Pages 65147±65316 Vol. 61 12±11±96 No. 239 federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday Printing Office(GPO). Access Regulations (CFR) Free, easy,onlineaccesstoselected The released concurrently. so thattheonlineandprintedversionsof 1997 untilacompletesetisavailable.GPOtakingsteps Access GPO Access services andaccessmethods,seepageIIorcontactthe For additionalinformationon service astheybecomeavailable. New titlesand/orvolumeswillbeaddedtothisonline Committee oftheFederalRegister. official onlineeditionsauthorizedbytheAdministrative ★ ★ CFR Code ofFederalRegulations Email: [email protected] Phone: toll-free:1-888-293-6498 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr , aserviceoftheUnitedStatesGovernment incrementally throughoutcalendaryears1996and and User SupportTeamvia: Federal Register Now AvailableOnline GPO Access (Selected Volumes) volumes isnowavailablevia CFR via titles willbeaddedto GPO Access on GPO Access Code ofFederal products, CFR , arethe GPO will be GPO 1 II Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996

SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES PUBLIC Subscriptions: Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 FEDERAL REGISTER Published daily, Monday through Friday, (not published on Saturdays, Sundays, or on official holidays), by General online information 202–512–1530 the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records 1–888–293–6498 Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Single copies/back copies: Act (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the Paper or fiche 512–1800 regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 (1 CFR Ch. I). Distribution is made only by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC FEDERAL AGENCIES 20402. Subscriptions: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 523–5243 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and For other telephone numbers, see the Reader Aids section Executive Orders and Federal agency documents having general applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published at the end of this issue. by act of Congress and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless earlier filing is requested by the issuing agency. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates this issue of the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. 44 U.S.C. 1507 provides that the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper, 24x microfiche and as an online database through GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. The online edition of the Federal Register on GPO Access is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions. The online database is updated by 6 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published. The database includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. Free public access is available on a Wide Area Information Server (WAIS) through the Internet and via asynchronous dial-in. Internet users can access the database by using the World Wide Web; the Superintendent of Documents home page address is http:// www.access.gpo.gov/suldocs/, by using local WAIS client software, or by telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, then login as guest, (no password required). Dial-in users should use communications software and modem to call (202) 512–1661; type swais, then login as guest (no password required). For general information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by sending Internet e-mail to [email protected]; by faxing to (202) 512–1262; or by calling toll free 1–888–293–6498 or (202) 512– 1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday– Friday, except for Federal holidays.

The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $494, or $544 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 $433. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $8.00 for each issue, or $8.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $1.50 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 or MasterCard. 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: 60 FR 12345.

2 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

Agricultural Research Service Corporation for National and Community Service RULES NOTICES Conduct on National Arboretum Property: Agency information collection activities: Technical amendments, 65302–65303 Proposed collection; comment request, 65198–65199

Agriculture Department Defense Department See Agricultural Research Service See Engineers Corps See Farm Service Agency PROPOSED RULES See Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): See Rural Business-Cooperative Service Contract administration and audit cognizance, 65306– See Rural Housing Service 65310 See Rural Utilities Service Drug Enforcement Administration Antitrust Division NOTICES NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Competitive impact statements and proposed consent Rozeboom, Earl G., M.D.; correction, 65266 judgments: Oldcastle Northeast, et al., 65236–65237 Education Department Westinghouse Electric Corp., et al., 65237–65238 NOTICES National cooperative research notifications: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: ATM forum, 65238 Individuals with disabilities— Fuel Cell Technical Team, 65238 Vocational rehabilitation services; special projects and Intelligent Network Forum, 65238–65239 demonstrations, 65200–65201 PNGV Electrochemical Energy Storage Technical Team, 65239 Energy Department Salutation Consortium, 65239 See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission See Hearings and Appeals Office, Energy Department Army Department NOTICES See Engineers Corps Atomic energy agreements; subsequent arrangements, 65201

Assassination Records Review Board Engineers Corps NOTICES NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65195 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Alexander and Pulaski Counties, IL, 65199–65200 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Meetings: NOTICES Coastal Engineering Research Board, 65200 Agency information collection activities: Environmental Protection Agency Proposed collection; comment request, 65226–65227 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65227 RULES Superfund program: Children and Families Administration National oil and hazardous substances contingency NOTICES plans— Agency information collection activities: National priorities list update, 65186 Proposed collection; comment request, 65227–65228 Toxic and hazardous substances: Health and safety data reporting rule— Commerce Department List additions; partial stay, 65186–65187 See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Water quality standards: See International Trade Administration Priority toxic pollutants; numeric criteria— See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Dioxin and pentachlorophenol, 65183–65185 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency information collection activities: Water pollution control: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65195 National pollutant discharge elimination system— Permitting procedures, 65268–65296 Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements NOTICES NOTICES Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Cotton, wool, and man-made textiles: FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel, 65208–65209 Hong Kong, 65196–65197 Confidential business information and data transfer, 65209– Nepal, 65197–65198 65210 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Copyright Office, Library of Congress Community/university partnership program (1997 FY), NOTICES 65210–65214 Digital phonorecord delivery rate adjustment proceeding; Office of Environmental Justice program (1997 FY), precontroversy discovery schedule, 65243–65245 65214–65218 IV Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Contents

Pesticide, food, and feed additive petitions: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Clopyralid, 65221–65223 Texas Eastern Gas Transmission Corp. et al., 65201– Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: 65202 Rigo Home Pest Control RTU, etc., 65218–65220 Western Gas Interstate Co., 65202 Toagosei Co., 65220–65221 Federal Reserve System Executive Office of the President NOTICES See Presidential Documents Banks and bank holding companies: Change in bank control, 65225 Farm Credit Administration Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 65226 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65223–65224 Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Farm Service Agency Endangered and threatened species permit applications, RULES 65229–65230 Program regulations: Construction and other development; planning and Food and Drug Administration performance, 65153–65157 NOTICES Single family housing; reengineering and reinvention of Medical devices; premarket approval: direct section 502 and 504 programs Neuromedical Systems, Inc.; PAPNET Testing System, Correction, 65266 65228–65229 Foreign Assets Control Office Federal Aviation Administration RULES PROPOSED RULES Iraqi sanctions regulations: Air traffic operating and flight rules: Executory contracts for purchase of Iraqi-origin petroleum Rocky Mountain National Park, CO; special flight rules in and petroleum products, etc., 65312–65315 vicinity, 65191 Rulemaking petitions; summary and disposition, 65190– Foreign-Trade Zones Board 65191 NOTICES NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Airport noise compatibility program: Michigan San Antonio International Airport, TX, 65257–65258 ESCO Co., L.P.; colorformer chemicals manufacturing Southwest Florida International Airport, FL, 65258 facility; correction, 65266 Passenger facility charges; applications, etc.: Capital City Airport, MI, 65258–65259 General Services Administration Grand Forks International Airport, ND, 65259 PROPOSED RULES Rulemaking petitions; summary and disposition, 65259– Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): 65264 Contract administration and audit cognizance, 65306– 65310 Federal Communications Commission PROPOSED RULES Health and Human Services Department Radio broadcasting: See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Newspaper/radio cross-ownership waiver policy, 65192 See Children and Families Administration NOTICES See Food and Drug Administration Agency information collection activities: See Health Resources and Services Administration Proposed collection; comment request, 65224 Health Resources and Services Administration Federal Crop Insurance Corporation NOTICES RULES Meetings; advisory committees: Administrative regulations: January (1997), 65229 Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996— Hearings and Appeals Office, Energy Department State castastrophic risk protection; reinsurance NOTICES agreement; correction, 65153 Cases filed, 65205–65206 Decisions and orders, 65206–65208 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Housing and Urban Development Department Retail repurchase agreements; policy statement rescission, PROPOSED RULES 65225–65226 Federal regulatory reform: Home investment partnership program; streamlining, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 65298–65299 NOTICES Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Interior Department Minnesota Power & Light Co., 65202 See Fish and Wildlife Service TPC Corp., 65202–65203 See Land Management Bureau Natural gas certificate filings: See National Park Service CNG Transmission Corp. et al., 65203–65205 See Reclamation Bureau Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Contents V

International Boundary and Water Commission, United National Highway Traffic Safety Administration States and Mexico RULES NOTICES Motor vehicle safety standards: Environmental infrastructure projects along U.S./Mexico Occupant crash protection— border; revised project certification criteria; availability, Smart air bags, vehicles without; warning labels, 65245 manual cutoff switches, etc.; correction, 65187– 65188 International Trade Administration National Labor Relations Board NOTICES Countervailing duties: RULES Viscose rayon staple fiber from— Privacy Act; implementation, 65182–65183 Summary judgment cases notice-to-show cause procedure, Sweden, 65195–65196 advisory opinions, etc.; Federal regulatory review, 65180–65182 International Trade Commission NOTICES NOTICES Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Import investigations: El Paso Resident Office, 65245 Dynamic Effects or Trade Liberalization: An Empirical Analysis, 65234–65235 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Examination of the Schedules of Commitments Submitted PROPOSED RULES by Asia/Pacific Trading Partners, 65235–65236 Fishery conservation and management: Northeastern United States fisheries— Justice Department Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish, 65192–65194 See Antitrust Division See Drug Enforcement Administration National Park Service RULES NOTICES Privacy Act; implementation, 65179–65180 Concession contracts and permits; extension, 65231–65232 Concession prospectus; availability: American Memorial Park, Northern Mariana Islands; Labor Department tennis complex, 65232–65233 See Labor Statistics Bureau NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Agency information collection activities: Olympic National Park, WA; Lake Crescent watershed, Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65239– 65233 65240 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Meetings: Zion National Park, UT, 65233 Trade Negotiations and Trade Policy Labor Advisory National Register of Historic Places: Pending nominations, 65233–65234 Committee, 65240 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Labor Statistics Bureau RULES NOTICES Reactor site criteria: Agency information collection activities: Seismic and earthquake engineering criteria for nuclear Proposed collection; comment request, 65240–65243 power plants, 65157–65177 PROPOSED RULES Land Management Bureau Production and utilization facilities; domestic licensing: NOTICES Electric utility industry; restructuring and economic Meetings: deregulation; public health and safety effect policy Resource advisory councils— statement Arizona, 65230 Comment period extended, 65190 New Mexico, 65230 NOTICES Realty action; sales, leases, etc.: Agency information collection activities: Nevada, 65230–65231 Proposed collection; comment request, 65245–65246 Survey plat filings: Meetings: Idaho, 65231 Nuclear Waste Advisory Committee, 65246–65247 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65247 Library of Congress Reports; availability, etc.: Electrical connections; aging and loss-of-coolant accident See Copyright Office, Library of Congress testing, 65247–65248 Reactor safety and plant performance; individual plant Mexico and United States, International Boundary and examination program; comment request and Water Commission workshop, 65248–65249 See International Boundary and Water Commission, United Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: States and Mexico Northern States Power Co., 65246

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Personnel Management Office PROPOSED RULES PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Employment: Contract administration and audit cognizance, 65306– Temporary and term employment; appointing system 65310 streamlining, 65189–65190 VI Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Contents

NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Excepted service: Hanover Investment Funds, Inc., 65251–65252 Schedules A, B, and C; positions placed or revoked— Sirrom Capital Corp., 65252–65254 Update, 65249–65250 State Department Presidential Documents NOTICES ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Meetings: Mexico; drawdown of articles, services, military education International Economic Policy Advisory Committee, and training from Defense Department (Presidential 65256 Determination No. 97–9 of December 2, 1996), 65149 Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962; availability Surface Transportation Board of funds (Presidential Determination No. 97–8 of NOTICES November 27, 1996), 65147–65148 Railroad services abandonment: Vietnam; cooperation in accounting for POW/MIA Union Pacific Railroad Co., 65264 (Presidential Determination No. 97–10 of December 3, 1996), 65151 Textile Agreements Implementation Committee See Committee for the Implementation of Textile Public Health Service Agreements See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration See Health Resources and Services Administration Thrift Supervision Office RULES Railroad Retirement Board Savings associations: Technical amendments, 65177–65179 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65250–65251 Transportation Department Reclamation Bureau See Federal Aviation Administration NOTICES See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Environmental statements; notice of intent: See Surface Transportation Board Elephant Butte and Caballo Reservoirs, NM, 65234 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65256– Rural Business-Cooperative Service 65257 RULES Program regulations: Construction and other development; planning and Treasury Department performance, 65153–65157 See Thrift Supervision Office Single family housing; reengineering and reinvention of See Foreign Assets Control direct section 502 and 504 programs Correction, 65266 Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Rural Housing Service Meetings: RULES Rehabilitation Research and Development Services Program regulations: Scientific Merit Review Board, 65264–65265 Construction and other development; planning and performance, 65153–65157 Single family housing; reeingineering and reinvention of Separate Parts In This Issue direct section 502 and 504 programs Correction, 65266 Part II Environmental Protection Agency, 65268–65296 Rural Utilities Service RULES Part III Program regulations: Department of Housing and Urban Development, 65298– Construction and other developments; planning and 65299 performance, 65153–65157 Single family housing; reengineering and reinvention of Part IV direct section 502 and 504 programs Agricultural Research Service, 65302–65303 Correction, 65266 Part V Securities and Exchange Commission Department of Defense, General Services Administration, PROPOSED RULES National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Semiannual regulatory agenda 65306–65310 Correction, 65191–65192 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Part VI Proposed collection; comment request, 65251 Department of the Treasury, Foreign Assets Control Office, Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: 65312–65315 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 65254–65256 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Contents VII

Reader Aids Additional information, including a list of public laws, telephone numbers, reminders, and finding aids, appears in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.

Electronic Bulletin Board Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law numbers, Federal Register finding aids, and a list of documents on public inspection is available on 202–275– 1538 or 275–0920. VIII Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Contents

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 48 CFR Presidential Determinations: Proposed Rules: No. 97±8 of November 15...... 65306 27, 1996 ...... 65147 42...... 65306 No. 97±9 of December 46...... 65306 2, 1996 ...... 65149 47...... 65306 No. 97±10 of 52...... 65306 December 3, 1996 ...... 65151 49 CFR 5 CFR 571...... 65187 Proposed Rules: 50 CFR 334...... 65189 Proposed Rules: 7 CFR 648...... 65192 400...... 65153 500...... 65153 1924...... 65153 1942...... 65153 1948...... 65153 1980...... 65153 3550...... 65266 10 CFR 21...... 65157 50...... 65157 52...... 65157 54...... 65157 100...... 65157 Proposed Rules: 50...... 65190 12 CFR 506...... 65177 561...... 65177 563...... 65177 563d...... 65177 574...... 65177 14 CFR Proposed Rules: Ch. I ...... 65190 91...... 65191 121...... 65191 127...... 65191 135...... 65191 17 CFR Proposed Rules: Ch. II ...... 65191 24 CFR Proposed Rules: 92...... 65298 28 CFR 16...... 65179 29 CFR 101...... 65180 102 (2 documents) ...... 65180, 65182 40 CFR 131...... 65183 300...... 65186 712...... 65186 716...... 65186 Proposed Rules: 22...... 65268 117...... 65268 122...... 65268 123...... 65268 124...... 65268 125...... 65268 144...... 65268 270...... 65268 271...... 65268 47 CFR Proposed Rules: 73...... 65192 65147

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

Title 3— Presidential Determination No. 97–8 of November 27, 1996

The President Determination Pursuant to Section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as Amended

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2601(c)(1), I hereby determine that it is important to the national interest that up to $15 million be made available from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund to meet the urgent and unexpected needs of refugees and migrants. These funds may be used to meet the urgent and unexpected needs of refugees, victims of conflict, and other persons at risk in and from northern Iraq. These funds may be used on a multilateral or bilateral basis as appropriate to provide contributions to international organizations, private voluntary organizations, governments, and other governmental and nongovernmental agencies. These funds may be used as reimbursement for expenses already incurred by the Department of State for these purposes and to pay related Department of State administrative expenses. You are authorized and directed to inform the appropriate committees of the Congress of this determination and the obligation of funds under this authority and to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register. œ–

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, November 27, 1996. 65148 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Presidential Documents

Justification for Presidential Determination Authorizing the Use of up to $15,000,000 From the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund

Under section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2601(c) (1), the President may authorize the furnishing of assistance from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assist- ance Fund (the Fund) to meet ‘‘unexpected urgent refugee and migration’’ needs whenever he determines it is ‘‘important to the national interest’’ to do so. The President may furnish assistance and make contributions under this act notwithstanding any provisions of law which restrict assistance to foreign countries. Between September 14 and September 18 the U.S. facilitated the evacuation of approximately 2,100 Kurdish employees of the U.S. Government and their dependents (Quick Transit I) who were considered to be at risk due to their close association with the U.S. Government. A second group has been evacuated. Due to the recent expansion of the Iraqi Government security presence in Northern Iraq, there are other persons who may need to be evacuated. A drawdown from the Fund of up to $15,000,000 is required to respond to these unexpected urgent refugee and migration needs related to the crisis in Northern Iraq. These funds may be used as reimbursement for expenses already incurred by the Department of State for these purposes and to pay related Department of State administrative expenses. These funds also may be used to provide contributions to international organizations, private voluntary organizations, governments, and other governmental and non-gov- ernmental agencies. The need for these funds is urgent and was not foreseen in the appropriation and programming of the FY 1997 Migration and Refugee Assistance funds. This drawdown furthers the U.S. national interest by providing humanitarian support where it is urgently needed. [FR Doc. 96–31598 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Billing code 4710–10–M Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Presidential Documents 65149 Presidential Documents

Presidential Determination No. 97–9 of December 2, 1996

Drawdown of Articles, Services, and Military Education and Training From DOD to Provide Anti-Narcotics Assistance to Mexico

Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the Secretary of Defense

Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 506(a)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2318(a)(2) (‘‘the Act’’), I hereby determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to draw down articles, services, and military education and training from the inventory and resources of the Department of Defense for the purpose of providing anti-narcotics assistance to Mexico. Therefore, I direct the drawdown of up to $37 million of such articles, services, and military education and training from the Department of Defense for the Government of Mexico for the purposes and under the authorities of Chapter 8 of Part I of the Act. The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to report this determination to the Congress immediately and to arrange for its publication in the Federal Register. œ–

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, December 2, 1996. [FR Doc. 96–31599 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Billing code 4710–10–M Federal Register /Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Presidential Documents 65151 Presidential Documents

Presidential Determination No. 97–10 of December 3, 1996

Continued Vietnamese Cooperation in Accounting for United States Prisoners of War and Missing in Action (POW/MIA)

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Consistent with section 609 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, 1997, as con- tained in the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, Public Law 104–208, I hereby determine, based on all relevant information available to the United States Government, that the Government of the Socialist Repub- lic of Vietnam continues to cooperate in full faith with the United States in four areas of accounting for American POW/MIA’s: 1. Resolving discrepancy cases, live sightings and field activities; 2. Recovering and repatriating American remains; 3. Accelerating efforts to provide documents that will help lead to the fullest possible accounting of POW/MIA’s; and 4. Providing further assistance in implementing trilateral investigations with Laos. I have been advised by the Department of Justice and believe that section 609 is unconstitutional because it purports to condition the execution of responsibilities—the authority to recognize, and to maintain diplomatic rela- tions with, a foreign government—that the Constitution commits exclusively to the President. I am, therefore, providing this determination as a matter of comity while preserving my position that the condition enacted in section 609 is unconstitutional. In making this determination, I wish to reaffirm my continuing personal commitment to the entire POW/MIA community, especially to the immediate families, relatives, friends, and supporters of these brave individuals, and to reconfirm that the central, guiding principle of my Vietnam policy is to achieve the fullest possible accounting for our prisoners of war and missing in action. You are authorized and directed to report this determination to the appro- priate committees of the Congress and to publish it in the Federal Register. œ–

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, December 3, 1996. [FR Doc. 96–31600 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Billing code 4710–10–M 65153

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Correction of Publication provisions of the Earthquake Hazards contains regulatory documents having general Accordingly, the publication on July Reduction Act of 1977, as amended. applicability and legal effect, most of which EFFECTIVE DATE: January 10, 1997. are keyed to and codified in the Code of 2, 1996 of the final regulations at 61 FR Federal Regulations, which is published under 34367 is corrected as follows: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Samuel J. Hodges III, Architect, Program § 400.168 [Corrected] Support Staff, Rural Housing Service, The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by On page 34368, in the second column, U.S. Department of Agriculture, STOP the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of in § 400.168, paragraph (c), in the eighth 0761, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., new books are listed in the first FEDERAL and ninth lines, the words ‘‘in Washington, DC 20250–0761, REGISTER issue of each week. accordance with subpart U of part 400’’ Telephone: (202) 720-9653. are removed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Signed in Washington, DC, on December 4, 1996. Classification Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Kenneth D. Ackerman, This rule has been determined to be Manager, Federal Crop Insurance not significant for the purposes of 7 CFR Part 400 Corporation. Executive Order 12866 and therefore [FR Doc. 96–31427 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] has not been reviewed by the Office of General Administrative Regulations; Management and Budget (OMB). Reinsurance AgreementÐStandards BILLING CODE 3410±FA±P for Approval; Correction Paperwork Reduction Act AGENCY: Federal Crop Insurance Rural Housing Service The information collection Corporation. requirements contained in these Rural Business-Cooperative Service regulations have been previously ACTION: Correction to final regulations. Rural Utilities Service approved by OMB under the provisions SUMMARY: This document contains a of 44 U.S.C. chapter 35 and have been correction to the final regulations for the Farm Service Agency assigned OMB control numbers 0575– General Administrative Regulations 0042, 0575–0015, 0575-0130, and 0575– 7 CFR Parts 1924, 1942, 1948, and 1980 which were published Tuesday, July 2, 0024, in accordance with the Paperwork 1996 (61 FR 34367). The regulations RIN 0575±AB59 Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507). related to obligations of participating This final rule does not revise or impose reinsured companies with respect to the Planning and Performing Construction any new information collection or sale and service of crop insurance to and Other Development recordkeeping requirements from those eligible producers. approved by OMB. AGENCIES: Rural Housing Service, Rural EFFECTIVE DATE: June 27, 1996. Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Environmental Impact Statement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Utilities Service, and Farm Service This document has been reviewed in Diana Moslak, Account Executive, Risk Agency, USDA. accordance with 7 CFR part 1940, Management Agency, Insurance ACTION: Final rule. subpart G, ‘‘Environmental Program.’’ It Services, Reinsurance Services Division, is the determination of the issuing U.S. Department of Agriculture, SUMMARY: The Rural Housing Service agencies that this action does not Washington, D.C. 20250, telephone (RHS), Rural Business- Cooperative constitute a major Federal action (202) 720–2832. Service (RBS), Rural Utilities Service significantly affecting the quality of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (RUS) and Farm Service Agency (FSA) human environment, in accordance are amending their regulations regarding with the National Environmental Policy Background construction and other development for Act of 1969, Public Law 91–190, an The final regulations that are the farm, housing, community and business Environmental Impact Statement is not subject of this correction, supersede programs. This action provides RHS, required. § 400.168, paragraph (c), to the extent RBS, RUS and FSA borrowers, grant that the final regulations make reference recipients and the public with rules for Regulatory Flexibility Act to a regulation (subpart U of part 400) compliance with seismic safety Pursuant to section 605(b) of the that does not exist at this time. This requirements for new building Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. erroneous reference may prove construction using RHS, RBS, RUS and 605(b), the head of the Agencies certify misleading to participating reinsured FSA loan, grant and guaranteed funds. that this rule will not have a significant companies with respect to the sale and This action is necessary to set forth the economic impact on a substantial service of crop insurance to eligible Agencies’ policies and requirements to number of small entities. producers. meet the implementation requirements The undersigned have determined of Executive Order 12699, ‘‘Seismic that this action will not have a Need for Correction Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted significant economic impact on a As published, the final regulations or Regulated New Building substantial number of small entities contain an error which may prove Construction,’’ 55 FR 835 (January 5, because the regulatory changes affect misleading and are in need of 1990). This Executive Order addresses processing of loans and eligibility for correction. compliance with the building safety the programs. 65154 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 intergovernmental consultation with building construction to the extent Title II of the Unfunded Mandate State and local officials. permitted by law. The Executive Order requires each Federal agency assisting Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Background Law 104–4, establishes requirements for in the financing through Federal grants Federal agencies to assess the effects of General or loans, or guaranteeing the financing their regulatory actions on State, local, The affected Agencies make grants, through loan or mortgage insurance and tribal governments and the private loans, and loan guarantees for the programs of newly constructed sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, planning and performing of buildings to initiate a plan to assure appropriate consideration of seismic the affected Agencies generally must construction and other development safety. prepare a written statement, including a work in rural areas. The Agencies To support the implementation of cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and require borrowers and grant recipients Executive Order 12699, the Interagency final rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that to meet applicable requirements Committee on Seismic Safety in may result in expenditures to State, mandated by Federal statutes, Construction (ICSSC), composed of local, or tribal governments, in the regulations, and executive orders to members representing Federal agencies aggregate, or to the private sector, of obtain Agency financing. One such involved with construction or $100 million or more in any one year. requirement is compliance with responsible for governmental assistance When such a statement is needed for a Executive Order 12699, which for construction, recommends the use of rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally implements the building safety seismic codes and standards which are requires the affected Agencies to provisions of the Earthquake Hazards substantially equivalent to the ‘‘NEHRP identify and consider a reasonable Reduction Act of 1977, as amended (42 Recommended Provisions for the number of regulatory alternatives and U.S.C. 7701 et seq.). Development of Seismic Regulations for adopt the least costly, more cost- Therefore, the Agencies are amending New Buildings.’’ This guideline that effective or least burdensome alternative their regulations regarding construction represents the state-of-the-art in seismic that achieves the objectives of the rule. and other development for farm credit design, has been widely reviewed, and This rule contains no Federal housing, community facilities and is currently incorporated into national mandates (under the regulatory business programs to address the standards and most model codes that provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for requirements of Executive Order 12699. can be adopted by state and local State, local, and tribal governments or This action clarifies the seismic building codes. the private sector. Thus, today’s rule is requirements applicable to RHS, RBS, not subject to the requirements of RUS, and FSA programs; informs Seismic Design sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. architects, engineers and contractors Unlike hurricanes, earthquakes Civil Justice Reform retained by borrowers and grant cannot be predicted; they strike without recipients of the seismic safety warning with great destructive forces. This final rule has been reviewed requirements applicable to new building Most casualties occur when ground under Executive Order 12778, Civil construction projects; and facilitates shaking causes buildings and other Justice Reform. In accordance with this understanding of and compliance with structures to collapse and objects to fall rule: (1) All state and local laws and the requirements. upon people. For these reasons, regulations that are in conflict with this buildings and other structures need to Seismic Introduction rule will be preempted; (2) No be designed to resist earthquake forces. retroactive effect will be given to this The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Structural performance in earthquakes rule; and (3) Administrative proceedings Act of 1977 (the Act), as amended, was indicates that severe damage to and in accordance with 7 CFR part 11 must enacted to reduce risks to life and collapse of buildings almost always are be exhausted before bringing suit in property from future earthquakes in the the consequence of inadequate design or court challenging action taken under United States through establishment construction. The successful this rule unless those regulations and maintenance of an effective performance of buildings designed and specifically allow bringing suit at an earthquake hazards reduction program. constructed in accordance with seismic earlier time. The Act also directs the President ‘‘to standards shows that effects of severe Intergovernmental Review establish and maintain an effective earthquakes can be resisted earthquake hazards reduction program’’ economically. This action affects the following (the National Earthquake Hazards In order to reduce hazards from programs as listed in the Catalog of Reduction Program or NEHRP). The earthquakes, buildings should be Federal Domestic Assistance: Federal Emergency Management Agency designed according to appropriate 10.405 Farm Labor Housing Loans and (FEMA) is the designated agency with seismic standards and codes. Executive Grants primary responsibilities to plan and Order 12699 requires the use of and 10.407 Farm Ownership Loans coordinate NEHRP. The objectives of conformance to seismic standards and 10.410 Low Income Housing Loans NEHRP include the development of codes for all new federally assisted 10.415 Rural Rental Housing Loans 10.420 Rural Self-Help Housing Technical technologically and economically buildings to the extent permitted by Assistance feasible design and construction law. The Federal government has 10.433 Housing Preservation Grants methods to make structures earthquake established NEHRP to reduce the hazard 10.766 Community Facilities Loans resistant; the development and due to earthquakes and ICSSC to assist 10.767 Intermediary Relending Program promotion of improved understanding Federal agencies with earthquake 10.768 Business and Industrial Loans and capability with respect to seismic hazard reduction implementation 10.770 Water and Waste Disposal Loans and risk; the education of the public as to measures. ICSSC has identified Grants earthquake phenomena; and other areas standards and model building codes All of the affected programs, except of seismic research. that meet the requirements of the 10.410 Low Income Housing Loans, are Executive Order 12699 requires that Executive Order and recommends their subject to the provisions of Executive measures to assure seismic safety be use. Therefore, the Agencies are Order 12372 that requires imposed on federally assisted new requiring that new construction Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65155 financed by programs deriving their However, townhouses where the Av ≥ Av threshold criteria. The ICSSC statutory from the Consolidated Farm 0.05 will not meet the level of safety recommendation of appropriate codes and Rural Development Act, 7 U.S.C. prescribed by the NEHRP provisions. specifically states that codes which are 1921, et seq., comply with the seismic Also, dwellings of masonry designed substantially equivalent to the most requirements of these model building using the CABO One and Two Family recent or immediately preceding edition codes and recommending that the Dwelling Code will not provide a of the NEHRP recommended provisions construction and housing under similar level of seismic safety except may be considered adequate. The programs authorized by title V of the where Av < 0.05. The CABO seismic Agency used the 1991 NEHRP Maps for Housing Act of 1949, as amended, 42 requirements for townhouses and the proposed rule. However, for the masonry construction are not U.S.C. 1491, et seq., scomply with the final rule the Agency used the 1994 comparable to those in the NEHRP seismic requirements of these model NEHRP Maps. There is no difference in building codes. recommended provisions. Therefore, ICSSC recommendation of model codes the 1991 and 1994 Av Maps. Discussion of Comments appropriate for use does not include the One comment requested a definition A proposed rule was published in the CABO code. of the term ‘‘earthquake resistant’’ in Federal Register (60 FR 44283) on The Agency recognizes that the CABO light of the 1994 NEHRP recommended August 25, 1995, providing for a 60-day code is not completely in compliance provisions that state ‘‘prevention of comment period. The rule proposed that with the NEHRP recommended damage even in an earthquake event RHS, RBS, RUS and FSA amend their provisions. However, section 509(a) of with a reasonable probability of regulations regarding construction and the Housing Act of 1949, 49 U.S.C. occurrence cannot be achieved other development in order to meet the 1479(a), requires the Secretary to economically for most buildings.’’ The implementation requirements of approve a residential building for point of this statement is that the Executive Order 12699. financing under title V of the Housing seismic safety provisions of our building Act of 1949 if the building is Interested persons were afforded an codes are intended to prevent fatalities; constructed in accordance with the opportunity to comment and participate they do not claim to be able to prevent in the making of this rule. Due standards contained in any of the voluntary national model building property damage. A building consideration has been given to the 5 constructed to meet modern code letters received commenting on the codes. The Housing Act of 1949 requires requirements is considered a success if, various aspects in the proposed rule. the Agency to finance decent, safe and after the earthquake, no one has been Three comments suggested that sanitary housing, and section 4(b) of the development work be designed and Executive Order requires the Agency to killed by collapse or partial collapse of constructed in accordance with the amend its regulations to comply with the building. The building will likely be seismic requirements of the most NEHRP only ‘‘to the extent permitted by damaged to some extent and may, in recently adopted model building code. law’’ to reduce the hazards from some cases, be so badly damaged that it After review of the May 95 National earthquakes. The Agency cannot is not economically feasible to repair. Institute of Standards and Technology disregard the requirements contained in Therefore, in terms of earthquake (NIST) report, Comparison of the the Housing Act and must continue to resistance, the successful performance Seismic Provisions of Model Building finance dwellings constructed in of buildings designed and constructed Codes and Standards to the 1991 accordance with CABO, even though in accordance with seismic standards NEHRP Recommended Provisions, this present CABO standards do not comply shows that the life-threatening effects of regulation provides for the use of the with NEHRP. However, it is important a severe earthquake can be resisted most recently adopted model building to design buildings according to economically. The level of earthquake code in the final rule. The following appropriate seismic standards and resistance provided by up-to-date editions of the model codes are codes. Therefore, the Agency seismic design codes and practices is recommends, but cannot require, that all referenced in the final rule as the intended to protect human life, not to townhouses and masonry dwellings baseline or minimum for providing a prevent damage to the building. level of seismic safety substantially financed by the Rural Housing Service Finally, one comment suggested that equivalent to that provided by NEHRP housing programs meet the seismic the proposed rule would drive up the Recommended Provisions: requirements of one of the voluntary national model codes that provide a cost of new construction in the face of —1991 ICBO Uniform Building Code level of safety substantially equivalent dwindling development resources and —1993 BOCA National Building Code to that intended by the NEHRP make new construction more difficult to —1992 SBCCI Standard Building Code recommended provisions. This will finance. This commenter also suggested One comment recommended the ensure that the Agency provides decent, an alternative, as he stated, ‘‘to dumping Agency recognize the Council of safe and sanitary housing for its large sums of both private and public American Building Officials (CABO) borrowers and meet the intent of the money into housing projects that could One and Two Family Dwelling Code Executive Order. be shaken into rubble by an with amendments for the purpose of The proposed rule contained the earthquake.’’ This alternative suggestion compliance with seismic requirements Agency’s seismic requirements for would promote the development of in addition to the three model building single family housing in exhibit N, of 7 housing that uses alternative building codes. Comparison of the CABO Code CFR part 1924, subpart A. This exhibit with the 1991 NEHRP provisions in the has been eliminated from the final rule materials that are less expensive to NIST report found that conventional and the single family housing seismic replace and more durable than today’s light frame dwellings of two stories or requirements are included in the body building materials. The Agency does not 35 feet in height maximum, constructed of 7 CFR part 1924, subpart A. believe that this rule will drive up the under the 1992 CABO One and Two One comment suggested that cost of housing and therefore, did not Family Dwelling Code provide the same regulations should reference the 1994 change the final rule nor adopt the level of seismic safety as those designed NEHRP Maps that delineate by counties suggested alternative as a result of this using the 1991 NEHRP provisions. geographic areas that are affected by the comment. 65156 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects designed and constructed in accordance identification and date of the model with the 1992 Council of American building code on the plans and 7 CFR Part 1924 Building Officials (CABO) One and Two specifications will be evidence of Agriculture, Construction and repair, Family Dwelling Code or the latest compliance with the seismic Construction management, Energy edition. requirements of the appropriate conservation, Housing, Loan programs— (iii) Single family housing of masonry building code. Agriculture, Low and moderate income design and townhouses of wood frame * * * * * housing. construction and additions financed 7 CFR Part 1942 (either directly or through a guarantee) PART 1948ÐRURAL DEVELOPMENT under title V of the Housing Act of 1949 Community development, are recommended to be designed and 5. The authority citation for part 1948 Community facilities, Loan programs— constructed in accordance with the is revised to read as follows: Housing and community development, earthquake (seismic) requirements of Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1989. Loan security, Rural areas, Waste one of the building codes that provides treatment and disposal—Domestic, an equivalent level of safety to that Subpart CÐIntermediary Relending Water supply—Domestic. contained in the latest edition of the Program (IRP) National Earthquake Hazard Reduction 7 CFR Part 1948 6. Section 1948.117 is amended by Program’s (NEHRP) Recommended adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: Business and Industry, Credit, Provisions for the Development of Economic development, Rural areas. Seismic Regulations for New Building § 1948.117 Other regulatory requirements. 7 CFR Part 1980 (NEHRP Provisions). * * * * * (iv) Acknowledgment of compliance (d) Seismic safety of new building Loan programs—Agriculture, Loan with the applicable seismic safety construction. (1) The Intermediary programs—Business and industry— requirements for new construction will Relending Program is subject to the Rural development assistance, Loan be contained in the certification of final provisions of Executive Order 12699 programs—Housing and community plans and specification on the that requires each Federal agency development, Loan programs— appropriate Agency Form. Community programs—Rural assisting in the financing, through development assistance. * * * * * Federal grants or loans, or guaranteeing the financing, through loan or mortgage Therefore, chapter XVIII, title 7, Code PART 1942ÐASSOCIATIONS of Federal Regulations is amended as insurance programs, of newly follows: 3. The authority citation for part 1942 constructed buildings to assure is revised to read as follows: appropriate consideration of seismic PART 1924ÐCONSTRUCTION AND Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C. 1989; 16 safety. REPAIR U.S.C. 1005. (2) All new buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance 1. The authority citation for part 1924 Subpart AÐCommunity Facility Loans with the seismic provisions of one of the is revised to read as follows: following model building codes or the 4. Section 1942.18 is amended by Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C 1989; 42 latest edition of that code providing an adding paragraph (d)(17) to read as U.S.C 1480. equivalent level of safety to that follows: contained in the latest edition of the Subpart AÐPlanning and Performing National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Construction And Other Development § 1942.18 Community FacilitiesÐPlanning, Bidding, Contracting, Constructing. Program’s (NEHRP) Recommended 2. Section 1924.5 is amended by * * * * * Provisions for the Development of adding paragraph (d)(4) to read as (d) * * * Seismic Regulations for New Building follows: (17) Seismic safety. (i) All new (NEHRP Provisions): building construction shall be designed (i) 1991 International Conference of § 1924.5 Planning development work. and constructed in accordance with the Building Officials (ICBO) Uniform * * * * * seismic provisions of one of the Building Code; (d) * * * following model building codes or the (ii) 1993 Building Officials and Code (4) Except as provided in paragraphs latest edition of that code providing an Administrators International, Inc. (d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, new equivalent level of safety to that (BOCA) National Building Code; or building construction and additions contained in latest edition of the (iii) 1992 Amendments to the shall be designed and constructed in National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Southern Building Code Congress accordance with the earthquake Program’s (NEHRP) Recommended International (SBCCI) Standard Building (seismic) requirements of the applicable Provisions for the Development of Code. Agency’s development standard Seismic Regulations for New Building (3) The date, signature, and seal of a (building code). The analysis and design (NEHRP Provisions): registered architect or engineer and the of structural systems and components (A) 1991 International Conference of identification and date of the model shall be in accordance with applicable Building Officials (ICBO) Uniform building code on the plans and requirements of an acceptable model Building Code; specifications will be evidence of building code. (B) 1993 Building Officials and Code compliance with the seismic (i) Agricultural buildings that are not Administrators International, Inc. requirements of the appropriate intended for human habitation are (BOCA) National Building Code; or building code. exempt from these earthquake (seismic) (C) 1992 Amendments to the Southern requirements. Building Code Congress International PART 1980ÐGENERAL (ii) Single family conventional light (SBCCI) Standard Building Code. wood frame dwellings of two stories or (ii) The date, signature, and seal of a 7. The authority citation for part 1980 35 feet in height maximum shall be registered architect or engineer and the is revised to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65157

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C. 1989; 7 NUCLEAR REGULATORY B. Seismic and Earthquake Engineering U.S.C. 4201 note; 42 U.S.C. 1480. COMMISSION Criteria. X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Subpart AÐGeneral 10 CFR Parts 21, 50, 52, 54 and 100 Fairness Act XI. Finding of No Significant Environmental 8. Section 1980.48 is added to read as Impact: Availability. RIN 3150±AD93 XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. follows: XIII. Regulatory Analysis. § 1980.48 Seismic safety of new building Reactor Site Criteria Including Seismic XIV. Regulatory Flexibility Certification. XV. Backfit Analysis. construction. and Earthquake Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants I. Background (a) The guaranteed loan programs are subject to the provisions of Executive AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory The present regulation regarding Order 12699 which requires each Commission. reactor site criteria (10 CFR Part 100) Federal agency assisting in the was promulgated April 12, 1962 (27 FR ACTION: Final rule. financing, through Federal grants or 3509). NRC staff guidance on exclusion loans, or guaranteeing the financing, area and low population zone sizes as SUMMARY: well as population density was issued through loan or mortgage insurance The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its in Regulatory Guide 4.7, ‘‘General Site programs, of newly constructed regulations to update the criteria used in Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power buildings to assure appropriate decisions regarding power reactor siting, Stations,’’ published for comment in consideration of seismic safety. including geologic, seismic, and September 1974. Revision 1 to this (b) All new buildings shall be earthquake engineering considerations guide was issued in November 1975. On designed and constructed in accordance for future nuclear power plants. The June 1, 1976, the Public Interest with the seismic provisions of one of the rule allows NRC to benefit from Research Group (PIRG) filed a petition following model building codes or the experience gained in the application of for rulemaking (PRM–100–2) requesting latest edition of that code providing an the procedures and methods set forth in that the NRC incorporate minimum equivalent level of safety to that the current regulation and to exclusion area and low population zone contained in the latest edition of the incorporate the rapid advancements in distances and population density limits National Earthquake Hazard Reduction the earth sciences and earthquake into the regulations. On April 28, 1977, Program’s (NEHRP) Recommended engineering. This rule primarily consists Free Environment, Inc. et al., filed a Provisions for the Development of of two separate changes, namely, the petition for rulemaking (PRM–50–20). The remaining issue of this petition Seismic Regulations for New Building source term and dose considerations, requests that the central Iowa nuclear (NEHRP Provisions): and the seismic and earthquake engineering considerations of reactor project and other reactors be sited at (1) 1991 International Conference of siting. The Commission also is denying least 40 miles from major population Building Officials (ICBO) Uniform the remaining issue in petition (PRM– centers. In August 1978, the Building Code; 50–20) filed by Free Environment, Inc. Commission directed the NRC staff to (2) 1993 Building Officials and Code et al. develop a general policy statement on Administrators International, Inc. nuclear power reactor siting. The EFFECTIVE DATE: January 10, 1997. (BOCA) National Building Code; or ‘‘Report of the Siting Policy Task Force’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. (NUREG–0625) was issued in August (3) 1992 Amendments to the Southern 1979 and provided recommendations Building Code Congress International Andrew J. Murphy, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear regarding siting of future nuclear power (SBCCI) Standard Building Code. Regulatory Commission, Washington, reactors. In the 1980 Authorization Act (c) The date, signature, and seal of a DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415– for the NRC, the Congress directed the registered architect or engineer and the 6010, concerning the seismic and NRC to decouple siting from design and identification and date of the model earthquake engineering aspects and Mr. to specify demographic criteria for building code on the plans and Charles E. Ader, Office of Nuclear siting. On July 29, 1980 (45 FR 50350), specifications will be evidence of Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear the NRC issued an Advance Notice of compliance with the seismic Regulatory Commission, Washington, Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) regarding revision of the reactor site requirements of the appropriate DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415– criteria, which discussed the building code. 5622, concerning other siting aspects. recommendations of the Siting Policy Dated: October 21, 1996. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Task Force and sought public Jill Long Thompson, comments. The proposed rulemaking I. Background. was deferred by the Commission in Under Secretary, Rural Development. II. Objectives. December 1981 to await development of Dated: October 15, 1996. III. Genesis. a Safety Goal and improved research on IV. Alternatives. Eugene Moos, accident source terms. On August 4, V. Major Changes. Under Secretary, Farm and Foreign 1986 (51 FR 23044), the NRC issued its Agricultural Services. A. Reactor Siting Criteria (Nonseismic). B. Seismic and Earthquake Engineering Policy Statement on Safety Goals that [FR Doc. 96–31426 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Criteria. stated quantitative health objectives BILLING CODE 3410±XV±U VI. Related Regulatory Guides and Standard with regard to both prompt and latent Review Plan Sections. cancer fatality risks. On December 14, VII. Future Regulatory Action. 1988 (53 FR 50232), the NRC denied VIII. Referenced Documents. PRM–100–2 on the basis that it would IX. Summary of Comments on the Proposed unnecessarily restrict NRC’s regulatory Regulations. siting policies and would not result in A. Reactor Siting Criteria (Nonseismic). a substantial increase in the overall 65158 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations protection of the public health and II. Objectives to 10 CFR Part 100, respectively. The safety. The Commission is addressing The objectives of this regulatory revised reactor site criteria is added as the remaining issue in PRM–50–20 as action are to— Subpart B in 10 CFR Part 100 and part of this rulemaking action. 1. State basic site criteria for future applies to site applications received on Appendix A, ‘‘Seismic and Geologic sites that, based upon experience and or after the effective date of the final Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power importance to risk, have been shown as regulations. Non-seismic site criteria is Plants,’’ to 10 CFR Part 100 was key to protecting public health and added as a new § 100.21 to Subpart B in originally issued as a proposed safety; 10 CFR Part 100. The criteria on seismic regulation on November 25, 1971 (36 FR 2. Provide a stable regulatory basis for and geologic siting is added as a new 22601), published as a final regulation seismic and geologic siting and § 100.23 to Subpart B in 10 CFR Part 100. The dose calculations and the on November 13, 1973 (38 FR 31279), applicable earthquake engineering earthquake engineering criteria is and became effective on December 13, design of future nuclear power plants located in 10 CFR Part 50 (§ 50.34(a) and 1973. There have been two amendments that will update and clarify regulatory Appendix S, respectively). Because to 10 CFR Part 100, Appendix A. The requirements and provide a flexible Appendix S is not self executing, first amendment, issued November 27, structure to permit consideration of new applicable sections of Part 50 (§ 50.34 1973 (38 FR 32575), corrected the final technical understandings; and and § 50.54) are revised to reference regulation by adding the legend under 3. Relocate source term and dose Appendix S. The regulation also makes the diagram. The second amendment requirements that apply primarily to conforming amendments to 10 CFR resulted from a petition for rulemaking plant design into 10 CFR Part 50. (PRM 100–1) requesting that an opinion Parts 21, 50, 52, and 54. Sections 21.3, be issued that would interpret and III. Genesis 50.49(b)(1), 50.65(b)(1), 52.17(a)(1), and clarify Appendix A with respect to the The regulatory action reflects changes 54.4(a)(1)(iii) are amended to reflect changes in § 50.34(a)(1) and 10 CFR Part determination of the Safe Shutdown that are intended to (1) benefit from the 100. Earthquake. A notice of filing of the experience gained in applying the petition was published on May 14, 1975 existing regulation and from research; IV. Alternatives (40 FR 20983). The substance of the (2) resolve interpretive questions; (3) The first alternative considered by the petitioner’s proposal was accepted and provide needed regulatory flexibility to Commission was to continue using published as an immediately effective incorporate state-of-the-art current regulations for site suitability final regulation on January 10, 1977 (42 improvements in the geosciences and determinations. This is not considered FR 2052). earthquake engineering; and (4) simplify an acceptable alternative. Accident The first proposed revision to these the language to a more ‘‘plain English’’ source terms and dose calculations regulations was published for public text. currently primarily influence plant comment on October 20, 1992, (57 FR The new requirements in this design requirements rather than siting. 47802). The availability of the five draft rulemaking apply to applicants who It is desirable to state basic site criteria regulatory guides and the standard apply for a construction permit, which, through importance to risk, have review plan section that were developed operating license, preliminary design been shown to be key to assuring public to provide guidance on meeting the approval, final design approval, health and safety. Further, significant proposed regulations was published on manufacturing license, early site permit, advances in understanding severe November 25, 1992, (57 FR 55601). The design certification, or combined license accident behavior, including fission comment period for the proposed on or after the effective date of the final product release and transport, as well as regulations was extended two times. regulations. However, for those in the earth sciences and in earthquake First, the NRC staff initiated an operating license applicants and holders engineering have taken place since the extension (58 FR 271; January 5, 1993) whose construction permits were issued promulgation of the present regulation from February 17, 1993 to March 24, prior to the effective date of this final and deserve to be reflected in the 1993, to be consistent with the comment regulation, the reactor site criteria in 10 regulations. period on the draft regulatory guides CFR Part 100, and the seismic and The second alternative considered and standard review plan section. geologic siting criteria and the was replacement of the existing Second, in response to a request from earthquake engineering criteria in regulation with an entirely new the public, the comment period was Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100 would regulation. This is not an acceptable extended to June 1, 1993 (58 FR 16377; continue to apply in all subsequent alternative because the provisions of the March 26, 1993). proceedings, including license existing regulations form part of the The second proposed revision to these amendments and renewal of operating licensing bases for many of the regulations was published for public licenses pursuant to 10 CFR Part 54. operating nuclear power plants and comment on October 17, 1994 (59 FR Criteria not associated with the others that are in various stages of 52255). The NRC stated on February 8, selection of the site or establishment of obtaining operating licenses. Therefore, 1995, (60 FR 7467) that it intended to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground these provisions should remain in force extend the comment period to allow Motion (SSE) have been placed in 10 and effect. interested persons adequate time to CFR Part 50. This action is consistent The approach of establishing the provide comments on staff guidance with the location of other design revised requirements in new sections to documents. On February 28, 1995, the requirements in 10 CFR Part 50. 10 CFR Part 100 and relocating plant availability of the five draft regulatory Because the revised criteria presented design requirements to 10 CFR Part 50 guides and three standard review plan in this final regulation does not apply to while retaining the existing regulation sections that were developed to provide existing plants, the licensing bases for was chosen as the best alternative. The guidance on meeting the proposed existing nuclear power plants must public will benefit from a clearer, more regulations was published (60 FR remain a part of the regulations. uniform, and more consistent licensing 10880) and the comment period for the Therefore, the non-seismic and seismic process that incorporates updated proposed rule was extended to May 12, reactor site criteria for current plants is information and is subject to fewer 1995 (60 FR 10810). retained as Subpart A and Appendix A interpretations. The NRC staff will Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65159 benefit from improved regulatory security measures to protect the plant Rationale for Individual Criteria implementation (both technical and can be developed, and that physical (A) Exclusion Area. An exclusion area legal), fewer interpretive debates, and characteristics unique to the proposed surrounding the immediate vicinity of increased regulatory flexibility. site that could pose a significant the plant has been a requirement for Applicants will derive the same benefits impediment to the development of siting power reactors from the very in addition to avoiding licensing delays emergency plans are identified. The beginning. This area provides a high caused by unclear regulatory Commission has also had a long degree of protection to the public from requirements. standing policy of siting reactors away a variety of potential plant accidents from densely populated centers, and is V. Major Changes and also affords protection to the plant continuing this policy in this rule. from potential man-related hazards. The A. Reactor Siting Criteria (Nonseismic) The Commission is incorporating Commission considers an exclusion area Since promulgation of the reactor site basic reactor site criteria in this rule to to be an essential feature of a reactor site criteria in 1962, the Commission has accomplish the above purposes. The and is retaining this requirement, in Part approved more than 75 sites for nuclear Commission is retaining source term 50, to verify that an applicant’s power reactors and has had an and dose calculations to verify the proposed exclusion area distance is opportunity to review a number of adequacy of a site for a specific plant, adequate to assure that the radiological others. In addition, light-water but source term and dose calculations dose to an individual will be acceptably commercial power reactors have are relocated to Part 50, since low in the event of a postulated accumulated about 2000 reactor-years of experience has shown that these accident. However, as noted above, if operating experience in the United calculations have tended to influence source term and dose calculations are States. As a result of these site reviews plant design aspects such as used in conjunction with standardized and operational experience, a great deal containment leak rate or filter designs, unlimited plant tradeoffs to of insight has been gained regarding the performance rather than siting. No compensate for poor site conditions will design and operation of nuclear power specific source term is referenced in not be permitted. For plants that do not plants as well as the site factors that Part 50. Rather, the source term is involve standardized designs, the source influence risk. In addition, an extensive required to be one that is ‘‘* ** term and dose calculations will provide research effort has been conducted to assumed to result in substantial assurance that the site is acceptable for understand accident phenomena, meltdown of the core with subsequent the proposed design. including fission product release and release into the containment of The present regulation requires that transport. This extensive operational appreciable quantities of fission the exclusion area be of such size that experience together with the insights products.’’ Hence, this guidance can be an individual located at any point on its gained from recent severe accident utilized with the source term currently boundary for two hours immediately research as well as numerous risk used for light-water reactors, or used in following onset of the postulated fission studies on radioactive material releases conjunction with revised accident product release would not receive a to the environment under severe source terms. total radiation dose in excess of 25 rem accident conditions have all confirmed The relocation of source term and to the whole body or 300 rem to the that present commercial power reactor dose calculations to Part 50 represent a thyroid gland. A footnote in the present design, construction, operation and partial decoupling of siting from regulation notes that a whole body dose siting is expected to effectively limit accident source term and dose of 25 rem has been stated to correspond risk to the public to very low levels. calculations. The siting criteria are numerically to the once in a lifetime These risk studies include the early envisioned to be utilized together with accidental or emergency dose to ‘‘Reactor Safety Study’’ (WASH–1400), standardized plant designs whose radiation workers which could be published in 1975, many Probabilistic features will be certified in a separate disregarded in the determination of Risk Assessment (PRA) studies design certification rulemaking their radiation exposure status (NBS conducted on individual plants as well procedure. Each of the standardized Handbook 69 dated June 5, 1959). as several specialized studies, and the designs will specify an atmospheric However, the same footnote also clearly recent ‘‘Severe Accident Risks: An dilution factor that would be required to states that the Commission’s use of this Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power be met, in order to meet the dose criteria value does not imply that it considers it Plants,’’ (NUREG–1150), issued in 1990. at the exclusion area boundary. For a to be an acceptable limit for an Advanced reactor designs currently given standardized design, a site having emergency dose to the public under under review are expected to result in relatively poor dispersion accident conditions, but only that it even lower risk and improved safety characteristics would require a larger represents a reference value to be used compared to existing plants. Hence, the exclusion area distance than one having for evaluating plant features and site substantial base of knowledge regarding good dispersion characteristics. characteristics intended to mitigate the power reactor siting, design, Additional design features would be radiological consequences of accidents construction and operation reflects that discouraged in a standardized design to in order to provide assurance of low risk the primary factors that determine compensate for otherwise poor site to the public under postulated public health and safety are the reactor conditions. accidents. The Commission, based upon design, construction and operation. Although individual plant tradeoffs extensive experience in applying this Siting factors and criteria, however, will be discouraged for a given criterion, and in recognition of the are important in assuring that standardized design, a different conservatism of the assumptions in its radiological doses from normal standardized design could require a application (a large fission product operation and postulated accidents will different atmospheric dilution factor. release within containment associated be acceptably low, that natural For custom plants that do not involve a with major core damage, maximum phenomena and potential man-made standardized design, the source term allowable containment leak rate, a hazards will be appropriately accounted and dose criteria will continue to postulated single failure of any of the for in the design of the plant, that site provide assurance that the site is fission product cleanup systems, such characteristics are such that adequate acceptable for the proposed design. as the containment sprays, adverse site 65160 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations meteorological dispersion incidence), or some other value should shown that the thyroid dose limit of 300 characteristics, an individual presumed be used, and whether the dose criterion rem has been the limiting dose criterion to be located at the boundary of the should also include a ‘‘capping’’ in licensing reviews, and that all exclusion area at the centerline of the limitation, that is, an additional operating plants would be able to meet plume for two hours without protective requirement that the dose to any a dose criterion of 25 rem TEDE. Hence, actions), believes that this criterion has individual organ not be in excess of the Commission concludes that, in clearly resulted in an adequate level of some fraction of the total. practice, use of the organ weighting protection. As an illustration of the Based on the comments received, factors of Part 20 together with a dose conservatism of this assessment, the there was a general consensus that the criterion of 25 rem TEDE, represents a maximum whole body dose received by use of the TEDE concept was relaxation rather than a tightening of the an actual individual during the Three appropriate, and a nearly unanimous dose criterion. In adopting this value, Mile Island accident in March 1979, opinion that no organ ‘‘capping’’ dose the Commission also rejects the view, which involved major core damage, was was required, since the TEDE concept advanced by some, that the dose estimated to be about 0.1 rem. provided the appropriate risk weighting calculation is merely a ‘‘reference’’ The proposed rule considered two for all body organs. value that bears no relation to what changes in this area. With regard to the value to be used as might be experienced by an actual First, the Commission proposed that the dose criterion, a number of person in an accident. Although the the use of different doses for the whole comments were received that the Commission considers it highly unlikely body and thyroid gland be replaced by proposed value of 25 rem TEDE that an actual person would receive a single value of 25 rem, total effective represented a more restrictive criterion such a dose, because of the conservative dose equivalent (TEDE). than the current values of 25 rem whole and stylized assumptions employed in The proposed use of the total effective body and 300 rem to the thyroid gland. its calculation, it is conceivable. dose equivalent, or TEDE, was noted as These commenters noted that the use of The second change proposed in this being consistent with Part 20 of the organ weighting factors of 1 for the area was in regard to the time period Commission’s regulations and was also whole body and 0.03 for the thyroid as that a hypothetical individual is based upon two considerations. First, given in 10 CFR Part 20, would yield a assumed to be at the exclusion area since it utilizes a risk consistent value of 34 rem TEDE for whole body boundary. While the duration of the methodology to assess the radiological and thyroid doses of 25 and 300 rem, time period remains at a value of two impact of all relevant nuclides upon all respectively. This is because the organ hours, the proposed rule stated that this body organs, use of TEDE promotes a weighting factors in 10 CFR Part 20 time period not be fixed in regard to the uniformity and consistency in assessing include other effects (e.g., genetic) in appearance of fission products within radiation risk that may not exist with addition to latent cancer fatality. containment, but that various two-hour the separate whole body and thyroid After careful consideration, the periods be examined with the objective organ dose values in the present Commission has decided to adopt a that the dose to an individual not be in regulation. Second, use of TEDE lends value of 25 rem TEDE as the dose excess of 25 rem TEDE for any two-hour itself readily to the application of acceptance criterion for the final rule. period after the appearance of fission updated accident source terms, which The bases for this decision follows. products within containment. The can vary not only with plant design, but First, the Commission has generally Commission proposed this change to in which additional nuclides, besides based its regulations on the risk of latent reflect improved understanding of the noble gases and iodine are predicted cancer fatality. Although a numerical fission product release into the to be released into containment. calculation would lead to a value of 27 containment under severe accident The Commission considered the rem TEDE, as noted in the discussion conditions. For an assumed current dose criteria of 25 rem whole that accompanied the proposed rule, the instantaneous release of fission body and 300 rem thyroid with the Commission concludes that a value of products, as contemplated by the intent of selecting a TEDE numerical 25 rem is sufficiently close, and that the present rule, the two hour period that value equivalent to the risk implied by use of 27 rather than 25 implies an commences with the onset of the fission the current dose criteria. The unwarranted numerical precision. In product release clearly results in the Commission proposed to use the risk of addition, in terms of occupational dose, highest dose to an individual offsite. latent cancer fatality as the appropriate Part 20 also permits a once-in-a-lifetime Improved understanding of severe risk measure since quantitative health planned special dose of 25 rem TEDE. accidents shows that fission product objectives (QHOs) for it have been In addition, EPA guidance sets a limit releases to the containment do not occur established in the Commission’s Safety of 25 rem TEDE for workers performing instantaneously, and that the bulk of the Goal policy. Although the emergency service such as lifesaving or releases may not take place for about an supplementary information in the protection of large populations. While hour or more. Hence, the two-hour proposed rule noted that the current the Commission does not, as noted period commencing with the onset of dose criteria are equivalent in risk to 27 above, regard this dose value as one that fission product release may not rem TEDE, the Commission proposed to is acceptable for members of the public represent the highest dose that an use 25 rem TEDE as the dose criterion under accident conditions, it provides a individual could be exposed to over any for plant evaluation purposes, since this useful perspective with regard to doses two-hour period. As a result, the value is essentially the same level of that ought not to be exceeded, even for Commission proposed that various two- risk as the current criteria. radiation workers under emergency hour periods be examined to assure that However, the Commission specifically conditions. the dose to a hypothetical individual at requested comments on whether the The argument that a criterion of 25 the exclusion area boundary would not current dose criteria should be modified rem TEDE in conjunction with the organ be in excess of 25 rem TEDE over any to utilize the total effective dose weighting factors of 10 CFR Part 20 for two-hour period after the onset of equivalent or TEDE concept, whether a its calculation represents a tightening of fission product release. TEDE value of 25 rem (consistent with the dose criterion, while true in theory, A number of comments received in latent cancer fatality), or 34 rem is not true in practice. A review of the regard to this proposed criterion stated (consistent with latent cancer dose analyses for operating plants has that so-called ‘‘sliding’’ two-hour Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65161 window for dose evaluation at the assessing radiological consequences of (F) Adequacy of Security Plans. The exclusion area boundary was confusing, normal operations as well as accidents. rule requires that the characteristics of illogical, and inappropriate. Several (C) Low Population Zone. The present the site be such that adequate security commenters felt it was difficult to regulation requires that a low plans and measures for the plant could ascertain which two hour period population zone (LPZ) be defined be developed. The Commission represented the maximum. Others immediately beyond the exclusion area. envisions that this will entail a small expressed the view that the significance Residents are permitted in this area, but secure area considerably smaller than of such a calculation was not clearly the number and density must be such that envisioned for the exclusion area. stated nor understood. For example, one that there is a reasonable probability (G) Emergency Planning. The comment expressed the view that a dose that appropriate protective measures proposed rule stated that the site evaluated for a ‘‘sliding’’ two-hour could be taken in their behalf in the characteristics should be such that period was logically inconsistent since event of a serious accident. In addition, adequate plans to carry out protective it implied either that an individual was the nearest densely populated center measures for members of the public in not at the exclusion area boundary prior containing more than about 25,000 the event of emergency could be to the accident, and approached close to residents must be located no closer than developed. To avoid any the plant after initiation of the accident, one and one-third times the outer misinterpretation that the Commission contrary to what might be expected, or boundary of the LPZ. Finally, the dose is adopting emergency planning that the individual was, in fact, located to a hypothetical individual located at standards that implicitly overrule or at the exclusion area boundary all along, the outer boundary of the LPZ over the may be in conflict with previous in which case the dose contribution entire course of the accident must not be Commission decisions (e.g., CLI–90–02), received prior to the ‘‘maximum’’ two- in excess of the dose values given in the the language in the final rule has been hour value was being ignored. regulation. modified to be consistent with that of Although the Commission recognizes While the Commission considers that section 52.17 of the Commission’s that evaluation of the dose to a the siting functions intended for the regulations regarding early site permits. The Commission’s decision in hypothetical individual over any two- LPZ, namely, a low density of residents Seabrook on emergency planning, made hour period may not be entirely and the feasibility of taking protective in connection with an operating license consistent with the actions of an actual actions, have been accomplished by review for a site previously approved, is individual in an accident, the intent is other regulations or can be being extended in considering site to assure that the short-term dose to an accomplished by other guidance, the suitability for future reactor sites. The individual will not be in excess of the Commission continues to believe that a Commission, in its Seabrook decision, acceptable value, even where there is requirement that limits the radiological CLI–90–02, reiterated its earlier some variability in the time that an consequences over the course of the determination in the Shoreham individual might be located at the accident provides a useful evaluation of decision, CLI–86–13, that the adequacy exclusion area boundary. In addition, the plant’s long-term capability to of an emergency plan is to be the dose calculation should not be taken mitigate postulated accidents. For this determined by the sixteen planning too literally with regard to the actions of reason, the Commission is retaining the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b), and that a real individual, but rather is intended requirement that the dose consequences these standards do not require that an primarily as a means to evaluate the be evaluated at the outer boundary of adequate plan achieve a preset effectiveness of the plant design and site the LPZ over the course of the minimum radiation dose saving or a characteristics in mitigating postulated postulated accident and that these not minimum evacuation time for the plume accidents. be in excess of 25 rem TEDE. exposure pathway emergency planning For these reasons, the Commission is (D) Physical Characteristics of the zone in the event of a serious accident. retaining the requirement, in the final Site. It has been required that physical Rather, the Commission noted that rule, that the dose to an individual characteristics of the site, such as the emergency planning is required as a located at the nearest exclusion area geology, seismology, hydrology, matter of prudence and for defense-in- boundary over any two-hour period meteorology characteristics be depth, and that the adequacy of an after the appearance of fission products considered in the design and emergency plan was to be judged on the in containment, should not be in excess construction of any plant proposed to be basis of its meeting the 16 planning of 25 rem total effective dose equivalent located there. The final rule requires standards given in 10 CFR 50.47(b). (TEDE). that these characteristics be evaluated Hence, the characteristics of the site, (B) Site Dispersion Factors. Site and that site parameters, such as design which determine the evacuation time dispersion factors have been utilized to basis flood conditions or tornado wind for the plume exposure pathway provide an assessment of dose to an loadings be established for use in emergency planning zone, have not individual as a result of a postulated evaluating any plant to be located on entered into the determination of the accident. Since the Commission is that site in order to ensure that the adequacy of an emergency plan. requiring that a verification be made occurrence of such physical phenomena Emergency plans developed according that the exclusion area distance is would pose no undue hazard. to the above planning standards will adequate to assure that the guideline (E) Nearby Transportation Routes, result in reasonable assurance that dose to a hypothetical individual will Industrial and Military Facilities. As for adequate protective measures can be not be exceeded under postulated natural phenomena, it has been a long- taken in the event of emergency. accident conditions, as well as to assure standing NRC staff practice to review It is sufficient that an applicant that radiological limits are met under man-related activities in the site vicinity identify any physical site characteristics normal operating conditions, the to provide assurance that potential that could represent a significant Commission is requiring that the hazards associated with such facilities impediment to the development of atmospheric dispersion characteristics or transportation routes will pose no emergency plans, primarily to assure of the site be evaluated, and that site undue risk to any plant proposed to be that ‘‘A range of protective actions have dispersion factors based upon this located at the site. The final rule been developed for the plume exposure evaluation be determined and used in codifies this practice. pathway emergency planning zone for 65162 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations emergency workers and the public’’, as (b) It reduces potential doses to large about 20 miles away from a city, stated in the planning standards. numbers of people and reduces property depending upon its size, the likelihood Accordingly, appropriate sections of damage in the event of severe accidents. of exposure of large numbers of people the rule (e.g., § 100.21(g)) have been Although the Commission’s Safety within the city would be reduced by modified to state that ‘‘physical Goal policy provides guidance on factors of ten to one hundred or more characteristics unique to the proposed individual risk limitations, in the form compared with locating a reactor very site that could pose a significant of the Quantitative Health Objectives close to a city. impediment to the development of (QHO), it provides no guidance with In summary, next-generation reactors emergency plans must be identified.’’ regard to societal risk limitations and are expected to have risk characteristics Except for the deletion of the phrase therefore cannot be used to ascertain sufficiently low that the safety of the whether a particular population density public is reasonably assured by the ‘‘such as egress limitations from the area would meet the Safety Goal. reactor and plant design and operation surrounding the site’’, this language is However, results of severe accident itself, resulting in a very low likelihood identical to that in § 52.17(b)(1). This risk studies, particularly those obtained of occurrence of a severe accident. Such phrase is being deleted from § 100.21(g) from NUREG–1150, can provide useful a plant can satisfy the QHOs of the (but § 52.17(b)(1) remains unchanged), insights for considering potential Safety Goal with a very small exclusion to eliminate any confusion that might criteria for population density. Severe area distance (as low as 0.1 miles). The arise regarding its scope. accidents having the highest consequences of design basis accidents, (H) Siting Away From Densely consequences are those where core-melt analyzed using revised source terms and Populated Centers. Population density together with early bypass of or with a realistic evaluation of engineered considerations beyond the exclusion containment failure occurs. Such an safety features, are likely to be found area have been required since issuance event would likely lead to a ‘‘large acceptable at distances of 0.25 miles or of Part 100 in 1962. The current rule release’’ (without defining this less. With regard to population density requires a ‘‘low population zone’’ (LPZ) precisely). Based upon NUREG–1150, beyond the exclusion area, siting a beyond the immediate exclusion area. the probability of a core-melt accident reactor closer to a densely populated The LPZ boundary must be of such a together with early containment failure city than is current NRC practice would size that an individual located at its or bypass for some current generation pose a very low risk to the populace. outer boundary must not receive a dose LWRs is estimated to be between 10±5 Nevertheless, the Commission in excess of the values given in Part 100 and 10±6 per reactor year. For future concludes that defense-in-depth over the course of the accident. While plants, this value is expected to be less considerations and the additional numerical values of population or than 10±6 per reactor year. enhancement in safety to be gained by population density are not specified for If a reactor was located nearer to a siting reactors away from densely this region, the regulation also requires large city than current NRC practice populated centers should be that the nearest boundary of a densely permitted, the likelihood of exposing a maintained. populated center of about 25,000 or large number of people to significant The Commission is incorporating a more persons be located no closer than releases of radioactive material would two-tier approach with regard to one and one-third times the LPZ outer be about the same as the probability of population density and reactor sites. boundary. Part 100 has no population a core-melt and early containment The rule requires that reactor sites be criteria other than the size of the LPZ failure, that is, less than 10±6 per reactor located away from very densely and the proximity of the nearest year for future reactor designs. It is populated centers, and that areas of low population center, but notes that ‘‘where worth noting that events having the very population density are, generally, very large cities are involved, a greater low likelihood of about 10±6 per reactor preferred. The Commission believes that distance may be necessary.’’ year or lower have been regarded in past a site not falling within these two licensing actions to be ‘‘incredible’’, and categories, although not preferred, can Whereas the exclusion area size is as such, have not been required to be be found acceptable under certain based upon limitation of individual risk, incorporated into the design basis of the conditions. population density requirements serve plant. Hence, based solely upon The Commission is not establishing to set societal risk limitations and reflect accident likelihood, it might be argued specific numerical criteria for consideration of accidents beyond the that siting a reactor nearer to a large city evaluation of population density in design basis, or severe accidents. Such than current NRC practice would pose siting future reactor facilities because accidents were clearly a consideration no undue risk. the acceptability of a specific site from in the original issuance of Part 100, If, however, a reactor were sited away the standpoint of population density since the Statement of Considerations from large cities, the likelihood of the must be considered in the overall (27 FR 3509; April 12, 1962) noted that: city being affected would be reduced context of safety and environmental Further, since accidents of greater potential because of two factors. First, the considerations. The Commission’s hazard than those commonly postulated as likelihood that radioactive material intent is to assure that a site that has representing an upper limit are conceivable, would actually be carried towards the significant safety, environmental or although highly improbable, it was city is reduced because it is likely that economic advantages is not rejected considered desirable to provide for the wind will blow in a direction away solely because it has a higher protection against excessive exposure doses to people in large centers, where effective from the city. Second, the radiological population density than other available protective measures might not be feasible dose consequences would also be sites. Population density is but one ** * Hence, the population center distance reduced with distance because the factor that must be balanced against the was added as a site requirement. radioactive material becomes other advantages and disadvantages of a increasingly diluted by the atmosphere particular site in determining the site’s Limitation of population density and the inventory becomes depleted due acceptability. Thus, it must be beyond the exclusion area has the to the natural processes of fallout and recognized that sites with higher following benefits: rainout before reaching the city. population density, so long as they are (a) It facilitates emergency Analyses indicate that if a reactor were located away from very densely preparedness and planning; and located at distances ranging from 10 to populated centers, can be approved by Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65163 the Commission if they present proposed change in regulation, the requirements for each applicant at advantages in terms of other likelihood of permanent relocation of specified distances. Because these considerations applicable to the people located more than about 20 miles requirements affect reactor design rather evaluation of proposed sites. (32 km) from the reactor as a result of than siting, they are more appropriately land contamination from a severe located in 10 CFR Part 50. Petition Filed By Free Environment, Inc. accident is very low. A revision of These requirements apply to future et al. Regulatory Guide 4.7 which applicants for a construction permit, On April 28, 1977, Free Environment, incorporated this finding that design certification, or an operating Inc. et al., filed a petition for rulemaking population density guidance beyond 20 license. The Commission will consider (PRM–50–20) requesting, among other miles was not needed in the evaluation after further experience in the review of things, that ‘‘the central Iowa nuclear of potential reactor sites was issued for certified designs whether more specific project and other reactors be sited at comment at the time of the proposed requirements need to be developed least 40 miles from major population rule. No comments were received on regarding revised accident source terms centers.’’ The petitioner also stated that this aspect of the guide. and severe accident insights. ‘‘locating reactors in sparsely-populated Therefore, the Commission concludes B. Seismic and Earthquake Engineering areas * * * has been endorsed in non- that the NRC staff guidance in Criteria binding NRC guidelines for reactor Regulatory Guide 4.7 provide a means of siting.’’ The petitioner did not specify locating reactors away from population The following major changes to what constituted a major population centers, including ‘‘major’’ population Appendix A, ‘‘Seismic and Geologic center. The only NRC guidelines centers, depending upon their size, that Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power concerning population density in regard would limit societal consequences Plants,’’ to 10 CFR Part 100, are to reactor siting are in Regulatory Guide significantly, in the event of a severe associated with the seismic and 4.7, issued in 1974, and revised in 1975, accident. The Commission finds that earthquake engineering criteria prior to the date of the petition. This granting of the petitioner’s request to rulemaking. These changes reflect new guide states population density values specify population criteria out to 40 information and research results, and of 500 persons per square mile out to a miles would not substantially reduce incorporate the intentions of this distance of 30 miles from the reactor, the risks to the public. As noted, the regulatory action as defined in Section not 40 miles. Commission also believes that a higher III of this rule. Much of the following Regulatory Guide 4.7 does provide population density site could be found discussion remains unchanged from that effective separation from population to be acceptable, compared to a lower issued for public comment (59 FR centers of various sizes. Under this population density site, provided there 52255) because there were no comments guide, a population center of about were safety, environmental, or economic which necessitated a major change to 25,000 or more residents should be no advantages to the higher population site. the regulations and supporting closer than 4 miles (6.4 km) from a Granting of the petitioner’s request documentation. reactor because a density of 500 persons would neglect this possibility and 1. Separate Siting From Design per square mile within this distance would make population density the sole would yield a total population of about criterion of site acceptability. For these Criteria not associated with site 25,000 persons. Similarly, a city of reasons, the Commission has decided suitability or establishment of the Safe 100,000 or more residents should be no not to adopt the proposal by Free Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion closer than about 10 miles (16 km); a Environment, Incorporated. (SSE) have been placed into 10 CFR Part city of 500,000 or more persons should The Commission also notes that 50. This action is consistent with the be no closer than about 20 miles (32 future population growth around a location of other design requirements in km), and a city of 1,000,000 or more nuclear power plant site, as in other 10 CFR Part 50. Because the revised persons should be no closer than about areas of the region, is expected but criteria presented in the regulation will 30 miles (50 km) from the reactor. cannot be predicted with great accuracy, not be applied to existing plants, the The Commission has examined these particularly in the long-term. Population licensing basis for existing nuclear guidelines with regard to the Safety growth in the site vicinity will be power plants must remain part of the Goal. The Safety Goal quantitative periodically factored into the emergency regulations. The criteria on seismic and health objective in regard to latent plan for the site, but since higher geologic siting would be designated as cancer fatality states that, within a population density sites are not a new § 100.23 to Subpart B in 10 CFR distance of ten miles (16 km) from the unacceptable, per se, the Commission Part 100. Criteria on earthquake reactor, the risk to the population of does not intend to consider license engineering would be designated as a latent cancer fatality from nuclear conditions or restrictions upon an new Appendix S, ‘‘Earthquake power plant operation, including operating reactor solely upon the basis Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power accidents, should not exceed one-tenth that the population density around it Plants,’’ to 10 CFR Part 50. of one percent of the likelihood of latent may reach or exceed levels that were not 2. Remove Detailed Guidance From the cancer fatalities from all other causes. In expected at the time of site approval. Regulation addition to the risks of latent cancer Finally, the Commission wishes to fatalities, the Commission has also emphasize that population Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100 investigated the likelihood and extent of considerations as well as other siting contains both requirements and land contamination arising from the requirements apply only for the initial guidance on how to satisfy the release of long-lived radioactive species, siting for new plants and will not be requirements. For example, Section IV, such as cesium-137, in the event of a used in evaluating applications for the ‘‘Required Investigations,’’ of Appendix severe reactor accident. renewal of existing nuclear power plant A, states that investigations are required The results of these analyses indicate licenses. for vibratory ground motion, surface that the latent cancer fatality faulting, and seismically induced floods quantitative health objective noted is Change to 10 CFR Part 50 and water waves. Appendix A then met for current plant designs. From The change to 10 CFR Part 50 provides detailed guidance on what analysis done in support of this relocates from 10 CFR Part 100 the dose constitutes an acceptable investigation. 65164 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

A similar situation exists in Section V, earthquake to be used as the source of Seismic Sources and Determination of ‘‘Seismic and Geologic Design Bases,’’ of ground motion that can affect the site, Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground Appendix A. locates the postulated earthquake Motion.’’ The key elements of this Geoscience assessments require according to prescribed rules, and then approach are: considerable latitude in judgment. This calculates ground motions at the site. —Conduct site-specific and regional latitude in judgment is needed because Although this approach has worked geoscience investigations, of limitations in data and the state-of- reasonably well for the past two —Target exceedance probability is set the-art of geologic and seismic analyses decades, in the sense that SSEs for by examining the design bases of and because of the rapid evolution plants sited with this approach are more recently licensed nuclear power taking place in the geosciences in terms judged to be suitably conservative, the plants, of accumulating knowledge and in approach has not explicitly recognized —Conduct probabilistic seismic hazard modifying concepts. This need appears uncertainties in geosciences parameters. analysis and determine ground to have been recognized when the Because of uncertainties about motion level corresponding to the existing regulation was developed. The earthquake phenomena (especially in target exceedance probability existing regulation states that it is based the eastern United States), there have —Determine if information from the on limited geophysical and geological often been differences of opinion and regional and site geoscience information and will be revised as differing interpretations among experts investigations change probabilistic necessary when more complete as to the largest earthquakes to be results, information becomes available. considered and ground-motion models —Determine site-specific spectral shape However, having geoscience to be used, thus often making the and scale this shape to the ground assessments detailed and cast in a licensing process relatively unstable. motion level determined above, regulation has created difficulty for Over the past decade, analysis —NRC staff review using all available applicants and the staff in terms of methods for incorporating these data including insights and inhibiting the use of needed latitude in different interpretations have been information from previous licensing judgment. Also, it has inhibited developed and used. These experience, and flexibility in applying basic principles ‘‘probabilistic’’ methods have been —Update the data base and reassess to new situations and the use of designed to allow explicit incorporation probabilistic methods at least every evolving methods of analyses (for of different models for zonation, ten years. instance, probabilistic) in the licensing earthquake size, ground motion, and process. other parameters. The advantage of Thus, the approach requires thorough The final regulation is streamlined, using these probabilistic methods is regional and site-specific geoscience becoming a new section in Subpart B to their ability not only to incorporate investigations. Results of the regional 10 CFR Part 100 rather than a new different models and different data sets, and site-specific investigations must be appendix to Part 100. Also, the level of but also to weight them using judgments considered in applications of the detail presented in the final regulation as to the validity of the different models probabilistic method. The current is reduced considerably. Thus, the final and data sets, and thereby providing an probabilistic methods, the NRC regulation contains: (a) required explicit expression for the uncertainty sponsored study conducted by definitions, (b) a requirement to in the ground motion estimates and a Lawrence Livermore National determine the geological, seismological, means of assessing sensitivity to various Laboratory (LLNL) or the Electric Power and engineering characteristics of the input parameters. Another advantage of Research Institute (EPRI) seismic hazard proposed site, and (c) requirements to the probabilistic method is the target study, are regional studies without determine the Safe Shutdown exceedance probability is set by detailed information on any specific Earthquake Ground Motion (SSE), to examining the design bases of more location. The regional and site-specific determine the potential for surface recently licensed nuclear power plants. investigations provide detailed deformation, and to determine the The final regulation explicitly information to update the database of design bases for seismically induced recognizes that there are inherent the hazard methodology as necessary. floods and water waves. The guidance uncertainties in establishing the seismic It is also necessary to incorporate documents describe how to carry out and geologic design parameters and local site geological factors such as these required determinations. The key allows for the option of using a structural geology, stratigraphy, and elements of the approach to determine probabilistic seismic hazard topography and to account for site- the SSE are presented in the following methodology capable of propagating specific geotechnical properties in section. The elements are the guidance uncertainties as a means to address establishing the design basis ground that is described in Regulatory Guide these uncertainties. The rule further motion. In order to incorporate local site 1.165, ‘‘Identification and recognizes that the nature of uncertainty factors and advances in ground motion Characterization of Seismic Sources and and the appropriate approach to account attenuation models, ground motion Determination of Safe Shutdown for it depend greatly on the tectonic characteristics are determined using the Earthquake Ground Motions.’’ regime and parameters, such as, the procedures outlined in Standard Review knowledge of seismic sources, the Plan Section 2.5.2, ‘‘Vibratory Ground 3. Uncertainties and Probabilistic existence of historical and recorded Motion,’’ Revision 3. Methods data, and the understanding of The NRC staff’s review approach to The existing approach for determining tectonics. Therefore, methods other than evaluate ground motion estimates is a Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground the probabilistic methods, such as described in SRP Section 2.5.2, Revision Motion (SSE) for a nuclear reactor site, sensitivity analyses, may be adequate 3. This review takes into account the embodied in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part for some sites to account for information base developed in licensing 100, relies on a ‘‘deterministic’’ uncertainties. more than 100 plants. Although the approach. Using this deterministic Methods acceptable to the NRC staff basic premise in establishing the target approach, an applicant develops a for implementing the regulation are exceedance probability is that the single set of earthquake sources, described in Regulatory Guide 1.165, current design levels are adequate, a develops for each source a postulated ‘‘Identification and Characterization of staff review further assures that there is Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65165 consistency with previous licensing OBE in the existing regulation made it restarting the plant is unacceptable. decisions and that the scientific bases possible for the OBE to have more Therefore, the applicant may voluntarily for decisions are clearly understood. design significance than the SSE. A select an OBE value at some higher This review approach will also assess decoupling of the OBE and SSE has fraction of the SSE to avoid plant the fairly complex regional probabilistic been suggested in several documents. shutdowns. However, if an applicant modeling, which incorporates multiple For instance, the NRC staff, SECY–79– selects an OBE value at a fraction of the hypotheses and a multitude of 300, suggested that a compromise is SSE higher than one-third, a suitable parameters. Furthermore, the NRC required between design for a broad analysis shall be performed to staff’s Safety Evaluation Report should spectrum of unlikely events and demonstrate that the requirements provide a clear basis for the staff’s optimum design for normal operation. associated with the OBE are satisfied. decisions and facilitate communication Design for a single limiting event (the The design shall take into account soil- with nonexperts. SSE) and inspection and evaluation for structure interaction effects and the earthquakes in excess of some specified expected duration of the vibratory 4. Safe Shutdown Earthquake limit (the OBE), when and if they occur, ground motion. The requirement The existing regulation (10 CFR Part may be the most sound regulatory associated with the OBE is that all 100, Appendix A, Section V(a)(1)(iv)) approach. NUREG–1061, ‘‘Report of the structures, systems, and components of states ‘‘The maximum vibratory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission the nuclear power plant necessary for accelerations of the Safe Shutdown Piping Review Committee,’’ Vol.5, April continued operation without undue risk Earthquake at each of the various 1985, (Table 10.1) ranked a decoupling to the health and safety of the public foundation locations of the nuclear of the OBE and SSE as third out of six shall remain functional and within power plant structures at a given site high priority changes. In SECY–90–016, applicable stress, strain and deformation shall be determined * * *’’ The ‘‘Evolutionary Light Water Reactor limits when subjected to the effects of location of the seismic input motion (LWR) Certification Issues and Their the OBE in combination with normal control point as stated in the existing Relationship to Current Regulatory operating loads. regulation has led to confrontations Requirements,’’ the NRC staff states that As stated, it is determined that if an with many applicants that believe this it agrees that the OBE should not control OBE of one-third or less of the SSE is stipulation is inconsistent with good the design of safety systems. used, the requirements of the OBE can engineering fundamentals. Furthermore, the final safety evaluation be satisfied without the applicant The final regulation moves the reports related to the certification of the performing any explicit response location of the seismic input motion System 80+ and the Advanced Boiling analyses. In this case, the OBE serves control point from the foundation-level Water Reactor design (NUREG–1462 and the function of an inspection and to the free-field at the free ground NUREG–1503, respectively) have shutdown earthquake. Some minimal surface. The 1975 version of the already adopted the single earthquake design checks and the applicability of Standard Review Plan placed the design philosophy. this position to seismic base isolation of control motion in the free-field. The Activities equivalent to OBE–SSE buildings are discussed below. There is final regulation is also consistent with decoupling are also being done in high confidence that, at this ground- the resolution of Unresolved Safety foreign countries. For instance, in motion level with other postulated Issue (USI) A–40, ‘‘Seismic Design Germany their new design standard concurrent loads, most critical Criteria’’ (August 1989), that resulted in requires only one design basis structures, systems, and components the revision of Standard Review Plan earthquake (equivalent to the SSE). will not exceed currently used design Sections 2.5.2, 3.7.1, 3.7.2, and 3.7.3. They require an inspection-level limits. This is ensured, in part, because The final regulation also requires that earthquake (for shutdown) of 0.4 SSE. PRA insights will be used to support a the horizontal component of the Safe This level was set so that the vibratory margins-type assessment of seismic Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion ground motion should not induce events. A PRA-based seismic margins in the free-field at the foundation level stresses exceeding the allowable stress analysis will consider sequence-level of the structures must be an appropriate limits originally required for the OBE High Confidence, Low Probability of response spectrum considering the site design. Failures (HCLPFs) and fragilities for all geotechnical properties, with a peak The final regulation allows the value sequences leading to core damage or ground acceleration of at least 0.1g. of the OBE to be set at (i) one-third or containment failures up to less of the SSE, where OBE 5. Value of the Operating Basis approximately one and two-thirds the requirements are satisfied without an ground motion acceleration of the Earthquake Ground Motion (OBE) and explicit response or design analyses design basis SSE (Reference: Item II.N, Required OBE Analyses being performed, or (ii) a value greater Site-Specific Probabilistic Risk The existing regulation (10 CFR Part than one-third of the SSE, where Assessment and Analysis of External 100, Appendix A, Section V(a)(2)) states analysis and design are required. There Events, memorandum from Samuel J. that the maximum vibratory ground are two issues the applicant should Chilk to James M. Taylor, Subject: motion of the OBE is at least one half consider in selecting the value of the SECY–93–087—Policy, Technical, and the maximum vibratory ground motion OBE: first, plant shutdown is required if Licensing Issues Pertaining to of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake vibratory ground motion exceeding that Evolutionary and Advance Light-Water ground motion. Also, the existing of the OBE occurs (discussed below in Reactor (ALWR) Designs, dated July 21, regulation (10 CFR Part 100, Appendix Item 6, Required Plant Shutdown), and 1993). A, Section VI(a)(2)) states that the second, the amount of analyses There are situations associated with engineering method used to insure that associated with the OBE. An applicant current analyses where only the OBE is structures, systems, and components are may determine that at one-third of the associated with the design capable of withstanding the effects of SSE level, the probability of exceeding requirements, for example, the ultimate the OBE shall involve the use of either the OBE vibratory ground motion is too heat sink (see Regulatory Guide 1.27, a suitable dynamic analysis or a suitable high, and the cost associated with plant ‘‘Ultimate Heat Sink for Nuclear Power qualification test. In some cases, for shutdown for inspections and testing of Plants’’). In these situations, a value instance piping, these multi-facets of the equipment and structures prior to expressed as a fraction of the SSE 65166 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations response would be used in the analyses. necessary for continued operation personnel conducting the inspection. Section VII of this final rule identifies without undue risk to the health and The regulation also includes a provision existing guides that would be revised safety of the public.’’ At that time, it was that requires the licensee to consult technically to maintain the existing the intention of the Commission to treat with the Commission and to propose a design philosophy. the OBE as a limiting condition of plan for the timely, safe shutdown of the In SECY–93–087, ‘‘Policy, Technical, operation. From the statement in the nuclear power plant if systems, and Licensing Issues Pertaining to Supplementary Information, the structures, or components necessary for Evolutionary and Advance Light-Water Commission directed applicants to a safe shutdown or to maintain a safe Reactor (ALWR) Designs,’’ the NRC staff specifically review 10 CFR Part 100 to shutdown are not available. requested Commission approval on 42 be aware of this intention in complying Regulatory Guide 1.167, ‘‘Restart of a technical and policy issues pertaining to with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36. Nuclear Power Plant Shut Down by a either evolutionary LWRs, passive Thus, the requirement to shut down if Seismic Event,’’ provides guidelines LWRs, or both. The issue pertaining to an OBE occurs was expected to be that are acceptable to the NRC staff for the elimination of the OBE is designated implemented by being included among performing inspections and tests of I.M. The NRC staff identified actions the technical specifications submitted nuclear power plant equipment and necessary for the design of structures, by applicants after the adoption of structures prior to plant restart. This systems, and components when the OBE Appendix A. In fact, applicants did not guidance is also based on EPRI reports. design requirement is eliminated. The include OBE shutdown requirements in Prior to resuming operations, the NRC staff clarified that guidelines their technical specifications. licensee must demonstrate to the should be maintained to ensure the The final regulation treats plant Commission that no functional damage functionality of components, shutdown associated with vibratory has occurred to those features necessary equipment, and their supports. In ground motion exceeding the OBE or for continued operation without undue addition, the NRC staff clarified how significant plant damage as a condition risk to the health and safety of the certain design requirements are to be in every operating license. A new public. The results of post-shutdown considered for buildings and structures § 50.54(ff) is added to the regulations to inspections, operability checks, and that are currently designed for the OBE, require a process leading to plant surveillance tests must be documented but not the SSE. Also, the NRC staff has shutdown for licensees of nuclear power in written reports and submitted to the evaluated the effect on safety of plants that comply with the earthquake Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor eliminating the OBE from the design engineering criteria in Paragraph Regulation. The licensee shall not load combinations for selected IV(a)(3) of Appendix S, ‘‘Earthquake resume operation until authorized to do structures, systems, and components Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power so by the Director, Office of Nuclear and has developed proposed criteria for Plants,’’ to 10 CFR Part 50. Immediate Reactor Regulation. an analysis using only the SSE. shutdown could be required until it is Commission approval is documented in determined that structures, systems, and 7. Clarify Interpretations the Chilk to Taylor memorandum dated components needed for safe shutdown Section 100.23 resolves questions of July 21, 1993, cited above. are still functional. interpretation. As an example, More than one earthquake response Regulatory Guide 1.166, ‘‘Pre- definitions and required investigations analysis for a seismic base isolated Earthquake Planning and Immediate stated in the final regulation do not nuclear power plant design may be Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post- contain the phrases in Appendix A to necessary to ensure adequate Earthquake Actions,’’ provides guidance Part 100 that were more applicable to performance at all earthquake levels. acceptable to the NRC staff for only the western part of the United Decisions pertaining to the response determining whether or not vibratory States. analyses associated with base isolated ground motion exceeding the OBE The institutional definition for facilities will be handled on a case by ground motion or significant plant ‘‘safety-related structures, systems, and case basis. damage had occurred and the timing of components’’ is drawn from Appendix nuclear power plant shutdown. The 6. Required Plant Shutdown A to Part 100 under III(c) and VI(a). guidance is based on criteria developed With the relocation of the earthquake The current regulation (Section by the Electric Power Research Institute engineering criteria to Appendix S to V(a)(2)) states that if vibratory ground (EPRI). The decision to shut down the Part 50 and the relocation and motion exceeding that of the OBE plant should be made by the licensee modification to dose guidelines in occurs, shutdown of the nuclear power within eight hours after the earthquake. § 50.34(a)(1), the definition of safety- plant will be required. The The data from the seismic related structures, systems, and supplementary information to the final instrumentation, coupled with components is included in Part 50 regulation (published November 13, information obtained from a plant walk definitions with references to both the 1973; 38 FR 31279, Item 6e) includes down, are used to make the Part 100 and Part 50 dose guidelines. the following statement: ‘‘A footnote has determination of when the plant should been added to § 50.36(c)(2) of 10 CFR be shut down, if it has not already been VI. Related Regulatory Guides and Part 50 to assure that each power plant shut down by operational perturbations Standard Review Plan Sections is aware of the limiting condition of resulting from the seismic event. The The NRC is developing the following operation which is imposed under guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.166 is regulatory guides and standard review Section V(2) of Appendix A to 10 CFR based on two assumptions, first, that the plan sections to provide prospective Part 100. This limitation requires that if nuclear power plant has operable licensees with the necessary guidance vibratory ground motion exceeding that seismic instrumentation, including the for implementing the final regulation. of the OBE occurs, shutdown of the equipment and software required to The notice of availability for these nuclear power plant will be required. process the data within four hours after materials will be published in a later Prior to resuming operations, the an earthquake, and second, that the issue of the Federal Register. licensee will be required to demonstrate operator walk down inspections can be 1. Regulatory Guide 1.165, to the Commission that no functional performed in approximately four to ‘‘Identification and Characterization of damage has occurred to those features eight hours depending on the number of Seismic Sources and Determination of Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65167

Shutdown Earthquake Ground or analysis philosophy. These guides Minor and conforming changes to Motions.’’ The guide provides general will be issued as final guides without other Regulatory Guides and standard guidance and recommendations, public comment subsequent to the review plan sections as a result of describes acceptable procedures and publication of the final regulations. changes in the nonseismic criteria are provides a list of references that present The following regulatory guides will also planned. If substantive changes are acceptable methodologies to identify be revised to incorporate editorial made during the revisions, the and characterize capable tectonic changes, for example to reference new applicable guides will be issued for sources and seismogenic sources. sections to Part 100 or Appendix S to public comment as draft guides. Section V.B.3 of this rule describes the Part 50. No technical changes will be VIII. Referenced Documents key elements. made in these regulatory guides. 2. Regulatory Guide 1.12, Revision 2, 1. 1.57, ‘‘Design Limits and Loading An interested person may examine or ‘‘Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation Combinations for Metal Primary Reactor obtain copies of the documents for Earthquakes.’’ The guide describes Containment System Components.’’ referenced in this rule as set out below. seismic instrumentation type and 2. 1.59, ‘‘Design Basis Floods for Copies of NUREG–0625, NUREG– location, operability, characteristics, Nuclear Power Plants.’’ 1061, NUREG–1150, NUREG–1451, installation, actuation, and maintenance 3. 1.60, ‘‘Design Response Spectra for NUREG–1462, NUREG–1503, and that are acceptable to the NRC staff. Seismic Design of Nuclear Power NUREG/CR–2239 may be purchased 3. Regulatory Guide 1.166, ‘‘Pre- Plants.’’ from the Superintendent of Documents, Earthquake Planning and Immediate 4. 1.83, ‘‘Inservice Inspection of U.S. Government Printing Office, Mail Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post- Pressurized Water Reactor Steam Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402– Earthquake Actions.’’ The guide Generator Tubes.’’ 9328. Copies also are available from the 5. 1.92, ‘‘Combining Modal Responses provides guidelines that are acceptable National Technical Information Service, and Spatial Components in Seismic to the NRC staff for a timely evaluation 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA Response Analysis.’’ of the recorded seismic instrumentation 6. 1.102, ‘‘Flood Protection for 22161. A copy also is available for data and to determine whether or not Nuclear Power Plants.’’ inspection and copying for a fee in the plant shutdown is required. 7. 1.121, ‘‘Bases for Plugging NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L 4. Regulatory Guide 1.167, ‘‘Restart of Degraded PWR Steam Generator Tubes.’’ Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, a Nuclear Power Plant Shut Down by a 8. 1.122, ‘‘Development of Floor DC. Seismic Event.’’ The guide provides Design Response Spectra for Seismic Copies of issued regulatory guides guidelines that are acceptable to the Design of Floor-Supported Equipment may be purchased from the Government NRC staff for performing inspections or Components.’’ Printing Office (GPO) at the current GPO and tests of nuclear power plant The following regulatory guides will price. Information on current GPO equipment and structures prior to restart be revised to update the design or prices may be obtained by contacting of a plant that has been shut down analysis philosophy, for example, to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. because of a seismic event. change OBE to a fraction of the SSE: Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 5. Standard Review Plan Section 1. 1.3, ‘‘Assumptions Used for 37082, Washington, DC 20402–9328. 2.5.1, Revision 3, ‘‘Basic Geologic and Evaluating the Potential Radiological Issued guides also may be purchased Seismic Information.’’ This SRP Section Consequences of a Loss of Coolant from the National Technical Information describes procedures to assess the Accident for Boiling Water Reactors.’’ Service on a standing order basis. adequacy of the geologic and seismic 2. 1.4, ‘‘Assumptions Used for Details on this service may be obtained information cited in support of the Evaluating the Potential Radiological by writing NTIS, 5826 Port Royal Road, applicant’s conclusions concerning the Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Springfield, VA 22161. suitability of the plant site. Accident for Pressurized Water SECY 79–300, SECY 90–016, SECY 6. Standard Review Plan Section Reactors.’’ 93–087, and WASH–1400 are available 2.5.2, Revision 3 ‘‘Vibratory Ground 3. 1.27, ‘‘Ultimate Heat Sink for for inspection and copying for a fee at Motion.’’ This SRP Section describes Nuclear Power Plants.’’ the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 procedures to assess the ground motion 4. 1.100, ‘‘Seismic Qualification of L Street, NW. (Lower Level), potential of seismic sources at the site Electric and Mechanical Equipment for Washington, DC. and to assess the adequacy of the SSE. Nuclear Power Plants.’’ 7. Standard Review Plan Section 5. 1.124, ‘‘Service Limits and Loading IX. Summary of Comments on the 2.5.3, Revision 3, ‘‘Surface Faulting.’’ Combinations for Class 1 Linear-Type Proposed Regulations This SRP Section describes procedures Component Supports.’’ A. Reactor Siting Criteria (Nonseismic) to assess the adequacy of the applicant’s 6. 1.130, ‘‘Service Limits and Loading submittal related to the existence of a Combinations for Class 1 Plate-and- Eight organizations or individuals potential for surface faulting affecting Shell-Type Component Supports.’’ commented on the nonseismic aspects the site. 7. 1.132, ‘‘Site Investigations for of the second proposed revision. The 8. Regulatory Guide 4.7, Revision 2, Foundations of Nuclear Power Plants.’’ first proposed revision issued for ‘‘General Site Suitability Criteria for 8. 1.138, ‘‘Laboratory Investigations of comment in October 20, 1992, (57 FR Nuclear Power Plants.’’ This guide Soils for Engineering Analysis and 47802) elicited strong comments in discusses the major site characteristics Design of Nuclear Power Plants.’’ regard to proposed numerical values of related to public health and safety and 9. 1.142, ‘‘Safety-Related Concrete population density and a minimum environmental issues that the NRC staff Structures for Nuclear Power Plants distance to the exclusion area boundary considers in determining the suitability (Other than Reactor Vessels and (EAB) in the rule. The second proposed of sites. Containments).’’ revision (October 17, 1994; 59 FR 10. 1.143, ‘‘Design Guidance for 52255) would delete these from the rule VII. Future Regulatory Action Radioactive Waste Management by providing guidance on population Several existing regulatory guides will Systems, Structures, and Components density in a Regulatory Guide and be revised to incorporate editorial Installed in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear determining the distance to the EAB and changes or maintain the existing design Power Plants.’’ LPZ by use of source term and dose 65168 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations calculations. The rule would contain DC. Single copies are available from Dr. applicability of § 100.23 to an MRS or basic site criteria, without any Andrew J. Murphy, Office of Nuclear other facility. In addition, NUREG–1451 numerical values. Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear will remain the NRC staff technical Several commentors representing the Regulatory Commission, Washington, position on seismic siting issues nuclear industry and international DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415– pertaining to an MGDS until it is nuclear organizations stated that the 6010. A second document, ‘‘Resolution superseded through a rulemaking, second proposed revision was a of Public Comments on Draft Regulatory revision of NUREG–1451, or other significant improvement over the first Guides and Standard Review Plan appropriate mechanism. proposed revision, while the only Sections Pertaining to the Proposed Section V(B)(5), ‘‘Value of the Operating public interest group commented that Seismic and Earthquake Engineering Basis Earthquake Ground Motion (OBE) the NRC had retreated from decoupling Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ will and Required OBE Analysis.’’ siting and design in response to the explain the NRC’s disposition of the comments of foreign entities. comments received on the guidance Comment: One commenter, ABB Most comments on the second documents. The Federal Register notice Combustion Engineering Nuclear proposed revision centered on the use of announcing the avaliability of the Systems, specifically stated that they total effective dose equivalent (TEDE), guidance documents will also discuss agree with the NRC’s proposal to not the proposed single numerical dose how to obtain copies of the comment require explicit design analysis of the acceptance criterion of 25 rem TEDE, resolution document. OBE if its peak acceleration is less than the evaluation of the maximum dose in A summary of the major comments on one-third of the Safe Shutdown any two-hour period, and the question the proposed regulations follows: Earthquake Ground Motion (SSE). The of whether an organ capping dose only negative comments, from G.C. should be adopted. Section III, Genesis (Application) Slagis Associates, stated that the Virtually all commenters supported Comment: The Department of Energy proposed rule in the area of required the concept of TEDE and its use. (Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste OBE analysis is not sound, not However, there were differing views on Management), requests an explicit technically justified, and not the proposed numerical dose of 25 rem statement on whether or not § 100.23 appropriate for the design of pressure- and the proposed use of the maximum applies to the Mined Geologic Disposal retaining components. The following are two-hour period to evaluate the dose. System (MGDS) and a Monitored specific comments (limited to the design Virtually all industry commenters felt Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility. The of pressure-retaining components to the that the proposed numerical value of 25 NRC has noted in NUREG–1451, ‘‘Staff ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel rem TEDE was too low and that it Technical Position on Investigations to Section III rules) that pertain to the represented a ‘‘ratchet’’ since the use of Identify Fault Displacement Hazards supplemental information to the the current dose criteria plus organ and Seismic Hazards at a Geologic proposed regulations, item V(B)(5), weighting factors would suggest a value Respository,’’ that Appendix A to 10 ‘‘Value of the Operating Basis of 34 rem TEDE. In addition, all CFR Part 100 does not apply to a Earthquake Ground Motion (OBE) and industry commenters believed the geologic repository. NUREG–1451 also Required OBE Analysis.’’ ‘‘sliding’’ two-hour window for dose notes that the contemplated revisions to (1) Comment: Disagrees with the evaluation to be confusing, illogical and Part 100 would also not be applicable to statement in SECY–79–300 that design inappropriate. They favored a rule that a geologic repository. Section 72.102(b) for a single limiting event and was based upon a two hour period after requires that, for an MRS located west inspection and evaluation for the onset of fission product release, of the Rocky Mountain front or in areas earthquakes in excess of some specified similar in concept to the existing rule. of known potential seismic activity in limit may be the most sound regulatory All industry commenters opposed the the east, the seismicity be evaluated by approach. It is not feasible to inspect for use of an organ capping dose. The only the techniques of Appendix A to 10 CFR cyclic damage to all the pressure- public interest group that commented Part 100. retaining components. Visually did not object to the use of TEDE, Response: Although Appendix A to inspecting for permanent deformation, favored the proposed dose value of 25 10 CFR Part 100 is titled ‘‘Seismic and or leakage, or failed component rem, and supported an organ capping Geologic Siting Criteria for Nuclear supports is certainly not adequate to dose. Power Plants,’’ it is also referenced in determine cyclic damage. two other parts of the regulation. They Response: The NRC agrees. B. Seismic and Earthquake Engineering are (1) Part 40, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Postearthquake inspection and Criteria Source Material,’’ Appendix A, ‘‘Criteria evaluation guidance is described in Seven letters were received Relating to the Operation of Uranium Regulatory Guide 1.167 (Draft was DG– addressing either the regulations or both Mills and the Disposition of Tailings or 1035), ‘‘Restart of a Nuclear Power Plant the regulations and the draft guidance Waste Produced by the Extraction or Shut Down by an Seismic Event.’’ The documents identified in Section VI Concentration of Source Material from guidance is not limited to visual (except DG–4003). An additional five Ores Processed Primarily for Their inspections; it includes inspections, letters were received addressing only Source Material Content,’’ Section I, tests, and analyses including fatigue the guidance documents, for a total of Criterion 4(e), and (2) Part 72, analysis. twelve comment letters. A document, ‘‘Licensing Requirements for the (2) Comment: Disagrees with the NRC ‘‘Resolution of Public Comments on the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear statement in SECY–090–016 that the Proposed Seismic and Earthquake Fuel and High-Level Radioactive OBE should not control design. There is Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power Waste,’’ Paragraphs (a)(2), (b) and (f)(1) a problem with the present Plants,’’ is available explaining the of § 72.102. requirements. Requiring design for five NRC’s disposition of the comments The referenced applicability of OBE events at one-half SSE is received on the regulations. A copy of § 100.23 to other than power reactors, if unrealistic for most (all?) sites and this document has been placed in the considered appropriate by the NRC, requires an excessive and unnecessary NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L would be a separate rulemaking. That number of seismic supports. The Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, rulemaking would clearly state the solution is to properly define the OBE Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65169 magnitude and the number of events (fatigue) effects of earthquake-induced components which are designed for expected during the life of the plant and motions in piping systems and the OBE only include components such as to require design for that loading. OBE relative motion effects of piping waste holdup tanks. As noted in Section may or may not control the design. But anchored to equipment and structures at VII, Future Regulatory Actions, you cannot assume, before you have the various elevations because both of these regulatory guides related to these seismicity defined and before you have effects are currently evaluated only for components will be revised to provide a component design, that OBE will not OBE loadings. Accordingly, to account alternative design requirements. govern the design. for earthquake cycles in the fatigue 10 CFR 100.23 Response: The NRC has concluded analysis of piping systems, the staff that design requirements based on an proposes to develop guidelines for The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) estimated OBE magnitude at the plant selecting a number of SSE cycles at a congratulated the NRC staff for carefully site and the number of events expected fraction of the peak amplitude of the considering and responding to the during the plant life will lead to low SSE. These guidelines will provide a voluminous and complex comments design values that will not control the level of fatigue design for the piping that were provided on the earlier design, thus resulting in unnecessary equivalent to that currently provided in proposed rulemaking package (October analyses. Standard Review Plan Section 3.9.2. 20, 1992; 57 FR 47802) and considered (3) Comment: It is not technically Positions pertaining to the that the seismic portion of the proposed justified to assume that Section III elimination of the OBE were proposed rulemaking package is nearing maturity components will remain within in SECY–93–087. Commission approval and with the inclusion of industry’s applicable stress limits (Level B limits) is documented in a memorandum from comments (which were principally on at one-third the SSE. The Section III Samuel J. Chilk to James M. Taylor, the guidance documents), has the acceptance criteria for Level D (for an Subject: SECY–93–087—Policy, potential to satisfy the objectives of SSE) is completely different than that Technical and Licensing Issues predictable licensing and stable for Level B (for an OBE). The Level D Pertaining to Evolutionary and regulations. criteria is based on surviving the Advanced Light-Water Reactor (ALWR) Both NEI and Westinghouse Electric extremely-low probability SSE load. Designs, dated July 21, 1993. Corporation support the regulation Gross structural deformations are (4) Comment: There is one major flaw format, that is, prescriptive guidance is possible, and it is expected that the in the ‘‘SSE only’’ design approach. The located in regulatory guides or standard component will have to be replaced. equipment designed for SSE is limited review plan sections and not the Cyclic effects are not considered. The to the equipment necessary to assure the regulation. cyclic effects of the repeated integrity of the reactor coolant pressure NEI and Westinghouse Electric earthquakes have to be considered in boundary, to shutdown the reactor, and Corporation support the removal of the the design of the component to ensure to prevent or mitigate accident requirement from the first proposed pressure boundary integrity throughout consequences. The equipment designed rulemaking (57 FR 47802) that both the life of the component, especially if for SSE is only part of the equipment deterministic and probabilistic the SSE can occur after the lower level ‘‘necessary for continued operation evaluations must be conducted to earthquakes. without undue risk to the health and determine site suitability and seismic Response: In SECY–93–087, Issue I.M, safety of the public.’’ Hence, by this design requirements for the site. [Note: ‘‘Elimination of Operating-Basis rule, it is possible that some equipment the commenters do not agree with the Earthquake,’’ the NRC recognizes that a necessary for continued operation will NRC staff’s deterministic check of the designer of piping systems considers the not be designed for SSE or OBE effects. seismic sources and parameters used in effects of primary and secondary Response: The NRC does not agree the LLNL and EPRI probabilistic seismic stresses and evaluates fatigue caused by that the design approach is flawed. It is hazard analyses (Regulatory Guide repeated cycles of loading. Primary not possible that some equipment 1.165, draft was DG–1032). Also, they stresses are induced by the inertial necessary for continued safe operation do not support the NRC staff’s effects of vibratory motion. The relative will not be designed for SSE or OBE deterministic check of the applicants motion of anchor points induces effects. General Design Criterion 2, submittal (SRP Section 2.5.2). These secondary stresses. The repeating ‘‘Design Bases for Protection Against items are addressed in the document seismic stress cycles induce cyclic Natural Phenomena,’’ of Appendix A, pertaining to comment resolution of the effects (fatigue). However, after ‘‘General Design Criteria for Nuclear draft regulatory guides and standard reviewing these aspects, the NRC Power Plants,’’ to 10 CFR Part 50 review plan sections.] concludes that, for primary stresses, if requires that nuclear power plant Comment: NEI, Westinghouse Electric the OBE is established at one-third the structures, systems, and components Corporation, and Yankee Atomic SSE, the SSE load combinations control important to safety be designed to Electric Corporation recommend that the piping design when the earthquake withstand the effects of earthquakes the regulation should state that for contribution dominates the load without loss of capability to perform existing sites east of the Rocky combination. Therefore, the NRC their safety functions. The criteria in Mountain Front (east of approximately concludes that eliminating the OBE Appendix S to 10 CFR Part 50 105° west longitude), a 0.3g piping stress load combination for implement General Design Criterion 2 standardized design level is acceptable primary stresses in piping systems will insofar as it requires structures, systems, at these sites given confirmatory not significantly reduce existing safety and components important to safety to foundations evaluations [Regulatory margins. withstand the effects of earthquakes. Guide 1.132, but not the geologic, Eliminating the OBE will, however, Regulatory Guide 1.29, ‘‘Seismic Design geophysical, seismological directly affect the current methods used Classification,’’ describes a method investigations in Regulatory Guide to evaluate the adequacy of cyclic and acceptable to the NRC for identifying 1.165]. secondary stress effects in the piping and classifying those features of light- Response: The NRC has determined design. Eliminating the OBE from the water-cooled nuclear power plants that that the use of a spectral shape anchored load combination could cause should be designed to withstand the to 0.3g peak ground acceleration as a uncertainty in evaluating the cyclic effects of the SSE. Currently, standardized design level would be 65170 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations appropriate for existing central and some extent, in standard review plan calculation to Part 50 and adding more eastern U.S. sites based on the current sections. Both the NRC and industry specific site criteria to Part 100 does not state of knowledge. However, as new have experienced difficulties in decrease the protection of public health information becomes available it may applying prescriptive regulations such and safety over the current regulations. not be appropriate for future licensing as Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100 The amendments do not affect decisions. Pertinent information such as because they inhibit the use of needed nonradiological plant effluents and have that described in Regulatory Guide latitude in judgment. Therefore, it is no other environmental impact. 1.165 (Draft was DG–1032) is needed to common NRC practice not to reference The addition of § 100.23 to 10 CFR make that assessment. Therefore, it is publications such as ASCE Standard 4 Part 100, and the addition of Appendix not appropriate to codify the request. (an analysis, not design standard) in its S to 10 CFR Part 50, will not change the Comment: NEI recommended a regulations. Rather, publications such as radiological environmental impact rewording of Paragraph (a), ASCE Standard 4 are cited in regulatory offsite. Onsite occupational radiation Applicability. Although unlikely, an guides and standard review plan exposure associated with inspection and applicant for an operating license sections. ASCE Standard 4 is cited in maintenance will not change. These already holding a construction permit the 1989 revision of Standard Review activities are principally associated with may elect to apply the amended Plan Sections 3.7.1, 3.7.2, and 3.7.3. baseline inspections of structures, methodology and criteria in Subpart B Comment: The Department of Energy equipment, and piping, and with to Part 100. stated that the required consideration of maintenance of seismic Response: The NRC will address this aftershocks in Paragraph IV(B), Surface instrumentation. Baseline inspections request on a case-by-case basis rather Deformation, is confusing and are needed to differentiate between pre- than through a generic change to the recommended that it be deleted. existing conditions at the nuclear power regulations. This situation pertains to a Response: The NRC agrees. The plant and earthquake related damage. limited number of facilities in various reference to aftershocks in Paragraph The structures, equipment and piping stages of construction. Some of the IV(b) has been deleted. Paragraphs VI(a), selected for these inspections are those issues that must be addressed by the Safe Shutdown Earthquake, and VI(B)(3) routinely examined by plant operators applicant and NRC during the operating of Appendix A to Part 100 contain the during normal plant walkdowns and license review include differences phrase ‘‘including aftershocks.’’ The inspections. Routine maintenance of between the design bases derived from ‘‘including aftershocks’’ phrase was seismic instrumentation ensures its the current and amended regulations removed from the Safe Shutdown operability during earthquakes. The (Appendix A to Part 100 and § 100.23, Earthquake Ground Motion location of the seismic instrumentation respectively), and earthquake requirements in the proposed is similar to that in the existing nuclear engineering criteria such as, OBE design regulation. The recommended change power plants. The amendments do not requirements and OBE shutdown will make Paragraphs IV(a)(1), ‘‘Safe affect nonradiological plant effluents requirements. Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion,’’ and have no other environmental impact. Appendix S to 10 CFR Part 50 and IV(b), ‘‘Surface Deformation, of Appendix S to 10 CFR Part 50 The environmental assessment and Support for the NRC position consistent. finding of no significant impact on pertaining to the elimination of the which this determination is based are Operating Basis Earthquake Ground X. Small Business Regulatory available for inspection at the NRC Motion (OBE) response analyses has Enforcement Fairness Act Public Document Room, 2120 L Street been documented in various NRC In accordance with the Small NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. publications such as SECY–79–300, Business Regulatory Enforcement Single copies of the environmental SECY–90–016, SECY–93–087, and Fairness Act of 1996 the NRC has assessment and finding of no significant NUREG–1061. The final safety determined that this action is not a impact are available from Dr. Andrew J. evaluation reports related to the major rule and has verified this Murphy, Office of Nuclear Regulatory certification of the System 80+ and the determination with the Office of Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Advanced Boiling Water Reactor design Information and Regulatory Affairs of Commission, Washington, DC 20555– (NUREG–1462 and NUREG–1503, OMB. 0001, telephone (301) 415–6010. respectively) have already adopted the single earthquake design philosophy. In XI. Finding of No Significant XII. Paperwork Reduction Act addition, similar activities are being Environmental Impact: Availability Statement done in foreign countries, for instance, The Commission has determined This final rule amends information Germany. (Additional discussion is under the National Environmental collection requirements that are subject provided in Section V(B)(5) of this rule). Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Comment: The American Society of Commission’s regulations in Subpart A (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). These Civil Engineers (ASCE) recommended of 10 CFR Part 51, that this regulation requirements were approved by the that the seismic design and engineering is not a major Federal action Office of Management and Budget, criteria of ASCE Standard 4, ‘‘Seismic significantly affecting the quality of the approval numbers 3150–0011 and 3150– Analysis of Safety-Related Nuclear human environment and therefore an 0093. Structures and Commentary on environmental impact statement is not The public reporting burden for this Standard for Seismic Analysis of Safety- required. collection of information is estimated to Related Nuclear Structures,’’ be The revisions associated with the average 800,000 hours per response, incorporated by reference into reactor siting criteria in 10 CFR Part 100 including the time for reviewing Appendix S to 10 CFR Part 50. and the relocation of the plant design instructions, searching existing data Response: The Commission has requirements from 10 CFR Part 100 to sources, gathering and maintaining the determined that new regulations will be 10 CFR Part 50 have been evaluated data needed, and completing and more streamlined and contain only against the current requirements. The reviewing the collection of information. basic requirements with guidance being Commission has concluded that Send comments on any aspect of this provided in regulatory guides and, to relocating the requirement for a dose collection of information, including Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65171 suggestions for reducing the burden, to List of Subjects § 21.3 Definitions. the Information and Records 10 CFR Part 21 * * * * * Management Branch (T–6 F33), U.S. Basic component. (1)(i) * * * Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear power plants and reactors, (C) The capability to prevent or Washington, DC 20555–0001, or by Penalties, Radiation protection, mitigate the consequences of accidents Internet electronic mail to Reporting and recordkeeping which could result in potential offsite [email protected]; and to the Desk requirements. exposures comparable to those referred Officer, Office of Information and to in § 50.34(a)(1) or § 100.11 of this Regulatory Affairs, NEOB–10202 (3150– 10 CFR Part 50 chapter, as applicable. 0011 and 3150–0093), Office of Antitrust, Classified information, * * * * * Management and Budget, Washington, Criminal penalties, Fire protection, DC 20503. Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear PART 50ÐDOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION Public Protection Notification power plants and reactors, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, FACILITIES The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, Reporting and recordkeeping 3. The authority citation for Part 50 and a person is not required to respond requirements. continues to read as follows: to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control 10 CFR Part 52 Authority: Secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, number. Administrative practice and 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. XIII. Regulatory Analysis procedure, Antitrust, Backfitting, 234, 83 Stat. 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. Combined license, Early site permit, 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2201, 2232, 2233, The Commission has prepared a Emergency planning, Fees, Inspection, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, regulatory analysis on this regulation. Limited work authorization, Nuclear 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, The analysis examines the costs and power plants and reactors, Probabilistic 1246, (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846). benefits of the alternatives considered Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95– risk assessment, Prototype, Reactor 601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). by the Commission. Interested persons siting criteria, Redress of site, Reporting Section 50.10 also issued under secs. 101, may examine a copy of the regulatory and recordkeeping requirements, 185, 68 Stat. 955 as amended (42 U.S.C. 2131, analysis at the NRC Public Document Standard design, Standard design 2235), sec. 102, Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 853 Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), certification. (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, 50.54(dd) Washington, DC. Single copies of the and 50.103 also issued under sec. 108, 68 analysis are available from Dr. Andrew 10 CFR Part 54 Stat. 939, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23, 50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also J. Murphy, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Administrative practice and Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory issued under sec. 185, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. procedure, Age-related degradation, 2235). Sections 50.33a, 50.55a and Appendix Commission, Washington, DC 20555– Backfitting, Classified information, Q also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91–190, 0001, telephone (301) 415–6010. Criminal penalties, Environmental, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 XIV. Regulatory Flexibility Certification Nuclear power plants and reactors, and 50.54 also issued under sec. 204, 88 Stat. Reporting and recordkeeping 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5844). Sections 50.58, 50.91 As required by the Regulatory requirements. and 50.92 also issued under Pub. L. 97–415, Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Section 50.78 the Commission certifies that this 10 CFR Part 100 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Sections 50.80–50.81 also regulation does not have a significant Nuclear power plants and reactors, issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as economic impact on a substantial Reactor siting criteria. amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Appendix F also number of small entities. This For the reasons set out in the issued under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. regulation affects only the licensing and preamble and under the authority of the 2237). operation of nuclear power plants. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 4. Section 50.2 is amended by adding companies that own these plants do not the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, in alphabetical order the definitions for fall within the definition of ‘‘small as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, Committed dose equivalent, Committed entities’’ set forth in the Regulatory the NRC is adopting the following effective dose equivalent, Deep-dose Flexibility Act or the size standards amendments to 10 CFR Parts 21, 50, 52, equivalent, Exclusion area, Low established by the NRC (April 11, 1995; 54, and 100: population zone, Safety-related 60 FR 18344). structures, systems, and components XV. Backfit Analysis PART 21ÐREPORTING OF DEFECTS and Total effective dose equivalent, and AND NONCOMPLIANCE revising the definition for Basic The NRC has determined that the component (1)(iii) to read as follows: backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does not 1. The authority citation for Part 21 apply to this regulation, and, therefore, continues to read as follows: § 50.2 Definitions. a backfit analysis is not required for this Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as * * * * * regulation because these amendments amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended, Basic component * ** do not involve any provisions that sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2953 (42 U.S.C. (1) * * * would impose backfits as defined in 10 2201, 2282, 2297f); secs. 201, as amended, (iii) The capability to prevent or CFR 50.109(a)(1). The regulation would 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1246 (42 mitigate the consequences of accidents apply only to applicants for future U.S.C. 5841, 5846). which could result in potential offsite nuclear power plant construction Section 21.2 also issued under secs. 135, exposures comparable to those referred permits, preliminary design approval, 141, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 to in § 50.34(a)(1) or § 100.11 of this U.S.C. 10155, 10161). final design approval, manufacturing chapter, as applicable. licenses, early site reviews, operating 2. In § 21.3, the definition for Basic * * * * * licenses, and combined operating component (1)(i)(C) is revised to read as Committed dose equivalent means the licenses. follows: dose equivalent to organs or tissues of 65172 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations reference that will be received from an (1) The integrity of the reactor coolant the facility which bear significantly on intake of radioactive material by an pressure boundary; the acceptability of the site under the individual during the 50-year period (2) The capability to shut down the site evaluation factors identified in part following the intake. reactor and maintain it in a safe 100 of this chapter, assuming that the Committed effective dose equivalent shutdown condition; and facility will be operated at the ultimate is the sum of the products of the (3) The capability to prevent or power level which is contemplated by weighting factors applicable to each of mitigate the consequences of accidents the applicant. With respect to operation the body organs or tissues that are which could result in potential offsite at the projected initial power level, the irradiated and the committed dose exposures comparable to the applicable applicant is required to submit equivalent to these organs or tissues. guideline exposures set forth in information prescribed in paragraphs * * * * * § 50.34(a)(1) or § 100.11 of this chapter, (a)(2) through (a)(8) of this section, as Deep-dose equivalent, which applies as applicable. well as the information required by this to external whole-body exposure, is the * * * * * paragraph, in support of the application dose equivalent at a tissue depth of 1 cm Total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) for a construction permit, or a design (1000mg/cm2). means the sum of the deep-dose approval. * * * * * equivalent (for external exposures) and (ii) A description and safety Exclusion area means that area the committed effective dose equivalent assessment of the site and a safety surrounding the reactor, in which the (for internal exposures). assessment of the facility. It is expected reactor licensee has the authority to * * * * * that reactors will reflect through their determine all activities including 5. In § 50.8, paragraph (b) is revised to design, construction and operation an exclusion or removal of personnel and read as follows: extremely low probability for accidents property from the area. This area may be that could result in the release of traversed by a highway, railroad, or § 50.8 Information collection significant quantities of radioactive requirements: OMB approval. waterway, provided these are not so fission products. The following power close to the facility as to interfere with * * * * * reactor design characteristics and normal operations of the facility and (b) The approved information proposed operation will be taken into provided appropriate and effective collection requirements contained in consideration by the Commission: arrangements are made to control traffic this part appear in §§ 50.30, 50.33, (A) Intended use of the reactor on the highway, railroad, or waterway, 50.33a, 50.34, 50.34a, 50.35, 50.36, including the proposed maximum in case of emergency, to protect the 50.36a, 50.36b, 50.44, 50.46, 50.47, power level and the nature and public health and safety. Residence 50.48, 50.49, 50.54, 50.55, 50.55a, 50.59, inventory of contained radioactive within the exclusion area shall normally 50.60, 50.61, 50.62, 50.63, 50.64, 50.65, materials; be prohibited. In any event, residents 50.66, 50.71, 50.72, 50.74, 50.75, 50.80, (B) The extent to which generally shall be subject to ready removal in case 50.82, 50.90, 50.91, 50.120, and accepted engineering standards are of necessity. Activities unrelated to Appendices A, B, E, G, H, I, J, K, M, N, applied to the design of the reactor; operation of the reactor may be O, Q, R, and S to this part. (C) The extent to which the reactor permitted in an exclusion area under * * * * * incorporates unique, unusual or appropriate limitations, provided that 6. In § 50.34, footnotes 6, 7, and 8 are enhanced safety features having a no significant hazards to the public redesignated as footnotes 8, 9 and 10 significant bearing on the probability or health and safety will result. and paragraph (a)(1) is revised and consequences of accidental release of * * * * * paragraphs (a)(12), (b)(10), and (b)(11) radioactive materials; Low population zone means the area are added to read as follows: (D) The safety features that are to be engineered into the facility and those immediately surrounding the exclusion § 50.34 Contents of applications; technical area which contains residents, the total information. barriers that must be breached as a result of an accident before a release of number and density of which are such (a) * * * that there is a reasonable probability (1) Stationary power reactor radioactive material to the environment that appropriate protective measures applicants for a construction permit can occur. Special attention must be could be taken in their behalf in the pursuant to this part, or a design directed to plant design features event of a serious accident. These certification or combined license intended to mitigate the radiological guides do not specify a permissible pursuant to part 52 of this chapter who consequences of accidents. In population density or total population apply on or after January 10, 1997, shall performing this assessment, an within this zone because the situation applicant shall assume a fission product comply with paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this 6 may vary from case to case. Whether a section. All other applicants for a release from the core into the specific number of people can, for construction permit pursuant to this containment assuming that the facility example, be evacuated from a specific part or a design certification or is operated at the ultimate power level area, or instructed to take shelter, on a combined license pursuant to part 52 of contemplated. The applicant shall timely basis will depend on many this chapter, shall comply with perform an evaluation and analysis of factors such as location, number and paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. the postulated fission product release, size of highways, scope and extent of (i) A description and safety using the expected demonstrable advance planning, and actual assessment of the site on which the containment leak rate and any fission distribution of residents within the area. facility is to be located, with appropriate 6 The fission product release assumed for this * * * * * attention to features affecting facility evaluation should be based upon a major accident, Safety-related structures, systems, and design. Special attention should be hypothesized for purposes of site analysis or components means those structures, directed to the site evaluation factors postulated from considerations of possible systems, and components that are relied identified in part 100 of this chapter. accidental events. Such accidents have generally been assumed to result in substantial meltdown of on to remain functional during and The assessment must contain an the core with subsequent release into the following design basis (postulated) analysis and evaluation of the major containment of appreciable quantities of fission events to assure: structures, systems and components of products. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65173 product cleanup systems intended to earthquake engineering criteria of (ff) For licensees of nuclear power mitigate the consequences of the Appendix S to this part. However, for plants that have implemented the accidents, together with applicable site those operating license applicants and earthquake engineering criteria in characteristics, including site holders whose construction permit was Appendix S to this part, plant shutdown meteorology, to evaluate the offsite issued prior to January 10, 1997, the is required as provided in Paragraph radiological consequences. Site earthquake engineering criteria in IV(a)(3) of Appendix S to this part. Prior characteristics must comply with part Section VI of Appendix A to part 100 of to resuming operations, the licensee 100 of this chapter. The evaluation must this chapter continues to apply. shall demonstrate to the Commission determine that: (11) On or after January 10, 1997, that no functional damage has occurred (1) An individual located at any point stationary power reactor applicants who to those features necessary for on the boundary of the exclusion area apply for an operating license pursuant continued operation without undue risk for any 2 hour period following the to this part, or a combined license to the health and safety of the public onset of the postulated fission product pursuant to part 52 of this chapter, shall and the licensing basis is maintained. release, would not receive a radiation provide a description and safety 9. In § 50.65, paragraph (b)(1) is dose in excess of 25 rem 7 total effective assessment of the site and of the facility revised to read as follows: dose equivalent (TEDE). as in § 50.34(a)(1)(ii) of this part. (2) An individual located at any point However, for either an operating license § 50.65 Requirements for monitoring the on the outer boundary of the low effectiveness of maintenance at nuclear applicant or holder whose construction power plants population zone, who is exposed to the permit was issued prior to January 10, radioactive cloud resulting from the 1997, the reactor site criteria in part 100 * * * * * postulated fission product release of this chapter and the seismic and (b) * * * (during the entire period of its passage) geologic siting criteria in Appendix A to (1) Safety related structures, systems, would not receive a radiation dose in part 100 of this chapter continues to or components that are relied upon to excess of 25 rem total effective dose apply. remain functional during and following equivalent (TEDE); design basis events to ensure the * * * * * (E) With respect to operation at the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure 7. In § 50.49, paragraph (b)(1) is projected initial power level, the boundary, the capability to shut down revised to read as follows: applicant is required to submit the reactor and maintain it in a safe information prescribed in paragraphs § 50.49 Environmental qualification of shutdown condition, and the capability (a)(2) through (a)(8) of this section, as electric equipment important to safety for to prevent or mitigate the consequences well as the information required by this nuclear power plants. of accidents that could result in paragraph (a)(1)(i), in support of the * * * * * potential offsite exposure comparable to application for a construction permit, or (b) * * * the guidelines in § 50.34(a)(1) or a design approval. (1) Safety-related electric equipment.3 § 100.11 of this chapter, as applicable. * * * * * (i) This equipment is that relied upon * * * * * (12) On or after January 10, 1997, to remain functional during and 10. Appendix S to Part 50 is added to stationary power reactor applicants who following design basis events to read as follows: apply for a construction permit ensure— pursuant to this part, or a design (A) The integrity of the reactor coolant Appendix S to Part 50—Earthquake certification or combined license pressure boundary; Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power pursuant to part 52 of this chapter, as (B) The capability to shut down the Plants partial conformance to General Design reactor and maintain it in a safe General Information Criterion 2 of Appendix A to this part, shutdown condition; and This appendix applies to applicants for a shall comply with the earthquake (C) The capability to prevent or engineering criteria in Appendix S to design certification or combined license mitigate the consequences of accidents pursuant to part 52 of this chapter or a this part. that could result in potential offsite construction permit or operating license (b) * * * exposures comparable to the guidelines pursuant to part 50 of this chapter on or after (10) On or after January 10, 1997, January 10, 1997. However, for either an stationary power reactor applicants who in § 50.34(a)(1) or § 100.11 of this chapter, as applicable. operating license applicant or holder whose apply for an operating license pursuant construction permit was issued prior to to this part, or a design certification or (ii) Design basis events are defined as January 10, 1997, the earthquake engineering combined license pursuant to part 52 of conditions of normal operation, criteria in Section VI of Appendix A to 10 this chapter, as partial conformance to including anticipated operational CFR part 100 continues to apply. occurrences, design basis accidents, General Design Criterion 2 of Appendix I. Introduction A to this part, shall comply with the external events, and natural phenomena for which the plant must be designed to (a) Each applicant for a construction permit, operating license, design 7 A whole body dose of 25 rem has been stated ensure functions (b)(1)(i) (A) through (C) of this section. certification, or combined license is required to correspond numerically to the once in a lifetime by § 50.34 (a)(12), (b)(10), and General Design accidental or emergency dose for radiation workers * * * * * which, according to NCRP recommendations at the Criterion 2 of Appendix A to this part to time could be disregarded in the determination of 8. In § 50.54, paragraph (ff) is added design nuclear power plant structures, their radiation exposure status (see NBS Handbook to read as follows: systems, and components important to safety 69 dated June 5, 1959). However, its use is not to withstand the effects of natural intended to imply that this number constitutes an § 50.54 Conditions of licenses. phenomena, such as earthquakes, without acceptable limit for an emergency dose to the public * * * * * loss of capability to perform their safety under accident conditions. Rather, this dose value functions. Also, as specified in § 50.54(ff), has been set forth in this section as a reference nuclear power plants that have implemented value, which can be used in the evaluation of plant 3 Safety-related electric equipment is referred to design features with respect to postulated reactor as ‘‘Class 1E’’ equipment in IEEE 323–1974. Copies the earthquake engineering criteria described accidents, in order to assure that such designs of this standard may be obtained from the Institute herein must shut down if the criteria in provide assurance of low risk of public exposure to of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., 345 Paragraph IV(a)(3) of this appendix are radiation, in the event of such accidents. East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017. exceeded. 65174 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

(b) These criteria implement General ground motion response spectra at the free the health and safety of the public must Design Criterion 2 insofar as it requires ground surface. In view of the limited data remain functional and within applicable structures, systems, and components available on vibratory ground motions of stress, strain, and deformation limits. important to safety to withstand the effects of strong earthquakes, it usually will be (3) Required Plant Shutdown. If vibratory earthquakes. appropriate that the design response spectra ground motion exceeding that of the be smoothed spectra. The horizontal II. Scope Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Motion component of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake or if significant plant damage occurs, the The evaluations described in this appendix Ground Motion in the free-field at the licensee must shut down the nuclear power are within the scope of investigations foundation level of the structures must be an plant. If systems, structures, or components permitted by § 50.10(c)(1). appropriate response spectrum with a peak necessary for the safe shutdown of the ground acceleration of at least 0.1g. III. Definitions nuclear power plant are not available after (ii) The nuclear power plant must be the occurrence of the Operating Basis As used in these criteria: designed so that, if the Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion, the licensee Combined license means a combined Earthquake Ground Motion occurs, certain construction permit and operating license structures, systems, and components will must consult with the Commission and must with conditions for a nuclear power facility remain functional and within applicable propose a plan for the timely, safe shutdown issued pursuant to Subpart C of Part 52 of stress, strain, and deformation limits. In of the nuclear power plant. Prior to resuming this chapter. addition to seismic loads, applicable operations, the licensee must demonstrate to Design Certification means a Commission concurrent normal operating, functional, and the Commission that no functional damage approval, issued pursuant to Subpart B of accident-induced loads must be taken into has occurred to those features necessary for Part 52 of this chapter, of a standard design account in the design of these safety-related continued operation without undue risk to for a nuclear power facility. A design so structures, systems, and components. The the health and safety of the public and the approved may be referred to as a ‘‘certified design of the nuclear power plant must also licensing basis is maintained. standard design.’’ take into account the possible effects of the (4) Required Seismic Instrumentation. The Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion Suitable instrumentation must be provided Motion (OBE) is the vibratory ground motion on the facility foundations by ground so that the seismic response of nuclear power for which those features of the nuclear power disruption, such as fissuring, lateral spreads, plant features important to safety can be plant necessary for continued operation differential settlement, liquefaction, and evaluated promptly after an earthquake. without undue risk to the health and safety landsliding, as required in § 100.23 of this (b) Surface Deformation. The potential for of the public will remain functional. The chapter. surface deformation must be taken into Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Motion (iii) The required safety functions of is only associated with plant shutdown and account in the design of the nuclear power structures, systems, and components must be plant by providing reasonable assurance that inspection unless specifically selected by the assured during and after the vibratory ground applicant as a design input. in the event of deformation, certain motion associated with the Safe Shutdown structures, systems, and components will A response spectrum is a plot of the Earthquake Ground Motion through design, maximum responses (acceleration, velocity, remain functional. In addition to surface testing, or qualification methods. or displacement) of idealized single-degree- deformation induced loads, the design of (iv) The evaluation must take into account of-freedom oscillators as a function of the safety features must take into account seismic soil-structure interaction effects and the natural frequencies of the oscillators for a loads and applicable concurrent functional expected duration of vibratory motion. It is given damping value. The response spectrum and accident-induced loads. The design permissible to design for strain limits in is calculated for a specified vibratory motion provisions for surface deformation must be excess of yield strain in some of these safety- input at the oscillators’ supports. based on its postulated occurrence in any related structures, systems, and components The Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground direction and azimuth and under any part of during the Safe Shutdown Earthquake Motion (SSE) is the vibratory ground motion the nuclear power plant, unless evidence Ground Motion and under the postulated for which certain structures, systems, and indicates this assumption is not appropriate, concurrent loads, provided the necessary components must be designed to remain and must take into account the estimated rate functional. safety functions are maintained. (2) Operating Basis Earthquake Ground at which the surface deformation may occur. The structures, systems, and components (c) Seismically Induced Floods and Water required to withstand the effects of the Safe Motion. (i) The Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Waves and Other Design Conditions. Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion or Seismically induced floods and water waves surface deformation are those necessary to Motion must be characterized by response spectra. The value of the Operating Basis from either locally or distantly generated assure: seismic activity and other design conditions (1) The integrity of the reactor coolant Earthquake Ground Motion must be set to one of the following choices: determined pursuant to § 100.23 of this pressure boundary; chapter must be taken into account in the (2) The capability to shut down the reactor (A) One-third or less of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion design response design of the nuclear power plant so as to and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition; prevent undue risk to the health and safety or spectra. The requirements associated with of the public. (3) The capability to prevent or mitigate the this Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Motion in Paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B)(I ) can be consequences of accidents that could result Part 52ÐEarly Site Permits; Standard in potential offsite exposures comparable to satisfied without the applicant performing the guideline exposures of § 50.34(a)(1). explicit response or design analyses, or Design Certifications; and Combined Surface deformation is distortion of (B) A value greater than one-third of the Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants geologic strata at or near the ground surface Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion by the processes of folding or faulting as a design response spectra. Analysis and design 11. The authority citation for Part 52 result of various earth forces. Tectonic must be performed to demonstrate that the continues to read as follows: surface deformation is associated with requirements associated with this Operating Authority: Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 183, earthquake processes. Basis Earthquake Ground Motion in Paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B)(I) are satisfied. The 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 948, 953, 954, 955, IV. Application To Engineering Design design must take into account soil-structure 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 1244, as The following are pursuant to the seismic interaction effects and the duration of amended (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2201, 2232, 2233, and geologic design basis requirements of vibratory ground motion. 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, 202, 206, 88 § 100.23 of this chapter: (I) When subjected to the effects of the Stat. 1242, 1244, 1246, as amended (42 U.S.C. (a) Vibratory Ground Motion. Operating Basis Earthquake Ground Motion 5841, 5842, 5846). (1) Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground in combination with normal operating loads, Motion. all structures, systems, and components of 12. In § 52.17, the introductory text of (i) The Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground the nuclear power plant necessary for paragraph (a)(1) and paragraph (a)(1)(vi) Motion must be characterized by free-field continued operation without undue risk to are revised to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65175

§ 52.17 Contents of applications. PART 100ÐREACTOR SITE CRITERIA 18. Section 100.2 is revised to read as (a)(1) The application must contain follows: Sec. the information required by § 50.33 (a) 100.1 Purpose. § 100.2 Scope. through (d), the information required by 100.2 Scope. The siting requirements contained in § 50.34 (a)(12) and (b)(10), and to the 100.3 Definitions. extent approval of emergency plans is 100.4 Communications. this part apply to applications for site sought under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this 100.8 Information collection requirements: approval for the purpose of constructing section, the information required by OMB approval. and operating stationary power and testing reactors pursuant to the § 50.33 (g) and (j), and § 50.34 (b)(6)(v) Subpart AÐEvaluation Factors for of this chapter. The application must Stationary Power Reactor Site Applications provisions of part 50 or part 52 of this also contain a description and safety Before January 10, 1997 and for Testing chapter. assessment of the site on which the Reactors 19. Section 100.3 is revised to read as facility is to be located. The assessment 100.10 Factors to be considered when follows: evaluating sites. must contain an analysis and evaluation § 100.3 Definitions. of the major structures, systems, and 100.11 Determination of exclusion area, low components of the facility that bear population zone, and population center As used in this part: significantly on the acceptability of the distance. Combined license means a combined site under the radiological consequence Subpart BÐEvaluation Factors for construction permit and operating evaluation factors identified in Stationary Power Reactor Site Applications license with conditions for a nuclear § 50.34(a)(1) of this chapter. Site on or After January 10, 1997 power facility issued pursuant to characteristics must comply with part 100.20 Factors to be considered when subpart C of part 52 of this chapter. 100 of this chapter. In addition, the evaluating sites. Early Site Permit means a application should describe the 100.21 Non-seismic site criteria. Commission approval, issued pursuant following: 100.23 Geologic and seismic siting criteria. to subpart A of part 52 of this chapter, * * * * * Appendix A to Part 100—Seismic and for a site or sites for one or more nuclear (vi) The seismic, meteorological, Geologic Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power power facilities. hydrologic, and geologic characteristics Plants Exclusion area means that area of the proposed site; 17. Section 100.1 is revised to read as surrounding the reactor, in which the follows: reactor licensee has the authority to * * * * * determine all activities including § 100.1 Purpose. PART 54ÐREQUIREMENTS FOR exclusion or removal of personnel and (a) The purpose of this part is to property from the area. This area may be RENEWAL OF OPERATING LICENSES establish approval requirements for FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS traversed by a highway, railroad, or proposed sites for stationary power and waterway, provided these are not so 13. The authority citation for Part 54 testing reactors subject to part 50 or part close to the facility as to interfere with continues to read as follows: 52 of this chapter. normal operations of the facility and (b) There exists a substantial base of provided appropriate and effective Authority: Secs. 102, 103, 104, 161, 181, knowledge regarding power reactor arrangements are made to control traffic 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, siting, design, construction and on the highway, railroad, or waterway, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, sec. 234, 83 operation. This base reflects that the Stat. 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, in case of emergency, to protect the primary factors that determine public 2134, 2135, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, public health and safety. Residence health and safety are the reactor design, 2282); secs. 201, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, within the exclusion area shall normally 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842). construction and operation. (c) Siting factors and criteria are be prohibited. In any event, residents 14. In § 54.4, paragraph (a)(1)(iii) is important in assuring that radiological shall be subject to ready removal in case revised to read as follows: doses from normal operation and of necessity. Activities unrelated to operation of the reactor may be § 54.4 Scope. postulated accidents will be acceptably low, that natural phenomena and permitted in an exclusion area under (a) * * * potential man-made hazards will be appropriate limitations, provided that (1) * * * appropriately accounted for in the no significant hazards to the public (iii) The capability to prevent or design of the plant, that site health and safety will result. mitigate the consequences of accidents characteristics are such that adequate Low population zone means the area that could result in potential offsite security measures to protect the plant immediately surrounding the exclusion exposure comparable to the guidelines can be developed, and that physical area which contains residents, the total in § 50.34(a)(1) or § 100.11 of this characteristics unique to the proposed number and density of which are such chapter, as applicable. site that could pose a significant that there is a reasonable probability * * * * * impediment to the development of that appropriate protective measures emergency plans are identified. could be taken in their behalf in the PART 100ÐREACTOR SITE CRITERIA (d) This approach incorporates the event of a serious accident. These appropriate standards and criteria for guides do not specify a permissible 15. The authority citation for Part 100 approval of stationary power and testing population density or total population continues to read as follows: reactor sites. The Commission intends within this zone because the situation Authority: Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 68 to carry out a traditional defense-in- may vary from case to case. Whether a Stat. 936, 937, 948, 953, as amended (42 depth approach with regard to reactor specific number of people can, for U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232); sec. 201, as siting to ensure public safety. Siting example, be evacuated from a specific amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, away from densely populated centers area, or instructed to take shelter, on a 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842). has been and will continue to be an timely basis will depend on many 16. The table of contents for Part 100 important factor in evaluating factors such as location, number and is revised to read as follows: applications for site approval. size of highways, scope and extent of 65176 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations advance planning, and actual (b) The approved information adsorption and retention coefficients, distribution of residents within the area. collection requirements contained in ground water velocity, and distances to Population center distance means the this part appear in § 100.23 and the nearest surface body of water) must distance from the reactor to the nearest appendix A to this part. be obtained from on-site measurements. boundary of a densely populated center 22. The undesignated centerheading The maximum probable flood along containing more than about 25,000 preceding § 100.10 is removed, with the potential for seismically residents. §§ 100.10 and 100.11 are designated as induced floods discussed in § 100.23 Power reactor means a nuclear reactor subpart A, and the subpart A heading is (d)(3) must be estimated using historical of a type described in § 50.21(b) or added to read as follows: data. § 50.22 of this chapter designed to produce electrical or heat energy. Subpart AÐEvaluation Factors for § 100.21 Non-seismic siting criteria. Response spectrum is a plot of the Stationary Power Reactor Site Applications for site approval for maximum responses (acceleration, Applications Before January 10, 1997 commercial power reactors shall velocity, or displacement) of idealized and for Testing Reactors demonstrate that the proposed site single-degree-of-freedom oscillators as a meets the following criteria: function of the natural frequencies of 23. Subpart B consisting of §§ 100.20, (a) Every site must have an exclusion the oscillators for a given damping 100.21 and 100.23 is added to part 100 area and a low population zone, as value. The response spectrum is to read as follows: defined in § 100.3; calculated for a specified vibratory Subpart BÐEvaluation Factors for (b) The population center distance, as motion input at the oscillators’ Stationary Power Reactor Site defined in § 100.3, must be at least one supports. Applications on or After January 10, and one-third times the distance from Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground 1997 the reactor to the outer boundary of the Motion is the vibratory ground motion low population zone. In applying this for which certain structures, systems, § 100.20 Factors to be considered when guide, the boundary of the population and components must be designed evaluating sites. center shall be determined upon pursuant to appendix S to part 50 of this The Commission will take the consideration of population chapter to remain functional. following factors into consideration in distribution. Political boundaries are not Surface deformation is distortion of determining the acceptability of a site controlling in the application of this geologic strata at or near the ground for a stationary power reactor: guide; surface by the processes of folding or (a) Population density and use (c) Site atmospheric dispersion faulting as a result of various earth characteristics of the site environs, characteristics must be evaluated and forces. Tectonic surface deformation is including the exclusion area, the dispersion parameters established such associated with earthquake processes. population distribution, and site-related that: Testing reactor means a testing facility characteristics must be evaluated to (1) Radiological effluent release limits as defined in § 50.2 of this chapter. determine whether individual as well as associated with normal operation from 20. Section 100.4 is added to read as societal risk of potential plant accidents the type of facility proposed to be follows: is low, and that physical characteristics located at the site can be met for any § 100.4 Communications. unique to the proposed site that could individual located offsite; and Except where otherwise specified in pose a significant impediment to the (2) Radiological dose consequences of this part, all correspondence, reports, development of emergency plans are postulated accidents shall meet the applications, and other written identified. criteria set forth in § 50.34(a)(1) of this communications submitted pursuant to (b) The nature and proximity of man- chapter for the type of facility proposed this part 100 should be addressed to the related hazards (e.g., airports, dams, to be located at the site; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transportation routes, military and (d) The physical characteristics of the ATTN: Document Control Desk, chemical facilities) must be evaluated to site, including meteorology, geology, Washington, DC 20555–0001, and establish site parameters for use in seismology, and hydrology must be copies sent to the appropriate Regional determining whether a plant design can evaluated and site parameters Office and Resident Inspector. accommodate commonly occurring established such that potential threats Communications and reports may be hazards, and whether the risk of other from such physical characteristics will delivered in person at the Commission’s hazards is very low. pose no undue risk to the type of facility offices at 2120 L Street, NW., (c) Physical characteristics of the site, proposed to be located at the site; Washington, DC, or at 11555 Rockville including seismology, meteorology, (e) Potential hazards associated with Pike, Rockville, Maryland. geology, and hydrology. nearby transportation routes, industrial 21. Section 100.8 is revised to read as (1) Section 100.23, ‘‘Geologic and and military facilities must be evaluated follows: seismic siting factors,’’ describes the and site parameters established such criteria and nature of investigations that potential hazards from such routes § 100.8 Information collection required to obtain the geologic and and facilities will pose no undue risk to requirements: OMB approval. seismic data necessary to determine the the type of facility proposed to be (a) The Nuclear Regulatory suitability of the proposed site and the located at the site; Commission has submitted the plant design bases. (f) Site characteristics must be such information collection requirements (2) Meteorological characteristics of that adequate security plans and contained in this part to the Office of the site that are necessary for safety measures can be developed; Management and Budget (OMB) for analysis or that may have an impact (g) Physical characteristics unique to approval as required by the Paperwork upon plant design (such as maximum the proposed site that could pose a Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 probable wind speed and precipitation) significant impediment to the et seq.). OMB has approved the must be identified and characterized. development of emergency plans must information collection requirements (3) Factors important to hydrological be identified; contained in this part under control radionuclide transport (such as soil, (h) Reactor sites should be located number 3150–0093. sediment, and rock characteristics, away from very densely populated Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65177 centers. Areas of low population density seismic effects at the proposed site. The evaluated include soil and rock are, generally, preferred. However, in size of the region to be investigated and stability, liquefaction potential, natural determining the acceptability of a the type of data pertinent to the and artificial slope stability, cooling particular site located away from a very investigations must be determined water supply, and remote safety-related densely populated center but not in an based on the nature of the region structure siting. Each applicant shall area of low density, consideration will surrounding the proposed site. Data on evaluate all siting factors and potential be given to safety, environmental, the vibratory ground motion, tectonic causes of failure, such as, the physical economic, or other factors, which may surface deformation, nontectonic properties of the materials underlying result in the site being found deformation, earthquake recurrence the site, ground disruption, and the acceptable 3. rates, fault geometry and slip rates, site effects of vibratory ground motion that foundation material, and seismically may affect the design and operation of § 100.23 Geologic and seismic siting induced floods and water waves must criteria. the proposed nuclear power plant. be obtained by reviewing pertinent This section sets forth the principal Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day literature and carrying out field of December, 1996. geologic and seismic considerations that investigations. However, each applicant guide the Commission in its evaluation For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. shall investigate all geologic and seismic John C. Hoyle, of the suitability of a proposed site and factors (for example, volcanic activity) Secretary of the Commission. adequacy of the design bases established that may affect the design and operation in consideration of the geologic and of the proposed nuclear power plant [FR Doc. 96–31075 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] seismic characteristics of the proposed irrespective of whether such factors are BILLING CODE 7590±01±P site, such that, there is a reasonable explicitly included in this section. assurance that a nuclear power plant (d) Geologic and seismic siting can be constructed and operated at the factors. The geologic and seismic siting DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY proposed site without undue risk to the factors considered for design must health and safety of the public. include a determination of the Safe Office of Thrift Supervision Applications to engineering design are Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion 12 CFR Parts 506, 561, 563, 563d, 574 contained in appendix S to part 50 of for the site, the potential for surface this chapter. tectonic and nontectonic deformations, [No. 96±118] (a) Applicability. The requirements in the design bases for seismically induced paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section floods and water waves, and other Technical Amendments apply to applicants for an early site design conditions as stated in paragraph permit or combined license pursuant to AGENCY: Office of Thrift Supervision, (d)(4) of this section. Treasury. Part 52 of this chapter, or a construction (1) Determination of the Safe permit or operating license for a nuclear Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion. ACTION: Final rule. power plant pursuant to Part 50 of this The Safe Shutdown Earthquake Ground SUMMARY: The Office of Thrift chapter on or after January 10, 1997. Motion for the site is characterized by However, for either an operating license Supervision (OTS) is amending its both horizontal and vertical free-field regulations to incorporate a number of applicant or holder whose construction ground motion response spectra at the permit was issued prior to January 10, technical and conforming amendments. free ground surface. The Safe Shutdown The amendments include a correction to 1997, the seismic and geologic siting Earthquake Ground Motion for the site criteria in Appendix A to Part 100 of the paragraph designations used in the is determined considering the results of transactions with affiliates regulation, this chapter continues to apply. the investigations required by paragraph (b) Commencement of construction. removal or correction of erroneous (c) of this section. Uncertainties are cross-references, and an amendment to The investigations required in inherent in such estimates. These paragraph (c) of this section are within specify where securities filings are to be uncertainties must be addressed through made. the scope of investigations permitted by an appropriate analysis, such as a § 50.10(c)(1) of this chapter. probabilistic seismic hazard analysis or EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 1996. (c) Geological, seismological, and suitable sensitivity analyses. Paragraph FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: engineering characteristics. The IV(a)(1) of appendix S to part 50 of this Mary Gottlieb, Senior Paralegal, (202) geological, seismological, and chapter defines the minimum Safe 906–7135, or Deborah Dakin, Assistant engineering characteristics of a site and Shutdown Earthquake Ground Motion Chief Counsel, (202) 906–6445, its environs must be investigated in for design. Regulations and Legislation Division, sufficient scope and detail to permit an (2) Determination of the potential for Chief Counsel’s Office, Office of Thrift adequate evaluation of the proposed surface tectonic and nontectonic Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., site, to provide sufficient information to deformations. Sufficient geological, Washington DC 20552. support evaluations performed to arrive seismological, and geophysical data SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OTS is at estimates of the Safe Shutdown must be provided to clearly establish today adopting several technical Earthquake Ground Motion, and to whether there is a potential for surface amendments to its regulations to correct permit adequate engineering solutions deformation. cross-references and codification errors, to actual or potential geologic and (3) Determination of design bases for and to add a reference to OTS’s seismically induced floods and water Securities Filing Desk to its securities 3 Examples of these factors include, but are not waves. The size of seismically induced regulations. limited to, such factors as the higher population floods and water waves that could affect density site having superior seismic characteristics, Transactions With Affiliates better access to skilled labor for construction, better a site from either locally or distantly rail and highway access, shorter transmission line generated seismic activity must be Current § 563.41(e)(2), as originally requirements, or less environmental impact on determined. adopted in July, 1991,1 specifies that undeveloped areas, wetlands or endangered species, etc. Some of these factors are included in, (4) Determination of siting factors for prior notification of transactions with or impact, the other criteria included in this other design conditions. Siting factors section. for other design conditions that must be 1 56 FR 34013 (July 25, 1991). 65178 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations any affiliate or subsidiary must be Display Table for Information Collection List of Subjects provided to OTS if the transaction Requirements 12 CFR Part 506 involves (1) a de novo savings The table setting forth OMB control Reporting and recordkeeping association that began operating or an numbers assigned to collections of requirements. association or holding company thereof information under the Paperwork that has been the subject of an Reduction Act contained in OTS 12 CFR Part 561 application or notice under part 574 that 2 regulations has been updated to reflect Savings associations. was approved during the preceding two any additional collections approved years; and (2) a savings association that during 1996, as well as any changes to 12 CFR Part 563 has a 4 or 5 MACRO (now CAMEL) existing collections. It is being reprinted Accounting, Advertising, Crime, rating, that is not meeting all of its in its entirety for ease of reader Currency, Investments, Reporting and current capital requirements, that has reference. recordkeeping requirements, Savings entered into a consent to merge, a associations, Securities, Surety bonds. supervisory agreement or cease and Administrative Procedure Act; Riegle desist order during the preceding two Community Development and 12 CFR Part 563d year period, or is subject to a formal Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 Authority delegations (Government enforcement proceeding, or that is The OTS has found good cause to agencies), Reporting and recordkeeping otherwise the subject of supervisory dispense with both prior notice and requirements, Savings associations, concern or requires extraordinary comment on this final rule and a 30-day Securities. supervision and OTS provides written delay of its effective date mandated by notice of the basis for the concern to the the Administrative Procedure Act.3 OTS 12 CFR Part 574 institution. believes that it is contrary to public Administrative practice and The intent of the regulation was that interest to delay the effective date of the procedure, Holding companies, OTS could require prior notice in either rule, as it corrects a number of errors Reporting and recordkeeping of the above circumstances. The that have caused confusion. Because the requirements, Savings associations, amendment being made today clarifies amendments in the rule are not Securities. that both criteria need not be met. substantive, they will not detrimentally Accordingly, the Office of Thrift Accordingly, the ‘‘and’’ that separates affect savings associations by becoming Supervision hereby amends title 12, the two clauses is being changed to an effective immediately. chapter V of the Code of Federal ‘‘or.’’ In addition, this document is exempt Regulations as set forth below. from the requirement found in section Several other clarifying amendments 302 of the Riegle Community PART 506ÐINFORMATION are also being made to § 563.41(e), Development and Regulatory COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER including redesignation of the final Improvement Act of 1994 4 that THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT paragraph in § 563.41(e)(2) as regulations must not take effect before 1. The authority citation for part 506 § 563.41(e)(3). It currently is included as the first day of the quarter following continues to read as follows: paragraph (iii), following paragraphs (i) publication, as it imposes no new and (ii) outlined above. Paragraph (iii) requirements. Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. specifies the steps to be taken following 2. Section 506.1 is amended by issuance of the written notice under Regulatory Flexibility Act revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: paragraphs (i) and (ii), and should not Pursuant to section 605(b) of the be part of the same paragraph sequence. 5 * * * * * Regulatory Flexibility Act, it is certified (b) Display. Corrections to Cross-References and that this technical corrections regulation will not have a significant economic Amendment to Securities Filing 12 CFR part or section Current OMB Regulation impact on a substantial number of small where identified and de- control No. entities. scribed Section 563d.1, regarding the Executive Order 12866 requirements of the Securities Exchange 502.3 ...... 1550±0053 OTS has determined that this rule is Part 510 ...... 1550±0081 Act of 1934, is being amended to specify 516.1(c) ...... 1550±0056 that securities filings are to be made not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ for Part 528 ...... 1550±0021 with the Securities Filing Desk of the purposes of Executive Order 12866. 543.2 ...... 1550±0005 Business Transaction Division (BTD). Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 543.9 ...... 1550±0007 The current regulation refers only to 1995 544.2 ...... 1550±0017 BTD. While the Securities Filings Desk 544.5 ...... 1550±0018 is now housed within the Dissemination OTS has determined that the 544.8 ...... 1550±0011 Branch of the Records Management and requirements of this final rule will not 545.74 ...... 1550±0013 Information Policy Division, filings result in expenditures by State, local, 545.92 ...... 1550±0006 and tribal governments, or by the 545.95 ...... 1550±0006 should be addressed to ‘‘Securities 545.96(c) ...... 1550±0011 Filing Desk, Business Transactions private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Accordingly, a 546.2 ...... 1550±0016 Division.’’ 546.4 ...... 1550±0066 budgetary impact statement is not Sections 563.7 and 574.6(c)(5) relating 552.1 ...... 1550±0019 required under section 202 of the 552.2±1 ...... 1550±0005 to fixed-term certificate accounts and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of acquisition of control are being revised 552.2±6 ...... 1550±0007 1995. 552.4 ...... 1550±0017 to correct erroneous cross-references. 552.5 ...... 1550±0018 Section 561.13, which deals with 2 12 CFR 506.1(b). 552.6 ...... 1550±0025 classifying consumer credit as a loss, is 3 5 U.S.C. 553. 552.7 ...... 1550±0025 being amended by removing an 4 Pub. L. 103–325, 12 U.S.C. 4802. 552.11 ...... 1550±0011 outdated cross-reference. 5 Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. 601. 559.12 ...... 1550±0013 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65179

§ 561.13 [Amended] DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 12 CFR part or section Current OMB where identified and de- control No. 4. Section 561.13 is amended by scribed 28 CFR Part 16 removing footnote 1 to the tables. 552.13 ...... 1550±0016, [AAG/A Order No. 124±96] 1550±0025 PART 563ÐOPERATIONS 559.3 ...... 1550±0077 Exemption of System of Records 559.11 ...... 1550±0067 5. The authority citation for part 563 Under the Privacy Act 559.12 ...... 1550±0013 continues to read as follows: AGENCY: Department of Justice. 559.13 ...... 1550±0065 Authority: 12 U.S.C. 375b, 1462, 1462a, 560.93(f) ...... 1550±0078 1463, 1464, 1467a, 1468, 1817, 1828, 3806. ACTION: Final rule. 560.100 ...... 1550±0078 560.101 ...... 1550±0078 § 563.7 [Amended] SUMMARY: The Department of Justice, 560.170 ...... 1550±0078 Federal Bureau of Investigation, is 560.170(c) ...... 1550±0083 6. Section 563.7 is amended in exempting the National DNA Index 560.172 ...... 1550±0078 paragraphs (a) and (d)(2) by removing System (NDIS) from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c) (3) 560.210 ...... 1550±0078 the phrases ‘‘paragraph (e)’’ and and (4); (d) (e) (1), and (2), and (3); (e)(4) 562.1 ...... 1550±0011 ‘‘paragraph (e)(1)’’, respectively, and by (G) and (H); (e) (5) and (8); and (g). The 562.1(b) ...... 1550±0078 adding in lieu thereof the phrases purposes of the exemption are to 562.4 ...... 1550±0011 ‘‘paragraph (d)’’ and ‘‘paragraph (d)(1)’’, maintain the confidentiality and 563.1 ...... 1550±0027 respectively. security of information compiled for 563.1(b) ...... 1550±0011 purposes of criminal investigation, or of 563.22 ...... 1550±0016 § 563.41 [Amended] reports compiled at any stage of the 563.41(e) ...... 1550±0078 7. Section 563.41 is amended by 563.42(e) ...... 1550±0078 criminal law enforcement process. 563.43(f) through (h) ...... 1550±0075 removing the word ‘‘and’’ at the end of Therefore, to the extent that these 563.43(i)(3) ...... 1550±0075 paragraph (e)(2)(i), and by adding in lieu records may be subject to the Privacy 563.47(e) ...... 1550±0011 thereof the word ‘‘or’’; by removing the Act, they are subject to exemption under 563.74 ...... 1550±0050 word ‘‘current’’ in paragraph subsection (j)(2) and are available under 563.76(c) ...... 1550±0011 (e)(2)(ii)(B); by redesignating paragraph the Privacy Act. 563.80 ...... 1550±0061 (e)(2)(iii) as paragraph (e)(3); and by EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 1996. 563.81 ...... 1550±0030 removing, in newly designated FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 563.131 ...... 1550±0028 paragraph (e)(3), the phrase ‘‘paragraph Patricia E. Neely, program Analyst (202– 563.134 ...... 1550±0059 (e)(2)(ii)’’, and by adding in lieu thereof 616–0178). 563.173(e) ...... 1550±0011 the phrase ‘‘paragraph (e)(2)’’. 563.174(e) ...... 1550±0011 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 563.174(f) ...... 1550±0011 PART 563dÐSECURITIES OF 18, 1996 (61 FR 37426), a proposed rule 563.175(e) ...... 1550±0011 SAVINGS ASSOCIATIONS was published in the Federal Register 563.175(f) ...... 1550±0011 with an invitation to comment. No 563.177 ...... 1550±0041 8. The authority citation for part 563d comments were received. 563.180 ...... 1550±0084 563.180(d) ...... 1550±0003 continues to read as follows: This order relates to individuals 563.180(e) ...... 1550±0079 Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462a, 1463, 1464; 15 rather than small business entities. 563.181 ...... 1550±0032 U.S.C. 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78w, 78d–1. Nevertheless, pursuant to the 563.183 ...... 1550±0032 requirements of the Regulatory Part 563b ...... 1550±0014 § 563d.1 [Amended] Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, it is 563b.4 ...... 1550±0032 9. Section 563d.1 is amended in the hereby stated that the order will not 563b.20 through 563b.32 ..... 1550±0074 fourth sentence by adding the phrase have ‘‘a significant economic impact on Part 563d ...... 1550±0019 ‘‘Securities Filing Desk,’’ after the a substantial number of small entities.’’ Part 563e ...... 1550±0012 phrase ‘‘Business Transactions List of Subjects in Part 16: Part 563f ...... 1550±0051 Administrative Practices and Procedure, Part 563g ...... 1550±0035 Division,’’. Part 564 ...... 1550±0078 Courts, Freedom of Information Act, 566.4 ...... 1550±0011 PART 574ÐACQUISITION OF Government in the Sunshine Act, and Part 568 ...... 1550±0062 CONTROL OF SAVINGS the Privacy Act. 571.6 ...... 1550±0005 ASSOCIATIONS Pursuant to the authority vested in the 574.3(b) ...... 1550±0032 Attorney General by 5 U.S.C. 552a and 574.4 ...... 1550±0032 10. The authority citation for part 574 delegated to me by Attorney General 574.5 ...... 1550±0032 continues to read as follows: Order No. 793–78, 28 CFR part 16 is 574.6 ...... 1550±0015 Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1467a, 1817, 1831i. amended as set forth below. Part 575 ...... 1550±0071 584.1(f) ...... 1550±0011 § 574.6 [Amended] Dated: November 22, 1996. 584.2±1 ...... 1550±0063 Stephen R. Colgate, 584.2±2 ...... 1550±0063 11. Section 574.6(c)(5) is amended by Assistant Attorney General for 584.9 ...... 1550±0063 removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)’’, Administration. 590.4(h) ...... 1550±0078 and by adding in lieu thereof the phrase 1. The authority for part 16 continues ‘‘paragraph (c)’’. to read as follows: PART 561ÐDEFINITIONS Dated: November 18, 1996. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 552, 552a, 552b(g), By the Office of Thrift Supervision. 553, 18 U.S.C. 4203(a)(1); 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 3. The authority citation for part 561 Nicolas P. Retsinas, 534; and 31 U.S.C. 3717, 9701. continues to read as follows: Director. 2. 28 CFR 16.96 is amended by Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1462, 1462a, 1463, [FR Doc. 96–31315 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] removing the heading ‘‘National Crime 1464, 1467a. BILLING CODE 6720±01±P Information Center (NCIC) (Justice/FBI– 65180 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

001)’’ and the undesignated paragraph impossible administrative and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS which follows paragraph (k)(4); and by investigative burden by forcing the BOARD adding paragraphs (n) and (o) as set agency to continuously retrograde forth below. investigations attempting to resolve 29 CFR Part 101 and 102 questions of accuracy, etc. § 16.96 Exemptions of Federal Bureau of (iii) In addition, from subsection (g) to Procedures and Rules Governing Investigation SystemsÐLimited Access, as the extent that the system is exempt Summary Judgment Motions and indicated. from the access and amendment Advisory Opinions * * * * * provisions of subsection (d). (n) The following system of records is (3) From subsection (e)(1) because: AGENCY: National Labor Relations exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a (c) (3) and (i) Information in this system is Board. (4); (d); (e) (1), (2), and 3; (e)(4) (G) and primarily from State and local records ACTION: Final rule. (H); (e) (5) and (8); and (g): and it is for the official use of agencies (1) National DNA Index System outside the Federal Government. SUMMARY: The National Labor Relations (NDIS) (JUSTICE/FBI–017). (ii) It is not possible in all instances Board (NLRB) issues a final rule (o) These exemptions apply only to to determine the relevancy or necessity implementing the proposal set forth in the extent that information in the of specific information in the early its July 5, 1996 Notice of Proposed system is subject to exemption pursuant stages of the criminal investigative Rulemaking (NPR) to eliminate to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). Exemptions from process. provisions in its current rules the particular subsections are justified (iii) Relevance and necessity are permitting parties to pending state for the following reasons: questions of judgment and timing; what proceedings to petition for an advisory (1) From subsection (c)(3) because appears relevant and necessary when opinion on whether the Board would making available the accounting of collected ultimately may be deemed assert jurisdiction under its commerce disclosures of records to the subject of unnecessary, and vice versa. It is only standards. The final rule does not the record would prematurely place the after the information is assessed that its implement the other proposal set forth subject on notice of the investigative relevancy in a specific investigative in the Board’s NPR which would have interest of law enforcement agencies, activity can be established. also eliminated provisions in the provide the subject with significant (iv) Although the investigative current rules requiring issuance of a information concerning the nature of the process could leave in doubt the notice to show cause before the Board investigation, or permit the subject to relevancy and necessity of evidence grants a motion for summary judgment. take measures to impede the which had been properly obtained, the The Board has decided to withdraw that investigation (e.g., destroy or alter same information could be relevant to proposal for further study in light of the evidence, intimidate potential another investigation or investigative comments and other actions recently witnesses, or flee the area to avoid activity under the jurisdiction of the FBI taken by the Board to streamline the investigation and prosecution), and or another law enforcement agency. summary judgment process. (4) From subsections (e)(2) and (3) result in a serious impediment to law EFFECTIVE DATE: January 10, 1997. enforcement. because it is not feasible to comply with (2)(i) From subsections (c)(4), (d), these provisions given the nature of this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John (e)(4) (G) and (H), and (g) because these system. Most of the records in this J. Toner, Executive Secretary, National provisions concern an individual’s system are necessarily furnished by Labor Relations Board, 1099 14th Street, access to records which concern him/ State and local criminal justice agencies NW., Room 11600, Washington, DC her and access to records in this system and not by individuals due to the very 20570. Telephone: (202) 273–1940. would compromise ongoing nature of the records and the system. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of investigations. Such access is directed at (5) From subsection (e)(5) because the the Agency’s ongoing efforts to allowing the subject of the record to vast majority of these records come from streamline its operations, on July 5, correct inaccuracies in it. The vast State and local criminal justice agencies 1996, the Board issued a Notice of majority of records in this system are and because it is administratively Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) proposing from the DNA records of local and State impossible for them and the FBI to certain changes to its rules and NDIS agencies which would be insure that the records comply with this statements of procedure regarding inappropriate and not feasible for the provision. Submitting agencies are motions for summary judgment and FBI to undertake to correct. urged and make every effort to insure petitions for advisory opinions (61 FR Nevertheless, an alternate method to records are accurate and complete; 35172). Specifically, the Board access and/or amend records in this however, since it is not possible to proposed: (1) To eliminate provisions in system is available to an individual who predict when information in the indexes the current rules and statements of is the subject of a record pursuant to of the system (whether submitted by procedure permitting parties to pending procedures and requirements specified State and local criminal justice agencies state proceedings to petition the Board in the Notice of Systems of Records or generated by the FBI) will be matched for an advisory opinion on whether the compiled by the National Archives and with other information, it is not possible Board would assert jurisdiction under Records Administration and published to determine when most of them are its commerce standards; and (2) to also in the Federal Register under the relevant or timely. eliminate provisions in the current rules (6) From subsection (e)(8) because the designation: National DNA Index requiring the Board to issue a notice to FBI has no logical manner to determine System (NDIS) (JUSTICE/FBI–017) show cause before granting a motion for whenever process has been made public (ii) In addition, from paragraph (d)(2) summary judgment. and compliance with this provision of this section, because to require the Four comments were received in would provide an impediment to law FBI to amend information thought to be response to the NPR, three from enforcement by interfering with ongoing incorrect, irrelevant, or untimely, practitioners (Robert J. Janowitz, Kansas investigations. because of the nature of the information City, Missouri; Ira Drogin, New York, collected and the essential length of [FR Doc. 96–31469 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] New York; and Rayford T. Blankenship, time it is maintained, would create an BILLING CODE 4410±02±M Greenwood, Indiana) and one from a Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65181 labor organization (AFL-CIO).1 Each of short, under the current procedure, the circumstances where there is a genuine these comments are addressed below. Board has been unnecessarily forced to and substantial question as to which issue repeated advisory opinions on the agency has jurisdiction and past I. Eliminating Party Petitions for same jurisdictional issue with respect to published Board opinions or decisions Advisory Opinions parties before the same state board. In do not provide a definitive answer. Only two of the four comments our view, this is clearly not an efficient II. Eliminating Notice-to-Show-Cause addressed this proposal. Attorney use of the Board’s limited resources.4 Requirement in Summary Judgment Robert Janowitz stated that he opposed Further, as indicated in the NPR, Cases the proposal on the grounds that the there are several other, often more proposal would deny parties an avenue expeditious, avenues for obtaining a Three of the four comments addressed of access to the Board; the current jurisdictional determination or opinion. this proposal. Attorney Janowitz stated procedure does not substantially burden As noted in the NPR, § 101.41 of the that he had no objection to the proposal, the Board since only 10–15 petitions for Board’s Statements of Procedure but argued that the rule should make advisory opinion are filed by parties provides that persons may seek informal clear that the General Counsel is each year; and eliminating the opinions on jurisdictional issues from required to postpone the hearing at the procedure will increase the risk that the Regional Offices. And the Regional time he files a motion for summary state agencies will improperly assert Office will also make a jurisdictional judgment with the Board. Management jurisdiction, which will require the determination early in its investigation representative Rayford Blankenship, on Board to engage in lengthy, expensive of any representation petition or unfair the other hand, opposed the proposal, and time-consuming litigation under labor practice charges filed with that stating that he believed elimination of NLRB v. Nash-Finch Co., 404 U.S. 138 office. See NLRB Casehandling Manual, the notice- to-show-cause procedure (1971), to enjoin the state agency’s Sec. 11706. would ‘‘add [] to the propensity of the improper actions. Moreover, as indicated in the NPR, NLRB to further abuse respondent[s] by Attorney Ira Drogin also opposed the the instant changes do not affect the arbitrary and capricious actions.’’ proposal. He stated that most of the 10– provisions of current §§ 102.98(b) and Finally, the AFL–CIO also opposed 15 petitions each year appear to be filed 102.99(b) of the Board’s rules and the proposal, but on the opposite by parties before the New York State § 101.39 of the Board’s statements of ground, i.e. on the ground that the Employment Relations Board procedure which permit the state or proposed change would greatly increase (NYSERB); the NYSERB is understaffed territorial agency or court itself to file a the burden on parties opposing and moves extremely slowly; the petition for an advisory opinion on respondent summary judgment motions. current procedure permitting parties to whether the Board would decline to The AFL–CIO argued that under the seek an advisory opinion from the Board assert jurisdiction based either on its proposed change the General Counsel and charging party will be forced to file works well and is expeditious; and this commerce standards or because the a comprehensive response to such procedure cannot be costly to the Board employer is not within the jurisdiction motions in their initial oppositions and given the low number of petitions that of the Act. The provisions permitting will not have the opportunity provided are filed. such petitions are retained, with minor under the current rule to file a further Although we have carefully modification to § 101.39 of the Board’s opposition brief in the event the Board considered the foregoing comments, we statements of procedure to conform it decides the motion warrants full have decided to implement this with Board decisions indicating that the consideration and issues a notice to proposal as set forth in the NPR. As Board will not issue an opinion unless show cause. The AFL–CIO argued that indicated in the NPR, there is no the relevant facts are undisputed or the this will give respondents a significant statutory requirement that the Board state agency or court has already made the relevant factual findings. See incentive to file summary judgment entertain party petitions for advisory Correctional Medical Systems, 299 motions for discovery purposes, which opinions, and the procedure is not NLRB 654 (1990); University of will inevitably result in a sharp rise in widely utilized. Indeed, as indicated in Vermont, 297 NLRB 291 (1989); and St. the number of respondent motions, the comments submitted by attorney Paul Ramsey Medical Center, 291 NLRB thereby increasing the workload not Drogin, virtually all of the 10–15 755 (1988). See also Brooklyn Bureau of only of the General Counsel, who will petitions received each year are filed by Community Service, 320 NLRB No. 157 be forced to file comprehensive parties to proceedings before the (April 15, 1996). responses to every motion, but also of NYSERB.2 Further, such petitions Given the foregoing alternative the Board, which will have to decide the typically raise issues which have been procedures, we do not believe, as motions. Finally, the AFL–CIO argued repeatedly addressed in numerous other suggested by attorney Janowitz, that that the proposal will also burden the published advisory opinions and eliminating party petitions for advisory Regions and administrative law judges decisions issued by the Board. Indeed, opinion will substantially increase the with the responsibility of postponing almost two-thirds of the 22 advisory risk that state agencies will improperly the hearing, one of the traditional opinions issued over the last two years assert jurisdiction. We believe it functions of the notice to show cause. addressed essentially the same issue: reasonable to presume that state Having carefully considered the the Board’s jurisdictional standard for foregoing comments, we have decided 3 agencies will act properly, and the building management companies. In alternative procedures outlined above not to implement this proposal at this will ensure that they have access to time. We do not necessarily agree with 1 The AFL–CIO’s comments were submitted by its General Counsel, Jonathan P. Hiatt. sufficient information to do so in those either management representative 2 Ten of the 12 advisory opinions issued by the Blankenship or the AFL–CIO that the Board in fiscal year 1995, and all of the 10 opinions Services, Inc., et al., 320 NLRB No. 74 (Feb. 28, proposal would unfairly prejudice issued in fiscal year 1996, involved parties before 1996); and Valentine Properties et al., 319 NLRB N. either respondents or the General the NYSERB. 5 (Sept. 19, 1995). Counsel. However, we are concerned 3 See, e.g., 209 Hull Realty Corp., 322 NLRB No. 4 Given that only two comments were filed 43 (Sept. 30, 1996); MCS Equities, Inc., 321 NLRB opposing the Board’s proposal to eliminate such about the AFL–CIO’s additional No. 78 (June 20, 1996); Center County Corp., 320 petitions, it would not appear that the majority of assertions that the proposal would NLRB No. 114 (March 20, 1996); Phipps Houses practitioners and the public disagree with this view. result in more motions for summary 65182 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations judgment being filed by respondents, 2. Section 101.39 is revised to read as 29 CFR Part 102 thereby placing greater burdens on both follows: the Board and the General Counsel, and Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation that the proposal would also place § 101.39 Initiation of advisory opinion case. AGENCY: National Labor Relations greater burdens on the Regions and Board. Judges Division with respect to The question of whether the Board ACTION: Final rule exempting system of postponement of the hearing. As will assert jurisdiction over a labor records from certain provisions of the indicated above and in the NPR, the dispute which is the subject of a Privacy Act. purpose of the proposal was to expedite proceeding in an agency or court of a the summary judgment process and State or territory is initiated by the filing SUMMARY: The National Labor Relations reduce the administrative burden on the of a petition with the Board. This Board [‘‘NLRB’’] issues a final rule Board and its staff which is responsible petition may be filed only if: exempting a new system of records for preparing and issuing such notices. (1) a proceeding is currently pending entitled ‘‘NLRB–20, Agency If the AFL–CIO’s predictions are correct, before such agency or court; Disciplinary Case Files however, and we cannot say that they (2) the petitioner is the agency or (Nonemployees)’’ from certain are unfounded, the proposal would court itself; and provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 actually increase the burdens not only (3) the relevant facts are undisputed U.S.C. 552a. on the Board, but also on the Regions or the agency or court has already made EFFECTIVE DATE: January 10, 1997. and the Judges Division. the relevant factual findings. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Given the Agency’s reduced budget (b) The petition must be in writing J. Toner, Executive Secretary, National and staffing, we believe it would and signed. It is filed with the Executive Labor Relations Board, 1099 14th Street, therefore be prudent for the Board to Secretary of the Board in Washington, NW., Room 11600, Washington, DC study further the issue before DC. No particular form is required, but 20570. Phone: (202) 273–1940. implementing the proposed change. It the petition must be properly captioned SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On may be that there are other alternatives and must contain the allegations October 26, 1993, the Board published available to the Board which could required by section 102.99 of the in the Federal Register a notice of the significantly reduce the current burdens Board’s Rules and Regulations. None of establishment of a new system of associated with issuing such notices. the information sought may relate to the records pursuant to the Privacy Act of One such alternative, simplifying or merits of the dispute. The petition may 1974, entitled ‘‘NLRB–20, Agency streamlining the notice itself by be withdrawn at any time before the Disciplinary Case Files’’ (58 FR 57633). reducing its length and eliminating Board issues its advisory opinion The same day, the Board also published unnecessary text, has recently been determining whether it would or would in the Federal Register a proposed rule implemented based on the not assert jurisdiction on the basis of the exempting the new system of records recommendation of Agency staff. Other facts before it. from certain provisions of the Privacy alternatives will continue to be studied Act (58 FR 57572). Both notices as part of the Agency’s ongoing PART 102ÐRULES AND provided for a public comment period. streamlining efforts. REGULATIONS Thereafter, on March 28, 1996, the As indicated in the NPR, although the Board issued a notice amending the 1. The authority citation for 29 CFR Agency decided to give notice of system name to read ‘‘NLRB–20, Agency part 102 continues to read as follows: proposed rulemaking with respect to the Disciplniary Case Files proposed rule changes, the changes Authority: Section 6, National Labor (Nonemployees),’’ and amending four of involve rules of agency organization, Relations Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 151, the routine uses specified in the original procedure or practice and thus no notice 156). Section 102.117(c) also issued under notice (61 FR 13884). In the absence of of proposed rulemaking was required Section 552(a)(4)(A) of the Freedom of Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. any comments, the amendments to the under section 553 of the Administrative system of records became final 30 days Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). 552(a)(4)(A)), and section 552a (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a (j) and (k). thereafter. Accordingly, the Regulatory Flexibility Sections 102.143 through 102.155 also issued No comments were filed regarding the Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq.), does not under Section 504(c)(1) of the Equal Access proposed rule exempting the system of apply to these rule changes. to Justice Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. records from certain provisions of the List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 101 and 504(c)(1)). Privacy Act. Accordingly, the Board has 102 decided to implement the proposed rule § 102.98 [Amended] as a final rule. Administrative practice and 2. Section 102.98, paragraph (a) and These rules relate to individuals procedure, Labor management relations. the paragraph designation (b) are rather than small business entities, are For the reasons set forth above, 29 removed. concerned with the Agency’s CFR parts 101 and 102 are amended as management of its Privacy Act system of follows: § 102.99 [Amended] records, and will not have any economic impact. Accordingly, pursuant to the PART 101ÐSTATEMENTS OF 3. In § 102.99, paragraph (a) is Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– PROCEDURE removed and paragraphs (b) and (c) are redesignated paragraphs (a) and (b) 612, the NLRB certifies that these rules 1. The authority citation for 29 CFR respectively. will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small part 101 continues to read as follows: Dated: Washington, DC, December 6, 1996. business entities. The NLRB further Authority: Sec. 6 of the National Labor By direction of the Board. finds that the rule does not qualify as a Relations Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 151, John J. Toner, 156), and sec. 522(a) of the Administrative ‘‘major rule’’ under Executive Order No. Executive Secretary. Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 552(a)). Section 12291 since it will not have an annual 101.14 also issued under sec. 2112(a)(1) of [FR Doc. 96–31457 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] effect on the economy of $100 million Pub. L. 100–236, 28 U.S.C. 2112(a)(1). BILLING CODE 7545±01±P or more. Finally, the rule is not subject Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65183 to the provisions of the Paperwork ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION dioxin and pentachlorophenol to EPA Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, as it AGENCY for ‘‘an adequate response to AFPA’s does not contain any information- comments’’ regarding two of the collection requirements within the 40 CFR Part 131 exposure assumptions used by EPA in meaning of that Act. developing the criteria. These [FRL±5663±5] assumptions are that daily water List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 102 National Toxics Rule: Remand of Water consumption is 2 liters, and that all Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping Quality Criteria for Dioxin and consumed fish are contaminated at the requirements. Pentachlorophenol to EPA for criteria levels. Response to Comments The court directed EPA to respond to For the reasons stated above, 29 CFR AFPA’s comments on these two issues part 102 is amended as follows: AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection by December 13, 1996, or the human Agency. health criteria for dioxin and PART 102Ð[AMENDED] ACTION: Notice of availability of US EPA pentachlorophenol will be vacated response to comments. automatically. This notice publishes Subpart KÐRecords and Information EPA’s response to AFPA’s comments. SUMMARY: In this document, the U.S. Under the order, AFPA has 60 days 1. The authority citation for part 102 Environmental Protection Agency from the publication of EPA’s response continues to read as follows: (‘‘EPA’’) is publishing a document to re-open the litigation; upon Authority: Sec. 6, National Labor Relations entitled ‘‘Response to Comments from expiration of the 60 days, the action will Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 151, 156). Section American Forest and Paper Association stand dismissed with prejudice. 102.117 also issued under section (‘‘AFPA’’) on Two of the Exposure In accordance with section 553 of the 552(a)(4)(A) of the Freedom of Information Assumptions Used by EPA in Administrative Procedure Act, EPA has Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)), and Developing the Human Health Water determined that there is good cause not section 552a (j) and (k) of the Privacy Act (5 Quality Criteria for Dioxin and to solicit public comment on this notice. U.S.C. 552a (j) and (k)). Sections 102.143 Pentachlorophenol’’. AFPA challenged In this notice, the Agency is simply through 102.155 also issued under sec. EPA’s promulgation of human health responding to comments on the 504(c)(1) of the Equal Access to Justice Act, water quality criteria for dioxin and proposed NTR and such responses are as amended (5 U.S.C. 504(c)(1)). pentachlorophenol. The District Court not subject to further public comment. remanded these criteria to EPA for an Moreover, the public has had ample 2. Section 102.117 is amended by adequate response to AFPA’s comments opportunity to comment on the adding paragraphs (p) and (q) as regarding two exposure assumptions exposure assumptions addressed in this follows: used by EPA in developing those notice since the assumptions have been reflected in a number of Agency § 102.117 [Amended] criteria: an assumption that daily water consumption is 2 liters, and an regulatory actions. For these reasons, * * * * * assumption that all consumed fish are EPA finds further public comment to be (p) Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), contaminated at criteria levels. EPA has unnecessary. the system of records maintained by the prepared a response in accordance with Dated: December 5, 1996. NLRB containing Agency Disciplinary the court’s order, and is publishing that Robert Perciasepe, Case Files (Nonemployees) shall be response in this document. Assistant Administrator for Water. exempted from the provisions of 5 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S.C. 552a (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4) (G), Response to Comments From the Denis R. Borum, Office of Science and American Forest and Paper Association (H), and (I), and (f) insofar as the system Technology, Office of Water (4304), contains investigatory material on Two Exposure Assumptions Used by USEPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, EPA To Develop Human Health Water compiled for law enforcement purposes D.C. 20460, (202) 260–8996. other than material within the scope of Quality Criteria for Dioxin and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Pentachlorophenol 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). November 1991, EPA proposed (q) The Privacy Act exemption set chemical-specific, numeric criteria for Background forth in paragraph (p) of this section is priority toxic pollutants, including The purpose of the Clean Water Act claimed on the ground that the dioxin and pentachlorophenol, (‘‘CWA’’) is to protect the nations requirements of subsections (c)(3), (d), necessary to bring all States into waters, on which public health and the (e)(1), (e)(4) (G), (H), and (I), and (f) of compliance with the requirements of environment depend. Toward this end, the Privacy Act, if applied to Agency section 303(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Water the CWA requires those discharging into Disciplinary Case Files, would seriously Act. (The ‘‘National Toxics Rule’’ or surface waters of the United States to impair the ability of the NLRB to ‘‘NTR’’, 56 FR 58420; codified at 40 CFR have permits that limit the amount of conduct investigations of alleged or 131.36.) AFPA commented on a number pollutants discharged. To set such suspected violations of the NLRB’s of aspects of the proposal, including the limits, ‘‘criteria’’ are established for each misconduct rules, as set forth in exposure assumptions used in EPA’s pollutant at a level necessary to preserve paragraphs (o) (1), (3), (4), (7), (8), and water quality criteria methodology. The or achieve the uses designated for (11) of this section. NTR was promulgated in December particular waterbodies by the States. In Dated, Washington, DC, December 5, 1996. 1992 (57 FR 60848; codified at 40 CFR other words, for waterbodies designated 131.36). AFPA challenged the rule as as drinking water supplies, the criteria By direction of the Board. arbitrary and capricious in violation of should assure that people can safely John J. Toner, the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 drink the water. Where waterbodies are Executive Secretary. U.S.C. 551 et seq. (Civil Action No. 93– to be used for fishing, swimming or [FR Doc. 96–31458 Filed 12–10 –96; 8:45 CV–0694 (RMU), DCDC.) On September recreation, the criteria should assure am] 4, 1996, the court issued an order that people can safely eat fish that are BILLING CODE 7545±01±P remanding the human health criteria for taken from those waters, and safely use 65184 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations the waters for other designated basis for the assumption, EPA here studies that show the average adult purposes. These criteria, intended to further explains that rationale. consumption rate for liquids ranges protect public health, are referred to as The Agency’s 1980 methodology for from 0.4 to 2.2 L/day. Based on a study ‘‘human health criteria’’. deriving human health criteria assumed showing that approximately 60% of the Human health criteria are derived to a water consumption of 2 liters per day. total dietary fluid intake is water, establish quantitative estimates of EPA cited a study done by the NAS in ChemRisk concludes that if a total fluid chemicals which, if not exceeded, will support of this assumption. The NAS consumption rate of 2 liters per day is protect the general population from study was undertaken to meet the needs reasonable, then 60% of that adverse health impacts from exposure to expressed in the 1974 Safe Drinking consumption rate or 1.2 liters per day is contaminated surface water. There are Water Act (‘‘SDWA’’). Under the SDWA, water. (pp. 5–1 to 5–2) two routes of human exposure: water EPA was required to establish federal EPA is familiar with the studies, consumption and fish consumption. In standards for protection from harmful including those cited by AFPA, that order to develop the criteria, EPA contaminants in the drinking water estimate average consumption of water needed to determine appropriate supplies of the nation. Congress to be less than 2 liters per day. Indeed, exposure assumptions for these directed EPA to arrange with the NAS in 1990, EPA conducted its own pathways. In 1980, EPA announced its to study the adverse effects on health analysis of data that suggested that the methodology for establishing human attributable to contaminants in drinking average water consumption rate across health criteria. 45 FR 79318 (Nov. 28, water. In 1977, NAS produced a multi- the U.S. adult population is 1.4 liters 1980). To predict the effects of low volume study entitled Drinking Water per day. ‘‘Exposure Factors Handbook’’, doses of the pollutant on a hypothetical and Health, National Academy of EPA 600/8–89/043, at 2–6 (AR VA–103). person over a 70-year lifetime, EPA Sciences, Washington, D.C. 1977. In this However, while noting that the assumed the exposed individual is a study, NAS considered 2 liters to be the scientific literature suggests a daily rate male who weighs 70-kilograms and who average amount of water consumed per of 1.4 liters, EPA made clear that on a daily basis consumes an average of day. While noting that the average per ‘‘[p]olicy or precedent reasons may 6.5 grams of fish and shellfish and 2 capita water consumption of the U.S. support the continued use of the 2.0 liters of water. Id, at 79323–24. EPA also population, as calculated from a survey L/day [figure] as the average adult assumed for purposes of the of nine different literature sources, was drinking water consumption rate.’’ This methodology that the consumed water 1.63 liters per day, NAS adopted 2 liters analysis further indicates that and fish are contaminated at the criteria per day as representing the ‘‘intake of consumption of 2 liters per day covers levels. Id., at 79323. the majority of water consumers’’. Id. at about 90 percent of the population; the remaining 10 percent of the population Issue 1: EPA’s Estimate of Water Intake 11. EPA adopted 2 liters per day as the consumes more than a daily average of as 2 Liters per Day drinking water exposure for its human health criteria methodology, 2 liters. In this analysis, 2 liters per day As noted above, in order to derive understanding that it included a margin is characterized as a reasonable worst- human health criteria, EPA needed to of safety that would ensure that most of case water consumption rate for adults. make assumptions concerning daily the population would be protected. Since EPA’s purpose in selecting 2 liters exposure to pollutants in surface water In its comments on the proposed as an average daily water consumption from two primary routes: water NTR, AFPA argued that the assumed 2 rate was to provide a margin of safety consumption and fish consumption. liters per day water consumption rate sufficient to protect most people—to the EPA has assumed an average daily water was overly conservative: extent that 2 liters per day is protective consumption of 2 liters. The Agency of approximately 90 percent of the recognizes that a number of other In a paper recently accepted for population—using 2 liters per day as the publication in Risk Analysis (Exhibit 9) drinking water consumption rates have assumed water consumption rate for the been suggested. Having reviewed those ** * (the) analysis demonstrated that the 50th percentile intake of ‘‘tap water’’ * ** NTR is consistent with EPA’s approach studies, EPA’s policy judgment was slightly less than one liter per day. * ** in setting human health criteria. continues to be that an assumed daily ChemRisk recently analyzed similar water In a 1992 SDWA rulemaking that consumption of 2 liters is reasonable to consumption data and came up with a established health-based contaminant provide the margin of safety needed to similar figure for ‘‘tap water’’ consumption— levels for numerous pollutants in protect most people and thereby meet 1.2 liters per day. (Exhibit 2) Since an drinking water (57 FR 31,776), the issue the objectives of the CWA. EPA is not individual exposed to contaminated surface of water consumption estimates was re- required, by the CWA or regulation, to water would at most only be exposed to that examined yet again. In the SDWA base its assumed water consumption on contamination in the ‘‘tap water’’ he consumes, and not in the moisture content rulemaking, the Chemical ‘‘average ingestion’’ in statistical terms. inherent in foods that he purchases. * ** Manufacturers Association (‘‘CMA’’) Rather, as EPA explained in the the two liter per day assumption EPA has submitted comments (which mirror proposed NTR, the assumed water used overstates by a factor of 2 the those submitted by AFPA in the consumption rate is based on an potentially contaminated water that an contemporaneous NTR rulemaking) ‘‘approximate’’ national average. (56 FR average individual might consume. AFPA objecting to EPA’s use of 2 liters per day 58436), i.e., the approximate national Comments on Proposed Rule, Dec. 19, 1991, to set drinking water standards. CMA average may be a starting point not an pp. 59–60. recommended instead the 1.4 liters per end point. Also, both the Agency and The ChemRisk analysis states that day estimate in EPA’s Exposure Factors the National Academy of Sciences EPA’s 2.0 liters per day value is based Handbook. In response to CMA’s (‘‘NAS’’) have indicated that policy on the daily ration of water required by comments, EPA acknowledged that the reasons are appropriate considerations US Army field personnel; ChemRisk 1.4 liters per day estimate is ‘‘an overall in adopting ‘‘average’’ drinking water questions whether this value is average of a number of studies’’ but consumption rates. Since 1980, EPA has appropriate for a general population rejected using that value since some of on several occasions reviewed and with access to other beverages and that the studies did not necessarily consider publicly addressed the rationale for its does not engage in as much physical indirect water consumption (such as use water consumption value, but to the exertion and is not as exposed to the in cooking) and therefore may not extent that questions remain as to the outdoors. ChemRisk reviewed several account for all exposures related to the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65185 occurrence of contaminants in drinking taken from waterbodies at the criteria ‘‘safe’’ (i.e., the criteria level). This is the water. EPA reiterated that the 2 liters level. EPA recognizes that there are same assumption that EPA makes as to per day assumption was a more differences in fishing patterns and the water consumption, and the Agency’s appropriate value ‘‘in order to be degree to which fish bioaccumulate rationale supporting that assumption is conservative and allow for an adequate contaminants from the water. However, equally applicable to fish consumption. margin of safety.’’ Id. at 31787. EPA it is EPA’s judgment that this AFPA offers examples of situations further noted that the Exposure Factors assumption regarding fish which, it contends, make it unlikely that Handbook considered 2 liters per day a contamination is necessary to derive individuals will be exposed at the reasonable worst case estimate. criteria that are sufficiently protective to criteria level. EPA is aware that levels The Agency’s rationale and meet the objectives of the CWA. of actual exposure to contamination conclusion in the drinking water AFPA commented that this from consuming fish will vary regulation is equally applicable to the assumption overstates the actual depending on a number of factors. Daily NTR. Therefore, EPA included the expected exposure to a contaminant: fish consumption may be both greater Federal Register notice (Id. 31787– Another source of overestimation of than and less than 6.5 grams. As EPA 31788) containing EPA’s response to exposure comes from the implicit noted in the proposed NTR, the CMA’s comments on the 2 liters per day assumption that each portion of freshwater exposure assumptions are based on figure in the record for the NTR fish consumed by an individual will have the approximate national averages, but rulemaking. In the NTR, an assumption maximum concentration of the subject ‘‘considerably understate the exposure of water consumption of 2 liters per day contaminant * * * This assumption is obviously an overstatement, since not all fish that would occur for certain segments of provides a sufficient margin of safety to the population that have high fish ensure that most people can safely drink (presumably very few of them, in fact) will have been exposed to ambient water which consumption or depend on fish from waterbodies designated as drinking is just barely achieving the water quality consumption for subsistence.’’ Id. at water sources. standard. Likewise, if the water quality 58,436. In sum, AFPA disagrees with EPA’s standards are being met, it would only be on choice of methodology and desired level rare occasions that the water consumed will AFPA’s exhibits note that sport of health protection in deriving an have a concentration as high as the water fishing patterns may differ among estimate of assumed water quality standard allows. By definition, if the communities. Fishermen with access to consumption. EPA is not required under water quality standard is implemented, a number of different waterbodies may the CWA to base its water consumption ambient concentrations of the pollutant will very well fish in several places and the estimate on ‘‘average ingestion’’ in normally be less. In addition, depending on levels of contamination may differ the dilution calculations (if any) used in statistical terms. In order to meet the among those waterbodies. Further, implementing the water quality standard, different species of fish bioaccumulate objectives of the CWA, EPA believes there may be little or no portion of the stream that its assumed water consumption where the concentration of the pollutant is pollutants at different rates. There are must include a margin of safety so that ever as high as the water quality standard many circumstances that may be the general population is protected. The allows (due to dilution and the use of low relevant to fish consumption in different NAS adopted a water consumption stream flows * * * EPA has very recently communities and the level of figure of 2 liters per day in its study of made this point forcefully in briefs and contamination of those fish. However, drinking water and public health as argument in the Eastern District of Virginia whether people fish from a number of in NRDC, et al. v. U.S. EPA, No. 3:91CV0058. locations, or whether some waterbodies representing the consumption of the [cite omitted]. EPA has noted that FDA’s majority of water consumers. EPA has analysis of risk from eating dioxin- are not as contaminated as others does reviewed the subsequent studies of contaminated fish in the Great Lakes not demonstrate that EPA’s assumption water consumption, but continues to assumed that * * * 90 percent of the fish an is invalid. EPA must develop national believe that 2 liters per day is individual consumed would show no criteria (that States may modify) that appropriate for ensuring protection of measurable contamination or would be taken must be protective of the general public health under the CWA. from uncontaminated areas. (cite omitted). population. Neither AFPA nor other AFPA Comments on Proposed National commenters provided EPA with Issue 2. EPA’s Assumption That All of Toxics Rule, December 19, 1991, pp. 60–61. evidence sufficient to allow the Agency the Fish Consumed Is Contaminated at Two exhibits to AFPA’s comments to use a less conservative assumption. the Criteria Level were prepared for the National Council It continues to be EPA’s view that in In developing a methodology for of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream order to develop criteria that are deriving human health criteria, EPA Improvement. Exhibit 2 discusses sufficiently protective, it is necessary to made assumptions about exposure to studies of fish consumption of anglers assume that all consumed fish are taken contamination from eating fish taken in New York and Maine, and Exhibit 4 from waters at the criteria level. By from surface waters. The purpose of the addresses exposure to dioxin from the deriving criteria based on that assumptions was to ensure that if the consumption of fish caught in fresh assumption, EPA is better able to ensure criteria were met in a waterbody waters impacted by certain pulp mills. that people can safely eat fish from designated for fishing, most people Both reports conclude that it is unlikely waters designated for fishing. could safely eat fish from that that all of the fish consumed by sport The local circumstances that AFPA waterbody. In addition to the anglers come from only one waterbody reports are best addressed by the States assumption in the methodology that the or from impacted waters. The dioxin which have chief responsibility for hypothetical man has an average daily report notes, however, that no data are implementing the CWA. States can consumption of 6.5 grams of fish, EPA available on the number of waterbodies modify or adapt EPA’s recommended assumes that all of that fish is taken fished by members of the general human health criteria to reflect just such from water with pollutants present at population or sport fishermen over a local environmental conditions, and the criteria level. course of time. EPA encourages them to do so. (See 57 It is EPA’s view that to ensure that In its methodology, EPA assumes that FR 60888, Dec. 22, l992). people can safely eat fish from waters all fish consumed by the hypothetical designated for fishing, it is necessary to exposed individual are contaminated at [FR Doc. 96–31429 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] assume that all of the consumed fish is the maximum concentration level that is BILLING CODE 6560±50±P 65186 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

40 CFR Part 300 The EPA identifies sites which appear October 29, 1996, which added to present a significant risk to public chemical substances to two model [FRL±5660±4] health, welfare, or the environment and information gathering rules: the Toxic it maintains the NPL as the list of those Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section National Oil and Hazardous sites. Sites on the NPL may be the 8(a) Preliminary Assessment Substances Contingency Plan; subject of Hazardous Substance Information Rule (PAIR) and the TSCA National Priorities List Update Response Trust Fund (Fund-) financed Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data remedial actions. Any site deleted from Reporting Rule.The TSCA Interagency AGENCY: Environmental Protection the NPL remains eligible for Fund- Testing Committee (ITC) has requested Agency. financed remedial actions in the that EPA stay certain provisions in the ACTION: Notice of deletion of the Omega unlikely event that conditions at the site October 29, 1996, final rule for Hills North Landfill, Germantown, warrant such action. Section nonylphenol ethoxylates in order to Wisconsin from the National Priorities 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that avoid ambiguities in TSCA section 8(a) List (NPL). Fund-financed actions may be taken at and 8(d) reporting resulting from the use of alternate CAS numbers cited in the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection sites deleted from the NPL in the ITC’s 38th report. Agency (EPA) announces the deletion of unlikely event that conditions at the site the Omega Hills North Landfill , warrant such action. Deletion of a site EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective Germantown, Wisconsin from the from the NPL does not affect responsible December 11, 1996. National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL party liability or impede agency efforts FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: is Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which to recover costs associated with Susan B. Hazen, Director, TSCA is the National Oil and Hazardous response efforts. Environmental Assistance Division Substances Contingency Plan (NCP), List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 (7408), Office of Pollution Prevention which EPA promulgated pursuant to and Toxics, Environmental Protection Environmental protection, Air Section 105 of the Comprehensive Agency, 401 M St., SW., Rm. E–543, pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous Environmental Response, Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: substances, Hazardous Waste, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (202) 554–1404, TDD: (202) 554–0551, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, (CERCLA), as amended. EPA and the e-mail: [email protected]. Reporting and recordkeeping State of Wisconsin have determined that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Eighteen requirements, Superfund, Water all appropriate Fund-financed responses nonylphenol ethoxylates were pollution control, Water supply. under CERCLA have been implemented recommended in the ITC’s 38th Report and that no further cleanup by Dated: November 21, 1996. (61 FR 39832, July 30, 1996) (FRL– responsible parties is appropriate. Valdas V. Adamkus, 5379–2). Alternate CAS registry Moreover, EPA and the State of Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region 5. numbers were listed for some of these nonylphenol ethoxylates. The use of Wisconsin have determined that 40 CFR part 300 is amended as alternate CAS numbers produced some remedial actions conducted at the site to follows: date remain protective of public health, ambiguities in the TSCA section 8(a) welfare, and the environment. PART 300Ð[AMENDED] and 8(d) rules that were promulgated for EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 1996. the nonylphenol ethoxylates (61 FR 1. The authority citation for part 300 55872, October 29, 1996) (FRL–5397–9). ADDRESSES: The comprehensive continues to read as follows: The ITC re-examined these alternate information on the site is available at CAS registry numbers and determined the local information repository located Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. that 5 were not associated with any of at: Wisconsin Department of Natural 9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.; p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, the listed nonylphenol ethoxylates Resources, 101 S. Webster, Madison, WI 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.; p. 193. chemical names. The ITC revised the 53707. Requests for comprehensive list of nonylphenol ethoxylates by copies of documents should be directed Appendix B—[Amended] providing 9th Collective Index names formally to the Regional Docket Office. 2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300 for all CAS-numbered nonylphenol Address for the Regional Docket Office is amended by removing the Omega ethoxylates, including the 5 not is Jan Pfundheller (H–7J), U.S. EPA, Hills North Landfill site, Germantown, previously associated with a unique Region V, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Wisconsin. name. This process eliminated the need IL 60604, (312) 353–5821. [FR Doc. 96–31272 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] for alternate CAS registry numbers. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The ITC’s 39th Report was delivered BILLING CODE 6560±50±P Gladys Beard, Associate Remedial to the EPA Administrator on November Project Manager, Office of Superfund, 27, 1996. In its report, the ITC provided U.S. EPA—Region V, 77 West Jackson 40 CFR Parts 712 and 716 more accurate information regarding the Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886– specific CAS-numbered nonylphenol 7253. [OPPTS±82049A; FRL±5577±6] ethoxylates for which there are U.S. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to Preliminary Assessment Information government data needs, and requested be deleted from the NPL list: The Omega and Health and Safety Data Reporting; that EPA stay the provisions for Hills North Landfill, Germantown, Stay of a Final Rule nonylphenol ethoxylates in the Wisconsin. Agency’s October 29, 1996, final rule for A Notice of Intent to Delete for this AGENCY: Environmental Protection these chemicals (61 FR 55872). To site was published at 61 FR 32765, June Agency (EPA). eliminate all ambiguities in TSCA 25, 1996. The closing date for comments ACTION: Final rule; stay. section 8(a) and 8(d) reporting resulting on the Notice of Intent to Delete was from the ITC’s use of alternate CAS July 25, 1996. EPA received no SUMMARY: EPA is staying certain numbers for nonylphenol ethoxylates in comments and therefore has not provisions of a final rule which was its 38th report, EPA is issuing this stay. prepared a Responsiveness Summary. published in the Federal Register of In the near future, EPA will publish the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65187

39th ITC Report in the Federal Register warning labels. Two labels include Rulemaking Analyses and Notices and amend the TSCA section 8(a) and language that children are safest in the Executive Order 12866 and DOT 8(d) reporting rules for the nonylphenol back seat. Automobile manufacturers Regulatory Policies and Procedures: ethoxylates in order to eliminate any have asked whether this language is NHTSA has considered the impact of ambiguities in those rules. appropriate in vehicles which do not this rulemaking action under E.O. 12866 have a back seat. This notice corrects List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 712 and and the Department of Transportation’s the language of the final rule to allow 716 regulatory policies and procedures. This manufacturers of vehicles with no back rulemaking document was not reviewed Environmental protection, Chemicals, seat to omit these sentences. This notice under E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning Hazardous substances, Health and safety also corrects a typographic error in a and Review.’’ This document is part of data, Reporting and recordkeeping December 4, 1996 correcting an action that was determined to be requirements. amendment which changed the dates in ‘‘significant’’ under the Department of Dated: December 5, 1996. the regulatory text from 1997 to 1996. Transportation’s regulatory policies and Charles M. Auer, DATES: Effective Date: The amendments procedures. However, this notice does Director, Chemical Control Division, Office made in this rule are effective December not impose any new requirements on of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 27, 1996. manufacturers. It simply corrects a Therefore, 40 CFR Chapter I is Petition Dates: Any petitions for typographic error and allows some amended as follows: reconsideration must be received by manufacturers the option of omitting NHTSA no later than January 27, 1997. two statements from warning labels. PART 712Ð[AMENDED] Regulatory Flexibility Act: NHTSA ADDRESSES: Any petitions for has also considered the impacts of this 1. In part 712: reconsideration should refer to the final rule under the Regulatory a. The authority citation for part 712 docket and notice number of this notice Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that this continues to read as follows: and be submitted to: Administrator, rule will not have a significant Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a). National Highway Traffic Safety economic impact on a substantial Administration, 400 Seventh Street, number of small entities. Further, this § 712.30 [Amended] SW., Washington, DC 20590. final rule will not alter the economic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: impacts of the November 1996 final b. In § 712.30, the table in paragraph Mary Versailles, Office of Safety rule. As explained above, this rule will (e) is amended by staying the entire Performance Standards, NPS–31, not have an economic impact on any category ‘‘Nonylphenol ethoxylates.’’ National Highway Traffic Safety manufacturers. PART 716Ð[AMENDED] Administration, 400 Seventh Street, Paperwork Reduction Act: In SW., Washington, D.C. 20590; telephone accordance with the Paperwork 2. In part 716: (202) 366–2057; facsimile (202) 366– Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96–511), a. The authority citation for part 716 4329; electronic mail there are no requirements for continues to read as follows: ‘‘[email protected]’’. information collection associated with this final rule. Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(d). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On National Environmental Policy Act: November 27, 1996, NHTSA published NHTSA has also analyzed this final rule § 716.120 [Amended] a final rule amending 49 CFR 571.208 to under the National Environmental require vehicles with air bags to have Policy Act and determined that it will b. In § 716.120, the table in paragraph new warning labels. One of these labels, not have a significant impact on the (d) is amended by staying the entire a sun visor label, includes the statement category ‘‘Nonylphenol ethoxylates.’’ human environment. ‘‘The back seat is the safest place for Executive Order 12612 (Federalism): [FR Doc. 96–31432 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] children.’’ Another label, a temporary NHTSA has analyzed this rule in BILLING CODE 6560±50±F label on the dash, includes the accordance with the principles and statement ‘‘The back seat is the safest criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and place for children 12 and under.’’ The has determined that this rule will not DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION regulatory language of the final rule have significant federalism implications does not allow manufacturers of to warrant the preparation of a National Highway Traffic Safety vehicles with no back seat to omit these Federalism Assessment. Administration statements. This notice adds language Civil Justice Reform: This final rule allowing manufacturers of vehicles with does not have any retroactive effect. 49 CFR Part 571 no back seat to omit these statements. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103, whenever a [Docket No. 74±14; Notice 106] On December 4, 1996, NHTSA Federal motor vehicle safety standard is published a correcting amendment to in effect, a State may not adopt or RIN 2127±AG14 the November 27 final rule. The maintain a safety standard applicable to regulatory language in that rule the same aspect of performance which Federal Motor Vehicle Safety inadvertently changed dates from 1997 Standards; Occupant Crash Protection is not identical to the Federal standard, to 1996. This notice also corrects that except to the extent that the State AGENCY: National Highway Traffic error. requirement imposes a higher level of Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. NHTSA finds for good cause that this performance and applies only to ACTION: Final rule, correcting final rule can be made effective in less vehicles procured for the State’s use. 49 amendment. than 30 days. This rule makes minor U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for corrections to the regulatory language of judicial review of final rules SUMMARY: On November 27, 1996, the November 27, 1996, final rule. This establishing, amending or revoking NHTSA published a final rule requiring notice should therefore be effective on Federal motor vehicle safety standards. vehicles with air bags to have new the same date as the earlier rule. That section does not require 65188 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations submission of a petition for (b) Sun visor warning label. figure 6c of this standard, and shall reconsideration or other administrative * * * * * comply with the requirements of proceedings before parties may file suit (2) Vehicles manufactured on or after S4.5.1(c)(2)(i) through S4.5.1(c)(2)(iii). in court. February 25, 1997. Each vehicle shall * * * * * List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 have a label permanently affixed to (e) Label on the dash. Each vehicle either side of the sun visor, at the manufactured on or after February 25, Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor manufacturer’s option, at each front 1997 that is equipped with an inflatable vehicles. outboard seating position that is restraint for the passenger position shall equipped with an inflatable restraint. have a label attached to a location on In consideration of the foregoing, 49 The label shall conform in content to CFR Part 571 is amended as follows: the dashboard or the steering wheel hub the label shown in either Figure 6a or that is clearly visible from all front 6b of this standard, as appropriate, and PART 571ÐFEDERAL MOTOR seating positions. The label need not be shall comply with the requirements of VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS permanently affixed to the vehicle. This S4.5.1(b)(2)(i) through S4.5.1(b)(2)(v). label shall conform in content to the 1. The authority citation for Part 571 * * * * * label shown in Figure 7 of this standard, of Title 49 continues to read as follows: (v) If the vehicle does not have a back and shall comply with the requirements seat, the label shown in Figure 6a or 6b Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, of S4.5.1(e)(2)(i) through may be modified by omitting the S4.5.1(e)(2)(iii). 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at statement: ‘‘The BACK SEAT is the 49 CFR 1.50. SAFEST place for children.’’ * * * * * (iii) If the vehicle does not have a 2. Section 571.208 is amended by * * * * * back seat, the label shown in Figure 7 revising the introductory text of (c) Air bag alert label. may be modified by omitting the S4.5.1(b)(2), S4.5.1(c)(2) and S4.5.1(e) * * * * * statement: ‘‘The back seat is the safest and by adding new S4.5.1(b)(2)(v) and (2) Vehicles manufactured on or after place for children 12 and under.’’ S4.5.1(e)(iii) to read as follows: 571.208 February 25, 1997. If the label required Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash by S4.5.1(b)(2) is not visible when the * * * * * Protection. sun visor is in the stowed position, an Issued on: December 5, 1996. L. Robert Shelton, * * * * * air bag alert label shall be permanently affixed to that visor so that the label is Associate Administrator for Safety S4.5.1 Labeling and owner's manual visible when the visor is in that Performance Standards. information. position. The label shall conform in [FR Doc. 96–31413 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] * * * * * content to the sun visor label shown in BILLING CODE 4910±59±P 65189

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER for FY 1995 (Pub. L. 103–337) included PART 334ÐTEMPORARY contains notices to the public of the proposed an amendment to the IPA which gives ASSIGNMENT OF EMPLOYEES issuance of rules and regulations. The these centers automatic eligibility. BETWEEN FEDERAL AGENCIES AND purpose of these notices is to give interested Section 334.103 was changed to require STATE, LOCAL, AND INDIAN TRIBAL persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final the nonprofit status of ‘‘Other GOVERNMENTS, INSTITUTIONS OF rules. Organizations’’ to be determined by HIGHER EDUCATION, AND OTHER agencies, not OPM. OPM will provide ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS criteria to determine nonprofit status. 1. The authority citation for part 334 OFFICE OF PERSONNEL Section 334.104 places a lifetime limit continues to read as follows: MANAGEMENT of 6 years for Federal employees on IPA Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3376; E.O. 11589, 3 assignments and for individuals from 5 CFR Part 334 CFR 557 (1971–1975). non-Federal organizations who receive RIN 3206 AG61 IPA assignments. This section also 2. Section 334.102, the definition of requires that when an assignment is other organization is revised to read as follows: Intergovernmental Personnel Act over, the employee must return to his or Mobility Program her home organization for the same § 334.102 Definitions. AGENCY: Office of Personnel duration as the assignment. Section * * * * * Management. 334.105 says that if an employee fails to Other organization means a national, ACTION: Proposed rule. return to Federal service for the regional, Statewide, area wide, or equivalent period of the assignment, metropolitan organization representing SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel then he or she is responsible for the member State or local governments; an Management (OPM) is proposing to costs of the assignment except for association of State or local public issue regulations governing mobility salary. Section 334.106 requires that officials; a nonprofit organization which assignments between Federal agencies agencies execute a written agreement for has as one of its principal functions the and non-Federal entities. Since 1979, each assignment and keep a copy of the offering of professional advisory, when the original regulations were agreement available for review. research, educational, or development issued, the program has evolved to a However, OPM will no longer require services, or related services to point where some of these regulations that a copy of the agreement be sent to governments or universities concerned have become too cumbersome. The them. To monitor mobility program with public management; or a federally revised regulations will allow the funded research and development program to operate more efficiently. activity, OPM will request agencies to submit an annual report, a requirement center; and DATES: Comments must be submitted on which was dropped a few years back. * * * * * or before January 10, 1997. 3. Section 334.103 is revised to read ADDRESSES: All comments concerning These revised regulations are a result as follows: these proposed changes to the of the feedback the review team regulations should be addressed to Tony received from the various shareholders. § 334.103 Approval of instrumentalities or While decentralizing responsibility for authorities of State and local governments Ryan, Director, IPA Mobility Program, and ``other organizations''. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the program, these new rules will Room 7457, 1900 E Street NW., empower agencies and allow them to (a) Organizations interested in Washington, DC 20415. operate the program in a more efficient participating in the mobility program as an instrumentality or authority of a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: manner. OPM will still exercise its State or local government or as an Tony Ryan, 202–606–1181. statutory authority to issue regulations, ‘‘other organization’’ as set out in this but the day-to-day management of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In October part must have their nonprofit status of 1995, OPM initiated a general review program will rest with agencies. approved for participation by the of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 334 Federal agency with which they are Mobility Program. The program was part entering into an assignment. of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Colleges and universities, (b) Written requests for approval as a (IPA) of 1970. The review team met with Government employees, Indians, nonprofit should include a copy of the IPA coordinators from eleven agencies, Intergovernmental relations. organization’s: in addition to contacting State (1) Articles of incorporation; governments, universities, and Office of Personnel Management. (2) Bylaws; nonprofit organizations which use the James B. King, (3) Internal Revenue Service nonprofit IPA Mobility Program. A summary of Director. statement; and the changes follows: (4) Any other information which In section 334.102, the definition of Accordingly, OPM proposes to amend indicates that the organization has as a ‘‘other organization’’ was expanded to part 334 of title 5, Code of Federal principal function the offering of include Federally funded research and Regulations: professional advisory, research, development centers, which formerly educational, or development services, or had to apply for certification to related services to governments or participate in the IPA Mobility Program. universities concerned with public The National Defense Authorization Act management. 65190 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

(c) Federally Funded Research and NUCLEAR REGULATORY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Development Centers which appear on COMMISSION the Master Government List maintained Federal Aviation Administration by the National Science Foundation are 10 CFR Part 50 eligible to enter into mobility 14 CFR Chapter I Draft Policy Statement on the agreements. An organization denied [Summary Notice No. PR±96±8] approval by an agency of its nonprofit Restructuring and Economic status may request reconsideration by Deregulation of the Electric Utility Petition for Rulemaking; Summary of the Office of Personnel Management. Industry Petitions Received; Dispositions of 4. Section 334.104 is revised to read Petitions Issued as follows: AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. AGENCY: Federal Aviation § 334.104 Length of assignment. ACTION: Extension of public comment Administration (FAA), DOT. (a) An assignment may be made for up period. ACTION: Notice of petitions for to 2 years and may be extended by the rulemaking received and of dispositions head of a Federal agency for up to 2 SUMMARY: On September 23, 1996 (61 of prior petitions. more years, given the concurrence of the FR 49711), the NRC published for SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking other parties to the agreement. public comment a draft policy statement (b) A Federal agency may not send or provisions governing the application, regarding its expectations for, and receive on assignment an employee who processing, and disposition of petitions intended approach to, its power reactor has served on mobility assignments for for rulemaking (14 CFR Part 11), this licensees as the electric utility industry more than a total of 6 years during his notice contains a summary of certain moves from an environment of rate or her career. The Office of Personnel petitions requesting the initiation of regulation toward greater competition. Management may waive this provision rulemaking procedures for the The comment period for this draft upon the written request of the agency amendment of specified provisions of policy statement was originally head. the Federal Aviation Regulations and of scheduled to expire on December 9, (c) At the completion of an denials or withdrawals of certain 1996. In a letter dated November 6, assignment, an employee must take a petitions previously received. The 1996, the Nuclear Information and break equal in length to the time spent purpose of this notice is to improve the Resource Service requested that the on that assignment before participating public’s awareness of, and participation NRC extend the comment period to again in the mobility program. in, this aspect of FAA’s regulatory allow sufficient time for the industry to 5. Section 334.105 is revised to read activities. Neither publication of this air concerns and develop comments. In as follows: notice nor the inclusion or omission of response to this request and NRC information in the summary is intended § 334.105 Obligated service requirement. concerns that the public have ample to affect the legal status of any petition opportunity to address the issues raised (a) A Federal employee assigned or its final disposition. under this subchapter must agree as a in the draft policy statement, the NRC DATES: condition of accepting an assignment to has decided to extend the comment Comments on petitions received serve with the Federal Government period 60 days. must identify the petition docket upon completion of the assignment for number involved and must be received DATES: The comment period has been February 10, 1997. a period equal to the length of the extended and now expires on February ADDRESSES: Send comments on any assignment. 9, 1997. Comments submitted after this petition in triplicate to: Federal (b) If the employee fails to carry out date will be considered if it is practical Aviation Administration, Office of the this agreement, he or she must to do so, but assurance of consideration Chief Counsel, Attn: Rules Docket No. reimburse the Federal agency of its cannot be given except for comments llll, 800 Independence Avenue, share of the costs of the assignment received on or before this date. (exclusive of salary). The head of the SW., Washington, DC 20591. Comments Federal agency may waive this ADDRESSEES: Submit written comments may also be sent electronically to the reimbursement for good and sufficient to Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory following internet address: reason. Commission, Attention: Docketing and [email protected]. 6. Section 334.106 is revised to read Service Branch, Washington, DC 20555. The petition, any comments received, as follows: Written comments may also be and a copy of any final disposition are delivered to 11555 Rockville Pike, filed in the assigned regulatory docket § 334.106 Requirement for written Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 AM to and are available for examination in the agreement. 4:15 PM, Federal workdays. Copies of Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G, (a) Before an assignment is made the written comments received may be FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A), Federal agency and the State, local, or examined at the NRC Public Document 800 Independence Ave., SW., Indian tribal government, institution of Room, 2120 L Street N.W. (Lower Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) higher education, or other eligible Level), Washington, DC. 267–3132. organization and the assigned employee FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: shall enter into a written agreement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Wood (301) 415–1255. Fred Haynes, (202) 267–3939, or Marisa which records the obligations and Mullen, (202) 267–9681, Office of responsibilities of the parties as Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation of December, 1996. specified in 5 U.S. Code 3373–3375. Administration, 800 Independence (b) Agencies must maintain a copy of For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591. each assignment agreement form as well John C. Hoyle, This notice is published pursuant to as any modification to the agreement. Secretary of the Commission. paragraphs (b) and (f) of § 11.27 of Part [FR Doc. 96–31394 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 96–31481 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations BILLING CODE 6325±01±M BILLING CODE 7590±01±P (14 CFR Part 11). Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65191

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 4, 14 CFR Parts 91, 121, 127, and 135 pertinent information and identify a 1996. proposed alternative for final [Docket No. 28577; Notice No. 96±4] Donald P. Bryne, rulemaking. The comment period closed Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. RIN 2120±AG11 on August 19, 1996. Following the closing date of the Disposition of Petitions Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of comment period, the FAA prepared a Docket No.: 26158 the Rocky Mountain National Park Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) Petitioner: Everett W. Morris AGENCY: Federal Aviation that evaluates various alternatives for Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Administration (FAA), DOT. addressing potential aviation noise 121 issues at RMNP. The FAA found that it ACTION: Description of Rulechange Sought: To Proposed rule; supplemental would be in the public interest to add a new section that would require notice of availability and opportunity reopen the comment period to allow that each large turbine-powered for comment. interested persons the opportunity to airplane be equipped with a takeoff SUMMARY: A notice of proposed comment on the Draft EA. warning system that meets the rulemaking (NPRM) relating to special Consequently, on November 21, 1996, requirements of 14 CFR § 25.703. flight rules in the vicinity of the Rocky the FAA announced the availability of Petitioner’s Reason for the Request: The Mountain National Park was published the Draft EA and reopened the comment petitioner feels amending the on May 15, 1996. This document period through December 23, 1996 (61 operating rule can provide an earlier announces the availability for public FR 5909). In addition, certain RMNP required compliance date, thus comment of recently submitted sound level data submitted by DOI also reducing the probability of future information from the Department of was made available for comment. accidents caused by improper Interior (DOI). This submission contains Availability of Information configuration of the airplane. Denial; information concerning the commercial November 15, 1996 air tour overflight operations in a The DOI has recently submitted Docket No.: 27371 sample of National Parks. information to the Department of Petitioner: Homeowners of Encino Transportation regarding the effects of DATES: Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Comments must be received on commercial air tour overflight 91.119(d) or before December 23, 1996. operations in a sample of National Description of Rulechange Sought: To ADDRESSES: Comments on this NPRM Parks. The FAA finds that it is in the limit helicopter operations below the should be mailed, in triplicate to public interest to provide the minimum altitudes prescribed in § 91/ Federal Aviation Administration, Office opportunity to comment on this 119 (b) and (c) except for helicopters of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules information. Accordingly, the DOI operated by any municipal, county, Docket (AGC–200), Docket No. 28577, submission is being made available in State, or Federal authority for 800 Independence Avenue, SW., the Docket for public comment. emergency services, rescue Washington, DC 20591. Comments may On April 22, 1996, the President of operations, or police or fire also be sent electronically to the Rules the United States established priorities protection. Docket by using the following Internet concerning the overflights of National Petitioner’s Reason for the Request: The address: [email protected]. Parks by aircraft. Addressing the petitioner feels that the petition for Comments must be marked Docket No. potential impacts of overflights of Rocky reconsideration of a previous denial 28577. Comments may be examined in Mountain National Park is one of these of petition for rulemaking was the Rules Docket Room 915G on priorities. In view of the brevity of this justified in that the FAA failed to weekdays between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 material and the importance of make a reasonable determination of p.m., except on Federal holidays. completing this rulemaking in a timely the facts and issues in the original FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: manner, ′the FAA finds that good cause petition for rulemaking. Denial; Neil Saunders, Airspace and Rules exists for providing less than 30 days October 31, 1996 Division, ATA–400, Airspace comment on this material. Docket No.: 27803 Management Service, Federal Aviation Issued in Washington, DC, on December 6, Petitioner: Air Transportation Administration, 800 Independence 1996. Association of America Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Harold W. Becker, Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR telephone: 202–267–8783. Acting Program Director for Air Traffic, 121, 135, and 145 Airspace Management. Description of Rulechange Sought: To SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 96–31528 Filed 12–9–96; 9:00 am] establish regulations requiring Background BILLING CODE 4910±13±M quality/inspection systems for all Notice No. 96–4 was placed on aircraft parts distributors, suppliers, immediate display at the Federal sellers, brokers, and surplus dealers. Register on May 10, 1996, and Petitioner’s Reason for the Request: The SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE published on May 15, 1996 (61 FR petitioner feels that it is imperative COMMISSION 24852). A correction document was that every step possible be taken to published on July 23, 1996 (61 FR ensure no opportunity is available to 17 CFR Chapter II 38119) extending the comment period to introduce an unapproved part into the August 19, 1996. Notice No. 96–4 [Release Nos. 33±7350, 34±37769, 35±26584, parts distribution/supply system and proposed several methods of preserving 39±2342, IC±22256, IA±1590; File No. S7± there must be regulations which help the natural park experience of Rocky 25±96] deter and remove unethical Mountain National Park (RMNP) by organizations from the aircraft parts Regulatory Flexibility Agenda; restricting aircraft-based sightseeing business. Denial; November 25, 1996. Correction flights. The NPRM indicated that the [FR Doc. 96–31381 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] FAA would select a viable alternative AGENCY: Securities and Exchange BILLING CODE 4910±13±M based on comments received and other Commission. 65192 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

ACTION: Semiannual regulatory agenda; (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., interest in a radio station or daily Correction. Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037. newspaper. In addition, many of the same competition and diversity Synopsis of Order Granting Extension SUMMARY: FR Document No. 96–26278, concerns that underlie the newspaper/ of Time for Filing Comments beginning on page 63548 in the unified radio cross-ownership restriction are agenda published in the Federal 1. On October 1, 1996, the also raised in our examination of the Register of Friday, November 29, 1996, Commission adopted a Notice of Inquiry television duopoly rule and radio- the Release Nos. were incorrect and (‘‘NOI’’) in this proceeding, 61 FR television cross-ownership rule. Given should be as set forth above. 53694, October 15, 1996, regarding its the similarity of the issues raised in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: policy for waiving the newspaper/radio NOI and the three rulemaking Frances R. Sienkiewicz, Office of the cross ownership restriction set forth in proceedings, we believe it is appropriate Secretary, (202) 942–7072. Section 73.3555(d) of the Commission’s that they share the same comment and Rules, 47 CFR 73.3555(d). The NOI reply comment deadlines. This will Dated: December 5, 1996. invited comment on a variety of Margaret H. McFarland, enable interested parties to submit more questions related to possible revisions to complete comments regarding the Deputy Secretary. the Commission’s current waiver policy. interrelated issues raised by these [FR Doc. 96–31399 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Comments were due to be filed by separate proceedings. This, in turn, will BILLING CODE 8010±01±M December 9, 1996, and reply comments result in a more comprehensive record by January 8, 1997. for the Commission to consider in 2. On November 7, 1996, the assessing whether to revise its FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Commission released three notices of newspaper/radio cross-ownership COMMISSION proposed rule making concerning (1) the waiver policy as well as its broadcast broadcast attribution rules, which attribution and television ownership 47 CFR Part 73 define what constitutes a ‘‘cognizable rules. interest’’ in applying the broadcast 4. Accordingly, it is ordered that the [MM Docket No. 96±197; DA 96±2036] multiple ownership rules, Further request filed by Haley Bader & Potts for Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Newspaper/Radio Cross-Ownership an extension of time in which to file Docket Nos. 94–150/92–51/87–154, FCC Waiver Policy comments and reply comments in 96–436 (‘‘FNPRM’’); (2) the local response to the Notice of Inquiry in MM AGENCY: Federal Communications television ownership rules, including Docket 96–197 is granted. Commission. the television duopoly rule and the 5. It is further ordered, that the time radio-television cross-ownership rule, ACTION: Notice of inquiry; extension of for filing comments in the above- comment and reply comment period. Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket Nos. 91–221/87– captioned proceeding is extended to February 7, 1997, and the time for filing SUMMARY: This action extends the 8, FCC 96–438 (‘‘FNPRM’’); and (3) the deadline for filing comments and reply national television ownership rule, reply comments is extended to March 7, comments to the Notice of Inquiry in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MM 1997. above-cited docket. It is taken in Docket Nos. 96–222/91–221/87–8, FCC 6. This action is taken pursuant to response to requests to extend the 96–437. The comment date established authority found in Sections 4(i) and comment and reply comment period for each of these three rulemaking 303(r) of the Communications Act of made by the law firm of Haley Bader & proceedings is February 7, 1997, and the 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and Potts. The intended effect of this action due date for reply comments is March 303(r), and Sections 0.204(b), 0.283, and is to allow the parties to the proceeding 7, 1997. 1.45 of the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR to have additional time in which to file 3. On November 27, 1996, the law 0.204(b), 0.283, and 1.45. comments and reply comments. firm of Haley Bader & Potts filed a Federal Communications Commission. DATES: Comments are due on or before Request For Extension Of Comment Roy J. Stewart, February 7, 1997, and reply comments Date (‘‘Request’’) to extend the comment Chief, Mass Media Bureau. are due on or before March 7, 1997. and reply comment deadlines in [FR Doc. 96–31503 Filed 12–9–96; 10:54 am] connection with the NOI in MM Docket ADDRESSES: Federal Communications No. 96–197 to February 7, 1997 and BILLING CODE 6712±01±P Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. March 7, 1997, respectively. In support FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of its Request, Haley Bader & Potts Roger Holberg (202–418–2130) or asserts that the above-referenced rule DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Charles Logan (202–418–2130), Mass makings raise issues that are strongly Media Bureau. related to those raised in the NOI. We National Oceanic and Atmospheric SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a are mindful that § 1.46 of the Administration synopsis of the Order granting an Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.46, extension of time for filing comments articulates a Commission policy that 50 CFR Part 648 and reply comments in MM Docket No. extensions of time for filing comments 96–197, DA 96–2036, adopted December in rule making proceedings are not to be [Docket No. 961126330±6330±01; I.D. 5, 1996, and released December 5, 1996. routinely granted. Nevertheless, we find 110796H] The complete text of this Order is that good cause exists for granting the available for inspection and copying requested extension of the comment and RIN 0648±XX72 during normal business hours in the reply comment deadlines. As Haley, Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 Bader & Potts points out, the issues Butterfish Fisheries; 1997 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and raised by the FNPRM are relevant to the Specifications also may be purchased from the newspaper/radio cross-ownership rule Commission’s copy contractor, in that the attribution rules define what AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries International Transcription Service, constitutes a cognizable ownership Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65193

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Management Council (Council) appear However, the ABC specification for Commerce. at 50 CFR part 648. These regulations Atlantic mackerel will be 1,178,000 mt ACTION: Proposed 1997 initial stipulate that NMFS publish a under the current FMP and would specifications; request for comments. document specifying the initial annual become 383,000 mt only if the proposed amounts of the initial optimum yield measure is approved by the Secretary. SUMMARY: NMFS proposes initial (IOY) as well as the amounts for specifications for the 1997 fishing year Atlantic squids—In response to the allowable biological catch (ABC), management advice from the 21st for Atlantic mackerel, squid, and domestic annual harvest (DAH), butterfish (SMB). Regulations governing Northeast Stock Assessment Workshop domestic annual processing (DAP), joint (SAW 21), the Council has adopted, and these fisheries require NMFS to publish venture processing (JVP), and total specifications for the upcoming fishing submitted for Secretarial review, allowable levels of foreign fishing Amendment 6 to the FMP that would year and provide an opportunity for the (TALFF) for the species managed under public to comment. This action is establish revised overfishing thresholds the FMP. No reserves are permitted and target fishing mortality rates for intended to promote the development of under the FMP for any of these species. the U.S. SMB fisheries. both Illex and Loligo squid. SAW 21 Procedures for determining the initial recommended, and Amendment 6 DATES: Public comments must be annual amounts are found in § 648.21. proposes, overfishing thresholds of F received on or before January 6, 1997. Proposed Council Actions Affecting max for Loligo and F for Illex, and ADDRESSES: Copies of the Mid-Atlantic 1997 Specifications 20 Maximum OY (Max OY) would be Fishery Management Council’s quota The Council adopted two redefined in the FMP to correspond to paper and recommendations and the amendments to the FMP that may affect these thresholds. The resulting Max OY Environmental Assessment are available the final specifications as described would be 26,000 mt for Loligo and from David R. Keifer, Executive below. Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Atlantic mackerel—The Council 24,000 mt for Illex. The Council’s Management Council, Room 2115, adopted a revision to a measure current submission, however, must Federal Building, 300 South New Street, disapproved under Amendment 5 to the utilize the definition of Max OY Dover, DE 19901. Comments should be FMP (Resubmitted Amendment 5), presently specified in the FMP (36,000 sent to Dr. Andrew A. Rosenberg, which, if approved by the Secretary of mt for Loligo, 30,000 mt for Illex). In Regional Administrator, Northeast Commerce (Secretary) will further making recommendations for ABC, Region, NMFS, 1 Blackburn Drive, restrict ABC for Atlantic mackerel. This however, the Council has used the target Gloucester, MA 01930. Please mark the measure proposes to define overfishing fishing mortality rate (F50) envelope ‘‘Comments—1997 SMB as catch (U.S. and Canadian) in excess recommended by SAW 21 in response to the concerns emanating from SAW 21 specifications.’’ of F0.1. The Northeast Fisheries Science FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Center has certified that this overfishing as a result of the determination that both Myles Raizin, 508–281–9104. definition is consistent with the NOAA species have a life span of only 1 year. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Guidelines for Fishery Management The following table contains the Regulations implementing the Fishery Plans. The Council recommended that proposed initial specifications for the Management Plan for Atlantic Mackerel, the 1997 Atlantic mackerel ABC 1997 Atlantic mackerel, Loligo and Illex Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP) specification be restricted to 383,000 mt squids, and butterfish fisheries as prepared by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery consistent with this proposed measure. recommended by the Council.

PRELIMINARY INITIAL ANNUAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ATLANTIC MACKEREL, SQUID, AND BUTTERFISH FOR THE FISHING YEAR JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1997 [mt]

Squid Specifications Atlantic Mack- Butterfish Loligo Illex erel

Max OY 1 ...... 2 36,000 3 30,000 N/A 16,000 ABC ...... 21,000 19,000 4 1,178,000 7,200 IOY 5 ...... 21,000 19,000 90,000 5,900 DAH ...... 21,000 19,000 6 90,000 5,900 DAP ...... 21,000 19,000 50,000 5,900 JVP ...... 0 0 25,000 0 TALFF ...... 0 0 0 0 1 Maximum optimum yield (OY) equals Maximum Sustainable Yield. 2 26,000 mt if overfishing threshold in Amendment 6 is approved. 3 24,000 mt if overfishing threshold in Amendment 6 is approved. 4 383,000 = (405,000 mt less 22,000 mt) if overfishing definition is approved that was submitted as part of Council's resubmission of measures disapproved in Amendment 5. 5 IOY can increase to this amount. 6 Contains 15,000 estimated recreational catch.

Atlantic Mackerel following the year for which quotas are 1,178,000 mt, assuming a beginning being prepared that is equal to or greater stock size of 2.1 million mt and a ABC in U.S. waters for the upcoming fishing year is that quantity of mackerel than 900,000 mt. An estimate of Canadian catch in 1997 of 22,000 mt. that could be caught in U.S. and Canadian catch is then deducted to IOY is a modification of ABC that Canadian waters while maintaining a calculate ABC. For 1997, this reflects social and economic factors. spawning stock size in the year calculation results in an ABC of IOY is comprised of two components: 65194 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DAH and TALFF. DAH is the sum of a intends to eliminate JVs as U.S. associated with a fishing mortality rate recreational catch estimate, DAP and processing and export capacity of F50. This is similar to the SAW 21 JVP. The Council estimates that the increases. recommendation of F50 as an 1997 recreational catch will be 15,000 An IOY that results in zero TALFF is appropriate target harvest level for both mt and DAP will be 50,000 mt. The recommended for the 1997 Atlantic Illex and Loligo. The Council Council also recommends that IOY be mackerel fishery. The Fisheries Act of recommended that the IOY for Illex be set at a level that provides for a JVP of 1995 prohibits a specification of TALFF set equal to ABC. 25,000 mt and TALFF of zero. The unless recommended by the Council. Butterfish resulting recommended IOY is 90,000 The Council also recommended that mt. four special conditions imposed in The FMP sets the Max OY for DAP has historically been estimated previous years continue to be imposed butterfish at 16,000 mt. The most recent on the 1997 Atlantic mackerel fishery as using the Council’s annual processor stock assessment was done in 1994 follows: (1) Joint ventures would be survey. However, for the years 1994 (SAW 17) and advised that the stock allowed south of 37°30′ N. lat., but river through 1996, response was low and did may not be able to sustain landings in herring bycatch may not exceed 0.25 not contain projections from the large, excess of the long term historical percent of the over-the-side transfers of known processors. Therefore, in order to average (1965–92) of 7,200 mt. Based on Atlantic mackerel; (2) the Regional estimate the expected processing this advice, the Council recommends Administrator should ensure that capacity for 1997, the Council used the maintaining ABC at 7,200 mt impacts on marine mammals are survey responses from those firms that (unchanged from 1996). The Council reduced in the prosecution of the provided estimates for both 1996 and also recommended maintaining IOY and 1997. For these firms, projected amount Atlantic mackerel fishery; (3) the mackerel OY may be increased during DAH at 1996 levels (5,900 mt) to reflect of fish needed increased 96 percent in the year, but the total should not exceed the uncertainty that exists regarding the 1997. In addition, numerous inquiries ABC; and (4) applications from a level of discards in the directed fishery. concerning entry of displaced New particular nation for a joint venture for As a result of the approval of England groundfish trawlers into the 1997 will not be decided on until the Amendment 5, the FMP specifies that Atlantic mackerel fishery have led the Regional Administrator determines, there will be no JVP or TALFF specified Council to recommend no change to the based on an evaluation of performances, for Loligo, Illex, or butterfish, except DAP for the 1997 fishery. that that nation’s purchase obligations that a butterfish bycatch TALFF will be The 1997 JVP specification was for previous years have been fulfilled. specified if TALFF is specified for reduced from 1996 to reflect the concern Atlantic mackerel. Since the Council Atlantic Squids that the Council has about the negative recommended no TALFF for Atlantic effect that joint ventures could have on The FMP sets the Max OY for Loligo mackerel, no bycatch TALFF is required the further development of the U.S. at 36,000 mt. The recommended ABC for butterfish. export market. Furthermore, the North for the 1997 Loligo fishery is 21,000 mt, Sea mackerel quota was reduced by 55 representing a decrease of 9,000 mt from Classification percent for 1996, and this reduced quota the 1996 ABC. The level specified for This action is authorized by 50 CFR may be extended and reduced further 1997 represents the harvest level part 648, and these proposed through 1997. These reductions may associated with a fishing mortality rate specifications are exempt from review provide an opportunity for U.S. of F50, which was recommended by under E.O. 12866. producers to sell additional mackerel on SAW 21 as an appropriate target harvest Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. the international market. The Council level for this species. The Council intends to proceed on a policy course recommended that IOY should equal Dated: December 4, 1996. that recognizes the need for JVs in the ABC. Charles Karnella, short term to allow U.S. harvesters to The FMP sets the Max OY for Illex Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for take mackerel at levels in excess of squid at 30,000 mt. The Council Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. current U.S. processing capacity. recommended an ABC of 19,000 mt, [FR Doc. 96–31376 Filed 12–5–96; 3:27 pm] However, in the longer term the Council which represents the harvest level BILLING CODE 3510±22±W 65195

Notices Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Avg Hours Per Response: 10 minutes. Dated: December 4, 1996. contains documents other than rules or Needs and Uses: Planning is currently Linda Engelmeier, proposed rules that are applicable to the Acting Departmental Forms Clearance public. Notices of hearings and investigations, underway for the 1997 American Community Survey (ACS). Data from Officer, Office of Management and committee meetings, agency decisions and Organization. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of the ACS will determine the feasibility of petitions and applications and agency a continuous measurement system that [FR Doc. 96–31375 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] statements of organization and functions are provides socioeconomic data on a BILLING CODE 3510±07±F examples of documents appearing in this continual basis throughout the decade. section. The bulk of the 1997 ACS activities International Trade Administration were previously cleared by OMB under ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW approval number 0607–0810. However, [C±401±056] BOARD the Census Bureau must also provide a sample of persons residing in Group Viscose Rayon Staple Fiber From Sunshine Act Meeting Quarters (GQs) the opportunity to be Sweden; Extension of Time Limit for interviewed for the ACS. GQs include Countervailing Duty Administrative DATE: December 17, 1996, 11:00 a.m. places such as student dorms, Review PLACE: ARRB, 600 E Street, NW, correctional facilities, hospitals, nursing AGENCY: Import Administration, Washington, DC. homes, shelters, and military quarters. International Trade Administration, STATUS: Open. Using the ACS–2(GQ) Facility Department of Commerce. Questionnaire, we will phone a sample ACTION: Notice of extension of time limit MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: of Group Quarters in Franklin County, for countervailing duty administrative OH –– one of the 1997 ACS test sites 1. Review and Accept Minutes of Open review. Meeting. (due to cost and operational restrictions, 2. Discussion of the Assassination Records Franklin County is the only GQ test SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Review Board’s FY 1996 Report, including site). We will verify/update information (the Department) is extending the time the section of the report described in the Act such as GQ name, address, phone limit of the preliminary results of this at 44 U.S.C. § 2107.9(f)(3)(F). number, and type. We will collect administrative review of the 3. Other Business. information such as the name of a GQ countervailing duty order on viscose CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: contact, current/maximum number of rayon staple fiber from Sweden. The Eileen Sullivan, Assistant Press and residents at the facility, usual length of review covers the period January 1, Public Affairs Officer, 600 E Street, NW, stay, and availability of facility records. 1995 through December 31, 1995. Second Floor, Washington, DC 20530. This information will assist in the EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 1996. Telephone: (202) 724–0088; Fax: (202) sampling and enumeration of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 724–0457. individuals living in each GQ. Cameron Cardozo or Stephanie Moore, David G. Marwell, Affected Public: Not–for–profit Office of CVD/AD Enforcement VI, Executive Director. institutions, Businesses or other for– Import Administration, International [FR Doc. 96–31604 Filed 12–9–96; 3:38 pm] profit, Farms. Trade Administration, U.S. Department BILLING CODE 6118±01±M Frequency: One time only. of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Legal Authority: Title 13 USC, Section (202) 482–2786. 182. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because it Submission For OMB Review; OMB Desk Officer: Jerry Coffey, (202) is not practicable to complete this Comment Request 395–7314. review within the original time limit, the Department is extending the time DOC has submitted to the Office of Copies of the above information limits for the completion of the Management and Budget (OMB) for collection proposal can be obtained by preliminary results to no later than May clearance the following proposal for calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, 30, 1997, in accordance with section collection of information under the Acting DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as provisions of the Paperwork Reduction (202) 482–3272, Department of amended by the Uruguay Round Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Commerce, room 5312, 14th and Agreements Act (URAA). (See Agency: Bureau of the Census. Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, Memorandum to the file from Jeffrey P. Title: 1997 American Community DC 20230. Bialos to Robert S. LaRussa on file in the Survey––Group Quarters Facility Written comments and public file of the Central Records Unit, Questionnaire. recommendations for the proposed Room B–099 of the Department of Form Number(s): ACS–2(GQ). information collection should be sent Commerce). Agency Approval Number: None. within 30 days of publication of this This extension is in accordance with Type of Request: New collection. notice to Jerry Coffey, OMB Desk section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of Burden: 17 hours. Officer, room 10201, New Executive 1930, as amended by the URAA (19 Number of Respondents: 100. Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. U.S.C. 1675(a)(3)(A)). 65196 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Dated: November 26, 1996. Federal Register notice 60 FR 65299, Category Twelve-month restraint Jeffrey P. Bialos, published on December 19, 1995). limit Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information regarding the 1997 Import Administration. CORRELATION will be published in the Group I subgroup 200, 226/313, 314, 108,370,178 square [FR Doc. 96–31456 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Federal Register at a later date. 315, 369(1) and meters equivalent. BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P The letter to the Commissioner of 604, as a group Customs and the actions taken pursuant Within Group I sub- to it are not designed to implement all group COMMITTEE FOR THE 200 ...... 351,463 kilograms. of the provisions of the Uruguay Round 226/313 ...... 73,124,341 square IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE Agreements Act and the ATC, but are AGREEMENTS meters. designed to assist only in the 314 ...... 19,720,758 square Announcement of Import Restraint implementation of certain of their meters provisions. 315 ...... 9,750,009 square me- Limits for Certain Cotton, Man-Made ters. Fiber, Silk Blend and Other Vegetable D. Michael Hutchinson, 369(1) 2 (shoptowels) 801,254 kilograms. Fiber Textiles and Textile Products Acting Chairman, Committee for the 604 ...... 241,257 kilograms. Produced or Manufactured in Hong Implementation of Textile Agreements. Group II 237, 239, 330±359, 861,136,621 square Kong Committee for the Implementation of Textile 431±459, 630±659 meters equivalent. Agreements December 5, 1996. and 443/444/643/ AGENCY: Committee for the December 5, 1997. 644/843/844(1), as Implementation of Textile Agreements Commissioner of Customs, a group. (CITA). Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC Sublevels in Group II 20229. 237 ...... 1,178,824 dozen. ACTION: Issuing a directive to the 239 ...... 5,403,886 kilograms. Commissioner of Customs establishing Dear Commissioner: Under the terms of 331 ...... 4,213,404 dozen pairs. limits. section 204 of the Agricultural Act of 1956, 333/334 ...... 299,232 dozen. as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854), the Uruguay 335 ...... 342,293 dozen. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1997. Round Agreements Act and the Uruguay 338/339 3 (shirts and 2,909,387 dozen. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing blouses other than Janet Heinzen, International Trade (ATC); and in accordance with the provisions tank tops and Specialist, Office of Textiles and of Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, tops, knit). 4 Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, as amended, you are directed to prohibit, 338/339(1) (tank 2,185,837 dozen. effective on January 1, 1997, entry into the tops and knit tops). (202) 482–4212. For information on the 340 ...... 2,786,045 dozen. United States for consumption and quota status of these limits, refer to the 345 ...... 455,179 dozen. Quota Status Reports posted on the withdrawal from warehouse for consumption 347/348 ...... 6,749,465 dozen of bulletin boards of each Customs port or of cotton, man-made fiber, silk blend and which not more than call (202) 927–5850. For information on other vegetable fiber textiles and textile 6,659,465 dozen embargoes and quota re-openings, call products in the following categories, shall be in Cat- (202) 482–3715. produced or manufactured in Hong Kong and egories 347±W/348± exported during the twelve-month period W 5; not more than SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: beginning on January 1, 1997 and extending 5,046,796 dozen Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March through December 31, 1997, in excess of the shall be in Category 3, 1972, as amended; section 204 of the following levels of restraint: 348±W 6. Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7 352 ...... 6,933,688 dozen. 359(1) 6 (coveralls, 613,340 kilograms. U.S.C. 1854); Uruguay Round Agreements Twelve-month restraint Act. Category limit overalls and jumpsuits). The import restraint limits for textile 7 Group I 359(2) (vests) ...... 1,278,325 kilograms. products, produced or manufactured in 433 ...... 10,359 dozen. 200±229, 300±326, 236,571,223 square Hong Kong and exported during the 434 ...... 11,121 dozen. 360±369, 400± meters equivalent. period January 1, 1997 through 435 ...... 76,592 dozen. 414, 464±469, December 31, 1997 are based on limits 436 ...... 99,757 dozen. 600±629 and 665± 438 ...... 819,284 dozen. notified to the Textiles Monitoring Body 670, as a group. 442 ...... 91,889 dozen. pursuant to the Uruguay Round Sublevels in Group I Agreements Act and the Uruguay Round 443 ...... 62,939 numbers. 219 ...... 40,765,382 square 444 ...... 41,607 numbers. Agreement on Textiles and Clothing meters. 445/446 ...... 1,354,168 dozen. (ATC). 218/225/317/326 ...... 72,329,264 square 447/448 ...... 68,101 dozen. In the letter published below, the meters of which not 631 ...... 654,264 dozen pairs. Chairman of CITA directs the more than 3,983,614 633/634/635 ...... 1,342,208 dozen of Commissioner of Customs to establish square meters shall which not more than the 1997 limits. These limits have been be in Category 502,016 dozen shall increased, variously, for adjustments 218(1) 1 (yarn dyed be in Categories permitted under the flexibility fabric other than 633/634 and not denim and jac- more than 1,030,664 provisions of the ATC. quard). A description of the textile and dozen shall be in 611 ...... 6,427,213 square me- Category 635. apparel categories in terms of HTS ters. 638/639 ...... 4,884,258 dozen. numbers is available in the 617 ...... 4,055,120 square me- 641 ...... 843,978 dozen. CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel ters. 644 ...... 44,376 numbers. Categories with the Harmonized Tariff 645/646 ...... 1,338,683 dozen. Schedule of the United States (see 647 ...... 544,261 dozen. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65197

4 Twelve-month restraint Category 338/339(1): only HTS numbers The conversion factors for merged Category limit 6109.10.0018, 6109.10.0023, 6109.10.0060, Categories 333/334, 633/634/635 and 638/ 6109.10.0065, 6114.20.0005 and 639 are 33, 33.90 and 13, respectively. 6114.20.0010. In carrying out the above directions, the 648 ...... 1,159,658 dozen of 5 Category 347±W: only HTS numbers Commissioner of Customs should construe which not more than 6203.19.1020, 6203.19.9020, 6203.22.3020, 1,144,868 dozen 6203.22.3030, 6203.42.4005, 6203.42.4010, entry into the United States for consumption shall be in Category 6203.42.4015, 6203.42.4025, 6203.42.4035, to include entry for consumption into the 648±W 8. 6203.42.4045, 6203.42.4050, 6203.42.4060, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 649 ...... 837,944 dozen. 6203.49.8020, 6210.40.9033, 6211.20.1520, The Committee for the Implementation of 650 ...... 173,283 dozen. 6211.20.3810 and 6211.32.0040; Category Textile Agreements has determined that 348±W: only HTS numbers 6204.12.0030, these actions fall within the foreign affairs 652 ...... 4,935,766 dozen. 6204.19.8030, 6204.22.3040, 6204.22.3050, 9 exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5 659(1) (coveralls, 677,901 kilograms. 6204.29.4034, 6204.62.3000, 6204.62.4005, U.S.C. 553(a)(1). overalls and 6204.62.4010, 6204.62.4020, 6204.62.4030, Sincerely, jumpsuits). 6204.62.4040, 6204.62.4050, 6204.62.4055, 659(2) 10 (swimsuits) 276,711 kilograms. 6204.62.4065, 6204.69.6010, 6204.69.9010, D. Michael Hutchinson, 443/444/643/644/ 57,573 numbers. 6210.50.9060, 6211.20.1550, 6211.20.6810, Acting Chairman, Committee for the 843/844(1) (made- 6211.42.0030 and 6217.90.9050. Implementation of Textile Agreements. 6 Category 359(1): only HTS numbers to-measure suits). 6103.42.2025, 6103.49.8034, 6104.62.1020, [FR Doc. 96–31460 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Group II subgroup 6104.69.8010, 6114.20.0048, 6114.20.0052, BILLING CODE 3510±DR±F 336,341, 342, 350, 156,179,899 square 6203.42.2010, 6203.42.2090, 6204.62.2010, 351, 636, 640, 642 meters equivalent. 6211.32.0010, 6211.32.0025 and and 651, as a 6211.42.0010. Announcement of Import Restraint 7 Category 359(2): only HTS numbers group. Limits for Certain Cotton and Man- Within Group II sub- 6103.19.2030, 6103.19.9030, 6104.12.0040, 6104.19.8040, 6110.20.1022, 6110.20.1024, Made Fiber Textile Products Produced group 6110.20.2030, 6110.20.2035, 6110.90.9044, or Manufactured in Nepal 336 ...... 227,679 dozen. 6110.90.9046, 6201.92.2010, 6202.92.2020, 341 ...... 2,820,117 dozen. 6203.19.1030, 6203.19.9030, 6204.12.0040, December 5, 1996. 342 ...... 556,399 dozen. 6204.19.8040, 6211.32.0070 and AGENCY: Committee for the 350 ...... 138,726 dozen. 6211.42.0070. 8 Category 648±W: only HTS numbers Implementation of Textile Agreements 351 ...... 1,191,090 dozen. 6204.23.0040, 6204.23.0045, 6204.29.2020, (CITA). 636 ...... 306,415 dozen. 6204.29.2025, 6204.29.4038, 6204.63.2000, ACTION: Issuing a directive to the 640 ...... 955,148 dozen. 6204.63.3000, 6204.63.3510, 6204.63.3530, Commissioner of Customs establishing 642 ...... 243,673 dozen. 6204.63.3532, 6204.63.3540, 6204.69.2510, 651 ...... 331,841 dozen. 6204.69.2530, 6204.69.2540, 6204.69.2560, limits. Group III 6204.69.6030, 6204.69.9030, 6210.50.5035, 6211.20.1555, 6211.20.6820, 6211.43.0040 EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1997. 831±844 and 847± 47,734,699 square and 6217.90.9060. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 859, as a group. meters equivalent. 9 Category 659(1): only HTS numbers Janet Heinzen, International Trade Sublevels in Group 6103.23.0055, 6103.43.2020, 6103.43.2025, III 6103.49.2000, 6103.49.8038, 6104.63.1020, Specialist, Office of Textiles and 834 ...... 12,470 dozen. 6104.63.1030, 6104.69.1000, 6104.69.8014, Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, 835 ...... 113,138 dozen. 6114.30.3044, 6114.30.3054, 6203.43.2010, (202) 482–4212. For information on the 6203.43.2090, 6203.49.1010, 6203.49.1090, quota status of these limits, refer to the 836 ...... 164,764 dozen. 6204.63.1510, 6204.69.1010, 6210.10.9010, 840 ...... 672,047 dozen. 6211.33.0010, 6211.33.0017 and Quota Status Reports posted on the 842 ...... 261,475 dozen. 6211.43.0010. bulletin boards of each Customs port or 847 ...... 360,912 dozen. 10 Category 659(2): only HTS numbers call (202) 927–5850. For information on Limits not in a group 6112.31.0010, 6112.31.0020, 6112.41.0010, embargoes and quota re-openings, call 11 6112.41.0020, 6112.41.0030, 6112.41.0040, 845(1) (sweaters 1,127,831 dozen. 6211.11.1010, 6211.11.1020, 6211.12.1010 (202) 482–3715. made in Hong and 6211.12.1020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Kong). 11 Category 845(1): only HTS numbers 845(2) 12 (sweaters 2,699,599 dozen. 6103.29.2074, 6104.29.2079, 6110.90.9024, Authority: Executive Order 11651 of March assembled in 6110.90.9042 and 6117.90.9015. 3, 1972, as amended; section 204 of the Hong Kong from 12 Category 845(2): only HTS numbers Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7 knit-to-shape com- 6103.29.2070, 6104.29.2077, 6110.90.9022 U.S.C. 1854). ponents, knit else- and 6110.90.9040. 13 Category 846(1): only HTS numbers The Bilateral Textile Agreement, where). effected by exchange of notes dated May 13 6103.29.2068, 6104.29.2075, 6110.90.9020 846(1) (sweaters 182,381 dozen. and 6110.90.9038. 30 and June 1, 1986, as amended and made in Hong 14 Category 846(2): only HTS numbers extended, and a Memorandum of Kong). 6103.29.2066, 6104.29.2073, 6110.90.9018 Understanding (MOU) dated November 846(2) 14 (sweaters 439,469 dozen. and 6110.90.9036. assembled in 6, 1996, between the Governments of Imports charged to these category limits for Hong Kong from the United States and Nepal establish the period January 1, 1996 through December knit-to-shape com- limits for the period January 1, 1997 31, 1996 shall be charged against those levels ponents, knit else- through December 31, 1997. where). of restraint to the extent of any unfilled These limits are subject to revision balances. In the event the limits established pursuant to the Uruguay Round 1 for that period have been exhausted by Category 218(1): all HTS numbers except Agreements Act and the Uruguay Round 5209.42.0060, 5209.42.0080, 5211.42.0060, previous entries, such goods shall be subject 5211.42.0080, 5514.32.0015 and to the levels set forth in this directive. Agreement on Textiles and Clothing 5516.43.0015. The limits set forth above are subject to (ATC). On the date that Nepal becomes 2 Category 369(1): only HTS numbers adjustment in the future pursuant to the a member of the World Trade 6307.10.2005. Organization the restraint limits will be 3 Categories 338/339: all HTS numbers ex- provisions of the Uruguay Round Agreements cept 6109.10.0018, 6109.10.0023, Act, the ATC and any administrative modified in accordance with the ATC. 6109.10.0060, 6109.10.0065, 6114.20.0005 arrangements notified to the Textiles In the letter published below, the and 6114.20.0010. Monitoring Body. Chairman of CITA directs the 65198 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Commissioner of Customs to establish extent of any unfilled balances. In the event Service Member Exit Form. Copies of the 1997 limits. The limit for Category the limits established for that period have the information collection requests can 340 has been reduced for carryforward been exhausted by previous entries, such be obtained by contacting the office and special carryforward applied in goods shall be subject to the levels set forth listed below in the address section of in this directive. 1996. Should Nepal become a member of the this notice. A description of the textile and World Trade Organization, the limits set DATES: Written comments must be apparel categories in terms of HTS forth above will be subject to adjustment in submitted to the office listed in the numbers is available in the the future pursuant to the provisions of the addresses section on or before February CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel Uruguay Round Agreements Act, the 5, 1997. Categories with the Harmonized Tariff Uruguay Round Agreement on Textiles and The Corporation for National and Schedule of the United States (see Clothing and any administrative Community Service is particularly Federal Register notice 60 FR 65299, arrangements notified to the Textiles Monitoring Body. interested in comments which: published on December 19, 1995). • Evaluate whether the proposed Information regarding the 1997 In carrying out the above directions, the Commissioner of Customs should construe collection of information is necessary CORRELATION will be published in the entry into the United States for consumption for the proper performance of the Federal Register at a later date. to include entry for consumption into the functions of the Corporation, including The letter to the Commissioner of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. whether the information will have Customs and the actions taken pursuant The Committee for the Implementation of practical utility; to it are not designed to implement all Textile Agreements has determined that • Evaluate the accuracy of the of the provisions of the bilateral these actions fall within the foreign affairs agency’s estimate of the burden of the agreement and MOU, but are designed exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5 proposed collection of information, to assist only in the implementation of U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Sincerely, including the validity of the certain of their provisions. methodology and assumptions used; D. Michael Hutchinson, D. Michael Hutchinson, • Enhance the quality, utility and Acting Chairman, Committee for the Acting Chairman, Committee for the clarity of the information to be Implementation of Textile Agreements. Implementation of Textile Agreements. collected; and [FR Doc. 96–31461 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Committee for the Implementation of Textile • Minimize the burden of the Agreements BILLING CODE 3510±DR±F collection of information on those who December 5, 1996. are to respond, including through the Commissioner of Customs, use of appropriate automated, Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND electronic, mechanical, or other 20229. COMMUNITY SERVICE technological collection techniques or Dear Commissioner: Pursuant to section other forms of information technology, 204 of the Agricultural Act of 1956, as Proposed Collection: Comment e.g., permitting electronic submissions amended (7 U.S.C. 1854), the Bilateral Request of responses. Textile Agreement, effected by exchange of ADDRESSES: Send comments to Lance notes datead May 30 and June 1, 1986, as December 6, 1996. amended and extended, and a Memorandum ACTION: Notice. Potter, Director, Office of Evaluation, of Understanding dated November 6, 1996 Corporation for National and between the Governments of the United SUMMARY: The Corporation for National Community Service, 1201 New York States and Nepal; and in accordance with the and Community Service (CNCS), as part Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C., 20525. provisions of Executive Order 11651 of of its continuing effort to reduce FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: March 3, 1972, as amended, you are directed paperwork and respondent burden, Lance Potter, (202) 606–5000, ext. 448. to prohibit, effective on January 1, 1997, conducts a preclearance consultation entry into the United States for consumption program to provide the general public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and withdrawal from warehouse for and Federal agencies with an Part I consumption of cotton and man-made fiber opportunity to comment on proposed textile products in the following categories, I. Background (Participant Enrollment produced or manufactured in Nepal and and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Form/National Service Trust Enrollment exported during the twelve-month period Form) beginning on January 1, 1997 and extending Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 through December 31, 1997, in excess of the (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3508(c)(2)(A)). This This notice involves the revision of following levels of restraint: program helps to ensure that requested the Participant Enrollment Form (OMB data can be provided in the desired 3200–0018) which is being revised to Twelve-month restraint format, reporting burden (time and incorporate elements from the National Category limit financial resources) is minimized, Service Trust Enrollment Form (OMB 336/636 ...... 220,957 dozen. collection instruments are clearly 3045–0006) in an effort to reduce 340 ...... 260,067 dozen. understood, and the impact of collection burden and facilitate data collection. 341 ...... 1,025,084 dozen. requirement on respondents can be After its revision, the form will be called 342/642 ...... 278,530 dozen. properly assessed. Currently, the the National Service Enrollment Form, 347/348 ...... 718,826 dozen. Corporation for National and and it will eliminate the need to 369±S 1 ...... 900,000 kilograms. Community Service is soliciting distribute the National Service Trust 640 ...... 160,617 dozen. comments concerning its proposed Enrollment Form. 641 ...... 362,151 dozen. combination of the Participant II. Current Action 1 Category 369±S: only HTS number Enrollment Form and National Service 6307.10.2005. Trust Enrollment Form into one form, The Corporation for National and Imports charged to these category limits, the National Service Enrollment Form, Community Service seeks the revision except Category 369–S, for the period January and the combination of the Member Exit of the Participant Enrollment Form to be 1, 1996 through December 31, 1996 shall be Form National Service Trust End of renamed the National Service charged against those levels of restraint to the Term Form into one form, the National Enrollment Form to collect evaluation Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65199 related data. The Participant Enrollment Agency Number: N/A. participate in the scoping process Form is one of the only two direct Affected Public: Individuals and Not- review of the draft EIS and two public sources of information that the for-profit institutions. meetings. This notice is published in Corporation collects from its members. Total Respondents: 21,000. accordance with the National The purpose of the National Service Frequency: Annually. Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Trust Enrollment Form is to function as Average Time Per Response: 12 regulations found in 40 CFR 1501.7. The a legal certification that a Member has Minutes. purpose of this notice is to solicit satisfied the requirements to qualify for Estimated Total Burden Hours: 4200. suggestions and information from other an educational award, and the form Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): agencies and the public on the scope of reserves an educational award in the $0. the feasibility study and issues to be National Service Trust. Total Burden Cost (operating/ addressed in the draft EIS. Comments Type of Review: Revision. maintenance): $137,000. and participation in this process are Agency: Corporation for National and Requirements relating to the encouraged. Community Service. educational awards are detailed in 42 Tentative Schedule: Title: National Service Enrollment U.S.C. 12501, and 42 U.S.C. 12594 a. Phase 2 Public Workshop & Letters Form. through 42 U.S.C. 12604. Requirements (Scoping) (Subject: Alternative OMB Number: 3200–0018. relating to evaluation of Member’s Measures)—Nov 1996. Agency Number: N/A. experience and development are b. Phase 2 Public Involvement Affected Public: Individuals and Not- provided in 42 U.S.C. 12639. Both of Results, Mailed to Public—Jan 1997. for-profit institutions. these new forms combine these c. Draft Feasibility Report & Draft EIS Total Respondents: 21,000. legislative mandates into one unified Mailed to Public for Review/Comment— Frequency: Annually. form. 1998. Average Time Per Response: 7 Comments submitted in response to d. Phase 3 Public Involvement Minutes. this notice will be summarized and/or (Workshop, Meeting, Letters; Subject: Estimated Total Burden Hours: 2450. included in the request for Office of Alternative Plans)—1998. Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): Management and Budget approval of the e. Final Feasibility Report & Final EIS $0. information collection request; they will Mailed to Public (Includes Phase 3 Total Burden Cost (operating/ also become a matter of public record. Public Involvement Analysis)—1999. maintenance): $137,000. Dated: December 6, 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the proposed action Lance Potter, Part II. Background (Member Exit and draft EIS can be answered by: Mr. Form/National Service Trust End of Director, Office of Evaluation. David Gates, (314) 331–8478, or Mr. T. Term Form) [FR Doc. 96–31480 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Miller, (314) 331–8458, Planning This notice involves the revision of BILLING CODE 6050±28±M Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Member Exit Form (OMB 3045– St. Louis District, 1222 Spruce Street, 0015) which is being revised to St. Louis, Missouri 63103. incorporate elements from the National DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Service Trust End of Term Form (OMB 3045–0009) in an effort to reduce Army Corps of Engineers 1. The study is in response to two Congressional Authorizations: (1) burden and facilitate data collection. Intent To Prepare A Draft Environment After its revision, the form will be called Resolution of the House Committee on Impact Statement (EIS) for the Flood Control, adopted 21 June 1944— the National Service Member Exit Form, Alexander and Pulaski Counties and it will eliminate the need to The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Feasibility Study, Alexander and harbors created under Section 3 of the distribute the National Service Trust Pulaski Counties, IL End of Term Form. Rivers and Harbors Act approved 13 AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, June 1902, was requested to review the II. Current Action DoD. report on flood control on the The Corporation for National and ACTION: Notice of intent and second Mississippi River between Coon Rapids Community Service seeks the revision public scoping meeting. Dam and the mouth of the Ohio River, of the Member Exit Form to be renamed contained in House Document No. 669, the National Service Member Exit Form SUMMARY: This notice advises the public 76th Congress, 3rd Session, with a view to collect evaluation related data. The that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to determining whether flood protection Member Exit Form is one of the only in cooperation with the Illinois should be provided for the area in two direct sources of information that Department of Natural Resources, Illinois between the proposed new the Corporation collects from its intends to prepare a Draft outlet Cache River, Illinois and Miller members. The purpose of the National Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) City, Illinois. (2) Resolution sponsored Service Member Exit Form is to function for the Alexander and Pulaski Counties by Congressman Paul Simon of Illinois as a legal certification that a Member Feasibility Study in Alexander and and adopted on 25 April 1978 by the has satisfied the requirements to qualify Pulaski Counties, Illinois. A description House Committee on Public Works and for an educational award. The National of the proposed project, location and Transportation—The Board of Engineers Service Member Exit Form certifies that environmental issues to be addressed in for Rivers and Harbors was requested to the Member has qualified for the the draft EIS are provided below review the report entitled educational award. (SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). In ‘‘Comprehensive Flood Control Plan for Type of Review: Revision. addition to this notice, a second public the Ohio and Lower Mississippi Rivers’’ Agency: Corporation for National and scoping meeting will be held to further published as Flood Control Committee Community Service. define the scope of the feasibility study Document No. 1. 75th Congress, 1st Title: National Service Enrollment and to receive public comments Session, and other pertinent reports Form. regarding the scope of the study and with a view toward provision of a OMB Number: 3045–0015. draft EIS. The public will be invited to comprehensive study of the flood 65200 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices control problems and related water selective sediment removal from Lower will be discussions with Division/ resources needs of streams in Alexander Cache River Swamp; diverting flow District personnel to discuss projects and Pulaski Counties, Illinois, and those from the Upper Cache towards Lower viewed and recommendations made. portions of the streams and basins in Cache River Swamp; Lower Cache River This meeting is open to the public, adjacent Illinois counties tributary to Swamp water control structures; and but since seating capacity is limited, Alexander and Pulaski Counties. rock weirs placement in Post Creek and advance notice of intent to attend, 2. For reasons of marginal flood the Upper Cache River. although not required, is requested in control benefits, changing land use, the 4. Scoping process includes the Nov order to assure adequate arrangements recognized environmental uniqueness of 1996 Phase 2 Public Workshop & for those wishing to attend. the area, changing Corps wetlands Written Comments period. Bruce K. Howard, restoration policies and sponsorship, 5. Draft EIS will be made available to Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Executive the planning investigation has shifted the public in 1998. Secretary. from its original focus on flood control Thomas J. Hodgini, [FR Doc. 96–31408 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] to its present purpose of habitat COL, EN, Commanding. BILLING CODE 3710±PU±M restoration. [FR Doc. 96–31409 Filed 12–11–96; 8:45 am] Sedimentation from tributary streams, and an altered hydrologic regime are BILLING CODE 3710±55±M destroying one of the most impressive DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION wetland areas in the Cache River—the Coastal Engineering Research Board Lower Cache River Swamp National (CERB); Notice Natural Landmark area. Heron Pond [CFDA No.: 84.235W] Little Black Slough National Natural AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Landmark area is threatened by drainage DoD. Special Projects and Demonstrations for Providing Vocational Rehabilitation induced by entrenchment of the Post ACTION: Notice of meeting. Creek/Upper Cache River channel. Services to Individuals With Prior Corps of Engineers projects have SUMMARY: In accordance with Section Disabilities; Notice Inviting contributed at least partially to these 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Applications for New Awards for Fiscal problems: flood water recharge of the Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), Year (FY) 1997 Lower Cache River wetlands has been announcement is made of the following committee meeting: Purpose of Program: To provide reduced as a result of Upper Cache financial assistance to projects for River and Ohio River flows being Name of Committee: Coastal expanding or otherwise improving deflected away from the Lower Cache Engineering Research Board (CERB). vocational rehabilitation and other via the Corps constructed Cache River Dates of Meeting: January 14–16, rehabilitation services for individuals and Reevesville Levees. The Cache 1997. with disabilities, especially individuals River levee has contributed to the Place: Inn at Morro Bay, Morro Bay, with the most severe disabilities. entrenchment process by ensuring that California, and the U.S. Army Engineer major flood flows from the Upper Cache Division, South Pacific, San Francisco, Eligible Applicants: State agencies; River and Main Ditch area are directed California. other public agencies and organizations, down the Post-Creek Cutoff channel. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. (January including Indian tribes; and nonprofit The Cache River levee culverts have 14, 1997), 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. private agencies and organizations. contributed to reverse flowage during (January 15, 1997), 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 Deadline for Transmittal of high and low water stages on the Lower a.m. (January 16, 1997). Applications: March 18, 1997. Cache. During higher tributary stages, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deadline for Intergovernmental sediment-laden waters are carried into Inquiries and notice of intent to attend Review: May 19, 1997. Lower Cache River Swamp, and during the meeting may be addressed to Applications Available: December 11, dry periods (due to the low culvert Colonel Bruce K. Howard, Executive 1996. inserts), the swamp is excessively Secretary, Coastal Engineering Research Available Funds: $2,958,000. drained. The Corps’ Cache River Board, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Estimated Range of Awards: diversion outlet and levee has diverted Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry $180,000—$220,000. flows away from the lowermost 7 miles Road, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180– Estimated Average Size of Awards: of Old Cache River channel. 6199. $200,000. Unless these problems are controlled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Estimated Number of Awards: 13–16. through sound environmental Agenda: The 64th meeting of the Coastal Engineering Research Board is a civilian Note: The Department is not bound by any engineering, the landmark areas will be estimates in this notice. lost. Solutions to these problems will Board meeting hosted by the U.S. Army require a thorough understanding of the Engineer Division, South Pacific. The Maximum Award: In no case does the complex hydrology of the Cache River civilian members of the Board will visit Secretary make an award greater than basin. The Corps has an opportunity to the Morro Bay site with a discussion of $220,000 for a single budget period of provide the highly specialized the project at the Inn at Morro Bay on 12 months. The Secretary rejects and hydrological engineering expertise the morning of January 14. There will be does not consider an application that needed for such an effort. The Corps is a discussion of the Surfside-Sunset proposes a budget exceeding this also in a unique position to provide the Alternative Structure Plan the afternoon maximum amount. implementation capabilities for of January 14. The Board will travel to Project Period: Up to 36 months. installing needed structural solutions. San Francisco where on Wednesday, Applicable Regulations: (a) The 3. Potential habitat restoration January 15, there will be site visits to Education Department General measures include: Big Creek and the Pillar Point Harbor Project, San Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in Cypress Creek floodplain restoration; Francisco Beach Project, and 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, sediment retention dams in the uplands Fisherman’s Wharf Project. On and 85; and (b) The regulations for this of Big Creek and Cypress Creek; Thursday morning, January 16, there program in 34 CFR parts 369 and 373. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65201

Priorities rehabilitation services to individuals DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY with chronic and progressive diseases, Competitive Preference Priority including HIV/AIDS. Projects should Office of Arms Control and The competitive preference priority demonstrate the utility of early Nonproliferation Policy; Proposed concerning Empowerment Zones and intervention in providing vocational Subsequent Arrangement Enterprise Communities in the notice of evaluation, training, and counseling AGENCY: Department of Energy. final priorities for this program, services to develop new careers and ACTION: Subsequent arrangement. published in the Federal Register on employment or to improve job retention. December 9, 1994 (59 FR 63860), SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 131 of the applies to this competition. Invitational Priority 3—Projects Focusing on Career Advancement Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) the (42 U.S.C. 2160), notice is hereby given Secretary gives preference to Projects that demonstrate service of a proposed ‘‘subsequent applications that meet the following delivery models that further high arrangement’’ under the Agreement for competitive priority. The Secretary quality employment outcomes for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of awards 10 bonus points to an individuals with disabilities by Nuclear Energy between the United application that meets this competitive providing services to ensure that those States of America and the European priority in a particularly effective way. individuals possess the knowledge and Atomic Energy Community These bonus points are in addition to skills necessary to compete for jobs with (EURATOM) and the Agreement for any points the application earns under potential for career advancement and by Cooperation between the Government of the selection criteria for the program: providing services to improve career the United States of America and the Competitive Preference Priority— advancement opportunities for Government of Norway concerning Providing Program Services in an individuals who are employed. Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy. Empowerment Zone or Enterprise The subsequent arrangement to be FOR APPLICATIONS CONTACT: Joyce R. Community carried out under the above-mentioned Jones, U.S. Department of Education, agreements involves approval of the Under this program the Secretary 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room following retransfer: RTD/NO(EU)–62, gives competitive preference to 3038 Switzer Building, Washington, for the transfer of two irradiated fuel applications that— D.C. 20202–2649; or call (202) 205– segments containing 293.1 grams of US- (1) Propose the provision of 8351. obligated enriched uranium with 5 substantial services in Empowerment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: grams of the isotope U-235 (1.5% Zones or Enterprise Communities; and enrichment) and 1.7 grams of plutonium (2) Propose projects that contribute to Pamela Martin or Alfreda Reeves, U.S. from EURATOM to Norway for the strategic plan of the Empowerment Department of Education, 600 irradiation in the frame of the TPW Zone or Enterprise Community and that Independence Avenue, S.W., Room programme. are made an integral component of the 3314, Switzer Building, Washington, In accordance with Section 131 of the Empowerment Zone or Enterprise D.C. 20202–2650. Telephone: (202) 205– Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Community activities. 8494 or (202) 205–9361. it has been determined that this Under this program a project is Individuals who use a subsequent arrangement will not be considered to be providing substantial telecommunications device for the deaf inimical to the common defense and services if a minimum of 51 percent of may call the Federal Information Relay security. the persons served by the project reside Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 This subsequent arrangement will within the Empowerment Zone or between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, take effect no sooner that fifteen days Enterprise Community. Monday through Friday. after the date of publication of this Invitational Priorities Information about the Department’s notice. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) the funding opportunities, including copies Dated: December 6, 1996. Secretary is particularly interested in of application notices for discretionary For the Department of Energy. applications that meet one or more of grant competitions, can be viewed on Edward T. Fei, the following invitational priorities. the Department’s electronic bulletin Acting Director, International Policy and However, an application that meets one board (ED Board), telephone (202) 260– Analysis Division, Office of Arms Control and or more of these invitational priorities 9950; on the Internet Gopher Server (at Nonproliferation. does not receive competitive or absolute gopher://gcs.ed.gov/); or on the World [FR Doc. 96–31423 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] preference over other applications: Wide Web (at http://gcs.ed.gov). This BILLING CODE 6450±01±P information can also be viewed on the Invitational Priority 1—Projects To Rehabilitations Services Increase Client Choice Administration’s electronic bulletin Federal Energy Regulatory Projects that emphasize and board, telephone (202) 401–6147. Commission However, the official application notice demonstrate effective ways to increase [Docket No. CP97±5±001] the choices and involvement of eligible for a discretionary grant competition is clients in the rehabilitation process, the notice published in the Federal Texas Eastern Transmission including the selection of goals, Register. Corporation; ANR Pipeline Company; services, and the providers of vocational Authority: 29 U.S.C. 777a(a)(1). Notice of Petition To Amend rehabilitation services. Dated: December 4, 1996. December 5, 1996. Invitational Priority 2—Programs To Judith E. Heumann, Take notice that on December 3, 1996, Demonstrate Early Intervention Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation Strategies Rehabilitative Services. (Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court, Projects that provide early [FR Doc. 96–31386 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Houston, Texas 770056–5310 and ANR intervention in providing vocational BILLING CODE 4000±01±P Pipeline Company (ANR), 500 65202 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan [Docket No. CP97±115±000] treated as an application for 48243, filed in Docket No. CP97–5–001 authorization pursuant to Section 7 of a joint petition to amend the order Western Gas Interstate Company; the Natural Gas Act. Notice of Request Under Blanket issued October 30, 1996, in Docket No. Lois D. Cashell, Authorization CP97–5–000 pursuant to Section 7(b) Secretary. and Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act December 3, 1996. [FR Doc. 96–31391 Filed 12–9–96; 8:45 am] for permission and approval to abandon Take notice that on November 22, BILLING CODE 6717±01±M operations and maintenance by ANR, 1996, Western Gas Interstate Company and the commencement of operations (WGI), 211 North Colorado, Midland, [Docket No. ER97±544±000] and maintenance by Texas Eastern, of Texas 79701 filed in Docket No. CP97– the existing Springboro Meter Station, 115–000 a request pursuant to Sections Minnesota Power & Light Company; all as more fully set forth in the 157.205, and 157.211 of the Notice of Filing application on file with the Commission Commission’s Regulations under the and open to public inspection. Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and December 5, 1996. 157.211) for approval and permission to Take notice that on October 21, 1996, It is stated that by order issued construct and operate a two-inch tap Minnesota Power & Light Company October 30, 1996, ANR was authorized and related facilities for the City of (MP) tendered for filing a report of to abandon by sale to Texas Eastern an Guymon, Oklahoma (Guymon), under short-term transaction made under MP’s undivided 50 percent interest in its the blanket certificate issued in Docket market-based tariff. Springboro Meter Station located in No. CP82–441–000, pursuant to Section Any person desiring to be heard or to Warren County, Ohio, and Texas 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), all as protest said filing should file a motion Eastern was authorized to acquire such more fully set forth in the request which to intervene or protest with the Federal 50 interest in ANR’s Springboro Meter is on file with the Commission and open Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Station. The October 30, 1996, order to public inspection. First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. also reflected that ANR would continue WGI states that it proposes to be 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 to operate and maintain the Springboro authorized under its blanket certificate, and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Meter Station. It is stated that, facilities that were originally Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 subsequently, Texas Eastern’s customer constructed under emergency authority and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions to be served through Texas Eastern’s granted in Subpart I of Part 284 of the or protests should be filed on or before interest in the facility, and the only Commission’s regulations in Docket No. December 13, 1996. Protests will be existing firm transportation customer at EM96–5–000. WGI further states that it considered by the Commission in the facility, Cincinnati Gas & Electric only recently acquired its interstate determining the appropriate action to be Co., requested that Texas Eastern pipeline system, including the subject taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. operate the Springboro Meter Station. It facilities, from a subsidiary of the Any person wishing to become a party is further stated that Texas Eastern and Southern Union Company. WGI asserts must file a motion to intervene. Copies ANR have agreed that Texas Eastern that at the time it acquired these facilities, WGI’s current owner was not of this filing are on file with the will operate and maintain the Commission and are available for public Springboro Meter Station. aware that the company’s previous owner had failed to take steps to secure inspection. Any person desiring to be heard or to appropriate regulatory approval for the Lois D. Cashell, make any protest with reference to said tap, or that service through these Secretary. petition to amend should on our before facilities was no longer authorized. [FR Doc. 96–31478 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] December 16, 1996, file with the Federal WGI indicates that deliveries to BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Energy Regulatory Commission, Guymon are currently authorized under Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to WGI’s Rate Schedule FT–N. WGI further intervene or a protest in accordance indicates that peak day and annual [Docket No. ER96±2658±001] with the requirements of the deliveries are 125 Mcf and 25,000 Mcf, TPC Corporation; Notice of Filing Commission’s Rules of Practice and respectively. WGI asserts that service to Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) Guymon will not affect service to any December 5, 1996. and the Regulations under the Natural existing firm customer. Take notice that on October 15, 1996, Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All protests Any person or the Commission’s Staff TPC Corporation tendered for filing its filed with the Commission will be may, within 45 days after the issuance Code of Conduct in compliance with the considered by it in determining the of the instant notice by the Commission, Commission’s September 30, 1996, appropriate action to be taken but will file pursuant to Rule 214 of the order issued in this docket. not serve to make the protestants parties Commission’s Rules of Practice and Any person desiring to be heard or to Procedure (18 CFR 385.214), a motion to protest said filing should file a motion to the proceeding. Any person wishing intervene or notice of intervention and to intervene or protest with the Federal to become a party to a proceeding or to pursuant to Section 157.205 of the Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 participate as a party in any hearing Regulations under the Natural Gas Act First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, therein must file a motion to intervene (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 in accordance with the Commission’s request. If no protest is filed within the of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Rules. time allowed therefor, the proposed and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 Lois D. Cashell, activities shall be deemed to be CFR 385.214). All such motions or Secretary. authorized effective the day after the protests should be filed on or before [FR Doc. 96–31392 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] time allowed for filing a protest. If a December 13, 1996. Protests will be BILLING CODE 6717±01±M protest is filed and not withdrawn 30 considered by the Commission in days after the time allowed for filing a determining the appropriate action to be protest, the instant request shall be taken, but will not serve to make Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65203 protestants parties to the proceeding. storage, and requests appropriate that ARKLA will construct the four-inch Any person wishing to become a party authorization for additional brine meter station and convey it to NGT. must file a motion to intervene. Copies disposal wells associated with the NGT indicates that it will own and of this filing are on file with the development of salt covers for natural operate the tap, first-cut regulator and Commission and are available for public gas storage. meter. NGT asserts that the estimated inspection. Comment date: December 26, 1996, in volumes to be delivered through the Lois D. Cashell, accordance with the first paragraph of above facilities are 5,760 MMBtu Secretary. Standard Paragraph F at the end of this annually and 10 MMBtu on a peak day. [FR Doc. 96–31479 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] notice. NGT also asserts that these facilities will be constructed at a cost of $2,435 of BILLING CODE 6717±01±M 2. Northern Natural Gas Company which ARKLA will reimburse NGT [Docket No. CP97–121–000] $1,538. [Docket No. CP96±492±002, et al.] Take notice that on November 25, Comment date: January 21, 1997, in 1996, Northern Natural Gas Company accordance with Standard Paragraph G CNG Transmission Corporation, et al.; (Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, at the end of this notice. Natural Gas Certificate Filings Omaha, Nebraska 68124, filed in Docket 4. Northern Natural Gas Company December 4, 1996. No. CP97–121–000, an abbreviated Take notice that the following filings application pursuant to Section 7(b) of [Docket No. CP97–125–000] have been made with the Commission: the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Take notice that on November 26, Commission’s Regulations, for 1996, Northern Natural Gas Company 1. CNG Transmission Corporation permission and approval to abandon the (Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, [Docket No. CP96–492–002] Big Lake Compressor Station located in Omaha, Nebraska 68124–1000, filed in Take notice that on November 26, Regan County, Texas, all as more fully Docket No. CP97–125–000 a request 1996, CNG Transmission Corporation set forth in the request which is on file pursuant Sections 157.205(b) and (CNG), 445 West Main Street, with the Commission and open to 157.212 of the Commission’s Clarksburg, West Virginia 26301, filed public inspection. Regulations under the Natural Gas Act in Docket No. CP96–492–001, an Northern states that due to changes in (18 CFR 157.205(b) and 157.212) to amendment to its pending application operating conditions on the Northern install and operate a new delivery point, in Docket No. CP96–492–000 for a system, the proposed abandonment of located in Ochiltree County, Texas to certificate of public convenience and natural gas compression facilities at the accommodate interruptible natural gas necessity, pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Big Lake Compressor Station will not deliveries to Midgard Energy Company Natural Gas Act, to construct and adversely affect Northern’s ability to (Midgard) under Northern’s blanket operate facilities for the transportation meet current service obligations. certificate issued in Docket No. CP82– and storage of natural gas on a firm Moreover, Northern says the proposed 401–000 pursuant to Section 7 of the basis. Take notice also that on October abandonment of facilities will not result Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set 30, 1996, CNG filed a supplement to its in the abandonment of service to any of forth in the request which is on file with pending application in Docket No. Northern’s existing shippers. the Commission and open to public CP96–492–000 requesting authorization Comment date: December 26, 1996, in inspection. for the conversion and operation of accordance with Standard Paragraph F Northern states that it requests existing salt caverns and the at the end of this notice. authority to install and operate the proposed delivery point to construction and operation of new salt 3. NorAm Gas Transmission Company caverns for the storage of natural gas in accommodate interruptible natural gas interstate commerce at the Bath [Docket No. CP97–122–000] deliveries to Midgard for commercial Petroleum Storage Inc. (Bath Petroleum) Take notice that on November 25, use under Northern’s currently effective site in Steuben County, New York. 1996, NorAm Gas Transmission throughput service agreement(s). CNG’s proposals are more fully set forth Company (NGT), 525 Milam, Northern asserts that Midgard has in the amendment and supplement Shreveport, Louisiana 71151 filed in requested the proposed delivery point to which are on file with the Federal Docket No. CP97–122–000 a request provide compressor fuel and starting gas Energy Regulatory Commission pursuant to Sections 157.205, and located in Ochiltree County, Texas. (Commission) and open to public 157.211 of the Commission’s Northern states that the proposed inspection. Regulations under the Natural Gas Act volumes that would be delivered to In its supplement, CNG requests (18 CFR 157.205 and 157.211) for Midgard at the proposed delivery point authorization for Bath Petroleum to approval and permission to construct are 2,000 MMBtu on a peak day and convert and operate existing salt caverns and operate a delivery tap for ARKLA, 500,000 MMBtu on an annual basis. (well numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7) at the a distribution division of NorAm Energy Northern estimates a cost of $11,600 for Bath Petroleum site and lease storage Corporation (ARKLA), under the blanket installing the proposed delivery point. It capacity to CNG for natural gas storage certificate issued in Docket No. CP82– is stated that Midgard would reimburse in 1997. CNG also seeks authorization 384–000, as amended in Docket No. Northern for the total cost of installing for Bath Petroleum to construct and CP82–384–001, pursuant to Section 7(c) the delivery point. operate well Numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, and of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), all as Comment date: January 21, 1997, in 13, and to lease storage capacity in these more fully set forth in the request which accordance with Standard Paragraph G caverns to CNG for natural gas storage is on file with the Commission and open at the end of this notice. after 1998. to public inspection. 5. Columbia Gas Transmission CNG’s amendment reflects a change NGT states that it proposes to Corporation in the pipe diameter of the TL–504 construct and operate a new two-inch pipeline, changes in the rates associated delivery tap on NGT’s Line JM–23 in [Docket No. CP97–127–000] with this project, a change in the well Crittenden County, Arkansas to provide Take notice that on November 22, numbers to be designated for natural gas service to ARKLA. NGT further states 1996, Columbia Gas Transmission 65204 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Corporation (Columbia), 1700 public auction and sale are currently compressor station), totaling 1,317 MacCorkle Avenue, S.E., Charleston, functioning as gathering facilities and horsepower, in the eighteen gathering West Virginia 25325–1273, filed in are an integral part of the geographic groups have ever been certificated. The Docket No. CP97–127–000 an gathering groups to be auctioned and certificated lines and the compressor application pursuant to Section 7(b) of sold. Columbia states that the station proposed for sale are primarily the Natural Gas Act for permission and purchasing parties are generally functionalized on Columbia’s books of approval to abandon certain certificated unknown at this time. Columbia further account as transmission and storage facilities by sale. In addition, Columbia states that Mountaineer is purchasing facilities except for 8.3 miles of pipeline requests an order declaring that upon certain of the facilities in West Virginia, currently functionalized as gathering. and after approval for the abandonment, and a bid has been accepted (subject to However, Columbia states, that once the subject facilities are and will be certain contingencies) whereby these facilities have been sold, these exempt from Commission jurisdiction Somerset Exploration Corporation will lines and stations will perform a non- under the Natural Gas Act as gathering purchase certain of the facilities located jurisdictional gathering function. facilities, all as more fully set forth in in Pennsylvania. Columbia states that as Comment date: December 26, 1996, in the application on file with the a condition of the sale, Columbia will accordance with Standard Paragraph F Commission and open to public require the purchasers of the gathering at the end of this notice. inspection. facilities to continue to provide Columbia states that the sale of these Columbia’s gathering customers with 6. Natural Gas Pipeline Company of certificated facilities is an integral part gathering service on an open access, America of Columbia’s plan to sell the majority non-jurisdictional basis and to charge, [Docket No. CP97–132–000] of its gathering facilities in order to during a period of up to two years, no expedite Columbia’s full unbundling of more than the rates specified in the Take notice that on November 27, rates and services as required under Settlement. 1996, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of Order No. 636. Columbia states that the Columbia maintains that approval of America (Natural), 701 East 2nd Street, sale of its gathering facilities, including this proposal will allow Columbia to Lombard, Illinois 60148, filed an the certificated facilities, will allow focus on its primary businesses of application pursuant to Section 7(b) of Columbia to cease providing gathering interstate gas transportation and storage. the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the services and to mitigate costs. Columbia Columbia further maintains that the Commission’s Regulations for an order further states that it intends to sell the auction and sale of these gathering granting permission and approval to gathering facilities (divided into facilities will further result, ultimately, abandon a firm transportation service eighteen designated geographic groups in reduced costs for Columbia’s for Chevron Chemical Company for descriptive purposes), located in customers through reduction in (Chevron Chemical) performed under Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and operation and maintenance costs. In Natural’s Rate Schedule X–139, Maryland. In addition, Columbia states addition, Columbia states that it will authorized in Docket No. CP85–347, as that of the eighteen designated systems, credit the net proceeds from the sale of amended. The application is on file all facilities, with the exception of a the gathering facilities to reduce its with the Commission and open to portion of the system committed for sale customers’ cost responsibility in public inspection. at net book value to Mountaineer Gas accordance with the Settlement. Finally, Natural states that said transportation Company (Mountaineer), will be offered as reflected in the Settlement, Columbia service was effected by Chevron U.S.A., for sale by public auction. Specifically, states that the respective purchasers of Inc. (Chevron U.S.A.), a producer, Columbia states that it proposes to Columbia’s gathering facilities will be tendering gas it produced in West abandon by sale the certificated obligated to continue to provide service Cameron Blocks 532, 533 and 534, facilities consisting of approximately to Columbia’s gathering customers on an offshore Louisiana for Chevron 189.7 miles of various sized pipeline open-access basis and to charge rates Chemical’s account at existing and the 225 horsepower not to exceed the gathering rates interconnections between Chevron McClellandtown compressor station. In established by the Settlement for a U.S.A. and Stingray Pipeline Company addition, Columbia proposes to abandon period of up to two years from the date (Stingray). Pursuant to a gas the points of delivery as identified in of purchase, but not beyond January 31, transportation agreement between Exhibit T to the application which 2000. Natural and Chevron Chemical dated consists of 139 town border stations and Columbia advises that it has provided September 26, 1977 (Agreement), as 4,081 mainline consumers. Also notice of the sale via press releases to amended on January 11, 1985, Natural requested is the authorization needed to newspapers and trade journals and has transported through its capacity in abandon five points of exchange with posted notice of the sale, including Stingray up to 3,750 Mcf of natural gas CNG Transmission Corporation under maps of the affected facilities, on its per day for Chevron Chemical to an Columbia’s Rate Schedules X–35 and electronic bulletin board which is X–84, all of which are served from the accessible through the Internet (World onshore interconnection between certificated facilities and noncertificated Wide Web) at http:// Natural and Stingray located in gathering facilities to be sold. www.Columbiaenergy.com/sale, and Cameron Parish, Louisiana (Holly It is stated that the subject Docket No. Columbia is now in the process of Beach). From Holly Beach, Natural CP97–127–000 is related to and is being accepting and evaluating bids for the further transported the gas to an filed concurrently with a partial gathering systems by geographic area. interconnection with Koch Gateway settlement in Columbia’s pending In addition, Columbia states that of Pipeline Company at the Texaco Henry Section 4 rate proceeding in Docket No. the approximately 3,332 miles of Plant in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana for RP95–408, et al. (Settlement), which pipeline being auctioned, many of the ultimate delivery to Chevron Chemical. resolves all issues related to the facilities were not certificated because Natural states that by a letter unbundling of gathering costs and of their location and function. Only agreement dated November 12, 1996, services. 189.7 miles of pipeline and one of the Natural and Chevron Chemical agreed to Columbia states that the certificated eight compressor stations (the 225 terminate the Agreement, as amended, facilities proposed to be abandoned by horsepower McClellandtown as of December 1, 1996. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65205

Comment date: December 26, 1996, in No. 4 to the Gookin Tap delivery point Commission on its own review of the accordance with Standard Paragraph F site. Questar states that the 35 feet of matter finds that a grant of the at the end of this notice. replacement pipeline will be installed certificate is required by the public within Questar’s existing, previously- convenience and necessity. If a motion 7. Questar Pipeline Company disturbed J.L. No. 4 right-of-way. for leave to intervene is timely filed, or [Docket No. CP97–133–000] Questar states that the estimated cost to if the Commission on its own motion Take notice that on November 29, install the replacement M&R facilities is believes that a formal hearing is 1996, Questar Pipeline Company $35,200 and that the replacement of the required, further notice of such hearing (Questar), 79 South State Street, Salt Gookin Tap M&R facilities will have no will be duly given. Lake City, Utah 84111, filed in Docket effect on the existing environment. Under the procedure herein provided No. CP97–133–000 a request pursuant to Questar further states that the current for, unless otherwise advised, it will be Sections 157.205, 157.212 and 157.216 Gookin Tap delivery point meter can unnecessary for the applicant to appear of the Commission’s Regulations under deliver up to 9,000 standard cubic feet or be represented at the hearing. the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, (Scf) per hour, or approximately 229 G. Any person or the Commission’s 157.212 and 157.216) for authorization Dekatherms (Dth) per day, while the staff may, within 45 days after the to abandon existing metering and proposed replacement delivery point issuance of the instant notice by the regulating (M&R) facilities and to install facilities, described above, will be Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 replacement M&R facilities for the capable of delivering up to 100,000 Scf of the Commission’s Procedural Rules purpose of increasing delivery capacity per hour or approximately 2,549 Dth per (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene to Mountain Fuel Supply Company day. Questar states that it has sufficient or notice of intervention and pursuant (MFS), Questar’s local distribution pipeline capacity to increase firm to Section 157.205 of the Regulations company affiliate, at the existing Gookin deliveries at the Gookin Tap delivery under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR Tap delivery point located in point without detriment or disadvantage 157.205) a protest to the request. If no Sweetwater County, Wyoming, under to Questar’s other customers. protest is filed within the time allowed Questar’s blanket certificate issued in Comment date: January 21, 1997, in therefore, the proposed activity shall be Docket No. CP82–491–000 pursuant to accordance with Standard Paragraph G deemed to be authorized effective the Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as at the end of this notice. day after the time allowed for filing a more fully set forth in the request that Standard Paragraphs protest. If a protest is filed and not is on file with the Commission and open withdrawn within 30 days after the time to public inspection. F. Any person desiring to be heard or allowed for filing a protest, the instant Questar explains that the city of Rock make any protest with reference to said request shall be treated as an Springs, Wyoming is experiencing filing should on or before the comment application for authorization pursuant substantial growth in the vicinity of the date file with the Federal Energy to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act. Gookin Tap delivery point. Questar Regulatory Commission, 888 First Lois D. Cashell, states that as a result of the continuing Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, a growth in residential hook-ups, the motion to intervene or a protest in Secretary. existing M&R facilities are too small to accordance with the requirements of the [FR Doc. 96–31452 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] service the capacity demands required Commission’s Rules of Practice and BILLING CODE 6717±01±P by the MFS distribution system. Questar Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and explains that to continue providing 385.214) and the Regulations under the Notice of Cases Filed With the Office reliable customer service to MFS, Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All of Hearings and Appeals; Week of Questar must install replacement M&R protests filed with the Commission will November 11 Through November 15, facilities of greater capacity at the be considered by it in determining the 1996 Gookin Tap delivery point to satisfy the appropriate action to be taken but will increasing MFS customer demand. not serve to make the protestants parties During the Week of November 11 It is stated that the existing M&R to the proceeding. Any person wishing through November 15, 1996, the appeal facilities, proposed to be replaced, to become a party to a proceeding or to listed in this Notice was filed with the comprise a 4-inch meter, two 1-inch participate as a party in any hearing Office of Hearings and Appeals of the regulator banks and appurtenant therein must file a motion to intervene Department of Energy. facilities contained in a 4-foot by 6-foot in accordance with the Commission’s Any person who will be aggrieved by skid-mounted meter building. The Rules. the DOE action sought in this case may replacement M&R facilities would Take further notice that, pursuant to file written comments on the appeal include a 6-inch turbine meter, two 2- the authority contained in and subject to within ten days of publication of this inch regulator banks, a filter and related jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal Notice or the date of receipt of actual valves, telemetry and station piping Energy Regulatory Commission by notice, whichever occurs first. All such housed in a 6-foot by 6-foot skid- Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act comments shall be filed with the Office mounted meter building. In addition, and the Commission’s Rules of Practice of Hearings and Appeals, Department of Questar proposes to replace and Procedure, a hearing will be held Energy, Washington, DC 20585–0107. approximately 35 feet of 1-inch without further notice before the diameter pipeline with 2-inch diameter Commission or its designee on this Dated: December 4, 1996. pipeline extending from a block valve filing if no motion to intervene is filed George B. Breznay, on Questar’s Jurisdictional Lateral (J.L.) within the time required herein, if the Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. 65206 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

LIST OF CASES RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS [Week of November 11 through November 15, 1996]

Date Name and location of applicant Case No. Type of submission

11/13/96 James H. Stebbings, Naperville, Illinois ...... VFA±0242 Appeal of an Information Request Denial. If granted: The April 19, 1996 Freedom of Information Request Denial issued by the Argonne Area Office would be rescinded, and James H. Stebbings would receive access to certain Department of Energy information.

[FR Doc. 96–31419 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] that the DOE direct BPA to release the illegal drugs; (ii) the individual BILLING CODE 6450±01±P documents. In considering the Appeal, provided false information to the DOE; the Office of Hearings and Appeals (iii) the acts of the individual tend to found that BPA properly applied the show that the individual is not honest, Notice of Issuance of Decisions and threshold requirements of Exemption 5 reliable, or trustworthy; and (iv) the Orders by the Office of Hearings and to the requested documents at issue, and DOE’s security concerns regarding these Appeals; Week of October 21 Through that there was no public interest in its behaviors were not overcome by October 25, 1996 release. However, the Office of Hearings evidence mitigating the derogatory During the week of October 21 and Appeals remanded this Appeal to information underlying the DOE’s through October 25, 1996, the decisions BPA to issue a new determination, charges. Accordingly, the Hearing and orders summarized below were either releasing reasonably segregable Officer found that the individual’s issued with respect to appeals, factual material or explaining the access authorization should not be applications, petitions, or other requests reasons for withholding any factual granted. material contained in the documents. filed with the Office of Hearings and Requests for Exception Appeals of the Department of Energy. Therefore, the Department of Energy J. Enterprises, Inc., 10/24/96, VEE–0027 The following summary also contains a granted Perkins Coie’s Appeal. list of submissions that were dismissed Radian International, 10/21/96 VFA– J. Enterprises, Inc. filed an by the Office of Hearings and Appeals. 0220 Application for Exception from the requirement that it file Form EIA–782B, Copies of the full text of these The Department of Energy (DOE) the ‘‘Reseller/Retailer’s Monthly decisions and orders are available in the issued a Decision and Order (D&O) Petroleum Product Sales Report.’’ The Public Reference Room of the Office of denying a Freedom of Information Act DOE found that the firm was not Hearings and Appeals, Room 1E–234, (FOIA) Appeal that was filed by Radian affected by the reporting requirement in Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence International. In its Appeal, Radian a manner different from other similar Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585– requested that we review a firms, and consequently was not 0107, Monday through Friday, between determination issued by the Oak Ridge experiencing a special hardship, the hours of 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., Operations office that certain inequity, or unfair distribution of except federal holidays. They are also documents were not ‘‘agency records’’ burdens. Accordingly, the firm’s available in Energy Management: and were therefore not subject to release Application for Exception was denied. Federal Energy Guidelines, a under the FOIA. Radian also expanded commercially published loose leaf the scope of its original request to Oil Products, Inc., 10/21/96, VEE–0023 reporter system. Some decisions and include additional documents. In the Oil Products, Inc. filed an Application orders are available on the Office of Decision, the OHA found that the for Exception from the Energy Hearings and Appeals World Wide Web documents in question were not agency Information Administration requirement site at http://www.oha.doe.gov. records, and that a FOIA appeal is not that it file Form EIA–782B, the Dated: December 4, 1996. the appropriate venue for the ‘‘Resellers’/Retailers’ Monthly George B. Breznay, consideration of an initial request for Petroleum Product Sales Report.’’ In Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. documents. The OHA therefore considering Oil Product’s request, the remanded Radian’s request for DOE found that the firm was not Decision List No. 4 additional documents to the Oak Ridge experiencing a serious hardship or gross Week of October 21 through October Office for processing under the FOIA, inequity. Accordingly, exception relief 25, 1996 and denied Radian’s appeal of Oak was denied. Ridge’s original determination. Appeals Interlocutory Order Perkins Coie, 10/25/96 VFA–0221 Personnel Security Hearing Meta, Inc., 10/23/96, VWZ–0007 The law firm of Perkins Coie filed an Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office, 10/24/ A Hearing Officer from the Office of Appeal from a determination issued to 96, VSO–0103 Hearings and Appeals denied a Motion it on August 20, 1996 by the Bonneville A Hearing Officer from the Office of to Dismiss filed by Maria Elena Torano Power Administration (BPA) of the Hearings and Appeals issued an Associates, Inc. (META). In its Motion, Department of Energy (DOE). In that Opinion regarding the eligibility of an META sought the dismissal of a determination, BPA denied in part individual for access authorization complaint filed by C. Lawrence Cornett Perkins Coie’s request for information under the provisions of 10 C.F.R. Part (Cornett) under the DOE’s Contractor filed under the Freedom of Information 710. After carefully considering the Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Act (FOIA). In its Appeal, Perkins Coie record of the processing in view of the Part 708. META alleged that Cornett’s challenged BPA’s application of standards set forth in Part 710, the complaint failed to state an actionable Exemption 5 to three requested Hearing Officer found that: (i) the claim. Specifically, META asserted that documents in dispute and requested individual has a history of abuse of Cornett failed to make a protected Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65207 disclosure under Part 708 since the and specific danger. The Hearing Officer Form and Waiver. In this filing, Steuben information contained in his alleged also found that the question regarding Co. Farm Bureau requested a Stripper disclosures was already known by DOE Cornett’s beliefs was a factual matter. Well refund from the Retailers’ escrow, or META and that information disclosed Consequently, the Hearing Officer thereby waiving its right to a Subpart V did not involve any substantial and denied the Motion. crude oil refund. Accordingly, the DOE specific threats to health and safety. The Refund Application denied the Application for Refund. Hearing Officer held that, under Part 708, a disclosure need not consist of Steuben CO. Farm Bureau, 10/21/96, Refund Applications unique information that is unknown to RF272–97912 the recipient. Further, the Hearing The DOE issued a Decision and Order The Office of Hearings and Appeals Officer found that a disclosure, to be concerning one Application for Refund issued the following Decisions and protected under Part 708, need not in filed by Steuben Co. Farm Bureau in the Orders concerning refund applications, fact involve a substantial and specific Subpart V crude oil overcharge refund which are not summarized. Copies of danger to employees or public health proceeding. The DOE determined that the full texts of the Decisions and and safety as long as individual making Steuben Co. Farm Bureau was not Orders are available in the Public the disclosure in good faith believes that entitled to a refund since it had filed a Reference Room of the Office of the disclosure concerns a substantial Retailer’s Escrow Settlement Claim Hearings and Appeals. Aline Manire, et al ...... RF272–94540 10/23/96 Atlantic Richfield Co./Jerair Panosian ...... RF304–15505 10/24/96 Atlantic Richfield Co./Ron’s ARCO ...... RF304–15506 10/24/96 Beaver Valley Builders Supply, Inc., et al ...... RF272–95100 10/24/96 Crude Oil Supple Ref Dist ...... RB272–00092 10/23/96 Holstein Coop Elevator, et al ...... RG272–6 10/23/96 Ruth A. Martinek ...... RJ272–24 10/24/96 W.E. Bartholw & Son Const., et al ...... RK272–01406 10/21/96 Dismissals The following submissions were dismissed.

Name Case No.

Craig W. Anderson ...... VFA±0207 Craid W. Anderson ...... VFA±0212 Loyd Jones Well Service ...... RF272±96591

[FR Doc. 96–31418 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Hearings and Appeals World Wide Web requested documents. Consequently, the BILLING CODE 6450±01±P site at http://www.oha.doe.gov. OHA denied the appeal. Dated: December 4, 1996. Personnel Security Hearings George B. Breznay, Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Albuquerque Operations Office, 11/14/ Orders by the Office of Hearings and Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. 96, VSO–0102 Appeals; Week of November 11 Decision List No. 7 Through November 15, 1996 A Hearing Officer of the Office of Week of November 11 through Hearings and Appeals issued an opinion During the week of November 11 November 15, 1996. concerning the continued eligibility of through November 15, 1996, the an individual for access authorization decisions and orders summarized below Appeals under 10 C.F.R. Part 710, ‘‘Criteria and were issued with respect to appeals, Nathaniel Hendricks, 11/13/96, VFA– Procedures for Determining Eligibility applications, petitions, or other requests 0229 filed with the Office of Hearings and for Access to Classified Matter or Special Nuclear Material.’’ After Appeals of the Department of Energy. The OHA denied an appeal of a The following summary also contains a Freedom of Information determination considering the record in view of the list of submissions that were dismissed issued by the Chicago Operations Office standards set forth in Part 710, the by the Office of Hearings and Appeals. (COO). Previously, the OHA had Hearing Officer found that the Copies of the full text of these remanded to COO a request by the information presented by the DOE with decisions and orders are available in the appellant so that COO could search for respect to the individual’s positive drug Public Reference Room of the Office of responsive documents concerning five test for marijuana use was sufficient to Hearings and Appeals, Room 1E–234, specific events that occurred in Chicago raise a substantial concern that the Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence in the 1940’s. The appellant conjectured individual may be a frequent Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585– that the events were connected with recreational user of that drug and to 0107, Monday through Friday, between Manhattan Project. When COO support a denial of access authorization the hours of 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., responded that it could find no pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 710.8(k). The except federal holidays. They are also responsive documents, the appellant Hearing Officer also found that the available in Energy Management: claimed that COO had not conducted an individual had failed to present Federal Energy Guidelines, a adequate search. The OHA questioned sufficient evidence to support his commercially published loose leaf personnel at COO about the search, and assertion that his marijuana use was reporter system. Some decisions and determined that there had been a search orders are available on the Office of reasonably calculated to uncover 65208 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices limited to one occasion in recent years. under the provisions of 10 C.F.R. Part Officer determined that the individual As a result, the Hearing Officer found 710. The DOE Personnel Security deliberately falsified information on a that the evidence of rehabilitation and Division alleged that the individual: (1) Questionnaire for Sensitive Positions, reformation was insufficient to mitigate deliberately falsified significant used an illegal drug, and engaged in the concerns raised by the positive drug information provided to the DOE; (2) conduct demonstrating that he is not test. Finally, the Hearing Officer found ‘‘[t]rafficked in, sold, transferred, honest, reliable or trustworthy within that conflicting statements concerning possessed, used, or experimented with a the meaning of 10 C.F.R. 710.8(l). drug use made by the individual to his drug or other substance listed in the Accordingly, the Hearing Officer drug counselor and to DOE security Schedule of Controlled Substances recommended that DOE Security not personnel were sufficient to support a established pursuant to Section 202 of restore the individual’s access denial of access authorization pursuant the Controlled Substances Act of 1970’’; authorization. to 10 C.F.R. 710.8(l). Accordingly, the and (3) ‘‘[e]ngaged in * * * unusual Refund Applications Hearing Officer concluded that, in his conduct or is subject to circumstances opinion, the individual’s access which tend to show that the individual The Office of Hearings and Appeals authorization should not be restored. is not honest, reliable, or issued the following Decisions and trustworthy * * * ’’. See 10 C.F.R. Orders concerning refund applications, Oak Ridge Operations Office, 11/13/96, 710.8 (f), (k), and (l). On September 24, which are not summarized. Copies of VSO–0100 1996, an evidentiary hearing was the full texts of the Decisions and A Hearing Officer issued an Opinion convened in which one witness Orders are available in the Public regarding the eligibility of an individual testified. After carefully examining the Reference Room of the Office of to maintain an access authorization record of the proceeding, the Hearing Hearings and Appeals. Columbia Township Schools, et al ...... RF272–87150 11/15/96 Cochise Airlines, Inc., et al ...... RG272–84 11/15/96 S.W. Foley ...... RJ272–25 11/13/96 SIGMA–4 Express, Inc., et al ...... RF272–97335 11/12/96 Summit City Enterprises ...... RF272–97829 11/12/96 Ben-Lee Motor Service ...... RF272–97858 Town Center Management Corp ...... RR272–248 11/12/96 Dismissals The following submissions were dismissed.

Name Case No.

Air Florida Airlines ...... RG272±996 Allegheny Development Corp ...... RG272±765 Crooker & Sons, Inc ...... RG272±918 Diocese of Monterey ...... RG272±785 Franklin Co. Grain Growers, Inc ...... RG272±942 Graves Construction Co, Inc ...... RG272±757 Great Bay Distributors Inc ...... RG272±756 National Linen Service ...... RG272±995 Ray Bell ...... RG272±755 Roman Catholic Bishop of Monterey ...... RG272±786 Roman Catholic Diocese of Sacramento ...... RG272±787 Tri-City Electrical Contractors, Inc ...... RG272±799 Wayne Densch, Inc ...... RG272±791 West Bldg Materials/ Associated Dist ...... RG272±790 Unisource ...... RG272±797

[FR Doc. 96–31420 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Advisory Panel established pursuant to ASCII file avoiding the use of special BILLING CODE 6450±01±P Section 25(d) of FIFRA, as amended (86 characters and any form of encryption. Stat. 973 and 89 Stat. 75l; 7 U.S.C. l36 Comments and data will also be et seq.). Public notice of nominees along accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION with a request for public comments file format or ASCII file format. All AGENCY appeared in the Federal Register of comments and data in electronic form February 14, 1996 (61 FR 5762). [OPP±00454; FRL±5572±5] must be identified by docket number ADDRESSES: Public Response and [OPP–00454]. No CBI should be FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel, Program Resources Branch, Field submitted through e-mail. Electronic Appointments Operations Division (7506C), Office of comments on this notice of filing may be filed online at many Federal AGENCY: Environmental Protection Pesticide Programs, Environmental Depository Libraries. Agency (EPA). Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Comments and ACTION: Notice. Information submitted as a comment data may also be submitted concerning this document may be SUMMARY: Notice is given of the electronically by sending electronic claimed confidential by marking any appointment of a new member to the mail (e-mail) to: opp- Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and [email protected]. Electronic Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Scientific comments must be submitted as an Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65209 part or all of that information as pesticides on fish and wildlife contract number 68–W6–0047, SRC will ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ populations, behavioral toxicology of require access to CBI submitted to EPA (CBI). Information so marked will not be pesticides in wildlife, heavy metal and under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA disclosed except in accordance with industrial contamination in the to perform successfully the duties procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. environment, toxicology of lead, specified under the contract. SRC A copy of the comment that does not cadmium, and PCBs in avian and personnel will be given access to contain CBI must be submitted for mammalian wildlife species, and information submitted to EPA under inclusion in the public record. ecological risk assessment; the need for sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA. Some Information not marked confidential a disciplinary mix; and the need for of the information may be claimed or may be disclosed publicly by EPA broader scientific views. determined to be CBI. without prior notice. All written Meetings of the Scientific Advisory EPA is issuing this notice to inform comments will be available for public Panel are always announced in the all submitters of information under inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address Federal Register at least fifteen days sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA that EPA given above, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., prior to each meeting, in accordance may provide SRC access to these CBI Monday through Friday, excluding legal with the directives of the Federal materials on a need-to-know basis only. holidays. Advisory Committee Act. All access to TSCA CBI under this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By contract will take place at EPA mail: Larry C. Dorsey, Designated List of subjects Headquarters, SRC’s site located at Federal Official, FIFRA Scientific Environmental protection. Crystal Gateway, Arlington, VA and Advisory Panel (7501C), Office of Dated: December 2, 1996. Merrill Lane, Syracuse NY. Pesticide Programs, Environmental SRC will be authorized access to Protection Agency, 40l M St., SW., Carol M. Browner, TSCA CBI at its facilities under the EPA Washington, DC 20460, Office location: Administrator. of TSCA Confidential Business Rm. 815B, CM#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis [FR Doc. 96–31304 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Information Security Manual. Before Highway, Arlington, VA 22203, access to TSCA CBI is authorized at BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Telephone: (703) 305–5369, e-mail: SRC’s sites, EPA will approve SRC’s [email protected]. security certification statements, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress [OPPTS±140251; FRL±5576±5] perform the required inspection of its mandated that the Scientific Advisory facilities, and ensure that the facilities Access to Confidential Business Panel would consist of seven members, are in compliance with the manual. Information by Syracuse Research selected from candidates nominated by Upon completing review of the CBI Corporation the National Science Foundation (NSF) materials, SRC will return all transferred and the National Institutes of Health AGENCY: Environmental Protection materials to EPA. (NIH). Congress also mandated that the Agency (EPA). Clearance for access to TSCA CBI under this contract may continue until terms of appointment would be ACTION: Notice. staggered. A list of nominees, including September 30, 2001. biographical data, appeared in the SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its SRC personnel will be required to Federal Register as indicated above. No contractor, Syracuse Research sign nondisclosure agreements and will comments were received in response to Corporation (SRC), of Syracuse, New be briefed on appropriate security this Notice. York, access to information which has procedures before they are permitted Dr. Patricia Buffler and Dr. Ron been submitted to EPA under sections 4, access to TSCA CBI. Kendall have been appointed as 5, 6, and 8 of the Toxic Substances members of the FIFRA Scientific Control Act (TSCA). Some of the List of Subjects Advisory Panel. Dr. Buffler is Dean of information may be claimed or Environmental protection, Access to the School of Public Health at the determined to be confidential business confidential business information. University of California at Berkeley; she information (CBI). Dated:December 3, 1996. will provide the experience and DATES: Access to the confidential data technical background needed in the area submitted to EPA will occur no sooner George A. Bonina, of epidemiology and public health. Dr. than December 24, 1996. Kendall is the Director of The Institute FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Acting Director, Information Management Susan B. Hazen, Director, TSCA Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and of Wildlife and Environmental Toxics. Toxicology at Clemson University; he Environmental Assistance Division will provide expertise in the area of (7408), Office of Pollution Prevention [FR Doc. 96–31433 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] wildlife and environmental toxicology. and Toxics, Environmental Protection BILLING CODE 6560±50±F The decision to appoint Dr. Buffler Agency, Rm. E–545, 401 M St., SW., and Dr. Kendall is based upon several Washington, DC 20460, (202) 554–1404, factors, including: Dr. Buffler’s expertise TDD: (202) 554–0551; e-mail: TSCA- [OPPTS±140250; FRL±5576±4] in the areas of association of diet, [email protected]. smoking, air pollution, toxic chemical SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Access to Confidential Business wastes, low-level radiation, and contract number 68–W6–0047, Information by Eastern Research electromagnetic fields on the risks of contractor SRC, of Merrill Lane, Group and Subcontractors cancer, lung diseases, fertility, Syracuse, NY, will assist the Office of pregnancy outcomes, diseases and Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) AGENCY: Environmental Protection conditions among working and in reviewing new chemical submissions, Agency (EPA). nonworking populations, and the and in creating and updating chemical ACTION: Notice. protective effects of vitamin A and beta- data bases of existing chemicals. carotene for laryngeal cancer; Dr. In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its Kendall’s work in the areas of effects of EPA has determined that under EPA contractor, Eastern Research Group 65210 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

(ERG), of Lexington, Massachusetts and at ERG’s Lexington, MA facility; SAIC, contractor HYP, of 1416 Fenwick Lane, it subcontractors Science Applications MAT, and ICF will have access only at Silver Spring, MD will assist the Office International Corp (SAIC) of McLean, EPA Headquarters. of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Virginia, Mathtech (MAT) of Falls ERG will be authorized access to (OPPT) in performing maintenance and Church, Virginia, and ICF Incorporated TSCA CBI at their facility under the enhancements to the TSCA Chemical (ICF) of Fairfax, Virginia, access to EPA TSCA Confidential Business Update System (CUS) residing on the information which has been submitted Information Security Manual. Before EPA Confidential Business Information to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of access to TSCA CBI is authorized at (CBI) Local Area Network. In the Toxic Substances Control Act ERG’s site, EPA will approve their accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), EPA (TSCA). Some of the information may be security certification statements and has determined that under EPA contract claimed or determined to be ensure that the facility is in compliance number 6W–4683–YASA, HYP will confidential business information (CBI). with the manual. Upon completing require access to CBI submitted to EPA DATES: Access to the confidential data review of the CBI materials, ERG will under all sections of TSCA to perform submitted to EPA will occur no sooner return all transferred materials to EPA. successfully the duties specified under than December 24, 1996. Clearance for access to TSCA CBI the contract. HYP personnel will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: under this contract may continue until given access to information submitted to Susan Hazen, Director, TSCA April 30, 2001. EPA under all sections of TSCA. Some Environmental Assistance Division ERG, SAIC, MAT, and ICF personnel of the information may be claimed or (7408), Office of Pollution Prevention will be required to sign nondisclosure determined to be CBI. EPA is issuing this notice to inform and Toxics, Environmental Protection agreements and will be briefed on all submitters of information under all Agency, Rm. E–545, 401 M St., SW., appropriate security procedures before sections of TSCA that EPA may provide Washington, DC 20460, (202) 554–1404, they are permitted access to TSCA CBI. HYP access to these CBI materials on a TDD: (202) 554–0551; e-mail: TSCA- need-to-know basis only. All access to [email protected]. List of Subjects TSCA CBI under this contract will take SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Environmental protection, Access to confidential business information. place at EPA Headquarters only. contract number 68–W6–0022, Clearance for access to TSCA CBI contractor ERG, of 110 Hartwell Dated: December 3, 1996. under this contract may continue until Avenue, Lexington, MA and its George A. Bonina, December 31, 1996. HYP personnel will subcontractors SAIC, of 1710 Goodridge be required to sign nondisclosure Drive, McLean VA, MAT of 5111 Acting Director, Information Management agreements and will be briefed on Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA, and Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and appropriate security procedures before Toxics. ICF of 9300 Lee Highway, Fairfax, VA, they are permitted access to TSCA CBI. will assist the Office of Pollution [FR Doc. 96–31434 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) in BILLING CODE 6560±50±F List of Subjects evaluating the potential risk of new and Environmental protection, Access to existing chemical substances and confidential business information. develop data bearing on such risks. [OPPTS±140249; FRL±5575±2] In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), Dated: December 3, 1996. Access to Confidential Business EPA has determined that under EPA George A. Bonina, contract number 68–W6–0022, ERG, Information by Hyperdyne Acting Director, Information Management SAIC, MAT, and ICF will require access AGENCY: Environmental Protection to CBI submitted to EPA under sections Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Agency (EPA). Toxics. 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA to perform successfully the duties specified under ACTION: Notice. [FR Doc. 96–31435 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] the contract. ERG, SAIC, MAT, and ICF SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its BILLING CODE 6560±50±F personnel will be given access to contractor, Hyperdyne, (HYP) of Silver information submitted to EPA under Spring, Maryland, access to information [FRL±5663±4] sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA. Some which has been submitted to EPA under of the information may be claimed or all sections of the Toxic Substances Environmental Justice Community/ determined to be CBI. Control Act (TSCA). Some of the University Partnership Grants In a previous notice published in the information may be claimed or Program; Request for Applications Federal Register of January 11, 1991 (56 determined to be confidential business (RFA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 1997; FR 1185; FRL–3843–2), ERG was information (CBI). Sponsored by U.S. Environmental authorized access to CBI submitted to DATES: Access to the confidential data Protection Agency (EPA), Office of EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 21 Environmental Justice of TSCA under contract number 68–D0– submitted to EPA will occur no sooner 0020. EPA is issuing this notice to allow than December 24, 1996. Purpose of Notice ERG, to continue its works under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The purpose of this notice is to solicit new contract number 68–W6–0022 and Susan B. Hazen, Director, applications from eligible candidates to allow TSCA CBI access for the new Environmental Assistance Division under the Environmental Justice subcontractors SAIC, MAT, and ICF. (7408), Office of Pollution Prevention Community/University Partnership EPA is issuing this notice to inform and Toxics, Environmental Protection Grants Program, sponsored by the all submitters of information under Agency, Rm. E–545, 401 M St., SW., Environmental Protection Agency. sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA that EPA Washington, DC 20460, (202) 554–1404, may provide ERG, SAIC, MAT, and ICF TDD: (202) 554–0551; e-mail: TSCA- Grants Program Overview access to these CBI materials on a need- [email protected]. The grant program was established to to-know basis only. All access to TSCA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under help community groups and tribal CBI under this contract will take place contract number 6W–4683–YASA, governments effectively address local Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65211 environmental justice issues through guidances, and approaches to problem Solid Waste Disposal Act, Section active partnerships with all institutions solving; and 8001(a) of higher education. These institutions • Are encouraged to be active Clean Air Act, Section 103(b)(3) are expected to have an ongoing partners in developing responses and Marine Protection, Research and relationship with the community setting priorities for intervention. Sanctuaries Act, Section 203 partner, including institutions such as Through these partnerships, Toxic Substances Control Act, Section Historically Black Colleges and communities will be encouraged to 10(a) Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic Serving become involved in accessing Safe Drinking Water Act, Section Institutions (HSIs), Tribal Colleges (TC), information from environmental 1442(b)(3) urban institutions and those serving databases, in cleaning-up and restoring Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Asian-American (AA) and other environmental quality in communities Rodenticide Act, Section 20(a) minority as well as low-income that have environmental insults, and in Background communities. The Universities/Colleges surveying and monitoring shall support affected environmental environmental quality. In its 1992 report, Environmental justice community groups and Number of Grants Proposed: A Equity: Reducing Risk for All American Indian tribes who engage in minimum of six grants are expected to Communities, EPA found that people of or plan to carry out projects that address be awarded for fiscal year (FY) 1997. color and low-income communities environmental justice issues. The Grant Award Amount: A maximum of experience higher than average Universities/Colleges that focus on the $250,000 will be awarded to each exposure to toxic pollutants than the design, methods, and techniques to recipient, contingent upon the general population. The Office of evaluate and solve the environmental availability of funds. Work funded by Environmental Justice (OEJ) was justice issues of concern of affected this program is expected to begin upon established in 1992 to help these communities, in actual partnership with award of the grant. All grants under this communities identify and assess these communities, will be given notice are expected to be awarded by pollution sources, implement priority. This grants program will September 1997. environmental awareness and training further the federal government’s Grant Term: The grant award will be programs for affected residents and commitment to develop stronger a maximum of $250,000, but the project work with local stakeholders partnerships with stakeholders in order period can extend up to three years, if (community-based organizations, to enhance community-based necessary. However, if the project academia, industry, local governments) environmental protection. period extends beyond one year the to devise strategies for environmental The emphasis of this grants program funding will be dispersed to the grantee improvements. is on meaningful, two-way cooperation over the course of the project period, not In June of 1993, OEJ was delegated between communities or tribes and all in the first year. granting authority to solicit projects, institutions of higher education serving Eligibility: Participation is limited to select suitable projects from among disproportionately exposed institutions of higher education, those proposed, supervise such projects, communities or tribes in order to including Historically Black Colleges or evaluate the results of projects, and address environmental justice issues. Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic Serving disseminate information on the Partnerships must be established with Institutions (HSIs), Tribal Colleges effectiveness of the projects, and formal agreements (i.e. Memorandum of (TCs), and institutions serving Asian- feasibility of the practices, methods, Agreements) between at least one American (AA’s) and other minority techniques and processes in College/University and at least one communities, low-income communities environmental justice areas. socio-economically disadvantaged or tribes that have formal partnerships General community or tribes which is adversely (i.e., a signed Memorandum of impacted by an environmental hazard The following questions and answers Agreement) with any affected party and public health concerns. These are designed to respond to frequent which is eligible under applicable partnerships become the catalyst for concerns of applicants. statutory authorities (i.e., community- increasing environmental awareness based/grassroots organizations, A. What Specific Requirements Exist for and involvement in resolving churches, schools or other non-profit the Environmental Justice Community/ environmental problems, such as community organizations, etc.) and University Partnership Grants Program? exposure to environmental pollutants in tribal governments. ‘‘Preference will be minority and low-income communities Projects or proposals that meet the given to University or Community and on Tribal lands. Environmental Justice Community/ The main objective of this grants groups who have not previously been University Partnership Grant program is to link community recipients of a CUP award’’. requirements shall include, but are not residence/organizations and tribes with The Environmental Justice limited to: their neighboring or affiliated academic Community/University Partnerships 1. Design and demonstration of field institutions to forge partnerships to may be either a partnership among two methods, practices, and techniques, address local environmental and public single entities or consortium of entities. including assessment and analysis of health concerns. This effort is designed If a consortium is proposed, the lead environmental justice conditions and to ensure that these partners: academic institution must be identified problems which may have a wide • Are aware of basic environmental and be one of the eligible applicants. applicability and/or addresses a high regulations, laws, concepts, issues, and This lead institution is recognized as the priority environmental justice issue (i.e., resources; grantee and as such is responsible for all socio-economic impact studies); • Understand their role in identifying activities under the agreement. 2. Research projects to understand, and defining problems, and monitoring Statutory Authorities: The granting assess or address, regional and local contaminants related to environmental authority is multi-media and the grant trends in environmental justice issues or exposures; proposal must address two or more of problems (i.e., monitoring of socio- • Are included in the dialogue that the statutory requirements. economic change in a community as a results in shaping future policies, Clean Water Act, Section 104(b)(3) result of an environmental abuse); 65212 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

3. Demonstration or dissemination of B. What Does Environmental Justice described in section B. The evaluations environmental justice information, Involve Under the Environmental Justice will be conducted, and items weighed, including development of educational Community/University Partnership as indicated in Section H. tools and materials (i.e., establish an Grant? F. Are Matching Funds Required? environmental justice clearinghouse of Environmental justice involves the successful environmental justice fair treatment of people of all races, Yes. Federal funds for the projects and activities or teach about cultures, and income with respect to the Environmental Justice Community/ risk reduction, pollution prevention, or development, implementation, and University Partnerships shall not exceed ecosystem protection as potential enforcement of environmental laws, 95% of the total cost of the project. EPA strategies for addressing environmental regulations, and policies. It seeks to encourages non-Federal matching shares justice problems or issues); ensure that all stakeholders of greater than 5%. The non-Federal 4. Determine the necessary (communities, industry, federal, tribal, share of costs may be provided in cash improvements in communication and state and local governments, grassroots or by in-kind contributions and other organizations, and individuals) act coordination among local, state and non-cash support. In-kind contributions responsibly to protect the environment tribal environmental programs and often include salaries or other verifiable and public health of all communities. facilitate communication, information costs. In the case of salaries, applicants Environmental justice efforts may may use either minimum wage or fair exchange, and community partnerships include, but are not necessarily limited among all stakeholders to enhance market value. The proposed match, to enhancing the gathering, observing, including the value of in-kind critical thinking, problem solving, and measuring, classifying, experimenting decision making; contributions, is subject to negotiation and other data gathering techniques that with EPA. All grants are subject to assist individuals in discussing, 5. Provide technical expert audit, so the value of in-kind inferring, predicting, and interpreting consultation and training for accessing, contributions must be carefully information to address environmental analyzing, and interpreting public documented. The matching (non- justice issues and concerns. environmental data, and utilization of Federal) share is a percentage of the Environmental justice projects or electronic communications technology entire cost of the project. For example, (i.e., TRI, GIS, Internet and E-mail); activities should enhance critical thinking, problem solving, and effective if the total project cost is approximately 6. Provide for a minimal ‘‘hard decision-making skills. $260,000 then the Federal portion can science’’ analysis capability (i.e., be no more than $247,000, which is analyze water and soil samples to test C. Who May Submit An Application? 95% of the total project cost. For this for basic pollutants, provide radon Any institution of higher education example, the grant recipient would be testing kits, etc.); which has a working relationship with required to provide $13,000 for the 7. Projects that involve new and affected communities or American project. The amount of non-Federal innovative approaches and/or Indian tribes, such as Historically Black funds, including in-kind contributions, significant new combinations of College or University (HBCU), Hispanic must be briefly itemized in Block 15 of resources, both of which should be Serving Institutions (HSI), Tribal the application form (SF 424) included identified in the partnership Colleges (TC), and institutions of higher at the end of this notice. Among other things, EPA funds cannot be used as agreements; education serving Asian-American (AA), other minority communities, or matching funds for other Federal grant 8. An applicant is required to include low-income communities may submit match requirements, nor used for in the application a signed agreement an application upon publication of this construction, buying furniture, lobbying, which describes the role of the solicitation. College/University or legal action (or any non-federal prospective partner(s) in the project and consortiums are eligible to apply. In contributions used as a match for the its implementation, and which includes order to be considered for funding, grant). a commitment or intent to commit applicants must provide a signed resources from the prospective Memorandum of Agreement which Application Procedure partner(s) contingent only upon receipt identifies the partners and defines the An ‘‘Application for Federal of funds. The college/university must roles and responsibilities of each Assistance’’ form (Standard Form 424 or identify the community residents or partner. SF 424), a ‘‘Budget Information: Non- tribal government representatives who D. May An Individual Apply? Construction Programs’’ form (SF 424A), will serve on the ‘‘partnership team.’’ It a Work Plan (described below), and a is expected that the community or tribal No. Only institutions of higher education may apply. The professional Memorandum of Agreement must be representatives on the team will be qualifications or community-based submitted. These documents contain all appropriately compensated for their experience of those individuals the information EPA needs to evaluate work; and that overall resources will be participating in the proposed project the merits of your proposed grant balanced among the partners. will be an important factor in the proposal. 9. Applications should include selection process. Each instrument approved under the partnerships between colleges and Funding Priorities environmental justice delegation must universities which are providers of be consistent with the Federal Grant and training and programs for these E. What Types of Proposed Cooperative Agreements Act of 1977, communities. One of the goals of the Environmental Justice Community/ Public Law 95–224, as amended, 31 partnerships should be to develop a University Partnerships Will Have the U.S.C. Section 6301; Title 40 of the plan to shift the focus of these Best Chance of Being Funded? Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 30, organizations from maintenance to that The Environmental Justice 31, 33, 40, 45 and 47, as appropriate; of self-sufficiency; Community/University Partnerships and existing media-specific regulations must meet the objectives and criteria as pertinent to the statement of work. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65213

G. How Must the Application Be next to the items are the weights EPA Educational Institutions,’’ such as A–87 Submitted and Specifically What Must will use to evaluate the applications. and A–122. (10%) It Include? Please note that certain sections are (e) An appendix with one or two page The applicants must submit one given greater weight than others. resumes of up to five key personnel. original, signed by a person authorized (a) A concise introduction of no more (5%) to receive funds for the applicant, and than three pages that states the nature of (f) An appendix with one page letters two copies of the application (double- the college/university, how the college/ of commitment from community-based sided copies encouraged). Applications university has been successful in the organizations with a significant role in must be reproducible (for example; past, proposed uses, objectives, the development and administration of stapled once in the upper left hand methods, plans, target audiences, and the partnership. Letters of endorsement corner, on white paper, and with page expected results of the proposed project. will not be considered. (5%) numbers). (10%) (g) A Memorandum of Agreement For the purposes of this grants (b) Clear and concise description of signed by each representative of the program, an application must contain an the project which includes the partnership team which identifies the SF 424, SF 424A, 424B, a work plan, a following: roles and responsibilities of each Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), and 1. A section describing the field partner. (10%) the Certification Forms. The following methods, practices, and techniques, I. When and Where Must the describes these items: including assessment and analysis, Applications Be Submitted? 1. Application for Federal Assistance which the partnership expects to An original plus two copies of the (SF 424). An SF 424 is an official form implement to address national, regional application must be mailed to EPA required for all Federal grants. A and local environmental justice issues. postmarked no later than Friday, March completed SF 424 must be submitted as (10%) 7, 1997. Applications must be submitted part of your preapplication. This form, 2. A section describing how the to this EPA headquarters address: along with instructions are included at partnership will disseminate the end of this notice. environmental justice information and United States Environmental Protection 2. Budget Information: Non- provide training, including educational Agency Construction Programs (SF 424A). An tools and materials. (10%) Office of Environmental Justice, Mail SF 424A is an official form required for 3. A section describing how the Code 2201–A all Federal grants. A completed SF 424A partnership will improve Environmental Justice Community/ must be submitted as part of your communications and coordination University Partnership Grants, 401 M application. This form, along with among local, state, tribal and federal Street S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460 instructions are included at the end of environmental programs and Review and Selection Process this notice. In addition, a detailed community organizations, and how the budget which breaks down the budget partnership will enhance critical J. How Will Applications Be Reviewed? categories is required. thinking, problem solving and decision EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice 3. Work Plan. A work plan describes making among all stakeholders. Specify will form a selections committee the applicant’s proposed project. Work effective and realistic methods for comprised of EPA, other federal agency plans must be no more than 15 pages involving members of the targeted staff, and outside reviewers to evaluate total. One page is one side of a single population. (10%) proposals and recommend selections. spaced typed page. The pages must be 4. A section describing who or how Applications will be screened to ensure letter size (81⁄2 × 11), with normal type the partnership will obtain expert they meet all eligible activities size (19 or 12 cpi) and at least 1′′ consultation and provide training for described in Sections A–I. Reviewers margins. The only appendices and the partners to access, analyze and will specifically evaluate the degree to letters of support that EPA will accept interpret public and environmental data which the applications meet EPA’s are a budget, resumes of key personnel, and utilize electronic communications objectives and criteria as discussed in and commitment letters. technology. (10%) section H. Applications will be 4. Memorandum of Agreement. The 5. A section describing the ‘‘hard disqualified if they are incomplete or do Memorandum of Agreement will science’’ analysis capability of the not meet EPA’s basic criteria. provide the foundation for the working college(s)/university(ies). (10%) relationship between the college/ (c) A conclusion discussing how the K. How Will the Final Selections Be university and the partners involved in applicant will evaluate the success of Made? the project. This agreement must be the partnership, in terms of the After the applications are reviewed signed and have the roles and anticipated strengths and challenges in and ranked as described in section H, responsibilities of each partner clearly developing and administering the EPA officials will compare the best defined. partnership. (10%) applications and make final selections. 5. Necessary Signed Forms. (d) An appendix with a budget Factors EPA will take into account Procurement Systems Certification, describing how funds (including include: geographic and socio-economic Certification Regarding Debarment, Federal and non-Federal shares) will be balance, diversity, substantial Suspension and Other Responsibility used in terms of personnel, fringe community group participation in Matters, Certification Regarding benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, development of proposal and if the Lobbying. These forms are provided in contract costs, and other. Funds cannot partnership’s benefits can be sustained the grant package. be used for construction, lobbying, or after the grant is completed. legal action. The budget must list H. How Will the Applications Be proposed milestones with deadlines and L. How Will Applicants Be Notified? Evaluated? estimated cost and completion dates. After all applications are received, The applications will be evaluated by All costs must be consistent with the EPA will mail acknowledgments to each a review panel and selected according to Office of Management and Budget applicant. Once applications have been the following criteria. The percentages (OMB) ‘‘The Cost Principles for recommended for funding, EPA will 65214 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices notify those applicants selected and April 15, 1997—Federal Agency organizations. Applications must be request any additional information Officials and review panel evaluate mailed to your appropriate EPA regional necessary to complete the award and recommend award office (listed in Section III) and process. The EPA Office of May 9, 1997—Selection postmarked no later than Friday, March Environmental Justice will notify those May 12, 1997—EPA grants division 7, 1997. applicants whose grant applications processes grants and makes awards This guidance includes the following: July 31, 1997—Applicants will be were not selected for funding. I. Scope and Purpose of the OEJ Small Grants contacted by the grants office if their Post-Award Program proposals were selected for funding. II. Eligible Applicants and Activities M. When Should the Proposed Additional information may be III. Application Requirements Partnership Begin Functioning? required from the selectees IV. Process for Awarding Grants September 15, 1997—EPA anticipates V. Expected Time-frame for Reviewing and Partnerships cannot operate or begin the awarding of the grants and the Awarding Grants development on this specific project beginning of the partnership projects/ VI. Project Period and Final Reports before funds are awarded. Start dates activities VII. Fiscal Year 1998 OEJ Small Grants are currently targeted for September 15, Program 1997. It is EPA’s intent to fund each Fiscal Year 1998 Grants Appendix A: Standard Forms 424 and 424A center only once. Future funding is To receive information on the Fiscal and Completed Sample Forms Appendix B: Copy of 40 CFR 30.27 dependent upon congressional Year (FY) 1998 Environmental Justice appropriations. ‘‘Allowable Costs’’ Community/University Partnership Appendix C. Guidance on Lobbying N. How Much Time Do Grant Recipients (CUP) Grants Program and future year Restrictions Have To Complete the Work Proposed? grants, please mail or fax your request Appendix D: Tips on Preparing an along with your name, organization, Application Activities must be completed within address, and phone number to the Translations Available the time frame specified in the grant Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), award, usually two or three years from FY 1997 CUP Grants. OEJ’s address is A Spanish translation of this the award date. Grant project periods provided in Section I. OEJ’s fax number announcement may be obtained by may be approved for up to three years. is (202) 501–0740. You may also obtain calling the Office of Environmental O. Who Will Develop and Manage the this information by calling OEJ’s 24 Justice at 1–800–962–6215. Partnerships? hour hotline number 1–800–962–6215. Hay traducciones disponibles de este anuncio en espanol. Si usted esta EPA requires that partnerships be Available Translations interesado en obtener una traduccion de developed and managed by the A Spanish translation of this este anuncio en espanol, por favor llame applicant or by persons satisfactory to announcement is available upon a La Officina de Justicia Ambiental the applicant and EPA. All applications request. Please call the Office of conocida como ‘‘Office of must identify any person(s) other than Environmental Justice at 1–800–962– Environmental Justice,’’ linea gratuita the applicant for approval. The lead 6215 for a copy. (1–800–962–6215). institution (applicant) is recognized as Hay traducciones disponsibles en the grantee and as such is responsible espan˜ ol. Si usted esta interesado en I. Scope and Purpose of the OEJ Small for all activities under the agreement. obtener una traduccion de este anuncilo Grants Program ˜ The purpose of this grant program is P. What Reports Must Grant Recipients en espanol, por favor llame a la Oficina to provide financial assistance to Complete? de Justicia Ambiental conocida como ‘‘Office of Environmental Justice’’, linea eligible community groups (i.e., Recipients of grants will be expected de emergencia (1–800–962–6215). community-based/grassroots to report on quarterly progress, as well Thank you for your interest in our organizations, churches, or other non- as final project completion. All Community/University Partnership profit organizations) and federally recipients must submit final reports for Grant and we wish you luck in the recognized tribal governments that are EPA approval prior to the expiration of application process. working on or plan to carry out projects the project period. Specific reporting Dated: December 5, 1996. to address environmental justice issues. requirements will be detailed in the Clarice E. Gaylord, Preference for awards will be given to award agreement. EPA plans to collect, community-based/grassroots Director, Office of Environmental Justice. evaluate, and disseminate grantees’ final organizations that are working on local reports to serve as model programs. [FR Doc. 96–31431 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] solutions to local environmental Since networking is crucial to the BILLING CODE 6560±50±M problems. Funds can be used to develop success of the program, grantees may be a new activity or substantially improve asked to transmit an extra copy to a [FRL±5663±3] the quality of existing programs that central collection point. have a direct impact on affected Office of Environmental Justice Small Q. What Is the Expected Time Frame for communities. Grants ProgramÐApplication the Review and Awarding of the Grants? Guidance FY 1997 Background December 15, 1996—Request for In its 1992 report, Environmental Applications Published in the Federal Introduction Equity: Reducing Risk for All Register This guidance outlines the purpose, Communities, EPA found that minority December 15, 1996—Eligible grant goals, and general procedures for and low-income populations may recipients develop their proposals application and award under the Fiscal experience higher than average March 7, 1997 Year (FY) 1997 Office of Environmental exposure to toxic pollutants than the March 7, 1997—Applications must be Justice Small Grants Program. For FY general population. The Office of postmarked or received by EPA by 1997, EPA will award approximately Environmental Justice (OEJ) was this date $2,500,000 in grant funds to eligible established in 1992 to help these Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65215 communities identify and assess educational, service, charitable, or c. Solid Waste Disposal Act, Section pollution sources, to implement similar purposes in the public interest; 8001(a): conduct and promote the environmental awareness and training (2) is not organized primarily for profit; coordination of research, investigations, programs for affected residents, and to and (3) uses its net proceeds to experiments, training, demonstrations, work with community stakeholders to maintain, improve, and/or expand its surveys, public education programs, and devise strategies for environmental operations. While state and local studies relating to solid waste (e.g., improvements. governments and academic institutions health and welfare effects of exposure to In June of 1993, OEJ was delegated are eligible to receive grants, preference materials present in solid waste and granting authority to solicit, select, will be given to non-profit, community- methods to eliminate such effects). supervise, and evaluate environmental based/grassroots organizations and d. Clean Air Act, Section 103(b) (3): justice-related projects, and to federally recognized tribal governments. conduct research, investigations, disseminate information on the projects’ Individuals are not eligible to receive experiments, demonstrations, surveys, content and effectiveness. Fiscal year grants. and studies related to the causes, effects (FY) 1994 marked the first year of the EPA will consider only one (including health and welfare effects), OEJ Small Grants Program. Seventy-one application per applicant for a given extent, prevention, and control of air (71) grants totaling $507,000 were project. Applicants may submit more pollution. awarded in FY 1994 and in FY 1995, than one application as long as the In some circumstances, your project over $3,000,000 was awarded to 175 applications are for separate and may be very research-oriented and small grant recipients. In FY 1996, distinct projects or activities. Applicants specific to a particular environmental $3,000,000 was awarded to 150 that were previously awarded small problem. If this is the case, you may organizations across the nation. grant funds may submit an application reference the following environmental for FY 1997. Every application for FY How Does EPA Define Environmental statutes (either list one of the following Justice Under the Environmental Justice 1997 will be evaluated based on the in addition to one listed above or list Small Grants Program? merit of the proposed project in relation two of the following). to the other FY 1997 pre-applications e. Toxic Substances Control Act, Environmental justice is the fair (regardless of whether or not the Section 10(a): conduct research, treatment and meaningful involvement proposal expands a project funded in development, and monitoring activities of all people regardless of race, color, previous years). on toxic substances. national origin, or income with respect f. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and to the development, implementation, B. What Types of Projects Are Eligible Rodenticide Act, Section 20(a): conduct and enforcement of environmental laws, for Funding? research on pesticides. regulations, and policies. Fair treatment In order to be considered for funding, g. Comprehensive Environmental means that no groups of people, the application must include the Response, Compensation, and Liability including racial, ethnic, or following information: (1) how the Act, Section 311(a): conduct basic socioeconomic groups, should bear a proposed project addresses issues research and training related to the disproportionate share of the negative related to at least two environmental detection, assessment, and evaluation of environmental consequences resulting statutes and (2) how the proposed the risks and human health effects of from industrial, municipal, and project meets at least two of the program exposure to hazardous substances. commercial operations or the execution goals. h. Marine Protection, Research, and of federal, state, local, and tribal Sanctuaries Act, Section 203: conduct (1) Multi-Media Statutory Requirement programs and policies. research, investigations, experiments, The OEJ Smalls Grants Program II. Eligible Applicants and Activities training, demonstrations, surveys, and awards grants under a multi-media studies relating to the minimizing or A. Who May Submit Applications and granting authority. This means that ending of ocean dumping of hazardous May an Applicant Submit More Than recipients of these funds must materials and the development of One? implement projects that address alternatives to ocean dumping. Any affected, non-profit community pollution in more than one Please note: if your project includes organization 501c (3) or 501c (4) 1 or environmental medium (e.g., air, water). scientific research and data collection, federally recognized tribal government To show evidence of the breadth of the you must be prepared to submit a may submit an application upon project’s scope, the application must Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) to your publication of this solicitation. identify at least two environmental EPA Project Officer prior to the Applicants must be non-profit to receive statutes that the project will address. In beginning of the research. these federal funds. State recognized most cases, your project will include activities outlined in the following (2) Office of Environmental Justice tribes or indigenous peoples Small Grants Program Goals organizations are able to apply for grant environmental statutes: assistance as long as they meet the a. Clean Water Act, Section 104(b) (3): In addition to the multi-statute definition of a non-profit organization. conduct and promote the coordination requirement outlined above, the ‘‘Non-profit organization’’ means any of research, investigations, experiments, application must also include a corporation, trust, association, training, demonstration, surveys, and description of how an applicant plans to cooperative, or other organization that studies relating to the causes, extent, meet at least two of the three program (1) is operated primarily for scientific, prevention, reduction, and elimination goals listed below. See Section III of water pollution. ‘‘Application Requirements’’ for more 1 As a result of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of b. Safe Drinking Water Act, Section details. 1995, EPA (and other federal agencies) may not 1442(b) (3): develop, expand, or carry 1. Identify necessary improvements in award grants to non-profit, 501(c)(4) organizations out a program (that may combine communication and coordination that engage in lobbying activities. This restriction training, education, and employment) among all stakeholders, including applies to any lobbying activities of a 501(c)(4) organization without distinguishing between for occupations relating to the public existing community-based/grassroots lobbying funded by federal money and lobbying health aspects of providing safe organizations and local, state, tribal, and funded by other sources. drinking water. federal environmental programs. 65216 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Facilitate communication and these federal assistance funds to sue the b. A concise introduction that states information exchange, and create federal government or any other the nature of the organization (i.e., how partnerships among stakeholders to government entity. Refer to 40 CFR long it has been in existence, if it is address disproportionate, high and 30.27, entitled ‘‘Allowable Costs’’ (see incorporated, if it is a network, etc.), adverse environmental exposure (e.g., Appendix B). how the organization has been workshops, awareness conferences, successful in the past, purpose of the III. Application Requirements establishment of community project, EJ community/target audience, stakeholder committees); A. What Is Required for Applications? project completion plans/time frames, 2. Build community capacity to and expected results. identify local environmental justice In order to be considered for funding under this program, proposals from c. A concise project description that problems and involve the community in describes how the applicant is the design and implementation of eligible organizations must have the following: community-based and/or plans to activities to address these concerns. involve the target audience in the 1. Application for Federal Assistance Enhance critical thinking, problem- project and how the applicant plans to (SF 424) the official form required for all solving, and active participation of meet at least two of the three program federal grants that requests basic affected communities (e.g., train-the- goals outlined in Section IIB: ‘‘Office of information about the grantee and the trainer programs). Environmental Justice Small Grants proposed project. The applicant must 3. Enhance community understanding Program Goals.’’ Additional credit will submit the original application, plus of environmental and public health not be given for projects that fulfill more two copies, signed by a person duly information systems and generate than two goals. information on pollution in the authorized by the governing board of the applicant. d. A conclusion discussing how the community. If appropriate, seek applicant will evaluate and measure the Please complete Part 10 of the SF 424 technical experts to demonstrate how to success of the project, including the form, ‘‘Catalog of Federal Domestic access and interpret public anticipated benefits and challenges in Assistance Number’’ with the following environmental data (e.g., Geographic implementing the project. Information Systems (GIS), Toxic information: 66.604—Environmental e. An appendix with resumes of up to Release Inventories (TRI), and other Justice Small Grants Program. See three key personnel who will be databases). Appendix A for a copy of this form and significantly involved in the project. The issues discussed above may be a completed sample. 4. Letter(s) of commitment. If your defined differently among applicants 2. The Federal Standard Form (SF proposed project includes the from various geographic regions, 424A) and budget detail, which significant involvement of other including areas outside the continental provides information on your budget. community organizations, your U.S. (Alaska, American Samoa, Guam, For the purposes of this grants program, application must include letters of Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin complete only the non-shaded areas of commitment from these organizations. Islands). Each application should define SF 424A. See Appendix A for a copy This requirement may not apply to your its issues as they relate to the specific and completed sample of a budget proposed project—only include if project. In your narrative/work plan, detail. Budget figures/projections applicable. include a succinct explanation of how should support your work plan/ the project may serve as a model in narrative. The EPA portion of these Applications that do not include the other settings and how it addresses a grants will not exceed $20,000, therefore information listed above in items 1–3 high-priority environmental justice your budget should reflect this upper and if applicable, item 4, will not be issue. The degree to which a project limit on federal funds. considered for an award. addresses a high-priority environmental 3. Narrative/work plan of the Please note: your application to this justice issue will vary and must be proposal, not to exceed ten pages. A EPA program may be subject to your defined by applicants according to their narrative/work plan describes the state’s intergovernmental review process local environmental justice concerns. applicant’s proposed project. The pages and/or the consultation requirements of Section 204, Demonstration Cities and C. How Much Money May Be Requested, of the work plan must be letter size 1 ′′ × ′′ Metropolitan Development Act. Check and Are Matching Funds Required? (8 ⁄2 11 ), with normal type size (12 cpi), and at least 1′′ margins. with your state’s Single Point of Contact to determine your requirements—some The ceiling for any one grant is The narrative/work plan is one of the states do not require this review. $20,000 in federal funds. EPA’s ten most important aspects of your Applicants from American Samoa, regional offices will each have application and (assuming that all other Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin approximately $250,000 to issue required materials are submitted) will Islands should also check with their awards. Applicants are not required to be used as the primary basis for Single Point of Contact. If you do not provide matching funds. selection. Work plans must be know who your Single Point of Contact submitted in the format described D. Are There Any Restrictions on the is, please call your EPA regional contact below: Use of the Federal Funds? (Section III) or EPA Headquarters at a. A one page summary that: Yes. EPA grant funds can only be (202) 260–9266. Federally recognized used for the purposes set forth in the • Identifies the environmental justice tribal governments are not required to grant agreement. Among other things, issue(s) to be addressed by the project; comply with this procedure. the grant funds from this program • Identifies the EJ community/target cannot be used for matching funds for audience; B. When and Where Must Applications other federal grants, construction, • Identifies at least two environmental be Submitted? personal gifts (e.g., t-shirts, buttons, statutes/Acts addressed by the project; The applicant must submit/mail one hats), buying furniture, litigation, and signed original application with lobbying, or intervention in federal • Identifies at least two program goals required attachments and two copies to regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. that the project will meet and how it the primary contact at the EPA regional In addition, the recipient may not use will meet them. office listed below. The application Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65217 must be postmarked no later than (8ENF–EJ), 999 18th Street, Suite 500, recommended for funding, the EPA Friday, March 7, 1996. Denver, CO 80202–2466. Regions will notify the finalists and Secondary Contact: Elisabeth Evans, request any additional information Regional Contact Names and Addresses (303) 312–6053. necessary to complete the award Region 1—Connecticut, Maine, Region 9—Arizona, California, Hawaii, process. The finalists will be required to Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Nevada, American Samoa, Guam complete additional government Island, Vermont application forms prior to receiving a Primary Contact: Willard Chin, (415) grant, such as the EPA Form SF–424B Primary Contact: Rhona Julien, (617) 744–1204, USEPA Region 9 (A–2–2), 75 565–9454, USEPA Region 1 (RAA), John (Assurances—Non-Construction Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA Programs), EPA Form 5700–48, and the F. Kennedy Federal Building, Boston, 94105. MA 02203 Certification Regarding Debarment, Secondary Contact: EJ Information Suspension, and Other Responsibility Secondary Contact: Pat O’Leary, (617) Line, (415) 744–1565. 565–3834. Matters. The federal government Region 10—Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, requires all grantees to certify and Region 2—New Jersey, New York, Puerto Washington assure that they will comply with all Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands Primary Contact: Susan Morales, (206) applicable federal laws, regulations, and Primary Contact: Natalie Loney, (212) 553–8580, USEPA Region 10 (MD–142), requirements. The EPA Regional Environmental 637–3639, USEPA Region 2, 290 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. Broadway, 26th Floor, New York, NY Secondary Contact : Joyce Kelly, (206) Justice Coordinators or their designees 10007. 553–4029. will notify those applicants whose Secondary Contact: Melva Hayden, projects are not selected for funding. IV. Process for Awarding Grants (212) 637–5027. V. Expected Time-Frame for Reviewing Region 3—Delaware, District of A. How Will Applications Be Reviewed? and Awarding Grants Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, EPA regional offices will review, December 16, 1996 FY 1997 OEJ Small Virginia, West Virginia evaluate, and select grant recipients. Grants Program Application Guidance Primary Contact: Reginald Harris, Applications will be screened to ensure is published in the Federal Register. (215) 566–2988, USEPA Region 3 that they meet all eligible activities and December 16, 1996 to March 7, 1997 (3DA00), 841 Chestnut Building, requirements described in Sections II Eligible grant recipients develop and Philadelphia, PA 19107–4431. and III. Applications will also be complete their applications. Secondary Contact: Mary Zielinski, evaluated by regional review panels March 7, 1997 Applications must be (215) 566–5415. based on the criteria outlined in this postmarked by this date and mailed or solicitation. Applications will be delivered to the appropriate EPA Region 4—Alabama, Florida, Georgia, disqualified if they do not meet these regional office. Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, criteria. March 10, 1997 to April 15, 1997 EPA South Carolina, Tennessee regional program officials review and B. How Will the Final Selections Be evaluate applications and select grant Primary Contact: Josephine Brown, Made? (404) 562–9672, USEPA Region 4, 100 finalists. Alabama Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303. After the individual projects are April 15, 1997 to August 1, 1997 Secondary Contact: Connie Raines, reviewed and ranked, EPA regional Applicants will be contacted by the (404) 562–9671. officials will compare the best Region if their application is being applications and make final selections. considered for funding. Additional Region 5—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Additional factors that EPA will take information may be required from the Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin into account include geographic and finalists, as indicated in Section IV. Primary Contact: Margaret Millard, socioeconomic balance, diverse nature EPA regional grant offices process (312) 353–1440, USEPA Region 5 (MC of the projects, cost, and projects whose grants and make awards. T–175), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, benefits can be sustained after the grant September 15, 1997 EPA expects to Chicago, IL 60604–3507. is completed. Regional Administrators release the national announcement of Secondary Contact: Karla Johnson, will select the grants with concurrence the FY 97 Office of Environmental (312) 886–5993. from the Director of the Office of Justice Small Grant Recipients. Environmental Justice at EPA VI. Project Period and Final Reports Region 6—Arkansas, Louisiana, New Headquarters. Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas Please note that this is a very Activities must be completed and Primary Contact: Shirley Augurson, competitive grants program. Limited funds spent within the time frame (214) 665–7401, USEPA Region 6 (6M- funding is available and many grant specified in the grant award, usually P), 1445 Ross Avenue, 12th Floor, applications are expected to be received. one year. Project start dates will depend Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Therefore, the Agency cannot fund all on the grant award date (most projects applications. If your project is not begin in August or September). The Region 7—Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, funded, a listing of other EPA grant recipient organization is responsible for Nebraska programs may be found in the Catalog the successful completion of the project. Primary Contact: Althea Moses, (913) of Federal Domestic Assistance. This The recipient’s project manager is 551–7649 or 1–800–223–0425, USEPA publication is available at local libraries, subject to approval by the EPA project Region 7, 726 Minnesota Avenue, colleges, or universities. officer but EPA may not direct that any Kansas City, KS 66101. particular person be the project C. How Will Applicants Be Notified? manager. Region 8—Colorado, Montana, North After all applications are received, All recipients must submit final Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming EPA regional offices will mail reports for EPA approval within ninety Primary Contact: Patricia Denham, acknowledgments to applicants in their (90) days of the end of the project (303) 312–6557, USEPA Region 8 regions. Once applications have been period. Specific report requirements 65218 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

(e.g., Final Technical Report and Dated: December 5, 1996. M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. Financial Status Report) will be Clarice E. Gaylord, Office location for commercial courier described in the award agreement. EPA Director, Office of Environmental Justice. delivery and telephone number: Room will collect, evaluate, and disseminate [FR Doc. 96–31430 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] 216, Crystal Mall No. 2, 1921 Jefferson grantees’ final reports to serve as model BILLING CODE 6560±50±P Davis Highway, Arlington, VA, (703) programs. 305–5761; e-mail: [email protected]. VII. Fiscal Year 1998 OEJ Small Grants [OPP±66233; FRL 5573±6] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Program Notice of Receipt of Requests to I. Introduction A. How Can I Receive Information on Voluntarily Cancel Certain Pesticide the Fiscal Year 1998 Environmental Registrations Section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Justice Grants Program? Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide AGENCY: Environmental Protection Act (FIFRA), as amended, provides that If you wish to be placed on the Agency (EPA). a pesticide registrant may, at any time, national mailing list to receive ACTION: Notice. request that any of its pesticide information on the FY 1998 registrations be cancelled. The Act Environmental Justice Small Grants SUMMARY: In accordance with section further provides that EPA must publish Program, you must mail your request 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, a notice of receipt of any such request Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), along with your name, organization, in the Federal Register before acting on as amended, EPA is issuing a notice of the request. address, and phone number to: receipt of requests by registrants to U.S. Environmental Protection voluntarily cancel certain pesticide II. Intent to Cancel Agency, Office of Environmental Justice registrations. This Notice announces receipt by the Small Grants Program (2201A), FY 1998 DATES: Unless a request is withdrawn by Agency of requests to cancel some 20 Grants Mailing List, 401 M Street, SW, March 11, 1997, orders will be issued pesticide products registered under Washington, DC 20460, (800) 962–6215. cancelling all of these registrations. section 3 or 24(c) of FIFRA. These Thank you for your interest in our FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By registrations are listed in sequence by Small Grants Program and we wish you mail: James A. Hollins, Office of registration number (or company luck in the application process. Pesticide Programs (7502C), number and 24(c) number) in the Environmental Protection Agency, 401 following Table 1.

TABLE 1. Ð REGISTRATIONS WITH PENDING REQUESTS FOR CANCELLATION

Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name

000070±00254 Rigo Home Pest Control RTU 2-Methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl d-trans-2,2- dimethyl- N-Octyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide (Butylcarbityl)(6-propylpiperonyl) ether 80% and related compounds 20% 4-Chloro-alpha-(1-methylethyl)benzeneacetic acid, cyano(3- phenoxyphenyl)methyl 000070±00256 Rigo Aero-Spray Home Pest Control 2-Methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propenyl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl d-trans-2,2- dimethyl- N-Octyl bicycloheptene dicarboximide (Butylcarbityl)(6-propylpiperonyl) ether 80% and related compounds 20% 4-Chloro-alpha-(1-methylethyl)benzeneacetic acid, cyano(3- phenoxyphenyl)methyl 000432±00770 Foliafume XK Insecticide Pyrethrins Rotenone 000869±00230 Green Light BT Worm Killer Bacillus Delta endotoxin of Bacillus thuringiensis variety kurstaki encap- Thuringiensis ME sulated in 003125±00321 Bolstar 6 O-Ethyl O-(4-(methylthio)phenyl) S-propylphosphorodithioate 003125±00328 Bolstar Technical Insecticide O-Ethyl O-(4-(methylthio)phenyl) S-propylphosphorodithioate 003125 AZ±91±0006 Monitor 4 O,S-Dimethyl phosphoramidothioate 003125 FL±82±0046 Bolstar 6 Emulsifiable Insecticide Xylene range aromatic solvent O-Ethyl O-(4-(methylthio)phenyl) S-propylphosphorodithioate 004758±00143 Hill's Holiday Flea & Tick Pump Spray Isopropanol (Butylcarbityl)(6-propylpiperonyl) ether 80% and related compounds 20% Pyrethrins Limonene 004816±00661 Dog Dip E.C. Rotenone Cube Resins other than rotenone 007969 ID±88±0005 Poast O,O-Dimethyl S-((methylcarbamoyl)methyl)phosphorodithioate 007969 ID±88±0006 Poast O,O-Dimethyl S-((methylcarbamoyl)methyl)phosphorodithioate Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65219

TABLE 1. Ð REGISTRATIONS WITH PENDING REQUESTS FOR CANCELLATIONÐContinued

Registration No. Product Name Chemical Name

010182±00167 Ordram 5-G S-Ethyl hexahydro-1H-azepine-1-carbothioate 010182±00272 Ordram A 10-G S-Ethyl hexahydro-1H-azepine-1-carbothioate 010182±00306 Drexel Molinate 96% Technical S-Ethyl hexahydro-1H-azepine-1-carbothioate 010182±00307 Drexel Molinate 8E S-Ethyl hexahydro-1H-azepine-1-carbothioate 010182±00308 Drexel Molinate 10G S-Ethyl hexahydro-1H-azepine-1-carbothioate 033688±00001 No Crab 4-(1,1-Dimethylethyl)-N-(1-methylpropyl)-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine 045728±00008 Ferbam Technical Ferric dimethyldithiocarbamate 056077±00050 Ethephon Concentrate (2-Chloroethyl)phosphonic acid

Unless a request is withdrawn by the registrant within 90 days of publication of this notice, orders will be issued cancelling all of these registrations. Users of these pesticides or anyone else desiring the retention of a registration should contact the applicable registrant directly during this 90-day period. The following Table 2, includes the names and addresses of record for all registrants of the products in Table 1, in sequence by EPA Company Number.

TABLE 2. Ð REGISTRANTS REQUESTING VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION

EPA Com- Company Name and Address pany No.

000070 SureCo Inc., 10012 N. Dale Mabry, Ste. 221, Tampa, FL 33618. 000432 Agrevo Environmental Health, 95 Chestnut Ridge Rd., Montvale, NJ 07645. 000869 Green Light Co., Box 17985, San Antonio, TX 78217. 003125 Bayer Corp., Agriculture Division, 8400 Hawthorn Rd., Box 4913, Kansas City, MO 64120. 004758 Pet Chemicals, 4242 BF Goodrich Blvd, Box 18993, Memphis, TN 38181. 004816 Agrevo Environmental Health, 95 Chestnut Ridge Rd., Montvale, NJ 07645. 007969 BASF Corp., Agricultural Products, Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. 010182 Zeneca Ag Products, Box 15458, Wilmington, DE 19850. 033688 Richard Otten, Agent For: CFPI Agro, S.A., 5116 Wood Valley Dr., Raleigh, NC 27613. 045728 Compliance Services International, Agent For: UCB Chemicals Corp., 2001 Jefferson Davis Highway, Ste. 1010, Arlington, VA 22202. 056077 Cedar Chemical Corp., 5100 Poplar, Suite 2414, Memphis, TN 38137.

III. Loss of Active Ingredients IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of registrant to sell or distribute existing Request stocks for 1 year after the date the Unless the requests for cancellation cancellation request was received. This are withdrawn, three pesticide active Registrants who choose to withdraw a policy is in accordance with the ingredients will no longer appear in any request for cancellation must submit Agency’s statement of policy as registered products. Those who are such withdrawal in writing to James A. prescribed in Federal Register (56 FR concerned about the potential loss of Hollins, at the address given above, 29362) June 26, 1991; [FRL 3846–4]. these active ingredients for pesticidal postmarked before March 11, 1997. This Exceptions to this general rule will be use are encouraged to work directly written withdrawal of the request for made if a product poses a risk concern, with the registrants to explore the cancellation will apply only to the or is in noncompliance with possibility of withdrawing their request applicable 6(f)(1) request listed in this reregistration requirements, or is subject for cancellation. The active ingredients notice. If the product(s) have been to a data call-in. In all cases, product- are listed in the following Table 3, with subject to a previous cancellation specific disposition dates will be given action, the effective date of cancellation the EPA Company and CAS Number. in the cancellation orders. and all other provisions of any earlier Existing stocks are those stocks of cancellation action are controlling. The registered pesticide products which are TABLE 3. Ð ACTIVE INGREDIENTS withdrawal request must also include a currently in the United States and WHICH WOULD DISAPPEAR AS A RE- commitment to pay any reregistration which have been packaged, labeled, and SULT OF REGISTRANTS' REQUESTS fees due, and to fulfill any applicable released for shipment prior to the TO CANCEL unsatisfied data requirements. effective date of the cancellation action. V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Unless the provisions of an earlier order EPA Stocks apply, existing stocks already in the Chemical Com- hands of dealers or users can be CAS No. Name pany No. The effective date of cancellation will distributed, sold or used legally until be the date of the cancellation order. they are exhausted, provided that such 35400±43±2 Sulprofos 003125 The orders effecting these requested further sale and use comply with the cancellations will generally permit a EPA-approved label and labeling of the 65220 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices affected product(s). Exceptions to these Information’’ (CBI) should be submitted extent possible without delaying general rules will be made in specific through e-mail. Electronic comments on processing of the application. cases when more stringent restrictions this notice may be filed online at many A record has been established for this on sale, distribution, or use of the Federal Depository Libraries. Additional notice under docket number [OPP– products or their ingredients have information on electronic submission 30425] (including comments and data already been imposed, as in Special can be found below in this document. submitted electronically as described Information submitted as a comment Review actions, or where the Agency below). A public version of this record, concerning this notice may be claimed has identified significant potential risk including printed, paper versions of concerns associated with a particular confidential by marking any part or all electronic comments, which does not chemical. of that information as ‘‘Confidential include any information claimed as CBI, Business Information’’ (CBI). is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to List of Subjects Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, Environmental protection, Pesticides excluding legal holidays. The public and pests, Product registrations. procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the comment that does not record is located in Rm. 1132 of the Dated: November 22, 1996. contain CBI must be submitted for Public Response and Program Resources Oscar Morales inclusion in the public record. Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Acting Director, Program Management and Information not marked confidential Support Division, Office of Pesticide may be disclosed publicly by EPA Environmental Protection Agency, Programs. without prior notice. All written Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. [FR Doc. 96–31122 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] comments will be available for public inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address Electronic comments can be sent BILLING CODE 6560±50±F given above, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., directly to EPA at: Monday through Friday, excluding [email protected] [OPP±30425; FRL±5574±6] holidays. Electronic comments must be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By Toagosei Co.; Application to Register mail: Denise Greenway, Biopesticides submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the a Pesticide Product and Pollution Prevention Division use of special characters and any form of encryption. AGENCY: Environmental Protection (7501W), Office of Pesticide Programs, Agency (EPA). Environmental Protection Agency, 401 The official record for this notice, as ACTION: Notice. M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. well as the public version, as described Office location and telephone number: above will be kept in paper form. SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt Rm. CS51B6, Westfield Building North Accordingly, EPA will transfer all of an application to register a pesticide Tower, 2800 Crystal Drive, Arlington, comments received electronically into product containing an active ingredient VA 22202, (703) 308–8263; e-mail: printed, paper form as they are received involving a changed use pattern [email protected]. and will place the paper copies in the pursuant to the provisions of section SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA official record which will also include 3(c)(4) of the Federal Insecticide, received an application from Toagosei all comments submitted directly in Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Co., Ltd. of Japan, represented by writing. The official record is the paper (FIFRA), as amended. Nichimen America, Inc., 1185 Avenue record maintained at the address in DATES: Written comments must be of the Americas, New York, NY 10036, ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of this submitted by January 10, 1997. to register the pesticide product document. ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written Kaligreen, a fungicide (EPA File Symbol Written comments filed pursuant to comments identified by the document 70231–R), containing the active this notice, will be available in the control number [OPP–30425] and the ingredient potassium bicarbonate at 82 Public Response and Program Resources file symbol (70231–R) to: Public percent, an active ingredient which Branch, Field Operations Division at the Response and Program Resources involves a change use pattern pursuant address provided from 8 a.m. to 4:30 Branch, Field Operations Division to the provisions of section 3(c)(4) of p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, FIFRA. The product is classified for legal holidays. It is suggested that Environmental Protection Agency, 401 general use to include in its presently persons interested in reviewing the M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In registered use, a new use to control application file, telephone this office at person, bring comments to: powdery mildew on grapes, cucumbers, (703–305–5805), to ensure that the file Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. strawberries, tobacco, and roses. Notice is available on the date of intended visit. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., of receipt of the application does not Arlington, VA. imply a decision by the Agency on the Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. Comments and data may also be application. submitted electronically by sending Notice of approval or denial of an List of Subjects electronic mail (e-mail) to: opp- application to register a pesticide [email protected]. Electronic product will be announced in the Environmental protection, Pesticides comments must be submitted as an Federal Register. The procedure for and pests, Product registration. ASCII file avoiding the use of special requesting data will be given in the Dated: November 26, 1996. characters and any form of encryption. Federal Register if an application is Flora Chow, Comments and data will be accepted on approved. disks in Wordperfect in 5.1 file format Comments received within the Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide or ASCII file format. All comments and specified time period will be considered Programs. data in electronic form must be before a final decision is made; identified by the docket number [OPP– comments received after the time [FR Doc. 96–31436 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] 30425]. No ‘‘Confidential Business specified will be considered only to the BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65221

[PF±675; FRL±5574±4] 305–6224; e-mail: were detected at the following ppm [email protected]. ranges; Grain 0.01 - 0.8, Fodder 0.02 - Pesticide Tolerance Petition; Notice of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has 8.8, and Silage 0.04 - 2.7. The proposed Filing received a pesticide petition (PP) tolerances would adequately cover these AGENCY: Environmental Protection 8F3622 from DowElanco, 9330 anticipated residues. Agency (EPA). Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268– 5. Residues of Clopyralid Found in Processed Field Corn - Clopyralid was ACTION: Notice of filing. 1054, proposing pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug and applied to corn at approximately 1X and SUMMARY: This notice is a summary of Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. section 346a(d), 5X the label rate. The 5X treatment was a pesticide petition proposing the to amend 40 CFR Part 180 by used for the processing residue study. establishment of a regulation for establishing a tolerance for residues of At the 5X rate, the corn grain RAC (raw residues of clopyralid in or on field the herbicide clopyralid in or on the raw agricultural commodity) sample was corn. This summary was prepared by agricultural commodities (RACs) field found to contain 4.3 ppm clopyralid. the petitioner. corn, fodder at 10.0 ppm; field corn, Starch and refined oil samples obtained DATES: Comments, identified by the forage at 3.0 ppm; field corn, grain at 1.0 from the wet milling of corn contained docket number [PF–675], must be ppm and on processed agricultural no residues above the LOQ (0.05 ppm) received on or before, January 10, 1997. commodity (PAC) field corn, milling of the method, while crude oil was found to contain 0.063 ppm. The dry ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written fractions at 1.5 ppm. The proposed milling fractions contained 4.9 ppm in comments to: Public Response and analytical method is available for flour, 2.7 ppm in meal, with no residues Program Resources Branch Field enforcement purposes. above the LOQ found in crude and Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pursuant to the section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) refined oil. Grain dust contained 4.8 Pesticide Programs, Environmental of the FFDCA, as amended, DowElanco ppm clopyralid, similar to levels found Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., has submitted the following summary of in the RAC. The proposed milling Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring information, data and arguments in fractions tolerance would cover these comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 support of their pesticide petition. This summary was prepared by DowElanco residue levels when adjusted from the Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 5X treatment rate. 22202. and EPA has not fully evaluated the Comments and data may also be merits of the petition. EPA edited the B. Toxicological Profile submitted electronically by sending summary to clarify that the conclusions 1. Acute Toxicity. Clopyralid has electronic mail (E-mail) to: opp- and arguments were the petitioners and low acute toxicity. The rat oral LD50 is [email protected]. Electronic not necessarily EPAs and to remove 5000 mg/kg or greater for males and comments must be submitted as an certain extraneous material. females. The rabbit dermal LD50 is ASCII file avoiding the use of special I. DOWELANCO Petition Summary: ≤2000 mg/kg and the rat inhalation characters and any form of encryption. LC50 is ≤1.0 mg/L air (the highest Comments and data will also be A. Residue Chemistry attainable concentration). In addition, accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 1. Plant Metabolism. The clopyralid is not a skin sensitizer in file format or ASCII file format. All metabolism in plants is adequately guinea pigs and is not a dermal irritant. comments and data in electronic form understood. No metabolites of Technical clopyralid is an ocular irritant must be identified by docket number significance were detected in plant but ocular exposure to the technical [PF-675]. Electronic comments on this metabolism studies. material would not normally be notice may be filed online at many 2. Analytical Method. There is a expected to occur to infants or children Federal Depository Libraries. Additional practical analytical method for detecting or the general public. End use information on electronic submissions and measuring levels of clopyralid in or formulations of clopyralid have similar can be found below in this document. on food with a limit of quantitation that low acute toxicity profiles and most Information submitted as comments allows monitoring of food with residues have low ocular toxicity as well. concerning this document may be at or above the levels set in these Therefore based on the available acute claimed confidential by marking any tolerances. EPA has provided toxicity data, clopyralid does not pose part or all of that information as information on this method to FDA. The any acute dietary risks. ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ method is available to anyone who is 2. Genotoxicity. Clopyralid is not (CBI). CBI should not be submitted interested in pesticide residue genotoxic. The following studies have through e-mail. Information marked as enforcement. been conducted and all were negative CBI will not be disclosed except in 3. Magnitude of Residues. Time for genotoxic responses. Ames bacterial accordance with procedures set forth in limited tolerances were established on mutagenicity assay (with and without 40 CFR Part 2. A copy of the comment April 25, 1994 (59 FR 19639) for exogenous metabolic activation) Host- that does not contain CBI must be residues of the herbicide clopyralid in Mediated assay In vivo cytogenetic test, submitted for inclusion in the public or on the following raw agricultural rat; In vivo cytogenetic test, mouse; In record. Information not marked commodities which are to expire vivo dominant lethal test, rat; In vitro confidential may be disclosed publicly December 31, 1996: field corn, grain at unscheduled DNA synthesis assay in by EPA without prior notice. All written 1.0 parts per million (ppm), field corn, primary rat hepatocyte cultures; In vitro comments will be available for public fodder at 10.0 ppm, field corn, forage at mammalian cell gene mutations assay in inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address 3.0 ppm, and for corn processed milling Chinese hamster ovary cell cultures given above, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., fractions at 1.5 ppm. Adequate residue (with and without exogenous metabolic Monday through Friday, excluding legal data supporting these tolerances were activation). holidays. submitted to the Agency in mid year 3. Reproductive and Developmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1994. Toxicity. Developmental toxicity was Joanne Miller, PM–23, (7505C) Rm. 237, 4. Residues of Clopyralid Found in studied using rats and rabbits. The Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Field Corn - Clopyralid was applied at developmental study in rats resulted in Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, (703) the maximum label rate and residues a developmental NOEL of >250 mg/kg/ 65222 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices day (a maternally toxic dose) and a clopyralid at doses of 15, 50 or 150 mg/ 7. Animal Metabolism. Disposition maternal toxicity NOEL of 75 mg/kg/ kg/day; there were no adverse effects. In and metabolism of clopyralid were day. A 1974 study in rabbits revealed no a second dietary study, dogs also were tested in male and female rats at a dose evidence of developmental or maternal fed diets containing clopyralid at doses of 5 mg/kg (oral). The majority of a toxicity at 250 mg/kg/day; thus the of 15, 50 or 150 mg/kg/day; the only radioactive dose was excreted in 24 developmental and maternal NOEL was effect was an increase in the mean hours of all dose groups. Fecal >250 mg/kg/day. A more recent study in relative liver weight in females at the elimination was minor. Detectable rabbits (1990) resulted in developmental 150 mg/kg/day. levels of residual radioactivity were and maternal NOELs of 110 mg/kg/day In a 21–day dermal study, clopyralid observed in the carcass and stomach at based on maternal toxicity at 250 mg/ was applied by repeated dermal 72 hours post-dose. HPLC and TLC kg/day. Based on all of the data for application to New Zealand White analysis of pooled urine and fecal clopyralid, there is no evidence of rabbits at dose levels up to 1000 mg/kg/ extracts showed no apparent developmental toxicity at dose levels day. Treatment produced no systemic metabolism of clopyralid. that do not result in maternal toxicity. effects. 8. Metabolite Toxicity. There are no In a 2–generation reproduction study 5. Chronic Toxicity. In a chronic clopyralid metabolites of toxicological in rats, pups from the high dose group toxicity and oncogenicity study, significance. which were fed diets containing Sprague-Dawley rats were fed diets 9. Endocrine Effects. There is no clopyralid had a slight reduction in containing clopyralid at doses of 5, 15, evidence to suggest that clopyralid has body weight during lactation and an 50 or 150 mg/kg/day. The only effect an effect on any endocrine system. was a trend toward a decreased body increase in liver weights in fla and flb C. Aggregate Exposure weanlings. The NOEL for parental weight of female rats receiving the 150 systemic toxicity was 500 mg/kg/day. mg/kg/day dose with a NOEL of 50 mg/ 1. Dietary Exposure - Food. For There was no effect on reproductive kg/day. In a second study clopyralid purposes of assessing the potential parameters at >1500 mg/kg/day nor was was fed to Fischer 344 rats in the diet dietary exposure under these tolerances, there an adverse effect on the at doses of 15, 150 or 1500 mg/kg/day. exposure is estimated based on the morphology, growth or viability of the The effects were confined almost TMRC from the existing and pending offspring; thus, the reproductive NOEL entirely to the 1500 mg/kg/day dose tolerances for clopyralid on food crops. is >1500 mg/kg/day. groups and included slightly decreased The TMRC is obtained by multiplying 4. Subchronic Toxicity. The food consumption and body weights, the tolerance level residues by the following studies have been conducted slightly increased liver and kidney consumption data which estimates the using clopyralid. In a rat 90–day feeding weights and macroscopic and amount of those food products eaten by study, Fischer 344 rats were fed diets microscopic changes in the stomach. No various population subgroups. Exposure containing clopyralid at doses of 5, 15, tumorigenic response was present. The of humans to residues could also result 50 or 150 mg/kg/day with no adverse NOEL for this study was 15 mg/kg/day. if such residues are transferred to meat, effects attributed to treatment. In a B6C3F1 mice were maintained for 2 milk, poultry or eggs. The following second study, Fischer 344 rats were fed years on diets formulated to provide assumptions were used in conducting diets containing clopyralid at doses of targeted dose levels of 10, 500 or 2000 this exposure assessment: 100% of the 300, 1500 and 2500 mg/kg/day. Effects mg/kg/day. The only evidence of crops were treated, the RAC residues at the highest doses were decreased food toxicity was body weight depression in would be at the level of the tolerance, consumption accompanied by decreased males dosed at 2000 mg/kg/day. There certain processed food residues would body weights and weight gains in both was no evidence of tumorigenic be at anticipated (average) levels based males and females. Slightly increased response at any dose level. on processing studies and all current mean relative liver and kidney weights Based on the chronic toxicity data, and pending tolerances were included. were noted in males of all 3 doses and EPA has established the RfD for This results in an overestimate of in females at the top 2 doses. Because clopyralid at 0.5 milligrams (mg)/ human exposure and a conservative there were no other effects, the kidney kilogram (kg)/day. The RfD for assessment of risk. and liver weight effects were judged as clopyralid is based on a 2–year chronic Based on a NOEL of 50 mg/kg/day in being adaptive rather than directly oncogenicity study in rats with a no- a 2–year chronic feeding/oncogenicity toxic. The no-observed-adverse effect observed-effect level (NOEL) of 50 mg/ study in the rat and a hundredfold level (NOAEL) was 1500 mg/kg/day for kg/day and an uncertainty (or safety) safety factor, the reference dose (RfD) males and females. The no-observed- factor of 100. Thus, it would not be would be 0.5 mg/kg/day. Consequently, effect level (NOEL) was 300 mg/kg/day necessary to require the application of all existing and pending tolerances have for females. an additional uncertainty factor above a theoretical maximum residue In a mouse 90–day feeding study, the 100–fold factor already applied to contribution of 0.001535 mg/kgBW/day B6C3F1 mice were fed diets containing the NOEL. and would utilize less than 2.3 percent clopyralid at doses of 200, 750, 2000 or 6. Carcinogenicity. Using its of the RfD. 5000 mg/kg/day. A slight decrease in Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk 2. Dietary Exposure - Drinking body weight occurred at the top dose in Assessment published September 24, Water. Another potential source of both sexes. The liver was identified as 1986 (51 FR 33992), clopyralid would dietary exposure to residues of the target organ based on slight be classified as Group E for pesticides are residues in drinking increases in liver weights and minimal carcinogenicity (no evidence of water. There is no established microscopic alterations at the higher carcinogenicity) based on the results of Maximum Concentration Level for dose levels. The liver changes were the carcinogenicity studies. There was residues of clopyralid in drinking water. considered to be reversible and no evidence of carcinogenicity in 2–year Although there has been limited adaptive. The NOEL for males was 2000 feeding studies in mice and rats at the detections at ppb levels in some of the mg/kg/day and for females was 750 mg/ dosage levels tested. The doses tested specially designed studies under highly kg/day. are adequate for identifying a cancer vulnerable test conditions, no ongoing In a 180–day feeding study, beagle risk. Thus, a cancer risk assessment monitoring studies (U.S. Geological dogs were fed diets containing would not be appropriate. Survey, Selected Water Resources Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65223

Abstracts, and Pesticides in Ground or both parents. Reproduction studies The public record is located in: Public Water Database - A Compilation of provide (1) information relating to Response and Program Resources Monitoring Studies: 1971 - 1991 effects from exposure to the pesticide on Branch, Field Operations Division National Summary; U.S. Department of the reproductive capability of mating (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Agriculture, AGRICOLA database; U.S. animals and (2) data on systemic Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Commerce, National toxicity. These studies indicate no Crystal Mall #2, Rm. 1132, 1921 Technical Information Service) have evidence of developmental toxicity at Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA reported residues of clopyralid in dose levels below those that cause 22202. ground or surface waters. maternal toxicity. Electronic comments can be sent Consequently, these data on potential FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA directly to EPA at: water exposure indicate insignificant may apply an additional safety factor for [email protected] additional dietary intake of clopyralid infants and children in the case of and any exposure is more than threshold effects to account for pre- and Electronic comments must be compensated for in the conservative post-natal toxicity and the completeness submitted as ASCII file avoiding the use dietary risk evaluation. of the database. Based on the current of special characters and any form of 3. Non-Dietary Exposure. Non- toxicological data requirements, the encryption. occupational exposure to clopyralid is database relative to pre and post-natal The official record for this limited to re-entry to treated turf grass effects for children is complete. rulemaking, as well as the public sites. Estimated exposures for children Therefore, it is concluded that an version, as described above will be kept is less than 0.05 mg/kg/day or 10% of additional uncertainty factor is not in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will the reference dose. warranted and that the RfD at 0.5 mg/ transfer all comments received D. Cumulative Effects kg/day is appropriate for assessing electronically into printed, paper form aggregate risk to infants and children. as they are received and will place the The potential for cumulative effects of Using the conservative exposure paper copies in the official rulemaking clopyralid and other substances that assumptions, it is concluded that the record which will also include all have a common mechanism of toxicity percent of the RfD that will be utilized comments submitted directly in writing. was considered. The mammalian by aggregate exposure to residues of The official rulemaking record is the toxicity of clopyralid is well defined. clopyralid will be less than 12 percent paper record maintained at the address However, no reliable information exists of the RfD for all populations and in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this to indicate that toxic effects produced subgroups. This estimate represents the document. by clopyralid would be cumulative with ‘‘worst case’’ exposure for a given those of any other chemical compound. population (i.e. children ages 1–6), List of Subjects Therefore, consideration of a common exposure is less for any other sub- Environmental Protection Agency, mechanism of toxicity with other population e.g. infants. Therefore, based compounds is not appropriate. Thus Administrative practice and procedure, on the completeness and reliability of Agricultural commodities, Pesticides only the potential exposures to the toxicity data and the conservative clopyralid were considered in the and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping exposure assessment, it is concluded requirements. aggregate exposure assessment. that there is a reasonable certainty that E. Safety Determinations no harm will result to infants and Dated: November 27, 1996. children from aggregate exposures to 1. U.S. Population in General. Using clopyralid residues. Stephen L. Johnson, the conservative exposure assumptions Director, Registration Division, Office of described above and based on the F. International Tolerances Pesticide Programs. completeness and reliability of the There are no Codex maximum residue [FR Doc. 96–31345 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] toxicity data, it is concluded that levels established for clopyralid. aggregate exposure to clopyralid will BILLING CODE 6560±50±F utilize approximately 7 percent of the II. Administrative Matters RfD for the U.S. population. Generally, Interested persons are invited to exposures below 100 percent of the RfD submit comments on this notice of FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION are of no concern because the RfD filing. Comments must bear a notation Sunshine Act Meeting; Farm Credit represents the level at or below which indicating the document control Administration Board daily aggregate dietary exposure over a number, [PF–675]. All written lifetime will not pose appreciable risk to comments filed in response to this AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. human health. Thus, there is a petition will be available in the Public reasonable certainty that no harm will Response and Program Resources SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, result from aggregate exposure to Branch, at the address given above from pursuant to the Government in the clopyralid residues. 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552(e)(3)), of the 2. Infants and Children. In assessing Friday, except legal holidays. forthcoming regular meeting of the Farm the potential for additional sensitivity of A record has be established for this Credit Administration Board (Board). infants and children to residues of notice under docket number [PF–675] DATE AND TIME: The regular meeting of clopyralid, data from the previously including comments and data submitted the Board will be held at the offices of discussed developmental toxicity electronically as described below. A the Farm Credit Administration in studies in the rat and rabbit and a 2- public version of this record, including McLean, Virginia, on December 12, generation reproduction study in the rat printed, paper versions of electronic 1996, from 10:00 a.m. until such time as were considered. The developmental comments, which does not include any the Board concludes its business. toxicity studies are designed to evaluate information claimed as CBI, is available FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: adverse effects on the developing for inspection from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Floyd Fithian, Secretary to the Farm organism during prenatal development Monday through Friday, excluding legal Credit Administration Board, (703) 883– resulting from pesticide exposure to one holidays. 4025, TDD (703) 883–4444. 65224 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

ADDRESS: Farm Credit Administration, minimize the burden of the collection of Number of Respondents: 65. 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, information on the respondents, Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours Virginia 22102–5090. including the use of automated (1–2 hours respondent; 1 hour SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This collection techniques or other forms of consulting engineer or attorney). meeting of the Board will be open to the information technology. Total Annual Burden: 69. public (limited space available). In order The FCC is reviewing the following Needs and Uses: Section 74.633 to increase the accessibility to Board information collection requirements for requires that licenses of television meetings, persons requiring assistance possible 3-year extension under auxiliary broadcast stations submit an should make arrangements in advance. delegated authority 5 CFR 1320, informed request for special temporary The matters to be considered at the authority delegated to the Commission authority to operate that station on a meeting are: by the Office of Management and temporary basis under certain Budget (OMB). Open Session circumstances. The data is used by FCC DATES: Written comments should be staff to ensure that interference will not A. Approval of Minutes submitted on or before January 10, 1997. be caused to other established stations. B. Report If you anticipate that you will be OMB Number: 3060–0240. —Farm Credit System Building submitting comments, but find it Association Quarterly Report Title: Section 74.651 Equipment difficult to do so within the period of C. New Business Regulations Changes. time allowed by this notice, you should 1. Regulation Review/Deletions [12 CFR advise the contact listed below as soon Form Number: None. Parts 602, 611, 614, 615, 618, and 619] Type of Review: Extension. (Interim with Request for Comment). as possible. 2. Book-Entry Farm Credit Securities [12 ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Affected Public: Business or other for- CFR Part 615, Subpart O] (Interim Final). Dorothy Conway, Federal profit. Dated: December 9, 1996. Communications Commission, Room Number of Respondents: 10. Floyd Fithian, 234, 1919 M St., N.W., Washington, DC Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour/ Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. 20554 or via internet to respondent. [FR Doc. 96–31573 Filed 12–9–96; 2:14 pm] [email protected]. Total Annual Burden: 10. BILLING CODE 6705±01±M FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Needs and Uses: Section 74.651(b) For additional information or copies of requires licensees of TV auxiliary the information collections contact broadcast stations to notify the FCC in FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Dorothy Conway at 202–418–0217 or via writing of equipment changes which COMMISSION internet at [email protected]. may be made at licensee’s discretion without use of a formal application SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of Public Information form. The data is used by FCC staff to Collections Being Reviewed by FCC OMB Number: 3060–0242. maintain complete technical records for Extension Under Delegated Title: Section 74.604 Interference regarding a licensee’s facilities. Authority 5 CFR 1320 Authority, Avoidance. OMB Number: 3060–0041. Comments Requested Form Number: None. Title: Application for Authority to Type of Review: Extension. December 4, 1996. Operate a Broadcast Station by Remote Affected Public: Business or other for- Control. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications profit. Type of Review: Extension of Commission, as part of its continuing Number of Respondents: 1. effort to reduce paperwork burden currently approved collection. Estimated Time per Response: 3 hours invites the general public and other Form Number: FCC 301–A. (2 hours respondent/1 hour attorney). Federal agencies to take this Affected Public: Business or other for- Total Annual Burden: 2. opportunity to comment on the profit. following proposed and/or continuing Needs and Uses: Licensees assigned a Number of Respondents: 80. common channel for TV pickup, TV information collections, as required by Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 studio transmitter link, or TV relay the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, hours (0.25 hours respondent; 0.25 purposes in the same area, where Public Law 104–13. An agency may not hours consulting engineer). simultaneous operation is conduct or sponsor a collection of Total Annual Burden: 30. information unless it displays a contemplated, shall take such steps as may be necessary to avoid mutual Needs and Uses: FCC Form 301–A is currently valid control number. No required to be filed by AM licensees or person shall be subject to any penalty interference. Section 74.604 requires that the Commission be notified if a permittees with directional antennas for failing to comply with a collection when requesting authority to operate a of information subject to the Paperwork mutual agreement to avoid interference cannot be reached. The data is used by station by remote control. The Reduction Act (PRA) that does not Commission will be adding the antenna display a valid control number. FCC staff to take such action as may be necessary to assure an equitable registration information that was Comments are requested concerning: (a) approved by OMB under control whether the proposed collection of distribution of available frequencies, thereby preventing mutual interference. number 3060–0714 to this form. The information is necessary for the proper data is used by FCC to assure that the OMB Number: 3060–0241. performance of the functions of the directional antenna system is stable. Commission, including whether the Title: 74.633 Temporary information shall have practical utility; Authorizations. Federal Communications Commission. (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s Form Number: None. William F. Caton, burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance Type of Review: Extension. Acting, Secretary. the quality, utility, and clarity of the Affected Public: Business or other for- [FR Doc. 96–31410 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] information collected; and (d) ways to profit. BILLING CODE 6712±01±M Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65225

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE requirements of 12 CFR part 329 and the acquire First National Bank, Rosedale, CORPORATION Investment Company Act of 1940, Mississippi. establishes disclosure requirements, and Comments on this application must Rescission of Statement of Policy; restricts bank advertising and be received by December 17, 1996. Retail Repurchase Agreements solicitations. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve The Government Securities Act of AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance System, December 5, 1996. 1986 established, among other things, Corporation (FDIC). Jennifer J. Johnson, requirements for repurchase agreement Deputy Secretary of the Board. ACTION: Rescission of statement of transactions using U.S. government and policy. agency securities. In addition, the [FR Doc. 96–31373 Filed 12-10-96; 8:45 am] Division of Supervision has issued BILLING CODE 6210-01-F SUMMARY: As part of the FDIC’s guidance for the sale of investment systematic review of its regulations and products by banks in the Interagency written policies under section 303(a) of Change in Bank Control Notices; Statement on Retail Sales of Nondeposit the Riegle Community Development and Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or Investment Products. This law partially Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 Bank Holding Companies supersedes the Policy Statement. (CDRI), the FDIC is rescinding its policy Similarly, the Interagency Statement statement concerning retail repurchase The notificants listed below have provides broader guidance for securities agreements (Statement). The Statement applied under the Change in Bank transactions, including retail repurchase alerts insured nonmember banks to legal Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § transactions. The presence of these two and safety and soundness issues 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 newer guideposts may lead to confusion involved in the issuance of retail CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank as to the application of the Policy repurchase agreements (retail repos). holding company. The factors that are Statement. The FDIC is rescinding the Statement considered in acting on the notices are The Policy Statement references parts because it is now outmoded. The set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 of the FDIC’s interest rate regulations, rescission does not reflect any U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). 12 CFR part 329, that are no longer in substantive change in the FDIC’s The notices are available for force. Much of the discussion on the supervisory attitude toward the need for immediate inspection at the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940, 17 fundamental disclosure of investor Reserve Bank indicated. Once the U.S.C. 80a–1 through 80a–64, is risks, as reflected in the Interagency notices have been accepted for unnecessary as the subject has not been Statement on Retail Sales of Nondeposit processing, they will also be available raised in recent years. These factors Investment Products. for inspection at the offices of the Board have caused confusion among banks, of Governors. Interested persons may EFFECTIVE DATE: This Statement is their advisors, and consumers. express their views in writing to the rescinded effective December 11, 1996. For the above reasons, the Policy Statement Reserve Bank indicated for that notice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: is hereby rescinded. or to the offices of the Board of Kenton Fox, Senior Capital Markets By order of the Board of Directors. Governors. Comments must be received Specialist, Division of Supervision, Dated at Washington, DC, this 26th day of not later than December 26, 1996. (202) 898–7119; Gerald J. Gervino, November, 1996. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Senior Attorney, (202) 898–3723, Legal Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Richmond (Lloyd W. Bostian, Jr., Senior Division, FDIC, 550 17th Street, N.W., Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street, Washington, D.C. 20429. Jerry L. Langley, Executive Secretary. Richmond, Virginia 23261: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC [FR Doc. 96–31393 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] 1. Joseph E. Corbitt, Waverly, West is conducting a systematic review of its BILLING CODE 6714±01±P Virginia; to acquire an additional 2.30 regulations and written policies. Section percent, for a total of 13.67 percent, of 303(a) of the CDRI (12 U.S.C. 4803(a)) the voting shares of First National requires each federal banking agency to Bancorp, Inc., St. Marys, West Virginia, streamline and modify its regulations FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM and thereby indirectly acquire The First and written policies in order to improve National Bank of St. Marys, St. Marys, efficiency, reduce unnecessary costs, Change in Bank Control Notices; West Virginia. and eliminate unwarranted constraints Formations of, Acquisitions by, and B. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta on credit availability. Section 303(a) Mergers of Bank Holding Companies; (Zane R. Kelley, Vice President) 104 also requires each federal banking Correction Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia agency to remove inconsistencies and 30303: outmoded and duplicative requirements This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 1. Jerome Dansker, New York, New from its regulations and written 96-30783) published on pages 64356 York; to acquire a total of 33.33 percent policies. and 64357 of the issue for Wednesday, of the voting shares of Intervest December 4, 1996. As part of this review, the FDIC has Bancshares Corporation, New York, determined that the Statement is Under the Federal Reserve Bank of St. New York, and thereby indirectly outmoded, and that the FDIC’s written Louis heading, the entry for Henry acquire Intervest Bank, Clearwater, policies can be streamlined by its McCaslin, Jr., is revised to read as Florida. elimination. follows: The Statement was published on 1. Henry McCaslin, Jr., Cleveland, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve October 6, 1981, 46 FR 49197. The Mississippi; to acquire an additional System, December 5, 1996. Statement requires banks to follow safe 8.72 percent, for a total of 28.93 percent, Jennifer J. Johnson, and sound banking practices in the of the voting shares of Rosedale First Deputy Secretary of the Board. issuance of retail repurchase National Corporation, Rosedale, [FR Doc. 96–31374 Filed 12-10-96; 8:45 am] agreements, alerts banks to certain Mississippi, and thereby indirectly BILLING CODE 6210-01-F 65226 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and be presented at a hearing, and indicating proposed projects or to obtain a copy of Mergers of Bank Holding Companies how the party commenting would be the data collection plans and aggrieved by approval of the proposal. instruments, call the CDC Reports The companies listed in this notice Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking Clearance Officer on (404) 639–7090. have applied to the Board for approval, activities will be conducted throughout pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the United States. the proposed collection of information Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Unless otherwise noted, comments is necessary for the proper performance (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part regarding each of these applications of the functions of the agency, including 225), and all other applicable statutes must be received at the Reserve Bank whether the information shall have and regulations to become a bank indicated or the offices of the Board of practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the holding company and/or to acquire the Governors not later than January 6, agency’s estimate of the burden of the assets or the ownership of, control of, or 1997. the power to vote shares of a bank or A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago proposed collection of information; (c) bank holding company and all of the (James A. Bluemle, Vice President) 230 ways to enhance the quality, utility, and banks and nonbanking companies South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois clarity of the information to be owned by the bank holding company, 60690: collected; and (d) ways to minimize the including the companies listed below. 1. Security National Corporation, burden of the collection of information The applications listed below, as well Sioux City, Iowa; to acquire 100 percent on respondents, including through the as other related filings required by the of the voting shares of Security National use of automated collection techniques Board, are available for immediate Bank of South Dakota, Dakota Dunes, for other forms of information inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank South Dakota (in organization). technology. Send comments to Wilma indicated. Once the application has Johnson, CDC Reports Clearance Officer, been accepted for processing, it will also Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 1600 Clifton Road, MS–D24, Atlanta, System, December 5, 1996. be available for inspection at the offices GA 30333. Written comments should be of the Board of Governors. Interested Jennifer J. Johnson, received within 60 days of this notice. persons may express their views in Deputy Secretary of the Board. writing on the standards enumerated in [FR Doc. 96–31372 Filed 12-10-96; 8:45 am] Proposed Projects the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the BILLING CODE 6210-01-F proposal also involves the acquisition of 1. Congenital Syphilis Case a nonbanking company, the review also Investigation and Report Form (CDC includes whether the acquisition of the 73.126 REV 09–91) (0920–0128)—This DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND request is for a 3-year extension of nonbanking company complies with the HUMAN SERVICES standards in section 4 of the BHC Act, clearance. Reducing congenital syphilis including whether the acquisition of the Centers for Disease Control and (CS) is a national objective in the DHHS nonbanking company can ‘‘reasonably Prevention Report entitled Healthy People 2000: be expected to produce benefits to the Midcourse Review and 1995 Revisions. [INFO±97±30] public, such as greater convenience, Objective 19.4 of this document states the goal: ‘‘reduce congenital syphilis to increased competition, or gains in Proposed Data Collections Submitted an incidence of no more than 40 cases efficiency, that outweigh possible for Public Comment and per 100,000 live births’’ by the year adverse effects, such as undue Recommendations concentration of resources, decreased or 2000. In order to meet this national unfair competition, conflicts of In compliance with the requirement objective, an effective surveillance interests, or unsound banking practices’’ of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the system for CS must be continued in (12 U.S.C. 1843). Any request for Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for order to monitor current levels of a hearing must be accompanied by a opportunity for public comment on disease and progress towards the year statement of the reasons a written proposed data collection projects, the 2000 objective. This data will also be presentation would not suffice in lieu of Centers for Disease Control and used to develop intervention strategies a hearing, identifying specifically any Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic and to evaluate ongoing control efforts. questions of fact that are in dispute, summaries of proposed projects. To The total estimated cost to respondents summarizing the evidence that would request more information on the is $14,550.

Number Number of re- Average of re- sponses/ burden/ Total bur- Respondents spond- respond- response den (in ents ent (in (in hrs.) hrs.) hrs.)

State and local health department ...... 2000 1 0.25 500

Total ...... 500

2. Survey to Evaluate the 1989 U.S. standard certificates and reports each individual state are used to Revisions of the U.S. Standard under OMB No. 0937–0114. The compile national vital statistics. The Certificates of Live Birth and Death and standard certificates are used by state standard certificates are the principal the U.S. Standard Report of Fetal vital statistics offices as models in means of achieving uniformity of Death—New—OMB approved the developing their own birth, death, and information upon which national vital information collections for the fetal death reporting forms. Data statistics are based. To ensure that the evaluation of the 1978 revisions of the obtained from these reporting forms in standard certificates meet the various Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65227 needs for which they are designed, it is included on the standards that is of the standard certificates. The essential that they be evaluated and needed for relevant public health information collected will be used by a revised periodically. This information research. Respondents will include group of consultants to determine what collection will be used to evaluate the individuals and organizations who are changes may be needed in the 1989 items on the 1989 revisions of the involved in the completion of vital standard certificates. The total cost to standard certificates and to determine if records or who utilize vital statistics respondents is estimated at $90,000. there is other information that should be data and have an interest in the content

Number Number of re- Average Total bur- Respondents of re- spond- burden/ den (in spond- ents/re- response hrs.) ents sponses (in hrs.)

Live Birth Questionnaire ...... 2000 1 0.5 1000 Fetal Death Questionnaire ...... 2000 1 0.5 1000 Death Questionnaire ...... 2000 1 0.5 1000

Total ...... 3000

Dated: December 4, 1996. Executive Office Building, Room 10235; over five percent of the population in Wilma G. Johnson, Washington, DC 20503. Written San Francisco. Acting Associate Director for Policy Planning comments should be received within 30 The proposed study replicates the San and Evaluation, Centers for Disease Control days of this notice. Francisco study using identical and Prevention (CDC). The following requests have been methodology and data collection [FR Doc. 96–31415 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] submitted for review since the last instruments. Beginning with a random- BILLING CODE 4163±18±P publication date on November 27, 1996. digit-dial telephone survey to identify fatigued individuals, followed by a case- Proposed Project control study where surveillance [30DAY±24] interview instruments will be used to 1. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome obtain comparative data on fatigued Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Surveillance and Related Studies— Reduction Act Review individuals and matched health (non- Prevalence and Incidence of Fatiguing fatigued) controls. Study objectives The Centers for Disease Control and Illness in Sedgewick County, Kansas— remain to refine estimates of CFS in Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of New—In 1994, OMB approved the Wichita, identify similarities and information collection requests under information collection ‘‘Epidemiology of differences among cases and controls, review by the Office of Management and Fatiguing Illness in Wichita: A and to evaluated the merits of a Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Population-Based Study’’ under OMB physician-based surveillance conducted Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Number (0920–0336). Data from this by the Wichita department of health. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these cross-sectional, point prevalence, The total annual burden is 7646. Send requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance random-digit-dial survey of prolonged comments to CDC Desk Officer, Human Office on (404) 639–7090. Send written fatiguing illness in San Francisco, CA Resources and Housing Branch, New comments to CDC, Desk Officer; Human concluded that CFS continues to exit Executive Office Building, Room 10235; Resources and Housing Branch, New and that prolonged fatigue occurs in Washington, DC 20503.

Number Number of re- Avg. bur- Respondents of re- sponses/ den/re- spond- respond- sponse ents ent (in hrs.)

Household Screener ...... 26,000 1 0.083 *Cross-sectional interview ...... 6,864 1 ...... *Follow-up interview ...... 5,148 1 ...... Adolescent Questionnaire ...... 5,532 1 0.027 *These respondents are a subset of the 26,000 respondents to household.

Dated: December 4, 1996. Administration for Children and Description: The new welfare reform Wilma G. Johnson, Families law requires the Federal Office of Child Acting Associate Director for Policy Planning Support Enforcement (OCSE) to provide and Evaluation, Centers for Disease Control Proposed Information Collection technical assistance to States and and Prevention (CDC). Activity; Comment Request localities. This information collection is designed to help OCSE learn what type [FR Doc. 96–31416 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Proposed Projects BILLING CODE 4163±18±P of technical assistance is needed, and Title: Child Support Enforcement what child support practices have been Technical Assistance Survey and Best successful. We plan to collect the first Practices Report. type of information through voluntary OMB No.: New Collection. 65228 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices assistance reporting documents, and the Respondents: States, District of Annual Burden Estimates: second through a voluntary best Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and practices reporting form. Virgin Islands.

Number Number of re- Average Total bur- Instrument of re- sponses burden den spond- per re- hours per hours ents spondent response

Needs Assessment ...... 54 1 16 864 Technical Assistance Request/Report ...... 54 1 3 162 Best Practices Report ...... 54 1 3 162 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,188.

In compliance with the requirements ACTION: Notice. endocervical adenocarcinoma and its of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the possible precursor lesion, atypical Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the SUMMARY: The Food and Drug glandular cells of undetermined Administration for Children and Administration (FDA) is announcing its significance (AGUS). The PAPNET Families is soliciting public comment approval of the application by testing is intended as an adjunct to all on the specific aspects of the Neuromedical Systems, Inc., Suffern, standard laboratory quality control and information collection described above. NY, for premarket approval, under the mandated re-screening procedures. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act On August 7, 1995, the Hematology Copies of the proposed collection of  information can be obtained and (the act), of the PAPNET Testing and Pathology Devices Panel of the comments may be forwarded by writing System. After reviewing the Medical Devices Advisory Committee, to the Administration for Children and recommendation of the Hematology and an FDA advisory committee, reviewed Pathology Devices Panel, FDA’s Center Families, Office of Information Services, and recommended approval of the for Devices and Radiological Health Division of Information Resource application. On November 8, 1995, (CDRH) notified the applicant, by letter Management Services, 370 L’Enfant CDRH approved the application by a of November 8, 1995, of the approval of Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, letter to the applicant from the Director the application. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All of the Office of Device Evaluation, requests should be identified by the title DATES: Petitions for administrative CDRH. of the information collection. review by January 10, 1997. A summary of the safety and The Department specifically requests ADDRESSES: Written requests for copies effectiveness data on which CDRH comments on: (a) Whether the proposed of the summary of safety and based its approval is on file in the collection of information is necessary effectiveness data and petitions for Dockets Management Branch (address for the proper performance of the administrative review to the Dockets above) and is available from that office functions of the agency, including Management Branch (HFA–305), Food upon written request. Requests should whether the information shall have and Drug Administration, 12420 be identified with the name of the practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Parklawn Dr., rm. 1–23, Rockville, MD device and the docket number found in 20857. agency’s estimate of the burden of the brackets in the heading of this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: proposed collection of information; (c) document. Peter E. Maxim, Center for Devices and the quality, utility, and clarity of the Radiological Health (HFZ–440), Food Opportunity for Administrative Review information to be collected; and (d) and Drug Administration, 2098 Gaither Section 515(d)(3) of the act (21 U.S.C. ways to minimize the burden of the Rd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301–594– 360e(d)(3)) authorizes any interested collection of information on 1293. person to petition, under section 515(g) respondents, including through the use SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On of the act, for administrative review of of automated collection techniques or September 21, 1994, Neuromedical CDRH’s decision to approve this other forms of information technology. Systems, Inc., Suffern, NY 10901–4164, application. A petitioner may request Consideration will be given to submitted to CDRH an application for either a formal hearing under 21 CFR comments and suggestions submitted premarket approval of the PAPNET part 12 of FDA’s administrative within 60 days of this publication. Testing System. The device is a semi- practices and procedures regulations or Dated: December 5, 1996. automated test indicated to aid in the a review of the application and CDRH’s Douglas J. Godesky, rescreening of cervical Papanicolaou action by an independent advisory Reports Clearance Officer. (Pap) smears previously reported as committee of experts. A petition is to be [FR Doc. 96–31377 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] negative. The PAPNET Testing System in the form of a petition for BILLING CODE 4184±01±M is intended to detect evidence of reconsideration under 21 CFR 10.33(b). cervical epithelial abnormalities A petitioner shall identify the form of including the following categories of the review requested (hearing or Food and Drug Administration Bethesda System for classification of independent advisory committee) and cervical cytology results: (1) Primary shall submit with the petition [Docket No. 96M±0472] squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix supporting data and information Neuromedical Systems, Inc.; and its possible precursor lesions, i.e., showing that there is a genuine and Premarket Approval of the PAPNET low grade squamous intra epithelial substantial issue of material fact for Testing System lesions (LGSIL), high grade intra resolution through administrative epithelial (HGSIL), and atypical review. After reviewing the petition, AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, squamous cells of undetermined FDA will decide whether to grant or HHS. significance (ASCUS); and (2) primary deny the petition and will publish a Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65229 notice of its decision in the Federal Health Resources and Services leopard cat (Prionailurus b. bengalensis) Register. If FDA grants the petition, the Administration, Telephone (301) 443–2204. from Jungle Cat World, Ontario, Canada notice will state the issue to be Agenda Items are subject to change as for the purpose of enhancement of the reviewed, the form of the review to be priorities dictate. survival of the species through used, the persons who may participate Dated: December 5, 1996. propagation. in the review, the time and place where Jackie E. Baum, The animal requested in this the review will occur, and other details. Advisory Committee Management Officer, application should have been listed as HRSA. Petitioners may, at any time on or a male. before January 10, 1997, file with the [FR Doc. 96–31421 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Written data or comments should be Dockets Management Branch (address BILLING CODE 4160±15±P submitted to the Director, U.S. Fish and above) two copies of each petition and Wildlife Service, Office of Management supporting data and information, Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, identified with the name of the device DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Room 430, Arlington, Virginia 22203, and the docket number found in and must be received by the Director Fish and Wildlife Service brackets in the heading of this within 30 days of the date of this document. Received petitions may be publication. Notice of Receipt of Applications for The public is invited to comment on seen in the office above between 9 a.m. Permit and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. the following application(s) for permits to conduct certain activities with marine This notice is issued under the The following applicants have mammals. The application(s) was/were Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act applied for a permit to conduct certain submitted to satisfy requirements of the (secs. 515(d), 520(h) (21 U.S.C. 360e(d), activities with endangered species. This Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 360j(h))) and under authority delegated notice is provided pursuant to Section as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of the regulations governing marine (21 CFR 5.10) and redelegated to the 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et mammals (50 CFR 18). Director, Center for Devices and seq.): Applicant: Jeffry Eberhart, Dallas, GA, Applicant: Point Defiance Zoo and Radiological Health (21 CFR 5.53). PRT–822430. Aquarium, Tacoma, WA, PRT–822531. Dated: October 24, 1996. The applicant requests a permit to Type of Permit: Import for public Joseph A. Levitt, import the sport-hunted trophy of one display. Deputy Director for Regulations Policy, Center male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus Name and Number of Animals: Polar for Devices and Radiological Health. dorcas) culled from a captive herd Bear (Ursus maritimus), 2. [FR Doc. 96–31422 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] maintained under the management Summary of Activity to be Authorized: The applicant has requested BILLING CODE 4160±01±F program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the a permit to import two polar bears survival of the species. presently held at the Calgary Zoo, Health Resources and Services Applicant: Dewey Morrison Dalton, Canada, which were legally removed Administration Dallas, TX, PRT–822764. from the wild at Churchill, Manitoba. The applicant requests a permit to Source of Marine Mammals for Advisory Council, Notice of Meeting import the sport-hunted trophy of one Research/Public Display: Canada. male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus Period of Activity: Up to five years In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of dorcas) culled from a captive herd from issuance of a permit, if issued. the Federal Advisory Committee Act maintained under the management Concurrent with the publication of (Public Law 92–463), announcement is program of the Republic of South Africa, this notice in the Federal Register, the made of the following National for the purpose of enhancement of the Office of Management Authority is Advisory body scheduled to meet survival of the species. forwarding copies of this application to during the month of January 1997: Applicant: Derek Baker, San Jose, CA, the Marine Mammal Commission and Name: Advisory Committee on Infant PRT–821239. the Committee of Scientific Advisors for Mortality. The applicant amends a request for a their review. Date and Time: January 9, 1997, 9:00 a.m.; permit to import 25 Asian bonytongue Written data or comments, requests January 10, 1997, 8:30 a.m. (Scleropages formosus) from P.S. for copies of the complete application, Place: Radisson Barcelo Hotel, 2121 P Bintang Kalbor, Lakimantan, Indonesia or requests for a public hearing on this Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20037. The for the purpose of survival of the species application should be sent to the U.S. meeting is open to the public. through propagation. The original Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Agenda: Topics that will be discussed request was to import three Asian Management Authority, 4401 N. Fairfax include: Updates on the Healthy Start Drive, Room 430, Arlington, Virginia Program, Evaluation, and Media Campaign; bonytonque and the notification the Southern Governor’s infant mortality appeared in the Federal Register Vol. 22203, telephone 703/358–2104 or fax initiatives; and Teenage Pregnancy 61. No. 26, page 55013, published 703/358–2281 and must be received Prevention Programs. October 23, 1996, pursuant to Section within 30 days of the date of publication Anyone requiring information regarding 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of of this notice. Anyone requesting a the Committee should contact Dr. Peter van 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et hearing should give specific reasons Dyck, Executive Secretary, Advisory seq.) why a hearing would be appropriate. Committee on Infant Mortality, Health Applicant: Teri Embery, The holding of such hearing is at the Resources and Services Administration, Bartlesvillew, OK, PRT–822244. discretion of the Director. Room 18–31, Parklawn Building, 5600 Documents and other information Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857, On November 20, 1996, Federal Telephone (301) 443–2204. Register/Vol. 61, No. 225, page 59106, submitted with these applications are Persons interested in attending any portion column 3, the following notice was available for review, subject to the of the meeting or having questions regarding published: requirements of the Privacy Act and the meeting should contact Ms. Kerry P. The applicant requests a permit for Freedom of Information Act, by any Nesseler, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, the import of one captive-born female party who submits a written request for 65230 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices a copy of such documents within 30 Bob Armstrong, New Mexico State Phoenix, Arizona 85004–2203, (602) days of the date of publication of this Office, Policy and Planning Team, 417–9512. notice at the above address. Bureau of Land Management, 1474 Michael A. Ferguson, Dated: December 6, 1996. Rodeo Road, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, Deputy State Director, Resource Planning, Use Mary Ellen Amtower, New Mexico 87502–0115, telephone and Protection Division. (505) 428–7436. Acting Chief, Branch of Permits, Office of [FR Doc. 96–31417 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Management Authority. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BILLING CODE 4310±32±P [FR Doc. 96–31482 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] purpose of the Resource Advisory BILLING CODE 4310±55±M Council is to advise the Secretary of the [NV±930±1430±01; N±47851] Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and management issues Notice of Realty Action: Sale of Public Bureau of Land Management associated with the management of Land in Lander County, Nevada, by [NM±910±07±1020±00] public lands. The Council’s Noncompetitive Sale Procedures responsibilities include providing AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico Resource Advisory advice on long range planning, Interior. Council Meeting establishing resource management priorities and assisting the BLM to ACTION: Direct Sale of Public Lands in AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, identify State and regional standards for Lander County, Nevada. Interior. rangeland health and guidelines for SUMMARY: ACTION: Notice of council meeting. The following described land grazing management. in Lander County, Nevada, has been SUMMARY: In accordance with the Dated: November 27, 1996. examined and identified as suitable for Federal Land Policy and Management William C. Calkins, disposal by direct sale under Sections 203 and 209 of the Federal Land Policy Act and the Federal Advisory State Director. Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), 5 U.S.C. and Management Act (FLPMA) of [FR Doc. 96–31378 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Appendix 1, The Department of the October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1713 and Interior, Bureau of Land Management BILLING CODE 4310±FB±M 1719) at no less than appraised fair (BLM), announces a meeting of the New market value: Mexico Resource Advisory Council Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada (RAC). The meeting will be held on [AZ±910±0777±61±241A] T. 31 N., R. 43 E., January 9 and 10, 1997 at the Amberely Section 26, lot 10; Suites Hotel, 7620 Pan America State of Arizona Resource Advisory Council Meeting Section 27, lots 31–33, 35, 36, 48–52 Freeway, Albuquerque, NM 87109. Comprising 36.18 acres, more or less. The agenda for the RAC meeting will include agreement on the meeting AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, The above-described lands are hereby agenda, any RAC comments on the draft Interior. classified for disposal in accordance with Executive Order 6910 and the Act summary minutes of the last RAC ACTION: Arizona Resource Advisory of June 28, 1934, as amended. meeting of Oct 10–11, 1996 in Council Meeting, notice of meeting. Albuquerque, NM., briefing on the The land is being offered as a direct sale to the adjacent landowner, Battle status of the RAC Standards for SUMMARY: This notice announces the Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Mountain Gold Corporation. The land seventh meeting of the Arizona will not be offered for sale until at least Livestock Grazing NEPA process, and Resource Advisory Council. The presentations by Bureau of Land 60 days after the date of publication of meeting will be held January 9, 1997, this notice in the Federal Register. Management staff and RAC members on beginning at 8:30 a.m. in the 1A FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy various resource concerns. Conference Room at the Bureau of Land The meeting will begin on January 9, A. Fry, Realty Specialist, Bureau of Management Arizona State Office, 222 1997 at 8:00 a.m. The meeting is open Land Management, Battle Mountain North Central Avenue, Phoenix, to the public. The time for the public to Field Office, 50 Bastian Road, P.O. Box Arizona. The agenda items to be covered address the RAC is on the Thursday, 1420, Battle Mountain, NV, 89820, (702) at the one-day business meeting include January 9, 1997, from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 635–4000. review of previous meeting minutes, p.m. The RAC may reduce or extend the and reports to the Council on the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The land end time of 5:00 p.m. depending on the Standards and Guidelines statewide has been identified as suitable for number of people wishing to address plan amendment, proposed Lake disposal by the Shoshone-Eureka the RAC. The length of time available Havasu planning process, recreation fee Resource Management Plan. The land is for each person to address the RAC will not needed for any resource program be established at the start of the public program, statewide land exchange effort, and the Arizona State Office Public and is not suitable for management by comment period and will depend on the Bureau or another Federal how many people there are that wish to Information Center. In addition, the Recreation and Public Relations department or agency. address the RAC. At the completion of The land to be sold is difficult and subgroups will report on current the public comments the RAC may uneconomical for the Bureau to manage. activities. A public comment period will continue discussion on its Agenda It consists of three parcels, two of which take place at 11:30 a.m. January 9, 1997 items. are totally surrounded by patented for any interested publics who wish to The meeting on January 10, 1997, will mining claims owned by the sale address the Council. be from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The end proponent. The third parcel is bordered time of 4:00 p.m. for the meeting may FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: on three sides by the proponent’s be changed depending on the work Deborah Stevens or Ken Mahoney, patented claims, and on the fourth by remaining for the RAC. Bureau of Land Management, Arizona unpatented mining claims held by the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: State Office, 222 North Central Avenue, proponent. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65231

The locatable, salable, and leasable [ID±957±1150±02] [ID±957±1910±00±4573] mineral estates, with the exception of geothermal resources, have been Idaho: Filing of Plats of Survey; Idaho Idaho: Filing of Plats of Survey; Idaho determined to have no known value. The plat of the following described The plat of the following described Therefore, the mineral estate, excluding land was officially filed in the Idaho land was officially filed in the Idaho geothermal resources, will be conveyed State Office, Bureau of Land State Office, Bureau of Land simultaneously with the surface estate Management, Boise, Idaho, effective Management, Boise, Idaho, effective in accordance with Section 209(b)(1) of 9:00 a.m. December 2, 1996. 9:00 a.m. December 2, 1996. Federal Land Policy and Management The plat representing the dependent The plat representing the dependent Act of 1976. Acceptance of the sale offer resurvey of portions of the west resurvey of portions of the north will constitute application for boundary and subdivisional lines, the boundary and subdivisional lines, and conveyance of the available mineral subdivision of section 7, and the survey the subdivision of certain sections, T. 4 interests. The sale proponent will be of lot 9 in section 7, T. 16 N., R. 26 E., S., R. 34 E., Boise Meridian, Idaho, required to submit a $50.00 Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group No. 959, Group No. 848, was accepted December nonrefundable filing fee for conveyance was accepted December 2, 1996. 2, 1996. of the mineral interests specified above This survey was executed to meet This survey was executed to meet with the purchase price for the land. certain administrative needs of the certain administrative needs of the Failure to submit the nonrefundable fee Bureau of Land Management. All Bureau of Indian Affairs, Fort Hall for the mineral estate within the time inquiries concerning the survey of the Agency. frame specified by the authorized officer above described land must be sent to the All inquiries concerning the survey of will result in cancellation of the sale. Chief, Cadastral Survey, Idaho State the above described land must be sent Office, Bureau of Land Management, to the Chief, Cadastral Survey, Idaho Upon publication of this Notice of 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Boise, Idaho, State Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Realty Action in the Federal Register, 83709–1657. Fort Hall Agency. the lands will be segregated from all Dated: December 2, 1996. All inquiries concerning the survey of forms of appropriation under the public the above described land must be sent land laws, including the mining laws, Duane E. Olsen, Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho. to the Chief, Cadastral Survey, Idaho but not the mineral leasing laws or State Office, Bureau of Land [FR Doc. 96–31470 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] disposals pursuant to Sections 203 and Management, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, 209 of FLPMA. The segregation shall BILLING CODE 4310±GG±M Boise, Idaho, 83709–1657. terminate upon issuance of a patent or Date: December 2, 1996. other document of conveyance, upon [ID-957-1220-00] publication in the Federal Register of a Duane E. Olsen, termination of segregation, or 270 days Idaho: Filing of Plats of Survey; Idaho Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho. from date of this publication, which [FR Doc. 96–31472 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] The plats of the following described ever occurs first. BILLING CODE 4310±GG±M land was officially filed in the Idaho The patent, when issued, will contain State Office, Bureau of Land the following reservations to the United Management, Boise, Idaho, effective National Park Service States: 9:00 a.m. December 2, 1996. 1. A right-of-way thereon for ditches The plat representing the corrective Notice of Intent to Extend Existing and canals constructed by the authority dependent resurvey of portions of the Concession Contracts and Permits south boundary, T. 15S., R. 23 E. Boise of the United States, Act of August 30, SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Act of October 1890, (43 U.S.C. 945); Meridian, Idaho, Group No. 954, was accepted December 2, 1996. 9, 1965, (79 Stat. 969; 16 U.S.C. 20 et 2. Geothermal resources; The plat representing the dependent esq.), notice is hereby given that the And will be subject to all other valid resurvey of a portion of the south National Park Service intends to extend existing rights. boundary and of the subdivisional lines the following concession contracts and and the subdivision of sections 27 and permits. These extensions are necessary For a period of 45 days from the date to allow the continuation of public of publication in the Federal Register, 34, T.15 S., R.24 E., Boise Meridian, Idaho, Group No. 954, was accepted services during the completion of the interested parties may submit comments planning for the parks. The current to the District Manager, Battle Mountain December 2, 1996. These surveys were executed to meet concessioners have performed their District, 50 Bastian Way, Box 1420, certain administrative needs of the obligations to the satisfaction of the Battle Mountain, NV 89820. Any Bureau of Land Management and of the Secretary and retain their rights of adverse comments will be evaluated by National Parks Service, City of Rocks preference under this administrative the State Director, who may sustain, National Reserve. action of extending the existing vacate or modify this realty action and All inquiries concerning the survey of contracts and permits. issue a final determination. In the the above described land must be sent The following concession contracts absence of timely filed objections, this to the Chief, Cadastral Survey, Idaho and permits will be extended for a realty action will become a final State Office, Bureau of Land period of one year through December determination of the Department of the Management, 3380 Americana Terrace, 31, 1997: BRYCE CANYON NATIONAL Interior. Boise, Idaho, 83706–2500. PARK, CC–BRCA002–87, Bryce-Zion Dated: November 15, 1996. Trail Rides, Inc.; CANYONLANDS Dated: December 2, 1996. NATIONAL PARK, CP–CANY001–87, Wayne King, Duane E. Olsen, Adventure Bound, Inc.; CP–CANY002– Acting District Manager. Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho. 87, Sheri Griffith River Expeditions; CP– [FR Doc. 96–31388 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 96–31471 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] CANY003–87, Navtec Expeditions, Inc.; BILLING CODE 4310±HC±P BILLING CODE 4310±GG±M CP–CANY004–87, Colorado Outward 65232 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Bound School, Inc.; CP–CANY005–87, GLAC008–92, Rocky Mountain the National Park Service to extend the Colorado River & Trail Expeditions; CP– Transportation, Inc.; GRAND CANYON current contracts and permits for a CANY006–87, Don Hatch River NATIONAL PARK, CC–GRCA030–84, period of one, two, or three years Expeditions; CP–CANY007–87, Holiday Samaritan Health Service; GRAND beginning January 1, 1997. River Expeditions; CP–CANY009–87, TETON NATIONAL PARK, CC– Information about this notice can be Moki Mac River Expeditions, Inc.; CP– GRTE002–90, Leek’s Marina; CP– sought from: Program Leader, CANY010–87, North American River GRTE005–89, American Alpine Club, Intermountain Office of Concessions Expeditions, Inc.; CP–CANY011–88, Inc.; CP–GRTE006–89, Barker-Ewing Management Support Attention: Judy Adventure River Expeditions; CP– Scenic Tours; CP–GRTE008–89, Jack Jennings, National Park Service, 12795 CANY012–87, Niskanen and Jones, Inc. Dennis Fishing Trips; CP–GRTE010–89, West Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box dba San Juan Expeditions; CP– Fort Jackson Float Trips; LP–GRTE011– 25287, Denver, Colorado 80225–0287, or CANY014–87, Niskanen & Jones dba 89, Heart 6 Float Trips; LP–GRTE014– call: (303) 969–2661. Tag-A-Long Expeditions; CP– 89, Rivermeadows Associates; CP– Dated: November 26, 1996. CANY015–88, Holiday River GRTE015–89, National Park Float Trips; Robert Reynolds, Expeditions; CP–CANY016–87, Tour CP–GRTE017–89, O.A.R.S, Inc; CP– Acting Field Director, Intermountain Field West, Inc.; CP–CANY017–87, Western GRTE020–89, Solitude Float Trips; CP– Area. River Expeditions; CP–CANY018–87, GRTE022–87, Teton Boating Company, [FR Doc. 96–31449 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] American Wilderness Expeditions dba Inc.; PETRIFIED FOREST NATIONAL Adrift Adventures; CP–CANY019–87, PARK, CC–PEFO001–84, AmFac Parks BILLING CODE 4310±70±P Niskanen & Jones dba Tag-A-Long and Resorts, Inc.; ROCKY MOUNTAIN Expeditions; CP–CANY020–87, World NATIONAL PARK, CC–ROMO002–87, Notice of the Intention To Issue a Wide River Expeditions; GRAND Hi Country Stables, Inc.; SAN Prospectus for the Operation and CANYON NATIONAL PARK, CC– ANTONIO MISSIONS NATIONAL Management of a Tennis Complex GRCA003–67, Babbitt Brothers Trading HISTORICAL PARK, CP–SAAN001–89, Company; GRAND TETON NATIONAL Los Compadres de San Antonio SUMMARY: The National Park Service PARK, CC–GRTE004–78, Triangle X National Historical Park, Inc. will be releasing a concession Ranch; LP–GRTE024–90, Jackson Hole The following concession contracts Prospectus seeking parties interested in Ski Corporation; LP–GRTE025–90, and permits will be extended for a operating a tennis complex and related Rendezvous Ski Tours; LP–GRTE032– period of three years through December support facilities within American 90, Spring Creek Ranch; LP–GRTE044– 31, 1999: AMISTAD NATIONAL Memorial Park in the Commonwealth of 91, Greater Yellowstone Expeditions; RECREATION AREA, CC–AMIS002–89, the Northern Mariana Islands on the LP–GRTE047–90, The National Outdoor Lake Amistad Resort and Marina; Island of Saipan. The operation consists Leadership School; LP–GRTE049–91, GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK, of four (4) lighted hard surfaced tennis Fox Creek Pack Station, Inc.; and CP– CC–GRTE009–89, Exum Mountain courts with a small pro shop and GRTE051–91, Triangle X Float Trips. Guide Service; CP–GRTE012–89, restroom facilities. The proposed The following concession contracts Jackson Hole Mountain Guides, Inc.; operation will be year round and is and permits will be extended for a LP–GRTE034–90, Wilderness Ventures; anticipated to operate both in the period of two years through December LP–GRTE038–90, Teton Valley Ranch; daytime and evening hours. There is no 31, 1998: AMISTAD NATIONAL LP–GRTE041–91, Jackson Hole Trail existing operator and this opportunity is RECREATION AREA, CC–AMIS003–87, Rides; LAKE MEREDITH NATIONAL fully competitive. All the existing Rough Canyon Marina; RECREATION AREA, CC–LAMR002– facilities are government owned. The CANYONLANDS NATIONAL PARK, 87, Marina at Lake Meredith; PADRE incoming operator will be required to CP–CANY022–89, North American ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE, CC– provide all the necessary items to River Expeditions dba Canyonlands PAIS001–85, Padre Island Park adequately stock the pro shop and staff Tours; CP–CANY024–89, Niskanen and Company; ROCKY MOUNTAIN the operation. The term of the proposed Jones, Inc. dba Tag-A-Long Tours; CP– NATIONAL PARK, CP–ROMO003–90, concession contract will be for seven (7) CANY025–89, Lin Ottinger Tours; CP– Colorado Mountain School; ZION years. CANY026–91, Niskanen and Jones, Inc. NATIONAL PARK, CC–ZION001–87, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The cost dba Tag-A-Long Tours; CP–CANY027– Bryce-Zion Trail Rides, Inc. for purchasing a Prospectus is $30.00. 91, 3–D River Visions, Inc. dba Tex’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These Parties interested in obtaining a Riverways; CP–CANY031–92, Holiday concession contracts and permits will Prospectus should send a check made River Expeditions, Inc.; CP–CANY032– expire on December 31, 1996, unless payable to the ‘‘National Park Service’’. 92, Kaibab Mountain Bike Tours; CP– extended. The National Park Service Send the check to the National Park CANY033–92, Nichols Expeditions, will not renew these contracts and Service, Office of Concession Program Inc.; CP–CANY034–92, Rim Tours; CP– permits for an extended period until Management, Pacific Great Basin CANY035–92, Western Spirit Cycling, planning can be conducted to determine System Support Office, 600 Harrison Inc.; CARLSBAD CAVERNS NATIONAL the future direction for concession Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA PARK, CC–CACA001–70, The Cavern services at these parks. The necessary 94107–1372. Please include a mailing Supply Company, Inc.; CURECANTI planning processes are expected to address of where to send the Prospectus. NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, CC– begin shortly and will affect the future On the front of the envelope mark CURE001–89, Elk Creek Marina, Inc.; of these concessions. The planning ‘‘Attention: Office of Concession DINOSAUR NATIONAL MONUMENT, processes are expected to take one, two, Program Management—Mail Room Do CP–DINO010–87, Faron and Wayne or three years to complete. Until the Not Open’’. If there are any questions Wilkins dba Wilkin’s Firewood and planning processes are completed, it contact Mr. Mac Foreman, Office of Beverage; GLACIER NATIONAL PARK, will not be in the best interest of the Concession Program Management, CC–GLAC001–89, Glacier Park Boat National Park Service to enter into long Pacific Great Basin System Support Company, Inc.; CP–GLAC006–89, term concession contracts and permits. Office, San Francisco, CA (415) 744– Glacier Wilderness Guides, Inc.; CP– For these reasons, it is the intention of 3981. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65233

Dated: November 25, 1996. environmental impact statement for a National Park Service, P.O. Box 37127, Stanley T. Albright, Visitor Management Resource Washington, D.C. 20013–7127. Written Field Director, Pacific West Area. Protection Plan for Zion National Park. comments should be submitted by [FR Doc. 96–31448 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] The project will result in a Plan December 26, 1996. encompassing visitor use, concessions BILLING CODE 4310±70±P Carol D. Shull, management, and preservation of natural and cultural resources. In Keeper of the National Register. Draft Environmental Impact Statement cooperation with local, state, tribal, and ARKANSAS (DEIS) for Lake Cresent Management other federal agencies, attention will Plan, Olympic National Park, WA also be given to cooperative Baxter County management of resources outside the Batesville East Main Historic District ACTION: Notice of change of dates for boundaries that affect the integrity of (Boundary Increase), 1011, 1041, 1063, and public meetings. Zion National Park. Alternatives that 1087 College Ave., Batesville, 96001520 SUMMARY: The dates of the public will be considered in the EIS will FLORIDA meetings specified in the National Park include no-action, the preferred Service Notice of Availability (FR, Vol. alternative, and other feasible options. Indian River County 61, No. 204, p. 54676) were November One of the major issues to be First Methodist Episcopal Church (Fellsmere 20, 1996, in Seattle, WA, and November addressed in this plan will be the MPS), 31 N. Broadway, Fellsmere, 21, 1996, in Port Angeles, WA. This identification and implementation of 96001521 visitor carrying capacity throughout the current Notice announces that the dates Leon County for those public meetings have been park. This will be accomplished by the changed as follows: Wednesday, January Visitor Experience and Resource Strickland—Herold House, Main St., NW of 15, 1997, from 7:00 to 9:30 p.m., at the Protection (VERP) process. VERP is a jct. of Moccasin Gap Rd. and FL 59, Jackson Federal Building, South planning framework that focuses on Miccosukee, 96001523 Auditorium, Seattle, WA, and Thursday, visitor use impacts as they relate to Sarasota County visitor experiences and park resources. January 16, 1997, from 7:00 to 9:30 p.m., Johnson—Schoolcrafy Building (Venice at the Vern Burton Community Center, Other issues to be addressed include: natural and cultural resource MPS), 201–203 W. Venice Ave., Venice, Port Angeles, WA. All comments 96001522 received will become part of the public management, the transportation system, record and copies of comments, and backcountry management. External MASSACHUSETTS threats, such as aircraft overflights, wild including any names, addresses and Hampden County telephone numbers provided by and scenic rivers, and wilderness will respondents, may be released for public also be addressed. Provided as guidance Russell Center Historic District, Jct. of Main and Lincoln Ave., Russell, 96001524 inspection. to these issues will be legislative DATES: Comments on the DEIS must be mandates, the park’s purpose and MONTANA received no later than February 3, 1997. significance statement, and the desired futures as established in the park’s Lincoln County ADDRESSES: Written comments should Statement for Management. A scoping Ant Flat Ranger Station, Forest Service Rd. be submitted to the Superintendent, newsletter has been prepared that 36, approximately 2 mi. S of Fortine, Olympic National Park, 600 E. Park details the issues and alternatives Kootenai National Forest, Fortine vicinity, Ave., Port Angeles, WA 98362. identified to date. Copies can be 96001533 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: obtained from Superintendent, Zion NORTH CAROLINA Superintendent, Olympic National Park, National Park, Springdale, Utah 84767– at the above address or at telephone 1099. Anson County number (360) 452–4501, ext. 207. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chambers—Morgan Farm, W side of NC Dated: November 29, 1996. Contact planning team coordinator, 1228, .1 mi. N of NC 1225, White Store William C. Walters, Darla Sidles, Zion National Park, 801– vicinity, 96001526 Deputy Field Director, Pacific West Field 772–0211. Area. Gaston County Dated: November 26, 1996. [FR Doc. 96–31451 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Belmont Historic District, Roughly bounded Donald A. Falvey, BILLING CODE 4310±70±P by Sacred Heart College campus, RR line, Superintendent. N. and S. Main, Glenway, Bryant Sts., [FR Doc. 96–31447 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Keener Blvd., Central Ave, Belmont, General Management PlanÐ BILLING CODE 4310±70±P 96001525 Environmental Impact Statement Zion Haywood County National Park, UT National Register of Historic Places; Davis Family House, N side of NC 1355, .8 AGENCY: National Park Service, Notification of Pending Nominations mi. NW of Ferguson Br. over the Pigeon Department of the Interior. River, Crabtree vicinity, 96001527 Nominations for the following ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an UTAH environmental impact statement for a properties being considered for listing General Management Plan, hereafter in the National Register were received Box Elder County known as a Visitor Management by the National Park Service before Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Resource Protection Plan (VMRPP), for November 30, 1996. Pursuant to section Building (Brigham City MPS), 20 E. 100 Zion National Park. 60.13 of 36 CFR Part 60 written South St., Brigham City, 96001530 comments concerning the significance SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the of these properties under the National Sanpete County National Environmental Policy Act, the Register criteria for evaluation may be Watkins—Tholman—Larsen Farmstead, 422 National Park Service is preparing an forwarded to the National Register, E. 400 South St., Mt. Pleasant, 96001531 65234 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

VERMONT Union Bldg., is located north of Pope Dated: December 4, 1996. Chittenden County Joy Hall). The Socorro meeting will be Charles A. Calhoun, Gray Rocks (Agricultural Resources of held at the Bureau of Reclamation Regional Director. Vermont MPS), US 2, near jct. with US 89, Socorro Field Division Office Building, [FR Doc. 96–31473 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Richmond, 96001534 2401 State Road 1, in the east assembly BILLING CODE 4310±94±M room. Written comments should be WEST VIRGINIA submitted to Mr. Chris Gorbach, Project Ohio County Team Leader at the address listed INTERNATIONAL TRADE Shaw Hall, West Liberty State College, below. COMMISSION Bethany Pike, approximately 1.25 mi. S of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: jct. with Locust Grove Rd., West Liberty, Investigation 332±375] 96001528 Mr. Chris Gorbach, Project Team Leader, Shotwell Hall, West Liberty State College, Bureau of Reclamation, 505 Marquette The Dynamic Effects of Trade Bethany Pike, approximately 1.25 mi. S of NW, Suite 1313, Albuquerque, New Liberalization: An Empirical Analysis jct. with Locust Grove Rd., West Liberty, Mexico, 87102; telephone: 505–248– 96001529 AGENCY: United States International 5379. E-mail: [email protected]. WISCONSIN Trade Commission. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Flood Grant County ACTION: Institution of investigation and Control Acts of 1948 and 1950 authorize request for written submissions. Potosi Badger Huts Site, .5 mi. SW of jct. of Reclamation to construct and maintain WI 133 and WI U, Potosi vicinity, channel works on the Rio Grande EFFECTIVE DATE: December 2, 1996. 96001532 between Velarde, New Mexico and SUMMARY: Following receipt on [FR Doc. 96–31450 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Caballo Reservoir. These works promote November 1, 1996, of a request from the BILLING CODE 4310±70±P efficient conveyance of water to Office of the U. S. Trade Representative Elephant Butte Reservoir. Channel (USTR), the Commission instituted works assist in meeting water delivery investigation No. 332–375, The Bureau of Reclamation obligations required by interstate Dynamic Effects of Trade Liberalization: An Empirical Analysis, under section Draft Environmental Impact Statement compact and international treaty. They 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 for Rio Grande and Low Flow also assist in providing reliable valley U.S.C. 1332(g)). Conveyance Channel Between San drainage and contribute to the safe Acacia, NM and Elephant Butte passage of flood waters. To assure that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reservoir these project purposes continue to be Information on economic aspects of the met effectively, Reclamation is investigation may be obtained from AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, reevaluating the configuration and Michael Ferrantino, Office of Economics Interior. operation of the channel system (202–205–3241), Arona Butcher, Office ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a between San Acacia, New Mexico and of Economics (202–205–3301), or draft environmental impact statement. Elephant Butte Reservoir. The channel William Donnelly, Office of Economics facilities specifically involved in this (202–205–3223), and on legal aspects, SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National from William Gearhart, Office of the reevaluation are the Low Flow Environmental Policy Act of 1969 General Counsel (202–205–3091). The Conveyance Channel and the Rio (NEPA), as amended, the Bureau of media should contact Margaret Reclamation (Reclamation) proposes to Grande Channel or ‘‘Floodway.’’ O’Laughlin, Office of External Relations prepare a draft environmental impact Factors prompting a reevaluation of (202–205– 1819). Hearing impaired statement (DEIS) addressing possible the channel system and its operation individuals are advised that information changes to the configuration and include changes in the flow of the Rio on this matter can be obtained by operation of the Rio Grande ‘‘Floodway’’ Grande due to climatic variation and contacting the TDD terminal on (202– and Low Flow Conveyance Channel infrastructure changes. Chronic 205–1810). between San Acacia, New Mexico and sediment management problems, Background: This investigation Elephant Butte Reservoir. Public anticipated reductions in Federal follows a previous investigation scoping meetings will be held to obtain funding, and new legal constraints, such requested by the United States Trade comments from interested organizations as the Endangered Species Act, on Representative on a similar topic (‘‘The and individuals on what issues should system operation are also factors that Dynamic Effects of Trade Liberalization: be considered in the DEIS. prompt this reevaluation. The needs of A Survey,’’ Investigation No. 332–324, DATES: Two public meetings will be endangered species and requirements USITC publication 2608, February held in January 1997 to present for preservation and enhancement of the 1993). In its report the Commission will, information and solicit public input. Rio Grande bosque will be considered. as requested by USTR in its November The first meeting will be held on 1, 1996 letter, review and summarize January 21, 1997, in Albuquerque, at the The DEIS will address possible actions or changes in the operation of the the existing literature on the dynamic University of New Mexico from 3:00 effects from trade, both theoretical and system that may result from the findings p.m. until 8:30 p.m. The second meeting empirical, both completed and in of these investigations. will be held on January 22, 1997, in progress, with an emphasis on empirical Socorro, New Mexico at the Bureau of Besides ensuring continued literature. The Commission will Reclamation Field Division Office from fulfillment of original project purposes, include, as background, a general 6:30 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. Reclamation will analyze the discussion of the relationship between ADDRESSES: The meeting in environmental impacts associated with trade and the underlying causes of Albuquerque will be held at the the maintenance and operation of the economic growth, such as capital University of New Mexico Union floodway and Low Flow Conveyance accumulation, technological change, Building, Rooms 250 A, B, and C (the Channel system. and labor force growth. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65235

The Commission will also provide a ACTION: Institution of investigation and • Travel and tourism services. comprehensive and critical assessment scheduling of public hearing. In addition, the Commission will of the results that this body of literature examine horizontal commitments provides regarding the dynamic gains EFFECTIVE DATE: November 26, 1996. relevant to the specified industries, such from trade. This assessment will SUMMARY: Following receipt on as those regarding investment and explicitly identify the merits and November 13, 1996, of a request from temporary entry and stay of foreign shortcomings of the technical methods, the Office of the United States Trade workers. As requested by the USTR, the data and results in the existing available Representative (USTR), the Commission Commission plans to deliver its report literature. The Commission will also instituted Investigation No. 332–374, to the USTR by August 15, 1997. The explore empirically the potential General Agreement on Trade in investigation follows Commission improvements that this assessment may Services: Examination of the Schedules Investigation No. 332–367, General suggest. USTR requested that the of Commitments Submitted by Asia/ Agreement on Trade in Services: Commission provide its report by Pacific Trading Partners, under section Examination of South American Trading October 31, 1997, and that it make the 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 Partners’ Schedules of Commitments, report available to the public in its U.S.C. 1332(g)). requested by the USTR on April 9, 1996, entirety. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Commission Investigation No. 332– Written Submissions: The ormation on service industries may be 358, General Agreement on Trade in Commission does not plan to hold a obtained from Mr. Richard Brown, Services: Examination of Major Trading public hearing in connection with this Office of Industries (202–205–3438) and Partners’ Schedules of Commitments, investigation. However, interested Mr. Christopher Melly, Office of requested by the USTR on December 28, persons are invited to submit written Industries (202–205–3461); economic 1994. In those reports, the Commission statements concerning the matters to be aspects, from Mr. William Donnelly, examined the commitments scheduled addressed in the report. Commercial or Office of Economics (202–205–3223); by selected trading partners with respect financial information that a party and legal aspects, from Mr. William to the industries delineated above. The desires the Commission to treat as Gearhart, Office of the General Counsel results of Investigation No. 332–367 will confidential must be submitted on (202–205–3091). The media should be published in December 1996. The separate sheets of paper, each clearly contact Ms. Margaret O’Laughlin, Office results of Investigation No. 332–358 marked ‘‘Confidential Business of External Relations (202–205–1819). were published in December 1995 in Information’’ at the top. (Generally, Hearing impaired individuals are USITC Publication 2940. This submission of separate confidential and advised that information on this matter publication is available on the ITC Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov or public versions of the submission would can be obtained by contacting the TDD ftp://ftp.usitc.gov). be appropriate.) All submissions terminal on (202–205–1810). Public Hearing: A public hearing in requesting confidential treatment must Background: As requested by the connection with the investigation will conform with the requirements of USTR in a letter dated November 12, § 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of be held at the U.S. International Trade 1996, the Commission, pursuant to Commission Building, 500 E Street SW, Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, All written submissions, except for Washington, DC, beginning at 9:30 a.m. has instituted an investigation and will on March 27, 1997. All persons shall confidential business information, will prepare a report that (1) examines the be made available in the Office of the have the right to appear, by counsel or content of schedules of commitments in person, to present information and to Secretary to the Commission for under the General Agreement on Trade inspection by interested persons. To be be heard. Requests to appear at the in Services (GATS) for the countries public hearing should be filed with the assured of consideration, written specified below, explaining the submissions must be filed by August 13, Secretary, U.S. International Trade commitments in non-technical Commission, 500 E Street SW, 1997. language; and (2) seeks to identify the Persons with mobility impairments Washington, DC 20436, no later than potential benefits and limitations of 5:15 p.m., March 13, 1997. Any who will need special assistance in foreign commitments. The Commission gaining access to the Commission prehearing briefs (original and 14 will examine sector-specific copies) should be filed not later than should contact the Office of the commitments scheduled by Australia, Secretary at 202–205–2000. 5:15 p.m., March 13, 1997. The deadline Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, for filing post-hearing briefs or Issued: December 2, 1996. Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, statements is 5:15 p.m., April 10, 1997. By order of the Commission. Singapore, and Thailand, with respect In the event that, as of the close of Donna R. Koehnke, to the following industries: business on March 13, 1997, no Secretary. • Distribution services (defined as witnesses are scheduled to appear at the [FR Doc. 96–31455 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] wholesaling, retailing, and franchising hearing, the hearing will be canceled. BILLING CODE 7020±02±P services); Any person interested in attending the • Education services; hearing as an observer or non- • Communication services (defined as participant may call the Secretary to the UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL enhanced telecommunication, courier, Commission (202–205–1816) after TRADE COMMISSION and audiovisual services); March 13, 1997, to determine whether • Health care services; the hearing will be held. [Investigation No. 332±374] • Professional services (defined as Written Submissions: In lieu of or in General Agreement on Trade in accounting, advertising, and legal addition to participating in the hearing, services); interested parties are invited to submit Services: Examination of the • Schedules of Commitments Submitted Architectural, engineering, and written statements concerning the by Asia/Pacific Trading Partners construction (AEC) services; matters to be addressed by the • Land-based transport services Commission in its report on this AGENCY: United States International (defined as rail and trucking services); investigation. Commercial or financial Trade Commission. and information that a submitter desires the 65236 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Commission to treat as confidential these materials may be obtained upon exercise this option, Whitcomb will remain must be submitted on separate sheets of request and payment of a copying fee. a competitor to Pike Industries in Vermont paper, each clearly marked Constance K. Robinson, and New Hampshire. If Oldcastle elects to ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ at exercise the option, the Division has the Director of Operations. ability to investigate the competitive impact the top. All submissions requesting December 2, 1996 of the potential acquisition at that time. confidential treatment must conform James A. Dunbar, Esquire In carefully reviewing the concerns made with the requirements of section 201.6 Venable, Baetjer and Howard in your letter about asphalt concrete of the Commission’s Rules of Practice 1800 Mercantile Bank & Trust Building competition in New Hampshire and and Procedure (19 C.F.R. 201.6). All Two Hopkins Plaza Vermont, it is clear that your concerns are written submissions, except for Baltimore, Maryland 21201–2978 outside the scope of the Complaint filed by confidential business information, will Re: United States, et al. v. Oldcastle the Division. When evaluating a complaint Northeast, Inc., et al., Civil Action No.: and proposed final judgment under the be made available in the Office of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, Secretary of the Commission for 396CV01749 AWT (District of Connecticut, September 3, 1996) unless a strong showing of bad faith or inspection by interested parties. To be improper behavior can be made, a court will assured of consideration by the Dear Mr. Dunbar: This letter responds to your letter of November 1, 1996 commenting not reach beyond the complaint to evaluate Commission, written statements relating on the proposed Final Judgment in the above- claims that the Division did not make and to to the Commission’s report should be referenced civil antitrust case challenging the inquire why they were not made (See, United submitted to the Commission at the acquisition by CRH plc (CRH) through States v. Microsoft Corp., 56 F.3d 1448, earliest practical date and should be Oldcastle Northeast, Inc. (Oldcastle) of 1459–60 (D.C. Cir 1995)). A court’s authority to review a decree depends on how the received no later than the close of Tilcon, Inc. (Tilcon) from BTR plc (BTR). The Complaint alleges that the acquisition Division exercises its prosecutorial business on April 10, 1997. All discretion. In this instance, the Court’s submissions should be addressed to the violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 18, because it is likely review is linked to whether the proposed Secretary, U.S. International Trade substantially to lessen competition in the Final Judgment assures that competition will Commission, 500 E Street SW, manufacture and sale of asphalt concrete in not be substantially lessened as alleged in the Washington, DC 20436. the greater Hartford, Connecticut area. Under Complaint brought by the Division. the proposed Final Judgment, the defendants The Division appreciates you bringing your Persons with mobility impairments concerns to our attention and hopes that this who will need special assistance in are required to divest Tilcon’s East Granby, Connecticut quarry; two, three-ton, hot-mix information will alleviate them. While the gaining access to the Commission plants located at the East Granby Quarry; and Division understands your position, we should contact the Office of the all intangible assets located at the quarry to believe that the proposed Final Judgment Secretary at 202–205–2000. assure that competition is not substantially will adequately alleviate the competitive concerns created by CRH’s acquisition of Issued: December 2, 1996. lessened in the greater Hartford area. In your letter, you expressed concern that Tilcon from BTR. Pursuant to the Antitrust By order of the Commission. the proposed Final Judgment does not Procedures and Penalties Act, a copy of your Donna R. Koehnke, address competitive concerns in additional letter and this response will be published in the Federal Register and filed with the Court. Secretary. geographic areas (Vermont and the southwestern and central parts of New Thank you for your interest in the [FR Doc. 96–31454 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Hampshire). The analytical process used by enforcement of the antitrust laws. BILLING CODE 7020±02±P the Antitrust Division to determine which Sincerely yours, areas the acquisition might raise substantial Frederick H. Parmenter, competitive concerns required us to assess a Senior Trial Attorney. number of factors including market November 1, 1996 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE concentration, potential adverse competitive effects, and entry. These factors must be VIA HAND-DELIVERY Antitrust Division; U.S. v. Oldcastle evaluated in an economically meaningful J. Robert Kramer, Esquire product and geographic market. This analysis Chief, Litigation II Section Northeast, Inc. et al.; Public Comments is aimed at allowing the Division to answer and Response on Proposed Final Antitrust Division the ultimate inquiry: whether the acquisition United States Department of Justice Judgment is likely to create or enhance market power 1401 H Street, N.W.—Suite 3000 or facilitate the exercise of market power in Washington, D.C. 20530 a relevant market. After a thorough Pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures Re. United States of America, et al. v. and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16 (c)–(h), investigation which included the geographic areas mentioned in your letter, the Division Oldcastle Northeast, Inc., et al., Civil the United States publishes below the Action No. 396 CV 01749 AWT, In the comment received on the proposed final concluded that the asphalt concrete market in the greater Hartford area was the relevant United States District Court for the judgment in United States, et al. v. market where Oldcastle’s acquisition of District of Connecticut Oldcastle Northeast, Inc., et al., Civil Tilcon might create or enhance market Dear Mr. Kramer: This letter will serve as Action No. 396CV01749 AWT, filed in power. It was determined that in Vermont the comments of my client, The Frank W. the United States District Court for the and central New Hampshire, the same Whitcomb Construction Corporation District of Connecticut, together with number of competitors would be present after (‘‘Whitcomb’’), on the proposed final the United States’ response to that the acquisition as were present before the judgment in the above-referenced matter. These comments concern an issue that has comment. acquisition. In southwestern New Hampshire, a sufficient number of already been raised with the Department of Copies of the comment and response competitors were found to be active in the Justice, but has not been acted upon. to the comment are available for region. The Division concluded that in these We believe that the facts and inspection and copying in Room 215 of three areas, the acquisition did not raise circumstances set forth in this letter the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust significant competitive concerns. demonstrate that the acquisition of Tilcon, Division, 325 7th Street, N.W., Your letter also raises concerns about the Inc. by Oldcastle Northeast, Inc. transfer to Pike Industries (a subsidiary of (‘‘Oldcastle’’) presents a substantial threat to Washington, DC 20530 (telephone: (202) Oldcastle) of Tilcon’s right of first refusal to competition in the aggregate and asphalt 514–2481), and at the Office of the Clerk purchase the assets of your client, Frank W. paving business in Vermont and the of the United States District Court for Whitcomb Construction Corporation southwestern and central parts of New the District of Connecticut. Copies of (Whitcomb). Until Oldcastle elects to Hampshire, by elimination of a potential Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65237 competitor and the possible elimination of as the distinct product. Transportation costs notice of its intent to Transfer. Buyer shall substantially all competition in those areas. and delivery time make it difficult for entities have thirty (30) days to decide internally Whitcomb is in the aggregate and asphalt outside of a geographic market—in this case whether it wishes to purchase or lease the paving business, primarily in the states of the Whitcomb market area of Vermont and property at such price and on such terms, New Hampshire and Vermont. Pike south-central New Hampshire—to compete and, if so, Buyer shall have another thirty Industries is Whitcomb’s primary competitor. with competitors located in the market. (30) days to obtain the approval of its parent Whitcomb and Pike are the only competitors In this case, the United States decided to corporation(s). Seller agrees to provide Buyer in Vermont with the exception of occasional sue Tilcon and CRH/Oldcastle because the with notice of the acquisition of any after- minimal competition in the southeast and acquisition would reduce the number of acquired real estate used in connection with northeast corners of the State. Pike is a competitors operating hot mix plants in the its aggregate and hot mix business, and Seller subsidiary of Oldcastle Northeast, Inc., and greater Hartford area from 3 to 2 and reduce agrees to execute any such instruments for an indirect subsidiary of CRH, Inc., the number of competitors supplying asphalt defendants in the above-referenced matter. concrete construction projects in that area recordation on the appropriate land records Tilcon is a large regional aggregate and from 2 to 1. The proposed acquisition has a as Buyer shall reasonably request. For paving company that, Whitcomb believes, comparable competitive effect in the purposes of this Section 16, the term ‘‘Seller’’ works primarily in New York, parts of New Whitcomb market area. It reduces by 1 the shall include not only the Frank W. England, and the Middle Atlantic States. At number of potential competitors, by Whitcomb Construction Corp. (‘‘FWWCC’’), present, it is not a direct competitor in most eliminating Tilcon; and it threatens to reduce but also any other company, corporation, of Whitcomb’s market area as described the number of competitors supplying asphalt trust, partnership, association or entity of any above, but it is a potential competitor. concrete construction projects in the market form in which either FWWCC, Claire R. Since 1993, Whitcomb has been area from 2 to 1, in the event that Oldcastle Whitcomb, Frank L. Whitcomb or the Frank considering the sale of portions or all of its is able to exercise the Right of First Refusal W. Whitcomb Trust shall have an interest business. In 1993, Whitcomb sold an asphalt to purchase all or a substantial part of whether direct or indirect. plant located in Keene, New Hampshire Whitcomb. In such an event, Oldcastle would (b) Frank L. Whitcomb and the Frank W. (which is in the southwestern part of the control the price of asphalt concrete in the Whitcomb Trust, (the ‘‘shareholders’’) agree State) to a subsidiary of Tilcon. As a part of State of Vermont. not to sell or transfer more than one-third of that sale Tilcon also purchased a Right of The potential harm stemming from the the outstanding shares of stock of Seller to First Refusal to purchase other plants and acquisition is particularly substantial in this any other person without in each and every real estate owned by Whitcomb. (A copy of case because the main purchasers of asphalt case first offering to sell any such business the portion of the sale contract relating to the concrete for paving projects are tax- assets or shares of stock at the same price and Right of First Refusal is attached hereto.) We supported government entities such as the on the same terms as offered to any such understand that as part of the purchase of State of Vermont. person. As to any proposed sale exceeding Under the circumstances, we request that Tilcon by Oldcastle, this Right of First one-third of the share, Buyer shall have sixty the Justice Department withdraw its consent Refusal has been assigned to Oldcastle. (60) days in which to exercise the right of to the proposed acquisition unless and until The proposed acquisition of Tilcon by first refusal granted hereunder. The sixty (60) Oldcastle threatens competition in the there is an agreement by both Tilcon and the day period shall commence after written aggregate and asphalt paving business in acquiring companies that the Right of First notice to Buyer and the delivery of all Vermont and south-central New Hampshire Refusal is null and void, and that they will information reasonably necessary to enable in two ways. First, it eliminates Tilcon as a not exercise or attempt to exercise it. In the Buyer to make a decision. Notwithstanding potential competitor. Before the acquisition, alternative, if the government declines to take the market consisted of two significant actual any action relating to the Right of First the foregoing, the shareholders shall be free competitors, Pike and Whitcomb, and at least Refusal, then the Court should modify the to transfer shares to any family member or one potential competitor, Tilcon. After the Consent Decree to add such a provision. any trust or other entity established for the acquisition, Tilcon will no longer offer Thank you for your attention to this matter. benefit of any family member provided that potential competition. Please do not hesitate to call me if you the transferee agrees to be bound by the same Second, with the assignment of the Right should have any questions. terms and conditions hereof. of First Refusal to Oldcastle, the proposed Very truly yours, (c) Seller agrees that it shall not issue any acquisition threatens to eliminate James A. Dunbar shares of stock, or warrants, options or other competition in the Whitcomb market area rights to acquire shares of stock, to any almost completely. Whitcomb would like to Attachment persons other than Frank L. Whitcomb or the sell all or part of its business to an entity that 16. Right of First Refusal. (a) As an Frank W. Whitcomb Trust if the issuance of can provide viable competition in the market additional inducement to enter into this such shares of stock would result in the area. The existence of the Right of First Agreement, Seller agrees that Seller shall not, aggregate ownership of the Frank L. Refusal in the hands of its principal directly or indirectly, sell or transfer Whitcomb or the Frank W. Whitcomb Trust competitor makes it difficult to find such a (whether by sale of stock, acquisitive merger, (or any transferees permitted under purchaser. Knowledge on the part of a business combination or otherwise), or offer paragraph (b) above) to be less than two- potential purchaser that a competitor could to sell, transfer or lease (other than a lease thirds of the total stock issued and prevent any purchase of Whitcomb or its for a term of not more than three years) (any outstanding, computed on a fully diluted assets will discourage most entities from such sale, lease, transfer or offer therefor basis. attempting to buy Whitcomb or any part of herein as ‘‘Transfer’’) any of its business real it. If Oldcastle is permitted to exercise the estate, now owned or hereafter acquired [FR Doc. 96–31468 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Right of First Refusal, then competition in (except the real estate identified on Schedule BILLING CODE 4410±11±M Vermont will be almost completely 16.1), to any other person without first eliminated and competition in south-central offering to Transfer such assets to the Buyer. New Hampshire will be significantly If the Buyer and Seller are unable to agree on Antitrust Division impaired. the price and the terms of any Transfer after As is set forth in the compliant and the full disclosure of information and negotiating United States of America v. competitive impact statement in this case, in good faith for a period of sixty (60) days, Westinghouse Electric Corporation there are high entry barriers into the then Seller shall be free to solicit offers on and Infinity Broadcasting Corporation; manufacture and sale of asphalt concrete. such property to or from any third parties, Proposed Final Judgment and The paving business itself, with the extensive but only at a price and on terms no more use of expensive heavy equipment, is also favorable to the purchaser than the price and Competitive Impact Statement capital intensive. terms offered to the Buyer. In the event that There are no real substitutes for asphalt the Seller receives a bona fide offer to The consent decree in United States concrete products, and manufacturers and purchase or lease any such property, directly v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation buyers of asphalt concrete recognize asphalt or indirectly, Seller shall provide Buyer with and Infinity Broadcasting Corporation 65238 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices which was filed with the United States Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual District Court for the District of § 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the ATM damages under specified circumstances. Columbia, Civil Action No. 96–02563 Forum (‘‘Forum’’) has filed written Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the was published in the Federal Register notifications simultaneously with the identities of the parties are General on December 2, 1996. Page two of the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Motors Corporation, Detroit, MI; stipulation was not included. Commission disclosing changes in its Chrysler Corporation, Auburn Hills, MI; In the Federal Register published membership. The notifications were and Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, December 2, 1996, on page 63861, in the filed for the purpose of extending the MI. third column, the following text should Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of The parties have established a Fuel be set forth after the word ‘‘record.’’ in antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages Cell Technical Team to conduct joint paragraph(a) and before the word under specified circumstances. research aimed at developing and ‘‘available’’. Specifically, the changes are as follows: demonstrating a viable fuel cell Constance K. Robinson, GIE COFiRA, Paris, FRANCE; IT powertrain. The activity encompasses Director of Operations. Concept PTE Ltd., Singapore, several related tasks including research SINGAPORE; LGIC Anyang, KOREA; and development efforts on fuel cells, * * * * * Lockheed Martin Corporation, stacks, modules and components as well (3) The parties stipulate that a Final Sunnyvale, CA; Paradyne Corporation, as development of fuel processing Judgment in the form hereto attached Melbourne Beach FL; and Teltrend Inc., technologies, fuel cell systems may be filed and entered by the Court, St. Charles, IL have been added to the integration, and fuel cell/vehicle upon the motion of any party or upon venture. Company name changes integration. The results of this effort will the Court’s own motion, at any time include the following: Telecom Lab support the Partnership for a New after compliance with the requirements MOTC ROC to Telecommunications Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) effort of the Antitrust Procedures and Labs, Chunghwa Telecom Co.; and Cray and allow each party to better service Penalties Act (15 U.S.C. 16), and Communications to Case Technology. customers around the world. PNGV is without further notice to any party or Agile Networks has withdrawn from the the joint effort of the Federal other proceedings, provided that venture. National Communications has Government and the U.S. auto industry plaintiff has not withdrawn its consent, changed from an auditing member to a to develop affordable, fuel-efficient, which it may do at any time before the principal member. low-emission automobiles that meet entry of the proposed Final Judgment by No changes have been made in the today’s performance standards. To meet serving notice thereof on the parties and planning activities of the Forum. these objectives, the parties will collect, by filing that notice with the Court. Membership remains open, and the exchange and analyze research (4) The defendants shall abide by and members intend to file additional information, interact with government, comply with the provisions of the written notifications disclosing all auto industry and other entities proposed Final Judgment pending entry changes in membership. interested in this area and perform other of the Final Judgment, and shall, from On April 19, 1993, the ATM Forum acts allowed by the Act that would the date of the signing of this filed its original notification pursuant to advance these goals. Stipulation, comply with all the terms § 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Contact: Steven J. Cernak, General and provisions of the proposed Final Justice published a notice in the Federal Motors Corporation Legal Staff, 3031 Judgment as though the same were in Register pursuant to § 6(b) of the Act on West Grand Boulevard, P.O. Box 33122, full force and effect as an order of the June 2, 1993 (58 FR 31415). The last M.C. 482–207–700, Detroit, MI 48232, Court. notification was filed on August 1, 1996 (313) 974–7735. (5) The parties recognize that there and the Department of Justice published Constance K. Robinson, could be a delay in obtaining approval a notice in the Federal Register on Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. by or a ruling of a government agency September 3, 1996 (61 FR 46488). [FR Doc. 96–31462 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] related to the divestitures required by Constance K. Robinson, BILLING CODE 4410±11±M Section IV of the Final Judgment, Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. notwithstanding the good faith efforts of [FR Doc. 96–31466 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] the defendants and any prospective BILLING CODE 4410±11±M Notice Pursuant to the National Acquirer, as defined in the Final Cooperative Research and Production Judgment. In this circumstance, plaintiff Act of 1993ÐIntelligent Network Forum will, in the exercise of its sole Notice Pursuant to the National discretion, acting in good faith, give Cooperative Research and Production Notice is hereby given that, on special consideration to forebearing Act of 1993; PNGV Fuel Cell Technical November 1, 1996, pursuant to § 6(a) of from applying for the appointment of a Team the National Cooperative Research and trustee pursuant to Section V of the Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. Final Judgment, or from pursuing legal Notice is hereby given that, on § 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the Intelligent remedies. October 30, 1996, pursuant to Section Network Forum (‘‘INF’’) has filed * * * * * 6(a) of the National Cooperative written notifications simultaneously Research and Production Act of 1993, with the Attorney General and the [FR Doc. 96–31467 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] 15 U.S.C. § 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Federal Trade Commission disclosing BILLING CODE 4410±11±M General Motors Corporation filed (1) the identities of the parties and (2) notifications simultaneously with the the nature and objectives of the venture. Notice Pursuant to the National Attorney General and the Federal Trade The notifications were filed for the Cooperative Research and Production Commission disclosing (1) the identities purpose of invoking the Act’s provisions Act of 1993; The ATM Forum of the parties to and (2) the nature and limiting the recovery of antitrust objectives of a research and plaintiffs to actual damages under Notice is hereby given that, on development venture. The notifications specified circumstances. Pursuant to October 30, 1996, pursuant to § 6(a) of were filed for the purpose of invoking § 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the the National Cooperative Research and the Act’s provisions limiting the parties are: Acorn Communications, Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65239

Boston, MA; AG Communications MI; and Ford Motor Company, under specified circumstances. Systems, Phoenix, AZ; Ameritech Dearborn, MI. Specifically, the changes are as follows: Corporation, Chicago, IL, AT&T The parties have established an Iwatsu Electric Co., Ltd., Tokyo, JAPAN Corporation, Basking Ridge, NJ; Axion, Electrochemical Energy Storage has been added to the venture. Irving, TX; Bellcore, Morristorn, NJ; Technical Team to conduct join No other changes have been made in Boston Technology, Inc., Wakefield, research aimed at developing and the membership or the planned activity MA; Dialogic Corporation, Parsippany, demonstrating the viability of of the joint venture. Membership in the NJ; Ericsson, Inc., Richardson, TX; GTE lightweight, compact, high power venture remains open and the Southwest Incorporated, Irving, TX; energy storage devices, capable of Consortium intends to file additional Hewlett-Packard Company, Cupertino, storing and releasing energy at high written notifications disclosing all CA; Illuminet, Overland Park, KS; power levels at very high levels of changes in membership. Lucent Technologies, Inc., Naperville, efficiency in automotive applications. On March 30, 1995, the Salutation IL; Metapath Corporation, Redmond, The research and development activities Consortium, under the name WA; Microcell Labs Inc., Montre´al, of this group involve efforts to reduce SmartOffice Industry Consortium, filed Que´bec, CANADA; Motorola, Inc., the weight and cost of high power its original notification pursuant to Arlington Heights, IL; Natural electrochemical batteries while § 6(a) of the Act. The Department of MicroSystems Corporation, Natick, MA; improving their power, performance, Justice published a notice in the Federal Tandem Computers, Plano, TX; efficiency, durability and cycle life as Register pursuant to § 6(b) of the Act on TeleCommunications Systems, Inc., well as pursuing material advancements June 27, 1995 (60 FR 33233). The last Annapolis, MD; Technical Marketing which will be required to improve the notification was filed on July 19, 1996. Services, St. Petersburg, FL; Trillium specific energy and reduce the cost of The Department of Justice published a Digital Systems, Inc., Los Angeles, CA; ultra capacitors, while not adversely notice in the Federal Register on and Versant Object Technology, Menlo affecting their high power capability, September 17, 1996 (61 FR 48983). Park, CA. efficiency or cycle life. The results of Constance K. Robinson, INF’s area of planned activity is to act this effort will support the Partnership Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. as an open international industry forum for a New Generation of Vehicles [FR Doc. 96–31463 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] to address interoperability and (PNGV) and allow each party to better management issues relative to serve its customers around the world. BILLING CODE 4410±11±M Intelligent Networks (IN). INF will PNGV is the joint effort of the Federal facilitate the continued growth, Government and the U.S. auto industry acceptance and implementation of IN to develop affordable, fuel-efficient, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR technology and applications, based on low-emission automobiles that meet Office of the Secretary national and international standards. today’s performance standards. To meet Membership in INF remains open and these objectives, the parties will collect, Submission for OMB Review; information regarding participation may exchange and analyze research Comment Request be obtained from Cathy Horn, INF, information, interact with government, 11312 LBJ Freeway #600–1114, Dallas, auto industry and other entities December 5, 1996. TX 75238. interested in this area and perform other The Department of Labor (DOL) has Constance K. Robinson, acts allowed by the Act that would submitted the following public Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. advance these goals. information collection requests (ICRs) to [FR Doc. 96–31464 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Contact: Steven J. Cernak, General the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in BILLING CODE 4410±11±M Motors Corporation Legal Staff, 3031 West Grand Boulevard, P.O. Box 33122, accordance with the Paperwork M.C. 482–207–700, Detroit, MI 48232, Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, Notice Pursuant to the National (313) 974–7735. 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each Cooperative Research and Production Constance K. Robinson, individual ICR, with applicable Act of 1993; PNGV Electrochemical Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. supporting documentation, may be Energy Storage Technical Team [FR Doc. 96–31465 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] obtained by calling the Department of Labor Acting Departmental Clearance BILLING CODE 4410±01±M Notice is hereby given that, on Officer, Theresa M. O’Malley ((202) October 30, 1996, pursuant to Section 219–5095). Individuals who use a 6(a) of the National Cooperative Notice Pursuant to the National telecommunications device for the deaf Research and Production Act of 1993, Cooperative Research and Production (TTY/TDD) may call (202) 219–4720 15 U.S.C. § 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Act of 1993ÐThe Salutation between 1:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern General Motors Corporation filed Consortium time, Monday through Friday. notifications simultaneously with the Comments should be sent to Office of Attorney General and the Federal Trade Notice is hereby given that, on Information and Regulatory Affairs, Commission disclosing (1) the identities October 15, 1996, pursuant to § 6(a) of Attn: OMB Desk Officer for BLS, DM, of the parties to and (2) the nature and the National Cooperative Research and ESA, ETA, MSHA, OSHA, PWBA, or objectives of a research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. VETS, Office of Management and development venture. The notifications § 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the Salutation Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC were filed for the purpose of invoking Consortium has filed written 20503) ((202) 395–7316), within 30 days the Act’s provisions limiting the notifications simultaneously with the from the date of this publication in the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual Attorney General and the Federal Trade Federal Register. damages under the specified Commission disclosing changes in its The OMB is particularly interested in circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) membership. The notifications were comments which: of the Act, the identities of the parties filed for the purpose of extending the • Evaluate whether the proposed are General Motors Corporation, Detroit, Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of collection of information is necessary MI; Chrysler Corporation, Auburn Hills, antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages for the proper performance of the 65240 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices functions of the agency, including Total annual costs (operating/ beneficiary’s claim file. The collection whether the information will have maintaining systems or purchasing of this information is required under 20 practical utility; services): 0. CFR 725.504–513. • Evaluate the accuracy of the Description: Federal Law 5 U.S.C. Theresa M. O’Malley, agency’s estimate of the burden of the 8521 et seq. Provides unemployment Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. proposed collection of information, insurance protection, to former [FR Doc. 96–31475 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] including the validity of the members of the Armed Forces (ex- BILLING CODE 4510±27±M; 4510±30±M methodology and assumptions used; servicepersons) and is referred to in • Enhance the quality, utility, and abbreviated forms as ‘‘UCX.’’ The forms clarity of the information to be in Chapter V through VIII of the UCX Labor Advisory Committee for Trade collected; and Handbook are used in connection with • Negotiations and Trade Policy; Minimize the burden of the the provisions of this benefit assistance. Meeting Notice collection of information on those who Agency: Employment Standards are to respond, including through the Administration. Pursuant to the provisions of the use of appropriate automated, Title: Agreement and Undertaking. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. electronic, mechanical, or other OMB Number: 1215–0034. L. 92–463 as amended), notice is hereby technological collection techniques or Agency Number: OWCP–1. given of a meeting of the Steering other forms of information technology, Frequency: On occasion. Subcommittee of the Labor Advisory e.g., permitting electronic submission of Affected Public: Business or other for- Committee for Trade Negotiations and responses. profit. Trade Policy. Agency: Employment and Training Number of Respondents: 300. Date, time and place: December 18, 1996, Administration. Estimated time Per Respondent: 15 10:00 a.m.–12:00 noon; U.S. Department of Title: ETA Summaries of the minutes. Labor, Room S–1011, 200 Constitution Ave., Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund Total Burden Hours: 75. NW, Washington, D.C. 20210. Activities. Total Annualized capital/startup Purpose: The meeting will include a OMB Number: 1205–0154. review and discussion of current issues costs: 0. which influence U.S. trade policy. Potential Agency Number: ETA 2112, 8401, Total annual costs (operating/ 8403, 8405, 8413, 8414. U.S. negotiating objectives and bargaining maintaining systems or purchasing positions in current and anticipated trade Frequency: Monthly. services): $105.00. negotiations will be discussed. Pursuant to Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Description: The OCWP–1 form is section 9(B) of the Government in the Government. executed by the self-insurer who agrees Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) it has Number of Respondents: ETA 2112, to abide by the Department’s rules and been determined that the meeting will be 8401, 8405, 8413, 8414=53 ETA authorizes the Secretary, in the event of concerned with matters the disclosure of 8403=18. default, to file suit to secure payment which would seriously compromise the Estimated Time Per Respondent: 30 from a bond underwriter or in the case Government’s negotiating objectives or bargaining positions. Accordingly, the minutes. of a Federal Reserve account, to sell the Total Burden Hours: 1,698. meeting will be closed to the public. securities for the same purpose. A Total Annualized capital/startup company cannot be authorized to self- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: costs: 0. Jorge Perez-Lopez, Director, Office of Total annual costs (operating/ insure until this requirement is met. Regulations establishing this International Economics Affairs. Phone: maintaining systems or purchasing (202) 219–7597. services): 0. requirement are at 20 CFR 726.110 for Description: The ETA report 8403 Coal Mine/Black Lung and 20 CFR Signed at Washington, D.C. this 25th day monitors Reed Act funds. The ETA 703.304 for Longshore. of November. reports 2112, 8401, 8405, 8413 and 8414 Agency: Employment Standards Andrew J. Samet, are used to monitor Unemployment Administration. Acting Deputy Under Secretary, International Trust Fund cash flow, disbursement, Title: Request to be Selected Payee. Affairs. measure cash management performance OMB Number: 1215–0166. [FR Doc. 96–31476 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] and to regulate balances pertaining to Agency Number: CM–910. BILLING CODE 4510±28±M unemployment benefits paid from Frequency: One-time. Federal sources. These activities are Affected Public: Individuals or coordinated from State government households; Business or other for-profit; Bureau of Labor Statistics accounting systems. Not-for-profit institutions. Number of Respondents: 600. Proposed Collection; Comment Agency: Employment and Training Request Administration. Estimated time Per Respondent: 20 Title: Unemployment Compensation minutes. ACTION: Notice. for Ex-Servicepersons (UCX) Handbook. Total Burden Hours: 200. OMB Number: 1205–0176. Total Annualized capital/startup SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as Agency Number: ETA 841, 842. costs: 0. part of its continuing effort to reduce Frequency: One-time. Total annual costs (operating/ paperwork and respondent burden, Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal maintaining systems or purchasing conducts a pre-clearance consultation Government. services): $210.00. program to provide the general public Number of Respondents: ETA Description: The CM–910 form is and Federal agencies with an 841=138,573; EETA 843=6,929. completed by representative payee opportunity to comment on proposed Estimated Time Per Respondent: applicants, who are responsible for the and/or continuing collections of ETA=1.5 minutes; ETA 843=1 minute. care of Black Lung beneficiaries. The information in accordance with the Total Burden Hours: 3,579. payee applicant completes the form and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Total Annualized capital/startup mails it for evaluation to the district (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This costs: 0. office that has jurisdiction over the program helps to ensure that requested Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65241 data can be provided in the desired are to respond, including through the quality of the data, and reduce the format, reporting burden (time and use of appropriate automated, burden on respondents. financial resources) is minimized, electronic, mechanical, or other II. Current Actions collection instruments are clearly technological collection techniques or understood, and the impact of collection other forms of information technology, The transition to a jointly collected requirements on respondents can be e.g., permitting electronic submissions and processed survey began in October assessed properly. Currently, the Bureau of responses. of 1996 with the replacement of the of Labor Statistics (BLS) is soliciting ADDRESSES: Send comments to Karin G. current OCSP wage levels data with comments concerning the proposed new Kurz, BLS Clearance Officer, Division of those from the COMP2000 program. BLS collection of ‘‘COMP2000.’’ A copy of Management Systems, Bureau of Labor began collecting a new, area-based the proposed information collection Statistics, Room 3255, 2 Massachusetts sample to collect wage levels. A new request (ICR) can be obtained by Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20212. way of identifying and classifying contacting the individual listed below Ms. Kurz can be reached on (202) 606– occupations in establishments was also in the addressee section of this notices. 7628 (this is not a toll free number). implemented. Area and national DATES bulletins replacing the OCSP : Written comments must be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submitted to the office listed in the publications will be produced beginning addressee section below on or before I. Background in 1997. February 10, 1997. BLS is particularly The COMP2000 survey, when fully in Beginning in 1998, the COMP 2000 interested in comments which help the place, will allow the statistical series survey will include the collection of agency to: now generated by three separate BLS benefits. This collection will include • Evaluate whether the proposed compensation programs to be jointly information on the cost, provisions, and collection of information is necessary produced. These programs are the availability of the major types of for the proper performance of the Occupational Compensation Survey employee benefits. This information functions of the agency, including Program (OCSP), Employment Cost will be integrated with the wage whether the information will have Index (ECI), and Employee Benefits information to tabulate the total practical utility; Survey (EBS). Data of these types are employer cost of compensation. • Evaluate the accuracy of the critical for setting Federal white-collar Data will be updated on either an agency’s estimate of the burden of the salaries, determining monetary policy annual or quarterly basis. The updates proposed collection of information, (as a Principal Economic Indicator), and will allow for production of data on including the validity of the providing data for compensation change in earnings and total methodology and assumptions used; administrators and researchers in the compensation over time. Enhance the quality; utility of the private sector. By uniting the collection information to be collected; and of these surveys, BLS intends to Type of Review: New collection. • Minimize the burden of the decrease the cost of gathering and Agency: Bureau of Labor Statistics. collection of information on those who processing these statistics, improve the Title: COMP2000. 65242 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices Total burden hours (est.) used) 2 (3 Avg. per year used) 7,261 62,221 1,029 1,029 1,029 1,029 1,029 2287 (3,430 avg. per year used) 4,801 4,801 4,801 4,801 4,801 10,673 (16,009 Avg. per year 194 (583 Avg. per year used) 906 (2,718 Avg. per year used) 518 (777 Avg. per year used) 11,228 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 49 30 15 25 49 262 262 220 (minutes) per response Average time ...... 623 158 133 6,393 6,393 6,393 6,393 6,393 4,193 32,497 32,497 32,497 16,545 82,293 32,497 32,497 19,567 22,456 Total responses ...... Frequency ...... 8 ...... Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual Annual Annual Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual or Quarterly Annual Annual Quarterly 8 133 623 158 8,005 4,677 4,677 4,677 4,677 4,677 1,715 5,614 21,823 21,823 21,823 21,823 16,545 32,578 21,823 Total respondents ...... 2 ...... # ...... 1 ...... 2 ...... # # Form 1 ...... # ...... All figures are based on a three-year average. The total respondents and responses columns do not equal the totals, because most asked to give data that Total Note: Government Establishment Form Government Generic Level Form Government Generic Level Form Government Wage Form Government Work Schedule Form Government Benefits Collection Form (FYs 98 and 99 only) Private Establishment Form Private Generic Level Form Private Establishment Generic Level Form Private Establishment Wage Form Private Establishment Work Schedule Form Private Establishment Benefits Collection Form (FYs 98 and 99 only) Government Benefit Tests Form (FY 97 only) Private Establishment Benefit Tests Form (FY 97 only) Employment Cost Index Collection Form (FYs 97 and 98 only) Employment Cost Index Update Form Employment Cost Index Quality Assurance Form (FYs 97 and 98 only) Collection done solely on Computer will be used on several forms. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65243

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): 70977, Southwest Station, Washington, 1996, on the possibility of consolidating $0. DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8380. the CARP proceeding to determine Total Burden Cost (operating/ terms and rates for digital phonorecord SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maintenance): $0. deliveries with the proceeding to adjust Comments submitted in response to Background the mechanical royalty rate for the this notice will be summarized and/or On November 1, 1995, Congress making and distributing of physical included in the request for Office of passed the Digital Performance Right in phonorecords. 61 FR 37215. Management and Budget approval of the Sound Recordings Act of 1995 (‘‘Digital Petition To Vacate information collection request; they also Performance Act’’). Public Law No. 104– On November 8, 1996, the Library will become a matter of public record. 39, 109 Stat. 336. Among other things, received a joint motion from the Signed at Washington, D.C., this 5th day of it confirms and clarifies that the scope December, 1996. Recording Industry Association of of the compulsory license to make and America, the National Music Publishers’ W. Stuart Rust, Jr., distribute phonorecords of nondramatic Association, Inc., and The Harry Fox Acting Chief, Division of Management musical compositions includes the right Agency, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘the Parties’’) Systems, Bureau of Labor Statistics. to distribute or authorize distribution by to vacate the scheduled dates appearing [FR Doc. 96–31474 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] means of a digital transmission which in the July 17, 1996, Federal Register BILLING CODE 4510±24±M constitutes a ‘‘digital phonorecord notice for convening a CARP. The delivery.’’ 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(A). A Parties submit that they are in ‘‘digital phonorecord delivery’’ is continuous negotiations to reach a LIBRARY OF CONGRESS defined as each individual delivery of a private agreement as to the terms and phonorecord by digital transmission of rates for digital phonorecord deliveries, Copyright Office a sound recording which results in a and that the Library’s announced [Docket No. 96±4 CARP DPRA] specifically identifiable reproduction by schedule for CARP proceedings will or for any transmission recipient prematurely terminate these Digital Phonorecord Delivery Rate ** *.’’ 17 U.S.C. 115(d). negotiations and eliminate the Adjustment Proceeding The Digital Performance Act likelihood that a private agreement will established that the rate for all digital be reached. The Parties request an AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of phonorecord deliveries made or extension of the negotiation period until Congress. authorized under a compulsory license April 1, 1997, at which point they will ACTION: Notice of precontroversy on or before December 31, 1997, is the inform the Library if they need discovery schedule. same rate in effect for the making and additional time. distribution of physical phonorecords. SUMMARY: The Library of Congress is In support of their request, the Parties 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(A)(i). For digital submit that a CARP proceeding to set announcing a new precontroversy phonorecord deliveries made or discovery period for determining terms and rates for digital phonorecord authorized after December 31, 1997, the deliveries, if required, need not be reasonable rates and terms for digital Digital Performance Act established a transmissions that constitute a digital completed in calendar year 1997. process that may take two-steps for Despite the fact that the current rates for phonorecord delivery. The Library is determining the terms and rates. 17 also establishing new dates for the filing digital phonorecord deliveries expire on U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(A)(ii). The first step in December 31, 1997, the Parties submit of petitions to convene a Copyright the process is a voluntary negotiation Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP) and that any rates and terms established period initiated by the Librarian of through a CARP proceeding, no matter Notices of Intent to Participate. This Congress to enable copyright owners action is intended to give all interested when it is completed, will be effective and users of the section 115 digital beginning January 1, 1998. 17 U.S.C. parties additional time to negotiate phonorecord delivery license to voluntary agreements. 115(c)(3)(D). As a result, the Parties negotiate the terms and rates of the assert that no party will be prejudiced DATES: Petitions to convene a CARP to license. The Librarian initiated this by vacating the current schedule and determine the terms and rates for digital period on July 17, 1996, and directed it allowing the current negotiations to phonorecord deliveries must be filed by to end on December 31, 1996. 61 FR continue until completed. March 3, 1997. Notices of Intent to 37213 (July 17, 1996). In addition to their request to vacate Participate must be filed by March 17, The second step of the process is the the CARP schedule, the Parties oppose 1997. convening of a CARP to determine at this time the consolidation of the ADDRESSES: Petitions to convene a reasonable terms and rates for digital digital phonorecord delivery CARP CARP and Notices of Intent to phonorecord deliveries for parties not proceeding with the CARP proceeding Participate, when sent by mail, should subject to a negotiated agreement. In the for adjusting the mechanical royalty rate be addressed to: Copyright Arbitration July 17, 1996, Federal Register notice, for physical phonorecords. Should Royalty Panel (CARP), P.O. Box 70977, the Library stated that CARP negotiations for a digital phonorecord Southwest Station, Washington, DC proceedings would begin, in accordance delivery agreement fail, the Parties will 20024. If hand delivered, they should be with the rules of 37 CFR part 251, on notify the Library at that time as to their brought to: Office of the General January 31, 1997. 61 FR 37214. The views on consolidation. Counsel, Copyright Office, James Library also directed those parties not Madison Memorial Building, Room LM– subject to a negotiated agreement to file New Precontroversy Discovery 407, First and Independence Avenues, their petitions to convene a CARP, as Schedule SE, Washington, DC. required by 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(D), by The Library is announcing a new and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: January 10, 1997, and their Notices of complete precontroversy discovery William Roberts, Senior Attorney for Intent to Participate in CARP schedule for a CARP proceeding to Compulsory Licenses, or Tanya proceedings by January 17, 1997. Id. In establish the terms and rates for the Sandros, Attorney Advisor, Copyright addition, the Library directed interested section 115 license for digital Arbitration Royalty Panels, P.O. Box parties to comment by November 8, phonorecord deliveries for parties not 65244 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices subject to a negotiated agreement. The is in the offing. However, the Parties, a Notice of Intent to Participate must file Library is creating a new schedule to and any others who file a Notice of a written direct case on the date provide all interested parties with Intent to Participate in the CARP prescribed above. Failure to submit a additional time to negotiate, subject to proceeding, are put on notice that this timely filed written direct case will the following comments. is the last time the Library will be able result in dismissal of that party’s case. As the Parties correctly observed in to alter the schedule for this proceeding. Parties must comply with the form and their joint motion, the Library set the The schedule described below gives all content of written direct cases as original schedule for CARP proceedings parties almost one year to negotiate prescribed in § 251.43. Each party to the based on the termination of the current voluntary agreements, a decidedly proceeding must deliver a complete rates for digital phonorecord deliveries longer period of time than Congress has copy of its written direct case to each of on December 31, 1997. 61 FR 37214 established for future digital the other parties to the proceeding, as (‘‘Should negotiations fail and the phonorecord delivery proceedings. well as file a complete copy with the Librarian be petitioned to convene a The following is the procedural Copyright Office by close of business on CARP, written direct cases would have schedule for the digital phonorecord April 1, 1997, the first day of the 45-day to be filed by January 31, 1997, if the delivery CARP proceeding, including period. precontroversy period (three months), the filing deadlines for Notices of Intent After the filing of the written direct the arbitration proceeding (six months) to Participate, additional comments on cases, document production will and the Librarian’s review of the CARP’s the advisability of consolidating the proceed according to the above- decision (two months) is to conclude by digital phonorecord delivery proceeding described schedule. Each party may December 31, 1997. Otherwise, there with the proceeding for adjustment of request underlying documents related to will be a lapse in time when no rates the mechanical royalty rate for physical each of the other parties’ written direct apply to digital phonorecord phonorecords, and the deadline for cases by April 8, 1997, and responses to deliveries.’’). The Parties submit that filing petitions to initiate a CARP those requests are due by April 14, there will not be any lapse because 17 proceeding for digital phonorecord 1997. Documents which are produced as U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(D) provides that terms delivery transmissions. a result of the requests must be and rates determined through a CARP exchanged by April 18, 1996. It is proceeding are effective on January 1, Action Deadline important to note that all initial 1998, no matter when adopted. As a document requests must be made by the result, the Parties view a CARP Petitions to Initiate March 3, 1997. April 8, 1997, deadline. Thus, for proceeding as an open-ended process, in CARP Proceeding to example, if one party asserts facts that Establish Terms and that it could take place in 1998, 1999, Rates for Digital Pho- expressly rely on the results of a or any subsequent year with a norecord Deliveries. particular study that was not included retroactive application to January 1, Notices of Intent to March 17, 1997. in the written direct case, another party 1998. Participate. desiring production of that study must The Library does not share the Parties’ Comments on Consoli- March 17, 1997. make its request by April 8; otherwise, view that the first CARP proceeding to dation of Digital Pho- the party is not entitled to production of set terms and rates for digital norecord Delivery the study. phonorecord deliveries is so open- CARP Proceeding The precontroversy discovery ended. Congress did intend that the With CARP Proceed- schedule also establishes deadlines for parties have a sufficient period of time ing for Physical follow-up discovery requests. Follow-up Phonorecords. to negotiate voluntary agreements, 141 Filing of Written Direct April 1, 1997. requests are due by April 23, 1997, and Cong. Rec. S11,945, S11,958 (daily ed. Cases. responses to those requests are due by August 8, 1995), but there is no Requests for Underly- April 8, 1997. April 30, 1997. Any documentation indication that the period was to be ing Documents to produced as a result of a follow-up indefinite. The statute is clear that Written Direct Cases. request must be exchanged by May 12, subsequent CARP proceedings to adjust Responses to Re- April 14, 1997. 1997. An example of a follow-up request terms and rates for digital phonorecord quests for Underlying would be as follows. In the above deliveries must be ‘‘repeated and Documents. example, one party expressly relies on concluded * * * in each fifth calendar Completion of Docu- April 18, 1997. the results of a particular study which ment Production. year after 1997’’. 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(F). Follow-Up Request for April 23, 1997. is not included in its written direct case. The statute is silent as to how long the Underlying Docu- As noted above, a party desiring 1997 CARP proceeding is to take, but it ments. production of that study or survey must is reasonable to conclude from the Responses to Follow- April 30, 1997. make its request by April 8, 1997. If, language of section 115(c)(3)(F) that up Requests. after receiving a copy of the study, the Congress did not intend the initiation Motions Related to May 5, 1997. reviewing party determines that the and conclusion of the CARP proceeding Document Produc- study heavily relies on the results of a to take place much after the current tion. statistical survey, it would be rates expire on December 31, 1997, Production of Docu- May 12, 1997. appropriate for that party to make a ments in Response notwithstanding that new terms and to Follow-Up Re- follow-up request for production of the rates are effective on January 1, 1998. quests. statistical survey by the April 23, 1997, The Library has balanced its All Other Motions, Peti- May 15, 1997. deadline. Again, failure to make a interpretation of what Congress desired tions and Objections. timely follow-up request would waive for the first CARP proceeding for digital Initiate CARP ...... June 23, 1997. that party’s right to request production phonorecord deliveries with the interest of the survey. of promoting voluntary agreements and, The precontroversy discovery period, In addition to the deadlines for is therefore, announcing a new as specified by 37 CFR 251.45(b), begins document requests and production, schedule. The Library is doing this in no on April 1, 1997, with the filing of there are two deadlines for the filing of small part because of the representation written direct cases by each party. Each precontroversy motions. Motions related of the Parties that a voluntary agreement party in this proceeding who has filed to document production must be filed Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65245 by May 5, 1997. Typically, these INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS motions are motions to compel WATER COMMISSION NOTICE BOARD production of requested documents for failure to produce them, but they may Publication of Revised Project Revision of Statement of Organization also be motions for protective orders. Certification Criteria and Functions Finally, all other motions, petitions and AGENCY: Border Environment AGENCY: National Labor Relations objections must be filed by May 15, Cooperation Commission (BECC). Board. 1997, the final day of the 45-day ACTION: Notice of restructuring of El ACTION: precontroversy discovery period. These Publication of revised project Paso Resident Office. motions, petitions, and objections certification criteria. include, but are not limited to, SUMMARY: The National Labor Relations objections to arbitrators appearing on SUMMARY: This notice announces Board gives notice of its intent to the arbitrator list under 37 CFR 251.4, publication of the revised Project restructure the El Paso Resident office, and petitions to dispense with formal Certification Criteria document which services the three counties in the hearings under § 251.41(b). approved by the BECC Board of State of Texas of Culberson, El Paso and Directors on November 9, 1996. Hudspeth, on January 31, 1997. On this Due to the strict time limitations date, the public office space in El Paso between the procedural steps of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: will be eliminated, but the Agency will precontroversy discovery schedule, we M.R. Ybarra, Secretary, United States continue to maintain a resident agent, a are requiring that all discovery requests Section, International Boundary and post office box and a telephone number and responses to such requests be Water Commission, telephone: (915) in El Paso. This restructuring is being served by hand or fax on the party to 534–6698; or April Lander, Program effectuated in order to meet the whom such response or request is Manager—Environment, Border objective of reducing governmental directed. Filing of requests and Environment Cooperation Commission, costs, improving administrative responses with the Copyright Office is P.O. Box 221648, El Paso, Texas 79913, efficiency and streamlining the not required. telephone: (011–52–16) 29–23–95; fax: operations of the Agency. The resident (011–52–16) 29–23–97; e-mail: Filing and service of all agent located in El Paso will continue to [email protected]. precontroversy motions, petitions, handle the investigation of unfair labor objections, oppositions and replies shall SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. practice charges and representation be as follows. In order to be considered Section, International Boundary and petitions arising in that area. Combined properly filed with the Librarian and/or Water Commission, on behalf of the with a post office box for filing charges Copyright Office, all pleadings must be Border Environment Cooperation and petitions and related brought to the Copyright Office at the Commission (BECC), announces that the correspondence and a local telephone following address no later than 5 p.m. revised Project Certification Criteria number to handle calls from the public seeking assistance, it is anticipated that of the filing deadline date: Office of the were approved by the BECC Board of the restructuring of the El Paso Resident Register of Copyrights, Room LM–403, Directors during their November 9, 1996 Public Meeting in Laredo, Texas, Office should not adversely affect our James Madison Memorial Building, 101 following an extensive public review service to the public in that area. Independence Avenue, S.E., and comment process. The changes in Washington, DC 20540. The form and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: this document from its original John J. Toner, 202–273–1940. content of all motions, petitions, community-tested version reflect the Dated, December 6, 1996, Washington, DC. objections, oppositions and replies filed knowledge gained from a year’s with the Office must be in compliance operating experience. The Criteria are By Direction of the Board: with §§ 251.44(b)–(e). As provided in utilized by the BECC to evaluate and National Labor Relations Board § 251.45(b), oppositions to any motions certify environmental infrastructure John J. Toner, or petitions must be filed with the projects along the U.S./Mexico border. Executive Secretary. Office no later than seven business days Projects that are certified by the BECC [FR Doc. 96–31459 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] from the date of filing of such motion qualify for financing consideration from BILLING CODE 7545±01±M or petition. Replies are due five business the North American Development Bank days from the date of filing of such (NADBank), BECC’s sister institution, oppositions. Service of all motions, and other funding sources. The Criteria NUCLEAR REGULATORY petitions, objections, oppositions and were first adopted by the BECC Board in COMMISSION replies must be made on counsel or the August 1995. A matrix summarizing parties by means no slower than public comments received during the Agency Information Collection overnight express mail on the same day public review process and the BECC Activities: Proposed Collection; the pleading is filed. responses will be available to the Comment Request public. Furthermore, the revised Criteria Dated: December 6, 1996. and the matrix will be available on AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Marilyn J. Kretsinger, BECC’s Home Page: http:// Commission (NRC). Acting General Counsel. cocef.interjuarez.com. Electronic and/or ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to [FR Doc. 96–31425 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] hard copies of the document are submit an information collection BILLING CODE 1410±33±P available by request. request to OMB and solicitation of Dated: December 5, 1996. public comment. M.R. Ybarra, SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a Secretary, U.S. IBWC. submittal to OMB for review of [FR Doc. 96–31414 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] continued approval of information BILLING CODE 4710±03±M collections under the provisions of the 65246 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 who are located outside of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear U.S.C. Chapter 35). Washington, DC, area can dial Waste; Notice of Meeting Information pertaining to the FedWorld, 1–800–303–9672, or use the requirement to be submitted: FedWorld Internet address: The Advisory Committee on Nuclear 1. The title of the information fedworld.gov (Telnet). The document Waste (ACNW) will hold its 89th meeting on January 28, 29 and 30, 1997, collection: 10 CFR Part 62—‘‘Criteria will be available on the bulletin board Room T–2B3, at 11545 Rockville Pike, and Procedures for Emergency Access to for 30 days after the signature date of Non-federal and Regional Low-level Rockville, Maryland. this notice. If assistance is needed in The entire meeting will be open to Waste Disposal Facilities.’’ accessing the document, please contact 2. Current OMB approval number: public attendance, with the exception of the FedWorld help desk at 703–487– a portion that may be closed to discuss 3150–0143. 4608. Additional assistance in locating 3. How often the collection is information the release of which would the document is available from the NRC required: Requests are made only when constitute a clearly unwarranted Public Document Room, nationally at 1– access to a non-federal low-level waste invasion of personal privacy pursuant to 800–397–4209, or within the disposal facility is denied, which results 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6). Washington, DC, area at 202–634–3273. in a threat to public health and safety The schedule for this meeting is as and/or common defense and security. Comments and questions about the follows: 4. Who is required or asked to report: information collection requirements Tuesday, January 28, 1997—8:30 A.M. Generators of low-level waste who are may be directed to the NRC Clearance until 6:00 P.M. denied access to a non-federal low-level Officer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear Wednesday, January 29, 1997—8:30 waste facility. Regulatory Commission, T–6 F33, A.M. until 6:00 P.M. 5. The number of annual respondents: Washington, DC, 20555–0001, by Thursday, January 30, 1997—8:30 A.M. No requests for emergency access have telephone at (301) 415–7233, or by until 4:00 P.M. been received to date. It is estimated Internet electronic mail at During this meeting, the Committee that up to one request would be made [email protected]. plans to consider the following: every three years. A. Key Technical Issue Status—The 6. The number of hours needed Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day Committee will review the status of annually to complete the requirement or of December, 1996. NRC staff key technical issue efforts request: It is estimated that 680 hours For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. relating to high-level waste and the staff would be required to review the request, Gerald F. Cranford, integration task force work. or approximately 227 hours per year. Designated Senior Official for Information B. Meeting with the Director, Division 7. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 62 sets out Resources Management. of Waste Management—The Committee the information which will have to be [FR Doc. 96–31440 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] will meet with the Director of NRC’s provided to the NRC by any low-level BILLING CODE 7590±01±P Division of Waste Management, Office waste generator seeking emergency of Nuclear Materials Safety and access to an operating low-level waste Safeguards to discuss items of current disposal facility. The information is interest, such as progress at the Yucca required to allow NRC to determine if [Docket No. 72±18±ISFSI, ASLBP No. 97± Mountain project. denial of disposal constitutes a serious 720±01±ISFSI] C. Defense In-Depth—The Committee will discuss with an NMSS and immediate threat to public health Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; and safety or common defense and representative the history of the defense Northern States Power Company in depth philosophy and subsystem security. (Independent Spent Fuel Storage Submit, by February 10, 1997, requirements in 10 CFR 60. Installation); Cancellation of comments that address the following D. Planning for Commission Prehearing Conference questions: Meeting—The Committee will prepare 1. Is the proposed collection of December 5, 1996. for their February 1997 meeting with the information necessary for the NRC to Commission. Selection of topics and the properly perform its functions? Does the Notice is hereby given that, as a result preparation of background material will information have practical utility? of the suspension of the proceeding be discussed. 2. Is the burden estimate accurate? granted by the Atomic Safety and E. Preparation of ACNW Reports— 3. Is there a way to enhance the Licensing Board’s Memorandum and The Committee will discuss proposed quality, utility, and clarity of the Order (Motion to Suspend Proceeding), reports, including: (1) radionuclide information to be collected? LBP–96–26, December 3, 1996, the transport at Yucca Mountain, (2) 4. How can the burden of the prehearing conference announced by specification of a critical group and information collection be minimized, our Notice of Prehearing Conference, reference biosphere to be used in the including the use of automated dated November 1, 1996, 61 FR 57721 performance assessment for a nuclear collection techniques or other forms of (November 7, 1996), has been cancelled. waste disposal facility, (3) time of information technology? The conference will be rescheduled at a compliance in low-level waste disposal, A copy of the draft supporting later date following resumption of the and (4) comments on selected NRC statement may be viewed free of charge proceeding. Strategic Assessment and Rebaselining at the NRC Public Document Room, Dated: December 5, 1996, Rockville, Decision Setting Issue papers. 2120 L Street NW, (lower level), Maryland. F. Committee Activities/Future Washington, DC. Members of the public For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Agenda/Appointment of New who are in the Washington, DC, area can Board. Members—The Committee will consider access this document via modem on the topics proposed for future consideration Public Document Room Bulletin Board Charles Bechhoefer, by the full Committee and Working (NRC’s Advance Copy Document Chairman, Administrative Judge. Groups. The Committee will discuss Library), NRC subsystem at FedWorld, [FR Doc. 96–31441 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] ACNW-related activities of individual 703–321–3339. Members of the public BILLING CODE 7590±01±P members. The Committee will also Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65247 consider the qualifications of potential ACNW meet- The NRC Commission Meeting new ACNW members. A portion of this ing No. 1997 ACNW meeting dates Schedule can be found on the Internet session may be closed to public at: attendance to discuss information the 90th ...... February 25±27, 1997 http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/ 91st ...... April 22±24, 1997 release of which would constitute a schedule.htm clearly unwarranted invasion of 92nd ...... May 20±22, 1997 93rd ...... July 22±24, 1997 This notice is distributed by mail to personal privacy pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 94th ...... September 23±25, 1997 several hundred subscribers; if you no 552b(c)(6). 95th ...... October 21±23, 1997 longer wish to receive it, or would like G. Miscellaneous—The Committee 96th ...... November 18±20, 1997 to be added to it, please contact the will discuss miscellaneous matters 97th ...... December 16±18, 1997 Office of the Secretary, Attn: Operations related to the conduct of Committee Branch, Washington, D.C. 20555 (301– activities and organizational activities Dated: December 5, 1996. 415–1661). and complete discussion of matters and Andrew L. Bates, In addition, distribution of this specific issues that were not completed Advisory Committee Management Office. meeting notice over the internet system during previous meetings, as time and [FR Doc. 96–31442 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] is available. If you are interested in availability of information permit. BILLING CODE 7590±01±P receiving this Commission meeting Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings were schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to [email protected] or published in the Federal Register on Sunshine Act Meeting October 8, 1996 (61 FR 52814). In [email protected]. accordance with these procedures, oral DATE: Weeks of December 9, 16, 23, and Dated: December 6, 1996. or written statements may be presented 30, 1966. William M. Hill, Jr., by members of the public, electronic PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference SECY Tracking Officer, Office of the recordings will be permitted only Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Secretary. during those portions of the meeting Maryland. [FR Doc. 96–31535 Filed 12–9–96; 10:20 am] that are open to the public, and BILLING CODE 7590±01±M questions may be asked only by STATUS: Public and Closed. members of the Committee, its MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: consultants, and staff. Persons desiring Week of December 9 Draft NUREG/CR Report; Availability to make oral statements should notify Thursday, December 12 the Chief, Nuclear Waste Branch, Mr. 3:30 p.m., Affirmation Session (Public The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Richard K. Major, as far in advance as Meeting) (if needed) has made available, a draft NUREG/CR– practicable so that appropriate Week of December 16—Tentative 6412, ‘‘Aging and Loss-of-Coolant arrangements can be made to schedule Monday, December 16 Accident (LOCA) Testing of Electrical the necessary time during the meeting 2:00 p.m., Briefing on Inspection Connections.’’ About 12 different types for such statements. Use of still, motion Criteria, Evolution of Assessment, of connections commonly used in picture, and television cameras during and SALP System (Public Meeting) nuclear power plants were tested by the this meeting will be limited to selected Tuesday, December 17 Sandia National Laboratories and the portions of the meeting as determined 2:00 p.m., Meeting with Chairman of test results are reported in the draft of by the ACNW Chairman. Information Nuclear Safety Research Review NUREG/CR–6412. The connections regarding the time to be set aside for this Committee (NSRRC) (Public were aged for 6 months under purpose may be obtained by contacting Meeting) (Contact: Jose Cortez, 301– simultaneous thermal (99 degrees C) the Chief, Nuclear Waste Branch, prior 415–6596) and radiation (45 GY/hr) conditions to to the meeting. In view of the possibility 3:00 p.m., Affirmation Session (Public simulate 60 years in a nuclear power that the schedule for ACNW meetings Meeting) plant environment. The objective of this may be adjusted by the Chairman as Week of December 23—Tentative program was to investigate the necessary to facilitate the conduct of the There are no meetings scheduled for performance of connections aged to a meeting, persons planning to attend the Week of December 23. 60-year life to determine their suitability for life extension beyond the current should notify Mr. Major as to their Week of December 30—Tentative nominal 40-year qualified life. The particular needs. There are no meetings scheduled for results show that 50% of the connection Further information regarding topics the Week of December 30. to be discussed, whether the meeting types were unable to successfully pass has been cancelled or rescheduled, the * * * * * the submerged dielectric test following Chairman’s ruling on requests for the By a vote of 5–0 on December 6, the a simulated life of 60-year and LOCA opportunity to present oral statements Commission determined pursuant to exposure. The problems were not and the time allotted therefor can be U.S.C. 552b(e) and 10 CFR Sec. 9.107(a) limited to any one family of electrical obtained by contacting Mr. Richard K. of the Commission’s rules that connections. Major, Chief, Nuclear Waste Branch ‘‘Affirmation of Cleveland Electric The preliminary review of this draft (telephone 301/415–7366), between 8:00 Illuminating Co.—Commission Review NUREG/CR by the NRC staff indicates A.M. and 5:00 P.M. EST. of LBP–95–17’’ be held on December 6, that the test results are inconclusive and ACNW meeting notices, meeting and on less than one week’s notice to that the additional investigation is transcripts, and letter reports are now the public. warranted. However, the NRC staff available on FedWorld from the ‘‘NRC The Schedule for Commission believes that this draft report will be of MAIN MENU.’’ Direct Dial Access Meetings Is Subject to Change on Short interest to the nuclear industry. number to FedWorld is (800) 303–9672; Notice. To Verify the Status of Meetings Comments, if submitted by February 28, the local direct dial number is 703–321– Call (Recording)—(301) 415–1292. 1997, would be considered by the NRC 3339. Contact Person For More Information: staff. Written comments may be The ACNW meeting dates for Bill Hill (301) 415–1661. submitted to the Rules Review and Calendar Year 1997 are provided below: * * * * * Directives Branch, Division of Freedom 65248 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices of Information and Publications Commission, Washington, DC 20555– • The results of the IPEs compared Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 0001. with the perspectives gained from Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Draft NUREG–1560 provides NUREG–1150. Washington, DC 20555. Copies of perspectives gained from the review of Draft NUREG–1560 also documents comments received may be examined in the IPEs submitted in response to the staff’s preliminary overall the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 Generic Letter 88–20. Five major conclusions and observations gained L Street, NW. (Lower Level), objectives were pursued in documenting from the perspectives of each of the Washington, DC. perspectives from the reviews: above noted areas. These conclusions A copy of the draft NUREG/CR–6412 (1) The impact of the IPE program on and observations address the following: is available for inspection at the reactor safety— • Generic Letter 88–20 objective Commission’s Public Document Room. • The number and type of (including improvement of plant safety) Requests for a single copy of the draft vulnerabilities or other safety issues that • Regulatory follow-up activities NUREG/CR should be made in writing have been identified, and the related —Plant safety enhancements to Mr. Satish K. Aggarwal, Senior safety enhancements that have been —Containment performance Program Manager, U.S. Nuclear implemented, improvements Regulatory Commission, Washington, • The impact that the improvements —Additional review of IPE/PRA DC 20555; or by fax at (301) 415–5074. have had on plant safety, and —Plants with relatively high CDF or Telephone requests cannot be • Whether any of these improvements conditional containment failure accommodated. have ‘‘generic’’ implications for all or a probability Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day class of plants. • Safety issues of December, 1996. (2) Plant-specific features and —Unresolved safety issue (USI) A–45 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. assumptions that play a significant role —Other USIs and generic safety issues Andrew J. Murphy, in the estimation of core damage (GSIs) Acting Director, Division of Engineering frequency (CDF) and the analysis of —Potential GSIs Technology, Office of Nuclear Regulatory containment performance— • Plant inspection activities Research. • Important design and operational • Areas for research [FR Doc. 96–31438 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] features that affect CDF and • Commission’s Safety Goals BILLING CODE 7590±01±P containment performance, with regard • Use of NUREG–1560 to the different reactor and containment —Accident management types, —Maintenance rule Individual Plant Examination Program: • The influence of the IPE —Risk-informed regulation Perspectives on Reactor Safety and methodology and assumptions on the —Miscellaneous issues Plant Performance, Volume 2, Parts 2± results, with regard to the different • Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) 5, Draft reactor and containment types, and Draft NUREG–1560 is comprised of • AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Significant plant improvements to two volumes. Volume 1 (Part 1) Commission. reduce CDF and increase containment provides an overall summary of the key performance, with regard to the ACTION: Availability of NUREG, Draft for perspectives (published October 1996). public comment; Notice of Public different reactor and containment types. Volume 2 (Parts 2 through 5) provides workshop meeting. (3) The importance of the operator’s a more in-depth discussion of the role in CDF estimation and containment perspectives summarized in Part 1. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory performance analysis— The staff recognizes that licensees Commission has published a draft of • Operator actions that are have updated their IPEs/PRAs which ‘‘Individual Plant Examination Program: consistently important in the IPEs, may have an impact on the perspectives Perspectives on Reactor Safety and Plant • Operator actions that are important discussed in the draft NUREG, and Performance, Summary Report,’’ because of plant-specific characteristics, therefore, the preliminary conclusions NUREG–1560, Volume 2, Parts 2–5. and and observations noted by the staff. This volume provides an in-depth • Influence of modeling assumptions Accuracy of the reported results in the discussion of the insights and findings and different methodologies on the IPEs and the appropriateness of the (summarized in Volume 1, Part 1, results. interpretation of these results will also Summary Report) from a review of the (4) IPEs with respect to risk-informed have a potential impact on the staff’s Individual Plant Examinations (IPE) regulation— perspectives, conclusions and submitted to the agency in response to • Quality of the IPEs, given the observations. Consequently, this Generic Letter 88–20. In addition, the limited scope of the staff’s review, NUREG is published as a draft for NRC staff will conduct a public compared to a quality probabilistic risk comment. All interested parties are workshop to discuss the contents of the assessment, and therefore, the potential encouraged to submit comments. draft NUREG and to solicit comments. role of the IPEs in risk-informed Mail comments on Draft NUREG– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Draft regulation. 1560 (Volumes 1 and 2) by February 14, NUREG–1560 (Volume 2, Parts 2–5) is (5) General Perspectives— 1997 to Mary Drouin, Office of Nuclear available for inspection and copying for • The implication of the IPE results Regulatory Research, Mail Stop T–10 a fee at the NRC Public Document relative to the current risk level of U.S. E50, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Room, 2120 L Street N.W. (Lower plants compared with the Commission’s Commission, Washington, DC 20555– Level), Washington D.C. 20555–0001. A Safety Goals, 0001. free single copy of Draft NUREG–1560 • The improvements that have been Workshop Meeting Information: A 3- (Volume 2, Parts 2–5), to the extent of identified as a result of the Station day workshop will be held to address supply, may be requested by writing to Blackout Rule and analyzed as part of comments and answer questions. Distribution Series, Printing and Mail the IPE, and the impact of these Persons other than NRC staff and NRC Services Branch, Office of improvements on reducing the contractors interested in making a Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory likelihood of station blackout, presentation at the workshop should Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65249 notify Mary Drouin, US Nuclear • Operational perspectives ** FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regulatory Commission, MS T10E50, • Perspectives on impact of IPE Patricia Paige, (202) 606–0830. Washington DC 20555, phone (301) program on reactor safety ** SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office • 415–6675, fax (301) 415–5062, e-mail Perspectives on IPEs with respect to of Personnel Management published its [email protected] or Edward Chow, US risk-informed regulation ** • last monthly notice updating appointing Nuclear Regulatory Commission, MS Perspectives on IPEs and authorities established or revoked under T10E50, Washington DC 20555, phone implication to Commission’s Safety the Excepted Service provisions of 5 (301) 415–6571, fax (301) 415–5062, e- Goals ** • CFR 213 on November 1, 1996 (61 FR mail [email protected]. Perspectives on IPEs and impact of 56575). Individual authorities Dates: April 7, 8, 9, 1997. Station Blackout rule on CDFs ** established or revoked under Schedules • IPEs perspectives compared to Location: Austin, Texas. A and B and established under NUREG–1150 perspectives ** Hotel: Hyatt Regency, 208 Barton Schedule C between October 1, 1996, IPE database demonstration Springs Rd., Austin, Texas, 78704. and October 31, 1996, appear in the Please make your reservations directly 5:30 pm to 6:30 pm ** Each ‘‘presentation’’ is comprised listing below. Future notices will be with the Hyatt Regency Hotel, phone published on the fourth Tuesday of each (512) 477–1234 (or 1 800 233–1234). of three discussions: (1) Presentation by NRC of overview month, or as soon as possible thereafter. Mention that you will be attending the of perspectives. A consolidated listing of all authorities NRC–IPE Workshop to receive the (2) Presentation by NRC of staff’s as of June 30 will also be published. meeting group rate of $113/night plus interpretation of comments received and Schedule A tax (single/double). Hotel reservations staff’s response. by March 7, 1997 are required in order (3) Brief open time for questions on The following Schedule A authorities to receive the group rate (subject to clarification. were established in October 1996: availability). Registration: The workshop Tuesday, April 8, 1997 Department of Defense registration fee is $75 USD ($100 for late 7:30 am to 4:00 pm Two positions above GS–15 in registration); registration fee is payable registration support of the President’s Commission by check or money orders drawn on US 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on Critical Infrastructure Protection. banks payable to Sandia National Presentations/comments by public This authority remains in effect for six Laboratories; no credit cards accepted. 5:30 pm to 6:30 pm months after termination of the Mail registration fees to Martha Lucero, IPE database demonstration Commission. Effective October 1, 1996. Sandia National Laboratories, PO Box Wednesday, April 9, 1997 Department of Transportation 5800, MS 0129, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185–0129. Please include 7:30 am to 4:00 pm Two positions above GS–15 in name, organization, address and phone registration support of the President’s Commission number with your registration fee. 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Critical Infrastructure Protection. Presentations/comments by public This authority remains in effect for six Registration fee includes reception, • daily continental breakfast, and one Wrap-up discussion by public months after termination of the • Wrap-up discussion by NRC lunch. Pre-registration fee ($75) is due Commission. Effective October 1, 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: by February 15, 1997. Late registration Federal Emergency Management Agency fee ($100) is due at time of workshop/ Edward Chow, Office of Nuclear meeting (cash is accepted for late Regulatory Research, MS T10E50, US One position above GS–15 in support registration payment at workshop). Nuclear Regulatory Commission, of the President’s Commission on Notification of attendance (e.g., pre- Washington DC 20555, (301) 415–6571. Critical Infrastructure Protection. This registration) is requested so that Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12th day authority remains in effect for six adequate space, etc. for the workshop of November, 1996. months after termination of the can be arranged. Notification of For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Commission. Effective October 1, 1996. attendance or questions regarding Mark Cunningham, Department of Justice meeting registration or fees should be Chief, Probabilistic Risk Analysis Branch, Two positions above GS–15 in directed to Martha Lucero, Sandia Division of Systems Technology, Office of National Laboratories, Phone (505) 845– Nuclear Regulatory Research. support of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection. 9787, fax (505) 844–1392, e- mail [FR Doc. 96–31439 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] This authority remains in effect for six [email protected] BILLING CODE 7590±01±P Agenda: Preliminary agenda is as months after termination of the follows. A final agenda will be available Commission. Effective October 1, 1996. at workshop. The following Schedule A authorities OFFICE OF PERSONNEL were revoked in October 1996: Sunday, April 6, 1997 MANAGEMENT Department of the Army 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm—Registration Excepted Service 6:00 pm to 9:00 pm—Reception Not to exceed 30 positions on the AGENCY: Office of Personnel faculty and staff which are classified in Monday, April 7, 1997 Management. the GS–1700 occupational group and 7:00 am to 4:00 am ACTION: Notice. the GS–1410 Librarian series, located at registration the U.S. Army Russian Institute, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm SUMMARY: This gives notice of positions Garmisch, Germany, and the U.S. Army • Opening remarks placed or revoked under Schedules A Training Center Europe, Munich • Introduction (Roadmap for meeting) and B, and placed under Schedule C in Germany. Effective October 8, 1996. • Conclusions and observations ** the excepted service, as required by Aviation Systems Command. One • Reactor and containment design Civil Service Rule VI, Exceptions from scientific and professional research perspectives * the Competitive Service. position in the U.S. Army Research and 65250 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Technology Laboratories, the duties of National Security Affairs. Effective Management Agency. Effective October which require specific knowledge of October 25, 1996. 8, 1996. aviation technology in non-allied Department of Commerce U.S. International Trade Commission nations. Effective October 8, 1996. U.S. Army School of the Americas, Confidential Assistant to the Deputy Staff Assistant (Legal) to the Fort Benning, Georgia. Positions of Chief of Staff for External Affairs. Commissioner. Effective October 17, Translator (Typing), GS–1040–5/9, and Effective October 11, 1996. 1996. Supervisory Translator, GS–1040–11. Special Assistant to the Deputy Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3301 and 3302; E.O. No new appointments were permitted Assistant Secretary for Agreements 10577, 3 CFR 1954–1958 Comp., p. 218. under this authority after December 31, Compliance. Effective October 11, 1996. Office of Personnel Management 1985. Effective October 8, 1996. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Department of Education Lorraine A. Green, PA. Nine senior policy analyst Special Assistant to the Assistant Deputy Director. positions, GS–14/15, at the Strategic Secretary, Office of Elementary and [FR Doc. 96–31395 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Studies Institute, Army War College, Secondary Education. Effective October BILLING CODE 6325±01±M with appointments to be made initially 4, 1996. for up to 3 years and thereafter extended Secretary’s Regional Representative, annually if needed. Effective October 8, Region I, Boston, Massachusetts, to the RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD 1996. Director, Regional Services Team. Central Identification Laboratory. One Effective October 25, 1996. Sunshine Act Meeting position of Scientific Director, GM– Sunshine Act 0190–15, and four positions of Forensic Department of Health and Human Scientist, GS–0190–14. Initial Services Notice is hereby given that the appointment to these positions is NTE Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Railroad Retirement Board will hold a 3–5 years, with Provision for indefinite Secretary for Public Affairs. Effective meeting on December 18, 1996, 9:00 numbers of renewals in 1-, 2-, or 3-year October 4, 1996. a.m., at the Board’s meeting room on the increments. Effective October 8, 1996. Special Assistant to the Assistant 8th floor of its headquarters building, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois, Department of Housing and Urban Secretary for Children and Families. Effective October 11, 1996. 60611. The agenda for this meeting Development follows: Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Department of Housing and Urban (1) Letter to Mr. Ken Apfel, Office of Oversight. All positions of the Staff. No Development Management and Budget, requesting an new appointments were permitted Deputy Assistant Secretary for exemption from OMB Bulletin 96–02, under this authority after September 30, Operations to the Assistant Secretary for Consolidation of Agency Data Centers. 1996. Effective October 21, 1996. Housing—Federal Housing Commission. (2) Options on Closing Phase III and IV Field Offices. Schedule B Effective October 17, 1996. (3) Co-Location of Westbury, NY No Schedule B authorities were Department of Justice Branch Office. established or revoked in October 1996. Staff Assistant to the Director, Office (4) Publication of Monthly Benefit Schedule C of Public Affairs. Effective October 11, Statistics. 1996. (5) General Speech for Use by Field The following Schedule C authorities Personnel. were established in October 1996: Department of Labor (6) Proposed Elimination of Forms Department of Agriculture Special Assistant to the Wage Hour RL–5a and RL–5b. (7) Railroad Unemployment and Staff Assistant to the Director, Office Administrator. Effective October 11, Sickness Benefits Booklet. of Communications. Effective October 4, 1996. (8) FY 1997 Management 1996. Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary Confidential Assistant to the Director, of Labor. Effective October 11, 1996. Development Center Courses. Empowerment Zone Enterprise Special Assistant to the Assistant (9) 1996 Federal Managers’ Financial Community, Rural Business-Cooperative Secretary for Policy. Effective October Integrity Act Report. Service. Effective October 11, 1996. 15, 1996. (10) Consultative Medical Examinations Contract. Deputy Press Secretary to the Department of Transportation Director, Office of Communications. (11) Proposed Buyout Offers. Effective October 17, 1996. Senior Congressional Liaison Officer (12) Letter to Sally Katzen, Office of Confidential Assistant to the Director, to the Director, Office of Congressional Management and Budget, re Parts 209, Office of Civil Rights, Policy, Analysis Affairs. Effective October 18, 1996. 216, and 295 of Board’s Regulations. (13) Regulations: Parts 211, 230, 255 and Coordination Center. Effective Environmental Protection Agency October 17, 1996. and 261. Director, Native American Programs, Special Assistant to the Associate (14) Occupational Disability to the Administrator, Rural Housing Administrator, Office of Regional Standards. Service. Effective October 25, 1996. Operations and State/Local Relations. A. Recommendations. Special Assistant to the Effective October 21, 1996. B. Regulations. Administrator, Rural Development/ Special Assistant to the Chief of Staff. (15) Labor Member Truth in Rural Housing Service. Effective Effective October 25, 1996. Budgeting Status Report. October 25, 1996. The entire meeting will be open to the Federal Emergency Management Agency public. The person to contact for more Department of the Air Force (DOD) Director, Office of Emergency information is Beatrice Ezerski, Staff Assistant (Typing) to the Information and Media Affairs to the Secretary to the Board, Phone No. 312– Assistant to the Vice President for Director, Federal Emergency 751–4920. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65251

Dated: December 6, 1996. Dated: December 2, 1996. company consisting of ten investment Beatrice Ezerski, Margaret H. McFarland, portfolios, eight of which are diversified Secretary to the Board. Deputy Secretary. and two of which are non-diversified. [FR Doc. 96–31529 Filed 12–9–96; 9:39 am] [FR Doc. 96–31400 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] On October 30, 1992, applicant filed a BILLING CODE 7905±01±M BILLING CODE 8010±01±M notification of registration on Form N– 8A under section 8(a) of the Act, and registered under section 8(b) of the Act [Investment Company Act Rel. No. 22373; and the Securities Act of 1933 on Form 811±7328] SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE N–1A. The registration statement was COMMISSION The Hanover Investment Funds, Inc.; declared effective on December 29, Notice of Application 1992, and an initial public offering was Request for Public Comment commenced for each of the following December 5, 1996. portfolios on the date indicated: The Upon Written Request, Copies AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Hanover Blue Chip Growth Fund (‘‘Blue Available From: Securities and Commission (‘‘SEC’’). Chip Fund’’ (February 19, 1993); The Exchange Commission, Office of Filings ACTION: Notice of application for Hanover American Value Fund (‘‘Value and Information Services, Washington, Fund’’) (February 3, 1995); the Hanover DC 20549. deregistration under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (‘‘Act’’). U.S. Government Securities Fund Extension (‘‘Government Securities Fund’’) APPLICANT: The Hanover Investment (February 19, 1993); The Hanover Short Rule 15c1–7; SEC File No. 270–146; Funds, Inc. Term U.S. Government Fund (‘‘Short OMB Control No. 3235–0134. RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Section 8(f). Term Government Fund’’) (February 25, Notice is hereby given that pursuant SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicant 1993); and The Hanover Small to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 seeks an order declaring that it has Capitalization Growth Fund (‘‘Small 1 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities ceased to be an investment company. Cap Fund’’) (April 1, 1993) and Exchange Commission (collectively, the ‘‘Merger Portfolios’’). FILING DATES: (‘‘Commission’’) is publishing the The application was filed Applicant has never made a public following summaries of collections for on September 12, 1996, and amended offering with respect to the following public comment. on November 26, 1996. five portfolios: The Hanover Tax Free Rule 15c1–7 requires broker-dealers to HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An Income Fund, The Hanover New York make a record of each transaction it order granting the application will be Tax Free Income Fund, The Hanover effects for customer accounts over issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. New Jersey Tax Free Income Fund, The which the broker-dealer has discretion. Interested persons may request a Hanover International Equity Fund, and The Commission estimates that 500 hearing by writing to the SEC’s The Hanover International Bond Fund respondents collect information Secretary and serving applicant with a (collectively, the ‘‘Non-Merger annually under Rule 15c1–7 and that copy of the request, personally or by Portfolios’’). approximately 33,333 hours would be mail. Hearing requests should be 2. At a special meeting held on required annually for these collections. received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on December 13, 1995, applicant’s board of The total annual burden hours have December 30, 1996, and should be directors (the ‘‘Board’’) approved a plan been increased from 16,667 hours as a accompanied by proof of service on of reorganization (the ‘‘Plan’’) between result of the growth in the securities applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, applicant and Mutual Fund Group market. for lawyers, a certificate of service. (‘‘MFG’’), a Massachusetts business trust Written comments are invited on: (a) Hearing requests should state the nature registered as an investment company Whether the proposed collection of of the writer’s interest, the reason for the under the Act. In approving the Plan, information is necessary for the proper request, and the issues contested. the Board considered the benefits to performance of the functions of the Persons who wish to be notified of a shareholders of pursuing their agency, including whether the hearing may request such notification investment goals in larger funds and/or information shall have practical utility; by writing to the SEC’s Secretary. a larger combined fund group, receiving (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth the combined investment advisory of the burden of the proposed collection Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. services of The Chase Manhattan Bank, of information; (c) ways to enhance the Applicant, 237 Part Avenue, New York, N.A. (including Chemical Banking) quality, utility, and clarity of the New York 10017. Corporation (‘‘Chemical’’) as its information to be collected; and (d) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: successor, renamed The Chase ways to minimize the burden of the Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel, Manhattan Corporation (‘‘Chase’’)), and collection of information on at (202) 942–0583, or Alison E. Baur, Chase Asset Management or Van respondents, including through the use Branch Chief, at (202) 942–0564 Deventer & Hoch (as the case may be), of automated collection techniques or (Division of Investment Management, and a more focused marketing and other forms of information technology. Office of Investment Company distribution effort. Consideration will be given to Regulation). 3. Applicant and MFG may be deemed affiliated persons of each other comments and suggestions submitted in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The writing within 60 days of this following is a summary of the publication. 1 The Small Cap Fund offered two classes of application. The complete application shares: CBC Benefit Shares, which were offered Direct your written comments to may be obtained for a fee from the SEC’s only through an investment program made available Michael E. Bartell, Associate Executive Public Reference Branch. to Chemical Banking Corporation employees (and Director, Office of Information employees of its affiliates), and Investor Shares, Applicant’s Representations which were offered to the public. Unlike Investor Technology, Securities and Exchange Shares, CBC Benefit Shares were not subject to a Commission, 450 5th Street, N.W., 1. Applicant, a Maryland corporation, rule 12b–1 distribution plan and did not bear Washington, DC 20549. is an open-end management investment shareholder servicing fees. 65252 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices within the meaning of the Act because share of the relevant Merger Portfolio by FILING DATE: The application was filed their respective investment advisers the NAV per share of the corresponding on October 1, 1996, and amended on came under common control as a result MFG portfolio. Applicant’s shareholders December 5, 1996. of the merger of Chase into Chemical on then received a pro rata distribution of HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An March 31, 1996. Applicant and MFG the shares of the corresponding MFG order granting the application will be therefore relied on the exemption portfolio received by the relevant issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. provided in rule 17a–8 to effect the Merger Portfolio. The merger Portfolio Interested persons may request a Plan.2 The Board and the board of shares held by such shareholders then hearing by writing to the SEC’s trustees of MFG each determined, in were cancelled. The Non-Merger Secretary and serving applicants with a accordance with rule 17a–8, that Portfolios did not participate in the copy of the request, personally or by participation in the Plan was in the best Plan, as they have never issued any mail. Hearing requests should be interests of applicant or MFG, as shares and have no shareholders, assets, received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on applicable, and that the interests of or liabilities. December 30, 1996, and should be existing shareholders of applicant or 7. All expenses incurred in accompanied by proof of service on MFG, as applicable, would not be connection with the Plan, including applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, diluted as a result of participation in the legal, printing, audit, and proxy for lawyers, a certificate of service. Plan. solicitation expenses, were borne by Hearing requests should state the nature 4. A proxy statement dated February Chase (including its affiliates), as the of the writer’s interest, the reason for the 8, 1996 describing the Plan, a ultimate parent of the investment request, and the issues contested. management letter, and proxy cards advisers to applicant and MFG. These Persons may request notification of a soliciting shareholder approval of the expenses amounted to approximately hearing by writing to the SEC’s Plan were distributed to applicant’s $2,330,335. Secretary. shareholders. Preliminary copies of 8. At the time of the application, ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 5th these proxy materials were filed with applicant had no shareholders, assets, or Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. the SEC by MFG as part of a registration liabilities, nor was applicant a party to statement on Form N–14 on December Applicant, 500 Church Street, Suite 200, any litigation or administrative Nashville, Tennessee 37219. 29, 1995 and amended on February 8, proceeding. Applicant is not engaged, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1996; definitive copies of these proxy nor does it propose to engage, in any Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel, materials were filed with the SEC on business activities other than those at (202) 942–0583, or Mary Kay Frech, February 15, 1996. necessary for the winding-up of its Branch Chief, at (202) 942–0564 5. On April 2, 1996, at a special affairs. (Division of Investment Management, meeting of the shareholders of the 9. Applicant filed Articles of Transfer Office of Investment Company Merger Portfolios, shareholders of the with respect to the merger transaction in Regulation). Short Term Government Fund, the the State of Maryland on May 6, 1996, Government Securities Fund, the Blue and intends to file Articles of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Chip Fund, the Investor Shares of the Dissolution in the state following the following is a summary of the Small Cap Fund, and the Value Fund grant of an order pursuant to this application. The complete application considered and approved the Plan. The application. may be obtained for a fee at the SEC’s special meeting with respect to the CBC Public Reference Branch. Benefit Shares of the Small Cap Fund For the SEC, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority. Applicant’s Representations was adjourned to solicit additional proxies. At a special meeting on April Margaret H. McFarland, 1. Applicant is a closed-end, 16, 1996, holders of CBC Benefit Shares Deputy Secretary. internally managed investment of the Small Cap Fund considered and [FR Doc. 96–31397 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] company that has elected to be treated approved the Plan. BILLING CODE 8010±01±M as a business development company 6. As of May 3, 1996 (the ‘‘Closing (‘‘BDC’’) pursuant to section 54 of the Act. As a BDC, applicant furnishes Date’’), applicant had an aggregate NAV [Rel. No. IC±22372; 812±10374] of $209,505,473. On the Closing Date, capital to small businesses through all of the assets and liabilities of each of Sirrom Capital Corporation; Notice of loans to, and investments in, small the Merger Portfolios were exchanged Application companies.1 Applicant typically makes for corresponding shares of a its loans in the form of secured debt corresponding portfolio of MFG.3 This December 5, 1996. with a relatively high fixed interest rate exchange was based on a ratio AGENCY: Securities and Exchange and with warrants to purchase equity determined by dividing the NAV per Commission (‘‘SEC’’). securities of the borrower. In the past, ACTION: Notice of application for applicant has funded its loan 2 Rule 17a–8 provides relief from the affiliated exemption under the Investment originations with financing from the transaction prohibition of section 17(a) of the Act Company Act of 1940 (‘‘Act’’). SBA and a syndicate of commercial for a merger of investment companies that may be banks. Applicants already has borrowed affiliated persons of each other solely by reason of APPLICANT: Sirrom Capital Corporation. having a common investment adviser, common a significant portion of the debt directors, and/or common officers. The staff of the RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Exemption Division of Investment Management has stated that requested under sections 6(c) from 1 applicant also makes loans to small, privately- it would not recommend that the Commission take sections 12(d)(1) 18(a), 19(b), and 61(a) owned companies through Sirrom Investments, Inc. enforcement action under section 17(a) of the Act of the Act. (‘‘Investments’’), a wholly-owned, closed-end if investment companies that are affiliated persons investment company that is licensed as a small solely by reason of having investment advisers that SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicant business investment company (‘‘SBIC’’) by the are under common control rely on rule 17a–8. See requests an order to permit it to form a Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’). Applicant Capitol Mutual Funds and Nations Fund Trust wholly-owned subsidiary that would previously obtained an order with respect to the (pub. avail. Feb. 24, 1994). establishment of Investments and certain of its 3 Holders of CBC Benefit Shares and Investor operate as a special purpose bankruptcy activities (the ‘‘SBIC Order’’). Investment Company Shares received Institutional and Class A shares, remote subsidiary and borrow funds Act Release Nos. 22016 (June 13, 1996) (notice) and respectively, of the Vista Small cap Equity Fund. under a new credit facility. 22057 (July 9, 1996) (order). Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65253 financing available to it from these the same borrower; (d) Newco will on a consolidated basis because it may sources, however, and needs to establish purchase portions of applicant’s be an indirect issuer of senior securities an alternative source of financing. portfolio investments in accordance with respect to any indebtedness of 2. Applicant has signed a with the terms of the credit facility; and Newco. Accordingly, applicant would commitment letter with ING Capital (e) applicant may repurchase all or a be required to treat as its own all assets Markets (‘‘ING’’) to establish a credit portion of portfolio investments held by held directly by itself and Newco (with facility in the amount of $100 million. Newco at such time as they are released the value of its investment in Newco To provide ING with collateral that from the pool of collateral established eliminated). Applicant also would be would be clearly and legally separate under the credit facility. required to treat as its own any from that pledged to other lenders, liabilities of Newco (with intercompany Applicant’s Legal Analysis applicant intends to form a special receivables and liabilities eliminated), purpose, bankruptcy remote subsidiary 1. Section 12(d)(1). Section including liabilities of Newco in respect (‘‘Newco’’). Newco will be a Delaware 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act prohibits any of senior securities. corporation and a registered closed-end registered investment company from 5. Applicant seeks an exemption from investment company. Applicant will purchasing or otherwise acquiring the sections 18(a) and 61(a) to permit the transfer to Newco at least $20 million in securities of another investment issuance of senior securities as loans as a capital contribution. In company, except as permitted by that described in the application. Applicant consideration of such transfer, Newco section. In addition, section 12(d)(1)(C) submits that, absent an exemption from will issue to applicant 1,000 shares of prohibits any investment company from the consolidated asset coverage its common stock, comprising all of its purchasing or otherwise acquiring any requirements of sections 18(a) as issued and outstanding shares. Newco’s security issued by a registered closed- modified by section 61(a), its ability to activities will be limited to: (a) end investment company if the obtain financing would be restricted. Purchasing secured loans to small acquiring company (and any affiliated Applicant believes that such an businesses and related warrants from investment companies) would own exemption is in the public interest applicant; (b) owning and holding such more than 10% of the voting stock of the because Newco’s activities will in all loans and warrants; (c) funding the closed-end investment company. material respects have the same purchases of such loans and warrants by 2. Because applicant will acquire all economic effect with respect to borrowing from financial institutions; of the capital stock of Newco, may make applicant’s shareholders as if applicant and (d) activities ancillary to such loans or advances to it, and may had engaged in them directly. activities. The directors and officers of guarantee its indebtedness (which also 6. Section 19(b). Section 19(b) of the Newco will be identical to those of could be considered as the acquisition Act prohibits any investment company applicant, except that Newco will have of its debt securities), applicant requests from distributing long-term capital gains no more than two directors who are not an exemption from section 12(d)(1). more than once every 12 months. directors or affiliated persons of Applicant asserts that its acquisition of Because the warrants held as collateral applicant. Applicant states that this Newco’s securities will not compromise for funds borrowed under the credit arrangement is necessary to permit the objectives of section 12 or harm the facility may be released from the Newco to obtain the opinions required public interest because it has agreed that collateral pool upon repayment of the to secure an investment grade rating it will exercise its rights as the small business loan related thereto, from one or more nationally recognized shareholder of Newco on matters Newco would be free to transfer any rating agencies for the commercial paper requiring shareholder approval only as such warrant to applicant or sell it to a to be issued by ING. directed by its shareholders. third party, thereby potentially realizing 3. Newco would borrow funds under Accordingly, applicant believes that the a long-term capital gain. Applicant the ING credit facility, and would use relationship of its shareholders to asserts that it and Newco effectively will such funds to purchase new loans and Newco’s activities will be no different be one company, and that no purpose related warrants from applicant. Newco than if it were to carry out such would be served by limiting would pledge these loans and warrants activities directly. distributions from Newco to one per to an indenture trustee as collateral to 3. Sections 18(a) and 61(a). Section year. Applicant also submits that more secure the funds loaned by ING. ING in 18(a) of the Act prohibits a closed-end frequent distributions would permit it to turn would fund borrowings under the investment company from issuing any more efficiently manage its internal cash credit facility by issuing commercial class of senior security unless the flow, resulting in administrative cost paper secured by the pool of loans and company complies with the asset savings and, thus, a benefit to its warrants owned by Newco. Newco coverage requirements set forth in the shareholders. Accordingly, applicant would pay a spread to ING over the rate section. ‘‘Asset coverage’’ is defined in seeks an exemption from section 19(b). paid on the commercial paper issued, section 18(h) as the ratio that the value 7. Section 6(c). Section 6(c) permits along with other fees to originate and of the total assets of an issuer, less all the SEC to exempt any person or administer the credit facility. liabilities not represented by senior transaction from any provision of the 4. The following kinds of inter- securities, bears to the aggregate amount Act, if such exemption is necessary or company transactions may arise in the of senior securities of such issuer. appropriate in the public interest and future between applicant and Newco: (a) Section 61 applies section 18, with consistent with the protection of Applicant may make additional certain modifications, to a BDC. investors and the purposes fairly investments in Newco either as 4. Applicant is a BDC, and Newco is intended by the policy of the Act. The contributions to capital, purchases of a closed-end investment company. Both relationship of applicant’s shareholders additional stock, or loans; (b) from time will be subject to the asset coverage to the activities to be carried out by to time Newco will pay dividends and requirements of section 18(a) on an Newco will be no different than if such make other distributions to applicant individual basis, although these activities were carried out by applicant with respect to its investment in the requirements are modified by section because (a) Newco will be a wholly- stock of Newco, including capital gains 61(a) with respect to applicant as a BDC. owned subsidiary of applicant, and (b) dividends; (c) applicant and Newco may Applicant also is subject to the asset applicant has agreed that it will exercise from time to time hold loans made to coverage requirements of section 18(a) its rights as the shareholder of Newco 65254 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices on matters required by the Act to be issuance or sale of any such notes or I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s approved by shareholders only as evidence of indebtedness by either Statement of the Terms and Substance directed by its shareholders. applicant or Newco, applicant and of the Proposed Rule Change Accordingly, applicant believes that the Newco, on a consolidated basis, and The Exchange proposes to change requested exemptions meet the section applicant individually, shall have the PHLX Rule 1057, in order to modify the 6(c) standards. asset coverage that would be required by formula which calculates the settlement Applicant’s Conditions section 18(a) if applicant and Newco value for Dollar Denominated Delivery each had elected to become a BDC currency options (‘‘3D Options’’). PHLX Applicant agrees that any exemptive pursuant to section 54 of the Act; and relief granted will be subject to the proposes to modify the existing formula (b) in addition, Newco may borrow from to reflect the fact that there may be a following conditions: applicant. None of the borrowings set 1. Applicant at all times will own and variation in the appropriate number of forth in clause (b) above shall be bids and offers that are available for hold, beneficially and of record, all of deemed senior securities for purposes of the outstanding voting capital stock of each currency. The Exchange would any order issued pursuant to the randomly select at least five (5) such Newco. application. 2. Applicant will not cause or permit bids and offers from a pool of twenty- Newco to change any of its fundamental 6. Applicant will file with the SEC the five (25) active interbank foreign investment policies, or take any other financial statements required by the exchange participants, and set the action referred to in section 13(a) of the federal securities laws on a consolidated number for each individual currency Act, unless such action shall have been basis as to applicant and Newco. prior to commencing trading 3D Options authorized by applicant after approval Applicant will provide to its on that currency.1 Due to the variation of such action by a vote of a majority of shareholders financial statements on a in the number of bids and offers, the applicant’s outstanding voting consolidated basis as to applicant and Exchange also proposes to amend the securities. Newco, except when unconsolidated rule to state that it will discard one third 3. No person shall serve or act as financial statements are required under of the highest offers and one third of the investment adviser to Newco under generally accepted accounting lowest bids and offers to arrive at the circumstances subject to section 15 of principles. closing settlement value. the Act unless applicant’s directors and For the Commission, by the Division of The text of the proposed rule change shareholders shall have taken the action Investment Management, pursuant to follows. (New language is in italics and with respect thereto also required to be delegated authority. deletions are in brackets.) taken by Newco’s directors and Margaret H. McFarland, Rule 1057. 3D (Dollar Denominated shareholders. Delivery) foreign currency options are cash Deputy Secretary. 4. Newco shall have two directors settled options. The Exchange shall contract who are not directors of applicant as [FR Doc. 96–31396 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] with a market information vendor(s) which long as a majority of its board of BILLING CODE 8010±01±M shall act as the Exchange’s designated directors consists of directors who are agent(s) to generate the closing settlement also directors of applicant. value utilizing the following methodology sanctioned by the Exchange described below. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the [Release No. 34±38017; File No. SR±PHLX± The closing settlement price shall be board of directors of Newco will be 96±44] determined by the Exchange’s designated elected by applicant as the sole agent(s) as follows: On every expiration date shareholder of Newco, and such board Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice for 3D contracts, at 10:30 A.M. (EST or EDT), will be composed of the same persons of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by the Exchange designated agent(s) shall collect that serve as directors of applicant Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. a bid and offer quotation for the current except to the extent noted above. Relating to Modifying the Formula foreign exchange spot/price [from at least 5. Applicant will not itself issue, and Which Calculates the Settlement Value fifteen (15) interbank foreign exchange will not cause or permit Newco to issue, for Dollar Denominated Delivery participants randomly selected from a list of any senior security or sell any senior Options (``3D Options'') twenty-five (25) active interbank foreign security of which applicant or Newco is exchange market participants.] from an December 4, 1996. appropriate number of interbank foreign the issuer except as hereinafter set forth: exchange participants determined by the (a) applicant and Newco may issue and Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange selected at random from a pool of sell to banks, insurance companies, and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 twenty-five (25) active interbank foreign other financial institutions their secured (‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is exchange participants. A minimum number or unsecured promissory notes or other hereby given that on October 30, 1996, of five (5) interbank foreign exchange evidences of indebtedness in the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. participants must be selected from the group consideration of any loan, or any (‘‘PHLX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the of 25 interbank foreign exchange extension or renewal thereof made by Securities and Exchange Commission participants. After discarding [the five] one- private arrangement, provided the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule third of the highest offers and [five] one-third of the lowest bids, the Exchange’s designated following conditions are met: (i) such change as described in Items I, II, and agent will arithmetically average the notes or evidences of indebtedness are III below, which Items have been remaining [ten (10) bids and ten (10) offers] not intended to be publicly distributed, prepared by the self-regulatory bids and offers to arrive at a closing (ii) such notes or evidences of organization. The Commission is settlement value. indebtedness are not convertible into, publishing this notice to solicit In the event of the Exchange’s designated exchangeable for, or accompanied by comments on the proposed rule change agent(s) inability to generate a closing any options to acquire any equity from interested persons. The Exchange settlement value, the Exchange will poll the security (except that, with respect to also filed Amendments Nos. 1, 2, and 3 interbank market participants directly (by applicant, the restrictions in this clause on November 19, 1996, December 2, 1 The Exchange would have the ability to obtain (ii) shall not be applicable except to the 1996 and December 3, 1996, bids and offers from more than five interbank extent they are applicable generally to respectively, the substance of which are foreign exchange participants as determined by the BDCs), and (iii) immediately after the incorporated into this notice. Foreign Currency Option Committee. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65255 phone or facsimile transmission) to bid and offer quotations for different Yen, however, there are fewer banks determine the fair and accurate closing currencies varies according to the that diligently provide updated quotes. settlement value using the above currency. For some of the more widely Therefore, the Committee has methodology. traded currencies such as the Deutsche The Exchange shall disseminate the closing determined that a more accurate settlement value after its calculation mark and the Japanese yen, updated representation of the Japanese Yen officially through the Options Price bids and offers among interbank Market would be derived from Reporting Authority. participants are much more prevalent collecting ten (10) bid and ask than for the less popular currencies, II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s quotations from a group of twenty-five where the pool of potential contributors (25) active interbank participants and Statement of the Purpose of, and of the spot value for the individual discarding the three (3) highest offers Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule currency is much smaller. Change The Exchange proposes to make the and the three (3) lowest bids prior to In its filing with the Commission, the current settlement value formula more averaging them. self-regulatory organization included flexible in order to permit the Exchange The Exchange maintains that in statements concerning the purpose of to determine the appropriate number of proposing any new 3D Foreign Currency and basis for the proposed rule change bids and offers to collect and average on Option contracts for listing and trading and discussed any comments it received a currency-by-currency basis. As noted on the Exchange, the Exchange will on the proposed rule change. The text above, the Exchange would randomly identify the appropriate number of bank of these statements may be examined at select at least five (5) interbank quotations that will be collected to the places specified in Item IV below. participants from a pool of twenty-five arrive at the settlement value in the rule The self-regulatory organization has (25) active interbank participants. filing submitted pursuant to Rule 19b– prepared summaries, set forth in Additionally, as the number of bids and 4 of the Act. The number of interbank Sections A, B, and C below, of the most offers may vary across currencies, the participants from which the quotations existing rule language that requires the significant aspects of such statements. are collected cannot be less than five (5). five (5) highest offers and the five (5) A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Any changes in that number will require lowest bids be discarded would also be Statement of the Purpose of, and modified. The Exchange proposes to approval of the Exchange’s Foreign Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule discard one third of the highest offers Currency Options Committee. Change and one third of the lowest bids and The Exchange will provide notice, at 1. Purpose average the remaining bids and offers to least one week prior to settlement of the The Commission approved trading for arrive at the closing settlement value. 3D currency option, to its membership 3D Foreign Currency Options on the The Exchange contends that the and the public of any change in the Deutsche Mark (‘‘3D Mark’’) on March 8, revised settlement value formula will number of contributor bank quotations 1994.2 In November 1995, the ensure that the settlement value for 3D used to calculate the settlement value Commission approved trading for 3D Options contracts accurately reflects the for that 3D currency option. In the event Foreign Currency Options on the spot price for foreign currencies because the Exchange lists and trades 3D options Japanese Yen (‘‘3D Yen’’) 3; however, it will use bid and offer quotations from on a new currency, the Exchange will the appropriate number of banks that they have not begun trading on the provide at least one week notice of the represent the spot value for the currency Exchange to date. Presently, bid and number of contributor bank quotations in question. In addition, the Exchange offer quotations for the current foreign used to derive the settlement value prior exchange spot price from at least fifteen will employ the same back up procedures that are outlined for the 3D to listing and trading the 3D options on (15) interbank foreign exchange the new currency. participants randomly selected from a Mark and the 3D Yen that guard against list of twenty-five (25) active interbank unreliable or manipulated quotes. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange’s Foreign Currency foreign exchange participants are Option Committee will determine what collected. After discarding the five (5) The Exchange believes that the the appropriate number of bid and offer highest offers and the five (5) lowest proposed rule change is consistent with quotations should be for each currency. 5 bids, the remaining ten (10) bids and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it The Committee will not have the offers are arithmetically averaged to promotes just and equitable principles discretion to select less than five (5) arrive at a closing settlement value.4 of trade, prevents fraudulent and The Exchange has found that the interbank foreign exchange participants manipulative acts and practices, and number of banks that are able to provide from which to obtain these bid and offer protects investors and the public quotations. The Committee will have interest because it provides the the ability to increase or decrease the 2 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33732 Exchange with the ability to list a wider number, although the Exchange does (March 8, 1994), 59 FR 12023 (order approving the variety of currencies and therefore, listing and trading of cash/spot dollar denominated not anticipate this occurring very provide investors with a greater delivery foreign currency option contracts.) frequently. The Committee will not have 3 opportunity to hedge their currency risk See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36505, the ability to decrease the number of (November 22, 1995), 60 FR 61277 (order approving interbank participants to less than five and facilitate transactions in foreign listing and trading of 3D foreign currency options currency options. on the Japanese yen.) (5) participants. The Exchange will 4 See Exchange Rule 1057. Exchange filing SR– periodically review the contributing B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s PHLX 96–11, pending at the Commission, would interbanks to assure that the number has allow PHLX to elect to calculate the settlement Statement on Burden on Competition value in house instead of requiring an agent/vendor not materially increased or decreased. to do it and would limit the liability of the The Committee will then have the The Exchange does not believe that Exchange regarding the accuracy of the settlement discretion to act upon this information. the proposed rule change will impose value. However, liability for intentional misconduct The Committee has determined to any inappropriate burden on and/or any violations of the federal securities laws would not be limited. See Securities Exchange Act continue to collect fifteen (15) bid and competition. Release No. 37323 (June 18, 1996), 61 FR 32880 offer quotations from a pool of twenty- (June 25, 1996) (notice). five (25) for the 3D Mark. For the 3D 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 65256 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s DEPARTMENT OF STATE Division, ABC–100, 800 Independence Statement on Comments on the Ave., SW., (202) 267–9895, Washington, [Public Notice No. 2485] Proposed Rule Change Received From DC 20591. Members, Participants, or Others Advisory Committee on International SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Economic Policy of Working Group on No written comments were either Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Economic Sanctions; Closed Meeting solicited or received. Title: Pilots Convicted of Alcohol or The Department of State announces a III. Date of Effectiveness of the Drug Related Motor Vehicle Offenses or meeting of the U.S. State Department Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Subject to State Motor Vehicle Advisory Committee on International Commission Action Administrative Procedures. Economic Policy Working Group on Type of Request: Reinstatement, Within 35 days of the publication of Economic Sanctions on Monday, without change, of a previously this notice in the Federal Register or December 18, 1996 at the U.S. approved information collection. within such longer period (i) as the Department of State, Washington, D.C. OMB Control Number: 2120–0543. Form Number: 8500–8. Commission may designate up to 90 Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and 5 Affected Public: 2184 pilots who have days of such date if it finds such longer U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), been/will be convicted of a drug- or period to be appropriate and publishes and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), it has been alcohol-related traffic violation. its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to determined the meeting will be closed Abstract: The requested information which the self-regulatory organization to the public. Matters relative to (1) is needed to mitigate potential consents, the Commission will: classified national security information hazards presented by airmen using (A) by order approve the proposed as well as privileged commercial alcohol or drugs in flight, (2) is used to rule change, or information will be discussed. identify persons possibly unsuitable for pilot certification, and (3) affects those (B) institute proceedings to determine For more information contact Joanne pilots who will be convicted of a drug- whether the proposed rule change Balzano, Working Group on Economic or alcohol-related traffic violation. should be disapproved. Sanctions, Department of State, Washington, DC 20522–1003, phone: Estimated Annual Burden: The IV. Solicitation of Comments 202–647–1498. estimated total annual burden is 364 hours. Dated: December 6, 1996. Interested persons are invited to ADDRESSES: Send comments to the submit written data, views, and Alan P. Larson, Office of Information and Regulatory arguments concerning the foregoing. Assistant Secretary for Economic and Affairs, Office of Management and Persons making written submissions Business Affairs. Budget, 725–17th Street, NW, should file six copies thereof with the [FR Doc. 96–31494 Filed 12–6–96; 4:11 pm] Washington, DC 20503, Attention DOT Secretary, Securities and Exchange BILLING CODE 4710±07±M Desk Officer. Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Comments are Invited on: whether the Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of the proposed collection of information is submission, all subsequent DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, amendments, all written statements Office of the Secretary with respect to the proposed rule including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of change that are filed with the Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping the Department’s estimate of the burden Commission, and all written Requirements, Agency Information of the proposed information collection; communications relating to the Collection Activity Under OMB Review ways to enhance the quality, utility and proposed rule change between the clarity of the information to be Commission and any person, other than AGENCY: Department of Transportation collected; and ways to minimize the those that may be withheld from the (DOT). ACTION: Notice. burden of the collection of information public in accordance with the on respondents, including the use of provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be SUMMARY: In compliance with the automated collection techniques or available for inspection and copying at Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. other forms of information technology. the Commission’s Public Reference 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5, Room. Copies of such filing will also be the Information Collection Requests 1996. available for inspection and copying at (ICR) abstracted below has been Phillip A. Leach, the principal office of the Exchange. All forwarded to the Office of Management Clearance Officer, United States Department submissions should refer to File No. SR- and Budget (OMB) for reinstatement, of Transportation. PHLX–96–44 and should be submitted review and comment. The ICR describes [FR Doc. 96–31411 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] by January 2, 1997. the nature of the information collection BILLING CODE 4910±62±P For the Commission, by the Division of and its expected burden. The Federal Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Register Notice with a 60-day comment authority.6 period soliciting comments on the Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping Margaret H. McFarland, following collection of information were Requirements Agency Information published on July 3, 1996 (FR 61, page Collection Activity Under OMB Review Deputy Secretary. 34921–34922). [FR Doc. 96–31398 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Department of Transportation DATES: Comments must be submitted on (DOT). BILLING CODE 8010±01±M or before January 10, 1997. ACTION: Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Judith Street, Federal Aviation SUMMARY: In compliance with the 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Administration, Corporate Information Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65257

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that automated collection techniques or revisions for FAA approval which sets the Information Collection Request (ICR) other forms of information technology. forth the measures the operator has abstracted below has been forwarded to Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5, taken or proposes for the reduction of the Office of Management and Budget 1996. existing noncompatible uses and for the (OMB) for review and comment. The Phillip A. Leach, prevention of the introduction of ICR describes the nature of the additional noncompatible uses. Clearance Officer, United States Department The city of San Antonio, Texas information collection and its expected of Transportation. submitted to the FAA on January 28, cost and burden. The Federal Register [FR Doc. 96–31412 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Notice with a 60-day comment period 1991 noise exposure maps, descriptions soliciting comments on the following BILLING CODE 4910±62±P and other documentation which were collections of information was produced during development of the San Antonio International Airport FAR published on September 26, 1996 (FR Federal Aviation Administration 61, page 50528–50529). Part 150 Noise Compatibility Study. DATES: Comments must be submitted on Receipt of Noise Compatibility These maps were reviewed and or before January 10, 1997. Program and Request for Review; San determined in compliance with applicable requirements on April 12, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Antonio International Airport San Antonio, TX 1991. Bernie Stankus, Office of Airline The FAA formally received the noise Information, K–25, Bureau of AGENCY: Federal Aviation compatibility program for San Antonio Transportation Statistics, 400 Seventh Administration, DOT. International Airport on April 12, 1991. Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, ACTION: Notice. The program was subsequently (202) 366–4387. approved on October 9, 1991. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation The FAA has now formally received Administration (FAA) announces that it a revision to the noise compatibility Bureau of Transportation Statistics is reviewing a proposed revision to the program for San Antonio International (BTS) previously approved noise compatibility Airport, effective November 27, 1996. 1. Title: Submission of Audit Reports, program that was submitted for the City Preliminary review of the submitted 14 CFR part 248. of San Antonio, Texas, for San Antonio material indicates that it conforms to the Type of Request: Extension of a International Airport under the requirements for the submittal of currently approved information provisions of Title I of the Aviation revisions to noise compatibility collection. Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 programs, but that further review will be OMB Control Number: 2138–0004. (Pub. L. 96–193) and 14 CFR Part 150 necessary prior to approval or Form Number: N/A. and that this program revision will be disapproval of the program revision. Affected Public: Large certificated air approved or disapproved on or before The formal review period, limited by carriers. May 26, 1997. law to a maximum of 180 days, will be Abstract: The audit reports are used as EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date of completed on or before May 26, 1997. follows: a means of monitoring an air The FAA’s detailed evaluation will be the FAA’s start of its review of the noise carrier’s continuing fitness, reference conducted under the provisions of 14 compatibility program revision is material by analysts in examining CFR Part 150, section 150.33. The November 27, 1996. The public foreign route cases, reference material primary considerations in the comment period ends January 26, 1997. by analysts in examining proposed evaluation process are whether the acquisitions, mergers, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. proposed revision may reduce the level consolidations, a means whereby the William A. Perkins, Federal Aviation of aviation safety, create an undue Department sends a copy of the report Administration, Southwest Region, burden on interstate or foreign to the International Civil Aviation Airports Division, Texas Airport commerce, or be reasonably consistent Organization (ICAO) in fulfillment of a Development Office, ASW–652, Forth land uses and preventing the U.S. treaty obligation, and corroboration Worth, Texas, 76193–0650. introduction of additional of carriers’ Form 41 filings. Comments on the proposed noise noncompatible land uses. Estimated Annual Burden: The total compatibility program revision should Interested persons are invited to estimated annual burden is 22.5 hours. also be submitted to the above address. comment on the proposed program ADDRESSES: Send comments to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This revision with specific reference to these Office of Information and Regulatory notice announces that the FAA is factors. All comments, other than those Affairs, Office of Management and reviewing a proposed noise properly addressed to local land use Budget, 725–17th Street, NW, compatibility program revision for San authorities, will be considered by the Washington, DC 20503, Attention DOT Antonio International Airport which FAA to the extent practicable. Copies of Desk Officer. will be approved or disapproved on or the noise exposure maps, the FAA’s Comments are Invited on: whether the before May 26, 1997. This notice also evaluation of the maps, the previously proposed collection of information is announces the availability of this approved noise compatibility program, necessary for the proper performance of program revision for public review and and the proposed revision are available the functions of the Department, comment. for examination at the following including whether the information will An airport operator who has locations: have practical utility; the accuracy of submitted noise exposure maps that are Federal Aviation Administration, the Department’s estimate of the burden found by the FAA to be in compliance Airports Division, ASW–600, Fort of the proposed information collection; with the requirements of Federal Worth, Texas 76193–0600. ways to enhance the quality, utility and Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150, City of San Antonio, Department of clarity of the information to be promulgated pursuant to Title I of the Aviation, 9800 Airport Boulevard, collected; and ways to minimize the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement San Antonio, Texas 78216–9990. burden of the collection of information Act of 1979, may submit a noise Questions may be directed to the on respondents, including the use of compatibility program and subsequent individual named above under the 65258 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION IX of the Omnibus Budget 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal CONTACT. Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, November 27, 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal DATES: Comments must be received on 1996. Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). or before January 10, 1997. Naomi L. Saunders, On November 27, 1996, the FAA ADDRESSES: Comments on this determined that the application to use Manager, Airport Division. application may be mailed or delivered the revenue from a PFC submitted by [FR Doc. 96–31385 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] in triplicate to the FAA at the following Lee County Port Authority was address: Federal Aviation BILLING CODE 4910±13±M substantially complete within the Administration, Detroit Airports District requirements of section 158.25 of Part Office, Willow Run Airport, East, 8820 158. The FAA will approve or Notice of Intent To Rule on Application Beck Road Belleville, Michigan 48111. disapprove the application, in whole or To Use the Revenue From a Passenger In addition, one copy of any in part, no later than February 27, 1997. Facility Charge (PFC) at Southwest comments submitted to the FAA must The following is a brief overview of Florida International Airport, Ft. Myers, be mailed or delivered to Mr. Thomas PFC Application No. 97–04–U–00– FL W. Schmidt, Executive Director of the RSW. Capital Region Airport Authority at the AGENCY: Federal Aviation Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00. following address: Capital Region Administration (FAA), DOT. Proposed charge effective date: Airport Authority, Capital City Airport, ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on November 1, 1992. Lansing, MI 48906. application. Proposed charge expiration date: Air carriers and foreign air carriers February 28, 2017. may submit copies of written comments SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Total estimated PFC revenue: previously provided to the Capital invites public comment on the $7,012,500. Region Airport Authority under section application to use the revenue from a Brief description of proposed 158.23 of Part 158. PFC at Southwest Florida International project(s): Concourse with three to five FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Airport under the provisions of the gates; Facility for commuter traffic; Mary Jagiello, Program Manager, Federal Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion Entrance road improvements; Departure Aviation Administration, Detroit Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus lounge. Airports District Office, Willow Run Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990) Class or classes of air carrier which Airport, East, 8820 Beck Road, (Pub. L. 101–508) and Part 158 of the the FAA previously approved to be Belleville, Michigan 48111 (313–487– Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR exempt from the requirement to collect 7296). The application may be reviewed Part 158). PFCs: Air Taxi/Commercial Operators in person at this same location. (ATCO) filing FAA Form 1800–31. DATES: Comments must be received on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Any person may inspect the or before January 10, 1997. proposes to rule and invites public application in person at the FAA office ADDRESSES: Comments on this comment on the application to use the listed above under FOR FURTHER application may be mailed or delivered revenue from a PFC at Capital City INFORMATION CONTACT. Airport under the provisions of the in triplicate to the FAA at the following In addition, any person may, upon Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion address: Orlando Airports District request, inspect the application, notice Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Office, 5950 Hazeltine National Dr., and other documents germane to the Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990) Suite 400, Orlando, Florida 32822. application in person at the Lee County In addition, one copy of any (Pub. L. 101–508) and Part 158 of the Port Authority. comments submitted to the FAA must Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR be mailed or delivered to Debra Lemke, Issued in Orlando, Florida on November Part 158). Division Manager, Governmental Affairs 27, 1996. On November 22, 1996, the FAA of the Lee County Port Authority at the W. Dean Stringer, determined that the application to use following address: Lee County Port Acting Manager, Orlando Airports District the revenue from a PFC submitted by Authority, 16000 Chamberlin Parkway, Office, Southern Region. Capital Region Airport Authority was Suite 8671, Fort Myers, FL 33913–8899. [FR Doc. 96–31382 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] substantially complete within the Air carriers and foreign air carriers BILLING CODE 4910±13±M requirements of section 158.25 of Part may submit copies of written comments 158. The FAA will approve or previously provided to the Lee County disapprove the application, in whole or Port Authority under section 158.23 of Notice of Intent To Rule on Application in part, no later than January 29, 1997. Part 158. To Use the Revenue From a Passenger The following is a brief overview of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Facility Charge (PFC) at Capital City the application. Mr. Miguel A. Martinez, Project Airport, Lansing, MI PFC Application No.: 96–02–U–00– Manager, Orlando Airports District LAN. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Level of the PFC: $3.00. Office, 5950 Hazeltine National Dr., Administration (FAA), DOT. Actual charge effective date: October Suite 400, Orlando, Florida 32822, 407– ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on 1, 1993. 812–6331. The application may be application. Estimated charge expiration date: reviewed in person at this same May 31, 2002. location. SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Total approved net PFC revenue: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA invites public comment on the $8,489,276.00. proposes to rule and invites public application to use the revenue from a Brief description of proposed comment on the application to use the PFC at Capital City Airport under the project(s): Airport Rescue Fire Fighting revenue from a PFC at Southwest provisions of the Aviation Safety and (ARFF) Access Road, Rehabilitate Florida International Airport under the Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title Access Roads, Obstruction Removal provisions of the Aviation Safety and IX of the Omnibus Budget Runway 6–24, Freight Ramp Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title Reconciliation Act of 1990). (Pub. L. Construction, Construction of Taxiway. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65259

Class or classes of air carriers which FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on December the public agency has requested not be Ms. Irene R. Porter, Manager, Bismarck 3, 1996 required to collect PFCs: Part 135 air Airports District Office, 2000 University Melissa S. Wishy, taxi/commercial operators filing FAA Drive, Bismarck, North Dakota 58504, Acting Manager, Planning and Programming Form 1800–31. (701) 250–4385. The application may be Branch, Airports Division, Great Lakes Any person may inspect the reviewed in person at this same Region. application in person at the FAA office location. [FR Doc. 96–31383 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] listed above under FOR FURTHER BILLING CODE 4910±13±M INFORMATION CONTACT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA In addition, any person may, upon proposes to rule and invites public request, inspect the application, notice, comment on the application to impose [Summary Notice No. PE±96±57] and other documents germane to the and use the revenue from a PFC at Petitions for Exemption; Summary of application in person at the Capital Grand Forks International Airport under Petitions Received; Dispositions of Region Airport Authority. the provisions of the Aviation Safety Petitions Issued Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois, on and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 December 3, 1996. (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget AGENCY: Federal Aviation Melissa S. Wishy, Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. Administration (FAA), DOT. Acting Manager, Planning/Programming 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal ACTION: Notice of petitions for Branch, Airports Division, Great Lakes Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). exemption received and of dispositions Region. On November 15, 1996, the FAA of prior petitions. [FR Doc. 96–31384 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] determined that the application to BILLING CODE 4910±13±M impose and use the revenue from a PFC SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking submitted by the Grand Forks Regional provisions governing the application, Airport Authority was substantially processing, and disposition of petitions Notice of Intent To Rule on Application complete within the requirements of for exemption (14 CFR Part 11), this To Impose and Use the Revenue From section 158.25 of Part 158. The FAA notice contains a summary of certain a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at will approve or disapprove the petitions seeking relief from specified Grand Forks International Airport, application, in whole or in part, no later requirements of the Federal Aviation Grand Forks, ND than February 15, 1997. Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I), dispositions of certain petitions AGENCY: Federal Aviation The following is a brief overview of the application. previously received, and corrections. Administration (FAA), DOT. The purpose of this notice is to improve ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on PFC application number: 97–04–C– the public’s awareness of, and application. 00–GFK. participation in, this aspect of FAA’s Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00. SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and regulatory activities. Neither publication invites public comment on the Proposed charge effective date: April of this notice nor the inclusion or application to impose and use the 1, 1997. omission of information in the summary revenue from a PFC at Grand Forks Proposed charge expiration date: is intended to affect the legal status of International Airport under the December 1, 1997. any petition or its final disposition. provisions of the Aviation Safety and Total estimated PFC revenue: DATES: Comments on petitions received Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title $331,110.00. must identify the petition docket IX of the Omnibus Budget number involved and must be received Brief description of proposed Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. on or before December 30, 1996. project(s): Reconstruct and Widen 101–508) and Part 158 of the Federal ADDRESSES: Taxiway A; Update Airport Master Plan Send comments on any Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). and Airport Layout Plan; Acquire Land petition in triplicate to: Federal DATES: Comments must be received on for Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and Aviation Administration, Office of the or before January 10, 1997. Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC– Obstruction Removal in RPZ; llll ADDRESSES: Comments on this Reconstruct April ‘‘B’’ and Install Apron 200), Petition Docket No. , 800 application may be mailed or delivered Lights; Purchase Snow Removal Independence Avenue, SW., in triplicate to the AA at the following Equipment (SRE)/Snowplow; Purchase Washington, D.C. 20591. address: Federal Aviation SRE/Loader; Rehabilitate Airline Comments may also be sent Administration, Bismarck Airports (Terminal) Apron. electronically to the following internet District Office, 2000 University Drive, address: [email protected]. Class or classes of air carriers which Bismarck, North Dakota 58504. In The petition, any comments received, the public agency has requested not be addition, one copy of any comments and a copy of any final disposition are required to collect PFCs: Air Taxi/ submitted to the FAA must be mailed or filed in the assigned regulatory docket Commercial Operators (ATCO) filing delivered to Ms. Mary Jo Crystal, and are available for examination in the FAA Form 1800–31. Director of Finance and Administration, Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G, of the Grand Forks Regional Airport Any person may inspect the FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A), Authority at the following address: application in person at the FAA office 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Grand Forks International Airport, 2787 listed above under FOR FURTHER Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone Airport Drive, Grand Forks, North INFORMATION CONTACT. (202) 267–3132. Dakota 58203. In addition, any person may, upon FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Air carriers and foreign air carriers request, inspect the application, notice Fred Haynes (202) 267–3939 or Angela may submit copies of written comments and other documents germane to the Anderson (202) 267–9681 Office of previously provided to the Grand Forks application in person at the Grand Forks Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation Regional Airport Authority under Regional Airport Authority offices at the Administration, 800 Independence section 158.23 of Part 158. Grand Forks International Airport. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. 65260 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

This notice is published pursuant to use Federal Aviation Administraion of part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Exemption No. 5110D Part 11 of the Federal Aviation certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 26056 Regulations (14 CFR Part 11). of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: AVIA Training Issued in Washington, D.C., on December Exemption No. 3931K Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 4, 1996. Docket No.: 23921 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and Donald P. Byrne, Petitioner: FlightSafety International (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65 (c), (e) (2) 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) Dispositions of Petitions (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); and (d)(2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e)(2) and 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Docket No.: 13199 Petitioner: American Airlines, Inc. (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) (1) Description of Relief Sought: To permit Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); 61.191(c); AVIA Training to use Federal 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and Appendix A to part 61 Aviation Administration (FAA)- (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), Description of Relief Sought: To permit approved simulators to meet certain and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) FlightSafety International to use flight experience requirements of Part and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) Federal Aviation Administration 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Exemption No. 516D 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 26163 Description of Relief Sought: To permit of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: USAir, Inc. American Airlines, Inc., to use Exemption No. 5317F Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Federal Aviation Administration Docket No.: 24256 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Petitioner: Dalfort Training, L.P. (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), certain flight experience requirements Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65 (c), (e) (2) of part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) Exemption No. 4652F (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Docket No.: 15903 and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Petitioner: Department of the Treasury, and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) Description of Relief Sought: To permit Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); USAir, Inc. to use Federal Aviation Firearms. 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Administration (FAA)-approved Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Description of Relief Sought: To permit simulators to meet certain flight 91.111(b); 91.119(c); 91.127(b); Dalfort Training, L.P. to use Federal experience requirements of Part 61. 91.159(a) (1) and (2); and 91.209(a) Aviation Administration (FAA)- Grant, October 17, 1996, Exemption Description of Relief Sought: To permit approved simulators to meet certain No. 5158E the petitioner to conduct surveillance flight experience requirements of part Docket No.: 26223 operations using aircraft to enforce 61. Grant, October 12, 1996, Petitioner: Airbus Service Company, Federal laws pertaining to firearms, Exemption No. 4955F Inc. liquor, explosives, and wagering. Docket No.: 24413 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Grant, October 18, 1996, Exemption Petitioner: Tiger 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57(c) and No. 2327A Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR (d); 61.58(c) (1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), Docket No.: 23336 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) Petitioner: Simulator Training, Inc. (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 (d); 61.58(c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Description of Relief Sought: To permit and (d) 2 and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) and 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Airbus Service Company, Inc. to use (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) (1) Description of Relief Sought: To permit Federal Aviation Administration and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); 61.191(c); Tiger to use Federal Aviation (FAA)-approved simulators to meet and Appendix A to part 61 Administration (FAA)-approved certain flight experience requirements Description of Relief Sought: To permit simulators to meet certain flight of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Simulator Training Inc. to use Federal experience requirements of part 61. Exemption No. 6032B Aviation Administration (FAA)- Grant, October 17, 1996, Exemption Docket No.: 26577 approved simulators to meet certain No. 6073A Petitioner: Jet Tech, Inc. flight experience requirements of Part Docket No.: 25892 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: Reflectone Training Center— 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and Exemption No. 5232E Dulles (d); 61.58 (c) (1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), Docket No.: 23713 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d)(2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) and Petitioner: Simuflite Training 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) (1) International (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); 61.191(c); Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) and Appendix A to part 61 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) Description of Relief Sought: To permit (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c) (2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Jet Tech, Inc. to use Federal Aviation and (d) 2 and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) and 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Administration (FAA)-approved (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) 1 Description of Relief Sought: To permit simulators to meet certain flight and 2, and (e) (1) and (2); 61.191(c); Reflectone Training Center—Dulles to experience requirements of Part 61. and Appendix A to part 61 use Federal Aviation Administration Grant, October 17, 1996, Exemption Description of Relief Sought: To permit (FAA)-approved simulators to meet No. 5377D SimuFlite Training International to certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 26945 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65261

Petitioner: Seven Stars International, (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), and (3), and (g); 61.67 (d) (2); 61.157 Inc. and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) (d) (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (3), and (g); 61.67(d) (2); 61.157(d) 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Description of Relief Sought: To permit (d); 61.58(c) (1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 American Trans Air Training and (d) (2) and (3); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 Description of Relief Sought: To permit Corporation to use Federal Aviation (d) (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); and Purdue University to use Federal Administration (FAA)-approved Appendix A to part 61 Aviation Administration (FAA)- simulator to meet certain flight Description of Relief Sought: To permit approved simulators to meet certain experience requirements of part 61. Seven Stars International, Inc. to use flight experience requirements of Part Grant, October 17, 1996, Exemption Federal Aviation Administration 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, No. 6411A (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Exemption No. 5706B Docket No.: 28485 certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 27978 Petitioner: Polar Air Cargo of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: Delta Airlines, Inc. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Exemption No. 5544B Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 121.583(a)(8) Docket No.: 26992 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and Description of Relief Sought: To allow Petitioner: Continental Airlines, Inc. (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), Polar Air Cargo to provide Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65 (c), (e) (2) transportation for the dependents of 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) its employees to any destination (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); without meeting certain passenger- and (d)(2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) and 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 carrying requirements of part 121 and (3), and (g); 61.67(d) (2); 61.157 (d) (1) Description of Relief Sought: To permit without the dependents traveling with and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); 61.191(c); Delta Airlines, Inc. to use Federal the employees, and without regard as and Appendix A to part 61 Aviation Administration (FAA)- to whether the employees are Description of Relief Sought: To permit approved simulators to meet certain traveling on company business. Grant, Continental Airlines, Inc. to use flight experience requirements of part October 18, 1996, Exemption No. Federal Aviation Administration 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, 6530 (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Exemption No. 5995A Docket No.: 28517 certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 28310 Petitioner: Samuel D. James of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: Waypoint Aeronautical Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Exemption No. 5557B Corporation 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) Docket No.: 27120 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Description of Relief Sought: To permit Petitioner: Flight Training International, 61.55 (b) (2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and Samuel D. James to conduct certain Inc. (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c) (2), flight instruction and simulated Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) instrument flights to meet recent 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) instrument experience requirements, (d); 61.58(c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); in certain Beechcraft airplanes and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 equipped with a functioning throw- and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) Description of Relief Sought: To permit over control wheel in place of (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); Waypoint Aeronautical Corporation to functioning dual controls. Grant, 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 use Federal Aviation Administration October 17, 1996, Exemption No. Description of Relief Sought: To permit (FAA)-approved simulators to meet 6532 Flight Training International, Inc. to certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 28536 use Federal Aviation Administration of part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitoner: Kenneth W. Brown (FAA)-approved simulators to meet Exemption No. 6155A Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR certain flight experience requirements Docket No.: 28237 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) of Part 61. Grant, October 17, 1996, Petitioner: Premair, Inc. Description of Relief Sought: To permit Exemption No. 5629B Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Kenneth W. Brown to conduct certain Docket No.: 27223 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and flight instruction and simulated Petitioner: Ralph J. Diana (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c) (2), instrument flights to meet recent Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) instrument experience requirements, 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57(c) and and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157 (d) in certain Beechcraft airplanes (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2), (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); equipped with a functioning throw- and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e) (2) 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 over control wheel in place of and (3), and (g); 61.76(d)(2); 61.157 (d) Description of Relief Sought: To permit functioning dual controls. Grant, (1) and (2), and (e) (1) and (2); PremAir, Inc. to use Federal Aviation October 17, 1996, Exemption No. 61.191(c); and Appendix A to part 61 Administration (FAA)-approved 6531 Description of Relief Sought: To permit simulators to meet certain flight Docket No.: 28538 Ralph J. Diana to use Federal Aviation experience requirements of part 61. Petitioner: John M. Hirsch Administration (FAA)-approved Grant, October 17, 1996, Exemption Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR simulators to meet certain flight No. 6190A 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) experience requirements of Part 61. Docket No.: 28423 Description of Relief Sought: To permit Grant, October 21, 1996, Exemption Petitioner: American Trans Air Training John M. Hirsch to conduct certain No. 6191A Corporation flight instruction and simulated Docket No.: 27310 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR instrument flights to meet recent Petitioner: Purdue University 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and instrument experience requirements, Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), in certain Beechcraft airplanes 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65 (c), (e) (2) equipped with a functioning throw- 65262 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

over control wheel in place of number involved and must be received (d); 61.58 (c)(1) and (d); 61.63 (c)(2), functioning dual controls. Grant, on or before December 30, 1996. and (d) (2) and (3); 61.65 (c), (e) (2) October 17, 1996, Exemption No. ADDRESSES: Send comments on any and (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d) 6533 petition in triplicate to: Federal (1) and (2), and (e)(1) and (e)(2); and Docket No.: 28619 Aviation Administration, Office of the Appendix A to part 61 Petitoner: Law Offices of Birch, Horton, Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC– Description of Relief Sought/ Bittner and Cherot 200), Petition Docket No. llll, 800 Disposition: To permit the petitioner Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Independence Avenue, SW., to use FAA-approved simulators to 135.267 (b)(2) and (c), and 135.269 (b) Washington, D.C. 20591. meet certain flight experience (2) (3) and (4) Comments may also be sent requirements of Part 61. Grant, Description of Relief Sought: To permit electronically to the following internet September 30, 1996, Exemption No. F.S. Air Service Inc., to assign its address: [email protected]. 4745E flight crewmembers and allow its The petition, any comments received, Docket No.: 25550 flight crewmembers to accept a flight and a copy of any final disposition are Petitioner: Department of The Army assignment of up 16 hours of flight filed in the assigned regulatory docket Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR time during 20-hour duty day, for the and are available for examination in the 91.1699a) (2) and (c) purpose of conducting international Description of Relief Sought/ emergency medical evacuation Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G, FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A), Disposition: To allow Army operations. Denial, October 17, 1996, flightcrews to file Instrument Flight Exemption No. 6534 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone Rules (IFR) flight plans in accordance Docket No.: 28694 (202) 267–3132. with regulations prescribed by the Petitioner: North American Airlines Army. Grant, October 16, 1996, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Exemption No. 6528 121.358(a) Haynes (202) 267–3939 or Angela Description of Relief Sought: To permit Anderson (202) 267–9681 Office of Docket No.: 25863 Petitioner: Office of the Secretary of North American Airlines to operate a rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation Defense foreign-registered B757–200 aircraft Administration, 800 Independence Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR (G–MONE) on an interchange Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. 91.117(a) and (b), 91.159(a), and agreement between December 2, 1996, This notice is published pursuant to 91.209(a) and March 31, 1997, without being paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of Description of Relief Sought/ equipped with a low-altitude Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Disposition: To permit the petitioner windshear system. Regulations (14 CFR Part 11). to continue to conduct air operations [FR Doc. 96–31379 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Issued in Washington, D.C., on December in support of drug law enforcement 4, 1996. BILLING CODE 4910±13±M and traffic interdiction without Donald P. Byrne, meeting certain FAA regulations Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. governing aircraft speed, cruising Federal Aviation Administration altitudes for flights conducted under Dispositions of Petitions [Summary Notice No. PE±96±56] visual flight rules and use of aircraft Docket No.: 23647 lights. Grant, September 25, 1996, Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Petitioner: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Exemption No. 5100D Petitions Received; Dispositions of University Docket No.: 26743 Petitions Issued Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Petitioner: The Goodyear Tire & Rubber 141.65 Company AGENCY: Federal Aviation Description of Relief Sought/ Administration (FAA), DOT. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Disposition: To permit the petitioner 145.45(f) ACTION: Notice of petitions for to recommend graduates of its Description of Relief Sought/ exemption received and of dispositions certified flight instructor courses for Disposition: To permit Air Treads of prior petitions. certification without taking the FAA Incorporated (ATI) to established and SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking written or flight tests. Grant, maintain a number of fixed locations provisions governing the application, September 30, 1996, Exemption No. for the distribution of its repair station processing, and disposition of petitions 3859I inspection procedures manual at each for exemption (14 CFR Part 11), this Docket No.: 24283 facility rather than providing a copy notice contains a summary of certain Petitioner: American Flyers of the manual to each of its petitions seeking relief from specified Incorporated supervisory and inspection requirements of the Federal Aviation Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR employees, as required by the Federal Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I), 141.65 Aviation Regulations. Grant, dispositions of certain petitions Description of Relief Sought/ September 30, 1996, Exemption No. previously received, and corrections. Disposition: To permit American 5543B The purpose of this notice is to improve Flyers Incorporated to hold examining Docket No.: 26846 the public’s awareness of, and authority for flight instructor and Petitioner: University of North Dakota participation in, this aspect of FAA’s airline transport pilot (ATP) written Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR regulatory activities. Neither publication tests. Grant, September 30, 1996, 141.65 of this notice nor the inclusion or Exemption No. 4287F Description of Relief Sought Disposition: omission of information in the summary Docket No.: 25080 To permit the University of North is intended to affect the legal status of Petitioner: Aeroservice Aviation Center, Dakota to recommend graduates of its any petition or its final disposition. Inc. approved certification course for DATES: Comments on petitions received Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR flight instructor certificates and must identify the petition docket 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57 (c) and ratings without those graduates taking Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65263

the Federal Aviation Administration Pearce to conduct certain flight Docket No.: 28541 (FAA) written test. Grant, September instruction and simulated instrument Petitioner: Isaac B. Weathers 30, 1996, Exemption No. 5512B flights to meet recent instrument Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Docket No.: 27548 experience requirements, in certain 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) Petitioner: Las Vegas Metropolitan Beechcraft airplanes equipped with a Description of Relief Sought: To permit Police Department functioning throw-over control wheel Isaac B. Weathers to conduct certain Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR in place of functioning dual controls. flight instruction and simulated 61.113(a)(2) Grant, October 16, 1996, Exemption instrument flights to meet recent Description of Relief Sought/ No. 6527. instrument experience requirements, Disposition: To permit the petitioner Docket No.: 28512 in certain Beechcraft airplanes to train new pilots with instructor Petitioner: Robert P. Lavery equipped with a functioning throw- pilots on board, rather than have the Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR over control wheel in place of pilots meet the 15 hours of solo flight 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) functioning dual controls. Grant, time required by the regulation. Description of Relief Sought/ October 15, 1996, Exemption No. Denial, September 30, 1996, Disposition: To permit Robert P. 6526 Exemption No. 6508 Lavery to conduct certain flight Docket No.: 28557 Docket No.: 27769 instruction and simulated instrument Petitioner: Chromalloy Gas Turbine Petitioner: Ballistic Recovery Systems, flights to meet recent instrument Corporation Inc. experience requirements, in certain Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Beechcraft airplanes equipped with a 43.9(a) (4), 43.11(a)(3), and 145.57(a) 91.307(c) functioning throw-over control wheel Description of Relief Sought: To permit Description of Relief Sought/ in place of functioning dual controls. Chromalloy and other persons Disposition: To permit operators of Grant, October 15, 1996, Exemption holding return-to-service authority certain civil aircraft equipped with a No. 6525. under the relevant, respective General Aviation Recovery Device Docket No.: 28514 Inspection Procedures Manuals (GARD) to use it as an alternate to Petitioner: Henry D. Canterbury (IPMs) to use electronic signatures in wearing an approved parachute Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR lieu of physical signatures to satisfy during certain international 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) the signature requirements of FAA maneuvers. Denial, October 10, 1996, Description of Relief Sought/ Form 8130–3, ‘‘Airworthiness Exemption No. 6519. Disposition: To permit Henry D. Approval Tag.’’ Grant, September 30, Docket No.: 28296 Canterbury to conduct certain flight 1996, Exemption No. 6513 Petitioner: Flight Safety International instruction and simulated instrument Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR flights to meet recent instrument Docket No.: 28588 Petitioner: Air Wisconsin Airlines 61.57 (c) and (d), 61.58(b), and 61.157 experience requirements, in certain Corporation (a) and (f)(1) Beechcraft airplanes equipped with a Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Description of Relief Sought/ functioning throw-over control wheel Disposition: To permit Flight Safety in place of functioning dual controls. 61.57(e), 121.433(c)(1)(iii), 121.441 International to conduct pilot Grant, October 15, 1996, Exemption (a)(1) and (b)(1), and Appendix F to qualification training and No. 6520. Part 121 certification, and recurrent pilot Description of Relief Sought: To permit Docket No.: 28515 Air Wisconsin Airlines Corporation to proficiency training and checking, for Petitioner: Kenneth L. Fossler the Gulfstream V (G–V) aircraft, based Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR conduct an annual single-visit on an alternative pilot training 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) training program (SVTP) for flight program for part 91 operators that is Description of Relief Sought: To permit crewmembers and eventually appropriate for part 61 and is similar Kenneth L. Fossler to conduct certain transition into the Advanced to the Advanced Qualification flight instruction and simulated Qualification Program (AQP) codified Program (AQP) codified in Special instrument flights to meet recent in Special Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) instrument experience requirements, Regulation (SFAR) No. 58. Grant, No. 58. Grant, October 17, 1996, in certain Beechcraft airplanes October 15, 1996, Exemption No. Exemption No. 6529. equipped with a functioning throw- 6522 Docket No.: 28502 over control wheel in place of Docket No.: 28639 Petitioner: Cap Smythe Service, Inc. functioning dual controls. Grant, Petitioner: Peninsula Airways, Inc. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR October 15, 1996, Exemption No. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 121.1 and 135.1 6524 121.574(a) (1) and (3) Description of Relief Sought/ Docket No.: 28530 Description of Relief Sought: To permit Disposition: To permit the petitioner Petitioner: John A. Porter Peninsula Airways, Inc. to carry and to continue its Beechcraft 99 (B–99) Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR operate oxygen storage and aircraft with up to 15 passenger seats 91.109(a) and (b) (3) dispensing equipment for medical use during scheduled passenger service Description of Relief Sought: To permit by passengers requiring emergency or under the requirements of part 135 John A. Porter to conduct certain continuing medical attention when rather than the requirements of part flight instruction and simulated the equipment is furnished and 121. Denial, October 7, 1996, instrument flights to meet recent maintained by a hospital, located in Exemption No. 6516. instrument experience requirements, Alaska, that is treating the passenger. Docket No.: 28503 in certain Beechcraft airplanes Grant, October 31, 1996, Exemption Petitioner: Kenneth R. Pearce equipped with a functioning throw- No. 6523 Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR over control wheel in place of Docket No.: 28640 91.109 (a) and (b)(3) functioning dual controls. Grant, Petitioner: Peninsula Airways, Inc. Description of Relief Sought/ October 15, 1996, Exemption No. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Disposition: To permit Kenneth R. 6521 121.356(b) 65264 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices

Description of Relief Sought: To permit complainant within the 2-year period; 20423) or by calling Elaine Kaiser, Chief Peninsula Airways, Inc. to operate its and (4) the requirements at 49 CFR of SEA, at (202) 927–6248. Comments 10- to 19-passenger seat Metroliner 1105.7 (environmental reports), 49 CFR on environmental and historic aircraft in Alaska without an 1105.8 (historic reports), 49 CFR preservation matters must be filed approved traffic alert and collision 1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR within 15 days after the EA becomes avoidance system (TCAS). Denial, 1105.12 (newspaper publication), and available to the public. September 30, 1996, Exemption No. 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to Environmental, historic preservation, 6510 governmental agencies) have been met. public use, or trail use/rail banking Docket No.: 28655 As a condition to this exemption, any conditions will be imposed, where Petitioner: United West Airlines, Inc. employee adversely affected by the appropriate, in a subsequent decision. abandonment shall be protected under Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Decided: December 3, 1996. 135.143(c) (2) Oregon Short Line R. Co.— Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91 By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Description of Relief Sought: To permit Director, Office of Proceedings. (1979). To address whether this United West Airlines, Inc. to operate Vernon A. Williams, its Falcon 20 (Registration No. condition adequately protects affected Secretary. N500BG, Serial No. 121) and Learjet employees, a petition for partial 25 (Registration No. N500DL, Serial revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) [FR Doc. 96–31477 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] No. 27) aircraft under part 135 must be filed. BILLING CODE 4915±00±P without a TSO–C112 (Mode S) Provided no formal expression of transponder installed. Grant, intent to file an offer of financial September 30, 1996, Exemption No. assistance (OFA) has been received, this DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 6512 exemption will be effective on January AFFAIRS 10, 1997, unless stayed pending Docket No.: 28651 reconsideration. Petitions to stay that do Rehabilitation Research and Petitioner: R.L. Olsonoski not involve environmental issues,1 Development Service Scientific Merit Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR formal expressions of intent to file an Review Board, Notice of Meeting 121.383(c) OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2),2 and Description of Relief Sought: To permit trail use/rail banking requests under 49 The Department of Veterans Affairs R.L. Olsonoski to act as a pilot in CFR 1152.29 3 must be filed by gives notice under Public Law 92–463 operations conducted under part 121 December 23, 1996. Petitions to reopen (Federal Advisory Committee Act) as after reaching his 60th birthday. or requests for public use conditions amended, by section 5(c) of Public Law Denial, September 30, 1996, under 49 CFR 1152.28 must be filed by 94–409 that a meeting of the Exemption No. 6511 December 31, 1996, with: Office of the Rehabilitation Research and [FR Doc. 96–31380 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] Secretary, Case Control Branch, Surface Development Service Scientific Merit Review Board will be held at the Vista BILLING CODE 4910±13±M Transportation Board, 1201 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20423. International Hotel, 1400 ‘‘M’’ Street, A copy of any petition filed with the NW, Washington, DC on January 14 Surface Transportation Board Board should be sent to applicant’s through January 16, 1997. The session on January 14, 1997 is [STB Docket No. AB±33 (Sub-No. 104X)] representative: Joseph D. Anthofer, General Attorney, Union Pacific scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. and end Union Pacific Railroad CompanyÐ Railroad Company, 1416 Dodge Street, at 9:30 p.m. The sessions on January 15 Abandonment ExemptionÐin Oconto Room 830, Omaha, NE 68179. and January 16, 1997, are scheduled to County, WI If the verified notice contains false or begin at 8 a.m. and end at 5 p.m. The misleading information, the exemption purpose of the meeting is to review Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) is void ab initio. rehabilitation research and development has filed a notice of exemption under 49 UP has filed an environmental report applications for scientific and technical CFR 1152 Subpart F—Exempt which addresses the abandonment’s merit and to make recommendations to Abandonments and Discontinuances of effects, if any, on the environment and the Director, Rehabilitation Research Service and Trackage Rights to abandon historic resources. The Section of and Development Service, regarding and discontinue service over an Environmental Analysis (SEA) will their funding. approximately 8.3-mile line of railroad issue an environmental assessment (EA) The meeting will be open to the known as the Oconto Falls Industrial by December 16, 1996. Interested public up to the seating capacity of the Lead from milepost 54.4, near Oconto, persons may obtain a copy of the EA by room for the January 14 session for the to the end of the line at milepost 46.1, writing to SEA (Room 3219, Surface discussion of administrative matters, the near Stiles Junction, in Oconto County, Transportation Board, Washington, DC general status of the program, and the WI. administrative details of the review UP has certified that: (1) No local 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed process. On January 15–16, 1997 the traffic has moved over the line for at decision on environmental issues (whether raised meeting is closed during which the by a party or by the Board’s Section of least 2 years; (2) there is no overhead Environmental Analysis in its independent Board will be reviewing research and traffic moving over the line and any investigation) cannot be made before the development applications. overhead traffic could be rerouted; (3) exemption’s effective date. See Exemption of Out- This review involves oral comments, of-Service Rail Lines, 5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any no formal complaint filed by a user of request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible discussion of site visits, staff and rail service on the line (or by a state or so that the Board may take appropriate action before consultant critiques of proposed local government entity acting on behalf the exemption’s effective date. research protocols, and similar of such user) regarding cessation of 2 See Exempt. of Rail Abandonment—Offers of analytical documents that necessitate service over the line either is pending Finan. Assist., 4 I.C.C.2d 164 (1987). the consideration of the personal 3 The Board will accept late-filed trail use with the Surface Transportation Board requests as long as the abandonment has not been qualifications, performance and (Board) or with any U.S. District Court consummated and the abandoning railroad is competence of individual research or has been decided in favor of willing to negotiate an agreement. investigators. Disclosure of such Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Notices 65265 information would constitute a clearly of the Department of Veterans Affairs Baltimore, Maryland 21202 (Phone: unwarranted invasion of personal under Sections 10(d) of Pub. L. 92–463 410–962–2563) at least five days before privacy. Disclosure would also reveal as amended by Section 5(c)of Pub. L. the meeting. research proposals and research 94–409. Dated: December 4, 1996. underway which could lead to the loss Due to the limited seating capacity of of these projects to third parties and the room, those who plan to attend the By direction of the Secretary. thereby frustrate future agency research open session should write to Ms. Heyward Bannister, efforts. Victoria Mongiardo, Program Analyst, Committee Management Officer. Thus, the closing is in accordance Rehabilitation Research and [FR Doc. 96–31401 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6), and (c)(9)(B) Development Service, Department of BILLING CODE 8320±01±M and the determination of the Secretary Veterans Affairs, 103 South Gay Street, 65266

Corrections Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239

Wednesday, December 11, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER §3550.9 [Corrected] Friday, November 22, 1996 make the contains editorial corrections of previously 2. On page 59780, in the second following correction: published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, column, in §3550.9(a), in the first line, In the third column, two paragraphs and Notice documents. These corrections are ‘‘Objective’’ should read ‘‘(a) Objective’’. prepared by the Office of the Federal from the bottom, in the tenth line Register. Agency prepared corrections are §3550.10 [Corrected] ‘‘January 21, 1996’’ should read issued as signed documents and appear in 3. On page 59780, in the third ‘‘January 21, 1997’’. the appropriate document categories column, in §3550.10, in the first full elsewhere in the issue. BILLING CODE 1505±01±D paragraph, in the sixth line, ‘‘4’’ should read ‘‘§3550.54’’. 4. On page 59781, in the third DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE column, in §3550.10, in the second line ‘‘Legal alien.’’ should denote a new Drug Enforcement Administration Rural Housing Service paragraph and read ‘‘Legal alien.’’ Earl G. Rozeboom, M.D.; Revocation of Rural Business-Cooperative Service §3550.63 [Corrected] Registration Rural Utilities Service 5. On page 59787, in the third column, in §3550.63(a), in the fifth line, Correction Farm Service Agency ‘‘7(a)’’ should read ‘‘§3550.57(a)’’. In notice document 96–30377 7 CFR Part 3550 BILLING CODE 1505±01±D appearing on page 60730 in the issue of RIN 0575ÐAB99 Friday, November 29, 1996, in the third DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE column, the signature was inadvertently Reengineering and Reinvention of the omitted and should appear as follows Direct Section 502 and 504 Single Foreign-Trade Zones Board before the FR Doc. line. Family Housing (SFH) Programs [Docket 57-96] James S. Milford, Correction Acting Deputy Administrator. Foreign-Trade Zone 189ÐMuskegon, In interim rule document 96–29777, Michigan; Application for Subzone BILLING CODE 1505±01±D beginning on page 59762, in the issue of Status, ESCO Company Limited Friday, November 22, 1996, make the Partnership (Colorformer Chemicals); following corrections: Extension of Public Comment Period 1. On page 59762, in the first column, in the ADDRESSES section, in the ninth Correction line, ‘‘comments’rus.usda.gov’’ should In notice document 96–29937 read ‘‘[email protected]’’. appearing on page 59401 in the issue of federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday Proposed Rule Program Regulations:RoundTwo; Pollutant DischargeEliminationSystem Amendments toStreamlinetheNational 40 CFRPart22,etal. Protection Agency Environmental Part II 65267 65268 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Commenters who would like This table is not intended to be AGENCY acknowledgment of receipt of their exhaustive, but rather provides a guide comments should include a self- for readers regarding entities likely to be 40 CFR Parts 22, 117, 122, 123, 124, addressed, stamped envelope. All regulated by this action. This table lists 125, 144, 270, and 271 comments must be postmarked or the types of entities that EPA is now delivered by hand by the comment aware could potentially be regulated by [FRL±5656±5] deadline. No facsimiles (faxes) will be this action. Other types of entities not Amendments to Streamline the accepted. listed in the table could also be National Pollutant Discharge EPA will also accept comments regulated. To determine whether your Elimination System Program electronically. Comments should be organization is likely to be regulated by Regulations: Round Two addressed to the following Internet this action, you should carefully read address: [email protected]. the applicability language of today’s AGENCY: Environmental Protection Electronic comments must be submitted rule. If you have any questions Agency. as an ASCII file avoiding the use of regarding the applicability of this action ACTION: Proposed rule. special characters and any form of to a particular entity, consult the person encryption. Electronic comments will be listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection transferred onto a paper version for the INFORMATION CONTACT section. Agency (EPA) is today proposing official record. EPA will attempt to Organization revisions to the National Pollutant clarify electronic comments if there is Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) an apparent error in transmission. Information in this preamble is regulations (40 CFR parts 122, 123, 124, Comments provided electronically will organized as follows: and 125). This proposal is part of an be considered timely if they are agency-wide effort to respond to a submitted electronically by 11:59 P.M. I. Background directive issued by the President on (Eastern time) February 10, 1997. As II. Proposed Revisions February 21, 1995, which directed EPA is experimenting with electronic Federal agencies to review their A. Proposed Revisions to Part 122 commenting, commenters may want to 1. Purpose and Scope (40 CFR 122.1) regulatory programs to eliminate any submit both electronic comments and obsolete, ineffective, or unduly 2. NPDES Program Definitions (40 CFR duplicate paper comments. This 122.2, 124.2) burdensome regulations. In response to document has also been placed on the 3. New Sources/New Dischargers (40 CFR that directive, EPA initiated a detailed Internet for public review and 122.4, 124.56) review of its regulations to determine downloading at the following location: 4. EPA Application Forms (40 CFR which provisions were obsolete, gopher.epa.gov. 122.1(d)(1), 122.21(a), 122.21(d), duplicative, or unduly burdensome. On The public may inspect the 122.26(c)(1)) June 29, 1995, EPA issued a rule (60 FR administrative record for this 5. Effluent Characteristics (40 CFR 33926) which removed some regulatory rulemaking at EPA’s Water Docket, 122.21(g)(7)) provisions in the Office of Water Room M2616, 401 M Street, S.W., 6. Signatories (40 CFR 122.22) program regulations (including certain Washington, D.C. 20460, between the 7. Group Permit Applications (40 CFR NPDES provisions) that were clearly hours of 9 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. on 122.26(c)(2)) obsolete. Today’s proposal is intended business days. For access to docket 8. General Permits (40 CFR 122.28) to further streamline NPDES and RCRA materials, please call (202) 260–3027 for 9. Monitoring (40 CFR 122.41(j), permitting procedures by revising an appointment during the 122.41(l)(4), 122.44(i)(1)(iv), 122.48) 10. Effluent Guideline Limits in Permits requirements in parts 122, 124, and 125 aforementioned hours. A reasonable fee (40 CFR 122.44(a)) to eliminate redundant regulatory will be charged for copying. language, provide clarification, and 11. Reopener Clauses (40 CFR 122.44(c)) remove or streamline unnecessary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 12. Best Management Practices (40 CFR procedures which do not provide any Thomas Charlton, Permits Division 122.44(k)) environmental benefits. Conforming (4203), U.S. Environmental Protection 13. Termination of Permits (40 CFR 122.64) changes to 40 CFR parts 22, 117, 144, Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., B. Proposed Revisions to Part 123 270, and 271 are also proposed in Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 260– 1. Requirements for Permitting (40 CFR 123.25) today’s notice. These proposed revisions 6960. 2. Transmission of Information to EPA (40 are identified and discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CFR 123.44) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section Regulated Entities C. Proposed Revisions to Public Hearing below. Requirements for NPDES Permit Actions DATES: Written comments on this Entities potentially regulated by this and RCRA Permit Terminations proposed rule must be received by or action are EPA, authorized State 1. Background of the Current Rule postmarked by February 10, 1997 to be programs, and the Regulated 2. Proposed Elimination considered timely. Community. a. Legal Basis (1) The Language of Section 402(a) ADDRESSES: Commenters are requested (2) Reasonableness of interpretation to submit written comments to: The Category Examples of regu- lated entities b. Proposed New System NPDES Round II Streamlining Rule, (1) Permit issuance Comment Clerk, Water Docket MC– Federal Government Federal NPDES Pro- (2) Termination of NPDES and RCRA 4101; U.S. Environmental Protection gram. Permits Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., State Government ..... State NPDES Pro- (3) Stays of Contested Permit Conditions gram. Washington, D.C. 20460. Commenters (4) Procedures for Variances and New Private ...... NPDES Regulated are requested to submit any references Source Determinations cited in their comments. Commenters Community. Private ...... RCRA Regulated (5) Transition to New Procedural are also requested to submit an original Community. Requirements and three copies of their comments. (6) Miscellaneous Changes Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65269

(7) Effect on State Programs parts 22, 117, 144, 270, and 271. 2. NPDES Program Definitions (40 CFR D. Proposed Reservation of Part 125, Subpart Today’s proposal contains many of the 122.2, 124.2) K—Criteria and Standards for Best revisions contained in EPA’s June 1, In this proposed rule, EPA seeks to Management Practices Authorized under 1995 report to the President. EPA also Section 304(e) of the Act streamline the NPDES program 1. 40 CFR Part 125, Subpart K proposes in today’s notice, amendments definitions found at parts 122 and 124 2. 40 CFR 122.44(k) to its regulations that would correct by removing redundant or superfluous E. Miscellaneous Corrections typographical errors, drafting errors, and language found in its regulatory misplaced or obsolete references. III. Administrative Requirements definitions. Today’s proposal may, at times, print A. Executive Order 12866 a. EPA intends to amend § 122.2 to extensive portions of existing regulatory add references to definitions that are B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act text without change. This is done to C. The Paperwork Reduction Act found elsewhere in parts 122 and 123. D. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act better describe the proposed revisions. The inclusion of such references in a For example, § 122.21(g)(7) is reprinted single location is intended to assist I. Background in its entirety to indicate where new readers in finding specific provisions in On February 21, 1995, the President paragraph headings are proposed to be the NPDES regulations. However, this directed all Federal agencies and inserted. However, EPA does not solicit, action is not intended to expand the departments to conduct a and will not respond to, comments on application of those definitions if they comprehensive review of the regulations existing regulatory provisions not are restricted to a particular section. they administer and by June 1, 1995, proposed to be amended, nor will such This proposed rule would provide identify those rules that are obsolete or provisions be subject to judicial review references to the following terms. unduly burdensome. EPA conducted a upon promulgation of the final rule. Animal feeding operation review of all of its rules, including those EPA is soliciting comment only on the Aquaculture project issued under the Federal Water revisions described in this preamble. Bypass Pollution Control Act, as amended II. Proposed Revisions Concentrated animal feeding operation (‘‘FWPCA’’) (33 U.S.C. 1158 and 1251 et Concentrated aquatic animal feeding seq.) (also cited below, as the Clean A. Revisions to Part 122 operation Water Act or ‘‘CWA’’), the Safe Drinking 1. Purpose and Scope (40 CFR 122.1) Individual control strategy Water Act (‘‘SDWA’’) (42 U.S.C. 300f et Municipal separate storm sewer system seq.), and the Marine Protection, Section 122.1 provides a general Silvicultural point source Research, and Sanctuaries Act (also description of the purpose and scope of Sludge only facility known as the Ocean Dumping Act) (33 the NPDES program regulations. Today, Storm water U.S.C. 1401 et seq.). In March and April EPA proposes to amend this section to Storm water discharge associated with of 1995, EPA solicited informal remove superfluous language and to industrial activity comments from the public, regulated provide better clarification. Paragraph Upset entities, States, and municipalities on (b)(2) states that concentrated animal b. In 40 CFR 124.2, EPA intends to ways to identify rules that are obsolete, feeding operations, concentrated aquatic remove definitions that are already redundant, or unduly burdensome. animal production facilities, discharges found in 122.2. This includes the terms, Towards that end, a number of meetings into aquaculture projects, discharges of ‘‘applicable standards and limitations’’, were held in the Regions. On April 3, storm water, and silvicultural point ‘‘variances’’, and ‘‘NPDES’’. EPA 1995, the Office of Water issued a sources are all point sources requiring believes such multiple definitions to be preliminary report which identified NPDES permits for discharges. This redundant because § 124.2(a) already those regulatory provisions that were information is already provided at provides that the definitions of § 122.2 amenable to streamlining. §§ 122.23, 122.24, 122.25, 122.26, and (as well as definitions for the sludge As a result of this review, EPA issued 122.27. EPA proposes to remove management, UIC, PSD, 404, and RCRA a final rule on June 29, 1995 (60 FR paragraph (b)(2). Existing paragraphs programs) apply to part 124. 33926) which removed a number of (b)(3) and (b)(4) are proposed to be regulatory provisions that were obsolete redesignated as (b)(2) and (b)(3) 3. New Sources/New Dischargers (40 or redundant with other regulatory respectively. References to existing CFR 122.4, 124.56) requirements. Today’s proposal is a § 122.1(b)(3) are found at § 122.2 and Section 122.4(i) prohibits the issuance continuation of this effort by EPA to § 124.1. Today’s notice would insert a of a permit to a new source or new revise the NPDES program regulations reference to 122.1(b)(2) in their place. discharger if the discharge would cause in parts 122, 123, 124 and 125 to To provide better clarification, EPA is or contribute to a violation of water eliminate redundant requirements, proposing to remove and revise quality standards. A new source or new remove superfluous language, provide language found at paragraphs (c), (d), discharger may, however, obtain a clarification, and remove or streamline (e), and (f) and place it in three new permit for discharge into a water unnecessary procedures which do not paragraphs (a)(3), (4), (5). Paragraphs (c), segment which does not meet applicable provide any environmental benefits. (d), (e), and (f) would be removed. By water quality standards by submitting Included in today’s notice are proposed these revisions to § 122.1, EPA does not information demonstrating that there is revisions which would revise the permit intend to change any existing sufficient loading capacity remaining in appeals process for EPA-issued NPDES substantive requirements of the NPDES waste load allocations (WLAs) for the permits by replacing the evidentiary program. EPA also proposes to provide stream segment to accommodate the hearing procedures found at part 124, a note at the end of this section to assist new discharge and that existing subpart E with a direct appeal to the readers in contacting EPA if they have dischargers to that segment are subject Environmental Appeals Board. This is questions regarding the NPDES program to compliance schedules designed to not intended to affect the permit appeal or its rules. EPA may also provide for bring the segment into compliance with procedures for State-authorized NPDES the electronic submission of queries the applicable water quality standards. programs. Also contained in today’s concerning the NPDES program and EPA is proposing to revise these proposal are conforming changes to solicits comment on that practice. information submission requirements to 65270 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules allow the Director to waive the present § 122.21. Section 122.21(d)(3)(ii) § 122.21(g)(7) to add language which submittal of information requirements requires that in addition to any other specifically addresses storm water under § 122.4(i) where the permitting applicable requirements in this part, all application requirements. However, the authority determines that it already has POTWs and other ‘‘treatment works addition of this language has made the required information. In many treating domestic sewage,’’ including paragraph (g)(7) more difficult to read instances the information required to be ‘‘sludge-only facilities,’’ must submit because there is a large amount of submitted by the applicant (such as with their applications the information uninterrupted text and it is difficult to waste load allocations available or listed at 40 CFR 501.15 (a)(2) within the separate out requirements that are compliance schedules for existing time frames established in paragraph specific to storm water discharges. discharges) may already be in the § 122.21(c)(2) of this section. Finally, Today’s proposal seeks to better clarify Director’s files. Where the information § 122.26(c)(1) requires storm water paragraph (g)(7) through the insertion of is not available or current, the Director discharges associated with industrial additional paragraph headings. No may not waive the requirement for the activity to submit Form 1 and Form 2F. substantive changes to 40 CFR applicant to generate all supporting Most of the requirements in these two 122.21(g)(7) are intended by this documentation. EPA notes that this paragraphs are duplicative. revision. EPA also proposes to revise information (as with any information Consequently, EPA proposes to references to provisions in paragraph which details how permit limits are consolidate the requirements of (g)(7) that are found elsewhere in the derived) should be included in the fact §§ 122.1(d) and 122.1(d)(3) and place NPDES regulations (§§ 122.21(g)(8); sheet or statement of basis for the them in a new paragraph designated as 122.21 notes 1, 2, and 3; 122.26(c)(1)(i); permit. See 40 CFR 124.7, 124.8, and § 122.21(a)(2). EPA believes paragraph and 122.26(d)(2)(iv)(C)(2)) to ensure 124.56. To underscore the importance of (a) is a more appropriate location those references reflect § 122.21(g)(7)’s such information and to clarify an because it pertains to all permit new structure. existing requirement, EPA also proposes applicants, whereas, paragraph (d) 6. Signatories (40 CFR 122.22) to include an express requirement in concerns situations involving permit §§ 122.4(i) and 122.56(b)(1) that reapplications. Section 122.1 is also not Section 122.22 requires that all permit information which demonstrates how a particularly suitable location because applications for corporations shall be the criteria for permit issuance in it concerns the scope of the NPDES signed by a responsible corporate officer § 122.4(i) are met is included in the fact program and not application as defined in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) or sheet for the permit. EPA notes that this requirements. The requirements (a)(1)(ii) of that section. Responsible revision merely clarifies existing currently found at § 122.21(a) would be corporate officer is defined at requirements found at §§ 124.7, 124.8, retained in new paragraph (a)(1). § 122.22(a)(1)(i) as a president, and 124.56 and does not result in an Section 122.21(d)(3) would be removed secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of increased burden to the regulated and reserved for future use. In the corporation in charge of a principal community or permit issuing § 122.21(c)(2)(i), EPA proposes to revise business function, or any other person authorities. a reference to paragraph (d)(3)(ii) found who performs similar policy- or in § 122.21(c)(2) (i) and (ii) to reflect decision-making functions for the 4. EPA Application Forms (40 CFR those provisions’ new location, corporation. Paragraph (a)(1)(ii) 122.1(d)(1), 122.21(a), 122.21(d), paragraph (a)(2). EPA is also in the provides that a responsible corporate 122.26(c)(1)) process of revising some of its officer may be the manager of one or EPA’s regulations contain two application forms (60 FR 62546, Dec. 6, more manufacturing, production, or provisions, §§ 122.1(d)(1) and 122.22(d) 1995). Those proposed revisions, once operating facilities employing more than which require the use of EPA finalized, will be coordinated with the 250 persons or having gross annual sales application forms for EPA-issued revisions proposed in today’s notice. or expenditures exceeding $25 million permits. In today’s notice EPA proposes EPA also proposes to add language in (in second-quarter 1980 dollars), if to consolidate these provisions and proposed § 122.21(a)(2) to clarify which authority to sign documents has been move them to a new location, EPA forms may be required for a assigned or delegated to the manager in § 122.21(a). Section 122.1(d)(1) requires particular discharger. This new accordance with corporate procedures. that applicants for EPA-issued permits language will also allow for the These numeric criteria (250 must submit applications on EPA possibility of electronic submittal of individuals, 25 million in second application forms when available and application information in the event quarter 1980 dollars) were added in indicates that most of the information that the Agency approves the electronic 1983 (See 48 FR 39612 (Sept. 1, 1983)) requested on these application forms is application submittal process. At that to ensure that facility managers who required by EPA’s regulations. The time, authorized-States would have the sign permit applications have high level provision also indicates that the basic option of using electronic submission of corporate knowledge of a corporation’s information required in the general form application information. EPA notes that pollution control operations and are (Form 1) and the additional information there are other ongoing efforts to update authorized to make management required for NPDES applications (Forms the EPA’s forms which may result in decisions which govern the operation of 2A through 2D) are listed in § 122.21. nonsubstantive revisions to paragraph the regulated facility. EPA did not Applicants for State-issued permits (a)(2). intend signatories to include field must use State forms which must supervisors or facility operators because require at a minimum the information 5. Effluent Characteristics (40 CFR at the time that rule was established, we listed in EPA’s application regulations. 122.21(g)(7)) believed such individuals might not Similarly, § 122.21(d)(3)(i) requires Section 122.21(g)(7) requires that have the ability to direct the activities that all applicants for EPA-issued applicants for permits for existing of the corporation so as to ensure that permits, other than POTWs, new manufacturing, commercial, mining, necessary procedures are established or sources, and ‘‘sludge-only facilities,’’ and silvicultural discharges must actions taken to gather complete and must complete Forms 1 and either 2B or submit information on effluent accurate information. EPA now believes 2C of the consolidated permit characteristics. On November 16, 1990 these criteria to be obsolete because they application forms to apply under (55 FR 48062), EPA revised do not apply well to current corporate Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65271 structures and facility operations in of storm water. Under Section 402(p), • To establish a procedure where light of emerging trends in automation Congress identified five classes of point adequate information would be and decentralization. The use of such source storm water discharges that collected for developing permits for rigid indicators may operate to would be included in Phase I of the certain classes of storm water disqualify individuals who are best able Storm water program and required to discharges; to undertake the responsibility of obtain NPDES permits. These are: • to reduce costs and administrative ensuring that permit applications are • A discharge for which a permit has burdens on permit applicants; accurate and complete. Today’s already been issued under this section • to reduce the amount of proposal seeks to revise § 122.22(a)(1)(ii) prior to February 4, 1987; quantitative data by requiring such data to remove numerical criteria, and • A discharge associated with from only selected facilities within a provide instead language which ensures industrial activity; group; and that facility managers who sign permit • A discharge from a municipal • to ease the burden on the permit applications have high level corporate separate storm sewer system serving a issuing authority by consolidating knowledge of a corporation’s pollution population of 250,000 or more; information. control operations and are authorized to • A discharge from a municipal In response to the group application make management decisions which separate storm sewer system serving a option, EPA received over 1200 group govern the operation of the regulated population of 100,000 or more but less applications encompassing 65,000 facility including the ability to allocate than 250,000; and industrial activities. Using the resources, make major capital • A discharge for which the information provided by group investments, and initiate and direct the Administrator or the State determines applicants, EPA developed a multi- development of other comprehensive that the storm water discharge sector storm water general permit measures to assure long term contributes to a violation of a water (MSGP) which was published on compliance with environmental laws quality standard or is a significant September 29, 1995 (and revised on and regulations. contributor of pollutants to waters of the February 9, 1996). The MSGP includes Instead of numeric criteria, today’s U.S. baseline conditions applicable to all proposal provides that signatories to To implement the phase I provisions industrial activities within 29 industrial permit applications may include the of Section 402(p) (1) through (5), EPA sectors and conditions that are specific manager of one or more manufacturing, published final storm water permit to each sector. The MSGP is available in production, or operating facilities, application regulations on November States where EPA is the permitting provided, (1) the manager is authorized 16, 1990 (55 FR 48063), as revised. For authority. Industrial facilities seeking to make management decisions which storm water discharges associated with coverage under the MSGP must submit govern the operation of the regulated industrial activity, EPA defined eleven a single page notice of intent (NOI) to facility including the ability to allocate categories comprising major groupings receive coverage. Where States have resources, make major capital of industrial sectors that are identified NPDES authority, the MSGP is available investments, and initiate and direct either by standard industrial as a model to assist those States in other comprehensive measures to assure classification (SIC) code or through providing permit coverage for storm long term environmental compliance narrative descriptions. Industrial water discharges in their jurisdictions. with environmental laws and activities that fall within these eleven While the MSGP was initially regulations; (2) the manager can ensure industrial categories and which have a developed through the group that the necessary systems are point source discharge of storm water application process, it has evolved into established or actions taken to gather are required to seek a NPDES permit. a general permit whose coverage is complete and accurate information for EPA anticipated that the available to all facilities that meet its permit application requirements; and (3) implementation of the Phase I industrial eligibility requirements. It has also led the manager has been assigned or program would cover over 100,000 to the development of a substantial body delegated authority to sign documents facilities. To ensure the timely issuance of information regarding the permitting in accordance with corporate of NPDES permits, EPA sought in the and control of storm water discharges procedures. final rule to offer several NPDES from industrial activity. EPA believes that today’s proposed administrative approaches to facilitate The group application process was rule remains consistent with the intent extended permit coverage as cost designed to accommodate the initial of the September 1, 1983 rulemaking to effectively and as efficiently as possible influx of first-time permit applications ensure that permit application to large numbers of permittees. In the from Phase I industrial activities and signatories are those who are best able November 16, 1990 final rule, EPA was based, in part, on the limited to ensure that accurate, complete, and provided that storm water discharges availability of storm water general truthful permit applications are associated with industrial activity could permits in States. However, the submitted, while allowing for greater pursue one of three permit application deadlines for submitting group flexibility in the use of signatories. options including the submission of: applications for Phase I facilities However, EPA invites comment on • An individual permit application; expired on October 1, 1992, and whether other criteria would prove • A notice of intent to be covered coverage under storm water general more appropriate in light of modern under a general permit; or permits is now widely available. Forty corporate management structures for • A group permit application. States are authorized to issue storm determining signatories for permit Today’s revision focuses on group water general permits. EPA issues storm applications under § 122.22(a)(1)(ii). applications. This option allowed water general permits for those States facilities with very similar activities to and jurisdictions that are without EPA 7. Group Permit Applications (40 CFR form groups to submit a joint authorization. Industrial facilities may 122.26(c)(2)) application of which only ten percent of readily obtain permit coverage by The 1987 amendments to the Clean the group would have to submit submitting a NOI to the appropriate Water Act (CWA) added section 402(p) monitoring information. EPA developed permitting authority or through which established a two phase approach this option to accomplish the following applying for an individual permit. for addressing point source discharges goals: Consequently, EPA believes the group 65272 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules application option is no longer needed. discharger (or treatment works treating (a)(4), to require that general permits General permits provide a more flexible domestic sewage) within a specific must clearly identify the applicable approach to storm water coverage and geographic area. Historically, certain conditions for each category of can accomplish the goals of the group regulatory restrictions have been dischargers or treatment works treating permit application process (i.e., more applied to general permits. General domestic sewage and provide that efficient monitoring, reduced permits have been limited to specific general permits may exclude specified application burdens) without requiring areas corresponding to certain sources or areas from coverage. that applicants form into groups prior to geographic or political boundaries. 40 Today’s proposal would also revise applying for permit coverage.1 EPA also CFR 122.28(a)(1). Current regulations § 122.28 by adding a new paragraph, believes that storm water pollution also provide that general permits may (a)(3), to provide that where dischargers prevention plans (a principal regulate storm water point sources, or a (or treatment works treating domestic requirement of most storm water general category of point sources other than sewage) are subject to water quality- permits) will ensure that permit storm water that involve substantially based limitations, the sources in that conditions are appropriate and similar types of operations, discharge specific category or subcategory shall be applicable for the industrial activities the same types of wastes or engage in subject to the same water quality-based covered. Consequently, today’s notice the same types of sludge use or disposal effluent limitations. While this proposes to eliminate the group practice, require the same effluent provision would appear at first to be application option at § 122.26(c)(2), and limitations, require the same or similar redundant with existing provisions at proposes conforming changes to monitoring, and in the opinion of the § 122.28(a)(2)(i)(C) which require that paragraph (c)(1). The removal of the permitting authority, are more non-storm water sources covered under group application provisions will not appropriately controlled under a general a general permit must require the same impact EPA’s ability to reissue the permit than under individual permits. effluent limitations, operating MSGP because it is a general permit. 40 CFR 122.28(a)(2). This provision has conditions, or standards for sewage been generally interpreted as limiting sludge or disposal, the restrictions 8. General Permits (40 CFR 122.28) coverage of non-storm water general contained in proposed paragraph (a)(3) EPA’s NPDES general permit program permits to only a single category of apply to storm water and non-storm arose out of the broad grant of authority point sources, such as a single industrial water sources where water quality-based in section 402(a) of the CWA and the category covered under an effluent limits are involved. EPA is proposing to decision of NRDC v. Train, 396 F.Supp. guideline. (EPA’s regulations do allow add this paragraph in part to clarify that 1393, 1402 (D.D.C. 1975), aff’d, NRDC v. general permits for storm water to general permit categories can be used to Costle, 568 F.2d 1369 (D.C. Cir. 1977) regulate multiple categories of point impose water quality-based limitations which recognized EPA’s authority to sources.) as well as technology-based limitations. employ administrative mechanisms, In today’s notice, EPA seeks to revise However, paragraph (a)(3)’s requirement such as area (general) permits, to assist § 122.28(a) (1) and (2) to clarify that a that sources in categories or the Agency in the practical general permit for non-storm water subcategories be subject to the same administration of the NPDES permit dischargers may cover more than one water quality-based limits reflects EPA’s program. In 1979, EPA promulgated category or subcategory of sources or position that general permits should not revisions to the NPDES regulations treatment works treating domestic be used to provide permit coverage to creating a class of permits referred to as sewage. This revision will enable greater loosely grouped categories of dissimilar ‘‘general permits.’’ 44 FR 32873 (June 7, permit drafting flexibility and would discharges. While EPA has decided not 1979). Under the general permit allow the Director to write a general to require that each category or program, the permitting authority may permit covering (as separate categories) subcategory covered under a general issue a permit to cover a class of similar permittees whose discharges or sludge permit discharge to waters that are dischargers or treatment works treating use or disposal practices differ subject to the same water quality domestic sewage in a defined substantially, for example, regarding standards, permit writers may wish to geographic area with the same effluent flow or pollutant load, as well as for consider such a categorization limitations.2 General permits have those permittees with similar discharges particularly when calculating general proven to be a valuable tool by which or sludge use or disposal practices (a permit discharges as part of a waste load to regulate classes of similar discharges. single category). In another case, the allocation. Because the proposal would allow To improve administration and Director might designate different issuance of a single general permit to operation of the general permit program monitoring requirements for different cover multiple categories of facilities, it and to encourage more widespread use categories based on discharge flow or would facilitate the use of general of general permits, the Agency is frequency and provide for this without permits in areas with differing water proposing to amend the general permit having to promulgate separate general quality requirements or standards. It regulations to allow general permits to permits for each group of dischargers or may allow the permitting authority to cover multiple categories of dischargers. treatment works treating domestic issue general permits on a watershed or The current regulatory requirements sewage in the general category. The types of operations conducted or geographic basis to facilities with the for general permits are set out at 40 CFR wastes discharged within each category same water quality requirements. The 122.28, and allow the Director to issue or subcategory authorized by the general proposal would allow a permit drafted a single permit covering more than one permit (except for general permits for to cover a single category of dischargers storm water discharges) would still have or treatment works treating domestic 1 However, permittees may still be classified as belonging to specific sectors or categories for the to be substantially the same. Within sewage to cover different subcategories purpose of coverage under a general permit. This each identified category or subcategory, subject to different effluent limitations, may result in the imposition of sector or category- limitations would have to be identical standards, or conditions. This should specific conditions. for all covered dischargers or treatment reduce the burden on the permitting 2 The provision allowing general permits to address treatment works treating domestic sewage works treating domestic sewage. In agency by decreasing the number of was added by EPA’s sewage sludge permit today’s notice, EPA proposes to revise general permits issued. The proposal regulations issued on May 2, 1989 (54 FR 18716). § 122.28 by adding a new paragraph, intends to provide flexibility to deal Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65273 with the variations between the As part of this consolidation, EPA is supporting information that the facility different dischargers or treatment works combining the provisions currently does not discharge and will not treating domestic sewage (or water found at §§ 122.41(j)(4) and discharge certain guideline-listed quality based stream segments) covered 122.44(i)(1)(iv) at proposed pollutants. In such cases, permit writers under a single general permit. General § 122.48(a)(3). Both of these provisions may decide not to include a limit for permits are still subject to the same require that monitoring be conducted in those parameters in the permit. reporting and monitoring requirements, accordance with test procedures However, it should be clearly limitations, enforcement provisions, approved under 40 CFR part 136 unless understood that in such instances, the penalties, and other substantive an alternative test procedure has been permit would not authorize any requirements as individual permits. approved under part 136. For sludge use discharges of those excluded parameters or disposal, monitoring must be in any amounts. For the exclusion to be 9. Monitoring (40 CFR 122.41(j), conducted in accordance with test valid, the permit would have to contain 122.41(l)(4), 122.44(i)(1)(iv), 122.48) procedures approved under part 136 an express condition which notes that Monitoring requirements for NPDES unless otherwise specified in 40 CFR the permit does not authorize the permits are currently found in different part 503. Both §§ 122.41(j)(4) and discharge of those excluded pollutants. locations in EPA’s regulations. Section 122.44(i)(1)(iv) were once promulgated This exclusion is good only for the term 122.41(j)(1) requires that monitoring be as single provision (See 44 FR 32910 of the permit. To receive an exclusion representative of the monitored activity. (June 7, 1979) (codified then as 40 CFR under proposed paragraph (a)(2), Paragraph (j)(2) imposes requirements 122.20 (a)–(c))) and were only broken Permittees must submit certifications relating to the retention of monitoring out to conform to the organization of the (along with supporting information) records. Paragraph (j)(3) places consolidated permit regulations. See 45 each time a permit is applied for requirements on what information will FR 33340–4, 33355, 33357, 33448, and (including permit reissuances). For such be provided in monitoring records. 33450 (May 19, 1980). EPA is also an exclusion to be valid, it must be Paragraph (j)(4) requires that monitoring clarifying that where no test procedure included as an express condition each be conducted according to part 136 has been approved under 40 CFR part time a permit is issued. testing procedures unless otherwise 136, the Director shall specify a test EPA believes that this approach specified. Paragraph (j)(5) imposes method in the permit. This reflects the provides permittees and permit writers penalties for any person who falsifies, current requirements found at with needed flexibility in reducing the tampers with, or knowingly renders § 122.44(i)(1)(iv) and as also expressed burdens associated with conducting inaccurate monitoring devices or in EPA’s June 7, 1979 rulemaking. EPA unnecessary monitoring while ensuring methods. Section 122.41(l)(4) addresses believes this revision does not result in that permits are not interpreted as an the reporting of monitoring results and any substantive changes to the authorization to discharge excluded provides specific requirements relating monitoring requirements but only pollutants in unlimited amounts. This to Discharge Monitoring Reports clarifies its existing interpretation of revision is not intended to allow the (DMRs). Section 122.44(i) imposes them. exclusion of any pollutants that should requirements on monitoring be limited on the basis of water quality methodologies. Finally, § 122.48 10. Effluent Guideline Limits in Permits standards. imposes requirements for recording and (40 CFR 122.44(a)) Applicants should not pursue this reporting of monitoring results. Currently, § 122.44(a) is interpreted to approach if there is any possibility those EPA believes this arrangement to be require that where a facility is covered excluded parameters might be confusing. To provide better by a particular effluent guideline, any discharged. Applicants may instead clarification, EPA proposes to permit issued to that facility must utilize the existing process of having consolidate the monitoring provisions contain effluent limitations for every limits placed on all guideline-listed found at §§ 122.41 (j), (l)(4), and pollutant or parameter listed in the pollutants and seek minimum 122.44(i) and place them at § 122.48. In guideline (also known as ‘‘guideline- monitoring for those parameters whose addition, a cross reference to the new listed pollutants’’). These limits would presence in the discharge is not consolidated monitoring requirements be required regardless of whether the expected. EPA solicits comments on this will be placed at 122.41(j) to ensure facility would actually be discharging proposal and also invites public monitoring remains a standard those parameters. Because permittees comment on other ways this process can condition for all NPDES permits. This must also monitor for all parameters be streamlined to remove any revision is not intended to result in any limited in a permit (see 40 CFR unnecessary burdens with respect to substantive changes to monitoring 122.44(i)(1)(i)), there are concerns that limiting and monitoring for pollutants. requirements. EPA notes that the this requirement may subject many penalty provisions of 40 CFR facilities to the unnecessary expense of 11. Reopener Clauses (40 CFR 122.44(c)) 122.41(j)(5) (providing for penalties for monitoring for pollutants that they are Section 122.44(c) provides for falsifying, tampering or knowingly not and will not be discharging. reopener clauses in permits. Section rendering inaccurate monitoring devices To provide permit writers with more 122.44(c)(1)(i) requires that any permit or methods) remain a standard flexibility in reducing the burdens issued to a discharger in a primary condition of all EPA-issued NPDES associated with unnecessary industry category (listed in Appendix A permits. As described in more detail monitoring, EPA is proposing to revise of part 122) on or before June 30, 1981, below, 40 CFR 122.41(j)(5) (proposed § 122.44(a) so that it does not require must contain an reopener clause to § 122.48(d) in today’s notice) is not limits for all guideline-listed pollutants allow for permit modification, required for authorized State programs. under certain circumstances. Existing revocation, or reissuance if an However, 40 CFR 123.27 contains a paragraph (a) would be redesignated as applicable standard or limitation is similar prohibition against falsifying, (a)(1). A new paragraph, (a)(2), would promulgated under sections 301(b)(2)(C) tampering, or knowingly rendering allow permit writers on a case-by-case and (D), 304(b)(2), and 307(a)(2) of the inaccurate monitoring devices or basis not to include limits for guideline CWA after such a permit was issued and methods which must be included in listed pollutants where a permit the standard or limitation is more authorized State programs. applicant certifies and provides stringent than what is found in the 65274 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules permit or controls a pollutant not paragraph, (a)(1). (As noted in greater assure that the rights of the permittee limited in the permit. Where applicable detail above, EPA is also creating a new are adequately considered. This is standards and limitations have already paragraph, (a)(2), which contains because permit termination has been been promulgated, § 122.44(c)(1)(ii) language concerning guideline listed considered as essentially an requires that subsequent permits pollutants.) Proposed paragraph (a)(1) enforcement mechanism. See 45 FR include those limitations. Section requires that permits shall include 33316 (May 19, 1980); 44 FR 34249 122.44(c)(3) imposes a duty on technology-based effluent limitations (June 14, 1979). However, there may be permitting authorities to promptly and standards based on: Effluent situations outside of enforcement where modify, revoke, and reissue permits to limitations and standards promulgated termination is desirable because the which § 122.44(c)(1)(i) applies. under section 301(b)(1) or 301(b)(2), as permittee has discontinued operation or These provisions were established to appropriate, new source performance connected the discharge to a POTW. In implement the requirements of a standards promulgated under section those situations, EPA sees little benefit settlement agreement approved by the 306 of CWA, case-by-case effluent in requiring the procedures of § 124.5 as United States District Court for the limitations determined under section currently written (or part 22 as District of Columbia issued on June 8, 402(a)(1) of CWA, or on a combination proposed). 1976 in Natural Resources Defense of the three, in accordance with § 125.3. EPA is proposing to revise § 122.64 to Council et al. v. Train, 8 E.R.C. 2120 For new sources or new dischargers, allow the Director to terminate a permit (D.D.C. 1976). See 43 FR 22161 (May 23, paragraph (a)(2) also notes that these by giving notice to the permittee and 1978). This settlement agreement technology based limitations and without following part 22 or 124 resulted in a new program for the standards are subject to the provisions procedures where the permittee has establishment of effluent limitations of § 122.29(d) (protection period). permanently terminated its entire guidelines, new source performance Paragraph (c)(4) covers reopeners of discharge (by elimination of its process standards, and pretreatment standards sludge conditions in NPDES permits. flow or other discharge components) or for 21 major categories of industries as EPA is proposing to retain that has redirected that discharge into a well as the incorporation of those limits provision and redesignate it as POTW. However, where a permittee in permits issued to dischargers from paragraph (c). objects to the termination, this revision those categories. To meet that goal, the By removing these provisions, EPA would require the Director to follow the agreement resulted in the imposition of does not intend to limit the ability of existing part 124 procedures to a number of deadlines. On May 19, 1980 permitting authorities to place reopener (45 FR 33449), those deadlines were clauses in permits on a case-by-case terminate the permit. (But as noted in replaced with a single deadline, June 30, basis particularly where reopeners may more detail below at Section II.B, formal 1981, which is found at § 122.44(c)(1). result in more environmentally hearings under part 22 would not be In today’s notice, EPA proposes to protective permit limits, standards, or necessary since the termination would remove paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and conditions. not be one for cause and today’s (c)(3) of § 122.44. Paragraphs (c)(1) and proposal would remove formal hearing (c)(3) apply only to permits issued on or 12. Best Management Practices (40 CFR requirements for permit terminations before June 30, 1981. These provisions 122.44(k)) that are not for cause. EPA notes that are obsolete as more than 14 years have As described in more detail below, these expedited permit termination passed since that deadline and any EPA is proposing in today’s notice a procedures would not be allowed where permits issued on or before that date are non-substantive revision to § 122.44(k) a permittee is subject to pending State either no longer in existence or in which would provide a reference to and/or Federal enforcement actions administrative continuance. EPA also available agency guidance on best including citizen suits brought under proposes to remove paragraph (c)(2) and management practices. The addition of State or Federal law. In such situations, consolidate its requirements with those this language is merely intended to the public has a strong interest in found at § 122.44(a). Paragraph (c)(2) assist readers in developing and participating in any permit termination provides that any permit issued after the implementing best management proceedings and permittees should not deadline provided by section 301(b)(2) practices. It is not intended in anyway use expedited permit termination (A), (C), and (E) (established as March to change the requirements of procedures as a way to avoid 31 1989 by the 1987 amendments to the § 122.44(k). enforcement liability. Therefore, EPA is Clean Water Act), must meet BAT and adding language in proposed § 122.64 to 13. Termination of Permits (40 CFR BCT standards whether or not state that expedited permit termination 122.64) applicable effluent limits have been procedures are not available to promulgated or approved. Paragraph Section 122.64 lists the causes for permittees that are subject to pending (c)(2) further states that such permits EPA termination of an NPDES permit State and/or Federal enforcement need not incorporate the reopener during its term, or for denial of an actions including citizen suits brought clause found in section paragraph (c)(1). application for permit renewal. If the under State or Federal law. EPA will Paragraph (c)(2) largely reiterates Director decides to terminate a permit, also require that permittees who request requirements found at Section 122.44(a) he or she currently must follow the expedited permit termination because paragraph (a) already requires procedures at § 124.5, or approved State procedures must certify that they are not that permits must meet all technology- procedures, which require preparation subject to any pending State and/or based effluent limitations and standards of a notice of intent to terminate (a type Federal enforcement actions including promulgated under section 301, all new of draft permit) and public notice and citizen suits brought under State or source performance standards under comment. (As discussed in more detail Federal law. EPA specifically invites section 306 of the CWA, and case-by- in Section II.B below, EPA is proposing comment on how EPA and permitees case effluent limitations determined to substitute part 22 procedures for may determine if there are pending under section 402(a)(1) of the CWA. termination of permits other than at the State and/or Federal enforcement EPA proposes in today’s notice to request of the permittee, also known as actions. One possible approach may be consolidate the requirements of 40 CFR ‘‘termination for cause’’.) These to deny the availability of expedited 122.44(a) and (c)(2) into a new procedures are intended primarily to permit terminations where EPA, the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65275

State, or any person has commenced an on whether expedited permit sewers) on EPA’s behalf. The action against a permittee under State termination procedures should be introductory text of § 123.43(b)(2) also and/or Federal Law, or where a employed for this and other situations. expressly provides OWEP with a role in permittee, the Administrator, or the objecting to State-issued general B. Proposed Revisions to Part 123 State has received notice of an intent to permits. Finally, § 123.44(i) makes the sue pursuant to 40 CFR § 135 or State 1. Requirements for Permitting (40 CFR role of the Director of OWEP law. EPA invites comment on that 123.25) coextensive with that of the Regional approach. EPA is today proposing revisions to Administrator for the purposes of Also, EPA is not proposing to 40 CFR 123.25(a) to clarify that certain objecting to proposed State-issued eliminate the requirement to follow part provisions which detail penalty general permits (other than those for 124 termination procedures if the amounts in § 122.41 (a)(2), (a)(3), and separate storm sewers). pollutants will be disposed of either in (j)(5) are not required of State NPDES wells or by land application of effluent, The Office of Wastewater programs. Instead, the applicable even if the permittee requests Management no longer plays an active termination. In such cases, it is penalty provisions for State NPDES role in reviewing State-issued general important that the public be notified programs are found at 40 CFR 123.27. permits. The number of State general and able to pursue any concerns about This is consistent with EPA’s long permit programs have increased with a such disposal methods under other standing interpretation of the Clean corresponding increase in the number of appropriate Federal, State or local Water Act and its regulations. See OGC State-issued general permits. This has regulatory programs. EPA also notes that Opinion dated May 31, 1973. However, resulted in the Regions assuming the there are situations where permits are EPA notes that while the penalty primary role in reviewing State-issued appropriate for no discharge facilities, provisions of 122.41 (a)(2) and (a)(3) general permits. Moreover, as States particularly where there is the need not be included in State NPDES have gained more experience in running possibility of an inadvertent discharge programs, § 122.41(a)’s condition, ‘‘a general permit programs, EPA believes into waters of the United States. duty to comply’’ does. With respect to that an extra level of EPA review is no This proposal would enable the existing § 122.41(j) (proposed in today’s longer warranted. On June 29, 1995, Director to terminate permits when the notice as § 122.48(d)), EPA notes that it EPA removed §§ 123.44(b) and 124.58 discharger has eliminated its discharge does not have to be included in NPDES from the Code of Federal regulations as without waiting for permit expiration. State Programs. However, EPA wishes it unnecessary in light of the Regions’ EPA notes that a permittee terminating to be clear that it interprets primary role in reviewing State permits. its discharge due to connection to a § 123.27(a)(3) to contain the same See 60 FR 33931. To conform to those POTW would be subject to applicable prohibitions as those found in earlier changes and to continue EPA’s pretreatment requirements, including paragraph § 122.41(j). That is, a person effort to streamline Federal oversight of those in parts 403 and 405–471, along who falsifies, tampers with, or State NPDES permit programs, EPA with any local requirements. An knowingly renders inaccurate, any proposes in today’s notice to revise existing categorical industrial user monitoring device or method required § 123.44 (a)(2) and (b)(2) to remove initiating a discharge to a POTW must under a permit is subject to criminal those references to OWEP and its role in notify the POTW in accord with fines and penalties as determined under reviewing State-issued general permits. § 403.12. EPA also notes that permittees § 123.27. Finally, EPA notes that States EPA would also remove and reserve 40 should be very sure that they have, in are not prohibited from adopting CFR 123.44(i). fact, eliminated their discharge when penalty amounts that are the same as requesting expedited permit termination those found at § 122.41 if they wish to C. Proposed Revisions to Public Hearing procedures. This is because any do so. Requirements for NPDES Permit Actions and RCRA Permit Terminations pollutants discharged by the facility 2. Transmission of Information to EPA subsequent to permit termination could (40 CFR 123.44) violate section 301 of the CWA EPA is today proposing substantial (prohibition against unpermitted EPA is today proposing revisions to revisions to its existing procedural discharges). 40 CFR 123.44 to remove references to requirements for issuing NPDES permits This proposal would streamline the the Office of Water Enforcement and in those States and territories (and in permit termination process without Permits (OWEP) and its role in Indian Country) where EPA retains the sacrificing any procedural safeguards. commenting on and objecting to State- authority to issue NPDES permits. EPA EPA specifically invites comment on issued general permits. At one time, is proposing to eliminate as unnecessary whether members of the public, other OWEP (now known as the Office of the existing procedures for conducting than the permittee, would have a Wastewater Management) was expected formal evidentiary hearings on NPDES significant interest in such terminations to play an active role in reviewing, permit conditions contained in 40 CFR such that public notice should continue commenting, and objecting to State- part 124, subpart E, and is further to be required. issued general permits. Under proposing to eliminate the alternative EPA is also proposing conforming provisions once found at 40 CFR ‘‘Non-Adversary Panel Procedures’’ in changes to § 124.5 procedures to reflect 123.43(b) and 124.58, authorized States part 124, subpart F. EPA is also abbreviated termination procedures were required to provide copies of draft proposing to eliminate Appendix A to proposed for the cases discussed in general permits (other than those for part 124 (Guide to Decisionmaking proposed § 122.64(b). One pre-notice separate storm sewers) to the Director of under part 124) because its role in commenter has recommended that these OWEP for review. Section 123.44(a)(2) explaining subpart E and subpart F expedited permit termination of EPA’s current regulations further procedures would no longer be relevant procedures be employed where an provides that the Director of OWEP may in the absence of those subparts. EPA is existing discharger seeks to terminate its comment upon, object to, or make also proposing to modify the procedures individual permit coverage and obtain recommendations with respect to for terminating NPDES and RCRA coverage under a general permit for the proposed State-issued general permits permits. These revisions do not apply to same discharge. EPA invites comment (other than those for separate storm authorized State NPDES Programs. 65276 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

1. Background of the Current Rule other member of the public who or the PSD program of the Clean Air Section 402(a) of the CWA authorizes commented on the draft permit initiates Act, use Steps 1 and 3 of the above- the Administrator to issue an NPDES Step 2 (or if one of the other two described process, but not Step 2. In permit ‘‘after opportunity for a hearing.’’ exceptions at 40 CFR 124.15(b) are met other words, a party may appeal from In the late 1970’s, three United States i.e., a later effective date is specified in the Regional Administrator’s permit Circuit Courts of Appeals concluded the permit decision, or if no comments decision directly to the Environmental that section 402(a) of the CWA requires have requested a change in the draft Appeals Board. 40 CFR 124.19(a). There that NPDES permit adjudications be permit, it becomes effective is no provision for formal adjudicatory conducted according to formal immediately upon issuance). In Step 2, hearings, unless the RCRA, UIC, or PSD adjudicatory procedures that meet the a party appeals the permit decision by permit has been consolidated for requesting an evidentiary hearing. 40 purposes of permit issuance with an standards set forth in sections 554, 556 CFR 124.15(b). To exhaust NPDES permit for which a request for and 557 of the Administrative administrative remedies, the permittee evidentiary hearing has been granted. 40 Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’). 5 U.S.C. 554, (or the public) must request an CFR 124.71(a). 556 & 557. These courts reasoned that evidentiary hearing on all contested EPA’s experience with the evidentiary the reference to a ‘‘hearing’’ in section issues (legal and factual). The EPA hearing process suggests that it causes 402(a), in light of the ‘‘quasi-judicial’’ Regional Administrator must then significant delays in NPDES permit nature of the fact finding involved in decide whether to grant or deny the issuance without causing noticeable NPDES permit proceedings, indicated request for a hearing. The Regional improvements in the quality of the Congressional intent to require formal Administrator shall grant a hearing on permit decisions made. As discussed in adjudicatory procedures, any issue for which there is a genuine more detail below, EPA statistics notwithstanding the absence of an dispute of material fact, and on any suggest that at least 80% of all requests explicit requirement in the Act that legal issue which is intertwined with for evidentiary hearing are resolved such procedures be followed. Seacoast such material factual issues. The without a hearing taking place or any Anti-Pollution League v. Costle, 572 Regional Administrator will deny a changes being made to the permit. F.2d 872, 877 (1st Cir. 1978); Marathon hearing on any other legal issues, or on Nonetheless, it takes an average of 18– Oil Co. v. EPA, 564 F.2d 1253, 1264 (9th any factual issues for which there is no 21 months to complete the 2-part Cir. 1977); United States Steel Corp. v. material dispute. If a hearing is granted appeals process for such permits. EPA Train, 556 F.2d 822, 833 (7th Cir. 1977). on any issue, an Administrative Law has maintained the process primarily Largely because of the holdings in Judge presides over a formal evidentiary due to concerns about the legality of these cases, EPA promulgated the hearing following the procedures of 40 adopting less formal procedures. As current part 124 regulations in 1979, CFR part 124 subpart E. discussed below, however, these which require formal evidentiary As an alternative to the full concerns no longer hold true. hearings of the type contemplated by adjudicatory proceeding, EPA 2. Proposed Elimination section 554 of the APA. 44 FR 32854, regulations also provide that Steps 1 32855 (June 7, 1979). These procedures and 2 may be combined in a single In EPA’s opinion, formal evidentiary apply to any NPDES permit decision semi-formal hearing process before a hearings are not required by the CWA, (i.e., a decision to grant a permit, to non-adversary panel of EPA experts nor are they necessary to protect the due deny a permit, or to terminate a permit (called a ‘‘Non-Adversary Panel process rights of permittees or other for cause under 40 CFR 122.64), and to Procedure’’ or ‘‘NAPP’’). 40 CFR part interested parties. EPA therefore a decision to terminate a permit for a 124 subpart F. These procedures apply proposes to eliminate the requirement hazardous waste treatment, storage, or only to NPDES permits which constitute for such hearings prior to EPA’s disposal facility issued under Section an ‘‘initial licensing’’ proceeding under issuance of NPDES permits. 3005 of RCRA. 40 CFR 124.71, 270.43. the Administrative Procedure Act, or if a. Legal Basis. (1) The Language of Under part 124, when issuing, a party to the proceeding requests such Section 402(a). EPA has concluded that denying, or terminating an NPDES a hearing. 40 CFR 124.74(c)(8), due to the progress of the law in the permit (or terminating a RCRA permit), 124.111(a)(1). Courts of Appeals, the Seacoast and EPA undergoes a complicated 3-step For issues decided in an evidentiary Marathon decisions are no longer good administrative process. Step 1 begins hearing or Non-Adversary Panel law, and that the CWA may be when a discharger submits an Procedure (and for issues arising when interpreted not to impose a formal application for a new or revised NPDES a request for an evidentiary hearing is hearing requirement. As noted earlier, permit. Based on the application, the denied), a party may initiate Step 3 by Section 402(a) does not explicitly state appropriate EPA Regional Office appealing the Regional Administrator’s that public hearings on NPDES permits prepares a draft permit (or draft decision decision to EPA’s Environmental must be conducted ‘‘on the record,’’ the to deny) detailing the proposed Appeals Board. 40 CFR 124.91, 124.127. phrase normally associated with a conditions on the discharger. The EPA The appeal provides an opportunity to requirement that hearings be conducted Region provides notice and an review any factual conclusions (under a under section 554 of the APA. The opportunity for public comment on ‘‘clear error’’ standard), policy absence of an explicit requirement in draft permits (40 CFR 124.10) and decisions, or legal conclusions. The section 402(a) that formal APA provides a public hearing when there is appeal is the final prerequisite to procedures be used is significant in light a significant degree of public interest. 40 judicial review. The entire of certain judicial decisions that CFR 124.12(c). Step 1 ends when the administrative process (that is, to followed the promulgation of the part Regional Administrator (or his or her comment at Step 1, to appeal at Step 2, 124 regulations. These decisions, which designee) issues a final permit decision, and to further appeal at Step 3) must be address procedural requirements under incorporating any changes in the draft exhausted in order to obtain judicial statutory provisions other than section permit occasioned by the public review. 402(a) of the CWA, have abandoned the comments received. By contrast, permits issued or denied presumption that trial-type hearings are The permit takes effect 30 days after under RCRA Subtitle C, the UIC required by the APA where a statute issuance unless the permittee or any program of the Safe Drinking Water Act, calls for an adjudicatory hearing Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65277 without explicitly requiring formal express a clear intent to the contrary, an activities in a lawful manner (and the procedures. Chemical Waste agency charged with administering the interests of private individuals in Management v. EPA, 873 F.2d 1477 statute may adopt any interpretation challenging permits). Yet, no personal (D.C. Cir. 1989) (‘‘CWM’’) (RCRA section which is reasonable in light of the goals liberty interests are at stake, there is no 3008(h)); Buttrey v. United States, 690 and purposes of the statute. Where a ‘‘right to pollute,’’ and the granting of an F.2d 1170 (5th Cir. 1982) (CWA section statute fails to use the term ‘‘on the NPDES permit does not convey a 404). record,’’ the court will evaluate whether property right of any sort, or any In CWM, the D.C. Circuit upheld the hearing procedures adopted by the exclusive privilege. See 40 CFR RCRA regulations establishing informal agency are reasonable in light of the 122.25(b). procedures for adjudicating corrective statute and also any due process EPA has previously concluded that, in action orders under RCRA section considerations. CWM, 873 F.2d at 1482. general, due process considerations 3008(h). 873 F.2d at 1478. RCRA section The D.C. Circuit has also noted that dictate that most administrative 3008(h) does not specifically provide for even assuming formal hearings are enforcement actions should proceed hearings, but section 3008(b) provides required for issuance of NPDES permits, under formal hearing procedures. In that ‘‘[a]ny order issued under this there is no absolute right to provide oral such a proceeding, EPA is accusing section shall become final unless * ** testimony or to cross examine witnesses respondents of violations of the person or persons named therein in such hearings. NRDC v. EPA, 859 ‘‘established legal standards,’’ and the request a public hearing. Upon such a F.2d 156, 193 (D.C. Cir. 1988) decision maker is called upon to request the Administrator shall (upholding EPA’s Non-Adversary Panel adjudicate specific factual issues promptly conduct a public hearing.’’ 42 Procedures and distinguishing relating to the violations in question. U.S.C. section 6928(b). Under the RCRA Seacoast). See 45 FR 24,360 (Apr. 9, 1980 corrective action hearing regulations at (2) Reasonableness of Interpretation. (promulgating part 22)). The Agency 40 CFR part 24, the operator of a As with the 3008(h) rules and the concluded that, without full hazardous waste facility may submit procedures for issuance of RCRA or UIC adjudicatory hearings, there was a written information and arguments for permits, EPA believes that providing for significant risk that EPA might be inclusion in the record and may make informal hearings prior to issuance of vulnerable to arguments that the Agency an oral presentation at the hearing itself. NPDES permits is a reasonable lacked the means to properly resolve Direct and cross-examination of interpretation of section 402(a). disputed factual matters upon which the witnesses is not permitted, but the First and most important, EPA alleged violator’s interests were Presiding Officer may direct questions believes that formal hearings are not dependent. to either party. The Presiding Officer is necessary to protect the due process However, EPA believes that the nature to be either the Regional Judicial Officer rights of permittees or other interested of the typical hearing on an NPDES or an attorney employed by the Agency parties. The leading Supreme Court case permit will differ significantly from the who has not had any prior connection discussing due process requirements is type of hearing held on a compliance or with the case. The RCRA regulations Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 penalty order. Hearings on permits are contain detailed requirements for the (1976). Mathews establishes a 3-part less apt to present the kind of factual establishment of the administrative analysis that balances the following issues regarding the conduct of the record. The Presiding Officer must factors in deciding what procedures are discharger, which case law identifies as review the record and file a required by the Due Process clause: (1) being uniquely susceptible to resolution recommended decision with the The private interests at stake, (2) the risk in a formal evidentiary hearing. Rather, Regional Administrator, who in turn of erroneous decision-making, and (3) the issues posed in proceedings on renders a final decision that is judicially the nature of the government interest. permits will typically relate to legal, reviewable under the APA. These Due process generally requires, at a policy, or technical matters concerning procedures closely parallel, of course, minimum, that EPA provide the appropriate limitations on the the procedures for processing a permit independent and objective fact-finding, pollutants in the discharge, which are under part 124, subpart A. see Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath, 339 most appropriately addressed in In Buttrey, the Fifth Circuit upheld U.S. 33, 41 (1949), Morrisey v. Brewer, informal hearings. The primary factual the hearing regulations used by the 408 U.S. 471, 489 (1972), as well as a issues in a hearing on an NPDES permit Army Corps of Engineers to issue or complete administrative record are likely to involve what technology- deny CWA section 404 permits. 690 containing the information upon which based and water quality-based F.2d at 1172. Section 404 provides that the Agency relies. See Camp v. Pitts, limitations are necessary for inclusion the Secretary may issue permits for the 411 U.S. 138, 139–142 (1973). Due in the permit, and whether EPA has discharge of dredge or fill material process also requires that, prior to final properly derived those limits. These ‘‘after notice and opportunity for public agency action, EPA must provide to kinds of issues are apt to involve wide- hearings.’’ 33 U.S.C. section 1344(a). affected parties notice of what the ranging and complex facts and are more The Corps’ section 404 procedures Agency intends so that, should those susceptible to resolution through authorize a ‘‘paper hearing,’’ with parties disagree, they may submit analysis of a full documentary record public notice and comment on the contrary arguments or evidence. See than through examination and cross- proposed permit action. Corps Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 581 (1975). examination of witnesses. The goal procedures do not explicitly provide an See generally, Kenneth C. Davis, should then be to compile a full and fair opportunity for oral presentations. Administrative Law Treatise, 10:3, 10:7, documentary record upon which EPA Both Buttrey and CWM seriously 13:1–2, 13:7, & 18:2 (2d ed. 1980). The can base its decision. The procedures in question the continuing validity of procedures for processing permits under subpart A allow the permittee, other Seacoast and Marathon. CWM, in part 124 subpart A meet all of these interested parties, and the Agency every particular, notes that the cases were minimum requirements. opportunity to develop just such a decided prior to the Supreme Court’s In an NPDES permit proceeding, the record. Where an issue is in dispute, the decision in Chevron, U.S.A. v. NRDC, private interests at stake are those of a Regional Administrator can typically 467 U.S. 837, 843 (1984), which held potential discharger in obtaining a resolve the dispute through analysis of that where Congress has failed to permit to conduct its economic the written affidavits and arguments of 65278 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules the parties’ technical experts. The risk hearing and appeal process resulted in permittee’s appeal of decisions to deny of an erroneous deprivation of the no changes to the permits. requests for hearings. Only about 5 and discharger’s rights in deciding these Yet, the evidentiary hearing process 1⁄4 of those work years were spent issues is accordingly very low. clearly delays the time in which the actually preparing for or conducting the By contrast, there is a significant permit becomes fully effective. Under hearings; the remainder of EPA staff public interest in an expedited process current regulations (§ 124.60), contested time was used responding to (and for issuing NPDES permits. EPA’s permit conditions are not in effect usually denying) requests for a hearing experience since 1979 has been that the pending the dual appeals process. The and defending a permittee’s appeal of opportunity to request an evidentiary 18–21 month average appeal time means those denials before the EAB. hearing has led to significant delays in that many permit limits do not take The evidentiary hearing process uses permit issuance. EPA does not have effect until well into the 5-year permit significant Agency resources with little complete data on evidentiary hearing term (the 5-year term generally begins or no apparent gain in the quality of the process all the way back to 1979. when the RA issues the permit under decision-making. Often, the key issue However, EPA kept comprehensive § 124.15). For new sources and NPDES before the EAB involves whether the RA statistics on the numbers of evidentiary dischargers without a prior NPDES properly denied the request for hearing requested, resolved, and permit, they cannot begin to discharge evidentiary hearing, either because there pending between 1990 and 1994. As of until the permit appeals are resolved. was no genuine issue of material fact July 1, 1994, the latest period for which For existing sources, any new or raised (see In re Mayaguez Regional data are available, 194 requests for modified permit limits to protect water Sewage Treatment Plant, Puerto Rico evidentiary hearing were pending at quality which are contested cannot take Aqueduct & Sewerage Authority, NPDES EPA. That is, 194 requests were effect. Thus, the long lag time in Appeal No. 92–23, at 11 (EAB, Aug. 23, awaiting a decision by the Region on the resolving permit appeals can affect all 1993), aff’d, Puerto Rico Aqueduct & request for evidentiary hearing, were sectors of the public. In particular, the Sewer Auth. v. Browner, 35 F.3d 600 waiting a hearing, or were awaiting need to pursue multiple levels of (1st Cir. 1994)), or because the only action on appeal to the EAB. administrative appeals imposes issues raised were legal issues for which unnecessary costs on the regulated no hearing is necessary (and which the Between March, 1990, and July 1, community or other parties EAB can resolve). EPA utilized 8 work 1994, 59 requests for a hearing were participating in the permit processes. years between 1990 and 1994 defending finally resolved, involving 55 different The lengthy appeals process also denials of evidentiary hearing requests, permits. Of those 59, 22 requests for impacts those members of the public and very few of those decisions were hearing were withdrawn, 26 were who have an interest in participating in reversed by the EAB. It seems denied by the Regional Administrator the permit process. Citizen participation particularly unnecessary for the RA to (RA) or the EAB, and the remaining 11 is a vital component of the NPDES have to review a request for hearing, were settled without hearing. Only four program. Section 101(e) of the CWA prepare a decision to deny the request hearings were conducted during this explicitly requires EPA to provide for, on the grounds that the only issues are period, and only one hearing resulted in encourage, and assist in the ones for which there is no genuine EPA being ordered to make changes to development of requirements under the dispute of material fact, and then defend the NPDES permit. Of the 194 pending CWA. As EPA has noted before, that decision to deny before the EAB. hearing requests, 19 had been pending adequate public participation helps to Rather, it would seem to make more with the Agency for 5 years or more. For ensure permits which are protective of sense to take the legal issues appropriate the 53 permits resolved during the the environment by giving permit for EAB resolution straight to the EAB, period for which EPA has data, the writers the valuable insights of and leave resolution of the factual issues average time between request and participants other than the permittee. 61 for the informal hearing process under resolution was over 18 months; if one FR 20973–74 (May 8, 1996). The lengthy subpart A. In those instances where the counts only the 33 proceedings which formal hearing process effectively EAB finds that the Region has made a were resolved on the merits (i.e., other requires all interested parties to obtain clear error in resolving a factual issue, than by withdrawal of the legal counsel and spend a significant the EAB could, as it does for RCRA, administrative appeal), the average time amount of time to request, prepare for, UIC, or PSD permits, remand the permit increases to over 21 months. In contrast, and conduct a trial-type hearing before decision for further consideration EAB appeals for NPDES, RCRA, or UIC an ALJ. Citizens groups interested in the including further development of the permits average under 9 months . content of an NPDES permit are likely administrative record using the informal These statistics suggest that to lack the same level of resources hearing process. Furthermore, to the evidentiary hearings themselves rarely necessary to participate in such a extent that informal settlement result in changes in permits. In only proceeding that either the government discussions are necessary to resolve 20% of the permits for which EPA has or an NPDES permittee will possess. outstanding issues, such discussions data did the appeal process result in Thus, the formal process may pose a could and would take place during EAB modifications to the permit, and only barrier to citizen involvement in the review; the formal evidentiary hearing one out of 55 of those as a direct result NPDES permit process. process is not necessary to provide an of a decision in an actual evidentiary In addition to affecting the opportunity for such discussions. hearing. Rather, any changes to the government and public interests in Balancing the private interests at stake permits usually resulted from informal effective permits and effective public in an NPDES permit proceeding with settlement discussions between the participation in permit proceedings, the the public interest in ensuring that such Region and the permittee (or evidentiary hearing process also permits control discharges (and ensure occasionally by unilateral decision by represents a significant drain on Agency protection of the environment) in an the Region to change the permit). For resources. EPA Regions utilized over 25 expeditious and effective manner and the remainder of the requests, the work years of staff time between 1990 the public interest in effective citizen decision of the Regional Administrator and 1994 on processing requests for participation in the permit process, and or the EAB was sufficient to resolve all evidentiary hearings, preparing for given that the availability of formal issues, and the complete evidentiary hearings, or defending before the EAB a hearings do not appear to reduce Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65279 significantly the already low risk of NPDES permits would therefore Regional Administrator issues an initial erroneous decision-making, EPA utilize Steps 1 and 3 of the existing decision, from which a party may concludes that due process process; Step 2 would be eliminated. request an evidentiary hearing under considerations do not mandate formal The EPA Regional Office would subpart E, and subsequently an appeal hearings. continue to prepare a draft permit, to the EAB. EPA also notes that the primary goal provide notice and an opportunity for In developing today’s proposal, EPA of the Clean Water Act is to ensure that public comment on the draft permit and seriously considered proposing to waters of the United States obtain opportunity for a public hearing when eliminate all formal hearing procedures ‘‘fishable/swimmable’’ status as early as there is a significant degree of public for RCRA and NPDES permit possible. CWA section 101(a). Section interest, and issue a final permit terminations and instead treat such 301(b)(1)(C), in particular, requires that decision, incorporating any changes in terminations just like permit issuance or NPDES discharges do not cause or the draft permit occasioned by the denial. EPA recognizes that due process contribute to violations of State water public comments received. After that considerations may not mandate such quality standards. The long lag time initial decision, however, a party would procedures. As noted above, issuance of between permit issuance and when appeal from the Regional an NPDES permit conveys no property effluent limitations take effect under the Administrator’s permit decision directly right to the permittee. Thus, the only current proceedings impairs to the Environmental Appeals Board. As private interests at stake relate to the achievement of these goals. provided in § 124.19, a party could expectation of a permittee to continue discharging until the end of a permit Finally, the number of States in which appeal any factual or legal determination in the Regional term, which can be up to 5 years at EPA is the permit issuing authority is Administrator’s decision (if the issue most. Otherwise, the permittee cannot small and getting smaller, and EPA were properly raised in public presume it will be able to continue anticipates that its role as a permit comments on the draft permit, as discharging beyond the end of the issuing authority will continue to provided in 124.13).4 Subpart E would permit term, particularly if the diminish. Forty-two States or Territories be eliminated in its entirety. permittee has violated the terms of the have obtained authorization to issue EPA also proposes to eliminate the permit or misrepresented information NPDES permits; EPA retains permitting NAPP procedure in subpart F. Subpart on its permit application (the bases for authority in only 15 States/Territories F was designed to be a less onerous terminating a permit). Thus, the private and in Indian Country. Many States do alternative hearing procedure for interests at stake in a permit termination not provide for formal hearings prior to NPDES permits, to substitute for subpart are only marginally stronger than those issuance of NPDES permits, and EPA is E when the parties so agreed. EPA has at stake in a permit denial proceeding unaware that there have been significant conducted no hearings under subpart F, (which EPA has always conducted using problems with the content of such and EPA is aware of only three permits informal hearing procedures except for 3 permits as a result. EPA sees no reason where a party requested use of the NPDES). Yet, EPA also recognizes some to retain formal hearings for a fraction proceeding. One of those involved a differences between permit terminations of the NPDES permits issued RCRA permit denial in EPA Region IX. and other permit proceedings. In nationwide. The purpose of requesting the NAPP in contrast to the issuance of a permit, the For all of these reasons, EPA believes that proceeding appears to have been decision to terminate a permit, other that neither due process nor the solely to delay final issuance of the than at the request of the permittee, is Congressional goals for the NPDES permit denial decision. (See the public more likely to involve factual issues for program counsels in favor of docket for today’s proposal for details.) which formal hearings are appropriate. maintaining the evidentiary hearing With the elimination of subpart E, and Under EPA regulations (40 CFR 122.64, process, and that, consistent with the given the fact that there has been so 270.43), EPA may terminate a permit principles of Chevron, EPA may little interest in the use of subpart F, only for reasons such as the non- reasonably interpret Section 402(a) to EPA sees no reason to retain it. compliance with the permit or failure to authorize use of informal hearings when (2) Termination of NPDES and RCRA have disclosed relevant information in issuing NPDES permits. Permits. EPA’s regulations also the permit application. In other words, b. Proposed New System. (1) Permit currently provide for a formal hearing a permit termination is akin to an Issuance. The existing process for prior to terminating an NPDES or RCRA enforcement action (and indeed often RCRA, UIC, and PSD permits has permit during its term. EPA regulations accompanies an administrative proven effective in resolving all factual, treat termination of a RCRA or NPDES enforcement action), where credibility legal, and policy issues, providing for permit in the same manner as the of witnesses will be a more significant adequate public participation, and issuance or denial of an NPDES permit. concern. ensuring that permit issues are resolved That is, termination of a permit begins On balance, EPA’s preferred option is in a relatively short time frame. EPA with preparation of a draft notice of to maintain the formal hearing therefore proposes to place NPDES intent to terminate. The notice of intent requirement for these type of permits under the same system. to terminate is subject to public proceedings. EPA solicits comment on comment and possibly an informal whether the formal hearing requirement 3 However, EPA believes that the ability to hearing. After the informal process, the should be eliminated entirely for RCRA judicially challenge final permits is an essential and NPDES permit terminations, and element of public participation under the Clean 4 The party need not, however, submit all whether there is an adequate basis for Water Act. On May 1, 1996, EPA issued a final rule supporting factual information during the comment doing so. which will require that all States that administer or period; rather the Regional Administrator may seek to administer the NPDES program shall instruct the party to submit such information if Termination of NPDES and RCRA provide an opportunity for judicial review in State desired. 40 CFR 124.13 (‘‘Commenters shall make permits is a rare occurrence; EPA is court of the final approval or denial of permits by supporting materials not already included in the aware of only one EPA-issued permit the State that is sufficient to provide for, encourage, administrative record available to EPA as directed that has been terminated using these and assist public participation in the NPDES by the Regional Administrator’’) (emphasis added); permitting process. This rule does not, at this time, 49 FR 38,042 (Sept. 26, 1984) (‘‘Generally procedures since 1980 (the NPDES apply to Indian Tribes. See 61 FR 20972 (May 8, supporting information would not be required to be permit for Marine Shale Processors in 1996). submitted during the comment period’’). Louisiana). EPA’s ‘‘Consolidated Rules 65280 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules of Procedure’’ at 40 CFR part 22 specify proceeding, i.e., consideration of the with permit conditions which have been procedures for formal hearings in a administrative record and provision for stayed pending the outcome of an variety of administrative enforcement informal public comment on the evidentiary hearing generally shall be actions, including civil compliance or proposed permit termination. EPA is extended for the period of the stay. penalty actions for violations of the also proposing one minor clarification Other provisions of § 124.60 parallel CWA and RCRA. These regulations also to part 22. Part 22 refers to involuntary provisions contained in §§ 124.15, cover the suspension/revocation of removal of a permit as ‘‘revocation[s].’’ 124.16, or 124.19. permits issued under the Marine Since the existing NPDES and RCRA EPA today proposes substantial Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act regulations use the term ‘‘revocation’’ to revisions to § 124.60 consistent with the (Ocean Dumping Act). There is no refer to permits which are to be reissued proposal to eliminate evidentiary significant difference between practice (see 40 CFR 122.62, 124.5), EPA is hearings. Sections 124.60(a)(2) and and the procedural guarantees under proposing to add the term ‘‘termination’’ 124.60(f) grant certain relief to the part 22 and under part 124 subpart E. of permits to the appropriate references regulated community to reflect the long The only difference is that a formal in part 22. EPA solicits comment on lag time between when a permit is hearing under part 22 begins with EPA’s using the part 22 procedures to cover issued and when it becomes effective if issuance of a complaint against an termination of NPDES and RCRA an evidentiary hearing takes place. By alleged violator, whereas subpart E permits, and whether further eliminating the evidentiary hearing step, constitutes an appeal of an initial amendments to part 22 would be today’s proposal would dramatically decision after a non-formal public necessary to make the regulations shorten that lag time. EPA believes that comment and hearing process. Since effective for this purpose. these provisions would no longer be there are no significant differences Today’s proposal is based on the necessary and proposes to delete them. between the two sets of rules, EPA sees current version of part 22. However, The existing § 124.60(c)(7) also provides no reason to leave subpart E in the Code EPA will soon propose more for temporary authorization pending the of Federal Regulations solely to cover comprehensive revisions to part 22 outcome of administrative review, but the very occasional involuntary NPDES designed to make the regulations more only for a very limited number of or RCRA permit termination. Instead, readable and thus easier for the public facilities and only as necessary to EPA today proposes to amend part 22 to to use. The changes proposed today will prevent environmental damage. EPA is mandate use of its procedures for such be harmonized with that proposal before unaware that this provision has ever terminations. Instead of the current final rules are issued. been invoked, but is proposing today to three-part process under part 124, such (3) Stays of Contested Permit retain it (recodified at § 124.60(a)) in permit terminations would occur in a Conditions. Existing EPA regulations at case the need arises. two-step process. Step 1 would be a § 124.15 specify that NPDES, RCRA, and The existing §§ 124.60(a)(1), hearing under part 22; the outcome of UIC permits take effect 30 days after the 124.60(c)(1), and 124.60(e) generally the hearing could then be appealed to Regional Administrator issues an initial clarify that only uncontested permit the EAB under § 22.30. permit decision, unless the permit is conditions take effect pending appeal, For terminations at the request of the appealed (or if one of the other and that the prior existing permit (if permittee, the part 124 process, as exceptions at 40 CFR 124.15(b) are met). any) remains in effect (to the extent they modified under today’s proposal, would Section 124.16(a) further provides that if match the contested conditions in the be used. In other words, EPA would an initial permit decision is appealed by new permit). As noted above, EPA is provide for an informal public comment requesting EAB review (for RCRA and today proposing to provide for a direct and hearing under subpart A, with UIC permits) or appealed by filing a appeal of the Regional Administrator’s opportunity for appeal to the EAB. This request for evidentiary hearing (for initial permit decision to the EAB. The will allow other interested parties to NPDES permits) and the request is existing regulations at § 124.16 contain comment on the proposed termination. granted, the contested conditions of the virtually the same requirements Also, as noted above, EPA is proposing permit (and any uncontested conditions regarding contested permit conditions in today’s notice revisions to § 122.64(b) which are not severable from the when a RCRA or UIC permit is appealed which would allow Directors to contested ones) are stayed (i.e., they do to the EAB. Compare § 124.60(a)(1) with terminate a permit by giving notice to not take effect) pending the outcome of § 124.16(a)(1); § 124.60(c)(1) with the permittee and without following the the appeal/evidentiary hearing. Existing § 124.16(a)(2); 124.60(e) with part 22 or 124 procedures (or State regulations at § 124.60 supplement 124.16(c)(2). EPA proposes to eliminate equivalent) where the permittee has § 124.16 for purposes of NPDES permits. the redundant portions of § 124.60 in permanently terminated its entire Section 124.60(a)(2) authorizes the favor of the generally applicable discharge (by elimination of its process Regional Administrator to issue an order provisions in § 124.16. However, EPA flow or other discharge components) or to a new source or new discharger for proposes to retain the NPDES-specific has redirected that discharge into a whom an evidentiary hearing request provisions of existing § 124.60(c) (2)–(6) POTW. EPA notes that NPDES- has been granted authorizing the source concerning what constitutes a authorized States are not required to use to begin discharging pending the ‘‘contested condition;’’ these would be part 22 procedures for permit outcome of the hearing process. Section recodified at § 124.60(b)(2)–(6). EPA terminations. 124.60(c)(7) authorizes the Regional also proposes to retain the specific EPA believes that the existing part 22 Administrator to impose interim permit language of 124.60(e) as recodified at is generally adequate to cover requirements for offshore oil rigs that do 124.60(c). involuntary permit terminations not have an existing permit, but only EPA also proposes to make a more without substantive amendment. when necessary to avoid ‘‘irreparable general change to its practice However, where permits are terminated environmental harm.’’ The provisions of surrounding effective dates, contested for cause, existing part 124 treats the §§ 124.60(c)(1)–(c)(6) provide detailed permit conditions, and stays. In the proceeding the same as for the issuance rules for determining what constitutes past, there has been significant or denial of a permit. EPA is proposing ‘‘contested conditions’’ stayed pending confusion surrounding when a RCRA, to incorporate relevant provisions of an evidentiary hearing. Section 124.60(f) UIC, or PSD permit takes effect if part 124 into such a permit termination specifies that the date of compliance appealed to the EAB, and somewhat less Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65281 confusion with respect to the same issue accordance with the procedures of appeal of a new source determination to for NPDES permits. Section 124.15(b) subpart A. In practice, EPA has the EAB. Similar to the existing specifies that permits generally take withdrawn and reissued permits under language, the proposed amendment effect 30 days after issuance by the all statutes prior to decisions of the EAB would allow the EAB, with consent of Regional Administrator unless EAB as well as prior to ALJ decisions. EPA the parties, to defer review of the review is requested under § 124.19 (for therefore proposes to clarify that the determination until a decision is made RCRA, UIC, or PSD) or an evidentiary Regional Administrator may withdraw on the permit for the source, and to hearing is requested (for NPDES) (or if and reissue any NPDES, RCRA, UIC, or consolidate review of the new source one of the other exceptions at 40 CFR PSD permit (or a contested condition determination with any review of the 124.15(b) are met). Existing §§ 124.16(a) thereof) prior to a decision of the EAB permit decision. (for non-NPDES) and 124.60(c)(1) clarify to grant or deny review under (5) Transition to New Procedural that, once the EAB grants review or the § 124.19(c). To make this change, the Requirements. If EPA decides to issue RA grants the evidentiary hearing existing § 124.60(b), as slightly the final rule as proposed today, there request, contested conditions are stayed modified, would be recodified as will be no further opportunity to request but uncontested conditions take effect. § 124.19(d). an evidentiary hearing and the existing Both sections require that the Regional This proposal, once finalized, will procedural rules will be deleted from Administrator identify the uncontested serve the public interest by shortening the CFR. The question arises, however, provisions. Section 124.60(c)(1) the time for appeals that may be brought how today’s proposal will affect ongoing explicitly requires the Regional by interested citizens, allowing for the NPDES permit issuance/denial or Administrator to notify all interested more timely resolution of these appeals, termination proceedings or RCRA parties. The regulations are not clear, with a shorter stay of conditions. permit termination proceedings. EPA however, as to whether any conditions Finally, § 124.60(f) specifies that proposes largely to ‘‘grandfather’’ such of the permit are in effect during the exhaustion of the evidentiary hearing proceedings under the prior rules. period between filing of the request for process is a prerequisite to judicial Under today’s proposal, contained in review and the decision to grant or deny review of an NPDES permit. EPA § 124.21, ongoing proceedings would be review. EPA has, in the past, interpreted proposes to eliminate this language in treated as follows: For any NPDES § 124.16(a)(2) to apply during this favor of the general exhaustion permit for which a request for period as well. In other words, the provision at § 124.19(e). evidentiary hearing was granted or uncontested conditions take effect even (4) Procedures for Variances and New denied as of the date of the final rule, prior to a decision to grant or deny Source Determinations. EPA also but for which a hearing had not yet been review under 40 CFR 124.19. See proposes changes in various NPDES completed, the permit process would Memorandum from Lisa K. Friedman, permit-related administrative continue under the procedures of the ‘‘Stays of Contested Permit Conditions,’’ procedures. Existing regulations at prior part 124. Similarly, appeals Mar. 22, 1988 (in the docket for today’s § 122.21(m) specify that applications for pending before the EAB would be proposal). a ‘‘fundamentally different factors’’ reviewed under the procedures of prior EPA today proposes to amend variance must be filed within 180 days part 124. In other words, the evidentiary § 124.16 to clearly reflect the Agency’s of promulgation of the applicable hearing would be conducted under the interpretation. Section 124.16(a)(1) effluent limitations guideline. Section old subpart E; an appeal from the would clarify that contested permit 125.32(a) contemplates that the evidentiary hearing decision (or an conditions are stayed as of the date of application for a variance be submitted appeal from the denial of a request for filing a request for review with the EAB in accordance with part 124, subpart F. an evidentiary hearing) would proceed under § 124.19, and any contested (However, subpart F does not appear to under the prior § 124.91; and any conditions will remain stayed until EPA have ever been used.) All other effluent further proceedings conducted pursuant takes final action (either a decision of limitation variances under § 122.21(m) to a remand from the EAB would the EAB or a decision of the Regional are processed as part of the underlying proceed under the appropriate Administrator on remand) under permit application in accordance with provisions of the old part 124. Ongoing § 124.19(f). Uncontested permit the procedures of part 124, subpart A. proceedings to terminate an NPDES or conditions would also be stayed upon EPA sees no continuing reason to treat RCRA permit similarly would continue filing of a request for review, but only Fundamentally Different Factors (FDF) under the prior rules. for a temporary period. Importing variances differently. EPA therefore EPA is proposing to grandfather these language from the existing proposes to amend § 125.32 to require proceedings in the interests of § 124.60(c)(1), the new § 124.16(a)(2) an applicant for an FDF variance to efficiency, fairness and minimizing the would clarify that the uncontested submit an application under the confusion to the regulated community. conditions take effect 30 days after the procedures of part 124, subpart A. EPA As of July 1, 1994, there were two Regional Administrator notifies the will process the request for a variance NPDES permits for which an EAB, the permit applicant, and other as if it were an application for an evidentiary hearing had been granted interested parties as to which conditions NPDES permit. but the proceedings had not yet are uncontested. Since EPA is proposing Existing § 122.21(l)(2) requires EPA to concluded, and 17 for which an appeal to use the same appeals process for make an initial determination of was pending before the EAB. Interested NPDES permits as for other permits, the whether an applicant for an NPDES parties involved in an ongoing new § 124.16 would apply to NPDES permit constitutes a ‘‘new source’’ evidentiary hearing process may have permits as well. subject to the additional requirements of invested significant resources to prepare The language of the existing § 122.29. Section 122.21(l)(4) allows for or conduct the hearing to date, as would § 124.60(b) specifies that the Regional appeal of that initial determination by have EPA. It could prove to be a waste Administrator may, at any time prior to requesting an evidentiary hearing. of all parties’ resources to suspend such the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) Consistent with its proposal to eliminate proceedings in mid-stream. Such decision in an evidentiary hearing, evidentiary hearings for NPDES permits preparation may have taken place even withdraw contested conditions of an themselves, EPA proposes to modify if the hearing itself has not begun. For NPDES permit and reissue them in this section to allow instead for an ongoing proceedings before the EAB, all 65282 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules parties may have invested resources in language in § 124.1(d), today’s proposal States.’’ BMPs include treatment a prior evidentiary hearing or in briefing would continue to authorize permits to requirements, operating procedures, and before the EAB. Rather than try to be processed in consolidated fashion practices to control plant site runoff, separate out on a case-by-case basis under subpart A. spillage or leaks, sludge or waste which proceedings are sufficiently (7) Effect on State Programs. Under disposal, or drainage from raw material advanced to justify continuing under EPA’s current regulations (40 CFR storage. BMPs are authorized under two the old rules, EPA proposes to let them 123.25), EPA does not require States and provisions of the CWA, sections 304(e) all continue if the parties wish. (Today’s Indian Tribes wishing to obtain and 402(a)(1). Section 304(e) of the Act proposal would allow an ongoing authorization to issue NPDES permits to authorizes the Administrator to publish evidentiary hearing proceeding to be provide for formal evidentiary hearings, regulations which are supplemental to terminated with right of appeal to the either under part 124 or part 22. Instead, effluent limitation guidelines, for a class EAB if all parties agree.) EPA solicits EPA requires States and Tribes to or category of point sources, for any comment on whether it is appropriate to provide for the informal process toxic or hazardous pollutant regulated have these permits proceed under the outlined in subpart A of part 124 and under sections 307(a)(1) or 311 of the prior rules or whether EPA should requires States to provide an CWA, in order to control plant site suspend all current proceedings and opportunity for judicial review in State runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste provide instead for an appeal to the court of the final approval or denial of disposal, and drainage from raw EAB. permits by the State that is sufficient to material storage, which the For any NPDES permit decision for provide for, encourage, and assist public Administrator determines are associated which a request for evidentiary hearing participation in the NPDES permitting with or ancillary to the industrial remains pending, considerations of process. EPA also does not require manufacturing or treatment process efficiency and fairness are less States nor Tribes to provide for formal within such class or category of point significant. Neither the parties nor EPA hearings prior to termination of NPDES sources and which may contribute are likely to have invested any or RCRA permits. This proposed significant amounts of toxic or significant resources yet. Therefore, EPA revision concerning permit appeal and hazardous pollutants to the waters of is proposing not to grandfather these termination procedures does not change the United States. In addition, section permits. Rather, EPA proposes to let the requirements of State programs. 402(a)(1) of the Act authorizes interested parties refile an appeal However, as described in more detail permitting authorities to include BMPs directly to the EAB. For such permits, above, another revision proposed in in permits using Best Professional the EPA Region would, within 30 days today’s package for 40 CFR 122.64(b) Judgment (BPJ). EPA’s authority to after the final rule takes effect, notify the would allow States to terminate NPDES impose BMPS under section 402(a)(1) requester that the request for evidentiary permits without following part 124 was recognized by the D.C. Circuit in hearing is being returned without procedures (or their State equivalent) NRDC v. Costle, 568 F.2d 1369 (D.C. Cir. prejudice. Notwithstanding the time under certain circumstances. Of course, 1977). limit in § 124.19(a), the requester would States and Tribes may continue to In addition to these statutory be allowed to file an appeal with the provide for formal evidentiary hearings authorities for BMPs, EPA’s regulations Board, in accordance with the other on such permit decisions if they wish, at 40 CFR 122.44(k) specifically requirements of § 124.19(a), within 30 under section 510 of the CWA and authorize EPA to require BMPs in days. section 3009 of RCRA. NPDES permits to control or abate the (6) Miscellaneous Changes. EPA discharge of pollutants where: (1) proposes a conforming change to part D. Proposed Removal and Reservation Authorized under section 304(e) of the 117, which establishes regulations of Part 125, Subpart K CWA for the control of toxic pollutants concerning the reporting of releases of 1. 40 CFR Part 125, Subpart K and hazardous substances, (2) numeric hazardous substances under section 311 effluent limitations are infeasible, or (3) of the CWA. The reporting obligation In today’s notice, EPA proposes to the practices are reasonably necessary to does not cover discharges of hazardous remove and reserve part 125, subpart K achieve effluent limitations and substances ‘‘resulting from (40 CFR 125.100–104) titled ‘‘Criteria standards or to carry out the purposes circumstances identified, reviewed, and and Standards for Best Management and intent of the CWA. EPA has used made a part of the public record with Practices Authorized Under Section § 122.44(k) to require specific BMPs in respect to a[n NPDES] permit.’’ 40 CFR 304(e) of the Act’’. This provision was permits and has required, as a permit 117.12(a)(2). Section 117.1 defines the originally promulgated on June 7, 1979 condition, that permittees develop and ‘‘public record’’ to include the permit (44 FR 32954) and would have implement BMP plans. These are also itself and the record prepared during a established criteria and standards for known as storm water pollution NAPP proceeding under (now) subpart imposing best management practices prevention plans (SWPPPs) in certain F. Since EPA is today proposing to (BMPs) in NPDES permits under the storm water general permits). See EPA’s eliminate subpart F, EPA proposes to authority provided in sections 304(e) ‘‘Storm Water Multisector General modify this definition to refer instead to and 402(a)(1) of the CWA. However, for Permit for Industrial Activities finalized the administrative record required for reasons set forth in more detail below, on September 29, 1995 (50 FR 50804) as all permits under § 124.18. subpart K has never been activated and well as EPA’s baseline storm water Finally, today’s proposal would its original purpose is now better served general permits finalized on September amend various sections of parts 122, by EPA’s existing BMP provisions at 40 9, 1992 (57 FR 41175) and September 124, 144, 270, and 271 to eliminate CFR 122.44(k) and accompanying 25, 1992 (57 FR 44412). obsolete references to subparts E or F of guidance for developing and The regulatory history covering the part 124. Many of these references implementing BMPS. development of part 125, subpart K is authorize RCRA, UIC, or PSD permits to BMPs are schedules of activities, lengthy. On August 21, 1978, EPA be processed under subparts E or F if prohibitions of practices, maintenance proposed regulations (43 FR 37089) that consolidated with an NPDES permit procedures, and other management provided a definition of ‘‘Best undergoing an evidentiary hearing or practices to prevent or reduce the Management Practices’’ (‘‘BMPs’’). In NAPP. As reflected by the proposed pollution of ‘‘waters of the United addition, subpart L—‘‘Criteria and Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65283

Standards for Best Management ‘‘NPDES Best Management Practices those reasons, EPA is proposing to Practices Authorized Under Section Guidance Document.’’ (The BMP remove the provisions of part 125, 304(e) of the Act’’, was created under Guidance Document has since been subpart K. part 125 and was reserved for later revised. The revised guidance was 2. 40 CFR 122.44(k) rulemaking. published in October 1993.) However, On September 1, 1978, EPA proposed the effective date of the regulation was In today’s notice, EPA proposes to a rule to revise the existing regulations never announced and subpart K never add a note to 40 CFR § 122.44(k) which governing the NPDES program in order became effective. lists the various EPA BMP guidance to reflect new controls on toxic and The continued inactive status of the documents. This will assist readers in hazardous pollutants under the 1977 subpart K has not hindered EPA’s developing and implementing BMPs amendments to the CWA. The proposed ability to require BMPs in permits and BMP plans. rule indicated how BMPs for on-site because § 122.44(k) remained effective. industrial activities (such as materials Moreover, a number of guidance E. Miscellaneous Corrections storage and waste disposal) may be documents have since become available EPA also proposes in today’s notice a required in NPDES permits to prevent to assist permit issuing authorities and number of minor non-substantive the release of toxic and hazardous permittees in developing and revisions to its regulations that would pollutants to surface waters. This implementing BMPs and BMP plans. correct typographical or drafting errors, regulation was proposed under part 125, While part 125, subpart K has remained and misplaced or obsolete references. subpart L—Criteria and Standards for in the Code of Federal Regulations as an EPA wishes to be clear that these Imposing Best Management Practices inactive regulation, it has nonetheless corrections and not intended in anyway Under Section 304(e) of the Act (43 FR been valuable as a model for imposing to result in substantive changes to its 39282). BMPS under 40 CFR 122.44(k). This was programs. In proposing these After evaluating the comments particularly true when there was less corrections, EPA does not solicit, and received on the proposed regulation, guidance available on how to develop will not respond to, comments on the EPA promulgated the BMP regulation in and implement BMPs. existing regulatory provisions which part 125, subpart K on June 7, 1979 (44 At present, requirements for the underlie those corrections. Furthermore, FR 32954). The revised regulation preparation and implementation of by including these corrections in the described how BMPs for control of toxic BMPs (and BMP plans) are commonly proposed rule, EPA is not conceding or hazardous pollutants that are found in NPDES permits as permit that any or all such changes require ancillary to industrial activities under conditions under 40 CFR 122.44(k). EPA notice and comment. However, these section 304(e) of the Act shall be has continued to work with industry to errors were discovered while reflected in permits, including BMPs identify the generic BMPs that most developing this proposed rule and EPA promulgated in effluent limitations well-operated facilities use for pollution believes it is more cost effective to guidelines under section 304, and BMPs control, fire prevention, occupational correct them in this rulemaking than in established on a case-by-case basis in safety and health, or product loss a separate Federal Register notice. EPA permits under sections 301(b) and prevention. Experience has shown that proposes the following corrections: 402(a) of the Act. BMPs can be appropriately used and 1. Section 122.1(b)(4) contains an In addition to the regulation, EPA had that permits containing BMP programs erroneous cite to § 122.1. EPA proposes intended to publish technical can effectively reduce pollutant to amend § 122.1(b)(4) to add the correct information supporting the discharges in a cost-effective manner. cite which is § 122.2. development of BMP programs in a BMPs are also an effective mechanism 2. In § 122.21(l)(1), EPA proposes to guidance document. However, on for promoting the goals of pollution replace the term ‘‘paragaraph’’ with its August 10, 1979, three days before the prevention. There are now a number of correct spelling, ‘‘paragraph’’. regulations were to become effective, EPA guidance documents available to the Agency announced that the assist permit issuing authorities and the 3. The current heading for § 122.24(b) guidance document had been regulated community in developing and is written incorrectly as ‘‘Defintion’’. unavoidably delayed and that the implementing BMPs and BMP plans. EPA proposes to correct that error by Agency was deferring the effective date Moreover, the BMP provisions of EPA’s inserting the correct term ‘‘Definition’’. of the BMP regulation until 60 days after baseline and multisector storm water 4. Section 40 CFR 122.21(l)(2)(ii) EPA published a Federal Register notice general permits also provide guidance incorrectly refers to paragraph of the availability of the BMP program on how to implement BMPs. ‘‘(k)(2)(i)’’. EPA proposes to insert the guidance document (44 FR 47063). Given these events and the continued correct reference, paragraph ‘‘(l)(2)’’. On March 20, 1980, EPA announced successful use of BMPs for NPDES 5. Section 40 CFR 122.21(l)(3) the availability of the draft guidance permits under existing § 122.44(k) and incorrectly refers to paragraph ‘‘(k)(2)’’. document and provided a 45-day its associated guidance, EPA now EPA proposes to insert the correct comment period (45 FR 17997). EPA believes that there is no longer a reason reference ‘‘paragraph (l)(2)’’. noted that after reviewing the comments to activate part 125, subpart K. Because 6. In § 122.26(b)(15), EPA proposes to on the guidance document, the BMPs are often best tailored for specific replace the term ‘‘landill’’ with its document would be finalized and a industries, EPA believes that the use of correct spelling, ‘‘landfill’’. notice would be published in the existing § 122.44(k) in combination with 7. In § 122.26(d)(1)(iii)(D)(1), EPA Federal Register announcing the guidance provides a more flexible and proposes to replace the term effective date of the BMP regulations. In effective approach in developing and ‘‘overlayed’’ with its correct spelling, response to public comment on the implementing BMPs than that found ‘‘overlaid’’. guidance document, the comment under part 125, subpart K. Finally, the 8. EPA proposes to remove an period was extended twice, resulting in provisions of subpart K are now over 16 obsolete reference to § 124.58 found in a 120-day comment period. After years old and are antiquated on a the last sentence of § 122.28(b)(1). evaluating the comments on the number of fronts particularly with Section 124.58 was removed from the guidance document, the Agency made respect storm water discharges which EPA’s regulations on June 29, 1995. See revisions and in June 1981 published form the bulk of BMP applications. For 60 FR 33927. 65284 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

9. Section 122.29(c)(1)(i) incorrectly § 122.45(g)(1)(ii). EPA proposes insert President’s priorities, or the principles refers to ‘‘§ 122.21(k)’’. EPA proposes to the correct references in today’s notice. set forth in the Executive Order.’’ provide the correct reference, 18. 40 CFR 123.25(a)(36) requires that It has been determined that this rule ‘‘§ 122.21(l)’’. authorized States must have legal is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 10. In § 122.41(l)(6)(i), EPA proposes authority to implement the provisions of under the terms of Executive Order to replace the term ‘‘becames’’ with the part 125, subparts A, B, C, D, H, I, J, K, 12866 and is therefore not subject to correct term, ‘‘becomes’’. L. However, subparts C, I, J, and L are OMB review. currently reserved and subpart K is 11. In § 122.43(b)(1), EPA proposes to B. The Regulatory Flexibility Act replace the term ‘‘additonal’’ with its proposed to be reserved in today’s correct spelling, ‘‘additional’’. notice. EPA proposes to revise 40 CFR Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 12. EPA proposes to correct two 123.25(a)(36) to remove the references to (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., EPA must inaccurate cites currently found at subparts C, I, J, K, and L. prepare a Regulatory Flexibility § 122.44(i)(1)(iii). Paragraph (iii) 19. In 40 CFR 123.25(b), EPA Analysis for all regulations that have a incorrectly refers to internal waste proposes to replace the citation, 40 CFR significant impact on a substantial stream provisions as occurring at 35.1500, with the correct citation, 40 number of small entities. The RFA § 122.45(i). The correct cite is CFR 130.5. This error occurred in 1985, recognizes three kinds of small entities § 122.45(h). Paragraph (iii) also when part 130 was created from former and defines them as follows: incorrectly refers to intake credit as subparts of part 35. —Small governmental jurisdictions— being located at § 122.45(f). The correct 20. Language which is the same as any government of a district with a cite is § 122.45(g). that found in the definition of ‘‘State population of less than 50,000. 13. The language in paragraph Director’’ is incorrectly inserted into the —Small business—any business which § 122.44(e)(1) contains a reference to definition of ‘‘State’’ at § 124.2. EPA is independently owned and operated § 122.21(g)(10). That cite is no longer proposes to remove that language. and not dominant in its field as current because § 122.21(g)(10) is 21. EPA proposes to remove the term defined by Small Business reserved. EPA proposes to remove that ‘‘consultation with the Regional Administration regulations under reference. Administrator’’ from § 124.2 because it section 3 of the Small Business Act. 14. In section 122.44(k), EPA proposes is obsolete. This term applies —Small organization—any not-for-profit to amend paragraph (k)(2) to replace the specifically to 301(k) compliance enterprise that is independently comma after with word ‘‘infeasible’’ extensions which have not been owned and operated and not with a semicolon. This provision was available since March 31, 1991. On June dominant in its field (e.g., private originally promulgated with a 29, 1995, EPA removed regulatory hospitals and educational semicolon on June 7, 1979 (44 FR provisions which implement § 301(k). institutions). 32907). However, when these provisions See 60 FR 33926, June 29, 1995. Under section 605(b) of the Act, an were combined with other EPA permit 22. EPA proposes to correct two agency may, in lieu of preparing an regulations as part of the June 14, 1979 references in § 124.55. Each refers to initial regulatory flexibility analysis, permit consolidation proposed ‘‘certification conditions’’ specified in certify that a rule will not have a rulemaking (44 FR 38244), a comma was § 124.53(d); the correct citation is to ‘‘significant impact on a substantial wrongly inserted in place of the 124.53(e). number of small entities.’’ Then no semicolon. EPA proposes to correct that III. Administrative Requirements further analysis is required. typographical error in today’s notice. Most of the changes in today’s 15. Section 122.44(q) incorrectly A. Executive Order 12866 proposal are purely technical and will refers to § 124.58 in support of the Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR have no effect on compliance costs for requirement that NPDES permits must 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency NPDES permittees. Also, to the extent include, where applicable, conditions must determine whether the regulatory these technical changes clarify and that the Secretary of the Army considers action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore simplify the regulations, they will make necessary to ensure that navigation and subject to review by the Office of them easier to understand and comply anchorage will not be substantially Management and Budget (OMB) and the with, reducing the burden on small impaired. The correct cite is § 124.59. requirements of the Executive Order. entities. The other changes will reduce EPA proposes to revise this paragraph to The Order defines ‘‘significant the costs of obtaining and complying include the correct cite. regulatory action’’ as one that is likely with NPDES permits. For instance, the 16. In the introductory text of to result in a rule that may: proposal would make it easier for § 122.47(b), EPA proposes to replace the (1) Have an annual effect on the facilities to obtain coverage under term ‘‘requriements’’ with the correct economy of $100 million or more or general permits, rather than go through spelling, ‘‘requirements’’. adversely affect in a material way the the more complicated and expensive 17. Section 122.62(a)(8) contains two economy, a sector of the economy, individual permit procedure. EPA also references that are incorrect. Paragraph productivity, competition, jobs, the proposes to minimize monitoring and (a)(8)(i) allows a permit to be modified environment, public health or safety, or recordkeeping for permittees subject to upon request of a permittee who State, local, or Tribal governments or effluent limitation guidelines, and qualifies for a net basis under communities; streamline permit application § 122.45(h). Net basis and net (2) Create a serious inconsistency or requirements for storm water limitations pertain to pollutants in otherwise interfere with an action taken dischargers and new sources/new intake waters which are found at or planned by another agency; dischargers. EPA is also proposing to § 122.45(g) and not at § 122.45(h). (3) Materially alter the budgetary streamline the permit appeals and Paragraph (a)(ii) would allow permit impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, permit termination processes, which modification when a discharger is no or loan programs or the rights and should further reduce the costs of longer eligible for net limitations, as obligations of recipients thereof; or obtaining (or modifying) or terminating provided in § 122.45(h)(1)(ii)(B). Net (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues an individual permit. None of these limitations are actually found at arising out of legal mandates, the proposed changes are expected to Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65285 increase, and most of the changes will costly, most cost-effective or least across the board to all permitting actually decrease, the costs of burdensome alternative if the authorities and the regulated compliance for NPDES dischargers, Administrator publishes with the final community. While, EPA cannot including small entities (if any). rule an explanation why that alternative document the effects of these Therefore, I certify that the proposed was not adopted. streamlining measures on each affected rule will not have a significant impact Under section 204 of the UMRA, EPA entity, those smaller governments that on a substantial number of small generally must develop a process to are NPDES permittees are expected to entities. permit elected officials of State, local benefit from the proposed and Tribal governments (or their modifications. C. Paperwork Reduction Act designated employees with authority to The proposed regulations are act on their behalf) to provide List of Subjects designed specifically to streamline the meaningful and timely input in the 40 CFR Part 22 regulatory process and will not impose development of regulatory proposals Environmental protection, any additional information collection containing significant Federal Administrative practice and procedure, requirements on either the regulated intergovernmental mandates. These Air pollution control, Hazardous community or permit issuing consultation requirements build on authorities. Therefore, EPA did not those of Executive Order 12875 substances, Hazardous waste, Penalties, prepare an Information Request (‘‘Enhancing the Intergovernmental Pesticides and pests, Poison prevention, document for approval by the Office of Partnership’’). Water pollution control. Management and Budget. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 40 CFR Part 117 Should any reviewer feel that the requirements that may significantly or Environmental Protection Agency, proposed rulemaking will require uniquely affect small governments, Hazardous substances, Penalties, additional information collection including Tribal governments, it must Reporting and recordkeeping activities, they should send their have developed under section 203 of the requirements, Water pollution control. comments regarding the burden UMRA a small government agency plan. estimate or any other aspect pertaining The plan must provide for notifying 40 CFR Part 122 to collection of information, including potentially affected small governments, Administrative practice and suggestions for reducing this burden to enabling officials of affected small procedure, Confidential business Chief, Information Policy Branch; EPA; governments to have meaningful and information, Hazardous substances, 401 M St., S.W. (Mail Code 2136); timely input in the development of EPA Reporting and recordkeeping Washington, DC 20460; and to the regulatory proposals with significant requirements, Water pollution control. Office of Information and Regulatory Federal intergovernmental mandates, Affairs, Office of Management and and informing, educating, and advising 40 CFR Part 123 Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked small governments on compliance with Administrative practice and ‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’ The the regulatory requirements. procedure, Confidential business final rule will respond to any OMB or Today’s rule contains no Federal information, Hazardous substances, public comments on any information mandates (under the regulatory Indians-lands, Intergovernmental collection requirements generated by provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for relations, Penalties, Reporting and this proposal. State, local, or Tribal governments or recordkeeping requirements, Water the private sector. The proposed D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act pollution control. rulemaking is basically ‘‘deregulatory’’ Title II of the Unfunded Mandates in nature and does not impose any 40 CFR Part 124 Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public enforceable duties on any of these Environmental protection, Law 104–4, establishes requirements for governmental entities or the private Administrative practice and procedure, Federal agencies to assess the effects of sector. Air pollution control, Hazardous waste, their regulatory actions on State, local, In any event, EPA has determined that Indians—lands, Reporting and and Tribal governments and the private this rule does not contain a Federal recordkeeping requirements, Water sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, mandate that may result in expenditures pollution control, Water supply. EPA generally must prepare a written of $100 million or more for State, local, statement, including a cost-benefit and Tribal governments, in the 40 CFR Part 125 analysis, for proposed and final rules aggregate, or the private sector in Environmental protection, Reporting with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may anyone year. This rule is intended to and recordkeeping requirements, Waste result in expenditures to State, local, streamline NPDES permitting treatment and disposal, Water pollution and Tribal governments, in the requirements and should result in control. aggregate, or to the private sector, of resource savings to Federal and State $100 million or more in any one year. permitting authorities as well as to the 40 CFR Part 144 Before promulgating an EPA rule for regulated community. Thus, today’s rule Environmental protection, which a written statement is needed, is not subject to the requirements of Administrative practice and procedure, section 205 of the UMRA generally sections 202, 204 and 205 of UMRA. Confidential business information, requires EPA to identify and consider a With respect to section 203 of UMRA, Hazardous waste, Indians—lands, reasonable number of regulatory EPA has determined that this rule Reporting and recordkeeping alternatives and adopt the least costly, contains no regulatory requirements that requirements, Surety bonds, Water most cost-effective or least burdensome might significantly or uniquely affect supply. alternative that achieves the objectives small governments. As previously of the rule. The provisions of section stated, EPA believes that the rule will 40 CFR Part 270 205 do not apply when they are reduce the regulatory burden on Federal Environmental protection, inconsistent with applicable law. and State NPDES Permitting authorities Administrative practice and procedure, Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to as well as on the regulated community. Confidential business information, adopt an alternative other than the least This overall reduction will be applied Hazardous materials transportation, 65286 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Hazardous waste, Reporting and 4. Section 22.03 is amended by 8. Section 22.17 is amended by recordkeeping requirements, Water revising the definition for ‘‘Consent revising the second-to-last sentence of pollution control, Water supply. Agreement’’ to read as follows: paragraph (a) and by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: 40 CFR Part 271 § 22.03 Definitions. Environmental protection, * * * * * § 22.17 Default order. Administrative practice and procedure, Consent Agreement means any (a) * * * If the complaint is for the Confidential business information, written document, signed by the parties, revocation or suspension of a permit, Hazardous materials transportation, containing stipulations or conclusions the conditions of revocation or Hazardous waste, Indians-lands, of fact or law and a proposed penalty or suspension proposed in the complaint Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, proposed revocation/termination or shall become effective without further Reporting and recordkeeping suspension acceptable to both proceedings on the date designated by requirements, Water pollution control, complainant and respondent. the Administrator in his final order Water supply. * * * * * issued upon default. * ** Dated: November 21, 1996. 5. Section 22.13 is amended by * * * * * revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: Carol M. Browner, (c) Contents of a default order. A default order shall include findings of Administrator. § 22.13 Issuance of complaint. fact showing the grounds for the order, For the reasons set forth in the * * * * * conclusions regarding all material issues preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 (c) Other good cause exists for such of law or discretion, and the penalty CFR parts 22, 117, 122, 123, 124, and action, he may institute a proceeding for which is recommended to be assessed or 125, 144, 270, and 271 as follows: the revocation/termination or the terms and conditions of permit suspension of a permit by issuing a PART 22Ð[AMENDED] revocation/termination or suspension, complaint under the Act and these rules as appropriate. of practice. A complaint may be for the 1. The title of part 22 is revised to suspension or revocation/termination of * * * * * read as follows: a permit in addition to the assessment 9. Section 22.18 is amended by of a civil penalty. revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as PART 22ÐCONSOLIDATED RULES OF follows: PRACTICE GOVERNING THE 6. Section 22.14 is amended by ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF revising paragraph (b) introductory text § 22.18 Informal settlement; consent CIVIL PENALTIES AND THE and paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), and (b)(6) agreement and order. REVOCATION/TERMINATION OR to read as follows: * * * * * SUSPENSION OF PERMITS § 22.14 Content and amendment of the (b) * * * complaint. (3) consents to the assessment of a 2. The authority citation for part 22 is stated civil penalty or to the stated revised to read as follows: * * * * * (b) Complaint for the revocation/ permit revocation/termination or Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136(l); 15 U.S.C. 2615; termination, or suspension of a permit. suspension, as the case may be. * ** 33 U.S.C. 1319, 1342, 1361, 1415 and 1418; Each complaint for the revocation/ * * * * * 42 U.S.C. 300g–3(g), 6912, 6925, 6928, 6991e 10. Section 22.24 is amended by and 6992d; 42 U.S.C. 7413(d), 7524(c), termination or suspension of a permit 7545(d), 7547, 7601 and 7607(a), 9609, and shall include: revising the first sentence to read as 11045. * * * * * follows: (4) A request for an order either to 3. Section 22.01 is amended by § 22.24 Burden of presentation; burden of revoke/terminate or suspend the permit revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(6) to persuasion. and a statement of the terms and read as follows: The complainant has the burden of conditions or any proposed partial going forward with and of proving that suspension or revocation/termination; § 22.01 Scope of these rules. the violation occurred as set forth in the (a) * * * (5) A statement indicating the basis for recommending the revocation/ complaint and that the proposed civil (4) The issuance of a compliance termination, rather than the suspension, penalty, revocation/termination, or order or the issuance of a corrective of the permit, or vice versa, as the case suspension, as the case may be, is action order, the termination of a permit may be; appropriate. * ** pursuant to section 3005(d), the (6) Notice of the respondent’s right to 11. Section 22.44 is added to subpart suspension or revocation of authority to request a hearing on any material fact H to read as follows: operate pursuant to section 3005(e), or contained in the complaint, or on the § 22.44 Supplemental rules of practice the assessment of any civil penalty appropriateness of the proposed under sections 3008, 9006, and 11005 of governing the termination of permits under revocation/termination or suspension. section 402(a) of the Clean Water Act or the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as * * * * * under section 3005(d) of the Resource amended (42 U.S.C. 6925(d), 6925(e), Conservation and Recovery Act. 6928, 6991e, and 6992d)), except as 7. Section 22.15 is amended by (a) Scope of these Supplemental provided in 40 CFR part 24; revising (a)(2) to read as follows: Rules. These supplemental rules of * * * * * § 22.15 Answer to the complaint. practice shall govern, in conjunction (6) The assessment of any Class II (a) * * * with the preceding Consolidated Rules penalty under section 309(g), or the (2) Contends that the amount of the of Practice (40 CFR part 22), termination of any permit issued penalty proposed in the complaint or administrative proceedings for the pursuant to section 402(a) of the Clean the proposed revocation/termination or termination of permits under section Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. suspension, as the case may be, is 402(a) of the Clean Water Act or under 1319(g), 1342(a)); inappropriate; or * ** section 3005(d) of the Resource * * * * * * * * * * Conservation and Recovery Act. Where Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65287 inconsistencies exist between these to operate its program in lieu of a programs approved by the supplemental rules and the Federal program and minimum Administrator as adequate to assure Consolidated Rules, these Supplemental requirements for administering the compliance with section 405 of the Rules shall apply. approved State program (part 123), and CWA. (b) In any proceeding to terminate a procedures for EPA processing of permit (3) The Regional Administrator may permit for cause under 40 CFR 122.64 applications and appeals (part 124). designate any person subject to the or 270.42 during the term of the permit: (3) These provisions also establish the standards for sewage sludge use and (1) The complaint shall, in addition to requirements for public participation in disposal as a ‘‘treatment works treating the requirements of § 22.14(b), contain EPA and State permit issuance and domestic sewage’’ as defined in § 122.2, any additional information specified in enforcement and related variance where he or she finds that a permit is 40 CFR 124.8; proceedings, and in the approval of necessary to protect public health and (2) The Director (as defined in 40 CFR State NPDES programs. These the environment from the adverse 124.2) shall provide public notice of the provisions carry out the purposes of the effects of sewage sludge or to ensure complaint in accordance with 40 CFR public participation requirements of 40 compliance with the technical standards 124.10, and allow for public comment CFR part 25, and supersede the for sludge use and disposal developed in accordance with 40 CFR 124.11; and requirements of that part as they apply under CWA section 405(d). Any person (3) The Presiding Officer shall admit to actions covered under parts 122, 123, designated as a ‘‘treatment works into evidence the contents of the and 124. treating domestic sewage’’ shall submit Administrative Record described in 40 (4) The NPDES permit program has an application for a permit under CFR 124.9, and any public comments separate additional provisions that are § 122.21 within 180 days of being received. used by permit issuing authorities to notified by the Regional Administrator determine what requirements must be that a permit is required. The Regional PART 117ÐDETERMINATION OF placed in permits if issued. These Administrator’s decision to designate a REPORTABLE QUANTITIES FOR provisions are located at 40 CFR parts person as a ‘‘treatment works treating HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 125, 129, 133, 136, 40 CFR subchapter domestic sewage’’ under this paragraph N (parts 400 through 460), and 40 CFR 1. The authority citation for part 117 shall be stated in the fact sheet or part 503. statement of basis for the permit. continues to read as follows: (5) Certain requirements set forth in Authority: Secs. 311 and 501(a), Federal parts 122 and 124 are made applicable [Note: Information concerning the NPDES Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 to approved State programs by reference program and its regulations can be obtained et. seq.), (‘‘the Act’’) and Executive Order in part 123. These references are set by contacting the Permits Division (4203), Office of Wastewater Management, 11735, superseded by Executive Order 12177, forth in § 123.25. If a section or 56 FR 54757. U.S.E.P.A., 401 M Street, SW., Washington, paragraph of part 122 or 124 is DC 20460 at (202) 260–9545.] 2. Section 117.1(d) is revised to read applicable to States, through reference as follows: in § 123.25, that fact is signaled by the 3. Section 122.2 is amended by following words at the end of the adding new definitions in alphabetical § 117.1 Definitions. section or paragraph heading: order, and by revising the definition of * * * * * (Applicable to State programs, see ‘‘Sludge-only facility’’ to read as (d) Public record means the NPDES § 123.25). If these words are absent, the follows: permit application or the NPDES permit section (or paragraph) applies only to § 122.2 Definitions. itself and the materials comprising the EPA administered permits. Nothing in administrative record for the permit parts 122, 123, or 124 precludes more * * * * * decision specified in 40 CFR 124.18. stringent State regulation of any activity Animal feeding operation is defined at § 122.23 of this part. * * * * * covered by these regulations, whether or not under an approved State program. * * * * * PART 122ÐEPA ADMINISTERED (b) Scope of the NPDES permit Aquaculture project is defined at PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL requirement. (1) The NPDES program § 122.25 of this part. POLLUTANT DISCHARGE requires permits for the discharge of * * * * * ELIMINATION SYSTEM ‘‘pollutants’’ from any ‘‘point source’’ Bypass is defined at § 122.41(m) of into ‘‘waters of the United States.’’ The this part. 1. The authority citation for part 122 terms ‘‘pollutant’’, ‘‘point source’’ and continues to read as follows: * * * * * ‘‘waters of the United States’’ are Concentrated animal feeding Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. defined at § 122.2. operation is defined at § 122.23 of this 1251 et seq. (2) The permit program established part. 2. Section 122.1 is revised to read as under this part also applies to owners or Concentrated aquatic animal feeding follows: operators of any treatment works operation is defined at § 122.24 of this treating domestic sewage, whether or part. § 122.1 Purpose and scope. not the treatment works is otherwise * * * * * (a) Coverage. (1) The regulatory required to obtain an NPDES permit, Individual control strategy is defined provisions contained in 40 CFR parts unless all requirements implementing at 40 CFR 123.46(c). 122, 123, and 124 implement the section 405(d) of the CWA applicable to National Pollutant Discharge the treatment works treating domestic * * * * * Elimination System (NPDES) Program sewage are included in a permit issued Municipal separate storm sewer under sections 318, 402, and 405 of the under the appropriate provisions of system is defined at § 122.26 (b)(4) and Clean Water Act (CWA) (Pub. L. 92–500, subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal (b)(7) of this part. as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) Act, Part C of the Safe Drinking Water * * * * * (2) These provisions cover basic EPA Act, the Marine Protection, Research, Silvicultural point source is defined at permitting requirements (part 122), and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, or the § 122.27 of this part. what a State must do to obtain approval Clean Air Act, or under State permit * * * * * 65288 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Sludge-only facility means any types of discharges or outfalls found (i) Any existing ‘‘treatment works ‘‘treatment works treating domestic there. Applications for EPA-issued treating domestic sewage’’ required to sewage’’ whose methods of sewage permits shall be submitted as follows: have, or requesting site-specific sludge use or disposal are subject to (A) All applicants must submit Form pollutant limits as provided in 40 CFR regulations promulgated pursuant to 1 containing general information except part 503, must submit the permit section 405(d) of the CWA, and is as otherwise provided in another EPA application information required by required to obtain a permit under application form. paragraph(a)(2) of this section within § 122.1(b)(2) of this part. (B) Applicants for new and existing 180 days after publication of a standard * * * * * POTWs must submit the information applicable to its sewage sludge use or Storm water is defined at contained in § 122.21 (f) and (j). disposal practice(s). After this 180 day § 122.26(b)(13) of this part. (C) Applicants for concentrated period, ‘‘treatment works treating Storm water discharge associated with animal feeding operations or aquatic domestic sewage’’ may only apply for industrial activity is defined at animal production facilities must site-specific pollutant limits for good § 122.26(b)(14) of this part. submit Form 2B. cause and such requests must be made * * * * * (D) Applicants for existing industrial within 180 days of becoming aware that Upset is defined at § 122.41(n) of this facilities (including manufacturing good cause exists. part. facilities, commercial facilities, mining (ii) Any ‘‘treatment works treating 4. Section 122.4 is amended by activities, silvicultural activities, domestic sewage’’ with a currently revising paragraph (i)(2) to read as privately owned waste treatment effective NPDES permit, not addressed follows: facilities, and water treatment facilities under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, plants whether publicly or privately must submit the application information § 122.4 Prohibitions (applicable to State owned that discharge process required by paragraph (a)(2) of this NPDES programs, see § 123.25). wastewater must submit Form 2C. section at the time of its next NPDES * * * * * (E) Applicants for new industrial permit renewal application. Such (i) * * * facilities that discharge process information must be submitted in (2) The existing dischargers into that wastewater must submit Form 2D. accordance with paragraph (d) of this segment are subject to compliance (F) Applicants for new and existing section. schedules designed to bring the segment industrial facilities that discharge only * * * * * into compliance with applicable water nonprocess wastewater must submit (g) * * * quality standards. The Director may Form 2E. (7) Effluent characteristics. (i) waive the submission of information by (G) Applicants for new and existing Information on the discharge of the new source or new discharger industrial facilities that whose discharge pollutants specified in this paragraph required by paragraph (i) of this section is composed entirely of storm water (g)(7) of this section (except information if the Director determines that the must submit Form 2F. If the discharge on storm water discharges which is to Director already has adequate is composed of storm water and non- be provided as specified in § 122.26). information to evaluate the request. An storm water, the applicant must also When ‘‘quantitative data’’ for a pollutant explanation of the development of submit, Forms 2C, 2D, and/or 2E, as are required, the applicant must collect limitations to meet the criteria of this appropriate (in addition to Form 2F). a sample of effluent and analyze it for paragraph is to be included in the fact (H) In addition to any other applicable the pollutant in accordance with sheet to the permit under § 124.56(b)(1). requirements in this part, all POTWs 5. Section 122.21 is amended by analytical methods approved under 40 and other ‘‘treatment works treating CFR part 136. When no analytical revising paragraphs (a), (c)(2)(i), domestic sewage,’’ including ‘‘sludge- (c)(2)(ii), (g)(7), (g)(8), (l)(1), (l)(2)(ii), method is approved the applicant may only facilities,’’ must submit with their use any suitable method but must (l)(3), (l)(4), and notes 1, and the applications the information listed at 40 introductory text of notes 2, and 3; and provide a description of the method. CFR 501.15(a)(2) within the timeframes When an applicant has two or more by removing and reserving paragraph established in paragraph (c)(2) of this (d)(3) to read as follows: outfalls with substantially identical section. effluents, the Director may allow the § 122.21 Application for a permit (ii) The application information applicant to test only one outfall and (applicable to State programs, see § 123.25). required by § 122.21(a)(2)(i) may be report that the quantitative data also (a) Duty to apply. (1) Any person who electronically submitted if such method apply to the substantially identical discharges or proposes to discharge of submittal is approved by EPA or outfall. The requirements in paragraphs pollutants or who owns or operates a authorized NPDES State Director. (g)(7) (iii) and (iv) of this section that an ‘‘sludge-only facility’’ and who does not (iii) Applicants can obtain copies of applicant must provide quantitative have an effective permit, except persons these forms by contacting the Water data for certain pollutants known or covered by general permits under Management Divisions (or equivalent believed to be present do not apply to § 122.28, excluded under § 122.3, or a division which contains the NPDES pollutants present in a discharge solely user of a privately owned treatment permitting function) of the EPA as the result of their presence in intake works unless the Director requires Regional Offices. The Regional Offices’ water; however, an applicant must otherwise under § 122.44(m), shall addresses can be found at § 1.7 of this report such pollutants as present. Grab submit a complete application to the title. samples must be used for pH, Director in accordance with this section (iv) Applicants for State-issued temperature, cyanide, total phenols, and part 124. permits must use State forms which residual chlorine, oil and grease, fecal (2) Application Forms: (i) All must require at a minimum the coliform and fecal streptococcus. For all applicants for EPA-issued permits must information required for permit other pollutants, 24-hour composite submit applications on EPA permit applications in this paragraph(a). samples must be used. However, a application forms. More than one * * * * * minimum of one grab sample may be application form may be required from (c) * * * taken for effluents from holding ponds a facility depending on the number and (2) * * * or other impoundments with a retention Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65289 period greater than 24 hours. In duration between the previous (B) The pollutants listed in table III of addition, for discharges other than measurable storm event and the storm appendix D of this part (the toxic storm water discharges, the Director event sampled, the minimum or metals, cyanide, and total phenols). may waive composite sampling for any maximum level of precipitation (vi)(A) Each applicant must indicate outfall for which the applicant required for an appropriate storm event, whether it knows or has reason to demonstrates that the use of an the form of precipitation sampled (snow believe that any of the pollutants in automatic sampler is infeasible and that melt or rain fall), protocols for collecting table IV of appendix D of this part the minimum of four (4) grab samples samples under 40 CFR part 136, and (certain conventional and will be a representative sample of the additional time for submitting data on a nonconventional pollutants) is effluent being discharged. case-by-case basis. An applicant is discharged from each outfall. If an (ii) For storm water discharges, all expected to ‘‘know or have reason to applicable effluent limitations guideline samples shall be collected from the believe’’ that a pollutant is present in an either directly limits the pollutant or, by discharge resulting from a storm event effluent based on an evaluation of the its express terms, indirectly limits the that is greater than 0.1 inch and at least expected use, production, or storage of pollutant through limitations on an 72 hours from the previously the pollutant, or on any previous indicator, the applicant must report measurable (greater than 0.1 inch analyses for the pollutant. (For example, quantitative data. For every pollutant rainfall) storm event. Where feasible, the any pesticide manufactured by a facility discharged which is not so limited in an variance in the duration of the event may be expected to be present in effluent limitations guideline, the applicant must either report quantitative and the total rainfall of the event should contaminated storm water runoff from data or briefly describe the reasons the not exceed 50 percent from the average the facility.) (iii) Every applicant must report pollutant is expected to be discharged. or median rainfall event in that area. For (B) Each applicant must indicate all applicants, a flow-weighted quantitative data for every outfall for the following pollutants: whether it knows or has reason to composite shall be taken for either the believe that any of the pollutants listed entire discharge or for the first three Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) in table II or table III of appendix D of hours of the discharge. The flow- Chemical Oxygen Demand this part (the toxic pollutants and total weighted composite sample for a storm Total Organic Carbon phenols) for which quantitative data are water discharge may be taken with a Total Suspended Solids Ammonia (as N) not otherwise required under paragraph continuous sampler or as a combination (g)(7)(v) of this section, is discharged of a minimum of three sample aliquots Temperature (both winter and summer) pH from each outfall. For every pollutant taken in each hour of discharge for the expected to be discharged in entire discharge or for the first three (iv) The Director may waive the concentrations of 10 ppb or greater the hours of the discharge, with each reporting requirements for individual applicant must report quantitative data. aliquot being separated by a minimum point sources or for a particular industry For acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 period of fifteen minutes (applicants category for one or more of the dinitrophenol, and 2-methyl-4,6 submitting permit applications for storm pollutants listed in paragraph (g)(7)(iii) dinitrophenol, where any of these four water discharges under § 122.26(d) may of this section if the applicant has pollutants are expected to be discharged collect flow-weighted composite demonstrated that such a waiver is in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater samples using different protocols with appropriate because information the applicant must report quantitative respect to the time duration between the adequate to support issuance of a permit data. For every pollutant expected to be collection of sample aliquots, subject to can be obtained with less stringent discharged in concentrations less than the approval of the Director). However, requirements. 10 ppb, or in the case of acrolein, a minimum of one grab sample may be (v) Each applicant with processes in acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, and 2- taken for storm water discharges from one or more primary industry category methyl-4,6 dinitrophenol, in holding ponds or other impoundments (see appendix A to part 122) concentrations less than 100 ppb, the with a retention period greater than 24 contributing to a discharge must report applicant must either submit hours. For a flow-weighted composite quantitative data for the following quantitative data or briefly describe the sample, only one analysis of the pollutants in each outfall containing reasons the pollutant is expected to be composite of aliquots is required. For process wastewater: discharged. An applicant qualifying as a storm water discharge samples taken (A) The organic toxic pollutants in the small business under paragraph (g)(8) of from discharges associated with fractions designated in table I of this section is not required to analyze industrial activities, quantitative data appendix D of this part for the for pollutants listed in table II of must be reported for the grab sample applicant’s industrial category or appendix D of this part (the organic taken during the first thirty minutes (or categories unless the applicant qualifies toxic pollutants). as soon thereafter as practicable) of the as a small business under paragraph (vii) Each applicant must indicate discharge for all pollutants specified in (g)(8) of this section. Table II of whether it knows or has reason to § 122.26(c)(1). For all storm water appendix D of this part lists the organic believe that any of the pollutants in permit applicants taking flow-weighted toxic pollutants in each fraction. The table V of appendix D of this part composites, quantitative data must be fractions result from the sample (certain hazardous substances and reported for all pollutants specified in preparation required by the analytical asbestos) are discharged from each § 122.26 except pH, temperature, procedure which uses gas outfall. For every pollutant expected to cyanide, total phenols, residual chromatography/mass spectrometry. A be discharged, the applicant must chlorine, oil and grease, fecal coliform, determination that an applicant falls briefly describe the reasons the and fecal streptococcus. The Director within a particular industrial category pollutant is expected to be discharged, may allow or establish appropriate site- for the purposes of selecting fractions and report any quantitative data it has specific sampling procedures or for testing is not conclusive as to the for any pollutant. requirements, including sampling applicant’s inclusion in that category for (viii) Each applicant must report locations, the season in which the any other purposes. [See Notes 2, 3, and qualitative data, generated using a sampling takes place, the minimum 4 of this section.] screening procedure not calibrated with 65290 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules analytical standards, for 2,3,7,8- consolidate review of the determination (b) * * * tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) if with any review of the permit decision. (15) Uncontrolled sanitary landfill it: * * * * * means a landfill or open dump, whether (A) Uses or manufactures 2,4,5- [Note 1: At 46 FR 2046, Jan. 8, 1981, the in operation or closed, that does not trichlorophenoxy acetic acid (2,4,5,-T); Environmental Protection Agency suspended meet the requirements for runon or 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy) propanoic until further notice § 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A) and runoff controls established pursuant to acid (Silvex, 2,4,5,-TP); 2-(2,4,5- the corresponding portions of Item V–C of subtitle D of the Solid Waste Disposal the NPDES application Form 2C as they trichlorophenoxy) ethyl, 2,2- apply to coal mines. This revision continues Act. dichloropropionate (Erbon); O,O- that suspension.] 1 * * * * * dimethyl O-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) [Note 2: At 46 FR 22585, Apr. 20, 1981, the (c) * * * phosphorothioate (Ronnel); 2,4,5- Environmental Protection Agency suspended (1) Individual application. trichlorophenol (TCP); or until further notice § 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A) and Dischargers of storm water associated hexachlorophene (HCP); or the corresponding portions of Item V–C of with industrial activity are required to (B) Knows or has reason to believe the NPDES application Form 2C as they apply for an individual permit or seek apply to: that TCDD is or may be present in an coverage under a promulgated storm effluent. * * * * * water general permit. Facilities that are (8) Small business exemption. An [Note 3: At 46 FR 35090, July 1, 1981, the required to obtain an individual permit, Environmental Protection Agency suspended applicant which qualifies as a small until further notice § 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A) and or any discharge of storm water which business under one of the following the corresponding portions of Item V–C of the Director is evaluating for criteria is exempt from the requirements the NPDES application Form 2C as they designation (see 40 CFR 124.52(c)) in paragraph (g)(7)(v)(A) or (g)(7)(vi)(A) apply to: under paragraph (a)(1)(v) of this section of this section to submit quantitative * * * * * and is not a municipal storm sewer, data for the pollutants listed in table II 6. Section 122.22 is amended by shall submit an NPDES application in of appendix D of this part (the organic revising paragraph (a)(1)(ii) to read as accordance with the requirements of toxic pollutants): follows: § 122.21 as modified and supplemented (i) For coal mines, a probable total by the provisions of this paragraph (c). § 122.22 Signatories to permit applications (i) * * * annual production of less than 100,000 and reports (applicable to State programs, tons per year. see § 123.25). (E) * * * (4) Any information on the discharge (ii) For all other applicants, gross total (a) * * * annual sales averaging less than (1) * * * required under paragraph § 122.21(g)(7) $100,000 per year (in second quarter (ii) The manager of one or more (vi) and (vii) of this part; 1980 dollars). manufacturing, production, or operating * * * * * * * * * * facilities, provided, the manager is (F) Operators of a discharge which is (l) * * * authorized to make management composed entirely of storm water are (1) The owner or operator of any decisions which govern the operation of exempt from the requirements of facility which may be a new sources (as the regulated facility including the § 122.21 (g)(2), (g)(3), (g)(4), (g)(5), defined in § 122.2) and which is located ability to allocate resources, make major (g)(7)(iii), (g)(7)(iv), (g)(7)(v), and in a State without an approved NPDES capital investments, and initiate and (g)(7)(viii); and * ** program must comply with the direct other comprehensive measures to * * * * * provisions of this paragraph (l). assure long term environmental (d) * * * (2) * * * compliance with environmental laws (1) * * * and regulations; can ensure that the (ii) The Regional Administrator shall (iii) * * * necessary systems are established or make an initial determination whether (D) * * * actions taken to gather complete and the facility is a new source within 30 (1) A grid system consisting of accurate information for permit days of receiving all necessary perpendicular north-south and east-west application requirements; and where information under paragraph (l)(2)(i) of lines spaced 1⁄4 mile apart shall be authority to sign documents has been this section. overlaid on a map of the municipal assigned or delegated to the manager in (3) The Regional Administrator shall storm sewer system, creating a series of accordance with corporate procedures. issue a public notice in accordance with cells; 40 CFR 124.10 of the new source Note: *** * * * * * determination under paragraph (l)(2) of * * * * * (2) * * * this section. If the Regional § 122.24 [Amended] (iv) * * * Administrator has determined that the (C) * * * 7. The paragraph heading for facility is a new source, the notice shall (2) Describe a monitoring program for § 122.24(b) (known as ‘‘Defintion’’) is state that the applicant must comply storm water discharges associated with with the environmental review revised to read ‘‘Definition’’. 8. Section 122.26 is amended by the industrial facilities identified in requirements of 40 CFR 6.600. revising paragraphs (b)(15), (c)(1) paragraph (d)(2)(iv)(C) of this section, to (4) Any interested party may introductory text, (c)(1)(i)(E)(4), be implemented during the term of the challenge the Regional Administrator’s (c)(1)(i)(F), (d)(1)(iii)(D)(1), and permit, including the submission of initial new source determination by (d)(2)(iv)(C)(2), and by removing and quantitative data on the following requesting review of the determination reserving paragraph (c)(2), to read as constituents: Any pollutants limited in under 40 CFR 124.19 within 30 days of follows: effluent guidelines subcategories, where the public notice of the initial applicable; any pollutant listed in an determination. If all interested parties § 122.26 Storm water discharges existing NPDES permit for a facility; oil agree, the Environmental Appeals Board (applicable to State NPDES programs, see and grease, COD, pH, BOD5, TSS, total may defer review until after a final § 123.25). phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, permit decision is made, and * * * * * nitrate plus nitrite nitrogen, and any Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65291 information on discharges required (ii) The general permit may exclude standards promulgated under section under 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7) (vi) and (vii). specified sources or areas from 306 of CWA, case-by-case effluent * * * * * coverage. limitations determined under section 9. Section 122.28 is amended by (b) * * * 402(a)(1) of CWA, or on a combination revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory (1) In general. General permits may be of the three, in accordance with § 125.3. text and (a)(2), adding paragraphs (a)(3) issued, modified, revoked and reissued, For new sources or new dischargers, and (a)(4), and revising paragraph (b)(1) or terminated in accordance with these technology based limitations and to read as follows: applicable requirements of part 124 or standards are subject to the provisions corresponding State regulations. Special of § 122.29(d) (protection period). § 122.28 General permits (applicable to procedures for issuance are found at (2) Permits need not include State NPDES programs, see § 123.25). § 123.44 for States. technology-based effluent limitations (a) * * * * * * * * and standards for every pollutant or (1) Area. The general permit shall be parameter listed in applicable effluent written to cover one or more categories § 122.29 [Amended] guidelines and standards found at 40 or subcategories of discharges or sludge 10. Section 122.29(c)(1)(i) is amended CFR Subchapter N if in the judgment of use or disposal practices or facilities by revising the reference to the Director, a permittee adequately described in the permit under paragraph ‘‘§ 122.21(k)’’ to read ‘‘§ 122.21(l)’’. demonstrates and certifies when (a)(2)(ii) of this section, except those 11. Section 122.41 is amended by applying for the permit that it will not covered by individual permits, within a revising paragraphs (j), (l)(4), and the discharge those pollutants. In such geographic area. The area should second sentence in paragraph (l)(6)(i) to cases, the permit will be deemed not to correspond to existing geographic or read as follows: authorize the discharge of those political boundaries such as: § 122.41 Conditions applicable to all excluded pollutants in any amounts, * * * * * and for this exclusion of limitations to (2) Sources. The general permit may permits (applicable to State programs, see § 123.25). be valid, the permit must contain an be written to regulate one or more * * * * * express condition to that effect. This categories or subcategories of discharges exclusion is good only for the term of or sludge use or disposal practices or (j) Monitoring and records. All permits must monitor and maintain the permit. Certifications along with any facilities, within the area described in supporting information must be paragraph (a)(1) of this section, where records in accordance with § 122.48 of this part. submitted each time a permit is applied the sources within a covered for. subcategory of discharges are either: * * * * * * * * * * (i) Storm water point sources; or (l) * * * (ii) One or more categories or (4) Monitoring reports. Monitoring (c) Reopener clause: For any permit subcategories of point sources other results shall be reported in accordance issued to a treatment works treating than storm water point sources, or one with § 122.48 of this part. domestic sewage (including ‘‘sludge- or more categories or subcategories of * * * * * only facilities’’), the Director shall ‘‘treatment works treating domestic (6) Twenty-four hour reporting. include a reopener clause to incorporate sewage’’, if the sources or ‘‘treatment (i) * * * Any information shall be any applicable standard for sewage works treating domestic sewage’’ within provided orally within 24 hours from sludge use or disposal promulgated each category or subcategory all: the time the permittee becomes aware of under section 405(d) of the CWA. The (A) Involve the same or substantially the circumstances. * ** Director may promptly modify or revoke and reissue any permit containing the similar types of operations; * * * * * (B) Discharge the same types of wastes reopener clause required by this or engage in the same types of sludge § 122.43 [Amended] paragraph if the standard for sewage use or disposal practices; 12. Section 122.43(b)(1) is amended sludge use or disposal is more stringent (C) Require the same effluent by removing from the second sentence than any requirements for sludge use or limitations, operating conditions, or the words ‘‘(except as provided in disposal in the permit, or controls a standards for sewage sludge use or § 124.86(c) for NPDES permits being pollutant or practice not limited in the disposal; processed under subpart E or F of part permit. (D) Require the same or similar 124)’’ and by replacing the term * * * * * monitoring; and ‘‘additonal’’ in the third sentence with (e) * * * (E) In the opinion of the Director, are its correct spelling, ‘‘additional’’. (1) Limitations must control all toxic more appropriately controlled under a 13. Section 122.44 is amended by pollutants which the Director general permit than under individual revising paragraphs (a), (c), and (e)(1), determines (based on information permits. by removing and reserving paragraph (i), reported in a permit application under (3) Water quality-based limits. Where by revising paragraph (k), and revising § 122.21(g)(7) or in a notification under sources within a specific category or paragraph (q) to read as follows: § 122.42(a)(1) or on other information) subcategory of dischargers are subject to are or may be discharged at a level water quality-based limits imposed § 122.44 Establishing limitations, greater than the level which can be pursuant to § 122.44 of this part, the standards, and other permit conditions achieved by the technology-based sources in that specific category or (applicable to State NPDES programs, see treatment requirements appropriate to subcategory shall be subject to the same § 123.25). the permittee under § 125.3(c); or water quality-based effluent limitations. * * * * * (4) Other requirements. (i) The general (a)(1) Any permit issued shall include * * * * * permit must clearly identify the technology-based effluent limitations (k) Best management practices (BMPs) applicable conditions for each category and standards based on: Effluent to control or abate the discharge of or subcategory of dischargers or limitations and standards promulgated pollutants when: treatment works treating domestic under section 301(b)(1) or 301(b)(2), as (1) Authorized under section 304(e) of sewage covered by the permit. appropriate, new source performance the CWA for the control of toxic 65292 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules pollutants and hazardous substances monitoring required by § 122.48 shall to yield data which are representative of from ancillary industrial activities; also be applied to the internal waste the monitored activity including, when (2) Numeric effluent limitations are streams. appropriate, continuous monitoring; infeasible; or * * * * * (iii) Applicable reporting (3) The practices are reasonably requirements based upon the impact of necessary to achieve effluent limitations § 122.47 [Amended] the regulated activity and as specified in and standards or to carry out the 15. Section 122.47(b) introductory § 122.44; and purposes and intent of the CWA. text is amended by removing the term (iv) Calculations for all limitations which require averaging of [Note: Additional technical information on ‘‘requriements’’ and replacing it with BMPs and the elements of BMP Plans is the correct spelling, ‘‘requirements’’. measurements shall utilize an contained in the following documents: 16. Section 122.48 is revised to read arithmetic mean unless otherwise Guidance Manual for Developing Best as follows: specified by the Director in the permit. Management Practices (BMPs), October 1993, (b) Reporting monitoring results. (1) EPA No. 833/B–93–004, NTIS No. PB 94– § 122.48 Requirements for monitoring, Monitoring results must be reported on 178324, ERIC No. W498); Storm Water recording and reporting of monitoring a Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) or Management for Construction Activities: results (applicable to State programs, see forms provided or specified by the Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and § 123.25). Director for reporting results of Best Management Practices, September 1992, (a) Monitoring requirements. All monitoring of sludge use or disposal EPA No. 832/R–92–005, NTIS No. PB 92– permits must contain monitoring practices. 235951, ERIC No. N482); Storm Water requirements to assure compliance with (2) Except as provided in paragraphs Management for Construction Activities, permit terms and conditions. Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and (b)(5) and (b)(6) of this section, Best Management Practices: Summary (1) Permittees must monitor: requirements to report monitoring Guidance, EPA No. 833/R–92–001, NTIS No. (i) The mass (or other measurement results shall be established on a case-by- PB 93–223550; ERIC No. W139; Storm Water specified in the permit) for each case basis with a frequency dependent Management for Industrial Activities, pollutant limited in the permit; on the nature and effect of the Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and (ii) The volume of effluent discharged discharge, but in no case less than once Best Management Practices, September 1992; from each outfall; and a year. EPA 832/R–92–006, NTIS No. PB 92–235969, (iii) Other measurements as (3) For sewage sludge use or disposal ERIC No. N477; Storm Water Management for appropriate including: practices, requirements to monitor and Industrial Activities, Developing Pollution (A) Pollutants in internal waste report results shall be established on a Prevention Plans and Best Management streams under § 122.45(h); Practices: Summary Guidance, EPA 833/R– case-by-case basis with a frequency 92–002, NTIS No. PB 94–133782; ERIC No. (B) Pollutants in intake water for net dependent on the nature and effect of W492. Copies of those documents (or limitations under § 122.45(g); the sewage sludge use or disposal directions on how to obtain them) can be (C) Frequency, rate of discharge, etc., practice; minimally this shall be as obtained by contacting either the Office of for noncontinuous discharges under specified in 40 CFR part 503 (where Water Resource Center (using the EPA § 122.45(e); applicable), but in no case less than document number as a reference) at (202) (D) Pollutants subject to notification once a year. 260–7786; the National Technical requirements under § 122.42(a); and (4) Requirements to report monitoring Information Service (NTIS) (using the NTIS (E) Pollutants in sewage sludge or results for storm water discharges number as a reference) at (800) 553–NTIS or other monitoring as specified in 40 CFR associated with industrial activity (703) 487–4650, or (3) the Educational part 503; or Resources Information Center (ERIC) (using which are subject to an effluent the ERIC number as a reference) at (800) 276– (F) As determined to be necessary on limitation guideline shall be established 0462. Updates of these documents or a case-by-case basis pursuant to section on a case-by-case basis with a frequency additional BMP documents may also be 405(d)(4) of the CWA. dependent on the nature and effect of available.] (2) Samples and measurements taken the discharge, but in no case less than * * * * * for the purpose of monitoring shall be once a year. (q) Navigation. Any conditions that representative of the monitored activity. (5) Requirements to report monitoring the Secretary of the Army considers (3) Monitoring will be conducted results for storm water discharges necessary to ensure that navigation and according to test procedures approved associated with industrial activity (other anchorage will not be substantially under 40 CFR part 136, unless an than those addressed in paragraph (b)(4) impaired, in accordance with § 124.59. alternative test procedure has been of this section) shall be established on approved under § 136.5. For sludge use * * * * * a case-by-case basis with a frequency 14. Section 122.45 is amended by or disposal, monitoring will be dependent on the nature and effect of revising paragraph (h)(1) to read as conducted in accordance with test the discharge. At a minimum, a permit follows: procedures approved under part 136 for such a discharge must require: unless otherwise specified in 40 CFR (i) The discharger to conduct an § 122.45 Calculating NPDES permit part 503. Where no test procedure has annual inspection of the facility site to conditions (applicable to State NPDES been approved under 40 CFR part 136, identify areas contributing to a storm programs, see § 123.25) the Director shall specify a test method water discharge associated with * * * * * in the Permit. industrial activity and evaluate whether (h) Internal waste streams. (1) When (4) All permits shall specify: measures to reduce pollutant loadings permit effluent limitations or standards (i) Requirements concerning the identified in a storm water pollution imposed at the point of discharge are proper use, maintenance, and prevention plan are adequate and impractical or infeasible, effluent installation, when appropriate, of properly implemented in accordance limitations or standards for discharges monitoring equipment or methods with the terms of the permit or whether of pollutants may be imposed on (including biological monitoring additional control measures are needed; internal waste streams before mixing methods when appropriate); (ii) The discharger to maintain for a with other waste streams or cooling (ii) Required monitoring including period of three years a record water streams. In those instances, the type, intervals, and frequency sufficient summarizing the results of the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65293 inspection and a certification that the (d) Penalties for falsification and programs are not required to use part 22 facility is in compliance with the plan tampering: (1) The Clean Water Act procedures for NPDES permit and the permit, and identifying any provides that any person who falsifies, terminations. incidents of non-compliance; tampers with, or knowingly renders (iii) Such report and certification be inaccurate any monitoring device or PART 123ÐSTATE PROGRAM signed in accordance with § 122.22; and method required to be maintained under REQUIREMENTS this permit shall, upon conviction, be (iv) Permits for storm water 1. The authority citation for part 123 punished by a fine of not more than discharges associated with industrial continues to read as follows: activity from inactive mining operations $10,000, or by imprisonment for not may, where annual inspections are more than 2 years, or both. Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 impracticable, require certification once (2) If a conviction of a person is for et seq. every three years by a Registered a violation committed after a first 2. Section 123.25 is amended by Professional Engineer that the facility is conviction of such person under this revising paragraphs (a)(12), (a)(19), in compliance with the permit, or paragraph (d), punishment is a fine of (a)(36) and paragraph (b) to read as alternative requirements. not more than $20,000 per day of follows: (6) Permits which do not require the violation, or by imprisonment of not submittal of monitoring result reports at more than 4 years, or both. § 123.25 Requirements for permitting. least annually shall require that the 17. Section 122.62 is amended by (a) * * * permittee report all instances of revising paragraph (a)(8) to read as * * * * * noncompliance not reported under follows: (12) § 122.41 (a)(1) and (b) through § 122.41(l) (1), (5), and (6) at least § 122.62 Modification or revocation and (n)—(Applicable permit conditions) annually. reissuance of permits (applicable to State (Indian Tribes can satisfy enforcement (7) If the permittee monitors any programs, see § 123.25). authority requirements under § 123.34); pollutant more frequently than required * * * * * * * * * * by the permit using test procedures (a) * * * (19) § 122.48 (a) through (c)— approved under 40 CFR part 136 or, in (8)(i) Net limits. Upon request of a (Monitoring requirements); the case of sludge use or disposal, permittee who qualifies for effluent * * * * * approved under 40 CFR part 136 unless limitations on a net basis under otherwise specified in 40 CFR part 503, (36) Subparts A, B, D, and H of part § 122.45(g). 125; or as specified in the permit, the results (ii) When a discharger is no longer * * * * * of this monitoring shall be included in eligible for net limitations, as provided (b) State NPDES programs shall have the calculation and reporting of the data in § 122.45(g)(1)(ii). submitted in the DMR or sludge an approved continuing planning * * * * * reporting form specified by the Director. process under 40 CFR 130.5 and shall 18. Section 122.64 is amended by assure that the approved planning (c) Records of monitoring information. revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: (1) Except for records of monitoring process is at all times consistent with information required by this permit § 122.64 Termination of permits the CWA. related to the permittee’s sewage sludge (applicable to State programs, see § 123.25). * * * * * use and disposal activities, which shall * * * * * 3. Section 123.44 is amended by be retained for a period of at least five (b) The Director shall follow the revising paragraph (a)(2) and the years (or longer as required by 40 CFR applicable procedures in part 124 or introductory text of paragraph (b)(2), part 503), the permittee shall retain part 22, as appropriate (or State and by removing and reserving records of all monitoring information, procedures equivalent to part 124) in paragraph (i) to read as follows: including all calibration and terminating any NPDES permit under maintenance records and all original § 123.44 EPA review of and objections to this section, except that if the entire State permits. strip chart recordings for continuous discharge is permanently terminated by monitoring instrumentation, copies of elimination of the flow or by connection (a) * * * all reports required by this permit, and to a POTW (but not by land application (2) In the case of general permits, EPA records of all data used to complete the or disposal into a well), the Director shall have 90 days from the date of application for this permit, for a period may terminate the permit by notice to receipt of the proposed general permit of at least 3 years from the date of the the permittee. Termination by notice to comment upon, object to or make sample, measurement, report or shall be effective 30 days after notice is recommendations with respect to the application. This period may be sent, unless the permittee objects within proposed general permit, and is not extended by request of the Director at that time. If the permittee objects during bound by any shorter time limits set by any time. that period, the Director shall follow the the Memorandum of Agreement for (2) Records of monitoring information applicable part 124 or State procedures general comments, objections or shall include: for termination. Expedited permit recommendations. (i) The date, exact place, and time of termination procedures are not available (b) * * * sampling or measurements; to permittees that are subject to pending (2) Within 90 days following receipt (ii) The individual(s) who performed State and/or Federal enforcement of a proposed permit to which he or she the sampling or measurements; actions including citizen suits brought has objected under paragraph (b)(1) of (iii) The date(s) analyses were under State or Federal law. If requesting this section, or in the case of general performed; expedited permit termination permits within 90 days after receipt of (iv) The individual(s) who performed procedures, a permittee must certify that the proposed general permit, the the analyses; it is not subject to any pending State or Regional Administrator shall set forth in (v) The analytical techniques or Federal enforcement actions including writing and transmit to the State methods used; and citizen suits brought under State or Director: (vi) The results of such analyses. Federal law. State-authorized NPDES * * * * * 65294 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

PART 124ÐPROCEDURES FOR § 124.3 [Amended] § 124.6 Draft permits. DECISIONMAKING 4. Section 124.3 is amended by * * * * * adding the word ‘‘and’’ at the end of (e) * * * For all permits issued 1. The authority citation for part 124 paragraph (g)(3), by removing ‘‘; and’’ pursuant to this part, an appeal may be is revised to read as follows: and replacing it with a period in taken under § 124.19. * * * Authority: Resource Conservation and paragraph (g)(4) and by removing § 124.10 [Amended] Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; Safe paragraph (g)(5). Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.; 8. Section 124.10 is amended by Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; § 124.4 [Amended] removing the words ’’, subpart E or Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 5. Section 124.4 is amended by subpart F’’ in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and 2. Section 124.1 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (d) (d)(2) introductory text. and by removing the phrase ‘‘or process revising the first sentence of paragraph § 124.12 [Amended] a PSD permit under subpart F as (a) and paragraphs (b) and (c), by 9. Section 124.12(e) is removed. removing the table entitled ‘‘Hearings provided in paragraph (d) of this Available Under This Part’’ following section’’ in paragraph (e). § 124.14 [Amended] 6. Section 124.5 is to be amended by paragraph (c), and by revising the fourth 10. Section 124.14(d) is removed and revising paragraph (d) to read as sentence of paragraph (d) to read as reserved. follows: follows: 11. Section 124.15 is amended by § 124.1 Purpose and scope. § 124.5 Modification, revocation and revising the third sentence of paragraph reissuance, or termination of permits. (a) and by revising paragraph (b)(2) to (a) This part contains EPA procedures * * * * * read as follows: for issuing, modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating all RCRA, UIC, (d) (Applicable to State programs, see § 124.15 Issuance and effective date of PSD and NPDES ‘‘permits’’ (including §§ 123.25 (NPDES), 145.11 (UIC), and permit. ‘‘sludge-only’’ permits issued pursuant 271.14 (RCRA)). (1) If the Director (a) * * * This notice shall include to § 122.1(b)(2). * * * tentatively decides to terminate: A reference to the procedures for permit under § 144.40 (UIC), a permit (b) Part 124 is organized into four appealing a decision on a RCRA, UIC, under §§ 122.64(a) (NPDES) or 270.43 PSD, or NPDES permit under § 124.19. subparts. Subpart A contains general (RCRA) (for EPA-issued NPDES or procedural requirements applicable to *** RCRA permits, only at the request of the (b) * * * all permit programs covered by these permittee), or a permit under § 122.64(b) provisions. Subparts B through D (2) Review is requested on the permit (NPDES) where the permittee objects, he under § 124.19; or supplement these general provisions or she shall issue a notice of intent to with requirements that apply to only terminate. A notice of intent to * * * * * one or more of the programs. Subpart A terminate is a type of draft permit which 12. Section 124.16 is amended by describes the steps EPA will follow in follows the same procedures as any revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: receiving permit applications, preparing draft permit prepared under § 124.6. draft permits, issuing public notices, § 124.16 Stays of contested permit (2) For EPA-issued NPDES or RCRA conditions. inviting public comment and holding permits, if the Director tentatively public hearings on draft permits. (a) Stays. (1) If a request for review of decides to terminate a permit under Subpart A also covers assembling an a RCRA, UIC, or NPDES permit under § 122.64(a) (NPDES) or § 270.43 (RCRA) administrative record, responding to § 124.19 is filed, the effect of the other than at the request of the comments, issuing a final permit contested permit conditions shall be permittee, he or she shall prepare a decision, and allowing for stayed and shall not be subject to complaint under 40 CFR 22.13 and administrative appeal of final permit judicial review pending final agency 22.44. Such termination of NPDES and decisions. Subpart B contains specific action. Uncontested permit conditions RCRA permits shall be subject to the procedural requirements for RCRA shall be stayed only until the date procedures of part 22 instead of this permits. Subpart C contains definitions specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this part. and specific procedural requirements section. (No stay of a PSD permit is (3) In the case of EPA-issued permits, for PSD permits. Subpart D contains available under this section.) If the a notice of intent to terminate or a specific procedural requirements for permit involves a new facility or new complaint shall not be issued if the NPDES permits. injection well, new source, new Regional Administrator and the discharger or a recommencing (c) Part 124 offers an opportunity for permittee agree to termination in the public hearings (see § 124.12). discharger, the applicant shall be course of transferring permit without a permit for the proposed new (d) * * * This part also allows responsibility to an approved State facility, injection well, source or consolidated permits to be subject to a under §§ 123.24(b)(1) (NPDES), discharger pending final agency action. single public hearing under § 124.12. 145.25(b)(1) (UIC), 271.8(b)(6) (RCRA), See also § 124.60. *** or 501.14(b)(1) (sludge). In addition, (2)(i) Uncontested conditions which * * * * * termination of an NPDES permit for are not severable from those contested cause pursuant to § 122.64(b) may be § 124.2 [Amended] shall be stayed together with the accomplished by providing written contested conditions. The Regional 3. Section 124.2 is amended by: notice to the permittee, unless the Administrator shall identify the stayed a. Removing the following definitions: permittee objects. provisions of permits for existing ‘‘Applicable standards and limitations’’, * * * * * facilities, injection wells, and sources. ‘‘[Consultation with the Regional 7. Section 124.6 is amended by All other provisions of the permit for Administrator’’], ‘‘NPDES’’, and revising the third sentence after the the existing facility, injection well, or ‘‘Variance’’; and heading of paragraph (e) to read as source become fully effective and b. Removing paragraph (c). follows: enforceable 30 days after the date of the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65295 notification required in paragraph issued by EPA and agency review hearing in the manner specified in (a)(2)(ii) of this section. procedures under this section are paragraph (c)(3) of this section. (ii) The Regional Administrator shall, exhausted. * * * (d) For any proceeding to terminate an as soon as possible after receiving * * * * * NPDES or RCRA permit commenced on notification from the EAB of the filing 14. Section 124.21 is revised to read or prior to [date 29 days after of a petition for review, notify the EAB, as follows: publication of the final rule], the the applicant, and all other interested Regional Administrator shall follow the parties of the uncontested (and § 124.21 Effective date of part 124. procedures of § 124.5(d) as in effect on severable) conditions of the final permit (a) Part 124 became effective for all [date 29 days after publication of the that will become fully effective permits except for RCRA permits on final rule], and any formal hearing shall enforceable obligations of the permit as July 18, 1980. Part 124 became effective follow the procedures of subpart E of of the date specified in paragraph for RCRA permits on November 19, this part as in effect on the same date. (a)(2)(i). For NPDES permits only, the 1980. § 124.52 [Amended] notice shall comply with the (b) EPA eliminated the previous requirements of § 124.60(b). requirement for NPDES permits to 15. Section 124.52 is amended by removing the words ‘‘or § 124.118’’ in * * * * * undergo an evidentiary hearing after 13. Section 124.19 is amended by permit issuance, and modified the paragraphs (b) and (c). revising the section heading, revising procedures for termination of NPDES § 124.55 [Amended] the first sentence of paragraph (a) and RCRA permits, on [date 30 days 16. Section 124.55 is amended by introductory text, revising the first after publication of final rule]. revising the reference ‘‘§ 124.53(d) (1) sentence of paragraph (b), revising (c)(1) For any NPDES permit decision and (2)’’ in paragraph (a)(2) to read paragraph (d), and revising the first for which a request for evidentiary ‘‘§ 124.53(e)’’ and by revising the sentence of paragraph (f)(1) introductory hearing was granted on or prior to [date reference ‘‘§ 124.53(d)’’ in paragraph (d) text to read as follows: 29 days after publication of final rule], to read ‘‘§ 124.53(e)’’. the hearing and any subsequent 17. Section 124.56 is amended by § 124.19 Appeal of RCRA, UIC, NPDES, proceedings (including any appeal to and PSD Permits. revising (b)(1) to read as follows: the Environmental Appeals Board) shall (a) Within 30 days after a RCRA, UIC, proceed pursuant to the procedures of § 124.56 Fact sheets (applicable to State NPDES, or PSD final permit decision (or this part as in effect on [date 29 days NPDES programs, see § 123.25). a decision under 40 CFR 270.29 to deny after publication of final rule]. * * * * * a permit for the active life of a RCRA (2) For any NPDES permit decision for (b)(1) When the draft permit contains hazardous waste management facility or which a request for evidentiary hearing any of the following conditions, an unit) has been issued under § 124.15, was denied on or prior to [date 29 days explanation of the reasons why such any person who filed comments on that after publication of final rule], but for conditions are applicable: draft permit or participated in the which the Board has not yet completed (i) Limitations to control toxic public hearing may petition the proceedings under § 124.91, the appeal, pollutants under § 122.44(e); Environmental Appeals Board to review and any hearing or other proceedings on (ii) Limitations on internal waste any condition of the permit decision. remand if the Board so orders, shall streams under § 122.45(i); *** proceed pursuant to the procedures of (iii) Limitations on indicator * * * * * this part as in effect on [date 29 days pollutants under § 125.3(g); (b) The Environmental Appeals Board after publication of final rule]. (iv) Limitations set on a case-by-case may also decide on its own initiative to (3) For any NPDES permit decision for basis under § 125.3 (c)(2) or (c)(3), or review any condition of any RCRA, UIC, which a request for evidentiary hearing pursuant to Section 405(d)(4) of the NPDES, or PSD permit decision issued was filed on or prior to [date 29 days CWA; or (v) Limitations to meet the criteria for under this part. * ** after publication of final rule] but was permit issuance under § 122.4(i). * * * * * neither granted nor denied prior to that (d) The Regional Administrator, at date, the Regional Administrator shall, * * * * * any time prior to the rendering of a no later than [date 60 days after § 124.57 [Amended] decision under paragraph (c) of this publication of the final rule], notify the 18. Section 124.57 is amended by section to grant or deny review of a requester that the request for evidentiary removing and reserving paragraph (b) permit decision, may, upon notification hearing is being returned without and by removing paragraph (c). to the Board and any interested parties, prejudice. Notwithstanding the time withdraw the permit and prepare a new 19. Section 124.60 is revised to read limit in § 124.19(a), the requester may as follows: draft permit under § 124.6 addressing file an appeal with the Board, in the portions so withdrawn. The new accordance with the other requirements § 124.60 Issuance and effective date and draft permit shall proceed through the of § 124.19(a), no later than [date 90 stays of NPDES permits. same process of public comment and days after publication of the final rule]. In addition to the requirements of opportunity for a public hearing as (4) A party to a proceeding otherwise §§ 124.15, 124.16, and 124.19, the would apply to any other draft permit subject to paragraphs (c) (1) or (2) of this following provisions apply to NPDES subject to this part. Any portions of the section may, no later than [date 30 days permits: permit which are not withdrawn and after publication of this rule], request (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of which are not stayed under § 124.16(a) that the evidentiary hearing process be § 124.16(a)(1), if, for any offshore or shall remain in effect. suspended. The Regional Administrator coastal mobile exploratory drilling rig or * * * * * shall inquire of all other parties whether coastal mobile developmental drilling (f)(1) For purposes of judicial review they desire the evidentiary hearing to rig which has never received a final under the appropriate Act, final agency continue. If no party desires the hearing effective permit to discharge at a ‘‘site,’’ action occurs when a final RCRA, UIC, to continue, the Regional Administrator but which is not a ‘‘new discharger’’ or NPDES, or PSD permit decision is shall return the request for evidentiary a ‘‘new source,’’ the Regional 65296 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Administrator finds that compliance achieve the discharger’s proposed accordance with §§ 122.21(m)(1) and with certain permit conditions may be alternative conditions. 124.3. necessary to avoid irreparable (c) In addition to the requirements of * * * * * environmental harm during the § 124.16(c)(2), when an appeal is filed administrative review, he or she may under § 124.19 on an application for a § 125.72 [Amended] specify in the statement of basis or fact renewal of an existing permit and upon 3. Section 125.72(c) is amended by sheet that those conditions, even if written request from the applicant, the removing the words ‘‘and contested, shall remain enforceable Regional Administrator may delete § 124.73(c)(1)’’. obligations of the discharger during requirements from the existing permit administrative review. which unnecessarily duplicate Subpart K to Part 125 [Removed and (b)(1) As provided in § 124.16(a), if an uncontested provisions of the new Reserved] appeal of an initial permit decision is permit. filed under § 124.19, the force and effect 20. Section 124.64 is amended by 4. Subpart K is removed and reserved. of the contested conditions of the final revising paragraph (b), paragraph (c) PART 144ÐUNDERGROUND permit shall be stayed until final agency introductory text, and paragraph (d) to INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAM action under § 124.19(f). The Regional read as follows: Administrator shall notify, in § 124.64 Appeals of variances. 1. The authority citation for part 144 accordance with § 124.16(a)(2)(ii), the continues to read as follows: discharger and all interested parties of * * * * * the uncontested conditions of the final (b) Variance decisions made by EPA Authority: Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 permit that are enforceable obligations may be appealed under the provisions U.S.C. 300f et seq.; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. of the discharger. of § 124.19. (2) When effluent limitations are (c) Stays for section 301(g) variances. § 144.52 [Amended] contested, but the underlying control If an appeal is filed under § 124.19 of a 2. Section 144.52(b)(2) is amended by technology is not, the notice shall variance requested under CWA section removing from the second sentence the identify the installation of the 301(g), any otherwise applicable parenthetical phrase ‘‘(except as technology in accordance with the standards and limitations under CWA provided in § 124.86(c) for UIC permits permit compliance schedules (if section 301 shall not be stayed unless: being processed under subpart E or F of uncontested) as an uncontested, * * * * * part 124)’’. enforceable obligation of the permit. (d) Stays for variances other than (3) When a combination of section 301(g) variances are governed by PART 270ÐEPA ADMINISTERED technologies is contested, but a portion §§ 124.16 and 124.60. PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE of the combination is not contested, that § 124.66 [Amended] HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT portion shall be identified as PROGRAM uncontested if compatible with the 21. Section 124.66(a) is amended by combination of technologies proposed removing the words ‘‘Except as 1. The authority citation for part 270 by the requester. provided in § 124.65,’’ from the first continues to read as follows: (4) Uncontested conditions, if sentence, and by revising the words ‘‘evidentiary or panel hearing under Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924, inseverable from a contested condition, 6925, 6927, 6939, and 6974. shall be considered contested. subpart E or F.’’ in the fourth sentence (5) Uncontested conditions shall to read ‘‘appeal under § 124.19.’’ § 270.32 [Amended] become enforceable 30 days after the Subpart E to Part 124 [Removed] 2. Section 270.32(c) is amended by date of notice under paragraph (b)(1) of removing from the second sentence the this section. 22. Subpart E is removed. parenthetical phrase ‘‘(except as (6) Uncontested conditions shall provided in § 124.86(c) for RCRA include: Subpart F to Part 124 [Removed] permits being processed under subpart (i) Preliminary design and engineering E or F of part 124)’’. studies or other requirements necessary 23. Subpart F is removed. to achieve the final permit conditions Appendix A to Part 124 [Removed] § 270.43 [Amended] which do not entail substantial 3. Section 270.43(b) is amended by expenditures; 24. Appendix A to Part 124 is revising the words ‘‘part 124’’ to read (ii) Permit conditions which will have removed. to be met regardless of the outcome of ‘‘part 124 or part 22, as appropriate’’. the appeal under § 124.19; PART 125ÐCRITERIA AND PART 271ÐREQUIREMENTS FOR (iii) When the discharger proposed a STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL AUTHORIZATION OF STATE less stringent level of treatment than POLLUTANT DISCHARGE HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS that contained in the final permit, any ELIMINATION SYSTEM permit conditions appropriate to meet 1. The authority citation for part 125 1. The authority citation for part 271 the levels proposed by the discharger, if continues to read as follows: the measures required to attain that less is revised to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, and 6926. stringent level of treatment are Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. consistent with the measures required to 1251 et seq., unless otherwise noted. § 271.19 [Amended] attain the limits proposed by any other 2. Section 125.32(a) is revised to read 2. Section 271.19(e) introductory text party; and as follows: is amended by removing the words ‘‘in (iv) Construction activities, such as accordance with the procedures of part segregation of waste streams or § 125.32 Method of application. 124, subpart E,’’. installation of equipment, which would (a) A written request for a variance partially meet the final permit under this subpart D shall be submitted [FR Doc. 96–30466 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] conditions and could also be used to in duplicate to the Director in BILLING CODE 6560±50±P federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday Additional Streamlining;ProposedRule HOME InvestmentPartnershipsProgram; 24 CFRPart92 Development Housing andUrban Department of Part III 65297 65298 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND conducted a page-by-page review of its between the actual interest rate charged URBAN DEVELOPMENT regulations to determine which can be and the market interest rate established eliminated, consolidated, or otherwise at § 92.220(a)(1)(iii)(B). The Department 24 CFR Part 92 improved. HUD has determined that the established the formula for determining regulations for the HOME Investment the market interest rate for various types [Docket No. FR±4111±P±01] Partnerships Program can be improved of projects based on assumptions RIN 2501±AC30 and streamlined by eliminating involving first mortgage financing. unnecessary provisions. In the course of administering the HOME Investment Partnerships As a part of HUD’s regulatory program, the Department has received ProgramÐAdditional Streamlining reinvention initiative, this rule proposes comments asserting that this method three streamlining changes to, and a undervalues the match contribution of AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD. change to the market rate formula in, the below-market interest rate financing for ACTION: Proposed rule. HOME regulation at 24 CFR part 92. rehabilitation loans. HUD recognizes For the first streamlining change, SUMMARY: This rule proposes to that loans for rehabilitation, whether for HUD proposes to replace the home improvements or renovation of streamline the HOME Program requirements for the competitive regulation by: replacing the hearing rental housing, typically carry higher reallocation of HOME funds in § 92.453, market interest rates than first mortgage procedures of the current HOME rule which largely repeat the HOME statute with the Department-wide streamlined financing for comparable projects. at section 217(c) of the Cranston- Consequently, the Department is hearing procedures; removing the Gonzalez National Affordable Housing closeout requirements and instead considering amending Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(c)), with a citation § 92.220(a)(1)(iii)(B) to establish a providing that HOME funds will be to the selection criteria in the statute; closed out in accordance with separate market interest rate formula for the maximum number of points that rehabilitation loans. The Department is procedures established by HUD; and may be awarded for each category of replacing the extensive requirements for soliciting comments on this proposed criteria (policies, actions, commitment), change. Specifically, comment is the competitive reallocation of HOME as is done in the current regulation; and funds with a citation to the selection requested on the formula to be used to a statement that such requirements will establish this rate and whether separate factors in the HOME statute and a be published in a Notice of Funding statement of the maximum number of rates for the type or tenure of housing Availability (NOFA) in accordance with would be appropriate. points that may be awarded for each the requirements of the HUD Reform factor. In addition, this rule invites Act as funds become available. Findings and Certifications comment on establishing a separate Second, this rule proposes to remove Paperwork Reduction Act market interest rate formula for the closeout requirements specified in rehabilitation loans. § 92.507 and instead provide that, The information collection DATES: Comment due date: February 10, ‘‘HOME funds will be closed out in requirements for the HOME Investment 1997. accordance with procedures established Partnerships Program have been ADDRESSES: Interested persons are by HUD.’’ approved by the Office of Management invited to submit comments regarding Third and last, this rule would and Budget, under section 3504(h) of this proposed rule to the Rules Docket replace the hearing procedures in the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 Clerk, Office of General Counsel, Room § 92.552 of the current HOME rule with (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and assigned 10278, Department of Housing and the Department-wide, streamlined, OMB control number 2501–0013. This Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, hearing procedures of 24 CFR part 26 proposed rule does not contain SW, Washington, DC 20410. published as a final rule on September additional information collection Communications should refer to the 24, 1996 (61 FR 50208). requirements. The changes described above are above docket number and title. A copy consistent with the general reinvention Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of each communication submitted will goals of streamlining the requirements Title II of the Unfunded Mandates be available for public inspection and of HUD’s funding programs and Reform Act of 1995 establishes copying between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 maximizing their administrative requirements for Federal agencies to p.m. weekdays at the above address. flexibility. For example, removing the assess the effects of their regulatory FAXED comments will not be accepted. current rigid and burdensome closeout actions on State, local, and tribal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requirements permits the Department to governments and the private sector. Mary Kolesar, Director, Program Policy simplify the closeout process and This rule does not impose any Federal Division, Office of Affordable Housing administer it on the basis of the reports mandates on any State, local or tribal Programs, Room 7162, 451 Seventh and other monitoring information it governments or the private sector within Street SW., Washington, DC 20410, receives. In addition, every recipient of the meaning of the Unfunded Mandates telephone (202) 708–2470 (this is not a HUD funding and the Department itself Reform Act of 1995. toll-free number). A would benefit from the adoption of Environmental Impact telecommunications device for hearing- uniform hearings procedures that would and speech-impaired persons (TTY) is apply to all HUD programs. A Finding of No Significant Impact available at 1–800–877–8339 (Federal The Department is considering with respect to the environment has Information Relay Service). making one additional change to the been made in accordance with HUD SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March HOME program besides the three regulations in 24 CFR part 50, which 4, 1995, President Clinton issued a described above. The HOME rule implement Section 102(2)(C) of the memorandum to all Federal currently requires a participating National Environmental Policy Act of departments and agencies regarding jurisdiction (PJ) wishing to claim match 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332. The Finding of No regulatory reinvention. In response to credit for the value of below-market Significant Impact is available for public this memorandum, the Department of interest rate loans to calculate the yield inspection and copying between 7:30 Housing and Urban Development foregone based upon the difference a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65299

Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, Room family values, by helping families The NOFA will also describe the 10276, 451 Seventh Street, SW, achieve security and independence; by selection criteria and any special factors Washington, D.C. 20410. enabling them to live in decent, safe, to be evaluated in awarding points and sanitary housing; and by giving under the selection criteria. Impact on Small Entities them the means to live independently in (b) The NOFA will include the The Secretary, in accordance with the mainstream American society. This rule selection criteria at sec. 217(c) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. would not, however, affect the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 605(b)) has reviewed and approved this institution of the family, which is Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(c)), with rule, and in so doing certifies that this requisite to coverage by the Order. the following maximum number of rule will not have a significant The Catalog of Federal Domestic points awarded for each category of economic impact on a substantial Assistance Number for the HOME Program is criteria: number of small entities, because 14.239. (1) Commitment. Up to 25 points for jurisdictions that are statutorily eligible to receive formula allocations are List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 92 the criteria at sec. 217(c)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable relatively larger cities, counties or Grant programs—housing and Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(c)(1)); States. In addition, this rule only community development, Manufactured proposes to streamline regulations by homes, Rent subsidies, Reporting and (2) Actions. Up to 50 points for the removing unnecessary provisions. The recordkeeping requirements. criteria at sec. 217(c)(2) of the Cranston- Gonzalez National Affordable Housing rule will have no adverse or Accordingly, part 92 of title 24 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(c)(2)); and disproportionate economic impact on Code of Federal Regulations would be small businesses. amended to read as follows: (3) Policies. Up to 25 points for the criteria at sec. 217(c)(3) of the Cranston- Federalism Impact PART 92ÐHOME INVESTMENT Gonzalez National Affordable Housing The General Counsel has determined, PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM Act (42 U.S.C. 12747(c)(3)). as the Designated Official for HUD 3. Section 92.507 is revised to read as 1. The authority citation for part 92 under section 6(a) of Executive Order follows: 12612, Federalism, that this rule does continues to read as follows: not have federalism implications Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 12701– § 92.507 Closeout. concerning the division of local, State, 12839. HOME funds will be closed out in and federal responsibilities. While the 2. Section 92.453 is revised to read as accordance with procedures established HOME Program interim rule was follows: by HUD. determined to be a rule with federalism § 92.453 Competitive reallocations. 4. In § 92.552, paragraph (b) is revised implications and the Department to read as follows: submitted a Federalism Assessment (a) HUD will invite applications concerning the interim rule to OMB, through Federal Register publication of § 92.552 Notice and opportunity for this proposed rule would only make a Notice of Funding Availability hearing; sanctions. limited adjustments to the interim rule (NOFA), in accordance with section 102 * * * * * and does not significantly affect any of of the Department of Housing and Urban (b) Proceedings. When HUD proposes the factors considered in the Federalism Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 to take action pursuant to this section, Assessment for the interim rule. U.S.C. 3545) and the requirements of the respondent in the proceedings will sec. 217(c) of the Cranston-Gonzalez Impact on the Family be the participating jurisdiction or, at National Affordable Housing Act (42 HUD’s option, the State recipient. The General Counsel, as the U.S.C. 12747(c)), for HOME funds that Proceedings will be conducted in designated official under Executive become available for competitive accordance with 24 CFR part 26. Order 12606, The Family, has reallocation under § 92.451 or § 92.452, determined that this rule would not or both. The NOFA will describe the Dated: October 31, 1996. have significant impact on family application requirements and Henry G. Cisneros, formation, maintenance, and general procedures, including the total funding Secretary. well-being. Assistance provided under available for the competition and any [FR Doc. 96–31307 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] this rule can be expected to support maximum amount of individual awards. BILLING CODE 4210±32±P federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday Final Rule Conduct onNationalArboretumProperty; 7 CFRPart500 Agricultural ResearchService Agriculture Department of Part IV 65301 65302 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ‘‘guard’’ or ‘‘watchman’’ is replaced § 500.6 Gambling. with the phrase ‘‘Security Staff’’; Participating in games for money or Agricultural Research Service other personal property, or the List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 500 operation of gambling devices, the 7 CFR Part 500 Agricultural Research Service, Federal conduct of a lottery or pool, or the buildings and facilities, National Conduct on National Arboretum selling or purchasing of numbers tickets, Arboretum. Property in or on U.S. National Arboretum For the reasons set out in the property, is prohibited. AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service; preamble, 7 CFR Part 500 is amended as 7. Section 500.7 is revised to read as Research, Education, and Economics; set forth below. follows: USDA. § 500.7 Intoxicating beverages and PART 500ÐCONDUCT ON U.S. ACTION: Final rule. narcotics. NATIONAL ARBORETUM PROPERTY Entering U.S. National Arboretum SUMMARY: The Agricultural Research 1. The heading for Part 500 is revised property or the operation of a motor Service (ARS) is revising regulations as set forth above. vehicle thereon, by a person under the governing conduct on the U.S. National influence of intoxicating beverages or Arboretum property. This action is 2. The authority citation for Part 500 is revised to read as follows: narcotic drug, or the consumption of being taken because a review of the such beverages or the use of such drug regulations identified certain words in Authority: Secs. 2, 4, 62 Stat. 281; sec. 103, in or on U.S. National Arboretum 63 Stat. 380; sec. 205(d), 63 Stat. 389; 40 the current regulations that are out of property, is prohibited. date. Other minor changes, corrections U.S.C. 318a, 318c, 486(d), 753, 34 FR 6406; 34 FR 7389. 8. Section 500.8 is revised to read as and deletions will be made to clarify the follows: regulations. 3. Section 500.1 is revised to read as § 500.8 Soliciting, vending, debt collection, EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 1996. follows: and distribution of handbills. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: § 500.1 General. The soliciting of contributions, Area Administrative Officer, Beltsville The rules and regulations in this part display or distribution of commercial Area, ARS, Building 003, Room 203, apply to the buildings and grounds of advertising and the collection of private Beltsville, Md. 20705; (301) 504–5392. the U.S. National Arboretum, debts, is prohibited. This section does SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A review Washington, D.C., and to all persons not apply to national or local drives for of this regulation was done in response entering in or on such property. The funds for welfare, health, and other to the President’s Regulatory Review Administrator, General Services purposes sponsored or approved by the Initiative. As a result, certain words Administration, has delegated to the Agricultural Research Service, describing the property and personnel Secretary of Agriculture, with authority concessions, or personal notices posted contained in the current regulations to redelegate, the authority to make all by employees on authorized bulletin were identified as obsolete. The the needful rules and regulations for the boards. Distribution of material such as amendments change these obsolete protection of the buildings and grounds pamphlets, handbills, and flyers is descriptions and make other minor of the U.S. National Arboretum (34 FR prohibited without prior approval of the revisions and deletions to the current 6406). The Secretary of Agriculture has Director, U.S. National Arboretum. regulations. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) in turn delegated such authority to the 9. Section 500.9 is revised to read as it has been determined that notice and Administrator, Agricultural Research follows: public comment procedures are Service (34 FR 7389). The rules and § 500.9 Photographs for news, advertising, unnecessary because the changes being regulations in this part are issued or commercial purposes. made are minor changes to obsolete pursuant to such delegations. Photographs for news purposes may words and will not substantively alter 4. Section 500.2 is revised to read as be taken at the U.S. National Arboretum the regulation. Further, since this rule follows: involves minor revision to existing without prior permission. Photographs regulations it is not a ‘‘major rule’’ and § 500.2 Recording presence. for advertising and commercial is exempt from the provisions of Admission to the U.S. National purposes may be taken, but only with Executive Order 12291. The Arboretum during periods when it is the prior approval of the Director, U.S. amendments will not have a significant closed to the public will be limited to National Arboretum and fees may be economic impact on a substantial authorized individuals who may be charged. 10. Section 500.10 is revised to read number of small entities under the required to sign the register and/or as follows: criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, display identification documents when 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. This rule has been requested by the Security Staff, or other § 500.10 Pets. determined to be not significant for the authorized individuals. Pets, except assistance trained purposes of Executive Order 12866 and 5. Section 500.4 is revised to read as animals, brought upon U.S. National therefore has not been reviewed by the follows: Arboretum property must be kept on Office of Management and Budget. This leash and have proper vaccinations. The rule is exempt from the requirements of § 500.4 Conformity with signs and emergency directions. abandonment of unwanted animals on the National Environmental Policy Act, USNA grounds is prohibited. as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and Persons in and on property of the U.S. 11. Section 500.11 is revised to read the requirements of the Paperwork National Arboretum shall comply with as follows: Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35). official signs of prohibitory or director Among other minor changes, the nature and with the directions of § 500.11 Vehicular and pedestrian traffic. amendment changes the phrase authorized individuals. (a) Drivers of all vehicles in or on U.S. ‘‘National Arboretum’’ to ‘‘U.S. National 6. Section 500.6 is revised to read as National Arboretum property shall drive Arboretum (USNA)’’; and the word follows: in a careful and safe manner at all times Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65303 and shall comply with the signals and directives as may be required, and when person or persons because of race, directions of the Security Staff and all so issued and posted such directives religion, color, age, sex, disability or posted traffic signs; shall have the same force and effect as national origin, in furnishing, or by (b) The blocking of entrances, if incorporated in this part. refusing to furnish to such person or driveways, walks, loading platforms, or 12. Section 500.12 is revised to read persons the use of any facility of a fire hydrants in or on U.S. National as follows: public nature, including all services, Arboretum property is prohibited; § 500.12 Weapons and explosives. privileges, accommodations, and (c) Except in emergencies, parking in No person while in or on U.S. activities provided thereby on U.S. or on U.S. National Arboretum property National Arboretum property shall carry National Arboretum property. in other than designated areas is not firearms, other dangerous or deadly allowed without a permit. Parking Done at Washington, DC, this 29th day of weapons, or explosives, either openly or November, 1996. without authority, parking in concealed, except for official purposes. Edward B. Knipling, unauthorized locations or in locations 13. Section 500.13 is revised to read reserved for other persons, or contrary as follows: Acting Administrator, Agricultural Research to the direction of posted signs is Service. prohibited. This section may be § 500.13 Nondiscrimination. [FR Doc. 96–31073 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] supplemented from time to time, by the There shall be no discrimination by BILLING CODE 3410±03±M issuance and posting of specific traffic segregation or otherwise against any federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday Cognizance; ProposedRule in ContractAdministrationandAudit Federal AcquisitionRegulation;Changes 48 CFRParts15,42,46,47and52 Space Administration National Aeronauticsand Administration General Services Department ofDefense Part V 65305 65306 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE subcommittees. This case implements 15.809 Forward pricing rate agreements. recommendations of Subcommittee One (a) * * * The cognizant Federal agency GENERAL SERVICES to address civilian agencies’ contract (see 42.003) shall determine whether an ADMINISTRATION administration and audit practices. The FPRA will be established. rule amends FAR Parts 15, 42, 46, 47 * * * * * NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND and 52 to add policies and procedures SPACE ADMINISTRATION for assigning and performing contract PART 42ÐCONTRACT audit services and to clarify the policy ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT 48 CFR Parts 15, 42, 46, 47 and 52 for assigning or delegating responsibility SERVICES [FAR Case 95±022] for establishing forward pricing and billing rates, and final indirect cost 3. Part 42 heading is revised to read RIN 9000±AH27 rates. as shown above. 4. Section 42.000 is revised and Federal Acquisition Regulation; B. Regulatory Flexibility Act placed in a new subpart 42.0, which is Changes in Contract Administration added to read as set forth below, and and Audit Cognizance This proposed rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on subparts 42.1 and 42.2 are revised to AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), a substantial number of small entities read as follows: General Services Administration (GSA), within the meaning of the Regulatory Sec. and National Aeronautics and Space Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., Subpart 42.0ÐGeneral Administration (NASA). because the proposed rule affects 42.000 Scope of part. ACTION: Proposed rule. primarily internal Government 42.001 Definitions. operating procedures. An Initial 42.002 Interagency agreements. SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has, 42.003 Cognizant Federal agency. Acquisition Council and the Defense therefore, not been performed. Acquisition Regulations Council are Comments from small entities Subpart 42.1ÐContract Audit Services proposing to amend the Federal concerning the affected FAR parts will 42.101 Contract audit responsibilities. Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to add be considered in accordance with 5 42.102 Assignment of audit services. policies and procedures for assigning U.S.C. 610 of the Act. Such comments 42.103 Audit services directory. and performing contract audit services must be submitted separately and Subpart 42.2ÐContract Administration and to clarify the policy for assigning or should cite 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. (FAR Services delegating responsibility for establishing case 95–022), in correspondence. 42.201 Contract administration forward pricing and billing rates, and responsibilities. final indirect cost rates. This regulatory C. Paperwork Reduction Act 42.202 Assignment of contract action was not subject to Office of The Paperwork Reduction Act does administration. Management and Budget review under 42.203 Contract administration services Executive Order 12866, dated not apply because the proposed changes directory. September 30, 1993. This is not a major to the FAR do not impose recordkeeping rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. or information collection requirements, Subpart 42.0ÐGeneral or collections of information from DATES: Comments should be submitted offerors, contractors, or members of the 42.000 Scope of part. on or before February 10, 1997 to be public which require the approval of the This part prescribes policy and considered in the formulation of a final Office of Management and Budget under procedures for assigning and performing rule. 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. contract administration and contract ADDRESSES: Interested parties should audit services. submit written comments to: General List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 15, 42, Services Administration, FAR 46, 47 and 52 42.001 Definitions. Secretariat (MVRS), 18th & F Streets, Government procurement. As used in this part— NW, Room 4037, Washington, DC Cognizant audit agency means the 20405. Dated: December 4, 1996. agency responsible for performing all E-mail comments submitted over Edward C. Loeb, required contract audit services at a Internet should be addressed to: 95– Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division. business unit (as defined in 31.001). [email protected]. Cognizant Federal agency means the Please cite FAR case 95–022 in all Therefore, it is proposed that 48 CFR Federal agency that on behalf of all correspondence related to this case. Parts 15, 42, 46, 47 and 52 be amended Federal agencies is responsible for as set forth below: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. establishing final indirect cost rates and Linda Klein at (202) 501–3775 in 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR forward pricing rates, if applicable, and reference to this FAR case. For general Parts 15, 42, 46, 47 and 52 continues to administering cost accounting standards information, contact the FAR read as follows: for all contracts in a business unit. Secretariat, Room 4037, GS Building, Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Washington, DC 20405 (202) 501–4755. 42.002 Interagency agreements. chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). Please cite FAR case 95–022. (a) Agencies shall avoid duplicate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PART 15ÐCONTRACTING BY audits, reviews, inspections, and NEGOTIATION examinations of contractors or A. Background subcontractors, by more than one In February 1994, the Office of 2. Section 15.809 is amended by agency, through the use of interagency Federal Procurement Policy formed a revising the section heading and the last agreements (see OFPP Policy Letter 78– Contract Audit Committee. The sentence in paragraph (a) to read as 4, Field Contract Support Cross- committee was divided into follows: Servicing Program). Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65307

(b) Subject to the fiscal regulations of request should include a suspense date administration (this information is also the agencies, the requesting agency may and identify any information needed by to be entered in the contract); reimburse the servicing agency for the contracting officer. (2) Any special instructions, rendered services in accordance with (b) The cognizant audit agency may including any specific authorization to the Economy Act of 1932 (31 U.S.C. decline requests for services in perform functions listed in 42.302(b); 1535). The hourly rate established under accordance with interagency agreements (3) A copy of the contract to be the interagency agreement between the on a case-by-case basis if resources of administered; copies of all contracting Department of Defense and the National the audit agency are inadequate to agency regulations or directives that Aeronautics and Space Administration accomplish the tasks. are— may be used by other agencies to (i) Incorporated into the contract by 42.103 Audit services directory. reimburse the Defense Contract Audit reference, or Agency for audit services. (a) DCAA maintains and distributes (ii) Otherwise necessary to administer (c) When an interagency agreement is the Directory of Federal Contract Audit the contract, unless copies have been established, the agencies are encouraged Offices. The directory identifies provided previously. to consider establishing procedures for cognizant audit offices and the (b) Special instructions. The the resolution of issues that may arise contractors over which they have contracting officer shall also advise the under the agreement. cognizance. Changes to audit CAO and the contractor (and other cognizance are to be provided to DCAA activities as appropriate) of any 42.003 Cognizant Federal agency. for updating the directory. functions withheld or additional (a) Normally, when a contractor has (b) Agencies may obtain a copy of the functions delegated in the special contracts with more than one agency, directory or obtain information instructions under paragraph (a)(2) of the agency with the largest dollar concerning cognizant audit offices by this section. amount of negotiated contracts should contacting the Defense Contract Audit (c) Delegating additional functions. be the cognizant Federal agency. Agency, ATTN: CMO, Publications For individual contracts or groups of (b) Once a Federal agency assumes Officer, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, contracts, the contracting office may cognizance for a contractor, it shall Suite 2135, Fort Belvoir, Virginia delegate to the CAO functions not listed remain cognizant for at least three years 22060–6219. in 42.302; provided that— to ensure continuity and ease of (1) Prior coordination with the CAO Subpart 42.2ÐContract Administration administration. If, at the end of the three ensures the availability of required Services years, another agency has the largest resources; dollar amount of negotiated contracts, 42.201 Contract administration (2) In the case of authority to issue the two agencies shall coordinate and responsibilities. orders under provisioning procedures in determine which will assume (a) For each contract assigned for existing contracts and under basic cognizance. administration, the contract ordering agreements for items and administration office (CAO) (see services identified in the schedule, the Subpart 42.1±Contract Audit Services definition at 2.101) shall—— head of the contracting activity or designee approves the delegation; and 42.101 Contract audit responsibilities. (1) Perform the functions listed in 42.302(a) to the extent that they apply (3) The delegation does not require (a) The auditor is responsible for to the contract, except for the functions the CAO to undertake new or follow-on submitting information and advice to specifically withheld; acquisitions. the requesting activity based on the (2) Perform the functions listed in (d) Rescinding functions. The auditor’s analysis of the contractor’s 42.302(b) only when and to the extent contracting officer of the requesting financial and accounting records or specifically authorized by the agency may rescind or recall a contract other related data as to the acceptability contracting officer; and or contract administration function of the contractor’s incurred and (3) Request supporting contract delegated to another agency for estimated costs, as well as for reviewing administration under 42.202(e), and (f) administration, except for cost the financial and accounting aspects of when it is required. accounting standards, and negotiation of the contractor’s cost control systems. (b) The Defense Logistics Agency, forward pricing rates and indirect cost The auditor is also responsible for Defense Contract Management rates (see 42.003). performing analyses and reviews which Command (DCMC), Fort Belvoir, (e) Secondary delegations of contract require access to the contractor’s Virginia, and certain civilian agencies administration. (1) A CAO delegated financial and accounting records offer a wide variety of contract administration of a contract under supporting proposed and incurred costs. administration and support services to 42.202(a) or (c), or a contracting office (b) The Defense Contract Audit other agencies. retaining administration, may request Agency (DCAA) is designated as the supporting contract administration from Government cognizant audit agency for 42.202 Assignment of contract the CAO cognizant of the contractor ‘‘for-profit’’ organizations and those administration. location where performance of specific ‘‘not-for-profit’’ organizations identified (a) Delegating functions. As provided contract administration functions is in Attachment C to OMB Circular A– in agency procedures, contracting required. The request shall— 122, Cost Principles for Nonprofit officers may delegate contract (i) Be in writing; Organizations. administration or specialized support (ii) Clearly state the specific functions services either through interagency to be performed; and 42.102 Assignment of audit services. agreements, or by direct request to the (iii) Be accompanied by a copy of (a) As provided in agency procedures cognizant CAO listed in the Federal pertinent contractual and other or interagency agreement, contracting Directory of Contract Administration necessary documents. officers may request audit services Services Components. The delegation (2) The prime contractor is directly from the cognizant audit agency should include—— responsible for managing its cited in the Directory of Federal (1) The name and address of the CAO subcontracts. The CAO’s review of Contract Audit Offices. The audit designated to perform the subcontracts is normally limited to 65308 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules evaluating the prime contractor’s 42.302 Contract administration functions. (b) The CAO shall perform the management of them (see part 44). (a) The following contract following functions only when and to Therefore, supporting contract administration functions are normally the extent specifically authorized by the administration shall not be used for delegated to a CAO. The contracting contracting office: subcontracts unless— officer may retain any of these * * * * * (i) The Government would otherwise functions, except those in paragraphs (a) 9. Section 42.602 is amended by incur undue cost; (5), (9), and (11) that cannot be retained revising paragraphs (c)(2) and (d) to read (ii) Successful completion of the by the awarding agency unless it is the as follows: prime contract is threatened; or cognizant Federal agency (see 42.001). (iii) It is authorized under paragraph * * * * * 42.602 Assignment and location. (f) of this section or elsewhere in this (9) Establish final indirect cost rates * * * * * part. and billing rates for those contractors (c) * * * (f) Special surveillance. For major meeting the criteria for contracting (2) When the locations are under the system acquisitions (see part 34), the officer determination in subpart 42.7 contract administration cognizance of contracting officer may designate certain (see 42.001). more than one agency, the agencies high risk or critical subsystems or * * * * * concerned shall agree on the responsible components for special surveillance in (11) In connection with Cost agency (normally on the basis of the addition to requesting supporting Accounting Standards (see 30.601, agency with the largest dollar balance of contract administration. This 42.001, and 48 CFR chapter 99 (FAR affected contracts). In such cases, surveillance shall be conducted in a Appendix B))—— agencies may sometimes also consider geographic location. manner consistent with the policy of * * * * * calling upon the cognizant CAO to (iv) Negotiate price adjustments and (d) The directory of contract perform contract administration execute supplemental agreements under administration components referenced functions at a contractor’s facility (see the Cost Accounting Standards clauses in 42.203 includes a listing of CACO’s 42.002). at 52.230–2, 52.230–3, 52.230–4, and the contractors for which they are (g) Refusing delegation of contract 52.230–5, and 52.230–6. assigned responsibility. administration. An agency may decline 10. Section 42.603(a) is revised to * * * * * read as follows: a request for contract administration (13) Make payments on assigned services on a case-by-case basis if contracts when prescribed in agency 42.603 Responsibilities. resources of the agency are inadequate acquisition regulations. (a) The CACO shall perform, on a to accomplish the tasks. * * * * * corporate-wide basis, the contract 42.203 Contract administration services (20) For classified contracts, administration functions as designated directory. administer those portions of the by the responsible agency. Typical applicable industrial security program CACO functions include— The Defense Contract Management delegated to the CAO (see subpart 4.4). Command (DCMC) maintains and (1) The determination of final indirect distributes the Federal Directory of * * * * * cost rates for cost-reimbursement Contract Administration Services (29) Issue contract modifications contracts, Components. The Directory lists the requiring the contractor to provide (2) Establishment of advance name and telephone number of those packing, crating, and handling services agreements or recommendations on DCMC and civilian agency offices which on excess Government property. When corporate/home office expense offer contract administration services the CAO determines it to be in the allocations, and within designated geographic areas and Government’s interests, the services (3) Administration of Cost Accounting at specified contractor plants. Federal may be secured from a contractor other Standards (CAS) applicable to agencies may obtain a free copy of the than the contractor in possession of the corporate-level and corporate-directed Directory on CD-ROM by writing to HQ property. accounting practices. Defense Logistics Agency, Attn: DLA- * * * * * * * * * * DASC-WP, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, (61) Obtain contractor proposals for 11. Section 42.701 is amended by Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060. any contract price adjustments resulting revising definitions for ‘‘Business unit’’ 5.–7. Section 42.301 is revised to read from amended shipping instructions. and ‘‘Indirect cost’’ and by adding in as follows: CAOs shall review all amended alphabetical order a definition for shipping instructions on a periodic, ‘‘Forward pricing rate agreement’’. The 42.301 General. consolidated basis to assure that revised and added text reads as follows: When a contract is assigned for adjustments are timely made. Except 42.701 Definitions. administration under Subpart 42.2, the when the CAO has settlement authority, contract administration office (CAO) the CAO shall forward the proposal to * * * * * shall perform contract administration the contracting officer for contract Business unit has the same meaning functions in accordance with this part, modification. The CAO shall not delay as defined in 31.001. the contract terms and, unless otherwise shipments pending completion and * * * * * agreed to in an interagency agreement formalization of negotiations of revised Forward pricing rate agreement has (see 42.002), the applicable regulations shipping instructions. the same meaning as defined in 15.801. of the servicing agency. * * * * * Indirect cost has the same meaning as 8. Section 42.302 is amended by (63) Cancel unilateral purchase orders defined in 31.203. revising paragraphs (a) introductory when notified of nonacceptance by the * * * * * text, (a)(9), (a)(11) introductory text, contractor. The CAO shall notify the 12. Section 42.703–1 is amended by (a)(11)(iv), (a)(13), (a)(20), (a)(29), (a)(61) contracting officer when the purchase revising paragraph (a), and by removing (a)(63) and (b) introductory text to read order is canceled. paragraph (c) introductory text, and as follows: * * * * * revising (c)(1) to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 65309

42.703±1 Policy. 14. Section 42.705–1 is amended by covered in 42.705–1(a) when the (a) A single agency (see 42.705–1) revising paragraphs (a) introductory contracting officer (or cognizant Federal shall be responsible for establishing text, (a) (1), (3) and (4) and (b) (1) and agency official) and auditor agree that final indirect cost rates for each (2) to read as follows: the indirect costs can be settled with business unit. These rates shall be little difficulty and any of the following 42.705±1 Contracting officer determination circumstances apply: binding on all agencies and their procedure. contracting offices, unless otherwise * * * * * specifically prohibited by statute. (a) Applicability and responsibility. Contracting officer determination shall (iv) The contracting officer (or * * * * * be used for the following, with the cognizant Federal agency official) and (c)(1) Final indirect cost rates shall be indicated cognizant contracting officer auditor agree that special circumstances used for contract closeout for a business (or cognizant Federal agency official) require auditor determination. unit unless the quick-closeout responsible for establishing the final (b) Procedures. (1) * ** procedure in 42.708 is used. These final indirect cost rates: (2) Upon receipt of proposal the rates shall be binding for all cost- (1) Business units of a multi- auditor shall— reimbursement contracts at the business divisional corporation under the (i) Audit the proposal and seek unit, subject to any specific limitation in cognizance of a corporate administrative agreement on indirect costs with the a contract or advance agreement; and contracting officer (CACO) (see subpart contractor; * * * * * 42.6), with that officer responsible for (ii) Prepare an indirect cost rate 13. Section 42.704 is amended by the determination, assisted, as required, agreement conforming to the revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to by the administrative contracting requirements of the contracts. The read as follows: officers, assigned to the individual agreement shall be signed by the 42.704 Billing rates. business units. Negotiations may be contractor and the auditor; conducted on a coordinated or * * * * * (a) The contracting officer (or centralized basis, depending upon the cognizant Federal agency official) or (iv) If agreement with the contractor is degree of centralization within the not reached, forward the audit report to auditor responsible under 42.705 for contractor’s organization. establishing the final indirect cost rates the contracting officer (or cognizant ordinarily shall also be responsible for * * * * * Federal agency official) identified in the determining the billing rates. (3) For business units not included in Directory of Contract Administration (b) The contracting officer (or paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this Services Components (see 42.203), who cognizant Federal agency official) or subsection, the contracting officer (or will then resolve the disagreement; and auditor shall establish billing rates on cognizant Federal agency official) will * * * * * the basis of information resulting from determine whether the rates will be recent review, previous rate audits or contracting officer or auditor PART 46ÐQUALITY ASSURANCE experience, or similar reliable data or determined. (4) Educational institutions (see 16. Section 46.103 is amended by experience of other contracting 42.705–3.). revising paragraph (d) to read as activities. In establishing billing rates, follows: the contracting officer (or cognizant * * * * * Federal agency official) or auditor (b) Procedures. (1) In accordance with 46.103 Contracting office responsibilities. the Allowable Cost and Payment clause should ensure that they are as close as * * * * * at 52.216–7 or 52.216–13, the contractor possible to the final indirect cost rates (d) When contract administration is anticipated for the contractor’s fiscal shall submit to the contracting officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) retained (see 42.201), verifying that the period, as adjusted for any unallowable contractor fulfills the contract quality costs. When the contracting officer (or and, if required by agency procedures, to the cognizant auditor a final indirect requirements; and cognizant Federal agency official) or * * * * * auditor determines that the dollar value cost rate proposal reflecting actual cost 17. Section 46.104 is amended by of contracts requiring use of billing rates experience during the covered period, revising paragraph (f) to read as follows: does not warrant submission of a together with supporting cost or pricing detailed billing rate proposal, the billing data. 46.104 Contract administration office rates may be established by making (2) The auditor shall submit to the responsibilities. contracting officer an advisory audit appropriate adjustments from the prior * * * * * year’s indirect cost experience to report— (i) Identifying any relevant advance (f) Recommend any changes necessary eliminate unallowable and nonrecurring agreement or restrictive terms of specific to the contract, specifications, costs and to reflect new or changed contracts, and instructions, or other requirements that conditions. (ii) Including the information required will provide more effective operations (c) Once established, billing rates may by 15.805–5(e) (1) and (2). or eliminate unnecessary costs (see be prospectively or retroactively revised * * * * * 46.103(c)). by mutual agreement of the contracting 18. Section 46.502 is amended by officer (or cognizant Federal agency 15. Section 42.705–2 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) introductory revising the second sentence to read as official) or auditor and the contractor at follows: either party’s request, to prevent teft, (a)(2)(iv), (b)(2) introductory text, substantial overpayment or and (b)(2) (i), (ii), and (iv) to read as 46.502 Responsibility for acceptance. follows: underpayment. When agreement cannot ** * When this responsibility is be reached, the billing rates may be 42.705±2 Auditor determination assigned to a cognizant contract unilaterally determined by the procedure. administration office or to another contracting officer (or cognizant Federal (a) * * * agency (see 42.202(g)), acceptance by agency official. (2) In addition, auditor determination that office or agency is binding on the * * * * * may be used for business units that are Government. 65310 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

47.301±3 Using the Defense Officer, submit to the cognizant Contracting (c) Negotiated indirect costs. (1) * ** Transportation System (DTS) Officer (or cognizant Federal agency official) (2) The Contractor shall, within 90 days 19. Section 47.301–3 is amended in responsible for negotiating its final indirect after the expiration of each of its fiscal years, paragraph (c) by removing ‘‘42.202(d)’’ cost rates and, if required by agency or by a later date approved by the Contracting and inserting ‘‘42.202(a)’’. procedures, to the cognizant audit activity Officer, submit to the Contracting Officer (or proposed final indirect cost rates for that cognizant Federal agency official) and to the PART 52ÐSOLICITATION PROVISIONS period and supporting cost data specifying cognizant audit activity proposed final AND CONTRACT CLAUSES the contract and/or subcontract to which the indirect cost rates for that period and rates apply. * * * supporting cost and data specifying the 20. Section 52.216–7 is amended by * * * * * contract and/or subcontract to which the revising the clause date and the first (End of clause) rates apply. The proposed rates shall be sentence of paragraph (d)(2) to read as based on the Contractor’s actual cost 21. Section 52.216–13 is amended by follows: experience for the period. The appropriate revising the clause date and paragraph Government representative and the 52.216±7 Allowable Cost and Payment. (c)(2) to read as follows: Contractor shall establish the final indirect * * * * * 52.216±13 Allowable Cost and PaymentÐ cost rates as promptly as practical after Allowable Cost and Payment (Date) Facilities. receipt of the Contractor’s proposal. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (d) Final indirect cost rates. (1) * ** (End of clause) (2) The Contractor shall, within 90 days Allowable Cost and Payment—Facilities after the expiration of each of its fiscal years, (Date) [FR Doc. 96–31405 Filed 12–10–96; 8:45 am] or by a later date approved by the Contracting * * * * * BILLING CODE 6820±EP±D federal register December 11,1996 Wednesday the GovernmentofIraq;FinalRule Performance onCertainContractsWith Iraqi SanctionsRegulations;Licensingof 31 CFRPart575 Office ofForeignAssetsControl Treasury Department ofthe Part VI 65311 65312 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY = ftp.fedworld.gov (192.239.92.205). Understanding’’ and ‘‘Guidelines,’’ and Additional information concerning the a technical amendment is made to Office of Foreign Assets Control programs of the Office of Foreign Assets § 575.325 (61 FR 36628, July 12, 1996). Control is available for downloading New § 575.523 provides a statement of 31 CFR Part 575 from the Office’s Internet Home Page: licensing policy for U.S. persons seeking http://www.ustreas.gov/treasury/ to purchase petroleum and petroleum Iraqi Sanctions Regulations; Licensing services/fac/fac.html, or in fax form products from the Government of Iraq or of Performance on Certain Contracts through the Office’s 24–hour fax–on– Iraq’s State Oil Marketing Organization With the Government of Iraq demand service: call 202/622–0077 (‘‘SOMO’’) pursuant to UNSC AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets using a fax machine, fax modem, or Resolution 986, other relevant Security Control, Treasury. touch–tone telephone. Council resolutions, the Memorandum ACTION: Final rule; amendment. of Understanding, and other guidance Background issued by the 661 Committee. Issuance SUMMARY: This final rule amends the On April 14, 1995, the United Nations of a specific license authorizes the Iraqi Sanctions Regulations to provide a Security Council (the ‘‘UNSC’’) adopted licensee to deal directly with the 661 statement of licensing policy regarding Resolution 986, which creates a Committee or its designee (the specific licensing of U.S. persons framework, subject to agreement of the ‘‘overseers’’) appointed by the UN seeking to purchase Iraqi–origin Government of Iraq, that would permit Secretary–General pursuant to UNSC petroleum and petroleum products from the Government of Iraq to sell $2 billion Resolution 986, other relevant Security Iraq. Statements of licensing policy are worth of petroleum and petroleum Council resolutions, the Memorandum also provided regarding sales of products over a 6–month period, with of Understanding, and other guidance essential parts and equipment for the all proceeds placed in a United Nations issued by the 661 Committee. The list of Kirkuk–Yumurtalik pipeline system, (‘‘UN’’) escrow account for designated ‘‘national oil purchasers’’ will be and sales of humanitarian goods to Iraq, uses. On May 20, 1996, a Memorandum supplied to the 661 Committee. pursuant to United Nations approval. A of Understanding Between the Licensees whose contracts are approved general license is being added to Secretariat of the United Nations and by the overseers are authorized to authorize dealings in Iraqi–origin the Government of Iraq on the perform those contracts in accordance petroleum and petroleum products that Implementation of Security Council with their terms. have been exported from Iraq with Resolution 986 (1995) (the New §§ 575.524 and 575.525 provide United Nations and U.S. Government ‘‘Memorandum of Understanding’’) was statements of licensing policy for the approval. The rule also adds definitions signed by representatives of the exportation to Iraq of pipeline parts and and makes technical amendments. Government of Iraq and the UN. The equipment necessary for the safe Memorandum of Understanding EFFECTIVE DATE: December 10, 1996. operation of the Iraqi portion of the contains agreements preparatory to Kirkuk–Yumurtalik pipeline system, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: implementation of Resolution 986. On and the sale of humanitarian aid to Iraq. Steven I. Pinter, Chief, Licensing August 12, 1996, Procedures to be New § 575.526 adds a general license Division, tel.: 202/622–2480, or William Employed by the Security Council for dealing in, and importation into the B. Hoffman, Chief Counsel, tel.: 202/ Committee Established by Resolution United States of, Iraqi–origin petroleum 622–2410, Office of Foreign Assets 661 (1990) Concerning the Situation and petroleum products, the purchase Control, Department of the Treasury, Between Iraq and Kuwait in the and exportation of which have been Washington, DC 20220. Discharge of its Responsibility as authorized in accordance with UNSC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Required by Paragraph 12 of Security Resolution 986, other relevant Security Electronic and Facsimile Availability Council Resolution 986 (1995) (the Council resolutions, the Memorandum ‘‘Guidelines’’) further elaborated the of Understanding, and other guidance This document is available as an procedures necessary to implement issued by the 661 Committee. electronic file on The Federal Bulletin Resolution 986. A portion of the Finally, § 575.522 (61 FR 36628, July Board the day of publication in the proceeds in the escrow account will be 12, 1996) is amended to clarify that the Federal Register. By modem, dial 202/ available for Iraq’s purchase of authorization for executory contracts by 512–1387 and type ‘‘/GO FAC,’’ or call medicine, health supplies, foodstuffs, U.S. persons includes contracts with 202/512–1530 for disk or paper copies. and materials and supplies for essential third parties incidental to permissible This file is available for downloading civilian needs, to be specified in a list executory contracts with the without charge in WordPerfect 5.1, prepared by Iraq and submitted to and Government of Iraq. ASCII, and Adobe AcrobatTM readable approved by the UN Secretary–General. Because the Regulations involve a (*.PDF) formats. For Internet access, the At the UN level, this program will be foreign affairs function, Executive Order address for use with the World Wide administered by the UNSC Committee 12886 and the provisions of the Web (Home Page), Telnet, or FTP established pursuant to UNSC Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. protocol is: fedbbs.access.gpo.gov. The Resolution 661 (the ‘‘661 Committee’’), 553), requiring notice of proposed document is also accessible for which has established guidelines rulemaking, opportunity for public downloading in ASCII format without concerning procedures for permitted participation, and delay in effective charge from Treasury’s Electronic Iraqi purchases and sales. Within the date, are inapplicable. Because no Library (‘‘TEL’’) in the ‘‘Business, Trade United States, the Treasury notice of proposed rulemaking is and Labor Mall’’ of the FedWorld Department’s Office of Foreign Assets required for this rule, the Regulatory bulletin board. By modem, dial 703/ Control (‘‘OFAC’’), in consultation with Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), does 321–3339, and select the appropriate the Department of State, will implement not apply. self–expanding file in TEL. For Internet UNSC Resolution 986. No direct access, use one of the following financial transactions with the Paperwork Reduction Act protocols: Telnet = fedworld.gov Government of Iraq are permitted. The Regulations are being issued (192.239.93.3); World Wide Web (Home New §§ 575.327 and 575.328 define without prior notice and public Page) = http://www.fedworld.gov; FTP the terms ‘‘Memorandum of procedure pursuant to the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65313

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1500 in the Discharge of its Responsibility as 553). Pursuant to the Paperwork Pennsylvania Ave., NW—Annex, Required by Paragraph 12 of Security Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), Washington, DC 20220. Any such Council Resolution 986 (1995). the collections of information contained comments should be submitted not later in the Regulations have been submitted than 60 days from publication. Subpart EÐLicenses, Authorizations, to and approved by the Office of Comments on aspects of the Regulations and Statements of Licensing Policy Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’), other than those involving collections of 5. Section 575.522 is amended by pending public comment, and have information should not be sent to OMB. removing paragraph (a)(2), redesignating been assigned control number 1505– List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 575: paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) as (a)(2) and 0130. An agency may not conduct or (a)(3) respectively; redesignating Administrative practice and sponsor, and a person is not required to paragraphs (b), (c), (d) and (e) as (c), (d), procedure, Banks, banking, Blocking of respond to, a collection of information (e), and (f) respectively amending new assets, Exports, Foreign trade, unless the collection of information paragraph (c) by revising ‘‘paragraph Humanitarian aid, Imports, Iraq, Oil displays a valid control number. (a)’’ to read ‘‘paragraphs (a) and (b)’’; ; The collections of information in this imports, Penalties, Petroleum, and adding a new paragraph (b) to read final rule are contained in §§ 575.523, Petroleum products, Reporting and as follows: 575.524, and 575.525. This information recordkeeping requirements, Specially is required by the Office of Foreign designated nationals, Travel restrictions. § 575.522 Executory contracts with the Assets Control for licensing and For the reasons set forth in the Government of Iraq for trade in petroleum, administrative purposes and for preamble, 31 CFR part 575 is amended pipeline parts and equipment, and ensuring compliance with the as follows: humanitarian goods authorized. Regulations. The likely respondents and ***** recordkeepers are business PART 575ÐIRAQI SANCTIONS (b) United States persons are organizations. REGULATIONS authorized to enter into executory No assurances of confidentiality are contracts for the trading, importation, 1. The authority citation for part 575 given to persons who furnish exportation, or other dealings in or is revised to read as follows: information to OFAC unless specifically Authority: 50 U.S.C. 1701–1706; 50 U.S.C. related to Iraqi–origin petroleum and indicated in advance. It is the policy of 1601–1651; 22 U.S.C. 287c; Pub. L. 101–513, petroleum products outside Iraq, the OFAC to protect the confidentiality of 104 Stat. 2047–55 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note); Pub. performance of which is contingent information in appropriate cases L. 104–132, 110 Stat. 1214, 1254 (18 U.S.C. upon the prior authorization of the pursuant to the exemptions from 2332d); Pub. L. 101–410, 104 Stat. 890 (28 Office of Foreign Assets Control in or disclosure provided under the Freedom U.S.C. 2461 note); 3 U.S.C. 301; E.O. 12722, pursuant to this part. of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and 55 FR 31803, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 294; E.O. ***** the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). 12724, 55 FR 33089, 3 CFR, 1992 Comp., p. 6. Section 575.523 is added to subpart 317; E.O. 12817, 57 FR 48433, 3 CFR, 1992 Estimated total annual reporting and/ E to read as follows: or recordkeeping burden: 100 hours. Comp., p. 317. The estimated annual burden per § 575.523 Certain transactions in Iraqi respondent/recordkeeper varies from 30 Subpart CÐGeneral Definitions petroleum and petroleum products. minutes to 1 1/2 hours, depending on (a) Specific licenses may be issued on 2. Section 575.325 is revised to read individual circumstances, with an a case–by–case basis to permit United as follows: estimated average of 1 hour. States persons to purchase Iraqi–origin Estimated number of respondents § 575.325 986 Escrow Account; United petroleum or petroleum products from and/or recordkeepers: 100. Nations Iraq Account. the Government of Iraq in accordance Estimated annual frequency of The term 986 Escrow Account or with the provisions of UNSC Resolution responses: 1. United Nations Iraq Account means the 986, other relevant Security Council Comments are invited on: (a) whether escrow account established by the resolutions, the Memorandum of these collections of information are Secretary–General of the United Nations Understanding, and other guidance necessary for the proper performance of pursuant to paragraph 7 of UNSC issued by the 661 Committee. Licensees the functions of the agency, including Resolution 986. will be included on the U.S. oil whether the information has practical 3. Section 575.327 is added to subpart purchaser list to be provided to the 661 utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s C to read as follows: Committee, authorizing such U.S. estimate of the burden of the collections persons to seek approval from the 661 of information; (c) ways to enhance the § 575.327 Memorandum of Understanding. Committee or its designee for the quality, utility, and clarity of the The term Memorandum of purchase of Iraqi–origin petroleum or information to be collected; and (d) Understanding means the Memorandum petroleum products. Licensees are ways to minimize the burden of the of Understanding Between the authorized to perform a contract collection of information on Secretariat of the United Nations and approved by the 661 Committee or its respondents, including through the use the Government of Iraq on the designee in accordance with its terms. of automated collection techniques or Implementation of Security Council (b) Applications for specific licenses other forms of information technology. Resolution 986 (1995). pursuant to this section shall provide Comments concerning the above 4. Section 575.328 is added to subpart the following information: information, the accuracy of estimated C to read as follows: (1) The applicant’s full legal name; average annual burden, and suggestions (2) The applicant’s mailing and street for reducing this burden should be § 575.328 Guidelines. addresses; directed to the Office of Management The term Guidelines means the (3) The name of the individual(s) and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Procedures to be Employed by the responsible for the license application Project, control number 1505–0130, Security Council Committee Established and related commercial transactions and Washington, DC 20503, with a copy to by Resolution 661 (1990) Concerning the individual’s telephone and facsimile the Office of Foreign Assets Control, the Situation Between Iraq and Kuwait numbers; 65314 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

(4) If the applicant is a business and applicable guidance issued by the Licensing requirements for the entity, the state or jurisdiction of 661 Committee. reexportation of goods subject to U.S. incorporation and principal place of (b) Applications for specific licenses jurisdiction are addressed in § 575.205. business; pursuant to this section shall be made (e) Contracts may be performed only (5) Written certification that the in advance of the proposed sale and pursuant to the terms submitted to applicant has entered into an executory exportation, and provide the following OFAC when specifically authorized contract for the purchase of Iraqi–origin information: pursuant to this section unless petroleum or petroleum products with (1) Identification of the applicant, additional authorization is granted or the Government of Iraq, that the contract including: obtained pursuant to this part for any accords with normal arms–length (i) Applicant’s full legal name; amendment or modification of such commercial practice, and that the (ii) Applicant’s mailing and street contracts. applicant is familiar with this part, addresses; (f) Payment for goods exported particularly §§ 575.601 and 575.602, (iii) The name of the individual(s) pursuant to this section may be obtained and will make the executory contract responsible for the application and only from the 986 Escrow Account, and and other documents related to the related commercial transactions and the must conform to the requirements of purchase of Iraqi–origin petroleum or individual’s telephone and facsimile UNSC Resolution 986, other applicable petroleum products available to the numbers; and Security Council resolutions, the Office of Foreign Assets Control in (iv) If the applicant is a business Memorandum of Understanding, and accordance with the requirements of entity, the state or jurisdiction of applicable guidance issued by the 661 this part; and incorporation and principal place of Committee. (6) Written certification that the business; (g) Attention is drawn to § 575.101 applicant understands that issuance of a (2) The name and address of all regarding compliance with other license pursuant to this section does not parties involved in the transactions and applicable laws and regulations. No authorize a licensee to provide goods, their role, including financial license or authorization contained in or services, or compensation of any kind to institutions and any Iraqi broker, issued pursuant to this part shall be the Government of Iraq other than that purchasing agent, or other participant in deemed to authorize the exportation, specifically provided in contracts the purchase of the pipeline parts or reexportation or retransfer of goods, entered into by the applicant and the equipment; technology, or services that are subject Government of Iraq and submitted to (3) The nature, quantity, value and to unmet export license application and approved by the 661 Committee or intended use of the pipeline parts and requirements of another agency of the its designee. equipment; United States Government. (c) Applications for specific licenses (4) The intended point(s) of entry into 8. Section 575.525 is added to subpart pursuant to this section shall be Iraq, proposed dates of entry and E to read as follows: submitted to the Licensing Division, delivery, and the final destination in Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Iraq of the pipeline parts and § 575.525 Exportation of humanitarian aid. Treasury Department, 1500 equipment; (a) Specific licenses may be issued to Pennsylvania Avenue, NW—Annex, (5) A copy of the concluded contract U.S. persons on a case–by–case basis to Washington, DC 20220. with the Government of Iraq and other permit the sale and exportation to Iraq (d) Contracts may be performed only relevant documentation, all of which of medicine, health supplies, foodstuffs, as specifically authorized pursuant to must comply with the provisions of and materials and supplies for essential this section unless additional UNSC Resolution 986, other applicable civilian needs of the Iraqi population authorization is granted or obtained Security Council resolutions, the (‘‘Humanitarian Aid’’), in accordance pursuant to this part for any amendment Memorandum of Understanding, and with the provisions of UNSC Resolution or modification. applicable guidance issued by the 661 986, other applicable Security Council (e) This section does not authorize Committee; and resolutions, the Memorandum of any transfer of funds or other financial (6) A statement that the applicant is Understanding, and applicable guidance or economic resources to or for the familiar with the requirements of the issued by the 661 Committee. benefit of the Government of Iraq or a above–referenced documents, (b) Applications for specific licenses person in Iraq except transfers to the particularly Memorandum of pursuant to this section shall be made 986 Escrow Account. Understanding paragraph 24 and in advance of the proposed sale and (f) Attention is drawn to § 575.418 Guidelines paragraphs 35 and 45, and exportation, and provide the following regarding authorization for transactions will conform the letter of credit and information: ordinarily incident to a licensed related financing documents to their (1) Identification of the applicant, transaction. terms. including: 7. Section 575.524 is added to subpart (c) Applications for specific licenses (i) Applicant’s full legal name; E to read as follows: pursuant to this section shall be (ii) Applicant’s mailing and street submitted to the Licensing Division, addresses; § 575.524 Exportation of pipeline parts and Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. (iii) The name of the individual(s) equipment. Treasury Department, 1500 responsible for the application and (a) Specific licenses may be issued to Pennsylvania Avenue, NW—Annex, related commercial transactions and the U.S. persons on a case–by–case basis to Washington, DC 20220. individual’s telephone and facsimile permit the sale and exportation to Iraq (d) Attention is drawn to § 575.418 numbers; and of pipeline parts and equipment regarding authorization for transactions (iv) If the applicant is a business essential for the safe operation of the ordinarily incident to a transaction entity, the state or jurisdiction of Kirkuk–Yumurtalik pipeline system in licensed by OFAC. Transactions of a incorporation and principal place of Iraq, in accordance with the provisions U.S. person that are incidental to a business. of UNSC Resolution 986, other third–country national’s activities (2) The name and address of all applicable Security Council resolutions, pursuant to UNSC Resolution 986 parties involved in the transactions and the Memorandum of Understanding, require specific OFAC licensing. their role, including financial Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 65315 institutions and any Iraqi broker, U.S. person that are incidental to a the United States, Iraqi–origin purchasing agent, or other participant in third–country national’s activities petroleum and petroleum products, the the purchase of the Humanitarian Aid; pursuant to UNSC Resolution 986 purchase and exportation from Iraq of (3) The nature, quantity, value and the require specific OFAC licensing. which have been authorized by the 661 intended use of the Humanitarian Aid; Licensing requirements for the Committee or its designee and, if (4) The intended point(s) of entry into reexportation of goods subject to U.S. otherwise required pursuant to this part, Iraq, proposed dates of entry and jurisdiction are addressed in § 575.205. by the Office of Foreign Assets Control. delivery, and the final destination in (e) Contracts may be performed only Iraq of the Humanitarian Aid; pursuant to the terms submitted to (b) This section does not authorize (5) A copy of the concluded contract OFAC when specifically authorized any transfer of funds or other financial with the Government of Iraq or the pursuant to this section unless or economic resources to or for the United Nations Inter–Agency additional authorization is granted or benefit of the Government of Iraq or a Humanitarian Programme and other obtained pursuant to this part for any person in Iraq except transfers to the relevant documentation, all of which amendment or modification of such 986 Escrow Account. must comply with the provisions of contracts. (c) Attention is drawn to § 575.418 UNSC Resolution 986, other applicable (f) Payment for goods exported regarding authorization for transactions Security Council resolutions, the pursuant to this section may be obtained ordinarily incident to a licensed Memorandum of Understanding, and only from the 986 Escrow Account and transaction. applicable guidance issued by the 661 must conform to the requirements of Committee; and UNSC Resolution 986, other applicable 10. Section 575.901 is amended by (6) A statement that the applicant is Security Council resolutions, the adding a sentence to the end thereof to familiar with the requirements of UNSC Memorandum of Understanding, and read as follows: Resolution 986, other applicable applicable guidance issued by the 661 Security Council resolutions, the § 575.901 Paperwork Reduction Act Committee. Notice. Memorandum of Understanding, and (g) Attention is drawn to § 575.101 applicable guidance issued by the 661 regarding compliance with other * * * The information collection Committee, particularly Memorandum applicable laws and regulations. No requirements in §§ 575.523, 575.524, of Understanding paragraph 24 and license or authorization contained in or and 575.525 have been approved by the Guidelines paragraphs 35 and 45, and issued pursuant to this part shall be Office of Management and Budget and will conform the letter of credit and deemed to authorize the exportation, assigned control number 1505–0130. related financing documents to their reexportation or retransfer of goods, Dated: December 9, 1996. terms. technology, or services that are subject (c) Applications for specific licenses to unmet export license application R. Richard Newcomb, pursuant to this section shall be requirements of another agency of the Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control. submitted to the Licensing Division, United States Government. Approved: December 9, 1996. Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. 9. Section 575.526 is added to subpart Elisabeth A. Bresee, Treasury Department, 1500 E to read as follows: Pennsylvania Avenue, NW—Annex, Deputy Assistant Secretary (Law Washington, DC 20220. § 575.526 Dealings in and importation of Enforcement). (d) Attention is drawn to § 575.418 certain Iraqi±origin petroleum and [FR Doc. 96–31647 Filed 12–10–96; 12:10 regarding authorization for transactions petroleum products authorized. pm] ordinarily incident to a transaction (a) United States persons are BILLING CODE 4810±25±F licensed by OFAC. Transactions of a authorized to deal in, and to import into i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 239 Wednesday, December 11, 1996

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING DECEMBER

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 1 CFR 1922...... 63928 For additional information 523±5227 1924...... 65153 462...... 64954 Presidential Documents 1942...... 65153 Executive orders and proclamations 523±5227 3 CFR 1944...... 63928 1948...... 65153 The United States Government Manual 523±5227 Presidential Determinations: 1951...... 63928 Other Services No. 97±8 of November 1955...... 63928 27, 1996 ...... 65147 1956...... 63928 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523±4534 No. 97±9 of December Privacy Act Compilation 523±3187 1965...... 63928 2, 1996 ...... 65149 1980...... 65153 TDD for the hearing impaired 523±5229 No. 97±10 of 3550...... 63928, 65266 December 3, 1996 ...... 65151 Proposed Rules: ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD Proclamations: 987...... 64638 6959...... 63691 1205...... 64640 Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law numbers, 6960...... 64245 Federal Register finding aids, and list of documents on public 6961...... 64431 10 CFR inspection. 202±275±0920 6962...... 64581 20...... 65120 FAX-ON-DEMAND 6963...... 64957 21...... 65157 Executive Orders: 50...... 65157 You may access our Fax-On-Demand service. You only need a fax 12757 (Amended by 52...... 65157 machine and there is no charge for the service except for long EO 13028)...... 64589 54...... 65157 distance telephone charges the user may incur. The list of 13028...... 64589 60...... 64257 documents on public inspection and the daily Federal Register’s 13029...... 64591 100...... 65157 table of contents are available using this service. The document Administrative Orders: 1021...... 64603 numbers are 7050-Public Inspection list and 7051-Table of Presidential Proposed Rules: Contents list. The public inspection list will be updated Determinations: 50...... 65190 immediately for documents filed on an emergency basis. No. 97±6 of November 431...... 64948 NOTE: YOU WILL ONLY GET A LISTING OF DOCUMENTS ON 26, 1996 ...... 63693 FILE AND NOT THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Documents on No. 97±7 of November 12 CFR public inspection may be viewed and copied in our office located 26, 1996 ...... 63695 1...... 63972 at 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 700. The Fax-On-Demand No. 97±8 of November 7...... 63972 telephone number is: 301±713±6905 27, 1996 ...... 65147 8...... 63700 No. 97±9 of December 12...... 63958 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATES, DECEMBER 2, 1996 ...... 65149 327...... 64609, 64960 No. 97±10 of 506...... 65177 63691±64006...... 2 December 3, 1996 ...... 65151 543...... 64007 64007±64244...... 3 Memorandums: 544...... 64007 64245±64440...... 4 November 20, 1996...... 64247 545...... 64007 64441±64600...... 5 November 21, 1996...... 64249 552...... 64007 556...... 64007 64601±64814...... 6 November 28, 1996...... 64439 561...... 65177 64815±64958...... 9 5 CFR 563...... 65177 64959±65146...... 10 630...... 64441 563d...... 65177 65147±65316...... 11 890...... 64441 574...... 65177 Proposed Rules: 575...... 64007 213...... 63762 902...... 64613 334...... 65189 910...... 64021 912...... 64021 7 CFR 14 CFR 400...... 65153 500...... 65302 25...... 63952 723...... 63697 39 ...... 63702, 63704, 63706, 760...... 64601 63707, 64270, 64456, 64948, 905...... 64251 64985 906...... 64253 71...... 64459 911...... 64255 73...... 64458 920...... 64959 97 ...... 64459, 64460, 64462 944...... 64251 107...... 64242 981...... 64601 108...... 64242 989...... 64454 Proposed Rules: 1464...... 63697 Ch. I ...... 65190 1806...... 63928 39 ...... 64489, 64491, 64492, 1910...... 63928 64643, 64645, 65001, 65002. ii Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Reader Aids

65004, 65006 Proposed Rules: 40 CFR 46 CFR 71...... 64826 92...... 65298 39...... 64290 31...... 64618 73...... 64494, 64495 242...... 64414 52 ...... 64028, 64029, 64291 35...... 64618 91...... 65191 985...... 63930 61...... 64463 572...... 64822 121...... 65142, 65191 63...... 64463, 64572 127...... 65191 28 CFR 70 ...... 63928, 64463, 64622 47 CFR 135...... 65142, 65191 16...... 65179 81...... 64294 31...... 65132 1...... 63758 15 CFR 82...... 64424 513...... 64950 131...... 64816,65183 2...... 63758 732...... 64272 522...... 64953 180...... 63721 15...... 63758 736...... 64272 Proposed Rules: 300...... 65186 24...... 63758 740...... 64272 540...... 64954 712...... 65186 73...... 63759, 64999 742...... 64272 716...... 65186 97...... 63758 29 CFR 744...... 64272 721...... 63726 Proposed Rules: 746...... 64272 101...... 65180 Ch. I...... 63774, 63778 748...... 64272 Proposed Rules: 102...... 65180, 65182 22...... 65268 1...... 64045 750...... 64272 4001...... 63988 52 ...... 64042, 64304, 64307, 73 ...... 63809, 63810, 63811, 752...... 64272 4043...... 63988 64308, 64647 64309, 64660, 65008, 65192 758...... 64272 4065...... 63988 70...... 64042, 64651 770...... 64272 81...... 64308 48 CFR 2301...... 64948 30 CFR 82...... 64045 Proposed Rules: 231...... 64635 Proposed Rules: 117...... 65268 249...... 64636 39...... 63762 870...... 64220 122...... 65268 252...... 64636 71 ...... 63764, 63765, 63766, 123...... 65268 63767, 63768 31 CFR 1843...... 64823 124...... 65268 1852...... 64823 135...... 64230 Ch. V...... 64289 125...... 65268 Proposed Rules: 17 CFR 144...... 65268 15...... 65306 32 CFR 270...... 65268 30...... 64985 42...... 65306 318...... 63712 271...... 65268 240...... 63709 46...... 65306 Proposed Rules: 33 CFR 41 CFR 47...... 65306 Ch. II ...... 65191 52...... 65306 100 ...... 64991, 64993, 64994 301±1...... 64997 18 CFR 110...... 63715 301±7...... 64997 117...... 64995 301±8...... 64997 49 CFR Proposed Rules: 157...... 64618 301±11...... 64997 1...... 64029 4...... 64031 334...... 64996 301±17...... 64997 106...... 64030 375...... 64031 190...... 64030 Proposed Rules: 42 CFR 19 CFR 100...... 64645 367...... 64295 401...... 63740 571...... 64297, 65187 Proposed Rules: 36 CFR 403...... 63740 Proposed Rules: 122...... 64041 223...... 64815 405...... 63740 Ch. XI...... 64849 411...... 63740 20 CFR Proposed Rules: 413...... 63740 223...... 64569 50 CFR 404...... 64615 447...... 63740 1190...... 64832 493...... 63740 17...... 64475, 64481 21 CFR 1191...... 64832 622...... 64485 73...... 64027 43 CFR 630...... 64486 37 CFR 178...... 64989 Proposed Rules: 648...... 64999 510...... 63710 1...... 64027 418...... 64832 679 ...... 63759, 64298, 64299, 520...... 63711 251...... 63715 2200...... 64658 64487, 64569 524...... 63712 252...... 63715 2210...... 64658 Proposed Rules: 880...... 64616 257...... 63715 2240...... 64658 17...... 64496 Proposed Rules: 259...... 63715 2250...... 64658 285...... 63812 892...... 63769 Proposed Rules: 2270...... 64658 630...... 63812 202...... 64042 644...... 63812 22 CFR 45 CFR 648 ...... 64046, 64307, 64852, 38 CFR 605...... 64286 801...... 64998 64854, 65192 17...... 63719 1610...... 63749 656...... 64497 24 CFR 1617...... 63754 678...... 63812 5...... 64617 39 CFR 1632...... 63755 679 ...... 63812, 63814, 64047, 81...... 63944 111...... 61618 1633...... 63756 64310 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Reader Aids iii

REMINDERS Fee increases; comments 20-96; published 12-2- Offshore press conferences, The items in this list were due by 12-16-96; 96 meetings with company editorially compiled as an aid published 11-14-96 Practice and procedure: representatives conducted to Federal Register users. COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Telecommunications Act of offshore and press related materials released Inclusion or exclusion from National Oceanic and 1996; conformance-- offshore; comments due this list has no legal Atmospheric Administration Universal service; significance. comments due by 12- by 12-17-96; published Fishery conservation and 10-18-96 management: 16-96; published 12-2- 96 TRANSPORTATION Atlantic highly migratory RULES GOING INTO Radio stations; table of DEPARTMENT EFFECT TODAY species; comments due by 12-20-96; published assignments: Federal Aviation 11-6-96 Iowa; comments due by 12- Administration AGRICULTURE Caribbean, Gulf, and South 16-96; published 11-6-96 Airworthiness directives: DEPARTMENT Atlantic fisheries-- Kansas; comments due by Air Tractor, Inc.; comments Agricultural Research 12-16-96; published 11-6- Red snapper, etc.; due by 12-20-96; Service 96 comments due by 12- published 10-18-96 Conduct on National 16-96; published 11-20- Ohio; comments due by 12- Airbus; comments due by Arboretum Property: 96 16-96; published 11-6-96 12-16-96; published 11-5- HEALTH AND HUMAN Technical amendments; ENVIRONMENTAL 96 SERVICES DEPARTMENT published 12-11-96 PROTECTION AGENCY Fokker; comments due by Food and Drug ENVIRONMENTAL Air pollution control; new 12-16-96; published 11-5- Administration PROTECTION AGENCY motor vehicles and engines: 96 Food additives: Superfund program: Light-duty vehicles and McDonnell Douglas; Paper and paperboard National oil and hazardous trucks-- comments due by 12-16- components-- 96; published 11-5-96 substances contingency Durability testing Acrylic acid, sodium salt plans-- procedures and Piper; comments due by 12- copolymer with National priorities list allowable maintenance; 16-96; published 10-10-96 polyethyleneglycol allyl update; published 12- 1994 and later model Raytheon; comments due by ether; comments due by 11-96 years; comments due 12-20-96; published 10- 12-18-96; published 11- Toxic and hazardous by 12-16-96; published 18-96 18-96 substances: 11-15-96 Class E airspace; comments INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Health and safety data Air programs: due by 12-16-96; published reporting rule-- Surface Mining Reclamation 11-20-96 Fuels and fuel additives-- and Enforcement Office List additions; partial stay; Restricted areas; comments Minor revisions; comments Permanent program and published 12-11-96 due by 12-17-96; published due by 12-18-96; abandoned mine land 11-5-96 JUSTICE DEPARTMENT published 11-18-96 reclamation plan Privacy Act; implementation; Air quality implementation submissions: TRANSPORTATION √ √ published 12-11-96 plans; A approval and Colorado; comments due by DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION promulgation; various 12-19-96; published 11- Federal Highway DEPARTMENT States; air quality planning 19-96 Administration purposes; designation of Federal Aviation JUSTICE DEPARTMENT Engineering and traffic areas: Administration Federal Bureau of operations: Indiana; comments due by Airworthiness directives: Investigation Truck size and weight-- 12-16-96; published 11- Airbus; published 11-6-96 15-96 Criminal Assistance for Law National Network for Enforcement Act of 1994; commercial vehicles; Beech; published 11-6-96 Drinking water: Bell; published 11-6-96 implementation: route additions in North Marine sanitation device Significant upgrade and Carolina; comments due Boeing; published 11-6-96 standards-- major modifications; by 12-20-96; published British Aerospace; published Application requirements section 109 terms 10-21-96 11-6-96 specific to drinking clarification; comment Motor carrier safety standards: Jetstream; published 11-6- water intake no request; comments due Parts and accessories 96 discharge zones; by 12-19-96; published necessary for safe comments due by 12- McDonnell Douglas; 11-19-96 operation-- published 11-6-96 16-96; published 10-16- JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 96 Protection against shifting Shorts; published 11-6-96 Parole Commission or falling cargo; North Water pollution control: TREASURY DEPARTMENT Federal prisoners; paroling American standard Thrift Supervision Office Great Lakes System; water and releasing, etc.: development; comments quality guidance-- Savings associations: Transfer treaty cases; due by 12-16-96; Selenium criterion special transferee published 10-17-96 Technical amendments; maximum concentration; published 12-11-96 hearings; comments due Motor carrier transportation: comments due by 12- by 12-16-96; published Agricultural cooperative 16-96; published 11-14- 10-17-96 COMMENTS DUE NEXT 96 associations which NUCLEAR REGULATORY conduct compensated WEEK FEDERAL COMMISSION transportation operations COMMUNICATIONS Deliberate misconduct by for nonmembers; notice AGRICULTURE COMMISSION unlicensed persons; filing requirements DEPARTMENT Common carrier services: comments due by 12-18-96; exemption; comments due Agricultural Marketing Telecommunications Act of published 10-4-96 by 12-20-96; published Service 1996; implementation-- SECURITIES AND 10-21-96 Dairy products; grading, Infrastructure sharing; EXCHANGE COMMISSION Compensated intercorporate inspection, and standards: comments due by 12- Securities hauling; Federal regulatory iv Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 11, 1996 / Reader Aids

review; comments due by 12-20-96; published 10- 21-96 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Motor vehicle safety standards: Power-operated window, partition, and roof panel systems; comments due by 12-16-96; published 11-15-96 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT Surface Transportation Board Tariffs and schedules: Tariff filing requirements; freight forwarders exemption in noncontiguous domestic trade from rate reasonableness; comments due by 12-20- 96; published 11-20-96 TREASURY DEPARTMENT Fiscal Service Acceptance of bonds secured by Government obligations in lieu of bonds with sureties; comments due by 12-16-96; published 11-15- 96 TREASURY DEPARTMENT Internal Revenue Service Income taxes: Retirement plans accepting rollover contributions; relief from disqualification; comments due by 12-18- 96; published 9-19-96