeling, the determination 58 percent reduction in emissions from that each site is representative of other of a background is ambiguous since it agricultural aprons and fields was similar areas in the nonattainment area. includes the effect of sources similar to needed. For the Gilbert site, a 20 percent In a growing metropolitan area like that those in the microscale domain. For emission reduction is shown to be of Phoenix, there will always be areas these reasons, the MAG plan include needed from the agricultural apron. with on-going construction. regional modeling in addition to the ADEQ TSD, pp. 3–9. microscale analysis. The BMP TSD shows that BMP On the other hand, the opposite general permit rule, together with a extreme of assuming no conversion of 2. EPA’s Review of the Air Quality agricultural lands at all does not seem Modeling in the MAG Plan 43 For the regional model, 65 individual days reasonable either. The reality is that the In today’s proposal, we focus our were analyzed in the base year and attainment year, discussion on the supplemental that is, MAG ran the UAM–LC model for each of 44 The reductions are not additive because the these 65 24-day days. To evalute the 24-hour BMP general permit rule reduces emissions only microscale modeling for the Gilbert and standard, the individual results from each one of from the land left in agricultural production. The West Chandler sites in the ADEQ TSD these modeling runs are used. To evaluate the overall control effectiveness is calculated as the and the evaluation of the agricultural annual standard, the results from all the modeling percent lost agricultural lands + BMP rule general permit rule in the BMP TSD. We runs for each year are averaged together. Thus, in effectiveness * percent remaining agricultural lands reviewing the modeling for the annual standard or 37% + 0.366*63%. have already extensively reviewed both demonstrations, we necessarily also reviewed the 45 In fact, at the West Chandler site, the the microscale modeling and the modeling for the regional 24-hour standard construction is complete and agricultural land has regional modeling in previous proposals demonstrations. been converted to residential and commercial uses.
VerDate 11
metropolitan area is growing and b. Control Measures Relied on for sources at each microscale site; 47 agricultural land is rapidly being Attainment however, we believe that an RE factor converted. Such changes have been For demonstrating attainment of the should be applied to the windblown observed over the past decades and are 24-hour PM–10 standard, the MAG plan background source categories because projected to continue. relies on reductions in directly-emitted each category represents multiple In this situation, using an estimate PM–10 from 3 measures: MCESD’s sources. To determine the effect of from the area’s land use model of the Rules 310 and 310.01 and the applying the RE factor to sources in the conversion of agricultural lands to occur agricultural BMP general permit rule. windblown background, we re- by 2006 is a reasonable approach to use. ADEQ TSD, pp. 3–3 to 3–6 and BMP evaluated the attainment This approach is a compromise between TSD, p. 8. We have proposed to approve demonstrations at both Gilbert and West the extremes of the no-conversion and all of these measures. See 65 FR 19992, Chandler. We found that the plan still the total-conversion assumptions. It is 19989 and 66 FR 34598. demonstrates attainment of the 24-hour driven by the area’s socioeconomic As part of these proposed approvals, standard as expeditiously as practicable. projections that are used for many we have evaluated each of these See EPA TSD section ‘‘Extension purposes and represent the best measure to ensure that it meets our SIP Request-Demonstrate Attainment by the available information about the land use enforceability criteria. These criteria Most Expeditious Alternative Date changes the overall area will experience. ensure that the measure’s compliance Practicable after December 31, 2001,’’ Also, using an area average figure is requirements-applicability, performance We find that the emission reduction consistent with the area wide standards, compliance schedule, and estimates for each source category are application of control measures required monitoring methods—are clear. For consistent with research on the under the submittal’s approach. Reliably MCESD’s rules, see sections on applicable control methods and are predicting the conversion for a proposed approval of Rule 310 and appropriately applied in the attainment particular small area (several square 310.01 in the TSD supporting the demonstrations. For more information miles in the microscale approach) annual standard proposal. For the on the quantification of emission would be problematic in any case, since agricultural general permit rule, see 66 reductions from Rules 310 and 310.01 it would depend on knowing FR 34598. see the section ‘‘Extension Request- individuals’ purchase decisions and We have also evaluated the emissions Demonstrate Attainment by the Most development plans. Aggregate reductions credited to each measure in Expeditious Alternative Date Practicable conversion figures, driven by larger the attainment demonstrations to ensure after December 31, 2001’’ in the EPA TSD for the annual standard proposal. economic forces and representing the they are reasonable. In performing the For more information on the average of many actions, should be more microscale analysis, ADEQ first quantification of emission reductions reliable. determined that each significant, non- from the agricultural general permit Assuming some land use change is agricultural source at the microscale rule, see the section ‘‘Implementation of more in line with the traditional use of sites (e.g., the unpaved parking lot at the BACM and Inclusion of MSM for microinventories in EPA’s PM–10 Gilbert site) was large enough to be Agricultural Sources’’ in the EPA TSD attainment demonstration guidance, and subject to Rules 310 or 310.01.46 For each of these sources, ADEQ then for this proposal. also is in line with how attainment We have also determined that the applied the control factor used in the demonstrations are performed in measures relied on for attainment are Microscale plan for that source. Except general. Typically the projections for being expeditiously implemented. Rule for the agricultural sources, it did not land use, employment, industrial 310 and 310.01 are effective now. use rule effectiveness factors for either production, population, vehicle traffic, Implementation of the agricultural the sources in the microscale etc. are part of the baseline conditions general permit rule began in July 2000 component or the sources in the assumed in projecting future air quality; and will be completed by December 31, windblown background component in in an attainment demonstration they are 2001. independent of, but used in conjunction the attainment demonstrations. with, estimates of control measure Rule effectiveness (RE) accounts for 6. Other Factors That EPA May Consider effectiveness. In other words, reductions emission reductions lost because of CAA section 188(e) list five additional that occur naturally because of noncompliance, control equipment factors that we may consider in deciding socioeconomic changes are implicitly downtime, failure to apply adequate whether to grant an extension and the counted in attainment demonstrations. controls, or failure to use control length of that extension. Conversely, growth in emission sources, equipment properly. One hundred The MAG plan provides information e.g., vehicle traffic, are also implicitly percent rule effectiveness is the ability addressing each of the factors in Chapter counted and must be compensated for of a regulatory program to achieve all 10 of the plan. Nothing in this by additional emission reductions. the emission reductions that could be additional information presented on the In summary, we believe that the achieved by full compliance with the five factors suggests that granting an approach used in 2001 BMP TSD, while applicable regulations at all sources at extension of the attainment date for the not completely consistent with how the all times. Because RE factors are Phoenix area to 2006 is inappropriate. microscale approach was implemented intended to reflect the variations in a. Nature and Extent of Nonattainment in the 1997 Microscale plan, compliance among large numbers of nevertheless, is a reasonable balance sources, they are applied to source In the Phoenix area, elevated 24-hour between different possible categories rather than to individual levels of PM–10 occur mainly in areas implementations of a microscale sources. with large fugitive dust sources or with approach. Overall, we propose to find We agree that it is appropriate not to a concentration of fugitive dust sources. that technical evaluation in the MAG apply an RE factor to the individual plan is adequate to support the 47 At each microscale site, there is only a single 46 Rule 310 and Rule 310.01 do not apply to source in each category, that is there is a single attainment demonstration for the 24- sources under a certain size. For example, Rule vacant lot, a single construction site, a single hour standard at the West Chandler and 310.01 does not apply to vacant lots under 0.1 agricultural field with its apron, a single unpaved Gilbert sites. acres. Rule 310.01, section 301. parking lot.
VerDate 11
Areas such as this can be found cleaner burning gasoline, national are to be achieved every 3 years until throughout the Phoenix nonattainment emission standards for nonroad engines) the area is redesignated attainment and area, so we would expect that there are target emissions from on and nonroad which demonstrate RFP. These elevated 24-hour PM–10 levels engines. quantitative milestones should consist throughout the Phoenix area. In order to Almost all of the PM–10 emission of elements that allow progress to be attain the 24-hour standard in this reductions in the out years of the MAG quantified or measured. Addendum at situation, controls need to be uniformly plan (2003 and later) are and need to be 42016. implemented throughout the area, a task from fugitive dust sources in order to 1. Reasonable Further Progress that generally requires longer to achieve show attainment of the 24-hour PM–10 than implementing controls in a few standard and not from on- and nonroad The MAG plan provides for annual localized areas. engines; therefore, extending the progress toward attaining the 24-hour attainment date does not affect the standard. This demonstration shows b. Types and Numbers of Sources or degree of public exposure to the major that most of the projected reductions Other Emitting Activities source of toxic risk because shortening occur after 2001; however, this is an Primary contributors to elevated PM– the extension would not accelerate artifact of the assumption that there are 10 levels are fugitive dust sources controls on the major source of toxic no controls on agricultural sources, including paved road dust, unpaved risk, on- and nonroad engines. vacant lots and unpaved parking prior roads, construction activities, disturbed to December 31, 2001. This assumption vacant lands, unpaved parking lots, and e. Technological and Economic does not reflect the efforts by MCESD to agricultural sources. MAG plan, p. 10– Feasibility of Controls assure the implementation of BACM on 51. These sources are ubiquitous in the Fugitive dust sources dominate the these sources and the requirement for nonattainment area and collectively emissions inventory in the Maricopa BMPs to be implemented by then. If the number in the thousands. For example, nonattainment area and are the most RFP demonstration is revised to include MCESD issued 2500 construction significant contributors to 24-hour PM– emission reductions from BACM on permits in 1999; we mailed 50,000 10 exceedances. Controls for these these sources, then the majority of the letters to owners of vacant lots in the sources are well known (paving, wetting emission reductions occur before 2001. nonattainment area to inform them of surfaces, etc.) and have been adopted; See the ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress our FIP fugitive dust rule; there are however, the number of sources and and Quantitative Milestones’’ section in 12,000 miles of roadway in the nature of sources make education and the EPA TSD. nonattainment area. outreach necessary to assure full In order to demonstrate RFP, the plan compliance with those controls. In first regionalizes the inventories at the c. Population Exposure to two microscale sites by multiplying Concentrations Above the Standard addition, costs for paving roads and other capital improvements needed to emissions from each source by a factor The MAG plan estimates population reduce PM–10 emissions are high and of 360, which is the ratio of the size of exposure to elevated levels of PM–10 necessary funds are only available over the nonattainment area (2,880 square (both annual and 24-hr) to be from a number of years. These factors miles) to the size of the microscale sites 78,000 to 163,000 (1995 figure), p. 10– generally support a longer time frame (8 square miles). It then calculates the 13. This population exposure is for attainment. emission reductions from the calculated using estimates of disturbed application of the adopted measures to land versus population in subareas of 7. Conclusion on Extension Request these sources. Next, it annualizes these the nonattainment area. According to Based on our review of the MAG plan emission reductions by multiplying the this calculation, 84 percent of and our proposed determination that it sources—which are all windblown Maricopa’s population lives in areas meets the requirements necessary for sources—by 11, the number of windy where 10 percent or less of the land is granting an extension of the attainment days in 1995. Finally, the annualized open. MAG plan, Table 10–13. date under CAA section 188(e), we are figure is divided by 365 days to get an However, the plan does provide for proposing to grant a five-year extension average annual day emission reductions. implementation of RACM, BACM, and of the attainment date for the 24-hour See BMP TSD, pp. 29—31.48 MSM on disturbed land (including PM–10 standard in the Phoenix PM–10 Regionalizing and annualizing the construction) and paved and unpaved serious nonattainment area from microscale inventories is a good roads with much of the emission December 31, 2001 to December 31, approach to demonstrating RFP and reductions being achieved in the first 2006. establishing milestones for the 24-hour few years. All these factors will reduce standard in the Phoenix area. Just a few H. Reasonable Further Progress and population exposure as quickly as source categories are explicitly Quantitative Milestones practicable. identified contributors to exceedances CAA section 172(c)(2) requires d. Presence and Concentration of of this standard, and it is effective nonattainment plans to provide for controls on these categories that are Potentially Toxic Substances in the reasonable further progress (RFP). Particulate necessary for progress and attainment. Section 171(1) of the Act defines RFP as Therefore, closely tracking the effect of The primary source of airborne cancer ‘‘such annual incremental reductions in risk in the Maricopa area is internal emissions of the relevant air pollutant as 48 There was an error in the original RFP combustion engine exhaust from both are required by this part [part D of title calculation on pages 29 to 31 in the BMP TSD. on and nonroad engines. This risk is I] or may reasonably be required by the ADEQ corrected this error and provided us a revised RFP and contingency measure from all pollutants emitted from these Administrator for the purpose of demonstrations and quantitative milestones in a sources (gaseous and particulate). MAG ensuring attainment of the applicable letter. See letter, Jacqueline E. Schafer, ADEQ, to plan, p. 10–61. The MAG plan national ambient air quality standard by Laura Yoshii, EPA, ‘‘Addendum to June 13, 2001, concludes that the cancer risk in the the applicable date.’’ Submittal of State Implementation Plan revision for the Agricultural Best Management Practices Phoenix area is comparable to that in CAA section 189(c) also requires PM– program in the Maricopa County PM–10 California cities, p. 10–61. The MAG 10 plans demonstrating attainment to Nonattainment Area,’’ September 7, 2001 (‘‘ADEQ plan and other Arizona programs (e.g., contain quantitative milestones which RFP Addendum Letter’’)
VerDate 11
those controls on these source categories of controls. Because of this, the set of measures that were is essential. Regionalizing and quantitative milestones for the 24-hour technologically and economically annualizing the microscale inventories plan need to reflect regional feasible and could collectively generate allows this to be done. implementation of controls. The MAG substantial emission reductions, e.g., The plan does not provide emission plan’s approach of regionalizing and one year’s worth of RFP, then a state reduction information for each year annualizing the emissions inventories would be hard pressed to justify between the base modeling year of 1995 from the microscale sites and then withholding their implementation.49 and the attainment year of 2006. We do basing its RFP demonstration and If we read the CAA to demand that not believe that this level of detail is milestones on the resulting inventory is the only acceptable contingency necessary or meaningful given the an appropriate way to deal with these measure are those that are adopted but evidence that progress is being made requirements for the 24-hour standard. not implemented, then states face a over time and the implementation of For these reasons, we propose to find difficult choice: adopt the controls for controls are not being delayed. that the MAG plan meets the immediate implementation and clearly Therefore, we propose to find that the quantitative milestone requirement in meet the core control measure MAG plan provides for ‘‘such annual CAA section 189(c)(1) for the 24-hour requirements but fail the contingency incremental reductions in emissions of standard. measure requirement or adopt the the relevant air pollutant as are required I. Contingency Measures control measures but hold by this part [part D of title I] or may implementation in reserve to meet the reasonably be required by the Section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act contingency measure requirement but Administrator for the purpose of requires that implementation plans potentially fail the core control measure ensuring attainment of the [24-hour provide for the implementation of requirements. PM–10] national ambient air quality specific measures to be undertaken if However, states do not need to face standard by the applicable date’’ as the area fails to make RFP or attain by this difficult choice if we read the CAA required by section 172(c)(2) of the Act. its attainment deadline. These to allow adopted and implemented contingency measures are to take effect 2. Quantitative Milestones measures to serve as contingency without further action by the State or measures, provided that those measures’ Quantitative milestones based on the Administrator. The Act does not emission reductions are not needed to regionalized and annualized microscale specify how many contingency demonstrate expeditious attainment inventories are provided for 2001, 2003, measures are necessary nor does it and/or RFP. There is nothing in the and 2006. See RFP Addendum Letter, specify the level of emission reductions language of section 172(c)(9) that Enclosure 2. These are the same they must produce. prohibits this interpretation. This We interpret the ‘‘take effect without milestone years used for the annual approach to the contingency measure standard. See 65 FR 19964, 19988. The further action by the State or the requirement also has the benefit of assumptions regarding control Administrator’’ to mean that no further allowing states to build uncredited measures’ implementation and rulemaking actions by the State or EPA cushions into their attainment and RFP effectiveness that underlie the would be needed to implement the demonstrations, which makes actual quantitative milestones are reasonable contingency measures. Addendum at failures to make progress or attain less and consistent with the RFP 42015. likely, while still obtaining the air demonstration. The purpose of contingency measures The plan does not provide milestones is to ensure that additional emission quality and public health benefits from for each of the two microscale sites. reductions beyond those relied on in the the implemented measures. Milestones are intended as checks along attainment and RFP demonstrations are We have allowed this approach, the way, a means of judging actual available if there is a failure to make which is effectively the early emission reductions and control RFP or attain by the applicable implementation of contingency measure implementation against those attainment date. These additional measures, in ozone and carbon projected in the plan. Arguably, given emission reductions will assure monoxide plans. See memorandum, G. the microscale analysis that is the basis continued progress towards attainment T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon for the Phoenix area’s 24-hour standard while the SIP is being revised to fully Monoxide Programs Brand, OAQPS to plan, quantitative milestones should be correct the failure. To ensure this Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X, ‘‘Early established for both the West Chandler continued progress, we recommend that Implementation of Contingency and Gilbert sites. However, this contingency measures provide emission Measures for Ozone and Carbon approach would actually defeat the reductions equivalent of one year’s Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,’’ purpose of the quantitative milestones average increment of RFP. Addendum at August 13, 1993. In this memorandum, rather than fulfill it. 42016. we note that several states wished to In order to report on a quantitative Certain core control measure implement their contingency measures milestone at the microscale sites, requirements such as RACM, BACM, early even though they were not needed Arizona would need to evaluate the and MSM may result in a state adopting for their attainment or RFP implementation of controls at each site. and expeditiously implementing more demonstrations and that ‘‘[i]t seems However, land uses and activities measures than are strictly necessary for illogical to penalize nonattainment areas around each of these microscale sites expeditious attainment and/or RFP. that are taking extra steps to ensure have changed significantly since 1995. Because of this and because these core attainment of the NAAQS by having For example, at the West Chandler site, requirements effectively require the them adopt additional [replacement] the road construction has been implementation of all non-trivial contingency measures now.’’ This completed and the agricultural field and measures that are technologically and rationale applies with equal force to its apron have been converted into economically feasible for the area, states PM–10 plans. stores. Thus, reporting on each site’s are left with few, if any, substantive 49 We do not believe that States are obligated by quantitative milestones would tell us unimplemented control measures. In section 172(c)(9) to adopt infeasible or unreasonable more about the land use changes around fact, under the Act’s PM–10 planning measures or measures that individual or each site than about the implementation provisions, if there were a measure or collectively have trivial benefit.
VerDate 11
Annual Standard This measure is estimated to reduce adequate authority under Arizona state The revised MAG plan as submitted emissions by 12.19 mtpd in 2006. MAG law to implement their respective in February 2000 identifies 5 measures plan, p. 8–9. The average annual commitments and, where applicable, to as contingency measures with a increment in RFP for the 24-hour obtain information necessary to collective emission reduction of 5.5 standard is 10.9 mtpd/year. See ADEQ determine compliance. 65 FR 19964, mtpd: the agricultural BMP general RFP Addendum Letter, Enclosure 1. 19989. While minor changes have been The unpaved road measure that is permit rule, off-road engine standards, made to several control measures (e.g., identified in the MAG plan as the clean burning fireplace ordinance, the remote sensing program), the State contingency measure for the 24-hour and additional dust controls from the continues to have adequate authority to standard has been adopted and is being implement the measures. No other cities of Tempe and Phoenix. MAG implemented but is not credited in the plan, p. 8–19. attainment, RFP or milestone changes have been made to any agencies Since the MAG plan was submitted, demonstrations for the 24-hour standard and/or jurisdictions authority since we Arizona has made changes to its and is not necessary to demonstrate proposed the annual standard. contingency measure package for the expeditious attainment of that standard. Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to annual standard. First, Arizona has Under our applicable policies, states are include a program to provide for the withdrawn its commitment to adopt allowed to use implemented but enforcement of SIP measures. The California’s off road vehicle standards uncredited measures as contingency implementing regulation for this section because the federal nonroad program measures. produces essentially the same emission is found at 40 CFR 51.111(a) and Based on this analysis, we propose to requires control strategies to include a reductions. ADEQ Off-Road Letter. find that the MAG plan provides for the Second, the emission reductions from description of enforcement methods implementation of contingency including (1) procedures for monitoring the agriculture contingency measure measures for the 24-hour standard as compliance with each of the selected have been recalculated based on the required by CAA section 172(c)(9). BMP general permit rule as adopted. control measures, (2) procedures for The emission reductions from the J. General SIP Requirements handling violations, and (3) the revised contingency measures package Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) of the Clean Air designation of the agency responsible are now 6.9 mtpd. See EPA TSD Act requires that implementation plan for enforcement. ‘‘Contingency Measures’’ for more provide necessary assurances that the The principle control measures in the details on the emission calculations. State (or the general purpose local plan are MCESD’s Rules 310 and 310.01 All the measures that have been government) will have adequate and the BMP General Permit. identified in the MAG plan as personnel, funding and authority under Procedures for monitoring compliance contingency measures have been State law. Requirements for legal (i.e., the inspection strategy) with these adopted and are being implemented but authority are further defined in 40 CFR rules are described in Maricopa are not credited in the attainment, RFP part 51, subpart L (51.230–51.232) and County’s commitments and the BMP or milestone demonstrations for the for resources in 40 CFR 51.280. TSD. See Maricopa County annual standard and are not necessary States and responsible local agencies to demonstrate expeditious attainment must demonstrate that they have the commitment, 1999 Revised Measure 6 of that standard. Under our applicable legal authority to adopt and enforce and BMP TSD, pp 33–34. policies, states are allowed to use provisions of the SIP and to obtain Based on the review of MCESD’s implemented but uncredited measures information necessary to determine enforcement procedures, we propose to as contingency measures. compliance. SIPs must also describe the find that the MAG plan adequately Under our contingency measure resources that are available or will be provides for the enforcement of the policy, we recommend contingency available to the State and local agencies principle measures relied on for measures have total emission reductions to carry out the plan, both at the time attainment and that the plan includes an equal to or more than the annual RFP of submittal and during the 5-year adequate description of enforcement increment. For the Phoenix area, the period following submittal of the MAG methods as required by our regulations. average annual increment in RFP for the plan. annual standard is 5.5 mtpd/year for the Other than revisions to Maricopa Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires SIPs full 11-year period, 1995 to 2006. See County’s revised commitments to to include necessary assurances that EPA TSD, ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress improve Rule 310, we are not proposing where a State has relied on a local or and Quantitative Milestones.’’ to approve any control measures in this regional government, agency or Collectively, the specified contingency proposal. All commitments and rules instrumentality for the implementation measures generate 6.9 mtpd. relied on in the MAG plan to meet the of any plan provision, the State has Based on this analysis, we propose to CAA requirements for the 24-hour PM– responsibility for ensuring adequate find that the MAG plan provides for the 10 standard are already approved, were implementation of the such plan implementation of contingency proposed for approval in the annual provision. measures for the annual standard as standard proposal, or proposed for We have previously found that required by CAA section 172(c)(9). approval in a subsequent notice. In Arizona law includes the necessary these notices, we have already proposed 24-Hour Standard assurances that where a State has relied to find that the implementing agencies on a local or regional government, The identified contingency measure for the MAG plan have adequate agency or instrumentality for the for the 24-hour standard is controls for resources for implementing their implementation of any plan provision, unpaved roads and alleys. BMP TSD, p. respective commitments and provided the State has responsibility for ensuring 30. This measure comprises not only the an opportunity for comment. We are not adequate implementation of the such unpaved road provisions in MCESD reproposing these findings. Rule 310.01 but also the commitments Finally, we initially proposed to find plan provision. 60 FR 18010, 18019 by local jurisdictions to control unpaved in the annual standard proposal that all (April 10, 1995). roads. See MAG plan, pp. 7–75 to 7–94. agencies and jurisdictions have
VerDate 11
V. CAA Requirements for BACM and and its applicability. The control In its ruling, the court held that we Attainment Date Extension and EPA’s requirement alone is not sufficient. have the power to make de minimis Guidance on Meeting These BACM must be applied to each exemptions to control requirements Requirements significant (i.e., non-de minimis) source under the Clean Air Act and that our category. Addendum at 42011. In use of the de minimis levels from the A. Implementation of Best Available guidance, we have established a NSR program was appropriate. Ober II at Control Measures presumption that a ‘‘significant’’ source 1195 and 1197. In addition, the court µ 3 Under section 189(b)(2), serious area category is one that contributes 5 g/m determined that it was appropriate for PM–10 plans must provide assurances or more of PM–10 to a location of 24- us to use, as a criterion for identifying that BACM will be implemented in the hour violation. Addendum at 42011. de minimis sources, whether controls area no later than four years after the However, whether the threshold should on the sources would result in area is reclassified as serious. For be lower than this in any particular area attainment by the attainment deadline. Phoenix, the BACM implementation depends upon the specific facts of that Ober II at 1198. Ober II dealt with a de deadline was June 10, 2000. area’s nonattainment problem. minimis exemption from the RACM Specifically, in areas that are requirement, but its reasoning applies The Act does not define what level of demonstrating attainment by December control constitutes a BACM-level of equally to the BACM requirement. 31, 2001, it depends on whether We have outlined in our guidance a control. In guidance, we have defined it requiring the application of BACM on to be, among other things, the maximum multi-step process for identifying source categories below a proposed de BACM. Addendum at 42010–42014. The degree of emission reduction achievable minimis level would meaningfully from a source or source category which steps are: expedite attainment. In areas that are 1. develop a detailed emissions is determined on a case-by-case basis, claiming the impracticability of inventory of PM–10 sources and source considering energy, economic and attainment by December 31, 2001, it categories, environmental impacts. Addendum at depends upon whether requiring the 2. model to evaluate the impact on 42010. This level of control is application of BACM on source PM–10 concentrations over the dependent on the deadline by which categories below a proposed de minimis standards of the various sources and BACM must be implemented.50 level would make the difference source categories to determine which We also considered a BACM-level between attainment and nonattainment are significant, control as going beyond existing RACM- by the serious area deadline of 3. identify potential BACM for level controls, such as expanding use of December 31, 2001.52 significant source categories including RACM (e.g, paving more miles of The recent decision by the Ninth their technological feasibility, costs, and unpaved roads). Addendum at 42013. Circuit Court of Appeals in Ober v. energy and environmental impacts Additionally, we believe that BACM Whitman 243 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2001) when it bears on the BACM should emphasize prevention rather (Ober II) supports the use of a de determination, and than remediation (e.g., preventing track minimis exemption in BACM analyses. 4. provide for the implementation of out at construction sites rather than Ober II was a challenge to our 1998 PM– the BACM or provide a reasoned simply requiring clean up of tracked-out 10 moderate area FIP for the Phoenix justification for rejecting any potential dirt). Addendum at 42013. area in which we exempted from the BACM. BACM is a best available control RACM requirement, source categories with de minimis impacts on PM–10 B. Extension of the Attainment Date measure. A control measure is a Beyond 2001 combination of a statement of levels. In the FIP, we established a de µ 3 applicability and the control minimis threshold of 1 g/m for the Section 188(e) of the Act allows us to µ 3 requirement, that is, what sources in the annual standard and 5 g/m for the 24- extend the attainment date for a serious category are subject to the measure and hour standard, borrowing these area for up to five years beyond 2001 if what the measure require the sources to thresholds from our new source review attainment by 2001 is impracticable. do to reduce emissions.51 Both these program for attainment areas to as a However, before we may grant an elements must be specified before the starting point in the de minimis extension of the attainment date, the measure’s level of control (i.e., its analysis. In evaluating the State must first: stringency) can be determined, thus in appropriateness of these thresholds, we 1. apply to us for an extension of the setting out a BACM, a state must specify showed that they did not eliminate PM–10 attainment date beyond 2001, both the measure’s control requirement controls that would make the difference 2. demonstrate that attainment by between attainment and nonattainment 2001 is impracticable, by the applicable attainment deadline, 3. have complied with all 50 We have long held that an otherwise available measure is reasonable and thus not an available and therefore were the appropriate requirements and commitments measure if it cannot be implemented on a schedule thresholds. See 63 FR 41326, 41330 applying to the area in its that will advance the attainment date. See, for (August 3, 1998). implementation plan, example, 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16, 1992). See, 4. demonstrate to our satisfaction that also Delaney v. EPA 898 F.2d 695 (9th Cir. 1990) 52 This principle is best illustrated by an example: which required the adoption of ‘‘all available its serious area plan includes the most In Area A, attainment of the 24-hour standard by stringent measures that are included in control measures’’ to attain ‘‘as soon as possible’’ December 31, 2001 requires that PM–10 ambient and not simply all available control measures. The levels at exceeding locations be reduced by 40 µg/ the implementation plan of any state most clear example of this is a measure that cannot m3 to 150 µg/m3. After application of BACM to all and/or are achieved in practice in any be implemented until after the applicable source categories above the proposed de minimis state and are feasible for the area, and attainment date. level, PM–10 levels are reduced by 32 µg/m3. 51 5. submit a demonstration of An example: a measure requires all unpaved BACM on the proposed de minimis source roads with ADT over 150 be stabilized by either categories would reduce levels by a further 3 µg/ attainment by the most expeditious paving, graveling, or treating with chemical m3, but still leaves ambient levels 5 µg/m3 short of alternative date practicable. stabilizers. The control requirement here is the reduction needed to show attainment. Since 6. the technological and economic ‘‘Stabilize using one of these three methods: paving, application of BACM to the proposed de minimis graveling, or chemical stabilization’’ and the source categories still leaves ambient levels above feasibility of various control measures. applicability is ‘‘all unpaved roads with ADT over the attainment level of 150 µg/m3, the proposed de We may grant only one extension for 150.’’ minimis level is appropriate. an area and that extension cannot be for
VerDate 11
more than 5 years after 2001; that is, the that the implementation of BACM on which requires the state to comply with extended attainment date can be no later significant (that is, non-de minimis) all requirements and commitments than December 31, 2006. CAA section source categories will not bring the area pertaining to that area in the 188(e). into attainment by December 31, 2001. implementation plan but does not We first presented our preliminary In serious areas, BACM is required to be require that the state comply with all interpretation of the attainment date in place in advance of the 2001 requirements pertaining to the area in extension provision in our proposed attainment date; therefore, we believe the Act. For the same reason, we also approval of the annual standard that it is reasonable to interpret the Act read this provision not to bar an provisions in the MAG plan. See 66 FR to require that a state provide at least for extension if all or part of an area’s 19992, 19967. Based on comments we the implementation of BACM on moderate area plan is disapproved or received on it during that proposal’s significant source categories before it has been promulgated as a FIP or if the comment period, we have clarified can claim impracticability of attainment area has failed to meet a RFP milestone. certain aspects of the policy but have by 2001.54 This interpretation parallels Part of determining whether a state made no substantive changes to it. We our interpretation of the impracticability has implemented its commitments and will provide our full response to option for moderate PM–10 requirements in earlier plans is comments received on the annual nonattainment areas in section assessing whether the state retains the standard proposal when we take final 189(a)(1)(B). In moderate areas, RACM legal authority for them and is funding, action. was required before a moderate area staffing, and enforcing them at the level This interpretation is our preliminary plan could claim impracticability of assumed or committed to in those plans. view of the section 188(e) requirements attainment by 1994, the moderate area Thus any determination that the state and we again request comment on it. We attainment date. See 57 FR 13498, 13544 has met its commitments and emphasize that these are our (April 16, 1992). The Ober II court requirements in earlier plans is also a preliminary views and they are subject found this approach reasonable. Ober II finding that it has retained its legal to modification as we gain more at 1198. authority and has met its commitments experience reviewing extension requests The statutory provision for regarding enforcement, funding, and from other areas. demonstrating impracticability requires staffing. In the following sections we discuss that the demonstration be based on air 4. Demonstrate the Inclusion of the the five requirements a State must meet quality modeling. See section Most Stringent Measures before we can consider granting an 189(b)(1)(A). We have established The fourth extension criterion attainment date extension. minimum requirements for air quality requires the State to ‘‘demonstrate to the 1. Apply for an Attainment Date modeling. See discussion on air quality satisfaction of the Administrator that the Extension modeling later in this TSD. plan for the area includes the most Under CAA section 188(e), a State 3. Have Complied With all stringent measures that are included in must apply for an extension of the Requirements and Commitments in its the implementation plan of any State, or attainment deadline. The request should Implementation Plan are achieved in practice in any State, be accompanied by the SIP submittal We interpret this criterion to mean and can be feasibly be implemented in containing the most expeditious that the state has implemented the the area.’’ CAA section 188(e). alternative attainment date emission reducing measures in the plan The requirement for most stringent demonstration required by CAA section revisions it has submitted to address the measures (MSM) is similar to the 189(b)(1)(A)(ii). The state must be CAA requirements in sections 172 and requirement for BACM. We define a provided the public with reasonable 189 for PM–10 nonattainment areas. BACM-level of control to be, among notice and a hearing on the request The purpose of this criterion is to other things, the maximum degree of before it is sent to EPA. assure that a state is not receiving emission reduction achievable from a Extension requests are not SIP additional time to attain because it source or source category which is submittals per se 53 and are therefore not failed to implement already-adopted or determined on a case by case basis subject to the requirements of the Clean already-committed-to control measures. considering energy, economic and Air Act and our regulations for public Given this purpose, we believe our environmental impacts. Addendum at notice and hearing on SIP revisions. review under this criterion should be 42010. The Act establishes the deadline However, because they can greatly affect limited to the implementation status of for implementing BACM as four years the content and ultimate approvability control measures from earlier PM–10 after an area’s reclassification to serious. of a serious area PM–10 SIP, we believe plans and not be an expansive review of CAA section 189(b)(1)(A). a state must give the public an the implementation status of every We propose to define a ‘‘most opportunity, consistent with the provision in submitted implementation stringent measure’’ level of control in a requirements for SIP revisions, to plans, whether or not it is an emission similar manner: the maximum degree of comment on an extension request prior reducing measure. emission reduction that has been to submitting it to us. We read this provision not to require required or achieved from a source or 2. Demonstrate That Attainment by the area to have a fully approved plan source category in other SIPs or in 2001 is Impracticable that meets the CAA’s requirements for practice in other states and can be In order to demonstrate moderate areas. We base this reading on feasibly implemented in the area. A impracticability, the plan must show the plain language of section 188(e) MSM then is a control measure that delivers this level of control. 53 This is clear from the wording of section 188(e) 54 As described in the section on the BACM which makes a distinction between the application requirement, if applying BACM-level controls to The Act does not specify an for an extension and the SIP revision that must one or more of the proposed de minimis source implementation deadline for MSM. accompany it: ‘‘at the time of the such application, categories would result in attainment by December Because the clear intent of section the State must submit a revision to the 31, 2001, then those categories are not de minimis 188(e) is to minimize the length of any implementation plan that includes a demonstration (i.e., they are significant) and must have BACM of attainment by the most expeditious alternative applied to them. Therefore, states cannot use the de attainment date extension, we propose date practicable.’’ This attainment demonstration is minimis exemption to BACM to avoid applying that the implementation of MSM should the one required by section 189(b)(1)(A)(ii). controls that would result in attainment by 2001. be as expeditiously as practicable.
VerDate 11
Given this similarity between the of control that could be applied to a responsibility under section 188(e), BACM requirement and the MSM source or a source category given local however, is to grant the shortest requirement, we believe that conditions and the additional practicable extension of the attainment determining MSM should follow a implementation time afforded by an date by assuring the plan provides for process similar to determining BACM, extension. attainment as expeditiously as but with one additional step, to compare In considering the MSM provision, practicable. Thus, one means of the potentially most stringent measure the inclination is to assume that there determining an appropriate de minimis against the measures already adopted in are always better controls in other areas level is to determine if applying MSM the area to determine if the existing than there are in the local area. This to the proposed de minimis source measures are most stringent: assumption is unwarranted, especially categories would meaningfully expedite 1. Develop a detailed emissions for areas that have already gone through attainment. If it did, then the de inventory of PM–10 sources and source the process of identifying and adopting minimis level is too high, and if it did categories, BACM for their significant sources in not, then the de minimis level is 2. Model to evaluate the impact on order to meet the section 189(b)(1)(B) appropriate. PM–10 concentrations over the requirement. These areas are likely to Like the RACM and BACM standards of the various source have already evaluated the best controls requirements, there is no explicit categories to determine which are from other areas and either adopted provision in the Act prohibiting an significant for the purposes of adopting them as BACM or rejected them as not exemption from the MSM requirement MSM, feasible for their area. As a result, the for de minimis sources of PM–10 3. Identify the potentially most likelihood of finding substantial new pollution. We are using here the same stringent measures in other controls during a MSM evaluation in principles for determining when a implementation plans or used in one of these areas is low.55 source is considered de minimis under practice in other states for each De Minimis Thresholds. What the MSM requirement that we used for significant source category and for each constitutes a de minimis source category the RACM requirement that the Ober II measure determine their technological for BACM is dependent upon the court upheld and thus we have and economic feasibility for the area as specific facts of the nonattainment constructed the de minimis exemption necessary, problem under consideration. In for the MSM requirement to prevent 4. Compare the potentially most particular, it depends upon whether states from eliminating any controls on stringent measures for each significant requiring the application of BACM for sources or source categories that alone source category against the measures, if such sources would make the difference or together would result in more any, already adopted for that source between attainment and nonattainment expeditious attainment of the PM–10 category, and by the serious area deadline. We standards. 5. Provide for the adoption of any propose to use a similar approach for Technological feasibility. In the MSM MSM that is more stringent than judging what constitutes a de minimis analysis, a state must evaluate the existing similar local measures and source category for MSM but instead of application of controls from elsewhere provide for implementation as the attainment/nonattainment test, we to sources in its own area. In many expeditiously as practicable or, in lieu propose to use the test of whether MSM cases, these sources are already subject of providing for adoption, provide a controls on the de minimis sources to local control measures. In these reasoned justification for rejecting the would result in more expeditious situations, part of determining if a potential MSM, i.e., why such measures attainment. control is technologically feasible is cannot be feasibly implemented in the We would not review an MSM determining if the new control can be area. analysis in a plan if the plan did not integrated with the existing controls The MSM provision only requires that demonstrate expeditious attainment without reducing or delaying the a state consider the best controls from since one prerequisite for granting an emission reductions from the existing elsewhere in the country for extension request is that the plan control. If it cannot, then we would not, implementation in the area requesting demonstrate attainment. Therefore, any in general, consider the measure to be an attainment date extension. It looks to de minimis standard for MSM that technologically feasible for the area see—and the results are completely relied on the difference between unless the emission benefit of the new dependent on—how well other areas attainment and nonattainment would be measure is substantially greater than the have controlled their PM–10 sources. If meaningless because no additional existing measure. other areas have not controlled a controls are needed for attainment Economic feasibility. Because cost is particular source or source category beyond those already in the plan. Our rarely used to justify rejection of a well, then the resulting level of control measure in the MAG plan, we will not from the MSM will not be the maximum 55 There is also an inclination to assume that the attempt to establish a general guide for feasible level of control for that source MSM requirement is the provision in section 188(e) evaluating when a measure is that implements the Act’s general strategy of or source category in the local area. offsetting longer attainment time frames with more economically infeasible but instead will Even if they have controlled them well, stringer control and therefore, the MSM address the issue on a case-by-case basis the resulting level of control may still requirement must be interpreted to result in the as needed. not be the maximum feasible level adoption of measures more stringent than BACM. Judging stringency. The stringency of We believe, however, that this offsetting function is because local conditions may allow a actually served by the CAA section 189(b)(i)(A)(ii) a control measure is determined higher degree of control than has been requirement for PM–10 plans to demonstrate primarily by a combination of its achieved elsewhere. attainment by the most expeditious date applicability and its control The MSM provision does not require practicable, if attainment by 2001 is impracticable. requirement, that is, who in the source Because we are required to grant the shortest a state to consider if local sources or possible extension, a state must demonstrate that it category is subject to the measure and source categories can be controlled at a has adopted the set of control measures that will what does the measure requires them to level greater than the most stringent result in the most expeditious date practicable for do to reduce emissions. When we use level from other areas. In other words, attainement. This requirement may very well the term ‘‘measure’’ in the context of the require that a state adopt controls that go beyond it does not require states to determine the most stringent measures adopted or MSM requirement, we are referring to and adopt the maximum feasible level implemented elsewhere. this combination; we are not referring to
VerDate 11
just the control requirement or to qualitatively or quantitatively. It is the In order to evaluate the control individual methods of control. state’s responsibility, however, to assure measures relied on in the attainment The approach we propose to use in that any determination is well demonstration to determine if: evaluating the selection of the most documented and persuasive. 1. We have approved it into the SIP stringent among multiple measures, i.e., Once a state has identified a potential or the State has submitted it to us for evaluating the determination of when most stringent measure, it must provide approval into the SIP. one control measure is more stringent for the adoption of any MSM that is 2. It is enforceable under our SIP- than another, is: more stringent than existing measures enforceability standards or qualifies to 1. If there is only a single measure and provide for implementation as be credited under our mobile source applicable to a source category then we expeditiously as practicable or, in lieu voluntary measures policy.58 will compare the measures directly. If of providing for adoption, provide a 3. The plan provides reasonable there are multiple control measures reasoned justification for rejecting the assurances, including funding and other with diverse controls requirements potential MSM, i.e., why such measures resource commitments, that it will be applicable to a source category (e.g., cannot be feasibly implemented in the implemented and enforced. tailpipe emissions are controlled area. 4. It will be implemented on the most through fuels, emission standards, Finally, we address how we view the expedient schedule practicable. inspection and maintenance programs, ‘‘to the satisfaction of the 5. The emission reductions credited to and transportation control measures) Administrator’’ qualifier on the it are reasonable and consistent with the then we will compare measures with requirement that the State demonstrate implementation resources and schedule, similar control requirements against one that its plan includes the most stringent and for any reductions coming from another. If several measures apply the measures. The presence and wording of mobile source voluntary measures, that same or very similar control this qualifier indicates that Congress they do not collectively exceed 3 requirements to a source category, that granted us considerable discretion in percent of the total reductions needed is they have the same control determining whether a plan in fact for attainment.59 requirement but different applicablities provides for MSM. Under the terms of Our determination of whether the (e.g., MCESD Rule 310.01 and City and section 188(e), we believe that we can plan provides for attainment by the County commitments all require similar still accept an MSM demonstration even most expeditious date practicable will controls on unpaved roads), then will if it falls short of having every MSM depend on whether we find that the use the collective stringency of all the possible. To intuit the limits of this plan provides for appropriate BACM, measures in the stringency analysis. discretion, we again look to the overall MSM, and any other technologically 2. We will review all the provisions intent of section 188(e) that we grant as and economically feasible measures that of a rule that apply to a specific type of short an extension as practicable and to will result in attainment as source (e.g., all the rule provision that how we have interpreted the CAA’s expeditiously as practicable and that apply to vacant lots) as an inseparable other general control requirements, these measures are implemented on an measure. As discussed above a rule’s RACM and BACM. expeditious schedule. stringency is defined by a combination In concrete terms, this means that Please see section 3 of the EPA TSD of its applicability and control when judging the overall adequacy of for additional discussion of our requirements (as they apply to a single the MSM demonstration, we will give proposed interpretation of the extension type of source). They are not separable more weight to a failure to include MSM requirements. elements that can be compared in for source categories that contribute the VI. Administrative Requirements isolation to another rule.56 most to the PM–10 problem and to the 3. In a MSM analysis, a measure’s failure to include measures that could Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR stringency should be determined provide for more expeditious attainment 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed assuming that it is appropriately and less weight to those measures for action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory adopted, implemented and enforced. source categories that contribute little to action’’ and therefore is not subject to Thus, we will not use a measure’s the PM–10 problem and would not review by the Office of Management and implementation mechanisms (e.g., rule expedite attainment. Budget. For this reason, this proposed versus commitment), funding level, 5. Demonstrate Attainment by the action is also not subject to Executive compliance schedule, test method, Most Expeditious Alternative Date Order 32111, ‘‘Actions Concerning resources available for enforcement, or Practicable. Regulations That Significantly Affect other similar items as criteria for Section 189(b)(1)(A) requires that a Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 judging relative stringency.57 serious area plan demonstrate FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed A state may determine which measure attainment by the most expeditious date action merely approves state law as or measures are most stringent either practicable using air quality modeling meeting federal requirements and after December 31, 2001. This imposes no additional requirements 56 For example, South Coast Rule 403 covers demonstration is the final criterion that beyond those imposed by state law. vacant lots, construction sites, and agriculture must be met before we may grant an Accordingly, the Administrator certifies among other fugitive dust sources. MCESD’s Rule 310.01 covers vacant lots and Rule 310 covers extension request. that this proposed rule will not have a construction sites. The Arizona BMP rule covers There are two parts to reviewing a significant economic impact on a agricultural sources. Under this test we would modeled attainment demonstration: substantial number of small entities evaluate Rule 403’s provisions for vacant lots evaluating the technical adequacy of the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 against Rule 310.01 provisions for vacant lots; Rule modeling itself, and evaluating the 403’s provisions for construction sites against Rule U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule 310’s provision for construction sites; Rule 403’s control measures that are relied on to provisions for agricultural sources against the BMP demonstrate attainment. 58 Memorandum, Richard D. Wilson, Acting rule’s ones. We have established technical Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, to 57 However, once a State determines a measure is requirements for modeling PM–10 in EPA Regional Administrators, 1–10, ‘‘Guidance on a feasible most stringent measure, it must convert Incorporating Voluntary Mobile Source Reduction the measure into a legally enforceable form and SIP attainment demonstrations. Please Programs in State Implementation Plans (SIPs),’’ provide the necessary level of resources, etc. to see discussion later in this TSD on October 24, 1997. ensure its implementation. modeling requirements for PM–10 SIPs. 59 Ibid., page 5.
VerDate 11
proposes to approve pre-existing and responsibilities established in the legal standard for affected conduct. EPA requirements under state law and does Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also has complied with Executive Order not impose any additional enforceable is not subject to Executive Order 13045 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by duty beyond that required by state law, (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because examining the takings implications of it does not contain any unfunded it is not economically significant. the rule in accordance with the mandate or significantly or uniquely In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental affect small governments, as described role is to approve state choices, Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act provided that they meet the criteria of and Avoidance of Unanticipated the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). This rule Takings’’ issued under the executive also does not have a substantial direct absence of a prior existing requirement order. This proposed rule does not effect on one or more Indian tribes, on for the State to use voluntary consensus impose an information collection the relationship between the Federal standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Government and Indian tribes, or on the to disapprove a SIP submission for burden under the provisions of the distribution of power and failure to use VCS. It would thus be Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 responsibilities between the Federal inconsistent with applicable law for U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Government and Indian tribes, as EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 to use VCS in place of a SIP submission FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Environmental protection, Air it have substantial direct effects on the the Clean Air Act. Thus, the pollution control, Intergovernmental States, on the relationship between the requirements of section 12(d) of the relations, Particulate matter, Reporting national government and the States, or National Technology Transfer and and recordkeeping requirements. on the distribution of power and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. responsibilities among the various 272 note) do not apply. As required by Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. levels of government, as specified in section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 Dated: September 14, 2001. Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing Mike Schulz, August 10, 1999), because it merely this proposed rule, EPA has taken the Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. necessary steps to eliminate drafting approves a state rule implementing a [FR Doc. 01–24203 Filed 10–1–01; 8:45 am] federal standard, and does not alter the errors and ambiguity, minimize relationship or the distribution of power potential litigation, and provide a clear BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 191 Tuesday, October 2, 2001
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–523–5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the revision date of each title. Laws 523–5227 3 CFR 61...... 50110 62...... 49834 Proclamations: Presidential Documents 63...... 50110, 50116 7471...... 50097 523–5227 70...... 49837, 49839 Executive orders and proclamations 7472...... 50099 The United States Government Manual 523–5227 271...... 49841 Administrative Orders: Proposed Rules: Presidential 51...... 50135 Other Services Determinations: 52...... 50252 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523–4534 No. 2001–28 of 60...... 49894 Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 September 22, 62...... 49895 2001 ...... 50095 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 63...... 50135 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229 14 CFR 70...... 49895, 50136 39...... 49823, 49825 271...... 49896 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 71...... 50101 45 CFR Proposed Rules: World Wide Web Ch. V...... 49844 39...... 50125 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other 46 CFR publications: 15 CFR 32...... 49877 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 14...... 49827 742...... 50090 47 CFR Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 744...... 50090 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access: Proposed Rules: 64...... 50139, 50140 http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 17 CFR 230...... 50102 48 CFR E-mail 232...... 49829 202...... 49860 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an E-mail 239...... 50102 204...... 49860 service for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. To 240...... 50103 211...... 49860 subscribe, send E-mail to 270...... 50102 274...... 50102 212...... 49860, 49862 [email protected] 215...... 49862 Proposed Rules: 219...... 49860, 49863 with the text message: 240...... 49877 223...... 49864 subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name 19 CFR 225...... 49862 Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe to 122...... 50103 232...... 49864 PENS. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. 236...... 49860 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 22 CFR 237...... 49860 Federal Register system to: 41...... 49830 242...... 49860 243...... 49865 [email protected] 24 CFR 245...... 49860 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 888...... 50024 248...... 49865 regulations. 985...... 50004 252 ...... 49860, 49862, 49864, 49865 25 CFR FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER 253...... 49862 Proposed Rules: 442...... 49866 580...... 50127 49823–50094...... 1 49 CFR 50095–50286...... 2 29 CFR 325...... 49867 Proposed Rules: 355...... 49867 470...... 50010 356...... 49867 360...... 49867 33 CFR 365...... 49867 165 ...... 50105, 50106, 50108 366...... 49867 Proposed Rules: 367...... 49867 155...... 49877 370...... 49867 156...... 49877 371...... 49867 372...... 49867 38 CFR 373...... 49867 Proposed Rules: 374...... 49867 3...... 49886 375...... 49867 4...... 49886 376...... 49867 377...... 49867 40 CFR 378...... 49867 60...... 49830, 50110 379...... 49867
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 2, 2001 / Reader Aids
381...... 49867 391...... 49867 Proposed Rules: 50 CFR 383...... 49867 171...... 50147 392...... 49867 660...... 49875 384...... 49867 393...... 49867 173...... 50147 Proposed Rules: 385...... 49867 174...... 50147 395...... 49867 222...... 50148 386...... 49867 175...... 50147 396...... 49867 223...... 50148 387...... 49867 176...... 50147 388...... 49867 397...... 49867 229...... 49896, 50160 177...... 50147 389...... 49867 398...... 49867 679...... 49908 390...... 49867 399...... 49867 178...... 50147
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 2, 2001 / Reader Aids iii
REMINDERS Critical habitat comments due by 10-11- Delaware; comments due by The items in this list were designations— 01; published 7-13-01 10-9-01; published 9-7-01 editorially compiled as an aid Southern resident killer Air pollution control: ENVIRONMENTAL to Federal Register users. whales; comments due State operating permits PROTECTION AGENCY Inclusion or exclusion from by 10-12-01; published programs— Air quality implementation this list has no legal 8-13-01 Arizona; comments due plans; approval and significance. Fishery conservation and by 10-10-01; published promulgation; various management: 9-10-01 States: West Coast States and RULES GOING INTO Air programs; approval and Maryland; comments due by Western Pacific promulgation; State plans 10-9-01; published 9-7-01 EFFECT OCTOBER 2, fisheries— for designated facilities and ENVIRONMENTAL 2001 West Coast salmon; pollutants: PROTECTION AGENCY comments due by 10- Various States; comments ENVIRONMENTAL Air quality implementation 12-01; published 9-27- due by 10-10-01; PROTECTION AGENCY 01 plans; approval and published 9-10-01 promulgation; various Air quality implementation DEFENSE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL States: plans; approval and Privacy Act; implementation; PROTECTION AGENCY Maryland; comments due by promulgation; various comments due by 10-9-01; Air programs; approval and 10-9-01; published 9-7-01 States: published 8-9-01 Oregon; published 8-3-01 promulgation; State plans New Jersey; comments due DEFENSE DEPARTMENT for designated facilities and TREASURY DEPARTMENT by 10-11-01; published 9- Federal Acquisition Regulation pollutants: User fee airports; published 11-01 (FAR): Various States; comments 10-2-01 ENVIRONMENTAL Trademarks for government due by 10-10-01; PROTECTION AGENCY products; comments due published 9-10-01 COMMENTS DUE NEXT by 10-9-01; published 8-9- Air quality implementation ENVIRONMENTAL plans; approval and WEEK 01 PROTECTION AGENCY Privacy Act; implementation promulgation; various Air quality implementation States: AGRICULTURE National Imagery and plans; approval and Pennsylvania; comments DEPARTMENT Mapping Agency; promulgation; various due by 10-9-01; published Cranberries grown in— comments due by 10-9- States: 9-6-01 Massachusetts et al.; 01; published 8-9-01 Alabama; comments due by comments due by 10-9- ENERGY DEPARTMENT 10-11-01; published 9-11- ENVIRONMENTAL 01; published 9-21-01 Physicians panel 01 PROTECTION AGENCY Dairy products: determinations on worker California; comments due by Air quality implementation Dairy plants approved for requests for assistance in 10-9-01; published 8-7-01 plans; approval and USDA inspection and promulgation; various filing for State workers’ ENVIRONMENTAL grading service; general States: compensation benefits; PROTECTION AGENCY specifications; comments guidelines; comments due Pennsylvania; comments due by 10-12-01; by 10-9-01; published 9-7- Air quality implementation due by 10-9-01; published published 8-13-01 01 plans; approval and 9-6-01 promulgation; various AGRICULTURE ENERGY DEPARTMENT States: ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT PROTECTION AGENCY Consumer products and California; comments due by Fresh prunes grown in— commercial and industrial 10-12-01; published 9-12- Air quality implementation Washington and Oregon; equipment; energy 01 plans; approval and comments due by 10-12- conservation program; promulgation; various 01; published 8-13-01 meeting; comments due by ENVIRONMENTAL States: PROTECTION AGENCY AGRICULTURE 10-11-01; published 8-28-01 Pennsylvania; comments Air quality implementation DEPARTMENT ; comments due by 10-11- due by 10-10-01; plans; approval and Oranges, grapefruit, 01; published 8-28-01 published 9-10-01 promulgation; various tangerines, and tangelos Consumer products; energy States: ENVIRONMENTAL grown in Florida; comments conservation program: PROTECTION AGENCY due by 10-9-01; published Energy conservation California; comments due by Air quality implementation 9-26-01 standards— 10-12-01; published 9-12- 01 plans; approval and AGRICULTURE Central air conditioners promulgation; various ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT and heat pumps; States: comments due by 10-9- PROTECTION AGENCY Food labeling: Pennsylvania; comments 01; published 7-25-01 Air quality implementation United States cattle and due by 10-10-01; plans; approval and United States fresh beef Commercial unitary air published 9-10-01 products; definitions; conditioners and heat promulgation; various labeling requirements; pumps; comments due States: ENVIRONMENTAL comments due by 10-9- by 10-12-01; published Colorado; comments due by PROTECTION AGENCY 01; published 8-7-01 8-17-01 10-11-01; published 9-11- Air quality implementation Meat and poultry inspection: ENVIRONMENTAL 01 plans; approval and Slovakia; addition to list of PROTECTION AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL promulgation; various States: countries eligible to export Air pollutants, hazardous; PROTECTION AGENCY meat and meat products national emission standards: Air quality implementation Pennsylvania; comments to U.S.; comments due by Flexible polyurethane foam plans; approval and due by 10-11-01; 10-12-01; published 8-13- fabrication operations; promulgation; various published 9-11-01 01 comments due by 10-9- States: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMERCE DEPARTMENT 01; published 8-8-01 Colorado; comments due by PROTECTION AGENCY Endangered and threatened Integrated iron and steel 10-11-01; published 9-11- Air quality implementation species: manufacturing facilities; 01 plans; approval and
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 2, 2001 / Reader Aids
promulgation; various Mobile satellite service comments due by 10-12- TRANSPORTATION States: providers; flexible use of 01; published 9-27-01 DEPARTMENT Texas; comments due by assigned spectrum over NATIONAL AERONAUTICS Insurer reporting requirements: 10-9-01; published 9-7-01 land-based transmitters; AND SPACE Insurers required to file ENVIRONMENTAL comments due by 10-11- ADMINISTRATION reports; list; comments PROTECTION AGENCY 01; published 9-13-01 Federal Acquisition Regulation due by 10-9-01; published Hazardous waste program New advanced mobile and (FAR): 8-7-01 authorizations: fixed terrestrial wireless Trademarks for government TRANSPORTATION District of Columbia; services; frequencies products; comments due DEPARTMENT comments due by 10-10- below 3 GHz; comments by 10-9-01; published 8-9- Hazardous materials: 01; published 9-10-01 due by 10-11-01; 01 Hazardous materials published 9-13-01 transportation— ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION Radio services, special: Loading, unloading, and PROTECTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT storage; comments due Hazardous waste; program Private land mobile Drawbridge operations: services— by 10-12-01; published authorizatiions: Massachusetts; comments 6-14-01 Low power operations in due by 10-11-01; District of Columbia; TREASURY DEPARTMENT 450-470 MHz band; published 9-11-01 comments due by 10-10- Dog and Cat Protection Act; 01; published 9-10-01 applications and Ports and waterways safety: licensing; comments implementation; prohibitions ENVIRONMENTAL Long Island Sound et al., due by 10-12-01; and penalties; comments PROTECTION AGENCY CT and NY; safety zones; published 9-12-01 due by 10-9-01; published Superfund program: comments due by 10-9- 8-10-01 FEDERAL TRADE 01; published 8-7-01 National oil and hazardous VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMISSION substances contingency TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT plan— Consumer information; DEPARTMENT Adjudication; pensions, National priorities list safeguard standards; Airworthiness directives: compensation, dependency, update; comments due comments due by 10-9-01; Boeing; comments due by etc.: by 10-9-01; published published 8-7-01 10-9-01; published 8-23- Radiation-risk activities; 9-6-01 GENERAL SERVICES 01 presumptive service ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATION TRANSPORTATION connection for certain PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Acquisition Regulation DEPARTMENT diseases; comments due Superfund program: (FAR): Airworthiness directives: by 10-9-01; published 8-8- 01 National oil and hazardous Trademarks for government Goodyear Tire & Rubber Correction; comments due substances contingency products; comments due Co.; comments due by by 10-9-01; published plan— by 10-9-01; published 8-9- 10-12-01; published 9-4- 8-31-01 National priorities list 01 01 update; comments due HOUSING AND URBAN TRANSPORTATION by 10-9-01; published DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS 9-6-01 DEPARTMENT Airworthiness directives: ENVIRONMENTAL Practice and procedure: McDonnell Douglas; This is a continuing list of public bills from the current PROTECTION AGENCY Federal National Mortgage comments due by 10-9- 01; published 8-24-01 session of Congress which Superfund program: Association and Federal have become Federal laws. It National oil and hazardous Home Loan Mortgage Rolls-Royce plc; comments may be used in conjunction substances contingency Corporation— due by 10-9-01; published with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws plan— Flood insurance; 8-9-01 Update Service) on 202–523– National priorities list comments due by 10- TRANSPORTATION 6641. This list is also update; comments due 12-01; published 9-12- DEPARTMENT available online at http:// by 10-11-01; published 01 Airworthiness directives: www.nara.gov/fedreg/ 9-11-01 INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Rolls-Royce plc.; comments plawcurr.html. ENVIRONMENTAL Endangered and threatened due by 10-9-01; published The text of laws is not PROTECTION AGENCY species: 8-10-01 published in the Federal Superfund program: Florida manatee; additional TRANSPORTATION Register but may be ordered National oil and hazardous protection areas; DEPARTMENT in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual substances contingency comments due by 10-9- Class E airspace; comments pamphlet) form from the plan— 01; published 8-10-01 due by 10-9-01; published Superintendent of Documents, National priorities list Hearings; comments due 8-23-01 U.S. Government Printing update; comments due by 10-9-01; published VOR Federal airways and jet Office, Washington, DC 20402 by 10-11-01; published 8-29-01 routes; comments due by (phone, 202–512–1808). The 9-11-01 10-11-01; published 9-11-01 text will also be made JUSTICE DEPARTMENT Water supply: TRANSPORTATION available on the Internet from Immigration: National primary drinking DEPARTMENT GPO Access at http:// www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ water regulations— Immigration examinations Processor-based signal and nara005.html. Some laws may Public notification and fee adjustment; comments train control systems; not yet be available. consumer confidence due by 10-9-01; published development and use 8-8-01 report rules; revisions; standards; comments due H.R. 2603/P.L. 107–43 comments due by 10-9- LIBRARY OF CONGRESS by 10-9-01; published 8-10- United States-Jordan Free 01; published 9-7-01 Copyright arbitration royalty 01 Trade Area Implementation FEDERAL panel rules and procedures: TRANSPORTATION Act (Sept. 28, 2001; 115 Stat. COMMUNICATIONS Digital performance of DEPARTMENT 243) COMMISSION sound recordings; Clean Fuels Formula Grant H.J. Res. 65/P.L. 107–44 Frequency allocations and reasonable rates and Program; comments due by Making continuing radio treaty matters: terms determination; 10-12-01; published 8-28-01 appropriations for the fiscal
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 2, 2001 / Reader Aids v
year 2002, and for other enacted public laws. To SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L purposes. (Sept. 28, 2001; subscribe, go to http:// Your Name. 115 Stat. 253) Public Laws Electronic hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ Notification Service Note: This service is strictly publaws-l.html or send E-mail for E-mail notification of new Last List September 25, 2001 (PENS) to [email protected] laws. The text of laws is not with the following text available through this service. PENS is a free electronic mail message: PENS cannot respond to notification service of newly specific inquiries sent to this address.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:41 Oct 01, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 02OCCU