10–12–01 Friday Vol. 66 No. 198 Oct. 12, 2001 Pages 52015–52306
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:15 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\12OCWS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2001
The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 523–5243 Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP fedreg. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication HOW TO USE IT established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the system and the public’s role in the development of authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register regulations. as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text of Federal Regulations. and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register documents. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system. documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), WHY: To provide the public with access to information necessary to or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check research Federal agency regulations which directly affect them. retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations. downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ WASHINGTON, DC /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to WHEN: October 23, 2001—9:00 a.m. to noon swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer WHERE: Office of the Federal Register and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log Conference Room in as guest with no password. 800 North Capitol Street, NW. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access Washington, DC User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll (3 blocks north of Union Station Metro) free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, RESERVATIONS: 202–523–4538; or except Federal holidays. [email protected] The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $699, or $764 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 $264. Six month What’s NEW! subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $10.00 for each issue, or Federal Register Table of Contents via e-mail $10.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for Subscribe to FEDREGTOC, to receive the Federal Register Table of each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic Contents in your e-mail every day. postage and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to If you get the HTML version, you can click directly to any document the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit in the issue. Account, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA To subscribe, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select: 15250–7954. Online mailing list archives There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing FEDREGTOC-L in the Federal Register. Join or leave the list How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the Then follow the instructions. page number. Example: 66 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:15 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\12OCWS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
Agriculture Department Education Department See Forest Service NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52118– People Who Are 52119 See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: or Severely Disabled Special education and rehabilitative services— Children with Disabilities Programs; correction, 52189 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Meetings: Institutional Quality and Integrity National Advisory NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Committee, 52119–52120 Proposed collection; comment request, 52137–52139 Employment Standards Administration Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52139– NOTICES 52140 Minimum wages for Federal and federally-assisted Medicare: construction; general wage determination decisions, Hospice wage index; correction, 52189 52153–52154
Coast Guard Energy Department RULES See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Ports and waterways safety: Lake Erie, Monroe, MI; Enrico Fermi nuclear power Environmental Protection Agency plant; security zone, 52039–52041 RULES Lake Erie, Perry nuclear power plant, OH; security zone, Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for 52043–52044 designated facilities and pollutants: Lake Erie, Toledo, OH; Davis Besse nuclear power plant; Missouri, 52060–52062 security zone, 52038–52039 Air quality implementation plans; approval and Lake Michigan, Kewaunee nuclear power plant, WI; promulgation; various States: security zone, 52036–52038 Pennsylvania, 52044–52060 Lake Michigan, Point Beach nuclear power plant, WI; PROPOSED RULES security zone, 52041–52043 Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Shores, MI; safety zone, designated facilities and pollutants: 52035–52036 Missouri, 52077 Hazardous waste management system: Commerce Department RCRA hazardous waste management facilities; See International Trade Administration standardized permit, corrective action, and financial See National Institute of Standards and Technology responsibility, 52191–52268 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES NOTICES Air pollution control: Agency information collection activities: Citizens suits; proposed settlements— Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52095 Louisiana Environmental Action Network et al., 52128– 52129 Air programs: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or State implementation plans; adequacy status for Severely Disabled transportation conformity purposes— NOTICES Colorado, 52129 Procurement list; additions and deletions, 52094–52095 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Agency statements— Commodity Futures Trading Commission Comment availability, 52130–52131 NOTICES Weekly receipts, 52130 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 52116 Meetings: State FIFRA Issues Research and Evaluation Group, Defense Department 52131–52132 See Navy Department Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: NOTICES Benomyl, 52132–52135 Agency information collection activities: Water pollution control: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52116 Clean Water Act— 52116–52117 Class II administrative penalty assessments, 52135– Meetings: 52136 Dependents’ Education Advisory Council, 52117 Science Board, 52117 Executive Office of the President Scientific Advisory Board, 52117 See Management and Budget Office
VerDate 11
See Presidential Documents Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Federal Aviation Administration Migratory bird hunting: RULES Light goose populations; harvest management, 52077– Airmen certification: 52090 Training and testing qualification requirements; time Migratory birds; revised list, 52281–52300 limits temporarily extended, 52277–52280 NOTICES Airworthiness directives: Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Migratory bird hunting— 52027–52031 Light goose management; meetings, 52147–52148 Fairchild, 52020–52023 Pratt & Whitney, 52023–52027 Food and Drug Administration Airworthiness standards: NOTICES Special conditions— Agency information collection activities: Boeing Model 777 series airplanes, 52017–52020 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 52140 PROPOSED RULES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52140– Airworthiness directives: 52141 Airbus, 52066–52070 Meetings: BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd., 52070–52072 Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Advisory Bell, 52072–52073 Committee, 52141–52142 Sikorsky, 52073–52076 Class E airspace, 52076–52077 Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Air traffic operating and flight rules, etc.: Meetings: High density airports; takeoff and landing slots, slot Giant Sequoia National Monument Scientific Advisory exemption lottery, and slot allocation procedures Board, 52094 LaGuardia Airport, NY and NJ, 52170–52171 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: General Services Administration Licensing launches, 52171–52178 NOTICES Meetings: Acquisition regulations: Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee, 52178 Foreign Service Residence and Dependency Report (OF Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory 126); form cancellation, 52136–52137 Committee, 52178–52179 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Health and Human Services Department NOTICES See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Meetings; Sunshine Act, 52136 See Food and Drug Administration See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Department NOTICES NOTICES Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Scientific misconduct findings; administrative actions: Gilroy Energy Center, L.L.C., et al., 52125–52127 Arnold, Steven F., Ph.D., 52137 PECO Energy Co. et al., 52127–52128 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Health Care Financing Administration John C. Jones Project, Waldo County, ME; facilitators See Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services improving fish habitat, 52128 Department Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Alliant Energy Corporate Services, Inc., et al., 52121 Housing and Urban Development Department American Transmission Co., 52121–52122 NOTICES Consumers Energy Co., 52122 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Duquesne Light Co., 52122 Facilities to assist homeless— Entergy Services, Inc., 52122 Excess and surplus Federal property, 52147 Progress Energy, Inc., 52122–52123 Questar Pipeline Co., 52123 Inspector General Office, Health and Human Services Southwestern Electric Power Co., 52123 Department TransColorado Gas Transmission Co., 52123–52124 NOTICES Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co., 52124 Program exclusions; list, 52142–52147 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 52124–52125 Interior Department Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission See Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES See Land Management Bureau Meetings; Sunshine Act, 52156–52157 See Minerals Management Service See National Park Service Federal Reserve System See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Internal Revenue Service Proposed collection; comment request, 52186–52187 NOTICES Banks and bank holding companies: Agency information collection activities: Permissible nonbanking activities, 52136 Proposed collection; comment request, 52185–52186
VerDate 11
International Trade Administration National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES NOTICES Antidumping: Grant and cooperative agreement awards: Corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from— American Ceramic Society Inc.; FORTRAN Content Canada, 52095–52097 Management System update, 52112 Dynamic random access memory semiconductors of one megabit or above from— National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Korea, 52097–52100 RULES Freshwater crawfish tail meat from— Fishery conservation and management: China, 52100–52107 West Coast States and Western Pacific fisheries— Mechanical transfer presses from— West Coast salmon, 52062–52064 Japan, 52107 PROPOSED RULES Polyester staple fiber from— Fishery conservation and management: Taiwan, 52107–52108 Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— Polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip from— Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska India and Taiwan, 52108–52109 groundfish, 52090–52093 Stainless steel bar from— NOTICES India, 52109 Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Tin mill products from— National Sea Grant Review Panel, 52112 Japan, 52109–52111 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Export trade certificates of review, 52111 National Estuarine Research Reserve System— North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); Tijuana National Estuarine Research Reserve, CA; Goat binational panel reviews: Canyon Creek and watershed, 52112–52113 Carbon steel flat products from— Meetings: Canada, 52111 National Sea Grant Review Panel, 52113–52114 Pacific Fishery Management Council, 52114–52116 Justice Department NOTICES National Park Service Privacy Act: NOTICES Systems of records; correction, 52189 Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 52150–52151 Labor Department Boundary establishment, descriptions, etc.: See Employment Standards Administration Catoctin Mountain Park, MD, 52151 See Mine Safety and Health Administration Environmental statements; notice of intent: See Occupational Safety and Health Administration Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, WI, 52151–52152 Battle of Homestead and Carrie Furnaces sites, PA; Land Management Bureau special resource study, 52152 NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent: National Science Foundation Western United States, including Alaska; conservation NOTICES and restoration of vegetation, watershed, and wildlife Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978; permit applications, habitat treatment on public lands, 52148–52149 etc., 52157–52158 Public land orders: California, 52149 Navy Department Utah, 52149 NOTICES Management and Budget Office Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially RULES exclusive: Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act: ALS Technologies, Inc., 52118 Aviation disaster relief; air carrier guarantee loan CG Industries, Inc., 52118 program, 52269–52275 Shock Tube Systems, Inc., 52118 Meetings: Minerals Management Service Naval Research Advisory Committee, 52305–52306 NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Eastern Gulf of Mexico OCS— PROPOSED RULES Oil and gas lease sales, 52149–52150 Rulemaking petitions: Outer Continental Shelf operations: Leyse, Robert H., 52065–52066 Oil and gas lease sales— NOTICES Restricted joint bidders list, 52150 Terminated license review project; completion, 52158 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Mine Safety and Health Administration Duke Energy Corp., 52158 NOTICES Safety standard petitions: Occupational Safety and Health Administration AB&J Coal Co., Inc., et al., 52154–52156 RULES Occupational injuries and illnesses; recording and reporting Mine Safety and Health Federal Review Commission requirements See Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Effective date delay, etc., 52031–52034
VerDate 11
Office of Management and Budget Transportation Department See Management and Budget Office See Coast Guard See Federal Aviation Administration Personnel Management Office See Research and Special Programs Administration NOTICES See Surface Transportation Board Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52158– Aviation proceedings: 52159 Agreements filed, weekly receipts, 52170 Certificates of public convenience and necessity and Presidential Documents foreign air carrier permits; weekly applications, PROCLAMATIONS 52170 Special observances: General Pulaski Memorial Day (Proc. No. 7484), 52301– Treasury Department 52304 See Internal Revenue Service Leif Erikson Day (Proc. 7483), 52015–52016 See Thrift Supervision Office NOTICES Public Health Service Agency information collection activities: See Food and Drug Administration Submission for OMB review; comment request, 52181– 52185 Research and Special Programs Administration Meetings: NOTICES Customs Service Commercial Operations Treasury Agency information collection activities: Advisory Committee, 52185 Proposed collection; comment request, 52179–52180 Veterans Affairs Department Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES NOTICES Senior Executive Service: Intermarket Trading System; plan amendments, 52159 Performance Review Boards; membership, 52187–52188 Investment Company Act of 1940: Exemption applications— Firstmark Corp., 52159–52160 Securities Exchange Act: Separate Parts In This Issue Government securities reconciliations; correction, 52189 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Part II Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 52161–52166 Environmental Protection Agency, 52191–52268 Government Securities Clearing Corp., 52166–52167 National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., 52167– Part III 52169 Office of Management and Budget, 52269–52275
Social Security Administration Part IV NOTICES Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Meetings: Administration, 52277–52280 Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel, 52169–52170 Part V Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, State Department 52281–52300 NOTICES Art objects; importation for exhibition: Part VI Luca Giordano (1634-1705), 52170 The President, 52301–52304 Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office Part VII NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Department of Defense, Navy Department, 52305–52306 Proposed collection; comment request, 52152–52153
Surface Transportation Board Reader Aids NOTICES Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Railroad services abandonment: phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, CSX Transportation, Inc., 52180–52181 and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Thrift Supervision Office LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// NOTICES listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Agency information collection activities: archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Proposed collection; comment request, 52186–52187 settings); then follow the instructions.
VerDate 11
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR Proclamations: 7483...... 52015 7484...... 52303 10 CFR Proposed Rules: 50...... 52065 14 CFR Ch. VI...... 52270 25...... 52017 39 (3 documents) ...... 52020, 52023, 52027 61...... 52278 63...... 52278 121...... 52278 135...... 52278 142...... 52278 1300...... 52270 Proposed Rules: 39 (5 documents) ...... 52066, 52068, 52070, 52072, 52073 71...... 52076 29 CFR 1904...... 52031 33 CFR 165 (6 documents) ...... 52035, 52036, 52038, 52039, 52041, 52043 40 CFR 52 (3 documents) ...... 52044, 52050, 52055 62...... 52060 Proposed Rules: 62...... 52077 124...... 52192 260...... 52192 267...... 52192 270...... 52192 50 CFR 660...... 52062 Proposed Rules: 10...... 52282 20...... 52077 21...... 52077 679...... 52090
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:15 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\12OCLS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCLS 52015
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
Title 3— Proclamation 7483 of October 9, 2001
The President Leif Erikson Day, 2001
By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation
On Leif Erikson Day, we join our friends in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden to celebrate and pay homage to our shared ideals and commemorate the contributions of Nordic Americans to our culture. We honor the explorers who led the first Viking explorations at the beginning of the last millennium, and we pay tribute to the many Nordic pioneers who helped to explore and settle America’s 19th Century frontiers. The Nordic and American peoples share the virtues of courage, resourcefulness, and self-reliance, and they have built nations based on the principles of liberty, justice, and equality. Leif Erikson and his men braved the unknown and risked their lives to become the first Europeans to set foot on North American soil. As we reflect upon Erikson’s groundbreaking achievements and marvel at the adver- sity and dangers he and his explorers endured, we are thankful for their great endeavor and recognize that achieving difficult goals requires people who are courageous and willing to sacrifice, who take action and take risks. Today, American researchers and entreprenuers, including many of Nordic descent, are making landmark discoveries in the fields of genetics, informa- tion technology, biotechnology, and renewable energy. Through our Northern European Initiative and the ‘‘Northern Dimension’’ program that Scandina- vian countries have sponsored, we are deepening our cooperation and con- nections with the Baltic region, building regional links in Northwest Russia, and renewing historic trade relationships. And, we are working closely with our Nordic Allies in NATO by helping to provide for the region’s common defense and stability. These and other efforts to improve the world mark the citizens of theUnited States as a people possessing virtues that echo those of Leif Erikson and the first Vikings who landed on our northern shores. To honor Leif Erikson, the brave son of Iceland and grandson of Norway, and our Nordic American heritage, the Congress, by joint resolution (Public Law 88–66) approved on September 2, 1964, has authorized and requested the President to proclaim October 9 of each year as Leif Erikson Day. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim October 9, 2001, as Leif Erikson Day. I call upon all Americans to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs to honor our rich Nordic-American heritage.
VerDate 11
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ninth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-sixth. W
[FR Doc. 01–25884 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Billing code 3195–01–P
VerDate 11
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: for head injury, thereby reducing the contains regulatory documents having general Jayson Claar, FAA, Airframe and Cabin Head Injury Criteria (HIC) measurement. applicability and legal effect, most of which Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport The inflatable lapbelt behaves similarly are keyed to and codified in the Code of Airplane Directorate, Aircraft to an automotive airbag, but in this case Federal Regulations, which is published under Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue the airbag is integrated into the lapbelt, 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. SW., Renton, Washington, 98055–4056; and inflates away from the seated The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by telephone (425) 227–2194; facsimile occupant. While airbags are now the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of (425) 227–1149. standard in the automotive industry, the new books are listed in the first FEDERAL SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA use of an inflatable lapbelt is novel for REGISTER issue of each week. has determined that notice and commercial aviation. opportunity for prior public comment Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations hereon are unnecessary because these (14 CFR) § 25.785 requires that DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION special conditions are substantially occupants be protected from head injury by either the elimination of any Federal Aviation Administration identical to those that have been issued on three previous occasions, and that injurious object within the striking further new comments are unlikely. radius of the head, or by padding. 14 CFR Part 25 Traditionally, this has required a set Comments Invited [Docket No. NM198; Special Conditions No. back of 35 inches from any bulkhead or 25–187–SC] Interested persons are invited to other rigid interior feature or, where not submit such written data, views, or practical, specified types of padding. Special Conditions: Boeing Model 777 arguments as they may desire. The relative effectiveness of these Series Airplanes; Seats with Inflatable Communications should identify the means of injury protection was not Lapbelts Rules Docket number identified above quantified. With the adoption of and be submitted in duplicate to the Amendment 25–64 to 14 CFR part 25, AGENCY: Federal Aviation address specified above. All specifically § 25.562, a new standard Administration (FAA), DOT. communications received on or before that quantifies required head injury ACTION: Final special conditions; request the closing date for comments specified protection was created. for comments. above will be considered. The special Section 25.562 specifies that dynamic conditions may be changed in light of tests must be conducted for each seat SUMMARY: These special conditions are the comments received. type installed in the airplane. In issued for Boeing Model 777 series All comments received will be particular, the regulations require that airplanes. These airplanes, which are available in the Rules Docket for persons not suffer serious head injury manufactured by Boeing Commercial examination by interested persons, both under the conditions specified in the Airplanes, will have novel and unusual before and after the closing date for tests, and that a HIC measurement of not design features associated with seats comments. A report summarizing each more than 1000 units be recorded, with inflatable lapbelts. The applicable substantive public contact with FAA should contact with the cabin interior airworthiness regulations do not contain personnel concerning this rulemaking occur. While the test conditions adequate or appropriate safety standards will be filed in the Rules Docket. described in this section are specific, it for this design feature. These special Commenters wishing the FAA to is the intent of the requirement that an conditions contain the additional safety acknowledge receipt of their comments adequate level of head injury protection standards that the Administrator submitted in response to this request be provided for crash severity up to and considers necessary to establish a level must submit a self-addressed, stamped including that specified. of safety equivalent to that established postcard on which the following Amendment 25–64 is part of the by the existing airworthiness standards. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Model 777 certification basis. Therefore, DATES: The effective date of these Docket Number NM198.’’ The postcard the seat installation with inflatable special conditions is October 3, 2001. will be date stamped and returned to the lapbelts must meet the requirement that Comments must be received on or commenter. a HIC of less than 1000 be demonstrated before November 13, 2001. for occupants of seats incorporating the ADDRESSES: Comments on these special Background inflatable lapbelt. conditions may be mailed in duplicate On April 20, 2001, Boeing Because §§ 25.562 and 25.785 and to: Federal Aviation Administration Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, associated guidance do not adequately (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle, Washington 98124, applied for address seats with inflatable lapbelts, ANM–113, Attention: Rules Docket No. a type certificate design change to the FAA recognizes that appropriate NM198, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., install inflatable lapbelts for head injury pass/fail criteria need to be developed Renton, Washington 98055–4056, or protection on certain seats in Boeing that do fully address the safety concerns delivered in duplicate to the Transport Model 777 series airplanes. The Model specific to occupants of these seats. Airplane Directorate at the above 777 series airplane is a swept-wing, The inflatable lapbelt has two address. All comments must be marked: conventional-tail, twin-engine, turbofan- potential advantages over other means Docket No. NM198. Comments may be powered transport. The inflatable of head impact protection. First, it can inspected in the Rules Docket lapbelt is designed to limit occupant provide significantly greater protection weekdays, except Federal holidays, forward excursion in the event of an than would be expected with energy- between 7:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. accident. This will reduce the potential absorbing pads, for example, and
VerDate 11
second, it can provide essentially lightning and high intensity considered the range from the fifth equivalent protection for occupants of electromagnetic fields (HIRF). Since the percentile female to the ninety-fifth all stature. These are significant sensors that trigger deployment are percentile male as the range of advantages from a safety standpoint, electronic, they must be protected from occupants that must be taken into since such devices will likely provide a the effects of these threats. Existing account. In this case, the FAA is level of safety that exceeds the Special Conditions No. 25–ANM–78 proposing consideration of a broader minimum standards of the Federal regarding lightning and HIRF are range of occupants, due to the nature of Aviation Regulations (FAR). Conversely, therefore applicable. For the purposes of the lapbelt installation and its close inflatable lapbelts in general are active compliance with those special proximity to the occupant. In a similar systems and must be relied upon to conditions, if inadvertent deployment vein, these persons could have assumed activate properly when needed, as could cause a hazard to the airplane, the the brace position, for those accidents opposed to an energy-absorbing pad or inflatable lapbelt is considered a critical where an impact is anticipated. Test upper torso restraint that is passive, and system; if inadvertent deployment could data indicate that occupants in the brace always available. These potential cause injuries to persons, the inflatable position may not require supplemental advantages must be balanced against the lapbelt should be considered an protection, and so it would not be potential disadvantages in order to essential system. Finally, the inflatable necessary to show that the inflatable develop standards that will provide an lapbelt installation should be protected lapbelt will enhance the brace position. equivalent level of safety to that from the effects of fire, so that an However, the inflatable lapbelt must not intended by the regulations. additional hazard is not created by, for introduce a hazard in that case by The FAA has considered the example, a rupture of the pyrotechnic deploying into the seated, braced installation of inflatable lapbelts to have squib. occupant. two primary safety concerns: first, that In order to be an effective safety Another area of concern is the use of they perform properly under foreseeable system, the inflatable lapbelt must seats so equipped by children whether operating conditions, and second, that function properly and must not lap-held, in approved child safety seats, they do not perform in a manner or at introduce any additional hazards to or occupying the seat directly. such times as would constitute a hazard occupants as a result of its functioning. Similarly, if the seat is occupied by a to the airplane or occupants. This latter There are several areas where the pregnant woman, the installation needs point has the potential to be the more inflatable lapbelt differs from traditional to address such usage, either by rigorous of the requirements, owing to occupant protection systems, and demonstrating that it will function the active nature of the system. With requires special conditions to ensure properly, or by adding appropriate this philosophy in mind, the FAA has adequate performance. limitation on usage. considered the following as a basis for Because the inflatable lapbelt is Since the inflatable lapbelt will be the special conditions. essentially a single use device, there is electrically powered, there is the The inflatable lapbelt will rely on the potential that it could deploy under possibility that the system could fail electronic sensors for signaling and crash conditions that are not sufficiently due to a separation in the fuselage. pyrotechnic charges for activation so severe as to require head injury Since this system is intended as crash/ that it is available when needed. These protection from the inflatable lapbelt. post-crash protection means, failure due same devices could be susceptible to Since an actual crash is frequently to fuselage separation is not acceptable. inadvertent activation, causing composed of a series of impacts before As with emergency lighting, the system deployment in a potentially unsafe the airplane comes to rest, this could should function properly if such a manner. The consequences of such render the inflatable lapbelt useless if a separation occurs at any point in the deployment must be considered in larger impact follows the initial impact. fuselage. A separation that occurs at the establishing the reliability of the system. This situation does not exist with location of the inflatable lapbelt would Boeing Commercial Airplanes must energy-absorbing pads or upper torso not have to be considered. substantiate that the effects of an restraints, which tend to provide Since the inflatable lapbelt is likely to inadvertent deployment in flight are protection according to the severity of have a large volume displacement, the either not a hazard to the airplane, or the impact. Therefore, the inflatable inflated bag could potentially impede that such deployment is an extremely lapbelt installation should be such that egress of passengers. Since the bag improbable occurrence (less than 10¥9 the inflatable lapbelt will provide deflates to absorb energy, it is likely that per flight hour). The effect of an protection when it is required, and will an inflatable lapbelt would be deflated inadvertent deployment on a passenger not expend its protection when it is not at the time that persons would be trying or crewmember that might be positioned needed. There is no requirement for the to leave their seats. Nonetheless, it is close to the inflatable lapbelt should inflatable lapbelt to provide protection considered appropriate to specify a time also be considered. The person could be for multiple impacts, where more than interval after which the inflatable either standing or sitting. A minimum one impact would require protection. lapbelt may not impede rapid egress. reliability level will have to be Since each occupant’s restraint Ten seconds has been chosen as a established for this case, depending system provides protection for that reasonable time since this corresponds upon the consequences, even if the occupant only, the installation must to the maximum time allowed for an effect on the airplane is negligible. address seats that are unoccupied. It exit to be openable. In actuality, it is The potential for an inadvertent will be necessary to show that the unlikely that an exit would be prepared deployment could be increased as a required protection is provided for each this quickly in an accident severe result of conditions in service. The occupant, regardless of the number of enough to warrant deployment of the installation must take into account wear occupied seats and considering that inflatable lapbelt, and the inflatable and tear so that the likelihood of an unoccupied seats may have inflatable lapbelt will likely deflate much quicker inadvertent deployment is not increased lapbelts that are active. than ten seconds. to an unacceptable level. In this context, Since a wide range of occupants could Finally, it should be noted that the an appropriate inspection interval and occupy a seat, the inflatable lapbelt special conditions are certification self-test capability are considered should be effective for a wide range of requirements applied to the inflatable necessary. Other outside influences are occupants. The FAA has historically lapbelt system as installed. The special
VerDate 11
conditions are not an installation Novel or Unusual Design Features activation are potentially quite severe, approval. Therefore, while the special The Model 777 series airplanes will these latter requirements are probably conditions relate to each such system incorporate the following novel or the more rigorous from a design installed, the overall installation unusual design features: Boeing standpoint. approval is a separate finding, and must Commercial Airplanes is proposing to Prior Comment consider the combined effects of all install an inflatable lapbelt on certain such systems installed. One comment was received in seats of Boeing Model 777 series response to the most recent publication Type Certification Basis airplanes, in order to reduce the of the inflatable lapbelt special potential for head injury in the event of conditions (65 FR 60343) which are Under the provisions of § 21.101, an accident. The inflatable lapbelt Boeing Commercial Airplanes must substantially identical to the special works similar to an automotive airbag, condition contained herein. The show that the Model 777 series except that the airbag is integrated with airplanes, as changed, continue to meet disposition of this comment is the lap belt of the restraint system. contained in Rules Docket No. NM176 the applicable provisions of the The CFR states the performance and is available for examination by regulations incorporated by reference in criteria for head injury protection in interested parties. In our disposition, we Type Certificate No. T00001SE or the objective terms. However, none of these substantially agreed with the applicable regulations in effect on the criteria are adequate to address the commenter, but noted that the substance date of application for the change. The specific issues raised concerning seats of the comment was already addressed regulations incorporated by reference in with inflatable lapbelts. The FAA has in the special conditions. Therefore, this the type certificate are commonly therefore determined that, in addition to comment did not result in a change to referred to as the ‘‘original type the requirements of part 25, special the special conditions. certification basis.’’ The regulations conditions are needed to address incorporated by reference in Type requirements particular to installation of Applicability Certificate No. T00001SE are as follows: seats with inflatable lapbelts. Amendments 25–1 through 25–82 for As discussed above, these special Accordingly, in addition to the conditions are applicable to the Model the Model 777–200 and Amendments passenger injury criteria specified in 25–1 through 25–86 with exceptions for 777 series airplanes. Should Boeing § 25.785, these special conditions are Commercial Airplanes apply at a later the Model 777–300. The U.S. type adopted for the Boeing Model 777 series certification basis for the Model 777 is date for a change to the type certificate airplanes equipped with inflatable to modify any other model included on established in accordance with §§ 21.29 lapbelts. Other conditions may be and 21.17 and the type certification Type Certificate No. T00001SE to developed, as needed, based on further incorporate the same novel or unusual application date. The U.S. type FAA review and discussions with the certification basis is listed in Type design feature, the special conditions manufacturer and civil aviation would apply to that model as well Certificate Data Sheet No. T00001SE. authorities. If the Administrator finds that the under the provisions of § 21.101(a)(1). applicable airworthiness regulations Discussion Conclusion (i.e., part 25 as amended) do not contain From the standpoint of a passenger This action affects only certain novel adequate or appropriate safety standards safety system, the inflatable lapbelt is or unusual design features on the for Boeing Model 777 series airplanes unique in that it is both an active and Boeing Model 777 series airplanes. It is because of a novel or unusual design entirely autonomous device. While the not a rule of general applicability, and feature, special conditions are automotive industry has good it affects only Model 777 series prescribed under the provisions of experience with airbags, the conditions airplanes listed on TCDS T00001SE. § 21.16. of use and reliance on the inflatable In addition to the applicable lapbelt as the sole means of injury Immediate Adoption of Special airworthiness regulations and special protection are quite different. In Conditions conditions, the Boeing Model 777 must automobile installations, the airbag is a The FAA has determined that notice comply with the fuel vent and exhaust supplemental system and works in and opportunity for prior public emission requirements of part 34 and conjunction with an upper torso comment hereon are unnecessary the noise certification requirements of restraint. In addition, the crash event is because these special conditions are part 36. more definable and of typically shorter substantially identical to those that have Special conditions, as appropriate, are duration, which can simplify the been issued on three previous issued in accordance with § 11.19 after activation logic. The airplane operating occasions, and that further new public notice, as required by § 11.38, environment is also quite different from comments are unlikely. and become part of the type certification automobiles and includes the potential basis in accordance with § 21.101(b)(2). for greater wear and tear, and List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Special conditions are initially unanticipated abuse conditions (due to Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting applicable to the model for which they galley loading, passenger baggage, etc.); and recordkeeping requirements. are issued. Should the type certificate airplanes also operate where exposure Authority Citation for that model be amended later to to high intensity electromagnetic fields include any other model that could affect the activation system. The authority citation for these incorporates the same novel or unusual The following special conditions can special conditions is as follows: design feature, or should any other be characterized as addressing either the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, model already included on the same safety performance of the system, or the 44702, 44704. type certificate be modified to system’s integrity against inadvertent The Special Conditions incorporate the same novel or unusual activation. Because a crash requiring use design feature, the special conditions of the inflatable lapbelts is a relatively Accordingly, pursuant to the would also apply to the other model rare event, and because the authority delegated to me by the under the provisions of § 21.101(a)(1). consequences of an inadvertent Administrator, the following special
VerDate 11
conditions are issued as part of the type 9. The system must be protected from metal device for certain SA226 series certification basis for the Boeing Model lightning and HIRF. The threats airplanes. This AD is the result of a 777 series airplanes. specified in Special Condition No. 25– report of a wheel brake system 1. Seats With Inflatable Lapbelts. It ANM–78 are incorporated by reference malfunction caused by a faulty brake must be shown that the inflatable for the purpose of measuring lightning shuttle valve. The actions specified by lapbelt will deploy and provide and HIRF protection. For the purposes this AD are intended to correct potential protection under crash conditions of complying with HIRF requirements, brake shuttle valve problems, which where it is necessary to prevent serious the inflatable lapbelt system is could cause the brake assembly to drag head injury. The means of protection considered a ‘‘critical system’’ if its and overheat. Hydraulic or fuel line must take into consideration a range of deployment could have a hazardous damage could then occur if the stature from a two-year-old child to a effect on the airplane; otherwise it is overheated brake assembly is retracted ninety-fifth percentile male. The considered an ‘‘essential’’ system. into the main wheel well, with a inflatable lapbelt must provide a 10. The inflatable lapbelt must consequent fire if the hydraulic or fuel consistent approach to energy function properly after loss of normal lines ruptured. absorption throughout that range. In aircraft electrical power, and after a DATES: This AD becomes effective on addition, the following situations must transverse separation of the fuselage at November 21, 2001. be considered: the most critical location. A separation The Director of the Federal Register a. The seat occupant is holding an at the location of the lapbelt does not approved the incorporation by reference infant. have to be considered. of certain publications listed in the b. The seat occupant is a child in a 11. It must be shown that the regulations as of November 21, 2001. child restraint device. inflatable lapbelt will not release ADDRESSES: You may get the service c. The seat occupant is a child not hazardous quantities of gas or information referenced in this AD from using a child restraint device. particulate matter into the cabin. Fairchild Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box d. The seat occupant is a pregnant 12. The inflatable lapbelt installation 790490, San Antonio, Texas 78279– woman. must be protected from the effects of fire 0490; telephone: (210) 824–9421; 2. The inflatable lapbelt must provide such that no hazard to occupants will facsimile: (210) 820–8609. You may adequate protection for each occupant result. view this information at the Federal regardless of the number of occupants of 13. There must be a means for a Aviation Administration (FAA), Central the seat assembly, considering that crewmember to verify the integrity of Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, unoccupied seats may have active the inflatable lapbelt activation system Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–CE– seatbelts. prior to each flight or it must be 28–AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas 3. The design must prevent the demonstrated to reliably operate City, Missouri 64106; or at the Office of inflatable lapbelt from being either between inspection intervals. the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol incorrectly buckled or incorrectly Issued in Renton, Washington, on October Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC. installed such that the inflatable lapbelt 3, 2001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: would not properly deploy. Ali Bahrami, Werner Koch, Aerospace Engineer, Alternatively, it must be shown that Acting Manager, Transport Airplane FAA, Airplane Certification Office, 2601 such deployment is not hazardous to the Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Meacham Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas occupant, and will provide the required [FR Doc. 01–25753 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 76193–0150; telephone: (817) 222–5133; facsimile: (817) 222–5960. head injury protection. BILLING CODE 4910–13–U 4. It must be shown that the inflatable SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: lapbelt system is not susceptible to Discussion inadvertent deployment as a result of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION wear and tear, or inertial loads resulting What Events Have Caused This AD? from in-flight or ground maneuvers Federal Aviation Administration The FAA received a report of an (including gusts and hard landings), accident involving a Fairchild Model likely to be experienced in service. 14 CFR Part 39 SA226-TC airplane where the flight 5. Deployment of the inflatable lapbelt [Docket No. 2000–CE–28–AD; Amendment crew lost control of the airplane at low must not introduce injury mechanisms 39–12462; AD 2001–20–14] altitude during the final approach for to the seated occupant, or result in landing. Prior to the accident, the flight RIN 2120–AA64 injuries that could impede rapid egress. crew reported a loss of hydraulic This assessment should include an Airworthiness Directives; Fairchild pressure and a fire on the left side of the occupant who is in the brace position Aircraft, Inc., Models SA226 and SA227 airplane. when it deploys and an occupant whose Series Airplanes Investigation of this accident belt is loosely fastened. indicates the following: 6. It must be shown that an AGENCY: Federal Aviation —The flight crew applied right rudder inadvertent deployment that could Administration, DOT. power during the takeoff roll to cause injury to a standing or sitting ACTION: Final rule. compensate for a dragging and person is improbable. overheated left wheel brake and then 7. It must be shown that inadvertent SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a raised the landing gear into the left deployment of the inflatable lapbelt new airworthiness directive (AD) that wheel well; during the most critical part of the flight applies to certain Fairchild Aircraft —The overheated left wheel brake will either not cause a hazard to the SA226 and SA227 series airplanes. This ignited the tires and the hydraulic airplane or is extremely improbable. AD requires you to replace the brake fluid; and 8. It must be shown that the inflatable shuttle valves with parts of improved —The resultant fire burned the rubber lapbelt will not impede rapid egress of design and install a shield over the fuel crossover hose and resulted in occupants 10 seconds after its hydraulic lines. This AD also requires fuel leakage with a consequent fuel deployment. replacing the rubber fuel hose with a fire.
VerDate 11
The accident investigation shows that Was the Public Invited To Comment? Register on August 21, 2001 (66 FR the brake shuttle valve may have caused 43814). The FAA encouraged interested the left wheel brake to drag and We will continue to investigate any persons to participate in the making of overheat. other potential causes for the dragging this amendment. The following presents brakes on the SA226 and SA227 Has FAA Taken Any Action to This the comment received on the proposal airplanes. Point? and FAA’s response to this comment: FAA’s Determination We issued a proposal to amend part Comment Disposition 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations What Is FAA’s Final Determination on What Is the Commenter’s Concern? (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that This Issue? The commenter suggests that the would apply to certain Fairchild We carefully reviewed all available cause of the wheel brake system Aircraft SA226 and SA227 series information related to the subject malfunction may not be related to the airplanes. This proposal was published presented above and determined that air brake shuttle valve. The commenter in the Federal Register as a safety and the public interest require the references an incident on a SA226 supplemental notice of proposed adoption of the rule as proposed except airplane relative to a dragging wheel rulemaking (NPRM) on December 5, for minor editorial corrections. We brake that was traced to the master 2000 (65 FR 75883). The supplemental determined that these minor cylinder internal relief valve. The FAA NPRM proposed to require you to corrections: replace the brake shuttle valves with infers that the commenter would like us parts of improved design (except on to continue to investigate this issue. —Will not change the meaning of the airplanes with an anti-skid/power brake AD; and What Is FAA’s Response to the Concern? system); install a shield over the —Will not add any additional burden hydraulic lines; and replace the rubber After thorough investigation of all upon the public than was already fuel hose with a metal device on certain available information, we determined proposed. SA226 series airplanes. that the cause of this unsafe condition Cost Impact is related to the brake shuttle valve. The What Is the Potential Impact if FAA FAA welcomes comments and How Many Airplanes Does This AD Took No Action? suggestions such as those made by the Impact? Original design brake shuttle valves, if commenter. In fact, we have determined We estimate that this AD affects 258 not replaced with improved design that the master cylinder relief valve may airplanes in the U.S. registry. valves, could cause the wheel brakes to have been the cause of other main gear drag and overheat. This could result in brake incidents. We issued a notice of What Is the Cost Impact of This AD on hydraulic or fuel line damage if the proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (Docket Owners/Operators of the Affected overheated brake assembly is retracted No. 2001–CE–17–AD), which proposes Airplanes? into the main wheel wells. A these brake master cylinders be replaced We estimate the following costs to consequent fire could occur if the with new or overhauled units. This accomplish the replacement and hydraulic or fuel lines ruptured. NPRM was published in the Federal installation:
SA226 SERIES AIRPLANES
Labor cost Parts cost Total cost on U.S. operators
65 workhours × $60 per hour = $3,900 ...... $3,431 per airplane ...... $7,331 per airplane × 258 = $1,891,398.
SA227 SERIES AIRPLANES
Labor cost Parts cost Total cost on U.S. operators
55 workhours × $60 per hour = $3,300 ...... $1,369 per airplane ...... $4,669 per airplane × 258 = $1,204,602.
Compliance Time of This AD Why Is the Compliance Time of This AD —Ensures that the unsafe condition Presented in Both Hours TIS and referenced in this AD will be What Is the Compliance Time of This Calendar Time? corrected within a reasonable time AD? period without inadvertently The affected airplanes are used in The compliance time of this AD is at grounding any of the affected both general aviation and commuter airplanes whichever of the following that occurs operations. Those commuter operators later: may accumulate 500 hours TIS on the Flexibility Determination and Analysis —Within 500 hours time-in-service airplane in less than 2 months and What Are the Requirements of the (TIS) after the effective date of this many owners have numerous affected Regulatory Flexibility Act? airplanes in their fleets. We have AD; or The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 determined that the dual compliance —Within 6 months after the effective was enacted by Congress to assure that time: date of this AD small entities are not unnecessarily or —Gives all owners/operators of the disproportionately burdened by affected airplanes adequate time to government regulations. This Act schedule and accomplish the actions establishes ‘‘as principle of regulatory in this AD; and issuance that agencies shall endeavor,
VerDate 11
consistent with the objectives of the rule impact on a substantial number of small under the criteria of the Regulatory and of applicable statutes, to fit entities. However, we have determined Flexibility Act. You may obtain a copy regulatory and informational that we should continue with this action of the complete Regulatory Flexibility requirements to the scale of the in order to address the unsafe condition Analysis (entitled ‘‘Final Regulatory businesses, organizations, and and ensure aviation safety. Flexibility Analysis’’) that was prepared governmental jurisdictions subject to You may obtain a copy of the for this AD from the Docket file at the regulation.’’ To achieve this principle, complete Regulatory Flexibility location listed under the ADDRESSES the Act requires agencies to solicit and Analysis (entitled ‘‘Final Regulatory section of this document. consider flexible regulatory proposals Flexibility Analysis’’) that was prepared List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 and to explain the rationale for their for this AD from the Docket file at the actions. The Act covers a wide range of location listed under the ADDRESSES Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation small entities, including small section of this document. safety, Incorporation by reference, businesses, not-for-profit organizations, Regulatory Impact Safety. and small governmental jurisdictions. Adoption of the Amendment Agencies must perform a review to Does This AD Impact Various Entities? determine whether a proposed or final The regulations adopted herein will Accordingly, under the authority rule will have a significant economic not have a substantial direct effect on delegated to me by the Administrator, impact on a substantial number of small the States, on the relationship between the Federal Aviation Administration entities. If the determination is that the the national government and the States, amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation rule will, the Agency must prepare a or on the distribution of power and Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: regulatory flexibility analysis as responsibilities among the various described in the RFA. levels of government. Therefore, it is PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS However, if an agency determines that determined that this final rule does not DIRECTIVES a proposed or final rule is not expected have federalism implications under 1. The authority citation for part 39 to have a significant economic impact Executive Order 13132. on a substantial number of small continues to read as follows: entities, section 605(b) of the RFA Does This AD Involve a Significant Rule Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. provides that the head of the agency or Regulatory Action? § 39.13 [Amended] may so certify and a regulatory For the reasons discussed above, I flexibility analysis is not required. The certify that this action (1) is not a 2. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding a certification must include a statement ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under new AD to read as follows: providing the factual basis for this Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 2001–20–14 Fairchild Aircraft, Inc.: determination, and the reasoning should ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Amendment 39–12462; Docket No. be clear. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 2000–CE–28–AD. FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) What Is FAA’s Determination? (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? could have a significant economic This AD affects the following airplane The FAA has determined that this AD impact, positive or negative, on a models and serial numbers that are could have a significant economic substantial number of small entities certificated in any category:
Model Serial Nos.
SA226–T ...... T201 through T248. SA226–T(A) ...... T(A)249 through T(A)–291. SA226–T(B) ...... T(B) 276 and T(B) 292 through T(B) 417. SA226–AT ...... AT001 through AT074. SA226–TC ...... TC201 through TC419. SA227–TT ...... TT421 through TT555. SA227–TT(300) ...... TT447, TT465, TT471, TT483, TT512, TT518, TT521, TT527, TT529, and 536. SA227–AT ...... AT421, AT423 through AT631, and AT695. SA227–AC ...... AC406, AC415, AC416, and AC420 through AC599.
(b) Who must comply with this AD? (c) What problem does this AD address? overheated brake assembly is retracted into Anyone who wishes to operate any of the The actions specified by this AD are intended the main wheel well, with a consequent fire above airplanes must comply with this AD. to correct potential brake shuttle valve if the hydraulic or fuel lines ruptured. The AD applies to any airplane with or problems, which could cause the brake without an anti-skid/power brake system assembly to drag and overheat. Hydraulic or installed. fuel line damage could then occur if the
(d) What actions must I accomplish to address this problem? To address this problem, you must accomplish the following:
Actions Compliance Procedures
(1) For all affected airplanes, except those Within 500 hours time-in-service (TIS) after In accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT equipped with an anti-skid/power brake sys- November 21, 2001 (the effective date of INSTRUCTIONS section of Fairchild Aircraft tem, replace each brake shuttle valve with this AD), or within 6 months after November Service Bulletin No. 226–26–003, or Fair- part number (P/N) MS28767–4 brake shuttle 21, 2001 (the effective date of this AD), child Aircraft Service Bulletin No. 227–26– valve (or FAA-approved equivalent part num- whichever occurs later. 002, as applicable. Page numbers with re- ber). spective dates are presented in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
VerDate 11
Actions Compliance Procedures
(2) For all affected airplanes, install a shield Within 500 hours time-in-service (TIS) after In accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT over the hydraulic lines. November 21, 2001 (the effective date of INSTRUCTIONS section of Fairchild Aircraft this AD), or within 6 months after November Service Bulletin No. 226–26–003, or Fair- 21, 2001 (the effective date of this AD), child Aircraft Service Bulletin No. 227–26– whichever occurs later. 002, as applicable. Page numbers with re- spective dates are presented in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD. (3) For all airplane models within the SA226 se- Within 500 hours time-in-service (TIS) after In accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT ries, replace the rubber fuel hose with a November 21, 2001 (the effective date of INSTRUCTIONS section of Fairchild Aircraft metal device. this AD), or within 6 months after November Service Bulletin No. 226–26–003. Page 21, 2001 (the effective date of this AD), numbers with respective dates are pre- whichever occurs later. sented in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) of this AD. (4) Do not install any brake shuttle valve that is As of November 21, 2001 (the effective date Not Applicable. not a P/N MS28767–4 brake shuttle valve (or of this AD). FAA-approved equivalent part number) or a fuel hose that is made out of rubber.
(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other that the performance of the requirements of telephone: (817) 222–5133; facsimile: (817) way? You may use an alternative method of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must 222–5960. compliance or adjust the compliance time if: request approval for an alternative method of (g) What if I need to fly the airplane to (1) Your alternative method of compliance compliance in accordance with paragraph (e) another location to comply with this AD? The provides an equivalent level of safety; and of this AD. The request should include an FAA can issue a special flight permit under (2) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane assessment of the effect of the modification, sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Certification Office (ACO), approves your alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and alternative. Submit your request through an addressed by this AD; and, if you have not FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location eliminated the unsafe condition, specific may add comments and then send it to the where you can accomplish the requirements Manager, Fort Worth ACO. actions you propose to address it. of this AD. Note: This AD applies to each airplane (f) Where can I get information about any (h) Are any service bulletins incorporated identified in paragraph (a) of this AD, already-approved alternative methods of into this AD by reference? regardless of whether it has been modified, compliance? Contact Werner Koch, (1) Actions required by this AD must be altered, or repaired in the area subject to the Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Airplane done in accordance with the following: requirements of this AD. For airplanes that Certification Office, 2601 Meacham (i) Fairchild Service Bulletin No. 226–26– have been modified, altered, or repaired so Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0150; 003, which incorporates the following pages:
Pages Date
16 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000. 14, 15 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: June 27, 2000. 17 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: October 2, 2000. 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 13 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: January 19, 2001. 1, 2, 3, 8, and 9 and ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: August 10, 2001.
(ii) Fairchild Service Bulletin No. 227–26–002, which incorporates the following pages:
Pages Date
1, 2, 8, and 9 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000. 7 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: June 27, 2000. 3, 4, 5, and 6 ...... Issued: March 1, 2000, Revised: October 2, 2000.
(2) The Director of the Federal Register Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION approved this incorporation by reference October 2, 2001. under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Michael Gallagher, Federal Aviation Administration (3) You can get copies from Fairchild Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 790490, San Antonio, Certification Service. 14 CFR Part 39 Texas 78279–0490. You can look at copies at [FR Doc. 01–25397 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the FAA, Central Region, Office of the [Docket No. 2000–NE–49–AD; Amendment Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 39–12461; AD 2001–20–13] Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office of the RIN 2120–AA64 Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC. Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & (j) When does this amendment become Whitney PW4000 Series Turbofan effective? This amendment becomes effective Engines on November 21, 2001. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Final rule.
VerDate 11
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a consideration has been given to the window or with the 1,500 cycle new airworthiness directive (AD), that is comments received. repetitive inspection interval. The FAA applicable to certain models of Pratt & based the initial inspection threshold, Five-Cycle Flyback Allowance Whitney PW4000 series turbofan reinspect flight allowance, and engines. This amendment requires Six commenters express concern with repetitive inspection interval on a risk operators to perform initial and the deletion of the five-cycle flyback assessment that uses known inspection repetitive inspections for cracking of allowance. data results to date. high pressure compressor (HPC) front One commenter requests clarification drum rotors based on cycle usage. This of the difference between the NPRM and Initial Front Drum Rotor Inspection amendment also requires the removal ASB 72–722 with respect to the deletion Several commenters request from service of any cracked HPC front of the five-cycle flyback allowance for clarification regarding initial and drum rotors. This amendment is engines with indications requiring eddy repetitive inspection of the HPC front prompted by reports that 11 HPC drum current inspection (ECI) verification. drum rotors. Two commenters request rotors have been found cracked on the Another commenter states that the AD clarification of the requirement stated in spacer surface between the sixth and should provide the five-cycle flyback the NPRM that the initial inspection be seventh stage disks. The actions allowance because eight reported performed before the drum accumulates specified by this AD are intended to findings of HPC front drum cracking 1,500 cycles-since-new (CSN). Other detect premature cracking of the HPC were discovered in the shop and that commenters express concern that the drum rotor that could result in an the cracks do not propagate quickly. NPRM does not address front drum A third commenter expresses concern uncontained engine failure and damage rotors that exceed 1,500 CSN. that in cases of suspect cracks, the to the airplane. The FAA agrees. It is the FAA’s intent airline would incur an undue economic DATES: Effective date November 16, to be consistent with the analytical data burden waiting for confirmation as to 2001. The incorporation by reference of associated with HPC front drum rotor whether the visual indication is a crack certain publications listed in the cracking. The ASB states that the initial or not. Also, the commenter suggests an regulations is approved by the Director borescope inspection should be initial inspection threshold of 1,200 of the Federal Register as of November performed on all HPC front drum rotors cycles-since-new and a 20-cycle 16, 2001. that have accumulated 1,000 cycles window for ECI reinspection to verify a (total drum cycles), at the next ‘‘A’’ ADDRESSES: The service information visual crack indication. The commenter check, or 500 cycles after the receipt of referenced in this AD may be obtained suggests that it is preferable to inspect the ASB. The FAA agrees with the from Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main Street, compressor drums at a more frequent inspection threshold of 500 cycles East Hartford, CT 06108. This inspection interval and allow an engine determined by the risk assessment and information may be examined at the with a ‘‘suspect’’ crack to continue in chose the upper limit of 1,500 CSN as FAA, New England Region, Office of the service for a limited time to allow for the compliance threshold for the initial Regional Counsel, 12 New England planning a reinspection. The same inspection. Rewording the initial Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at commenter suggests a 1,500 cycle inspection threshold inadvertently the Office of the Federal Register, 800 repetitive inspection. North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Another commenter provided introduced confusion. The requirements Washington, DC. information on the nature of the crack of the ASB and the AD are equivalent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara findings to date. Fifteen engines were because they are based on the same Goodman, Aerospace Engineer, Engine identified with crack indications data. Therefore, the FAA will change Certification Office, FAA, Engine and through borescope inspection. Three the wording to be consistent with the Propeller Directorate, 12 New England were obvious visual cracks and 12 ASB. Executive Park, Burlington MA 01803– required further assessment using the Repetitive Front Drum Rotor Inspection 5299; telephone: 781–238–7130, fax: ECI inspection procedure cited in the 781–238–7199. SB. These 12 indications were One commenter requests that a drum SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A confirmed not to be cracks. rotor that was inspected in accordance proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Two commenters state that the five- with SB 72–722, having a total time Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to cycle allowance for additional beyond 1,500 CSN when inspected, be include an AD that is applicable to nondestructive inspections is effective permitted to remain in service. certain models of Pratt & Whitney (PW) in eliminating false initial crack Another commenter asks if the AD PW4000 series turbofan engines was indications and should be reinstated. has the same exemption as the ASB, published in the Federal Register on The FAA agrees that the five-cycle which states that HPC front drum rotors March 22, 2001 (66 FR 16017). That flyback allowance for engines with previously inspected in accordance with action proposed to require operators to suspect crack indications is acceptable. the CIR Manual requirement at the last perform initial and repetitive Since the publication of the NPRM, shop visit within 500 cycles, are exempt inspections for cracking of high pressure results of a metallurgical investigation from the initial borescope inspection. compressor (HPC) front drum rotors were provided that substantiate the five- That commenter also states that the based on cycle usage. The action also cycle flight allowance. This information requirement is not clear for the proposed to require the removal from also determined that if a suspect crack repetitive inspection requirement for service of any cracked HPC front drum indication extends from the knife edges HPC front drum rotors that were rotors in accordance with PW Alert to the disk radius of the sixth or seventh previously inspected in the shop. Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW4ENG stage, an ECI reinspection must be Another commenter states that the A72–722, dated September 29, 2000. accomplished before further flight. provision in ASB PW4ENG A72–722 Accordingly, a five-cycle flyback that exempts drums that were detail- Comments allowance has been added to the part-inspected within 500 cycles from Interested persons have been afforded compliance section of the AD. the initial inspection and fall into the an opportunity to participate in the However, the FAA does not agree 2,200 cycle reinspection interval should making of this amendment. Due with the suggested 20-cycle reinspection be included in the final rule.
VerDate 11
The FAA agrees that if an HPC front cumulative risk assessment that uses the off-wing requirements are not drum rotor was inspected in accordance known inspection data results to date. mandated by this AD. The FAA has with On-Wing paragraphs of ASB 72– The AD provides for individual evaluated a 20-year cumulative risk 722, as required by the proposed rule, operators to submit substantiating data assessment and has determined that an the initial inspection requirement is that would support an increase in the acceptable level of safety will be met by satisfied. However, the rotor is still repetitive inspection interval under the requiring the on-wing inspections at the subject to the repetitive On-Wing alternative method of compliance cyclic intervals detailed in the ASB. inspection requirements, within 2,200 paragraph. Economic Analysis cycles since last inspection. Inclusion of PW SB PW4ENG A72–693 The FAA also agrees that an HPC in AD front drum rotor inspected in the shop The FAA estimates that there are utilizing the flourescent penetrant One commenter states that the 1,970 engines of the affected design in inspection (FPI) procedure within the inspection procedure in Pratt & Whitney the worldwide fleet, and that 538 past 500 CIS is exempt from the initial Service Bulletin PW4ENG A72–693 is engines installed on aircraft of U.S. borescope inspection. Again, the rotor is the same as that required by the registry would be affected by this still subject to the repetitive On-Wing proposed rule; therefore, ‘‘credit’’ proposed AD. The FAA also estimates inspection requirements, within 2,200 should be given for the inspections that it would take approximately 2.5 cycles since last inspection. previously performed using this SB. work hours per engine to accomplish The FAA disagrees. PW ASB the proposed on-wing inspection, and Omission of ECI PW4ENG A72–693 was not referenced that the average labor rate is $60 per One commenter requests that the ECI in the NPRM because that was a work hour. It is estimated that three of ASB 72–722 be omitted when the fleetwide campaign that has been engines would be found with cracked drum rotor is FPI per SPOP82 (CIR P/ completed and was not part of the 20- HPC front drum rotors in the time frame N 51A357 72–35–00). Another year risk assessment for which the start of one year. Approximately 269 engines commenter asks whether the HPC front date was June 2000. However, credit will be inspected on average per year. drum knife edge spacer area between will be given for inspections done prior The cost of removal and reinstallation of the sixth and seventh stage disks to the issuance of this AD depending on an engine is approximately $10,000, and previously visually inspected with split when and how they were accomplished. the cost of replacing the HPC front drum case condition or during light These should be evaluated on an rotor is approximately $750,000. maintenance also should be exempted individual case basis within the context Required replacement parts would cost from initial borescope inspection. of the alternative method of compliance $356,130 per engine. Based on these As noted above, the FAA agrees that provision of the AD. figures, the total cost impact per year of an HPC front drum rotor that was Exemption of PW4158 Engine Serial the proposed AD for accomplishing fluorescent penetrant inspected in the Numbers initial inspections and replacing HPC shop, as cited in the compliance section front drum rotors, on U.S. operators is One commenter notes that Revision 1 of the ASB, within the past 500 cycles estimated to be $3,388,730. in service (CIS), satisfies the initial of the ASB does not exempt PW4158 inspection requirement. The ECI engine serial numbers P728534 through Regulatory Impact inspection requirement that is provided P728546 from the inspection to confirm a suspect crack indication requirements and the AD does not need This final rule does not have does not apply to HPC front drum rotors to include this information in the federalism implications, as defined in that have been fluorescent penetrant description of the differences between Executive Order 13132, because it inspected in the shop within the past the manufacturer’s service information would not have a substantial direct 500 CIS. The in-shop FPI inspection is and this AD. The FAA agrees and that effect on the States, on the relationship more rigorous than the on-wing statement has been removed from the between the national government and inspection requirements. AD. the States, or on the distribution of After careful review of the available power and responsibilities among the Number of Confirmed Cracked Drum data, including the comments noted various levels of government. Rotors above, the FAA has determined that air Accordingly, the FAA has not consulted One commenter provides new safety and the public interest require the with state authorities prior to information that there are eleven adoption of the rule with the changes publication of this final rule. described previously. The FAA has confirmed cracked HPC front drum For the reasons discussed above, I determined that these changes will rotors to date as compared to the seven certify that this action (1) is not a that were described in the Summary and neither increase the economic burden ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Discussion Sections of the NPRM. The on any operator nor increase the scope Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a FAA agrees that the higher number is of the AD. ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT accurate. Differences Between Manufacturer’s Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Raise Inspection Requirement Service Information and This AD FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if One commenter expresses a Since the publication of the NPRM, promulgated, will not have a significant preference to inspect after 3,000 CIS, the manufacturer revised, and the FAA economic impact, positive or negative, given that operator’s experience with has approved the technical contents of on a substantial number of small entities HPC front drum rotor cracking. alert service bulletin (ASB) No. under the criteria of the Regulatory The FAA does not agree with the PW4ENG A72–722, Revision 1, dated Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has suggested 3,000 cycle repetitive June 7, 2001. Although ASB No. been prepared for this action and it is inspection interval. The FAA based the PW4ENG A72–722, Revision 1, dated contained in the Rules Docket. A copy initial inspection threshold, reinspect June 7, 2001, provides procedures for of it may be obtained by contacting the flight allowance, and repetitive operators to perform off-wing initial and Rules Docket at the location provided inspection interval on a 20-year repetitive HPC drum rotor inspections, under the caption ADDRESSES.
VerDate 11
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Compliance (2) If the presence of a crack needs to be Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Required as indicated, unless confirmed and the suspect crack indication extends from the knife edges to the disk safety, Incorporation by reference, accomplished previously. radius directly adjacent to the spacer wall of Safety. To detect premature cracking of the high pressure compressor (HPC) front drum rotor, the sixth or seventh stage as shown in Adoption of the Amendment that could result in an uncontained engine Figures 2 and 3 of PW ASB No. PW4ENG failure and damage to the airplane, A72–722, Revision 1, dated June 7, 2001, the Accordingly, pursuant to the accomplish the following: ECI inspection must be accomplished before authority delegated to me by the further flight. Initial Inspection Administrator, the Federal Aviation (3) If the presence of a crack is confirmed, Administration amends part 39 of the (a) Perform an initial inspection in remove and replace with a serviceable HPC Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR accordance with the Accomplishment front drum rotor before further flight. part 39) as follows: Instructions, On-Wing paragraphs 1 through 13, of Pratt & Whitney (PW) Alert Service Definition of Suspect Crack Indication PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS Bulletin (ASB) No. PW4ENG A72–722, dated (c) For the purposes of this AD, a suspect DIRECTIVES September 29, 2000 or Revision 1, dated June crack indication is defined as a response 7, 2001, as follows: from the visual borescope inspection 1. The authority citation for part 39 (1) Perform an initial inspection of HPC procedure that denotes the possible presence continues to read as follows: front drum rotors before accumulating 1,000 of a material discontinuity and requires cycles-since-new (CSN) within 500 cycles-in- Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. interpretation to determine its significance. service (CIS) after the effective date of this § 39.13 [Amended] AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (2) If the presence of a crack needs to be (d) An alternative method of compliance or 2. Section 39.13 is amended adding a confirmed, perform an eddy current adjustment of the compliance time that new airworthiness directive to read as inspection (ECI) within five flight cycles. follows: (3) If the presence of a crack needs to be provides an acceptable level of safety may be confirmed and the suspect crack indication used if approved by the Manager, Engine 2001–20–13 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment Certification Office (ECO). Operators must 39–12461. Docket 2000–NE–49–AD. extends from the knife edges to the disk radius directly adjacent to the spacer wall of submit their request through an appropriate Applicability the sixth or seventh stage as shown in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) This airworthiness directive (AD) applies Figures 2 and 3 of PW ASB No. PW4ENG Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may to Pratt & Whitney (PW) models PW4052, A72–722, Revision 1, dated June 7, 2001, the add comments and then send it to the PW4056, PW4060, PW4062, PW4152, ECI inspection must be accomplished before Manager, ECO. PW4156A, PW4158, PW4460, and PW4462 further flight. Note 2: Information concerning the turbofan engines. These engines are installed (4) If the presence of a crack is confirmed, existence of approved alternative methods of on but not limited to Boeing 747, 767, remove and replace the HPC front drum rotor compliance with this airworthiness directive, McDonnell Douglas MD–11, Airbus Industrie with a serviceable part before further flight. if any, may be obtained from the ECO. A300, and A310 series airplanes. (5) HPC front drum rotors fluorescent Note 1: This AD applies to each engine penetrant inspected at the last shop visit, as Special Flight Permits cited in the compliance section of the ASB, identified in the preceding applicability (e) Special flight permits may be issued in within 500 cycles of the publication date of provision, regardless of whether it has been accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the this AD, satisfy the initial inspection modified, altered, or repaired in the area Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 subject to the requirements of this AD. For requirement. and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a engines that have been modified, altered, or Repetitive Inspections location where the requirements of this AD repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the (b) Thereafter, perform inspections within can be accomplished. owner/operator must request approval for an 2,200 cycles-since-last-inspection, in Documents That Have Been Incorporated By alternative method of compliance in accordance with the Accomplishment Reference accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. Instructions, On-Wing paragraphs 1 through The request should include an assessment of 13, of PW ASB No. PW4ENG A72–722, dated (f) The inspection must be done in the effect of the modification, alteration, or September 29, 2000, or Revision 1, dated accordance with the following Pratt & repair on the unsafe condition addressed by June 7, 2001. Whitney Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not (1) If the presence of a crack needs to be PW4ENG A72–722, dated September 29, been eliminated, the request should include confirmed, perform an ECI within five flight 2000 or (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722, Revision specific proposed actions to address it. cycles. 1, dated June 7, 2001.
Document No. Pages Revision Date
(ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... All Original ...... September 29, 2001. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 1–4 1 ...... June 7, 2001. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 5 Original ...... September 29, 2000. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 6 1 ...... June 7, 2001. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 7–9 Original ...... September 29, 2000. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 10–11 1 ...... June 7, 2001. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 12–16 Original ...... September 29, 2000. (ASB) PW4ENG A72–722 ...... 17 1 ...... June 7, 2001. Total pages: 17.
This incorporation by reference was Hartford, CT 06108. Copies may be inspected Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, approved by the Director of the Federal at the FAA, New England Region, Office of DC. Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) the Regional Counsel, 12 New England Effective Date and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the (g) This amendment becomes effective on from Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main Street, East Office of the Federal Register, 800 North November 16, 2001.
VerDate 11
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on Comments for inclusion in the Rules Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule October 2, 2001. Docket must be received on or before Mark C. Fulmer, November 13, 2001. Since the issuance of that AD, the Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller ADDRESSES: Submit comments in Departmento de Aviacao Civil (DAC), Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. triplicate to the Federal Aviation which is the airworthiness authority for [FR Doc. 01–25396 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Administration (FAA), Transport Brazil, has notified the FAA that an BILLING CODE 4910–13–U Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, unsafe condition may exist on all Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM– EMBRAER Model EMB–120 series 298–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., airplanes. The DAC advises that it has DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Renton, Washington 98055–4056. received reports of loss of control events Comments may be inspected at this occurring on EMBRAER Model EMB– Federal Aviation Administration location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., 120 series airplanes that were flying Monday through Friday, except Federal during icing conditions. The DAC 14 CFR Part 39 holidays. Comments may be submitted advises that such events indicate that [Docket No. 2001–NM–298–AD; Amendment via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments the flightcrews may not have correctly 39–12465; AD 2001–20–17] may also be sent via the Internet using determined both the severity of the ice accretion and the need to take RIN 2120–AA64 the following address: 9-anm- [email protected]. Comments sent immediate action to prevent excessive Airworthiness Directives; Empresa via fax or the Internet must contain loss of airspeed, especially when using Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–298–AD’’ in the the autopilot. This situation, if not (EMBRAER) Model EMB–120 Series subject line and need not be submitted corrected, could result in reduced Airplanes in triplicate. Comments sent via the controllability of the airplane due to Internet as attached electronic files must accretion of ice on the airplane. AGENCY: Federal Aviation be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Issuance of Service Information Administration, DOT. Windows or ASCII text. ACTION: Final rule; request for The service information referenced in EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin comments. this AD may be obtained from Empresa 120–30–0033, Change 01, dated SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. September 6, 2001, that describes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, procedures for installing a low speed applicable to all EMBRAER Model Sao Jose dos Campos—SP, Brazil. This alarm on the glareshield panel, adding EMB–120 series airplanes, that currently information may be examined at the new electrical wires in the cockpit and requires revising the Airplane Flight FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, in the electronic compartment, Manual, installing a placard on the main 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, installing or replacing two placards, and instrument panel, and removing the Washington; or at the FAA, Atlanta reworking the pitot-static system ‘‘LIGHT–HEAVY’’ inflation switch of Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown between frames 3 and 4. the leading edge deicing boots. This Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of EMBRAER also issued Service amendment continues to require those Bulletin 120–30–0033, Change 02, dated actions and adds requirements to install the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. September 14, 2001, which includes a low speed alarm for icing conditions, two new electrical diagrams, corrects FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to revise the AFM, and to replace an the hook-up charts, and describes a Carla J. Worthey, Program Manager, existing placard with a placard that check for correct installation of diodes. directs the flightcrew to activate the ACE–118A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft deicing boots whenever ice is detected Certification Office, One Crown Center, EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin by visual cues or ice detector 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, 120–25–0258, Change 01, dated August illumination. This amendment is Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone (770) 30, 2001, which describes procedures prompted by issuance of mandatory 703–6062; fax (770) 703–6097. for installing a placard to instruct pilots continuing airworthiness information by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June to immediately activate the deicing a foreign civil airworthiness authority. 20, 2001, the FAA issued AD 2001–13– boots and disengage the autopilot, This action is intended to ensure that 14, amendment 39–12295 (66 FR 34083, whenever ice is detected by visual cues the flightcrew is provided with accurate June 27, 2001), applicable to all or ice detector illumination. The indications of the severity of ice EMBRAER Model EMB–120 series original issue of Service Bulletin 120– accretion, clear indication of airplanes, to require revising the 25–0258, dated May 14, 2001, was cited unintentional airplane speed reductions Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), as a source of service information in AD in icing conditions, and appropriate installing a placard on the main 2001–13–14. Change 01 is identical in procedures to prevent reduced instrument panel, and removing the technical content to the original service controllability of the aircraft due to ‘‘LIGHT–HEAVY’’ inflation switch of bulletin, and merely specifies that a new accretion of ice on the airplane. the leading edge deicing boots. That placard has been developed for airplanes that have been modified per DATES: Effective October 22, 2001. action was prompted by issuance of The incorporation by reference of mandatory continuing airworthiness EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30– certain publications listed in the information by a foreign civil 0033, and contains procedures for regulations is approved by the Director airworthiness authority. The actions installing the new placard. of the Federal Register as of October 22, required by that AD are intended to The DAC classified these service 2001. ensure that the flightcrew is provided bulletins as mandatory and issued The incorporation of certain other with accurate indications of the severity Brazilian airworthiness directive 2001– publications listed in the regulations of ice accretion and appropriate 05–02R1, effective September 30, 2001, was approved previously by the Director procedures and actions to prevent in order to assure the continued of the Federal Register as of July 12, reduced controllability of the airplane airworthiness of these airplanes in 2001 (66 FR 34083, June 27, 2001). due to accretion of ice on the airplane. Brazil.
VerDate 11
FAA’s Conclusions Determination of Rule’s Effective Date Regulatory Impact This airplane model is manufactured Since a situation exists that requires The regulations adopted herein will in Brazil and is type certificated for the immediate adoption of this not have a substantial direct effect on operation in the United States under the regulation, it is found that notice and the States, on the relationship between provisions of section 21.29 of the opportunity for prior public comment the national Government and the States, Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR hereon are impracticable, and that good or on the distribution of power and 21.29) and the applicable bilateral cause exists for making this amendment responsibilities among the various airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to effective in less than 30 days. levels of government. Therefore, it is this bilateral airworthiness agreement, determined that this final rule does not the DAC has kept the FAA informed of Comments Invited have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. the situation described above. The FAA Although this action is in the form of The FAA has determined that this has examined the findings of the DAC, a final rule that involves requirements regulation is an emergency regulation reviewed all available information, and affecting flight safety and, thus, was not that must be issued immediately to determined that AD action is necessary preceded by notice and an opportunity correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, for products of this type design that are for public comment, comments are and that it is not a ‘‘significant certificated for operation in the United invited on this rule. Interested persons regulatory action’’ under Executive States. are invited to comment on this rule by Order 12866. It has been determined submitting such written data, views, or Explanation of Requirements of Rule further that this action involves an arguments as they may desire. emergency regulation under DOT Since an unsafe condition has been Communications shall identify the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 identified that is likely to exist or Rules Docket number and be submitted FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is develop on other airplanes of the same in triplicate to the address specified type design registered in the United determined that this emergency under the caption ADDRESSES. All States, this AD supersedes AD 2001–13– regulation otherwise would be communications received on or before 14 to continue to require revising the significant under DOT Regulatory the closing date for comments will be AFM, installing a placard on the main Policies and Procedures, a final considered, and this rule may be instrument panel, and removing the regulatory evaluation will be prepared amended in light of the comments ‘‘LIGHT–HEAVY’’ inflation switch of and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy received. Factual information that the leading edge deicing boots. This AD of it, if filed, may be obtained from the supports the commenter’s ideas and will also require installing a low speed Rules Docket at the location provided suggestions is extremely helpful in alarm for icing conditions, revising the under the caption ADDRESSES. evaluating the effectiveness of the AD AFM, and replacing an existing placard action and determining whether List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 with a placard that directs the additional rulemaking action would be flightcrew to activate the deicing boots Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation needed. whenever ice is detected by visual cues safety, Incorporation by reference, or ice detector illumination. Submit comments using the following Safety. format: Adoption of the Amendment Differences Between This AD and the • Organize comments issue-by-issue. Brazilian AD For example, discuss a request to Accordingly, pursuant to the This AD differs from the Brazilian AD change the compliance time and a authority delegated to me by the in the following ways: request to change the service bulletin Administrator, the Federal Aviation 1. This AD is more specific as to when reference as two separate issues. Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR to disconnect the autopilot. • For each issue, state what specific part 39) as follows: 2. This AD includes instructions to change to the AD is being requested. remove the current information • Include justification (e.g., reasons or PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS contained in the Normal Procedures data) for each request. DIRECTIVES Section advising the flightcrew to select either HEAVY or LIGHT mode. Comments are specifically invited on 1. The authority citation for part 39 3. This AD adds a WARNING to the the overall regulatory, economic, continues to read as follows: environmental, and energy aspects of Normal Procedures section to exit icing Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. conditions if the flightcrew detects large the rule that might suggest a need to or frequent changes in trim or excessive modify the rule. All comments § 39.13 [Amended] performance degradation. submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, 2. Section 39.13 is amended by 4. This AD includes additional AFM removing amendment 39–12295 (66 FR instructions regarding abnormal in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that 34083, June 27, 2001), and by adding a operations with the icing low speed new airworthiness directive (AD), alarm activated. summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this AD amendment 39–12465, to read as 5. This AD also includes dispatch follows: relief regarding certain Master will be filed in the Rules Docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to 2001–20–17 Empresa Brasileira de Minimum Equipment List items for the Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): ice detection system and the new icing acknowledge receipt of their comments Amendment 39–12465. Docket 2001– low speed alarm system. submitted in response to this rule must NM–298–AD. Supersedes AD 2001–13– submit a self-addressed, stamped Interim Action 14, Amendment 39–12295. postcard on which the following Applicability: All Model EMB–120, This is considered to be interim statement is made: ‘‘Comments to –120RT, –120ER, and –120FC series action until final action is identified, at Docket Number 2001–NM–298–AD.’’ airplanes, certificated in any category. which time the FAA may consider The postcard will be date stamped and Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane further rulemaking. returned to the commenter. identified in the preceding applicability
VerDate 11
provision, regardless of whether it has been The request should include an assessment of To ensure that the flightcrew is provided modified, altered, or repaired in the area the effect of the modification, alteration, or with accurate indications of the severity of subject to the requirements of this AD. For repair on the unsafe condition addressed by ice accretion, clear indication of airplanes that have been modified, altered, or this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not unintentional airplane speed reductions in repaired so that the performance of the been eliminated, the request should include icing conditions, and appropriate procedures requirements of this AD is affected, the specific proposed actions to address it. to prevent reduced controllability of the owner/operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance in Compliance: Required as indicated, unless aircraft due to accretion of ice on the accordance with paragraph (m) of this AD. accomplished previously. airplane; accomplish the following:
Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2001–13–14 Airplane Flight Manual (a) Within 20 flight hours after July 12, 2001 (the effective date of AD 2001–13–14, amendment 39–12295): Revise the Limitations and Normal Procedures Sections of the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to include the following procedures, as specified in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4) of this AD. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. (1) In the Limitations section under the existing title ‘Operation in Icing Conditions,’ insert the following: ‘‘Autopilot use is prohibited when atmospheric icing conditions exist, at the first sign of icing accretion anywhere on the airplane, or after the illumination of the Ice Condition light, whichever occurs first. Leading edge deicers switch must be operated in the ‘Heavy’ mode only.’’ (2) In the Normal Procedures section under the existing title, ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions,’’ delete the following: ‘‘Leading edge deicers switch ...... ON Select ‘‘Heavy’’ or ‘‘Light’’ mode (1 or 3 minutes cycle), based on the flightcrew’s judgement and evaluation of the severity of the ice encounter and rate of accretion.’’ (3) In the Normal Procedures section under the existing title, ‘Operation in Icing Conditions,’ insert the following: ‘‘Leading edge deicers switch ...... On (TIMER 1 or TIMER 2) Select ‘Heavy’ mode if Light/Heavy switch is still installed.’’ (4) In the Normal Procedures section insert the following warning: ‘‘WARNING: If large or frequent changes in longitudinal trim, and/or excessive performance degradation occur (identified by large in- creases in power required to maintain airspeed and altitude), immediately request priority handling from air traffic control to exit icing conditions.’’ Placard Installation (b) Within 400 flight hours after July 12, 2001: Install a placard to activate the deicing boots and disengage the autopilot, whenever ice is detected by visual cues or ice detector illumination, to the left of the pilot’s airspeed indicator and one placard to the right of the co-pilot’s altimeter, per EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–25–0258, dated May 14, 2001, or Change 01, dated August 30, 2001. Removal of Inflation Switch (c) Within 400 flight hours after July 12, 2001: Remove the ‘‘Light-Heavy’’ inflation switch of the leading edge deicing boots, per EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0032, Change 01, dated June 13, 2001. New Requirements of This AD Installation of a Low Speed Alarm (d) Within 40 days after the effective date of this AD: Install a low speed alarm for icing conditions per EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0033, Change 01, dated September 6, 2001, or Change 02, dated September 14, 2001. Accomplish the installation together with or after the removal of the leading edge boots inflation cycle control ‘‘light-heavy’’ switch, required by paragraph (c) of this AD. Placards (e) Prior to further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (d) of this AD: Remove the placard required by paragraph (b) of this AD, and prior to further flight, replace it with a new placard to specify activation of the deicing boots whenever ice is detected by visual cues or ice detector illumination, per EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0033, Change 01, dated September 6, 2001, or Change 02, dated September 14, 2001. Airplane Flight Manual (f) Prior to further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (d) of this AD: Accomplish the actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD. (1) Remove the AFM Limitation required by paragraph (a)(1) of this AD, and revise the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM under the existing title of ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions’’ to include the following procedures (This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.): For airplanes on which the HEAVY/LIGHT switch is installed: Leading edge deicers switch must be operated in the HEAVY mode only at the first sign of icing accretion anywhere on the airplane or after the illumination of the ICE CONDITION light, whichever occurs first. For airplanes on which the low speed alarm has NOT been installed: Autopilot use is prohibited at the first sign of icing accretion anywhere on the airplane or after illumination of the ICE CONDITION light, whichever occurs first. Airspeeds: Flaps and Gear UP ...... 160 KIAS MINIMUM (All engines operating) Flaps 15% Gear UP ...... 160 KIAS MINIMUM (All engines operating)
Note: In the event of an engine failure in airspeeds shown in Section V, Performance. activate if the airspeed is below 160 KIAS icing conditions, maintain the engine failure The icing condition low speed alarm may with the flaps up.’’
VerDate 11
(2) Remove the following paragraph from of ‘‘Flight With All Engines Inoperative,’’ the Green (Hydraulic) System,’’ ‘‘Loss of the the Limitations Section of the AFM under the ‘‘Forced Landing,’’ ‘‘Ditching,’’ ‘‘Takeoff with Blue (Hydraulic) System,’’ and ‘‘Loss of Both existing title of ‘‘Operation in Icing Engine Failure (Above V1),’’ ‘‘One Engine Hydraulic Systems’’ to include the following Conditions,’’ that currently reads as follows: Inoperative Approach and Landing,’’ ‘‘One procedures (This may be accomplished by ‘‘When operating in known or forecast Engine Inoperative Go-Around,’’ and ‘‘Engine inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.): icing conditions, the specific procedures for Airstart’’ to include the following Note (This ‘‘Note: In the event of a 0° flap landing in operation in icing conditions presented in may be accomplished by inserting a copy of the Normal Procedures Section of this this AD in the AFM.): icing conditions, maintain 160 KIAS until manual must be followed.’’ ‘‘Note: In the event of an engine failure in landing is assured. Reduce airspeed to cross (3) Insert the following into the Limitations icing conditions, maintain the engine failure runway threshold (50 ft) at VREF 45 + 35 Section of the AFM under the existing title airspeeds shown in Section V, Performance. KIAS. The icing condition low speed alarm of ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions’’: The icing condition low speed alarm may may activate as airspeed decreases below 160 ‘‘When operating in known or forecast activate as airspeed decreases below 160 KIAS.’’ icing conditions, the specific procedures for KIAS.’’ (2) Revise the Abnormal Procedures operation in icing conditions presented in (h) Prior to further flight after Section of the AFM to include the following the Abnormal Procedures and Normal accomplishment of the installation required new section (This may be accomplished by Procedures Sections of the AFM must be by paragraph (d) of this AD: Accomplish the inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.): followed.’’ actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (g) Prior to further flight after (h)(2) of this AD. ‘‘ICING CONDITION LOW SPEED ALARM (If accomplishment of the installation required (1) Revise the Abnormal Procedures installed): by paragraph (d) of this AD: Revise the Section of the AFM under the existing titles • LOW SPEED amber light illuminated on Emergency and Abnormal Procedures of ‘‘Flap Control Fault,’’ ‘‘Flap the Icing Cond Low speed Alarm Panel. Sections of the AFM under the existing titles Disagreement,’’ ‘‘Flap Asymmetry,’’ ‘‘Loss of • Buzzer sound.
1. Airspeed ...... ABOVE 160 KIAS 2. Leading Edge Deicer Switch ...... VERIFY TIMER 1 OR TIMER 2
Note: ICING CONDITION LOW SPEED ALARM may not be cancelable by the flightcrew, and may not extinguish until 170 KIAS. Apply- ing power should promptly recover speed. If necessary, disengage the autopilot, push over to regain airspeed, and notify ATC of altitude deviation. When ICING CONDITION LOW SPEED ALARM extinguishes: Autopilot ...... AS REQUIRED Note: Monitor the ice accretion and the airspeed. Severe Icing Conditions ...... CHECK If Severe Icing Conditions are confirmed: Flying in Severe Icing Conditions Procedure ...... APPLY (i) Prior to further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (d) of this AD: Add the following new procedure to the Normal Procedures Section of the AFM under the existing title of ‘‘Daily Checks, Before Engine Start,’’ as follows (This may be ac- complished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.): ‘‘Icing Condition Low Speed Alarm System: TEST Button ...... PRESS Check the buzzer sounding continously and the LOW SPEED amber light illuminated. Release button. Check sound and light extinguished.’’ (j) Prior to further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (d) of this AD: Revise the Normal Procedures Section of the AFM under the existing title of ‘‘Turbulent Air Penetration,’’ as specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. (1) Remove the following from the existing paragraph under ‘‘Turbulent Air Penetration’’: ‘‘1. Airspeed: 180 KIAS (from sea level to 15000 ft); 160 KIAS (above 15000 ft)’’ (2) Replace the wording specified in paragraph (j)(1) with the following: ‘‘1. Airspeed: 175 KIAS’’ (k) Prior to further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (d) of this AD: Revise the Normal Procedures Section of the FAA-approved AFM under the existing title of ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions’’ as specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. (1) Remove the following from the wording under the existing title of ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions’’: ‘‘At the first sign of icing accretion anywhere on the airplane, proceed: Windshield Heat Switches ...... ON Leading Edge Deicers Switch ...... ON Select HEAVY or LIGHT mode (1 or 3 minutes cycle), based on the pilot’s judgement and eval- uation of the severity of the ice encounter and rate of accretion.’’ (2) Insert the following wording under the existing title of ‘‘Operation in Icing Conditions’’: ‘‘At the first sign of icing accretion anywhere on the airplane or ICE CONDITION light illumination, whichever occurs first, proceed as follows: If the icing condition low speed alarm is NOT installed: Autopilot ...... DISENGAGE Windshield Heat Switches ...... ON Leading Edge Deicers Switch ...... ON (TIMER 1 or TIMER 2) Inflation Cycle Switch (if installed) ...... HEAVY If the icing condition low speed alarm IS installed: Windshield Heat Switches ...... ON Leading Edge Deicers Switch ...... ON (TIMER 1 or TIMER 2) ‘‘WARNING: If large or frequent changes in longitudinal trim, and/or excessive performance degradation (identified by large increases in power required to maintain airspeed and altitude), immediately request priority handling from air traffic control to exit icing conditions.’’ .
VerDate 11
Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) Change 02, dated September 14, 2001, is which defines ‘‘musculoskeletal (l) The dispatch relief conditions specified approved by the Director of the Federal disorder (MSD)’’ and requires employers in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this AD are Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) to check the MSD column on the OSHA considered to be acceptable for continued and 1 CFR part 51. Log if an employee experiences a work- operations if either the ice detection system (2) The incorporation by reference of related musculoskeletal disorder, and or the low speed alarm system is inoperative: EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–25–0258, dated May 14, 2001; and EMBRAER Service § 1904.29(b)(7)(vi), which states that (1) The airplane may be operated for a MSDs are not considered privacy period of three days with the ice detection Bulletin 120–30–0032, Change 01, dated June system inoperative, provided that, whenever 13, 2001, was approved previously by the concern cases. The effective date of operating in visible moisture at temperatures Director of the Federal Register as of July 12, these provisions is delayed from January below 10 degrees C (50 degrees F): 2001 (66 FR 34083, June 27, 2001). 1, 2002 until January 1, 2003. OSHA (i) All ice protection systems are turned on (3) Copies may be obtained from Empresa will continue to evaluate §§ 1904.10 and (except leading edge deicing during takeoff), Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), 1904.12 over the next year. and P.O. Box 343—CEP 12.225, Sao Jose dos OSHA is also adding a new paragraph (ii) AFM limitations and normal Campos—SP, Brazil. Copies may be (c) to §1904.10, establishing criteria for procedures for operating in icing conditions inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane recording cases of work-related hearing are complied with. Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Atlanta Aircraft loss during calendar year 2002. Section (2) The airplane may be operated for a 1904.10(c) codifies the enforcement period of three days with the icing condition Certification Office, One Crown Center, 1895 low speed alarm system inoperative, Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, policy in effect since 1991, under which provided: Georgia; or at the Office of the Federal employers must record work related (i) It is not operated in known or forecast Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite shifts in hearing of an average of 25dB icing conditions, and 700, Washington, DC. or more at 2000, 3000 and 4000 hertz in (ii) If icing conditions are inadvertently Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed either ear. encountered, the autopilot must be in Brazilian airworthiness directive 2001–05– DATES: The amendments in this rule disconnected and steps must be taken to exit 02R1, effective date of September 30, 2001. will become effective on January 1, icing conditions. 2002. Note 2: Refer to MMEL/MEL system for Effective Date complete dispatch requirements. Where a (p) This amendment becomes effective on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim difference exists between this AD and the October 22, 2001. Maddux, Occupational Safety and MMEL, the provisions of this AD prevail. Issued in Renton, Washington, on October Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Directorate of Safety Standards Alternative Methods of Compliance 3, 2001. Charles Huber, Programs, Room N–3609, 200 (m) An alternative method of compliance Constitution Avenue, N.W., or adjustment of the compliance time that Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Washington, DC 20210. Telephone (202) provides an acceptable level of safety may be 693–2222. used if approved by the Manager, Atlanta FR Doc. 01–25395 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Operators shall submit their requests through I. Background an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then In January, 2001 (66 FR 5916–6135), send it to the Manager, Atlanta ACO. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OSHA published revisions to its rule on recording and reporting occupational Note 3: Information concerning the Occupational Safety and Health injuries and illnesses (29 CFR parts existence of approved alternative methods of Administration compliance with this AD, if any, may be 1904 and 1952) to take effect on January obtained from the Atlanta ACO. 1, 2002. On July 3, 2001, the agency 29 CFR Part 1904 proposed to delay the effective date of Special Flight Permits [Docket No. R–02A] Sections 1904.10 Recording criteria for (n) Special flight permits may be issued in cases involving occupational hearing accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 RIN 1218–AC00 loss, and 1904.12 Recording criteria for of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR cases involving work-related 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to Occupational Injury and Illness a location where the requirements of this AD Recording and Reporting musculoskeletal disorders, until January can be accomplished. Requirements 1, 2003 (66 FR 35113–35115). In that notice, OSHA explained that, as a result Incorporation by Reference AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health of the regulatory review required by the (o) Except for the actions specified in Administration (OSHA), U.S. Andrew Card memorandum (66 FR paragraphs (a), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) of Department of Labor. 7702), it was reconsidering the this AD the actions shall be done in requirement in Section 1904.10 to accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin ACTION: Final rule. 120–25–0258, dated May 14, 2001; record a case involving an occupational EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0032, SUMMARY: The Occupational Safety and hearing loss averaging 10dB, or more. Change 01, dated June 13, 2001; EMBRAER Health Administration (OSHA) is OSHA found that there were reasons to Service Bulletin 120–25–0258, Change 01, delaying the effective date of three question the appropriateness of 10dB as dated August 30, 2001; EMBRAER Service provisions of the Occupational Injury the recording criterion, and asked for Bulletin 120–30–0033, Change 01, dated and Illness Recording and Reporting comment on other approaches and September 6, 2001; and EMBRAER Service Requirements rule published January criteria, including recording losses Bulletin 120–30–0033, Change 02, dated 19, 2001 (66 FR 5916–6135) and is averaging 15, 20 or 25dB. In view of the September 14, 2001; as applicable. establishing interim criteria for uncertainty concerning the appropriate (1) The incorporation by reference of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–25–0258, recording cases of work-related hearing criteria, OSHA preliminarily concluded Change 01, dated August 30, 2001; loss. The provisions being delayed are that it should delay implementing the EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0033, §§ 1904.10(a) and (b), which specify 10dB requirement for a year while it Change 01, dated September 6, 2001; and recording criteria for cases involving reconsidered the question. The proposal EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–30–0033, occupational hearing loss, § 1904.12, stated that if implementation of Section
VerDate 11
1904.10 were delayed for a year, require the employer to test employee’s variations in audiometric measurement employers would continue to record hearing. However, OSHA’s occupational (66 FR 35114). For these and other hearing loss cases during that year using noise standard (29 CFR 1910.95), reasons, OSHA reopened the record to the 25dB criterion articulated in requires employers in general industry permit consideration of additional OSHA’s 1991 enforcement policy (See to conduct periodic audiometric testing evidence and to explore alternative 66 FR 35114–35115). of employees when employees’ noise approaches (Id.). OSHA also stated that it was exposures are equal to, or exceed, an 8- Most commenters supported the reconsidering the requirement in hour time-weighted average of 85dB. If proposed delay in implementation of Section 1904.12 that employers check such testing reveals that an employee Section 1940.10 (see, e.g., Exs. 3–1, 3– the MSD column on the OSHA Log for has sustained hearing loss equal to an 6, 3–14, 3–22, 3–25, 3–26, 3–29, 3–34, a case involving a ‘‘musculoskelal STS, the employer must take protective 3–49, 3–50, 3–54). The view expressed disorder’’ as defined in that Section. measures, including requiring the use of by Organization Resources Counselors, This action was taken in light of a the hearing protectors, to prevent further Inc. is representative. ORC (Ex. 3–49, p. Secretary’s decision to develop a hearing loss. 3) argued: comprehensive plan to address The old recordkeeping rule, which [T]he finding of a Standard Threshold Shift ergonomic hazards, and to schedule a remains in effect until January 1, 2001, (STS) [is][ a ‘flag’ for the implementation of series of forums to consider key issues contained no specific threshold for a series of actions required by the OSHA relating to the plan, including the recording hearing loss cases. In 1991, standard on exposure to occupational noise. approach to defining an ergonomic OSHA issued an enforcement policy on It was not intended, by itself, to be an injury. OSHA preliminarily found that it the criteria for recording hearing loss indicator of illness, or impairment, but, rather, a sentinel event that triggers a series would be premature to define a cases, to remain in effect until new criteria were established by rulemaking. of actions that will prevent illness or musculoskeletal disorder for impairment from occurring. As such a tool, recordkeeping purposes before further The 1991 policy stated that OSHA it has been an effective protector of employee progress has been made in developing would cite employers for failing to hearing, but does not, by itself, rise to the the comprehensive ergonomics plan, record work related shifts in hearing of level of recordability. See also, e.g., Ex. 3–54 and that a delay in the effective date of an average of 25dB or more at 2000, (American Iron and Steel Institute), Ex. 3–50 Section 1904.12 was therefore 3000 and 4000 hertz in either ear. (National Association of Manufacturers and Can Manufacturers Institute). appropriate. 66 FR 35115. The Agency Subsequently, OSHA released noted that the proposed delay would interpretations stating that the employer Several commenters opposed the not affect the employer’s obligation to could adjust the audiogram for aging delay, with most citing the protective record all injuries and illnesses, using the tables in Appendix F of the purposes served by recordkeeping including musculoskeletal injuries and Noise Standard, and that the employer requirements (see, e.g., Exs. 3–3, 3–4, 3– illnesses, that meet the criteria in was to use the employee’s pre- 8, 3–9, 3–10, 3–11, 3–12, 3–17, 3–31). In Sections 1904.4–1904.7, regardless of employment audiogram as the baseline a representative comment, the AFL–CIO whether a particular injury or illness reference audiogram for determining a argued that the requirement to record a would meet the definition of MSD recordable hearing loss. 10dB hearing loss on the Log would aid found in Section 1904.12. Id. One of the major issues in the in the early detection and prevention of The period for submission of recordkeeping rulemaking was to occupational hearing loss. It stated (Ex. comments on the proposed rule closed determine the level of occupational 3–24–1, p.3) that, on September 4, 2001. After considering hearing loss that constitutes a health condition serious enough to warrant [r]ecording a 10 dB STS on Form 300 is a the views of interested parties, OSHA practical and reasonable means to assist in has determined that the effective date of recording. This was necessary because the early detection of a loss in hearing so that Sections 1904.10(a) and 1904.12(a) and the final rule no longer requires workplace intervention measures can be (b) should be delayed until January 1, recording of minor or insignificant implemented to protect workers from the 2003, and that a new paragraph (c) health conditions. See, e.g., 66 FR 5931. hazards of noise. Having employers continue OSHA proposed a requirement to record to record shifts in hearing of an average of should be added to Section 1904.10 re- hearing loss averaging 15dB at 2000, 25 dB * * * is too high a threshold of loss establishing a 25dB recording criterion 3000 and 4000 hertz in one or both ears. in hearing acuity to be sufficiently proactive for hearing loss cases for calendar year OSHA adopted the lower 10dB in preventing worker hearing loss. 2002. threshold in the final rule based in large OSHA is not persuaded by this II. Summary and Explanation of Final part upon comments submitted by the argument. As the AFL–CIO concedes Rule Coalition to Preserve OSHA and NIOSH (Ex. 3–24–1, p.6), Congress intended the and Protect Workers’ Hearing, asserting recordkeeping system to capture non- A. Recording Occupational Hearing Loss that ‘‘[a]n age-corrected STS is a large minor injuries and illnesses. OSHA is Cases hearing change that can affect reconsidering the finding that a 10dB Section 1904.10 of the final communicative competence.’’ 66 FR shift in hearing acuity represents such a recordkeeping rule requires employers 6008. health condition, and intends to resolve to record, by checking the ‘‘hearing In its July 3 proposal to delay this issue based on all the available loss’’ column on the OSHA 300 Log, a implementation of Section 1904.10, evidence. In the meantime, there is case in which an employee’s hearing OSHA expressed reservations about sufficient question concerning the test (audiogram) reveals that a Standard whether 10dB is the appropriate appropriateness of 10dB as a recording Threshold Shift (STS) in hearing acuity threshold for recording hearing loss. threshold to justify a limited delay in has occurred. An STS is defined as ‘‘a The agency acknowledged that there is implementing Section 1904.10(a) and change in hearing threshold, relative to evidence that an STS may not be a (b). the most recent audiogram for that serious health problem, particularly for Delaying implementation of the 10dB employee, of an average of 10 decibels employees who have not previously threshold for a year while OSHA (dB) or more at 2000, 3000 and 4000 sustained hearing loss, and that a 10dB reconsiders the criteria for recording hertz in one or both ears.’’ The shift may not be a reliable criterion for hearing loss cases will not deprive recordkeeping rule itself does not recording purposes because of normal employers and employees of
VerDate 11
information about noise hazards. The B. Defining an MSD and Checking the 44, 3–49, 3–50, 3–54, 3–59, 3–61). occupational noise exposure standard MSD Column OSHA continues to believe a delay is requires that employees in general Section 1904.12 provides that if an justified for these reasons. industry be tested for hearing loss when employee experiences a recordable Several commenters opposed a delay noise exposure exceeds an 8-hour time- musculoskeletal disorder (MSD), the in implementing the recordkeeping weighted average of 85dB, and that employer must record it on the OSHA rule’s definition of MSD and the employees be informed, in writing, if a Log and must check the MSD column. requirement to check the MSD column 10dB shift has occurred. The For recordkeeping purposes, the rule (see, e.g., Exs. 3–3, 3–8, 3–9, 3–10, 3– audiometric test records must be defines MSDs as disorders of the 11, 3–12, 3–17, 3–21, 3–24, 3–28, 3–31, retained for the duration of the affected muscles, nerves, tendons, ligaments, 3–36, 3–40, 3–42, 3–52). In a employee’s employment. See 29 CFR joints, cartilage and spinal discs that are representative comment, the AFL–CIO 1910.95 (g), (m). The noise standard also not caused by slips, trips, falls, motor argued that delayed implementation of specifies the protective measures to be vehicle accidents or other similar Section 1904.12 will make it more taken to prevent further hearing loss for accidents (see Section 1904.12(b)(1)). difficult for employers, workers and employees who have experience a 10dB The Section also explains that in OSHA to address workplace ergonomic shift, including the use of hearing determining whether an MSD is hazards, and will seriously undermine protectors and referral for audiological recordable, the employer must use the OSHA’s ability to enforce the general evaluation where appropriate. See 29 same criteria that apply to other injuries duty clause for ergonomic hazards (see CFR 1910.95 (g)(8). These requirements, and illnesses. To be recordable, the Ex. 3–24–1, pp. 15–22). which apply without regard to the disorder must be work related, must be OSHA does not agree with this recording criteria in the recordkeeping a new case, and must meet one or more assessment. Employers are required to rule, will protect workers against the of the general recording criteria. Section record all injuries and illnesses meeting hazards of noise. The one-year delay in the criteria established in Sections implementing Section 1904.10(a) and 1904.12 states that ‘‘[t]here are no special criteria for determining which 1904.4 through 1904.7 of the (b) will therefore not deprive employers recordkeeping rule regardless of and workers of the means to detect and musculoskeletal disorders to record,’’ and refers the reader to other sections of whether a particular injury or illness prevent hearing loss. meets the definition of MSD in Section Several commenters supported a the rule in which the basic recording 1904.12. Thus, the delay in requirement to record a hearing loss criteria are found. implementing Section 1904.12 will not averaging 25 dB or more while OSHA OSHA’s purpose in including an MSD reduce the number of cases recorded or reconsidered the 10dB criterion (see, column on the Log was to gather data affect the narrative description of the e.g., Exs. 3–49, 3–54), The American on ‘‘musculoskeletal disorders’’ as that injury or illness that must be provided Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) argued term is defined in Section 1904.12. Two for each case. Employers who use the that the 25dB criterion should be months after publication of the new Log and injury reports to discover included in the regulatory text to avoid recordkeeping rule, Congress any confusion about employers’ disapproved OSHA’s ergonomics ergonomic hazards will be able to compliance responsibilities during standard under the Congressional continue to do so, relying on the calendar year 2002. OSHA agrees with Review Act (Pub. L. 107.5 Mar. 20, description-of-injury information and AISI on this point, and has added a new 2001). Following Congressional other data to identify soft-tissued paragraph (c) to Section 1904.10 disapproval of the ergonomics standard, disorders in their workplaces (Ex. 3–24– specifying the criteria to be used for the the Secretary announced that she 1, p. 15). Employees will continue to 2002 recording year. The AISI also intends to develop a comprehensive have access to the information provided recommended that OSHA continue its plan to address ergonomics hazards and in the Log and, under the new rule, to policy of allowing employers to correct scheduled a series of forums to consider the information in the part of the employee’s audiograms for aging basic issues related to ergonomics (66 Incident Report explaining how the (presbycusis) using the age correction FR 31694, 66 FR 33578). One of the key incident occurred. Employers and tables in the occupational noise issues to be considered in connection employees will be able to categorize this standard (Ex. 3–54). Since this was with the Secretary’s comprehensive injury and illness information in any OSHA’s policy in the past, the Agency plan is the approach to defining an manner they find useful. has also included language to this effect ergonomic injury. The delay need not lead to the in the new paragraph, 1904.10(c). In the July proposal, OSHA elimination of useful statistical data on A few commenters urged OSHA to preliminarily found that it would be MSDs, as the AFL–CIO suggests (Ex. 3– make sure that the State Plan States premature to implement the new 24–1, p. 16). The definition of MSD in have the same recording criteria as definition of MSD in Section 1904.12 Section 1904.12 is a new one. The federal OSHA (see, e.g., Exs. 3–22, 3– before considering the views of Secretary is currently considering 49). When OSHA issues a final business, labor and the public health approaches to defining ergonomic determination for the recording of community on the problem of injuries in connection with her occupational hearing loss for calendar ergonomic hazards. It also preliminarily comprehensive plan, and it is premature years 2003 and beyond, the states will found that it would create confusion to say, at this point, what definition be required to have identical criteria. and uncertainty to require employers to would be appropriate to produce useful However, the purpose of this notice is implement the new MSD definition data. To require employers to to maintain the status quo regarding the while the Secretary was considering implement a new definition of MSD recording of occupational hearing loss how to define an ergonomic injury while the agency is considering the for the year 2002, while OSHA under the comprehensive plan. 66 FR issue in connection with the reconsiders what the appropriate 35115. Many commenters supported the comprehensive ergonomics plan could recording criteria should be. Therefore, delay, citing reasons similar to those in create unnecessary confusion which the State Plan States will be allowed to the July 3 proposal (see, e.g., Exs. 3–1, would not, in OSHA’s view, be balanced maintain their policies for the recording 3–6, 3–14, 3–19, 3–20, 3–25, 3–26, 3–27, by improvements in the national of hearing loss during 2002. 3–29, 3–32, 3–35, 3–37, 3–38, 3–43, 3– statistics.
VerDate 11
Finally, OSHA notes that the delay in OSHA publications office at (202) 693– averaging 25dB or more at 2000, 3000, the implementation of Section 1904.12 1888. and 4000 hertz in either ear on the will have no effect on the Department’s Paperwork Reduction Act OSHA 300 Log. You must use the enforcement of the general duty clause. employee’s original baseline audiogram The definition of MSD in that section OSHA has submitted to OMB a for comparison. You may make a has never been in effect, and has not request for approval of the information correction for presbycusis (aging) by been a factor in enforcement of the collection requirements of the final using the tables in Appendix F of 29 clause. The sole effect of the delay is recordkeeping rule, including the effect CFR 1910.95. The requirement of that employers need not use the on the rule’s paperwork burden of the § 1904.37(b)(1) that States with OSHA- delay in implementation of Sections definition to categorize cases on the approved state plans must have the 1904.10 and 1904.12 until January 1, OSHA Recordkeeping Log for calendar same requirements for determining 2003, and the adoption of an interim year 2002. This recordkeeping issue which injuries and illnesses are does not affect an employer’s obligation 25dB recording criterion for hearing loss recordable and how they are recorded under the general duty clause. The cases for calendar year 2002. OSHA will shall not preclude the states from employer remains obligated to free its publish a subsequent Federal Register workplace from recognized hazards that document when OMB takes further retaining their existing criteria with are likely to cause serious physical action on the information collection regard to this section during calendar harm. requirements in the recordkeeping rule. year 2002. OSHA is adding a note following the Regulatory Flexibility Certification Note to § 1904.10: Paragraphs (a) and (b) of introduction to Section 1904.12 to this section are effective on January 1, 2003. inform employers of the policy that will Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Paragraph (c) of this section applies from be in effect during 2002. The note also Act (5 U.S.C. 601), the Assistant January 1, 2002 until December 31, 2002. informs the employer that, instead of Secretary certifies that the final rule will checking the column on the 300 Log for not have a significant economic impact 3. Section 1904.12 is amended by musculoskeletal disorders (since this on a substantial number of small adding a note to the section, to read as column is being removed from the log), entities. The rule does not add any new follows: the employer is to check the column for requirements, but merely delays the § 1904.12 Recording criteria for cases ‘‘injury’’ or ‘‘all other illness,’’ effective date of two sections of the rule. The delay will not impose any involving work-related musculoskeletal depending on the circumstances of the disorders. case. additional costs on the regulated public. * * * * * In a related matter, paragraph Executive Order 1904.29(b)(7)(vi) of the rule states that Note to § 1904.12: This section is effective This document has been deemed employers must consider an illness case January 1, 2003. From January 1, 2002 until significant under Executive Order 12866 to be a privacy concern case, and December 31, 2002, you are required to and has been reviewed by OMB. withhold the employee’s name from the record work-related injuries and illnesses forms, if the employee independently Authority involving muscles, nerves, tendons, and voluntarily requests that his or her This document was prepared under ligaments, joints, cartilage and spinal discs in accordance with the requirements applicable name not be entered on the Log. The the direction of John Henshaw, to any injury or illness under § 1904.5, second sentence of the paragraph states Assistant Secretary for Occupational § 1904.6, § 1904.7, and § 1904.29. For entry that ‘‘[m]usculoskeletal disorders Safety and Health. It is issued under (M) on the OSHA 300 Log, you must check (MSDs) are not considered privacy Section 8 of the Occupational Safety concern cases.’’ OSHA will be unable to either the entry for ‘‘injury’’ or ‘‘all other and Health Act (29 U.S.C. 657) and 5 illneses.’’ enforce this requirement during the U.S.C. 553. period of time that the definition of MSD in the rule is delayed. John Henshaw, 4. Section 1904.29(b)(7)(vi) is revised Accordingly, OSHA is adding a note to Assistant Secretary of Labor. to read as follows: section 1904.29(b)(7)(vi) stating that the 29 CFR part 1904 is hereby amended § 1904.29 Forms. first sentence of that section takes effect as set forth below: on January 1, 2002, and the second * * * * * sentence takes effect on January 1, 2003. PART 1904—[AMENDED] (6) * * * C. The 1904 Forms 1. The authority citation for 29 CFR (7) * * * Consistent with the above decisions, part 1904 is revised to read as follows: (vi) Other illnesses, if the employee OSHA will issue new recordkeeping Authority: 29 U.S.C. 657, 658, 660, 666, independently and voluntarily requests forms that have been modified to 669, 673, Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 3– that his or her name not be entered on remove the MSD and hearing loss 2000 (65 FR 50017), and 5 U.S.C. 533. the log. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are not considered privacy columns from the OSHA 300 Log of 2. Section 1904.10 of 29 CFR is concern cases. (Note: The first sentence Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses and amended by adding a note to the the OSHA 300A Summary of Work- section, and by adding a new paragraph of this § 1904.29(b)(7)(vi) is effective on Related Injuries and Illnesses. The (c), to read as follows: January 1, 2002. The second sentence is instructions accompanying the forms effective beginning on January 1, 2003.) have also been modified to reflect the § 1904.10 Recording criteria for cases decisions for the 1904 requirements that involving occupational hearing loss. * * * * * will be in effect during calendar year * * * * * [FR Doc. 01–25552 Filed 10–10–01; 8:45 am] 2002. (c) Recording criteria for calendar BILLING CODE 4510–26–M Employers may obtain copies of the year 2002. From January 1, 2002 until forms from OSHA’s Internet homepage December 31, 2002, you are required to at www.osha.gov, or by contacting the record a work-related hearing loss
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION comments previously with regard to this procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This event. determination is based on the minimal Coast Guard time (2 hours) that vessels will be Background and Purpose restricted from the zone. 33 CFR Part 165 A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and Small Entities [CGD09–01–132] spectators from the hazards associated Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act RIN 2115–AA97 with fireworks displays. Based on recent (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered accidents that have occurred in other whether this rule would have a Safety Zone; Lake St. Clair, Grosse Captain of the Port zones, and the significant impact on a substantial Pointe Yacht Club, Grosse Pointe explosive hazard of fireworks, the number of small entities. The term Shores, MI Captain of the Port Detroit has ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small determined fireworks launches in close AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. businesses, not-for-profit organizations proximity to watercraft pose significant that are independently owned and ACTION: Temporary final rule. risks to public safety and property. The operated and are not dominant in their likely combination of large numbers of SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is fields, and governmental jurisdictions establishing a 400-yard radius safety recreational vessels, congested with populations of less than 50,000. zone off of Harbor Seawall in Lake St. waterways, darkness punctuated by The Coast Guard certifies under 5 bright flashes of light, alcohol use, and Clair for a fireworks display on October U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not debris falling into the water could easily 13, 2001. This regulation is necessary to have a significant economic impact on result in serious injuries or fatalities. control vessel traffic within the a substantial number of small entities. Establishing a safety zone to control This rule would affect the following immediate vicinity of the fireworks vessel movement around the locations entities, some of which might be small launch site and to ensure the safety of of the launch platform will help ensure entities: the owners or operators of life and property during the event. Entry the safety of persons and property at commercial vessels intending to transit into, transiting, or anchoring within this this event and help minimize the or anchor in a portion of the activated safety zone is prohibited unless associated risk. safety zone. authorized by the Captain of the Port The safety zone will encompass all This safety zone will not have a Detroit or his designated on-scene waters surrounding the fireworks significant economic impact on a representative. launch platform within a 400-yard substantial number of small entities for DATES: This regulation is effective from radius of the fireworks barge with its the following reasons: This safety zone 9 p.m. until 11 p.m. on October 13, center in approximate position is only in effect from 9 p.m. until 11 2001. 42°26′01″ N, 083°51′56″ W, off of Harbor p.m. the day of the event. Vessel traffic Seawall. The geographic coordinates are ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this may pass safely around the safety zone. preamble as being available in the based upon North American Datum Before the effective period, we will docket, are part of docket [CGD09–01– 1983 (NAD 83). The size of this zone issue maritime advisories widely 132] and are available for inspection or was determined using the National Fire available to users of the Detroit River by copying at: U.S. Coast Guard Marine Prevention Association guidelines and the Ninth Coast Guard District Local Safety Office Detroit, 110 Mt. Elliott local knowledge concerning wind, Notice to Mariners, and Marine Ave., Detroit, MI 48207, between 8 a.m. waves, and currents. Information Broadcasts. Facsimile All persons and vessels shall comply and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, broadcasts may also be made. with the instructions of the Coast Guard except Federal holidays. If you think that your business, Captain of the Port or the designated on- organization, or governmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ENS scene patrol representative. Entry into, jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity Brandon Sullivan, U. S. Coast Guard transiting, or anchoring within this and that this rule would have a Marine Safety Office Detroit, (313) 568– safety zone is prohibited unless significant economic impact on it, 9558. authorized by the Captain of the Port please submit a comment (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Detroit or his designated on-scene ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it Regulatory Information representative. The Captain of the Port qualifies and how and to what degree or his designated on-scene this rule would economically affect it. We did not publish a notice of representative may be contacted via proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this VHF Channel 16. Assistance for Small Entities regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Under section 213(a) of the Small Coast Guard finds that good cause exists Regulatory Evaluation Business Regulatory Enforcement for not publishing an NPRM. Under 5 This rule is not a ‘‘significant Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of we want to assist small entities in that good cause exists for making this Executive Order 12866 and does not understanding this rule so that they can rule effective less than 30 days after require an assessment of potential costs better evaluate its effects and participate publication in the Federal Register. The and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that in the rulemaking process. If the rule permit application was not received in order. The Office of Management and would affect your small business, time to publish an NPRM followed by Budget has not reviewed this rule under organization, or governmental a final rule before the effective date. that order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under jurisdiction and you have questions Delaying this rule would be contrary to the regulatory policies and procedures concerning its provisions or options for the public interest of ensuring the safety of the Department of Transportation compliance, please contact Marine of spectators and vessels during this (DOT) (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). Safety Office Detroit (see ADDRESSES). event and immediate action is necessary The economic impact of this proposed Small businesses may send comments to prevent possible loss of life or rule to be so minimal that a full on the actions of federal employees who property. The Coast Guard has not Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph enforce, or otherwise determine received any complaints or negative 10(e) of the regulatory policies and compliance with, Federal regulations to
VerDate 11
the Small Business and Agriculture 1, paragraph 34(g) of Commandant coordinates are based upon North Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman Instruction M16475.1C, this rule is American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). and the Regional Small Business categorically excluded from further (b) Effective times and date. This Regulatory Fairness Boards. The environmental documentation. A section is effective from 9 p.m. until 11 Ombudsman evaluates these actions written categorical exclusion p.m. (local time) on October 13, 2001. annually and rates each agency’s determination is available in the docket The designated on-scene Patrol responsiveness to small business. If you for inspection or copying where Commander may be contacted via VHF wish to comment on actions by indicated under ADDRESSES. Channel 16. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– (c) Regulations. In accordance with Indian Tribal Governments 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). the general regulations in § 165.23 of This rule does not have tribal this part, entry into this safety zone is Collection of Information implications under Executive Order prohibited unless authorized by the This rule would call for no new 13175, Consultation and Coordination Coast Guard Captain of the Port Detroit, collection of information under the with Indian Tribal Governments, or his designated on-scene Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 because it does not have a substantial representative. U.S.C. 3501–3520). direct effect on one or more Indian Dated: October 1, 2001. tribes, on the relationship between the Federalism P.G. Gerrity, Federal Government and Indian tribes, We have analyzed this rule under or on the distribution of power and Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit. Executive Order 13132 and have responsibilities between the Federal determined that this rule does not have Government and Indian tribes. [FR Doc. 01–25650 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] implications for federalism under that BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Order. Energy Effects We have analyzed this proposed rule Unfunded Mandates Reform Act under Executive Order 13211, Actions DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Concerning Regulations That Coast Guard of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Federal agencies to assess the effects of Distribution, or Use. We have 33 CFR Part 165 their discretionary regulatory actions. In determined that it is not a ‘‘significant particular, the Act addresses actions energy action’’ under that order because [CGD09–01–138] that may result in the expenditure by a it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ RIN 2115–AA97 State, local, or tribal government, in the under Executive Order 12866 and is not aggregate, or by the private sector of likely to have a significant adverse effect Security Zone; Lake Michigan, $100,000,000 or more in any one year. on the supply, distribution, or use of Kewaunee, WI Though this proposed rule would not energy. It has not been designated by the result in such an expenditure, we do Administrator of the Office of AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere Information and Regulatory Affairs as a ACTION: Temporary final rule. in this preamble. significant energy action. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is Taking of Private Property List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 establishing a temporary security zone This rule would not affect a taking of Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation encompassing the navigable waters of private property or otherwise have (water), Reporting and recordkeeping Western Lake Michigan, adjacent to the taking implications under Executive requirements, Security measures, Kewaunee nuclear power plant. This Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Waterways. security zone is necessary to prevent Interference with Constitutionally For the reasons discussed in the unauthorized access into this nuclear Protected Property Rights. preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 power plant facility. Entry into, transit CFR part 165 as follows: through or anchoring within this Civil Justice Reform security zone is prohibited unless This rule meets applicable standards PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION authorized by the Captain of the Port in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Milwaukee or his designated on-scene Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to representative. minimize litigation, eliminate 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: DATES: This rule is effective from ambiguity, and reduce burden. September 28, 2001 through June 15, Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 2002. Protection of Children 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 The Coast Guard has analyzed this CFR 1.46. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this rule under Executive Order 13045, preamble as being available in the 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–105 is docket, are part of docket CGD09–01– Protection of Children from added to read as follows: Environmental Health Risks and Safety 138 and are available for inspection or Risks. This rule is not an economically § 165.T09–105 Safety Zone; Lake St. Clair, copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine significant rule and does not concern an Grosse Pointe Yacht Club, Gross Pointe Safety Office Milwaukee, 2420 South environmental risk to health or risk to Shores, MI. Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, WI safety that may disproportionately affect (a) Location. The safety zone will 53207 between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., children. encompass all navigable waters of Lake Monday through Friday, except Federal St. Clair within a 400-yard radius of the holidays. Environment fireworks barge being used as the launch FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: We have considered the platform with its center in approximate LCDR Timothy Sickler, U.S. Coast environmental impact of this proposed position 42°26′01″ N, 083°51′56″ W, off Guard Marine Safety Office Milwaukee, rule and concluded that, under figure 2– of Harbor Seawall. The geographic (414) 747–7155.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the Federalism, if it has a substantial direct regulatory policies and procedures of effect on State or local governments and Regulatory Information the Department of Transportation (DOT) would either preempt State law or As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, we did (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). This impose a substantial direct cost of not publish a notice of proposed is a temporary rule and vessels will be compliance on them. We have analyzed rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. able to transit around the security zone. this rule under that Order and have Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast In addition, vessels may request determined that it does not have Guard finds that good cause exists for permission from the Captain of the Port implications for federalism. not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 to transit through the security zone. U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for Unfunded Mandates Reform Act making this rule effective less than 30 Small Entities The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act days after publication in the Federal Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Register. Following the catastrophic (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered Federal agencies to assess the effects of nature and extent of damage realized whether this rule would have a their discretionary regulatory actions. In from the aircraft flown into the World significant economic impact on a particular, the Act addresses actions Trade Center towers September 11, substantial number of small entities. that may result in the expenditure by a 2001, this rulemaking is urgently The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises State, local, or tribal government, in the necessary to protect the national small businesses, not-for-profit aggregate, or by the private sector of security interests of the United States organizations that are independently $100,000,000 or more in any one year. against future potential terrorists strikes owned and operated and are not Though this rule will not result in such against public and governmental targets. dominant in their fields, and an expenditure, we do discuss the A similar attack was conducted against governmental jurisdictions with effects of this rule elsewhere in this the Pentagon on the same day. National populations of less than 50,000. preamble. security and intelligence officials warn For the reasons set out in the that future terrorist attacks against Regulatory Evaluation, the Coast Guard Taking of Private Property civilian targets may be anticipated. certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this This rule will not effect a taking of Publication of a notice of proposed rule will not have a significant private property or otherwise have rulemaking and delay of effective date economic impact on a substantial taking implications under Executive would be contrary to the public interest number of small entities. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and because immediate action is necessary Interference with Constitutionally Assistance for Small Entities to protect against the possible loss of Protected Property Rights. life, injury, or damage to property. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Civil Justice Reform Background and Purpose Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), This rule meets applicable standards A temporary security zone is we offered to assist small entities in in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive necessary to ensure the security of the understanding the rule so that they Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Kewaunee nuclear power plant as a could better evaluate its effects on them minimize litigation, eliminate result of the terrorist attacks on the and participate in the rulemaking ambiguity, and reduce burden. United States on September 11, 2001. process. If the rule would affect your Protection of Children The security zone is described as small business, organization, or follows: all navigable waters of Western governmental jurisdiction and you have We have analyzed this rule under Lake Michigan commencing from a questions concerning its provisions or Executive Order 13045, Protection of point on the shoreline at 44°20.85′ N, options for compliance, please contact Children from Environmental Health 087°32.1′ W; then easterly to 44°20.85′ Marine Safety Office Buffalo (see Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not ° ′ N, 087 31.4 W; then southerly to ADDRESSES.) an economically significant rule and 44°20.35′ N, 087°31.4′ W; then westerly Small businesses may send comments does not create an environmental risk to to 44°20.35′ N, 087°32.1′ W; then on the actions of Federal employees health or risk to safety that may northerly following the shoreline back who enforce, or otherwise determine disproportionately affect children. to the point of origin. These coordinates compliance with, Federal regulations to Indian Tribal Governments are based upon North American Datum the Small Business and Agriculture 1983 (NAD 83). Entry into, transit Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman This rule does not have tribal through or anchoring within this and the Regional Small Business implications under Executive Order security zone is prohibited unless Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 13175, Consultation and Coordination authorized by the Captain of the Port Ombudsman evaluates these actions with Indian Tribal Governments, Milwaukee or his designated on-scene annually and rates each agency’s because it does not have a substantial representative. The designated on-scene responsiveness to small business. If you direct effect on one or more Indian representative will be the Patrol wish to comment on actions by tribes, on the relationship between the Commander and may be contacted via employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Federal Government and Indian tribes, VHF/FM Marine Channel 16. 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Regulatory Evaluation Collection of Information Government and Indian tribes. This rule is not a ‘‘significant This rule calls for no new collection Energy Effects regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of of information under the Paperwork Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– We have analyzed this rule under Planning and Review, and does not 3520). Executive Order 13211, Actions require an assessment of potential costs Concerning Regulations That and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Order. The Office of Management and A rule has implications for federalism Distribution, or Use. We have Budget has not reviewed it under that under Executive Order 13132, determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
VerDate 11
energy action’’ under that order because representative. The designated on-scene making this rule it effective less than 30 it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ representative will be the Patrol days after publication in the Federal under Executive Order 12866 and is not Commander. The Captain of the Port Register. The Coast Guard had likely to have a significant adverse effect Milwaukee or the Patrol Commander insufficient advance notice to publish on the supply, distribution, or use of may be contacted via VHF/FM Marine an NPRM followed by a temporary final energy. It has not been designated by the Channel 16. rule. Publication of a notice of proposed Administrator of the Office of Dated: September 28, 2001. rulemaking and delay of effective date Information and Regulatory Affairs as a M.R. DeVries, would be contrary to the public interest significant energy action. Therefore, it because immediate action is necessary Commander, Coast Guard, Captain of the Port does not require a Statement of Energy Milwaukee. to prevent possible loss of life, injury, or Effects under Executive Order 13211. damage to property. [FR Doc. 01–25750 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Environment BILLING CODE 4910–15–U Background and Purpose The Coast Guard considered the A temporary security zone is environmental impact of this regulation DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION necessary to ensure the security of Davis and concluded that, under figure 2–1, Besse nuclear power plant, as a result of paragraph (34)(g) of Commandant Coast Guard the terrorist attacks on the United States Instruction M16475.1C, it is on September 11, 2001. The security categorically excluded from further 33 CFR Part 165 zone consists of all navigable waters of environmental documentation. A Lake Erie within a line beginning from ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ [CGD09–01–136] position 41°36.8′ N, 083°06.2′ W; north is available in the docket for inspection RIN 2115–AA97 to 41°37.7′ N, 083°06.0′ W; east to or copying where indicated under 41°36.6′ N, 083°03.7′ W; south to ADDRESSES. Security Zone; Lake Erie, Toledo, OH 41°35.8′ N, 083°04.0′ W; back to the List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. beginning point. Entry into, transit through or anchoring within this ACTION: Temporary final rule. Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation security zone is prohibited unless (water), Reporting and recordkeeping SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is authorized by the Coast Guard Captain requirements, Security measures, of the Port Toledo or the designated on Waterways. establishing a temporary security zone encompassing navigable water of Lake scene representative. The designated on For the reasons set out in the Erie near the Davis Besse nuclear power scene representative will be the Patrol preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 plant. This security zone is necessary to Commander and may be contacted via CFR part 165 as follows: prevent damage to the nuclear power VHF Channel 16. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION plant. Entry into, transit through or Regulatory Evaluation AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS anchoring within this security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the This rule is not a ‘‘significant 1. The authority citation for part 165 Coast Guard Captain of the Port Toledo regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of continues to read as follows: or the designated on scene Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, representative. Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of potential costs 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 DATES: This rule is effective from CFR 1.46. and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that September 28, 2001 through June 15, Order. The Office of Management and 2002. 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–109 is Budget has not reviewed it under that added to read as follows: ADDRESSES: Comments and material order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the § 165.T09–109 Security Zone; Lake received from the public, as well as regulatory policies and procedures of Michigan, Kewaunee, WI. documents indicated in this preamble as the Department of Transportation (DOT) (a) Location. The following area is a being available in the docket, are part of (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). This temporary security zone: all navigable docket [CGD09–01–136] and are finding is based on the historical lack of waters of Western Lake Michigan bound available for inspection or copying at vessel traffic during this time of year. by the following coordinates beginning U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Also, vessel traffic can pass safely from a point on the shoreline at Toledo, 420 Madison Ave, Suite 700, around the security zone and vessels 44°20.85′ N, 087°32.1′ W; then easterly Toledo, Ohio, 43604 between 9:30 a.m. may request permission from the to 44°20.85′ N, 087°31.4′ W; then and 2 p.m., Monday through Friday, Captain of the Port Toledo to transit southerly to 44°20.35′ N, 087°31.4′ W; except Federal holidays. through the security zone. ° ′ ° FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT then westerly to 44 20.35 N, 087 32.1 Small Entities W; then northerly following the Herb Oertli, Chief of Port Operations, shoreline back to the point of origin. Marine Safety Office Toledo, Ohio, (419) Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act These coordinates are based upon North 418–6050. (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: whether this rule would have a (b) Effective period. This section is significant economic impact on a effective from September 28, 2001 Regulatory Information substantial number of small entities. through June 15, 2002. As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, we did The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises (c) Regulations. In accordance with not publish a notice of proposed small businesses, not-for-profit the general regulations in § 165.33 of rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. organizations that are independently this part, entry into this zone is Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast owned and operated and are not prohibited unless authorized by the Guard finds that good cause exists for dominant in their fields, and Coast Guard Captain of the Port not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 governmental jurisdictions with Milwaukee, or his designated on-scene U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for populations of less than 50,000.
VerDate 11
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 government or the private sector to the office of Information and Regulatory U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have incur direct costs without the Federal Affairs as a significant energy action. a significant economic impact on a government having first provided the Therefore, it does not require a substantial number of small entities. funds to pay those costs. This rule will statement of Energy Effects under This rule will affect the following not impose an unfunded mandate. Executive Order 13211. entities, some of which may be small entities: the owners and operators of Taking of Private Property List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 vessels intending to transit or anchor in This rule will not effect a taking of Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation a portion of Lake Erie. private property or otherwise have (water), Reporting and recordkeeping This security zone will not have a taking implications under Executive requirements, Security measures, significant economic impact on a Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Waterways. substantial number of small entities for Interference with Constitutionally For the reasons discussed in the the following reasons: Vessel traffic can Protected Property Rights. preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 pass safely around the security zone and Civil Justice Reform CFR part 165 as follows: commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of the Port This rule meets applicable standards PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Toledo to transit through the security in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS zone. Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate 1. The authority citation for part 165 Assistance for Small Entities ambiguity, and reduce burden. continues to read as follows: Under section 213(a) of the Small Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, Protection of Children Business Regulatory Enforcement 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), We have analyzed this rule under 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–136 is we offered to assist small entities in Executive Order 13045, Protection of added as follows: understanding the rule so that they Children from Environmental Health could better evaluate its effects on them Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not § 165.T09–136 Security Zone: Lake Erie, and participate in the rulemaking an economically significant rule and Toledo, Ohio. process. If the rule would affect your does not concern an environmental risk (a) Location. This security zone small business, organization, or to health or risk to safety that may consists of all navigable waters of Lake governmental jurisdiction and you have disproportionately affect children. Erie within a line beginning from ° ′ ° ′ questions concerning its provisions or Environment position 41 36.8 N, 083 06.2 W; north options for compliance, please contact to 41°37.7′ N, 083°06.0′ W; east to Marine Safety Office Toledo (see The Coast Guard considered the 41°36.6′ N, 083°03.7′ W; south to ADDRESSES.) environmental impact of this rule and 41°35.8′ N, 083°04.0′ W; back to the Small businesses may send comments concluded that under figure 2–1, beginning point. All geographic on the actions of Federal employees paragraph 34(g), of Commandant coordinated are North American Datum who enforce, or otherwise determine Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is of 1983 (NAD 1983). compliance with, Federal regulations to categorically excluded from further (b) Effective period. This section is the Small Business and Agriculture environmental documentation. A effective from September 28, 2001 Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ through June 15, 2002. and the Regional Small Business is available in the docket for inspection (c) Regulations. In accordance with Regulatory Fairness Boards. The or copying where indicated under the general regulations in § 165.23 of Ombudsman evaluates these actions ADDRESSES. this part, entry into this zone is annually and rates each agency’s Indian Tribal Governments prohibited unless authorized by the responsiveness to small business. If you Captain of the Port. wish to comment on actions by This rule does not have tribal Dated: September 28, 2001. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– implications under Executive Order 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 13175, Consultation and Coordination David L. Scott, with Indian Tribal Governments, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of Collection of Information because it does not have a substantial the Port. This rule calls for no new collection direct effect on one or more Indian [FR Doc. 01–25651 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] of information under the Paperwork tribes, on the relationship between the BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Federal Government and Indian tribes, 3520). or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federalism Government and Indian tribes. We have analyzed this rule under Coast Guard Energy Effects Executive Order 13132 and have determined that this rule does not have We have analyzed this proposed rule 33 CFR Part 165 implications for federalism under that under Executive order 13211, Actions [CGD09–01–135] Order. Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, RIN 2115–AA97 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Distribution, or Use. We have Security Zone; Lake Erie, Monroe, MI The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act determined that it is not a ‘‘significant of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs regulatory action’’ under Executive AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. the issuance of Federal regulations that Order 12866 and is not likely to have a ACTION: Temporary final rule. require unfunded mandates. An significant adverse effect on the supply, unfunded mandate is a regulation that distribution, or use of energy. It has not SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is requires a State, local, or tribal been designated by the Administrator of establishing a temporary security zone
VerDate 11
encompassing navigable water of Lake Commander and may be contacted via Marine Safety Office Toledo (see Erie in the vicinity of the Enrico Fermi VHF Channel 16. ADDRESSES.) nuclear power plant. This security zone Regulatory Evaluation Small businesses may send comments is necessary to prevent damage to the on the actions of Federal employees This rule is not a ‘‘significant nuclear power plant. Entry into, transit who enforce, or otherwise determine regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of through or anchoring within this compliance with, Federal regulations to Executive Order 12866, Regulatory security zone is prohibited unless the Small Business and Agriculture Planning and Review, and does not authorized by the Coast Guard Captain Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman require an assessment of potential costs of the Port Toledo or the designated on and the Regional Small Business and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that scene representative. Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Order. The Office of Management and DATES: This rule is effective from Ombudsman evaluates these actions Budget has not reviewed it under that September 28, 2001 through June 15, annually and rates each agency’s order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the 2002. responsiveness to small business. If you regulatory policies and procedures of ADDRESSES: wish to comment on actions by Documents indicated in this the Department of Transportation (DOT) employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– preamble as being available in the (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). This 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). docket are part of docket [CGD09–01– finding is based on the historical lack of 135] and are available for inspection or vessel traffic during this time of year. Collection of Information copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Also, vessels can pass safely around the Safety Office Toledo, 420 Madison Ave, security zone and vessels may request This rule calls for no new collection Suite 700, Toledo, Ohio, 43604 between permission from the Captain of the Port of information under the Paperwork 9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through Toledo to transit through the security Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Friday, except Federal holidays. zone. 3520). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Federalism Herb Oertli, Chief of Port Operations, Small Entities Marine Safety Office, Toledo, Ohio, Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act We have analyzed this rule under (419) 418–6050. (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered Executive Order 13132 and have SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: whether this rule would have a determined that this rule does not have significant economic impact on a implications for federalism under that Regulatory Information substantial number of small entities. Order. As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, we did The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Unfunded Mandates Reform Act not publish a notice of proposed small businesses, not-for-profit rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. organizations that are independently The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast owned and operated and are not of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs Guard finds that good cause exists for dominant in their fields, and the issuance of Federal regulations that not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 governmental jurisdictions with require unfunded mandates. An U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for populations of less than 50,000. unfunded mandate is a regulation that making this rule effective less than 30 The Coast Guard certifies under 5 requires a State, local, or tribal days after publication in the Federal U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have government or the private sector to Register. The Coast Guard had a significant economic impact on a incur direct costs without the Federal insufficient advance notice to publish substantial number of small entities. government having first provided the an NPRM followed by a temporary final This rule will affect the following funds to pay those costs. This rule will rule. Publication of a notice of proposed entities, some of which may be small not impose an unfunded mandate. rulemaking and delay of effective date entities: the owners and operators of would be contrary to the public interest vessels intending to transit or anchor in Taking of Private Property because immediate action is necessary a portion of Lake Erie. This rule will not effect a taking of to prevent possible loss of life, injury, or This security zone will not have a private property or otherwise have damage to property. significant economic impact on a taking implications under Executive substantial number of small entities for Background and Purpose Order 12630, Governmental Actions and the following reasons: Vessel traffic can Interference with Constitutionally A temporary security zone is pass safely around the security zone and Protected Property Rights. necessary to ensure the security of commercial vessels may request Enrico Fermi nuclear power plant, as a permission from the Captain of the Port Civil Justice Reform result of the terrorist attacks on the Toledo to transit through the security United States on September 11, 2001. zone. This rule meets applicable standards The security zone consists of all in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive navigable waters of Lake Erie within a Assistance for Small Entities Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to line beginning from position 41°58.5′ N, Under section 213(a) of the Small minimize litigation, eliminate 083°14.8′ W; southeast to 41°58.2′ N, Business Regulatory Enforcement ambiguity, and reduce burden. ° ′ ° ′ 083 13.7 W; south to 41 56.7 N, Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Protection of Children 083°14.8′ W; west to 41°56.7′ N, we offered to assist small entities in 083°15.3′ W; back to the beginning understanding the rule so that they We have analyzed this rule under point. Entry into, transit through or could better evaluate its effects on them Executive Order 13045, Protection of anchoring within this security zone is and participate in the rulemaking Children from Environmental Health prohibited unless authorized by the process. If the rule would affect your Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not Coast Guard Captain of the Port Toledo small business, organization, or an economically significant rule and or the designated on scene governmental jurisdiction and you have does not concern an environmental risk representative. The designated on scene questions concerning its provisions or to health or risk to safety that may representative will be the Patrol options for compliance, please contact disproportionately affect children.
VerDate 11
Environment southeast to 41°58.2′ N, 083°13.7′ W; Regulatory Information ° ′ ° ′ The Coast Guard considered the south to 41 56.7 N, 083 14.8 W; west ° ′ ° ′ As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, we did environmental impact of this rule and to 41 56.7 N, 083 15.3 W; back to the not publish a notice of proposed concluded that under figure 2–1, beginning point. All geographic rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. paragraph (34)(g), of Commandant coordinated are North American Datum Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Instruction M16475.lC, this rule is of 1983 (NAD 1983). Guard finds that good cause exists for (b) Effective period. This section is categorically excluded from further not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 effective from September 28, 2001 environmental documentation. A U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for through June 15, 2002. ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ making this rule effective less than 30 (c) Regulations. In accordance with is available in the docket for inspection days after publication in the Federal the general regulations in § 165.23 of or copying where indicated under Register. Following the catastrophic this part, entry into this zone is ADDRESSES. nature and extent of damage realized prohibited unless authorized by the from the aircraft flown into the World Indian Tribal Governments Captain of the Port. Trade Center towers on September 11, This rule does not have tribal Dated: September 28, 2001. 2001, this rulemaking is urgently implications under Executive Order David L. Scott, necessary to protect the national 13175, Consultation and Coordination Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of security interests of the United States with Indian Tribal Governments, the Port. against future potential terrorists strikes because it does not have a substantial [FR Doc. 01–25649 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] against public and governmental targets. direct effect on one or more Indian BILLING CODE 4910–15–P A similar attack was conducted against tribes, on the relationship between the the Pentagon on the same day. National Federal Government and Indian tribes, security and intelligence officials warn or on the distribution of power and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION that future terrorist attacks against responsibilities between the Federal civilian targets may be anticipated. Government and Indian tribes. Coast Guard Publication of a notice of proposed Energy Effects rulemaking and delay of effective date 33 CFR Part 165 would be contrary to the public interest We have analyzed this proposed rule [CGD09–01–137] because immediate action is necessary under Executive order 13211, Actions to protect against the possible loss of Concerning Regulations that RIN 2115–AA97 life, injury, or damage to property. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have Security Zone; Lake Michigan, Point Background and Purpose Beach Nuclear Power Plant, WI determined that it is not a ‘‘significant A temporary security zone is regulatory action’’ under Executive AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. necessary to ensure the security of the Order 12866 and is not likely to have a ACTION: Temporary final rule. Point Beach nuclear power plant as a significant adverse effect on the supply, result of the terrorist attacks on the distribution, or use of energy. It has not SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is United States on September 11, 2001. been designated by the Administrator of establishing a temporary security zone The security zone is described as the office of Information and Regulatory encompassing the navigable waters of follows: All navigable waters of Western Affairs as a significant energy action. Western Lake Michigan, adjacent to the Lake Michigan commencing from a Therefore, it does not require a Point Beach nuclear power plant. This point on the shoreline at 44°17.1′ N, statement of Energy Effects under security zone is necessary to prevent 087°32.3′ W; then northeasterly to Executive Order 13211. unauthorized access into this nuclear 44°17.4′ N, 087°31.6′ W; then List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 power plant facility. Entry into, transit southeasterly to 44°16.9′ N, 087°31.3′ W; through or anchoring within this then southwesterly to 44°16.7′ N, Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation security zone is prohibited unless 087°32.0′ W; then northwesterly along (water), Reporting and recordkeeping authorized by the Captain of the Port the shoreline back to the point of origin. requirements, Security measures, Milwaukee or his designated on-scene These coordinates are based upon North Waterways. representative. For the reasons discussed in the American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). Entry preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 DATES: This rule is effective from into, transit through or anchoring within CFR part 165 as follows: September 28, 2001, through June 15, this security zone is prohibited unless 2002. authorized by the Captain of the Port PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Milwaukee or his designated on-scene ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS representative. The designated on-scene preamble as being available in the representative will be the Patrol 1. The authority citation for part 165 docket, are part of docket CGD09–01– Commander and may be contacted via continues to read as follows: 137 and are available for inspection or VHF/FM Marine Channel 16. copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, Regulatory Evaluation 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. Safety Office Milwaukee, 2420 South Lincoln Memorial Drive, Milwaukee, WI This rule is not a ‘‘significant 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–135 is 53207 between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., added as follows: regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Monday through Friday, except Federal Executive Order 12866, Regulatory § 165.T09–135 Security zone: Lake Erie, holidays. Planning and Review, and does not Toledo, Ohio. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: require an assessment of potential costs (a) Location. This security zone LCDR Timothy Sickler, U.S. Coast and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that consists of all navigable waters of Lake Guard Marine Safety Office Milwaukee, Order. The Office of Management and Erie within a line beginning from (414) 747–7155. Budget has not reviewed it under that position 41°58.5′ N, 083°14.8′ W; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the
VerDate 11
regulatory policies and procedures of Federalism Significantly Affect Energy Supply, the Department of Transportation (DOT) A rule has implications for federalism Distribution, or Use. We have (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). under Executive Order 13132, determined that it is not a ‘‘significant This is a temporary rule Federalism, if it has a substantial direct energy action’’ under that order because encompassing winter months. During effect on State or local governments and it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ periods when the waters in this area are would either preempt State law or under Executive Order 12866 and is not not frozen, vessels will be able to transit impose a substantial direct cost of likely to have a significant adverse effect around the security zone. In addition, compliance on them. We have analyzed on the supply, distribution, or use of vessels may request permission from the this rule under that Order and have energy. It has not been designated by the Captain of the Port to transit through the determined that it does not have Administrator of the Office of security zone. implications for federalism. Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action. Therefore, it Small Entities Unfunded Mandates Reform Act does not require a Statement of Energy Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Effects under Executive Order 13211. (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Environment Federal agencies to assess the effects of whether this rule would have a The Coast Guard considered the significant economic impact on a their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions environmental impact of this regulation substantial number of small entities. and concluded that, under figure 2–1, The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the paragraph 34(g) of Commandant small businesses, not-for-profit Instruction M16475.1C, it is organizations that are independently aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any one year. categorically excluded from further owned and operated and are not environmental documentation. A dominant in their fields, and Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ governmental jurisdictions with is available in the docket for inspection populations of less than 50,000. effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. or copying where indicated under For reasons stated in the Regulatory ADDRESSES. Evaluation, the Coast Guard certifies Taking of Private Property List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will This rule will not effect a taking of not have a significant economic impact private property or otherwise have Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation on a substantial number of small taking implications under Executive (water), Reporting and recordkeeping entities. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and requirements, Security measures, Waterways. Assistance for Small Entities Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. For the reasons set out in the Under section 213(a) of the Small preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Business Regulatory Enforcement Civil Justice Reform CFR part 165 as follows: Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), This rule meets applicable standards we offered to assist small entities in in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION understanding the rule so that they Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS could better evaluate its effects on them minimize litigation, eliminate 1. The authority citation for part 165 and participate in the rulemaking ambiguity, and reduce burden. continues to read as follows: process. If the rule would affect your Protection of Children small business, organization, or Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, governmental jurisdiction and you have We have analyzed this rule under 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. questions concerning its provisions or Executive Order 13045, Protection of options for compliance, please contact Children from Environmental Health 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–110 is Marine Safety Office Milwaukee (see Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not added to read as follows: ADDRESSES.) an economically significant rule and does not create an environmental risk to § 165.T09–110 Security Zone; Lake Small businesses may send comments health or risk to safety that may Michigan, Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, on the actions of Federal employees disproportionately affect children. WI. who enforce, or otherwise determine (a) Location. The following area is a compliance with, Federal regulations to Indian Tribal Governments temporary security zone: all navigable the Small Business and Agriculture This rule does not have tribal waters of Western Lake Michigan bound Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman implications under Executive Order by the following coordinates beginning and the Regional Small Business 13175, Consultation and Coordination on the shoreline at 44°17.1′ N, 087°32.3′ Regulatory Fairness Boards. The with Indian Tribal Governments, W; then northeasterly to 44°17.4′ N, Ombudsman evaluates these actions because it does not have a substantial 087°31.6′ W; then southeasterly to annually and rates each agency’s direct effect on one or more Indian 44°16.9′ N, 087°31.3′ W; then responsiveness to small business. If you tribes, on the relationship between the southwesterly to 44°16.7′ N, 087°32.0′ wish to comment on actions by Federal Government and Indian tribes, W; then northwesterly along the employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– or on the distribution of power and shoreline back to the point of origin. 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). responsibilities between the Federal These coordinates are based upon North Collection of Information Government and Indian tribes. American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). (b) Effective time and date. This This rule calls for no new collection Energy Effects section is effective from September 28, of information under the Paperwork We have analyzed this rule under 2001 through June 15, 2002. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Executive Order 13211, Actions (c) Regulations. In accordance with 3520). Concerning Regulations That the general regulations in § 165.33 of
VerDate 11
this part, entry into this zone is Guard finds that good cause exists for permission from the Captain of the Port prohibited unless authorized by the not publishing an NPRM, and, under 5 to transit through the security zone. Coast Guard Captain of the Port U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for Small Entities Milwaukee, or the designated on-scene making this rule effective less than 30 representative. The Captain of the Port days after publication in the Federal Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Milwaukee or the designated on-scene Register. Following the catastrophic (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered representative may be contacted on nature and extent of damage realized whether this rule would have a VHF–FM Channel 16. The designated from the aircraft flown into the World significant economic impact on a on-scene representative will be the Trade Center towers on September 11, substantial number of small entities. Patrol Commander. 2001, this rulemaking is urgently The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Dated: September 28, 2001. necessary to protect the national small businesses, not-for-profit M. R. DeVries, security interests of the United States organizations that are independently against future potential terrorists strikes owned and operated and are not Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Milwaukee. against public and governmental targets. dominant in their fields, and A similar attack was conducted against governmental jurisdictions with [FR Doc. 01–25751 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the Pentagon on the same day. National populations of less than 50,000. BILLING CODE 4910–15–P security and intelligence officials warn For reasons stated in the Regulatory that future terrorist attacks against Evaluation, the Coast Guard certifies DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION civilian targets may be anticipated. under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will Publication of a notice of proposed not have a significant economic impact Coast Guard rulemaking and delay of effective date on a substantial number of small would be contrary to the public interest entities. 33 CFR Part 165 because immediate action is necessary to protect against the possible loss of Assistance for Small Entities [CGD09–01–130] life, injury, or damage to property. Under section 213(a) of the Small RIN 2115–AA97 Background and Purpose Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Security Zone; Lake Erie, Perry, Ohio A temporary security zone is we offered to assist small entities in AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. necessary to ensure the security of the understanding the rule so that they Perry nuclear power plant, as a result of could better evaluate its effects on them ACTION: Temporary final rule. the terrorist attacks on the United States and participate in the rulemaking SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is on September 11, 2001. The security process. If the rule would affect your establishing a temporary security zone zone consists of all navigable waters of small business, organization, or in the Captain of the Port Cleveland Lake Erie bound by a line beginning at governmental jurisdiction and you have ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ zone for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant. a point 41 48 6 N, 081 09 6 W; thence questions concerning its provisions or ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ This security zone is necessary to due north to 41 48 36 N, 081 09 6 W; options for compliance, please contact ° ′ ″ protect this nuclear power plant from thence due east to 41 49 0 N, Marine Safety Office Cleveland (see ° ′ ″ possible sabotage or other subversive 081 07 54 W; thence due south to the ADDRESSES.) ° ′ ″ acts, accidents, or possible acts of south shore of Lake Erie at 41 48 36 N, Small businesses may send comments ° ′ ″ terrorism. Entry into, transit through or 081 07 54 W; and thence westerly on the actions of Federal employees anchoring within this security zone on along south shore back to the beginning. who enforce, or otherwise determine Lake Erie is prohibited unless These coordinates are based upon North compliance with, Federal regulations to authorized by the Captain of the Port American Datum 1983 (NAD 83). Entry the Small Business and Agriculture Cleveland or his designated on-scene into, transit through or anchoring within Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman representative. this security zone is prohibited unless and the Regional Small Business authorized by the Captain of the Port Regulatory Fairness Boards. The DATES: This rule is effective from Cleveland or his designated on-scene Ombudsman evaluates these actions October 1, 2001 through June 15, 2002. representative. The designated on-scene annually and rates each agency’s ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this representative will be the Patrol responsiveness to small business. If you preamble as being available in the Commander and may be contacted via wish to comment on actions by docket, are part of docket CGD09–01– VHF/FM Marine Channel 16. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 130 and are available for inspection or 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). copying at U.S. Coast Guard Marine Regulatory Evaluation Collection of Information Safety Cleveland, 1055 East Ninth This rule is not a ‘‘significant Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44126 between regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of This rule calls for no new collection 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Executive Order 12866, Regulatory of information under the Paperwork Friday, except Federal holidays. Planning and Review, and does not Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: require an assessment of potential costs 3520). Lieutenant Junior Grade Allen Turner, and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Federalism U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Order. The Office of Management and Cleveland, (216) 937–0111. Budget has not reviewed it under that A rule has implications for federalism SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the under Executive Order 13132, regulatory policies and procedures of Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Regulatory Information the Department of Transportation (DOT) effect on State or local governments and As authorized by 5 U.S.C. 553, we did (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). This would either preempt State law or not publish a notice of proposed is a temporary rule and vessels will be impose a substantial direct cost of rulemaking (NPRM) for this regulation. able to transit around the security zone. compliance on them. We have analyzed Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast In addition, vessels may request this rule under that Order and have
VerDate 11
determined that it does not have Information and Regulatory Affairs as a Dated: October 1, 2001. implications for federalism. significant energy action. Therefore, it R. J. Perry, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act does not require a Statement of Energy Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of Effects under Executive Order 13211. the Port Cleveland. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act [FR Doc. 01–25752 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Environment of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In The Coast Guard considered the particular, the Act addresses actions environmental impact of this regulation and concluded that, under figure 2–1, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION that may result in the expenditure by a AGENCY State, local, or tribal government, in the paragraph (34)(g) of Commandant Instruction M16475.1C, it is aggregate, or by the private sector of 40 CFR Part 52 $100,000,000 or more in any one year. categorically excluded from further Though this rule will not result in such environmental documentation. A [PA–4172; FRL–7079–9] ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ expenditure, we do discuss the effects of Approval and Promulgation of Air is available in the docket for inspection this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Quality Implementation Plans; or copying where indicated under Taking of Private Property Pennsylvania; VOC and NOX RACT ADDRESSES. This rule will not effect a taking of Determinations for Eight Individual private property or otherwise have List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Sources in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area taking implications under Executive Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Order 12630, Governmental Actions and (water), Reporting and recordkeeping AGENCY: Environmental Protection Interference with Constitutionally requirements, Security measures, Agency (EPA). Protected Property Rights. Waterways. ACTION: Final rule. Civil Justice Reform For the reasons set out in the SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to This rule meets applicable standards preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 approve revisions to the Commonwealth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive CFR part 165 as follows: of Pennsylvania’s State Implementation Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Plan (SIP). The revisions were minimize litigation, eliminate PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION submitted by the Pennsylvania ambiguity, and reduce burden. AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Department of Environmental Protection Protection of Children (PADEP) to establish and require 1. The authority citation for part 165 reasonably available control technology We have analyzed this rule under continues to read as follows: (RACT) for eight major sources of Executive Order 13045, Protection of Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and Children from Environmental Health nitrogen oxides (NOX). These sources Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46. are located in the Pittsburgh-Beaver an economically significant rule and Valley ozone nonattainment area (the does not create an environmental risk to 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–111 is Pittsburgh area). EPA is approving these health or risk to safety that may added to read as follows: revisions to establish RACT disproportionately affect children. requirements in the SIP in accordance § 165.T09–111 Security Zone; Lake Erie, with the Clean Air Act (CAA). Indian Tribal Governments Perry, OH. EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is This rule does not have tribal (a) Location. The following area is a effective on October 29, 2001. implications under Executive Order temporary security zone: all navigable 13175, Consultation and Coordination ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents waters of Lake Erie bound by a line with Indian Tribal Governments, relevant to this action are available for beginning at a point 41°48′6″ N, public inspection during normal because it does not have a substantial ° ′ ″ direct effect on one or more Indian 081 09 6 W; thence due north to business hours at the Air Protection 41°48′36″ N, 081°09′6″ W; thence due Division, U.S. Environmental Protection tribes, on the relationship between the ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Federal Government and Indian tribes, east to 41 49 0 N, 081 07 54 W; thence Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, or on the distribution of power and due south to the south shore of Lake Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ responsibilities between the Federal Erie at 41 48 36 N, 081 07 54 W; and Air and Radiation Docket and Government and Indian tribes. thence westerly along south shore back Information Center, U.S. Environmental to the beginning (NAD 83). Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Energy Effects Washington, DC 20460; and the (b) Effective period. This section is Pennsylvania Department of We have analyzed this rule under effective from October 1, 2001 through Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Executive Order 13211, Actions June 15, 2002. Concerning Regulations That Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Significantly Affect Energy Supply, (c) Regulations. In accordance with Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. Distribution, or Use. We have the general regulations in § 165.33 of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: determined that it is not a ‘‘significant this part, entry into this zone is Marcia L. Spink (215) 814–2104 or by e- energy action’’ under that order because prohibited unless authorized by the mail at [email protected]. it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Coast Guard Captain of the Port SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: under Executive Order 12866 and is not Cleveland, or the designated on-scene likely to have a significant adverse effect representative. The designated on-scene I. Background on the supply, distribution, or use of representative will be the Patrol On December 8, 1995, July 1, 1997, energy. It has not been designated by the Commander on may be contacted on and April 19, 2001, PADEP submitted Administrator of the Office of VHF–FM Channel 16. revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP which
VerDate 11
establish and impose RACT for several ton of NOX and VOC controlled. In RACT proposal, and submit each RACT sources of VOC and/or NOX. This citing the definition of the term determination to EPA for approval as a rulemaking pertains to eight of those ‘‘RACT,’’ and the Strelow Memorandum SIP revision. sources. The remaining sources are or [Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator The conditional nature of EPA’s have been the subject of separate for Air and Waste Management, EPA, March 23, 1998 conditional limited rulemakings. The Commonwealth’s December 9, 1976, cited in Michigan v. approval did not impose any conditions submittals consist of operating permits, Thomas, 805 F.2d 176, 180 (6th Cir. pertaining to the regulation’s procedures enforcement orders and consent orders 1986) and at 62 FR 43134, 43136 for the submittal of RACT plans and which impose VOC and/or NOX RACT (1997)], PennFuture appears to analyses by subject sources and requirements for each source. These comment that in every situation, RACT approval of case-by-case RACT eight sources are all located in the must include an emission rate. determinations by the DEP. Rather, EPA Pittsburgh area and consist of: Ashland PennFuture asserts that EPA should stated that ‘‘* * * RACT rules may not Petroleum Company; BP Exploration & conduct its own RACT evaluation for merely be procedural rules (emphasis Oil, Inc.; Gulf Oil, L.P.; Penreco; each source, or at a minimum document added) that require the source and the Bellefield Boiler Plant; PA Dept. of a step-by-step review demonstrating the State to later agree to the appropriate Corrections; Pittsburgh Allegheny adequacy of state evaluations, to ensure level of control; rather the rules must County Thermal; and Pittsburgh that appropriate control technology is identify the appropriate level of control Thermal Limited Partnership. applied. The commenter also believes for source categories or individual On August 21, 2001, EPA published a that EPA’s failure to conduct its own sources.’’ direct final rule (66 FR 43783) and a independent review of control On May 3, 2001 (66 FR 22123), EPA companion notice of proposed technologies has resulted in our published a rulemaking determining rulemaking (66 FR 43822) to approve proposing to approve some RACT that Pennsylvania had satisfied the these SIP revisions. On September 7, determinations that fail to meet the conditions imposed in its conditional 2001, we received adverse comments on terms of EPA’s own RACT standard. limited approval. In that rulemaking, our direct final rule from the Citizens EPA removed the conditional status of Response: On March 23, 1998 (63 FR for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture). its approval of the Commonwealth’s 13789), EPA granted conditional limited On September 27, 2001 (66 FR 49293), generic VOC and NOX RACT regulations approval of Pennsylvania’s generic we published a timely withdrawal in on a statewide basis. EPA received no RACT regulations, 25 PA Code Chapters the Federal Register informing the public comments on its action and that public that the direct final rule did not 121 and 129, thereby approving the final rule removing the conditional definitions, provisions and procedures take effect. We indicated in our August status of Pennsylvania’s VOC and NOX 21, 2001 direct final rulemaking that if contained within those regulations RACT regulations became effective on we received adverse comments, EPA under which the Commonwealth would June 18, 2001. As of that time, require and impose RACT. Subsection would address all public comments in Pennsylvania’s generic VOC and NOX a subsequent final rule based on the 129.91, Control of major sources of NOX RACT regulations retained a limited proposed rule (66 FR 43822). This is and VOCs, requires subject facilities to approval status. On August 24, 2001 (66 that subsequent final rule. A description submit a RACT plan proposal to both FR 44578), EPA proposed to remove the of the RACT determination(s) made for the Pennsylvania Department of limited nature of its approval of each source was provided in the August Environmental Protection (DEP) and to Pennsylvania’s generic RACT regulation 21, 2001 direct final rule and will not EPA Region III by July 15, 1994 in in the Pittsburgh area. EPA received no be restated here. A summary of the accordance with subsection 129.92, public comments on that proposal. Final comments submitted by PennFuture entitled, RACT proposal requirements. action converting the limited approval germane to this final rulemaking and Under subsection 129.92, that proposal to full approval shall occur once EPA EPA’s responses are provided in Section is to include, among other information: has completed rulemaking to approve II of this document. (1) A list of each subject source at the either (1) the case-by-case RACT facility; (2) The size or capacity of each proposals for all sources subject to the II. Public Comments and Responses affected source, and the types of fuel RACT requirements currently known in The Citizens for Pennsylvania’s combusted, and the types and amounts the Pittsburgh-Beaver area or (2) for a Future (PennFuture) submitted adverse of materials processed or produced at sufficient number of sources such that comments on twenty proposed rules each source; (3) A physical description the emissions from any remaining published by EPA in the Federal of each source and its operating subject sources represent a de minimis Register between August 6 and August characteristics; (4) Estimates of potential level of emissions as defined in the 24, 2001 to approve case-by-case RACT and actual emissions from each affected March 23, 1998 rulemaking (63 FR SIP submissions from the source with supporting documentation; 13789). Commonwealth for NOX and or VOC (5) A RACT analysis which meets the EPA agrees that it has an obligation to sources located in the Pittsburgh area. requirements of subsection 129.92 (b), review the case-by-case RACT plan PennFuture’s letter includes general including technical and economic approvals and/or permits submitted as comments and comments specific to support documentation for each affected individual SIP revisions by EPA’s proposals for certain sources. A source; (6) A schedule for Commonwealth to verify and determine summary of those comments and EPA’s implementation as expeditiously as if they are consistent with the RACT responses are provided below. practicable but not later than May 15, requirements of the Act and any A. Comment: PennFuture comments 1995; (7) The testing, monitoring, relevant EPA guidance. EPA does not that EPA has conducted no independent recordkeeping and reporting procedures agree, however, that this obligation to technical review, and has prepared no proposed to demonstrate compliance review the case-by-case RACT technical support document to survey with RACT; and (8) any additional determinations submitted by potential control technologies, information requested by the DEP Pennsylvania necessarily extends to our determine the capital and operating necessary to evaluate the RACT performing our own RACT analyses, costs of different options, and rank these proposal. Under subsection 129.91, the independent of the sources’ RACT options in total and marginal cost per DEP will approve, deny or modify each plans/analyses (included as part of the
VerDate 11
case-by-case RACT SIP revisions) or the United States’’ [63 FR 13789, 13791 emission limitation has been placed in Commonwealth’s analyses. EPA first (1998)] and as such should have the Administrative Records for the case- reviews this submission to ensure that numeric emission limitations imposed by-case RACT rulemakings for the the source and the Commonwealth as RACT whether or not they install Pittsburgh area. followed the SIP-approved generic rule presumptive RACT (under 25 Pa.Code C. Comment: PennFuture asserts that when applying for and imposing RACT 129.93) to guarantee that sources would the Commonwealth has not adopted and for a specific source. Then EPA achieve quantifiable emissions submitted category RACT rules for all performs a thorough review of the reductions under the RACT program. VOC source categories for which federal technical and economic analyses PennFuture goes on to comment that control technique guidelines (CTGs) conducted by the source and the state. because EPA has not conducted and have been issued. The commenter refers If EPA believes additional information documented a technical review of to Appendix 1 of the Technical Support may further support or would undercut Pennsylvania case-by case RACT Document (dated May 14, 2001), the RACT analyses submitted by the submissions, EPA has not demonstrated prepared by EPA in support of its state, then EPA may add additional that these large boilers are subject to proposed rule to redesignate the EPA-generated analyses to the record. ‘‘numeric emission limitations’’ under Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Ozone While RACT, as defined for an RACT. EPA must conduct a thorough Nonattainment Area (66 FR 29270), to individual source or source category, RACT evaluation or review for each assert that EPA has failed to require the often does specify an emission rate, such source, and must document the Commonwealth to submit VOC RACT such is not always the case. EPA has application of numeric emission limits rules for certain categories of sources. issued Control Technique Guidelines and quantifiable reductions for each PennFuture specifically names source (CTGs) which states are to use as coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input categories such as equipment leaks from guidance in development of their RACT of over 100 million Btu per hour. natural gas/gas processing plants, coke determinations/rules for certain sources Response: Circumstances may exist oven batteries, iron and steel foundries, or source categories. Not every CTG wherein a state could justify otherwise, and publically owned treatment works issued by EPA includes an emission however, in general, EPA agrees with and asserts that the Commonwealth has rate. There are several examples of CTGs PennFuture that coal-fired boilers with neglected a statutory requirement to issued by EPA wherein equipment a rated heat input of equal to or greater adopt category RACT regulations for standards and/or work practice than 100 million Btu per hour should these and 14 other unnamed VOC standards alone are provided as RACT have numeric emission limitations source categories. guidance for all or part of the processes imposed as RACT whether or not they Response: EPA has not issued CTGs covered. Such examples include the install presumptive RACT (under 25 for coke oven batteries, iron and steel CTGs issued for Bulk gasoline plants, Pa.Code 129.93). foundries and publically owned Gasoline service stations—Stage I, As provided in the response found in treatment works. The Appendix 1, Petroleum Storage in Fixed-roof tanks, II. A, EPA does not agree that it must referred to by the commenter, lists CTG Petroleum refinery processes, Solvent conduct its own technical analysis of covered categories as well as source metal cleaning, Pharmaceutical each of the case-by-case RACT categories taken from two STAPPA/ products, External Floating roof tanks determinations submitted for each ALAPCO documents entitled, ‘‘Meeting and Synthetic Organic Chemical RACT source in order to document that the 15-Percent Rate-of-Progress Manufacturing (SOCMI)/polymer its RACT requirements include numeric Requirement Under the Clean Air Act— manufacturing. (The publication emission limitations. That A Menu of Options’ (September 1993) numbers for these CTG documents may determination can be made by EPA and ‘‘Controlling Nitrogen Oxides be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ when it reviews the plan approval, Under the Clean Air Act—A Menu of catc/dir1/ctg.txt). consent order, or permit issued to such Options’’ (July 1994). The categories EPA disagrees with PennFuture’s a source as submitted by the referenced by PennFuture are not VOC general comment that our failure to Commonwealth as SIP revision. categories for which EPA has issued conduct our own independent review of PennFuture’s comment did not point to CTGs, but were included in Appendix A control technologies for every case-by- a specific instance where a RACT plan as examples of some of the types of case RACT determination conducted by approval, consent order or permit sources that could be subject to the Commonwealth has resulted in our imposing RACT on a coal-fired boiler Pennsylvania’s generic RACT proposing to approve some RACT with a rated heat input of equal to or regulations. The Commonwealth is determinations that fail to meet the greater than 100 million Btu per hour under no statutory obligation to adopt terms of our own RACT standard. did, in fact, lack a numerical emission RACT rules for source categories for PennFuture submitted comments limitation(s). Nonetheless, pursuant to which EPA has not issued a CTG. In specific to the case-by-case RACT PennFuture’s comment, EPA has re- fact, CTGs do not exist for all but one determinations for only three sources examined all of the case-by-case RACT of the categories to which the located in the Pittsburgh area, namely SIP submissions made by the commenter explicitly refers. for Duquesne Light’s Elrama, Phillips Commonwealth for such sources located The Act requires that states adopt and Brunot Island stations. EPA in the Pittsburgh area. That re- regulations to impose RACT for ‘‘major summarizes those comments and examination, combined with sources of VOC,’’ located within those provides responses in the final rule information provided by the areas of a state where RACT applies pertaining to those sources. Commonwealth, indicates that each under Part D of the Act [182(b)(2)(C)]. B. Comment: PennFuture comments case-by-case RACT plan approval, This is referred to as the non-CTG VOC that when EPA reviewed Pennsylvania’s consent order and/or permit for each RACT requirement. Moreover, EPA RACT program, it noted that coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input disagrees that there is a statutory Pennsylvania coal-fired boilers with a of equal to or greater than 100 million mandate that a state adopt a source rated heat input of equal to or greater Btu per hour includes a numeric category RACT regulation even for a than 100 million Btu per hour ‘‘are some emission limitation. A listing of each source category where EPA has issued a of the largest NOX emitting sources in source, its plan approval, consent order CTG. There are two statutory provisions the Commonwealth and in the Northeast and/or permit number and its numerical that address RACT for sources covered
VerDate 11
by a CTG. One provides that states must guidance will not provide for the Emissions.’’ March 11, 1994, had not adopt RACT for ‘‘any category of VOC ‘‘automatic’’ selection or rejection of a been included as part of the SIP sources’’ covered by a CTG issued prior control technology or emission submission of the Commonwealth’s to November 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(A)]. limitation as RACT for a source or generic regulation and, therefore, had The other provides that states must source category. With regard to the not been approved by EPA. EPA further adopt VOC RACT for all ‘‘VOC sources’’ Pennsylvania DEP’s intent to finalize a notes that the Administrative Record of covered by a CTG issued after November NOX RACT Guidance Document for the March 23, 1998 rulemaking [63 FR 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(B)]. EPA has long implementation of its NOX RACT 13789], in addition to the interpreted the statutory RACT regulation, EPA’s 1993 letter stated that correspondence cited by PennFuture, requirement to be met either by the document could improperly be used also includes correspondence from DEP adoption of category-specific rules or by to establish ‘‘bright line’’ or ‘‘cook- to EPA [letter from James Salvaggio, source-specific rules for each source book’’ approaches, particularly for a DEP to David Arnold, EPA, September within a category. When initially regulation applicable to many source 10, 1997] stating that DEP’s RACT established, RACT was clearly defined categories and suggested that if the guidance document does not establish a as a case-by-case determination, but guidance document must include dollar maximum dollar per ton for determining EPA provided CTG’s to simplify the figures/ton, it provide approximate the cost effectiveness for RACT process for states such that they would ranges by source category. PennFuture determinations and notes that the DEP’s not be required to adopt hundreds or comments that DEP issued its $1500 per ton cost effectiveness is a thousands of individual rules. See ‘‘Guidance Document on Reasonably target value and not an absolute Strelow Memorandum dated December Available Control Technology for maximum. For example, in its analyses 9, 1976 and 44 FR 53761, September 17, Sources of NOX Emissions,’’ March 11, of the cost effectiveness of RACT control 1979. EPA does not believe that 1994, and on pp. 8–9 states that the options submitted by DEP as part of the Congress’ use of ‘‘source category’’ in acceptable threshold is $1500 per ton, case-by-case SIP revision for Peoples one provision of section 182(b)(2) was and that this figure applies to ‘‘all Natural Gas (PNG) Valley Compressor intended to preclude the adoption of source categories.’’ PennFuture notes Station’s turbo charged lean burn IC source-specific rules. that EPA later objected to the $1500 per engine (see the Administrative Record Thus, where CTG-subject sources are ton methodology as ‘‘not generically for 66 FR 43492), the Commonwealth located within those areas of a state acceptable to EPA’’ [letter from Thomas included DEP interoffice memoranda where RACT applies under Part D of the Maslany, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, (Thomas Joseph to Krishnan Act, the state is obligated to impose June 24, 1997] and further stated in a Ramamurthy, July 14, 1994 and RACT for the same universe of sources Federal Register notice that a ‘‘dollar Krishnan Ramamurthy to Thomas covered by the CTG. However, that per ton threshold’’ is ‘‘inconsistent with McGinley, Babu Patel, Ronald Davis, obligation is not required to be met by the definition of RACT’’ [62 FR 43134, Richard Maxwell, and Devendra Verma, the adoption and submittal of a source 37–38 (1997)]. July 15, 1994) which spoke directly to category RACT rule. A state may, PennFuture comments that EPA is the $1500/ton dollar figure as being a instead, opt to impose RACT for such proposing to approve RACT guideline and not an upper limit. These sources in permits, plan approvals, determinations based on a cost per ton memoranda explain that although PNG consent orders or in any other state method that EPA had previously initially proposed intermediate original enforceable document and submit those rejected, and according to its own equipment manufacturer (OEM) documents to EPA for approval as clearly expressed standard, EPA must combustion controls which would have source-specific SIP revisions. This not approve RACT determinations by reduced NO emissions from 254.7 tons option has been exercised by many Pennsylvania DEP that apply this $1500 X per year to 115 tons per year (by 55%) states, and happens most commonly per ton threshold. The commenter states at a cost of $1355 per ton reduced, DEP when only a few CTG-subject sources that PennFuture’s review of several of required the installation of an OEM lean are located in the state. The source- the current DEP evaluations indicate combustion modification that reduced specific approach is generally employed that the Commonwealth applied this NO emissions from 254.7 tons per year to avoid what can be a lengthy and standard and provides the examples of X to 76 tons per year (by 69%) at a cost resource-intensive state rule adoption Duquesne Light’Elrama (auxiliary of $1684 per ton reduced. The DEP’s process for only a few sources that may boiler); Allegheny Ludlum— have different needs and considerations Washington (formerly Jessop Steel). July 15, 1994 interoffice memorandum that must be taken into account. PennFuture asserts EPA must reject all says of the PNG RACT determination As stated earlier, there is one source Pennsylvania RACT determinations which exceeded the cost effectiveness category explicitly included in applying the standard of $1500 per ton, screening level of $1500 per ton ‘‘Tom’s PennFuture’s comment for which EPA or any other ‘‘bright line’’ approach, as (Joseph) insistence for the next more has issued a CTG, namely natural gas/ failing to follow EPA procedures stringent level of control than the gas processing plants. The established for Pennsylvania RACT. company’s chosen level in the case of Commonwealth made a negative Response: EPA still takes the position PNG was consistent with EPA Region declaration to EPA on April 13, 1993, that a single cost per ton dollar figure III’s sentiment that establishing any stating that as of that date there were no may not, in and of itself, form the basis dollar figure in RACT guidance will not applicable sources in this category. for rejecting a control technology, provide for an ‘‘automatic’’ rejection of Therefore, the Commonwealth did not equipment standard, or work practice a control technology as RACT for a adopt a category RACT regulation for standard as RACT. The Technical source.’’ natural gas/gas processing plants. Support Document prepared by EPA in In no instance, including that for D. Comment: PennFuture cites EPA support of its March 23, 1998 Duquesne Light—Elrama (auxiliary correspondence [letter from Marcia rulemaking [63 FR 13789] clearly boiler) and Allegheny Ludlum— Spink, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, indicates that the Commonwealth’s Washington (formerly Jessop Steel), has December 15, 1993] to the document, ‘‘Guidance Document on EPA proposed to approve a RACT Commonwealth which states that Reasonably Available Control determination submitted by the establishing any dollar figure in RACT Technology for Sources of NOX Commonwealth which was based solely
VerDate 11
on a conclusion that controls that cost reductions may be calculated and reduction programs for RACT, there is more than $1500/ton were not required assumed creditable under the no presumption that acid rain controls as RACT. As explained in the response Commonwealth’s SIP-approved NSR should be mandated as RACT. provided in section II. A. of this and ERC program. Moreover, EPA’s EPA stated in the final disapproval of document, EPA conducts its review of review of the Pennsylvania DEP’s the NOX RACT determination for PPNC the entire case-by-case RACT SIP implementation of its approved SIP- [63 FR at 23669], that the discussion submittal including the source’s approved NSR and ERC program concerning average emission rates for proposed RACT plan and analyses, indicates that the Commonwealth boilers with respect to the acid rain Pennsylvania’s analyses and the RACT calculates and credits ERCs in program requirements were included in plan approval, consent order or permit accordance with the SIP-approved order to provide a context for EPA’s itself to insure that the requirements of criteria for doing so as outlined in proposed disapproval. EPA made clear the SIP-approved generic RACT have PennFuture’s comment. No source for in its August 18, 1997 proposed been followed. These analyses not only which EPA is approving a case-by-case disapproval of Pennsylvania Powers’— evaluate and consider the costs of RACT determination should assume Newcastle (PPNC) RACT determination, potential control options, but also that its RACT approval alone that the basis for disapproval was a evaluate their technological feasibility. automatically establishes the baseline comparison between PPNC’s boilers and E. Comment: PennFuture comments against which it may calculate other similar combustion units, not acid that any emission reduction credits creditable ERCs. rain limits. In fact, EPA stated in the (ERCs) earned by sources subject to F. Comment: PennFuture comments August 18, 1997 proposed disapproval RACT must be surplus to all applicable that as in the case with Pennsylvania that ‘‘Without additional knowledge or state and federal requirements. Under Power—Newcastle, EPA should information, it would be erroneous and Pennsylvania law, ERCs must be compare RACT proposals to applicable premature to conclude that the limits in surplus, permanent, quantified, and acid rain program emission limits and the acid rain permit are RACT.’’ [62 FR Federally enforceable. 25 Pa.Code control strategies. PennFuture contends at 43961]. EPA clearly stated in the final 127.207(1). As to the requirement that that EPA previously disapproved a disapproval for PPNC that it did not use ERCs be surplus, the Pennsylvania Code RACT proposal for the Pennsylvania acid rain permit limits, or states: ERCs shall be included in the Power—Newcastle plant [62 FR 43959 Pennsylvania’s participation in any current emission inventory, and may (1997); 63 FR 23668 (1998)] and that other NOX control program, to not be required by or be used to meet EPA did so on the basis that the acid determine PPNC RACT approvability past or current SIP, attainment rain program requires more stringent [63 FR at 23670]. Nor has EPA intended demonstration, RFP, emission limitation emission limits. PennFuture asserts that to use participation in NOX control or compliance plans. Emission while EPA had originally proposed to programs including acid rain, in reductions necessary to meet NSPS, approve this proposal, an analysis of determining RACT for PPNC or any LAER, RACT, Best Available comparable boilers and, especially, a other subject sources. EPA also stated Technology, BACT and permit or plan comparison to Phase II emission limits that the April 30, 1998, PPNC approval emissions limitations or under the acid rain program led EPA to disapproval was based on the absence of another emissions limitation required conclude that the RACT proposal pertinent information regarding a by the Clean Air Act or the [Air emission limits were too lenient. [62 FR computerized combustion optimization Pollution Control Act] may not be used at 43961]. Therefore, PennFuture system through an enforceable permit, to generate ERCs. 25 Pa.Code contends that for sources subject to the not comparison of acid rain permit 127.207(1)(i). To be creditable, ERCs acid rain program, EPA should consider limits. must surpass not only RACT emissions and control strategies for requirements but a host of other compliance with acid rain emission III. Final Action possible sources of emission limits. limits when evaluating proposals for EPA is approving the revisions to the PennFuture comments that some of the compliance with RACT. Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP RACT evaluations at issue in the current Response: Title IV of the Act, to establish and require VOC and/or EPA notices purport to establish RACT addressing the acid rain program, NOX RACT for eight major of sources as a baseline for future ERCs. contains NOX emission requirements for located in the Pittsburgh area. EPA is PennFuture does acknowledge that EPA utilities which must be met in addition approving these SIP revisions because to any RACT requirements (see NO notes in its boilerplate for the notices, X ACHD and PADEP established and Supplement to the General Preamble at that Pennsylvania and EPA have imposed these RACT requirements in 57 FR 55625, November 25, 1992). The established a series of NOX-reducing accordance with the criteria set forth in Act provides for a number of control rules, including the recent Chapter 145 its SIP-approved RACT regulations programs that may affect similar rule, to reduce NOX at large utility and applicable to these sources. The sources. For example, new sources may industrial sources. See, for example, 66 Commonwealth has also imposed be subject to new source performance FR 42415, 16–17 (August 13, 2001). record-keeping, monitoring, and testing Because any ERCs must be surplus to standards (NSPS), best available control requirements on these sufficient to the most stringent limitation applicable technology (BACT), and lowest determine compliance with the under state or federal law as described achievable emission rate (LAER). Other applicable RACT determinations. in the Pennsylvania Code provision set controls, under such programs as the forth above, DEP and EPA must not acid rain program or the hazardous air IV. Administrative Requirements approve ERCs unless they surpass all pollutant program may also apply to A. General Requirements such limitations in addition to any sources. However, the applicability of limits set by RACT. these other requirements, which are Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Response: EPA agrees with this often more stringent than RACT, do not 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is comment by PennFuture. The approval establish what requirements must apply not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and of a case-by-case RACT determination, under the RACT program. While these therefore is not subject to review by the in and of itself, does not establish the programs may provide information as to Office of Management and Budget. For baseline from which further emission the technical and economic feasibility of this reason, this action is also not
VerDate 11
subject to Executive Order 13211, requirements of section 12(d) of the Dated: October 3, 2001. ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That National Technology Transfer and Thomas C. Voltaggio, Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 272 note) do not apply. This rule does 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 22, 2001). This action merely approves not impose an information collection state law as meeting Federal burden under the provisions of the PART 52—[AMENDED] requirements and imposes no additional Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 requirements beyond those imposed by U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 1. The authority citation for Part 52 state law. Accordingly, the continues to read as follows: Administrator certifies that this rule B. Submission to Congress and the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. will not have a significant economic Comptroller General impact on a substantial number of small Subpart NN—Pennsylvania The Congressional Review Act, 5 entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 2. Section 52.2020 is amended by rule approves pre-existing requirements Business Regulatory Enforcement adding paragraph (c)(177) to read as under state law and does not impose Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides follows: that before a rule may take effect, the any additional enforceable duty beyond § 52.2020 Identification of plan. that required by state law, it does not agency promulgating the rule must contain any unfunded mandate or submit a rule report, which includes a * * * * * significantly or uniquely affect small copy of the rule, to each House of the (c) * * * governments, as described in the Congress and to the Comptroller General (177) Revisions pertaining to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 of the United States. Section 804 Chapter 129 for VOC and NOX RACT for (Public Law 104–4). This rule also does exempts from section 801 the following sources located in the Pittsburgh-Beaver not have tribal implications because it types of rules: (1) Rules of particular Valley nonattainment area, submitted by will not have a substantial direct effect applicability; (2) rules relating to agency the Pennsylvania Department of on one or more Indian tribes, on the management or personnel; and (3) rules Environmental Protection on December relationship between the Federal of agency organization, procedure, or 8, 1995, July 1, 1997, and April 19, Government and Indian tribes, or on the practice that do not substantially affect 2001. distribution of power and the rights or obligations of non-agency (i) Incorporation by reference. responsibilities between the Federal parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not (A) Letters submitted by the Government and Indian tribes, as required to submit a rule report Pennsylvania Department of specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 regarding today’s action under section Environmental Protection transmitting FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 801 because this is a rule of particular source-specific VOC and/or NOX RACT action also does not have Federalism applicability establishing source- determinations, in the form of operating implications because it does not have specific requirements for eight named permits, enforcement orders, and substantial direct effects on the States, sources. consent orders on the following dates: on the relationship between the national December 8, 1995, July 1, 1997, and government and the States, or on the C. Petitions for Judicial Review April 19, 2001. (B) Operating Permits (OP), distribution of power and Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean responsibilities among the various Enforcement Orders (EO), and Consent Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Orders (CO) issued to the following levels of government, as specified in this action must be filed in the United Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, sources: States Court of Appeals for the August 10, 1999). This action merely (1) Penreco, OP 10–027, effective May appropriate circuit by December 11, approves a state rule implementing a 31, 1995. 2001. Filing a petition for Federal standard, and does not alter the (2) Ashland Petroleum Company, CO reconsideration by the Administrator of relationship or the distribution of power 256, effective December 19, 1996, except this final rule does not affect the finality and responsibilities established in the for condition 2.9. Clean Air Act. This rule also is not of this rule for the purposes of judicial (3) Bellefield Boiler Plant, EO 248, subject to Executive Order 13045 review nor does it extend the time effective December 19, 1996. ‘‘Protection of Children from within which a petition for judicial (4) Gulf Oil L. P., CO 250, effective Environmental Health Risks and Safety review may be filed, and shall not December 19, 1996, except for condition Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), postpone the effectiveness of such rule 2.5. because it is not economically or action. This action approving the (5) PA Dept. of Corrections, EO 244, significant. Commonwealth’s source-specific RACT effective January 23, 1997. requirements to control VOC and or In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s (6) Pittsburgh Thermal Limited NO from eight individual sources in role is to approve state choices, X Partnership, CO 220, effective March 4, the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley area of provided that they meet the criteria of 1996, except for condition 2.5. the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the Pennsylvania may not be challenged (7) BP Exploration & Oil, Inc., absence of a prior existing requirement later in proceedings to enforce its Greensburg Terminal, OP 65–000–378, for the State to use voluntary consensus requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) effective March 23, 2001. standards (VCS), EPA has no authority List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 (8) Pittsburgh Allegheny County to disapprove a SIP submission for Thermal, Ltd., CO 265, effective failure to use VCS. It would thus be Environmental protection, Air November 9, 1998, except for condition inconsistent with applicable law for pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 2.5. EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, Incorporation by reference, (ii) Additional Materials—Other to use VCS in place of a SIP submission Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen materials submitted by the that otherwise satisfies the provisions of dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the recordkeeping requirements. support of and pertaining to the RACT
VerDate 11
determinations for the sources listed in pertains to five of those sources. The for Air and Waste Management, EPA, paragraph (c)(177)(i)(B) of this section. remaining sources are or have been the December 9, 1976, cited in Michigan v. [FR Doc. 01–25575 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] subject of separate rulemakings. The Thomas, 805 F.2d 176, 180 (6th Cir. Commonwealth’s submittals consist of 1986) and at 62 FR 43134, 43136 BILLING CODE 6560–50–P plan approval and agreement upon (1997)], PennFuture appears to consent orders (COs) and enforcement comment that in every situation, RACT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION orders (EOs) issued by the Allegheny must include an emission rate. AGENCY County Health Department (ACHD). PennFuture asserts that EPA should These five sources are located in the conduct its own RACT evaluation for 40 CFR Part 52 Pittsburgh area and consist of Pruett each source, or at a minimum document Schaffer, Chemical Company; PPG a step-by-step review demonstrating the [PA–4163; FRL–7079–7] Industries, Inc.; Reichhold Chemicals, adequacy of state evaluations, to ensure Approval and Promulgation of Air Inc.; Reichhold Chemicals, Inc.; and that appropriate control technology is Valspar Corporation. applied. The commenter also believes Quality Implementation Plans; On August 10, 2001, EPA published a that EPA’s failure to conduct its own Pennsylvania; VOC and NO RACT X direct final rule (66 FR 42123) and a independent review of control Determinations for Five Individual companion notice of proposed technologies has resulted in our Sources in the Pittsburgh-Beaver rulemaking (66 FR 42172) to approve proposing to approve some RACT Valley Area these SIP revisions. On September 7, determinations that fail to meet the AGENCY: Environmental Protection 2001, we received adverse comments on terms of EPA’s own RACT standard. Agency (EPA). our direct final rule from the Citizens Response: On March 23, 1998 (63 FR ACTION: Final rule. for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture). 13789), EPA granted conditional limited On September 26, 2001 (66 FR 49108), approval of Pennsylvania’s generic SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to we published a timely withdrawal in RACT regulations, 25 PA Code Chapters approve revisions to the Commonwealth the Federal Register informing the 121 and 129, thereby approving the of Pennsylvania’s State Implementation public that the direct final rule did not definitions, provisions and procedures Plan (SIP). The revisions were take effect. We indicated in our August contained within those regulations submitted by the Pennsylvania 21, 2001 direct final rulemaking that if under which the Commonwealth would Department of Environmental Protection we received adverse comments, EPA require and impose RACT. Subsection (PADEP) to establish and require would address all public comments in 129.91, Control of major sources of NOX reasonably available control technology a subsequent final rule based on the and VOCs, requires subject facilities to (RACT) for five major sources of volatile proposed rule (66 FR 42172). This is submit a RACT plan proposal to both organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen that subsequent final rule. A description the Pennsylvania Department of oxides (NOX). These sources are located of the RACT determination(s) made for Environmental Protection (DEP) and to in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley ozone each source was provided in the August EPA Region III by July 15, 1994 in nonattainment area (the Pittsburgh 10, 2001 direct final rule and will not accordance with subsection 129.92, area). EPA is approving these revisions be restated here. A summary of the entitled, RACT proposal requirements. to establish RACT requirements in the comments submitted by PennFuture Under subsection 129.92, that proposal SIP in accordance with the Clean Air germane to this final rulemaking and is to include, among other information: Act (CAA). EPA’s responses are provided in Section (1) A list of each subject source at the EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is II of this document. facility; (2) The size or capacity of each affected source, and the types of fuel effective on October 29, 2001. II. Public Comments and Responses combusted, and the types and amounts ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents The Citizens for Pennsylvania’s of materials processed or produced at relevant to this action are available for Future (PennFuture) submitted adverse each source; (3) A physical description public inspection during normal comments on twenty proposed rules of each source and its operating business hours at the Air Protection published by EPA in the Federal characteristics; (4) Estimates of potential Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Register between August 6 and August and actual emissions from each affected Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 24, 2001 to approve case-by-case RACT source with supporting documentation; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the SIP submissions from the (5) A RACT analysis which meets the Air and Radiation Docket and Commonwealth for NOX and or VOC requirements of subsection 129.92 (b), Information Center, U.S. Environmental sources located in the Pittsburgh area. including technical and economic Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., PennFuture’s letter includes general support documentation for each affected Washington, DC 20460; and the comments and comments specific to source; (6) A schedule for Pennsylvania Department of EPA’s proposals for certain sources. A implementation as expeditiously as Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air summary of those comments and EPA’s practicable but not later than May 15, Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market responses are provided below. 1995; (7) The testing, monitoring, Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. A. Comment: PennFuture comments recordkeeping and reporting procedures FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that EPA has conducted no independent proposed to demonstrate compliance Marcia Spink, (215) 814–2104 or by e- technical review, and has prepared no with RACT; and (8) any additional mail at [email protected]. technical support document to survey information requested by the DEP SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: potential control technologies, necessary to evaluate the RACT determine the capital and operating proposal. Under subsection 129.91, the I. Background costs of different options, and rank these DEP will approve, deny or modify each On July 1, 1997 and April 19, 2001, options in total and marginal cost per RACT proposal, and submit each RACT PADEP submitted revisions to the ton of NOX and VOC controlled. In determination to EPA for approval as a Pennsylvania SIP which establish and citing the definition of the term SIP revision. impose RACT for several major sources ‘‘RACT,’’ and the Strelow Memorandum The conditional nature of EPA’s of VOC and/or NOX. This rulemaking [Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator March 23, 1998 conditional limited
VerDate 11
approval did not impose any conditions when applying for and imposing RACT 129.93) to guarantee that sources would pertaining to the regulation’s procedures for a specific source. Then EPA achieve quantifiable emissions for the submittal of RACT plans and performs a thorough review of the reductions under the RACT program. analyses by subject sources and technical and economic analyses PennFuture goes on to comment that approval of case-by-case RACT conducted by the source and the state. because EPA has not conducted and determinations by the DEP. Rather, EPA If EPA believes additional information documented a technical review of stated that ‘‘RACT rules may not merely may further support or would undercut Pennsylvania case-by case RACT be procedural rules (emphasis added) the RACT analyses submitted by the submissions, EPA has not demonstrated that require the source and the State to state, then EPA may add additional that these large boilers are subject to later agree to the appropriate level of EPA-generated analyses to the record. ‘‘numeric emission limitations’’ under control; rather the rules must identify While RACT, as defined for an RACT. EPA must conduct a thorough the appropriate level of control for individual source or source category, RACT evaluation or review for each source categories or individual often does specify an emission rate, such source, and must document the sources.’’ such is not always the case. EPA has application of numeric emission limits On May 3, 2001 (66 FR 22123), EPA issued Control Technique Guidelines and quantifiable reductions for each published a rulemaking determining (CTGs) which states are to use as coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input that Pennsylvania had satisfied the guidance in development of their RACT of over 100 million Btu per hour. conditions imposed in its conditional determinations/rules for certain sources Response: Circumstances may exist limited approval. In that rulemaking, or source categories. Not every CTG wherein a state could justify otherwise, EPA removed the conditional status of issued by EPA includes an emission however, in general, EPA agrees with its approval of the Commonwealth’s rate. There are several examples of CTGs PennFuture that coal-fired boilers with generic VOC and NOX RACT regulations issued by EPA wherein equipment a rated heat input of equal to or greater on a statewide basis. EPA received no standards and/or work practice than 100 million Btu per hour should public comments on its action and that standards alone are provided as RACT have numeric emission limitations final rule removing the conditional guidance for all or part of the processes imposed as RACT whether or not they status of Pennsylvania’s VOC and NOX covered. Such examples include the install presumptive RACT (under 25 RACT regulations became effective on CTGs issued for Bulk gasoline plants, Pa.Code 129.93). June 18, 2001. As of that time, Gasoline service stations—Stage I, As provided in the response found in Pennsylvania’s generic VOC and NOX Petroleum Storage in Fixed-roof tanks, RACT regulations retained a limited Petroleum refinery processes, Solvent II. A, EPA does not agree that it must approval status. On August 24, 2001 (66 metal cleaning, Pharmaceutical conduct its own technical analysis of FR 44578), EPA proposed to remove the products, External Floating roof tanks each of the case-by-case RACT limited nature of its approval of and Synthetic Organic Chemical determinations submitted for each Pennsylvania’s generic RACT regulation Manufacturing (SOCMI)/polymer RACT source in order to document that in the Pittsburgh area. EPA received no manufacturing. (The publication its RACT requirements include numeric public comments on that proposal. Final numbers for these CTG documents may emission limitations. That action converting the limited approval be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ determination can be made by EPA to full approval shall occur once EPA catc/dir1/ctg.txt). when it reviews the plan approval, has completed rulemaking to approve EPA disagrees with PennFuture’s consent order, or permit issued to such either (1) the case-by-case RACT general comment that our failure to a source as submitted by the proposals for all sources subject to the conduct our own independent review of Commonwealth as SIP revision. RACT requirements currently known in control technologies for every case-by- PennFuture’s comment did not point to the Pittsburgh-Beaver area or (2) for a case RACT determination conducted by a specific instance where a RACT plan sufficient number of sources such that the Commonwealth has resulted in our approval, consent order or permit the emissions from any remaining proposing to approve some RACT imposing RACT on a coal-fired boiler subject sources represent a de minimis determinations that fail to meet the with a rated heat input of equal to or level of emissions as defined in the terms of our own RACT standard. greater than 100 million Btu per hour March 23, 1998 rulemaking (63 FR PennFuture submitted comments did, in fact, lack a numerical emission 13789). specific to the case-by-case RACT limitation(s). Nonetheless, pursuant to EPA agrees that it has an obligation to determinations for only three sources PennFuture’s comment, EPA has re- review the case-by-case RACT plan located in the Pittsburgh area, namely examined all of the case-by-case RACT approvals and/or permits submitted as for Duquesne Light’s Elrama, Phillips SIP submissions made by the individual SIP revisions by and Brunot Island stations. EPA Commonwealth for such sources located Commonwealth to verify and determine summarizes those comments and in the Pittsburgh area. That re- if they are consistent with the RACT provides responses in the final rule examination, combined with requirements of the Act and any pertaining to those sources. information provided by the relevant EPA guidance. EPA does not B. Comment: PennFuture comments Commonwealth, indicates that each agree, however, that this obligation to that when EPA reviewed Pennsylvania’s case-by-case RACT plan approval, review the case-by-case RACT RACT program, it noted that consent order and/or permit for each determinations submitted by Pennsylvania coal-fired boilers with a coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input Pennsylvania necessarily extends to our rated heat input of equal to or greater of equal to or greater than 100 million performing our own RACT analyses, than 100 million Btu per hour ‘‘are some Btu per hour includes a numeric independent of the sources’ RACT of the largest NOX emitting sources in emission limitation. A listing of each plans/analyses (included as part of the the Commonwealth and in the Northeast source, its plan approval, consent order case-by-case RACT SIP revisions) or the United States’’ [63 FR 13789, 13791 and/or permit number and its numerical Commonwealth’s analyses. EPA first (1998)] and as such should have emission limitation has been placed in reviews this submission to ensure that numeric emission limitations imposed the Administrative Records for the case- the source and the Commonwealth as RACT whether or not they install by-case RACT rulemakings for the followed the SIP-approved generic rule presumptive RACT (under 25 Pa.Code Pittsburgh area.
VerDate 11
C. Comment: PennFuture asserts that The other provides that states must source category. With regard to the the Commonwealth has not adopted and adopt VOC RACT for all ‘‘VOC sources’’ Pennsylvania DEP’s intent to finalize a submitted category RACT rules for all covered by a CTG issued after November NOX RACT Guidance Document for VOC source categories for which federal 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(B)]. EPA has long implementation of its NOX RACT control technique guidelines (CTGs) interpreted the statutory RACT regulation, EPA’s 1993 letter stated that have been issued. The commenter refers requirement to be met either by the document could improperly be used to Appendix 1 of the Technical Support adoption of category-specific rules or by to establish ‘‘bright line’’ or ‘‘cook- Document (dated May 14, 2001), source-specific rules for each source book’’ approaches, particularly for a prepared by EPA in support of its within a category. When initially regulation applicable to many source proposed rule to redesignate the established, RACT was clearly defined categories and suggested that if the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Ozone as a case-by-case determination, but guidance document must include dollar Nonattainment Area (66 FR 29270), to EPA provided CTG’s to simplify the figures/ton, it provide approximate assert that EPA has failed to require the process for states such that they would ranges by source category. PennFuture Commonwealth to submit VOC RACT not be required to adopt hundreds or comments that DEP issued its rules for certain categories of sources. thousands of individual rules. See ‘‘Guidance Document on Reasonably PennFuture specifically names source Strelow Memorandum dated December Available Control Technology for categories such as equipment leaks from 9, 1976 and 44 FR 53761, September 17, Sources of NOX Emissions,’’ March 11, natural gas/gas processing plants, coke 1979. EPA does not believe that 1994, and on pp. 8–9 states that the oven batteries, iron and steel foundries, Congress’ use of ‘‘source category’’ in acceptable threshold is $1500 per ton, and publically owned treatment works one provision of section 182(b)(2) was and that this figure applies to ‘‘all and asserts that the Commonwealth has intended to preclude the adoption of source categories.’’ PennFuture notes neglected a statutory requirement to source-specific rules. that EPA later objected to the $1500 per adopt category RACT regulations for Thus, where CTG-subject sources are ton methodology as ‘‘not generically these and 14 other unnamed VOC located within those areas of a state acceptable to EPA’’ [letter from Thomas source categories. where RACT applies under Part D of the Maslany, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, Response: EPA has not issued CTGs Act, the state is obligated to impose June 24, 1997] and further stated in a for coke oven batteries, iron and steel RACT for the same universe of sources Federal Register notice that a ‘‘dollar foundries and publically owned covered by the CTG. However, that per ton threshold’’ is ‘‘inconsistent with treatment works. The Appendix 1, obligation is not required to be met by the definition of RACT’’ [62 FR 43134, referred to by the commenter, lists CTG the adoption and submittal of a source 37–38 (1997)]. covered categories as well as source category RACT rule. A state may, PennFuture comments that EPA is categories taken from two STAPPA/ instead, opt to impose RACT for such proposing to approve RACT ALAPCO documents entitled, ‘‘Meeting sources in permits, plan approvals, determinations based on a cost per ton the 15-Percent Rate-of-Progress consent orders or in any other state method that EPA had previously Requirement Under the Clean Air Act— enforceable document and submit those rejected, and according to its own A Menu of Options’’ (September 1993) documents to EPA for approval as clearly expressed standard, EPA must and ‘‘Controlling Nitrogen Oxides source-specific SIP revisions. This not approve RACT determinations by Under the Clean Air Act—A Menu of option has been exercised by many Pennsylvania DEP that apply this $1500 Options’’ (July 1994). The categories states, and happens most commonly per ton threshold. The commenter states referenced by PennFuture are not VOC when only a few CTG-subject sources that PennFuture’s review of several of categories for which EPA has issued are located in the state. The source- the current DEP evaluations indicate CTGs, but were included in Appendix A specific approach is generally employed that the Commonwealth applied this as examples of some of the types of to avoid what can be a lengthy and standard and provides the examples of sources that could be subject to resource-intensive state rule adoption Duquesne Light—Elrama (auxiliary Pennsylvania’s generic RACT process for only a few sources that may boiler); Allegheny Ludlum— regulations. The Commonwealth is have different needs and considerations Washington (formerly Jessop Steel). under no statutory obligation to adopt that must be taken into account. PennFuture asserts EPA must reject all RACT rules for source categories for As stated earlier, there is one source Pennsylvania RACT determinations which EPA has not issued a CTG. In category explicitly included in applying the standard of $1500 per ton, fact, CTGs do not exist for all but one PennFuture’s comment for which EPA or any other ‘‘bright line’’ approach, as of the categories to which the has issued a CTG, namely natural gas/ failing to follow EPA procedures commenter explicitly refers. gas processing plants. The established for Pennsylvania RACT. The Act requires that states adopt Commonwealth made a negative Response: EPA still takes the position regulations to impose RACT for ‘‘major declaration to EPA on April 13, 1993, that a single cost per ton dollar figure sources of VOC,’’ located within those stating that as of that date there were no may not, in and of itself, form the basis areas of a state where RACT applies applicable sources in this category. for rejecting a control technology, under Part D of the Act [182(b)(2)(C)]. Therefore, the Commonwealth did not equipment standard, or work practice This is referred to as the non-CTG VOC adopt a category RACT regulation for standard as RACT. The Technical RACT requirement. Moreover, EPA natural gas/gas processing plants. Support Document prepared by EPA in disagrees that there is a statutory D. Comment: PennFuture cites EPA support of its March 23, 1998 mandate that a state adopt a source correspondence [letter from Marcia rulemaking [63 FR 13789] clearly category RACT regulation even for a Spink, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, indicates that the Commonwealth’s source category where EPA has issued a December 15, 1993] to the document, ‘‘Guidance Document on CTG. There are two statutory provisions Commonwealth which states that Reasonably Available Control that address RACT for sources covered establishing any dollar figure in RACT Technology for Sources of NOX by a CTG. One provides that states must guidance will not provide for the Emissions.’’ March 11, 1994, had not adopt RACT for ‘‘any category of VOC ‘‘automatic’’ selection or rejection of a been included as part of the SIP sources’’ covered by a CTG issued prior control technology or emission submission of the Commonwealth’s to November 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(A)]. limitation as RACT for a source or generic regulation and, therefore, had
VerDate 11
not been approved by EPA. EPA further document, EPA conducts its review of review of the Pennsylvania DEP’s notes that the Administrative Record of the entire case-by-case RACT SIP implementation of its approved SIP- the March 23, 1998 rulemaking [63 FR submittal including the source’s approved NSR and ERC program 13789], in addition to the proposed RACT plan and analyses, indicates that the Commonwealth correspondence cited by PennFuture, Pennsylvania’s analyses and the RACT calculates and credits ERCs in also includes correspondence from DEP plan approval, consent order or permit accordance with the SIP-approved to EPA [letter from James Salvaggio, itself to insure that the requirements of criteria for doing so as outlined in DEP to David Arnold, EPA, September the SIP-approved generic RACT have PennFuture’s comment. No source for 10, 1997] stating that DEP’s RACT been followed. These analyses not only which EPA is approving a case-by-case guidance document does not establish a evaluate and consider the costs of RACT determination should assume maximum dollar per ton for determining potential control options, but also that its RACT approval alone the cost effectiveness for RACT evaluate their technological feasibility. automatically establishes the baseline determinations and notes that the DEP’s E. Comment: PennFuture comments against which it may calculate $1500 per ton cost effectiveness is a that any emission reduction credits creditable ERCs. target value and not an absolute (ERCs) earned by sources subject to F. Comment: PennFuture comments maximum. For example, in its analyses RACT must be surplus to all applicable that as in the case with Pennsylvania of the cost effectiveness of RACT control state and federal requirements. Under Power—Newcastle, EPA should options submitted by DEP as part of the Pennsylvania law, ERCs must be compare RACT proposals to applicable case-by-case SIP revision for Peoples surplus, permanent, quantified, and acid rain program emission limits and Natural Gas (PNG) Valley Compressor Federally enforceable. 25 Pa.Code control strategies. PennFuture contends Station’s turbo charged lean burn IC 127.207(1). As to the requirement that that EPA previously disapproved a engine (see the Administrative Record ERCs be surplus, the Pennsylvania Code RACT proposal for the Pennsylvania for 66 FR 43492), the Commonwealth states: ERCs shall be included in the Power—Newcastle plant [62 FR 43959 included DEP interoffice memoranda current emission inventory, and may (1997); 63 FR 23668 (1998)] and that (Thomas Joseph to Krishnan not be required by or be used to meet EPA did so on the basis that the acid Ramamurthy, July 14, 1994 and past or current SIP, attainment rain program requires more stringent Krishnan Ramamurthy to Thomas demonstration, RFP, emission limitation emission limits. PennFuture asserts that McGinley, Babu Patel, Ronald Davis, or compliance plans. Emission while EPA had originally proposed to Richard Maxwell, and Devendra Verma, reductions necessary to meet NSPS, approve this proposal, an analysis of LAER, RACT, Best Available July 15, 1994) which spoke directly to comparable boilers and, especially, a Technology, BACT and permit or plan the $1500/ton dollar figure as being a comparison to Phase II emission limits approval emissions limitations or guideline and not an upper limit. These under the acid rain program led EPA to another emissions limitation required memoranda explain that although PNG conclude that the RACT proposal by the Clean Air Act or the [Air initially proposed intermediate original emission limits were too lenient. [62 FR Pollution Control Act] may not be used equipment manufacturer (OEM) at 43961]. Therefore, PennFuture to generate ERCs. 25 Pa.Code combustion controls which would have contends that for sources subject to the 127.207(1)(i). To be creditable, ERCs reduced NOX emissions from 254.7 tons acid rain program, EPA should consider must surpass not only RACT per year to 115 tons per year (by 55%) emissions and control strategies for requirements but a host of other at a cost of $1355 per ton reduced, DEP possible sources of emission limits. compliance with acid rain emission required the installation of an OEM lean PennFuture comments that some of the limits when evaluating proposals for combustion modification that reduced RACT evaluations at issue in the current compliance with RACT. NO emissions from 254.7 tons per year X EPA notices purport to establish RACT Response: Title IV of the Act, to 76 tons per year (by 69%) at a cost as a baseline for future ERCs. addressing the acid rain program, of $1684 per ton reduced. The DEP’s PennFuture does acknowledge that EPA contains NOX emission requirements for July 15, 1994 interoffice memorandum notes in its boilerplate for the notices, utilities which must be met in addition says of the PNG RACT determination that Pennsylvania and EPA have to any RACT requirements (see NOX which exceeded the cost effectiveness established a series of NO -reducing Supplement to the General Preamble at screening level of $1500 per ton ‘‘Tom’s X rules, including the recent Chapter 145 57 FR 55625, November 25, 1992). The (Joseph) insistence for the next more rule, to reduce NOX at large utility and Act provides for a number of control stringent level of control than the industrial sources. See, for example, 66 programs that may affect similar company’s chosen level in the case of FR 42415, 16–17 (August 13, 2001). sources. For example, new sources may PNG was consistent with EPA Region Because any ERCs must be surplus to be subject to new source performance III’s sentiment that establishing any the most stringent limitation applicable standards (NSPS), best available control dollar figure in RACT guidance will not under state or federal law as described technology (BACT), and lowest provide for an ‘‘automatic’’ rejection of in the Pennsylvania Code provision set achievable emission rate (LAER). Other a control technology as RACT for a forth above, DEP and EPA must not controls, under such programs as the source.’’ approve ERCs unless they surpass all acid rain program or the hazardous air In no instance, including that for such limitations in addition to any pollutant program may also apply to Duquesne Light—Elrama (auxiliary limits set by RACT. sources. However, the applicability of boiler) and Allegheny Ludlum— Response: EPA agrees with this these other requirements, which are Washington (formerly Jessop Steel), has comment by PennFuture. The approval often more stringent than RACT, do not EPA proposed to approve a RACT of a case-by-case RACT determination, establish what requirements must apply determination submitted by the in and of itself, does not establish the under the RACT program. While these Commonwealth which was based solely baseline from which further emission programs may provide information as to on a conclusion that controls that cost reductions may be calculated and the technical and economic feasibility of more than $1500/ton were not required assumed creditable under the reduction programs for RACT, there is as RACT. As explained in the response Commonwealth’s SIP-approved NSR no presumption that acid rain controls provided in section II. A. of this and ERC program. Moreover, EPA’s should be mandated as RACT.
VerDate 11
EPA stated in the final disapproval of Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 272 note) do not apply. This rule does the NOX RACT determination for PPNC 22, 2001). This action merely approves not impose an information collection [63 FR at 23669], that the discussion state law as meeting Federal burden under the provisions of the concerning average emission rates for requirements and imposes no additional Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 boilers with respect to the acid rain requirements beyond those imposed by U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). program requirements were included in state law. Accordingly, the B. Submission to Congress and the order to provide a context for EPA’s Administrator certifies that this rule Comptroller General proposed disapproval. EPA made clear will not have a significant economic in its August 18, 1997 proposed impact on a substantial number of small The Congressional Review Act, 5 disapproval of Pennsylvania Powers’— entities under the Regulatory Flexibility U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Newcastle (PPNC) RACT determination, Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this Business Regulatory Enforcement that the basis for disapproval was a rule approves pre-existing requirements Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides comparison between PPNC’s boilers and under state law and does not impose that before a rule may take effect, the other similar combustion units, not acid any additional enforceable duty beyond agency promulgating the rule must rain limits. In fact, EPA stated in the that required by state law, it does not submit a rule report, which includes a August 18, 1997 proposed disapproval contain any unfunded mandate or copy of the rule, to each House of the that ‘‘Without additional knowledge or significantly or uniquely affect small Congress and to the Comptroller General information, it would be erroneous and governments, as described in the of the United States. Section 804 premature to conclude that the limits in Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 exempts from section 801 the following the acid rain permit are RACT.’’ [62 FR (Public Law 104–4). This rule also does types of rules: (1) Rules of particular at 43961]. EPA clearly stated in the final not have tribal implications because it applicability; (2) rules relating to agency disapproval for PPNC that it did not use will not have a substantial direct effect management or personnel; and (3) rules acid rain permit limits, or on one or more Indian tribes, on the of agency organization, procedure, or Pennsylvania’s participation in any relationship between the Federal practice that do not substantially affect other NOX control program, to Government and Indian tribes, or on the the rights or obligations of non-agency determine PPNC RACT approvability distribution of power and parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not [63 FR at 23670]. Nor has EPA intended responsibilities between the Federal required to submit a rule report to use participation in NOX control Government and Indian tribes, as regarding today’s action under section programs including acid rain, in specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 801 because this is a rule of particular determining RACT for PPNC or any FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This applicability establishing source- other subject sources. EPA also stated action also does not have Federalism specific requirements for five named that the April 30, 1998, PPNC implications because it does not have sources. disapproval was based on the absence of substantial direct effects on the States, C. Petitions for Judicial Review pertinent information regarding a on the relationship between the national Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean computerized combustion optimization government and the States, or on the Air Act, petitions for judicial review of system through an enforceable permit, distribution of power and this action must be filed in the United not comparison of acid rain permit responsibilities among the various States Court of Appeals for the limits. levels of government, as specified in appropriate circuit by December 11, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, II. Final Action 2001. Filing a petition for August 10, 1999). This action merely reconsideration by the Administrator of EPA is approving the revisions to the approves a state rule implementing a this final rule does not affect the finality Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP Federal standard, and does not alter the of this rule for the purposes of judicial to establish and require VOC and NOX relationship or the distribution of power review nor does it extend the time RACT for five major sources located in and responsibilities established in the within which a petition for judicial the Pittsburgh area. EPA is approving Clean Air Act. This rule also is not review may be filed, and shall not these RACT SIP submittals because subject to Executive Order 13045 postpone the effectiveness of such rule ACHD and PADEP established and ‘‘Protection of Children from or action. This action approving the imposed these RACT requirements in Environmental Health Risks and Safety Commonwealth’s source-specific RACT accordance with the criteria set forth in Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requirements to control VOC and NO the SIP-approved RACT regulations because it is not economically X from five individual sources in the applicable to these sources. The ACHD significant. Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley ozone and PADEP have also imposed record- In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s keeping, monitoring, and testing nonattainment area of Pennsylvania role is to approve state choices, may not be challenged later in requirements on these sources sufficient provided that they meet the criteria of to determine compliance with the proceedings to enforce its requirements. the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the (See section 307(b)(2).) applicable RACT determinations. absence of a prior existing requirement III. Administrative Requirements for the State to use voluntary consensus List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Environmental protection, Air A. General Requirements to disapprove a SIP submission for pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR failure to use VCS. It would thus be Incorporation by reference, 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is inconsistent with applicable law for Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and therefore is not subject to review by the to use VCS in place of a SIP submission recordkeeping requirements. Office of Management and Budget. For that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Dated: October 3, 2001. this reason, this action is also not the Clean Air Act. Thus, the Thomas C. Voltaggio, subject to Executive Order 13211, requirements of section 12(d) of the ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That National Technology Transfer and Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
VerDate 11
PART 52—[AMENDED] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Commonwealth’s submittals consist of AGENCY Operating Permits (OP) issued by 1. The authority citation for Part 52 PADEP, and an Enforcement Order (EO) continues to read as follows: 40 CFR Part 52 issued by the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD). These OPs, and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. [PA–4162; FRL–7080–6] EOs impose VOC and/or NOX RACT Subpart NN—Pennsylvania Approval and Promulgation of Air requirements for each source. These Quality Implementation Plans; sources are all located in the Pittsburgh 2. Section 52.2020 is amended by Pennsylvania; VOC and NOX RACT area and consist of: Consolidated adding paragraph (c)(165) to read as Determinations for Eight Individual Natural Gas Transmission Corporation— follows: Sources in the Pittsburgh-Beaver South Oakford Station; Consolidated Valley Area Natural Gas Transmission Corporation— § 52.2020 Identification of plan. Tonkin Station; Carnegie Natural Gas AGENCY: Environmental Protection * * * * * Company—Creighton Station; Agency (EPA). Consolidated Natural Gas Transmission (c) * * * ACTION: Final rule. Corporation—Beaver Station; (165) Revisions pertaining to VOC and Consolidated Natural Gas Transmission SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to NOX RACT for major sources, located in Corporation—Jeannette Station; the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley ozone approve revisions to the Commonwealth Consolidated Natural Gas Transmission nonattainment area, submitted by the of Pennsylvania’s State Implementation Corporation—South Bend Station; Plan (SIP). The revisions were Pennsylvania Department of Consolidated Natural Gas Transmission submitted by the Pennsylvania Environmental Protection on July 1, Corporation—Oakford Station; and Department of Environmental Protection 1997 and April 19, 2001. Texas Eastern Transmission (PADEP) to establish and require Corporation—Uniontown Station. (i) Incorporation by reference. reasonably available control technology On August 13, 2001, EPA published a (A) Letters dated July 1, 1997 and (RACT) for eight major sources of direct final rule (66 FR 42418) and a April 19, 2001, submitted by the volatile organic compounds (VOC) and companion notice of proposed Pennsylvania Department of nitrogen oxides (NOX). These sources rulemaking (66 FR 42487) to approve Environmental Protection transmitting are located in the Pittsburgh-Beaver these SIP revisions. On September 7, Valley ozone nonattainment area (the 2001, we received adverse comments on source-specific VOC and NOX RACT determinations. Pittsburgh area). EPA is approving these our direct final rule from the Citizens revisions to establish RACT for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture). (B) Plan Approval and Agreement requirements in the SIP in accordance On September 24, 2001 (66 FR 48806), Upon Consent Orders (COs) and an with the Clean Air Act (CAA). we published a timely withdrawal in Enforcement Order (EO) for the EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is the Federal Register informing the following sources: effective on October 29, 2001. public that the direct final rule did not (1) Pruett Schaffer Chemical ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents take effect. We indicated in our August Company, CO 266, effective September relevant to this action are available for 13, 2001 direct final rulemaking that if 2, 1998, except for condition 2.5. public inspection during normal we received adverse comments, EPA would address all public comments in (2) PPG Industries, Inc., CO 254, business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection a subsequent final rule based on the effective December 19, 1996, except for proposed rule (66 FR 42487). This is condition 2.5. Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the that subsequent final rule. A description of the RACT determination(s) made for (3) Reichhold Chemicals, Inc., CO Air and Radiation Docket and each source was provided in the August 218, effective December 19, 1996, except Information Center, U.S. Environmental 13, 2001 direct final rule and will not for condition 2.5. Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, be restated here. A summary of the (4) Reichhold Chemicals, Inc., CO Washington, DC 20460; and the comments submitted by PennFuture 219, effective February 21, 1996, except Pennsylvania Department of germane to this final rulemaking and Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air for condition 2.5. EPA’s responses are provided in Section Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market (5) Valspar Corporation, EO 209, II of this document. effective March 8, 1996, except for Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. II. Public Comments and Responses condition 2.5. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia L. Spink (215) 814–2104 or by e- The Citizens for Pennsylvania’s (ii) Additional Materials—Other mail at [email protected]. Future (PennFuture) submitted adverse materials submitted by the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comments on twenty proposed rules Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in published by EPA in the Federal I. Background support of and pertaining to the RACT Register between August 6 and August determinations submitted for the On August 1, 1995, December 8, 1995, 24, 2001 to approve case-by-case RACT sources listed in paragraph (c)(165)(i)(B) April 16, 1996, July 1, 1997, July 2, SIP submissions from the of this section. 1997, January 21, 1997, and February 2, Commonwealth for NOX and or VOC [FR Doc. 01–25574 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 1999, PADEP submitted revisions to the sources located in the Pittsburgh area. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Pennsylvania SIP which establish and PennFuture’s letter includes general impose RACT for several major sources comments and comments specific to of VOC and/or NOX. This rulemaking EPA’s proposals for certain sources. A pertains to eight of those sources. The summary of those comments and EPA’s RACT determinations for the other responses are provided below. sources are, or have been, the subject of A. Comment: PennFuture comments separate rulemakings. The that EPA has conducted no independent
VerDate 11
technical review, and has prepared no proposed to demonstrate compliance review the case-by-case RACT technical support document to survey with RACT; and (8) any additional determinations submitted by potential control technologies, information requested by the DEP Pennsylvania necessarily extends to our determine the capital and operating necessary to evaluate the RACT performing our own RACT analyses, costs of different options, and rank these proposal. Under subsection 129.91, the independent of the sources’ RACT options in total and marginal cost per DEP will approve, deny or modify each plans/analyses (included as part of the ton of NOX and VOC controlled. In RACT proposal, and submit each RACT case-by case RACT SIP revisions) or the citing the definition of the term determination to EPA for approval as a Commonwealth’s analyses. EPA first ‘‘RACT,’’ and the Strelow Memorandum SIP revision. reviews this submission to ensure that [Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator The conditional nature of EPA’s the source and the Commonwealth for Air and Waste Management, EPA, March 23, 1998 conditional limited followed the SIP-approved generic rule December 9, 1976, cited in Michigan v. approval did not impose any conditions when applying for and imposing RACT Thomas, 805 F.2d 176, 180 (6th Cir. pertaining to the regulation’s procedures for a specific source. Then EPA 1986) and at 62 FR 43134, 43136 for the submittal of RACT plans and performs a thorough review of the (1997)], PennFuture appears to analyses by subject sources and technical and economic analyses comment that in every situation, RACT approval of case-by case RACT conducted by the source and the state. must include an emission rate. determinations by the DEP. Rather, EPA If EPA believes additional information PennFuture asserts that EPA should stated that ‘‘ * * *RACT rules may not may further support or would undercut conduct its own RACT evaluation for merely be procedural rules (emphasis the RACT analyses submitted by the each source, or at a minimum document added) that require the source and the state, then EPA may add additional a step-by-step review demonstrating the State to later agree to the appropriate EPA-generated analyses to the record. adequacy of state evaluations, to ensure level of control; rather the rules must While RACT, as defined for an that appropriate control technology is identify the appropriate level of control individual source or source category, applied. The commenter also believes for source categories or individual often does specify an emission rate, that EPA’s failure to conduct its own sources.’’ such is not always the case. EPA has independent review of control On May 3, 2001 (66 FR 22123), EPA issued Control Technique Guidelines technologies has resulted in our published a rulemaking determining (CTGs) which states are to use as proposing to approve some RACT that Pennsylvania had satisfied the guidance in development of their RACT determinations that fail to meet the conditions imposed in its conditional determinations/rules for certain sources terms of EPA’s own RACT standard. limited approval. In that rulemaking, or source categories. Not every CTG EPA removed the conditional status of issued by EPA includes an emission Response: On March 23, 1998 (63 FR its approval of the Commonwealth’s rate. There are several examples of CTGs 13789), EPA granted conditional limited generic VOC and NOX RACT regulations issued by EPA wherein equipment approval of Pennsylvania’s generic on a statewide basis. EPA received no standards and/or work practice RACT regulations, 25 PA Code Chapters public comments on its action and that standards alone are provided as RACT 121 and 129, thereby approving the final rule removing the conditional guidance for all or part of the processes definitions, provisions and procedures status of Pennsylvania’s VOC and NOX covered. Such examples include the contained within those regulations RACT regulations became effective on CTGs issued for Bulk gasoline plants, under which the Commonwealth would June 18, 2001. As of that time, Gasoline service stations—Stage I, require and impose RACT. Subsection Pennsylvania’s generic VOC and NOX Petroleum Storage in Fixed-roof tanks, 129.91, Control of major sources of NOX RACT regulations retained a limited Petroleum refinery processes, Solvent and VOCs, requires subject facilities to approval status. On August 24, 2001 (66 metal cleaning, Pharmaceutical submit a RACT plan proposal to both FR 44578), EPA proposed to remove the products, External Floating roof tanks the Pennsylvania Department of limited nature of its approval of and Synthetic Organic Chemical Environmental Protection (DEP) and to Pennsylvania’s generic RACT regulation Manufacturing (SOCMI)/polymer EPA Region III by July 15, 1994 in in the Pittsburgh area. EPA received no manufacturing. (The publication accordance with subsection 129.92, public comments on that proposal. Final numbers for these CTG documents may entitled, RACT proposal requirements. action converting the limited approval be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ Under subsection 129.92, that proposal to full approval shall occur once EPA catc/dir1/ctg.txt). is to include, among other information: has completed rulemaking to approve EPA disagrees with PennFuture’s (1) A list each of subject source at the either (1) the case-by-case RACT general comment that our failure to facility; (2) The size or capacity of each proposals for all sources subject to the conduct our own independent review of affected source, and the types of fuel RACT requirements currently known in control technologies for every case-by- combusted, and the types and amounts the Pittsburgh-Beaver area or (2) for a case RACT determination conducted by of materials processed or produced at sufficient number of sources such that the Commonwealth has resulted in our each source; (3) A physical description the emissions from any remaining proposing to approve some RACT of each source and its operating subject sources represent a de minimis determinations that fail to meet the characteristics; (4) Estimates of potential level of emissions as defined in the terms of our own RACT standard. and actual emissions from each affected March 23, 1998 rulemaking (63 FR PennFuture submitted comments source with supporting documentation; 13789). specific to the case-by-case RACT (5) A RACT analysis which meets the EPA agrees that it has an obligation to determinations for only three sources requirements of subsection 129.92 (b), review the case-by-case RACT plan located in the Pittsburgh area, namely including technical and economic approvals and/or permits submitted as for Duquesne Light’s Elrama, Phillips support documentation for each affected individual SIP revisions by and Brunot Island stations. EPA source; (6) A schedule for Commonwealth to verify and determine summarizes those comments and implementation as expeditiously as if they are consistent with the RACT provides responses in the final rule practicable but not later than May 15, requirements of the Act and any pertaining to those sources. 1995; (7) The testing, monitoring, relevant EPA guidance. EPA does not B. Comment: PennFuture comments recordkeeping and reporting procedures agree, however, that this obligation to that when EPA reviewed Pennsylvania’s
VerDate 11
RACT program, it noted that coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input disagrees that there is a statutory Pennsylvania coal-fired boilers with a of equal to or greater than 100 million mandate that a state adopt a source rated heat input of equal to or greater Btu per hour includes a numeric category RACT regulation even for a than 100 million Btu per hour ‘‘are some emission limitation. A listing of each source category where EPA has issued a of the largest NOX emitting sources in source, its plan approval, consent order CTG. There are two statutory provisions the Commonwealth and in the Northeast and/or permit number and its numerical that address RACT for sources covered United States’ [63 FR 13789, 13791 emission limitation has been placed in by a CTG. One provides that states must (1998)] and as such should have the Administrative Records for the case- adopt RACT for ‘‘any category of VOC numeric emission limitations imposed by-case RACT rulemakings for the sources’’ covered by a CTG issued prior as RACT whether or not they install Pittsburgh area. to November 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(A)]. presumptive RACT (under 25 Pa.Code C. Comment: PennFuture asserts that The other provides that states must 129.93) to guarantee that sources would the Commonwealth has not adopted and adopt VOC RACT for all ‘‘VOC sources’’ achieve quantifiable emissions submitted category RACT rules for all covered by a CTG issued after November reductions under the RACT program. VOC source categories for which federal 15, 1990 [182(b)(2)(B)]. EPA has long PennFuture goes on to comment that control technique guidelines (CTGs) interpreted the statutory RACT because EPA has not conducted and have been issued. The commenter refers requirement to be met either by documented a technical review of to Appendix 1 of the Technical Support adoption of category-specific rules or by Pennsylvania case-by case RACT Document (dated May 14, 2001), source-specific rules for each source submissions, EPA has not demonstrated prepared by EPA in support of its within a category. When initially that these large boilers are subject to proposed rule to redesignate the established, RACT was clearly defined ‘‘numeric emission limitations’’ under Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Ozone as a case-by-case determination, but RACT. EPA must conduct a thorough Nonattainment Area (66 FR 29270), to EPA provided CTG’s to simplify the RACT evaluation or review for each assert that EPA has failed to require the process for states such that they would such source, and must document the Commonwealth to submit VOC RACT not be required to adopt hundreds or application of numeric emission limits rules for certain categories of sources. thousands of individual rules. See and quantifiable reductions for each PennFuture specifically names source Strelow Memorandum dated December coal-fired boiler with a rated heat input categories such as equipment leaks from 9, 1976 and 44 FR 53761, September 17, of over 100 million Btu per hour. natural gas/gas processing plants, coke 1979. EPA does not believe that Response: Circumstances may exist oven batteries, iron and steel foundries, Congress’ use of ‘‘source category’’ in wherein a state could justify otherwise, and publically owned treatment works one provision of section 182(b)(2) was however, in general, EPA agrees with and asserts that the Commonwealth has intended to preclude the adoption of PennFuture that coal-fired boilers with neglected a statutory requirement to source-specific rules. a rated heat input of equal to or greater adopt category RACT regulations for Thus, where CTG-subject sources are than 100 million Btu per hour should these and 14 other unnamed VOC located within those areas of a state have numeric emission limitations source categories. where RACT applies under Part D of the imposed as RACT whether or not they Response: EPA has not issued CTGs Act, the state is obligated to impose install presumptive RACT (under 25 for coke oven batteries, iron and steel RACT for the same universe of sources Pa.Code 129.93). foundries and publically owned covered by the CTG. However, that As provided in the response found in treatment works. The Appendix 1, obligation is not required to be met by II. A, EPA does not agree that it must referred to by the commenter, lists CTG the adoption and submittal of a source conduct its own technical analysis of covered categories as well as source category RACT rule. A state may, each of the case-by-case RACT categories taken from two STAPPA/ instead, opt to impose RACT for such determinations submitted for each ALAPCO documents entitled, ‘‘Meeting sources in permits, plan approvals, RACT source in order to document that the 15-Percent Rate-of-Progress consent orders or in any other state its RACT requirements include numeric Requirement Under the Clean Air Act— enforceable document and submit those emission limitations. That A Menu of Options’’ (September 1993) documents to EPA for approval as determination can be made by EPA and ‘‘Controlling Nitrogen Oxides source-specific SIP revisions. This when it reviews the plan approval, Under the Clean Air Act—A Menu of option has been exercised by many consent order, or permit issued to such Options’’ (July 1994). The categories states, and happens most commonly a source as submitted by the referenced by PennFuture are not VOC when only a few CTG-subject sources Commonwealth as SIP revision. categories for which EPA has issued are located in the state. The source- PennFuture’s comment did not point to CTGs, but were included in Appendix A specific approach is generally employed a specific instance where a RACT plan as examples of some of the types of to avoid what can be a lengthy and approval, consent order or permit sources that could be subject to resource-intensive state rule adoption imposing RACT on a coal-fired boiler Pennsylvania’s generic RACT process for only a few sources that may with a rated heat input of equal to or regulations. The Commonwealth is have different needs and considerations greater than 100 million Btu per hour under no statutory obligation to adopt that must be taken into account. did, in fact, lack a numerical emission RACT rules for source categories for As stated earlier, there is one source limitation(s). Nonetheless, pursuant to which EPA has not issued a CTG. In category explicitly included in PennFuture’s comment, EPA has re- fact, CTGs do not exist for all but one PennFuture’s comment for which EPA examined all of the case-by-case RACT of the categories to which the has issued a CTG, namely natural gas/ SIP submissions made by the commenter explicitly refers. gas processing plants. The Commonwealth for such sources located The Act requires that states adopt Commonwealth made a negative in the Pittsburgh area. That re- regulations to impose RACT for ‘‘major declaration to EPA on April 13, 1993, examination, combined with sources of VOC,’’ located within those stating that as of that date there were no information provided by the areas of a state where RACT applies applicable sources in this category. Commonwealth, indicates that each under Part D of the Act [182(b)(2)(C)]. Therefore, the Commonwealth did not case-by-case RACT plan approval, This is referred to as the non-CTG VOC adopt a category RACT regulation for consent order and/or permit for each RACT requirement. Moreover, EPA natural gas/gas processing plants.
VerDate 11
D. Comment: PennFuture cites EPA support of its March 23, 1998 In no instance, including that for correspondence [letter from Marcia rulemaking [63 FR 13789] clearly Duquesne Light—Elrama (auxiliary Spink, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, indicates that the Commonwealth’s boiler) and Allegheny Ludlum— December 15, 1993] to the document, ‘‘Guidance Document on Washington (formerly Jessop Steel), has Commonwealth which states that Reasonably Available Control EPA proposed to approve a RACT establishing any dollar figure in RACT Technology for Sources of NOX determination submitted by the guidance will not provide for the Emissions.’’ March 11, 1994, had not Commonwealth which was based solely ‘‘automatic’’ selection or rejection of a been included as part of the SIP on a conclusion that controls that cost control technology or emission submission of the Commonwealth’s more than $1500/ton were not required limitation as RACT for a source or generic regulation and, therefore, had as RACT. As explained in the response source category. With regard to the not been approved by EPA. EPA further provided in section II. A. of this Pennsylvania DEP’s intent to finalize a notes that the Administrative Record of document, EPA conducts its review of NOX RACT Guidance Document for the March 23, 1998 rulemaking [63 FR the entire case-by-case RACT SIP implementation of its NOX RACT 13789], in addition to the submittal including the source’s regulation, EPA’s 1993 letter stated that correspondence cited by PennFuture, proposed RACT plan and analyses, the document could improperly be used also includes correspondence from DEP Pennsylvania’s analyses and the RACT to establish ‘‘bright line’’ or ‘‘cook- to EPA [letter from James Salvaggio, plan approval, consent order or permit book’’ approaches, particularly for a DEP to David Arnold, EPA, September itself to insure that the requirements of regulation applicable to many source 10, 1997] stating that DEP’s RACT the SIP-approved generic RACT have categories and suggested that if the been followed. These analyses not only guidance document must include dollar guidance document does not establish a maximum dollar per ton for determining evaluate and consider the costs of figures/ton, it provide approximate potential control options, but also ranges by source category. PennFuture the cost effectiveness for RACT determinations and notes that the DEP’s evaluate their technological feasibility. comments that DEP issued its E. Comment: PennFuture comments ‘‘Guidance Document on Reasonably $1500 per ton cost effectiveness is a target value and not an absolute that any emission reduction credits Available Control Technology for (ERCs) earned by sources subject to Sources of NO Emissions,’’ March 11, maximum. For example, in its analyses X RACT must be surplus to all applicable 1994, and on pp. 8–9 states that the of the cost effectiveness of RACT control state and federal requirements. Under acceptable threshold is $1500 per ton, options submitted by DEP as part of the Pennsylvania law, ERCs must be and that this figure applies to ‘‘all case-by-case SIP revision for Peoples surplus, permanent, quantified, and source categories.’’ PennFuture notes Natural Gas (PNG) Valley Compressor Federally enforceable. 25 Pa.Code that EPA later objected to the $1500 per Station’s turbo charged lean burn IC 127.207(1). As to the requirement that ton methodology as ‘‘not generically engine (see the Administrative Record ERCs be surplus, the Pennsylvania Code acceptable to EPA’’ [letter from Thomas for 66 FR 43492), the Commonwealth states: ERCs shall be included in the Maslany, EPA, to James Salvaggio, DEP, included DEP interoffice memoranda current emission inventory, and may June 24, 1997] and further stated in a (Thomas Joseph to Krishnan not be required by or be used to meet Federal Register notice that a ‘‘dollar Ramamurthy, July 14, 1994 and past or current SIP, attainment per ton threshold’’ is ‘‘inconsistent with Krishnan Ramamurthy to Thomas demonstration, RFP, emission limitation the definition of RACT’’ [62 FR 43134, McGinley, Babu Patel, Ronald Davis, 37–38 (1997)]. or compliance plans. Emission Richard Maxwell, and Devendra Verma, reductions necessary to meet NSPS, PennFuture comments that EPA is July 15, 1994) which spoke directly to proposing to approve RACT LAER, RACT, Best Available the $1500/ton dollar figure as being a Technology, BACT and permit or plan determinations based on a cost per ton guideline and not an upper limit. These method that EPA had previously approval emissions limitations or memoranda explain that although PNG another emissions limitation required rejected, and according to its own initially proposed intermediate original clearly expressed standard, EPA must by the Clean Air Act or the [Air equipment manufacturer (OEM) Pollution Control Act] may not be used not approve RACT determinations by combustion controls which would have Pennsylvania DEP that apply this $1500 to generate ERCs. 25 Pa.Code reduced NO emissions from 254.7 tons per ton threshold. The commenter states X 127.207(1)(i). To be creditable, ERCs per year to 115 tons per year (by 55%) that PennFuture’s review of several of must surpass not only RACT at a cost of $1355 per ton reduced, DEP the current DEP evaluations indicate requirements but a host of other that the Commonwealth applied this required the installation of an OEM lean possible sources of emission limits. standard and provides the examples of combustion modification that reduced PennFuture comments that some of the Duquesne Light—Elrama (auxiliary NOX emissions from 254.7 tons per year RACT evaluations at issue in the current boiler); Allegheny Ludlum— to 76 tons per year (by 69%) at a cost EPA notices purport to establish RACT Washington (formerly Jessop Steel). of $1684 per ton reduced. The DEP’s as a baseline for future ERCs. PennFuture asserts EPA must reject all July 15, 1994 interoffice memorandum PennFuture does acknowledge that EPA Pennsylvania RACT determinations says of the PNG RACT determination notes in its boilerplate for the notices, applying the standard of $1500 per ton, which exceeded the cost effectiveness that Pennsylvania and EPA have or any other ‘‘bright line’’ approach, as screening level of $1500 per ton ‘‘Tom’s established a series of NOX-reducing failing to follow EPA procedures (Joseph) insistence for the next more rules, including the recent Chapter 145 established for Pennsylvania RACT. stringent level of control than the rule, to reduce NOX at large utility and Response: EPA still takes the position company’s chosen level in the case of industrial sources. See, for example, 66 that a single cost per ton dollar figure PNG was consistent with EPA Region FR 42415, 16–17 (August 13, 2001). may not, in and of itself, form the basis III’s sentiment that establishing any Because any ERCs must be surplus to for rejecting a control technology, dollar figure in RACT guidance will not the most stringent limitation applicable equipment standard, or work practice provide for an ‘automatic’ rejection of a under state or federal law as described standard as RACT. The Technical control technology as RACT for a in the Pennsylvania Code provision set Support Document prepared by EPA in source.’’ forth above, DEP and EPA must not
VerDate 11
approve ERCs unless they surpass all sources. However, the applicability of IV. Administrative Requirements such limitations in addition to any these other requirements, which are A. General Requirements limits set by RACT. often more stringent than RACT, do not Response: EPA agrees with this establish what requirements must apply Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR comment by PennFuture. The approval under the RACT program. While these 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is of a case-by-case RACT determination, programs may provide information as to not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and in and of itself, does not establish the the technical and economic feasibility of therefore is not subject to review by the baseline from which further emission reduction programs for RACT, there is Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not reductions may be calculated and no presumption that acid rain controls subject to Executive Order 13211, assumed creditable under the should be mandated as RACT. Commonwealth’s SIP-approved NSR ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That and ERC program. Moreover, EPA’s EPA stated in the final disapproval of Significantly Affect Energy Supply, review of the Pennsylvania DEP’s the NOX RACT determination for PPNC Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May implementation of its approved SIP- [63 FR at 23669], that the discussion 22, 2001). This action merely approves approved NSR and ERC program concerning average emission rates for state law as meeting Federal indicates that the Commonwealth boilers with respect to the acid rain requirements and imposes no additional calculates and credits ERCs in program requirements were included in requirements beyond those imposed by accordance with the SIP-approved order to provide a context for EPA’s state law. Accordingly, the criteria for doing so as outlined in proposed disapproval. EPA made clear Administrator certifies that this rule PennFuture’s comment. No source for in its August 18, 1997 proposed will not have a significant economic which EPA is approving a case-by-case disapproval of Pennsylvania Powers’- impact on a substantial number of small RACT determination should assume Newcastle (PPNC) RACT determination, entities under the Regulatory Flexibility that its RACT approval alone that the basis for disapproval was a Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this automatically establishes the baseline comparison between PPNC’s boilers and rule approves pre-existing requirements against which it may calculate other similar combustion units, not acid under state law and does not impose creditable ERCs. rain limits. In fact, EPA stated in the any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not F. Comment: PennFuture comments August 18, 1997 proposed disapproval that as in the case with Pennsylvania contain any unfunded mandate or that ‘‘Without additional knowledge or Power-Newcastle, EPA should compare significantly or uniquely affect small information, it would be erroneous and RACT proposals to applicable acid rain governments, as described in the program emission limits and control premature to conclude that the limits in Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 strategies. PennFuture contends that the acid rain permit are RACT.’’ [62 FR (Public Law 104–4). This rule also does EPA previously disapproved a RACT at 43961]. EPA clearly stated in the final not have tribal implications because it proposal for the Pennsylvania Power- disapproval for PPNC that it did not use will not have a substantial direct effect Newcastle plant [62 FR 43959 (1997); 63 acid rain permit limits, or on one or more Indian tribes, on the FR 23668 (1998)] and that EPA did so Pennsylvania’s participation in any relationship between the Federal on the basis that the acid rain program other NOX control program, to Government and Indian tribes, or on the requires more stringent emission limits. determine PPNC RACT approvability distribution of power and PennFuture asserts that while EPA had [63 FR at 23670]. Nor has EPA intended responsibilities between the Federal originally proposed to approve this to use participation in NOX control Government and Indian tribes, as proposal, an analysis of comparable programs including acid rain, in specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 boilers and, especially, a comparison to determining RACT for PPNC or any FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This Phase II emission limits under the acid other subject sources. EPA also stated action also does not have Federalism rain program led EPA to conclude that that the April 30, 1998, PPNC implications because it does not have the RACT proposal emission limits were disapproval was based on the absence of substantial direct effects on the States, too lenient. [62 FR at 43961]. Therefore, pertinent information regarding a on the relationship between the national PennFuture contends that for sources computerized combustion optimization government and the States, or on the subject to the acid rain program, EPA system through an enforceable permit, distribution of power and should consider emissions and control not comparison of acid rain permit responsibilities among the various strategies for compliance with acid rain limits. levels of government, as specified in emission limits when evaluating Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, proposals for compliance with RACT. III. Final Action August 10, 1999). This action merely Response: Title IV of the Act, approves a state rule implementing a addressing the acid rain program, EPA is approving the revisions to the Federal standard, and does not alter the Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP contains NOX emission requirements for relationship or the distribution of power utilities which must be met in addition to establish and require VOC and NOX and responsibilities established in the to any RACT requirements (see NOX RACT for eight major of sources located Clean Air Act. This rule also is not Supplement to the General Preamble at in the Pittsburgh area. EPA is approving subject to Executive Order 13045 57 FR 55625, November 25, 1992). The these RACT SIP submittals because the ‘‘Protection of Children from Act provides for a number of control ACHD and PADEP established and Environmental Health Risks and Safety programs that may affect similar imposed these RACT requirements in Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), sources. For example, new sources may accordance with the criteria set forth in because it is not economically be subject to new source performance the SIP-approved RACT regulations significant. In reviewing SIP standards (NSPS), best available control applicable to these sources. The ACHD submissions, EPA’s role is to approve technology (BACT), and lowest and PADEP have also imposed record- state choices, provided that they meet achievable emission rate (LAER). Other keeping, monitoring, and testing the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this controls, under such programs as the requirements on these sources sufficient context, in the absence of a prior acid rain program or the hazardous air to determine compliance with the existing requirement for the State to use pollutant program may also apply to applicable RACT determinations. voluntary consensus standards (VCS),
VerDate 11
EPA has no authority to disapprove a Incorporation by reference, 26–000–413, effective December 20, SIP submission for failure to use VCS. Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 1996. It would thus be inconsistent with dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and (8) Consolidated Natural Gas applicable law for EPA, when it reviews recordkeeping requirements. Transmission Corporation, South Bend a SIP submission, to use VCS in place Dated: October 3, 2001. Station, OP 03–000–180, effective of a SIP submission that otherwise December 2, 1998. Thomas C. Voltaggio, satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air (ii) Additional Materials—Other Act. Thus, the requirements of section Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. materials submitted by the 12(d) of the National Technology 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 support of and pertaining to the RACT (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This PART 52—[AMENDED] determinations for the sources listed in rule does not impose an information 1. The authority citation for Part 52 paragraph (c)(164)(i)(B) of this section. collection burden under the provisions continues to read as follows: [FR Doc. 01–25582 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P B. Submission to Congress and the Subpart NN—Pennsylvania Comptroller General ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 2. Section 52.2020 is amended by AGENCY The Congressional Review Act, 5 adding paragraph (c)(164) to read as U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small follows: 40 CFR Part 62 Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides § 52.2020 Identification of plan. [MO 0136–1136a; FRL–7078–8] that before a rule may take effect, the * * * * * Approval and Promulgation of State agency promulgating the rule must (c) * * * submit a rule report, which includes a (164) Revisions to the Pennsylvania Plans for Designated Facilities and copy of the rule, to each House of the Regulations, Chapter 129 pertaining to Pollutants; Control of Emissions From Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Congress and to the Comptroller General VOC and NOX RACT, submitted by the of the United States. Section 804 Pennsylvania Department of Incinerators (HMIWIs); State of exempts from section 801 the following Environmental Protection on August 1, Missouri types of rules: (1) Rules of particular 1995, December 8, 1995, April 16, 1996, AGENCY: Environmental Protection applicability; (2) rules relating to agency July 1, 1997, July 2, 1997, January 21, Agency (EPA). management or personnel; and (3) rules 1997, and February 2, 1999. ACTION: Direct final rule. of agency organization, procedure, or (i) Incorporation by reference. practice that do not substantially affect (A) Letters submitted by the SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to the rights or obligations of non-agency Pennsylvania Department of the state of Missouri’s section 111(d) parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not Environmental Protection dated August plan for controlling emissions from required to submit a rule report 1, 1995, December 8, 1995, April 16, existing hospital/medical/infectious regarding today’s action under section 1996, July 1, 1997, July 2, 1997, January waste incinerators. The state modified 801 because this is a rule of particular 21, 1997, and February 2, 1999, two definitions contained in its 111(d) applicability establishing source- transmitting source-specific RACT plan to make them equivalent to the specific requirements for eight named determinations. EPA definitions. Approval of the revised sources. (B) The following companies’ state plan will ensure that it is Operating Permits (OP) or Enforcement C. Petitions for Judicial Review consistent with the Federal regulations Order (EO): and is Federally enforceable. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean (1) Consolidated Natural Gas DATES: This direct final rule will be Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Transmission Corporation, Beaver effective December 11, 2001 unless EPA this action must be filed in the United Station, OP 04–000–490, effective June receives adverse comments by States Court of Appeals for the 23, 1995. November 13, 2001. If adverse appropriate circuit by December 11, (2) Consolidated Natural Gas comments are received, EPA will 2001. Filing a petition for Transmission Corporation, Oakford publish a timely withdrawal of the reconsideration by the Administrator of Station, OP 65–000–837, effective direct final rule in the Federal Register this final rule does not affect the finality October 13, 1995. informing the public that the rule will of this rule for the purposes of judicial (3) Consolidated Natural Gas not take effect. review nor does it extend the time Transmission Corporation, South within which a petition for judicial Oakford Station, OP 65–000–840, ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to review may be filed, and shall not effective October 13, 1995. Wayne Kaiser, Environmental postpone the effectiveness of such rule (4) Consolidated Natural Gas Protection Agency, Air Planning and or action. This action approving the Transmission Corporation, Tonkin Development Branch, 901 North 5th Commonwealth’s source-specific RACT Station, OP 65–000–634, effective Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Copies of documents relative to this requirements to control VOC and NOX October 13, 1995. from eight individual gas compressor (5) Consolidated Natural Gas action are available for public stations in the Pittsburgh area may not Transmission Corporation, Jeannette inspection during normal business be challenged later in proceedings to Station, OP 65–000–852, effective hours at the above-listed Region 7 enforce its requirements. (See section October 13, 1995. location. The interested persons 307(b)(2).) (6) Carnegie Natural Gas Company, wanting to examine these documents Creighton Station, EO 213, effective May should make an appointment with the List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 14, 1996, except for condition 2.7. office at least 24 hours in advance. Environmental protection, Air (7) Texas Eastern Transmission FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Corporation, Uniontown Station, OP Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551–7603.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: chemotherapeutic, and low-level as specified by Executive Order 13175 Throughout this document whenever radioactive waste. This amendment can (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean affect applicability as companies action also does not have Federalism EPA. calculate the percentage of other waste implications because it does not have Information regarding this action is being incinerated. This definition is substantial direct effects on the States, presented in the following order: now consistent with the EPA definition on the relationship between the national What are the regulatory requirements for at 40 CFR 62.14490. government and the States, or on the HMIWIs? In subsection (2)(T) of the same rule, distribution of power and Why is this action necessary? the term ‘‘medical/infectious waste’’ responsibilities among the various What changes did the state make in their was amended. The additional language levels of government, as specified in 111(d) plan? helps to clarify what the term ‘‘medical/ Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, What action are we taking in this infectious waste’’ means by listing August 10, 1999). This action merely document? specific excluded wastes. These approves a state plan implementing a What Are the Regulatory Requirements excluded wastes include such things as Federal standard, and does not alter the for HMIWIs? hazardous waste, household waste, and relationship or the distribution of power domestic sewage materials. This and responsibilities established in the Standards and guidelines for new and additional language can also affect Clean Air Act. This rule also is not existing HMIWIs were promulgated applicability when calculating the subject to Executive Order 13045 under the authority of sections 111 and percentage of waste incinerated. This ‘‘Protection of Children from 129 of the Clean Air Act on September definition is now consistent with the Environmental Health Risks and Safety 15, 1997 (62 FR 48374). These standards EPA definition at 40 CFR 62.14490. Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), are 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ec for new because it is not economically sources, and 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce What Action Are We Taking in This Document? significant. for existing sources. In reviewing state plan submissions, These rules apply to new and existing Since the additional language serves EPA’s role is to approve state choices, incinerators used by hospitals and to clarify the meaning of the respective provided that they meet the criteria of health care facilities, as well as to terms and these definitions are now the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the incinerators used by commercial waste equivalent to the EPA definitions, we absence of a prior existing requirement disposal companies to burn hospital are approving these revisions to the for the State to use voluntary consensus waste and/or medical/infectious waste. state’s HMIWI 111(d) plan. standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Subpart Ce establishes an emission Administrative Requirements to disapprove a state plan submission guideline (EG) which applies to existing for failure to use VCS. It would thus be HMIWIs that commenced construction Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR inconsistent with applicable law for on or before June 20, 1996. 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is EPA, when it reviews a state plan The subpart Ce EG is not a direct not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and submission, to use VCS in place of a Federal regulation but is a ‘‘guideline’’ therefore is not subject to review by the state plan submission that otherwise for states to use in regulating existing Office of Management and Budget. For satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air HMIWIs. The EG requires states to this reason, this action is also not Act. Thus, the requirements of section submit for EPA approval a section subject to Executive Order 13211, 12(d) of the National Technology 111(d) state plan containing air ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 emission regulations and compliance Significantly Affect Energy Supply, (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This schedules for existing HMIWIs. Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May rule does not impose an information 22, 2001). This action merely approves Why Is This Action Necessary? collection burden under the provisions state law as meeting Federal of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 We originally approved the state’s requirements and imposes no additional (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). HMIWI 111(d) plan in 40 CFR part 62 requirements beyond those imposed by The Congressional Review Act, 5 on August 19, 1999 (64 FR 45187). Upon state law. Accordingly, the U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small implementation of the plan, the state Administrator certifies that this rule Business Regulatory Enforcement determined two definitions in rule 10 will not have a significant economic Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides CSR 10–6.200, Hospital, Medical, impact on a substantial number of small that before a rule may take effect, the Infectious Waste Incinerators (which is entities under the Regulatory Flexibility agency promulgating the rule must part of the 111(d) plan) were Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this submit a rule report, which includes a incomplete, and needed to be revised rule approves pre-existing requirements copy of the rule, to each House of the for clarification and to be consistent under state law and does not impose Congress and to the Comptroller General with the EPA definitions. any additional enforceable duty beyond of the United States. We will submit a that required by state law, it does not report containing this rule and other What Changes Did the State Make in contain any unfunded mandate or required information to the United Their 111(d) Plan? significantly or uniquely affect small States Senate, the United States House Subsequently, in this rule, in governments, as described in the of Representatives, and the Comptroller subsection (2)(E), the term ‘‘co-fired Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 General of the United States prior to combustor’’ was amended. The (Public Law 104–4). publication of the rule in the Federal additional language addresses what is This rule also does not have tribal Register. A major rule cannot take effect considered other waste for purposes of implications because it will not have a until 60 days after it is published in the calculating the percentage of hospital substantial direct effect on one or more Federal Register. This action is not a and medical/infectious waste Indian tribes, on the relationship ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. combusted of the total of all wastes between the Federal Government and 804(2). combusted in a co-fired combustor. Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Other waste for purposes of the power and responsibilities between the Air Act, petitions for judicial review of definition includes pathological, Federal Government and Indian tribes, this action must be filed in the United
VerDate 11
States Court of Appeals for the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WA to Cape Falcon, OR was effective appropriate circuit by December 11, 0001 hours l.t. August 31, 2001, until 2001. Filing a petition for National Oceanic and Atmospheric 2400 hours l.t. September 30, 2001, or reconsideration by the Administrator of Administration the attainment of the overall chinook this final rule does not affect the finality quota or the overall marked coho quota. of this rule for the purposes of judicial 50 CFR Part 660 The inseason adjustment for the review nor does it extend the time [Docket No. 010502110–1110–01; I.D. Columbia River Area recreational within which a petition for judicial 092601B] fishery was effective 0001 hours l.t. review may be filed, and shall not September 7, 2001, until 2400 hours l.t. Fisheries Off West Coast States and in postpone the effectiveness of such rule September 30, 2001, or the attainment of the Western Pacific; West Coast or action. This action may not be the overall subarea quota of coho. Salmon Fisheries; Inseason Actions challenged later in proceedings to Comments will be accepted through for the Recreational and Commercial October 29, 2001. enforce its requirements. (See section Salmon Seasons from the U.S.-Canada ADDRESSES: Comments on this action 307(b)(2).) Border to Cape Falcon, Oregon may be mailed to D. Robert Lohn, List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 62 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Regional Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Environmental protection, Air Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Way N.E., Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115– pollution control, Hospital/medical/ Commerce. 0070; fax 206–526–6376; or Rod infectious waste incinerators, ACTION: McInnis, Acting Regional Intergovernmental relations, Reporting Inseason adjustments to the 2001 annual management measures for Administrator, Southwest Region, and recordkeeping requirements. the ocean salmon fishery; request for NMFS, NOAA, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Dated: September 27, 2001. comments. Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802– William W. Rice, 4132; fax 562–980–4018. Comments will SUMMARY: NMFS announces inseason Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. not be accepted if submitted via e-mail actions for the ocean salmon fishery. A or the Internet. Information relevant to Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of total of 20,000 marked coho were this document is available for public Federal Regulations is amended as transferred from the overall marked review during business hours at the follows: coho quota for the commercial fishery Office of the Regional Administrator, area from Queets River, WA to Cape Northwest Region, NMFS. PART 62—[AMENDED] Falcon, OR to the overall coho quota for the recreational fishery area from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Wright, 206–526–6140, 1. The authority citation for part 62 Leadbetter Pt., WA to Cape Falcon, OR Northwest Region, NMFS, NOAA. continues to read as follows: (Columbia River Area), effective August 22, 2001. The recreational fishery area SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. from Queets River to Leadbetter Pt., WA Transfer of Marked Coho to the Subpart AA—Missouri opened 7 days per week effective Columbia River Area Recreational Friday, September 7, 2001. Open Fishery 2. Section 62.6358 is amended by periods and limited retention adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: regulations for the commercial fishery On August 22, 2001, the Northwest from Queets River, WA to Cape Falcon, Regional Administrator, NMFS § 62.6358 Identification of plan. OR were modified and the fishery (Regional Administrator), transferred * * * * * reopened Friday, August 31 to continue 20,000 coho from the overall marked through the earliest of September 30 or coho quota for the commercial fishery (d) Amended plan for the control of the attainment of the overall chinook area from Queets River, WA to Cape air emissions from Hospital/Medical/ quota of 7,600 chinook or a 53,700 Falcon, OR to the marked coho sub- Infectious Waste Incinerators submitted overall marked coho quota. The sub- quota in the recreational fishery subarea by the Missouri Department of Natural areas opened for recreational salmon from Leadbetter Pt., WA to Cape Falcon, Resources on July 13, 2001. The fishing in the Columbia River Area were OR (Columbia River Area), hence effective date of the amended plan is modified to include the sub-area from making the overall sub-quota 122,500 December 11, 2001. Leadbetter Pt., WA to Klipsan Beach, coho. Modification of quotas is ° ′ ″ [FR Doc. 01–25583 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] WA (46 28 12 N. lat.) effective Friday, authorized by regulations at 50 CFR September 7, 2001. These actions are 660.409 (b)(1)(i). BILLING CODE 6560–50–P necessary to conform to the 2001 annual In the 2001 annual management management measures. measures for ocean salmon fisheries (66 DATES: The transfer of marked coho to FR 23185, May 8, 2001), NMFS the Columbia River Area recreational announced that the recreational fishery fishery was effective 1600 hours local from Leadbetter Pt., WA to Cape Falcon, time (l.t.) August 22, 2001, until 2400 OR would open July 1 through the hours l.t. September 30, 2001, or the earlier of September 3, or the attainment attainment of the overall coho quota. of the subarea sub-quota of 102,500 The inseason adjustment from Queets coho. NMFS also announced an opening River to Leadbetter Pt., WA was for the commercial fishery for Queets effective 0001 hours l.t., September 7, River, WA to Cape Falcon, OR that 2001, until 2400 hours l.t. September would extend through the earliest of 30, 2001, or the attainment of the September 30, or the attainment of the marked coho subarea quota. The overall chinook quota or a 63,000 inseason adjustment from Queets River, marked coho guideline.
VerDate 11
The Regional Administrator consulted data indicated that it was unlikely that Because of a higher than expected with representatives of the Pacific either quota would be reached prior to chinook/coho catch ratio, the Fishery Management Council (Council), the September 30 closing date. As a commercial fishery from Queets River, Washington Department of Fish and result, the WDFW and ODFW WA to Cape Falcon, OR began July 20 Wildlife (WDFW), and Oregon recommended, and the Regional under a cycle of 4 days open/3 days Department of Fish and Wildlife Administrator concurred, that the open closed, and a limit of 65 chinook per (ODFW) by conference call on August period be modified for the recreational open period per boat (66 FR 45634, 22, 2001. The chinook/coho catch rates fishery from Queets River to Leadbetter August 29, 2001). The modifications to and effort data indicated that the Pt., WA to open 7 days per week, the season were adopted to avoid availability of marked coho was effective Friday, September 7, 2001. All closing the fishery early due to increasing in the area while the other restrictions that apply to this premature achievement of the chinook availability of chinook was decreasing. fishery remain in effect as announced in quota, thus precluding the opportunity In addition, the marked coho subarea the 2001 annual management measures to catch available marked hatchery coho sub-quota of 102,500 marked coho in and subsequent inseason actions. salmon. the recreational fishery was projected to Evaluation of the catch rates during Inseason Adjustment From Queets be reached before the Labor Day the first open period indicated that no River, WA to Cape Falcon, OR weekend. The WDFW and ODFW further season modifications were therefore recommended, and the The Regional Administrator modified necessary for the second 4-day opening Regional Administrator concurred, that the open period and limited retention (July 27–30). 20,000 marked coho be transferred from regulations for the commercial fishery Because the availability of coho the overall marked coho quota for the from Queets River, WA to Cape Falcon, salmon was increasing, the next opening commercial fishery to the marked coho OR. The fishery reopened Friday, was lengthened to 10 days, reopening sub-quota for the recreational fishery. August 31 and will continue through August 3 and closing at midnight on This transfer provided the necessary the earliest of September 30 or the August 12, with a limit of 100 chinook buffer to allow the recreational fishery attainment of the overall chinook quota for the open period per boat (66 FR to continue without closing the area or of 7,600 chinook or the 53,700 overall 46403, September 5, 2001). modifying the season structure. The marked coho quota, with the limited The Regional Administrator reopened commercial fishery was unaffected by retention regulations suspended until the commercial fishery from Queets the transfer because information related further notice. The preseason guidelines River, WA to Cape Falcon, OR for 11 to catch to date, the chinook and coho for the fishery of 6,000 chinook and days, starting August 17 and closing at catch rates, and effort data indicated 63,000 marked coho were modified by midnight on August 27, with a limit of that it would be unable to catch its full earlier inseason transfers and/or 150 chinook for this open period per quota. All other restrictions that apply allocation adjustments (see following boat (66 FR 49322, September 27, 2001). to this fishery remain in effect as text). Modification of fishing seasons is The chinook/coho catch rates and effort announced in the 2001 annual authorized by regulations at 50 CFR data indicated that the availability of management measures and subsequent 660.409(b)(1)(i). Modification of the coho was increasing in the area while inseason actions. species that may be caught and landed the availability of chinook was during specific seasons and the decreasing. Inseason Adjustment From Queets establishment or modification of limited On August 29, after the fourth open River to Leadbetter Pt., WA retention regulations is authorized by period, the Regional Administrator The Regional Administrator modified regulations at 50 CFR 660.409 (b)(1)(ii). consulted with representatives of the the open period for the recreational In the 2001 annual management Council, WDFW, and ODFW by fishery from Queets River to Leadbetter measures for ocean salmon fisheries (66 conference call. Information related to Pt., WA to be open 7 days per week FR 23185, May 8, 2001), NMFS catch to date, the chinook and coho effective Friday, September 7, 2001. announced that the commercial fishery catch rates, and effort data indicated Modification of recreational fishing days for all salmon in the area from Queets that it was unlikely that either quota per calendar week is authorized by River, WA to Cape Falcon, OR would would be reached prior to the regulations at 50 CFR 660.409 (b)(1)(iii). open the earlier of the day following September 30 closing date. The WDFW In the 2001 annual management closure of the U.S.-Canada Border to and ODFW recommended, and the measures for ocean salmon fisheries (66 Leadbetter Pt. WA. July troll fishery or Regional Administrator concurred, that FR 23185, May 8, 2001), NMFS July 28, but not before July 20, through the season reopen Friday, August 31 announced that the recreational fishery the earliest of September 30 or the and continue through the earliest of from Queets River to Leadbetter Pt., WA attainment of the overall chinook quota September 30 or the attainment of the would open July 1 through the earlier of (preseason 6,000-chinook guideline) or a overall chinook quota of 7,600 chinook September 30 or the attainment of the 63,000 marked coho guideline. The or the 53,700 marked coho quota. All 83,250 coho subarea quota, with the fishery was scheduled to run other restrictions that apply to this weekly open period running Sunday continuously until 75 percent of either fishery remain in effect as announced in through Thursday. guideline was caught; it would then the 2001 annual management measures The annual management measures revert to a cycle of 4 days open/3 days and subsequent inseason actions. included weekly closures on Fridays closed. NMFS would then institute or and Saturdays with the intention of adjust inseason trip limits, gear Inseason Adjustment for the Columbia providing harvest opportunity as long as restrictions, and guidelines. River Area Recreational Fishery possible into the month of September. The U.S.-Canada Border to Leadbetter The Regional Administrator modified On August 27, 2001, the Regional Pt., WA July troll fishery closed on July the sub-areas opened for the recreational Administrator consulted with 9, 2001, at 2359 hours l.t.(66 FR 38573, salmon fishing area from Leadbetter Pt., representatives of the Council, WDFW, July 25, 2001). Therefore, the WA to Cape Falcon, OR (Columbia River and ODFW by conference call. commercial fishery for all salmon from Area) to include the sub-area from Information related to catch to date, the Queets River, WA to Cape Falcon, OR Leadbetter Pt. to Klipsan Beach, WA chinook and coho catch rates, and effort started July 20, 2001. (46°28′12″ N. lat.) effective Friday,
VerDate 11
September 7, 2001. Modification of WDFW indicated that opening the notice of these actions was provided to boundaries and establishment of closed additional area at the northern end of fishermen through telephone hotline areas are authorized by regulations at 50 the Columbia River Area would not and radio notification. Notice and the CFR 660.409 (b)(1)(v). interfere with data collection efforts opportunity for public comment is In the 2001 annual management and, given the expected catch rates, impracticable because NMFS, in concert measures for ocean salmon fisheries (66 would not likely increase catches to the with the state agencies, needs to take FR 23185, May 8, 2001), NMFS degree that quotas for chinook and coho immediate action after collecting the announced that the recreational fishery would be met early. The WDFW fishery catch and effort data in order to for the Columbia River Area would open recommended, and the Regional comply with the requirements of the September 4 through the earlier of Administrator concurred, that the area annual management measures for ocean September 30 or the attainment of the from Leadbetter Pt., WA to Klipsan salmon fisheries (66 FR 23185, May 8, overall subarea quota of 112,500 coho Beach, WA (46°28′12″ N. lat.) be added 2001) and the West Coast Salmon Plan. (10,000 set-aside), with only the area to the areas open to fishing, and that it Moreover, such prior notice and the from Tillamook Head, OR to the North be effective Friday, September 7, 2001. opportunity for public comment is Head Lighthouse, WA (46°18′00″ N. The Regional Administrator contrary to the public interest because it Lat.) open to fishing (Note: The first determined that the best available does not allow commercial and inseason action described in this information indicated that the catch and recreational fishermen appropriately document that transferred 20,000 effort data, and catch and effort controlled access to the available fish at marked coho to the Columbia River projections, supported the above the time they are available. The 30-day Area effectively makes the overall inseason actions recommended by the delay in effectiveness required under subarea quota 132,500 marked coho). states. The states manage the fisheries in U.S.C. 553(d)is also hereby waived as The primary purpose of only having state waters adjacent to the areas of the the inseason actions described in this the area off the mouth of the Columbia exclusive economic zone in accordance document either increase quotas or River open, with the areas to the north with these Federal actions. As provided fishing times, or open areas previously and south closed during this late season, by the inseason notice procedures of 50 closed to fishing, and thus relieve was to limit impacts to Oregon coastal CFR 660.411, actual notice to fishers of restrictions. natural coho and target hatchery coho the above described actions were given These actions do not apply to other that usually stage in this location before prior to the effective dates by telephone fisheries that may be operating in other migrating to their hatchery of origin in hotline number 206–526–6667 and 800- areas. the lower Columbia River. In addition, 662-9825, and by U.S. Coast Guard the states planned on evaluating their Notice to Mariners broadcasts on These actions are authorized by 50 assumptions about stock composition in Channel 16 VHF-FM and 2182 kHz. CFR 660.409 and 660.411 and are the area by sampling the catch. During exempt from review under Executive preseason planning, the area to the Classification Order 12866. north of the North Head Lighthouse, The Assistant Administrator for Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. WA was closed to minimize Fisheries, NOAA, finds that good cause complications related to the catch exists for issuing this notification Dated: October 9, 2001. sampling program. without affording a prior opportunity Bruce C. Morehead, On September 5, the Regional for public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553 Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Administrator consulted with (b)(3)(B). Such notification is Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. representatives of the Council, WDFW, impracticable and contrary to the public [FR Doc. 01–25722 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] and ODFW by conference call. The interest. As previously noted, actual BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate 11
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER website at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. The petitioner further states that, during contains notices to the public of the proposed This site provides the capability to blowdown, the redistribution of crud issuance of rules and regulations. The upload comments as files (any format), into any or all of the several restricted purpose of these notices is to give interested if your web browser supports that channels would result in the substantial persons an opportunity to participate in the function. For information about the flow blockage. The petitioner states that rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. interactive rulemaking website, contact these restricted flow channels include at Ms. Carol Gallagher, 301–415–5905 (e- least the following items within the fuel mail: [email protected]). bundles: the spacer grids, the mixing NUCLEAR REGULATORY The petition and copies of comments vanes attached to spacer grids, and the COMMISSION received may be inspected and copied regions of ballooned and burst fuel for a fee at the NRC Public Document cladding. The petitioner states that the 10 CFR Part 50 Room,11555 Rockville Pike, Public File consequent degradation of coolability Area O1F21, Rockville, Maryland. [Docket No. PRM–50–73] would have resulted in a rapid Copies of comments received are also deterioration of defense in depth. Under Robert H. Leyse; Receipt of Petition for available through the NRC’s these conditions, the unusually heavy Rulemaking Agencywide Documents Access and crud deposits on the fuel pins would Management System (ADAMS), which have threatened the integrity of all of AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory provides text and image files of NRC’s the barriers that in total comprise Commission. public documents. These documents defense in depth. ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; notice may be accessed through the NRC’s The petitioner believes that it could of receipt. Public Electronic Reading Room on the be argued that significant crud deposits Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ would lead to an extensive amount of SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory ADAMS/index.html. If you do not have fuel failure during operation at [full] Commission (NRC) is publishing for access to ADAMS or if there are power. The petitioner believes that the public comment a notice of receipt of a problems in accessing the documents amount of failed fuel would then lead petition for rulemaking, dated located in ADAMS contact the NRC to a decision to shut down the reactor September 4, 2001, which was filed Public Document Room (PDR) Reference as the inventory of radioactive material with the Commission by Robert H. staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415– in the reactor coolant reached the limits Leyse. The petition was docketed by the 4737or by e-mail to [email protected]. that are allowed by the Technical NRC on September 4, 2001, and has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Specifications. According to the been assigned Docket No. PRM–50–73. Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and petitioner, operating experience reveals The petitioner requests that the NRC Directives Branch, Division of that it is possible to operate a light- amend its regulations on the acceptance Administrative Services, Office of water reactor within the applicable criteria for emergency core cooling Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Technical Specifications even though systems for light-water nuclear power Commission, Washington, DC 20555– unusually heavy crud deposits are reactors to address the impact of crud 0001, Telephone: 301–415–7163 or Toll present on the fuel pins. on cooling capability during a fast- Free: 800–368–5642. moving, large-break, loss-of-coolant The Petitioner’s Conclusions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: accident (LOCA). The petitioner believes that the DATES: Submit comments by December The Petitioners Request deficiencies in Part 50 must be corrected 26, 2001. Comments received after this The petitioner requests that the NRC to retain defense in depth. Accordingly, date will be considered if it is practical amend § 50.46(a)(1)(i) and Appendix K elements in § 50.46 concerning to do so, but the Commission is able to to Part 50 to address the impact of crud comparisons to applicable experimental assure consideration only for comments on cooling capability during a fast- data must be revised to include the received on or before this date. moving (large-break), LOCA. impact of crud on deposits on fuel pins. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments Also, the following paragraphs in to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Background Appendix K to part 50, should be Nuclear Regulatory Commission, The petitioner states that § 50.46 and revised to include the impact of crud Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: Appendix K to part 50 do not address deposits on fuel pins: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. the impact of crud on coolability during I.B. Swelling and Rupture of the Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville a fast-moving (large-break) LOCA. The Cladding and Fuel Rod Thermal Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 petitioner states that a certain licensed Parameters; a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. power reactor has operated with I.C.2 Frictional Pressure Drops; For a copy of the petition, write to unusually heavy crud deposits on many I.C.4 Critical Heat Flux; Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and of the fuel pins. These crud deposits I.C.5 Post-CHF Heat Transfer Directives Branch, Division of were identified and partially classified Correlations; Administrative Services, Office of during a refueling outage. The petitioner I.C.7 Core Flow Distribution During Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory states that if a fast-moving (large-break) Blowdown; Commission, Washington, DC 20555– LOCA had occurred before the I.D.3 Calculation of Reflood Rate for 0001. shutdown for refueling, extensive Pressurized Water Reactors; You may also provide comments via blockage of the flow channels within the I.D.6 Convective Heat Transfer the NRC’s interactive rulemaking fuel bundles would have developed. Coefficients for Boiling Water
VerDate 11
Reactor Fuel Rods Under Spray 114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001– in the Rules Docket for examination by Cooling; and NM–154–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., interested persons. A report I.D.7 The Boiling-Water Reactor Renton, Washington 98055–4056. summarizing each FAA-public contact Channel Box Under Spray Cooling. Comments may be inspected at this concerned with the substance of this II.1.a The documentation requirements location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 proposal will be filed in the Rules in this paragraph should include a p.m., Monday through Friday, except Docket. description of each evaluation Federal holidays. Comments may be Commenters wishing the FAA to model used for estimation of the submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. acknowledge receipt of their comments effects of crud deposits on fuel pins. Comments may also be sent via the submitted in response to this action Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day Internet using the following address: 9- must submit a self-addressed, stamped of October, 2001. [email protected]. Comments postcard on which the following For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. sent via fax or the Internet must contain statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Annette L. Vietti-Cook, ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–154–AD’’ in the Docket Number 2001–NM–154–AD.’’ subject line and need not be submitted Secretary of the Commission. The postcard will be date stamped and in triplicate. Comments sent via the returned to the commenter. [FR Doc. 01–25672 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Internet as attached electronic files must BILLING CODE 7590–01–P be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Availability of NPRMs Windows or ASCII text. Any person may obtain a copy of this The service information referenced in NPRM by submitting a request to the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION the proposed rule may be obtained from FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. Federal Aviation Administration Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. 2001–NM–154–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, This information may be examined at SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 14 CFR Part 39 the FAA, Transport Airplane [Docket No. 2001–NM–154–AD] Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Discussion Renton, Washington. ´ ´ RIN 2120–AA64 The Direction Generale de l’Aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Civile (DGAC), which is the Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, airworthiness authority for France, A330 and A340 Series Airplanes International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, notified the FAA that an unsafe Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 condition may exist on certain Airbus AGENCY: Federal Aviation Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington Model A330 and A340 series airplanes. Administration, DOT. 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2125; The DGAC advises that, during escape ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking fax (425) 227–1149. slide deployment tests on a Model A330 (NPRM). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: series airplane, the girt bar of the emergency escape slide became SUMMARY: This document proposes the Comments Invited detached from the airplane when the adoption of a new airworthiness Interested persons are invited to escape slide was deployed. Such directive (AD) that is applicable to participate in the making of the detachment of the girt bar has been certain Airbus Model A330 and A340 proposed rule by submitting such attributed to various factors, including a series airplanes. This proposal would written data, views, or arguments as foreign object between the slider and require repetitive inspections for foreign they may desire. Communications shall girt bar attachment fitting, incorrect objects between the slider and the girt identify the Rules Docket number and adjustment of the escape slide release bar attachment fittings of the emergency be submitted in triplicate to the address mechanism, and incorrect installation of escape slides, and corrective actions, if specified above. All communications both girt bar attachment fittings. This necessary. This proposal also would received on or before the closing date condition, if not corrected, could result eventually require a one-time inspection for comments, specified above, will be in failure of an emergency escape slide, to determine whether the release considered before taking action on the which could delay evacuation in an mechanism of the emergency escape proposed rule. The proposals contained emergency and result in injury to slides and girt bar attachment fittings in this action may be changed in light passengers or crew. are adjusted correctly, which would of the comments received. The girt bar installation on certain terminate the repetitive inspections for Submit comments using the following Model A340 series airplanes is identical foreign objects between the slider and format: to that on the affected Model A330 the girt bar attachment fittings; a one- • Organize comments issue-by-issue. series airplanes. Therefore, those Model time test to ensure that the girt bar For example, discuss a request to A340 series airplanes may be subject to extends through the sliders correctly; change the compliance time and a the same unsafe condition revealed on and corrective action, if necessary. This request to change the service bulletin the Model A330 series airplanes. action is necessary to prevent failure of reference as two separate issues. an emergency escape slide, which could • Explanation of Relevant Service For each issue, state what specific Information delay evacuation in an emergency and change to the proposed AD is being result in injury to passengers or crew. requested. Airbus has issued Service Bulletins This action is intended to address the • Include justification (e.g., reasons or A330–52–3064 and A340–52–4076, both identified unsafe condition. data) for each request. dated April 4, 2001. Those service DATES: Comments must be received by Comments are specifically invited on bulletins describe procedures for the November 13, 2001. the overall regulatory, economic, following: ADDRESSES: environmental, and energy aspects of • Repetitive visual inspections for Submit comments in triplicate to the the proposed rule. All comments foreign objects between the slider and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), submitted will be available, both before the girt bar attachment fittings of the Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM– and after the closing date for comments, emergency escape slides, removal of any
VerDate 11
foreign object, and determination that in this proposed AD to define this type is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ the girt bar attachment fittings are clean. of inspection. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not • a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT A one-time inspection to determine Cost Impact whether the release mechanism of the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 emergency escape slides and girt bar The FAA estimates that 5 airplanes of FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if attachment fittings are adjusted U.S. registry would be affected by this promulgated, will not have a significant correctly, which eliminates the need for proposed AD. economic impact, positive or negative, the repetitive inspections for foreign It would take approximately 2 work on a substantial number of small entities objects between the slider and the girt hours per airplane to accomplish the under the criteria of the Regulatory bar attachment fittings, and adjustment proposed inspection for foreign objects Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft of the release mechanism or girt bar between the slider and the girt bar regulatory evaluation prepared for this attachment fittings, if necessary. attachment fittings of the emergency action is contained in the Rules Docket. escape slide, at an average labor rate of • A one-time test to ensure that the A copy of it may be obtained by $60 per work hour. Based on these girt bar extends through the sliders contacting the Rules Docket at the figures, the cost impact of this correctly, and rework or replacement of location provided under the caption inspection on U.S. operators is the girt bar, if necessary. ADDRESSES. estimated to be $600, or $120 per Accomplishment of the actions airplane, per inspection cycle. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 specified in the service bulletins is It would take approximately 4 work Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation intended to adequately address the hours per airplane to accomplish the safety, Safety. identified unsafe condition. The DGAC proposed inspection to determine classified these service bulletins as whether the release mechanism for the The Proposed Amendment mandatory and issued French emergency escape slide and girt bar airworthiness directives 2001–190(B) attachment fittings are adjusted Accordingly, pursuant to the and 2001–191(B), both dated May 16, correctly, at an average labor rate of $60 authority delegated to me by the 2001, in order to assure the continued per work hour. Based on these figures, Administrator, the Federal Aviation airworthiness of these airplanes in the cost impact of this inspection on Administration proposes to amend part France. U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,200, 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: FAA’s Conclusions or $240 per airplane. It would take approximately 4 work PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS These airplane models are hours per airplane to accomplish the DIRECTIVES manufactured in France and are type proposed inspection to determine certificated for operation in the United whether the girt bar of the emergency States under the provisions of § 21.29 of 1. The authority citation for part 39 escape slide extends through the sliders continues to read as follows: the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 correctly, at an average labor rate of $60 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral per work hour. Based on these figures, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to the cost impact of this inspection on § 39.13 [Amended] this bilateral airworthiness agreement, U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,200, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed or $240 per airplane. 2. Section 39.13 is amended by of the situation described above. The The cost impact figures discussed adding the following new airworthiness FAA has examined the findings of the above are based on assumptions that no directive: DGAC, reviewed all available operator has yet accomplished any of Airbus Industrie: Docket 2001–NM–154–AD. information, and determined that AD the proposed requirements of this AD Applicability: Model A330 series airplanes, action is necessary for products of this action, and that no operator would as listed in Airbus Service Bulletin A330–52– type design that are certificated for accomplish those actions in the future if 3064, dated April 4, 2001; and Model A340 operation in the United States. this proposed AD were not adopted. The series airplanes, as listed in Airbus Service cost impact figures discussed in AD Bulletin A340–52–4076, dated April 4, 2001; Explanation of Requirements of certificated in any category. Proposed Rule rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform the specific Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane Since an unsafe condition has been actions actually required by the AD. identified in the preceding applicability identified that is likely to exist or provision, regardless of whether it has been These figures typically do not include modified, altered, or repaired in the area develop on other airplanes of the same incidental costs, such as the time type design registered in the United subject to the requirements of this AD. For required to gain access and close up, airplanes that have been modified, altered, or States, the proposed AD would require planning time, or time necessitated by repaired so that the performance of the accomplishment of the actions specified other administrative actions. requirements of this AD is affected, the in the applicable service bulletin owner/operator must request approval for an described previously, except as Regulatory Impact alternative method of compliance in discussed below. The regulations proposed herein accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. would not have a substantial direct The request should include an assessment of Difference Between Service Bulletins the effect of the modification, alteration, or and This Proposed AD effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and repair on the unsafe condition addressed by The service bulletins refer to the three this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not the States, or on the distribution of been eliminated, the request should include inspections that would be required by power and responsibilities among the specific proposed actions to address it. this proposed AD as a ‘‘visual various levels of government. Therefore, Compliance: Required as indicated, unless inspection,’’ an ‘‘inspection,’’ and a it is determined that this proposal accomplished previously. ‘‘check,’’ respectively. The FAA finds would not have federalism implications To prevent failure of the emergency escape that all three inspections should be under Executive Order 13132. slide, which could delay evacuation in an described as ‘‘general visual’’ For the reasons discussed above, I emergency and result in injury to passengers inspections. Note 2 has been included certify that this proposed regulation (1) or crew, accomplish the following:
VerDate 11
Repetitive Inspections for Foreign Objects may add comments and then send it to the 153–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., (a) For all passenger/crew doors (Type A) Manager, International Branch, ANM–116. Renton, Washington 98055–4056. and emergency exit doors (Type A and Type Note 3: Information concerning the Comments may be inspected at this 1): Within 550 flight hours after the effective existence of approved alternative methods of location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., date of this AD, perform a general visual compliance with this AD, if any, may be Monday through Friday, except Federal inspection for foreign objects between the obtained from the International Branch, holidays. Comments may be submitted ANM–116. slider and the girt bar attachment fittings of via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments the emergency escape slide, according to Airbus Service Bulletin A330–52–3064 or Special Flight Permits may also be sent via the Internet using A340–52–4076, both dated April 4, 2001, as (e) Special flight permits may be issued in the following address: 9-anm- applicable. Repeat the inspection at least accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 [email protected]. Comments sent every 7 days until paragraph (b) of this AD of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR via fax or the Internet must contain is done. If any foreign object is found during 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to ‘‘Docket No. 2001-NM–153–AD’’ in the any inspection per this paragraph, before a location where the requirements of this AD subject line and need not be submitted further flight, remove the object and ensure can be accomplished. in triplicate. Comments sent via the that the girt bar attachment fittings are clean, Internet as attached electronic files must according to the applicable service bulletin. Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in French airworthiness directives 2001– be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a 190(B) and 2001–191(B), both dated May 16, Windows or ASCII text. general visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘A 2001. visual examination of an interior or exterior The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from area, installation, or assembly to detect Issued in Renton, Washington, on October obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This 4, 2001. Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice level of inspection is made under normally Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Vi L. Lipski, available lighting conditions such as This information may be examined at daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or drop- Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, the FAA, Transport Airplane Aircraft Certification Service. light, and may require removal or opening of Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or [FR Doc. 01–25619 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Renton, Washington. platforms may be required to gain proximity BILLING CODE 4910–13–U to the area being checked.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer, One-Time Inspection of Slide Release DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Mechanism and Girt Bar Attachment Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Fittings Federal Aviation Administration Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington (b) For all passenger/crew doors (Type A) 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2797; and emergency exit doors (Type A and Type fax (425) 227–1149. 1): Within 18 months after the effective date 14 CFR Part 39 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of this AD, perform a one-time general visual [Docket No. 2001–NM–153–AD] inspection to determine whether the release Comments Invited mechanism for the emergency escape slide RIN 2120–AA64 and girt bar attachment fittings are adjusted Interested persons are invited to correctly, according to Airbus Service Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model participate in the making of the Bulletin A330–52–3064 or A340–52–4076, A330 and A340 Series Airplanes proposed rule by submitting such both dated April 4, 2001, as applicable. If the written data, views, or arguments as slide mechanism or girt bar attachment AGENCY: Federal Aviation they may desire. Communications shall fittings are not adjusted correctly, before Administration, DOT. further flight, adjust them correctly, identify the Rules Docket number and ACTION: according to the applicable service bulletin. Notice of proposed rulemaking be submitted in triplicate to the address This inspection terminates the repetitive (NPRM). specified above. All communications inspections required by paragraph (a) of this received on or before the closing date SUMMARY: AD. This document proposes the for comments, specified above, will be adoption of a new airworthiness considered before taking action on the One-Time Inspection of Girt Bar Attachment directive (AD) that is applicable to all Fittings proposed rule. The proposals contained Airbus Model A330 and A340 series in this action may be changed in light (c) For all passenger/crew doors (Type A) airplanes. This proposal would require and emergency exit doors (Type A ONLY): of the comments received. repetitive inspections and operational Submit comments using the following Within 18 months after the effective date of checks of the spring function of the this AD, perform a one-time general visual format: inspection to determine whether the girt bar emergency exit door slider mechanism, • Organize comments issue-by-issue. of the emergency escape slide extends and corrective action if necessary. This For example, discuss a request to through the sliders correctly, according to action is necessary to prevent failure of change the compliance time and a Airbus Service Bulletin A330–52–3064 or the spring locking function of the slider request to change the service bulletin A340–52–4076, both dated April 4, 2001, as mechanism due to corrosion, which reference as two separate issues. applicable. If the girt bar does not extend could result in the escape slide • correctly, before further flight, rework or For each issue, state what specific detaching from the airplane in an change to the proposed AD is being replace the girt bar, according to the emergency evacuation. This action is applicable service bulletin. requested. intended to address the identified • Include justification (e.g., reasons or Alternative Methods of Compliance unsafe condition. data) for each request. (d) An alternative method of compliance or DATES: Comments must be received by Comments are specifically invited on adjustment of the compliance time that November 13, 2001. the overall regulatory, economic, provides an acceptable level of safety may be ADDRESSES: used if approved by the Manager, Submit comments in environmental, and energy aspects of International Branch, ANM–116, Transport triplicate to the Federal Aviation the proposed rule. All comments Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall Administration (FAA), Transport submitted will be available, both before submit their requests through an appropriate Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, and after the closing date for comments, FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM– in the Rules Docket for examination by
VerDate 11
interested persons. A report FAA’s Conclusions For the reasons discussed above, I summarizing each FAA-public contact These airplane models are certify that this proposed regulation (1) concerned with the substance of this manufactured in France and are type is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ proposal will be filed in the Rules certificated for operation in the United under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not Docket. States under the provisions of section a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Commenters wishing the FAA to 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 acknowledge receipt of their comments Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if submitted in response to this action applicable bilateral airworthiness promulgated, will not have a significant must submit a self-addressed, stamped agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral economic impact, positive or negative, postcard on which the following airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has on a substantial number of small entities statement is made: ‘‘Comments to kept the FAA informed of the situation under the criteria of the Regulatory Docket 2001-NM–153–AD.’’ The described above. The FAA has Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft postcard will be date stamped and examined the findings of the DGAC, regulatory evaluation prepared for this returned to the commenter. reviewed all available information, and action is contained in the Rules Docket. determined that AD action is necessary A copy of it may be obtained by Availability of NPRMs for products of this type design that are contacting the Rules Docket at the certificated for operation in the United location provided under the caption Any person may obtain a copy of this States. ADDRESSES. NPRM by submitting a request to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Explanation of Requirements of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket Proposed Rule 2001–NM–153–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Since an unsafe condition has been safety, Safety. SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. identified that is likely to exist or Discussion develop on other airplanes of the same The Proposed Amendment type design registered in the United The Direction Ge´ne´rale de l’Aviation States, the proposed AD would require Accordingly, pursuant to the Civile (DGAC), which is the accomplishment of the actions specified authority delegated to me by the airworthiness authority for France, in the AOTs described previously. Administrator, the Federal Aviation notified the FAA that an unsafe Administration proposes to amend part Cost Impact condition may exist on all Airbus Model 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations A330 and A340 series airplanes. The The FAA estimates that 9 airplanes of (14 CFR part 39) as follows: DGAC advises that a deployment test of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS an escape slide revealed that a DIRECTIVES component of the emergency exit door approximately 3 work hours per was not operating correctly. airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, and that the average labor 1. The authority citation for part 39 Specifically, the spring function of a continues to read as follows: slide release mechanism (slider) was rate is $60 per work hour. Based on inoperative due to corrosion or a these figures, the cost impact of the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. proposed AD on U.S. operators is missing spring function. The two sliders § 39.13 [Amended] installed on each end of the girt bar estimated to be $1,620, or $180 per attach the escape slide either to the door airplane, per inspection cycle. 2. Section 39.13 is amended by (when disarmed) or to the fuselage The cost impact figure discussed adding the following new airworthiness (when armed). Without the proper above is based on assumptions that no directive: operator has yet accomplished any of spring function of the slider, the girt bar Airbus Industrie: Docket 2001–NM–153–AD. will not be correctly attached to the the proposed requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would Applicability: All Model A330 and A340 fuselage. This condition, if not series airplanes, certificated in any category. accomplish those actions in the future if corrected, could result in the escape this proposed AD were not adopted. The Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane slide detaching from the airplane in an cost impact figures discussed in AD identified in the preceding applicability emergency evacuation. provision, regardless of whether it has been rulemaking actions represent only the modified, altered, or repaired in the area Explanation of Relevant Service time necessary to perform the specific subject to the requirements of this AD. For Information actions actually required by the AD. airplanes that have been modified, altered, or These figures typically do not include repaired so that the performance of the Airbus has issued All Operators incidental costs, such as the time requirements of this AD is affected, the Telexes (AOTs) A330–52A3063 and required to gain access and close up, owner/operator must request approval for an A340–52A4075, both dated August 2, planning time, or time necessitated by alternative method of compliance in 2000. Revision 01 of each AOT was other administrative actions. accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. issued January 3, 2001. The AOTs The request should include an assessment of describe procedures for repetitive Regulatory Impact the effect of the modification, alteration, or inspections and operational checks of The regulations proposed herein repair on the unsafe condition addressed by the spring function of the emergency would not have a substantial direct this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been eliminated, the request should include exit door slider mechanism, and effect on the States, on the relationship specific proposed actions to address it. corrective action, if necessary. The between the national Government and DGAC classified the AOTs as mandatory the States, or on the distribution of Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously. and issued French airworthiness power and responsibilities among the To prevent failure of the spring locking directives 2001–053(B) and 2001– various levels of government. Therefore, function of the slider due to corrosion, which 052(B), both dated February 7, 2001, to it is determined that this proposal could result in the escape slide detaching ensure the continued airworthiness of would not have federalism implications from the airplane in an emergency these airplanes in France. under Executive Order 13132. evacuation, accomplish the following:
VerDate 11
Inspection DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, (a) Within 18 months since date of Washington. Federal Aviation Administration manufacture, or within 550 flight hours after FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the effective date of this AD, whichever Tamra Elkins, Aerospace Engineer, occurs later: Perform a detailed visual 14 CFR Part 39 inspection and an operational check of the International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, spring function of the emergency exit door [Docket No. 2001–NM–199–AD] Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 slider mechanism, in accordance with Airbus RIN 2120–AA64 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington All Operators Telex (AOT) A330–52A3063 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2669; (for Model A330 series airplanes) or A340– Airworthiness Directives; BAE fax (425) 227–1149. 52A4075 (for Model A340 series airplanes), Systems (Operations) Limited Model SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: as applicable, both Revision 01, both dated BAe 146 Series Airplanes and Avro Comments Invited January 3, 2001. 146–RJ Series Airplanes Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a Interested persons are invited to detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An AGENCY: Federal Aviation participate in the making of the intensive visual examination of a specific Administration, DOT. proposed rule by submitting such structural area, system, installation, or ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking written data, views, or arguments as assembly to detect damage, failure, or (NPRM). irregularity. Available lighting is normally they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and supplemented with a direct source of good SUMMARY: This document proposes the be submitted in triplicate to the address lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by adoption of a new airworthiness specified above. All communications the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, directive (AD) that is applicable to magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface received on or before the closing date certain BAE Systems (Operations) cleaning and elaborate access procedures for comments, specified above, will be Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes may be required.’’ considered before taking action on the and Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. This (1) If all sliders lock properly: Apply proposed rule. The proposals contained proposal would require replacement of corrosion inhibitor to the sliders, in in this action may be changed in light the standby generator with a new, accordance with the applicable AOT. of the comments received. improved standby generator. This action Thereafter, repeat the inspection and Submit comments using the following is prompted by mandatory continuing operational check at least every 18 months. format: (2) If any slider does not lock properly: airworthiness information from a • Repair the slider or replace it with a new Organize comments issue-by-issue. foreign airworthiness authority. This For example, discuss a request to part, and apply corrosion inhibitor to the action is necessary to prevent loss of the sliders; in accordance with the applicable change the compliance time and a standby generator, which in the event of request to change the service bulletin AOT. Thereafter, repeat the inspection and an emergency involving the principal operational check at least every 18 months. reference as two separate issues. generator, could result in the loss of • For each issue, state what specific Alternative Methods of Compliance electrical power to the airplane. This change to the proposed AD is being (b) An alternative method of compliance or action is intended to address the requested. adjustment of the compliance time that identified unsafe condition. • Include justification (e.g., reasons or provides an acceptable level of safety may be DATES: Comments must be received by data) for each request. used if approved by the Manager, November 13, 2001. International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Comments are specifically invited on Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall ADDRESSES: Submit comments in the overall regulatory, economic, submit their requests through an appropriate triplicate to the Federal Aviation environmental, and energy aspects of FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who Administration (FAA), Transport the proposed rule. All comments may add comments and then send it to the Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, submitted will be available, both before Manager, International Branch, ANM–116. Attention: Rules Docket Number 2001– and after the closing date for comments, Note 3: Information concerning the NM–199–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., in the Rules Docket for examination by existence of approved alternative methods of Renton, Washington 98055–4056. interested persons. A report compliance with this AD, if any, may be Comments may be inspected at this summarizing each FAA-public contact obtained from the International Branch, location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 concerned with the substance of this ANM–116. p.m., Monday through Friday, except proposal will be filed in the Rules Special Flight Permits Federal holidays. Comments may be Docket. submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. Commenters wishing the FAA to (c) Special flight permits may be issued in Comments may also be sent via the accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the acknowledge receipt of their comments Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 Internet using the following address: 9- submitted in response to this action and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a [email protected]. Comments must submit a self-addressed, stamped location where the requirements of this AD sent via fax or the Internet must contain postcard on which the following can be accomplished. ‘‘Docket Number 2001-NM–199–AD’’ in statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed the subject line and need not be Docket Number 2001–NM–199–AD.’’ in French airworthiness directives 2001– submitted in triplicate. Comments sent The postcard will be date stamped and 053(B) and 2001–052(B), both dated February via the Internet as attached electronic returned to the commenter. 7, 2001. files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or ASCII text. Availability of NPRMs Issued in Renton, Washington, on October The service information referenced in Any person may obtain a copy of this 4, 2001. the proposed rule may be obtained from NPRM by submitting a request to the Vi L. Lipski, British Aerospace Regional Aircraft FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, American Support, 13850 Mclearen ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket Aircraft Certification Service. Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171. This Number 2001–NM–199–AD, 1601 Lind [FR Doc. 01–25618 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] information may be examined at the Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington BILLING CODE 4910–13–U FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 98055–4056.
VerDate 11
Discussion Explanation of Requirements of contacting the Rules Docket at the Proposed Rule location provided under the caption The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), ADDRESSES. which is the airworthiness authority for Since an unsafe condition has been the United Kingdom, notified the FAA identified that is likely to exist or List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 that an unsafe condition may exist on develop on other airplanes of the same Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation certain BAE Systems (Operations) type design registered in the United safety, Safety. Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes States, the proposed AD would require The Proposed Amendment and Avro 146–RJ series airplanes. The accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletin described CAA advises that testing has revealed Accordingly, pursuant to the previously. that the armature banding rings on authority delegated to me by the standby generators manufactured by Cost Impact Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend part Vickers have been found to delaminate The FAA estimates that 40 airplanes after prolonged operation at high 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations of U.S. registry would be affected by this (14 CFR part 39) as follows: temperature. Vickers has introduced a proposed AD, that it would take replacement standby generator with approximately 3 work hours per PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS armature banding rings made of airplane to accomplish the proposed DIRECTIVES titanium rather than of the original replacement of the standby generator composite material. Delamination of the with a new, improved standby 1. The authority citation for part 39 armature banding rings, if not corrected, generator, and that the average labor rate continues to read as follows: could result in loss of the standby is $60 per work hour. There is no charge Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. generator, which in the event of an for required parts. Based on these § 39.13 [Amended] emergency involving the principal figures, the cost impact of the proposed generator, could result in loss of AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 2. Section 39.13 is amended by electrical power to the airplane. $7,200, or $180 per airplane. adding the following new airworthiness directive: Explanation of Relevant Service The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that no BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Formerly Information operator has yet accomplished any of British Aerospace Regional Aircraft): Docket 2001–NM–199–AD. BAE Systems (Operations) Limited the proposed requirements of this AD Applicability: Model BAe 146 series has issued Modification Service Bulletin action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the future if airplanes and Avro 146–RJ series airplanes, SB.24–137–01691A, dated April 12, certificated in any category, having BAe 2001, which describes procedures for this proposed AD were not adopted. The Modification HCM01059A (installation of a replacement of the standby generator cost impact figures discussed in AD standby generator and control system with a new, improved standby rulemaking actions represent only the manufactured by Vickers) embodied. generator. The new unit has armature time necessary to perform the specific Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane banding rings made from titanium in actions actually required by the AD. identified in the preceding applicability place of composite armature banding These figures typically do not include provision, regardless of whether it has been incidental costs, such as the time modified, altered, or repaired in the area rings used in the original units. subject to the requirements of this AD. For Accomplishment of the actions required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by airplanes that have been modified, altered, or specified in the service bulletin is repaired so that the performance of the intended to adequately address the other administrative actions. requirements of this AD is affected, the identified unsafe condition. The CAA Regulatory Impact owner/operator must request approval for an classified this service bulletin as alternative method of compliance in The regulations proposed herein mandatory and issued British accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. would not have a substantial direct The request should include an assessment of airworthiness directive 004–04–2001, effect on the States, on the relationship the effect of the modification, alteration, or dated May 22, 2001, in order to assure between the national Government and repair on the unsafe condition addressed by the continued airworthiness of these the States, or on the distribution of this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not airplanes in the United Kingdom. been eliminated, the request should include power and responsibilities among the specific proposed actions to address it. various levels of government. Therefore, FAA’s Conclusions Compliance: Required as indicated, unless it is determined that this proposal accomplished previously. These airplane models are would not have federalism implications To prevent loss of the standby generator, manufactured in the United Kingdom under Executive Order 13132. which in the event of an emergency and are type certificated for operation in For the reasons discussed above, I involving the principal generator could result the United States under the provisions certify that this proposed regulation (1) in the loss of electrical power to the airplane; of § 21.29 of the Federal Aviation is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ accomplish the following: Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not Replacement applicable bilateral airworthiness a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT (a) Within 43 months after the effective agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 date of this AD: Replace the Vickers standby airworthiness agreement, CAA has kept FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if generator having part number (P/N) 520829 the FAA informed of the situation promulgated, will not have a significant with a new, improved Vickers standby described above. The FAA has economic impact, positive or negative, generator having P/N 3022049–000, in examined the findings of the CAA, on a substantial number of small entities accordance with BAE Systems (Operations) reviewed all available information, and under the criteria of the Regulatory Limited Modification Service Bulletin SB.24– determined that AD action is necessary Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 137–01691A, dated April 12, 2001. for products of this type design that are regulatory evaluation prepared for this Alternative Methods of Compliance certificated for operation in the United action is contained in the Rules Docket. (b) An alternative method of compliance or States. A copy of it may be obtained by adjustment of the compliance time that
VerDate 11
provides an acceptable level of safety may be Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, that an unsafe condition may exist on used if approved by the Manager, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–SW– BHTC Model 430 helicopters. Transport International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 21–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room Canada advises that the electrical Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may system has a potential for single fault submit their requests through an appropriate also send comments electronically to multiple system failures and does not FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the the Rules Docket at the following comply with regulatory requirements for Manager, International Branch, ANM–116. address: [email protected]. Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) or for Note 2: Information concerning the Comments may be inspected at the Category A design. Transport Canada existence of approved alternative methods of Office of the Regional Counsel between issued AD No. CF–2000–32R1, dated compliance with this AD, if any, may be 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through May 28, 2001, that mandated certain obtained from the International Branch, Friday, except Federal holidays. revisions to the Rotorcraft Flight Manual ANM–116. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (RFM) to safely cope with this type of Robert McCallister, Aviation Safety electrical failure. Special Flight Permits Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, BHTC has issued Alert Service (c) Special flight permits may be issued in Rotorcraft Standards Staff, Fort Worth, Bulletin (ASB) No. 430–01–19, dated accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Texas 76193–0110, telephone (817) February 22, 2001, which specifies Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 222–5121, fax (817) 222–5961. certain modifications to improve the and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: electrical system for BHTC Model 430 location where the requirements of this AD helicopters, serial numbers (S/N) 49001 can be accomplished. Comments Invited through 49069. Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed Interested persons are invited to This helicopter model is in British airworthiness directive 004–04– manufactured in Canada and is type 2001, dated May 22, 2001. participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such certificated for operation in the United Issued in Renton, Washington, on October written data, views, or arguments as States under the provisions of 14 CFR 4, 2001. they may desire. Communications 21.29 and the applicable bilateral Vi L. Lipski, should identify the Rules Docket agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, number and be submitted in triplicate to agreement, Transport Canada has kept Aircraft Certification Service. the address specified above. All the FAA informed of the situation [FR Doc. 01–25620 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] communications received on or before described above. The FAA has BILLING CODE 4910–13–U the closing date for comments, will be examined the findings of Transport considered before taking action on the Canada, reviewed all available proposed rule. The proposals contained information, and determined that AD DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION in this document may be changed in action is necessary for products of this light of the comments received. type design that are certificated for Federal Aviation Administration Comments are specifically invited on operation in the United States. the overall regulatory, economic, We have identified an unsafe 14 CFR Part 39 environmental, and energy aspects of condition that is likely to exist or [Docket No. 2001–SW–21–AD] the proposed rule. All comments develop on other BHTC Model 430 submitted will be available, both before helicopters of the same type design RIN 2120–AA64 and after the closing date for comments, registered in the United States. Therefore, the proposed AD would Airworthiness Directives; Bell in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report require, before further flight after March Helicopter Textron Canada Model 430 31, 2002, accomplishing the electrical Helicopters summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this power distribution system changes in AGENCY: Federal Aviation proposal will be filed in the Rules accordance with BHTC ASB No. 430– Administration, DOT. Docket. 01–19, dated February 22, 2001, which is terminating action for the ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Commenters wishing the FAA to requirements of this AD. (NPRM). acknowledge receipt of their mailed comments submitted in response to this The FAA estimates that this proposed SUMMARY: This document proposes the proposal must submit a self-addressed, AD would affect 33 helicopters of U.S. adoption of a new airworthiness stamped postcard on which the registry. The FAA estimates that that it directive (AD) for Bell Helicopter following statement is made: would take approximately 48 work Textron Canada (BHTC) Model 430 ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2001–SW– hours per helicopter to accomplish the helicopters. This proposal would 21–AD.’’ The postcard will be date changes to the electrical system. The require changes to the electrical power stamped and returned to the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. distribution system. This proposal is commenter. The manufacturer states in the ASB that prompted by design deficiencies in the the parts will be provided at no cost Availability of NPRMs electrical systems. The actions specified before March 31, 2002. Based on these by the proposed AD are intended to Any person may obtain a copy of this figures, the total cost impact of the prevent failure of both generators, loss NPRM by submitting a request to the proposed AD on U.S. operators is of primary electrical power, and FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, estimated to be $95,040. subsequent loss of control of the Southwest Region, Attention: Rules The regulations proposed herein helicopter. Docket No. 2001–SW–21–AD, 2601 would not have a substantial direct Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, effect on the States, on the relationship DATES: Comments must be received on Texas 76137. between the national Government and or before December 11, 2001. the States, or on the distribution of ADDRESSES: Submit comments in Discussion power and responsibilities among the triplicate to the Federal Aviation Transport Canada, the airworthiness various levels of government. Therefore, Administration (FAA), Office of the authority for Canada, notified the FAA it is determined that this proposal
VerDate 11
would not have federalism implications (a) Before further flight after March 31, upon either the maximum hours TIS or under Executive Order 13132. 2002, perform the Accomplishment the maximum cycles but not both. This For the reasons discussed above, I Instructions, paragraphs 1 through 124, of proposal is prompted by the need to add certify that this proposed regulation (1) Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Alert Service flight cycles as a method of calculating is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Bulletin No 430–01–19, dated February 22, 2001, which is terminating action for the the life limit for certain landing gear under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not requirements of this AD. parts based on fatigue analyses. The a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT (b) An alternative method of compliance or actions required by the proposed AD are Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 adjustment of the compliance time that intended to add or revise the retirement FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if provides an acceptable level of safety may be life for certain landing gear parts to promulgated, will not have a significant used if approved by the Manager, Regulations prevent fatigue failure of the landing economic impact, positive or negative, Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. gear and subsequent loss of control of on a substantial number of small entities Operators shall submit their requests through the helicopter. an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, under the criteria of the Regulatory DATES: Comments must be received on Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft who may concur or comment and then send it to the Manager, Regulations Group. or before December 11, 2001. regulatory evaluation prepared for this ADDRESSES: Submit comments in action is contained in the Rules Docket. Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of triplicate to the Federal Aviation A copy of it may be obtained by compliance with this AD, if any, may be Administration (FAA), Office of the contacting the Rules Docket at the obtained from the Regulations Group. Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, location provided under the caption (c) Special flight permits may be issued in Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–SW– ADDRESSES. accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 46–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 to operate the helicopter to a location where 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may the requirements of this AD can be also send comments electronically to Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation accomplished. the Rules Docket at the following safety, Safety. Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed address: [email protected]. The Proposed Amendment in Transport Canada (Canada) AD No. CF– Comments may be inspected at the 2000–32R1, dated May 28, 2001. Accordingly, pursuant to the Office of the Regional Counsel between authority delegated to me by the Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 3, 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Administrator, the Federal Aviation 2001. Friday, except Federal holidays. Administration proposes to amend 14 Mark R. Schilling, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CFR part 39 as follows: Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Richard Noll, Aviation Safety Engineer, Aircraft Certification Service. Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 12 PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS [FR Doc. 01–25695 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] New England Executive Park, DIRECTIVES BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Burlington, MA 01803, telephone (781) 238–7160, fax (781) 238–7199. 1. The authority citation for part 39 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: continues to read as follows: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Comments Invited Federal Aviation Administration Interested persons are invited to § 39.13 [Amended] participate in the making of the 2. Section 39.13 is amended by 14 CFR Part 39 proposed rule by submitting such adding a new airworthiness directive to [Docket No. 2000–SW–46–AD] written data, views, or arguments as read as follows: they may desire. Communications Bell Helicopter Textron Canada: Docket No. RIN 2120–AA64 should identify the Rules Docket 2001–SW–21–AD. Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky number and be submitted in triplicate to Applicability: Model 430 helicopters, serial Aircraft Corporation Model S–76A the address specified above. All numbers 49002 through 49071, certificated in Helicopter communications received on or before any category. the closing date for comments will be Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter AGENCY: Federal Aviation considered before taking action on the identified in the preceding applicability Administration, DOT. proposed rule. The proposals contained provision, regardless of whether it has been ACTION: in this document may be changed in otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). light of the comments received. the area subject to the requirements of this Comments are specifically invited on AD. For helicopters that have been modified, SUMMARY: altered, or repaired so that the performance This document proposes the overall regulatory, economic, of the requirements of this AD is affected, the superseding an existing airworthiness environmental, and energy aspects of owner/operator must request approval for an directive (AD) for Sikorsky Aircraft the proposed rule. All comments alternative method of compliance in Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S–76A submitted will be available in the Rules accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. helicopters. That AD currently requires Docket for examination by interested The request should include an assessment of a service life limit on certain landing persons. A report summarizing each the effect of the modification, alteration, or gear parts based on hours time-in- FAA-public contact concerned with the repair on the unsafe condition addressed by service (TIS). This action would add substance of this proposal will be filed this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not another method of calculating the life in the Rules Docket. been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it. limit for certain landing gear parts based Commenters wishing the FAA to on cycles and would require the acknowledge receipt of their mailed Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously. operator to choose and record the comments submitted in response to this To prevent failure of both generators, loss method of calculating the service life of proposal must submit a self-addressed, of primary electrical power, and subsequent each part in the rotorcraft history or stamped postcard on which the loss of control of the helicopter, accomplish equivalent record. This action would following statement is made: the following: also require replacing the part based ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2000–SW–
VerDate 11
46–AD.’’ The postcard will be date equivalent records and using only that Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. stamped and returned to the method throughout the life of the part. commenter. A cycle is defined as one takeoff to a § 39.13 [Amended] hover or other mode of flight and one Availability of NPRMs 2. Section 39.13 is amended by landing. removing Amendment 39–5298 (51 FR Any person may obtain a copy of this The FAA estimates that 87 helicopters 17009, May 8, 1986), and by adding a NPRM by submitting a request to the of U.S. registry would be affected by this new airworthiness directive (AD), to FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, proposed AD, that it would take read as follows: Southwest Region, Attention: Rules approximately 2 work hours per Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. Docket No. 2000–SW–46–AD, 2601 helicopter to determine the number of 2000–SW–46–AD. Supersedes AD 86– Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, cycles, and that the average labor rate is 09–11, Amendment 39–5298, Docket No. Texas 76137. $60 per work hour. Based on these 86–ASW–12. Discussion figures, the total cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is Applicability: Model S–76A helicopters, On April 23, 1986, the FAA issued estimated to be $10,440. certificated in any category. AD 86–09–11, Amendment 39–5298 (51 The regulations proposed herein Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter FR 17009, May 8, 1986), to require would not have a substantial direct identified in the preceding applicability placing a service life limit on certain effect on the States, on the relationship provision, regardless of whether it has been landing gear parts on Sikorsky Model S– between the national Government and otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in 76A helicopters based on hours TIS. the States, or on the distribution of the area subject to the requirements of this That action was prompted by safety power and responsibilities among the AD. For helicopters that have been modified, considerations and landing gear fatigue various levels of government. Therefore, altered, or repaired so that the performance analysis. The requirements of that AD it is determined that this proposal of the requirements of this AD is affected the are intended to prevent fatigue failure of would not have federalism implications owner/operator must request approval for an landing gear parts and landing gear. alternative method of compliance in Since the issuance of that AD, under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD. Sikorsky has issued a revision and a The request should include an assessment of Supplement No.1 to the Airworthiness certify that this proposed regulation (1) is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ the effect of the modification, alteration, or Limitations Section, Chapter 4, of the repair on the unsafe condition addressed by Sikorsky Maintenance Manual SA under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not 4047–76–2–1. Replacing the parts in been eliminated, the request should include accordance with the revisions dated Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if specific proposed actions to address it. May 9, 1997 (page 1), and March 2, 1999 Compliance: Required as indicated, unless (page 2), constitutes compliance with promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, accomplished previously. this AD when applied to helicopters To prevent fatigue failures of the main and that have not been modified by on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory nose landing gear parts and subsequent loss Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) of control of the helicopter, accomplish the SH568NE. Replacing the parts in Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for this following: accordance with Supplement No. 1, (a) Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS), dated May 21, 1997, revised pages 2 and action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by determine either the hours TIS or cycles 3 dated March 2, 1999, constitutes accumulated on each part listed in Table 1 compliance with this AD when applied contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption or Table 2 of this AD, as applicable. A cycle to helicopters that have been modified is a takeoff to a hover or other mode of flight ADDRESSES. by STC SH568NE. The change and and a landing. supplement specify replacing parts List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (1) If neither the hours TIS nor cycles are installed in the Sikorsky Model S–76A known for an affected part, assume the helicopter at the expiration of a Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. rotorcraft’s total hours TIS are the hours TIS specified number of cycles. for that part. The life limit in AD 86–09–11 is The Proposed Amendment (2) If only one history is known for the part based on hours TIS, and the life limit in (either hours TIS or cycles), use that method the airworthiness limitations section of Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the for tracking the remaining life of that part. the maintenance manual is based on (3) Thereafter, record in the rotorcraft cycles. The proposed AD would Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend part history or equivalent record the selected supersede AD 86–09–11, retaining a life method of calculating the life limit for each limit based on hours TIS but also 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: landing gear part, and record either the allowing the life limit to be based on accumulated hours TIS or cycles for the cycles for certain landing gear parts. The PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS selected method. proposed AD would also require DIRECTIVES (b) Before further flight, remove from recording the method selected for service each part listed in the following Table calculating the life limit of the landing 1. The authority citation for part 39 1 of this AD on or before reaching the gear parts in the rotorcraft history or continues to read as follows: applicable life limit:
TABLE 1
Life limit hours Life limit Component Part No. TIS cycles
(1) Main Landing Gear: (i) Cylinder ...... 1945E2 30,300 136,350 (ii) Axle Support Fitting ...... 1945C12 9,600 43,200
VerDate 11
TABLE 1—Continued
Life limit hours Life limit Component Part No. TIS cycles
(iii) Pin, Universal to Cylinder ...... 1945C29 23,800 107,100 (iv) Drag Brace Rod End ...... 1945E35 38,200 171,900 (v) Upper Torque Arm ...... 1945E46 37,900 170,550 (vi) Lower Torque Arm ...... 1945C47 16,200 72,900 (vii) Axle ...... 195E85 23,380 105,210 (viii) Rod End, Positioning Rod ...... 1945E235 19,100 85,950 (ix) Retraction Actuator: (A) Outer Cylinder ...... 1945E302, 1945F302 7,100 31,950 (B) Piston ...... 1945E314 33,300 148,500 (C) Piston Rod End ...... 01–747–061 8,000 36,000
(2) Nose Landing Gear: (i) Fork ...... 1944E60 42,500 191,250 (ii) Cylinder ...... 1944C2, 1944E2 18,500 83,250 (iii) Drag Brace Actuator: (A) Cylinder Terminal ...... 1944D201 28,800 129,600 (B) Piston Rod ...... 1944E204 22,000 99,000
(c) For helicopters modified by SH568NE, before further flight, remove from 2 of this AD on or before reaching the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) service each part listed in the following Table applicable life limit:
TABLE 2
Life limit hours Life limit Component Part No. TIS cycles
(1) Main Landing Gear: (i) Cylinder ...... 1945E2, 2071–2 24,000 108,000 (ii) Piston ...... 1945E4, 2071–4 28,600 128,700 (iii) Axle Support Fitting ...... 1945C12, 2071–12 7,400 33,300 (iv) Pin, Universal to Cylinder ...... 1945C29, 2071–29 16,000 72,000 (v) Pin, Positioning Rod to Upper Torque Arm ...... 1945A32, 2071–32 25,000 112,500 (vi) Drag Brace Rod End ...... 1945E35, 2071–35 23,864 107,388 (vii) Upper Torque Arm ...... 1945E46, 2071–46 26,829 120,730 (viii) Lower Torque Arm ...... 1945C47, 2071–47 11,928 53,676 (ix) Lower Drag Brace ...... 1945E74, 2071–74 46,000 207,000 (x) Retraction Brace ...... 1945E76A11, 41,000 184,500 1945E76A12, 2071– 76–11, 2071–76–12 (xi) Axle ...... 1945E85, 2071–85 23,380 105,210 (xii) Rod End, Positioning Rod ...... 1945E235, 2071–235 13,600 61,200 (xiii) Retraction Actuator: (A) Outer Cylinder ...... 1945E302, 1945F302 7,100 31,950 (B) Piston ...... 1945E314 33,000 148,500 (C) Piston Rod End ...... 01–747–061 8,000 36,000
(2) Nose Landing Gear: (i) Axle ...... 1944B85, 2070–85 49,833 224,248 (ii) Fork ...... 1944E60, 2070–60 32,000 144,000 (iii) Piston ...... 1944E4, 2070–4 35,878 161,451 (iv) Cylinder ...... 1944C2, 1944E2, 2070– 13,500 60,750 2 (v) Drag Brace Actuator: (A) Cylinder Terminal ...... 1944D201, 2070–201 23,000 103,500 (B) Piston Terminal ...... 1944E212B, 2070–212 40,000 180,000 (C) Piston Rod ...... 1944E204 22,000 99,000
(d) This AD revises the Limitations section provides an acceptable level of safety may be obtained from the Boston Aircraft of the maintenance manual by establishing or used if approved by the Manager, Boston Certification Office. revising the retirement lives for the affected Aircraft Certification Office, FAA. Operators (f) Special flight permits may be issued in parts shown in Tables 1 and 2 of this AD and shall submit their requests through an FAA accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 establishing cycle counting as an additional Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may to operate the helicopter to a location where method to determine retirement for the concur or comment and then send it to the the requirements of this AD can be affected parts. Installing STC SH568NE Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office. accomplished. affects the retirement life of certain parts. Note 2: Information concerning the (e) An alternative method of compliance or existence of approved alternative methods of adjustment of the compliance time that compliance with this AD, if any, may be
VerDate 11
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 3, presented are particularly helpful in incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 2001. developing reasoned regulatory 71.1. The Class E airspace designation Mark R. Schilling, decisions on the proposal. Comments listed in this document would be Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, are specifically invited on the overall published subsequently in the Order. Aircraft Certification Service. regulatory, aeronautical, economic, The FAA has determined that this [FR Doc. 01–25696 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] environmental,and energy-related proposed regulation only involves an BILLING CODE 4910–13–P aspects of the proposal. established body of technical Communications should identify the regulations for which frequent and airspace docket number and be routine amendments are necessary to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION submitted in triplicate to the address keep them operationally current. It, listed above. Commenters wishing the therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant Federal Aviation Administration FAA to acknowledge receipt of their regulatory action’’ under Executive comments on this action must submit Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 14 CFR Part 71 with those comments a self-addressed, rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies [Airspace Docket No. 01–ASO–13] stamped postcard on which the and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February following statement is made: 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant Proposed Amendment of Class E ‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 01– preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation Airspace; Dayton, TN ASO–13.’’ The postcard will be date/ as the anticipated impact is so minimal. time stamped and returned to the Since this is a routine matter that will AGENCY: Federal Aviation commenter. All communications only affect air traffic procedures and air Administration (FAA), DOT. received before the specified closing navigation, it is certified that this rule, ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. date for comments will be considered when promulgated, will not have a before taking action on the proposed significant economic impact on a SUMMARY: This action proposes to rule. The proposal contained in this substantial number of small entities amend Class E airspace at Dayton, TN. action may be changed in light of the A Global Positioning System (GPS) under the criteria of the Regulatory comments received. All comments Flexibility Act. Standard Instrument Approach submitted will be available for Procedure (SIAP), helicopter point in examination in the Office of the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 space approach, has been developed for Regional Counsel for Southern Region, Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Bradley Memorial Hospital, Cleveland, Room 550, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Navigation (air). TN. As a result, additional controlled College Park, Georgia 30337, both before The Proposed Amendment airspace extending upward from 700 and after the closing date for comments. feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is A report summarizing each substantive In consideration of the foregoing, the needed to accommodate the SIAP. This public contact with FAA personnel Federal Aviation Administration action proposes to amend the Class E5 concerned with this rulemaking will be proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as airspace for Dayton, TN, to the south, in filed in the docket. follows: order to include the point in space approach serving Bradley Memorial Availability of NPRMs PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, Hospital. Any person may obtain a copy of this CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; EFFECTIVE DATES: Comments must be Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) received on or before November 13, by submitting a request to the Federal AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING 2001. Aviation Administration, Manager, POINTS Airspace Branch, ASO–520, Air Traffic ADDRESSES: Send comments on the 1. The authority citation for part 71 Division, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, continues to read as follows: proposal in triplicate to: Federal Georgia 30320. Communications must Aviation Administration, Docket No. identify the docket number of this Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 01–ASO–13, Manager, Airspace Branch, NPRM. Persons interested in being 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 1963 Comp., p. 389. ASO–520, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, placed on a mailing list for future Georgia 30320. The official docket may NPRMs should also request a copy of § 71.1 [Amended] be examined in the Office of the Advisory Circular No. 11–2A which 2. The incorporation by reference in Regional Counsel for Southern Region, describes the application procedure. 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Room 550, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Administration Order 7400.9J, Airspace College Park, Georgia 30337, telephone The Proposal Designations and Reporting Points, (404) 305–5627. The FAA is considering an dated August 31, 2001, and effective FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: amendment to part 71 of the Federal September 16, 2001, is amended as Walter R. Cochran, Manager, Airspace Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to follows: Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal amend Class E airspace at Dayton, TN. Aviation Administration, P.O. Box A GPS SIAP, helicopter point in space Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 20210; approach, has been developed for Extending Upward From 700 feet or More telephone (40) 305–5627. Bradley Memorial Hospital, Cleveland, Above the Surface of the Earth. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TN. Additional controlled airspace * * * * * extending upward from 700 feet AGL is ASO TN E5 Dayton, TN [REVISED] Comments Invited needed to accommodate the SIAP. Class Dayton, Mark Anton Airport, TN Interested parties are invited to E airspace designations for airspace ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ participate in this proposed rulemaking areas extending upward from 700 feet or (Lat. 35 29 08 N, long. 84 55 54 W) Hardwick Field Airport by submitting such written data, views more above the surface are published in (Lat. 35°13′12″ N, long. 84°49′57″ W) or arguments as they may desire. Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9J, Bledsoe County Hospital, Pikeville, TN Comments that provide the factual basis dated August 31, 2001, and effective Point In Space Coordinates supporting the views and suggestions September 16, 2001, which is (Lat. 35°37′34″ N, long. 85°10′38″ W)
VerDate 11
Bradley Memorial Hospital, Cleveland, TN DATES: Comments on this proposed [email protected]. In order to be Point In Space Coordinates action must be received in writing by considered, electronic submissions must ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (Lat. 35 10 52 N, long. 84 52 56 W) November 13, 2001. include your name and postal mailing That airspace extending upward from 700 ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to address; we will not consider feet or more above the surface within a 12.5- anonymous comments. All comments mile radius of Mark Anton Airport, and that Wayne Kaiser, Environmental airspace within a 6.5-mile radius of Protection Agency, Air Planning and received, including names and Hardwick Field Airport, and that airspace Development Branch, 901 North 5th addresses, will become part of the within a 6-mile radius of the point in space Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. public record. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (Lat. 35 37 34 N, long. 85 10 38 W) serving FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2. The public may inspect comments Bledsoe County Hospital, Pikeville, TN, and Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551–7603. during normal business hours in Room that airspace within a 6-mile radius of the 634—Arlington Square Building, 4401 point in space (Lat. 35°10′52″ N, long. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the ° ′ ″ N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. 84 52 56 W) serving Bradley Memorial information provided in the direct final 3. You may obtain copies of the draft Hospital, Cleveland, TN, excluding that rule which is located in the rules environmental impact statement from airspace within the Athens, TN, Class E section of the Federal Register. airspace area. the above address, or by downloading it Dated: September 27, 2001. from our Web site at http:// * * * * * William W. Rice, migratorybirds.fws.gov/issues/snowgse/ Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. tblcont.html. 4, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–25584 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Wade T. Carpenter, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Andrew, Chief, Division of Migratory Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Bird Management, (703) 358–1714; or Southern Region. James Kelley (612) 713–5409. [FR Doc. 01–25755 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We BILLING CODE 4910–13–M regulate the taking of migratory birds Fish and Wildlife Service under the four bilateral migratory bird treaties the United States entered into ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 50 CFR Parts 20 and 21 with Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico, AGENCY RIN 1018–AI07 Japan, and Russia. Regulations allowing the take of migratory birds are 40 CFR Part 62 Migratory Bird Hunting and Permits; authorized by the Migratory Bird Treaty [MO 0136–1136; FRL–7078–9] Regulations for Managing Harvest of Act (16 U.S.C. 703–711), and the Fish Light Goose Populations and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 Approval and Promulgation of State (16 U.S.C. 712). The Acts authorize and Plans for Designated Facilities and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, direct the Secretary of the Interior to Pollutants; Control of Emissions From Interior. allow hunting, taking, killing, etc. of Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste ACTION: Proposed rule. migratory birds subject to the provisions Incinerators (HMIWIs); State of of, and in order to carry out the Missouri SUMMARY: Various populations of light purposes of, the four migratory bird geese (greater and lesser snow geese and AGENCY: Environmental Protection treaties. Ross’ geese) have undergone rapid The 1916 treaty with Great Britain Agency (EPA). growth during the past 30 years, and was amended in 1999 by the ACTION: Proposed rule. have become seriously injurious to their governments of Canada and the U.S. habitat, habitat important to other SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve a Article II of the amended U.S.-Canada migratory birds, and agricultural revision to the state of Missouri’s migratory bird treaty (Treaty) states that, interests. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife section 111(d) plan for controlling in order to ensure the long-term Service (Service or ‘‘we’’) believes that emissions from existing HMIWIs. conservation of migratory birds, In the final rules section of the several of these populations have migratory bird populations shall be Federal Register, EPA is approving the exceeded the long-term carrying managed in accord with conservation state’s submittal as a direct final rule capacity of their breeding and/or principles that include (among others): without prior proposal because the migration habitats and must be reduced. To manage migratory birds Agency views this as a noncontroversial This rule would authorize new methods internationally; to sustain healthy revision amendment and anticipates no of take for light goose hunting. In migratory bird populations for relevant adverse comments to this addition, the rule would revise the harvesting needs; and to provide for and action. A detailed rationale for the regulations for the management of protect habitat necessary for the approval is set forth in the direct final overabundant light goose populations conservation of migratory birds. Article rule. If no relevant adverse comments and modifies the conservation order that III of the Treaty states that the are received in response to this action, will increase take of such populations. governments should meet regularly to no further activity is contemplated in DATES: Comments on this proposed rule review progress in implementing the relation to this action. If EPA receives must be received by December 11, 2001. Treaty. The review shall address issues relevant adverse comments, the direct ADDRESSES: important to the conservation of final rule will be withdrawn and all 1. Comments should be mailed to migratory birds, including the status of public comments received will be Chief, Division of Migratory Bird migratory bird populations, the status of addressed in a subsequent final rule Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife important migratory bird habitats, and based on this proposed action. EPA will Service, Department of the Interior, ms the effectiveness of management and not institute a second comment period 634—ARLSQ, 1849 C Street NW., regulatory systems. The governments on this action. Any parties interested in Washington, DC 20240. Alternatively, agree to work cooperatively to resolve commenting on this action should do so comments may be submitted identified problems in a manner at this time. electronically to the following address: consistent with the principles of the
VerDate 11
Treaty and, if the need arises, to include both plumage variations of northwestern Texas, New Mexico, and conclude special arrangements to lesser snow geese (white, or ‘‘snow’’ and the northern Highlands of Mexico conserve and protect species of concern. dark, or ‘‘blue’’) under the designation (Hines et al. 1999). WCFP light geese Article IV of the Treaty states that each light geese. Dark phase Ross’ geese exist nest primarily in the central and government shall use its authority to but are uncommon. western Canadian Arctic, with nesting take appropriate measures to preserve colonies on Banks Island (mostly lesser Population Delineation and enhance the environment of snow geese, with some Ross’ geese) and migratory birds. In particular, the Waterfowl management activities Queen Maud Gulf (mostly Ross’ geese, governments shall, within their frequently are based on delineation of with some lesser snow geese). constitutional authority, seek means to populations that are the target of Observations of birds marked with neck prevent damage to such birds and their management. In most instances, collars indicate that 17% of lesser snow environments and pursue cooperative populations are delineated according to geese from the central Arctic (Kerbes et arrangements to conserve habitats where they winter, whereas others are al. 1999), and 24% of lesser snow geese essential to migratory bird populations. delineated based on location of their from the western Arctic (Armstrong et Article VII of the Treaty authorizes breeding grounds. For management al. 1999), migrate to WCFP wintering permitting the take, kill, etc., of purposes, populations can comprise one areas. Neck collar data are not available migratory birds that, under or more species of geese. For example, for Ross’ geese. Overall, the WCFP extraordinary conditions, become lesser snow geese and Ross’ geese in the comprises approximately 79% lesser seriously injurious to agricultural or central portion of North America are snow geese and 21% Ross’ geese other interests. frequently found in the same breeding, (Thorpe 1999). migration, and wintering areas. Due to In our previous Environmental Geographic Distribution of Species these similarities, the term ‘‘light goose Assessment on light goose management Greater snow geese (Chen population’’ is used to refer to various (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999), caerulescens atlantica) breed in the populations comprising both lesser we used the term Mid-Continent light eastern Arctic of Canada and migrate snow geese and Ross’ geese, as geese (MCLG) to refer to birds that southward through Quebec, New York, described below. In descriptions of migrated and wintered in the Central and New England to their wintering geographic areas, eastern Arctic refers to and Mississippi Flyways. We defined grounds in the mid-Atlantic United the area east of approximately longitude MCLG as the combination of MCP and States (Reed et al. 1998). Lesser snow 95° W; the central Arctic refers to the WCFP, as described above. However, geese (Chen c. caerulescens) breed area between 95° W and approximately confusion arose over the use of the throughout much of the Arctic region of 115° W; and the western Arctic refers to terms MCLG and the Mid-Continent North America (Mowbray et al. 2000). the area west of 115° W. Administrative Population of light geese. Therefore, we Additionally, a population that breeds flyway boundaries also are used to have discontinued the use of the term on Wrangel Island, Russia, migrates describe population ranges. MCLG. In our current EIS on light goose through Alaska, western Canada, and Greater snow geese—A single management, we refer to the several western States. The wintering population of greater snow geese is combination of MCP and WCFP birds as range of lesser snow geese is broad, with recognized in North America. The Central/Mississippi Flyway (CMF) light birds nesting in the western Arctic population is relatively isolated from geese. tending to winter in the Pacific Flyway, other light goose populations, except for Western Population of Ross’ geese and birds nesting in the central and potential mixing with small groups of (WPRG)—We have chosen this eastern Arctic wintering primarily in the lesser snow geese in the central portion designation for Ross’ geese that migrate Central and Mississippi Flyways. Small of the Atlantic Flyway. to the Pacific Flyway; primarily to the numbers of lesser snow geese winter in Mid-Continent Population (MCP) of Central Valley of California. The WPRG the Atlantic Flyway. light geese—This term is used to nests mainly in the Queen Maud Gulf Approximately 95% of Ross’ geese describe light geese (lesser snow and region of the central Arctic, although an (Chen rossii) breed in the Queen Maud Ross’ geese) that migrate primarily increasing number of birds nest in the Gulf region of the central Arctic (Kerbes through North Dakota, South Dakota, eastern Arctic. Smaller numbers of birds 1994). Small numbers of Ross’ geese Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, and Missouri, nest on Banks Island in the western also breed on Banks Island in the and winter in Arkansas, Louisiana, Arctic. The WPRG comprises the largest western Arctic, along western and Mississippi, and eastern, central, and percentage of wintering Ross’ geese in southern Hudson Bay, and southern Texas. MCP birds nest in the United States. However, the percent Southampton and Baffin Islands in the colonies along the southern and western of central Arctic Ross’ geese that are eastern Arctic. Prior to the 1960s, most shores of Hudson Bay and on recovered by hunters in the Pacific Ross’ geese migrated to wintering areas Southampton and Baffin Islands in the Flyway has declined from nearly 100% in California. This species has eastern Arctic, and in the Queen Maud in the 1950s and 1960s, to 60% during dramatically expanded its range Gulf region of the central Arctic. Field 1990–98. eastward in recent decades (Ryder and studies conducted in Texas during Pacific Flyway Population of lesser Alisauskas 1995). A large proportion of winter indicate that surveyed MCP light snow geese (PFSG)—PFSG birds winter Ross’ geese winters in the Central Valley geese comprise approximately 94% in the Pacific Flyway and nest primarily of California. Smaller numbers of Ross’ lesser snow geese and 6% Ross’ geese on Banks Island, and coastal river deltas geese winter in the southwest portion of (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, on the mainland at Anderson River and the Central Flyway, and in Arkansas unpublished data). Similar studies Kendall Island in the western Arctic. and Louisiana. conducted in Louisiana indicate that Neck collar observations indicate that Greater snow geese, lesser snow geese, MCP flocks in sampled areas comprise approximately 76% of lesser snow geese and Ross’ geese are referred to as ‘‘light’’ approximately 98% lesser snow geese that nest in the western Arctic migrate geese due to the light coloration of the and 2% Ross’ geese (Helm 2001). to PFSG wintering areas (Hines et al. white-phase plumage morph, as Western Central Flyway Population 1999). Very few lesser snow geese opposed to true ‘‘dark’’ geese such as (WCFP) of light geese—WCFP light banded in the central and eastern Arctic the white-fronted or Canada goose. We geese winter in southern Colorado, are recovered in the Pacific Flyway.
VerDate 11
Wrangel Island Population of lesser index is utilized to monitor the relative approximately 2,000 birds in 1990, to snow geese—This population nests on size of the various populations each 52,000 birds in 1998 (Canadian Wildlife Wrangel Island off the north coast of year. Because winter index data are Service, unpublished data). A reliable Russia, and winters in southern British available every year for most light goose estimate of the annual growth rate of Columbia, the Puget Sound area of populations (versus every 5 years for Ross’ geese in the eastern Arctic is not Washington, and in northern California. arctic breeding colony data), the winter available; therefore, we cannot project index is utilized to annually monitor the number of Ross’ geese for spring Population Surveys populations and aid in making many 2001. The status of light goose populations management decisions. Light geese in the central Arctic—In in North America is monitored using a 1966, the numbers of breeding lesser combination of aerial surveys conducted Population Status—Spring Surveys snow and Ross’ geese on surveyed on breeding, migration, and wintering Estimation of the spring population of colonies in the central Arctic were areas. The breeding population of greater snow geese is straightforward, 10,300 and 34,000 birds, respectively greater snow geese is estimated each because most birds are encountered (Kerbes 1994). During the period 1966– spring when the entire population is during the photo survey conducted in 98, the number of breeding lesser snow staging in the St. Lawrence River Valley the St. Lawrence River Valley in geese in the central Arctic increased at during northward migration (Reed et al. Quebec. However, determination of the an annual rate of 14.6%, to the latest 1998). Due to the difficulty of number of breeding lesser snow and estimate of 816,100 birds (Canadian conducting surveys throughout the vast Ross’ geese for various populations is Wildlife Service, unpublished data). arctic region, lesser snow and Ross’ problematic because delineation of most During the same period, the number of goose breeding colonies are monitored populations is based on wintering breeding Ross’ geese increased at an on a 5-year rotating basis using low- ground affiliation. For example, MCP annual rate of 9.0%, to the latest level aerial photography (Kerbes et al. light geese comprise birds that breed in estimate of 567,100 birds (Canadian 1999). Therefore, estimates of the the eastern and central Arctic. WCFP Wildlife Service, unpublished data). number of breeding birds at each colony light geese comprise birds that breed in Including an additional 30% to account are not available every year. Surveys of the central and western Arctic. Because for non-breeding birds, the total number breeding colonies provide estimates of photo surveys of breeding colonies for a of lesser snow and Ross’ geese in the the number of nesting birds, but not the particular region are conducted every 5 central Arctic during spring 1998 was number of non-breeding birds (primarily years, simultaneous estimates from 2 approximately 1,061,000 and 737,000 1- and 2-year olds). Consequently, the different portions of a population’s birds, respectively. Population estimates total population size in spring is higher breeding range may be lacking. following the 1998 photo surveys are than estimates derived from photo Therefore, we present breeding not available at this time. However, surveys of breeding colonies. On the population estimates for lesser snow assuming the same growth rates for each average, snow goose populations are and Ross’ geese for the eastern, central, species cited above, the total number of considered to have 25–35% non- and western arctic regions, rather than lesser snow and Ross’ geese in the breeders in spring (Kerbes et al. 1999). providing spring estimates for central Arctic in spring 2001 will be Therefore, on average, the total populations that are delineated based on approximately 1,572,000 and 955,000 population size may be 30% greater wintering ground affiliation. birds, respectively. than breeding colony estimates indicate. Greater snow geese—The spring Light geese in the western Arctic—The Winter waterfowl surveys are population estimate of greater snow number of breeding lesser snow geese conducted each year throughout the geese increased from approximately on surveyed colonies in 1976 was entire lower 48 States. These surveys 25,400 birds in 1965, to 813,900 birds in estimated to be 169,600 birds (Kerbes et began in some areas as early as the 2000 (Reed et al. 1998, Reed et al. 2000). al. 1999). During the period 1976–95, 1930s; however, consistent survey The population growth rate during the number of breeding lesser snow coverage began in 1955. Biologists did 1965–2000 was 8.8 % per year. At the geese increased at an annual rate of not begin separate inventories of MCP current rate of growth, the greater snow 5.3% to 486,000 birds (Kerbes et al. and WCFP light geese until the winter goose population will reach 1 million by 1999). Including an additional 30% for of 1969–70. Therefore, during 1955– 2002, and over 2 million by 2010. non-breeding birds, the total number of 1969, the light goose count in the Light geese in the eastern Arctic—The lesser snow geese in the western Arctic Central and Mississippi Flyways could number of breeding lesser snow geese was approximately 632,000 birds in not be separated into MCP and WCFP on surveyed colonies in 1973 was 1995. The annual rate of population components. approximately 1,057,400 birds (Kerbes growth increased to 6.3% during 1981– Because not all areas in each State are 1975). During 1973–97, the number of 95 (Kerbes et al. 1999); therefore, the surveyed, the winter survey does not breeding lesser snow geese increased at number of lesser snow geese in spring provide a complete population count for an annual rate of 4.7%, to 2001 likely will approach 912,000 birds. light geese. Instead, the survey provides approximately 3,010,200 birds Ross’ geese are not commonly found on an index to the winter population of (Canadian Wildlife Service, breeding colonies in the western Arctic; geese, which should not be confused unpublished data). Including an however small numbers of birds are with the size of the breeding population. additional 30% for non-breeding birds, found on Banks Island. Past photographic inventories of eastern the total number of lesser snow geese in Wrangel Island Population of lesser arctic nesting colonies suggested that the eastern Arctic was nearly 4 million snow geese—The total population winter indices averaged about half of birds in 1997. Assuming a 4.7% annual (breeders and non-breeders) of lesser the actual spring population estimate growth rate since 1997, we project the snow geese on Wrangel Island declined (Kerbes 1975). Boyd et al. (1982) used a total number of lesser snow geese in the from approximately 150,000 birds in correction factor of 1.6 to apply to eastern Arctic will be approximately 4.7 1970 to 56,000 birds in 1975, due to four winter indices to estimate the million in spring 2001. Due to consecutive years of poor reproductive approximate breeding population size in expansion of its breeding range, the success (Kerbes et al. 1999). The spring. By maintaining similar survey number of Ross’ geese in the eastern population increased during the 1980s methods from year to year, the winter Arctic has increased from to nearly 100,000 birds, but averaged
VerDate 11
only about 65,000 birds in the mid- Western Population of Ross’ geese deteriorate, or if measures taken to 1990s. The 2000 population estimate (WPRG)—Consistent, long-term surveys reduce crop depredation do not achieve was approximately 95,000 birds (U.S. have not been in place to provide desired results (Giroux et al. 1998a). Fish and Wildlife Service 2000). annual winter indices for WPRG. Lesser snow geese—The NAWMP Special surveys conducted during the winter index goal for MCP lesser snow Population Status—Winter Surveys winters of 1988 and 1989 produced geese is 1 million birds. The Central and We use operational surveys estimates of over 200,000 Ross’ geese in Mississippi Flyway Councils have set an conducted annually on wintering California (Pacific Flyway Council upper management threshold (winter grounds to derive winter indices to light 1992). Species composition surveys index) of 1.5 million for MCP lesser goose populations. Winter indices conducted in the Central Valley during snow geese, but have not set a threshold represent a certain proportion of the the winter of 1992 resulted in an index for WCFP lesser snow geese. The 2000 total wintering population, and thus are of 221,300 birds (Mensik and Silveira winter index of MCP lesser snow geese smaller than the true population size. 1993). The survey also was completed is 129% higher than the NAWMP goal, However, by assuming that the same in December, 2000, resulting in an and 53% higher than the management proportion of the population is counted estimate of 256,000 Ross’ geese (U.S. threshold adopted by the Flyway each winter, we are able to monitor the Fish and Wildlife Service, unpublished Councils. The 2000 winter index of trend of the overall population. Aerial data). WCFP lesser snow geese is 84% higher surveys do not distinguish between Pacific Flyway Population of lesser than the NAWMP winter index goal of lesser snow and Ross’ geese; therefore, snow geese (PFSG)—Annual winter 110,000 birds. winter indices for each species are not indices are not available for PFSG. In 1997, the Arctic Goose Habitat generated. Species composition Species composition surveys conducted Working Group of the AGJV information derived from flock in 1992 indicated that 63% of light recommended a management goal of sampling on the ground can be used to geese wintering in California were lesser reducing the number of light geese in approximate the number of lesser snow snow geese (Mensik and Silveira 1993). the mid-continent region (primarily and Ross’ geese in winter indices. The species composition survey MCP and WCFP birds) by 50% (Arctic Greater snow geese—The winter conducted in California during Goose Habitat Working Group 1997). index of greater snow geese has December, 2000, yielded an estimate of This suggests a reduction of the increased from approximately 46,000 409,000 lesser snow geese (U.S. Fish combined winter index of MCP and birds in 1955, to approximately 465,000 and Wildlife Service, unpublished data). WCFP light geese from the winter 1996/ Wrangel Island Population of lesser birds in 2000 (Serie and Raftovich 1997 value of 3.1 million to snow geese—Winter indices are not 2000). The winter survey is a useful tool approximately 1.6 million birds. available for Wrangel Island lesser snow for providing information on the winter geese. The NAWMP does not contain a distribution of snow geese in the winter index goal for lesser snow geese Atlantic Flyway. However, the winter Population Goals in the Pacific Flyway (PFSG), but does survey counts a smaller proportion of Population goals for various light contain a goal of 200,000 birds for the population than does the spring goose populations are outlined in the breeding lesser snow geese in the survey. North American Waterfowl Management western Arctic. Approximately 76% of Mid-Continent Population (MCP) of Plan (NAWMP; U.S. Department of the lesser snow geese that nest in the light geese—The winter index of MCP Interior et al. 1998). In addition, Flyway western Arctic migrate to PFSG light geese has increased from Councils have set population goals for wintering areas (Hines et al. 1999). The approximately 777,000 birds in 1970, to light geese they manage within their 1995 photo survey estimate of 486,000 nearly 2.4 million birds in 2000 (Sharp geographic boundaries. We compare breeding lesser snow geese in the and Moser 2000). During 1970–2000, the current population levels to NAWMP western Arctic (Kerbes et al. 1999) is MCP winter index increased 3.3% per population goals to demonstrate that 143% higher than the NAWMP goal. year, although the rate of increase has most light goose populations have Hines et al. (1999) suggested a proactive elevated to 4.2% per year in the past 10 increased substantially over what is approach to management of western years. Using the average of species considered to be a healthy population Arctic lesser snow geese by stabilizing composition data obtained in Texas and level. We are not suggesting that light the population at its current level before Louisiana cited earlier, we estimate that goose populations be reduced for the it escapes control via normal harvest. the numbers of lesser snow and Ross’ sole purpose of meeting NAWMP Ross’ geese—The NAWMP does not geese in the 2000 MCP winter index population goals. contain separate population goals for were 2,291,000 and 99,200 birds, Greater snow geese—The Atlantic MCP and WCFP Ross’ geese. However, respectively. Flyway Council population objective, as the NAWMP and Pacific Flyway Western Central Flyway Population well as the NAWMP spring population Council (Pacific Flyway Council 1992) (WCFP) of light geese—The winter index goal for greater snow geese, is 500,000 utilize a total continental goal of of WCFP light geese has increased from birds. Therefore, the greater snow goose 100,000 breeding Ross’ geese. The approximately 42,000 birds in 1970 to population currently is 63% higher than estimate of 619,100 breeding Ross’ geese approximately 256,000 birds in 2000 the Atlantic Flyway Council and in the central and eastern Arctic in 1998 (Sharp and Moser 2000). During 1970– NAWMP goals. The Arctic Goose is 519% higher than the NAWMP and 2000, the WCFP winter index increased Habitat Working Group of the Arctic Pacific Flyway goal. 6.2% per year. Lesser snow geese and Goose Joint Venture has recommended The Pacific Flyway Council also has Ross’ geese comprise approximately a management goal of stabilizing the adopted a continental winter index goal 79% and 21%, respectively, of WCFP greater snow goose population at of 150,000 Ross’ geese (Pacific Flyway light geese (Thorpe 1999). Using these between 800,000 to 1 million birds Council 1992). The combined winter proportions, the lesser snow and Ross’ (Giroux et al. 1998a). However, the index total of 408,750 Ross’ geese in the goose components of WCFP light geese Working Group recommended a MCP, WCFP, and WPRG geographic in winter 2000 were approximately reduction of the population below this ranges is 172% higher than the Pacific 202,200 and 53,600 birds, respectively. level if natural habitats continue to Flyway Council goal.
VerDate 11
Potential Causes of Population Growth third feeding strategy utilized by all biomass suggested that geese had The rapid rise of light goose light goose species is grazing of above- maintained the marsh system in a low- populations has been influenced heavily ground plant material by clipping action level steady state during the 1980s. by human activities (Abraham and of the bill. The amount of time in which However, decreased number of use-days Jefferies 1997, Filion et al. 1998, Reed et Ross’ geese utilize grubbing and shoot- by geese, declining productivity of al. 1998, Sparrowe 1998). The greatest pulling is not well documented. bulrush habitats at some sites, changes attributable factors likely include: However, Ross’ geese are known to grub in plant species composition, and (1) A decline in harvest rate (percent for below-ground roots of sedges and erosion of marshes indicate that the of population removed by hunting); grasses in early spring (Ryder and carrying capacity of bulrush marshes (2) an increase in adult survival rates; Alisauskas 1995). Due to their smaller may have been reached and that (3) the expansion of agricultural areas bill size, Ross’ geese are able to graze marshes can no longer accommodate the shorter stands of vegetation, which in the United States and prairie Canada increasing number of snow geese could prevent or slow vegetation that provide abundant food resources (Giroux et al. 1998b). Until the 1960s, recovery in damaged areas (Didiuk et al. during migration and winter; and migrating greater snow geese staged in 2001). In addition, Ross’ geese cause (4) the establishment of sanctuaries their traditional bulrush marshes of the considerable damage to vegetation by along the Flyways. upper St. Lawrence River estuary. pulling up plants during nest-building We have attempted to curb the growth However, birds gradually began field- activities (Didiuk et al. 2001). of light goose populations by increasing feeding behavior during spring in the bag and possession limits and extending Habitat Impacts late 1960s and early 1970s, when the the open hunting season length for light population level approached 100,000 We have described the impact of light (Filion et al. 1998). Crop damage in geese to 107 days, the maximum geese on natural and agricultural allowed by the Treaty. Despite Quebec has prompted implementation systems for various breeding, migration, of a compensation fund to cover 80% of liberalizations in regular-season and wintering areas in our draft EIS on regulations, the harvest rate (the farmers’ losses. Bedard and LaPointe light goose management. Due to the (1991) predicted that rapid goose percentage of the population that is volume of technical information, we harvested) for light goose populations population growth would soon lead to refer the reader to the draft EIS for unacceptable crop damage. In some traditionally has been low. Low hunting specific details. Procedures for mortality has contributed to population areas, compensation has not been obtaining a copy of the draft EIS are sufficient for farmers who experience growth, which further reduces the described in the ADDRESSES section of losses and the Quebec Farmers Union harvest rate. The decline in harvest rate this document. A synopsis of ecosystem has asked for a control of the snow indicates that past harvest management impacts follows. strategies have not been sufficient to Greater snow geese—Studies goose population (Filion et al. 1998). stabilize or reduce population growth conducted on Bylot Island, where 15% With recent shifts of geese toward the rates. of the greater snow goose population upper St. Lawrence estuary and their Expansion of agriculture in light nests, indicate that goose grazing levels later departure from these regions, goose migration and wintering areas has are high, but there are as yet no damage to forage production could contributed to population growth by indications of damage to the vegetation increase and additional crops, such as providing a food subsidy (Ankney and in terms of absence of re-growth winter cereals, could be affected (Filion MacInnes 1978; Abraham and Jefferies following grazing (Giroux et al. 1998b). et al. 1998). 1997, Giroux et al. 1998b). Light geese However, monitoring of fenced and un- Prior to the 1960s, the impact of exploit corn, soybean, rice, wheat, fenced study plots has shown that greater snow geese on coastal marshes of barley, oats and rye during migration composition of the plant community is the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast appeared to and winter. Food subsidies contribute to modified by geese, and that annual be relatively small. Goose impacts on higher survival rates of geese and plant productivity is reduced in heavily- marshes became more apparent as the provide birds with additional nutrients grazed areas. Long-term, intense grazing population grew during the 1970s and during spring migration that allow them by geese leads to a low-level production 1980s. From New Jersey to North to arrive on the breeding grounds in equilibrium between geese and plants. Carolina, areas of denuded marsh, or prime condition to breed and have When grazing is experimentally ‘‘eat-outs,’’ were created by foraging higher breeding success. stopped, via exclosure fences, plant geese (Giroux et al. 1998b). Marshes that biomass increases rapidly within a few have experienced eat-outs may be able Foraging Behavior of Geese years (Giroux et al. 1998b). to recover relatively quickly if sufficient Light geese have a profound effect on Measurements of food availability on below-ground biomass remains to habitat through their feeding actions, Bylot Island suggest that the short-term resume vegetative growth (Smith and and have developed several modes of ability of habitat to support geese has Odum 1981). However, areas that are feeding on plant material for meeting not been exceeded. However, given the grazed by geese year after year may be their energy needs (Goodman and Fisher rate of increase of greater snow goose maintained as mudflats (Young 1985). 1962, Bolen and Rylander 1978). Where numbers, it is highly probable that the Snow goose grazing has impacted spring thawing has occurred, and above- intensity of grazing will increase and natural marshes at several sites ground plant growth has not begun, that the capacity of plants to recover throughout the mid-Atlantic coast, snow geese dig into and break open the will be exceeded (Masse et al. 2001). although impacts to coastal marshes turf (grubbing), consuming the highly The St. Lawrence River Valley is an appear to have been reduced in areas nutritious below-ground portions (e.g., important spring and fall staging area where birds have adapted to feeding in roots, rhizomes) of plants. Grubbing for greater snow geese. Vegetation agricultural habitats. The nutritional continues into late spring. Snow geese studies in bulrush marshes indicate that subsidy that agricultural foods provide also engage in shoot-pulling where birds plant stem density in some marshes to birds has likely contributed to the pull the shoots of large sedges, consume declined by 40% during 1971–96 increase in the goose population. the highly nutritious basal portion, and (Giroux and Bedard 1987). Repeated Increased damage to coastal marshes discard the remainder of the plant. A measures of below-ground plant during the last 5–10 years has occurred
VerDate 11
in areas where agricultural foods are communities they utilize. Removal of vegetation in fenced areas also should less available or where large increases in above-ground plant cover reduces the have been affected. goose numbers have rapidly occurred thickness of the vegetative mat that Satellite imagery has been used to (Giroux et al. 1998b). insulates underlying sediments from the demonstrate habitat damage at other The use of agricultural lands by air. This causes an increase in the rate sites in the Arctic. For example, lesser greater snow geese in the mid-Atlantic of evaporation from surface sediments snow and Ross’ goose population region is a relatively recent and greater concentration of salts from growth at Karrak Lake (approximately development. Agricultural depredations marine clays. Grubbing by geese further 750 miles north of La Perouse Bay) in by geese in the mid-Atlantic were first exposes the soil substrate. Most of the the Queen Maude Gulf Migratory Bird reported during the winter of 1971–72. impacts by light geese on breeding Sanctuary has negatively affected A 1998 poll of agency personnel in 6 habitats have been documented in the habitat (Alisauskas 1998, Didiuk et al. mid-Atlantic States indicated, on eastern and central arctic region. For 2001). By 1989, 52% of plant average, an annual total of fewer than 35 example, the Hudson Bay Lowlands communities within the areas occupied crop damage complaints (Giroux et al. salt-marsh ecosystem consists of a by nesting light geese at Karrak Lake 1998b). However, goose damage was 1,200-mile strip of coastline along west were converted to exposed peat, and a reported to be on the increase in Hudson and James Bays, Canada. Vast further 7% had eroded to bare mineral Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware, areas of desertification, characterized by soils (Alisauskas 1998). Loss of and stable in New Jersey, Virginia, high soil salinity and little or no vegetation at colony sites may North Carolina, and New York (Giroux vegetation, have been documented eventually lead to desertification et al. 1998b). Crop damage assessment extensively throughout the Hudson Bay (Alisauskas 1998). Abraham and surveys were conducted in Delaware Lowlands (Abraham and Jefferies 1997). Jefferies (1997) described indications of during 1998 and 1999 (Delaware Div. of Of the 135,000 acres of salt-marsh habitat impacts by geese at other sites, Fish and Wildlife 2000). In 1998, a total habitat in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, such as: Akimiski Island; west coast of of $500,000 in crop damage affecting 35% is considered to be destroyed, 30% James Bay; Cape Henrietta Maria; 12,000 acres was documented; primarily is damaged, and 35% is overgrazed Hudson Bay coast of Ontario; Hudson in wheat, barley, and rye crops. In 1999, (Abraham and Jefferies 1997). The rate Bay coast of Manitoba; Knife and Seal the number of acres affected had of vegetation decline at La Perouse Bay Rivers; Manitoba; Tha-Anne River to the declined to 3,800 acres, with damage during 1984–93 was approximately 159 Maguse River (west coast of Hudson amounts of $180,300 resulting. acres/year (calculated from data in Jano Bay); Southampton Island; and Although similar numbers of snow et al. 1998). Habitats currently Southwestern Baffin Island. As of yet, geese were present in both years, categorized as ‘‘damaged’’ or extensive damage to vegetation has not modification of hunting season opening ‘‘overgrazed’’ are being further impacted been reported on breeding areas in the dates for snow geese is believed to be and will be classified as ‘‘destroyed’’ if western arctic; however, field studies responsible for the decline in crop goose populations continue to expand. have not been in place to document damage. It is likely that crop damage Experts fear that many destroyed whether or not any significant impacts reports underestimate actual losses. U.S. habitats will not recover (Abraham and have occurred (Kerbes et al. 1999). farmers are not traditionally Jefferies 1997). For example, in a badly Recent photographs from Banks Island compensated for wildlife damage and degraded area, less than 20% of the indicate possible vegetation changes as thus have little incentive to report vegetation within an exclosure (fenced damage to agencies. As snow goose a result of goose grazing (Abraham and in area where geese cannot feed) has populations continue to grow, it is Jefferies 1997). As population size and recovered after 15 years of protection expected that agricultural depredations bird density increases, geese may begin from light geese (Abraham and Jefferies will increase. to impact western arctic breeding Lesser snow and Ross’ geese—Under 1997). Recovery rates of degraded areas habitats in a manner similar to birds in certain levels of goose grazing intensity, are further slowed by the short tundra the eastern and central Arctic. some salt-marsh plants in the Arctic growing season and the high salinity In contrast to the greater snow goose show enhanced shoot growth following levels in the exposed and unprotected situation, less attention has been paid to defoliation (Abraham and Jefferies soil. the impacts of lesser snow and Ross’ 1997). However, other plant species The Hudson Bay Lowlands have geese on migration and wintering show only limited shoot growth or no undergone isostatic uplift following habitats. As of yet, increasing light growth following defoliation (Zellmer et retreat of the last glacial episode. Upon goose populations in the mid-continent al. 1993). At high levels of grazing being released from the weight of region have not caused a widespread intensity, plant communities are unable glaciers, the coastline has undergone a crop depredation problem. A search of to rebound from constant feeding slow rate of elevation increase (Hik et al. the crop damage reporting system of the pressures. Once lesser snow geese graze 1992). The gradual uplift causes U.S. Department of Agriculture an area to the point where they can no modification to the soil environment indicated losses of $28,000 in Louisiana longer obtain sufficient food, they will and leads to a shift in communities of during January 1994 through November leave to exploit other areas. Normally, plants that tolerate drier conditions. It 2000 (U.S. Dept. Agr., unpublished this would allow plant communities to has been suggested that isostatic uplift, data). Losses totaling $39,000 were rebound from grazing. However, Ross’ not the feeding actions of geese, is reported in Texas from October 1993 to geese can further impact areas after responsible for habitat damage at September 2000. Although many snow geese leave because they can graze breeding colony sites. This theory is farmers may incur crop damage, they on shorter stands of plants. The disproved by studies that utilize fencing often do not report such losses because potential for plant recovery is further to exclude geese from feeding in study there is no compensation program in reduced by the short growing season in plots. Vegetation in adjacent study plots place. Although light geese create eat- arctic and sub-arctic habitats. that are exposed to goose grazing is outs in natural marsh systems on the Accelerated habitat degradation removed, whereas vegetation in fenced Gulf Coast, there are no indications that results from a negative feedback loop plots is unaffected. If isostatic uplift was such occurrences are serious enough to between light geese and the plant responsible for vegetation damage, warrant management action.
VerDate 11
Impacts on Other Species The potential for massive outbreaks of This may result in reduced hunting, Habitat damage will not only affect avian cholera in light geese and other birdwatching, and other recreational light geese themselves, but will also waterfowl is illustrated by several opportunities. affect habitat that other species rely documented die-offs. On Banks Island, Habitat damage in the Arctic will upon. Rockwell et al. (1997b) observed avian cholera caused the death of at eventually trigger density-dependent the decline of local populations of more least 30,000 and 20,000 lesser snow regulation of the population which than 30 avian species in the La Pe´rouse geese in 1995 and 1996, respectively likely will result in increased gosling Bay area due to severe habitat (Samuel et al. 1999a). Over 72,000 mortality and may cause the population degradation. Documentation of specific waterbirds died of cholera in the to decline precipitously. Impacts such declines in bird nesting activity has Rainwater Basin of Nebraska during as physiological stress, malnutrition, and disease in goslings have been been accomplished by repeated visits to 1980 (Brand 1984). We believe that the documented and observations of such study plots. For example, local nesting increasing number and expanding impacts are increasing. However, it is populations of semi-palmated geographic distribution of cholera not clear when natural population sandpipers and red-necked phalaropes outbreaks represents a serious threat to regulation will occur and what habitat, at La Pe´rouse Bay, Manitoba, were waterfowl and other bird populations if any, will remain to support the periodically sampled on study areas that are susceptible to the disease. This survivors. Such a decline may result in during 1983–99 (Gratto-Trevor 1994; threat is heightened due to the rapid increase of light goose populations that a population too low to permit any Rockwell 1999). In 1983, more than 120 are known carriers of the disease. hunting, effectively closing light goose semi-palmated sandpiper and 46 red- Transmission of avian cholera is hunting seasons. The length of the necked phalarope nests were enhanced by the gregarious nature of closures will largely depend on the documented (Gratto-Trevor 1994). When most waterfowl species and by high recovery rate of the breeding habitat, the study area was sampled in 1999, densities of birds that result from which likely will take decades. only 4 sandpiper and 1 phalarope nests habitat limitations, especially in winter In the near term, existing light goose were found (Rockwell 1999). Results and spring (Friend 1999). The hunting seasons would continue under from these studies indicate declines in likelihood of cholera outbreaks may be the No Action Alternative. We have local populations of species in areas reduced when waterfowl occur in lower attempted to curb the growth of light damaged by light geese. These results densities (Samuel et al. 1999b). goose populations by increasing bag and are not presented here to indicate Therefore, we believe that a reduction of possession limits and extending the continental declines in populations of light goose populations will reduce the open hunting season length for light any species. However, if light goose risk of avian cholera outbreaks and geese to 107 days, the maximum populations continue to grow at current associated impacts to other species in allowed by the Migratory Bird Treaty. rates, and geese continue to exploit and the future. However, due to the rapid rise in light destroy habitats in new areas, it is goose numbers, the harvest rate (the possible that regional and continental Environmental Consequences of Taking percentage of the population that is declines in populations of other avian No Action harvested), has declined even though species may occur. We fully analyzed the No Action the actual number of geese harvested Avian cholera is a highly contagious alternative with regard to light goose has increased (Martin and Padding and deadly disease, caused by the management in our draft EIS, to which 2000). The decline in harvest rate bacterium Pasteurella multocida, and is we refer the reader (U.S. Fish and indicates that traditional harvest one of the most important diseases of Wildlife Service 2001). In summary, management strategies, which would North American waterfowl (Friend most light goose populations will continue under the No Action 1999). Although much remains to be continue to increase at rates anywhere Alternative, are not sufficient to reduce learned about the mechanism of from 5–15% per year, depending on the population growth rates. transmission, there is increasing population. We expect breeding evidence that lesser snow and Ross’ colonies to expand as habitat becomes Environmental Consequences of geese act as reservoirs for the bacterium destroyed in core areas. Birds will begin Proposed Action that causes cholera (Friend 1999, to exploit new areas and repeat the We fully analyzed our proposed Samuel et al. 1997, Samuel et al. 1999a). pattern of habitat destruction and action in the draft EIS on light goose The movement of cholera from major colony expansion. In the case of greater management, to which we refer the focal points of the disease follows the snow geese, we expect the population to reader for specific details (U.S. Fish and well-defined pathways of waterfowl exceed the ability of migration habitats Wildlife Service 2001). In summary, migration, and is associated with to support them. Concurrently, we implementation of regulations to movements of lesser snow and Ross’ expect goose damage to agricultural increase harvest of light geese will geese (Brand 1984; Samuel et al. 1999a). crops to increase. reduce various light goose populations Over 100 species of waterbirds and Even if natural causes result in to levels we believe are more compatible raptors are susceptible to avian cholera declines of goose populations, it will with the ability of habitats to support (Botzler 1991). The threat of avian take habitats a prolonged time period to them. Furthermore, habitats upon which cholera to endangered and threatened recover, especially in the Arctic. A other species depend will be preserved. bird species is continually increasing variety of other bird species will be The greater snow goose population because of increasing numbers of negatively impacted as the habitats they will be reduced from the spring 2000 cholera outbreaks and the expanding depend on become destroyed by light level of 813,900 birds to the geographic distribution of the disease geese. As population densities increase, management goal of 500,000 birds. The (Friend 1999). Potentially-affected the incidence of avian cholera among number of light geese in the Central and species include whooping cranes and light geese and other species is likely to Mississippi Flyways (primarily MCP bald eagles. Various populations of increase. Significant losses of other and WCFP light geese) will be reduced sandhill cranes migrate, stage, and species, such as pintails, white-fronted by 50%. This suggests a reduction of the winter with light geese and potentially geese, sandhill cranes, and whooping combined winter index of MCP and could be affected by cholera outbreaks. cranes, from avian cholera may occur. WCFP light geese from 3.1 million in
VerDate 11
1997 (the year the management Experts feel that breaking or removing be allowed only during normal hunting objective was established) to slightly eggs from nests, and other non-lethal season framework dates (September 1 to less than 1.6 million. Because the winter techniques, would be ineffective at March 10), except as provided in Part 21 index does not represent the entire significantly reducing the populations described below. Individual States population, the true population size will within a reasonable timeframe to would determine the exact dates when be much higher than 1.6 million preserve and protect habitat (Batt 1997). such changes would be authorized. following a reduction program. Using an We prefer to implement alternative Persons utilizing new methods of take adjustment factor of 1.6 (Boyd et al. regulatory strategies designed to during light goose hunting seasons 1982), we estimate that a winter index increase light goose harvest afforded by would be required to possess a Federal of 1.6 million corresponds to nearly 2.6 the Migratory Bird Treaty and avoid the migratory bird hunting stamp, be million breeding birds in spring. Adding use of more drastic population control registered under the Harvest 30% for non-breeding birds brings the measures. Information Program, and be in total population to a minimum of 3.3 We believe that a reduction of certain compliance with any additional State million birds following a population light goose populations will relieve license and stamp requirements reduction program. We believe a negative habitat pressures on other pertaining to hunting waterfowl. population level of 3.3 million birds is migratory bird populations that occur The second would revise subpart E of more than adequate to ensure the long- on light goose breeding and wintering 50 CFR part 21 for the management of term health of MCP and WCFP light grounds and other areas along migration overabundant light goose populations. goose populations. routes. By arresting habitat damage by Under this subpart, we propose to We do not anticipate population light geese, other species will not be establish a conservation order reduction actions for either Pacific forced to seek habitats elsewhere, thus specifically for the control and Flyway lesser snow geese, or the avoiding potential decreases in their management of light geese. Under the Western Population of Ross’ geese over reproductive success. Further, we authority of this rule, States could the next several years. However, Hines expect that by decreasing the numbers initiate aggressive harvest management et al. (1999) have suggested a proactive of light geese on wintering and strategies with the intent to increase approach to management of lesser snow migration stopover areas, the risk of light goose harvest without having to geese that breed in the western Arctic by transmission of avian cholera to other obtain an individual permit, which will stabilizing the population at its current species will be reduced. significantly reduce the administrative burden on State and Federal level before it escapes control via Special Light Goose Regulations governments. This rule would enable normal harvest. Future actions may be This proposed rule would make States, as a management tool, to use taken to control either of these permanent regulations that are very hunters to harvest light geese, by populations if it becomes evident that similar to those in effect by reason of the shooting in a hunting manner, inside or (1) additional harvest pressure is needed Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency outside of the regular migratory bird to control light geese that breed in the Conservation Act. The differences are hunting season framework dates of central Arctic, and/or (2) light goose that we now would include the Atlantic September 1 and March 10. Although a damage to habitats in the western Arctic Flyway States as being eligible to conservation order could be necessitates control of light geese that implement special light goose implemented at any time, we believe the breed there. We would propose to regulations to manage the population of greatest value of this rule would be the authorize the Pacific Flyway to greater snow geese. Pacific Flyway provision of a mechanism to increase implement special light goose States may be eligible in the future if harvest of light geese beyond March 10, regulations under the above habitat damage becomes evident in the the latest possible closing date for circumstances because a large western Arctic, or if additional harvest traditional migratory bird hunting proportion of central arctic light geese, pressure is needed on central Arctic seasons. This provision would be especially Ross’ geese, and the majority light geese. We also have provided especially effective in increasing harvest of western arctic light geese winter in further guidance to States as to what in mid-latitude and northern States the Pacific Flyway. If necessary, a type of information should be collected during spring migration. The proposal to include the Pacific Flyway and reported with regard to harvest conservation order is not a hunting would be published in the Federal resulting from implementation of the season, and implementation of such Register for public comment. Any conservation order. Such information regulations should not be construed as population control actions for light will further refine our ability to evaluate opening, re-opening, or extending any geese in the Pacific Flyway should be the impacts of such regulations on light open hunting season contrary to any designed to minimize negative impacts goose populations. Finally, we have regulations promulgated under Section to Wrangel Island lesser snow geese, revised terminology with regard to 3 of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. which historically have not fared as baiting that incorporate changes we Conditions under the conservation well as other light goose populations. made to baiting regulations on June 3, order would require that participating Although our intention is to 1999 (64 FR 29799). States inform participants acting under significantly reduce some light goose These proposed regulations address the authority of the conservation order populations in order to relieve pressures two areas. The first would authorize the of the conditions that apply to the on breeding and/or migration habitats, use of new hunting methods (e.g., amendment. In order to minimize or we feel that these efforts will not electronic calls and unplugged avoid take of non-target species, States threaten the long-term status of these shotguns) to harvest light geese during may implement this action only when populations. We will carefully analyze normal hunting season frameworks. all waterfowl (including light goose) and and assess the status of light goose New methods of take would be allowed crane hunting seasons, excluding populations on an annual basis, using only during periods when all waterfowl falconry, are closed. In addition to the winter index, periodic photo (except light goose) and crane hunting authorizing new methods of take (i.e., surveys in the Arctic, banding data, and seasons, excluding falconry, are closed. electronic calls and unplugged other surveys, to ensure that the Authorization of new methods of take shotguns), the conservation order would populations are not over-harvested. during light-goose-only seasons would not impose daily bag limits for light
VerDate 11
geese and would allow shooting hours Parts 20 and 21 will be suspended in the greater snow geese Chen caerulescens for light geese to end one-half hour after Atlantic Flyway if the greater snow atlantica. J. Appl. Ecol. 28:187–93. sunset. Because it is not a hunting goose population is reduced to the goal Bolen, E.G., and M.K. Rylander. 1978. season, conservation order participants of 500,000 birds. The amendments will Feeding adaptations in the lesser snow goose (Anser caerulescens). Southwest. would not be required by Federal law to be suspended in the Central and Nat. 23:158–161. possess a valid migratory bird hunting Mississippi Flyways if the winter index Botzler, R.G. 1991. Epizootiology of avian stamp or be registered in the Harvest is reduced to the management goal of cholera in wildfowl. J. Wildl. Dis. 27:367– Information Program, unless otherwise approximately 1.6 million birds 395. required by an individual State. States (primarily MCP and WCFP light geese). Boyd, H., G.E.J. Smith and F.G. Cooch. 1982. may impose additional requirements on However, in the event that any light The lesser snow goose of the eastern participants. goose population resumes population Canadian Arctic: Their status during 1964– Initially, we restrict the scope of this growth above management goals, it may 1979 and their management from 1982– 1990. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occ. Pap. No. 46. proposed rule to the light geese in the become necessary to re-implement U.S. portions of the Atlantic, 21 pp. additional methods of take (Part 20) Brand, C.J. 1984. Avian cholera in the Central Mississippi, and Central Flyways. and/or the conservation order (Part 21) and Mississippi Flyways during 1979–80. However, we would propose to include in an attempt to return the population J. Wildl. Manage. 48:399–406. the Pacific Flyway in the future if it to the desired level. Furthermore, if Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife. 2000. becomes evident that (1) additional electronic calls and unplugged shotguns Greater snow goose season and damage harvest pressure is needed to control are shown to be no longer effective in evaluation 1999–2000. 2pp. light geese that breed in the central increasing harvest of light geese, we will Didiuk, A.B., R.T. Alisauskas, and R.F. Arctic, and/or (2) light goose damage to Rockwell. 2001. Interactions with Arctic propose to supplement them by and Subarctic habitats. Pages 17–26 in T.J. habitats in the western Arctic authorizing additional methods of take. necessitates control of light geese that Moser, ed. The status of Ross’s geese. Any proposed changes to light goose Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special breed there. The Pacific Flyway would regulations will be published in the Publication. 65pp. be allowed to implement special light Federal Register for public comment. Filion, B., D. Luszcz, and G. Allard. 1998. goose regulations under the above Impact of geese on farmlands. Pages 58–64 circumstances because a large References Cited in B.D.J. Batt, ed. The greater snow goose: proportion of central Arctic light geese, Abraham, K.F., and R.L. Jefferies. 1997. High Report of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working especially Ross’ geese, and the majority goose populations: Causes, impacts and Group. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special of western Arctic light geese, winter in implications. Pages 7–72 in B.D.J. Batt, ed. Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife the Pacific Flyway. Arctic ecosystems in peril: report of the Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian We acquired experience with the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 88pp. proposed regulatory changes in the Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Friend, M. 1999. Avian cholera. Pages 75–98 Central and Mississippi Flyways during Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife in M. Friend and J.C. Franson, eds. Field Manual of Wildlife Diseases. U.S. Dept. of 1999–2001 after we implemented such Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 120 pp. Interior, Biological Resources Division, regulations on February 16, 1999 (64 FR Alisauskas, R. 1998. Nutritional ecology and Information and Technology Report 1999– 7507; 64 FR 7517). We withdrew the population biology of Ross’ geese. Progress 001. new light goose regulations on June 17, Report March 1998. Can. Wildl. Serv., Giroux, J-F., and J. Bedard. 1987. The effects 1999 (64 FR 32778) to end existing Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. 27pp. of grazing by greater snow geese on the litigation and initiate development of Ankney, C.D. and C.D. MacInnes. 1978. vegetation of tidal marshes in the St. the environmental impact statement. Nutrient reserves and reproductive Lawrence estuary. J. Appl. Ecol. 24:773– However, Congress passed the Arctic performance of female lesser snow geese. 788. Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Auk 95:459–471. Giroux, J-F., B. Batt, S. Brault, G. Costanzo, Act (Pub. L. 106–108) in November, Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. 1997. B. Filion, G. Gauthier, D. Luszcz, and A. Conclusions and recommendations for Reed. 1998a. Conclusions and management 1999, which reinstated the regulations. future action. Pages 117–120 in B. D. J. recommendations. Pages 81–88 in B.D.J. We published a notice of this Batt, ed. Arctic Ecosystems in Peril: Report Batt, ed. The greater snow goose: report of reinstatement on December 20, 1999 (64 of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. FR 71236). Our most recent estimate Group. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special indicates that implementation of new Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife light goose regulations increased harvest Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian of light geese in the Central and Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 120 pp. Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 88pp. Mississippi Flyways by 69% during Armstrong, W.T., K.M. Meeres, R.H. Kerbes, Giroux, J-F., G. Gauthier, G. Costanzo, and A. 1999/00 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service W.S. Boyd, J.G. Silveira, J.P. Taylor, and B. Reed. 1998b. Impact of geese on natural 2001). The 1999/2000 total U.S. harvest Turner. 1999. Routes and timing of habitats. Pages 32–57 in B.D.J. Batt, ed. The migration of lesser snow geese from the greater snow goose: report of the Arctic of over 1.3 million light geese in the western Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Goose Habitat Working Group. Arctic Central and Mississippi Flyways is Island, Russia, 1987–92. Pages 75–88 in Goose Joint Venture Special Publication. nearly equal to the annual harvest of 1.4 R.H. Kerbes, K.M. Meeres, and J.E. Hines U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, million that is required to reduce the (eds.), Distribution, survival, and numbers Washington, D.C. and Canadian Wildlife number of birds by 50% (Rockwell and of lesser snow geese of the Western Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 88pp. Ankney 2000). We estimate that the Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Island, Goodman, D.C., and H.I. Fisher. 1962. greater snow goose population can be Russia. Canadian Wildlife Service Functional anatomy of the feeding reduced to 500,000 birds by 2004 if Occasional Paper No. 98, Ottawa, Ontario. apparatus in waterfowl. Southern Illinois implementation of new light goose Batt, B.D.J., editor. 1997. Arctic ecosystems University Press, Carbondale, Illinois. in peril: Report of the Arctic Goose Habitat 193pp. regulations in the Atlantic Flyway Working Group. Arctic Goose Joint Venture Gratto-Trevor, C. 1994. Monitoring shorebird increases harvest by 69% (U.S. Fish and Special Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife populations in the Arctic. Bird Trends Wildlife Service 2001). Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian 3:10–12. We will annually monitor the status Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. Helm, R. 2001. Results of January 2001 Ross’ of light goose populations in North Bedard, J. and G. LaPointe. 1991. Responses goose survey. Louisiana Dept. Wildlife and America. The amendments to 50 CFR of hayfields vegetation to spring grazing by Fisheries. Baton Rouge, LA. 3 pp.
VerDate 11
Hik, D.S., R.L. Jefferies, and A.R.E. Sinclair. Reed, A., G. Gauthier, and J-F Giroux. 2000. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. 1992. Foraging by geese, isostatic uplift Population and productivity surveys of Waterfowl Populations Status, 2000. and asymmetry in the development of salt- greater snow geese in 2000. Report to the Department of Interior, U. S. Fish and marsh plant communities. J. Ecology USFWS and the Atlantic Flyway Technical Wildlife Service, Arlington, VA. 48 pp. 80:395–406. Section, February 2000. 6pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Draft Hines, J.E., V.V. Baranyuk, B. Turner, W.S. Rockwell, R.F.E. 1999. The impact of snow Environmental Impact Statement: light Boyd, J.G. Silveira, J.P. Taylor, S.J. Barry, geese on nesting birds at La Perouse Bay. goose management. U.S. Dept. of Interior, K.M. Meeres, R.H. Kerbes, and W.T. Interim report of the second year’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Armstrong. 1999. Autumn and winter activities—10/15/99, Hudson Bay Project. Washington, D.C. distribution of lesser snow geese from the 4pp. Young, K.E. 1985. The effect of greater snow Western Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Rockwell, R.F.E., and C.D. Ankney. 2000. geese, Anser caerulescens atlantica, (Aves: Island, Russia, 1953–1992. Pages 39–73 in Snow geese: Can we pay down the Anatidae: Anserini) grazing on a Delaware R.H. Kerbes, K.M. Meeres, and J.E. Hines mortgage? Pages 32–24 in: H. Boyd (ed.) tidal marsh. M.Sc. Thesis. University of (eds.), Distribution, survival, and numbers Population modeling and management of Delaware. 63pp. of lesser snow geese of the Western snow geese. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occas. Pap. Zellmer, I.D., M.J. Claus, D.S. Hik, and R.L. Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Island, No. 102. Jefferies. 1993. Growth responses of arctic Russia. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occ. Pap. No. 98, Ryder, J.P., and R.T. Alisauskas. 1995. Ross’ graminoids following grazing by captive Ottawa, Ontario. goose (Chen rossii). In: The birds of North lesser snow geese. Oecologia 93:487–492. Jano, A.P., R.L. Jefferies, and R.F. Rockwell. America, No. 162 (A. Poole and F. Gill, NEPA Considerations 1998. The detection of vegetational change eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, by multitemporal analysis of LANDSAT Philadelphia, and The American In compliance with the requirements data: The effects of goose foraging. J. Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. of section 102(2)(C) of the National Ecology 86:93–99. Samuel, M.D., D.R. Goldberg, D.J. Shadduck, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Kerbes, R.H. 1975. The nesting population of J.I. Price, and E.G. Cooch. 1997. Pasteurella U.S.C. 4332(C)), and the Council on lesser snow geese in the eastern Canadian multocida serotype 1 isolated from a lesser arctic: A photographic inventory of June Environmental Quality’s regulation for snow goose: Evidence of a carrier state. J. implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500– 1973. Can. Wildl. Serv. Rep. Ser. No. 35. Wildl. Diseases 33:332–335. Kerbes, R.H. 1994. Colonies and numbers of Samuel, M.D., J.Y. Takekaws, G. Samelius, 1508), we prepared a draft Ross’ geese and lesser snow geese in the and D.R. Goldberg. 1999a. Avian cholera Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Queen Maud Gulf Migratory Bird mortality in lesser snow geese nesting on in August 2001. The DEIS is available to Sanctuary. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occ. Pap. No. Banks Island, Northwest Territories. Wildl. the public at the location indicated 81. 45pp. Soc. Bull. 27:780–787. under the ADDRESSES caption. Kerbes, R.H., V.V. Baranyuk, and J.E. Hines. Samuel, M.D., J.Y. Takekaws, V.V. Baranyuk, 1999. Estimated size of the Western and D.L. Orthmeyer. 1999b. Effects of avian Endangered Species Act Consideration Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Island lesser cholera on survival of lesser snow geese snow goose populations on their breeding Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Anser caerulescens: an experimental and wintering grounds. Pages 25–38 in Species Act (ESA), as amended (16 R.H. Kerbes, K.M. Meeres, and J.E. Hines approach. Bird Study 46(Suppl.):S239– U.S.C. 1531–1543; 87 Stat. 884) (eds.), Distribution, survival, and numbers S247. provides that ‘‘Each Federal agency of lesser snow geese of the Western Serie, J., and B. Raftovich. 2000. Atlantic Flyway waterfowl harvest and population shall, in consultation with and with the Canadian Arctic and Wrangel Island, assistance of the Secretary, insure that Russia. Can. Wildl. Serv. Occ. Pap. No. 98, survey data, July 2000. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Migratory Bird any action authorized, funded, or Ottawa, Ontario. carried out * * * is not likely to Martin, E.M., and P.I. Padding. 2000. Management. Laurel, MD. 90pp. Preliminary estimates of waterfowl harvest Sharp, D.E., and T.J. Moser. 2000. Central jeopardize the continued existence of and hunter activity in the United States Flyway Harvest and Population Survey any endangered species or threatened during the 1999 hunting season. U.S. Fish Data Book, 2000. U.S. Fish and Wildlife species or result in the destruction or and Wildlife Service, Office of Migratory Service, Office of Migratory Bird adverse modification of [critical] habitat Bird Management. Laurel, MD. 34pp. Management. Denver, CO. 124pp. ***.’’ We have initiated Section 7 Smith, T.J. III and W.D. Odum. 1981. The Masse, H., L. Rochefort, and G. Gauthier. consultation under the ESA for this 2001. Carrying capacity of wetland habitats effects of grazing by snow geese on coastal salt marshes. Ecology 62:98–106. proposed rule. The result of our used by breeding greater snow geese. J. consultation under Section 7 of the ESA Wildl. Manage. 65:271–281. Sparrowe, R. 1998. Report of the Mensik, G., and J. Silveira. 1993. Status of Stakeholder’s Committee on Arctic Nesting will be available to the public at the Ross’ and lesser snow geese wintering in Geese. Rollin Sparrowe, Chair. Wildlife location indicated under the ADDRESSES California, December 1992. U.S. Fish and Management Institute, Washington, DC. caption. Wildlife Service unpublished report. Thorpe, P. 1999. Western Central Flyway Mowbray, T.B., F. Cooke, and B. Ganter. Light Goose Productivity Report—1999. Regulatory Flexibility Act 2000. Snow goose (Chen caerulescens). In: Pages 14–29 in J. Bidwell, ed. Productivity The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 The birds of North America, No. 514 (A. surveys of geese, swans, and brant (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq) requires the Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of wintering in North America 1999. U.S. preparation of flexibility analyses for Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The Dept. Interior, Fish and Wildl. Serv. Arlington, Virginia. 79pp. rules that will have a significant effect American Ornithologists’ Union, on a substantial number of small Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior, Environment Pacific Flyway Council. 1992. Pacific Flyway Canada, and Secretaria De Desarrollo entities, which includes small Management Plan for Ross’ geese. Social. 1998. 1998 Update to the North businesses, organizations, or Subcommittee on White Geese. Portland, American Waterfowl Management Plan— governmental jurisdictions. The OR. 24pp. fulfilling the legacy: expanding the vision. economic impacts of this proposed Reed, A., J-F Giroux, and G. Gauthier. 1998. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington rulemaking will fall primarily on small Population size, productivity, harvest and D.C. businesses because of the structure of distribution. Pages 5–31 in B.D.J. Batt, ed. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Final the waterfowl hunting-related Environmental Assessment: alternative The greater snow goose: Report of the industries. The rule benefits small Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. regulatory strategies to reduce Arctic Goose Joint Venture Special overabundant populations of mid- businesses by avoiding failure of an Publication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife continent light geese. U.S. Dept. of Interior, ecosystem that produces migratory bird Service, Washington, D.C. and Canadian Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, resources important to American Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 88pp. D.C. . 98pp. citizens. Hunting seasons for all goose
VerDate 11
species produce a total annual economic and birdwatchers by ensuring the industries, Federal, State, or local impact of $608 million (U.S. populations remain at usable levels and government agencies, or geographic Department of the Interior 1997). Light ensures the future of a $146 million regions. It will not have significant geese represent approximately 24% of industry associated with light goose adverse effects on competition, all geese taken in the U.S. The hunting in the U.S. Second, the rule employment, investment, productivity, distribution of light goose harvest would generate about $21 million in innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based among Flyways is as follows: Atlantic added local output associated with enterprises to compete with foreign- Flyway 5%; Mississippi Flyway 36%, increased number of days to take light based enterprises. Central Flyway 53%; Pacific Flyway geese during conservation orders in the Paperwork Reduction Act and 6%. Allocating the economic impact of Atlantic, Mississippi, and Central Information Collection light goose hunting in each Flyway by Flyways. Information on the economic these proportions, the economic impact benefit to non-consumptive uses of light We examined these regulations under of light goose hunting is $7.5 million in geese is not available. Finally, control of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the Atlantic Flyway, $52.5 million in light goose populations will reduce the (44 U.S.C. 3507(d). Under the Act, the Mississippi Flyway, $76.7 million in probability of avian disease spreading to information collections must be the Central Flyway, and $9.3 million in other species, curb further damage to approved by the Office of Management the Pacific Flyway. The proposed rule is natural habitats, and reduce agricultural and Budget (OMB). Agencies may not expected to preserve this economic losses to goose depredations. This rule conduct or sponsor, and a person is not impact and generate additional output will not create inconsistencies with required to respond to a collection of by providing opportunity to increase other agencies’ actions or otherwise information unless it displays a take of light geese beyond March 10 in interfere with an action taken or currently valid OMB control number. the three easternmost Flyways. Data are planned by another agency. Federal We expect a maximum of 39 State not available to estimate the number of agencies most interested in this wildlife agencies will participate under small entities affected, but it is unlikely rulemaking are primarily other the authority of the conservation order to be a substantial number on a national Department of the Interior bureaus (e.g., each year it is available, requiring an scale. In 1999, we estimated that Biological Resources Division of the average of 24 hours to collect the implementation of new light goose U.S. Geological Survey). The action information from participants. regulations would avert a population proposed is consistent with the policies Therefore, the burden assumed by the crash, thus avoiding the closure of and guidelines of other Interior bureaus. State participants would be 936 hours or normal light goose hunting seasons due This rule will not materially affect less. Any suggestions on how to reduce to low populations in the Central and entitlements, grants, user fees, loan this burden should be sent to the Mississippi Flyways, and avoiding a $70 programs, or the rights and obligations Information Collection Clearance million loss in economic output of their recipients. This rule will not Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, associated with such seasons. raise novel legal or policy issues ms 222–ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Implementation of light goose because we have previously managed Washington, DC 20204. We will use the regulations would also help reduce the harvest of light geese under the record-keeping and reporting agricultural losses caused by geese. Our Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Executive requirements imposed under regulations proposed action is to implement special Order 12866 requires each agency to established in 50 CFR part 21, subpart regulations to increase harvest of light write regulations that are easy to E to administer this program, geese. If the proposed alternative is understand. We invite comments on particularly in the assessment of implemented, populations would be how to make this rule easier to impacts that alternative regulatory reduced to levels that habitats can understand, including answers to strategies may have on light geese and support and agricultural damages will questions such as the following: (1) Are other migratory bird populations. We be reduced. We have determined that a the requirements in the rule clearly will require the information collected to Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis is stated? (2) Does the rule contain authorize State and Tribal governments not required. technical language or jargon that responsible for migratory bird interferes with its clarity? (3) Does the Executive Order 12866 management to take light geese within format of the rule (grouping and order our guidelines. Specifically, OMB has This rule was reviewed by the Office of sections, use of headings, approved the information collection of Management and Budget and deemed paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its requirements of this action and assigned non-significant under E.O. 12866. This clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to clearance number 1018–0103 (expires rule will not have an annual economic understand if it were divided into more 01/31/2002). effect of $100 million or adversely affect (but shorter) sections? (5) Is the any economic sector, productivity, description of the rule in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act competition, jobs, the environment, or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of We have determined and certify other units of government. Therefore, a the preamble helpful in understanding pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates cost-benefit economic analysis is not the rule? (6) What else could the Service Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502, et seq., that required. The rule will affect regional do to make the rule easier to this rulemaking will not impose a cost economic benefits in two ways. First, it understand? of $100 million or more in any given may prevent a die-off of light geese and year on local or State government or Small Business Regulatory Enforcement other ill-effects of overpopulation. private entities. People derive pleasure from both Fairness Act hunting and watching light geese. The This rule is not a major rule under 5 Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order improvement in public welfare is U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 12988 difficult to measure but, given the Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It We, in promulgating this rule, have number of people involved and time will not have an annual effect on the determined that these regulations meet committed, it is less than $100 million. economy of $100 million or more; nor the applicable standards provided in By preventing a crash in light goose will it cause a major increase in costs or Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive populations, the rule benefits hunters prices for consumers, individual Order 12988. Specifically, this rule has
VerDate 11
been reviewed to eliminate errors and opportunity to comment on the DEIS (g) By the use or aid of recorded or ambiguity, has been written to minimize process. electrically amplified bird calls or litigation, provides a clear legal sounds, or recorded or electrically Energy Effects—Executive Order 13211 standard for affected conduct, and amplified imitations of bird calls or specifies in clear language the effect on On May 18, 2001, the President issued sounds. This restriction does not apply existing Federal law or regulation. It is Executive Order 13211 on regulations during a light-goose-only season (greater not anticipated that this rule will that significantly affect energy supply, and lesser snow geese and Ross’ geese) require any additional involvement of distribution, and use. Executive Order when all other waterfowl and crane the justice system beyond enforcement 13211 requires agencies to prepare hunting seasons, excluding falconry, are of provisions of the Migratory Bird Statements of Energy Effects when closed while hunting light geese in Treaty Act of 1918 that have already undertaking certain actions. This rule is Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi been implemented through previous not a significant regulatory action under Flyway portions of Alabama, Arkansas, rulemakings. Executive Order 12866 and is not Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, expected to adversely affect energy Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Takings Implication Assessment supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, In accordance with Executive Order this action is not a significant energy Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, 12630, this proposed rule, authorized by action and no Statement of Energy Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, will not Effects is required. Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, have significant takings implications List of Subjects in 50 CFR Parts 20 and New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, and will not affect any constitutionally 21 North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, protected property rights. The rule will Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South not result in the physical occupancy of Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, property, the physical invasion of and recordkeeping requirements, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, property, or the regulatory taking of any Transportation, Wildlife. Wisconsin, and Wyoming. property. In fact, the proposed rule For the reasons stated in the * * * * * would allow hunters to exercise preamble, we hereby propose to amend 3. Revise § 20.22 to read as follows: privileges that would be otherwise parts 20 and 21, of subchapter B, unavailable; and, therefore, reduce chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal § 20.22 Closed seasons. restrictions on the use of private and Regulations, as set forth below: No person shall take migratory game public property. birds during the closed season except as PART 20—[AMENDED] provided in part 21. Federalism Effects 4. Revise § 20.23 to read as follows: 1. The authority citation for part 20 Due to the migratory nature of certain continues to read as follows: § 20.23 Shooting hours. species of birds, the Federal Government has been given Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703–712; and 16 No person shall take migratory game responsibility over these species by the U.S.C 742a–j. birds except during the hours open to Migratory Bird Treaty Act. These rules 2. Revise paragraphs (b) and (g) of shooting as prescribed in subpart K of do not have a substantial direct effect on § 20.21 to read as follows: this part and subpart E of part 21. fiscal capacity, change the roles or PART 21—[AMENDED] responsibilities of Federal or State § 20.21 What hunting methods are illegal? governments, or intrude on State policy * * * * * 5. The authority citation for part 21 or administration. Therefore, in (b) With a shotgun of any description continues to read as follows: capable of holding more than three accordance with Executive Order 13132, Authority: Pub. L. 95–616, 92 Stat. 3112 these regulations do not have significant shells, unless it is plugged with a one- (16 U.S.C. 712(2)). federalism effects and do not have piece filler, incapable of removal 6. Subpart E, consisting of § 21.60, is sufficient federalism implications to without disassembling the gun, so its revised to read as follows: warrant the preparation of a Federalism total capacity does not exceed three Assessment. shells. This restriction does not apply Subpart E—Control of Overabundant during a light-goose-only season (greater Migratory Bird Populations Government-to-Government and lesser snow geese and Ross’ geese) Relationship With Tribes when all other waterfowl and crane § 21.60 Conservation order for light geese. In accordance with the President’s hunting seasons, excluding falconry, are (a) What is a conservation order? A memorandum of April 29, 1994, closed while hunting light geese in conservation order is a special ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations Atlantic, Central, and Mississippi management action that is needed to with Native American Tribal Flyway portions of Alabama, Arkansas, control certain wildlife populations Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), E.O. Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, when traditional management programs 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, are unsuccessful in preventing determined that this rule has no effects Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, overabundance of the population. We on Federally-recognized Indian tribes. Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, are implementing a conservation order Specifically, Tribes were sent copies of Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, under the authority of the Migratory our May 13, 1999, Notice of Intent (64 Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Bird Treaty Act to reduce and stabilize FR 26268) that outlined the proposed New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, various light goose populations. The action in the Draft Environmental North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, conservation order allows additional Impact Statement on Light Goose Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South methods of taking light geese, allows Management. In addition, Tribes were Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, shooting hours for light geese to extend sent our August 30, 1999, Notice of Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, to one-half hour after sunset, and Meetings (64 FR 47332), which Wisconsin, and Wyoming. removes daily bag limits for light geese provided the public additional * * * * * inside or outside the migratory bird
VerDate 11
hunting season frameworks as described actions on Federal land without actual operations, any Federal or State below. concurrence of the Federal agency with game or deputy game agent, warden, (b) Which waterfowl species are jurisdiction. protector, or other game law covered by the order? The conservation (6) States and Tribes must designate enforcement officer free and order addresses management of greater participants who must operate under unrestricted access over the premises on snow (Chen caerulescens atlantica), the conditions of the conservation order. which such operations have been or are lesser snow (Chen c. caerulescens) and (7) States and Tribes must inform being conducted and must promptly Ross’ (Chen rossii) geese that breed, participants of the requirements/ furnish whatever information an officer migrate, and winter in North America. conditions of the conservation order requires concerning the operation. Populations in the Atlantic, Central and that apply. (4) Participants may take light geese Mississippi Flyways are the primary (8) States and Tribes must keep by any method except those prohibited focus of concern. annual records of activities carried out as follows: (c) In what areas can the conservation under the authority of the conservation (i) With a trap, snare, net, rifle, pistol, order be implemented? (1) The order. Specifically, information must be swivel gun, shotgun larger than 10 following States, or portions of States, collected on: gauge, punt gun, battery gun, machine that are contained within the (i) The number of individuals gun, fish hook, poison, drug, explosive, boundaries of the Atlantic, Mississippi, participating in the conservation order; or stupefying substance. and Central Flyways: Alabama, (ii) The number of days individuals (ii) From or by means, aid, or use of Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, participated in the conservation order; a sinkbox or any other type of low- Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, (iii) The number of individuals who floating device, having a depression Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, pursued light geese with the aid of a affording the person a means of Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, shotgun capable of holding more than concealment beneath the surface of the Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, three shells; water. Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, (iv) The number of individuals who (iii) From or by means, aid, or use of Nebraska, New Hampshire, New pursued light geese with the aid of an any motor vehicle, motor-driven land Mexico, New York, North Carolina, electronic call; conveyance, or aircraft of any kind, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, (v) The number of individuals who except that paraplegics and persons Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South pursued light geese during the period missing one or both legs may take from Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, one-half hour after sunset; any stationary motor vehicle or Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, (vi) The total number of light geese stationary motor-driven land Wisconsin, and Wyoming. shot and retrieved during the conveyance. (2) Tribal lands within the geographic conservation order; (iv) From or by means of any boundaries in paragraph (b) (1) above. (vii) The number of light geese taken motorboat or other craft having a motor (d) What is required in order for State/ with the aid of an electronic call; attached, or any sailboat, unless the Tribal governments to participate in the (viii) The number of light geese taken motor has been completely shut off and conservation order? Any State or Tribal with the fourth, fifth, or sixth shotgun the sails furled, and its progress has government responsible for the shell; ceased. A craft under power may be management of wildlife and migratory (ix) The number of light geese taken used only to retrieve dead or crippled birds may, without permit, kill or cause during the period one-half hour after birds; however, the craft may not be to be killed under its general sunset; and used under power to shoot any crippled supervision, light geese under the (x) The number of light geese shot but birds. following conditions: not retrieved. Information from Tribes (v) By the use or aid of live birds as (1) Activities conducted under the may be incorporated in State reports. decoys. No person may take light geese conservation order may not affect The States and Tribes must submit an on an area where tame or captive live endangered or threatened species as annual report summarizing activities geese are present unless such birds are, designated under the Endangered conducted under the conservation order and have been for a period of 10 Species Act. on or before September 15 of each year, consecutive days before the taking, (2) Control activities must be to the Chief, Division of Migratory Bird confined within an enclosure that conducted clearly as such and are Management, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite substantially reduces the audibility of intended to relieve pressures on 634, Arlington, Virginia 22203. their calls and totally conceals the birds migratory birds and habitat essential to (e) What is required for individuals to from the sight of light geese. migratory bird populations only and are participate in the conservation order? (vi) By means or aid of any motor- not to be construed as opening, re- Individual participants in State or Tribal driven land, water, or air conveyance, or opening, or extending any open hunting programs covered by the conservation any sailboat used for the purpose of or season contrary to any regulations order must comply with the following resulting in the concentrating, driving, promulgated under Section 3 of the requirements: rallying, or stirring up of light geese. Migratory Bird Treaty Act. (1) Participants must comply with all (vii) By the aid of baiting, or on or (3) Control activities may be applicable State or Tribal laws or over any baited area, where a person conducted only when all waterfowl regulations including possession of knows or reasonably should know that (including light goose) and crane whatever permit(s) or other the area is or has been baited as hunting seasons, excluding falconry, are authorization(s) may be required by the described in § 20.11(j–k). Light geese closed. State or Tribal government concerned. may not be taken on or over lands or (4) Control measures employed (2) Participants who take light geese areas that are baited areas, and where through this section may be under the conservation order may not grain or other feed has been distributed implemented only between the hours of sell or offer for sale those birds or their or scattered solely as the result of one-half hour before sunrise to one-half plumage, but may possess, transport, manipulation of an agricultural crop or hour after sunset. and otherwise properly use them. other feed on the land where grown, or (5) Nothing in the conservation order (3) Participants must permit at all solely as the result of a normal may limit or initiate management reasonable times including during agricultural operation as described in
VerDate 11
§ 20.11(h and l). However, nothing in person is not required to respond to, a proposed amendments are intended to this paragraph prohibits the taking of collection of information unless it improve the effectiveness of the IFQ light geese on or over the following displays a currently valid OMB control Program and are necessary to promote lands or areas that are not otherwise number. The recordkeeping and the objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens baited areas: reporting requirements imposed under Fishery Conservation and Management (A) Standing crops or flooded § 21.60 will be utilized to administer Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the standing crops (including aquatics); this program, particularly in the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 standing, flooded, or manipulated assessment of impacts that alternative (Halibut Act) with respect to the IFQ natural vegetation; flooded harvested regulatory strategies may have on light fisheries. croplands; or lands or areas where seeds geese and other migratory bird DATES: or grains have been scattered solely as Comments on the proposed rule populations. The information collected must be received by November 26, 2001. the result of a normal agricultural will be required to authorize State and planting, harvesting, post-harvest Tribal governments responsible for ADDRESSES: Comments must be sent to manipulation or normal soil migratory bird management to take light Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional stabilization practice as described in geese within the guidelines provided by Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, § 20.11(g, i, l, and m); the Service. Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, (B) From a blind or other place of Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori Gravel, or concealment camouflaged with natural Dated: October 5, 2001. delivered to the Federal Building, 709 vegetation; Joseph E. Doddridge, West 9th Street, Juneau, AK. Copies of (C) From a blind or other place of Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Amendments 54/54 and the Regulatory concealment camouflaged with Parks. Impact Review/Initial Regulatory vegetation from agricultural crops, as [FR Doc. 01–25612 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Flexibility Analysis (RIR/IRFA) long as such camouflaging does not BILLING CODE 4310–55–P prepared for the amendments are result in the exposing, depositing, available from NMFS at the above distributing, or scattering of grain or address. other feed; or DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John (D) Standing or flooded standing agricultural crops where grain is National Oceanic and Atmospheric Lepore, 907-586-7228 or email at inadvertently scattered solely as a result Administration john.lepore.noaa.gov. of a hunter entering or exiting a hunting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: area, placing decoys, or retrieving 50 CFR Part 679 Background downed birds. [Docket No. 010823213–1213–01; I.D. (viii) Participants may not possess 071701C] The groundfish fisheries in the shot (either in shotshells or as loose shot Exclusive Economic Zone (3 to 200 for muzzleloading) other than steel shot, RIN 0648–AK70 nautical miles offshore) of the Bering bismuth-tin, tungsten-iron, tungsten- Sea and Aleutian Islands management Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic polymer, tungsten-matrix, tungsten- area (BSAI) and Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Zone Off Alaska; Individual Fishing nickel-iron, or other shots that are are managed under their respective Quota Program authorized in § 20.21(j). FMPs. Both FMPs were prepared by the (f) Under what conditions would the AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries North Pacific Fishery Management conservation order be suspended? We Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Council (Council) under the Magnuson- will annually assess the overall impact Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Stevens Act, Public Law 94–265, 16 and effectiveness of the conservation Commerce. U.S.C. 1801. The GOA and BSAI FMPs order on each light goose population to ACTION: Proposed rule; request for were approved by NMFS and became ensure compatibility with long-term comments. effective in 1978 and 1982, respectively. conservation of this resource. If at any The IFQ Program, a limited access time evidence is presented that clearly SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to management system for the fixed gear demonstrates that an individual light implement Amendment 54 to the Pacific halibut and sablefish fisheries off goose population no longer presents a Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Alaska, was approved by NMFS in serious threat of injury to the area or Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea January 1993, and fully implemented areas involved, we will initiate action to and Aleutian Islands Area and beginning in March 1995. The IFQ suspend the conservation order for the Amendment 54 to the FMP for Program for the sablefish fishery is specific light goose population in Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska implemented by the FMPs and Federal question. However, resumption of (collectively, Amendments 54/54). regulations under 50 CFR part 679, growth by the light goose population in These amendments would make three Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic question may warrant reinstatement of changes in the Individual Fishing Quota Zone Off Alaska, under authority of the such regulations to control the (IFQ) Program: (1) allow a quota share Magnuson-Stevens Act. The IFQ population. Depending on the status of (QS) holder’s indirect ownership of a Program for the halibut fishery is individual light goose populations, it is vessel, through corporate or other implemented by Federal regulations possible that a conservation order may collective ties, to substitute for vessel promulgated under the authority of the be in effect for one or more light goose ownership in the QS holder’s own name Halibut Act. populations, but not others. for purposes of hiring a skipper to fish (g) Will information concerning the the QS holder’s IFQ; (2) revise the Indirect Vessel Ownership conservation order be collected? The definition of ‘‘a change in the The IFQ Program contains a number information collection requirements of corporation or partnership’’ to include of provisions designed to promote an the conservation order have been language specific to estates; and (3) owner-operator IFQ fishing fleet. For approved by OMB and assigned revise sablefish use limits to be example, one exception to the owner- clearance number 1018–0103. Agencies expressed in QS units rather than as onboard provisions of the IFQ Program may not conduct or sponsor, and a percentages of the QS pool. These allows initial recipients of QS in
VerDate 11
categories B, C, or D (catcher vessel QS) have to hold the same 20 percent distributed, the estate is effectively to employ hired skippers to fish their minimum interest in the collective that dissolved. Allowing an estate to IFQ, provided that the QS holder owns he or she otherwise would have to hold continue holding catcher vessel QS and the vessel on which the IFQ species are in a vessel to hire a skipper to fish his fishing the resulting IFQ beyond that being fished. This exception was created or her IFQ. For example, an individual point would compromise the Council’s to allow IFQ fishermen who had wishing to hire a skipper to fish his or intent to ensure that catcher vessel QS operated their fishing businesses in this her IFQ on a vessel owned by a eventually transfer to qualified manner before implementation of the corporation in which he or she is a individuals. Therefore, when an estate IFQ Program to continue such business shareholder must hold a minimum of 20 ‘‘changes’’ in this manner, its QS would practices. While the IFQ Program percent interest in the corporation. be restricted from generating annual IFQ prohibits leasing of IFQ derived from Likewise, a corporation may hire a until the QS is transferred to a qualified catcher vessel QS, this exception allows skipper to fish its collectively held IFQ individual. This requirement would initial recipients of catcher vessel QS to on a vessel owned by a shareholder in prevent estates from holding QS and remain ashore while having their IFQ the corporation only if that shareholder fishing the resulting IFQ indefinitely. harvested by a hired skipper. holds a minimum of 20 percent interest Upon a legal order for the final Corporations, partnerships, and other in the vessel, either indirectly through distribution of an estate, the estate’s QS collective entities that hold initial an interest in the corporation or through holdings would become restricted in the allocations of QS must designate a hired direct ownership of the vessel or same way QS held by a corporation or skipper, the individual who will through a combination of both indirect partnership becomes restricted when actually fish the IFQ derived from the and direct ownership of the vessel. the corporation or partnership adds a collective’s QS. shareholder or partner. Since implementing the IFQ Program Revising the Definition of a Change in in 1995, NMFS has broadly interpreted Corporation or Partnership Sablefish Use Limits the regulations’ vessel ownership To prevent excessive consolidation of The IFQ Program limits the amount of provision to allow a person holding an QS and promote an owner-operator IFQ QS an individual may use to harvest initial allocation of QS to hire a skipper fleet, the IFQ Program provides a means IFQ species. Such use limits were to fish the QS holder’s IFQ on a vessel for determining corporations, created to address the concern that an owned by another ‘‘person,’’ provided partnerships, and other collective unrestricted market for QS could result that the QS holder can show an entities to be qualified to hold catcher in a few powerful interests controlling association to the owner of the vessel vessel QS. The regulations pertaining to most of the landings. They were also through corporate or other collective collective QS holdings provide that created to address the possibility of ties. For example, the QS holder may be upon any ‘‘change’’ in a collective excessive decreases in the number and a shareholder or partner in the entity, any collectively held QS will demographic distribution of vessels and corporation or partnership that owns the cease to generate annual IFQ for fishermen participating in the IFQ vessel or a collective QS holder may harvesting IFQ species until the QS is Program. In the original implementing have the individual owner of the vessel transferred to a qualified individual. regulations for the IFQ Program (58 FR as a shareholder or partner in the The regulations define a ‘‘change’’ in the 59375, November 9, 1993), use limits collective. collective entity to mean the addition of are expressed as percentages of the QS At the beginning of the 1997 IFQ a shareholder or partner to the collective pool, the total amount of QS available season, NMFS announced to the IFQ entity. By thus defining such a in a given year. fleet that this policy of broadly ‘‘change,’’ the Council clearly expressed In 1997, in an action that increased interpreting the hired skipper its intent to prevent collective entities the halibut use limits in IFQ regulatory provision’s vessel ownership from holding catcher vessel QS and area 4, all halibut use limits were requirement would continue in effect using the resulting IFQ indefinitely. revised to be expressed in numbers of for the 1997 season, or until the Council The current IFQ regulations do not QS units based on the 1996 QS pool (62 determined whether the policy address changes in estates holding QS. FR 7947, February 21, 1997). A use limit comports with its original intention. In Under the current rules, an estate may expressed as a percentage of the QS pool September 1997, the Council requested be issued an initial allocation of catcher provides a variable use limit, because an analysis of alternatives for this issue vessel QS based on the qualifications of the size of the QS pool may vary from and, in October 1998, recommended a deceased fisherman. However, because year to year. Consequently, a that the regulations be revised to an estate is not a ‘‘collective’’ with the fisherman’s QS holdings that have provide explicitly for this policy. This potential to acquire additional members, reached the limit in one year may proposed action would allow a QS the present definition of a ‘‘change in actually exceed the limit in a holder’s association to a collective the corporation or partnership’’ subsequent year without the fisherman entity to substitute for the QS holder’s provides no way of determining at having acquired any additional QS. To vessel ownership in his or her own which point an estate’s QS holdings will allow QS holders the means to gauge name for purposes of hiring a skipper to cease to generate annual IFQ. This more accurately the position of their fish the QS holder’s IFQ. allows an estate to hold QS and fish the holdings in relation to the use limits The hired skipper provisions define resulting IFQ indefinitely. and thus to manage their fishing ‘‘vessel ownership’’ as a minimum of 20 To assure that catcher vessel QS held businesses in a more rational manner, percent interest in the vessel to prevent by estates eventually transfer into the NMFS, in consultation with the persons from acquiring minimal or possession of qualified individuals, Council, revised the halibut use limits nominal vessel ownership interest these proposed amendments would to provide a fixed limit that does not simply to exploit the hired skipper revise the definition of ‘‘a change in the change according to the size of the QS provision in ways not intended by the corporation or partnership’’ to state that pool. This revision of the halibut use Council (see 64 FR 24960, May 10, for estates holding QS a ‘‘change’’ limits was accomplished with a 1999). To maintain the intent of the occurs upon a legal order for final regulatory amendment, because the requirement for minimum ownership distribution of the estate. At the point halibut provisions of the IFQ Program interest in a vessel, a QS holder would that an estate’s holdings are legally are implemented under authority of the
VerDate 11
Halibut Act, and no halibut fishery This action proposes to make changes accordingly be required to transfer any management plan exists. to the IFQ program that are necessary to estate-held QS to a qualified individual. The sablefish use limits are set in the ensure the program continues to be It is the intent of the IFQ Program to FMPs and can be revised only through managed in a manner intended by the promote an owner-operator fleet in the the FMP amendment process specified Council. The proposed changes would: fixed gear fisheries for Pacific halibut at section 304 of the Magnuson-Stevens (1) Specify the vessel ownership level and sablefish. Act. If approved, proposed for purposes of hiring a skipper, (2) This alternative should make more QS Amendments 54/54 would standarize clarify when estates must distribute QS available on the open market for the application of use limits for halibut being held, and (3) revise sablefish QS qualified individuals. Market prices for and sablefish by providing sablefish QS limit to be expressed as a specific QS could go down, thereby making it holders with the same benefit of a stable number rather than as a percentage. easier for qualified small entities to use limit by which to manage their The proposed rule would allow a QS acquire and use QS. Under the other fishing businesses more rationally. holder’s indirect ownership of a vessel, alternative, keeping the status quo, QS Current regulations at 50 CFR 679.42 through corporate or other ties, to held by an estate does not automatically (e) restrict sablefish QS use, so that (1) substitute for vessel ownership in the transfer. Such estates could continue to no person, individually or collectively, QS holder’s own name for purposes of receive annual allocations of QS, may use an amount of sablefish QS hiring a skipper to fish the QS holder’s thereby limiting the supply of QS greater than 1 percent of the combined QS. This action merely modifies NMFS’ available. This could raise the price of total sablefish QS for the GOA and BSAI regulations to more explicitly reflect such shares such that it could prevent IFQ regulatory areas, unless the amount current NMFS’ policy of allowing QS others who desire to fish and are in excess of 1 percent was received in holders to substitute a corporate link to otherwise qualified from purchasing the initial allocation of QS; and (2) in vessel ownership for purposes of hiring those shares. Such an occurrence would the IFQ regulatory area east of 140° W. a skipper. frustrate the intent of the IFQ Program Another alternative considered was to long., no person, individually or to promote an owner-operator fleet. prohibit a corporation or partnership The proposed rule would revise collectively, may use more than 1 from hiring a skipper to fish its sablefish use limits to be expressed in percent of the total amount of QS for collectively held QS on a vessel owned QS units, rather than as a percentage of this area, unless the amount in excess of by an individual, even if that individual the QS pool. In 1996, the Council 1 percent was received in the initial is a member of the corporation or recommended that halibut use limits be allocation of QS. This action would partnership. Under such an alternative, expressed as fixed numbers of QS units, revise the sablefish use limit an individual would not be allowed to rather than percentage. This change was percentages to 3,229,721 units of hire a skipper to fish his or her implemented by NMFS and provided sablefish QS; and (2) for the IFQ individually held QS on a vessel owned halibut QS holders with a more stable regulatory area 2C: 688,485 units of by a corporation or partnership, even if reference for measuring their halibut QS sablefish QS. that individual is a shareholder or holdings against area use limits. The 1996 regulatory amendment that partner in the collective that owns the Amendment 54/54 would change the changed halibut use limits to QS units vessel. This could result in considerable calculation of sablefish use limits to a based the limit on that year’s QS pool disruptions to small entities, as it would fixed number of QS units, based on the (62 FR 7947, February 21, 1997). In that deviate from current NMFS practice and 1996 QS pools, for consistency with the action, NMFS implied that sablefish use could prevent collective entities from halibut fishery and eliminate limits would be similarly changed. For fishing the QS of their shareholders or operational problems resulting from the sake of consistency and to meet partners. Such collective entities would differing QS systems in the IFQ fishery. expectations raised by NMFS in the suffer considerable adverse impacts if This proposed rule would eliminate former action, the sablefish use limits they were unable to use their vessels to year-to-year fluctuations in the user would be based also on the 1996 QS catch IFQ fish. limit and facilitate the ability of pool. NMFS is particularly interested in Although the proposed action may sablefish IFQ fishermen to stay within receiving public comments on this cause individual partners or the user limit for sablefish QS. Under aspect of the proposed amendments. shareholders to incur costs associated the no action alternative to the proposed This alternative would not change the with meeting the proposed ownership action, sablefish fishing capacity, amount of QS that an individual could requirements, this proposed action is measured in terms of QS, may fluctuate use. It simply proposes to set those unlikely to have adverse effects on the each year as the TAC changes. This limits in QS units, instead of as a small entities themselves, as uncertainty may impose a burden on percentage of the QS pool. corporations or partnerships will not fishermen close to, or at, the user limit. Classification incur significant new costs and their net They may be forced to adjust their values will remain unchanged. holdings each year to stay within the At this time, NMFS has not The proposed rule would also revise user limit for sablefish. As individual determined that the FMP amendments the definition of a ‘‘change in fishermen are likely to catch the same that this proposed rule would corporation or partnership’’ to include amount of sablefish under either system, implement are consistent with the language specific to estates. NMFS the proposed action mostly likely national standards of the Magnuson- proposes that upon a legal order for reduces impacts on small entities as it Stevens Act and the provisions of the final distribution of the estate the estate eases compliance with sablefish user Halibut Act and other applicable laws. would lose its eligibility to hold QS. limits and sablefish fixed gear NMFS, in making that determination, Upon such legal order for the final fishermen, who also catch halibut, will take into account the data, views, distribution, the estate’s QS holdings would no longer have to operate under and comments received during the would become restricted in the same two different use limit systems. Because comment period. way QS held by a corporation or the halibut fixed gear fishery is The proposed rule has been partnership becomes restricted when operating successfully under the fixed determined to be not significant for the the corporation or partnership adds a QS number system, the most feasible purposes of Executive Order 12866. shareholder or partner and would alternative is to use the fixed number
VerDate 11
QS system for sablefish, rather than Dated: October 5, 2001. a shareholder, partner, or member with devise a completely different system for William T. Hogarth, a minimum of 20 percent interest, both fisheries. Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, provided that the corporation, At the end of 2000, NMFS determined National Marine Fisheries Service. partnership, or other entity owns a that 4,546 entities hold QS (3,649 For the reasons set out in the minimum of 20 percent interest in the unique persons hold halibut QS and 897 preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed vessel. unique persons hold sablefish QS). to be amended as follows: * * * * * Given the average price levels for (j) * * * halibut and sablefish and the maximum PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE (2) For purposes of this paragraph (j), amount of QS for both species that EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ‘‘a change’’ means: could be held by any unique entity, the ALASKA (i) For corporations and partnerships, maximum amount of annual revenue 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR the addition of any new shareholder(s) would not exceed 3 million dollars part 679 continues to read as follows: or partner(s), except that a court (implied maximum of $1,400,000). appointed trustee to act on behalf of a Therefore, all these entities would be Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq, 1801 et shareholder or partner who becomes seq., and 3631 et seq. treated as small entities for purposes of incapacitated is not a change in the the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). 2. In § 679.42, paragraphs (e), (j)(2), corporation or partnership; or However, this likely overestimates the and (j)(3) are revised, and paragraphs (ii) For estates, the final or summary number of small entities that may be (i)(3) and (j)(6) are added to read as distribution of the estate. affected by this action because it does follows. (3) The Regional Administrator must not take into account income these § 679.42 Limitations on use of QS and IFQ. be notified of a change in the entities may derive from other fisheries corporation, partnership, or other entity * * * * * as defined in this paragraph (j) within and assumes that all QS holders would (e) Sablefish QS use. (1) No person, 15 days of the effective date of the be affected by these changes. individually or collectively, may use change. The effective date of change, for No additional recordkeeping and more than 3,229,721 units of sablefish purposes of this paragraph (j), is the reporting requirements are associated QS, except if the amount of a person’s date on which the new shareholder(s) or with this action, nor is NMFS aware of initial allocation of sablefish QS is partner(s) may realize any corporate any other Federal rules that would greater than 3,229,721 units, in which liabilities or benefits of the corporation duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this case that person may not use more than or partnership or, for estates, the date of proposed action. At present, the data the amount of the initial allocation. the determination of a legal heir to the necessary to determine the full extent of (2) In the IFQ regulatory area east of estate. impact to small entities is not available 140° W. long., no person, individually to NMFS (i.e., operational cost data). or collectively, may use more than * * * * * Therefore, NMFS is unable to conclude 688,485 units of sablefish QS for this (6) The exemption provided in that this action has no impact on small area, except if the amount of a person’s paragraph (j) of this section may be entities as defined by the RFA. A copy initial allocation of sablefish QS is exercised by a corporation, partnership, of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see greater than 688,485 units, in which or other entity on a vessel owned by a ADDRESSES). NMFS specifically requests case that person may not use more than person who holds a minimum of 20 comments on any additional the amount of the initial allocation. percent interest in the corporation, partnership, or other entity, provided alternatives to these proposed actions * * * * * that may achieve the stated goals and (i) * * * that the person who owns the vessel reduce impacts to small entities. (3) The exemption provided in possesses a minimum of 20 percent interest in the vessel. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679 paragraph (i)(1) of this section may be exercised by an individual on a vessel * * * * * Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and owned by a corporation, partnership, or [FR Doc. 01–25716 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] reporting requirements. other entity in which the individual is BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate 11
Notices Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER presentations will be given to persons COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ON OR contains documents other than rules or who did not make a presentation at a BEFORE: November 12, 2001. proposed rules that are applicable to the previous meeting; and all presentations ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase public. Notices of hearings and investigations, must be related to the science From People Who Are Blind or Severely committee meetings, agency decisions and surrounding the development of the rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, petitions and applications and agency Management Plan for the Giant Sequoia 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, statements of organization and functions are National Monument. Some members of Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259. examples of documents appearing in this the Scientific Advisory Board may FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: section. participate in the meeting via telephone. Sheryl D. Kennerly (703) In that event, arrangements will be 630ndash;7740. made to enable the public to listen to all DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE the members participating in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting. notice is published pursuant to 41 Forest Service A portion of the meeting will be for U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its the Scientific Advisory Board to receive purpose is to provide interested persons Giant Sequoia National Monument information from speakers who an opportunity to submit comments on Scientific Advisory Board specialize in the human dimensions of the possible impact of the proposed actions. AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. natural resource planning. The ACTION: Notice of meeting. informational portion of the meeting is Additions not subject to the Federal Advisory If the Committee approves the SUMMARY: The Giant Sequoia National Committee Act, is open to the public, proposed addition, the entities of the Monument Scientific Advisory Board and is subject to the same procedures as Federal Government identified in this (Scientific Advisory Board) will meet at the rest of the meeting. notice for each service will be required the Visalia Convention Center in Written comments for the Scientific to procure the services listed below Visalia, California, October 31 and Advisory Board may be submitted to from nonprofit agencies employing November 1, 2001. The purpose of the Forest Supervisor Arthur L. Gaffrey, persons who are blind or have other meeting is to hear comments from the Sequoia National Forest, 900 West severe disabilities. I certify that the public; affirm advisories drafted at the Grand Avenue, Porterville, California following action will not have a September meeting; review issues from 93257. significant impact on a substantial the Giant Sequoia National Monument A final agenda can be obtained by number of small entities. The major planning team; and consider the contacting Arthur L. Gaffrey or by factors considered for this certification planning process to date. visiting the Giant Sequoia National DATES: The meeting will be held were: Monument web site at 1. The action will not result in any October 31 and November 1, from 8 a.m. www.r5.fs.fed.us/giant_sequoia. to 5 p.m. additional reporting, recordkeeping or Dated: October 5, 2001. other compliance requirements for small ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Juliet B. Allen, entities other than the small the Visalia Convention Center, 303 E. organizations that will furnish the Acequia Avenue, Visalia, California, in Acting Forest Supervisor, Sequoia National Forest. services to the Government. room San Joaquin D. [FR Doc. 01–25661 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 2. The action will result in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To BILLING CODE 3410–11–M authorizing small entities to furnish the receive further information, contact services to the Government. Arthur L. Gaffrey, 559–784–1500. 3. There are no known regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM alternatives which would accomplish meeting is open to the public. If you are PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- planning to attend, please contact SEVERELY DISABLED O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in Arthur L. Gaffrey to ensure adequate connection with the services proposed seating. Guidelines for the public Procurement List; Proposed Additions for addition to the Procurement List. participation portion of the Scientific and Deletions Comments on this certification are Advisory Board’s meeting are as invited. Commenters should identify the follows: The public will be allowed to AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From statement(s) underlying the certification address the Scientific Advisory Board People Who Are Blind or Severely on which they are providing additional during the first 30 minutes of the Disabled. information. The following services are meeting on October 31; when ACTION: Proposed additions to and proposed for addition to Procurement registering, participants must provide 9 deletions from Procurement List. List for production by the nonprofit written copies of their presentation, one agencies listed: copy for each member of the Board and SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing one copy to be included the meeting to add to the Procurement List services Services minutes; oral presentations may be no to be furnished by nonprofit agencies Janitorial/Custodial more than 5 minutes in length, employing persons who are blind or Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Centers, depending on the number of people have other severe disabilities, and to Alameda, California wishing to address the Scientific delete commodities previously NPA: ARC—Alameda County, Oakland, Advisory Board; priority for furnished by such agencies. California
VerDate 11
Government Agency: Naval Facilities Title: Swordfish Import Certificate of Type of Request: Regular submission. Engineering Command Eligibility. Burden Hours: 45,000. Mailroom Operation, At the following Form Number(s): None. Number of Respondents: 3,000. Locations: OMB Approval Number: 0648–0363. Average Hours Per Response: 3 hours. GSA Washington, 18th and F Streets NW, Type of Request: Regular submission. Needs and Uses: NOAA’s National Washington, DC GSA Arlington, Crystal Mall #3, 1931 Burden Hours: 5,700. Ocean Service (NOS) produces the Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Number of Respondents: 204. official nautical charts of the United Virginia Average Hours Per Response: 1 hour. States. Forms are provided to members GSA Regional Office Building, 7th and D Needs and Uses: In order to support of U.S. Power Squadrons and the U.S. Streets, SW, Washington, DC recommendations of the International Coast Guard Auxiliary to report NPA: Didlake, Inc., Manassas, Virginia Commission for the Conservation of observations of changes that require Government Agency: General Services Atlantic Tunas, imports of swordfish additions, corrections, or revisions to Administration, Public Buildings Service have to be accompanied by a certificate the nautical charts. The information Deletions of eligibility for lawful entry into the provided is used by NOS cartographers customs territory of the United States. to maintain and prepare new additions I certify that the following action will The objective is to ensure that all of nautical charts that are used not have a significant impact on a imports of Atlantic swordfish meet the nationwide by commercial and substantial number of small entities. same minimum size standards as apply recreational navigators. The major factors considered for this to landings by U.S. vessels. Affected Public: Individuals or certification were: Affected Public: Business and other households, not-for-profit institutions. 1. The action will not result in any for-profit organizations. Frequency: On occasion. additional reporting, recordkeeping or Frequency: On occasion. Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. other compliance requirements for small Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, entities. OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395–3897. 2. The action will result in (202) 395–3897. Copies of the above information authorizing small entities to furnish the Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by services to the Government. collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Madeleine Clayton, 3. There are no known regulatory calling or writing Madeleine Clayton, Departmental Paperwork Clearance alternatives which would accomplish Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, (202) 482–3129, Department of the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Officer, (202) 482–3129, Department of Commerce, Room 6086, 14th and O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in Commerce, Room 6086, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, connection with the services proposed Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at for deletion from the Procurement List. DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]). The following commodities are [email protected]). Written comments and proposed for deletion from the Written comments and recommendations for the proposed Procurement List: recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent Commodities information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this Skin Protectant, Plus within 30 days of publication of this notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk 6505–01–474–7724 notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10202, New Executive Skin Protectant Plus, Effective Prevention Officer, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. 6505–01–474–7707 Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. Dated: October 4, 2001. 6505–01–474–7343 Box, Storage, Magnetic Tape Dated: October 4, 2001. Madeleine Clayton, 8115–00–432–6729 Madeleine Clayton, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, 8115–00–432–6730 Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Suspension Assembly, Liner, Helmet Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 01–25719 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 8470–00–880–8814 [FR Doc. 01–25718 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–JT–S Sheryl D. Kennerly, BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Director, Information Management. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [FR Doc. 01–25704 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BILLING CODE 6353–01–P International Trade Administration [I.D. 100901B] [A–122–822] Submission for OMB Review; DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Comment Request Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon [I.D. 100901A] Steel Flat Products From Canada; The Department of Commerce has Notice of Amended Final Results of Submission for OMB Review; submitted to the Office of Management Administrative Review in Accordance Comment Request and Budget (OMB) for clearance the With North American Free Trade following proposal for collection of Agreement Panel Decision The Department of Commerce has information under the provisions of the submitted to the Office of Management Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. AGENCY: Import Administration, and Budget (OMB) for clearance the Chapter 35). International Trade Administration, following proposal for collection of Agency: National Oceanic and Department of Commerce. information under the provisions of the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). ACTION: Notice of amended final results Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Title: Cooperative Charting Programs. of Administrative Review in accordance Chapter 35). Form Number(s): NOAA Forms 77–4 with North American Free Trade Agency: National Oceanic and and 77–5. Agreement Panel Decision on Certain Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). OMB Approval Number: 0648–0022. Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat
VerDate 11
Products from Canada. USA–CDA–98– inapplicable, as there were no 98–1904–01 (March 20, 2001) (Panel 1904–01. unaffiliated transactions to indicate Decision). market price); and the affiliated Pursuant to its receipt of the NAFTA SUMMARY: On August 24, 2001, the supplier’s cost of producing the input. Panel’s remand instructions, the North American Free Trade Agreement See Final Results, at 63 FR 18464. Department issued a supplemental (NAFTA) Panel affirmed the Department In responding to the Department’s questionnaire to Stelco. On June 25, of Commerce’s final remand results of questionnaire, Stelco only supplied Z- 2001, Stelco submitted its response to the antidumping duty administrative Line’s ‘‘actual cost of the operation in a this questionnaire (Supplemental review of certain corrosion-resistant manner consistent with other Hilton Response). On July 6, 2001, the carbon steel flat products from Canada. Works operating units,’’ and Baycoat’s Department issued its draft remand As there is now a final and conclusive transfer price adjusted for profit results and requested comments from NAFTA Panel decision in this action, remitted to Stelco. In the Final Results, interested parties. See Draft Results of we are amending our final results. the Department increased the reported Redetermination: North American Free EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. cost of coating and painting by the Trade Agreement, Article 1904 Panel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: weighted average difference between Review, USA–CDA–98–1904–01 (July 6, Mark Hoadley at (202) 482–0666 or Julio invoice (i.e. transfer price) values from 2001) (Draft Remand Results). In the Fernandez at (202) 482–0190, Office of the sample invoices of the respective Draft Remand Results, we reconsidered AD/CVD Enforcement VII, Group III, services to Stelco, obtained at our methodology in accordance with the Import Administration, International verification, and the values reported by Panel Decision. On July 11, 2001, Trade Administration, U.S. Department Stelco. The Department determined that respondent filed comments on the Draft of Commerce, Room 7866, 14th Street these transfer prices were above the Remand Results. No party filed rebuttal and Constitution Avenue, NW., affiliated supplier’s cost of producing comments. Washington, DC 20230. these inputs. Therefore, for the final On July 20, 2001, the Department SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: results of review, the Department used issued its final remand results, which the transfer prices to value such inputs are discussed in detail below. See Final The Applicable Statute and Regulations when calculating Stelco’s cost of Remand Determination: North Unless otherwise indicated, all production (COP) and constructed value American Free Trade Agreement, citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as (CV). See Final Results. Article 1904 Panel Review, USA–CDA– amended (the Act), are references to the With regard to the Department’s 98–1904–01 (July 20, 2001) (Final provisions effective January 1, 1995, the calculation of imputed credit expenses, Remand Results). effective date of the amendments made in the Final Results the Department Pursuant to the order of the Panel, the to the Act by the Uruguay Round applied the Federal Reserve rate in its Department recalculated Stelco’s COP Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In addition, calculations of Stelco’s imputed credit by taking into account year-end return unless otherwise indicated, all citations expenses in the United States for each of profits to Stelco from Baycoat and Z- to the Department’s regulations are to transaction during the period of review Line, as reported in Stelco’s the regulations set forth at 19 CFR part (POR). Furthermore, to calculate Supplemental Response. See Final 351 (2000). imputed credit expenses for sales in Remand Results. The methodologies which payment was not received by the adopted for recalculating Stelco’s COP, Background time Stelco submitted its response to the by accounting for profits returned to On March 16, 1998, the Department of agency, the Department applied the date Baycoat and Z-Line, were used in light Commerce (the Department) published of its final results as the surrogate of the Panel’s interpretation of the its final results for the administrative payment date. relevant statutory provisions and their review of certain corrosion-resistant On March 20, 2001, the NAFTA Panel legislative history, including those carbon steel flat products from Canada remanded the above-referenced provisions set forth in subsections for the period August 1, 1995 through proceeding to the Department with 773(f)(2) and (f)(3). July 31, 1996. See Certain Corrosion- instructions to: (1) Recalculate Stelco’s Specifically, the Panel found that the Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products costs of production, taking account of Department failed to reasonably comply and Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel the year-end return of profits by Baycoat with the requirement to establish that Plate from Canada: Final Results of and Z-Line to Stelco; provide the Panel the amount, which in the instant case Antidumping Duty Administrative with the method by which the the Panel found to be the invoice prices Reviews, 63 FR 12725 (March 16, 1998) Department recalculates COP in light of less profits returned from Baycoat, ‘‘did (Final Results). One of the respondents such return of profits; and explain the not fairly reflect’’ the amount usually in this review was Stelco Inc. (Stelco). Department’s methodology in light of reflected in sales. The NAFTA Panel In the Final Results, with respect to the statutory requirements and further found that even if the Stelco’s cost of producing the subject attendant legislation as interpreted by Department were entitled to rely on the merchandise, the Department explained this Panel; (2) to reevaluate the invoice prices paid by Stelco, rather that, in accordance with its standard application of section 773(f)(3) of the than the invoice price adjusted for profit practice for valuing major inputs Act in light of the requirement that the remittances, the Department has not supplied by affiliated companies, it had Department adjust the transfer price in established that it has taken due account valued coating services and painting accordance with the recalculation set of all material factors in arriving at a services supplied by Baycoat out under (1) immediately above; and reasonable calculation of costs. Partnership (Baycoat) and Z-Line (3) to correct any errors on the imputed In light of the Panel’s statement that Company (Z-Line), respectively, credit expense and payment date issues, it has remanded the case for the pursuant to the major input rule and the in light of Stelco’s complaint. See Department to compare Baycoat’s transactions disregarded rule, at the Article 1904 Panel Review Pursuant to transfer price without profits to the highest of three valuations: The transfer the North American Free Trade COP, we interpreted the Panel’s ruling price between the affiliated parties; the Agreement: Panel Determination and to mean that, pursuant to the major market price between unaffiliated Remand, Stelco, Inc. v. United States input rule, the Department is to ensure parties (which, in this case, was Department of Commerce, USA–CDA– that the value of the major inputs used
VerDate 11
to calculate Stelco’s COP are not below DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Background the cost of producing such inputs. In the The antidumping duty order for International Trade Administration Final Remand Results, we recalculated DRAMs from Korea was revoked, Stelco’s COP for the subject [A–580–812] pursuant to the sunset procedures merchandise based upon the adjusted established by statute, effective January transfer price. Where the Department Dynamic Random Access Memory 1, 2000. See Dynamic Random Access found that the adjusted transfer price Semiconductors of One Megabit or Memory Semiconductors (DRAMs) of value was less than Baycoat and Z- Above From the Republic of Korea: One Megabit and Above From the Line’s respective costs of producing Final Results of Antidumping Duty Republic of Korea; Final Results of Full such inputs, the Department used the Administrative Review Sunset Review and Revocation of Order, COP for such inputs, pursuant to the AGENCY: Import Administration, 65 FR 1471366 (October 5, 2000). major input rule. International Trade Administration, Therefore, we are conducting this We note that the NAFTA Panel’s Department of Commerce. review of exports of the subject ruling does not establish binding ACTION: Notice of final results of merchandise to the United States by precedent and that the Department Antidumping Duty Administrative Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. believes its interpretation of these Review. and LG Semicon Co., Ltd. (LG) for the statutory rules is reasonable and 8-month period from May 1, 1999 consistent with the intent of Congress. SUMMARY: On June 7, 2001, the through December 31, 1999. We also note that, in future reviews, the Department of Commerce (the On June 7, 2001, the Department Department intends to pursue an Department) published the preliminary published the preliminary results of examination of market price more fully results of administrative review of the administrative review of the to ensure appropriate application of the antidumping duty order on dynamic antidumping duty order on DRAMs test, consistent with subsections random access memory semiconductors from Korea. See Dynamic Random 773(f)(2) and (f)(3) of the Act. of one megabit or above (DRAMs) from Access Memory Semiconductors of One the Republic of Korea. The merchandise The Department also reconsidered the Megabit or Above From the Republic of covered by this order is DRAMs from calculation of Stelco’s imputed credit Korea: Preliminary Results of the Republic of Korea. The review expense in the United States during the Antidumping Duty Administrative covers two manufacturers, Hyundai POR and its choice of surrogate payment Review and Notice of Intent Not to Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. and dates where payment was not remitted Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 30688 (June Hyundai Electronics America at the time of submission. In addition, 7, 2001) (Preliminary Results). As stated (collectively Hyundai), and LG Semicon we corrected a clerical error, as alleged in the Preliminary Results, we are Co., Ltd. and LG Semicon America by respondent in its comment on the collapsing Hyundai and LG into one (collectively LG), and six resellers of Draft Remand Results. See Final entity for the purposes of in this subject merchandise to the United Remand Results. administrative review (collectively States. The period of review (POR) is Hyundai). See Preliminary Results, 66 On August 24, 2001, the Panel May 1, 1999, through December 31, FR at 30690. We invited parties to affirmed the Department’s Final 1999. Based on our analysis of the comment on our preliminary results of Remand Results. As this case is now comments received, we have made review. On July 9, 2001, we received final and conclusive, we are amending changes in the margin calculations. case briefs from Micron Technology, the Final Results of review. As a result Therefore, the final results differ from Inc. (Micron), the petitioner, and of our recalculations, based upon the the preliminary results. The final Hyundai. On July 13, 2001, we received changes set forth above, we have revised weighted-average dumping margins for rebuttal briefs from Micron and the dumping margin for respondent. the reviewed firms are listed below in Hyundai. The petitioner requested a the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the Amendment to Final Results of Review public hearing on July 12, 2001, and a Review.’’ public hearing was held on July 17, Because no further appeals have been EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. 2001. The Department has conducted filed and there is now a final and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: this administrative review in conclusive decision in the Panel Paige Rivas or Ron Trentham, AD/CVD accordance with section 751 of the Act. Decision proceeding, effective as of the Enforcement, Office 4, Group II, Import Scope of Review publication date of this notice, we are Administration, International Trade amending the Final Results, and Administration, U.S. Department of Imports covered by the review are establishing the following revised Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution shipments of DRAMs from Korea. weight-averaged dumping margin: Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230; Included in the scope are assembled and telephone: (202) 482–0651 or 482–6320, unassembled DRAMs. Assembled Amended respectively. DRAMs include all package types. final SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Unassembled DRAMs include processed Company results wafers, uncut die, and cut die. 1995–1996 The Applicable Statute (percent) Processed wafers produced in Korea, Unless otherwise indicated, all but packaged or assembled into memory Stelco Ltd ...... 0.00 citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as modules in a third country, are included amended (the Act), are references to the in the scope; wafers produced in a third Dated: October 5, 2001. provisions effective January 1, 1995, the country and assembled or packaged in effective date of the amendments made Korea are not included in the scope. Joseph A. Spetrini, to the Act by the Uruguay Round The scope of this review includes Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, memory modules. A memory module is Administration. unless otherwise indicated, all citations a collection of DRAMs, the sole function [FR Doc. 01–25705 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] to the Department’s regulations are to 19 of which is memory. Modules include BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P CFR part 351 (1999). single in-line processing modules (SIPs),
VerDate 11
single in-line memory modules information which cannot be verified, Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of (SIMMs), or other collections of DRAMs, the Department shall use, subject to Antidumping Duty Administrative whether unmounted or mounted on a sections 782(d) and (e) of the Act, facts Review, 62 FR 53808, 53819–20 circuit board. Modules that contain otherwise available in reaching the (October 16, 1997). In the Preliminary other parts that are needed to support applicable determination. In this Results, the Department determined that the function of memory are covered. review, as described in detail below, the by not responding to the Department’s Only those modules which contain above-referenced companies failed to questionnaire, each of these six additional items which alter the provide the necessary information in the companies did not act to the best of its function of the module to something form and manner requested and, in respective abilities, and therefore an other than memory, such as video some instances, the submitted adverse inference is warranted in graphics adapter (VGA) boards and information could not be verified. Thus, applying facts available for these cards, are not included in the scope. pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, companies. The scope of this review also includes the Department is required to apply, For the final results, no interested video random access memory subject to section 782(d), facts otherwise party comments were submitted semiconductors (VRAMS), as well as available. regarding this issue and we continue to any future packaging and assembling of Section 782(d) of the Act provides find that the failure of G5, Kim’s DRAMs; and, removable memory that, if the Department determines that Marketing, Jewon, Jae Won, Techsan, modules placed on motherboards, with a response to a request for information and Wooyang to respond to the or without a central processing unit does not comply with the request, the Department’s questionnaire in this (CPU), unless the importer of Department will inform the person review demonstrates that these entities motherboards certifies with the Customs submitting the response of the nature of failed to cooperate by not acting to the Service that neither it nor a party related the deficiency and shall, to the extent best of their ability. Thus, consistent to it or under contract to it will remove practicable, provide that person the with the Department’s practice in cases the modules from the motherboards opportunity to remedy or explain the where a respondent fails to respond to after importation. The scope of this deficiency. If that person submits the Department’s questionnaire, in review does not include DRAMs or further information that continues to be selecting FA for G5, Kim’s Marketing, memory modules that are reimported for unsatisfactory, or this information is not Jewon, Jae Won, Techsan, and Wooyang repair or replacement. submitted within the applicable time in this review, an adverse inference is The DRAMS and modules subject to limits, the Department may, subject to warranted. See Static Random Access this review are currently classifiable section 782(e), disregard all or part of Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan; under subheadings 8471.50.0085, the original and subsequent responses, Final Determination of Sales at Less 8471.91.8085, 8542.11.0024, as appropriate. Than Fair Value, 63 FR 8909, 8932 8542.11.8026, 8542.13.8034, Pursuant to section 782(e) of the Act, (February 23, 1998). Therefore, we are 8471.50.4000, 8473.30.1000, notwithstanding the Department’s assigning G5, Kim’s Marketing, Jewon, 8542.11.0026, 8542.11.8034, determination that the submitted Jae Won, Techsan, and Wooyang an 8471.50.8095, 8473.30.4000, information is ‘‘deficient’’ under section adverse FA rate of 10.44 percent, the 8542.11.0034, 8542.13.8005, 782(d) of the Act, the Department shall rate calculated for Hyundai in a 8471.91.0090, 8473.30.8000, not decline to consider such previous review and the highest margin 8542.11.8001, 8542.13.8024, information if all of the following from any segment of the proceeding 8471.91.4000, 8542.11.0001, requirements are satisfied: (1) The related to DRAMS from Korea. 8542.11.8024 and 8542.13.8026 of the information is submitted by the Information from prior segments of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the established deadline; (2) the information the proceeding, such as involved here, United States (HTSUS). Although the can be verified; (3) the information is constitutes ‘‘secondary information’’ HTSUS subheadings are provided for not so incomplete that it cannot serve as under section 776(c) of the Act. Section convenience and customs purposes, the a reliable basis for reaching the 776(c) of the Act provides that the Department’s written description of the applicable determination; (4) the Department shall, to the extent scope of this review remains interested party has demonstrated that it practicable, corroborate secondary dispositive. acted to the best of its ability; and (5) information used for FA by reviewing the information can be used without independent sources reasonably at its Facts Available (FA) undue difficulties. disposal. The SAA provides that to In accordance with section 776(a) of The Department has concluded that, ‘‘corroborate’’ means simply that the the Act, we have determined that the because G5, Kim’s Marketing, Jewon, Jae Department will satisfy itself that the use of adverse FA is warranted for G5 Won, Techsan, and Wooyang failed to secondary information to be used has Corporation (G5), Kim’s Marketing, respond to the Department’s probative value. See SAA at 870. As Jewon Trading (Jewon), Wooyang questionnaire, a determination based on noted in Tapered Roller Bearings and Industry Co., Ltd. (Wooyang), Jae Won a total FA is warranted for these Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, Microelectronics (Jae Won), and companies. See the Preliminary Results from Japan, and Tapered Roller Techsan Electronics (Techsan) for these for a detailed discussion of this analysis. Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside final results of review. Diameter, and Components Thereof, 2. Selection of FA from Japan; Preliminary Results of 1. Application of FA In selecting from among the facts Antidumping Duty Administrative Section 776(a) of the Act provides otherwise available, section 776(b) of Reviews and Partial Termination of that, if an interested party withholds the Act authorizes the Department to Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, information that has been requested by use an adverse inference if the 57392 (November 6, 1996) (TRBs), to the Department, fails to provide such Department finds that an interested corroborate secondary information, the information in a timely manner or in the party failed to cooperate by not acting Department will, to the extent form or manner requested, significantly to the best of its ability to comply with practicable, examine the reliability and impedes a proceeding under the the request for information. See, e.g., relevance of the information used. antidumping statute, or provides Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and However, unlike other types of
VerDate 11
information, such as input costs or Import Administration, to Faryar entries on or after January 1, 2000, selling expenses, there are no Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import without regard to antidumping duties. independent sources from which the Administration, dated October 5, 2001, The Department shall determine, and Department can derive calculated which is hereby adopted by this notice. the Customs Service shall assess, dumping margins; the only source for A list of the issues which parties have antidumping duties on all appropriate margins is administrative raised and to which we have responded, entries during the POR. The Department determinations. Thus, in an all of which are in the Decision will issue appraisement instructions administrative review, if the Department Memorandum, is attached to this notice chooses as total adverse FA a calculated as an Appendix. Parties can find a directly to the Customs Service. Where dumping margin from a prior segment of complete discussion of all issues raised the importer-specific assessment rate is the proceeding, it is not necessary to in this review and the corresponding above de minimis, we will instruct question the reliability of the margin for recommendations in this public Customs to assess antidumping duties that time period. memorandum which is on file in the on that importer’s entries of subject As to the relevance of the margin used Central Records Unit, room B–099 of the merchandise. for adverse FA, the Department stated in main Department building. In addition, These final results of review shall be TRBs that it will ‘‘consider information a complete version of the Decision the basis for the assessment of reasonably at its disposal as to whether Memorandum can be accessed directly antidumping duties on entries of there are circumstances that would on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ merchandise covered by this review. For render a margin irrelevant. Where summary/list.htm. The paper copy and duty-assessment purposes with respect circumstances indicate that the selected electronic version of the Decision to Hyundai, we calculated importer- margin is not appropriate as adverse FA, Memorandum are identical in content. specific assessment rates by aggregating the Department will disregard the the dumping margins calculated for all margin and determine an appropriate Changes Since the Preliminary Results margin.’’ Id.; see also Fresh Cut Flowers U.S. sales to each importer and dividing Based on our analysis of comments this amount by the total estimated from Mexico; Preliminary Results of received, we have made certain changes entered value reported for those sales. Antidumping Duty Administrative in the margin calculations. These Hyundai, in accordance with the Review, 60 FR 49567 (February 22, changes are listed below and discussed Department’s questionnaire, estimated 1996), where we disregarded the highest in the relevant sections of the Decision the entered value of these sales by margin in the case as best information Memorandum. calculating the average of the entered available because the margin was based 1. We corrected an error in the CEP on another company’s uncharacteristic offset calculation, see Comment 8. value of each control number for the business expense resulting in an 2. We corrected two errors in the POR. For all other respondents, we extremely high margin. margin part of the program, see based the assessment rate on the facts As stated above, the highest rate Comment 9. available margin percentage. determined in any prior segment of the 3. We recalculated HM credit Notification proceeding is 10.44 percent, a expense, see Comment 10. calculated rate from the fifth 4. We recalculated CEP profit ratio, This notice serves as a final reminder administrative review. See Dynamic see Comment 11. to importers of their responsibility Random Access Memory 5. We recalculated U.S. credit under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a Semiconductors of One Megabit or expense, see Comment 12. certificate regarding the reimbursement Above From the Republic of Korea: of antidumping duties prior to Final Results of Antidumping Duty Final Results of Review liquidation of the relevant entries Administrative Review and We determine that the following during this review period. Failure to Determination Not To Revoke the Order percentage weighted-average margins comply with this requirement could in Part, 64 FR 69694 (December 14, exist for the period May 1, 1999 result in the Secretary’s presumption 1999). In the absence of information on through, December 31, 1999: the administrative record that that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent application of the 10.44 percent rate to Margin G5, Kim’s Marketing, Jewon, Jae Won, Manufacturer/exporter (percent) assessment of doubled antidumping Techsan, and Wooyang would be duties. inappropriate as an adverse FA rate in Hyundai ...... 2.92 This notice also serves as a reminder the instant review, that the margin is not G5 ...... 10.44 to parties subject to administrative Wooyang ...... 10.44 relevant, or that leads us to re-examine protective order (APO) of their this rate as adverse facts available in the Jae Won ...... 10.44 Jewon ...... 10.44 responsibility concerning the instant review, we have applied, as FA, Techsan ...... 10.44 disposition of proprietary information the 10.44 percent margin from a prior Kim’s Marketing ...... 10.44 disclosed under APO in accordance administrative review of this order, and with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely have satisfied the corroboration Assessment notification of return/destruction of requirements under section 776(c) of the APO materials or conversion to judicial The Department will not issue cash Act. protective order is hereby requested. deposit instructions to Customs based Failure to comply with the regulations Analysis of Comments Received on the results of this review. Since the and the terms of an APO is a All issues raised in the case and order was revoked effective January 1, rebuttal briefs by parties to this 2000, current and future imports of sanctionable violation. administrative review are addressed in DRAMs from Korea shall be entered into We are issuing and publishing this the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’ the United States without regard to determination and notice in accordance (Decision Memorandum) from Bernard antidumping duties. We have already with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the T. Carreau, Deputy Assistant Secretary, instructed Customs to liquidate all Act.
VerDate 11
Dated: October 5, 2001. below in the section titled ‘‘Preliminary (Fujian Pelagic); Fujian Hualong Faryar Shirzad, Results of Review.’’ If these preliminary Aquatic Trade Development; Funing Assistant Secretary for Import results are adopted in our final results, County Frozen Food; Guangzhou Xinye Administration. we will instruct the U.S. Customs Plastic Products, Hengji Trading Co., Service to assess antidumping duties Ltd.; Hexing Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; Hongze Appendix—Issues in Decision based on the difference between the County Laoshan Danxian Freezing Memorandum export price (EP) or constructed export Factory; Hongze Lake Green Food Co., Comments and Responses price (CEP), as applicable, and NV. Ltd.; Hongze County Aquatic Freezing 1. Offset to Foreign Currency Translation Interested parties are invited to Factory; Hua Yin; Huai Yin; Huaiyin Losses comment on these preliminary results. County Freezing Factory; Huaiyin 2. Research and Development (R&D) (See the ‘‘Preliminary Results of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade 3. Cross-Fertilization of R&D Review’’ section of this notice.) Committee; Huaiyin Foreign Trade 4. Use of Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) to EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. Corp. Shunda Branch; Huaiyin Foreign Calculate R&D Ratio Trade Corporation; Huaiyin Foreign 5. Increase in Useful Lives FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trading; Huaiyin Foreign Trade 6. U.S. Antidumping Statute and World Doug Campau or Maureen Flannery, Corporation (3); Huaiyin Foreign Trade Trade Organization (WTO) Antidumping Import Administration, International Corporation (5) (Huaiyin 5); Huaiyin Agreement Trade Administration, U.S. Department 7. Post-POR Sales of Subject Merchandise Foreign Trade Corporation (30) (Huaiyin of Commerce, 14th Street and 30); Huaiyin Foreign Trade; Huaiyin Entered During the POR Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 8. Offset for CEP Sales Luky Trade Corp.; Huaiyin Shunda 9. Recalculation of Expenses in Margin DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1395 or Economic and Technology Trading Co.; Program (202) 482–3020, respectively. JAS Forwarding; Jiangsu Zhenfeng 10. Calculation of Home Market Credit The Applicable Statute Group Foodstuff; Jiangsu Zhenfeng Expense Group; Jiangsu Lukang Foodstuffs; Jin 11. CEP Profit Ratio—Calculation of Total Unless otherwise indicated, all Hu Foreign Trading; Jinghu Aquatic Profit citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as Foodstuff Processing Plant; Jinpeng 12. U.S. Credit Expense amended (the Act) are to the provisions Agriculture and By-Product [FR Doc. 01–25711 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] effective January 1, 1995, the effective Development Co.; Laoshan Brother BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P date of the amendments made to the Act Freezing Plant; Mr. Edward Lee; by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act Lianyungang Haiwang Aquatic Products (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise Co., Ltd.; Liaoning Limeng Exports & DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE indicated, all citations to the Imports; Mr. Lin Zhong Nan; Mr. Ma Department’s regulations are to 19 CFR Guo Zhong; Nantong Shengfa Frozen International Trade Administration part 351 (2000). Food Co., Ltd. (Nantong Shengfa); [A–570–848] Background Nantong Delu Aquatic Food Co., Ltd.; Neptune International; Ningbo Nanlian Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From On September 15, 1997, the Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. (Ningbo the People’s Republic of China: Notice Department published in the Federal Nanlian); Pacific Coast Fisheries Corp.; of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Register an antidumping duty order on Panwin Logistics; Qidong Baoluu Duty Administrative Review and freshwater crawfish tail meat from the Aquatic Food Co., Ltd.; Qingdao Rirong Preliminary Partial Rescission of PRC. See Notice of Amendment to Final Foodstuff Co., Ltd. aka Qingdao Rirong Antidumping Duty Administrative Determination of Sales at Less Than Foodstuffs (Qingdao Rirong); Qingdao Review Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Shun Hang Forwarding; Qingdao Order: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat Zhengri Seafood Co., Ltd., aka Qingdao AGENCY: Import Administration, From the People’s Republic of China, 62 Zhengri Seafoods (Qingdao Zhengri); International Trade Administration, FR 48218 (September 15, 1997). On Qingshan Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; Rich Department of Commerce. September 26, 2000, in accordance with Shipping; Seatrade International, aka SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 19 CFR 351.213(b)(3), the Department Seatrade Enter.; Shanghai Guangxum (the Department) is conducting an received a request from importer Bo Trading; Shanghai Zhongjian administrative review of the Asia, Inc. to conduct an administrative International Trading; Shantou SEZ antidumping duty order on freshwater review of Huaiyin Foreign Trade Yangfeng Marine Products Co. crawfish tail meat from the People’s Corporation, Huaiyin Foreign Trade (Yangfeng Marine); Suqian Foreign Republic of China (PRC) in response to Corporation ι30 (Huaiyin 30), and Yan Trade Corp., aka Suqian Foreign requests from the Crawfish Processors Cheng Foreign Trade (YFT). Trading (Suqian FTC); Suyang Alliance (petitioner) and the Louisiana On September 29, 2000, in accordance Shuangyu Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; Toyo Department of Agriculture & Forestry with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), the Warehouse, aka TKK Toyo; Mr. Wei and Bob Odom, Commissioner; from Department received a request from the Wei, aka Philip Wei; Mr. Wei Zhang; respondents Fujian Pelagic Fishery petitioner to conduct an administrative Weishan Fukang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.; Group Co., Qingdao Zhengri Seafood review of Anhui Chaohu Daxin Meat Weishan Jinmuan Foodstuff; Weishan Company, Ltd., and Yancheng Yaou Poultry Co, Ltd.; Anhui Cereals, Oils & Hongfa Lake Foodstuff Co., Ltd., aka Seafood Co., Ltd.; and from importers Foodstuffs; Anhui Provincial Aquatic Weishan Fongfa Lake Foodstuff; Y & Z Bo Asia, Inc. and Hontex Enterprises, Co.; Baoluu Waterstuff Co., Ltd.; International, aka Y & Z International Inc. (d/b/a Louisiana Packing Baoying Freezing Plant; Baoying County Trading; Yancheng Baolong Company). The period of review is from Freezing Plant; Beijing Farenco; Ever Biochemical Products, Co., Ltd.; September 1, 1999 through August 31, Concord; Feidong Freezing Plant; Fubao Yancheng Foreign Trade Corp., aka 2000. Aquatic Foodstuff Co., Ltd;. Fujian Yancheng Foreign Trading, aka Yang We preliminarily determine that sales Hualong Aquatic Trade Development Chen Foreign Trading; Yancheng Fubao have been made below normal value Co. Lianjian Seafood Processing Plant; Aquatic Food Co., Ltd.; Yancheng (NV). The preliminary results are listed Fujian Pelagic Fishery Group Co. Haibao Foods; Yancheng Haiteng
VerDate 11
Aquatic Products & Foods Co., Ltd. Frozen Food; Guangzhou Xinye Plastic Ltd., aka Weishan Fongfa Lake (Yancheng Haiteng); Yancheng Yao Products; Hengji Trading Co., Ltd.; Foodstuff; Yancheng Fubao Aquatic Seafoods (Yancheng Seafood); Mr. Yang Hexing Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; Hongze Food Co., Ltd.; Yancheng Yao Seafoods; Yi Xiang; Yangzhou Foreign Trading; County Laoshan Danxian Freezing and Mr. Yang Yi Xiang. Yangzhou Lakebest Foods Co., Ltd. Factory; Hongze Lake Green Food Co., The aforementioned withdrawals of (Yangzhou Lakebest); Yiaxian No. 2 Ltd.; Hongze County Aquatic Freezing requests for administrative review were Freezing Factory; Yundong Aquatic Factory; Hua Yin; Huai Yin; Huaiyin all timely, in accordance with 19 CFR Products Processing Factory; Yundong County Freezing Factory; Huaiyin 351.213(d)(1). Furthermore, no other Waterstuff Processing Plant; Zegao Foreign Economic Relations and Trade parties requested review of those Daxin Foodstuff Freezing Plant; Mr. Committee; Huaiyin Foreign Trade companies. Consequently, we are Zhang Wei; Zhenfeng Foodstuff Co. and Corp. Shunda Branch; Huaiyin Foreign preliminarily rescinding the Zhenfeng Group Food Co. Trade Corporation; Huaiyin Foreign administrative reviews of each company Also on September 29, 2000, in Trading; Huaiyin Luky Trade Corp.; for which a request for administrative accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Huaiyin Shunda Economic and review was withdrawn. Department received a request for an Technology Trading Co.; JAS An analysis of the responses administrative review of Nantong Delu Forwarding; Jiangsu Zhenfeng Group submitted by Yancheng Foreign Trading Aquatic Food Co. Ltd. (Nantong Delu) Foodstuff; Jiangsu Zhenfeng Group; (YFT) on June 12, 2001 and on August from importer Ocean Harvest Wholesale Jiangsu Lukang Foodstuffs; Jin Hu 21, 2001 indicates that all sales reported Inc. (Ocean Harvest) and Nantong Delu; Foreign Trading; Jinghu Aquatic for the current period of review (POR) for an administrative review of Ningbo Foodstuff Processing Plant; Jinpeng are identical to sales reported by YFT Nanlian from Hontex Enterprises, Inc. Agriculture and By-Product and reviewed by the Department in the (d/b/a Louisiana Packing Company); Development Co.; Laoshan Brother previous POR (September 1, 1998 and for an administrative review of Freezing Plant; Liaoning Limeng through August 31, 1999). See YFT’s Fujian Pelagic, Qingdao Zhengri, and Exports & Imports; Neptune section C response of March 23, 2000, Yancheng Yaou-exporters requesting International; Panwin Logistics; Qidong Exhibit C–1, and the supplemental review on their own behalf. Baoluu Aquatic Food Co., Ltd.; Qingdao response of July 7, 2000, Exhibit S–4, On October 30, 2000, the Department Shun Hang Forwarding; Qingshan placed on the record of this review. A initiated an antidumping duty Foodstuff Co., Ltd.; Rich Shipping; comparison of the data fields for the administrative review for this case. See Seatrade International, aka Seatrade sales reported in this administrative Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Enter.; Shanghai Guangxum Trading; review with certain sales documentation Countervailing Duty Administrative Toyo Warehouse, aka TKK Toyo; submitted in the responses cited above Reviews, Requests for Revocation in Part Weishan Jinmuan Foodstuff; Y & Z indicate that the sales are identical. The and Deferral of Administrative Review, International, aka Y & Z International sales documentation submitted for the 65 FR 64662 (October 30, 2000). Trading; Yancheng Baolong current review ties directly into the On June 1, 2001, the Department Biochemical Products, Co., Ltd.; sales listing reported in the previous determined that it was not practicable to Yancheng Haibao Foods; Mr. Yang Yi review. Therefore, evidence on the complete the preliminary results of this Xiang; Yangzhou Foreign Trading; record demonstrates that the sales YFT review within the statutory time limit. Yiaxian No. 2 Freezing Factory; reported for the current POR were Consequently, in accordance with Yundong Aquatic Products Processing already reported and reviewed by the section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and Factory; Yundong Waterstuff Processing Department during the previous POR. section 351.213(h)(2) of the Plant; Zegao Daxin Foodstuff Freezing Furthermore, in its supplemental Department’s regulations, the Plant; Zegao Foodstuff Freezing Plant; response of August 21, 2001, YFT Department extended the deadline for Zhenfeng Foodstuff Co.; and Zhenfeng confirms that the only sales covered by completion of the preliminary results of Group Food Co. this POR are the ones it reported. Since the administrative review 120 days, to On January 22, 2001, in accordance the only sales YFT reported for the October 1, 2001. See Notice of Extension with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Ocean current POR were already reported and of Time Limits for Preliminary Results of Harvest and Nantong Delu withdrew reviewed during the previous POR, we Administrative Antidumping Review: their requests for administrative review. preliminarily conclude that no sales Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the On January 29, 2001, in accordance were made during the current POR. See People’s Republic of China, 66 FR 31204 with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman (June 11, 2001). petitioner withdrew its request for through Maureen Flannery from Elfi administrative review of Anhui Cereals, Blum: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat Preliminary Rescission of Oils & Foodstuffs; Fujian Hualong from the People’s Republic of China Administrative Review in Part Aquatic Trade Development Co. (PRC); Yancheng Foreign Trade, Ltd. On November 13, 2000, in accordance Lianjian Seafood Processing Plant; (YFT), formerly Yancheng Foreign with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Fujian Hualong Aquatic Trade Trade Corporation (YFTC): Intent to petitioner withdrew its request for Development; Funing County Frozen Rescind Administrative Review. administrative review of Anhui Chaohu Food; Guangzhou Xinye Plastic The Department’s regulations at 19 Daxin Meat Poultry Co, Ltd.; Anhui Products, Huaiyin Foreign Trade CFR 351.213(d)(3) provide that the Provincial Aquatic Co.; Baoluu Corporation (1); Huaiyin Foreign Trade Department may rescind a review with Waterstuff Co., Ltd.; Baoying Freezing Corporation (3); Mr. Edward Lee; respect to a company if that company Plant; Baoying County Freezing Plant; Lianyungang Haiwang Aquatic Products made no exports of subject merchandise Beijing Farenco; Ever Concord; Feidong Co., Ltd.; Mr. Lin Zhong Nan; Mr. Ma during the POR. Therefore, in Freezing Plant; Fubao Aquatic Foodstuff Guo Zhong; Pacific Coast Fisheries accordance with section 351.213(d)(3) of Co., Ltd.; Fujian Hualong Aquatic Trade Corp.; Shanghai Zhongjian International the Department’s regulations, we are Development Co. Lianjian Seafood Trading; Suyang Shuangyu Foodstuff preliminarily rescinding our review of Processing Plant; Fujian Pelagic Fishery Co., Ltd.; Mr. Wei Wei, aka Philip Wei; YFT. Group Co.; Fujian Hualong Aquatic Mr. Wei Zhang, aka Zhang Wei; Based on these preliminary Trade Development; Funing County Weishan Hongfa Lake Foodstuff Co., rescissions, this administrative review
VerDate 11
now covers the following companies: that the two companies appeared to be proprietary version of the memorandum Huaiyin 30, Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin 5, under common control and should entitled Antidumping Review of Qingdao Rirong, Fujian Pelagic, receive a single antidumping duty rate. Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat (tail Yancheng Seafood/Qingdao Zhengri, See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from meat) from the People’s Republic of Yangfeng Marine, Suquian FTC, the People’s Republic of China: Final China (PRC) (A–570–848): Nantong Shengfa, Yancheng Haiteng, Results of Administrative Antidumping Sales and Factors Verification Report for and Yangzhou Lakebest. Duty and New Shipper Reviews, and Ningbo Nanlian Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. Final Recission of New Shipper Review, and Huaiyin 5, September 28, 2001; see Scope of Review 65 FR 20948 (April 19, 2000) (Crawfish also the Memorandum from Edward C. The product covered by these reviews 1997/1998 Final). Specifically, the Yang to Joseph A. Spetrini: Relationship is freshwater crawfish tail meat, in all Department found that the nature of the of Ningbo Nanlian Frozen Foods its forms (whether washed or with fat relationships between Huaiyin 5 and Company, Ltd. and Huaiyin Foreign on, whether purged or unpurged), Ningbo Nanlian constituted a web of Trade Corporation (5), dated April 7, grades, and sizes; whether frozen, fresh, control relationships such that prices 2000. A public version of this or chilled; and regardless of how it is and exports were subject to significant memorandum is available in the Central packed, preserved, or prepared. manipulation. See Memorandum from Records Unit, Room B–099 of the Main Excluded from the scope of the order are Edward C. Yang to Joseph A. Spetrini: Commerce Building. The report live crawfish and other whole crawfish, Relationship of Ningbo Nanlian Frozen discusses Mr. Wei Wei’s involvement whether boiled, frozen, fresh, or chilled. Foods Company, Ltd. and Huaiyin with Ningbo Nanlian and Huaiyin 5, up Also excluded are saltwater crawfish of Foreign Trade Corporation (5), dated to and including the 1997–1998 any type, and parts thereof. Freshwater April 7, 2000; and Crawfish 1997/1998 administrative review period, in detail. crawfish tail meat is currently Final and accompanying Issues and Accordingly, we continue to conclude classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Decision Memorandum, at Comments that Ningbo Nanlian and Huaiyin 5 Schedule of the United States (HTS) 13–17, both of which have been placed should receive a single antidumping under item numbers 1605.40.10.10, on the record of this review. Ningbo duty rate for purposes of these 0306.19.00.10 and 0306.29.00.00. The Nanlian and Huaiyin 5 were given a preliminary results. HTS subheadings are provided for single rate in the 1998/1999 Application of Facts Available convenience and Customs purposes administrative review as well, as the only. The written description of the Department was not provided with new Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides scope of this order is dispositive. information or evidence of that if any interested party: (A) circumstances in the 1998/1999 review Withholds information that has been Relationship Between Qingdao Zhengri that differed sufficiently from requested by the Department; (B) fails to and Yancheng Seafood circumstances in the 1997/1998 review provide such information in a timely We determine that Qingdao Zhengri to warrant any reconsideration of the manner or in the form or manner and Yancheng Seafood should be relationship between Ningbo Nanlian requested; (C) significantly impedes an treated as a single entity for purposes of and Huaiyin 5. antidumping investigation; or (D) this administrative review. Qingdao See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from provides such information but the Zhengri and Yancheng Seafood’s the People’s Republic of China; Notice information cannot be verified, as consolidated supplemental response of Final Results of Antidumping Duty provided in section 782(i) of the Act, the states that Yancheng Seafood negotiates Administrative Review and New Department shall, subject to section the price with U.S. customers on behalf Shipper Reviews, and Final Partial 782(d) of the Act, use the facts of Qingdao Zhengri, and that Qingdao Recission of Antidumping Duty otherwise available in reaching the Zhengri receives payment for such sales. Administrative Review, 66 FR 20643 applicable determination under this The sales for which Qingdao Zhengri (April 24, 2001) (Crawfish 1998/1999 title. produced the merchandise account for a Final). On May 22, 2001, Huaiyin 5 Yangfeng Marine failed to respond to significant portion of Qingdao Zhengri/ submitted a letter to the Department sections C and D of the Department’s Yancheng Seafood’s reported U.S. sales. stating, in part, that Huaiyin 5 ‘‘is questionnaire. As a result, we were We also note that in their response to entitled to a separate rate.’’ However, unable to obtain the information the Department’s questionnaire, the again the Department has not been necessary to conduct a review. total volume and value of sales for both provided with new information or Therefore, in accordance with section Qingdao Zhengri and Yancheng Seafood evidence of circumstances in the current 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act, we are applying were consolidated in Yancheng review that differ sufficiently from facts available to Yangfeng Marine. See Seafood’s section A response. circumstances in the prior reviews to Silicon Metal from the People’s Furthermore, the companies submitted a warrant any reconsideration of the Republic of China: Preliminary Results consolidated response to sections C and relationship between Ningbo Nanlian of Antidumping Duty Administrative D of the Department’s questionnaire, and Huaiyin 5. Review, 63 FR 37850 (July 14, 1998); and to the Department’s supplemental Furthermore, as noted in the verification and Silicon Metal From the People’s questionnaire for sections A, C, and D. report concerning these entities, while Republic of China; Final Results of For the reasons cited above, the conducting verification, the Department Antidumping Duty Administrative Department is treating these two found evidence of a continuing Review, 63 FR 37850 (July 14, 1998). companies as a single entity for these commercial relationship between Because Yangfeng Marine failed to preliminary results. Ningbo Nanlian and Huaiyin 5, as well provide sections C and D questionnaire as evidence of a continuing business responses on the record, section 782(d) Relationship Between Ningbo Nanlian relationship between Mr. Wei Wei and does not apply. Further, absent these and Huaiyin 5 both Huaiyin 5 and Ningbo Nanlian (by sections, the Department cannot In the 1997/1998 administrative virtue of Mr. Wei’s dealings with calculate export price or normal value, review, the Department determined that Louisiana Packing Company, which is and thus any remaining information the export operations of Ningbo Nanlian the U.S. owner in the Ningbo Nanlian cannot form the basis for this and Huaiyin 5 were intertwined such joint-venture). See the business determination under section 782(e).
VerDate 11
Therefore, in accordance with section Based on these findings of lack of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon 776(a)(2), we are applying facts cooperation, we preliminarily determine Carbide from the People’s Republic of available to Yangfeng Marine. that we should apply adverse facts China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994). As noted above, we have determined available to Qingdao Zhengri/Yancheng Under this policy, exporters in NMEs that Qingdao Zhengri and Yancheng Seafood and to Yangfeng Marine. are entitled to separate, company- Seafood should be treated as a single Section 776(b) of the Act states that specific margins when they can entity. Since Qingdao Zhengri did not adverse facts available may include demonstrate an absence of government allow verification of its portion of the information derived from the petition, control, both in law and in fact, with consolidated response, the Department the final determination, a previous respect to export activities. Evidence considers the whole of the consolidated administrative review, or other supporting, though not requiring, a response to be unverifiable. See letter information placed on the record. As finding of de jure absence of from Barbara E. Tillman to Yancheng adverse facts available, we are treating government control over export Yaou Seafood Co., Ltd. a.k.a. Asia these parties as part of the PRC-wide activities includes: Europe and Qingdao Zhengri Seafood entity, and using the rate for Huaiyin 30, (1) An absence of restrictive stipulations Co., Ltd., dated August 7, 2001. 217.09 percent, the highest rate in this associated with an individual exporter’s Therefore, in accordance with section segment of the proceeding, which is also business and export licenses; (2) any 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act, we are applying the highest rate from any segment of the legislative enactments decentralizing facts available to Qingdao Zhengri/ proceeding. As we did not rely upon control of companies; and (3) any other Yancheng Seafood. secondary information, no corroboration formal measures by the government Section 776(b) of the Act provides was required under section 776(c) of the decentralizing control of companies. De that the Department may apply adverse Act. facto absence of government control facts available to a respondent when over exports is based on four factors: (1) that respondent fails to cooperate to the Verification Whether each exporter sets its own best of its ability. As noted above, in the As provided in section 782(i) of the export prices independently of the instant administrative review, Yangfeng Act, we conducted a verification of the government and without the approval of Marine and Qingdao Zhengri/Yancheng responses of Qingdao Rirong, Ningbo a government authority; (2) whether Seafood failed to provide complete and/ Nanlian, and Huaiyin 5. We used each exporter retains the proceeds from or verifiable responses. With respect to standard verification procedures, its sales and makes independent Yangfeng Marine, this company failed to including on-site inspection of the decisions regarding the disposition of provide full section C and D manufacturers’ facilities and the profits or financing of losses; (3) questionnaire responses. These examination of relevant sales and whether each exporter has the authority responses are necessary for the financial records. Our verification to negotiate and sign contracts and other Department to calculate an accurate results are outlined in the public agreements; and (4) whether each margin. Without section C and D versions of the verification reports, on exporter has autonomy from the information, the record is devoid of file in Room B–099 of the Main government regarding the selection of information concerning U.S. sales and Commerce Building. management. factors of production. At no time did Separate Rates Yangfeng Marine indicate to the De Jure Control Department that it was having Ningbo Nanlian, Huaiyin5, With respect to the absence of de jure difficulties complying with the Huaiyin30, Qingdao Rirong, Fujian government control over the export Department’s requests for information, Pelagic, Yancheng Seafood/Qingdao activities of all the companies reviewed, nor did it seek assistance from the Zhengri, Yangfeng Marine, Yancheng evidence on the record indicates that Department. Therefore, we conclude Haiteng, Yancheng FTC, Yangzhou Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin5, Huaiyin30, that Yangfeng Marine has failed to Lakebest, Suqian FTC, and Nantong Qingdao Rirong, Fujian Pelagic, cooperate in this review. Shengfa have requested separate, Yancheng Haiteng, Yangzhou Lakebest, With respect to Qingdao Zhengri/ company-specific rates. In their Suqian FTC, and Nantong Shengfa are Yancheng Seafood, after the Department questionnaire responses, the above not controlled by the government. All of received a letter from Qingdao Zhengri companies state that they are the above companies submitted indicating that it would not submit to independent legal entities. Ningbo evidence of their legal right to set prices verification, the Department issued Nanlian, Qingdao Zhengri, Yangzhou independent of all government Qingdao Zhengri/Yancheng Seafood a Lakebest, Yancheng Haiteng, and oversight. The business licenses of every letter indicating that it would not be Nantong Shengfa have furthermore company indicates that each is possible for the Department to verify reported they are PRC-foreign joint permitted to engage in the exportation any part of the companies’ consolidated ventures. Pursuant to our findings in the of crawfish. We find no evidence of de response. The letter pointed out that if ‘‘Application of Facts Available’’ section jure government control restricting any a company objects to verification, the above, Yancheng Seafood/Qingdao of the reviewed companies from the Department will not conduct Zhengri and Yangfeng Marine are not exportation of crawfish. verification and may disregard any or all entitled to separate rates. In their responses, each of the above information submitted by the company To establish whether a company companies has stated that no export in favor of the use of the facts available. operating in a non-market-economy quotas apply to crawfish. Prior Qingdao Zhengri/Yancheng Seafood (NME) country is sufficiently verifications have confirmed that there never responded to the Department’s independent to be entitled to a separate are no commodity specific export letter, and made no subsequent efforts to rate, the Department analyzes each licenses required and no quotas for the contact or arrange verification with the exporting entity under the test seafood category ‘‘Other,’’ which Department. Therefore, we determine established in the Final Determination includes crawfish, in China’s Tariff and that these entities did not cooperate by of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Non-Tariff Handbook for 1996. In acting to the best of their ability in Sparklers from the People’s Republic of addition, we have previously confirmed complying with the Department’s China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) as that crawfish is not on the list of requests for information. amplified by the Final Determination of commodities with planned quotas in the
VerDate 11
1992 PRC Ministry of Foreign Trade and investment, grants autonomy to foreign that these exporters are entitled to Economic Cooperation document trade operators in management separate rates. entitled Temporary Provisions for decisions, and establishes the foreign Huaiyin 5 Name Change Administration of Export Commodities. trade operator’s accountability for See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat profits and losses. Yancheng Haiteng While on verification, the team From The People’s Republic of China; placed on the record of this review The discovered that, effective January 10, Preliminary Results of New Shipper Sino-Foreign Equity Joint Venture Law 2001, Huaiyin 5’s official name changed Review, 64 FR 8543 (February 22, 1999) of the PRC, which grants legal autonomy to Jiangsu Hilong International Trading and Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat and export rights to Sino-foreign equity Company, Ltd. However, throughout From the People’s Republic of China; joint venture companies without this notice, this company is referred to Final Results of New Shipper Review, 64 additional approval from a government as Huaiyin 5—the name of this entity FR 27961 (May 24, 1999) (Ningbo New entity. Yangzhou Lakebest and Nantong during the POR, and under which Shipper Review Shengfa also cited this law in their questionnaire responses were The following laws, which have been responses. At verification, we saw that submitted. placed on the record of this review, business licenses for Ningbo Nanlian/ indicate a lack of de jure government Huaiyin5 and Qingdao Rirong were Normal Value Comparisons control over companies owned by ‘‘all established in accordance with the To determine whether respondents’ the people’’ and that control over these applicable laws. Therefore, with respect sales of the subject merchandise to the enterprises has been transferred from to the absence of de jure control over United States were made at prices below the government to the enterprises export activity, we determine that all of NV, we compared their United States themselves. The Administrative the above firms are independent legal prices to NV, as described in the Regulations of the People’s Republic of entities. ‘‘United States Price’’ and ‘‘Normal China for Controlling the Registration of Value’’ sections of this notice. Enterprises as Legal Persons (Legal De Facto Control Persons Law), issued on July 13, 1988 by With respect to the absence of de United States Price facto control over export activities, the the State Administration for Industry For Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin 5 and information presented indicates that the and Commerce of the PRC provide that, Yancheng Haiteng, we based United management of Ningbo Nanlian/ to qualify as legal persons, companies States price on CEP in accordance with Huaiyin5, Yancheng Haiteng, must have the ‘‘ability to bear civil section 772(b) of the Act, because the Huaiyin30, Fujian Pelagic, Yangzhou liability independently’’ and the right to first sales to unaffiliated purchasers Lakebest, Suqian FTC, Qingdao Rirong, control and manage their businesses. were made after importation. We These regulations also state that as an and Nantong Shengfa are responsible for calculated CEP based on packed prices independent legal entity, a company is all decisions such as the determination from the U.S. affiliate’s warehouse to responsible for its own profits and of export prices, profit distribution, the first unaffiliated purchaser in the losses. See Notice of Final marketing strategy, and contract United States. We made the following Determination of Sales at Less Than negotiations. Our analysis indicates that deductions from the starting price (gross Fair Value: Manganese Metal from the there is no government involvement in unit price), where applicable: Foreign People’s Republic of China, 60 FR 56046 the daily operations or the selection of inland freight, international (ocean) (November 6, 1995). Ningbo Nanlian/ management for any of these companies. freight, U.S. customs duty, brokerage Huaiyin5, Huiayin30, Fujian Pelagic, In addition, we have found that these and handling expenses, the affiliated and Yangzhou Lakebest cited the Legal respondents’ pricing and export strategy Persons Law in their responses. decisions are not subject to any outside reseller’s U.S. credit expenses, and the Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin5 and Fujian entity’s review or approval, and that affiliated reseller’s selling expenses. See Pelagic also submitted the General there are no governmental policy sections 772(c) and (d) of the Act. Principles of the Civil Law of the directives that affect these decisions. Because U.S. customs duty, brokerage People’s Republic of China, which There are no restrictions on the use of and handling expenses, credit expenses, establishes guidelines regarding the respondents’ revenues or profits, and selling expenses are market- conduct of companies as legal entities. including export earnings. Each economy costs incurred in U.S. dollars, Huaiyin5, Huiayin30, and Fujian company’s general manager has the we used actual costs rather than Pelagic, as independent companies right to negotiate and enter into surrogate values for these deductions to under the jurisdiction of local or contracts, and may delegate this gross unit price. provincial governments, submitted authority to employees within the For Fujian Pelagic, Huaiyin30, copies of the Regulations for company. There is no evidence that this Qingdao Rirong, Suqian FTC, Yangzhou Transformation of Operational authority is subject to any level of Lakebest, and Nantong Shengfa, we Mechanism of State-Owned Industrial governmental approval. Each company based United States price on EP in Enterprises and the Law of the People’s has stated that its management is accordance with section 772(a) of the Republic of China of Industrial selected by its board of directors and/or Act, because the first sales to Enterprises Owned by the Whole People, its employees and that there is no unaffiliated purchasers were made prior which state that such enterprises will government involvement in the to importation, and CEP was not have autonomy in management and selection process. Lastly, decisions otherwise warranted by the facts on the carry full responsibility for profits and made by respondents concerning record. We calculated EP based on losses. purchases of subject merchandise from packed prices from the exporter to the Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin5, Huaiyin30, other suppliers are not subject to first unaffiliated purchaser in the United Fujian Pelagic, Qingdao Rirong, government approval. Consequently, States. Where applicable, we deducted Yancheng Haiteng, Yangzhou Lakebest, because evidence on the record, as foreign inland freight, inland insurance, and Suqian FTC provided copies of the supported by verification, indicates an and brokerage and handling expenses in Foreign Trade Law of the PRC, which absence of government control, both in the home market from the starting price identifies the rights and responsibilities law and in fact, over their export (gross unit price) in accordance with of business enterprises with foreign activities, we preliminarily determine section 772(c) of the Act.
VerDate 11
The Department has preliminarily crawfish imported from Portugal. See To value coal and electricity, we used determined that Fujian Pelagic’s sales to Notice of Final Determination of Sales data reported as the average Indian Pacific Coast Fishery Corporation at Less Than Fair Value: Freshwater domestic prices within the categories of (Pacific Coast) should be treated as EP Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s ‘‘Steam Coal for Industry’’ and sales because the first sales were made Republic of China, 62 FR 41347 (August ‘‘Electricity for Industry,’’ published in to unaffiliated purchasers prior to 1, 1997), and Crawfish 1997/1998 Final. the International Energy Agency’s importation in accordance with 772(a) However, Spanish imports of live publication, Energy Prices and Taxes, of the Act, and CEP was not otherwise freshwater crawfish from Portugal have First Quarter, 2000. We adjusted the warranted by the facts on the record. declined drastically. From April 1999 cost of coal to include an amount for See Memorandum from Matthew through March 2000, the production transportation. For water, we relied Renkey through Maureen Flannery to period corresponding in part to the upon public information from the Barbara E. Tillman, Analysis of the current review period, Spanish imports October 1997 Second Water Utilities Relationship between Fujian Pelagic from Portugal were only 17 metric tons, Data Book: Asian and Pacific Region, Fishery Group Co. and Pacific Coast in contrast to the 357 metric tons used published by the Asian Development Fisheries, dated October 1, 2001. A during the investigation, and 160 metric Bank. public version of this memorandum is tons used during the 1997–98 To achieve comparability of energy available in the Central Records Unit, administrative review. This represents a and water prices to the factors reported Room B–099 of the Main Commerce decline of 95.2 percent since the period for the crawfish processing periods Building. of the LTFV investigation. In addition, applicable to the companies under unlike in other years, Spanish imports review, we adjusted these factor values Normal Value from Portugal were heavily weighted to reflect inflation to the applicable For companies located in NME towards one month. This one month crawfish processing season during the countries, section 773(c)(1) of the Act accounted for 71 percent of the total POR using the Wholesale Price Index provides that the Department shall volume of imports from Portugal for that (WPI) for India, as published in the 2001 determine NV using a factors-of- year. Small import volumes as a whole, International Financial Statistics (IFS) production methodology if (1) the and one month accounting for the vast by the International Monetary Fund merchandise is exported from an NME proportion of imports, indicate that live (IMF). country, and (2) available information freshwater crawfish is no longer a To value packing materials (plastic does not permit the calculation of NV product that is regularly traded between bags, cardboard boxes and adhesive using home-market prices, third-country Portugal and Spain. Therefore, we tape), we relied upon Indian import data prices, or constructed value under searched for data reflecting a more from the April 1999 through September section 773(a) of the Act. substantial volume of trade. For these 1999 issues of Monthly Statistics of the In every case conducted by the preliminary results, we have used Foreign Trade of India (Monthly Department involving the PRC, the PRC Australian farm gate prices for whole, Statistics). We adjusted these prices to has been treated as an NME country. live freshwater crawfish. See Factor reflect inflation to the crawfish Pursuant to section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Values Memorandum. For a complete processing season during the POR. We Act, any determination that a foreign discussion of our choice of Australian adjusted the values of packing materials country is an NME country shall remain farm gate prices, refer to Freshwater to include freight costs incurred in effect until revoked by the Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s between the supplier and the factory. administering authority. None of the Republic of China; Notice of Final For transportation distances used in the companies contested such treatment in Results of Antidumping Duty New calculation of freight expenses on these reviews. Accordingly, we have Shipper Reviews, 66 FR 45002 (August packing materials, we added, to applied surrogate values to the factors of 27, 2001), and the accompanying surrogate values from India, a surrogate production to determine NV. See memorandum (September 1999—March freight cost using the shorter of (a) the Administrative Review of Freshwater 2000 Decision Memo) at Comment 1. distances between the closest PRC port Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s This memorandum is on file in the and the factory, or (b) the distance Republic of China: Factor Values Central Records Unit (Room B–099 of between the domestic supplier and the Memorandum, October 1, 2001 (Factor the Main Commerce Building). factory. See Notice of Final Values Memorandum). We calculated We valued the factors of production Determination of Sales at Less Than NV based on factors of production in as follows: Fair Value: Collated Roofing Nails From accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the To value whole crawfish, we used the the People’s Republic of China, 62 FR Act and section 351.408(c) of our Australian farm gate price for freshwater 51410 (October 1, 1997) (Roofing Nails). regulations. Consistent with the original crawfish as reported in Freshwater To value factory overhead, selling, investigation and prior administrative Crawfish Tail Meat (crawfish) from the general, and administrative expenses reviews of this order, we determined People’s Republic of China (PRC): (SG&A) and profit, we calculated simple that India (1) is comparable to the PRC Meetings Regarding the Crawfish average rates using publicly available in level of economic development, and Industry in Western Australia, July 31, financial statements of four Indian (2) is a significant producer of 2001. For further details, refer to the seafood processing companies, and comparable merchandise. With the September 1999–March 2000 Decision applied these rates to the calculated cost exceptions of the crawfish input and by- Memo, at Comment 1. of manufacture. See Factor Values product, we valued the factors of To value the by-product of shells, we Memorandum. production using publicly available used a September 1999 free-on-board For labor, we used the PRC information from India. We adjusted the (FOB) factory price quote for crab and regression-based wage rate at Import Indian import prices by adding freight shrimp shells from a Canadian seller of Administration’s home page, Import expenses to make them delivered prices. crustacean shells and incorporated a 30 Library, Expected Wages of Selected In the original LTFV investigation and percent wet/dry conversion factor, NME Countries, revised in September in previous reviews of this order, for the where shells were sold wet. For further 2001. See http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/. raw crawfish input, we used Spanish details, see Factors Value Because of the variability of wage rates import statistics for live freshwater Memorandum. in countries with similar per capita
VerDate 11
gross domestic products, section sale of the finished product using the public questionnaire response 351.408(c)(3) of the Department’s WPI for India from the IFS. For submitted in the antidumping review of regulations requires the use of a transportation of production inputs, we Viraj Group, Ltd. in Stainless Steel Wire regression-based wage rate. The source adjusted the rate to reflect inflation to Rod from India. Charges were reported of these wage rate data on the Import the period of production. on a per metric ton basis. We adjusted Administration’s Web site is the 2000 To value brokerage and handling in these values to reflect inflation to the Year Book of Labour Statistics, the home market, we used public month of sale using the WPI for India International Labour Office (Geneva: information reported in the from the IFS. For further discussion, see 1998), Chapter 5: Wages in antidumping administrative review of Factor Values Memorandum. Manufacturing. Certain Stainless Steel Wire Rod From We valued movement expenses as India; Preliminary Results of Currency Conversion follows: Antidumping Duty Administrative and We made currency conversions To value truck freight expenses we New Shipper Reviews, 63 FR 48184 used seventeen price quotes from six (September 9, 1998) (Stainless Steel pursuant to section 351.415 of the different Indian trucking companies Wire Rod from India), and also used in Department’s regulations at the rates which were used in the Final the Crawfish 1998/1999 Final. We certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. Determination of Sales at Less Than adjusted the rates to reflect inflation to (See ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/ Fair Value: Bulk Aspirin From the the month of sale using the WPI for index.html.) People’s Republic of China, 65 FR 33805 India from the IFS. Preliminary Results of Review (May 25, 2000). For transportation of the We used the average of the foreign subject merchandise, we adjusted the brokerage and handling expenses We preliminarily determine that the rates to reflect inflation to the month of reported in the U.S. sales listing of the following dumping margins exist:
Manufacturer/exporter Time period Margin (percent)
Ningbo Nanlian/Huaiyin5 (a.k.a. Jiangsu Hilong International Trading Company, Ltd.) ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 62.18 Yancheng Haiteng ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 102.82 Huaiyin30 ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 217.09 Fujian Pelagic ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 173.60 Yangzhou Lakebest ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 28.88 Suqian FTC ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 26.75 Qingdao Rirong ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 9.40 Nantong Shengfa ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 45.64 PRC-Wide Rate ...... 9/1/99–8/31/00 217.09
Parties to the proceeding may request days after the deadline for rebuttal between NV and EP) for each importer disclosure within 5 days of the date of briefs, or the first workday thereafter, at by the total quantity of subject publication of this notice in accordance the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th merchandise sold to that importer with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested Street and Constitution Avenue NW., during the POR. Upon the completion of party may request a hearing within 30 Washington, DC 20230. If a hearing is this review, we will direct Customs to days of publication in accordance with held, an interested party may make an assess the resulting quantity-based rates 19 CFR 351.310(c). Interested parties affirmative presentation only on against the weight in kilograms of each may submit case briefs within 30 days arguments included in that party’s case entry of the subject merchandise by the of the date of publication of this notice brief and may make a rebuttal importer during the POR. (See in accordance with 19 CFR presentation only on arguments Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman 351.309(c)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, which included in that party’s rebuttal brief. through Maureen Flannery, from Mark must be limited to issues raised in the Parties should confirm by telephone the Hoadley: Collection of Cash Deposits case briefs, may be filed not later than time, date, and place of the hearing 48 and Assessment of Duties on Freshwater 5 days after the due date for submission hours before the scheduled time. Crawfish from the PRC, dated August of case briefs. Parties who submit The Department intends to issue the 27, 2001). A public version of this arguments are requested to submit with final results of this administrative memorandum is available in th Central each argument (1) a statement of the review, which will include the results of Records Unit, Room B–099 of the Main issue and (2) a brief summary of the its analysis of issues raised in the briefs, Commerce Building. argument. Individuals who wish to within 120 days from the date of The following deposit rates will be request a hearing must submit a written publication of these preliminary results. effective upon publication of the final request within 30 days of the Upon completion of this results of this administrative review for publication of this notice in the Federal administrative review, the Department all shipments of freshwater crawfish tail Register to the Assistant Secretary for shall determine, and the U.S. Customs meat from the PRC entered, or Import Administration, U.S. Department Service shall assess, antidumping duties withdrawn from warehouse, for of Commerce, Room 1870, 14th Street on all appropriate entries. The consumption on or after the publication and Constitution Avenue, NW., Department will issue appraisement date, as provided for by section Washington, DC 20230. Requests for a instructions directly to the U.S. Customs 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For exporters public hearing should contain: (1) The Service upon completion of this review. with separate rates listed above, we will party’s name, address, and telephone For assessment purposes, we calculated establish a per kilogram cash deposit number; (2) the number of participants; importer-specific assessment rates for rate which will be equivalent to the (3) the reason for attending; and (4) a list freshwater crawfish tail meat from the company-specific cash deposit of the issues to be discussed. Any PRC. We divided the total dumping established in this review (see hearing would normally be held two margins (calculated as the difference Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman
VerDate 11
through Maureen Flannery, from Mark The Applicable Statute is extending the time period for issuing Hoadley: Collection of Cash Deposits Unless otherwise indicated, all the preliminary results of this review by and Assessment of Duties on Freshwater citations to the statute are references to 120 days, until no later than February Crawfish from the PRC, dated August the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act), as 28, 2002. The final results continue to 27, 2001); (2) for previously reviewed amended. In addition, unless otherwise be due 120 days after the publication of PRC and non-PRC exporters with indicated, all citations to the the preliminary results. separate rates, the cash deposit rate will Department’s regulations are to the Dated: October 2, 2001. be the company-specific rate established regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 Joseph A. Spetrini, for the most recent period; (3) for all (2000). Deputy Assistant Secretary, AD/CVD other PRC exporters, the rate will be the Enforcement Group III. current PRC-wide rate, 217.09 percent; Background [FR Doc. 01–25706 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] and (4) for all other non-PRC exporters On February 28, 2001, the Department BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P of subject merchandise from the PRC, of Commerce (the Department) received the cash deposit rate will be the rate requests from Komatsu, Ltd., Hitachi applicable to the PRC supplier of that Zosen Corp. (HZC), and Hitachi Zosen DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE exporter.This notice also serves as a Fukui Corp. (HZFC) for an preliminary reminder to importers of administrative review of the International Trade Administration their responsibility under 19 CFR antidumping duty order on mechanical [A–583–833] 351.402(f) of the Department’s transfer presses (MTPs) from Japan. On regulations to file a certificate regarding March 22, 2001, the Department Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the reimbursement of antidumping published a notice of initiation of this Taiwan: Rescission of Antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the administrative review covering the Duty Administrative Review relevant entries during this review period of February 1, 2000 through period. Failure to comply with this January 31, 2001 (66 FR 16037). Because AGENCY: Import Administration, requirement could result in the of an inadvertent omission in the March International Trade Administration, Secretary’s presumption that initiation notice, the review of HZFC Department of Commerce. reimbursement of antidumping duties was not initiated until May 23, 2001 (66 ACTION: Notice of rescission of the first occurred and the subsequent assessment FR 28421). antidumping duty administrative of double antidumping duties. review. This administrative review and notice Extension of Time Limits for are published in accordance with Preliminary Results SUMMARY: In response to a May 29, 2001 section 751(a)(1) of the Act, and sections Because of a number of complexities request made by Far Eastern Textile, 351.213 and 351.221 of the in this case, it is not practicable to Ltd., a producer/exporter of certain Department’s regulations. complete this review within the time polyester staple fiber in Taiwan, and a Dated: October 1, 2001. limits mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) May 30, 2001 request made by Arteva Specialities S.a.r.l. d/b/a/ KoSa and Joseph A. Spetrini, of the Act. Depending on our analysis of home market sales information provided Wellman Inc., the petitioners, the Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Department of Commerce published the Administration. by the respondents, our basis for determining normal value, which has in initiation of an administrative review of [FR Doc. 01–25709 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the antidumping duty order on certain BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P past administrative reviews been based on constructed value because of the polyester staple fiber from Taiwan for difficulties involved in comparing Far Eastern Textile, Ltd (covering the period March 30, 2000 to April 30, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE MTPs, might need to be reconsidered. Even if the Department determines 2001) and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, International Trade Administration again not to use home market sales for Ltd. (covering the period April 27, 2000 to April 30, 2001). Initiation of [A–588–810] calculating normal value, contemporaneous home market sales Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests Mechanical Transfer Presses From must be used for calculating constructed for Revocations in Part, 66 FR 32934 Japan: Extension of Time Limit for value profit, and, thus, in either case, (June 19, 2001). This review has now Preliminary Results of Antidumping we will have to determine the proper been rescinded as a result of the Administrative Review sales dates and the contemporaneity window for home market sales. withdrawal of the requests for review by AGENCY: Import Administration, Furthermore, Komatsu has requested Far Eastern Textile, Ltd. and Arteva International Trade Administration, that the order be partially revoked, as it Specialities S.a.r.l., d/b/a/ KoSa and Department of Commerce. applies to its sales, and HZC and HZFC Wellman Inc. ACTION: Notice of extension of time limit have not participated in recent reviews. EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. For preliminary results of Therefore, verification of the sales and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administrative Review. cost information of all three respondents Suresh Maniam, AD/CVD Enforcement, might need to be conducted. While HZC Group I, Office 1, Import EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. claims that it did not have any entries Administration, U.S. Department of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: during the period of review or Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Mark Hoadley, Office of AD/CVD contemporaneous home market sales, Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; Enforcement VII, Import resolution of these claims will depend telephone: (202) 482–0176. Administration, International Trade on our analysis of the date-of-sale issue SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Administration, U.S. Department of and the establishment of the Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution contemporaneity window. Applicable Statute Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230; Therefore, in accordance with section Unless otherwise indicated, all telephone: (202)482–0666. 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department citations to the statute are references to
VerDate 11
the provisions effective January 1, 1995, to section A of the Department’s 2001. This postponement is made the effective date of the amendments questionnaire in this administrative pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(B) of the made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the review until three days before the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the ‘‘Act’’) by the Uruguay Round ninety-day deadline, we find it Uruguay Round Agreements Act. Agreements Act. In addition, unless reasonable that the petitioners would EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. otherwise indicated, all citations to the need some time to examine at least the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Department of Commerce’s information in that response before Howard Smith, Ronald Trentham or (‘‘Department’’) regulations refer to 19 making a determination to withdraw Timothy Finn at (202) 482–5193, (202) CFR part 351 (2001). their request for review. Therefore, we 482–6320, or (202) 482–0065, have accepted the petitioners’ Background respectively; Office 4, Group 2, Import withdrawal of their request for review Administration, International Trade On May 25, 2000, the Department despite it being filed after the ninety- Administration, U.S. Department of published an antidumping duty order day deadline. Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution on certain polyester staple fiber from As a result of the withdrawals of the Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Taiwan. Notice of Amended Final requests for review and because the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Determination of Sales at Less Than Department received no other request Fair Value: Certain Polyester Staple for review, the Department is rescinding The Applicable Statute and Regulations Fiber From the Republic of Korea and this administrative review. Unless otherwise indicated, all Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain This notice also serves as a reminder citations to the statute are references to Polyester Staple Fiber From the to parties subject to administrative the provisions effective January 1, 1995, Republic of Korea and Taiwan, 65 FR protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their the effective date of the amendments 33807. On May 29, 2001, Far Eastern responsibility concerning the made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) Textile, Ltd. (‘‘FETL’’), a producer/ disposition of proprietary information by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. exporter of certain polyester staple fiber disclosed under APO in accordance In addition, unless otherwise indicated, in Taiwan, requested an administrative with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely all citations to Department of review of the antidumping duty order written notification of the return or Commerce’s (the Department’s) on certain polyester staple fiber from destruction of APO materials or regulations are to 19 CFR Part 351 Taiwan covering the period March 30, conversion to judicial protective order is (2001). 2000 to April 30, 2001. On May 30, hereby requested. Failure to comply 2001, Arteva Specialities S.a.r.l. d/b/a/ with the regulations and the terms of an Background KoSa and Wellman Inc. (‘‘the APO is a sanctionable violation. On June 13, 2001, the Department petitioners’’), requested an This determination is issued and initiated the above-referenced administrative review of the published in accordance with sections investigations. See Notice of Initiation antidumping duty order on certain 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of Antidumping Duty Investigations: polyester staple fiber from Taiwan for of 1930, as amended. Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd. (‘‘Nan Dated: October 4, 2001. and Strip from India and Taiwan, 66 FR Ya’’), a producer/exporter of certain Richard W. Moreland, 31888 (June 13, 2001). polyester staple fiber in Taiwan, covering the period April 27, 2000 to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Postponement of Preliminary Administration. April 30, 2001. In accordance with 19 Determination [FR Doc. 01–25708 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we published the Currently, the preliminary BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P initiation of the review on June 19, determinations are due no later than 2001. Initiation of Antidumping and October 24, 2001. However, pursuant to Countervailing Duty Administrative DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we have Reviews and Requests for Revocations in determined that these investigations are Part, 66 FR 32934. On September 4, International Trade Administration ‘‘extraordinarily complicated’’ and are 2001, FETL withdrew its request for therefore postponing the preliminary [Case Number: A–533–824, A–583–837] review. On September 20, 2001, the determinations by 50 days to December petitioners withdrew their request for Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, 13, 2001. Under section 733(c)(1)(B) of review for Nan Ya. Sheet, and Strip From India and the Act, the Department can extend the Rescission of Review Taiwan: Notice of Postponement of period for reaching a preliminary determination until not later than the The Department’s regulations provide Preliminary Antidumping Duty 190th day after the date on which the that the Department will rescind an Determinations administering authority initiates an administrative review if a party that AGENCY: Import Administration, investigation if: requested a review withdraws the International Trade Administration, (B) The administering authority request within ninety days of the date Department of Commerce. concludes that the parties concerned are of publication of the notice of initiation ACTION: Notice of postponement of cooperating and determines that— of the requested review. 19 CFR preliminary antidumping duty (i) the case is extraordinarily 351.213(d)(1). The Department’s determinations in antidumping duty complicated by reason of— regulations also allow the Secretary to investigations. (I) the number and complexity of the extend this time limit if it is reasonable transactions to be investigated or to do so. Id. FETL’s request for review SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce adjustments to be considered; was withdrawn within the ninety-day is postponing the preliminary (II) the novelty of the issues deadline. The petitioners’ request for determinations in the antidumping duty presented; or review for Nan Ya was withdrawn investigations on polyethylene (III) the number of firms whose ninety-three days after the initiation was terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET activities must be investigated; and published. However, because Nan Ya film) from India and Taiwan from (ii) additional time is necessary to received an extension to file its response October 24, 2001, until December 13, make the preliminary determination.
VerDate 11
The parties concerned are cooperating FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: October 5, 2001. in these investigations. Additional time Melanie Brown or Annika O’Hara in Richard W. Moreland, is necessary, however, to complete the Office 1, Import Administration, Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD preliminary determinations due to the International Trade Administration, Enforcement. number and complexity of the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th [FR Doc. 01–25707 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] transactions to be investigated and Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P adjustments to be considered, and the Washington DC 20230; at telephone novelty of issues presented. (202) 482–4987 and 482–3798, With respect to India, the Department respectively. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE needs to consider a number of complex Applicable Statute sales, cost, and affiliation issues International Trade Administration associated with two companies. In Unless otherwise indicated, all [A–588–854] regard to Taiwan, on September 19 and citations to the statute are references to September 26, 2001 the Department the provisions effective January 1, 1995, Certain Tin Mill Products From Japan: received allegations that sales were the effective date of the amendments Final Results of Changed made below the cost of production made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Circumstances Review during the period of investigation. We Act’’) by the Uruguay Round AGENCY: Import Administration, reviewed those allegations and initiated Agreements Act and all citations to the International Trade Administration, investigations of sales below cost. regulations are to 19 CFR part 351 U.S. Department of Commerce. Therefore, for both investigations, (2000). ACTION: Final results of changed additional time is required to review the Statutory Time Limits circumstances review. issues and the cost information for purposes of the preliminary Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act SUMMARY: On May 29, 2001, the determinations. Therefore, pursuant to requires the Department to issue the Department of Commerce (‘‘the section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are preliminary results of an administrative Department’’) published a notice of postponing the preliminary review within 245 days after the last day initiation of a changed circumstances determinations in these investigations of the anniversary month of an order for review for a partial revocation of the until December 13, 2001. This notice is which a review is requested and a final antidumping duty order on tin mill issued and published pursuant to determination within 120 days after the products from Japan with respect to the section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR date on which the preliminary results merchandise described below at the 351.205(f). are published. However, if it is not request of Weirton Steel and the Dated: October 4, 2001. practicable to complete the review Independent Steelworkers Union, Joseph A. Spetrini, within the time period, section interested parties in this proceeding. 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the See Certain Tin Mill Products from Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Department to extend these deadlines to Japan: Notice of Initiation of Changed a maximum of 365 days and 180 days, Circumstances Review of the [FR Doc. 01–25712 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] respectively. Antidumping Duty Order, 66 FR 29086 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P (May 29, 2001). On August 8, 2001, the Background Department published the preliminary DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE On March 22, 2001, the Department results of the changed circumstances published a notice of initiation of review and preliminarily determined International Trade Administration administrative review of the that several interested parties are antidumping duty order on stainless interested in the maintenance of the [A–533–810] steel bar from India., covering the order with respect to the merchandise described below, and that there was no Stainless Steel Bar From India; period February 1, 2000 through January reasonable basis to believe that changed Extension of Time Limit for the 31, 2001 (66 FR 16037). The preliminary circumstances sufficient to warrant Preliminary Results of the results for the antidumping duty revocation exist. See Certain Tin Mill Antidumping Duty Administrative administrative review of stainless steel Products from Japan: Preliminary Review bar from India are currently due no later than October 31, 2001. Results of Changed Circumstances AGENCY: Import Administration, Review, 66 FR 41550 (August 8, 2001). Extension of Time Limits for International Trade Administration, In our preliminary results we gave Preliminary Results Department of Commerce. interested parties an opportunity to ACTION: Notice of extension of time Due to the complexity of the issues comment; however, we did not receive limit. raised by the revocation requests that any comments. We are unable to have been made by two respondents, it determine that producers accounting for SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is not practicable to complete this substantially all of the production of the is extending the time limit for the review within the originally anticipated domestic like product have expressed preliminary results of the administrative time limit (i.e., October 31, 2001). lack of interest in the product in review of the antidumping duty order Therefore, the Department of Commerce question. Thus we determine that on stainless steel bar from India. The is extending the time limit for changed circumstances do not exist to period of review is February 1, 2000 completion of the preliminary results to warrant revocation of the order in part. through January 31, 2001. This no later than February 28, 2002, in EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. extension is made pursuant to section accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as the Act. Michael Ferrier or Steve Bezirganian, amended by the Uruguay Round We are issuing and publishing this Import Administration, International Agreements Act. notice in accordance with sections Trade Administration, U.S. Department EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. of Commerce, 14th Street and
VerDate 11
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, subheading 7210.50.0000 of non-alloy Final Results of Changed DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–1394 or steel, and under HTSUS subheading Circumstances Review (202) 482–1131, respectively. 7225.99.0090 if of alloy steel. Although Pursuant to section 751(d) of the Act, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the subheadings are provided for convenience, our written description of the Department may partially revoke an The Applicable Statute and Regulations antidumping duty order based on a the scope is dispositive. Unless otherwise indicated, all review under section 751(b) of the Act. citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as On June 18, 2001, National Steel Section 782(h)(2) of the Act and section amended (the Act), are references to the Corporation (‘‘National’’), a producer of 351.222(g)(1)(i) of the Department’s provisions effective January 1, 1995, the tin mill products, stated that it objects regulations provide that the Secretary effective date of the amendments made to the partial revocation of the may revoke an order, in whole or in to the Act by the Uruguay Round antidumping order on certain tin mill part, based on changed circumstances if Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, products from Japan as proposed by ‘‘(p)roducers accounting for unless otherwise indicated, all citations Weirton Steel and the Independent substantially all of the production of the to the Department of Commerce’s (the Steelworkers Union. On June 15, 2001, domestic like product to which the Department’s) regulations are to the USS-Posco Industries (‘‘UPI’’), a order (or the part of the order to be regulations at 19 CFR part 351 (2001). domestic producer of tin mill products revoked) * * * pertains have expressed stated that UPI can produce and has a lack of interest in the order, in whole Background produced the 60-pound double-reduced or in part. * * *’’ In this context, the On April 6, 2001, Weirton Steel and tin-free steel products and therefore has Department has interpreted the Independent Steelworkers Union, an interest in maintaining the ‘‘substantially all’’ production normally petitioners in this proceeding, requested antidumping order on tin mill products to mean at least 85 percent of domestic that the Department revoke in part the from Japan. Information on the record production of the like product (see Oil antidumping duty order on certain tin indicates that both interested parties Country Tubular Goods From Mexico: mill products from Japan. On May 3, opposed to the partial revocation Preliminary Results of Changed 2001, petitioners submitted a change in accounted for over 15 percent of the Circumstances Antidumping Duty the definition of the product for which domestic production of tin mill Administrative Review, 64 FR 14213, they requested a changed circumstances products in year 2000. 14214 (March 24, 1999)). review. Specifically, petitioners In order to determine whether requested that the Department revoke Scope of Changed Circumstances ‘‘substantially all’’ of the domestic the order with respect to imports of Review producers supported revocation of the merchandise meeting the following order with respect to the merchandise in specifications: double reduced (CADR8 The merchandise covered by this question, the Department solicited temper) electrolytically chromium changed circumstances review is certain comments from all parties (see Initiation coated steel with chromium oxide at a double reduced (CADR8 temper) of Changed Circumstances Review, 66 level of 1.6 mg/sq. ft. (#0.9), having a electrolytically chromium coated steel FR at 29088). Weirton Steel and the base box weight of 60 pounds (nominal with chromium oxide at a level of 1.6 Independent Steelworkers Union have thickness of 0.0066 inch (#5% mg/sq. ft. (#0.9), having a base box not provided evidence that they account tolerance)), and a surface with a 7C weight of 60 pounds (nominal thickness for 85 percent of domestic production. stone finish, lubricated with butyl of 0.0066 inch (#5% tolerance)), and a The Department received comments stearate oil (BSO) or dioctyl sebacate oil surface with a 7C stone finish, (DOS) with the level ranging from 0.22 from UPI and from National Steel. In lubricated with butyl stearate oil (BSO) fact, information on the record to 0.32 gm/base box. The material is or dioctyl sebacate oil (DOS) with the 1 ¥ 1 demonstrates that interested parties 31 ⁄2 inches in actual width 0/+ ⁄16 level ranging from 0.22 to 0.32 gm/base inch width tolerance) and made from opposed to the partial revocation box. The material is 311⁄2 inches in collectively account for over 15 percent fully deoxidized (killed) continuous cast ¥ 1 actual width ( 0/+ ⁄16 inch width of the domestic production of tin mill and continuous annealed steel that is tolerance) and made from fully free of detrimental non-metallic products in 2000. More specifically, deoxidized (killed) continuous cast and inclusions (i.e., clean steel) with earring National’s production of tin mill continuous annealed steel that is free of hazard minimized. The maximum edge products for year 2000 exceeds 15 detrimental non-metallic inclusions percent. Therefore the Department is wave is 1⁄8 inch, with crossbow controllable to less than 2 inches per (i.e., clean steel) with earring hazard maintaining the order on tin mill sheet. The maximum camber per three minimized. The maximum edge wave is products from Japan and is continuing 1 feet is 0.020 inch, the maximum burr is ⁄8 inch, with crossbow controllable to to include the product which meets the 0.001 inch, and the maximum pinholes less than 2 inches per sheet. The specifications detailed above in the per coil is 0.2%. The maximum coil maximum camber per three feet is 0.020 order on tin mill products from Japan, weight is 25,000 pounds, with an inch, the maximum burr is 0.001 inch, in accordance with sections 751(b) and interior coil diameter of 16 inches to and the maximum pinholes per coil is (d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216. 161⁄2 inches, and an exterior coil 0.2%. The maximum coil weight is This notice also serves as a reminder diameter of 36 inches to 60 inches. 25,000 pounds, with an interior coil to parties subject to administrative When loaded for shipment, the coil is diameter of 16 inches to 161⁄2 inches, protective orders (APOs) of their placed on the pallet with the eye of the and an exterior coil diameter of 36 responsibility concerning the coil standing vertical, with each side of inches to 60 inches. When loaded for disposition of proprietary information the pallet being 60 inches having 4 x 4 shipment, the coil is placed on the disclosed under APO in accordance runners, and outside runners placed a pallet with the eye of the coil standing with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written minimum of 37 inches apart. vertical, with each side of the pallet notification of the return/destruction of The merchandise subject to this being 60 inches having 4 x 4 runners, APO materials or conversion to judicial changed circumstances review is and outside runners placed a minimum protective order is hereby requested. classified in the HTSUS under of 37 inches apart. Failure to comply with the regulations
VerDate 11
and terms of an APO is a sanctionable September 27, 1988); September 20, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE violation. 1989 (54 FR 39454, September 26, This determination is issued and 1989); November 19, 1992 (57 FR 55510, International Trade Administration published in accordance with sections November 25, 1992); August 16, 1994 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and (59 FR 43093, August 22, 1994); North American Free-Trade section 351.216 of the Department’s November 4, 1996 (61 FR 57850, Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel regulations. November 8, 1996); October 22, 1997 Reviews; Notice of Completion of Dated: October 2, 2001. (62 FR 55783, October 28, 1997); Panel Review. Joseph A. Spetrini, November 2, 1998 (63 FR 60304, AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United Acting Assistant Secretary for Import November 9, 1998); October 20, 1999 States Section, International Trade Administration. (64 FR 57438, October 25, 1999); and Administration, Department of [FR Doc. 01–25710 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] October 16, 2000 (65 FR 63567, October Commerce. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 24, 2000). NFE’s Export Trade Certificate of ACTION: Notice of completion of panel review of the final remand DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Review has been amended to: determination made by the U.S. 1. Add each of the following International Trade Administration, in International Trade Administration companies as a new ‘‘Member’’ of the the matter of Carbon Steel Flat Products Certificate within the meaning of Export Trade Certificate of Review from Canada, Secretariat File No. USA– section 325.2(1) of the Regulations (15 98–1904–01. ACTION: Notice of issuance of an CFR 325.2(1)): Bertha’s Marketing, Inc., amended export trade certificate of Wenatchee, Washington; Crane & Crane, SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Order of the review, Application No. 84–12A12. Inc., Brewster, Washington; Garrett Binational Panel dated August 24, 2001, Ranches Packing, Wilder, Idaho; Sun affirming the final remand SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Fresh International, LLC, Wenatchee, has issued an amendment to the Export determination described above was Washington; and Valicoff Fruit Trade Certificate of Review granted to completed on September 4, 2001. Company, Wapato, Washington; Northwest Fruit Exporters (‘‘NFE’’) on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June 11, 1984. Notice of issuance of the 2. Delete the following companies as Certificate was published in the Federal ‘‘Members’’ of the Certificate: Beebe Caratina L. Alston, United States Register on June 14, 1984 (49 FR 24581). Orchard Company, Chelan, Washington; Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cashmere Fruit Exchange, Cashmere, Vanessa M. Bachman, Acting Director, Washington; Custom Fruit Packers, Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. Office of Export Trading Company Wenatchee, Washington; Chief Tonasket SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August Affairs, International Trade Growers, Tonasket, Washington; and 24, 2001, the Binational Panel issued an Administration, (202) 482–5131 (this is Wells & Wade Fruit Co., Wenatchee, order which affirmed the final remand not a toll-free number) or E-mail at Washington; and determination of the United States [email protected]. 3. Change the listing of the following International Trade Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of Members: ‘‘Custom Apple Packers, Inc., (‘‘ITA’’) concerning Carbon Steel Flat the Export Trading Company Act of Brewster and Quincy, Washington’’ to Products from Canada. The Secretariat 1982 (15 U.S.C. sections 4001–21) the new listing ‘‘Custom Apple Packers, was instructed to issue a Notice of authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to Inc., Brewster, Quincy & Wenatchee, Completion of Panel Review on the 31st issue Export Trade Certificates of Washington’’; ‘‘Columbia Reach Pack, day following the issuance of the Notice Review. The regulations implementing Yakima, Washington’’ to ‘‘Chiawana, of Final Panel Action, if no request for Title III are found at 15 CFR part 325 Inc. dba Columbia Reach Pack, Yakima, an Extraordinary Challenge was filed. (2000). Washington’’; and ‘‘Double Diamond No such request was filed. Therefore, on The Office of Export Trading Fruit, Quincy, Washington’’ to the basis of the Panel Order and Rule 80 Company Affairs (‘‘OETCA’’) is issuing ‘‘Morgan’s of Washington dba Double of the Article 1904 Panel Rules, the this notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), Panel Review was completed and the which requires the Department of Diamond Fruit, Quincy, Washington’’. panelists discharged from their duties Commerce to publish a summary of the The effective date of the amended certification in the Federal Register. certificate is July 9, 2001. A copy of the effective October 5, 2001. Under section 305(a) of the Act and 15 amended certificate will be kept in the October 5, 2001. CFR 325.11(a), any person aggrieved by International Trade Administration’s Caratina L. Alston, the Secretary’s determination may, Freedom of Information Records United States Secretary NAFTA Secretariat. within 30 days of the date of this notice, Inspection Facility, Room 4102, U.S. [FR Doc. 01–25678 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] bring an action in any appropriate Department of Commerce, 14th Street BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P district court of the United States to set and Constitution Avenue, NW., aside the determination on the ground Washington, DC 20230. that the determination is erroneous. Dated: October 9, 2001. Description of Amended Certificate Vanessa M. Bachman, Export Trade Certificate of Review Acting Director, Office of Export Trading, No. 84–00012, was issued to NFE on Company Affairs. June 11, 1984 (49 FR 24581, June 14, [FR Doc. 01–25713 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 1984) and previously amended on May BILLING CODE 3510–DR–U 2, 1988 (53 FR 16306, May 6, 1988); September 21, 1988 (53 FR 37628,
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Interested parties are invited to submit The Panel is to consist of 15 voting comments. members composed as follows: Not less National Institute of Standards and Dated: October 5, 2001. than eight of voting members of the Technology Karen H. Brown, panel should be individuals who, by reason of knowledge, experience, or Deputy Director. [Docket No.: 010910225–1225–01] training, are especially qualified in one [FR Doc. 01–25745 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] or more of the disciplines and fields Notice of Intent To Modernize the BILLING CODE 3510–13–M included in marine science. The other Existing FORTRAN Content voting members shall be individuals Management System of the ACerS– who by reason of knowledge, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NIST Phase Equilibria for Ceramics experience, or training, are especially Database. National Oceanic and Atmospheric qualified in, or representative of, education, extension service, state AGENCY: National Institute of Standards Administration Office of Oceanic and government, industry, economics, and Technology, Commerce. Atmospheric Research (OAR) National planning, or any other activity which is ACTION: Notice and request for See Grant Review Panel appropriate to, and important for, any comments. effort to enhance the understanding, AGENCY: Notice of Solicitation for Sea assessment, development, utilization, or SUMMARY: The National Institute of Grant Review Panelists. Standards and Technology announces conservation of ocean and coastal SUMMARY: its intent to provide technical assistance This notice responds to the resources. No individual is eligible to be to the American Ceramic Society Inc. National Sea Grant College Program Act, a voting members of the panel if the (ACerS) to update the current at 33 U.S.C. 1128, which requires the individual is (a) the director of a sea FORTRAN Content Management System Secretary of Commerce to solicit grant college, sea grant regional (CMS) system that provides users with nominations at least once a year for consortium, or sea grant program, (b) access to the NIST–ACerS Phase membership on the Sea Grant Review and applicant for or beneficiary (as Equilibria for Ceramics database. The Panel. This advisory committee determined by the Secretary) of any updated CMS system will provide users provides advice on the implementation grant or contract under 33 U.S.C. 1124 with improved access to the database. of the National Sea Grant College or (c) a full-time officer or employee of Interested parties are invited to submit Program. the United States. The Director of the comments to the address below. Work DATES: Resumes should be sent to the National See Grant College Program and on the project will not begin until after address specified and must be received one Director of a Sea Grant Program also the comment period ends. by November 13, 2001. serve as non-voting members. Panel members are appointed for a 3-year DATES ADDRESSES: : Comments must be received by Dr. Ronald C. Baird, term. November 13, 2001. Director; National Sea Grant College ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Program; 1315 East-West Highway, Louisa Koch, the attention of Stephen Freiman at the Room 11716; Silver Spring, Maryland Deputy Assistant Administratior, Office of National Institute of Standards and 20910. Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. Technology, Mail Stop 8520, 100 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. [FR Doc. 01–25635 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899– Ronald Baird of the National Sea Grant BILLING CODE 3510–KA–M 8520. College Program at the address given FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: above; telephone (301) 713–2448 or fax Stephen Freiman by writing to the number (301) 713–1031. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE above address or by e-mail at SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section National Oceanic and Atmospheric [email protected] or by 209 of the Act establishes a Sea Grant Administration telephone at (301) 975–6119. Review Panel to advise the Secretary of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of Commerce, the Under Secretary for National Estuarine Research Reserve its responsibilities under Title 15 U.S.C. Oceans and Atmosphere, and the System: Sediment Retention System in 290 to collect, evaluate and publish high Director of the National Sea Grant Goat Canyon Creek and Watershed at quality Standard Reference Data (SRD), College Program on the implementation Tijuana National Estuarine Research NIST creates and maintains SRD of the Sea Grant Program. The Panel Reserve databases. NIST intends to work with provides advice on such matters as: the American Ceramic Society, Inc. in (a) the Sea Grant Fellowship Program; AGENCY: Estuarine Reserves Division, their effort to modernize AcerS software (b) applications or proposals for, and Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource that delivers critically evaluated phase performance under, grants and contracts Management, National Ocean Service, equilibrium data for ceramic and other awarded under the Sea Grant Program National Oceanic and Atmospheric inorganic materials. NIST will provide Improvement Act of 12976, as amended Administration, U.S. Department of technical assistance to identify at 33 U.S.C. 1124; Commerce. appropriate scientific, mathematical, (c) the designation and operation of ACTION: Notice of availability of a draft analytical and display algorithms for sea grant colleges and sea grant Environmental Impact Statement/ implementation in the new AcerS institutes; and the operation of the sea Environmental Impact Report on a software. NIST will also provide grant program; proposed sediment retention system in documentation on existing related NIST (d) the formulation and application of the Goat Canyon Creek and watershed at algorithms and will verify proposed the planning guidelines and priorities the Tijuana River National Estuarine new algorithms for scientific and under 33 U.S.C. 1123(a) and (c)(1); and Research Reserve, Imperial Beach, computational correctness and (e) such other matters as the Secretary California; and notice of public hearings accuracy. All work done by NIST refers to the panel for review and on this project. scientists will be on NIST premises. advice.
VerDate 11
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National DATES: The comment period for the draft and the alluvial fan. NOS has identified Environmental Policy Act and the joint EIS/EIR will end on Monday, Alternative D as the Preferred California Environmental Quality Act, November 26, 2001. All written Alternative based on an evaluation of the National Ocean Service (NOS), in comments received by this deadline will the impacts and comparison between cooperation with California State Parks, be considered in the preparation of the the alternatives. Alternative D features has completed the preparation of a joint FEIS/FEIR. an in-canyon diversion structure and Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ ADDRESSES: Written comments on the sedimentation basin system consisting Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) joint Draft EIS/EIR should be sent to of two basins in series to capture the addressing the potential effects on the Nina Garfield, NOAA, Estuarine flow in Goat Canyon Creek. The system human and natural environment that Reserves Division,SSMC–4, 11th Floor, has been designed to contain the full may result from construction of 1305 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, 100-year flood event. The Preferred sedimentation, flood control and other Maryland, 20910–3281. Alternative also involves construction of facilities within and adjacent to Goat FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: access roads around the basins, staging Canyon, and the elevation and/or Mayda Winter, Goat Canyon areas adjacent to the basins, a visual realignment of Monument Road through Enhancement Project, Southwest berm located between the basins and Border Field State Park lands. The Wetlands Interpretive Association, 925 Monument Road, options for purpose of these proposed facilities is to Seacoast Drive, Imperial Beach, improvements to Monument Road and a enhance the existing Goat Canyon Creek California, 91932, tel. (619) 575–0550. multi-purpose trail, and creation of and its natural habitat communities, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Goat wetland habitat. The preferred option including the Tijuana River Estuary, Canyon Creek is located in the far for the road and trail has not been through the management of sediment western portion of the greater Tijuana determined at this time. The Preferred within the canyon and on the adjacent River Watershed. The watershed is Alternative would be the most efficient alluvial fan. characterized by steep slopes, sandy at capturing sediment and would result The proposed project is in soils with cobbles, pockets of native in the least impacts to sensitive wetland conformance with the Final Goat coastal sage scrub, riparian vegetation, habitats and endangered species. ˜ Canyon/Canon de los Laureles and a high level of human-induced Document Availability Enhancement Plan prepared by the disturbance, especially during the last Copies of the draft EIS/EIR are Southwest Wetlands Interpretive 20 to 30 years. A prominent result of available for review at the California Association (SWIA). As a result of the changes in the watershed has been a State Parks, San Diego Coast District construction of sedimentation basins, it significant increase in sediment yield in Office, 9609 Waples, Suite 200, San is anticipated that Goat Canyon Creek, response to higher volumes of runoff Diego, California, 92108, (858) 642– its watershed, and the Tijuana River and an increased sediment supply 4200, the Tijuana River National Estuary will be enhanced. throughout the watershed. Increased Estuarine Research Reserve at 301 The draft EIS/EIR is available for sedimentation has adversely affected the Caspian Way, Imperial Beach, California public review and comment. All local habitat communities of Goat 91932, (619) 575–3613, and at the comments received, including names Canyon and downstream within the Imperial Beach Public Library, 810 and addresses, will become part of the Tijuana River Estuary. By the mid- Imperial Beach Boulevard, Imperial administrative record and be made 1980s, it was estimated that erosion and Beach, 91932, (619) 424–6981. available to the public. sedimentation had resulted in the loss NOS will hold a public hearing from of 30 acres of intertidal wetland area in Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Number 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on November 7, the Tijuana River Estuary. The 11.420 (Coastal Zone Management) Research 2001, at the City of Imperial Beach City composition and distribution of native Reserves Dated: October 5, 2001. Hall Community Room, 825 Imperial habitat communities along the creek and Beach Boulevard, Imperial Beach, on the alluvial fan have been altered, as Jamison S. Hawkins, California 91932. The views of has the morphology of the creek. Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean interested persons and organizations on Further, during storm events, sediment Services and Coastal Zone Management. the adequacy of the joint Draft EIS/EIR is deposited on Monument Road, which [FR Doc. 01–25657 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] are solicited, and may be expressed in turn blocks public access to Border BILLING CODE 3510–08–P orally and/or in written statements. Field State Park and impedes the U.S. Presentations by the public will be Border Patrol. scheduled on a first-come, first-heard On August 10, 2000, the National DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE basis, and may be limited to a maximum Ocean Service published in the Federal of five (5) minutes. The time allotment National Oceanic and Atmospheric Register a Notice of Intent to prepare a Administration may be extended before the hearing after joint Environmental Impact Statement/ the number of speakers has been Environmental Impact Report [Vol. 65 National Sea Grant Review Panel determined. All comments received at No. 155, 48971–48972]. The stated the hearing will be considered in the intent of the proposed project was to AGENCY: Notice of public meeting. preparation of the Final EIS/EIR. enhance the existing Goat Canyon Creek SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the These meetings are physically and its natural habitat communities, schedule and proposed agenda of a accessible to people with disabilities. including the Tijuana River Estuary, forthcoming meeting of the Sea Grant Requests for sign language through the management of sediment Review Panel. The meeting will have interpretation or other auxiliary aids within the canyon and on the adjacent several purposes. Panel members will should be directed to Mayda Winter, alluvial fan. discuss and provide advice on the Goat Canyon Enhancement Project, The draft EIS/EIR examines the National Sea Grant College Program in Southwest Wetlands Interpretive potential effects of the No Project the areas of program evaluation, Association, 925 Seacoast Drive, Alternative and four project alternatives education and extension, science and Imperial Beach, California, 91932, tel. for construction of a sedimentation technology programs, and other matters 619–575–0550. retention system within Goat Canyon as described below:
VerDate 11
DATES: The announced meeting is 12:15 p.m.—Wrap-up B. Pacific Halibut Management scheduled during two days: Thursday, 12:30 p.m.—Adjourn Proposed Changes to the Recreational November 8, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; This meeting will be open to the Catch Sharing Plan and Annual Friday, November 9, 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 public. Regulations for 2002 noon. Louisa Koch, ADDRESSES: National Oceanic and C. Groundfish Management Atmospheric Administration, Silver Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. 1. NMFS Report Spring Metro Center III, 1315 East-West 2. Marine Recreational Fisheries [FR Doc. 01–25636 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Highway, Room 4527, Silver Spring, Statistics Survey Update Maryland 20910. BILLING CODE 3510–KA–M 3. Final Harvest Levels for 2002 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 4. Management Measures for 2002 and Ronald C. Baird, Director, National Sea DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Environmental Assessment Grant College Program, National 5. Groundfish Strategic Plan Oceanic and Atmospheric National Oceanic and Atmospheric Implementation Administration, 1315 East-West Administration 6. Rebuilding Plans Highway, Room 11716, Silver Spring, 7. Groundfish Fishery Management [I.D. 100101D] Maryland 20910, (301) 713–2448. Plan Environmental Impact Statement 8. Exempted Fishing Permits (EFP) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Panel, Pacific Fishery Management Council; 9. Status of Fisheries and Inseason which consists of a balanced Public Meetings representation from academia, industry, Adjustments state government and citizens groups, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries D. Salmon Management was established in 1976 by Section 209 Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 1. NMFS Report of the Sea Grant Improvement Act (P.L. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2. Update of Ongoing Fisheries 94–461, 33 U.S.C. 1128). The Panel Commerce. 3. Salmon Option Hearing Sites advises the Secretary of Commerce and ACTION: Notice of public meetings. 4. Sacramento Winter Run Chinook the Director of the National Sea Grant Management College Program with respect to SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery 5. Results of Scientific and Statistical operations under the Act, and such Management Council (Council) and its Committee (SSC) Methodology Review other matters as the Secretary refers to advisory bodies will hold public 6. Queets River Coho Status Review them for review and advice. The agenda meetings. for the meeting is as follows: DATES: The Council and its advisory E. Habitat Issues bodies will meet October 28, 2001– Thursday, November 8, 2001 Essential Fish Habitat Issues November 2, 2001. The Council meeting 8:30 a.m.—Welcoming and Opening will begin on Monday, October 29, F. Marine Reserves Formalities 2001, at 3 p.m., reconvening each day at 1. Status of Marine Reserves Proposals 8:45 a.m.—Executive Committee Report 8 a.m. through Friday. All meetings are for Channel Island National Marine 9:00 a.m.—State of Sea Grant open to the public, except a closed Sanctuary Presentation session will be held at 4 p.m. on 9:20 a.m.—Sea Grant Association Monday, October 29, 2001, to address G. Highly Migratory Species Presentation litigation and personnel matters. The Management 10:15 a.m.—Break Council will meet as late as necessary 1. NMFS Report 10:30 a.m.—Program Evaluation each day to complete its scheduled 2. Draft Highly Migratory Species Committee Report business. Fishery Management Plan (FMP) 12:00 p.m.—Lunch ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at 3. Draft FMP Public Hearing Schedule 1:00 p.m.—Program Evaluation and Sites Committee Report (continued) the Clarion Hotel San Francisco Airport, 3:00 p.m.—Break 401 East Millbrae Avenue, Millbrae, CA H. Coastal Pelagic Species Management 94030; telephone: 650–692–6363. 3:15 p.m.—Review of the National Sea 1. NMFS Report Grant Office Status Report Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE 2. Amendment 10 to the Coastal 3:45 p.m.—National Extension Review Pelagic Species FMP Update Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97220. 3. Pacific Sardine Harvest Guideline 4:00 p.m.—National Sea Grant Panel for 2002 Procedures Manual FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 5:00 p.m.—Maine and New Hampshire Donald O. McIsaac, Executive Director; I. Administrative and Other Matters Sea Grant Programs telephone: 503–326–6352. 1. Status of Legislation 5:40 p.m.—Adjourn SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 2. Elections and Appointments following items are on the Council Friday, November 9, 2001 3. Report of the Budget Committee agenda, but not necessarily in this order. 4. Council Staff Work Load Priorities 8:30 a.m.—Panel Business; Election of All items listed are subject to potential 5. March 2002 Council Meeting Draft Officers, Committee Assignments, Council action. Agenda Panel Meeting Dates 9:00 a.m.—Congressional Update A. Call to Order Schedule of Ancillary Meetings 9:45 a.m.—Commission on Ocean Policy 1. Opening Remarks, Introductions The following ancillary meetings are Report 2. Council Member Appointments scheduled in addition to the Council 10:30 a.m.—Break 3. Roll Call general sessions. 10:45 a.m.—NOAA Update 4. Executive Director’s Report 11:30 a.m.—National Sea Grant Office 5. Approve Agenda Sunday, October 28, 2001 Update 6. Approve September 2001 Minutes Groundfish Management Team, 2 p.m.
VerDate 11
Monday, October 29, 2001 interpretation or other auxiliary aids Note: The NMFS listening station in Groundfish Advisory Subpanel, 8 a.m. should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter Seattle is on Federal property, and due Groundfish Management Team, 8 a.m. at (503) 326–6352 at least 5 days prior to heightened security concerns, photo Scientific and Statistical Committee, 8 to the meeting date. identification will be required to enter a.m. Dated: October 5, 2001. the building, and vehicle inspections Habitat Steering Group, 8 a.m. Richard W. Surdi, may be necessary to park on the facility grounds. Budget Committee, 10 a.m. Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. The purpose of the work session is to Tuesday, October 30, 2001 review information in the Council [FR Doc. 01–25717 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] California State Delegation, 7 a.m. briefing book related to salmon and BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Oregon State Delegation, 7 a.m. pacific halibut management and to Washington State Delegation, 7 a.m. develop comments and Groundfish Advisory Subpanel, 8 a.m. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE recommendations for consideration at Groundfish Management Team, 8 a.m. the October-November Council meeting. Scientific and Statistical Committee, 8 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Although non-emergency issues not a.m. Administration contained in the meeting agenda may Enforcement Consultants, come before the SAS for discussion, immediately following Council session. [I.D. 092401B] those issues may not be the subject of formal SAS action during this meeting. Wednesday, October 31, 2001 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting SAS action will be restricted to those California State Delegation, 7 a.m. issues specifically listed in this notice Oregon State Delegation, 7 a.m. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries and any issues arising after publication Washington State Delegation, 7 a.m. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and of this notice that require emergency Groundfish Advisory Subpanel, 8 a.m. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), action under section 305(c) of the Highly Migratory Species Advisory Commerce. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Subpanel, 8 a.m. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. Conservation and Management Act, Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory provided the public has been notified of Subpanel, 10 a.m. SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery the SAS’s intent to take final action to Groundfish Management Team, as Management Council’s (Council) address the emergency. necessary Salmon Advisory Subpanel (SAS) will Enforcement Consultants, as hold a work session by telephone Special Accommodations necessary conference, which is open to the public. This meeting is physically accessible Thursday, November 1, 2001 DATES: The telephone conference will be to people with disabilities. Requests for held Friday, October 26, 2001, from 9 sign language interpretation or other California State Delegation, 7 a.m. a.m. to noon. auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. Oregon State Delegation, 7 a.m. ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY Carolyn Porter at (503) 326–6352 at least Washington State Delegation, 7 a.m. 5 days prior to the meeting date. Groundfish Advisory Subpanel, 8 a.m. INFORMATION for the locations of the Groundfish Management Team, as listening stations. Dated: October 5, 2001. necessary. Council address: Pacific Fishery Richard W Sutdi, Enforcement Consultants, as Management Council, 7700 NE Acting Director, Office of Sustainable necessary. Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. OR 97220–1384. [FR Doc. 01–25720 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Friday, November 2, 2001 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S California State Delegation, 7 a.m. Chuck Tracy, Salmon Management Staff Oregon State Delegation, 7 a.m. Officer, Pacific Fishery Management Washington State Delegation, 7 a.m. Council: (503) 326–6352. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Enforcement Consultants, as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Three National Oceanic and Atmospheric necessary. listening stations will be available at the Administration Although non-emergency issues not following locations: contained in this agenda may come 1. California Department of Fish and [I.D. 100401D] before the Council for discussion, those Game issues may not be the subject of formal 1528–A Healdsburg Avenue Pacific Fishery Management Council; Council action during this meeting. Healdsburg, CA 95448 Public Meeting Council action will be restricted to those Contact: Mr. Allen Grover; (707) 431– issues specifically listed in this notice 2860 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries and any issues arising after publication 2. Pacific Fishery Management Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and of this notice that require emergency Council Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), action under section 305(c) of the East Conference Room Commerce. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200 ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Conservation and Management Act, Portland, OR 97220–1384 provided the public has been notified of Contact: Mr. Chuck Tracy; (503) 326– SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery the Council’s intent to take final action 6352 Management Council’s (Council) Highly to address the emergency. 3. NMFS Northwest Region Migratory Species Plan Development Director’s Conference Room Team (HMSPDT) will hold a work Special Accommodations 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Building 1 session, which is open to the public. These meetings are physically Seattle, WA 98115 DATES: The HMSPDT will meet on accessible to people with disabilities. Contact: Mr. Chris Wright; (206) 526– Wednesday, November 7, 2001 and Requests for sign language 4323 Thursday, November 8, 2001, from 8:30
VerDate 11
a.m. to 5 p.m., and on Friday, November COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING military applicants. It provides 9, 2001, from 8:30 a.m. until business COMMISSION necessary information to determine if an for the day is completed. applicant meets qualifications Sunshine Act Meeting established for appointment to fill ADDRESSES: The work session will be authorized ANGUS and USAFR position held at the Hubbs-Sea World Research Agency Holding the Meeting: vacancies and active duty requirements. Institute, East Conference Room, 2595 Commodity Futures Trading Eligibility requirements are outlined in Ingraham Street, San Diego, CA 92109, Commission. Time and Date: 2 p.m., Tuesday, Air Force Instruction 36–2005. telephone: 619–226–3870. Affected Public: Individuals or October 30, 2001. Council address: Pacific Fishery households. Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Management Council, 7700 NE Frequency: On occasion. Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, Respondent’s Obligation: Required to Room. OR 97220–1384. obtain or retain benefits. Status: Closed. OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Edward C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Matters To Be Considered: Rule Springer. Enforcement Review. Waldeck, Pacific Fishery Management Written comments and Contact Person For More Information: Council, telephone: 503–326–6352. recommendations on the proposed Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collection should be sent to purpose of this meeting is to incorporate Jean A. Webb, Mr. Springer at the Office of Council guidance stemming from the Secretary of the Commission. Management and Budget, Desk Officer November Council meeting into a public [FR Doc. 01–25913 Filed 10–10–01; 3:18 pm] for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive review draft of the fishery management BILLING CODE 6351–01–M Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. plan (FMP) for West Coast-based highly DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Robert migratory species (HMS) fisheries. Cushing. Following completion of the HMSPDT’s DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Written requests for copies of the work, the draft FMP will be made information collection proposal should available for public review. The Council Office of the Secretary be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR, is scheduled to consider final adoption 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite of the HMS FMP at the Council’s March Submission for OMB Review; 1204, Arlington, VA 22202–4302. 2002 meeting. Please note, the HMSPDT Comment Request Dated: October 4, 2001. meeting is a work session devoted to Patricia L. Toppings, ACTION: Notice. finalizing the draft FMP for public Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison review. Public hearings will be The Department of Defense has Officer, Department of Defense. scheduled at the November Council submitted to OMB for clearance, the [FR Doc. 01–25667 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] meeting. Dates and locations of these following proposal for collection of BILLING CODE 5001–08–M hearings will be published in information under the provisions of the subsequent Federal Register notices. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Although non-emergency issues not Chapter 35). The Office of Management DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE contained in the HMSPDT meeting and Budget had previously approved agenda may come before the HMSPDT this information collection requirement Office of the Secretary for discussion, those issues may not be for use through September 30, 2001. Submission for OMB Review; the subject of formal HMSPDT action DATES: Consideration will be given to all Comment Request during this meeting. HMSPDT action comments received by November 13, will be restricted to those issues 2001. ACTION: Notice. specifically listed in this document and Title, Form Number, and OMB any issues arising after publication of Number: Application for an The Department of Defense has this document that require emergency Appointment as a Reserve of the Air submitted to OMB for clearance, the action under section 305(c) of the Force or USAF Without Component; AF following proposal for collection of Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Form 24; OMB Number 0701–0096. information under the provisions of the Conservation and Management Act, Type of Request: Reinstatement. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. provided the public has been notified of Number of Respondents: 5,899. Chapter 35). The Office of Management the HMSPDT’s intent to take final action Responses per Respondent: 1. and Budget had previously approved to address the emergency. Annual Responses: 5,899. this information collection requirement Average Burden per Response: 20 for use through September 30, 2001. Special Accommodations minutes. DATES: Consideration will be given to all The meeting is physically accessible Annual Burden Hours: 1,966. comments received by November 13, to people with disabilities. Requests for Needs And Uses: The information 2001. sign language interpretation or other collection requirement is necessary to Title, Form Number, and OMB auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. provide information to determine if an Number: Application for Former Spouse Carolyn Porter at (503) 326–6352 at least applicant meets the qualifications Payments from Retired Pay; DD Form 5 days prior to the meeting date. established for appointment in the 2293; OMB Number 0730–0008. Reserves of the Air Force or the Air Type of Request: Reinstatement. Dated: October 5, 2001. Force without component and entry into Number of Respondents: 20,520. Richard W. Surdi, active duty. Responses per Respondent: 1. Acting Director, Office of Sustainable The information contained on AF Annual Responses: 20,520. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Form 24 supports the Air Force as it Average Burden per Response: 15 [FR Doc. 01–25721 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] applies to direct appointment minutes. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S (procurement) programs for civilian and Annual Burden Hours: 5,064.
VerDate 11
Needs And Uses: Under 10 U.S.C. scheduled to be held on October 4, In accordance with Section 10(d) of 1408, state courts may divide military 2001, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. has been the Federal Advisory Committee Act, retired pay as property or order alimony postponed. A new meeting date will be Pub. L. No. 92–463, as amended (5 and child support payment from that announced. For further information U.S.C. App. II), it has been determined retired pay. The former spouse may contact Ms. Marsha Jacobson, at 703– that these DSB Task Force meetings apply to the Defense Finance and 696–4235, extension 1990. concern matters listed in 5 U.S.C. Accounting Service (DFAS) for direct Dated: October 4, 2001. 552b(c)(1), and that accordingly these payment of these monies by using DD L.M. Bynum, meetings will be closed to the public. Form 2293. This information collection Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Dated: October 5, 2001. is needed to provide DFAS the basic Officer, DoD. data needed to process the request. The L.M. Bynum, [FR Doc. 01–25670 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] respondents of this information Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison collection are spouses or former spouses BILLING CODE 5001–08–M Officer, Department of Defense. of military members. The DD Form 2293 [FR Doc. 01–25666 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] was devised to standardize applications DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BILLING CODE 5001–08–M for payment under 10 U.S.C. 1408. Information on the form is also used to Office of the Secretary determine the applicant’s current status DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and contains statutory required Defense Science Board certifications the applicant/former Office of the Secretary spouse must make when applying for AGENCY: Department of Defense. Strategic Environmental Research and payments. ACTION: Notice of advisory committee Affected Public: Individuals or meetings. Development Program, Scientific households. Advisory Board Frequency: On occasion. SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Respondent’s Obligation: Required to (DSB) Task Force on Aircraft Carriers of ACTION: Notice. obtain or retain benefits. the Future will meet in closed session OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Edward C. on October 22–23, 2001; November 5–7, SUMMARY: In accordance with Section Springer. 2001; November 15–16, 2001; December 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Written comments and 11–12, 2001; January 16–17, 2002; Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), recommendations on the proposed February 21–22, 2002; and March 13– announcement is made of the following information collection should be sent to 14, 2002. All meetings will be held at Committee meetings. Mr. Springer at the Office of Strategic Analysis Inc., 3601 Wilson Management and Budget, Desk Officer Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22201, with DATES: October 16, 2001 from 1230 p.m. for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive the exception of the November 5–7 and to 1815 p.m., October 17, 2001 from Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. November 15–16 meetings, which will 0830 a.m. to 1735 p.m., and October 18, DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Robert be held in San Diego, CA. The Task 2001 from 0830 a.m. to 1245 p.m. Cushing. Force will assess how aircraft carriers ADDRESSES: National Rural Electric Written requests for copies of the should serve the nation’s defense needs Cooperative Association (NRECA), 4301 information collection proposal should in the 21st Century and beyond. be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR, Wilson Boulevard, Conference Center The mission of the Defense Science 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite Room 1, Arlington, VA 22203. Board is to advise the Secretary of 1204, Arlington, VA 22202–4302. Defense and the Under Secretary of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Dated: October 4, 2001. Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Veronica Rice, SERDP Program Office, Patricia L. Toppings, Logistics on scientific and technical 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 303, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison matters as they affect the perceived Arlington, VA, or by telephone at (703) Officer, Department of Defense. needs of the Department of Defense. At 696–2119. [FR Doc. 01–25668 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] these meetings, the Task Force will SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: examine the expected naval BILLING CODE 5001–08–M Matters to be Considered: Research environment and the role of the Navy for the next 20–50 years; the role of the and Development proposals and DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE carrier and the carrier battle group in a continuing projects requesting Strategic joint environment in which technology Environmental Research and Office of the Secretary has progressed at an appropriate pace Development Program funds in excess for both the U.S. and its potential of $1M will be reviewed. Meeting of the Advisory Council on adversaries; the effects of Unmanned This meeting is open to the public. Dependents’ Education Combat Air Vehicles on the role of the Any interested person may attend, AGENCY: Department of Defense carrier and the carrier battle group; how appear before, or file statements with Education Activity (DoDEA). the carrier should evolve or be the Scientific Advisory Board at the ACTION: Meeting postponement notice. transformed to best meet mission time and in the manner permitted by the requirements in a joint environment; Board. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal how the role of the aircraft carrier might Dated: October 3, 2001. Advisory Committee Act, Appendix 2 of change and the characteristics that title 5, United States Code, Public Law might affect the change; and the Patricia L. Toppings, 92–463, a notice published on August technology improvement barriers that Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 28, 2001, (66 FR 45285), announcing need to be overcome to significantly Officer, Department of Defense. meeting of the Advisory Council on improve the ability of the carrier to [FR Doc. 01–25669 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Dependents’ Education (ACDE) execute its missions. BILLING CODE 5001–08–M
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the Dated: September 28, 2001. grant of this license must file written Robert E. Vincent II, Department of the Navy objections along with supporting Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate evidence, if any, not later than October General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Notice of Intent To Grant Partially 31, 2001. Liaison Officer. Exclusive License; ALS Technologies, [FR Doc. 01–25681 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Inc. ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P filed with Indian Head Division, Naval AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. Surface Warfare Center, Code OC4, 101 ACTION: Notice. Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy 20640–5035. Submission for OMB Review; gives notice of its intent to grant ALS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Comment Request Technologies, Inc., a revocable, J. Scott Deiter, Head, Technology nonassignable, partially exclusive Transfer Office, Naval Surface Warfare AGENCY: Department of Education. license, with exclusive fields of use in Center Indian Head Division, Code 05T, SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory less than lethal weaponry for humans, 101 Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD Information Management Group, Office less than lethal weaponry for animals, 20640–5035, telephone (301) 744–6111. of the Chief Information Officer invites in the United States to practice the Dated: September 28, 2001. comments on the submission for OMB Government-owned invention, U.S. review as required by the Paperwork Robert E. Vincent II, Patent Application Serial Number 09/ Reduction Act of 1995. 649,607 entitled ‘‘Bola Launcher.’’ Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate DATES: Interested persons are invited to General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the submit comments on or before Liaison Officer. grant of this license must file written November 13, 2001. objections along with supporting [FR Doc. 01–25682 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: Written comments should evidence, if any, not later than October BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P be addressed to the Office of 31, 2001. Information and Regulatory Affairs, ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be Attention: Karen Lee, Desk Officer, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE filed with Indian Head Division, Naval Department of Education, Office of Surface Warfare Center, Code OC4, 101 Department of the Navy Management and Budget, 725 17th Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD Street, NW., Room 10202, New 20640–5035. Notice of Intent To Grant Nonexclusive Executive Office Building, Washington, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Patent License; Shock Tube Systems, DC 20503 or should be electronically J. Scott Deiter, Head, Technology Inc. mailed to the internet address Transfer Office, Naval Surface Warfare [email protected]. Center Indian Head Division, Code 05T, AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 101 Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of ACTION: Notice. 20640–5035, telephone (301) 744–6111. 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires Dated: September 1, 2001. that the Office of Management and SUMMARY: Robert E. Vincent II, The Department of the Navy Budget (OMB) provide interested gives notice of its intent to grant Shock Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate Federal agencies and the public an early General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Tube Systems, Inc., a revocable, opportunity to comment on information Liaison Officer. nonassignable, nonexclusive license in collection requests. OMB may amend or [FR Doc. 01–25680 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] fields of use in demolition, commercial waive the requirement for public BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P blasting, special effects, display consultation to the extent that public fireworks, in the United States to participation in the approval process practice the Government-owned would defeat the purpose of the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE invention, U.S. Patent Application information collection, violate State or Serial Number 09/678,302 entitled Federal law, or substantially interfere Department of the Navy ‘‘Ignitor Apparatus.’’ with any agency’s ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Leader, Notice of Intent To Grant Partially DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the Regulatory Information Management Exclusive License; CG Industries, Inc. grant of this license must file written Group, Office of the Chief Information objections along with supporting AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. Officer, publishes that notice containing evidence, if any, not later than October ACTION: Notice. proposed information collection 31, 2001. requests prior to submission of these SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be requests to OMB. Each proposed gives notice of its intent to grant CG filed with Indian Head Division, Naval information collection, grouped by Industries, Inc., a revocable, Surface Warfare Center, Code OC4, 101 office, contains the following: (1) Type nonassignable partially exclusive Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD of review requested, e.g. new, revision, license, with exclusive fields of use in 20640–5035. extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) dimensional measurement, threaded Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) measurement, in the United States to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Description of the need for, and practice the Government-owned J. Scott Deiter, Head, Technology proposed use of, the information; (5) invention, U.S. Patent Application Transfer Office, Naval Surface Warfare Respondents and frequency of Serial Number 09/907,879 entitled Center Indian Head Division, Code 05T, collection; and (6) Reporting and/or ‘‘Automated Contact Gage System Using 101 Strauss Avenue, Indian Head, MD Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites Three-Axis Contact Comparator.’’ 20640–5035, telephone (301) 744–6111. public comment.
VerDate 11
Dated: October 5, 2001. What Is the Purpose of This Notice? What Are the Functions of the National John Tressler, Advisory Committee? The purpose of this notice is to Leader, Regulatory Information Management, The Committee advises the Secretary Office of the Chief Information Officer. announce the public meeting of the National Advisory Committee and invite of Education about: • Office of Elementary and Secondary third-party oral presentations before the The establishment and enforcement Education Committee. This notice also presents the of the criteria for recognition of proposed agenda and informs the public accrediting agencies or associations Type of Review: Reinstatement, with under subpart 2 of part H of Title IV, change, of a previously approved of its opportunity to attend this meeting. The notice of this meeting is required HEA. collection for which approval has • The recognition of specific expired. under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. accrediting agencies or associations. Title: Annual Report of Children in • The preparation and publication of State Agency and Locally Operated When and Where Will the Meeting the list of nationally recognized Institutions for Neglected and Take Place? accrediting agencies and associations. Delinquent Children (KA). • The eligibility and certification We will hold the public meeting on process for institutions of higher Frequency: Annually. December 10, 2001 from 1 p.m. until Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal education under Title IV, HEA. 5:30 p.m., and on December 11, 2001 • Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs (primary). The development of standards and from 8:30 a.m. until 4 p.m. at the criteria for specific categories of Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Swissoˆtel Washington (The Watergate), Burden: vocational training institutions and 2650 Virginia Avenue, NW., institutions of higher education for Responses: 3052 Washington, DC 20037. You may call which there are no recognized Burden Hours: 4224. the hotel at (202) 965–2300 or fax the accrediting agencies, associations, or Abstract: An annual survey is hotel at (202) 965–1173 to inquire about State agencies in order to establish the conducted to collect data on (1) the rooms. interim eligibility of those institutions number of children enrolled in What Assistance Will Be Provided to to participate in Federally funded educational programs of State-operated Individuals With Disabilities? programs. institutions for neglected or delinquent • The relationship between: (1) (N or D) children, community day The meeting site is accessible to Accreditation of institutions of higher programs for N or D children; and adult individuals with disabilities. If you will education and the certification and correctional institutions and (2) the need an auxiliary aid or service to eligibility of such institutions, and (2) October caseload of N or D children in participate in the meeting (e.g., State licensing responsibilities with local institutions. interpreting service, assistive listening respect to such institutions. Requests for copies of the proposed device, or materials in an alternate • Any other advisory functions information collection request may be format), notify the contact person listed relating to accreditation and accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or in this notice at least two weeks before institutional eligibility that the should be addressed to Vivian Reese, the scheduled meeting date. Although Secretary may prescribe. Department of Education, 400 Maryland we will attempt to meet a request What Items Will Be on the Agenda for Avenue, SW., Room 4050, Regional received after that date, we may not be Discussion at the Meeting? Office Building 3, Washington, DC able to make available the requested 20202–4651. Requests may also be auxiliary aid or service because of Agenda topics will include the review electronically mailed to the Internet insufficient time to arrange it. of agencies that have submitted address [email protected] or faxed to Who Is the Contact Person for the petitions for initial recognition or 202–708–9346. Please specify the Meeting? renewal of recognition or request for an complete title of the information expansion of scope. Please contact Ms. Bonnie LeBold, the collection when making your request. What Agencies Will the Advisory Executive Director of the National Comments regarding burden and/or Committee Review at the Meeting? the collection activity requirements Advisory Committee on Institutional should be directed to Kathy Axt at (540) Quality and Integrity, if you have The Advisory Committee will review 776–7742. Individuals who use a questions about the meeting. You may the following agencies during its telecommunications device for the deaf contact her at the U.S. Department of December 10–11, 2001 meeting. (TDD) may call the Federal Information Education, room 7007, MS 7592, 1990 K Nationally Recognized Accrediting Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– St., NW., Washington, DC 20006, Agencies 8339. telephone: (202) 219–7009, fax: (202) 219–7008, e-mail: Petition for Initial Recognition [FR Doc. 01–25637 Filed 10–4–01; 8:45 am] [email protected]. Individuals who 1. Commission on Massage Therapy BILLING CODE 4000–01–P use a telecommunications device for the Accreditation (Requested scope of deaf (TDD) may call the Federal recognition: the accreditation of Information Relay Service at 1–800– DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION institutions and programs that award 877–8339. postsecondary certificates, diplomas, National Advisory Committee on What Is the Authority for the National and degrees in the practice of massage Institutional Quality and Integrity Advisory Committee? therapy.) (National Advisory Committee); Petitions for Renewal of Recognition Meeting The National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity is 1. Accrediting Association of Bible AGENCY: National Advisory Committee established under Section 114 of the Colleges, Commission on Accreditation on Institutional Quality and Integrity, Higher Education Act (HEA) as (Current scope of recognition: the Department of Education. amended, 20 U.S.C. 1011c. accreditation and preaccreditation
VerDate 11
(‘‘Candidate for Accreditation’’) of Bible higher degree nurse education request for written comments on colleges and institutes offering programs.) agencies that are being reviewed during undergraduate programs.) this meeting was published in the Petition for an Expansion of Scope 2. American Academy for Liberal Federal Register on July 13, 2001. The Education (Current scope of recognition: 1. Accrediting Council for Continuing Advisory Committee will receive and the accreditation and preaccreditation Education and Training (Current scope consider only written comments (‘‘Candidate for Accreditation’’) of of recognition: the accreditation of submitted by the deadline specified in institutions of higher education and institutions of higher education that that Federal Register notice. programs within institutions of higher offer non-collegiate continuing education that offer liberal arts degrees education programs. Requested scope of How Do I Request To Present Comments at the baccalaureate level or a recognition: the accreditation of Regarding General Issues Rather Than documented equivalency.) institutions of higher education that Specific Accrediting Agencies? 3. American Physical Therapy offer non-collegiate continuing education programs and occupational At the conclusion of the meeting, the Association, Commission on Committee, at its discretion, may invite Accreditation in Physical Therapy associate degrees (Associate in attendees to address the Committee Education (Current scope of recognition: Occupational Studies (A.O.S) and briefly on issues pertaining to the the accreditation and preaccreditation Associate in Applied Science (A.A.S.)) functions of the Committee, which are (‘‘Candidate for Accreditation’’ status) of Who Can Make Third-Party Oral listed earlier in this notice. If you are programs for the preparation of physical Presentations at This Meeting? interested in making such comments, therapists and physical therapist you should inform Ms. LeBold before or assistants. Requested scope of We invite you to make a third-party during the meeting. recognition: The accreditation and oral presentation before the National Advisory Committee concerning the preaccreditation (‘‘Candidate for How May I Obtain Access to the Records recognition of any agency published in Accreditation’) of physical therapist of the Meeting? education programs leading to the first this notice. professional degree at the master’s or How Do I Request To Make an Oral We will record the meeting and make doctoral level and physical therapist Presentation? a transcript available for public assistant education programs at the inspection at the U.S. Department of You must submit a written request to Education, 1990 K St., NW., associate degree level, including the use make an oral presentation concerning an of distance education.) Washington, DC 20006 between the agency listed in this notice to the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday 4. American Veterinary Medical contact person so that the request is through Friday, except Federal holidays. Association, Council on Education received no later than November 16, It is preferred that an appointment be (Current scope of recognition: the 2001. Your request (no more than 6 made in advance of such inspection. accreditation and preaccreditation pages maximum) should include: (‘‘Reasonable Assurance’’) of programs • The names, addresses, phone How May I Obtain Electronic Access to leading to professional degrees (D.V.M. numbers, and fax numbers of all persons This Document? or D.M.V.) in veterinary medicine.) seeking an appearance, 5. Association for Clinical Pastoral • The organization they represent, You may view this document, as well Education, Inc., Accreditation and as all other Department of Education Commission (Current scope of • A brief summary of the principal documents published in the Federal recognition: the accreditation of clinical points to be made during the oral Register, in text or Adobe Portable pastoral education (CPE) centers and presentation. Document Format (PDF) on the Internet CPE and supervisory CPE programs.) If you wish, you may attach documents at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/ 6. Commission on Collegiate Nursing illustrating the main points of your oral legislation/FedRegister. Education (Current scope of recognition: testimony. Please keep in mind, To use PDF you must have Adobe the accreditation of nursing education however, that any attachments are Acrobat Reader, which is available free programs at the baccalaureate and included in the 6-page limit. at this site. If you have questions about graduate degree levels.) Please do not send materials directly using PDF, call the U.S. Government 7. Distance Education and Training to Committee members. Only materials Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1– Council, Accrediting Commission submitted by the deadline to the contact 888–293–6498; or in the Washington, (Current scope of recognition: the person listed in this notice and in DC, area at (202) 512–1530. accreditation of private and non-private accordance with these instructions distance education institutions offering become part of the official record and Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal non-degree and associate, baccalaureate, are considered by the Committee in its Register. Free Internet access to the official and master’s degree programs primarily deliberations. Documents received after edition of the Federal Register and the Code through the distance learning method. the November 16, 2001 deadline will of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Requested scope of recognition: the not be distributed to the Advisory accreditation of private and non-private Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ Committee for their consideration. index.html. distance education institutions offering Individuals making oral presentations non-degree and associate, baccalaureate, may not distribute written materials at Authority: 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2. master’s, and first professional degree the meeting. programs primarily through the distance Dated: October 5, 2001. learning method.) If I Cannot Attend the Meeting, Can I Maureen McLaughlin, 8. National League for Nursing Submit Written Comments Regarding an Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Accrediting Commission (Current scope Accrediting Agency in Lieu of Making Planning and Innovation Office of of recognition: the accreditation of an Oral Presentation? Postsecondary Education. programs in practical nursing, and This notice requests third-party oral [FR Doc. 01–25665 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] diploma, associate, baccalaureate and testimony, not written comment. A BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants have also submitted under begin operations on the earliest possible Section 205 of the FPA a pro forma date. Federal Energy Regulatory Asset Contribution Agreement, a pro The Applicants state that this filing Commission forma Lease Agreement, and a pro forma has been served upon all customers [Docket Nos. EC01–156–000 and ER01– Private Power Participant Agreement for taking service under an existing open 3154–000] the transfer of ownership or functional access transmission tariff of one of its responsibility to TRANSLink of participants. Alliant Energy Corporate Services, transmission facilities by jurisdictional Any person desiring to be heard or to Inc., MidAmerican Energy Company, public utilities. The pro forma protest such filing should file a motion Xcel Energy Services, Inc., TRANSLink agreements include cost of service to intervene or protest with the Federal Transmission Company, LLC.; Notice formula rates for the calculation of the Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 of Filing contribution fee, rental fee, or operating First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, fee TRANSLink will pay to the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 October 5, 2001. respective Participant. Amounts payable of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Take notice that on September 28, under the agreement will be reflected in and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 2001, Alliant Energy Corporate Services, TRANSLink’s transmission rates under 385.214). All such motions and protests et al. (Applicants), tendered for filing a the TRANSLink Tariff. should be filed on or before October 29, Joint Application for Authorization to 2001. Protests will be considered by the Transfer and Consolidate Transmission In addition, filings were made under Section 205 of the FPA by TRANSLink, Commission to determine the Assets To and In an Independent appropriate action to be taken, but will Transmission Company, a pro forma as contracts affecting TRANSLink’s jurisdictional rates, of a pro forma not serve to make protestants parties to Lease Agreement, a pro forma Private the proceedings. Any person wishing to Power Participant Operating Agreement, Public and Cooperative Power become a party must file a motion to a pro forma Public and Cooperative Participant Operating Agreement. The intervene. Copies of this filing are on Power Participant Operating Agreement, agreement allows transfer to file with the Commission and are and a pro forma Asset Contribution TRANSLink of functional responsibility available for public inspection. This Agreement and an open access for the transmission facilities of Public filing may also be viewed on the web at transmission tariff (TRANSLink Tariff). Power Participants and Cooperative Applicants submitted an application, Power Participants that are not http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ pursuant to Section 203 of the Federal jurisdictional ‘‘public utilities.’’ The pro link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824b, for forma Public and Cooperative Power instructions (call 202–208–2222 for authorization to transfer control and, Participant Operating Agreement is assistance). Comments, protests and potentially, ownership, of certain similar to the pro forma Private Power interventions may be filed electronically transmission facilities to TRANSLink Participant Operating Agreement, but via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 for the purpose of providing open access contains provisions appropriate to CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the transmission service on an unbundled recognize the special requirements and instructions on the Commission’s web basis over these interconnected limitations applicable to non- site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. transmission facilities. To the extent jurisdictional Participants. It includes Linwood A. Watson, Jr., necessary, the Applicants are also formulas for the recovery of the Acting Secretary. transmission revenue requirements of seeking authorization under Section 203 [FR Doc. 01–25625 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] to consolidate in TRANSLink the each such Participant. In addition to the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P operation of certain of the Private Power generic form of this pro forma Participants’ transmission facilities with agreement that TRANSLink intends to those of Public Power Participants and make available to additional public and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the Cooperative Power Participant, cooperative power participants, a including the planned consolidation of second version, tailored to address the Federal Energy Regulatory the Applicants’ systems into a single unique limitations to which public Commission electrical control area. power entities in Nebraska are subject as Applicants also submitted several a result of restrictions in financing [Docket No. ER01–1107–000] filings under Section 205 of the FPA, 16 arrangements and state law, was also American Transmission Company; U.S.C. 824d. The first of these is a filed. Notice of Settlement Conference proposed open access transmission Applicants request that the tariff, pursuant to which TRANSLink TRANSLink Tariff and the pro forma October 5, 2001. will provide transmission service over Lease Agreement, pro forma Private Take notice that an informal the interconnected transmission Power Participant Operating Agreement, settlement conference will be convened facilities of the Applicants within the pro forma Public and Cooperative Power in this proceeding commencing at 1:00 Midwest ISO region. The proposed Participant Operating Agreement, and pm on Monday, October 15, 2001, at the TRANSLink Tariff includes all ancillary pro forma Asset Contribution offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory service schedules included in the Order Agreement be accepted for filing Commission, 888 First Street, NE., No. 888 pro forma tariff. The proposed effective on the date for initial Washington, DC, 20426, for the purpose TRANSLink Tariff includes cost of commercial operations of TRANSLink, of discussing the possible settlement of service formula rates for the recovery of which is expected to be in the fourth the above-referenced dockets. TRANSLink’s costs of providing quarter of 2002. The TRANSLink This proceeding involves the transmission service, including its costs Participants respectfully request the resolution of network facility credit of owning, operating and maintaining Commission issue an order issues regarding an unexecuted Network those transmission facilities that are provisionally approving the TRANSLink Integration Transmission Service transferred to it by the Applicants as rate schedules and transactions by Agreement (NITSA) between American well as the management fees of the December 31, 2001, so the transactions Transmission Company LLC (ATCLLC) TRANSLink Corporate Manager. may be completed and TRANSLink may and Dairyland Power Cooperative
VerDate 11
(DPC). Resolution of the proceeding Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY could result in the recalculation of load online/rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for ratio shares in the WPL rate zone assistance). Comments, protests and Federal Energy Regulatory effective January 1, 2001. Resolution of interventions may be filed electronically Commission the proceeding could also involve the via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 [Docket No. ER01–1530–000] payment of transmission facility credits CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the to DPC, which would affect the WPL instructions on the Commission’s web Entergy Services, Inc.; Notice of Filing rate zone immediately and the other site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ ATCLLC rate zones either immediately doorbell.htm. October 5, 2001. or after the conclusion of the rate phase- Take notice that on October 2, 2001, Linwood A. Watson, Jr., in. FERC Staff and ATCLLC invite Entergy Services, Inc. (ESI), tendered for interested customers to attend. Acting Secretary. filing with the Federal Energy Any person wishing to become a party [FR Doc. 01–25629 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Regulatory Commission (Commission), must move to intervene and receive BILLING CODE 6717–01–P that Arkansas Electric Cooperative intervenor status pursuant to the Corporation (AECC) requests that its Commission’s regulations (18 CFR July 2, 2001 protest be held in abeyance 385.214). DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY until November 30, 2001. For additional information, contact Any person desiring to be heard or to Federal Energy Regulatory Joseph H. Long at (202) 208–2149. protest such filing should file a motion Commission to intervene or protest with the Federal Linwood A. Watson, Jr., [Docket No. ER98–4159–002] Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Acting Secretary. First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, [FR Doc. 01–25628 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Duquesne Light Company; Notice of in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Filing of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and October 5, 2001. 385.214). All such motions and protests DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Take notice that on October 2, 2001, should be filed on or before October 23, Duquesne Light Company (Duquesne), 2001. Protests will be considered by the Federal Energy Regulatory tendered for filing with the Federal Commission to determine the Commission Energy Regulatory Commission appropriate action to be taken, but will [Docket No. ES00–28–002] (Commission) an updated market power not serve to make protestants parties to study in support of Duquesne’s market- the proceedings. Any person wishing to Consumers Energy Company; Notice based rate tariff, Rate Schedule FERC become a party must file a motion to of Application No. 3 and a report of changes in status. intervene. Copies of this filing are on Any person desiring to be heard or to file with the Commission and are October 5, 2001. protest such filing should file a motion Take notice that on October 2, 2001, available for public inspection. This to intervene or protest with the Federal filing may also be viewed on the Consumers Energy Company submitted Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 an amendment to its original Commission’s web site at http:// First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, application in this proceeding, pursuant in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 to section 204 of the Federal Power Act. select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the of the Commission’s Rules of Practice instructions (call 202–208–2222 for The amendment seeks authorization to and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and issue up to an additional $1 billion of assistance). Comments, protests and 385.214). All such motions and protests interventions may be filed electronically long-term securities (up to an additional should be filed on or before October 23, $500 million for general corporate via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 2001. Protests will be considered by the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the purposes and up to an additional $500 Commission to determine the million of first mortgage bonds to be instructions on the Commission’s web appropriate action to be taken, but will site under the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. issued solely as security for other long- not serve to make protestants parties to term issuances). the proceedings. Any person wishing to Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Any person desiring to be heard or to become a party must file a motion to Acting Secretary. protest such filing should file a motion intervene. Copies of this filing are on [FR Doc. 01–25627 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] to intervene or protest with the Federal file with the Commission and are BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 available for public inspection. This First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, filing may also be viewed on the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Commission’s web site at http:// DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of the Commission’s Rules of Practice www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the Federal Energy Regulatory 385.214). All such motions and protests instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Commission should be filed on or before October 26, assistance). Comments, protests and [Docket No. EC01–141–001] 2001. Protests will be considered by the interventions may be filed electronically Commission to determine the via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Progress Energy, Inc.; Notice of Filing appropriate action to be taken, but will CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the not serve to make protestants parties to instructions on the Commission’s web October 5, 2001. the proceedings. Any person wishing to site under the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. Take notice that on October 3, 2001, become a party must file a motion to Progress Energy, Inc., on behalf of intervene. Copies of this filing are on Linwood A. Watson, Jr. Carolina Power & Light Company, file with the Commission and are Acting Secretary. Progress Genco Ventures, LLC, Progress available for public inspection. This [FR Doc. 01–25626 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Energy Ventures, Inc., Richmond filing may also be viewed on the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P County Power, LLC, Monroe Power
VerDate 11
Company, Effingham County Power, al. The Commission approved Questar’s Company (SWEPCO), tendered for filing LLC, MPC Generating, LLC, Newco, and request to implement a negotiated-rate with the Federal Energy Regulatory Rowan County Power, LLC (collectively, option for Rate Schedules T–1, NNT, T– Commission (Commission) a Restated Applicants) tendered for filing an 2, PKS, FSS and ISS shippers. Questar and Amended Power Supply Agreement amendment to an application requesting submitted its negotiated-rate filing in between SWEPCO and Rayburn Country all necessary authorizations under accordance with the Commission’s Electric Cooperative, Inc (Rayburn Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, Policy Statement in Docket Nos. RM95– Country). 16 U.S.C. § 824b (1996), to engage in a 6–000 and RM96–7–000 (Policy SWEPCO has served copies to this corporate reorganization. Statement) issued January 31, 1996. notice on Rayburn Country, and the Applicants request that the Ninth Revised Sheet No. 7 Public Utilities Commission of Texas Commission approve the application by Second Revised Sheet No. 7A and all parties to this docket. October 31, 2001. First Revised Volume No. 1 Any person desiring to be heard or to Any person desiring to be heard or to Questar requested waiver of 18 CFR protest such filing should file a motion protest such filing should file a motion 154.207 so that Ninth Revised Sheet No. to intervene or protest with the Federal to intervene or protest with the Federal 7 and Second Revised Sheet No. 7A to Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Revised Volume No. 1 of its FERC First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, Gas Tariff may become effective October in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 1, 2001. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice of the Commission’s Rules of Practice A copy of this filing has been served and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and upon Questar’s customers, the Public 385.214). All such motions and protests 385.214). All such motions and protests Service Commission of Utah and the should be filed on or before October 17, should be filed on or before October 15, Public Service Commission of 2001. Protests will be considered by the 2001. Protests will be considered by the Wyoming. Commission to determine the Commission to determine the Any person desiring to protest said appropriate action to be taken, but will appropriate action to be taken, but will filing should file a protest with the not serve to make protestants parties to not serve to make protestants parties to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the proceedings. Any person wishing to the proceedings. Any person wishing to 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. become a party must file a motion to become a party must file a motion to 20426, in accordance with Section intervene. Copies of this filing are on intervene. Copies of this filing are on 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and file with the Commission and are file with the Commission and are Regulations. All such protests must be available for public inspection. This available for public inspection. This filed in accordance with Section filing may also be viewed on the filing may also be viewed on the web at 154.210 of the Commission’s Commission’s web site at http:// http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ Regulations. Protests will be considered www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the by the Commission in determining the select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the instructions (call 202–208–2222 for appropriate action to be taken, but will instructions (call 202–208–2222 for assistance). Comments, protests and not serve to make protestants parties to assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically the proceedings. Copies of this filing are interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 on file with the Commission and are via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the available for public inspection. This CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s web filing may also be viewed on the web at instructions on the Commission’s web site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ site under the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary. assistance). Comments, protests and Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–25624 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] interventions may be filed electronically [FR Doc. 01–25634 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s web DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Acting Secretary. Commission [Docket No. RP99–513–008] [FR Doc. 01–25632 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [Docket No. RP97–255–034] Questar Pipeline Company; Notice of Tariff Filing TransColorado Gas Transmission DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Company; Notice of Tariff Filing October 5, 2001. Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Federal Energy Regulatory October 5, 2001. pursuant to 18 CFR 154.7 and 154.203, Commission Take notice that on October 1, 2001, and as provided by Section 30 pursuant to 18 CFR 154.7 and 154.203, (Negotiated Rates) to the General Terms [Docket No. ER01–651–001 and ER01–2970– and in compliance with the 000] and Conditions of Part 1 of Questar Commission’s letter order issued March Pipeline Company’s (Questar) FERC Gas Southwestern Electric Power 20, 1997, in Docket No. RP97–255–000, Tariff, Questar filed a tariff filing to Company; Notice of Filing TransColorado Gas Transmission implement a negotiated-rate contract as Company (TransColorado) tendered for authorized by Commission orders October 5, 2001. filing and acceptance Thirty-Fourth issued October 27, 1999, and December Take notice that on September 13, Revised Sheet No. 21 and Seventh 14, 1999, in Docket Nos. RP99–513, et 2001, Southwestern Electric Power Revised Sheet No. 22A to Original
VerDate 11
Volume No. 1 of its FERC Gas Tariff to provisions in Section 15 of the General accompany the OEP staff. The following be effective October 1, 2001. Terms and Conditions of Transco’s list specifies the time and location to Thirty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 21 FERC Gas Tariff. meet staff at each project facility. Seventh Revised Sheet No. 22A Transco states that the report shows Monday, October 22, 2001: that for the annual cash-out period The tendered tariff sheets propose to Compressor Station 160: 9:00 am, ending July 31, 2000, Transco received revise TransColorado’s Tariff to reflect 4300 NC Highway 65, southwest of revenues in excess of costs incurred. two amended and one deleted Reidsville, North Carolina. Therefore, in accordance with Section negotiated-rate contracts. TransColorado Tuesday, October 23, 2001: 15 of the General Terms and Conditions requested waiver of 18 CFR 154.207 so Bowman Loop: 9:00 am, at Transco has refunded excess revenues that the tendered tariff sheets may Compressor Station 130, 117 Winns in the amount of $2,319,365 to firm and become effective October 1, 2001. Lake Road, Comer, Geogia. TransColorado stated that a copy of interruptible transportation customers Wednesday, October 24, 2001: this filing has been served upon all on a pro rata basis in accordance with Kellyton Loop and Compressor parties to this proceeding, the transportation quantities delivered Station 105: 9:00 am, 232 Highway TransColorado’s customers, the during the annual period ending July 22 East, Rockford, Alabama. Colorado Public Utilities Commission 31, 2001. Thursday, October 25, 2001: and the New Mexico Public Utilities Any person desiring to protest said Jones Loop and Compressor Stations Commission. filing should file a protest with the 90 & 100: 9:00 am, at Compressor Any person desiring to protest said Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Station 100, 642 Country Road 62, filing should file a protest with the 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Billingsly, Alabama. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 20426, in accordance with Section 3:00 pm, at Compressor Station 90, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and 18491 Alabama Highway 69, 20426, in accordance with Section Regulations. All such protests must be southwest of Myrtlewood, Alabama. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and filed on or before October 12, 2001. Friday, October 26, 2001: Regulations. All such protests must be Protests will be considered by the Hale and Magnolia Loops: 8:00 am, filed in accordance with Section Commission in determining the parking lot First United Methodist 154.210 of the Commission’s appropriate action to be taken, but will Church, 203 Franklin Street, Regulations. Protests will be considered not serve to make protestants parties to Quitman, Mississippi. by the Commission in determining the the proceedings. Copies of this filing are 3:00 pm, at MTS Grocery, southeast appropriate action to be taken, but will on file with the Commission and are corner of Highway 48 and I–55 in not serve to make protestants parties to available for public inspection. This Magnolia, Mississippi. the proceedings. Copies of this filing are filing may also be viewed on the web at Anyone interested in attending the on file with the Commission and are http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ route and site review or obtaining available for public inspection. This link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the further information may contact the filing may also be viewed on the web at instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Commission’s Office of External Affairs http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ assistance). Comments, protests and at (202) 208–1088. Attendees must link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the interventions may be filed electronically provide their own transportation. instructions (call 202–208–2222 for via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., assistance). Comments, protests and Acting Secretary. interventions may be filed electronically instructions on the Commission’s web [FR Doc. 01–25623 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., instructions on the Commission’s web Acting Secretary. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. [FR Doc. 01–25622 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Linwood A. Watson, Jr., BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Acting Secretary. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FR Doc. 01–25631 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [Docket Nos. RP01–245–000 and RP01–253– 000] Federal Energy Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line [Docket No. CP01–388–000] Corporation; Notice of Informal Federal Energy Regulatory Settlement Conference Commission Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line October 5, 2001. [Docket Nos. CP88–391–026 and RP93–162– Company; Notice of Route and Site Review Take notice that an informal 011] settlement conference will be convened Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line October 5, 2001. in this proceeding commencing at 12:00 Corporation; Notice of Cash-Out On October 22 and continuing Noon on Thursday, October 18, 2001 at Report through October 26, 2001, the staff of the offices of the Federal Energy the Office of Energy Projects (OEP) will Regulatory Commission, 888 First October 5, 2001. conduct a route and site review of the Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20426, for Take notice that on September 28, proposed Momentum Expansion the purpose of exploring the possible 2001 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Project. The Momentum Expansion settlement of the above-referenced Corporation (Transco) filed its annual Project facilities are proposed for dockets. cash-out report for the period August 1, construction by Transcontinental Gas Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 2000 through July 31, 2001. The report Pipe Line Company (Transco). 385.102(c), or any participant as defined was filed to comply with the cash-out Representatives of Transco will by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to
VerDate 11
attend. Persons wishing to become a between SDG&E and CalPeak Enterprise, Comment date: October 22, 2001, in party must move to intervene and under which SDG&E will construct, accordance with Standard Paragraph E receive intervenor status pursuant to the operate and maintain the proposed at the end of this notice. Commission’s regulations (18 CFR interconnection facilities. Service 5. MidAmerican Energy Company 385.214). Agreement No. 10, the Interconnection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Agreement between SDG&E and CalPeak [Docket No. ER02–3–000] William J. Collins at (202) 208–0248 or Enterprise dated September 21, 2001, Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Irene Szopo at (202) 208–1602. establishes interconnection and MidAmerican Energy Company operating responsibilities and associated (MidAmerican), filed with the Federal Linwood A. Watson, Jr., communications procedures between Energy Regulatory Commission Acting Secretary. the parties. (Commission), a Master Energy Sales [FR Doc. 01–25633 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] SDG&E requests an effective date of Agreement (Agreement) dated BILLING CODE 6717–01–P September 21, 2001 for both agreements. September 1, 2001, entered into with SDG&E states that copies of the Peoples Energy Services Corporation amended filing have been served on (Peoples), pursuant to MidAmerican’s DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CalPeak Enterprise and on the California Rate Schedule for Power Sales, FERC Public Utilities Commission. Electric Tariff (Tariff), Original Volume Federal Energy Regulatory Comment date: October 23, 2001, in No. 5. The Agreement constitutes a 1st Commission accordance with Standard Paragraph E revised Service Agreement No. 57, [Docket No. ER01–2688–001, et al.] at the end of this notice. under the Tariff, between MidAmerican and Peoples. Gilroy Energy Center, L.L.C., et al.; 3. Southern Energy Retail Trading and Marketing, Inc. MidAmerican requests a September 1, Electric Rate and Corporate Regulation 2001 effective date for the Master Filings [Docket No. ER02–1–000] Energy Sales Agreement and seeks a October 5, 2001. Take notice that on October 1, 2001, waiver of the Commission’s notice Take notice that the following filings Southern Energy Retail Trading and requirement. MidAmerican has served a have been made with the Commission: Marketing, Inc. tendered for filing with copy of the compliance filing on the Federal Energy Regulatory Peoples Energy Services Corporation, 1. Gilroy Energy Center, LLC Commission (Commission) a Notice of the Iowa Utilities Board, the Illinois [Docket No. ER01–2688–001] Cancellation pursuant to 18 CFR 35.15 Commerce Commission and the South Take notice that on October 2, 2001, (2001), in order to reflect the Dakota Public Utilities Commission. Gilroy Energy Center, LLC (the cancellation of its Market Rate Tariff, Comment date: October 22, 2001, in Applicant), submitted for filing with the designated as Rate Schedule FERC No. accordance with Standard Paragraph E Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 1, originally accepted for filing in at the end of this notice. (Commission) a first Substitute Sheet Docket No. ER98–1149–000. 6. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Nos. 2 and 3 to its FERC Electric Tariff Comment date: October 23, 2001, in No. 1, in compliance with the accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. ER02–4–000] Commission Staff Letter issued in this at the end of this notice. Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Pacific Gas and Electric Company Docket on September 21, 2001. 4. New England Power Pool Comment date: October 23, 2001, in (PG&E) tendered for filing with the accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. ER02–2–000] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at the end of this notice. Take notice that on October 1, 2001, (Commission) a Notice of Cancellation the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) of the PG&E First Revised Rate Schedule 2. San Diego Gas & Electric Company Participants Committee filed with the FERC No. 215 (Must-Run Service [Docket No. ER01–3093–000] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Agreement between Pacific Gas and Take notice that on October 2, 2001, (Commission) for acceptance materials Electric Company and the California San Diego Gas & Electric Company (1) to permit NEPOOL to expand its Independent System Operator (SDG&E) tendered for filing with the membership to include AES Corporation for the FMC Synchronous Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Londonderry, L.L.C. (AESL), Long Condenser/Emergency Gas Turbine). (FERC or Commission), its Service Island Lighting Company d/b/a LIPA Copies of this filing have been served Agreements numbers 9 and 10 to its (LIPA), and New Hampshire Office of upon the California System Operator FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised Consumer Advocate (NHOCA); and (2) Corporation (ISO) and the California Volume No. 6, two interconnection to terminate the membership of Public Utilities Commission. agreements. Both agreements relate to Merchant Energy Group of Americas, Comment date: October 22, 2001, in the interconnection of a new generation Inc. (MEGA). accordance with Standard Paragraph E plant to be owned by CalPeak Power The Participants Committee requests at the end of this notice. -Enterprise, LLC (CalPeak Enterprise). an effective date of October 1, 2001 for 7. Southern Company Services, Inc. The plant, with a capacity of 49 MW, is commencement of participation in being constructed on an expedited basis NEPOOL by LIPA, December 1, 2001 for [Docket No. ER02–5–000] to meet potential shortfalls in the commencement of participation in Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Western states’ electric supplies. It will NEPOOL by AESL and NHOCA, and Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), be located near the City of Escondido in August 21, 2001 for the termination of acting on behalf of Alabama Power San Diego County, California, and is MEGA. Company (APC), Georgia Power expected to begin service on or about The Participants Committee states Company, Gulf Power Company, September 24, 2001. that copies of these materials were sent Mississippi Power Company, and Service Agreement No. 9 is an to the New England state governors and Savannah Electric and Power Company Expedited Interconnection Facilities regulatory commissions and the (collectively referred to as Southern Agreement dated September 21, 2001 Participants in NEPOOL. Companies), filed with the Federal
VerDate 11
Energy Regulatory Commission behalf of Public Service Company of Comment date: October 22, 2001, in (Commission), a Service Agreement for Colorado (Public Service), submitted for accordance with Standard Paragraph E Conditional and Experimental Firm filing with the Federal Energy at the end of this notice. Point-to-Point Transmission Service Regulatory Commission (Commission) a 13. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Between SCS, as agent for Southern Second Amendment to the Power Companies, and Coral Power, L.L.C. Purchase Agreement dated May 14, [Docket No. ER02–11–000] Regarding OASIS request 1717624, 1998 between Public Service and Holy Take notice that on October 1, 2001, under the Open Access Transmission Cross Energy. XES requests that this Pacific Gas and Electric Company Tariff of Southern Companies (FERC agreement become effective on October (PG&E) made an informational filing Electric Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1, 2001. with the Federal Energy Regulatory No. 5). Under this agreement, Coral will Comment date: October 22, 2001, in Commission (Commission), for be provided monthly transmission accordance with Standard Paragraph E proposed revisions, to become effective service on a firm basis except for when at the end of this notice. January 1, 2002, to its Reliability Must- providing such service could cause or 11. Southern Company Services, Inc. Run Service Agreements (RMR potentially cause a stability-related Agreements) with the California problem that has been identified in the [Docket No. ER02–9–000] Independent System Operator Southwest Quadrant of Southern Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Corporation (ISO) for Helms Power Companies’ transmission system. Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Plant (Helms), PG&E First Revised Rate Comment date: October 22, 2001, in acting on behalf of Alabama Power Schedule FERC No. 207, Humboldt Bay accordance with Standard Paragraph E Company, Georgia Power Company, Power Plant (Humboldt Bay), PG&E at the end of this notice. Gulf Power Company, Mississippi First Revised Rate Schedule FERC No Power Company, and Savannah Electric 8. Avista Corporation 208, Hunters Point Power Plant and Power Company (collectively (Hunters Point), PG&E First Revised [Docket No. ER02–6–000] referred to as Southern Companies), Rate Schedule FERC No. 209, and San Take notice that on October 1, 2001, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Joaquin Power Plant (San Joaquin), Avista Corporation (Avista) tendered for Commission (Commission) one PG&E First Revised Rate Schedule FERC filing with the Federal Energy agreement for network integration No. 211. This filing proposes revisions Regulatory Commission (Commission) transmission service between Southern to portions of the listed Rate Schedules an executed Service Agreement for Firm Companies and Generation Energy to adjust the applicable rates as required Point-To-Point Transmission Service Marketing, a Department of SCS, as under the currently-effective RMR under Avista’s Open Access agent for Mississippi Power Company, Agreement. Transmission Tariff—FERC Electric under the Open Access Transmission Copies of PG&E’s filing have been Tariff, Volume No. 8 with Consolidated Tariff of Southern Companies (FERC served upon the ISO, the California Irrigation District No. 19. The Service Electric Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume Electricity Oversight Board, and the Agreement replaces an existing No. 5). Under this agreement, power California Public Utilities Commission. agreement that terminates on October 1, will be delivered to the South Comment date: October 22, 2001, in 2001. Mississippi Electric Power Association’s accordance with Standard Paragraph E Avista requests a waiver of the Coast EPA Lizana Delivery Point. This at the end of this notice. Commission’s notice requirements to agreement is being filed in conjunction allow the Service Agreement to become with a power sale by SCS, as agent for 14. New England Power Pool effective on October 1, 2001. Mississippi Power Company, to the [Docket No. ER02–12–000] Comment date: October 22, 2001, in South Mississippi Electric Power accordance with Standard Paragraph E Association under Southern Companies’ Take notice that on October 1, 2001, at the end of this notice. Market-Based Rate Power Sales Tariff, the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) Participants Committee tendered for 9. Great Bay Power Corporation as was approved in FERC Docket No. ER01–1284–000. filing with the Federal Energy [Docket No. ER02–7–000] Comment date: October 22, 2001, in Regulatory Commission (Commission) a Take notice that on October 1, 2001, accordance with Standard Paragraph E Service Agreement for Long-Term Firm Great Bay Power Corporation (Great at the end of this notice. In Service pursuant to Section 205 of Bay) tendered for filing with the Federal the Federal Power Act and 18 CFR 35.12 12. Duke Energy Oakland, LLC and Energy Regulatory Commission of the Commission’s regulations. Duke Energy South Bay, LLC (Commission) a service agreement Acceptance of this Service Agreement between Constellation Power Source, [Docket No. ER02–10–000] will recognize the provision of Long- Inc. and Great Bay for service under Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Term Firm In Service to Morgan Stanley Great Bay’s revised Market-Based Rate Duke Energy Oakland, L.L.C. (DEO) and Capital Group, Inc., in accordance with Power Sales Tariff Volume No. 2 Duke Energy South Bay, L.L.C. (DESB) the provisions of the NEPOOL Open (Tariff). This Tariff was accepted for made an informational filing with the Access Transmission Tariff, as amended filing by the Commission on May 31, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and supplemented, and the 2000, in Docket No. ER00–2211–000. (Commission) detailing and supporting Commission’s order issued July 16, 2001 The service agreement is proposed to be their Annual Fixed Revenue in New England Power Pool, 96 FERC effective September 25, 2001. Requirements and their Variable O&M ¶ 61,087 (2001). An effective date of Comment date: October 22, 2001, in Rates as required by Schedule F of the September 1, 2001 for commencement accordance with Standard Paragraph E reliability Must Run Agreement with the of transmission service has been at the end of this notice. California Independent System Operator requested. Copies of this filing were sent to the 10. Xcel Energy Services Inc. (CAISO). Copies of the filing have been served upon the CAISO both in hard NEPOOL Participants, the New England [Docket No. ER02–8–000] copy and electronic format. state governors and regulatory Take notice that on October 1, 2001, DEO and DESB request an effective commissions, and all parties to the Xcel Energy Services, Inc. (XES), on date of January 2, 2002. transaction.
VerDate 11
Comment date: October 22, 2001, in considered by the Commission in 2. Old Dominion Electric Cooperative accordance with Standard Paragraph E determining the appropriate action to be [Docket No. ER01–2982–001] at the end of this notice. taken, but will not serve to make Take notice that on October 1, 2001, protestants parties to the proceeding. 15. Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Old Dominion Electric Cooperative Any person wishing to become a party (Applicant) tendered for filing with the [Docket No. ER02–13–000] must file a motion to intervene. Copies Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Take notice that on October 1, 2001, of this filing are on file with the (Commission) a substitute Service Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) Commission and are available for public Agreement Between Old Dominion submitted for filing with the Federal inspection. This filing may also be Electric Cooperative and Northern Energy Regulatory Commission viewed on the Web at http:// Virginia Electric Cooperative for Market (Commission) a service agreement for www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Rate Electric Power and Rate Schedule Firm Point-to-Point Transmission select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the NOVEC1–OD with proper designations, Service with OG+E Energy Resources, instructions (call 202–208–2222 for as well as redesignated Rate Schedule Inc. (Transmission Customer). A copy of assistance). Comments, protests and NOVEC1–OD Load Control Addendum this filing was served on the interventions may be filed electronically and Rate Schedule NOVEC2–OD. Transmission Customer. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Pursuant to instructions from SPP requests an effective date of CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Commission staff, this filing provides a September 1, 2001 for this service instructions on the Commission’s Web substitute, correctly designated version agreement. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Comment date: October 22, 2001, in of the Service Agreement and Rate accordance with Standard Paragraph E Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Schedule NOVEC1–OD originally at the end of this notice. Acting Secretary. accepted for filing in Docket No. ER00– 1512–000, and correctly designated 16. West Texas Utilities Company [FR Doc. 01–25664 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P versions of Rate Schedule NOVEC1–OD [Docket No. ER02–14–000] Load Control Addendum and Rate Take notice that on October 1, 2001, Schedule NOVEC2–OD. The terms of West Texas Utilities Company (WTU) DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the rate schedule are not otherwise filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory modified by this filing. Commission (Commission) a Restated Federal Energy Regulatory Comment date: October 22, 2001, in and Amended Power Supply Agreement Commission accordance with Standard Paragraph E (Restated PSA) between WTU and the at the end of this notice. City of Weatherford, Texas [Docket No. ER01–2613–001, et al.] 3. Somerset Windpower LLC (Weatherford) for the period July 17, 2001 through December 31, 2001 and a PECO Energy Company, et al.; Electric [Docket No. ER01–2139–002] restated service agreement (Restated Rate and Corporate Regulation Filings Take notice that on October 2, 2001, Service Agreement) between WTU and Somerset Windpower LLC (Somerset) October 4, 2001. Weatherford under WTU’s Market- tendered an amendment with the Take notice that the following filings Based Rate Tariff for the period on and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission have been made with the Commission: after January 1, 2002. The only (Commission) Revision to Somerset’s substantive change to the two 1. PECO Energy Company application for order authorizing documents is the addition of a new market-based rates to its compliance [Docket No. ER01–2613–001] point of receipt to Exhibit A of each filing of August 2, 2001 as requested by agreement. Take notice that on October 2, 2001, commission staff. WTU seeks an effective date of July PECO Energy Company (PECO) Comment date: October 23, 2001, in 17, 2001 for the Restated PSA and an resubmitted a Construction Agreement accordance with Standard Paragraph E effective date of January 1, 2002 for the with the Federal Energy Regulatory at the end of this notice. Commission (Commission), between Restated Service Agreement and, 4. Carr Street Generating Station, L.P. accordingly, seeks waiver of the PECO and Old Dominion Electric Commission’s notice requirements to Cooperative (Old Dominion) in the [Docket No. ER98–4095–001] the extent necessary. Copies of the filing format required by the Commission’s Take notice that on October 1, 2001, have been served on Weatherford and Order No. 614. The Construction Carr Street Generating Station, L.P. on the Public Utility Commission of Agreement has been designated as submitted for filing with the Federal Texas. Service Agreement No. 612 under PJM Energy Regulatory Commission Comment date: October 22, 2001, in Interconnection L.L.C.’s (PJM) open (Commission), an updated market accordance with Standard Paragraph E access transmission tariff. The filing was analysis as required by the at the end of this notice. made in compliance with the Commission’s condition granting it Commission’s Letter Order dated authorization to sell wholesale power Standard Paragraph September 13, 2001 in Docket No. and market-based rates. E. Any person desiring to be heard or ER01–2613–000, which accepted the Comment date: October 22, 2001, in to protest such filing should file a Construction Agreement for filing on the accordance with Standard Paragraph E motion to intervene or protest with the requested effective date, conditioned at the end of this notice. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, upon this compliance filing. Except for 5. UtiliCorp United Inc. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC the new designation and pagination, the 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 Construction Agreement is not changed. [Docket No. ES01–43–000] and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of A copy of the compliance filing has Take notice that on September 27, Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 been served on ODEC and PJM. 2001, UtiliCorp United Inc. (UtiliCorp) and 385.214). All such motions or Comment date: October 23, 2001, in submitted an application pursuant to protests should be filed on or before the accordance with Standard Paragraph E section 204 of the Federal Power Act comment date. Protests will be at the end of this notice. seeking authorization to issue corporate
VerDate 11
guarantees in an amount not to exceed Commission’s (Commission’s) ‘‘lawsuit’’) filed by four environmental $1 billion an any one time in support of regulations, the Office of Energy Projects groups, consisting of Louisiana long-term debt and related obligations to has reviewed the application dated July Environmental Action Network, North be issued by one or more UtiliCorp 11, 2001, requesting the Commission’s Baton Rouge Environmental subsidiaries in connection with approval to surrender the Exemption Association, Save Our Lakes and Ducks, investments in, acquisitions of assets of, and removal of a dam at the John C. and Southern University Environmental or continuing ownership of gas and/or Jones Project, located on the Marsh Law Society, represented by Tulane electric utility assets outside of the Stream, a tributary of the Penobscot Environmental Law Clinic (collectively, United States. River, near the towns of Winterport and ‘‘LEAN’’). LEAN petitioned for judicial UtiliCorp also requests a waiver from Frankfort, in Waldo County, Maine, and review of a final rule (‘‘the Rule’’) the Commission’s competitive bidding has prepared an Environmental promulgated by the United States and negotiated placement requirements Assessment (EA) for the proposed and Environmental Protection Agency at 18 CFR 34.2. alternative actions. (‘‘EPA’’) on July 2, 1999, published at 64 Comment date: October 24, 2001, in Copies of the EA can be viewed at the FR 35930, approving the revised Post- accordance with Standard Paragraph E Commission’s Public Reference Room, 1996 Rate-of-Progress (‘‘ROP’’), at the end of this notice. Room 2A, 888 First Street, NE, Attainment Demonstration, and Washington, DC 20426, or by calling Contingency Measures State Standard Paragraph (202) 208–1371. Copies of this filing are Implementation Plans for the Baton E. Any person desiring to be heard or on file with the Commission and are Rouge ozone nonattainment area. to protest such filing should file a available for public inspection. This Louisiana Environmental Action motion to intervene or protest with the document may also be viewed on the Network, et al., v. United States Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, web at http://www.ferc.gov using the Environmental Protection Agency, No. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC ‘‘RIMS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and 99–60570 (5th Cir.). These State 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 follow the instructions (call 202–208– Implementation Plan (‘‘SIP’’) revisions and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of 2222 for assistance). were submitted by the State of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 Any comments on the EA should be Louisiana, through its Department of and 385.214). All such motions or filed within 30 days from the date of Environmental Quality (‘‘LDEQ’’), protests should be filed on or before the this notice and should be addressed to: pursuant to the Act. comment date. Protests will be David P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal DATES: Written comments on the considered by the Commission in Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 proposed Settlement Agreement must be determining the appropriate action to be First Street, NE., Washington, DC, received by November 13, 2001. taken, but will not serve to make 20426. Please affix ‘‘John C. Jones protestants parties to the proceeding. Project No. 6132–006’’ to the first page ADDRESSES: Written comments should Any person wishing to become a party of your comments. All timely filed be sent to Jonathan Weisberg, Office of must file a motion to intervene. Copies comments will be considered in the Regional Counsel (6 RC–M), Region 6, of this filing are on file with the Commission order addressing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Commission and are available for public proposed surrender of exemption and 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. inspection. This filing may also be dam removal. Comments, protests and Copies of the proposed Settlement viewed on the Web at http:// interventions may be filed electronically Agreement are available from Jonathan www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Weisberg, (214) 665–2180. select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In instructions (call 202–208–2222 for instructions on the Commission’s web September 1996, the State of Louisiana, assistance). Comments, protests and site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. through LDEQ, proposed a revised State interventions may be filed electronically For further information, please Implementation Plan (the ‘‘revised SIP’’) via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 contact Jack Hannula at (202) 219–0116. for the attainment of the National CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Ambient Air Quality Standard instructions on the Commission’s Web Acting Secretary. (‘‘NAAQS’’) for ozone for the Baton site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. [FR Doc. 01–25630 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Rouge ozone nonattainment area. On July 2, 1999, EPA approved the revised Linwood A. Watson, Jr., BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Acting Secretary. SIP. LEAN objected to EPA’s approval of the revised SIP, alleging that the revised [FR Doc. 01–25621 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] SIP must provide for more reductions in BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION VOC emissions, that the contingency AGENCY plan in the revised SIP was inadequate, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FR1–7082–2] and that Louisiana did not demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS for ozone by Federal Energy Regulatory Proposed Settlement Agreement, November 15, 1999. Commission Clean Air Act Citizen Suit Under the revised SIP, Louisiana elected to develop a contingency [Project No. 6132–006] AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. measure plan using Emission Reduction Facilitators Improving Fish Habitat; ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement Credits (‘‘ERCs’’) held in escrow in the Notice of Availability of Environmental agreement; request for pubic comment. Louisiana Emission Reduction Credit Assessment Bank (the ‘‘Louisiana ERC Bank’’), SUMMARY: In accordance with section established pursuant to Louisiana’s October 5, 2001. 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended banking rule, set forth in Title 33 of the In accordance with the National (‘‘Act’’), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g) notice is Louisiana Administrative Code, Chapter Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and hereby given of a proposed Settlement 6. LEAN alleged the ERCs held in the Federal Energy Regulatory Agreement, to address a lawsuit (the escrow in the Louisiana ERC Bank were
VerDate 11
not adequate to meet requirements for receive substantial adverse comment, (8P–AR), United States Environmental contingency measures. and LDEQ has opted to proceed with the Protection Agency, Region 8, 999 18th Subsequent to the initiation of the Settlement Agreement. Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado lawsuit, EPA learned that LDEQ did not For a period of thirty (30) days 80202–2466, (303) 312–6493. interpret the Act to require emission following the date of publication of this The letter documenting our finding is reductions to be discounted to reflect all notice, the Agency will receive written available at EPA’s conformity website: emission reductions required under the comments relating to the proposed Act, at time of their use, and that LDEQ Settlement Agreement from persons http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/ did not discount ERCs in the Louisiana who were not named as parties or conform/adequacy.htm. ERC Bank at time of their use. In part, interveners to the litigation in question. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: based on this new information, on EPA or the Department of Justice may Throughout this document wherever October 6, 2000, the parties to the withdraw or withhold consent to the ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used we mean lawsuit filed a joint motion for a partial proposed Settlement Agreement if the EPA. voluntary remand of EPA’s approval of comments disclose facts or Louisiana’s contingency measure plan considerations that indicate that such This action is simply an for the Baton Rouge ozone consent is inappropriate, improper, announcement of a finding that we have nonattainment area, and for a stay of all inadequate, or inconsistent with the already made. We sent a letter to the proceedings of the lawsuit (the ‘‘joint requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or Colorado Air Pollution Control Division motion’’). On October 19, 2000, the the Department of Justice determine, on September 20, 2001 stating that the Court granted the joint motion. following the comment period, that motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Louisiana has been working to consent is inappropriate, the Settlement submitted Denver PM10 maintenance develop a new State Implementation Agreement will be final. plan are adequate. This finding has also Plan (the ‘‘new SIP’’) for the Baton Dated: October 1, 2001. been announced on our conformity Web Rouge ozone nonattainment area. The Alan W. Eckert, site at http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/ minimum requirements for SIP conform/adequacy.htm. submissions are described in 40 CFR Associate General Counsel. Transportation conformity is required part 51. As part of the new SIP, EPA [FR Doc. 01–25737 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. expects Louisiana to submit a new BILLING CODE 6560–50–M ozone attainment demonstration for the Our conformity rule requires that Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment area. transportation plans, programs, and The ozone attainment demonstration ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION projects conform to SIPs and establishes must document the photochemical AGENCY the criteria and procedures for modeling procedure used to determine [CO–001–0066; FRL–7082–3] determining whether or not they do. the impacts of both local and regional Conformity to a SIP means that control measures, must document Adequacy Status of the Denver, transportation activities will not modeling results, and, to the extent Colorado PM10 Maintenance Plan for produce new air quality violations, necessary to attain the ozone standard, Transportation Conformity Purposes worsen existing violations, or delay must document additional control timely attainment of the national AGENCY: measures that Louisiana has selected. Environmental Protection ambient air quality standards. Agency (EPA). Any additional control measures must The criteria by which we determine ACTION: Notice of adequacy. be reflected through adopted emission whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emission control regulations. SUMMARY: budgets are adequate for conformity The Settlement Agreement provides In this document, EPA is purposes are outlined in 40 CFR that: (1) Tulane Environmental Law notifying the public that we have found 93.118(e)(4). Please note that an Clinic (on behalf of LEAN) will file a that the motor vehicle emissions motion to dismiss the lawsuit in its budgets in the Denver particulate matter adequacy review is separate from our entirety, with prejudice to its refiling, of 10 micrograms in size or smaller completeness review, and it also should within five (5) days after the Settlement (PM10) maintenance plan submitted on not be used to prejudge our ultimate Agreement becomes effective; (2) EPA July 30, 2001, are adequate for approval of the SIP. Even if we find a and LDEQ has met and/or will meet conformity purposes. On March 2, 1999, budget adequate, the SIP could later be with representatives from LEAN to the D.C. Circuit Court ruled that disapproved, and vice versa. discuss the proper modeling and submitted State Implementation Plans (SIPs) cannot be used for conformity We’ve described our process for attainment protocols to calculate and determining the adequacy of submitted assess the attainment demonstration in determinations until EPA has affirmatively found them adequate. As a SIP budgets in a memo entitled, the new SIP for the Baton Rouge ozone ‘‘Conformity Guidance on nonattainment area; and (3) the United result of our finding, the Denver Regional Council of Governments, the Implementation of March 2, 1999 States will reimburse LEAN $34,000 in Conformity Court Decision,’’ dated May full satisfaction of any claim for Colorado Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of 14, 1999. We followed this guidance in attorney’s fees and costs that was or making our adequacy determination. could have been asserted in connection Transportation are required to use the with the lawsuit. motor vehicle emissions budgets from Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. LDEQ published notice of the this submitted maintenance plan for future conformity determinations. Dated: October 4, 2001. Settlement Agreement in the Louisiana Andrew M. Gaydosh, Register (0106Pot2) on June 20, 2001. DATES: This finding is effective October The notice specified that, to be 29, 2001. Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII. considered, comments had to be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 01–25739 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] received by July 13, 2001. LDEQ did not Kerri Fiedler, Air & Radiation Program BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FDR 711.1A Motorized or Non- Substantive Changes to Alternatives AGENCY Motorized Determination and and New Information, Extension of Trailhead Parking Areas Creation at the Runways 9R/27L and 9L/27R, [ER–FRL–6622–6] both ends of the Trail, Routt National Long-Term Comprehensive Environmental Impact Statements; Forest, Jackson County, CO, Wait Development, In the City of Eden Notice of Availability Period Ends: November 13, 2001, Prairie, Hennepin County, MN, Contact: Melissa Martin (307) 745– Comment Period Ends: October 9, Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 2371. 2001, Contact: Glen Orcutt (612) 713– Activities, General Information (202) EIS No. 010379, Final EIS, FRC, PA, NJ, 4354. Revision of FR Notice Published 564–7167 or www.epa.gov/ocea/ofa NY, Millennium Pipeline Project, on 8/24/2001: CEQ Comment Period Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Construct and Operate an Interstate Ending 10/9/2001 has been extended Statements Filed October 1, 2001 Natural Gas Pipeline from United to 11/5/2001. Through October 5, 2001 States to Canada, including PA, NY EIS No. 010354, Final EIS, FHW, VA, Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. and NJ, Wait Period Ends: November Coalfields Expressway Location 13, 2001, Contact: Paul McKee (202) Study, Improvements from Route 23 EIS No. 010372, Draft EIS, AFS, ID, 208–1611. near Pound, VA to the WV State Line Garnet Stars and Sands Project, To EIS No. 010380, Final EIS, AFS, NM, east of Slate, VA, Funding and COE Test and Develop Future Recreational Santa Fe National Forest, Santa Fe Section 404 Permit, Wise, Dickerson Garnet, Idaho Panhandle National Municipal Watershed Project, Servere and Buchanan Counties, VA, Forests, St. Joe Ranger District, Latah, Crown Fire Reduction and Comment Period Ends: November 5, Shoshone and Benewah Counties, ID, Sustainable Forest and Watershed 2001, Contact: Roberto Fonseca- Comment Period Ends: November 26, Conditions Restoration, Martinez (804) 775–3320. Revision of 2001, Contact: Tracy Gravelle (208) Implementation, Pecos Wilderness to FR notice published on 09/28/2001: 765–7223. This document is available Cochitti Lake, Santa Fe National CEQ Comment Period Ending 10/29/ on the Internet at: http:// Forest, Santa Fe County, NM, Wait 2001 has been Corrected to 11/5/2001. www.ferc.fed.us/online/htm. Period Ends: November 13, 2001, EIS No. 010366, Draft EIS, AFS, OR, EIS No. 010373, Draft EIS, AFS, AZ, Contact: John Bruin (505) 438–7872. Umpqua National Forest, Land and Buck Springs Range Allotment EIS No. 010381, Draft Supplement, Resource Management Plan, Rangeland Management, COE, FL, Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow Implementation, Lane, Douglas and Implementation, Blue Ridge Coconino Protection, Interim Operating Plan Jackson Counties, OR, Comment National Forest, Coconino County, (IOP), Updated Information on a New Period Ends: November 19, 2001, AZ, Comment Period Ends: November Alternative 7 for Emergency Sparrow Contact: Patrick S. William (541) 498– 26, 2001, Contact: Larry G. Sears (928) Protection Actions, Implementation, 2531. Revision of FR notice published 477–2255. Everglades National Park, Miami- on 10/5/2001: CEQ Due Date EIS No. 010374, Final EIS, NPS, MN, Dade County, FL, Comment Period Corrected from 11/19/2001 to 11/26/ Voyageurs National Park General Ends: November 26, 2001, Contact: 2001. Management, Visitor Use and Jon Moulding (904) 232–2286. Dated: October 9, 2001. Facilities Plans, Implementation, EIS No. 010382, Final EIS, AFS, OR, Koochiching and St. Louis Counties, Joseph C. Montgomery, Deep Vegetation Management Project, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office MN, Wait Period Ends: November 13, Implementation, Ochoco National 2001, Contact: Michael Madell (608) of Federal Activities. Forest, Paulina Ranger District, Crook [FR Doc. 01–25714 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 441–5600. and Wheeler Counties, OR , Wait BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EIS No. 010375, Draft EIS, NPS, AZ, Period Ends: November 13, 2001, Sunset Crater Volcano National Contact: Lori Blackburn (541) 477– Monument, General Management 6900. Plan, Implementation, Flagstaff Area, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EIS No. 010383, Draft EIS, NOA, CA, AGENCY Coconina County, AZ, Comment Goat Canyon Watershed Enhancement Period Ends: November 26, 2001, Project, Design, Construction [ER–FRL–6622–7] Contact: Sam Henderson (520) 526– Operation and Long-Term Environmental Impact Statements and 1157. Maintenance, Tijuana River Estuary, Regulations; Availability of EPA EIS No. 010376, Draft EIS, NPS, AZ, City and County of San Diego, CA, Comments Wupatki National Monument, General Comment Period Ends: November 26, Management Plan, Implementation, 2001, Contact: Steve Kokkinakis (202) Availability of EPA comments Flagstaff Area, Coconina County, AZ, 482–5181. prepared pursuant to the Environmental Comment Period Ends: November 26, EIS No. 010384, Final EIS, FAA, KY, Review Process (ERP), under Section 2001, Contact: Sam Henderson (520) Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 526–1157. International Airport, Construction 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental EIS No. 010377, Draft EIS, NPS, AZ, and Operation of a New 8,000-foot Policy Act as amended. Requests for Walnut Canyon National Monument, Runway 17/35 (Future 18R/36L); copies of EPA comments can be directed General Management Plan, 2,000-foot Extension of Runway 9/27, to the Office of Federal Activities at Implementation, Flagstaff Area, Funding and Airport Layout Plan, (202) 260–5076. Coconina County, AZ, Comment (ALP) Boone County, KY , Wait An explanation of the ratings assigned Period Ends: November 26, 2001, Period Ends: November 13, 2001, to draft environmental impact Contact: Sam Henderson (520) 526– Contact: Peggy S. Kelly (901) 544– statements (EISs) was published in FR 1157. 3495. dated May 18, 2001 (97 FR 27647). EIS No. 010378, Final EIS, AFS, CO, Forest Development Trail (FDT) 1135 Amended Notices Draft EISs (Arapho Ridge Trail), Forest EIS No. 010305, Draft Supplement, ERP No. D–DOE–L08055–WA Rating Development Road (FDR) 711.1 and FAA, MN, Flying Cloud Airport, EO2, Kangley—Echo Lake Transmission
VerDate 11
Line Project, Construct a New 500- strengthen the NEPA document. EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line, COE asked that its concerns be addressed in I. General Information Section 10 and 404 Permits, (DOE/EIS– the Record of Decision Document or in 0317), King County, WA. any subsequent NEPA documents that A. Does this Action Apply to Me? are tiered to the Programmatic EIS. Summary This action is directed to the public EPA expressed objections regarding Dated: October 9, 2001. in general. This action may, however, be the project’s potential impacts to the Joseph C. Montgomery, of interest to all parties interested in Cedar River watershed and to Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office SFIREG’s information exchange endangered species. EPA requested that of Federal Activities. relationship with EPA regarding the final EIS provide information to [FR Doc. 01–25715 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] important issues related to human fully evaluate these impacts, that it BILLING CODE 6560–50–P health, environmental exposure to consider a broader range of alternatives, pesticides, and insight into EPA’s and that it discuss compliance with the decision-making process are invited and Clean Water Act’s antidegradation ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION encourage to attend the meetings and requirement. AGENCY participate as appropriate. Since other entities may also be interested, the ERP No. D–DOE–L09815–00 Rating [OPP–00746; FRL–6806–8] LO, Fish and Wildlife Implementation Agency has not attempted to describe all Plan, To Implement and Fund a Policy Association of American Pesticide the specific entities that may be affected Directions for Fish and Wildlife Control Officials/State FIFRA Issues by this action. If you have any questions Mitigation and Recovery, Pacific Research and Evaluation Group regarding the applicability of this action Northwest, AZ, CA, ID, MT, NV, NM, Working Committee on Pesticide to a particular entity, consult the person OR, UT, WY and British Columbia. Operations and Management listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Summary AGENCY: Environmental Protection B. How Can I Get Additional EPA has no objections to the draft EIS. Agency (EPA). Information, Including Copies of this It provides a framework for deciding ACTION: Notice. Document and Other Related policy directions, rather than describing the impacts of a particular action or set SUMMARY: The Association of American Documents? of actions that will result from the Pesticide Control Officials (AAPC0)/the 1. Electronically. You may obtain document. Agencies with jurisdiction in State FIFRA Issues Research and electronic copies of this document, and the Columbia River Basin will, however, Evaluation Group (SFIREG) Working certain other related documents that have to individually address Fish and Committee on Pesticide Operations and might be available electronically, from Wildlife recovery plans in stand alone Management (WC/POM) will hold a 2– the EPA Internet home page at http:// NEPA documents in order to comply day meeting, beginning on November 5, www.epa.gov/. To access this document, with the 2000 Biological Opinion for the 2001 and ending November 6, 2001. on the home page select ‘‘Laws and Federal Columbia River Power System. This notice announces the location and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations and times for the meeting and sets forth the Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up the Final EISs tentative agenda topics. entry for this document under the ERP No. F–FHW–H59000–NB, DATES: The meeting will be held on ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental Antelope Valley Study, Implementation Monday, November 5, 2001, from 8:30 Documents.’’ You can also go directly to of Stormwater Management, a.m. to 5 p.m. and Tuesday, November the Federal Register listings at http:// Transportation Improvements and 6, 2001, from 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon. www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. Community Revitalization, Major ADDRESS: This meeting will be held at 2. In person. The Agency has Investment Study, City of Lincoln, the Double Tree Hotel, 300 Army Navy established an official record for this Lancaster County, NB. Drive, Arlington, VA, 22202. action under docket control number Summary Comments may be submitted by mail, OPP–00746. The official record consists electronically, or in person. Please of the documents specifically referenced No formal comment letter was sent to follow the detailed instructions for each in this action, any public comments the preparing agency. method as provided in Unit I. of the received during an applicable comment ERP No. F–USA–D11031–MD, Fort SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure period, and other information related to George G. Meade Future Development proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative this action, including any information and Operations of a New Administrative that you identify docket control number claimed as Confidential Business and Support Buildings, Anne Arundel OPP–00746 in the subject line on the Information (CBI). This official record and Howard Counties, MD. first page of your response. includes the documents that are Summary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: physically located in the docket, as well No formal comment letter was sent to Philip H. Gray, SFIREG Executive as the documents that are referenced in preparing agency. Secretary, P.O. Box 1249, Hardwick, VT those documents. The public version of ERP No. FS–JUS–G11010–00, 05843–1249; telephone number: (802) the official record does not include any Programmatic—Final Supplemental EIS 472–6956; fax (802) 472–6957; e-mail information claimed as CBI. The public US Naturalization Service (INS) and US address: [email protected]. version of the official record, which Joint Task Force-Six (JTF–6) Activities Georgia A. McDuffie, Field and includes printed, paper versions of any Along the US/Mexico Border from External Affairs Division (7506C), Office electronic comments submitted during Brownsville Texas to San Diego, of Pesticide Programs, Environmental an applicable comment period, is California. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania available for inspection in the Public Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; Information and Records Integrity Summary telephone number: (703) 605–0195; fax Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall EPA offered additional comments on number: (703) 308–1850; e-mail address: #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., the Final Programmatic EIS to [email protected]. Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
VerDate 11
Monday through Friday, excluding legal will be included in the public version List of Subjects holidays. The PIRIB telephone number of the official record without prior Environmental protection. is (703) 305–5805. notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, Dated: October 4, 2001. C. How and to Whom Do I Submit please consult the person listed under Jay Ellenberger, Comments? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Acting Director, Field and External Affairs You may submit comments through Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. the mail, in person, or electronically. To E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare [FR Doc. 01–25743 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] My Comments for EPA? ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is BILLING CODE 6560–50–S imperative that you identify docket You may find the following control number OPP–00746 in the suggestions helpful for preparing your subject line on the first page of your comments: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION response. 1. Explain your views as clearly as AGENCY 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: possible. [OPP–66295; FRL–6805–3] Public Information and Records 2. Describe any assumptions that you Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information used. Benomyl; Receipt of Request for Resources and Services Division 3. Provide copies of any technical Registration Cancellations (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs information and/or data you used that (OPP), Environmental Protection support your views. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 4. If you estimate potential burden or Agency (EPA). Washington, DC 20460. costs, explain how you arrived at the ACTION: Notice. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver estimate that you provide. your comments to: Public Information 5. Provide specific examples to SUMMARY: In accordance with section and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), illustrate your concerns. 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Information Resources and Services 6. Offer alternative ways to improve Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide the notice or collection activity. (FIFRA), as amended, EPA is issuing a Programs (OPP), Environmental 7. Make sure to submit your notice of receipt of request by American Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal comments by the deadline in this Mushroom Institute, Amvac Chemical Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., notice. Corp., Pursell Industries, Inc., the Scotts Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, Company, Value Garden Supply LLC, 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through be sure to identify the docket control and Voluntary Purchasing Groups, Inc., Friday, excluding legal holidays. The number assigned to this action in the to cancel the registrations for all of their PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– subject line on the first page of your products containing methyl 1- 5805. response. You may also provide the (butylcarbamoyl)-2-benzimidazole 3. Electronically. You may submit name, date, and Federal Register carbamate, or benomyl. No other your comments electronically by e-mail citation. registrants hold registrations for to: [email protected], or you can benomyl. Prior to acting on these II. Tentative Agenda: submit a computer disk as described request, EPA is providing a 30–day above. Do not submit any information The tentative agenda items idenified period for public comment. electronically that you consider to be by the AAPCO and SFIREG follows: DATES: Comments on the requested CBI. Avoid the use of special characters 1. Section 24(c) denials for cancellation of product and use and any form of encryption. Electronic organophosphates (OP)s. registrations must be submitted to the submissions will be accepted in 2. Cross contamination. address provided below by November WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file 3. Spray drift. 13, 2001. 4. Mosquito control update/West Nile format. All comments in electronic form FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By must be identified by docket control Virus. 5. Wood treaters and the chromated mail: Demson Fuller, Special Review number OPP–00746. Electronic copper arsenate (CCA) issues. and Reregistration Division (7508C), comments may also be filed online at 6. CAPRM (Environmental Office of Pesticide Programs, many Federal Depository Libraries. Performance Measures) update. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want 7. Cooperative agreements/$25 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, to Submit to the Agency? million enforcement grants update. DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 8. Field data plan update. 308–8062; fax number: (703) 308–7042; Do not submit any information 9. Insecticidal chalk enforcement e-mail address: electronically that you consider to be issues. [email protected]. CBI. You may claim information that 10. Supplemental labeling electronic SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: you submit to EPA in response to this distribution. document as CBI by marking any part or 11. Inspector credentials. I. General Information all of that information as CBI. 12. Chlorine swimming pool A. Does this Action Apply to Me? Information so marked will not be products. disclosed except in accordance with 13. Surf day results. This action is directed to the public procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 14. North American Free Trade in general. Although this action may be In addition to one complete version of Agreement (NAFTA) labeling review. of particular interest to persons who the comment that includes any 15. POM working committee produce or use pesticides, the Agency information claimed as CBI, a copy of workgroups/updates. has not attempted to describe all the the comment that does not contain the 16. EPA update/briefing: specific entities that may be affected by information claimed as CBI must be a. Office of Pesticide Programs this action. If you have any questions submitted for inclusion in the public update. regarding the information in this notice, version of the official record. b. Office Enforcement Compliance consult the person listed under FOR Information not marked confidential Assurance update. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
VerDate 11
B. How Can I Get Additional Information Resources and Services 6. Offer alternative ways to improve Information, Including Copies of this Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide the notice or collection activity. Document and Other Related Programs (OPP), Environmental 7. Make sure to submit your Documents? Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal comments by the deadline in this notice. 1. Electronically. You may obtain Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, electronic copies of this document and Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from be sure to identify the docket control certain other related documents that 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through number assigned to this action in the might be available electronically, from Friday, excluding legal holidays. The subject line on the first page of your the EPA Internet homepage at http:// PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– response. You may also provide the www.epa.gov. To access this document, 5805. 3. Electronically. You may submit name, date, and Federal Register on the homepage select ‘‘Laws and your comments electronically by e-mail citation. Regulations’’ ‘‘Regulations and to: [email protected], or you can Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up the II. What Action is the Agency Taking submit a computer disk as described entry for this document under the above. Do not submit any information This notice announces receipt by the ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental electronically that you consider to be Agency of requests from the American Documents.’’ You can also go directly to CBI. Avoid the use of special characters Mushroom Institute, Amvac Chemical the Federal Register listing at http:// and any form of encryption. Electronic Corp., Pursell Industries Inc., the Scotts www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. submissions will be accepted in Company, Value Garden Supply LLC, 2. In person. The Agency has and Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc., established an official record for this WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form to cancel all pesticide products action under docket control number registered under sections 3 and 24(c) of OPP–66295. The official record consists must be identified by docket control number OPP–66295. Electronic FIFRA. These registrations are listed in of the documents specifically referenced the following table. in this action, any public comments comments may also be filed online at received during an applicable comment many Federal Depository Libraries. A. Background Information period, and other information related to D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want Benomyl, is a benzimidazole this action, including any information to Submit to the Agency? carbamate and systemic foliar fungicide claimed as Confidential Business Do not submit any information registered for use on apples, apricots, Information (CBI). This official record electronically that you consider to be bean vine, blueberries, caneberries includes the documents that are CBI. You may claim information that (raspberries, blackberries, boysenberries, physically located in the docket, as well you submit to EPA in response to this loganberries, and dewberries), celery, as the documents that are referenced in document as CBI by marking any part or cherries, citrus, cucurbits (cucumber, those documents. The public version of all of that information as CBI. melons, pumpkins, and squash) the official record does not include any Information so marked will not be mangoes, mushrooms, nectarines, information claimed as CBI. The public disclosed except in accordance with peaches, and tomatoes. version of the official record, which procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. The technical registrant, E.I. du Pont includes printed, paper versions of any In addition to one complete version of de Nemours & Company met with the electronic comments submitted during the comment that includes any Agency on April 18, 2001, and an applicable comment period, is information claimed as CBI, a copy of requested a voluntary cancellation of all available for inspection in the Public the comment that does not contain the their registrations for products Information and Records Integrity information claimed as CBI must be containing benomyl, to be effective Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall submitted for inclusion in the public December 31, 2001. Dupont stated that #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., version of the official record. this decision was based on business Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Information not marked confidential reasons. The 6(f)(1) comment period Monday through Friday, excluding legal will be included in the public version announcing the request for voluntary holidays. The PIRIB telephone number of the official record without prior cancellation of Dupont benomyl is (703) 305–5805. notice. If you have any questions about registrations opened on May 23, 2001 and ended on June 22, 2001. Seven C. How and to Whom Do I Submit CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, public comments were received and Comments? please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. addressed. The cancellation order was You may submit comments through published in the Federal Register and the mail, in person, or electronically. To E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare became effective on August 8, 2001. ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is My Comments for EPA? The Agency has also received letters imperative that you identify docket You may find the following from the following registrants requesting control number OPP–66295 in the suggestions helpful for preparing your voluntary cancellation of all their subject line on the first page of your comments: products containing benomyl: American response. 1. Explain your views as clearly as Mushroom Institute, Amvac Chemical 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: possible. Corp., Pursell Industries, Inc., the Scotts Public Information and Records 2. Describe any assumptions that you Company, Value Garden Supply LLC, Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information used. and Voluntary Purchasing Groups, Inc. Resources and Services Division 3. Provide copies of any technical In their letters, Pursell and Amvac (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs information and/or data you used that stated that they no longer manufactured (OPP), Environmental Protection support your views. or distributed end-use products that Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 4. If you estimate potential burden or contained benomyl and therefore, no Washington, DC 20460. costs, explain how you arrived at the end-use products should be in the 2. In person or by courier. Deliver estimate that you provide. channels of trade. Likewise, in their your comments to: Public Information 5. Provide specific examples to letter, Value Garden Supply noted that and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), illustrate your concerns. their end-use products that contain
VerDate 11
benomyl are no longer being sold. Value Both registrants submitted letters stating granting the request, unless the Garden Supply is not aware of any that they would voluntarily cancel their registrants request a waiver of the stocks of the products in the channels registrations. comment period, or the Administrator of trade. The American Mushroom B. Requests for Voluntary Cancellation determines that continued use of the Institute requested cancellation of its pesticide would pose an unreasonable 24(c) registration. The reason was due to Under section 6(f)(1)(A) of FIFRA, adverse effect on the environment. The registrants may request, at any time, that the effective cancellation of all Dupont registrants have requested that EPA their pesticide registrations be canceled registrations that contain benomyl on waive the 180–day comment period. or amended to terminate one or more August 8, 2001. The Scotts Company pesticide uses. Section 6(f)(1)(B) of EPA is granting the registrants’ request and Voluntary Purchasing Group had FIFRA requires that before acting on a to waive the 180–day comment period. end-use products that were suspended request for voluntary cancellation, EPA Therefore, EPA will provide a 30–day on April 13, 1994 and May 20, 1998, must provide a 30–day public comment comment period on the proposed respectively. Both registrants failed to period on the request for voluntary requests. EPA anticipates granting the comply with a data call-in that was cancellation. In addition, section cancellation request shortly after the issued on June 16, 1992. The Agency, 6(f)(1)(C) of FIFRA requires that EPA end of the 30–day comment period for contacted both Scotts and Voluntary provide a 180–day comment period on this notice. The registrations for which Purchasing to notify them that Dupont a request for voluntary termination of cancellations were requested are canceled all registrations for benomyl. any minor agricultural use before identified below.
REGISTRATIONS WITH PENDING REQUESTS FOR CANCELLATION
Company Reg. No. Product
Pursell Industries Inc. 8660–75 VertaGreen Systemic Disease Control Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. 7401–225 Fertilome Systemic Fungicide with Benomyl Voluntary Purchasing Groups Inc. 7401–407 American Brand Benomyl Systemic Fungicide Amvac Chemical Corp. 5481–138 ALCO Systemic Fungicide The Scotts Company 538–66 Scotts Proturf 28–0–7 Fertilizer Plus Fungicide DSB The Scotts Company 538–132 Scotts Proturf DSB Fungicide Value Garden Supply LLC 769–874 Pratt Benomyl 50W Systemic Fungicide Value Garden Supply LLC 769–921 Science Benomyl 50W Systemic Fungicide American Mushroom Institute PA–97000200 Dupont Benlate SP Fungicide
III. What is the Agency’s Authority for any earlier cancellation action are released for shipment prior to the Taking this Action? controlling. The withdrawal request effective date of the cancellation action. must also include a commitment to pay Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA, provides that Unless the provisions of an earlier order any reregistration fees due, and to fulfill a registrant of a pesticide product may apply, the Agency intends to permit any applicable unsatisfied data at any time request that any of its existing stocks already in the hands of requirements. pesticide registrations be canceled. dealers or users to be distributed, sold, FIFRA section 6(f)(1) further provides V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing or used legally until they are exhausted, that, before acting on the request, EPA Stocks provided that such further sale and use must publish a notice of receipt of any comply with the EPA-approved label such request in the Federal Register, The effective date of cancellation will and labeling of the affected product. make reasonable efforts to inform be the date of the cancellation order. Exception to these general rules will be persons who rely on the pesticide for The orders effecting these requested made in specific cases when more minor agricultural uses, and provide a cancellations will generally permit a stringent restrictions on sale, 30–day period in which the public may registrant to sell or distribute existing distribution, or use of the products or comment. Thereafter, the Administrator stocks for 1 year after the date the their ingredients have already been may approve such a request. cancellation request was received. This imposed, as in a Special Review action, policy is in accordance with the or where the Agency has identified IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of Agency’s statement of policy as significant potential risk concerns Request prescribed in the Federal Register of associated with a particular chemical. Registrants who choose to withdraw a June 26, 1991 (56 FR 29362) (FRL– request for cancellation must submit 3846–4). Exceptions to this general rule VI. Future Tolerance Revocations such withdrawal in writing to the will be made if a product poses a risk person listed under FOR FURTHER concern, or is in noncompliance with EPA anticipates drafting a future INFORMATION CONTACT. This written reregistration requirements, or is subject Federal Register notice proposing withdrawal of the request for to a data call-in. In all cases, product- revocation of tolerances on cancellation will apply only to the specific disposition dates will be given commodities, which no longer have applicable FIFRA section 6(f)(1) request in the cancellation orders. registered uses of benomyl. In this listed in this notice. If the product(s) Existing stocks are those stocks of notice, EPA seeks comment as to have been subject to a previous registered pesticide products which are whether any individuals or groups want cancellation action, the effective date of currently in the United States and to support continuation of these cancellation and all other provisions of which have been packaged, labeled, and tolerances.
VerDate 11
List of Subjects implementation plan (‘‘SIP’’) Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Environmental protection, requirements for emergency generators. Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20460; Agricultural commodities, Pesticides EPA, as authorized by CAA section telephone (202) 564–3271; fax: (202) and pests. 113(d)(1), 42 U.S.C. 7413(d)(1), has 564–9001; e-mail: assessed a civil penalty for these [email protected]. Dated: October 2, 2001. violations. WorldCom failed to file an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Lois A. Rossi, Electronic emergency planning notification with Copies: Electronic copies of this Director, Special Review and Reregistration the State Emergency Response Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. document are available from the EPA Commission (‘‘SERC’’) and to provide Home Page under the link ‘‘Laws and [FR Doc. 01–25742 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the name of an emergency contact to the Regulations’’ at the Federal Register— BILLING CODE 6560–50–S Local Emergency Planning Committee Environmental Documents entry (‘‘LEPC’’). WorldCom failed to submit (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr). Material Safety Data Sheets (‘‘MSDS’’) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION or a list of chemicals to the LEPC, the I. Background AGENCY SERC, and the fire department with WorldCom, Inc., a [FRL–7081–8 ; CWA–HQ–2001–6001; jurisdiction over each facility for three telecommunications company EPCRA–HQ–2001–6001; CAA–HQ–2001– hundred and ninety-four facilities in incorporated in the State of Georgia and 6001] violation of EPCRA section 311, 42 located at 500 Clinton Center Drive, U.S.C. 11021. At the same facilities, Clinton, Mississippi 39056, disclosed, Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed WorldCom failed to submit and pursuant to the EPA ‘‘Incentives for Administrative Settlement, Penalty Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosures, Assessment and Opportunity To Inventory form to the LEPC, the SERC, Correction and Prevention of and the fire department with Comment Regarding WorldCom, Inc.; Violations’’ (‘‘Audit Policy’’), 65 FR jurisdiction over each facility in Correction 19618 (April 11, 2000), that they failed violation of EPCRA section 312, 42 to prepare SPCC plans for seventy-five AGENCY: Environmental Protection U.S.C. 11022. EPA, as authorized by facilities where they stored diesel oil in Agency (EPA). EPCRA section 325, 42 U.S.C. 11045, above ground storage tanks, in violation ACTION: Notice. has assessed a civil penalty for these of the CWA section 311(b)(3) and 40 violations. SUMMARY: On June 8, 2001, EPA CFR Part 112. WorldCom disclosed that published in the Federal Register, (66 DATES: Comments are due on or before for one hundred and six facilities they FR 30923) information concerning a November 13, 2001. had failed to obtain operating permits or proposed settlement with WorldCom, ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to exemptions in violation of CAA section Inc. (‘‘WorldCom’’) The purpose of this the Enforcement & Compliance Docket 110, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and various SIP correction is to provide additional and Information Center (2201A), Docket requirements for emergency generators. information about this settlement and to Number EC–2001–005, Office of WorldCom disclosed that at three offer interested parties the opportunity Enforcement and Compliance hundred and ninety-four facilities they to comment on all aspects of this Assurance, U.S. Environmental had: (1) Failed to file emergency consent agreement and proposed final Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania planning notifications with the SERC order. EPA has entered into a consent Avenue, NW., Mail Code 2201A, and failed to provide the name of an agreement with WorldCom to resolve Washington, DC 20460. (Comments may emergency contact to the LEPC, in violations of the Clean Water Act be submitted on disk in WordPerfect 8.0 violation of EPCRA sections 302–303, (‘‘CWA’’), Clean Air Act (‘‘CAA’’), and or earlier versions.) Written comments 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(1); (2) failed to submit Emergency Planning and Community may be delivered in person to: MSDS’ or a list of chemicals to the Right-to-Know Act (‘‘EPCRA’’) and their Enforcement and Compliance Docket LEPC, SERC, and the fire departments implementing regulations. Information Center, U.S. Environmental with jurisdiction over the facilities, in The Administrator, as required by Protection Agency, Rm. 4033, Ariel Rios violation of EPCRA section 311, 42 CWA section 311(b)(6)(C), 33 U.S.C. Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., U.S.C. 11021; and (3) failed to submit an 1321(b)(6)(C), is hereby providing Washington, DC. Submit comments Emergency and Hazardous Chemical public notice of, and an opportunity for electronically to [email protected]. Inventory to the LEPC, SERC, and fire interested persons to comment on, this Electronic comments may be filed departments with jurisdiction over the consent agreement and proposed final online at many Federal Depository facilities, in violation of EPCRA section order. EPA is also providing public Libraries. 312, 42 U.S.C. 11022. notice of, and opportunity for interested The consent agreement, the proposed EPA determined that WorldCom met parties to comment on, the CAA and final order, and public comments, if the criteria set out in the Audit Policy EPCRA portions of this consent any, may be reviewed at the for a 100% waiver of the gravity agreement. Enforcement and Compliance Docket component of the penalty. As a result, WorldCom failed to prepare Spill Information Center, U.S. Environmental EPA waived the gravity based penalty Prevention Control and Countermeasure Protection Agency, Rm. 4033, Ariel Rios ($3,888,207) and proposed a settlement (‘‘SPCC’’) plans for seventy-five Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., penalty amount of one hundred and facilities where they stored diesel oil in Washington, DC. Persons interested in forty-three thousand, five hundred and above ground tanks. EPA, as authorized reviewing these materials must make twenty dollars ($143,520). This is the by CWA section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C. arrangements in advance by calling the amount of the economic benefit gained 1321(b)(6), has assessed a civil penalty docket clerk at 202–564–2614. A by WorldCom, attributable to their for these violations. WorldCom failed to reasonable fee may be charged by EPA delayed compliance with the SPCC, obtain the appropriate operating permits for copying docket materials. CAA and EPCRA regulations. or exemptions at one hundred and six FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beth WorldCom, Inc. has agreed to pay this facilities in violation of CAA section Cavalier, Multimedia Enforcement amount. EPA and WorldCom negotiated 110, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and various state Division (2248–A), U.S. Environmental and signed an administrative consent
VerDate 11
agreement, following the Consolidated Dated: October 3, 2001. assets of a company, including the Rules of Practice, 40 CFR section David A. Nielsen, companies listed below, that engages 22.13(b), on June 1, 2001 (In Re: Director, Multimedia Enforcement Division, either directly or through a subsidiary or WorldCom, Inc., Docket No. CWA–HQ– Office of Enforcement and Compliance other company, in a nonbanking activity 2001–6001). This consent agreement is Assurance. that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y subject to public notice and comment [FR Doc. 01–25741 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has under CWA section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P determined by Order to be closely section 1321(b)(6). EPA is expanding related to banking and permissible for this opportunity for public comment to bank holding companies. Unless all other aspects of this consent FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE otherwise noted, these activities will be agreement. CORPORATION conducted throughout the United States. Each notice is available for inspection Under CWA section 311(b)(6)(A), 33 SUNSHINE ACT MEETING at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. U.S.C. 1321 (b)(6)(A), any owner, Pursuant to the provisions of the The notice also will be available for operator, or person in charge of a vessel, inspection at the offices of the Board of onshore facility, or offshore facility from ‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that Governors. Interested persons may which oil is discharged in violation of express their views in writing on the the CWA section 311 (b)(3), 33 U.S.C. at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 9, 2001, the Board of Directors of the question whether the proposal complies 1321 (b)(3), or who fails or refuses to with the standards of section 4 of the comply with any regulations that have Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider BHC Act. Additional information on all been issued under CWA section 311(j), matters relating to the Corporation’s bank holding companies may be 33 U.S.C. 1321(j), may be assessed an corporate activities. obtained from the National Information administrative civil penalty of up to In calling the meeting, the Board Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. $137,500 by EPA. Class II proceedings determined, on motion of Director Ellen Unless otherwise noted, comments under CWA section 311(b)(6) are S. Seidman (Director, Office of Thrift regarding the applications must be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR Supervision), seconded by Director John received at the Reserve Bank indicated Part 22. M. Reich, and concurred in by Director or the offices of the Board of Governors Under CAA section 113(d), the John D. Hawke, Jr. (Comptrolelr of the not later than October 25, 2001. A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Administrator may issue an Currency), and Chairman Donald E. (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 administrative order assessing a civil Powell, that Corporation business Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri penalty against any person who has required its consideration of the matters 63166–2034: on less than seven days’ notice to the violated an applicable implementation 1. Lauderdale County Bancshares, public; that no earlier notice of the plan or any other requirement of the Inc., Halls, Tennessee; to engage de meeting was practicable; that the public Act, including any rule, order, waiver, novo through its subsidiary, Farmers interest did not require consideration of permit or plan. Proceedings under CAA Crop Insurance Agency, Halls, the matters in a meeting open to public section 113(d) are conducted in Tennessee, in insurance activities in a observation; and that the matters could accordance with 40 CFR Part 22. place not exceeding 5,000 in e considered in a closed meeting by Under EPCRA section 325, the population, pursuant to authority of subsections (c)(4), (c)(6), Administrator may issue an § 225.28(b)(11)(iii) of Regulation Y. (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10) of the ‘‘Government administrative order assessing a civil in the Sunshine Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve penalty against any person who has 552b(c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10)). System, October 5, 2001. violated applicable emergency planning The meeting was held in the Boad Robert deV. Frierson, or right to know requirements, or any Room of the FDIC Building located at Deputy Secretary of the Board. other requirement of the Act. 550—17th Street, NW., Washington, DC. [FR Doc. 01–25642 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Proceedings under EPCRA section 325 BILLING CODE 6210–01–S are conducted in accordance with 40 Dated: October 9, 2001. CFR Part 22. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. James D. LaPierre, The procedures by which the public Deputy Executive Secretary. GENERAL SERVICES may comment on a proposed Class II [FR Doc. 01–25846 Filed 10–10–01; 11:45 ADMINISTRATION penalty order, or participate in a Clean am] Water Act Class II penalty proceeding, Office of Communications; BILLING CODE 6714–01–M are set forth in 40 CFR 22.45. The Cancellation of an Optional Form by deadline for submitting public comment the Department of State on this proposed final order is FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM AGENCY: Office of Communications, November 13, 2001. All comments will GSA. be transferred to the Environmental Notice of Proposals to Engage in ACTION: Notice. Appeals Board (‘‘EAB’’) of EPA for Permissible Nonbanking Activities or consideration. The powers and duties of to Acquire Companies that are SUMMARY: The Department of State the EAB are outlined in 40 CFR 22.4(a). Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking cancelled the following Optional Form Pursuant to CWA section 311(b)(6)(C), Activities because of low usage: OF 126, Foreign Service Residence and Dependency EPA will not issue an order in this The companies listed in this notice Report. proceeding prior to the close of the have given notice under section 4 of the public comment period. Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. DATES: Effective October 12, 2001. List of Subjects 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to Charles Cunningham, Department of Environmental protection. acquire or control voting securities or State, (202) 312–9605.
VerDate 11
Dated: October 2, 2001. because they suggested that the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Barbara M. Williams, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Deputy Standard and Optional Forms may need to adjust its guidelines on Services (CMS) (formerly known as the Management Officer, General Services exposure limits to such chemicals. The Health Care Financing Administration Administration. Science paper was withdrawn on July (HCFA)), Department of Health and [FR Doc. 01–25744 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 25, 1997. See Science 277:462 (July 25, Human Services, is publishing the BILLING CODE 6820–34–M 1997). following summary of proposed This research formed the basis of collections for public comment. National Institute of Diabetes and Interested persons are invited to send DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), comments regarding this burden HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health (NIH), estimate or any other aspect of this grant application 1 R29 DK52420–01, collection of information, including any Office of the Secretary ‘‘Two Estrogen Binding Sites on the of the following subjects: (1) The Estrogen Receptor.’’ necessity and utility of the proposed Findings of Scientific Misconduct Dr. Arnold has entered into a information collection for the proper Voluntary Exclusion Agreement performance of the agency’s functions; AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. (Agreement) with PHS in which he has (2) the accuracy of the estimated ACTION: Notice. voluntarily agreed for a period of five (5) burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that years, beginning on September 20, 2001: (1) To exclude himself from any be collected; and (4) the use of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) contracting or subcontracting with any automated collection techniques or and the Assistant Secretary for Health agency of the United States Government other forms of information technology to have taken final action in the following and from eligibility for, or involvement minimize the information collection case: burden. Steven F. Arnold, Ph.D., Tulane in, nonprocurement transactions (e.g., grants and cooperative agreements) of Type of Information Collection University: Based on the report of an Request: Extension of a currently investigation conducted by Tulane the United States Government as defined in 45 C.F.R. Part 76 (Debarment approved collection; Title of University, dated July 16, 1999, and Information Collection: Inpatient additional analysis conducted by ORI in Regulations); (2) To exclude himself from serving in Psychiatric Services for Individuals its oversight review, the U.S. Public any advisory capacity to PHS, including Under Age 21 and Supporting Health Service (PHS) found that Dr. but not limited to service on any PHS Regulations in 42 CFR 441.152; Form Arnold, former Research Assistant advisory committee, board, and/or peer No.: CMS—(OMB# 0938–0754); Use: Professor at the Center for review committee, or as a consultant. Certification requirements in section Bioenvironmental Research at Tulane During discussions about the 441.152 are modified to require that the University Medical Center, engaged in proposed Agreement, Dr. Arnold was certification of need for inpatient scientific misconduct. Dr. Arnold cooperative with ORI and accepted psychiatric services include committed scientific misconduct by responsibility for his actions, admitted documented clinical evidence that intentionally falsifying the research to scientific misconduct, and conceded serves as the basis for the certification results reported in Table 3 of a paper of need for inpatient psychiatric care. 1 that there were no original data or other published in the journal Science and corroborating evidence to support the Section 1905(h)(1)(B) requires by providing falsified and fabricated conclusions reported in the Science physicians and other personnel materials to investigating officials at paper. qualified to make determinations with Tulane University in response to a respect to mental health conditions and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: request for original data to support the the treatment thereof certify the need for Director, Division of Investigative research results and conclusions care which they have determined to be reported in the Science paper. In Oversight, Office of Research Integrity, necessary on an inpatient basis; addition, PHS finds that there is no 5515 Security Lane, Suite 700, Affected Public: State, local, or tribal original data or other corroborating Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 443–5330. govt, Business or other for-profit, Not- evidence to support the research results Chris B. Pascal, for-profit institutions; Number of and conclusions reported in the Science Director, Office of Research Integrity. Respondents: 80,000; Total Annual paper as a whole. [FR Doc. 01–25608 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Responses: 80,000; Total Annual Hours: Specifically, PHS finds that Dr. 1. BILLING CODE 4150–31–P Arnold’s research reported in the To obtain copies of the supporting Science paper involved a finding that statement and any related forms for the environmental chemicals, such as DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND proposed paperwork collections certain insecticides and hydroxylated HUMAN SERVICES referenced above, access CMS’s Web site polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), address at http://www.hcfa.gov/regs/ which have a weak estrogenic activity Centers for Medicare & Medicaid prdact95.htm, or e-mail your request, when acting alone, were up to 1000 Services including your address, phone number, times more potent in mimicking OMB number, and HCFA document estrogen when tested in combination. [Document Identifier: CMS–R–238] identifier, to [email protected], or These research results and conclusions Agency Information Collection call the Reports Clearance Office on were important to the public health Activities: Proposed Collection; (410) 786–1326. Written comments and Comment Request recommendations for the proposed 1 Steven F. Arnold, Diane M. Klotz, Bridgette M. information collections must be mailed collins, Peter M. Vonier, Louis J. Guillette, Jr., John AGENCY: Centers for Medicare and within 60 days of this notice directly to A. McLachlan. ‘‘Synergistic Activation of Estrogen Receptor with Combinations of Environmental Medicaid Services, HHS. the CMS Paperwork Clearance Officer Chemicals.’’ Science 272:1489–1492 (June 7, 1996) In compliance with the requirement designated at the following address: (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Science paper’’). of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the CMS, Office of Information Services,
VerDate 11
Security and Standards Group, Division standards of quality; Frequency: When utility, and clarity of the information to of CMS Enterprise Standards, Attention: records are reviewed; Affected Public: be collected; and (4) the use of Julie Brown CMS–R–238, Room N2–14– Business or other for profit; Number of automated collection techniques or 26, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Respondents: 7,087; Total Annual other forms of information technology to Maryland 21244–1850. Responses: 899,340; Total Annual minimize the information collection Dated: October 4, 2001. Hours: 26,865. burden. To obtain copies of the supporting John P. Burke III, statement and any related forms for the Type of Information Collection Reports Clearance Officer, Security and proposed paperwork collections Request: Revision of a currently Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise approved collection; Title of Standards. referenced above, access CMS’s Web site address at http://www.hcfa.gov/regs/ Information Collection: Model [FR Doc. 01–25683 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] prdact95.htm, or e-mail your request, Application Template for State Child BILLING CODE 4120–03–P including your address, phone number, Health Plan Under Title XXI of the OMB number, and HCFA document Social Security Act, State Children’s DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND identifier, to [email protected], or Health Insurance Program, and Model HUMAN SERVICES call the Reports Clearance Office on Application Template and Instructions; (410) 786–1326. Written comments and Form No.: CMS—(OMB# 0938–0707); Centers for Medicare & Medicaid recommendations for the proposed Use: States are required to submit Title Services information collections must be mailed XXI plans and amendments for approval within 60 days of this notice directly to [Document Identifier: CMS–R–50] by the Secretary pursuant to section the CMS Paperwork Clearance Officer 2102 of the Social Security Act in order Agency Information Collection designated at the following address: to receive funds for initiating and Activities: Proposed Collection; CMS, Office of Information Services, expanding health insurance coverage for Security and Standards Group, Division Comment Request uninsured children. The model of CMS Enterprise Standards, Attention: application Template is used to assist AGENCY: Centers for Medicare and Julie Brown, CMS–R–50, Room N2–14– Medicaid Services, HHS. In compliance 26, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, States in submitting a State Child Health with the requirement of section Maryland 21244–1850. Plan and amendments to that plan; 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Frequency: Once; Affected Public: State, Dated: October 4, 2001. local, or tribal gov’t; Number of Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for John P. Burke III, Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Respondents: 42; Total Annual Reports Clearance Officer, Security and Responses: 42; Total Annual Hours: (formerly known as the Health Care Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise Financing Administration (HCFA)), Standards, 3,360. Department of Health and Human [FR Doc. 01–25684 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] To obtain copies of the supporting Services, is publishing the following BILLING CODE 4120–30–P statement and any related forms for the summary of proposed collections for proposed paperwork collections public comment. Interested persons are referenced above, access CMS’s Web site invited to send comments regarding this DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND address at http://www.hcfa.gov/regs/ burden estimate or any other aspect of HUMAN SERVICES prdact95.htm, or E-mail your request, this collection of information, including including your address, phone number, any of the following subjects: (1) The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid OMB number, and HCFA document necessity and utility of the proposed Services information collection for the proper identifier, to [email protected], or performance of the agency’s functions; [Document Identifier: CMS–R–211] call the Reports Clearance Office on (2) the accuracy of the estimated (410) 786–1326. Written comments and Agency Information Collection recommendations for the proposed burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, Activities: Proposed Collection; information collections must be mailed utility, and clarity of the information to Comment Request be collected; and (4) the use of within 60 days of this notice directly to automated collection techniques or AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & the CMS Paperwork Clearance Officer other forms of information technology to Medicaid Services, HHS. In compliance designated at the following address: minimize the information collection with the requirement of section CMS, Office of Information Services, burden. 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Security and Standards Group, Division Type of Information Collection Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for of CMS Enterprise Standards, Attention: Request: Extension of a currently Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Julie Brown, CMS R 211, Room N2–14– approved collection; Title of (formerly known as the Health Care 26, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Information Collection: Medical Records Financing Administration (HCFA)), Maryland 21244–1850. Review Under PPS and Supporting Department of Health and Human Regulations in 42 CFR 412.40–412.52; Services, is publishing the following Dated: October 4, 2001. Form No.: CMS-R–0050 (OMB # 0938– summary of proposed collections for John P. Burke III, 0359); Use: Peer Review Organizations public comment. Interested persons are Reports Clearance Officer, Security and (PRO) are authorized to conduct invited to send comments regarding this Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise medical review activities under the burden estimate or any other aspect of Standards. Prospective Payment System. In order to this collection of information, including [FR Doc. 01–25685 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] conduct the medical review activities any of the following subjects: (1) The BILLING CODE 4120–03–P we depend upon hospitals to make necessity and utility of the proposed available medical records. PROs ensure information collection for the proper that admissions are medically performance of the agency’s functions; necessary, provided in the appropriate (2) the accuracy of the estimated setting, and that they meet acceptable burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND number, OMB number, and HCFA This form is completed by all Medicare HUMAN SERVICES document identifier, to approved ESRD facilities upon death of [email protected], or call the Reports an ESRD patient. The forms primary Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Clearance Office on (410) 786–1326. purpose is to collect fact and cause of Services Written comments and death. Reports of deaths are used to [Document Identifier: CMS–R–131] recommendations for the proposed show cause of death and demographic information collections must be mailed characteristics of these patients.; Agency Information Collection within 60 days of this notice directly to Frequency: On occasion; Affected Activities: Proposed Collection; the CMS Paperwork Clearance Officer Public: Business or other for-profit; Comment Request designated at the following address: Federal Gov’t., Not-for-profit CMS, Office of Information Services, institutions; Number of Respondents: AGENCY: Centers for Medicare and Security and Standards Group, Division 4,000; Total Annual Responses: 56,258; Medicaid Services, HHS. of CMS Enterprise Standards, Attention: Total Annual Hours: 9,564. In compliance with the requirement Julie Brown, CMS–R–131, Room N2– To obtain copies of the supporting of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 14–26, 7500 Security Boulevard, statement for the proposed paperwork Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Baltimore, Maryland 21244–1850. collections referenced above, access Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Dated: October 4, 2001. HCFA’s Web Site Address at http:// Services (CMS) (formerly known as the www.hcfa.gov/regs/prdact95.htm, or e- John P. Burke III, Health Care Financing Administration mail your request, including your (HCFA)), Department of Health and Reports Clearance Officer, Security and address and phone number, to Human Services, is publishing the Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise Standards. [email protected], or call the Reports following summary of proposed Clearance Office on (410) 786–1326. [FR Doc. 01–25686 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] collections for public comment. Written comments and Interested persons are invited to send BILLING CODE 4120–03–M recommendations for the proposed comments regarding this burden information collections must be mailed estimate or any other aspect of this within 30 days of this notice directly to collection of information, including any DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES the OMB Desk Officer designated at the of the following subjects: (1) The following address: OMB Human necessity and utility of the proposed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Resources and Housing Branch, information collection for the proper Services Attention: Allison Eydt, New Executive performance of the agency’s functions; Office Building, Room 10235, (2) the accuracy of the estimated [Document Identifier: CMS–2746 (formerly Washington, DC 20503. burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, HCFA–2746)] utility, and clarity of the information to Dated: September 27, 2001. Agency Information Collection be collected; and (4) the use of John P. Burke III, Activities: Submission for OMB automated collection techniques or CMS Reports Clearance Officer, CMS, Office Review; Comment Request other forms of information technology to of Information Services, Security and Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise minimize the information collection In compliance with the requirement Standards. burden. of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the [FR Doc. 01–25687 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Type of Information Collection Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Request: Revision of a currently Centers for Medicare and Medicaid BILLING CODE 4120–03–P approved collection; Title of Services ((CMS) formerly the Health Information Collection: Advance Care Financing Administration), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Beneficiary Notice; Form No.: CMS–R– Department of Health and Human HUMAN SERVICES 131 (OMB# 0938–0566); Use: Services, has submitted to the Office of Physicians, practitioners, suppliers, and Management and Budget (OMB) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid providers furnishing Part A or Part B following proposal for the collection of Services items or services may bill a patient for information. Interested persons are items or services denied by Medicare as invited to send comments regarding the [Document Identifier: CMS–10026] not reasonable and necessary if they burden estimate or any other aspect of Agency Information Collection informed the patient, before furnishing this collection of information, including Activities: Submission for OMB the item or service, that Medicare was any of the following subjects: (1) The Review; Comment Request likely to deny payment for the items or necessity and utility of the proposed services and the patient, after being information collection for the proper In compliance with the requirement informed, agreed to pay for the items or performance of the agency’s functions; of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the services; Frequency: On occasion; (2) the accuracy of the estimated Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Affected Public: Businesses or other for- burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid profit, Individuals or households, Not- utility, and clarity of the information to Services (CMS), Department of Health for-profit institutions; Number of be collected; and (4) the use of and Human Services, has submitted to Respondents; 1,028,585; Total Annual automated collection techniques or the Office of Management and Budget Responses: 19,660,110; Total Annual other forms of information technology to (OMB) the following proposal for the Hours: 1,638,345. minimize the information collection collection of information. Interested To obtain copies of the supporting burden. persons are invited to send comments statement and any related forms for the Type of Information Collection regarding the burden estimate or any proposed paperwork collections Request: Extension of a currently other aspect of this collection of referenced above, access, CMS’s Web approved collection; Title of information, including any of the Site address at http://www.hcfa.gov/ Information Collection: End Stage Renal following subjects: (1) The necessity and regs/prdact95.htm, or E-mail your Disease Death Notification; Form No.: utility of the proposed information request, including your address, phone CMS–2746 (OMB# 0938–0448); Use: collection for the proper performance of
VerDate 11
the agency’s functions; (2) the accuracy DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of the estimated burden; (3) ways to HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and Food and Drug Administration Food and Drug Administration (4) the use of automated collection [Docket No. 01N–0176] techniques or other forms of information [Docket No. 01N–0048] technology to minimize the information Agency Information Collection collection burden. Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB Activities; Announcement of OMB Approval; Good Laboratory Practices Type of Information Collection Approval; Current Good Manufacturing (GLP) Regulations for Nonclinical Request: Reinstatement, without change, Practice Regulations for Type A Laboratory Studies of a previously approved collection for Medicated Articles which approval has expired. AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Title of Information Collection: AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, ACTION: Notice. Survey of Medicare Beneficiaries Who HHS. Involuntarily Disenroll from their SUMMARY: The Food and Drug ACTION: Notice. Health Plan. Administration (FDA) is announcing Form No.: CMS–10026 (OMB# 0938– that a collection of information entitled SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 0817). ‘‘Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) Administration (FDA) is announcing Regulations for Nonclinical Laboratory Use: In January 2002, many managed that a collection of information entitled Studies’’ has been approved by the care plans are expected to withdraw ‘‘Current Good Manufacturing Practice Office of Management and Budget from Medicare or reduce their service Regulations for Type A Medicated (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction area. This will continue a trend that Articles,’’ has been approved by the Act of 1995. began in January 1999. CMS wishes to Office of Management and Budget FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: survey approximately 3,600 affected (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction JonnaLynn P. Capezzuto, Office of beneficiaries in early 2002 to determine Act of 1995 (the PRA). Information Resources Management how they were impacted by the (HFA–250), Food and Drug FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: withdrawals and whether they received Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Denver Presley, Office of Information sufficient information about options for Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–4659. Resources Management (HFA–250), replacing their managed care coverage. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Federal Register of July 20, 2001 (66 FR Frequency: Other: One-Time. Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 37977), the agency announced that the Affected Public: Individuals or 301–827–1472. proposed information collection had Households. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the been submitted to OMB for review and Number of Respondents: 3,600. Federal Register of June 15, 2001 (66 FR clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Total Annual Responses: 3,600. 32628), the agency announced that the agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, Total Annual Hours: 684. proposed information collection had been submitted to OMB for review and a collection of information unless it To obtain copies of the supporting clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An displays a currently valid OMB control statement for the proposed paperwork agency may not conduct or sponsor, and number. OMB has now approved the collections referenced above, access a person is not required to respond to, information collection and has assigned CMS’s Web Site address at http:// OMB control number 0910–0119. The a collection of information unless it www.hcfa.gov/regs/prdact95.htm, or e- approval expires on September 30, displays a currently valid OMB control mail your request, including your 2004. A copy of the supporting number. OMB has now approved the address and phone number, to statement for this information collection information collection and has assigned [email protected], or call the Reports is available on the Internet at http:// OMB control number 0910–0154. The Clearance Office on (410) 786–1326. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets. approval expires on September 30, Written comments and Dated: October 5, 2001. 2004. A copy of the supporting recommendations for the proposed Margaret M. Dotzel, statement for this information collection information collections must be mailed is available on the Internet at http:// Associate Commissioner for Policy. within 30 days of this notice directly to www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets. [FR Doc. 01–25659 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the OMB Desk Officer designated at the BILLING CODE 4160–01–S following address: OMB Human Dated: October 5, 2001. Resources and Housing Branch, Margaret M. Dotzel, Attention: Allison Eydt, New Executive Associate Commissioner for Policy. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Office Building, Room 10235, [FR Doc. 01–25658 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] HUMAN SERVICES Washington, DC 20503. BILLING CODE 4160–01–S Food and Drug Administration Dated: September 25, 2001. [Docket No. 01N–0277] John P. Burke III, CMS Reports Clearance Officer, CMS, Office Agency Information Collection of Information Services, Security and Activities; Submission for OMB Standards Group, Division of CMS Enterprise Review; Comment Request; Reports of Standards. Corrections and Removals [FR Doc. 01–25688 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, BILLING CODE 4120–03–P HHS.
VerDate 11
ACTION: Notice. collection of information to OMB for a device that is not required to be review and clearance. reported to FDA shall keep a record of SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Reports of Corrections and Removals— such correction or removal. Administration (FDA) is announcing 21 CFR Part 806 (OMB Control No. The information collected in the that the proposed collection of 0910–0359)—Extension reports of corrections and removals will information listed below has been Section 519(f) of the Federal Food, be used by FDA to identify marketed submitted to the Office of Management Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 devices that have serious problems and and Budget (OMB) for review and U.S.C. 360i(f)) directs FDA to issue to ensure that dangerous and defective clearance under the Paperwork regulations to require device devices are removed from the market, Reduction Act of 1995. manufacturers and importers to report assuring that FDA has current and DATES: Submit written comments on the promptly to FDA any correction or complete information regarding these collection of information by November removal of a device undertaken by such corrections and removals and whether 13, 2001. manufacturers and importers if the recall action is adequate. Failure to correction or removal was undertaken to collect this information prevents FDA ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the collection of information to the reduce a risk to health posed by the from receiving timely information about Office of Information and Regulatory device or to remedy a violation of the devices that may have a serious effect Affairs, OMB, New Executive Office act caused by the device which may on the health of the users of the devices. Bldg., 725 17th St. NW., rm. 10235, present a risk to health. Under 21 CFR Respondents to this information Washington, DC 20503, Attn: Wendy 806.10 and 806.20(a), FDA requires that collection are businesses or other for- Taylor, Desk Officer for FDA. each device manufacturer and importer profit manufacturers or importers of shall submit a written report to FDA of medical devices who must remove or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: any action initiated to correct or remove correct medical devices that cause Peggy Schlosburg, Office of Information a device to reduce a risk to health posed public health risk to the general public. Resources Management (HFA–250), by the device or to remedy a violation In the Federal Register of July 6, 2001 Food and Drug Administration, 5600 of the act caused by the device which (66 FR 35644), the agency requested Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, may present a risk to health within 10 comments on the proposed collection of 301–827–1223. working days of initiating such information. No comments were SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In correction or removal. In addition, each received. compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA manufacturer and importer of a device FDA estimates the burden of this has submitted the following proposed who initiates a correction or removal of collection of information as follows:
TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1
Annual Frequency Total Annual 21 CFR Section No. of Respondents per Response Responses Hours per Response Total Hours
806.10 880 1 880 10 8,800 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
TABLE 2.—ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN 1
Annual Frequency of Total Annual Hours per 21 CFR Section No. of Recordkeepers Recordkeeping Records Recordkeeper Total Hours
806.20(a) 440 1 440 10 4,400 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
The following is an explanation of the Dated: October 5, 2001. This notice announces a forthcoming burden estimate: Margaret M. Dotzel, meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration Reporting Burden Associate Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. 01–25660 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] (FDA). At least one portion of the meeting will be closed to the public. FDA estimates that it would take 10 BILLING CODE 4160–01–S staff hours to prepare and assemble a Name of Committee: Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies Advisory written report. For the estimated 880 Committee. reports, FDA estimates that respondents DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND General Function of the Committee: HUMAN SERVICES will spend 8,800 hours to prepare, To provide advice and assemble, and send the reports. Food and Drug Administration recommendations to the agency on Recordkeeping Burden FDA’s regulatory issues. Transmissible Spongiform Date and Time: The meeting will be FDA estimates that it would take 10 Encephalopathies Advisory held on October 25, 2001, from 8 a.m. staff hours to prepare a written record. Committee; Notice of Meeting to 3:30 p.m., and on October 26, 2001, For the estimated 440 records, the total from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. recordkeeping burden is estimated at AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Location: Holiday Inn, Kennedy 4,400 hours per recordkeeper. HHS. Ballroom, 8777 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, MD. ACTION: Notice. Contact: William Freas, or Sheila D. Langford, Center for Biologics
VerDate 11
Evaluation and Research (HFM–71), Dated: October 4, 2001. Subject Effective Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Linda A. Suydam, City, State date Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852– Senior Associate Commissioner. 1448, 301–827–0314, or FDA Advisory Denver, CO [FR Doc. 01–25607 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Galstyan, Arutyun ...... 10/18/2001 Committee Information Line, 1–800– BILLING CODE 4160–01–S Glendale, CA 741–8138 (301–443–0572 in the Gevorkyan, Arman ...... 10/18/2001 Washington, DC area), code 12392. North Hollywood, CA Please call the Information Line for up- DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Glass, Ted Alan ...... 10/18/2001 to-date information on this meeting. HUMAN SERVICES Fredericksburg, VA Griffin, Brian Michael ...... 10/18/2001 Agenda: On October 25, 2001, the Office of Inspector General Shatleigh, ME committee will discuss FDA’s draft Grigoryan, Manouk ...... 10/18/2001 document entitled ‘‘Guidance for Program Exclusions: September 2001 Los Angeles, CA Industry: Revised Preventive Measures Grossman, Gary ...... 10/18/2001 AGENCY: Office of Inspector General, Dix Hills, NY to Reduce the Possible Risk of HHS. Guerrero, Marta ...... 10/18/2001 Transmission of Creutzfeldt-Jakob ACTION: Notice of program exclusions. Miami, FL Disease (CJD) and Variant Creutzfeldt- Gutierrez, Orlando ...... 10/18/2001 Jakob Disease (vCJD) by Blood and During the month of September 2001, Southgate, CA Blood Products’’ (published in the the HHS Office of Inspector General Hardister, Earnest Richard ...... 10/18/2001 Federal Register on August 29, 2001 (66 Boise, ID imposed exclusions in the cases set Hertz, Bradley ...... 10/18/2001 FR 45683), http://www.fda.gov/cber/ forth below. When an exclusion is Miami, FL gdlns/cjdvcjd.pdf). Later that morning imposed, no program payment is made Hicks, Ingrid D ...... 10/18/2001 the committee will discuss amino acid to anyone for any items or services Union Grove, WI sourcing and production, and the (other than an emergency item or Johnson, Lucy Young ...... 10/18/2001 theoretical risk of transmission of the service not provided in a hospital Maplewood, MN emergency room) furnished, ordered or Keating, Janadean ...... 10/18/2001 BSE agent through their use in vaccines, Salt Lake City, UT other biologicals and human drugs. On prescribed by an excluded party under Keo, Channy ...... 10/18/2001 October 26, 2001, the committee will the Medicare, Medicaid, and all Federal Long Beach, CA discuss the risk of bovine brains and Health Care programs. In addition, no Kessler, James M ...... 10/18/2001 other neurological tissue for human use. program payment is made to any Lutherville, MD business or facility, e.g., a hospital, that Khozak, Elizabeth A ...... 10/18/2001 Procedure: On October 25, 2001, from submits bills for payment for items or Manchester, NH 8 a.m. to 1:10 p.m. and from 1:40 p.m. services provided by an excluded party. Kuyumdzhyan, Armen ...... 10/18/2001 to 3:30 p.m., and on October 26, 2001, Program beneficiaries remain free to Los Angeles, CA from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., the meeting is Lagasse, Joy A ...... 10/18/2001 decide for themselves whether they will South Casco, ME open to the public. Interested persons continue to use the services of an Larson, Jeannine C ...... 10/18/2001 may present data, information, or views, excluded party even though no program Portland, ME orally or in writing, on issues pending payments will be made for items and Leach, Debra ...... 10/18/2001 before the committee. Written services provided by that excluded Danbury, CT submissions may be made to the contact party. The exclusions have national Lee, Salvacion ...... 10/18/2001 person by October 18, 2001. Oral effect and also apply to all Executive Bell Canyon, CA Leiti, John ...... 10/18/2001 presentations from the public will be Branch procurement and non- Roswell, GA scheduled between approximately 9 procurement programs and activities. Levias, Percy L ...... 10/18/2001 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., and 1:40 p.m. to 2:10 Starks, LA p.m. on October 25, 2001; and between Subject Effective Linscott, Terry L ...... 10/18/2001 City, State date 1 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. on October 26, 2001. Alderson, WV Lovett, Gareth ...... 10/18/2001 Time allotted for each presentation may PROGRAM-RELATED CONVICTIONS Marietta, GA be limited. Those desiring to make Lyall, Chelsea Damaris ...... 10/18/2001 formal oral presentations should notify Aragones, Concepcion N ...... 10/18/2001 Durango, CO the contact person before October 18, Newmarket, NH Maury, Maricela ...... 10/18/2001 2001, and submit a brief statement of Brocuglio, Steven J ...... 10/18/2001 Surfside, FL Devens, MA the general nature of the evidence or McKeown, James Lee Jr ...... 10/18/2001 Butt, Atiq Amad ...... 10/18/2001 Clearwater, FL arguments they wish to present, the Elizabeth, NJ Men, Yen ...... 10/18/2001 names and addresses of proposed Carlton, Edward D ...... 10/18/2001 Kent, WA participants, and an indication of the Gainesville, VA Miller, Nival Rizk ...... 10/18/2001 approximate time requested to make Columbia Management Cos, Tuscaloosa, AL their presentation. Inc ...... 07/01/2001 Mkhitaryan, Ashot ...... 10/18/2001 Nashville, TN Van Nuys, CA Closed Committee Deliberations: On Connell, Debra A ...... 10/18/2001 Munguia, Carlos ...... 10/18/2001 October 25, 2001, from 1:10 p.m. to 1:40 Lancaster, OH Pinkerington, OH p.m., the meeting will be closed to Covone, Dominick ...... 10/18/2001 Nguyen, Ly Quang ...... 10/18/2001 permit discussion and review of trade Fort Dix, NJ Escondido, CA Cragen, Kenneth Russell ...... 10/18/2001 secret and/or confidential information Oilschlager, Gerald Albert ...... 10/18/2001 Los Angeles, CA Long Beach, CA (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)). Ekpo, Asuquo Eyo ...... 10/18/2001 Pacher, Catherine Jean ...... 10/18/2001 Notice of this meeting is given under Sugarland, TX Gulfport, MS the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 Espinoza, Maria Aura ...... 10/18/2001 Pak, John Won Chai ...... 10/18/2001 U.S.C. app. 2). Southgate, CA Fresno, CA Fenster, Robert H ...... 10/18/2001 Pakhanyan, Hakob ...... 10/18/2001
VerDate 11
Subject Effective Subject Effective Subject Effective City, State date City, State date City, State date
Van Nuys, CA Detroit, MI Ilion, NY Paris, Allen Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Weisbrod, Earl Bruce ...... 10/18/2001 Johnson, Sadie ...... 10/18/2001 Altanta, GA Paradise Valley, AZ Alexandria, LA Peck, Christopher J ...... 10/18/2001 Joyner, Demetrius ...... 10/18/2001 Kensington, CT FELONY CONTROL SUBSTANCE Wilmington, DE Petrosyan, Karapet ...... 10/18/2001 CONVICTION Kemmer, Richard C ...... 10/18/2001 Burbank, CA Sacramento, CA Pharmacare, Inc ...... 10/18/2001 Corzine, Kendra S Childress .... 10/18/2001 Klosterman, Michael Justin ...... 10/18/2001 Lutherville, MD Belknap, IL Loveland, OH Reddick, Labrenda Jacqueline 10/18/2001 Courtney, Joan Fazio ...... 10/18/2001 McGill, Jeri ...... 10/18/2001 Detriot, MI Venetia, PA Heidelberg, MS Reed, Tracy Lanell ...... 10/18/2001 Davis, Royanna Mae ...... 10/18/2001 Merchant, David L ...... 10/18/2001 Tulsa, OK Cincinnati, OH W Lebanon, NH Riverview Nursing Centre, Inc .. 10/18/2001 Floyd, Thomas P ...... 10/18/2001 Minks, Rebecca L ...... 10/18/2001 Baltimore, MD Plainfield, MI Phoenix, AZ Rubin, Daniel ...... 10/18/2001 Gunnell, Shirley Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Moore, Moses ...... 10/18/2001 Warwick, NY Drift, KY Hutchinson, KS Ruiz, Rolando Jose ...... 10/18/2001 Poindexter, James Willie ...... 10/18/2001 Morell, James A ...... 10/18/2001 Southgate, CA Houston, TX Easton, PA Sadatrafiei, Mohammad R ...... 10/18/2001 Potter, Mark C ...... 10/18/2001 Nielsen, Teresa Rae ...... 10/18/2001 Brockton, MA Lewisburg, PA Sterling, CO Saing, Chhaylee Soy ...... 10/18/2001 Runnels, Ann Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Olivas, Rafael A ...... 10/18/2001 Atwater, CA Mamon, LA Tucson, AZ Shirley Mastic Pharmacy, Inc ... 10/18/2001 Stanton, Francis Xavier, JR ..... 10/18/2001 Peak, Sun O ...... 10/18/2001 Shirley, NY La Jolla, CA Olympia, WA Silbaugh, Theresa ...... 10/18/2001 Thompson, Ricardo D ...... 10/18/2001 Phillips, Patricia A ...... 10/18/2001 Chicopee, MA Oklahoma City, OK Baltimore, MD Snyder, Alfred ...... 10/18/2001 Weber, Carolyn J ...... 10/18/2001 Reaster-Glover, Sharmane B ... 10/18/2001 Lawrence, NY Pittsburgh, PA Columbia, SC Thetford, Nancy ...... 10/18/2001 Rivera, Edgar Humberto Bryan, TX PATIENT ABUSE/NEGLECT CONVICTIONS Robles ...... 10/18/2001 Thibodeau, Patrick ...... 10/18/2001 W Valley City, UT Ray Brook, NY Ada, Dohnis I ...... 10/18/2001 Rodriguez, Julia ...... 10/18/2001 Tibbitts, A Jeffrey ...... 10/18/2001 Mt Pleasant, IA Muncy, PA W Hartford, CT Allen, June ...... 10/18/2001 Rominger, Kristina ...... 10/18/2001 Torosian, Rouben ...... 10/18/2001 Victor, NY Hattiesburg, MS Los Angeles, CA Alter, Robert John ...... 10/18/2001 Russell, Victoria Mayo ...... 10/18/2001 Tyler, John W ...... 10/18/2001 St Louis, MI Miami, FL Ray Brook, NY Ancino, Elena Buendia ...... 10/18/2001 Scarbrough, Joyce Marie ...... 10/18/2001 W Alan Racette, D D S, M S, Palmdale, CA Detroit, MI Shelton, Mary Lou ...... 10/18/2001 PC ...... 10/18/2001 Baker, Edith Renee ...... 10/18/2001 Apple Valley, CA Lansing, MI Richmond, VA Showalter, Anna Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Webster, Anthony F ...... 10/18/2001 Bangura, Fatima ...... 10/18/2001 Lorain, OH Ray Brook, NY Columbus, OH Spaulding, Paul E ...... 10/18/2001 Wolfe, Dana L ...... 10/18/2001 Bermudez, Janet ...... 10/18/2001 Augusta, WV Alderson, WV Newhall, CA Thacker, Frances Conner ...... 10/18/2001 Wright, James B ...... 10/18/2001 Broussard, Ned E ...... 10/18/2001 Amelia Courthouse, VA Caryville, TN Exeter, NH Burns, Katrina ...... 10/18/2001 Ward, Adrian Darryl ...... 10/18/2001 Richmond, VA FELONY CONVICTION FOR HEALTH CARE Jackson, MS Charbonneau, Robert ...... 10/18/2001 CONVICTION FOR HEALTH CARE FRAUD Batchelder, Annette J ...... 10/18/2001 Sioux Falls, SD Loudon, NH Criger, Christina Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Everman, Keith Michael ...... 10/18/2001 Cantu, Estefana Maria ...... 10/18/2001 Denver, CO Diamondhead, MS Mathis, TX Cruz, Joyce ...... 10/18/2001 Phelps, Brenda Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Chasse, John P ...... 10/18/2001 Kaplan, LA Waverly, IA Minersville, PA Dalton, Del B ...... 10/18/2001 Reuther, Mary Elizabeth ...... 10/18/2001 Donahoe, Donald R ...... 10/18/2001 San Diego, CA Prescott, MI Milford, CT Dodson, William Henry ...... 10/18/2001 Dubowski, Walter ...... 10/18/2001 Charleston, WV CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE CONVICTIONS Monterey, CA Edwards, McKinsey Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Glomah, Tabla Barbor ...... 10/18/2001 Glenmora, LA Miller, Vicki Jean ...... 10/18/2001 West Covina, CA Etherington, Woods Jr ...... 10/18/2001 Fort Wayne, IN Mestetsky, Ilya Gregory ...... 10/18/2001 Wilmington, DE Whipkey, Carla T ...... 10/18/2001 Valley Village, CA Freeman, Katherine N ...... 10/18/2001 Murrysville, PA Moore, Shomia Shautia ...... 10/18/2001 Waynesboro, PA San Diego, CA Gabrinowicz, Adam James ...... 10/18/2001 LICENSE REVOCATION/SUSPENSION/ Murray, Nichole M ...... 10/18/2001 Mesa, AZ SURRENDERED Springfield, VT Gilbert, Kristen H ...... 10/18/2001 Racette, Wendall Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Fort Worth, TX Alexander, William ...... 10/18/2001 Lansing, MI Hagger, Charles Ray ...... 10/18/2001 Tiburon, CA Smith, Sabrina Anne ...... 10/18/2001 Cottonport, LA Allen, Kristine M ...... 10/18/2001 Harter, Charlynne S ...... 10/18/2001
VerDate 11
Subject Effective Subject Effective Subject Effective City, State date City, State date City, State date
Geneva, NY Meeker, CO Appomattox, VA Andersen, Michelle ...... 10/18/2001 Cole, Sheila Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Goldstein, Lori L ...... 10/18/2001 Salt Lake City, UT Oklahoma, OK E Northport, NY Avila, Diane M ...... 10/18/2001 Combs, Brenda K Cook ...... 10/18/2001 Grayson, Greta ...... 10/18/2001 Hill, NH Ferguson, KY Metairie, La Bacon, Marybeth ...... 10/18/2001 Connolly, Barbara Jean ...... 10/18/2001 Groll, Sherry L ...... 10/18/2001 Robbinsdale, MN Rochester, MN Randolph, UT Bair, Holly ...... 10/18/2001 Constantino, Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Hadley, Russell L ...... 10/18/2001 Richmond, UT Roselle, NJ Amarillo, TX Baker, Virgie ‘‘Gemma’’ ...... 10/18/2001 Cowsar, Sheila ...... 10/18/2001 Hager, Leslie W ...... 10/18/2001 Louisville, CO Benton, LA W Covina, CA Baker, Leon Lloyd ...... 10/18/2001 Craven, Carla Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Hall, Anna M ...... 10/18/2001 Waterloo, IA Minnetonka, MN Wayne, NJ Baker, Denise ...... 10/18/2001 Crotts, Krystal A ...... 10/18/2001 Hanson, Patricia Ann ...... 10/18/2001 New Orleans, LA Ft Dodge, IA Hayfield, MN Ball, Teresa J ...... 10/18/2001 Culp, Mary Gail ...... 10/18/2001 Hauberg, Virginia Lynn ...... 10/18/2001 Aurora, CO Fort Worth, TX Blaine, MN Ball, Charles B ...... 10/18/2001 Daley, Rita E ...... 10/18/2001 Hawkins, Karen ...... 10/18/2001 Redondo Beach, CA Watervliet, NY Oakland, CA Bashier-Elahi, Abbas ...... 10/18/2001 De Monterice, Anu ...... 10/18/2001 Hays, Peter M ...... 10/18/2001 Vienna, VA Cotati, CA Warren, VT Bayard, Sara Elaine ...... 10/18/2001 Deal, Kim Gloria ...... 10/18/2001 Heming, Joyce Snyder ...... 10/18/2001 Lewisville, TX Waterbury, CT Boxwell, PA Belliveau, Dana A ...... 10/18/2001 Dean, Gayle J ...... 10/18/2001 Hicks, James Thomas ...... 10/18/2001 Killingsworth, CT Council Bluffs, IA Oakbrook Ter, IL Bennett, Paula Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Dearth, Donna Elaine ...... 10/18/2001 Hingston, Elizabeth J ...... 10/18/2001 Rockwall, TX Newport, RI Beverly, MA Besack, Debra ...... 10/18/2001 Del Pozzo, Phillip Vincent ...... 10/20/2001 Hirsch, Michael Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Bristol, PA San Francisco, CA Davis, CA Billew, Sheila ...... 10/18/2001 Dinelli, Joseph ...... 10/18/2001 Holsey, Martha B ...... 10/18/2001 New Orleans, LA Scottsdale, AZ Denver, CO Bobo, Susan A ...... 10/18/2001 Dinville, Joanne M ...... 10/18/2001 Hosey, Jennifer Garlick ...... 10/18/2001 Colorado Springs, CO Ankeny, IA Christiansburg, VA Bogenschutz, Elizabeth A Rasp 10/18/2001 Domingue, Carmen ...... 10/18/2001 Hovland, James S ...... 10/18/2001 Louisville, KY Plaquemine, LA Waynesboro, VA Bourbonniere, Debra Kay ...... 10/18/2001 Drake, Susan E ...... 10/18/2001 Hrinchuk-Hurley, Diane M ...... 10/18/2001 Duluth, MN Pilot Mound, IA Londonderry, NH Bowers, Elizabeth M ...... 10/18/2001 Drennon, Catherine Claire ...... 10/18/2001 Hull, Tyrone Leroy ...... 10/18/2001 Taylors, SC Cedar, MN Chicago, IL Branch, Cheryl Jones ...... 10/18/2001 Dyke, Barbara W ...... 10/18/2001 Irwin, Tiara M ...... 10/18/2001 Philadelphia, PA Orford, NH Hibbing, MN Brooks, Cynthia Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Eavens, Linda ...... 10/18/2001 Isaacson, Judy Lynn ...... 10/18/2001 Minneapolis, MN Hamden, CT Fort Myers, FL Brown, Floy Watkins ...... 10/18/2001 Eschle, Roseanne ...... 10/18/2001 Jensen, Vicki Arlene ...... 10/18/2001 Dawson Springs, KY Mendota Hgts, MN Pocatello, ID Bunton, Aprille Dawn ...... 10/18/2001 Fiegenschuh, William Harold .... 10/18/2001 Johnson, Robert S ...... 10/18/2001 Charleston, SC Alliance, OH Palm Desert, CA Burch, Yvonne N Jarrett ...... 10/18/2001 Fitzpatrick, Jennifer M ...... 10/18/2001 Johnson, Sandra Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Owensboro, KY Manchester, NH Grand Meadow, MN Burgett-Clayton, Michelle ...... 10/18/2001 Forni, Michael D ...... 10/18/2001 Johnson, Molly B ...... 10/18/2001 Surprise, AZ Ware, MA Spartanburg, SC Byrd, Peggy S ...... 10/18/2001 Foster, Heather M ...... 10/18/2001 Jones, Donald Earl ...... 10/18/2001 San Angelo, TX Security, CO Dallas, TX Caldwell, Kathryn J ...... 10/18/2001 Foster, Craig Douglas ...... 10/18/2001 Kahl, Russell Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Tucson, AZ Sacramento, CA Orono, ME Carroll, Sandra Jean ...... 10/18/2001 Fox, Bridget Carol Stubbs ...... 10/18/2001 Kahrhoff, Julie Ellen ...... 10/18/2001 St Paul, MN Richmond, KY East Greenwich, RI Caruthers, Christopher A ...... 10/18/2001 Fox, Nelda B ...... 10/18/2001 Kallina, Jacqueline C ...... 10/18/2001 Victorville, CA Orem, UT Garwood, TX Cast, Amy M ...... 10/18/2001 Frasier, Kelly L ...... 10/18/2001 King, Deborah ...... 10/18/2001 Frederickburg, VA Schenectady, NY Willingboro, NJ Caulkins, Robert M ...... 10/18/2001 Frost, Ronald George ...... 10/18/2001 Klein, Barbara Jean ...... 10/18/2001 Shrewsbury, MA El Paso, TX Clearwater, MN Cenac, Kellie ...... 10/18/2001 Garner, Lowell ...... 10/18/2001 Knisley, Charles Gary ...... 10/18/2001 Bourg, LA Ithaca, NY Phoenix, AZ Childers, Clarence David ...... 10/18/2001 Garver, Jo Ann Jorgenson ...... 10/18/2001 Kotsias, Rita M ...... 10/18/2001 Beggs, OK Tempe, AZ Caledonia, MN Christensen, Cynthia ...... 10/18/2001 Gauthe, David ...... 10/18/2001 Labruzzo, Melissa ...... 10/18/2001 Hazlet, NJ Jefferson, La Haughton, LA Christofferson, Terry Lyle ...... 10/18/2001 Gerhardt, Nancy ...... 10/18/2001 Lange, Cynthia Gaye ...... 10/18/2001 Chico, CA Denville, NJ Forest Lake, MN Christopherson, Janice Renee 10/18/2001 Gilpin, Patricia A ...... 10/18/2001 Leger, Patricia Elizabeth ...... 10/18/2001 San Jose, CA Miami, FL Brookeland, TX Clairmont, Deborah A ...... 10/18/2001 Giltz, Julie Jeanine ...... 10/18/2001 Leveratto, Sandro ...... 10/18/2001
VerDate 11
Subject Effective Subject Effective Subject Effective City, State date City, State date City, State date
Corona, CA Baltimore, MD Corpus Christi, TX Lloyd, Ginger Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Oum, Chul On ...... 10/18/2001 Singh, Kuldeep ...... 10/18/2001 Wichita Falls, TX Northridge, CA Macon, MO Lockett, Harvey O ...... 10/18/2001 Overstreet, Robert Edward ...... 10/18/2001 Slater, Barbara A ...... 10/18/2001 Newport News, VA Westmoreland, TN Toms River, NJ Long, Karen Sue ...... 10/18/2001 Pachol, Lisa Anne ...... 10/18/2001 Smiddy, Denise Martinicky ...... 10/18/2001 Luling, TX Corona, CA Radcliff, KY Loomis, Sandra D ...... 10/18/2001 Park, Rin Andrew ...... 10/18/2001 Smith, Karen Sue ...... 10/18/2001 New Virginia, IA Sunnyvale, CA Channelview, TX Lopa, Patricia ...... 10/18/2001 Pathak, Arvind K ...... 10/18/2001 Smith, Elizabeth Agnes ...... 10/18/2001 Branford, CT Cumberland, MD Orange, TX Luzik, Michelle L ...... 10/18/2001 Patton, Michael John ...... 10/18/2001 Smith, Lynne Shanley ...... 10/18/2001 Crescent, PA El Cajon, CA Lexington, VA Lynch, Michael J ...... 10/18/2001 Pedersen, Craig Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Smith, Jimmy Wayne ...... 10/18/2001 Bethlehem, CT San Diego, CA Hastings, OK Macmaster, Duncan R ...... 10/18/2001 Perez, Roman T ...... 10/18/2001 Smith Wheeler, Sharron L ...... 10/18/2001 Woodbury, CT Denver, CO San Antonio, TX Madson, Melissa Mae ...... 10/18/2001 Perretta, Frank P ...... 10/18/2001 Steed, Katrine ...... 10/18/2001 Faribault, MN Clermont, FL Evanston, IL Marshman, William Howard ..... 10/18/2001 Peter, David Charles ...... 10/18/2001 Stephens, Linda Denise ...... 10/18/2001 Dallas, TX Vancouver, WA Big Spring, TX Martinez, Ramiro ...... 10/18/2001 Peters, Barbara J ...... 10/18/2001 Stephens, Robin R ...... 10/18/2001 Orange Cove, CA Clinton, IA Ottawa, IL Matijevic, Ivo ...... 10/18/2001 Peterson, Lindsey Grady ...... 10/18/2001 Streit, Howard Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Key Biscayne, FL Virginia Beach, VA Bartlett, IL Maultsby, Barbara Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Pineda, Francesca M ...... 10/18/2001 Stull, Patricia J ...... 10/18/2001 Marble Falls, TX New City, NY Katy, TX McAlister, John Edwards ...... 10/18/2001 Pinkney, Gregory W Sr ...... 10/18/2001 Sykes, Sheila Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Norman, OK Richmond, VA Maryville, TN McAllister, Donald John ...... 10/18/2001 Pino, Cynthia A ...... 10/18/2001 Taylor, Marsha Lynne ...... 10/18/2001 Bristol, CT Pueblo, CO Orem, UT McAnulty, Kerry Renee ...... 10/18/2001 Plotts, Lisa ...... 10/18/2001 Tedeton, Tina Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Mabelvale, AR Oaklyn, NJ Pickens, SC McCaffrey, Celia ...... 10/18/2001 Ponce De Leon, Carlos J ...... 10/18/2001 Tellis, Roger Allen ...... 10/18/2001 Bayville, NJ Payson, AZ San Francisco, CA McCall, Scott Donald ...... 10/18/2001 Quinlan, Kristel Dawn ...... 10/18/2001 Thibodeau, Richard J ...... 10/18/2001 San Juan Capistrano, CA Rantoul, IL Lewiston, ME McCarty, Teresia Dawnette ...... 10/18/2001 Reach, Ralph Thomas ...... 10/18/2001 Tom, Danny ...... 10/18/2001 Austin, TX Christiansburg, VA Sunnyvale, CA Melnyk, Hazel Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Regan, Sheila A ...... 10/18/2001 Tortis, Christina Anne ...... 10/18/2001 St Paul, MN Hudson, NH Lincoln, RI Mercer, Michael Blaine ...... 10/18/2001 Reynolds, Julie Morgan ...... 10/18/2001 Tosh, Cynthia Sue ...... 10/18/2001 Phoenix, AZ Greenville, TX E Alton, IL Messenger, Beverly Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Rice, James Lewis ...... 10/18/2001 Varda, Anne Elizabeth ...... 10/18/2001 Irving, TX Omaha, NE Chisholm, MN Miller, Phillip Duane ...... 10/18/2001 Rikard, Candace Noel ...... 10/18/2001 Varnado, Brenda ...... 10/18/2001 Springfield, IL Wichita Falls, TX Mccomb, MS Miller, Rebecca A ...... 10/18/2001 Rodriguez, Beatriz ...... 10/18/2001 Verdin, Kathy ...... 10/18/2001 Groton, CT Richland, NJ Tallulah, LA Miller, Trease Ann ...... 10/18/2001 Rodriguez, David Michael ...... 10/18/2001 Vogel, Scott M ...... 10/18/2001 San Antonio, TX Portola, CA Glastonbury, CT Moody, Kelly Denise ...... 10/18/2001 Roesch, Kris A ...... 10/18/2001 Walker, Paul Anthony ...... 10/18/2001 Pocahontas, AR Troy, IL Fresno, CA Mooney, Patricia Anne ...... 10/18/2001 Roger, Kevin ...... 10/18/2001 Wallis, Jodi ...... 10/18/2001 Palmdale, CA Lafayette, LA Forked River, NJ Moore, Linda Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Rogers, Shelia Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Ward, Helen Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Joliet, IL Conroe, TX Arlington, TX Morgan-Carter, Constance J .... 10/18/2001 Ronan, Kathleen ...... 10/18/2001 Waugh, Dianne L ...... 10/18/2001 Phoenix, AZ Sayreville, NJ Portland, ME Morsch, Charles T ...... 10/18/2001 Ruggiero, Paula E ...... 10/18/2001 Wheat, Carl C ...... 10/18/2001 Carterville, IL Westville, NJ San Antonio, TX Moyer, Thomas Arthur II ...... 10/20/2001 Salsbury Oxner, Doris ...... 10/18/2001 Wilson, Roger Dale ...... 10/18/2001 Sharon, WI Alexandria, LA Wichita Falls, TX Murphy, Susanne Marie ...... 10/18/2001 Sanderlin, Kathleen ...... 10/18/2001 Wilson, Herbert Clyde II ...... 10/18/2001 Minneapolis, MN Southampton, NJ S Houston, TX Nelson, Virginia Louise ...... 10/18/2001 Sands, Michelle L ...... 10/18/2001 Wilson, Patrick F ...... 10/18/2001 Lincoln, IL Dallas, TX Schaumburg, IL Norton, Michelle L ...... 10/18/2001 Scott, Glenn ...... 10/18/2001 Withers, David B ...... 10/18/2001 Security, CO Hackensack, NJ Woodstock, Ct O’Donnell, Gloria J ...... 10/18/2001 Scott, Jewel L ...... 10/18/2001 Wood, Jerry Martin ...... 10/18/2001 Iowa City, IA Washington, DC Layton, UT Ogden, Sean M ...... 10/18/2001 Shea, Ann M ...... 10/18/2001 Young, Kelly A ...... 10/18/2001 Philadelphia, PA Freehold, NJ York, PA Orth, Debra C ...... 10/18/2001 Simon, Barbara Jean ...... 10/18/2001 Youssef, Samir Michael ...... 10/18/2001
VerDate 11
Subject Effective Subject Effective Subject Effective City, State date City, State date City, State date
Pasadena, CA San Antonio, TX Winter Haven, FL Chase, Mathew J ...... 10/18/2001 Martin, Ron R ...... 10/18/2001 FEDERAL/STATE EXCLUSION/ Plover, WI El Dorado, CA SUSPENSION Cho, David Kyu Won ...... 10/18/2001 Mathiak, Karen I ...... 10/18/2001 Gilroy, CA Griffin, GA Violette, Jeffrey E ...... 10/18/2001 Davidson, Philip R ...... 10/18/2001 Medina, Jacqueline ...... 10/18/2001 Bucksport, ME Grand Prairie, TX Grandada Hills, CA Voncanon, Carol ...... 10/18/2001 Dinoff, Lee F ...... 10/18/2001 Mirrafati, Sayed Jalil ...... 10/18/2001 Stockton, MO Griffin, GA Irvine, CA Edgar, John D JR ...... 10/18/2001 Moussaed, Emile K ...... 09/05/2001 FRAUD/KICKBACKS New York, NY Livonia, MI Fischer, Steven Anthony ...... 10/18/2001 Nguyen, Thomas A ...... 10/18/2001 Bar-Av, Zeev ...... 08/06/2001 Vallejo, CA Grove, OK Madison, WI Fitzgerald, Robert N ...... 10/18/2001 Packard, Richard Vandyke ...... 10/18/2001 Klearman, Merrill ...... 04/30/2001 Dundee, NY Riverside, CA St Louis, MO Francis, Michael Jon ...... 10/18/2001 Passler, Charles ...... 10/18/2001 Lancer Medical, Inc ...... 04/30/2001 Jonesboro, GA Armonk, NY Bala Cynwyd, PA Freson, Frank J ...... 10/18/2001 Peerenboom-Grenier, Paula J .. 10/18/2001 Midwest Continuing Care, Inc .. 04/30/2001 Tyler, TX Viroqua, WI St Louis, MO Frye, Derrick O ...... 10/18/2001 Peguero, Daniel Amaado ...... 10/18/2001 Midwest Medical Supply Co, University City, MO Weston, FL Inc ...... 04/30/2001 Fulton, William Christopher ...... 10/18/2001 Perso, Anthony ...... 10/18/2001 St Louis, MO Oakland, CA Massapequa, NY Morten, Daniel Joseph ...... 08/23/2001 Galgot, Keith H ...... 10/18/2001 Peterson, Jon B ...... 10/18/2001 Bruning, NE Waterbury, CT Saint Cloud, MN Native American Health Sup Gilroy, Anne F ...... 09/05/2001 Ramirez, Richard R ...... 10/18/2001 Inc ...... 08/24/1999 Ardmore, PA Houston, TX Rapid City, SD Gray, Susan D ...... 10/18/2001 Reid, Stephanie Lynn ...... 10/18/2001 Native American Health Svc Inc 08/24/1999 Portland, OR Georgetown, TX Rapid City, SD Greenwood, Kerry Lance JR .... 10/18/2001 Rich, Kenneth E ...... 10/18/2001 Quigley, Michael A ...... 08/07/2001 Rockford, MI Armonk, NY Santa Rosa, CA Hashemieh-Estes, Simin ...... 10/18/2001 Rima, Mark Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Encino, CA Hot Sprngs Nat’l Pk, AR OWNED/CONTROLLED BY CONVICTED Heim, Deborah M ...... 10/18/2001 Robinson, Kalvin M ...... 10/18/2001 ENTITIES Little Canada, MN Houston, TX Heinlein, Gary M ...... 10/18/2001 Robinson, Paul Michael ...... 10/18/2001 General Cosmetic Dentistry ..... 10/18/2001 Chesterfield, MO Venice, CA Glen Cove, NY Herbert, Robert F ...... 10/18/2001 Rodrigues, Paul Jorge ...... 10/18/2001 Interim Healthcare of Hollywoo 10/18/2001 Valencia, CA Artesia, CA Miami, FL Hernandez, Agapito B JR ...... 10/18/2001 Roesler-Sirlin, Christina ...... 10/18/2001 Livermore Chiropractic & Welln 10/18/2001 McAllen, TX Yonkers, NY Livermore, CA Hiserodt, David William ...... 10/18/2001 Rogers, William Baird ...... 10/18/2001 PD Medical Supply ...... 10/18/2001 Van Nuys, CA Tulsa, OK Los Angeles, CA Holm, Richard Nathan ...... 10/18/2001 Rothman, Laura Lee ...... 10/18/2001 Reason Chiropractic ...... 10/18/2001 Hollister, CA Arroyo Grande, CA Woodland Park, CO Hunt, Samuel I ...... 10/18/2001 Sabatowicz, Peter Frank ...... 10/18/2001 Summit Chiropractic ...... 10/18/2001 Deer Park, TX Arlington, MA Redding, CA IP, Stephen Clement ...... 10/18/2001 Salmon, Noreen A ...... 10/18/2001 W G Clarks Counseling Center 10/18/2001 Irving, TX Oak Lawn, IL Detroit, MI Isaac, Herbert L II ...... 10/18/2001 Scow, Roger Dale Jr ...... 10/18/2001 Westfield Chiropractic Center ... 10/18/2001 Bloomfield Hills, MI Beaufort, SC Kansas City, KS Jepson, Douglas Trent ...... 10/18/2001 Smith, Carol A ...... 10/18/2001 Willow Counseling Center ...... 10/18/2001 Colton, CA Memphis, TN Dayton, OH Johnson, Ricky ...... 10/18/2001 Southerland, Rhonda K ...... 10/18/2001 Chicago, IL Kirksville, MO DEFAULT ON HEAL LOAN Johnson, Samuel E ...... 10/18/2001 Staples, Joyce A ...... 10/18/2001 Forsyth, GA Coos Bay, OR Agyeman, Kwabena O ...... 10/18/2001 Kea, Rattana D ...... 10/18/2001 Tarango, Rosa M ...... 10/18/2001 Silver Spring, MD New York, NY Downey, CA Agyepong, Eva Osahene ...... 10/18/2001 Kilgore, William P ...... 10/18/2001 Tchakalian, Leon Jay ...... 10/18/2001 San Dimas, CA Joplin, MO Sherman Oaks, CA Albright, Elizabeth Sue ...... 10/18/2001 Lamar, Fernando ...... 10/18/2001 Thompson, Stephen P ...... 10/18/2001 San Antonio, TX Euclid, OH Lansing, MI Asuan, Senen R ...... 10/18/2001 Lee, Stephen J ...... 10/18/2001 Trevino, James G ...... 10/18/2001 Chicago, IL Langhorne, PA San Antonio, TX Barry, Tracy L ...... 10/18/2001 Leeper, Kenneth ...... 10/18/2001 Veal, Ulanda Michelle ...... 10/18/2001 New York, NY Madison, WI Oakland, CA Bittenbender, Robert G ...... 10/18/2001 Lescht, Ira C ...... 10/18/2001 Voigt, Eric E ...... 10/18/2001 Wilkes-Barre, PA Pismo Beach, CA Hood River, OR Calandros, Michael J ...... 10/18/2001 Lund, Stevan Alan ...... 10/18/2001 Walsh, Christopher J ...... 10/18/2001 Point Pleasant, WV Arlington, TX W Chester, OH Campo, Stephen ...... 10/18/2001 Manual, Leanna E ...... 10/18/2001 Warner, Rick A ...... 10/18/2001 Avon, NY Dayton, OH W Los Angeles, CA Carlin, Susan L ...... 10/18/2001 Marrero, David R ...... 10/18/2001 White, Wanda M ...... 10/18/2001
VerDate 11
Subject Effective publishes a notice, on a weekly basis, [email protected]. Locations for City, State date identifying unutilized, underutilized, eight public hearings are identified in excess and surplus Federal buildings the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. Riverdale, GA and real property that HUD has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Wiklinski, Stephen L ...... 10/18/2001 reviewed for suitability for use to assist Old Tappan, NJ Andrew, Chief, Division of Migratory Williams, Ronald L ...... 10/18/2001 the homeless. Today’s Notice is for the Bird Management, (703) 358–1714; or Toledo, OH purpose of announcing that no James Kelley (612) 713–5409. Yearous, Mark Harold ...... 10/18/2001 additional properties have been SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May Fort Morgan, CO determined suitable or unsuitable this 13, 1999, a notice was publish in the Yi, Mison ...... 10/18/2001 week. Federal Register (64 FR 26268) Arlington Hgts, IL Dated: October 4, 2001. announcing that the Service intended to OWNERS OF EXCLUDED ENTITIES John D. Garrity, prepare an Environmental Impact Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance Statement addressing problems Pitts, Joseph Alexander ...... 10/18/2001 Programs. associated with overabundant light Detroit, MI [FR Doc. 01–25456 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] goose populations. Comments were BILLING CODE 4210–29–M received and considered and are CIVIL MONEY PENALTY OR ASSESSMENT reflected in the DEIS. On October 5, Applewhite, Monica Janet ...... 12/18/2000 2001, we notified the public of the Williamsville, NY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR availability of the DEIS in the Federal Register (66 FR 51274). In our October PEER REVIEW ORGANIZATION CASES Fish and Wildlife Service 5, 2001 notice we indicated that the comment period would end on Lehman, Thomas ...... 10/17/2001 Migratory Bird Hunting; Draft November 28, 2001. Due to the timing Shreveport, LA Environmental Impact Statement on of public hearings, we have extended Light Goose Management the comment period on the DEIS to Dated: October 3, 2001. December 14, 2001. This notice is AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Calvin Anderson, Jr., provided pursuant to Fish and Wildlife Interior. Director, Health Care Administrative Service regulations for implementing Sanctions, Office of Inspector General. ACTION: Notice of meetings. the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (40 CFR 1506.6). [FR Doc. 01–25689 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife BILLING CODE 4150–04–P Service (Service) has prepared a Draft Public Scoping Meetings Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Eight public hearings will be held on on light goose management which is the following dates at the indicated DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND available for public review. The DEIS locations and times: URBAN DEVELOPMENT analyzes the potential environmental 1. November 13, 2001; Washington, impacts of several management [Docket No. FR–4644–N–41] DC at the Auditorium of the Department alternatives for addressing problems of the Interior Building, 1849 C Street associated with overabundant light Federal Property Suitable as Facilities NW., 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. To Assist the Homeless goose populations. The Service is 2. November 13, 2001; Dover, DE at issuing this notice to invite further the Richardson and Robbins AGENCY: Office of the Assistant public participation in the review Auditorium, Delaware Department of Secretary for Community Planning and process, identify the location, date, and Development, HUD. Natural Resources and Environmental time of public hearings, and identify the Control, 89 Kings Highway, 7 p.m. to ACTION: Notice. Service official to whom questions and 9:30 p.m. comments may be directed. SUMMARY: This Notice identifies 3. November 27, 2001; Bismarck, ND DATES: Written comments regarding the at the North Dakota Game and Fish unutilized, underutilized, excess, and DEIS should be submitted by December surplus Federal property reviewed by Department Auditorium, 100 N. 14, 2001, to the address below. Dates for Bismarck Expressway, 7 p.m. to 9:30 HUD for suitability for possible use to eight public scoping meetings are assist the homeless. p.m. identified in the SUPPLEMENTARY 4. November 28, 2001; Bloomington, EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. INFORMATION section. MN at the Minnesota Valley National FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the Wildlife Refuge Visitors Center, 3815 Clifford Taffet, Department of Housing DEIS should be mailed to Chief, East 80th Street, 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. and Urban Development, Room 7262, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 5. November 29, 2001; Egg Harbor 451 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Township, NJ at the Clarion Hotel and 20410; telephone (202) 708–1234; TTY Department of the Interior, ms 634— Convention Center, 6821 Black Horse number for the hearing- and speech- ARLSQ, 1849 C Street NW., Pike, 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. impaired (202) 708–2565, (these Washington, DC 20240. Copies of the 6. December 5, 2001; Blue Springs, telephone numbers are not toll-free), or DEIS can be downloaded from the MO at the Auditorium of the Burr Oak call the toll-free Title V information line Division of Migratory Bird Management Woods Nature Center, 1401 Northwest at 1–800–927–7588. Web site at http:// Park Road, 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In migratorybirds.fws.gov/issues/snowgse/ 7. December 12, 2001; Rosenberg, TX accordance with the December 12, 1988 tblcont.html. Comments on the DEIS at the Texas Agricultural Extension court order in National Coalition for the should be sent to the above address. Service Education Center, 1402 Band Homeless v. Veterans Administration, Alternatively, comments may be Road, 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. No. 88–2503–OG (D.D.C.), HUD submitted electronically to the 8. December 13, 2001; Baton Rouge, following address: LA at the Louisiana Room, First Floor,
VerDate 11
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR however, consider anonymous Fisheries Building, 2000 Quail Drive, 7 comments. All submissions from p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Bureau of Land Management organizations or businesses, and from In order to be considered, electronic [WO–220–01–1020–JA–VEIS] individuals identifying themselves as submission of comments must include representatives or officials of your name and postal mailing address; Notice of Intent To Prepare an organizations or businesses, will be we will not consider anonymous Environmental Impact Statement for available for public inspection in their comments. All comments received, the Conservation and Restoration of entirety. including names and addresses, will Vegetation, Watershed, and Wildlife become part of the public record. The Habitat Treatments on Public Lands SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This public may inspect comments during Administered by the Bureau of Land national, programmatic EIS will provide normal business hours in Room 634— Management in the Western United a comprehensive cumulative analysis of Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. States Including Alaska BLM conservation and restoration Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. treatments involving vegetation Requests for such comments will be AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, communities, watersheds, and wildlife handled in accordance with the Interior. habitats. It will also consider State- Freedom of Information Act and the ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a specific reasonably foreseeable Council on Environmental Quality’s national, programmatic environmental activities, including hazardous fuels National Environmental Policy Act impact statement (EIS). reduction treatments. Restoration regulations [40 CFR 1506.6(f)]. Our activities may include but are not practice is to make comments available SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102 (2) limited to prescribed fire; riparian for public review during regular (C) of the National Environmental business hours. Individual respondents Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the BLM restoration; native plant community may request that we withhold their will prepare a national, programmatic restoration; invasive plants and noxious home address from the record, which EIS and conduct public scoping weeds treatments; under-story thinning; we will honor to the extent allowable by meetings on (1) management forest health treatments; or other law. If a respondent wishes us to opportunities and treatment methods for activities related to restoring fire- withhold his/her name and/or address, noxious weeds and other invasive adapted ecosystems. The analysis area this must be stated prominently at the species, and (2) the conservation and will include all surface estate public beginning of the comment. restoration of native vegetation, lands administered by the BLM in the The DEIS evaluates four management watersheds, and wildlife habitat. The following western States: Alaska, alternatives to address habitat EIS will cover the public lands Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, destruction and agricultural administered by BLM in eleven western Kansas, Montana, Nevada, North and depredations caused by light geese on States, including Alaska. South Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, various breeding, migration, and DATES: Written or e-mailed comments Oregon, Utah, Washington, and wintering areas: (1) No action or for this initial scoping phase will be Wyoming. The EIS will update analyses continue to manage light goose accepted for 30 days following that are contained in four existing BLM populations through existing wildlife publication of this notice. In addition, vegetation treatment and noxious weed management policies and practices BLM will hold public scoping meetings management EIS’s and analyze similar (Alternative A); (2) modify harvest to focus on relevant issues and activities on public lands in Alaska, regulation options and refuge environmental concerns, identify which were not included in the existing management (Alternative B) possible alternatives, and help EIS’s. (PREFERRED); (3) implement direct determine the scope of the EIS. Times agency control of light goose and locations will be announced in a The BLM has initially identified the populations on migration and wintering separate Federal Register notice and following issues for analysis in this areas in the United States (Alternative through local press releases and programmatic EIS: hazardous fuels C); (4) seek direct light goose population advertisements. reduction and treatment including control on breeding grounds in Canada mechanical treatments; wildlife habitat (Alternative D). Our preferred ADDRESSES: For further information, to improvement; restoration of ecosystem alternative (Alternative B) modifies provide written comments, or to be processes; protection of cultural existing light goose hunting regulations placed on the mailing list, contact Brian resources; watershed and vegetative to expand methods of take during Amme, Acting Project Manager, Bureau community health; new listings of of Land Management, P.O. Box 12000, normal hunting season frameworks. In threatened and endangered species and Reno, Nevada 89520–0006; e-mail addition, we propose to create a _ consideration of other sensitive and conservation order to allow take of light brian [email protected] ; telephone, (775) 861–6645. Comments will be special status species; new chemical geese outside of normal hunting season formulations for herbicides deemed to frameworks, authorize new methods of available for public inspection at the Bureau of Land Management Nevada be more environmentally favorable; take, and allow shooting hours until smoke management and air quality; one-half hour after sunset. We would State Office, 1340 Financial Blvd., Reno, Nevada 89502. emergency stabilization and restoration; also modify management practices on and watershed and water quality certain National Wildlife Refuges to Individual respondents may request improvement. The EIS will also provide alter the availability of food and confidentiality. If you wish your name human health risk assessments for a sanctuary to light geese. and/or address withheld from public review or disclosure under the Freedom broad array of newly available chemical Dated: October 1, 2001. of Information Act, you must state this herbicides, and inert ingredients used in Kevin Adams, prominently at the beginning of your combination with chemical treatment Director. written or e-mailed comment. Such activities. [FR Doc. 01–25611 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] requests will be honored to the extent BILLING CODE 4310–55–M allowed by law. The BLM will not,
VerDate 11
Dated: September 14, 2001. seq. (1994), and mineral material sale Dated: September 7, 2001. Elena Daly, laws, 30 U.S.C. 601–604 (1994), for the J. Steven Griles, Acting Assistant Director, Renewable Bureau of Land Management to assure Deputy Secretary. Resources and Planning. long term protection and preservation of [FR Doc. 01–25639 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–25723 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the historic Piedras Blancas Light BILLING CODE 4310–DQ–P BILLING CODE 4310–84–P Station and associated values (CACA 42632). 4. This withdrawal will expire 20 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR years from the effective date of this order unless, as a result of a review Minerals Management Service Bureau of Land Management conducted before the expiration date pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal Environmental Assessment for [CA–160–1430–ET; CACA 7682 and CACA Proposed Eastern Gulf of Mexico 42632] Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (1994), the Lease Sale 181 Public Land Order No. 7501; Partial Secretary determines that the AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, Revocation of Executive Order Dated withdrawal shall be extended. Interior. June 8, 1866, and Withdrawal of Public Dated: September 21, 2001. ACTION: Availability of the Land for Piedras Blancas Light J. Steven Griles, Station; California environmental assessment for proposed Deputy Secretary. Eastern Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale 181. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, [FR Doc. 01–25690 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The Minerals Management Interior. BILLING CODE 4310–40–P Service (MMS) has prepared an ACTION: Public land order. environmental assessment (EA) on the SUMMARY: This order partially revokes DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Revised Proposal for Eastern Gulf of an executive order insofar as it affects Mexico (GOM) Lease Sale 181. The EA 19.9 acres of public land withdrawn for Bureau of land management was prepared to determine whether there are any new significant issues or lighthouse purposes. The land is no [UTU–010–1232–ET–UT–17; UTU 27914] longer needed by the United States environmental impacts that might occur Coast Guard for the purpose for which Public Land Order No. 7500; Extension as a result of offering a reduced-area it was withdrawn. This order also of Public Land Order No. 5984; Utah configuration of proposed Eastern Gulf withdraws the same land from surface of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sale entry, mining, mineral leasing, and AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 181, and whether a supplemental mineral material sales for a period of 20 Interior. environmental impact statement (EIS) years for the Bureau of Land ACTION: Public land order. should be prepared. The EA implements Management to assure long term the ‘‘incorporation by reference’’ SUMMARY: protection and preservation of the This order extends Public process outlined in 40 CFR 1502.21, historic Piedras Blancas Light Station Land Order No. 5984 for an additional which encourages agencies to and associated values. 20-year period. This extension is incorporate material by reference to ‘‘cut necessary to continue the protection of EFFECTIVE DATE: down on the bulk without impeding October 12, 2001. the Little Sahara Recreation Area. The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: agency and public review of the action.’’ lands have been and will remain open Because the recent Final EIS for Lease Duane Marti, BLM California State to mineral leasing. Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, Sale 181 examined the potential EFFECTIVE DATE: September 9, 2001. California 95825–1886, 916–978–4675. environmental impacts of activities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: similar to those projected for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By virtue Field Office Manager, BLM Fillmore Revised Proposal, the EA incorporates of the authority vested in the Secretary Field Office, 35 East 500 North, much of the material of the Final EIS by of the Interior by section 204 of the Fillmore, Utah 84631, 435–743–3100. reference. The EA, used in conjunction Federal Land Policy and Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: with the Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714 (1994), it is By virtue Gas Lease Sale 181 Final Environmental ordered as follows: of the authority vested in the Secretary 1. The Executive Order, dated June 8, of the Interior by Section 204 of the Impact Statement, can be used to 1866, which withdrew public land for Federal Land Policy and Management compare the types, intensities, and areal lighthouse purposes, is hereby revoked Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714 (1994), it is extents of the impacts expected to be insofar as it affects the following ordered as follows: associated with the original proposed described land (CACA 7682): 1. Public Land Order No. 5984, which action analyzed in the Final EIS to the withdrew public lands in Juab County, impacts expected to be associated with Mount Diablo Meridian Utah, from surface entry and mining, is the Revised Proposal examined in the T. 26 S., R. 6 E., hereby extended for an additional 20- EA. U.S. Lighthouse Reserve. year period following its date of No new significant impacts were expiration. identified for the Revised Proposal that The area described contains 19.90 acres in 2. This withdrawal will expire 20 were not already assessed in the Final San Luis Obispo County. years from the effective date of this EIS for Lease Sale 181. The MMS 2. Subject to valid existing rights, the order, unless, as a result of a review determined that a supplemental EIS is land described in Paragraph 1, is hereby conducted before the expiration date not required and prepared a Finding of withdrawn from settlement, sale, pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal No New Significant Impact. location, or entry under the general land Land Policy and Management Act of A copy of the EA is available to the laws, including the United States 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (1994), the public upon request from the Minerals mining laws, 30 U.S.C. Ch. 2 (1994), Secretary determines that the Management Service, Gulf of Mexico mineral leasing laws, 30 U.S.C. 181 et withdrawal shall be extended. OCS Region, Attention: Public
VerDate 11
Information Office (MS 5034), 1201 groups shall be restricted from bidding Dated: October 9, 2001. Elmwood Park Boulevard, Room 114, with any entity in any other of the Thomas R. Kitsos, New Orleans, Louisiana 70123–2394 or following groups at Outer Continental Acting Director, Minerals Management by calling 1–800–200–GULF. Shelf oil and gas lease sales to be held Service. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: during the bidding period November 1, [FR Doc. 01–25746 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Minerals Management Service, Gulf of 2001, through April 30, 2002. The List BILLING CODE 4910–MR–P Mexico OCS Region, 1201 Elmwood of Restricted Joint Bidders published Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana April 3, 2001,in the Federal Register at 70123–2394, Ms. Deborah Cranswick, 66 FR 17731 covered the period May 1, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR telephone (504) 736–2744. 2001, through October 31, 2001. Group I: Exxon Mobil Corporation, National Park Service Dated: October 9, 2001. Mobil Oil Exploration and Producing Carolita U. Kallaur, Southeast Inc., Mobil Producing Texas 60-Day Notice of Intention To Request Associate Director for Offshore Minerals and New Mexico, Mobil Oil Clearance of Collection of Information; Management. Corporation, and Exxon Assets Holdings Opportunity for Public Comment [FR Doc. 01–25747 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] LLC AGENCY: Department of the Interior. BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P Group II: Shell Oil Company, Shell Offshore Inc., SWEPI LP, Shell Frontier ACTION: Notice and request for Oil & Gas Inc., Shell Consolidated comments. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Energy Resources Inc., Shell Land & SUMMARY: The National Park Service Minerals Management Service Energy Company Shell Onshore Ventures Inc., and Shell Offshore (NPS) is proposing in 2002 to conduct Notice on Outer Continental Shelf Oil Properties and Capital II, Inc. a survey of trail management partners, and Gas Lease Sales Group III: BP Exploration & Oil Inc., including individuals working for state BP Exploration & Production Inc., BP and federal agencies and nonprofit AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, Exploration (Alaska) Inc., Amoco organizations located in 14 states Interior. Production Company, Vastar Offshore between Georgia and Maine. In the ACTION: List of restricted joint bidders. Inc., and Vastar Resources Inc. survey, partners will be asked about Group IV: TotalFinaElf E&P USA Inc., their satisfaction with the level of SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authority Elf Aquitaine Oil Programs, Inc., support provided by the National Park vested in the Director of the Minerals TOTAL Exploration Production USA, Service. This survey will measure Management Service by the joint Inc., and Fina E&P Inc. performance in meeting goals as bidding provisions of 30 CFR 256.41, Group V: Chevron Corporation and required by the 1995 Government each entity within one of the following Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Estimated numbers of Responses Burden hours
Survey of Appalachian National Scenic Trail Management Partners ...... 100 25
Under provisions of the Paperwork date of publication in the Federal Automated data collection: At the Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 CFR Part Register. present time, there is not an automated 1320, Reporting and Record Keeping Send Comments To: Rita Hennessy, way to gather this information because Requirements, the National Park Service Outdoor Recreation Specialist, it includes asking respondents about is soliciting comments on the need for Appalachian National Scenic Trail, their level of satisfaction with support gathering the information in the Harpers Ferry Center, Harpers Ferry, provided by the National Park Service. proposed surveys. The NPS also is West Virginia 25425. Description of respondents: asking for comments on the practical Individuals working for State and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rita utility of the information being Hennessy: Voice: (304) 535–6170, e- Federal agencies and nonprofit gathered; the accuracy of the burden mail: [email protected] organizations sharing responsibility for hour estimate; ways to enhance the the management of the Appalachian quality, utility, and clarity of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: National Scenic Trail. information to be collected; and ways to Titles: Survey of Appalachian Estimated average number of minimize the burden to respondents, National Scenic Trail Management respondents: 100. including use of automated information Partners. Estimated average number of collection techniques or other forms of Bureau Form Number: None. responses: Each respondent will information technology. OMB Number: To be requested. respond only one time, so the number The NPS goal in conducting this Expiration Date: To be requested. of responses will be the same as the survey is to determine the satisfaction Type of request: Request for new number of respondents. level of Appalachian National Scenic clearance. Estimated average burden hours per Trail management partners in response Description of need: The National response: 15 minutes. to level of support provided by the Frequency of Response: 1 time per National Park Service. Park Service needs information to measure performance and to meet the respondent. DATES: Public comments will be requirements of the 1995 Government Estimated annual reporting burden: accepted on or before 60 days from the Performance and Results Act (GPRA). 25 hours.
VerDate 11
Dated: September 25, 2001. survey error, it is necessary to revise the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore for Betsy Chittenden, existing boundary of Catoctin Mountain possible designation as wilderness, in Information Collection Clearance Officer, Park to include three additional tracts of accordance with the provisions of the WASO Administrative Program Center, land comprising 39.64 acres of land and Wilderness Act of 1964 and NPS National Park Service. to delete one tract of land containing Management Policies (2001). To [FR Doc. 01–25644 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 1.65 acres. Tract Numbers 01–110 and facilitate sound analysis of BILLING CODE 4310–70–M 01–111 will be acquired by purchase. environmental impacts, the NPS is Tract Number 01–113 will be acquired gathering information necessary for the in exchange for Tract Number 01–112 preparation of the wilderness suitability DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR which is to be excluded from the study and the associated environmental boundary. The exclusion of Tract impact statement (EIS). Suggestions and National Park Service Number 01–112 will rectify a previous information are being sought from other survey error. agencies, tribes, organizations, and the Notice of Boundary Revision and Land Notice is hereby given that the public on the scope of issues and range Exchange: Catoctin Mountain Park boundary of Catoctin Mountain Park is of alternatives to be addressed. AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. hereby revised to include three Comments and participation in this ACTION: Notice of boundary revision and additional tracts of land and to delete scoping process are invited and land exchange. one tract of land as more particularly encouraged. This notice is being described as follows: furnished as required by National SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Tract Number 01–110, contains 18.3 Environmental Policy Act regulations 40 the National Park Service (NPS) is acres of unimproved land and is more CFR 1501.7. revising the boundary of Catoctin particularly identified as part of Parcel A series of scoping sessions with Mountain Park by including three 49 on Frederick County, Maryland, Tax local, county, state, and tribal additional tracts of land and deleting Map 12. Tract Number 01–111 contains governments, neighboring agencies, and one tract of land. The addition of one 20.21 acres of unimproved land and is the public is scheduled to be held in tract and the deletion of one tract will more particularly identified as Parcel 6 late July 2001. The purpose of these be effected by means of a land exchange. on Frederick County, Maryland, Tax meetings will be to explain the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Map 18. Tract Number 01–112 contains wilderness suitability study process, Chief, Land Resources Program Center, 1.65 acres of land improved with a and to provide an opportunity for National Park Service, National Capitol wood-framed picnic pavilion and is governments, tribes, agencies, Region, 1100 Ohio Drives, SW., more particularly identified as part of communities, and interested citizens to Washington DC 20242, (202) 619–7034; Parcel 105 on Frederick County, express the issues and concerns they or Superintendent, Catoctin Mountain Maryland, Tax Map 18. Tract Number believe the study should address. At Park, 6602 Foxville Road, Thurmont, 01–113 contains 1.13 acres of least one public session will be held in Bayfield, Wisconsin. Notice of the dates, Maryland 21788–1598, (301) 663–6751. unimproved land and is more times, and locations of public scoping SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive particularly identified as part of Catoctin Mountain Park. sessions will be advertised in local Order 7496, dated November 14, 1936, media outlets prior to the events. authorizes the Secretary of the Interior Detailed information concerning the above referenced properties in the form Persons wishing to receive direct mail (Secretary) through NPS to acquire real notification of the public scoping property or any interest therein to of maps, drawings and descriptions are available for inspection in the office of sessions should contact the park’s complete and administer Catoctin Management Assistant at the address or Mountain Park, formerly known as the Land Resources Program Center, National Capital Region, National Park telephone number below. Up-to-date Catoctin Recreational Demonstration schedules, draft documents, current Area. Public Law 83–654, enacted Service, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW., Washington, DC 20242. information regarding the wilderness August 24, 1954, authorizes the suitability study and EIS, and an Secretary to obtain for the United States Dated: August 14, 2001. address for electronically transmitted lands and interests in land held in Terry R. Carlstrom, comments can be found on the park’s private ownership within the Regional Director, National Park Service, Web site at http://www.nps.gov/apis/ established watersheds and boundaries National Capital Region. wstudy.htm. Written comments may of Catoctin Mountain Park in exchange [FR Doc. 01–25645 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] also be mailed to the park’s for Federally owned land of BILLING CODE 4310–70–M Management Assistant at the address approximately equal value. Section below. 7c(ii) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, as amended by DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: General park information Section 814(b) of Public Law 104–333, requests, or requests to be added to the authorizes minor boundary revisions of National Park Service project mailing list should be directed areas within the National Park System. to: Superintendent, Apostle Islands Such boundary revisions may be made Apostle Islands National Lakeshore National Lakeshore, Route 1, Box 4, Bayfield, Wisconsin 54814. Telephone: when necessary, after advising the AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. appropriate Congressional Committees, 715–779–3397. E-mail: ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a [email protected]. and following publication of a revised draft wilderness suitability study and boundary map, drawing or other draft environmental impact statement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: boundary description in the Federal for Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, Written comments, and information Register. In order to preserve and Wisconsin. concerning the scope of the EIS and protect existing natural resources within other matters should be directed to: the boundaries of Catoctin Mountain SUMMARY: The National Park Service Management Assistant, Apostle Islands Park and to effect a technical adjustment (NPS) will prepare a wilderness National Lakeshore, at the address to the boundary to rectify a previous suitability study to evaluate portions of above. Telephone: 715–779–3398
VerDate 11
extension 102. e-mail: This is a SRS of the former U.S. Steel A scoping meeting will be scheduled [email protected]. Homestead Works including the Battle and notice will be made of the meeting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NPS of Homestead site and adjacent town of through a broad public mailing and Management Policies (2001) section Homestead and the related Carrie publication in the local newspaper. 6.2.1 requires a wilderness suitability Furnace area. The study area includes FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: assessment as a prelude to a wilderness the National Register Historic District in Peter Samuel, Project Leader, suitability study. This requirement was the town of Homestead, the landing site Philadelphia Support Office, National met by the 1989 General Management and pump house, the site of Carrier Park Service, US Custom House, 200 Plan (GMP) for Apostle Islands National Furnaces number 6 and 7, and the Hot Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA Lakeshore. During the GMP planning Metal Bridge. Additional sites in the 19106, [email protected], 215– process, it was determined that about Monongahela Valley will be considered 597–1848. 97% of the park’s land base was as necessary during the study process. If you correspond using the internet, potentially suitable for wilderness, and The study will address the significance please include you rename and return required further study. Since that time, of the site in the contexts of the history address in your e-mail message. Our in accordance with the GMP, these of steel making and labor history in the practice is to make comments, including lands have been managed as though United States. All of the sites are located names and home addresses of they were wilderness, so the within the County of Allegheny in respondents, available for public conclusions of the assessment remain Pennsylvania adjacent to the review. Individual respondents may accurate and valid. Copies of the GMP Monongahela River. request that we withhold their home are available at the address above. The area is located within the address from the record, which we will The environmental review of the boundaries of the Rivers of Steel honor to the extent allowable by law. wilderness suitability study and EIS for National Heritage Area, which was There also may be circumstances in the Lakeshore will be conducted in designated by Congress in 1996. The which we would withhold from the accordance with requirements of the National Park Service (NPS) does not record a respondent’s identity, as NEPA (42 U.S.C. § 4371 et seq.), NEPA own land or assume a management role allowable by law. If you wish us to regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), other in the region. Instead, conservation, withhold your name and/or address, appropriate Federal regulations, and interpretation and other activities are you must state this prominently at the National Park Service procedures and managed by partnerships among federal, beginning of your comment. However, policies for compliance with those state, and local governments and private we will not consider anonymous regulations. nonprofit organizations. The national comments. We will make all Dated: May 14, 2001. heritage area is managed by the Steel submissions from organizations or Industry Heritage Corporation (SIHC). William W. Schenk, businesses, and from individuals The National Park Service has been identifying themselves as Regional Director. authorized by Congress to provide representatives or officials of [FR Doc. 01–25643 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] technical and financial assistance for a organizations or businesses, available BILLING CODE 4310–70–P limited period (up to 10 years from the for public inspection in their entirety. time of their designation in 1996) to the Dated: June 7, 2001. SIHC. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The SRS/EIS will address a range of Marie Rust, Regional Director, Northeast Region. National Park Service alternatives including potential roles for the NPS in preservation and [FR Doc. 01–25646 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Notice of Intent To Prepare an interpretation of the labor history story BILLING CODE 4310–30–M Environmental Impact Statement for associated with the study area. Alternatives to be considered include: the Special Resource Study for the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Battle of Homestead and Carrier no action. (continuation of existing Furnaces Sites in Western partnerships among the SIHC, NPS and Office of Surface Mining Reclamation Pennsylvania others) the establishment of a National and Enforcement Historic Site, or the establishment of a AGENCY: National Park Service, National Historic Trail, and other acts as Notice of Proposed Information Department of the Interior. may arise during the study process. Collection ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an In summary, the SRS will present Environmental Impact Statement for the findings on five topics: AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Special Resource Study for the Battle of • Determination of the national Reclamation and Enforcement. Homestead and Carrie Furnaces in significance of the sites and their ACTION: Notice and request for Western Pennsylvania. resource values; comments. • Determination of the suitability for SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the the sites to be included within the SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of National Park System in relation to Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 1969, the National Park Service is other sites of the same theme; Office of Surface Mining Reclamation preparing an environmental impact • Determination of feasibility for the and Enforcement (OSM) is announcing statement (EIS) for the Special Resource NPS to own, manage or participate in that the information collection request Study for the Battle of Homestead and conservation and interpretation in the for its Technical Evaluation customer Carrier Furnaces Sites in Western study area; surveys has been forwarded to the Pennsylvania. The purpose of a Special • Determination of the need for NPS Office of Management and Budget Resource Study (SRS) is to determine management of the sites, (OMB) for review and comment. The the degree and kind of federal actions • Identification of alternatives for any information collection request describes for the management and protection of an potential role for the NPS in the future. the nature of the information collection area considered to have potential for The EIS will assess the impacts of the and the expected burden and cost. The addition to the National Park System. alternatives for NPS participation. OMB control number for this collection
VerDate 11
of information is 1029–0114 and is on Government Performance and Results The prevailing rates and fringe benefits the forms along with the expiration Act. determined in these decisions shall, in date. Bureau Form Number: None. accordance with the provisions of the Frequency of Collection: Once. foregoing statutes, constitute the DATES: OMB has up to 60 days to Description of Respondents: 26 State minimum wages payable on Federal and approve or disapprove the information and Tribal governments, industry federally assisted construction projects collections but may respond after 30 organizations and individuals who to laborers and mechanics of the days. Therefore, public comments request information or assistance. specified classes engaged on contract should be submitted to OMB by Total Annual Responses: 750. work of the character and in the November 13, 2001 in order to be Total Annual Burden Hours: 125. localities described therein. assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Office of Information and Good cause is hereby found for not FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Regulatory Affairs, Office Of utilizing notice and public comment request a copy of the information Management and Budget, Attention: procedure thereon prior to the issuance collection request, explanatory Department of Interior Desk Officer, 725 of these determinations as prescribed in information and related form, contact 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay John A. Trelease at (202) 208–2783, or 20503. Also, please send a copy of your in the effective date as prescribed in that electronically to [email protected]. comments to John A. Trelease, Office of section, because the necessity to issue SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office Surface Mining Reclamation and current construction industry wage determinations frequently and in large of Management and Budget (OMB) Enforcement, 1951 Constitution Ave, volume causes procedures to be regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which NW., Room 210–SIB, Washington, DC impractical and contrary to the public implement provisions of the Paperwork 20240, or electronically to interest. Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13), [email protected]. require that interested members of the General wage determination public and affected agencies have an Dated: August 28, 2001. decisions, and modifications and opportunity to comment on information Richard G. Bryson, supersedeas decisions thereto, contain collection and recordkeeping activities Chief, Division of Regulatory Support. no expiration dates and are effective [see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)]. OSM has [FR Doc. 01–25647 Filed 10–12–01; 8:45 am] from their date of notice in the Federal submitted a request to OMB to renew its BILLING CODE 4310–05–M Register, or on the date written notice approval of the collection of information is received by the agency, whichever is contained in a series of technical earlier. These decisions are to be used evaluation customer surveys. OSM is DEPARTMENT OF LABOR in accordance with the provisions of 29 requesting a 3-year term of approval for CFR parts 1 and 5. Accordingly, the the information collection activity. Employment Standards applicable decision, together with any An agency may not conduct or Administration; Wage and Hour modifications issued, must be made a sponsor, and a person is not required to Division part of every contract for performance of respond to, a collection of information the described work within the unless it displays a currently valid OMB Minimum Wages for Federal and geographic area indicated as required by control number. The OMB control Federally Assisted Construction; an applicable Federal prevailing wage number for this collection of General Wage Determination Decisions law and 29 CFR part 5. The wage rates information is 1029–0039. and fringe benefits, notice of which is General wage determination decisions published herein, and which are As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), of the Secretary of Labor are issued in contained in the Government Printing Federal Register notice soliciting accordance with applicable law and are Office (GPO) document entitled comments on this collection of based on the information obtained by ‘‘General Wage Determinations Issued information was published on February the Department of Labor from its study Under The Davis-Bacon And Related 7, 2001 (66 FR 9357). No comments of local wage conditions and data made Acts,’’ shall be the minimum paid by were received. This notice provides the available from other sources. They contractors and subcontractors to public with an additional 30 days in specify the basic hourly wage rates and laborers and mechanics. which to comment on the following fringe benefits which are determined to Any person, organization, or information collection activity: be prevailing for the described classes of governmental agency having an interest Title: Technical Evaluations Series. laborers and mechanics employed on in the rates determined as prevailing OMB Control Number: 1029–0114. construction projects of a similar encouraged to submit wage rate and Summary: The series of surveys are character and in the localities specified fringe benefit information for needed to ensure that technical therein. consideration by the Department. assistance activities, technology transfer The determinations in these decisions Further information and self- activities and technical forums are of prevailing rates and fringe benefits explanatory forms for the purpose of useful for those who participate or have been made in accordance with 29 submitting this data may be obtained by receive the assistance. Specifically, CFR part 1, by authority of the Secretary writing to the U.S. Department of Labor, representatives from State and Tribal of Labor pursuant to the provisions of Employment Standards Administration, regulatory and reclamation authorities, the Davis-Bacon Act of March 3, 1931, Wage and Hour Division, Division of representatives of industry, as amended (46 Stat. 1494, as amended, Wage Determinations, 200 Constitution environmental or citizen groups, or the 40 U.S.C. 276a) and of other Federal Avenue, N.W., Room S–3014, public, are the recipients of the statutes referred to in 29 CFR part 1, Washington, DC 20210. assistance or participants in these appendix, as well as such additional forums. These surveys will be the statutes as may from time to time be Modification to General Wage primary means through which OSM enacted containing provisions for the Determination Decisions evaluates its performance in meeting the payment of wages determined to be The number of decisions listed to the performance goals outlined in its annual prevailing by the Secretary of Labor in Government Printing Office document plans developed pursuant to the accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. entitled ‘‘General Wage determinations
VerDate 11
Issued Under the Davis-Bacon and Volume V National Technical Information Service related Acts’’ being modified are listed Arkansas (NTIS) of the U.S. Department of by Volume and State. Dates of AR010003 (Mar. 2, 2001) Commerce at 1–800–363–2068. This publication in the Federal Register are AR010023 (Mar. 2, 2001) subscription offers value-added features in parentheses following the decisions Kansas such as electronic delivery of modified being modified. KS010007 (Mar. 2, 2001) wage decisions directly to the user’s KS010008 (Mar. 2, 2001) Volume I KS010013 (Mar. 2, 2001) desktop, the ability to access prior wage decisions issued during the year, None KS010016 (Mar. 2, 2001) KS010018 (Mar. 2, 2001) extensive Help desk Support, etc. Volume II KS010019 (Mar. 2, 2001) Hard-copy subscriptions may be Delaware KS010020 (Mar. 2, 2001) purchased from: Superintendent of DE10009 (Mar. 2, 2001) KS010021 (Mar. 2, 2001) Documents, U.S. Government Printing KS010022 (Mar. 2, 2001) Pennsylvania Office, Washington, DC 20402, (202) KS010023 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010001 (Mar. 2, 2001) 512–1800. KS010069 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010002 (Mar. 2, 2001) When ordering hard-copy KS010070 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010003 (Mar. 2, 2001) Nebraska subscription(s), be sure to specify the PA010004 (Mar. 2, 2001) NE010001 (Mar. 2, 2001) State(s) of interest, since subscriptions PA010005 (Mar. 2, 2001) NE010003 (Mar. 2, 2001) may be ordered for any or all of the six PA010006 (Mar. 2, 2001) NE010005 (Mar. 2, 2001) separate volumes, arranged by State. PA010007 (Mar. 2, 2001) NE010011 (Mar. 2, 2001) Subscriptions include an annual edition PA010008 (Mar. 2, 2001) NE010019 (Mar. 2, 2001) (issued in January or February) which PA010009 (Mar. 2, 2001) Texas PA010010 (Mar. 2, 2001) includes all current general wage TX010002 (Mar. 2, 2001) determinations for the States covered by PA010012 (Mar. 2, 2001) TX010005 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010016 (Mar. 2, 2001) TX010010 (Mar. 2, 2001) each volume. Throughout the remainder PA010017 (Mar. 2, 2001) TX010054 (Mar. 2, 2001) of the year, regular weekly updates will PA010018 (Mar. 2, 2001) be distributed to subscribers. PA010019 (Mar. 2, 2001) Volume VI Signed at Washington, DC this 4th day of PA010020 (Mar. 2, 2001) Colorado October 2001. PA010021 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010001 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010023 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010004 (Mar. 2, 2001) John Frank, PA010024 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010005 (Mar. 2, 2001) Acting Chief, Branch of Construction Wage PA010025 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010006 (Mar. 2, 2001) Determinations. PA010026 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010007 (Mar. 2, 2001) [FR Doc. 01–25464 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] PA010027 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010008 (Mar. 2, 2001) BILLING CODE 4510–27–M PA010029 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010009 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010030 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010010 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010032 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010014 (Mar. 2, 2001) DEPARTMENT OF LABOR PA010038 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010018 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010040 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010020 (Mar. 2, 2001) Mine Safety and Health Administration PA010042 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010021 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010052 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010023 (Mar. 2, 2001) Petitions for Modification PA010059 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010024 (Mar. 2, 2001) PA010060 (Mar. 2, 2001) CO010025 (Mar. 2, 2001) The following parties have filed PA010061 (Mar. 2, 2001) Volume VII petitions to modify the application of Volume III California existing safety standards under section CA010029 (Mar. 2, 2001) 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Florida Health Act of 1977. FL010001 (Mar. 2, 2001) General Wage Determination FL010009 (Mar. 2, 2001) Publication 1. A B & J Coal Company, Inc. FL010013 (Mar. 2, 2001) FL010014 (Mar. 2, 2001) General wage determinations issued [Docket No. M–2001–085–C] FL010017 (Mar. 2, 2001) under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts, A B & J Coal Company, Inc., PO Box FL010032 (Mar. 2, 2001) including those noted above, may be 35, Vansant, Virginia 24656 has filed a FL010045 (Mar. 2, 2001) found in the Government Printing Office petition to modify the application of 30 FL010046 (Mar. 2, 2001) (GPO) document entitled ‘‘General Wage CFR 75.1710–1 (canopies or cabs; self- Georgia Determinations Issued Under The Davis- propelled diesel-powered and electric GA010083 (Mar. 2, 2001) Bacon And Related Acts’’. This face equipment; installation North Carolina requirements) to its Mine No. 2 (I.D. No. NC010050 (Mar. 2, 2001) publication is available at each of the 50 South Carolina Regional Government Depository 44–06828) located in Buchanan County, SC010036 (Mar. 2, 2001) Libraries and many of the 1,400 Virginia. The petitioner proposes to Tennessee Government Depository Libraries across operate self-propelled electric face TN010048 (Mar. 2, 2001) the country. equipment without cabs or canopies in General wage determinations issued seam heights of 48 inches or less. The Volume IV under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts petitioner asserts that application of the Michigan are available electronically at no cost on existing standard would result in a MI010013 (Mar. 2, 2001) the Government Printing Office site at diminution of safety to the miners. MI010019 (Mar. 2, 2001) www.access.gpo.gov/davisbacon. They MI010047 (Mar. 2, 2001) 2. McElroy Coal Company MI010049 (Mar. 2, 2001) are also available electronically by MI010062 (Mar. 2, 2001) subscription to the Davis-Bacon Online [Docket No. M–2001–086–C] MI010063 (Mar. 2, 2001) Service (http:// McElroy Coal Company, Consol Plaza, MI010106 (Mar. 2, 2001) davisbacon.fedworld.gov) of the 1800 Washington Road, Pittsburgh,
VerDate 11
Pennsylvania 15241–1421 has filed a 5. Maple Creek Mining, Inc. maintenance) and 18.41(f) (plug and petition to modify the application of 30 [Docket No. M–2001–089–C] receptacle-type connectors) to its Tiny CFR 75.1002 (location of trolley wires, Creek No. 2 Mine (I.D. No. 46–08835) Maple Creek Mining, Inc., 981 Route trolley feeder wires, high-voltage cables located in Lincoln County, West 917, Bentleyville, Pennsylvania 15314 and transformers) to its McElroy Mine Virginia. The petitioner proposes to use has filed a petition to modify the (I.D. No. 46–01437) located in Marshall a threaded ring and a spring-loaded application of 30 CFR 75.1700 (oil and County, West Virginia. The petitioner device instead of a padlock on mobile gas wells) to its High Quality Mine (I.D. proposes to use high-voltage (4,160-volt) battery-powered machines to prevent No. 33–08375) located in Washington cables inby the last open crosscut. The County, Pennsylvania. The petitioner the plug connector from accidentally petitioner asserts that the proposed proposes to plug and mine through oil disengaging while under load. The alternative method would provide at and gas wells. The petitioner asserts that petitioner asserts that application of the least the same measure of protection as the proposed alternative method would existing standard would result in a the existing standard. provide at least the same measure of diminution of safety to the miners and that the proposed alternative method 3. Maple Creek Mining, Inc. protection as the existing standard. would provide at least the same [Docket No. M–2001–087–C] 6. Maple Creek Mining, Inc. measure of protection as the existing Maple Creek Mining, Inc., 981 Route [Docket No. M–2001–090–C] standard. 917, Bentleyville, Pennsylvania 15314 Maple Creek Mining, Inc., 981 Route 9. Consolidation Coal Company has filed a petition to modify the 917, Bentleyville, Pennsylvania 15314 application of 30 CFR 75.804(a) has filed a petition to modify the [Docket No. M–2001–093–C] (underground high-voltage cables) to its application of 30 CFR 75.350 (air Consolidation Coal Company, Consol High Quality Mine (I.D. No. 36–08375) courses and belt haulage entries) to its Plaza, 1800 Washington Road, located in Washington County, High Quality Mine (I.D. No. 36–08375) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15241–1421 Pennsylvania. The petitioner proposes located in Washington County, has filed a petition to modify the to use a high-voltage cable with an Pennsylvania. The petitioner requests a application of 30 CFR 75.364(b)(4) internal ground check conductor modification of the existing standard to (weekly examination) to its Shoemaker smaller than No. 10 AWG. The allow belt air coursed through belt Mine (I.D. No. 46–01436) located in petitioner states that high-voltage cables haulage entries to be used to ventilate Marshall County, West Virginia. Due to would be SHD+CG cable, manufactured active working places. The petitioner deteriorating roof and rib conditions of to ICEA Standard S–75–381 for Type proposes to install a carbon monoxide the six seals in 1 South of the intake air SHD three-conductor cables (except that monitoring system as an early warning course, traveling this areas would be it would have an insulated flexible fire detection system in all belt entries unsafe. The petitioner proposes to center ground check conductor having a used to course intake air to a working establish designated check points and cross-sectional area of not less than place. The petitioner asserts that the have a certified person examined these 1,800 circular mils), accepted by MSHA proposed alternative method would check points on a daily basis to monitor as flame-resistant, and with symmetrical provide at least the same measure of for methane and to ensure safe air 3/C, G/G and 1/GC construction; that all protection as the existing standard. passage. The petitioner asserts that the electrical personnel who perform proposed alternative method would maintenance on the longwall will 7. Alex Energy, Inc. provide at least the same measure of receive training on installing and [Docket No. M–2001–091–C] protection as the existing standard. repairing the cables prior to Alex Energy, Inc., P.O. Box 857, 10. Bledsoe Coal Corporation implementation; and that a revised Part Summersville, West Virginia 26651 has 48 training plan, specifying task training filed a petition to modify the [Docket No. M–2001–094–C] and review of the terms and conditions application of 30 CFR 75.350 (air Bledsoe Coal Corporation, 1374 for the affected miners, would be courses and belt haulage entries) to its Highway 192 East, London, Kentucky submitted to the District Manager. The Sugarcamp Mine (I.D. No. 46–08745) 40741 has filed a petition to modify the petitioner asserts that the proposed located in Nicholas County, West application of 30 CFR 75.1711–1 alternative method would provide at Virginia. The petitioner requests a (sealing of shaft openings) to its Mine least the same measure of protection as modification of the existing standard to No. 60 (I.D. No. 15–12941) located in the existing standard. allow belt air coursed through belt Leslie County, Kentucky. The petitioner 4. Maple Creek Mining, Inc. haulage entries to be used to ventilate proposes to use an alternative method to active working places. The petitioner establish a more permanent resolution [Docket No. M–2001–088–C] proposes to install a carbon monoxide for sealing shaft openings that would Maple Creek Mining, Inc., 981 Route monitoring system as an early warning protect the general public from 917, Bentleyville, Pennsylvania 15314 fire detection system in all belt entries vandalism or accidents at the Mine No. has filed a petition to modify the used to course intake air to a working 60, and establish an alternative method application of 30 CFR 75.1002 (location place. The petitioner asserts that the for reclamation requirements from the of trolley wires, trolley feeder wires, proposed alternative method would Department of Reclamation and high-voltage cables and transformers) to provide at least the same measure of Enforcement, due to the remote location its High Quality Mine (I.D. No. 36– protection as the existing standard. of the shaft and the unfeasibility of 08375) located in Washington County, obtaining material to backfill the shaft. 8. 3–D Management Service, Inc. Pennsylvania. The petitioner proposes The petitioner states that the Mine No. to use high-voltage (4,160-volt) cables [Docket No. M–2001–092–C] 60 has ceased production and portals inby the last open crosscut. The 3–D Management Service, Inc., PO have been backfilled; that the shaft has petitioner asserts that the proposed Box 186, Madison, West Virginia 25130 been sealed with a 17-inch concrete cap alternative method would provide at has filed a petition to modify the that is equipped with a vent pipe of 2- least the same measure of protection as application of 30 CFR 75.503 inches in diameter, at a distance of 15 the existing standard. (permissible electric face equipment; feet above the surface of the shaft; and
VerDate 11
that the proposed alternative method 13. American Energy Corporation FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH would be sufficient to sustain the loads [Docket No. M–2001–097–C] REVIEW COMMISSION that occur from the reclamation material American Energy Corporation, PO Sunshine Act Meeting and any other possible load situations. Box 5, Alledonia, Ohio 43902 has filed The petitioner has provided with this a petition to modify the application of October 9, 2001. petition 3-sets of drawings that detail 30 CFR 75.1700 (oil and gas wells) to its Time and Date: 10 a.m., Wednesday, how the 18-inch shaft will be Century Mine (I.D. No. 33–01070) October 17, 2001. permanently sealed. The petitioner located in Belmont County, Ohio. The Place: Room 6005, 6th Floor, 1730 K asserts that the proposed alternative petitioner proposes to plug and mine Street, NW., Washington, DC. method would provide at least the same through oil and gas wells at the Century Status: Open. measure of protection as the existing Mine using the specific procedures Matters to be Considered: The standard. outlined in this petition for Commission will consider and act upon the following: 11. Leeco, Inc. modification. The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method would 1. Secretary of Labor on behalf of [Docket No. M–2001–095–C] provide at least the same measure of Noakes v. Gabel Stone Co., Docket No. protection as the existing standard. CENT 2000–75–DM (Issues include Leeco, Inc., P.O. Box 309, Jeff, whether the judge erred in refusing to Kentucky 41751 has filed a petition to 14. Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation find that the discriminatee failed to modify the application of 30 CFR 75.900 [Docket No. M–2001–004–M] mitigate his damages while enrolled in (low- and medium-voltage circuits Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation, college). serving three-phase alternating current 8362 West 10200 South, Bingham Time and Date: The Commission equipment; circuit breakers) to its No. Canyon, Utah 84006–0351 has filed a meeting will commence following upon 68 Mine (I.D. No. 15–17497) located in petition to modify the application of 30 the conclusion of the Commission Perry County, Kentucky; and its No. 78 CFR 56.14109 (unguarded conveyors meeting in Secretary of Labor on behalf Mine (I.D. No. 15–17816) located in with adjacent travelways) to its of Noakes v. Gabel Stone Co., Docket Knott County, Kentucky. The petitioner Bingham Canyon Mine (I.D. No. 42– No. CENT 2000–75–DM, which proposes to a alternate method to meet 00149) located in Salt Lake County, commences at 10:00 a.m. on the requirements of under-voltage Utah. The petitioner requests a Wednesday, October 17, 2001. protection. The petitioner proposes for modification of the existing standard to Place: Room 6005, 6th Floor, 1730 K under-voltage protection a maximum allow emergency stop devices in the Street, NW., Washington, DC. nominal voltage of the belt conveyor form of a hand-held portable radio to be Status: Open. drive and water pump circuit(s) not to used at those portions of the Bingham Matters to be Considered: The exceed 995 volts, nominal voltage of the Canyon Mine’s Mine-Concentrator Commission will consider and act upon belt conveyor drive control and water Conveyor where pull-cords or railings the following: pump control circuit(s) not to exceed are not located, which when activated 1. Secretary of Labor on behalf of 120 volts, vacuum contactors built into through a single push-button at any Jackson v. Mountain Top Trucking Co., or permanently affixed to the position along the beltway, will Docket No. KENT 613–D (Issues include transformer enclosure and properly deactivate the conveyor motor and stop whether the judge erred in concluding separated and isolated from the other the belt. The petitioner asserts that that the discriminatee failed to mitigate components of the unit, and provide application of the existing standard his damages while enrolled in college). under-voltage protection for belt drive(s) would result in a diminution of safety Time and Date: 10 a.m., Thursday, November 1, 2001. and water pump motors that are greater to the miners and that the proposed alternative method would provide at Place: Room 6005, 6th Floor, 1730 K than 5 horsepower for vacuum Street, NW., Washington, DC. contactors that have associated least the same measure of protection as the existing standard. Status: Open. protective relays. The petitioner has Matters to be Considered: The listed in this petition additional specific Request for Comments Commission will consider and act upon procedures that would be followed Persons interested in these petitions the following: when its proposed alternative method is are encouraged to submit comments via 1. American Coal Co., Docket Nos. implemented. The petitioner asserts that e-mail to ‘‘[email protected],’’ or on LAKE 2000–111–R, etc. (Issues include the proposed alternative method would a computer disk along with an original whether tags required to be placed on provide at least the same measure of hard copy to the Office of Standards, all approved diesel engines under 30 protection as the existing standard. Regulations, and Variances, Mine Safety CFR 7.90 must be supplied by the engine manufacturer). 12. Leeco, Inc. and Health Administration, 4015 Wilson Boulevard, Room 627, Time and Date: The Commission [Docket No. M–2001–096–C] Arlington, Virginia 22203. All meeting will commence following upon comments must be postmarked or the conclusion of the Commission Leeco, Inc., PO Box 309, Jeff, meeting in American Coal Co., Docket Kentucky 41751 has filed a petition to received in that office on or before November 13, 2001. Copies of these Nos. LAKE 2000–111–R, etc., which modify the application of 30 CFR commences at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, 77.214(a) (refuse piles; general) to its petitions are available for inspection at that address. November 1, 2001. No. 64 Mine (I.D. No. 15–16353) located Place: Room 6005, 6th Floor, 1730 K in Perry County, Kentucky. The Dated at Arlington, Virginia this 4th day of Street, NW., Washington, DC. petitioner proposes to place refuse over October 2001. Status: Open. previously abandoned and reclaimed David L. Meyer, Matters to be Considered: The mines. The petitioner asserts that the Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, Commission will consider and act upon proposed alternative method would and Variances. the following: provide at least the same measure of [FR Doc. 01–25691 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 1. Freeman United Coal Mining Co., protection as the existing standard. BILLING CODE 4510–43–P Docket Nos. LAKE 2000–12–R, etc.
VerDate 11
(Issues include whether tags required to application under this Regulation for applications received. Permits were be placed on all approved diesel operation of remote camp at Patriot issued on October 3, 2001 to: Vickie equipment under 30 CFR 7.90 must be Hills, Antarctica, and logistic support Usher Russell, Permit No. 2002–008; supplied by the engine manufacturer). services for scientific and other Terry J. Wilson, Permit Nos. 2002–009 Any person attending an open expeditions, film crews, and tourists. and –010; Robert A. Blanchette, Permit meeting who requires special These activities include aircraft support, No. 2002–011; Tom W. Yelvington, accessibility features and/or auxiliary cache positioning, camp and field Permit No. 2002–012; John T. Lisle, aids, such as sign language interpreters, support, resupply, search and rescue, Permit No. 2002–013; Melissa must inform the Commission in advance medevac, medical support and logistic Alexander, Permit No. 2002–014. of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR support for some National Operators. Nadene G. Kennedy, 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d). The camp can accommodate up to 100 Permit Officer. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: people and is adjacent to a 100m x [FR Doc. 01–25614 Filed 10–4–01; 8:45 am] Jean Ellen—(202) 653–5629 / (202) 708– 2000m blue-ice runway. The blue-ice 9300 for TDD Relay / 1–800–877–8339 runway is a natural feature that requires BILLING CODE 7555–01–M for toll free. limited amount of preparation and upkeep for aircraft use. There are Jean H. Ellen, standard programs offered on a regular NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Chief Docket Clerk. basis. These include: Climbing trips to Conservation Act of 1978; Notice of [FR Doc. 01–25863 Filed 10–10–01; 12:28 Vinson Massif, the Ellsworth Mountains Permit Modification pm] and the Transantarctic Mountains; ski BILLING CODE 6735–01–M trips to the Ellsworth Mountains and the AGENCY: National Science Foundation. Geographic South Pole; and flights to SUMMARY: The Foundation modified a the Geographic South Pole, and the permit to conduct activities regulated NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Emperor Penguin Colony at the Dawson under the Antarctic Conservation Act of Lambton Glacier. Notice of Permit Application Received 1978 (Public Law 95–541; Code of A total of four aircraft will be Federal Regulations title 45, part 670). Under the Antarctic Conservation Act operated by Adventure Network FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of 1978 International throughout the Antarctic. Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Officer, AGENCY: National Science Foundation. They will consist of the following: Two Twin Otter aircraft, and Ilyushin 76 (IL– Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, ACTION: Notice of permit applications 76), and either a turbine DC–3 or a National Science Foundation, 4201 received under the Antarctic Cessna 185. Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Conservation Act. The permit applicant is: Ms. Anne DESCRIPTION OF PERMIT AND MODIFICATION: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Kershaw, President, Adventure Network On September 15, 1999, the National the National Science Foundation (NSF) International (ANI), 4800 N. Federal Science Foundation issued a permit has received a waste management Highway, Suite 307D, Boca Raton, FL (ACA #2000–001) to Dr. Steven D. permit application for operation of a 33431. Permit application No. 2002– Enslie after posting a notice in the camp at Patriot Hills, Heritage Range, WM–003. August 17, 1999 Federal Register. Public comments were not received. A southern Ellsworth Mountains, Nadene G. Kennedy, Antarctica, by Adventure Network request to modify the permit was posted Permit Officer. in the Federal Register on April 30, International, a company within the [FR Doc. 01–25613 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] United States. The application is 2001. No public comments were BILLING CODE 7555–01–M submitted to NSF pursuant to received. The modification, issued by regulations issued under the Antarctic the Foundation on September 19, 2001, Conservation Act of 1978. allows the permit holder to enter NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION additional Antarctic Specially Protected DATES: Interested parties are invited to Areas for the purpose of collecting submit written data, comments, or Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 conducting surveys and excavating views with respect to this permit small 5–10cm soil samples from application on or before November 13, AGENCY: National Science Foundation. abandoned penguin rookeries. 2001. Permit applications may be inspected by interested parties at the ACTION: Notice of permits issued under Location: Permit Office, address below. the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, ASPA 102—Rookery Islands, Holme Public Law 95–541. ADDRESSES: Comments should be Bay addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, SUMMARY: The National Science ASPA 103—Ardery and Odbert Office of Polar Programs, National Foundation (NSF) is required to publish Islands Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson notice of permits issued under the ASPA 109—Moe Island, South Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. Orkneys FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This is the required notice. ASPA 110—Lynch Island, South Joyce A. Jatko or Nadene Kennedy at the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Orkneys above address or (703) 292–8030. Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Office, ASPA 111—Southern Powell Island SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NSF’s Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, and adjacent islands, Orkney Antarctic Waste Regulation, 45 CFR Part National Science Foundation, 4201 Islands 671, requires all U.S. citizens and Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. ASPA 114—North Coronation Island entities to obtain a permit for the use or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August ASPA 127—Haswell Island release of a designated pollutant in 29, 2001, the National Science ASPA 135—Bailey Peninsula, Budd Antarctica, and for the release of waste Foundation published a notice in the Coast in Antarctica. NSF has received a permit Federal Register of a permit ASPA 136—Clark Peninsula,
VerDate 11
Budd Coast All correspondence, documents, and terminated license files. This database other materials shall be filed with the will also be used to track the 300–400 Nadene G. Kennedy, administrative judges in accordance licenses terminated each year by NRC. Permit Officer. with 10 CFR 2.1203. The database will be completed in [FR Doc. 01–25615 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Issued at Rockville, Md, this 5th day of September 2002. BILLING CODE 7555–01–M October 2001. For further details with respect to this G. Paul Bollwerk III, action, see the Final Report on Results Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety of Terminated License Reviews, dated NUCLEAR REGULATORY September 26, 2001. This report is COMMISSION and Licensing Board Panel. [FR Doc. 01–25673 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] available online through NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and [Docket Nos. 50–369–LR, 50–370–LR, 50– BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 413–LR, and 50–414–LR; ASLBP No. 02– Management Systems (Accession No. 794–01–LR] ML012710539). NUCLEAR REGULATORY Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day Duke Energy Corp., McGuire Nuclear of October 2001. Station, Units 1 and 2, Catawba COMMISSION Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2; For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Completion of Terminated License Larry W. Camper, Establishment of Atomic Safety and Review Project Licensing Board Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Pursuant to delegation by the Commission. Material Safety and Safeguards. Commission dated December 29, 1972, ACTION: Completion of terminated [FR Doc. 01–25671 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] published in the Federal Register, 37 FR license review project. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 28,710 (1972); the Commission’s Regulations, see 10 CFR 2.1201, 2.1207; In 1989 the General Accounting Office and the Commission’s Order dated issued a report which raised concerns October 4, 2001, CLI–01–20, 54 NRC OFFICE OF PERSONNEL about the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory MANAGEMENT ll (Oct. 4, 2001), an Atomic Safety Commission’s (NRC’s) criteria and and Licensing Board is being procedures used for the Submission for OMB Review: established to preside over the following decommissioning of formerly licensed Comment Request for Review of an proceeding: sites. As a result, in 1990, the NRC Expiring Information Collection: Duke Energy Corporation decided to undertake a review of Standard Form 1153 terminated materials licenses to assure McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 AGENCY: Office of Personnel Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 that previously licensed facilities were properly decontaminated and posed no Management. On June 13, 2001, Duke Energy threat to public health and safety. Oak ACTION: Notice. Corporation submitted an application to Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was renew the operating licenses for its contracted to review all materials SUMMARY: In accordance with the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, licenses terminated by the NRC or its Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 predecessor agencies, from inception of (Public Law 104–13, May 22, 1995), this and 2, near Charlotte, North Carolina. material regulation, to: (1) Identify sites notice announces that the Office of This Licensing Board is being with potential for meaningful residual Personnel Management (OPM) has established pursuant to an August 15, contamination, based on information in submitted to the Office of Management 2000 notice of acceptance for docketing the license documentation; and (2) to and Budget a request for review of an of an application and opportunity for a identify sealed sources with incomplete expired information collection. hearing (65 FR 60,693). The proceeding or no accounting that could represent a Standard Form 1153, Claim for Unpaid involves intervention petitions/hearing public hazard. Compensation of Deceased Civilian requests regarding the renewal ORNL examined in excess of 37,000 Employee, is used to collect information application filed by the Nuclear terminated license files. From its from individuals, who have been Information and Resource Service and evaluation of these license files, ORNL designated as beneficiaries of the the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense identified approximately 675 loose unpaid compensation of a deceased League. material licenses and 565 sealed source Federal employee or who believe that The Board is comprised of the licenses that required further review. their relationship to the deceased following administrative judges: NRC Regional offices either performed a entitles them to receive the unpaid Administrative Judge Ann Marshall follow-up review, or transferred compensation of a deceased Federal Young, Chair, Atomic Safety and responsibility for the follow-up review employee. OPM needs this information Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear to the appropriate Agreement State. in order to adjudicate the claim and Regulatory Commission, Washington, As a result of the Regional reviews, 40 properly assign a deceased Federal DC 20555–0001. sites were found to have residual employee’s unpaid compensation to the Administrative Judge Charles N. Kelber, contamination in excess of the NRC’s appropriate individual(s). Atomic Safety and Licensing Board criteria for unrestricted release. Of these We received no comments on our 60- Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory sites, 18 have been closed, 11 have been day notice on Standard Form 1153, Commission, Washington, DC 20555– transferred to Agreement States or the published in the Federal Register on 0001. U.S. Department of Air Force, 8 are in June 15, 2001. Administrative Judge Lester S. the process of decommissioning, and 3 Approximately 3,000 SF 1153 forms Rubenstein, Atomic Safety and are under further NRC review. are submitted annually. It takes Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear ORNL has developed a web-based approximately 15 minutes to complete Regulatory Commission, Washington, database for the NRC to document the the form. The annual estimated burden DC 20555–0001. evaluation and closure process for all is 750 hours.
VerDate 11
For copies of this proposal, contact amendment recognized the National SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on (202) 606– Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.’s COMMISSION 8358, fax to (202) 418–3251, or e-mail to (‘‘NASD’’) use of the Regional Computer [email protected]. Please include Interface (‘‘RCI’’),4 and provided for a [Investment Company Act Release No. your mailing address. six-month pilot program for the use of 25205; 812–12016] DATES: Comments on this proposal a 30-second commitment expiration. In should be received within 30 calendar addition, the proposed amendment Firstmark Corp.; Notice of Application. days from the date of this publication. reflected the BSE’s new principal place October 5, 2001. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments of business. Notice of the proposed AGENCY: to—Melissa A. Drummond, Program amendment appeared in the Federal Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’). Manager, Office of Merit Systems Register on August 15, 2001.5 The Oversight, Office of Merit Systems Commission received no comments on ACTION: Notice of an application for an Oversight and Effectiveness, U.S. Office the proposed amendment. This order order under section 6(c) of the of Personnel Management, 1900 E approves the proposed amendment. Investment Company Act of 1940 (the Street, NW., Room 7671, Washington, ‘‘Act’’). DC 20415, and Joseph Lackey, OPM The Commission finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with Desk Officer, Office of Information and SUMMARY OF THE APPLICATION: Firstmark Regulatory Affairs, Office of the Act and the rules and regulations Corp. (‘‘Applicant’’) requests an order Management and Budget, New thereunder applicable to the ITS and, in exempting it from all provisions of the Executive Office Building, NW., Room particular, sections 11A(a)(1)(C)(ii) and Act until the earlier of one year from the 10235, Washington, DC 20503. (D) of the Act,6 and Rule 11A3–2(c)(2) date the requested order is issued or the 7 U.S. Office of Personnel Management. thereunder, which requires among date it no longer may be deemed to be Kay Coles James, other things, that such plan amendment an investment company. is necessary or appropriate in the public Director. FILING DATES: The application was filed interest, for the protection of investors [FR Doc. 01–25610 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] on March 3, 2000 and amended on and the maintenance of fair and orderly BILLING CODE 6325–43–P October 2, 2001. markets, and removes impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a Hearing or Notification of Hearing: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE national market system. Specifically, the An order granting the application will COMMISSION Commission believes that the plan be issued unless the Commission orders amendment should help to enable the [Release No. 34–44903; File No. 4–208] a hearing. Interested persons may NASD to use the communications request a hearing by writing to the Intermarket Trading System; Order network that links all the Participant Commission’s Secretary and serving Granting Approval of the Seventeenth markets. In addition, the Commission Applicant with a copy of the request, Amendment to the ITS Plan Relating to believes that by providing a shorter personally or by mail. Hearing requests Regional Computer Interface, 30- commitment expiration option of 30- should be received by the Commission Second Commitment Expiration, and seconds as a six-month pilot program, by 5:30 p.m. on October 31, 2001 and the Principal Place of Business of the the proposed amendment should foster should be accompanied by proof of Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. efficiency and enhance competition service on Applicant in the form of an among Participant markets. affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of October 3, 2001. service. Hearing requests should state On July 16, 2001, the Intermarket It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to section 11A(a)(3)(B) of the Act,8 that the the nature of the writer’s interest, the Trading System Operating Committee reason for the request, and the issues (‘‘ITSOC’’) submitted to the Securities proposed Seventeenth Amendment be, and hereby is, approved. contested. Persons who wish to be and Exchange Commission notified of a hearing may request (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section For the Commission, by the Division of notification by writing to the 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Commission’s Secretary. 1934 (‘‘ACT’’),1 and Rule 11A3a3–2 authority.9 thereunder,2 a proposed amendment ADDRESSES: Secretary, Commission, 450 Margaret H. McFarland, Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC (‘‘Seventeenth Amendment’’) to the Deputy Secretary. restated ITS Plan.3 The proposed 20549–0609. Applicant, Three James [FR Doc. 01–25702 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Center, 7th Floor, 1051 Eash Cary Street, 1 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. BILLING CODE 8010–01–M Richmond, VA 23219. 2 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 3 The ITS is a National Market System (‘‘NMS’’) Emerson S. Davis, Sr., Senior Counsel, plan, which was designed to facilitate intermarket at (202) 942–0714, or Michael W. trading in exchange-listed equity securities based 4 ‘‘RCI’’ is defined in Section 1(34A) of the ITS Mundt, Branch Chief, at (202) 942–0564 on current quotation information emanating from Plan as the ‘‘automated linkage between the System the linked markets. See Securities Exchange Act and, and collectively, the Regional Switches and (Division of Investment Management, Release No. 19456 (January 27, 1983), 48 FR 4938 Office of Investment Company (February 3, 1983). the AMEX [Display Book Manager] DBM that, when The ItS Participants include the American Stock implemented, will enable members located on the Regulation). floors of the Amex, BSE, the CHX, the PSE, and the Exchange LLC (‘‘Amex’’), the Boston Stock SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’), the Chicago Board Options PHLX to participate in the Applications.’’ The Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’), the Chicago Stock 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44661 following is a summary of the Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’), the Cincinnati Stock (August 8, 2001), 65 FR 42904. application. The complete application Exchange Inc. (‘‘CSE’’), the National Association of 6 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(ii) and (D). may be obtained for a fee from the Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’), the New York 7 17 CFR 240.11A3–2(c)(2). Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NYSE’’), the Pacific Commission’s Public Reference Branch, Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PCX’’), and the Philadelphia Stock 8 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(3)(B). 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PHLX’’) (‘‘Participants’’). 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(29). 20549–0102 (telephone (202) 942–8090).
VerDate 11
Applicant’s Representations Applicant’s Legal Analysis 5. Applicant states that since the 1. Applicant is a Maine corporation 1. Under section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Act, Asset Sale, it has devoted substantial formed in 1982. Most recently, an issuer is an investment company if effort to acquire or merge with an Applicant through wholly-owned it is engaged or proposes to engage in unaffiliated business. Applicant subsidiaries, was engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting, believes that the inability to the title insurance business and related owning, holding or trading in securities, consummate an acquisition or merge services. On December 2, 1998, and owns or proposes to acquire was largely due to certain civil litigation Applicant executed a stock purchase investment securities having a value matters involving the Applicant as a agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) under which exceeding 40 per cent of the value of result of the conduct of Applicant’s Applicant and its wholly-owned such issuer’s total assets (exclusive of previous management. Applicant states subsidiary, Southern Capital government securities and cash items) that all litigation matters have now been Acquisition Corporation (‘‘SCAC’’), on an unconsolidated basis. Section resolved, and the payment in settlement would sell its principal operating 3(a)(2) of the Act defines ‘‘investment of claims has been drawn from Invested subsidiary, Investor Southern securities’’ to include all securities Proceeds. Applicant states that it Corporation (‘‘ISC’’), to Old Guard except government securities, securities continues to hold the Invested Proceeds Group, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation which are issued by employees’ to preserve the value of assets while it (the ‘‘Asset Sale’’). Prior to the Asset securities companies, and securities pursues possible acquisitions or Sale, Applicant’s board of directors issued by majority-owned subsidiaries mergers, and it has not engaged in any (‘‘Board’’) adopted a resolution, effective of the owner which are not investment speculation or trading of securities. December 15, 1998, declaring companies, and are not relying on the Applicant contends that registration exception from the definition of Applicant’s intent to become engaged under the Act would involve investment company in section 3(c)(1) primarily in non-investment company unnecessary burden and expense for or 3(c)(7) of the Act. businesses following the consummation Applicant and its stockholders and of the Asset Sale. The Board reaffirmed 2. Applicant states that the Invested would serve no regulatory purpose. this intent on March 1, 2000. Proceeds and Other Investments may Applicant thus asserts that the 2. As a result of the Asset Sale, which constitute ‘‘investment securities’’ requested relief is consistent with the occurred on March 5, 1999, Applicant, within the meaning of section 3(a)(2) of protection of investors and the purposes through SCAC, received $6,750,000, and the Act. Applicant states that because the right to receive certain additional the Invested Proceeds and Other fairly intended by the policy and cash payments in 2000, 2001, and 2002, Investments represent more than 40% of provisions of the Act. if the pre-tax net income of ISC and its its total assets (exclusive of government Applicant’s Conditions subsidiaries in the fiscal years ending securities and cash items) on an December 31, 1999, 2000, and 2001, unconsolidated basis, Applicant may be Applicant agrees that the requested reached targeted goals.1 Applicant states an investment company within the exemption will be subject to the that it invested its cash from the Asset meaning of section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Act. following conditions: Rule 3a–2 under the Act generally Sale in a money market fund registered 1. Applicant will not purchase or provides that, for purposes of section under the Act (‘‘Invested Proceeds’’) to otherwise acquire (directly or through a preserve its value pending application 3(a)(1)(C), an issuer will not be deemed to be engaged in the business of Subsidiary) any securities other than of such assets to an acquisition of or short-term U.S. Government securities, merger with an operating business. As investing, reinvesting, owning, holding certificates of deposit, commercial paper of March 31, 2001, the balance of the or trading in securities for a period not rated A–1/P–1, and shares of registered Invested Proceeds was $4,248,000 or to exceed one year if the issuer has a 84.9% of Applicant’s total assets bona fide intent to be engaged in a non- money market funds; except that (exclusive of U.S. Government securities investment company business. Applicant may acquire equity securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated Applicant states that it relied on the of an issuer that is not an investment basis (and approximately 92.5% on a one-year ‘‘transient’’ investment company as defined in section 3(a) of consolidated basis). Applicant also company exception under rule 3a–2 for the Act or is relying on an exclusion states that as of March 31, 2001, the the period ending March 5, 2000. from the definition of investment remaining investments of Applicant and 3. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the company under section 3(c) of the Act its two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Commission to exempt any person, other than section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7), in SCAC and QFAN Marketing Services, security, or transaction from any connection with the acquisition of an Inc. (each, a ‘‘Subsidiary’’), included provision of the Act, if and to the extent operating business as evidenced by a real estate, shares of two money market that the exemption is necessary or resolution approved by Applicant’s funds registered under the Act, other appropriate in the public interest and Board. marketable securities, and stamps and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly 2. Applicant will not hold itself out as artwork (‘‘Other Investments’’), totaling being engaged in the business of approximately $261,515, $6,998, intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. investing, reinvesting, owning, holding $25,719, and $9,209, respectively. or trading in securities. Applicant states that the Other 4. Applicant requests an exemption Investments predate the Asset Sale, and under section 6(c) from all provisions of For the Commission, by the Division of that Applicant is in the process of the Act until the earlier of one year from Investment Management, under delegated liquidating the Other Investments, the date the requested order is issued or authority. except for the investments in the money such time as Applicant would no longer Margaret H. McFarland, be required to register as an investment market funds. Deputy Secretary. company under the Act. Applicant [FR Doc. 01–25698 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] 1 believes that within this period it will Applicant received an earn-out payment in the BILLING CODE 8010–01–M amount of $167,683 for the fiscal year ending be able to complete an acquisition of or December 31, 1999. a merger with a new operating business.
VerDate 11
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Rule 31.5 Criteria for Eligibility of of Trust Issued Receipts (as defined in COMMISSION Securities Interpretations and Policies .04 following Rule 1.1) may be listed or [Release No. 34–44908; File No. SR–CBOE– L. IPRs. 2001–48] traded pursuant to unlisted trading (a)–(d) Unchanged. privileges on the Exchange subject to Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice *** Interpretations and Policies: the criteria set forth below: of Filing and Order Granting (a)–(d) Unchanged. .01 The Exchange may approve a Accelerated Approval of Proposed series of IPRs for listing and trading * * * Interpretations and Policies: Rule Change by the Chicago Board (including pursuant to unlisted trading Options Exchange, Incorporated To .01 The Exchange may approve a privileges) pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) Adopt Generic Listing Standards for series if Trust Issued Receipts for listing under the Securities Exchange Act of Trust Issued Receipts, To Provide and trading (including pursuant to 1934 provided each of the following Alternate Eligibility Requirements for unlisted trading privileges) on the criteria is satisfied: Component Securities of Trust Issued Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) (a) Eligibility Criteria for Index Receipts in Certain Limited Situations under the Securities Exchange Act of Components. Upon the initial listing of and To Increase the Permissible 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’), provided each a series of IPRs on the Exchange, or if Weight of the Most Heavily Weighted of the component securities satisfies the the Exchange is trading the IPRs Component Stock of Index Portfolio following criteria: pursuant to unlisted trading privileges, Shares and Index Portfolio Receipts (i) each component security must be upon the initial listing on the original registered under Section 12 of the October 4, 2001. listing exchange, each component of an Exchange Act; Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the index or portfolio underlying a series of (ii) each component security must Securities Exchange Act of 1934 IPRs shall meet the following criteria: have a minimum public float of at least (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 (1)–(2) Unchanged. $50 million. notice is hereby given that on August (3) The most heavily weighted (iii) each component security must be 31, 2001, the Chicago Board Options component stock cannot exceed [25%] listed on a national securities exchange Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’ or 30% of the weight of the index or or traded through the facilities of ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities portfolio, and the five most heavily Nasdaq, and a reported national market and Exchange Commission weighted component stocks cannot system security; (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule exceed 65% of the weight of the index (iv) each component security must change as described in Items I, II, and or portfolio; have an average daily trading volume of III below, which Items have been (4)–(5) Unchanged. at least 100,000 shares during the prepared by the CBOE. The Commission (b)–(e) Unchanged. preceding sixty days trading period; (v) each component security must is publishing this notice to solicit M. IPRs. comments on the proposed rule change have an average daily dollar value of from interested persons and to approve (a)–(b) Unchanged. shares traded during the proceeding sixty-day trading period of at least $1 the proposal on an accelerated basis. * * * Interpretations and Policies: million; and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s .01 The Exchange may approve a (vi) the most heavily weighted Statement of the Terms of Substance of series of IPSs for listing and trading component security may not initially the Proposed Rule Change (including pursuant to unlisted trading represent more than 20% of the overall The Exchange proposes to amend its privileges) pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) value of the Trust Issued Receipt. rules to adopt generic listing standards under the Securities Exchange Act of .02 The eligibility requirements for applicable to listing and trading of Trust 1934 provided each of the following component securities that are Issued Receipts (‘‘TIRs’’) pursuant to criteria is satisfied: represented by a series of Trust Issued Rule 19b–4(e) under the Act, to provide (a) Eligibility Criteria for Index Receipts and that became part of the eligibility requirements for component Components. Upon the initial listing of Trust Issued Receipt when the security securities represented by a series of TIRs a series of IPSs on the Exchange, or if was either: (a) distributed by a company that became part of such TIR under the Exchange is trading the IPSs already included as a component certain limited circumstances, and to pursuant to unlisted trading privileges, security in the series of Trust Issued increase the permissible weight of the upon the initial listing on the original Receipts; or (b) received in exchange for most heavily weighted component stock listing exchange, each component of an the securities of a company previously of Index Portfolio Receipts (‘‘IPRs’’) and index or portfolio underlying a series of included as a component security that Index Portfolio Shares (‘‘IPSs’’). Below IPSs shall meet the following criteria: is no longer outstanding due to a is the text of the proposed rule change. (1)–(2) Unchanged. merger, consolidation, corporate Proposed new language is italicized; (3) The most heavily weighted combination or other event, shale as proposed deletions are in brackets.3 component stock cannot exceed [25%] follows: 30% of the weight of the index or (i) the component security must be Chicago Board Options Exchange, portfolio, and the five most heavily listed on a national securities exchange Incorporated Rules weighted component stocks cannot or traded through the facilities of * * * * * exceed 65% of the weight of the index Nasdaq and a reported national market or portfolio; system security. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). (4)–(5) Unchanged. (ii) the component security must be 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. (b)–(e) Unchanged. registered under Section 12 of the 3 The CBOE made non-substantive changes by .02 Unchanged Exchange Act; and deleting a typographical error from its rule text. See (iii) the component security must have telephone conversation between Angelo Evangelou, N. Trust Issued Receipts Attorney, CBOE, and Cyndi Nguyen, Attorney, a Standard & Poor’s Sector Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on Notwithstanding any other provisions Classification that is the same as the October 1, 2001. in these Rules to the contrary, a series Standard & Poor’s Sector Classification
VerDate 11
represented by the component securities Rule 31.5.N.5 As discussed in the Specifically, the proposed alternate included in the Trust Issued Receipt at Original Approval Order, TIRs are eligibility criteria would apply to a the time of the distribution or exchange. negotiable receipts that are issued by a component security that became part of trust representing securities of issuers a trust when the security was either: (a) II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s (‘‘component securities’’) that have been distributed by an issuer already Statement of the Purpose of, and deposited and are held on behalf of the included as a component security in the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule holders of the TIRs. TIRs are considered series of TIRs; or (b) received in Change ‘‘securities’’ under the rules of the exchange for the securities of an issuer In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange and are subject to various previously included as a component CBOE included statements concerning applicable trading rules. security and that are no longer the purpose of and basis for the The Exchange now is proposing to outstanding due to a merger, proposed rule change and discussed any implement generic listing criteria that consolidation, corporate combination or comments it received on the proposed are intended to allow those TIRs that other event. The Exchange believes that rule change. The text of these statements satisfy the proposed generic listing it would be useful to allow such may be examined at the places specified standards to start trading without the securities to remain in the TIR in Item III below. The CBOE has need for notice and comment and (provided, however, that they meet the prepared summaries, set forth in Commission approval. The proposed proposed standards described below) to sections A, B, and C below, of the most rule change to CBOE Rule 31.5.N reduce the number of distributions of significant aspects of such statements. concerning the listing of TIRs would securities from the TIR, which would provide that the Exchange may approve cause inconvenience and increased A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s for trading, pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) of transaction and administrative costs for Statement of the Purpose of, and the Act, a series of TIRs if the following investors. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule criteria are satisfied. First, each The eligibility requirements for such Change component security must be registered component securities are as follows. 1. Purpose under Section 12 of the Act. Second, First, the component security must be each component security must have a listed on a national securities exchange The Exchange proposes to amend its minimum public float of at least $150 or traded through the facilities of current listing standards for TIRs, million. Third, each component security Nasdaq and a reported national market contained in CBOE Rule 31.5.N, to must be listed on a national securities system security. Second, the component provide generic standards that would exchange or traded through the facilities security must be registered under permit listing and trading, or trading of the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. and a Section 12 of the Act. Finally, the pursuant to unlisted trading privileges reported national market system component security must have a (‘‘UTP’’), of certain products pursuant to security. Fourth, each component Standard & Poor’s sector classification 4 Rule 19b–4(e) under the Act. The security must have an average daily that is the same as the Standard & Poor’s Exchange believes that the application trading volume of at least 100,000 sector classification represented by the of Rule 19b–4(e) to these securities will shares and an average daily dollar value component securities included in the further the intent of that rule by of shares traded of at least $1 million TIR at the time of the distribution or allowing trading to begin in these during the preceding sixty-day trading exchange.7 securities, subject to the proposed period. Finally, the most heavily generic standards, without the need for weighted component security may not c. Changes to IPR and IPS Rules notice and comment and Commission initially represent more than twenty The Exchange also proposes to amend 6 approval. Accordingly, the Exchange percent of the overall value of the TIR. its existing generic listing standards The Exchange will implement written believes that this new procedure has the applicable to IPRs and IPSs in CBOE surveillance procedures for the TIRs potential to reduce the time frame for Rules 31.5.L and 31.5.M, respectively.8 that it trades pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) bringing these securities to the market among other things, these rules provide of the Act. Further, the Exchange will or for trading them pursuant to UTP. In that no one component security may comply with all recordkeeping addition, the Exchange proposes to exceed twenty-five percent of the weight requirements of Rule 19b–4(e) of the provide eligibility requirements for of the index or portfolio. The Exchange Act. The Exchange also will file Form component securities represented by a now proposes to increase from twenty- 19b–4(e) for each series of TIRs listed series of TIRs that become part of such five percent to thirty percent the under Rule 19b–4(e) of the Act within TIR under certain limited permissible weight of the most heavily five business days of commencement of circumstances, and to make minor weighted component stock in an trading. changes to its current listing standards underlying index or portfolio.9 The for IPRs and IPSs, contained in CBOE b. Alternate Eligibility Rules Exchange believes that the proposed Rule 31.5.L and 31.5.M, respectively. The Exchange also proposes to rule change will provide additional a. Generic Listing Standards for TIRs provide alternate eligibility requirements for component securities 7 The proposed alternate eligibility requirements In August 2000, the Commission are consistent with those currently used by the in certain limited situations. approved the Exchange’s proposal to Amex, which were approved by the Commission on May 16, 2001. See Securities Exchange Act Release adopt listing standards for TIRs in CBOE 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43134 No. 44309 (May 16, 2001), 66 FR 28587 (May 23, (August 10, 2000), 65 FR 50255 (August 17, 2000) 2001) (SR–Amex–2001–04). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). Rule 19b–4(e) permits self- (SR–CBOE–00–23) (‘‘Original Approval Order’’). 8 The Commission approved the Exchange’s regulatory organizations (‘‘SROs’’) to list and trade 6 The proposed generic listing standards are generic listing standards applicable to IPRs and new derivatives products that comply with existing consistent with those used by the American Stock IPSs on March 7, 2001. See Securities Exchange Act SRO trading rules, procedures, surveillance Exchange (‘‘Amex’’) and the Chicago Stock Release No. 44046 (March 7, 2001), 66 FR 15152 programs and listing standards, without submitting Exchange (‘‘CHX’’), which were approved by the (March 15, 2001) (SR–CBOE–00–51). a proposed rule change under Section 19(b). See Commission on September 29, 2000. See Securities 9 The Commission approved a similar rule change Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40761 Exchange Act Release No. 43396 (September 29, proposal by the Amex. See Securities Exchange Act (December 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 2000), 65 FR 60230 (October 10, 2000) (SR–Amex– Release No. 44532 (July 10, 2001), 66 FR 37078 1998) (File No. S7–13–98). 00–10 and SR–CHX–00–16). (July 16, 2001) (SR–Amex–2001–25).
VerDate 11
flexibility to unit investment trusts (in Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of more quickly. Furthermore, the cases of IPRs) or mutual funds (in cases the submission, all subsequent Commission notes that it has previously of IPSs) to be listed pursuant to Rule amendments, all written statements approved similar proposals by the CHX, 19b–4(e) of the Act in structuring their with respect to the proposed rule the Amex, the Cincinnati Stock products and would help reduce change that are filed with the Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CSE’’) and the Pacific possible concerns associated with a Commission, and all written Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PCX’’) to establish single stock exceeding the twenty-five communications relating to the generic listing standards for TIRs.16 percent threshold immediately prior to proposed rule change between the Rule 19b–4(e) 17 provides that the initial listing and trading due to a spike Commission and any person, other than listing and trading of a new derivative in the price of the most heavily those that may be withheld from the securities product by an SRO shall not weighted index stock. This change public in accordance with the be deemed a proposed rule change, would not affect the Internal Revenue provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule Code Subchapter M requirements available for inspection and copying in 19b–4, if the Commission has approved applicable to regulated investment the Commission’s Public Reference pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act, the companies, which continue to require Room. Copies of such filing will also be SRO’s trading rules, procedures and investment companies to rebalance their available for inspection and copying at listing standards for the product class portfolios quarterly to avoid one the principal office of the CBOE. All that include the new derivative component stock exceeding a twenty- submissions should refer to File No. securities product and the SRO has a five percent weighting in the portfolio SR–CBOE–2001–48 and should be surveillance program for the product in order to maintain regulated submitted by November 2, 2001. class.18 investment company status. As noted above, the Commission has IV. Commission Findings and Order previously approved the CBOE’s 2. Statutory Basis Granting Accelerated Approval of the proposal to permit the listing and Proposed Rule Change The Exchange believes the proposed trading of TIRs and to trade nine series rule change is consistent with Section After careful consideration, the of TIRs (Biotech HOLDRs, Internet 6(b) of the Act,10 in general, and furthers Commission finds that the proposed HOLDRs, Broadband HOLDRs, B2B the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),11 in rule change is consistent with the Internet HOLDRs, Internet Architecture particular, because it is designed to requirements of the Act and the rules HOLDRs, Internet Infrastructure promote just and equitable principles of and regulations thereunder applicable to HOLDRs, Pharmaceutical HOLDRs, trade, to remove impediments to and a national securities exchange, and in Semiconductor HOLDRs, and Telecom perfect the mechanism of a free and particular, the requirements of Section HOLDRs) on the Exchange or pursuant 12 open market and a national market 6(b)(5) of the Act. Specifically, the to UTP.19 In approving these securities system, and, in general, to protect Commission finds that the CBOE’s for trading, the Commission considered investors and the public interest. proposal will prevent fraudulent and the structure of these securities, their Furthermore, the CBOE believes that the manipulative acts and practices, usefulness to investors and to the proposed rule change will enhance promote just and equitable principles of markets, and the CBOE’s rules and competition for the listing and trading trade, foster cooperation and surveillance programs that govern their of TIRs, IPRs, and IPSs, which currently coordination with persons engaged in trading. Securities that satisfy the are traded on other securities exchanges. regulating, clearing, settling, processing proposed generic listing standards for information with respect to, and TIRs would also allow investors to: (1) B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s facilitating transactions in securities, Respond quickly to changes in the Statement on Burden on Competition remove impediments to and perfect the overall securities markets generally and The CBOE does not believe that the mechanism of a free and open market for the industry represented by a proposed rule change will impose any and a national market system, and, in particular trust; (2) trade, at a price burden on competition that is not general, protect investors and the public disseminated on a continuous basis, a necessary or appropriate in furtherance interest consistent with Section 6(b)(5) single security representing a portfolio of the purposes of the Act. of the Act.13 of securities that the investor owns The Commission finds that the beneficially; (3) engage in hedging C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposal to provide generic standards to strategies similar to those used by Statement on Comment on the Proposed permit the listing and trading of TIRs institutional investors; 94) reduce Rule Change Received From Members, pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) of the Act 14 transaction costs for trading a portfolio Participants or Others furthers the intent of that rule by of securities; and (5) retain beneficial No written comments were solicited facilitating commencement of trading in ownership of the securities underlying or received with respect to the proposed these securities without the need for the TIRs. The Commission therefore rule change. notice and comment and Commission finds for these reasons, and the reasons approval under Section 19(b) of the set forth below, that additional TIRs that III. Solicitation of Comments Act.15 By establishing generic standards, satisfy the proposed generic standards Interested persons are invited to the proposal should reduce the CBOE’s and, therefore, can be listed pursuant to submit written data, views and regulatory burden, as well as benefit the Rule 19b–4(e) of the Act without prior arguments concerning the foregoing, public interest, by enabling the CBOE to Commission approval, should produce including whether the proposed rule bring qualifying products to the market the same benefits to the CBOE and to change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 16 See supra note 6, Securities Exchange Act should file six copies thereof with the 13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). In approving this proposed Release Nos. 43604 (November 21, 2000), 65 FR Secretary, Securities and Exchange rule change, the Commission notes that it has 75746 (December 4, 2000) (SR–CSE–00–05), and considered the proposed rule’s impact on 44182 (April 16, 2001), 66 FR 21798 (May 1, 2001) commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 (SR–PCX–2001–01). U.S.C. 78c(f). 17 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). 18 See supra note 4. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 19 See Original Approval Order, supra note 5.
VerDate 11
investors. Trading of these products will event occurs that makes further dealings the twenty-five percent threshold be subject to the full panoply of CBOE in such securities inadvisable. This will immediately prior to initial listing and rules and procedures that govern the give the CBOE flexibility to delist TIRs trading due to a spike in the price of the trading of equity securities on the if circumstances warrant. most heavily weighted index stock. CBOE, including, among others, rules The Commission further notes that, in Furthermore, the Commission notes that governing margin, the priority, parity connection with its previous review and it has previously approved a similar and precedence of orders, approval of CBOE Rule 31.5.N, it proposal by the Amex to increase to responsibilities of the specialist, and approved the Exchange’s surveillance thirty percent the permissible weight of operational and regulatory trading procedures and disclosure and the most heavily weighted component halts.20 prospectus delivery requirements for stock in an underlying index.26 The Commission further finds that TIRs.21 In accord with these previous Accordingly, the Commission finds adopting generic listing standards for findings, the Commission believes that good cause, consistent with Section these securities and applying Rule 19b– these rules, which will govern the 6(b)(5) of the Act,27 to approve the 4(e) of the Act should fulfill the trading of TIRs pursuant to Rule 19b– proposed rule change on an accelerated intended objective of that rule by 4(e), will provide adequate safeguards to basis prior to the thirtieth day after the allowing those TIR products that satisfy prevent manipulative acts and practices date of publication of notice in the the generic standards to start trading, and to protect investors and the public Federal Register, pursuant to Section without the need for notice and interest. Further, the Commission finds 19(b)(2) of the Act.28 comment and Commission approval. that the proposal will ensure that V. Conclusion The Exchange’s ability to rely on Rule investors have information that will 19b–4(e) of the Act for these products allow them to be adequately apprised of It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to potentially reduces the time frame for the terms, characteristics, and risks of Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,29 that the bringing these securities to the market trading TIRs. proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–2001– or for permitting the trading of these Finally, the CBOE will file Form 19b– 48) is hereby approved an accelerated securities pursuant to UTP, and thus 4(e) 22 with the Commission within five basis. enhances investors’ opportunities. The business days of commencement of For the Commission, by the Division of Commission notes that while the trading a TIR under the generic Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated proposal reduces the Exchange’s standards.23 authority.30 regulatory burden, the Commission Accordingly, the Commission believes Margaret H. McFarland, maintains regulatory oversight over any that the CBOE’s proposed rules Deputy Secretary. products listed under the generic listing governing the listing and trading of TIRs [FR Doc. 01–25700 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] standards through regular inspection pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) will provide BILLING CODE 8010–01–M oversight. adequate safeguards to prevent The Commission further finds that: (1) manipulative acts and practices and to by requiring that the underlying protect investors and the public interest, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE securities in a TIR be registered under consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the COMMISSION Section 12 of the Act and listed on a Act.24 national securities exchange or Nasdaq; Furthermore, the Commission finds [Release No. 34–44906; File No. SR–CBOE– and (2) by establishing minimum values that the proposal to provide an alternate 2001–53] for the number of outstanding receipts, eligibility criteria for component Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice average daily trading volume, average securities received as part of a of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness daily dollar volume, and public float, distribution or as a result of a merger, of Proposed Rule Change by the the Exchange’s proposed listing criteria consolidation, corporate combination or Chicago Board Options Exchange, will help to insure that a minimum level other event to remain in the trust should Incorporated To Allow Spread Orders of liquidity will exist to allow for the enhance competition by enabling the Involving Certain Broad-Based Index maintenance of fair and orderly markets CBOE to better compete with other Options and Options on Exchange for those TIR products listed and traded markets trading TIRs and notes that the Traded Funds To Be Executed at a pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) of the Act. Commission has previously approved Single Trading Post The Commission finds that these listing similar listing standards modifications criteria will help to ensure that no for the Amex.25 October 4, 2001. security underlying a TIR will be readily Finally, the Commission finds that the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the susceptible to manipulation, while proposal to increase from twenty-five Securities Exchange Act of 1934 permitting sufficient flexibility in the percent to thirty percent the permissible (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 construction of various TIRs to meet weight of the most heavily weighted notice is hereby given that on investors’ needs. The Commission component stock in an underlying index September 20, 2001, the Chicago Board further finds that these criteria should or portfolio of an IPR or IPS should Options Exchange, Incorporated serve to ensure that the securities provide additional flexibility to unit (‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the underlying such TIRs are well investment trusts (in cases of IPRs) or Securities and Exchange Commission capitalized and actively traded, which mutual funds (in cases of IPSs) to be (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule will help ensure that U.S. securities listed pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) of the change as described in Items I, II, and markets are not adversely affected by Act in structuring their products and III below, which Items have been the listing and trading of new TIRs should help reduce possible concerns under Rule 19b–4(e) of the Act. associated with a single stock exceeding 26 Additionally, the Exchange’s delisting See supra noted 9. 27 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). criteria set forth in CBOE Rule 31.94.I 21 See Original Approval Order, supra note 5. 28 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). allow it to consider the suspension of 22 17 CFR 249.820. 2915 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). trading and the delisting of a TIR if an 23 See 17 CFR 19b–4(e)(2). 30 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 24 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 20 Id. 25 See supra note 7. 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
VerDate 11
prepared by the Exchange. On October efficient manner of conducting business CBOE Rule 24.19. Revised paragraph (a) 2, 2001, CBOE submitted Amendment involving the two option classes while also would define a ‘‘Multi-Class Broad- No. 1 to the proposal.3 CBOE filed the protecting the customer orders in the Based Index Option Spread Order’’ proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) customer limit order books of both (‘‘Multi-Class Spread Order’’) as an of the Act 4 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) products and the customer orders being order to buy a stated number of thereunder,5 which renders the proposal represented in the crowd at both trading contracts of a Broad-Based Index Option effective upon filing with the posts. and to sell an equal number, or an Commission. The Commission is The purpose of the proposed rule equivalent number, of contracts of a publishing this notice to solicit change is to apply CBOE Rule 24.19 to different Broad-Based Index Option. comments on the proposed rule change spread orders involving certain other The proposed amendments to CBOE from interested persons. broad-based index options and options Rule 24.19 would apply only to Multi- Class Spread Orders composed of: (1) I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s on exchange traded fund shares derived Any combination of MNX, NDX, or Statement of the Terms of Substance of from broad-based indices (‘‘ETF QQQ (MNX–NDX, MNX–QQQ, and the Proposed Rule Change Options’’) that are currently listed and traded on the Exchange, in addition to NDX–QQQ); (2) any combination of The Exchange proposes to amend OEX and SPX options. The additional OEF, OEX, XEO, or SPX (OEX–SPX, CBOE Rule 24.19, OEX–SPX Spread broad-based index options that would OEX–OEF, OEF–SPX, etc.); and (3) any Orders, to apply its terms to certain be included under CBOE Rule 24.19 are other combination of related Broad- order broad-based index options and options on the Mini-NDX Index Based Index Options as determined by options on exchange traded fund shares (MNXSM) and the Nasdaq 100 Index the appropriate Floor Procedure listed and traded on the Exchange. The (NDX).7 The ETF Options that would be Committee. text of the proposed rule change is included under CBOE Rule 24.19 are When making its determination what available at the principal office of the options on the iShares S&P 100 Index products and spread strategies would be Exchange and at the Commission’s Fund (OEF) and Nasdaq 100 Tracking eligible for execution pursuant to CBOE Public Reference Room. Stock (QQQ).8 The Exchange is not Rule 24.19, the appropriate Floor II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposing to change any of the Procedure Committee would consider, Statement of the Purpose of, and procedures in the Rule for representing among other things, whether the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule and filing spread orders. Customers and particular index options classes under Change traders alike often employ spread consideration are derived from the same strategies using these products for underlying index, whether the In its filing with the Commission, particular index options classes have CBOE included statements concerning hedging and risk management. The Exchange believes that expanding the underlying indices that have a close the purpose of and basis for the relationship in their price movement, proposed rule change and discussed any applicability of Rule 24.19 to these products will encourage the use of and whether there is customer demand comments it received on the proposed for the particular spread strategy. The rule change. The text of these statements spread orders involving these products and provide an alternative to cross Exchange has proposed to include the may be examined at the places specified spread orders listed above under CBOE in Item IV below. CBOE has prepared market hedging of these products. Paragraph (a) of CBOE Rule 24.19 Rule 24.19 because of customer demand summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, for these strategies for hedging and risk would be revised to define a ‘‘Broad- and C below, of the most significant management purposes. For example, Based Index Option’’ for purposes of the aspects of such statements. spread strategies between OEX/XEO and rule to mean MNX, NDX, OEX, XEO, OEF options are used to hedge risk as A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s OEF, QQQ, and SPX options, and any they are each based on the S&P 100. 9 Statement of the Purpose of, and other broad-based index option or ETF Likewise, spread strategies between Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Option that is determined by the MNX, NDX, and QQQ options are Change appropriate Floor Procedure Committee proposed to be included under CBOE to create an appropriate hedge with any 1. Purpose Rule 24.19, as each of these options other Broad-Based Index Option under In 1997, the Commission approved classes are based on the Nasdaq 100 CBOE Rule 24.19 which sets forth a 7 The Exchange is also proposing to explicitly Index, and each option class is special procedure to facilitate the include XEO options under CBOE Rule 24.19. XEO frequently used to hedge positions in transaction of both legs of a spread order options are a new series of OEX options with a one of the other classes. Spread between OEX and SPX options at either European-style, rather than American-style, strategies between OEF and SPX would 6 exercise feature. See Securities Exchange Act the OEX or the SPX trading post. The Release No. 44556 (July 16, 2001), 66 FR 38046 be included under CBOE Rule 24.19 as Exchange believes that CBOE Rule 24.19 (July 20, 2001). Because of their relation to OEX OEF options, like OEX and XEO has provided both customers and options, the Exchange already deems XEO options options, can also be hedged with SPX traders of OEX and SPX options an to be subject to CBOE Rule 24.19. options. 8 OEF options are options overlying shares of the The procedures to be followed in iShares S&P 100 Index Fund, an exchange traded 3 See Letter from Jaime Galvan, Attorney, CBOE, fund based on the S&P 100 Index. QQQ options are representing and filling a Multi-Class to Michael Gaw, Division of Market Regulation, options overlying the Nasdaq 100 Index Tracking Spread Order, set forth in paragraph (b) Commission, dated October 1, 2001 (‘‘Amendment Stock, an exchange traded fund designed to track of CBOE Rule 24.19, remain the same as No. 1’’). In Amendment No. 1, CBOE made a minor the performance of the Nasdaq 100 Index. CBOE has the current procedures for representing change to the proposed rule text to clarify that the determined to treat options on exchange traded appropriate Floor Procedure Committee may fund shares that are derived from broad-based and filing an OEX–SPX spread order, determine to make only spread orders based on a indices like broad-based index options, and except for one minor change. The combination of related broad-based index options generally to apply to these products the same rules Exchange proposes to revise paragraph eligible to be handled pursuant to CBOE Rule 24.19. that are applicable to broad-based index options. (b)(i) of CBOE Rule 24.19 to provide 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). CBOE believes that options on exchange traded 5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). fund shares derived from broad-based indices, such that, immediately after a Multi-Class 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38782 as OEF and QQQ options, share trading (June 26, 1997), 62 FR 35862 (July 2, 1997) (SR– characteristics similar to broad-based index options 9 CBOE states that OEF options are about 1/10th CBOE–97–15). and, therefore, the same rules should apply to both. the size of OEX and XEO options.
VerDate 11
Spread Order is represented at the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available for inspection and copying at primary trading station or concurrent Statement on Comments on the the principal office of the Exchange. All with the announcement of such order, Proposed Rule Change Received From submissions should refer to File No. the member initiating the order must Members, Participants, or Others SR–CBOE–2001–53 and should be contact the Order Book Official or the No written comments were solicited submitted by November 2, 2001. DPM, as applicable, at the other trading or received with respect to the proposed For the Commission, by the Division of station. This change is required due to rule change. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated the fact that the MNX, NDX, OEF, and authority.13 III. Date of Effectiveness of the Margaret H. McFarland, QQQ trading crowds are DPM trading Proposed Rule Change and Timing for crowds. Commission Action Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–25701 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] As is currently the case, paragraph CBOE has asserted that, because the BILLING CODE 8010–01–M (b)(iii) of CBOE Rule 24.19 will provide foregoing proposed rule change does not that a member holding a Multi-Class (1) Significantly affect the protection of Spread Order that is priced net in a investors or the public interest; (2) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE multiple of the minimum increment impose any significant burden on COMMISSION will have priority over bids and offers competition; and (3) become operative in the trading crowd if both legs of the for 30 days from the date on which it [Release No. 34–44849; File No. SR–GSCC– spread would trade at a price that is at was filed (or such shorter time as the 00–10] least equivalent to quotes in the crowd. Commission may designate if consistent Similarly, such an order will have with the protection of investors and the Self-Regulatory Organizations; priority over bids and offers in the public interest), it has become effective Government Securities Clearing customer limit order books so long as: pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Corporation; Order Approving (1) No leg of the order would trade at Act 11 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) Proposed Rule Change Relating to the a price outside the currently displayed thereunder.12 In addition, CBOE gave Submission of Repo Collateral Substitutions bids or offers, or bids or offers in the the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, customer limit order book; and (2) at September 25, 2001. least one leg of the order would trade at along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five On September 11, 2000, the a price that is better than the business days prior to the date of filing Government Securities Clearing corresponding bid or offer in one of the of the proposed rule change. At any Corporation (‘‘GSCC’’) filed with the books. time within 60 days of the filing of the Securities and Exchange Commission The Exchange believes that expanding proposed rule change, the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) pursuant to Section the application of CBOE Rule 24.19 to may summarily abrogate such rule 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act 1 the products and spread orders listed change if it appears to the Commission of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) a proposed rule change above, so that both legs of such spread that such action is necessary or (File No. GSCC–00–10) and on orders can be executed at the same post, appropriate in the public interest, for November 20, 2000, and August 28, 2001, amended the proposed rule will result in tighter and more the protection of investors, or otherwise change.2 Notice of the proposal was competitive markets for such orders, in the furtherance of the purposes of the published in the Federal Register on benefiting both customers and traders. Act. January 11, 2001.3 No comment letters 2. Statutory Basis IV. Solicitation of Comments were received. For the reasons Interested persons are invited to discussed below, the Commission is CBOE believes that the proposed rule submit written data, views, and approving the proposed rule change. change is consistent with and furthers arguments concerning the foregoing, I. Description the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) Act10 in including whether the proposed rule that it is designed to perfect the change is consistent with the Act. The rule change enables GSCC to mechanisms of a free and open market Persons making written submissions reduce the risk to itself and its members and to protect investors and the public should file six copies thereof with the caused by the repurchase (‘‘repo’’) interest. CBOE believes that the Secretary, Securities and Exchange collateral substitution process. Due to a proposed rule will further these Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., variety of reasons, this process has statutory goals by allowing for the Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of recently stressed GSCC’s and its inter- efficient conduct of Multi-Class Broad- the submission, all subsequent dealer broker members’ operational Based Index Option Spread Orders that amendments, all written statements infrastructures, and has caused undue will be beneficial to both customers and with respect to the proposed rule fail-financing expenses for other traders. change that are filed with the members. GSCC’s new rules relating to Commission, and all written repo collateral substitutions processes B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s communications relating to the and the fees associated with such Statement on Burden on Competition proposed rule change between the substitutions will prohibit certain Commission and any person, other than practices and will impose an additional CBOE does not believe that the those that may be withheld from the proposed rule change will impose a public in accordance with the provision 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). burden on competition that is not of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). necessary or appropriate in furtherance inspection and copying in the 2 Because the second amendment merely of purposes of the Act. Commission’s Public Reference Room. modified the language in GSCC’s rule to better reflect what was discussed and comment requested Copies of such filing will also be on in the notice, notice of the amendment and comment is not required. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43794 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). (January 3, 2001), 66 FR 2466.
VerDate 11
risk management measure on the repo part of this change, GSCC will add the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE substitution process. definition of repo broker to its COMMISSION First, GSCC will amend Rule 18 definitions under Rule 1. A repo broker (‘‘Special Provisions for Repo [Release No. 34–44910; File No. SR–NASD– will be defined as an inter-dealer broker 2001–67] Transactions’’), its Schedule of or a division or other separate operating Timeframes, and its Fee Schedule to unit within a dealer netting member that Self-Regulatory Organizations; initially impose: (i) a deadline of noon operates in the same manner as a broker National Association of Securities (12:00 p.m. for the submission of repo and that participates in GSCC’s repo Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and collateral substitution notifications after netting service pursuant to the same Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed which time the dealer member that requirements imposed under Rule 15 Rule Change Relating to Nasdaq initiated the substitution will be subject governing special provisions for certain National Market Execution System to a late fee of $500 per substitution Fees and the Introduction of a notification and (ii) an absolute netting members and Rule 19 governing special provisions for brokered repo Liquidity Provider Rebate for NASD deadline of 12:30 p.m. for the Members submission of repo collateral transactions. substitution notifications after which II. Discussion October 5, 2001. time GSCC will reject the substitution Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the notification.4 GSCC will extend these The Commission finds that the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 submission deadlines by one hour on proposed rule change is consistent with (‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is those days that The Bond Market the requirements of the Act and the hereby given that on October 4, 2001, Association announces in advance will rules and regulations thereunder and the National Association of Securities be extraordinary volume days. All particularly with the requirements of Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’ or required information must be included Section 17A(b)(3)(F) 6 of the Act, which ‘‘Association’’), through its subsidiary, in the substitution notification in order requires that the rules of a clearing The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. for it to be deemed to be received by the agency be designed to assure the (‘‘Nasdaq’’), filed with the Securities deadlines. Substitution notifications or safeguarding of securities and funds and Exchange Commission amendments will no longer be accepted which are in the custody or control of (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule verbally but instead will only be change as described in Items I, II, and accepted through the use of GSCC’s the clearing agency or for which it is responsible. The commission finds that III below, which Items have been designated messaging utility that is prepared by Nasdaq. Nasdaq has available to all repo-netting participants. GSCC’s rule change meets these conditions because it implements designated this proposal as one Second, GSCC will revise Rule 12 establishing or changing a due, fee or procedures designed to prohibit (‘‘Securities Settlement’’) to make clear other charge imposed by the self- practices that pose risk and operational that the use of reversal codes in certain regulatory organization under Section difficulties to GSCC. situations is improper and that members 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act, which renders may not use a reversal code for a III. Conclusion the rule effective upon filing with the securities delivery obligation to GSCC Commission.1 The Commission is unless the member has obtained GSCC’s On the basis of the foregoing, the publishing this notice to solicit prior consent. The rule change also Commission finds that the proposal is comments on the proposed rule change provides that if GSCC is required to consistent with the requirements of the from interested persons. obtain overnight financing with respect Act and in particular with the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to securities delivered in violation of requirements of Section 17A of the Act this new rule, the entire amount of the Statement of the Terms of Substance of and the rules and regulations financing cost will be borne by the the Proposed Rule Change thereunder. offender.5 This is a rule change, on a pilot basis, It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Third, for risk management reasons, to: (1) Increase the per share charge for GSCC will amend Rule 18 to add a Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the use of the Nasdaq National Market requirement that all collateral proposed rule change (File No. SR– Execution System (‘‘NNMS’’ or substitutions with regard to repos that GSCC–00–10) be, and hereby is, ‘‘SuperSOES’’); and (2) introduce a are on GSCC’s books pending settlement approved. liquidity provider rebate. Nasdaq has must be made through GSCC. For the Commission, by the Division of designated this proposal as one Fourth, GSCC will amend Section 4 of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated establishing or changing a due, fee, or Rule 18 to permit a repo broker to authority.7 other charge imposed by a self- submit a repo collateral substitution. As Margaret H. McFarland, regulatory organization, and therefore the proposed rule change is effective 4 The 12 p.m. deadline is one hour after which Deputy Secretary. upon filing as applied to NASD time the broker should have received all of the [FR Doc. 01–25703 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] requisite substitution information under The Bond members. The rule change will become Market Association guidelines. In the future, GSCC BILLING CODE 8010–01–M operative on a pilot basis, commencing may change these deadlines depending on market on November 1, 2001 and ending on practice. Prior to making any such change, GSCC 2 will make an appropriate filing under Section 19 of October 31, 2002. During the pilot the Act and Rule 19(b)(4) thereunder and notify its members in advance. 1 The NASD filed an amendment to the filing on 5 A GSCC member may continue to use a reversal October 5, 2001. The substance of the amendment code under circumstances where it wishes to has been incorporated into this notice. See letter to indicate to GSCC (where GSCC is the initiating Katherine A. England, Assistant Director, party of a securities delivery to the member) that Commission, from John M. Yetter, Assistant General it ‘‘does not know’’ (‘‘DK’’) the transaction. For Counsel, Nasdaq. (October 4, 2001). example, if GSCC sends a securities delivery to a 2 Nasdaq also filed a companion rule filing (SR– member in error, it is appropriate for the member 6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). NASD–2001–68) to apply the per share charge to DK such delivery. 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Continued
VerDate 11
period, Nasdaq will assess the effect of II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and introducing a liquidity provider the rule change on market participants Statement of the Purpose of, and rebate. The per share charge for orders and Nasdaq and may file additional Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule entered and executed in the NNMS will changes to the level or structure of its Change increase from $0.001 per share to $0.002 fees. The text of the proposed rule In its filing with the Commission, per share, in keeping with Nasdaq’s change is set forth below. Proposed new Nasdaq included statements concerning ongoing efforts to align charges with language is italicized; proposed the purpose of and basis for the costs and benefits. This increase, deletions are in brackets. proposed rule change and discussed however, will be accompanied by the *** comments it received on the proposed institution of a liquidity provider rebate. The rebate is designed to enhance 7010. System Services rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified market efficiency and fairness by (a)–(h) No change. in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared offering incentives to market summaries, set forth below in Sections participants that provide liquidity (i) Transaction Execution Services (A), (B), and (C), of the most significant through the NNMS. Nasdaq believes (1) No change. aspects of such statements. that the rebate will increase the extent to which orders are exposed to the (2) Nasdaq National Market Execution A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s entire market. The rebate is also System (SuperSOES) Statement of the Purpose of, and structured to address competitive The following charges shall apply to Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule disparities between electronic the use of the Nasdaq National Market Change communications networks, which may Execution System: On January 14, 2000, the Commission charge non-subscribers fees for issued an order approving a rule change accessing their quotes, and market that: (1) Established the NNMS, a new makers, which generally are prohibited Order Entry $0.10 per order entry (entering platform for the trading of Nasdaq Charge. party only). by the Commission from charging access Per Share $0.001 per share executed for National Market (‘‘NNM’’) securities; (2) fees. Members that do not charge an Charge. all fully or partially executed modified the rules governing the use of access fee will receive a rebate of $0.001 orders (entering party only). SelectNet for trading NNM issues; and per share when their quotation is Cancellation Fee $0.25 per order cancelled (can- (3) left unchanged trading of Nasdaq celing party only). executed against by an order sent via the SmallCap securities through the Small NNMS; in addition, a rebate of $0.001 For a pilot period commencing on Order Execution System (‘‘SOES’’) and per share will be paid to members when November 1, 2001 and lasting until SelectNet.3 Nasdaq began implementing they send an NNMS order that executes October 31, 2002, the per share charge these system changes on July 9, 2001 against the quotation of a market will be $0.002 per share executed for all and completed implementation on July participant that charges in access fee. fully or partially executed orders 30, 2001. Through these changes, the The rebate will be applied to reduce any (entering party only). NNMS has become the primary trading charges payable by the recipient of the (3) No change. platform for NNM securities, and rebate to Nasdaq. Any remaining SelectNet is intended to be used (4) Liquidity provider rebate balance may be paid directly to the primarily for the transmittal and member. The rebate will be calculated For a pilot period commencing on execution of ‘‘non-liability’’ orders for November 1, 2001 and lasting until on a monthly basis. market makers in NNM securities, as Nasdaq believes that the proposed October 31, 2002: well as the transmittal and execution of (A) NASD members that do not charge rule change is consistent with the Act, ‘‘liability’’ orders to market participants including Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act, an access fee to market participants that do not participate in the automatic which requires that the rules of the accessing their quotations through the execution functionality of the NNMS. NASD provide for the equitable Nasdaq National Market Execution On September 28, 2001, Nasdaq filed allocation of reasonable fees, dues, and System will receive a rebate of $0.001 modifications to the pricing structure other charges among members and per share when their quotation is for SelectNet and the NNMS.4 These issuers and other persons using any executed against by a Nasdaq National changes were designed as an interim facility or system which the NASD Market Execution System order. modification to begin the process of operates or controls, and Section (B) NASD members will receive a aligning the charges to market 15A(b)(6) of the Act, which requires rebate of $0.001 per share when they participants for using the NNMS and rules that are not designed to permit send a Nasdaq National Market SelectNet more closely with the costs of unfair discrimination between Execution System order that executes providing these services and the customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. against the quotation of a market benefits that they provide to market Nasdaq believes that the level of fees participant that charges an access fee to participants. charged to market participants under market participants accessing its In this filing, Nasdaq is increasing the the proposal is reasonable. Nasdaq quotations through the Nasdaq National per share charge for use of the NNMS anticipates that overall fees for the Market Execution System. 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42344 (Jan. NNMS, SelectNet, and SOES, net of the (j)–(q) No change. 14, 2000), 65 FR 16 (Jan. 25, 2000) (SR–NASD–99– liquidity provider rebate, will be 11). comparable to overall fees for the portion of the rule change to national securities 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44899 NNMS, SelectNet, and SOES under the exchanges trading Nasdaq-listed securities pursuant (October 2, 2001) (File No. SR–NASD–2001–63) and to grants of unlisted trading privileges (‘‘UTP Securities Exchange Act Release No. 44898 (October pricing changes contained in SR– Exchanges’’), which are not NASD members, and 2, 2001) (File No. SR–NASD–2001–64). SR–NASD– NASD–2001–63 and SR–NASD–2001– has requested that the Commission grant 2001–63 applied the new fees to NASD members, 64. Such fees are, in turn, estimated to accelerated approval to the filing. SR–NASD–2001– effective upon filing, and was implemented on be slightly lower than overall fees for 68 will become effective immediately upon October 1, 2001. SR–NASD–2001–64 will apply the approval by the Commission and will be new fees to UTP Exchanges, and will be SelectNet and SOES prior to the implemented on the first day of the month implemented on the first day of the month introduction of the NNMS. Moreover, immediately following Commission approval. immediately following Commission approval. Nasdaq believes that the structure of the
VerDate 11
liquidity provider rebate is equitable, submissions should refer to file number presentations, conduct full Panel because it will help to address SR–NASD–2001–67 and should be deliberations on the implementation of competitive disparities between submitted by November 2, 2001. TWWIIA, receive public testimony, and electronic communications networks For the Commission, by the Division of conduct an experts roundtable and other and market makers stemming from Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated business. access fees. authority.5 The Panel will meet in person Margaret H. McFarland, commencing on Wednesday, November B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 14, 2001 from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.; Deputy Secretary. Statement on Burden on Competition Thursday, November 15, 2001 from 9 Nasdaq believes that the proposed [FR Doc. 01–25699 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] a.m. to 5 p.m.; and Friday, November rule change will not result in any BILLING CODE 8010–01–M 16, 2001 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. burden on competition that is not Agenda: The Panel will hold a necessary or appropriate in furtherance quarterly meeting and host an experts of the purposes of the Act. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION roundtable on the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The Ticket To Work and Work demonstration projects. Briefings, Statement on Comments on the Incentives Advisory Panel Meeting presentations, full Panel deliberations Proposed Rule Change Received From and other Panel business will be held Members, Participants, or Others AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). Wednesday and Thursday, November 14 Written comments were neither and 15, 2001. Public testimony will be ACTION: Notice of meeting. solicited nor received. heard in person Thursday, November III. Date of Effectiveness of the DATES: 15, 2001 from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for November 14, 2001, 9:30 a.m.–4 p.m. Members of the public must schedule a timeslot in order to comment. In the Commission Action November 15, 2001, 9:00 a.m.–5 p.m. November 16, 2001, 9:00 a.m.–4 p.m. event that the public comments do not The foregoing rule change has become ADDRESSES: take up the scheduled time period for effective pursuant to Section Madison Hotel, 15th and M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, public comment, the Panel will use that 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act and time to deliberate and conduct other subparagraph (f) of Rule 19b–4, Phone: 202–862–1600, Fax: 202–785– 1255. Panel business. The experts roundtable thereunder because it establishes or will be held Friday, November 16, 2001. changes a due, fee or other charge SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Type of Individuals interested in providing imposed by the self-regulatory meeting: This is a quarterly meeting and testimony in person should contact the organization. At any time within 60 experts roundtable on of the Ticket to Panel staff as outlined below to days of the filing of the proposed rule Work and Work Incentives schedule time slots. Each presenter will change, the Commission may summarily Improvement Act demonstration be called on by the Chair in the order abrogate the rule change if it appears to projects, open to the public. The public in which they are scheduled to testify the Commission that such action is is invited to participate by coming to the and is limited to a maximum five- necessary or appropriate in the public address listed above. Public comment minute verbal presentation. Full written interest, for the protection of investors, will be taken during the quarterly testimony on TWWIIA Implementation, or otherwise in furtherance of the meeting. The public is also invited to no longer than 5 pages, may be purposes of the Act. submit comments in writing on the submitted in person or by mail, fax or implementation of the Ticket to Work IV. Solicitation of Comments email on an on-going basis to the Panel and Work Incentives Improvement Act for consideration. Interested persons are invited to (TWWIIA) of 1999 at any time. Since seating may be limited, persons submit written data, views, and Purpose: In accordance with section interested in providing testimony at the arguments concerning the foregoing, 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory meeting should contact the Panel staff including whether the proposed rule Committee Act, the Social Security by e-mailing Kristen M. Breland, at change is consistent with the Act. Administration (SSA) announces a [email protected] or calling Persons making written submissions meeting of the Ticket to Work and Work (202) 358–6423. should file six copies thereof with the Incentives Advisory Panel (the Panel). The full agenda for the meeting will Secretary, Securities and Exchange Section 101(f) of Pub. L. 106–170 be posted on the Internet at http:// Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., establishes the Panel to advise the www.ssa.gov/work/panel/ two weeks Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of Commissioner of SSA, the President, before the meeting or can be received in the submission, all subsequent and the Congress on issues related to advance electronically or by fax upon amendments, all written statements work incentives programs, planning and request. with respect to the proposed rule assistance for individuals with Contact Information: Anyone change that are filed with the disabilities as provided under section requiring information regarding the Commission, and all written 101(f)(2)(A) of the TWWIIA. The Panel Panel should contact the TWWIIA Panel communications relating to the is also to advise the Commissioner on staff. Records are being kept of all Panel proposed rule change between the matters specified in section 101(f)(2)(B) proceedings and will be available for Commission and any person, other than of that Act, including certain issues public inspection by appointment at the those that may be withheld from the related to the Ticket to Work and Self- Panel office. Anyone requiring public in accordance with the Sufficiency Program established under information regarding the Panel should provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be section 101(a) of that Act. contact the Panel staff by: available for inspection and copying in Interested parties are invited to attend • Mail addressed to Social Security the Commission’s Public Reference the meeting. The Panel will use the Administration, Ticket to Work and Room. Copies of the filing will also be meeting time to receive briefings, hear Work Incentives Advisory Panel Staff, available for inspection and copying at 400 Virginia Avenue, SW., Suite 700, the principal office of the NASD. All 5 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Washington, DC 20024.
VerDate 11
• Telephone contact with Kristen DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION transportation of persons, property and Breland at (202) 358–6423. mail between a point or points in the • Fax at (202) 358–6440. Office of the Secretary United States, the intermediate point, • E-mail to [email protected]. Vienna, Austria, and, the terminal point Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Warsaw, Poland. Dated: October 5, 2001. Filed During Week Ending September Deborah M. Morrison, 28, 2001 Andrea M. Jenkins, Designated Federal Officer. Federal Register Liaison. The following Agreements were filed [FR Doc. 01–25606 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–25655 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] with the Department of Transportation BILLING CODE 4191–01–P under provisions of 49 U.S.C. sections BILLING CODE 4910–62–P 412 and 414. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF STATE applications. Docket Number: OST–2001–10688. Federal Aviation Administration [Public Notice 3812] Date Filed: September 24, 2001. Parties: Members of the International Culturally Significant Objects Imported Air Transport Association. [Docket No. FAA–2001–9854] for Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘Luca Subject: PTC123 0158 dated 25 Notice of Alternative Policy Options for Giordano, 1634–1705’’ September 2001, Mail Vote 146— Resolution 010n, TC123 South Atlantic Managing Capacity at LaGuardia DEPARTMENT: United States Department Special Passenger Amending Resolution Airport and Proposed Extension of the of State. from Brazil, Intended effective date: 1 Lottery Allocation; Suspension of the ACTION: Notice. October, 2001. Closing Date of the Comment Period
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the Andrea M. Jenkins, AGENCY: Federal Aviation following determinations: Pursuant to Federal Register Liaison. Administration (FAA), DOT. the authority vested in me by the Act of [FR Doc. 01–25656 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice to suspend until further October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. BILLING CODE 4910–62–P notice the closing date of the comment 2459), the Foreign Affairs Reform and period on alternative policy options for Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. managing capacity and mitigating DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2681, et seq.), Delegation of Authority congestion and delay at LaGuardia No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Airport (LGA). Delegation of Authority No. 236 of Office of the Secretary October 19, 1999, as amended, I hereby Aviation Proceedings SUMMARY: In a notice published on June determine that the objects to be 12, 2001, the FAA requested comments included in the exhibition ‘‘Luca Notice of Applications for Certificates on the feasibility and effectiveness of Giordano, 1634–1705,’’ imported from of Public Convenience and Necessity five different demand management abroad for the temporary exhibition and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed options that could be used to replace the without profit within the United States, Under subpart B (formerly subpart Q) current temporary administrative limits are of cultural significance. The objects during the week ending September 28, on the number of aircraft operations at are imported pursuant to loan 2001. The following Applications for LGA. The comment period is scheduled agreements with the foreign lenders. I Certificates of Public Convenience and to close on October 12, 2001. This also determine that the exhibition or Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier notice suspends the closing date of the display of the exhibit objects at the Los Permits were filed under subpart B comment period until further notice. Angeles County Museum of Art, Los (formerly subpart Q) of the Department Angeles, CA from on or about November of Transportation’s Procedural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 4, 2001 to on or about January 20, 2002, Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et Jeffrey Wharff, Senior Economist, Office and at possible additional venues yet to seq.). The due date for Answers, of Aviation Policy and Plans, 800 be determined, is in the national Conforming Applications, or Motions to Independence Avenue, SW., interest. Public Notice of these Modify Scope are set forth below for Washington, DC 20591; telephone Determinations is ordered to be each application. Following the Answer number 202–267–7035. published in the Federal Register. period, DOT may process the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For application by expedited procedures. further information, including a list of Such procedures may consist of the Background the exhibit objects, contact Carol B. adoption of a show-cause order, a On June 12, 2001, the FAA issued a Epstein, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the tentative order, or in appropriate cases ‘‘Notice of Alternative Policy Options Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State, a final order without further for Managing Capacity at LaGuardia (telephone: 202/619–6981). The address proceedings. Airport and Proposed Extension of the is U.S. Department of State, SA–44, 301 Docket Number: OST–1996–1592. Lottery Allocation’’ (65 FR 31731, June 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, Date Filed: September 28, 2001. 12, 2001). In that notice, commenters DC 20547–0001. Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify were asked to submit detailed analyses Dated: October 4, 2001. Scope: October 19, 2001. of two different market-based Patricia S. Harrison, Description: Contingent Application approaches and three types of Assistant Secretary for Educational and of Delta Air Lines, Inc., pursuant to 49 administrative options to allocate Cultural Affairs, United States Department U.S.C. Section 411102 and 41108 and capacity at LGA. Commenters were also of State. subpart B, for renewal of its certificate encouraged to submit comments on [FR Doc. 01–25697 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] of public convenience and necessity for alternative approaches to allocate BILLING CODE 4710–08–P Route 732, to engage in foreign air capacity at LGA.
VerDate 11
Suspension of the Closing Date of the SUMMARY: The FAA prepared a Final environment resulting from this Comment Period Programmatic Environmental Impact licensing program. The proposed The terrorist attacks of September 11, Statement for Licensing Launches Federal action is consistent with the 2001 on the World Trade Center and the (PEIS), to evaluate the potential purpose of national environmental Pentagon caused the FAA to temporarily environmental consequences of policies and objectives as set forth in cease all non-military flights in the licensing launches. After reviewing and NEPA and will not significantly affect United States and required airports and analyzing currently available data and the quality of the human environment. airlines to adopt certain security information on existing conditions, Background measures prior to the resumption of potential environmental impacts, and alternative measures to mitigate those The Commercial Space Launch Act of commercial service. In response to the 1984 (the Act) (49 U.S.C. 70101–70121), new security requirements and lowered impacts, the FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space authorizes the Department of passenger demand, several, airlines Transportation, and through have reduced the number of aircraft Transportation (AST) finds that the proposed action of licensing launches, delegations, the FAA, to oversee, operations below previously planned license, and regulate launch and reentry levels throughout the national airport as described in the PEIS, is not a major Federal action that would significantly activities and the operation of launch system, including LGA. These factors, at and reentry sites as carried out by U.S. least in the short-run, have contributed affect the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the citizens or within the United States. 49 to a significant decrease in airport U.S.C. 70104, 70105. The Act directs the congestion at LGA. In addition, the FAA National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The information in this FAA to exercise the responsibility has received a joint request (dated consistent with public health and safety, September 28, 2001) by the Air PEIS is not intended to address all site- specific launch issues including safety of property, and the national Transport Association, Regional Airline security and foreign policy interests of Association, National Air Carrier localized effects. This PEIS is intended to serve as a tiering document to assist the United States. 49 U.S.C. 70105. The Association, American Association of FAA is also responsible for encouraging, Airport Executives, and the Cargo commercial launch operators in preparing site-specific documentation. facilitating, and promoting launches by Airline Association for the FAA to the private sector. 49 U.S.C. 70103. The suspend indefinitely its consideration of Any additionally required site-specific environmental documentation will be FAA first licensed a launch in 1989. alternative demand management policy In the past three decades, space has developed as needed prior to FAA options or at a minimum extend the become increasingly important in a approval of proposed licensing comment period by 180 days. In a letter broad range of areas including scientific activities. Localized effects and any dated October 8, 2001, the Air Carrier research, communications, and Association of America disagrees that cumulative impacts at individual navigation. Human advancements in all issues addressed in the June 12, launch sites are appropriately analyzed technologies such as 2001, Federal Register notice be in the environmental review of a launch telecommunications and microgravity delayed for any time period. site operator. crystal growth are leading to increased In these circumstances, the FAA has This PEIS assesses the potential demand for access to space because of determined that it would be reasonable environmental effects of licensing its unique environment and are being and in the public interest to suspend launches from ignition, liftoff, and developed for direct commercial until further notice the closing date of ascent through the atmosphere to orbit, application. These new technologies the comment period for the notice 65 FR the disposition of launch vehicle (LV) and industry’s desire to market them, 31731, June 12, 2001. At the appropriate components down range, and controlled have created the need for increased time, FAA will publish an advance reentry of reusable launch vehicles. access to space. Based on the FAA’s notice giving the new closing date and Additional launch activities (including proprietary model used to project an indication whether the scope or vehicle assembly, payload preparation launch manifests, the demand for access nature of the demand management prior to liftoff, payload functioning to space cannot be met by the current or options under consideration have during useful life, and payload reentry foreseeable U.S. government procured changed. whether controlled or uncontrolled) launch vehicles (LVs) (see Section 2.1 of were determined to be outside the scope Issued on October 9, 2001 in Washington, the PEIS). Therefore, the commercial DC. of the PEIS. launch program is critical to ensure that John M. Rodgers, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. the U.S. remains in the forefront of Director of the Office of Aviation Policy and Michon Washington, Office of the commercial space development. Current Plans. Associate Administrator for Commercial U.S. space policy requires that the U.S. [FR Doc. 01–25725 Filed 10–9–01; 4:16 pm] Space Transportation, Space System government encourage private sector BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Development Division, Suite 331/AST– and state and local government 100, 800 Independence Ave., SW., investment and participation in the Washington, DC 20591; phone (202) development and improvement of U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 267–9305, or refer to the following launch systems and infrastructure. Internet address: http://ast.faa.gov Along with the technological Federal Aviation Administration advancements which increase the Introduction demand for space access, the private Record of Decision This Record of Decision (ROD) sector has expressed heightened interest AGENCY: Federal Aviation provides final FAA approval for a in conducting launches. These types of Administration (FAA), Department of program to issue launch licenses to launches have previously been Transportation (DOT). United States (U.S.) citizens or for conducted only by the Federal licensed launches within the United government. However, now the ACTION: Record of decision: States. The FAA has concluded that commercial launch industry is Programmatic Environmental Impact there are no significant short-term or attempting to promote convenient, Statement for Licensing Launches. long-term effects to the human affordable access to space, while
VerDate 11
satisfying the payload lift requirements potential environmental impacts of the Construction Alternative. The Non- of the space industry, and promoting the estimated 261 U.S. licensed launches Solid Propellant Alternative would commercial development of space. that will result from the proposed require the FAA to preferentially license Under the authority of 49 U.S.C. licensing program between 2000 and only those vehicles that use liquid or Subtitle IX, ch. 701, the FAA determines 2010. Included in the analysis are hybrid fuels. Implementing this whether to issue a launch license. potential environmental impacts alternative would eliminate the majority Issuing a launch license is considered a resulting from ignition and lift-off to of licensed launches by existing launch major federal action and is therefore payload separation, the deposition of LV service providers. The More subject to NEPA review. In order to components downrange and controlled Environmentally-Friendly Vehicles meet the need for commercial access to reentry of reusable launch vehicles. Alternative would require the FAA to space and comply with the Site-specific, localized environmental stop licensing launches until such time requirements of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, effects will be subject to project specific that a new launch vehicle is designed ch. 701, the FAA regulation 14 CFR environmental reviews as part of the that causes no adverse impacts to the 415.101, Environmental Review, and licensing process. environment. At this time, the NEPA, the FAA prepared a PEIS for development of such technology is not Licensing Launches. This type of Proposed Agency Action reasonably foreseeable or sufficiently document is permitted by the Council The preferred alternative for the PEIS practicable. Also, this alternative would on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the is the Launch Licensing Alternative. put additional pressure on foreign Implementation of Procedural The PEIS analyzes impacts by markets to keep up with the increased Provisions of NEPA (Preamble to Final examining the following characteristics demand while prohibiting the FAA from Regulations) 43 FR 55978 (November of LVs and LV launch profiles: fulfilling its mandated responsibility for 29, 1978.) (See also CEQ regulations at • Payload capacity (the mass an LV encouraging, facilitating, and promoting 40 CFR 1500.4, 1502.4, 1502.20, and can lift into a particular orbit), launches by the private sector. Finally, 1508.28 and FAA Order 1050.1D, • Types of propulsion systems (the the Composite Vehicle Construction paragraph 88.) ‘‘Material common to mechanisms that change the mass and Alternative would require the FAA to many actions may be covered in a broad velocity of the vehicle), and preferentially license those launches EIS, and then through tiering may be • Launch platforms—ground, air, or using vehicles that are constructed summarized and incorporated in each sea-based. entirely of composite materials which subsequent EIS.’’ Environmental Impacts of the Proposed would make the vehicle lighter and In February 1986, the FAA published therefore, not require as much fuel to Action and Alternatives a Programmatic Environmental reach orbit. However, again these Assessment for Commercial Expendable Launch licenses are needed to provide vehicles do not currently exist and there Launch Vehicle Programs. The a mechanism for ensuring protection of are no realistic plans to develop them. document provided information on the public health and safety. U.S. laws and Based on a systematic evaluation of impacts of expendable launch vehicles policy and international treaties the full range of potential alternatives, based on the known effects in existing recognize the technological and three alternatives were carried forward documentation for U.S. government economic importance of developing for detailed assessment of expendable launch vehicle programs. space transportation. The FAA’s launch environmental impacts. They include, This document did not address site- review and licensing procedures are the Preferred Alternative, the More specific aspects of launches. necessary to ensure that launch Environmentally-Friendly Propellant The PEIS will update and replace the applicants meet conditions designed to Combinations Alternative, and the No 1986 programmatic environmental protect the public health and safety, Action Alternative. assessment. A Notice of Intent was safety of property, and national security Preferred Alternative; Under this published in the Federal Register on and foreign policy interests. These alternative, the FAA would license November 27, 1995 announcing the conditions include: launches. The licensing process would preparation of a PEIS addressing the • Adhering to launch safety follow specifications as set forth in the potential effects of licensing expendable regulations and procedures, Act and its implementing regulations. launches. The notice stated that FAA • Complying with requirements This alternative would allow U.S. would conduct a public scoping concerning pre-launch record keeping licensed launch providers to meet the meeting if sufficient interest was and notifications, including those needs of U.S. companies that want to expressed. Although no one expressed pertaining to federal airspace launch satellites; thus, decreasing the an interest in FAA conducting public restrictions and military tracking need for U.S. companies to look to scoping meetings, written comments operations, foreign launch providers to launch U.S. were received. These comments have • Complying with federal inspection, satellites. been summarized in the PEIS. In verification, and enforcement More Environmentally-Friendly addition to the announcement of the requirements, and Propellant Combination Alternative; written comment period on the Draft • Securing the minimum amount of Under this alternative, the FAA would EIS, the FAA requested comments third-party liability insurance specified preferentially license those launches directly from Federal agencies, industry, by the DOT. that produce less harmful tropospheric and individuals who expressed an Five alternatives were considered in and stratospheric air emissions of interest in being included on the the PEIS in addition to the preferred hydrogen chloride (HCl) and aluminum distribution list. The second volume of alternative. Three of these alternatives oxide (Al2O3) which are associated with the Final PEIS summarizes the were considered but not retained for solid rocket motor (SRM) propellants. comments received and set forth the detailed study in the PEIS because they Therefore, the FAA would preferentially FAA’s responses. were determined not to be feasible. license launches of LVs with no SRMs The Final PEIS considers, at the These alternatives include the Non- or with combinations of SRMs and programmatic level, the environmental Solid Propellant Alternative, More liquids. Preferentially licensing those impacts of licensing launches. The Final Environmentally-Friendly Vehicles launches with LVs that are not solely PEIS also analyzes in detail the Alternative, and Composite Vehicle propelled by SRMs would reduce the
VerDate 11
total number of licensed launches Preferred Alternative people were engaged in prior to the projected through 2010. The number of The launch licensing alternative is the interference affect annoyance levels, launches using liquid, liquid/solid, or preferred alternative under which the and a wide range exists in estimating hybrid propellant systems was assumed FAA would license launches. Licenses the percent of people annoyed. to remain unchanged under this would be issued in accordance with the However, preliminary data indicate that people perceive sonic booms as more alternative. Thus, the total number of specifications set out in 49 U.S.C. FAA-licensed launches in the U.S. or by intrusive than aircraft noise at Subtitle IX, ch. 701 and supporting U.S. citizens (i.e., programmatic comparable levels. Structural damage to regulations. Under this alternative, some launches) would decrease substantially facilities may occur as a result of site-specific NEPA and other under this alternative. It is assumed that overpressure. Overpressure is a environmental review would still be the decrease in U.S. licensed launches transient pressure, that occurs as a required, prior to issuing launch using only solid propellants would be result of an explosion, that exerts a force licenses. compensated for by the increase in these that exceeds the standard atmospheric launches elsewhere in the world, Atmospheric Impacts pressure. Approximately one in 10,000 because the same number of payloads The atmospheric impacts of the panes of glass may be broken at an overpressure of four pounds per square would still be produced and need to be preferred alternative are addressed for launched (see Section 2.4.1 of the PEIS) foot. LVs can possibly produce an all levels of the atmosphere. The and it is likely that a similar size and overpressure in the two to three pounds primary impacts to the troposphere may type of launch vehicle would be per square foot range and would only result from the ground cloud, the cluster employed. affect structures under the flight path. of emissions formed from the ignition of No Action Alternative; Under this Flight paths could be altered to avoid rocket motors and the resulting launch alternative, the FAA would not issue overflight of sensitive structures and of the LV. Other potential impacts to the licenses for launches. Because 49 U.S.C. therefore launches of LVs would have troposphere could result from accidents Subtitle IX, ch. 701 requires launches insignificant impacts from noise. within the United States or conducted on the launch pad or during initial LV by U.S. citizens to be licensed, the U.S. flight. In the stratosphere, LV emissions Land and Water launch industry would be unable to could potentially affect global warming Impacts to soil may include provide licensed launches, regardless of (the greenhouse gas effect) and the temporary increases in available metals launch location. In addition, it is depletion of the stratospheric ozone and temporary decreases in pH. Impacts possible that worldwide demand for layer. The potential LV emissions that to surface water may include temporary licensed launches would decline if the may affect global warming include increases in available metals and U.S. were no longer in the commercial water vapor and CO2. The estimated temporary decreases in pH. For each of space launch market. However, it is water vapor and CO2 emissions from the six environment types evaluated in more likely that companies in need of LVs constitute a very small fraction of the PEIS, the buffering capacity of the launch services would procure these emissions of these substances from soil and water were found to be services from another country. This other sources. Consequently, as sufficient to prevent significant impacts alternative would prohibit the FAA discussed in Section 5.1.2 of the PEIS, from launches (see Sections 5.3.2 and from overseeing, licensing, and the impacts of LV emissions on global 5.3.3 of the PEIS). warming are expected to be regulating launch and reentry sites as Biological Resources carried out by U.S. citizens or within insignificant. In this analysis, no the United States. In addition, the FAA impacts are predicted to the mesosphere Chronic impacts could result from could not fulfill its mandated during normal launches because air subtle changes in habitat and the responsibility for encouraging emissions are not an issue in this region potential for bioaccumulation (a facilitating and promoting launches by of the atmosphere. Some exhaust progressive increase of the bodily the private sector. products from LVs generated during content of a toxic compound) of There are three major categories of launch and vehicle flight have been pollutants that may be released into the environmental impacts examined for the found to have a temporary effect on environment from launch-related preferred alternative, more electron concentrations in the F layer of activities. Impacts to biological environmentally-friendly propellants the ionosphere. However, as discussed resources from repeated LV emissions alternative, and no action alternative; in Section 5.1.5, these effects have been close to the source can include fish kills they include: Atmospheric, noise, and found to dissipate quickly (within and/or mortality of terrestrial fauna. other environmental impacts. The minutes) and are therefore found to be Flora in the vicinity of the launch site atmospheric category analyzes impacts insignificant. may be affected by the launch exhaust to air quality, and includes an analysis products or from combustion products Noise Impacts of acid rain, ozone depletion, and global associated with catastrophic events. warming. The noise category includes The noise impacts of the preferred However, a study of the impact of ten an analysis of launch, in-flight, and alternative were also considered, years of Space Shuttle launches on the reentry noise on various human and particularly the impact of sonic booms. local biota, soil, and water has not animal receptors. The final category, A sonic boom is the noise created by a found significant impacts on these other environmental effects includes shock wave when an aircraft or LV is resources. analyses of impacts to water, land, and traveling overhead faster than the speed Launches also present a potential for biota, as well as analyses of of sound. As discussed in Section 5.2.1 acute impacts to fish and wildlife in the socioeconomic, historical, cultural and of the PEIS, there was no indication of vicinity of the launch pad resulting from archaeological impacts. Cumulative possible health impacts from the noise, blast debris, heat, and toxic impacts are discussed in a separate preferred alternative. While annoyance chemicals. The possibility of acute noise section of this document. The data have not been validated, people impacts depends on the size and type of environmental impacts of each may be more sensitive to sonic booms LVs being launched or reentering. In alternative are summarized in detail than previously thought. The type of general, the potential for impacts to below. interference and the activities that biological resources from LV heat
VerDate 11
exhaust is mitigated by the use of berms examined for each atmospheric layer. would reduce the impacts of licensed or shields. In addition, environmental The impacts from this alternative to the launches on soils in the vicinity of monitoring following launch failures mesosphere and ionosphere are launch pads (see Section 6.3 of the has not indicated discernable impacts expected to be the same as the impacts PEIS). Space Shuttle and other on sensitive receptors. from the preferred alternative, because government launches using solids There is a remote possibility that this alternative does not affect emissions would still have an impact on soil pH, jettisoned motors, stages, or fairings in those regions of the atmosphere. but the cumulative effects from these from an expendable launch vehicle Potential impacts to the troposphere and launches, as a result of fewer licensed could strike a marine animal when stratosphere from this alternative are launches involving only solid impacting the ocean during normal discussed below. It is important to note propellants, would not be as great. The flight operations. According to the that conclusive data and analyses additional impact to local water marine animal strike probability regarding the specific impacts of resources near a launch site from FAA analysis conducted for the PEIS, fewer emissions from multiple combination licensed launches would also be than 0.5 animal strikes are expected propellant propulsion systems (e.g., reduced (see Section 6.4 of the PEIS). annually, even when all launch activity liquid and solid combinations) currently Additionally, coastal waters that could is summed and a summation is done do not exist. Because the environmental be affected in the event of an accident across all species over both the Atlantic impacts from multi-propellant or hybrid would experience reduced impacts due and Pacific Oceans (see Appendix B of propulsion systems have not been to the lack of use of solely SRM the PEIS). For the purpose of this PEIS, adequately characterized at this time, propelled vehicles. this analysis relies on existing, available a ‘‘strike’’ refers to harassment, injury, Biological Resources or death of a marine animal. The strike data on emissions from conventional probability estimate does not indicate propellant systems. Ongoing U.S. Air Vegetation changes due to acid potential for a significant impact from Force and industry research in this area deposition from the ground cloud at launches. may alter the future understanding of launch, as well as wildlife impacts from the cumulative atmospheric impacts of launch activities, would be reduced. Socioeconomic Impacts multi-propellant propulsion systems However, the demand for launches Development and growth of a and the relative atmospheric impacts of could lead to construction of launch commercial launch industry would have these different systems. sites outside the U.S. As discussed in a beneficial economic impact. Jobs The expected emission load of HCl in Section 6.5 of the PEIS, these launch associated with the commercial launch the stratosphere for all projected U.S. sites could potentially have a significant industry tend to be technology-based licensed launches from 2000 through impact on biodiversity if they are sited and require highly skilled workers with 2010 (a period of 11 years) is on or near endangered or biologically specialized training and education. approximately 1,787 tons, and fragile ecosystems (i.e., rain forests or additional free Chlorine (Cl) load is 24 habitats of endangered species). The Environmental Justice Impacts tons. This averages to approximately probability of jettisoned expendable LV The PEIS considered environmental 165 tons of HCl and Cl load to the sections (e.g., payload fairings or stages) justice impacts in a general, non-site stratosphere from U.S. licensed striking a marine animal would remain specific manner. Thus, environmental launches per year. In comparison, under remote under this alternative. the preferred alternative, the emission justice effects within the scope of this Socioeconomic Impacts analysis are related to socioeconomic load of HCl in the stratosphere for all effects. The PEIS did not identify any projected U.S. licensed launches from Development and growth of the significant environmental impacts from 2000 through 2010 is approximately commercial launch industry would have the preferred alternative. Therefore, no 2,292 tons, and additional free Cl load a beneficial economic impact; limiting disproportionately high and adverse is 31 tons. This averages to this development and growth by environmental impacts on any low- approximately 211 tons of HCl and Cl preferentially licensing a subset of income or minority populations are load to the stratosphere from U.S. launches of LVs would reduce the expected as a result of the preferred licensed launches per year. In general, magnitude of this beneficial impact alternative. Impacts to individuals and emissions of concern resulting from relative to the preferred alternative (see communities would be considered in potential accidents on the launch pad Section 6.6 of the PEIS). site-specific environmental and from activation of flight termination Environmental Justice Impacts documentation. This analysis assumes systems would also be reduced under this more environmentally-friendly This PEIS considered environmental that the preferred alternative would justice impacts in a general non site- result in positive socioeconomic effects, propellant combinations alternative, because LVs using only solid propellant specific manner. Thus, environmental including maintaining or increasing justice effects within the scope of this current employment levels in the U.S. systems would no longer be licensed by the FAA (see Section 6.1 of the PEIS). analysis are related to the launch industry, it is assumed that these socioeconomic effects. Because this positive effects would at a minimum not Noise Impacts analysis has shown no significant produce disproportionate negative environmental effects from this impacts on minority or low-income As discussed in Section 6.2 of the PEIS, due to the expected decrease in alternative and further assumes that this populations (see Section 5.5 of the alternative would result in positive PEIS). the number of U.S. licensed launches, this alternative is anticipated to have socioeconomic effects (although less More Environmentally-Friendly fewer noise impacts than those positive relative to the preferred Propellant Combination Alternative associated with the preferred alternative), including maintaining or alternative. increasing current employment levels in Atmospheric Impacts the U.S. launch industry, it is assumed Potential impacts to the atmosphere Land and Water that these positive effects would, at a from the more environmentally-friendly The more environmentally-friendly minimum, not produce disproportionate propellant combination alternative were propellant combinations alternative negative impacts on minority racial,
VerDate 11
ethnic, or economically-disadvantaged programs would initiate commercial sited on or near endangered or populations (see Section 6.7 of the launches to meet this worldwide biologically fragile ecosystems (i.e., PEIS). demand. rainforest or habitats of endangered species). The probability of jettisoned No Action Alternative Atmospheric Impacts expendable launch vehicle sections Because 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, ch. It is possible that if no licensed (e.g., spent SRMs, payload fairings, or 701—Commercial Space Launch launches could take place from the U.S., stages) striking a marine animal would Activities, formerly the Commercial then fewer LVs would be launched remain remote. Space Launch Act (CSLA) requires overall worldwide unless existing launches by U.S. entities to be licensed, foreign launch programs could expand Socioeconomic Impacts the U.S. launch industry would be rapidly to accommodate increased The no action alternative could have unable to continue LV launch launch requirements. As discussed in negative socioeconomic impacts by operations regardless of their location, Section 7.1 of the PEIS, this would forcing all payloads currently planned under the no action alternative. Chapter result in an overall decrease globally in for licensed launches in the U.S. to use 701 requires FAA to license a launch if launch emissions that potentially affect foreign launch vehicles (see Section 7.6 the applicant complies and will the atmosphere. However, based on the of the PEIS). As a result, U.S. jobs would continue to comply with chapter 701 comparison of capacity and propulsion be lost to foreign entities to support and implementing regulations. 49 U.S.C. systems, the transfer of launches from their launch activities and programs. It 70105. One of the purposes of chapter U.S. LVs to foreign LVs (e.g., Zenit is also possible that U.S. 701 is to provide that the Secretary of (Russia), Proton (Russia), Ariane IV and telecommunication companies and Transportation, and therefore the FAA, V (France), Long March (China), H2 other U.S. space users would be given pursuant to delegations, oversees and (Japan), GSLV (India), PSLV (India), and lower priority for launching satellites, coordinates the conduct of launch and M–V (Japan)) could cause an increase in creating a potential for scheduling reentry, and issues and transfers atmospheric emissions overall. Any problems and loss of competitiveness in licenses authorizing those activities. 49 specific effects that might be associated the global technology market. U.S.C. 70104 (b)(3). The agency has the with launches such as the potential for Environmental Justice Impacts authority to prevent a launch if it acid rain, and highly transient and decides that the launch would localized stratospheric ozone depletion, The no action alternative would jeopardize public health and safety, would occur outside the U.S. However, create no significant environmental safety of property, or national security the potential for global warming and effects and thus would not or a foreign policy interest of the United stratospheric ozone depletion would disproportionately affect minority or States. 49 U.S.C. 70104 (c). Not remain essentially the same based on disadvantaged populations. However, licensing any U.S. launches would not the assumption that an equal number of because the no action alternative would be consistent with chapter 701 in this launches would occur in either case. have negative socioeconomic impacts context. Additionally, the no action that may result in a loss of U.S. jobs to alternative could negatively impact the Noise Impacts foreign entities, it is possible that national security and foreign policy The prospect of noise and sonic minority or low-income populations interests of the United States. Some U.S. booms near U.S. launch sites from could suffer some disproportionate government payloads have been licensed launches would be eliminated effects of these job losses (see Section launched by the U.S. commercial (see Section 7.2 of the PEIS). 7.7 of the PEIS). launch industry. Therefore, if launches were not licensed, the overall reduction Land and Water Potential Cumulative Impacts of in available payload capacity could, in If no licensed launches occurred, Launches a worst case scenario, impact the U.S. there would be no impact on the soils This section considers the potential government’s ability to launch needed in the vicinity of launch pads at U.S. cumulative impacts of launch events. payloads and negatively affect programs launch sites. Space Shuttle and other Cumulative impacts are defined as that rely on access to space. government launches would still have impacts to the environment which Additionally, parties that had planned an impact on soil pH, but the result from the incremental impact of to launch from U.S. launch sites would cumulative effects from these launches, the action when added to other past, be forced to find alternatives potentially absent licensed launches, would not be present, and reasonably foreseeable exposing sensitive technologies to as great (see Section 7.3 of the PEIS). future actions regardless of what agency countries with competing economic and Similarly, the prospect of local water (Federal or non-Federal) or person security interests. impacts near U.S. licensed launch sites undertakes such other actions (40 CFR Under the no action alternative it was would be eliminated, and coastal waters 1508.7). Only the cumulative assumed that the same number of that could be affected in the event of an atmospheric impacts of licensed worldwide commercial launches would accident would no longer be impacted launches combined with all other take place. However, because the FAA (see Section 7.4 of the PEIS). launches worldwide were analyzed. would cease issuing licenses for Other cumulative impacts, including Biological Resources launches by U.S. companies, the most cumulative noise and local launches would take place using foreign Vegetation changes from the launch environmental impacts, would be site- launch providers and locations. In the ground cloud would be eliminated, as specific and are beyond the scope of this absence of access to licensed launches well as impacts to wildlife from launch PEIS. Other cumulative impacts would in the United States, it is likely that activities. However, the increased be considered in site-specific other countries with existing launch demand for launches could lead to documentation. programs (e.g., France, Russia, China, construction of launch sites outside the and Canada) would significantly expand U.S. As discussed in Section 7.5 of the Cumulative Atmospheric Impacts their programs to accommodate the PEIS, these launch sites could The cumulative impact of all demand. In addition, it is possible that potentially have a significant impact on tropospheric emissions loadings from countries without existing launch worldwide biodiversity if they were launches is relatively insignificant
VerDate 11
compared with industrial and natural resources, whether human or land • Planting tall and fast-growing trees emissions loadings to the troposphere resources, are expected to be committed around the perimeter of the launch site (see Section 8.1.1 of the PEIS). to the launching of LVs beyond those (e.g., poplar trees). As discussed in Section 8.1.2 of the that have been or will be addressed in • Constructing berms along roadways. PEIS, the cumulative impacts of site-specific environmental • Using lower engine power levels at launches on global warming and documentation. Basic commitments of liftoff, as appropriate. depletion of the stratospheric ozone natural and cultural resources for • Coordinating with U.S. Fish and layer are insignificant compared to other licensed launches are not different from Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries global industrial sources. The those necessary for many other research Service (NMFS) personnel regarding cumulative impact on stratospheric and development programs; they are appropriate local activities and ozone depletion from launches is far similar to the activities that have been monitoring of sensitive species. below and indistinguishable from the carried out in previous space program Water Quality. Possible actions to effects from other natural and man- activities (see Section 11 of the PEIS). mitigate the effects on water quality at made sources. launch sites include: The PEIS does not predict any Mitigation Measures • If surface or ground water is to be cumulative impacts to the mesosphere A variety of mitigation measures are withdrawn for fire protection, personnel or ionosphere (see Sections 8.1.3 and presented in the PEIS and selected deluge purposes, noise mitigation, or for 8.1.4 of the PEIS). The greater the measures could be implemented for potable water, studies may be number of vehicles that are launched, those projects for which site-specific undertaken to ensure the reservoir has the greater the potential for creating an adequate capacity. environmental analyses show the • ‘‘holes’’ in the ionosphere; however, potential for significant impacts. The Preparing spill contingency plans based on available data indicating that PEIS specifically presented mitigation that are updated as frequently as this effect is temporary, the cumulative measures for noise, water quality, air needed. • Containment structures can be impacts to the ionosphere are assumed quality, solid and hazardous waste, constructed around storage facilities to to be extremely small. cultural and historical resources, prevent a leak from impacting surface or When an accident occurs near the biological resources, and orbital debris ground water. launch pad or a launch anomaly forces (for detailed discussion see Sections 9.1, • Contoured land or catchment basins the use of in-flight termination 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, and 9.7, can be put in place to collect excess capabilities (if equipped), there is a respectively, of the PEIS). Monitoring water from flame suppression or noise cumulative effect on air quality, may be appropriate at individual launch suppression activities to prevent runoff potential global warming, and sites, such as water sampling and into bodies of water. stratospheric ozone depletion (see analyses, archeological surveys of areas Section 8.1.5 of the PEIS). For accidents • Recycle or reuse water generated with historic artifacts, and biological and used on site. that occur in the stratosphere, HCl and species surveys by specialists to monitor nitrogen oxides emissions could • Marine pollution abatement the health and numbers of biological measures may include: Deployment of potentially contribute to stratospheric species of concern. ozone depletion, while carbon dioxide booms, use of dispersion chemicals, emissions could potentially contribute Examples of mitigation measures are collection of debris, and to global warming. Although on a described below. implementation of a monitoring cumulative basis the likelihood of Noise. Research and guidelines program. accidents occurring increases as the regarding noise harassment and injury Air Quality. Possible actions to number of launches increases, accidents to threatened or endangered species are mitigate the effects on air quality at involving launch vehicles are relatively evolving. Launch personnel responsible launch sites include: • uncommon events primarily because for environmental health and safety Using environmentally-friendly launches of these vehicles are should keep abreast of advances in this propellants, as feasible. • infrequent events especially as area, and take active measures to avoid Launching in optimal weather and compared to other traditional modes of levels established as inducing behavior wind conditions to maximize the rate of transportation. modification or injury (e.g., certain sea dissipation of the ground cloud while state conditions may be associated with minimizing the potential impacts to Cumulative Noise Impacts less noise impacts, as well as certain sensitive receptors. In general, the potential cumulative slower speeds). Possible actions to • Participating in emissions banking/ impacts of noise from LV launches are mitigate the effects of noise at launch trading programs. expected to be local effects that are sites include: Research is continuing in several expected to impact the area around the • Orientating the flame bucket away areas vital to mitigating the potential air launch pad (see Section 8.2 of the PEIS). from sensitive receptor areas. impacts of launches. As additional However, an important possible • Using a deflector sheet on the flame information becomes available regarding cumulative noise impact might include bucket. currently unresolved research questions, changes in the migrating route and • this information should be used to Using a deluge system to suppress implement appropriate air quality habitat selection of certain marine engine ignition noise. animals exposed to repeated mitigation measures. Examples of • Constructing blast fences around occurrences of sonic booms caused by current unresolved research questions the launch site perimeter. the flight and reentry of LVs. include: (1) The influence of local • Restricting launches to optimal stratospheric meteorology in ozone Irreversible and Irretrievable seasons (e.g., launching only during depletion related to LV emissions; (2) Commitment of Resources non-nesting or non-migratory seasons, size distributions and relative influence The launch of LVs requires the depending on the species of concern). of alumina versus soot emissions; (3) commitment of natural resources, • Restricting launches to optimal U.S. LOx/kerosene propellant systems including the consumption of mineral times during the day (e.g., preferably ozone loss mechanism; (4) emissions resources. No additional cultural mid-day). and potential ozone-depleting
VerDate 11
differences between U.S. and Russian should also include proper containment chemical, pressure, and kinetic energy; LOx/kerosene motors; and (5) impacts of all chemicals and an adequate spill and (c) Stored energy will be removed from emissions from pure (no SRM) preparedness program, including by depleting residual fuel and leaving i LOx/kerosene LV propellant systems. effective emergency and disaster plans all fuel line valves open, venting any Solid and Hazardous Waste. Possible to minimize the effects of accidents. pressurized system, leaving all batteries actions to mitigate the effects of solid Specific mitigation measures to protect in a permanent discharge state, and and hazardous wastes at launch sites biological resources at launch sites removing any remaining source of include: might also include the following: stored energy. Other equivalent • Taking advantage of all pollution • Relocating endangered or procedures may be approved in the prevention opportunities, and threatened animals. course of the licensing process. • implementing an active pollution Banking wetlands. Additional mitigation measures may be • prevention plan and reward system. Using barriers (e.g., fencing) to employed to shield against debris • Implementing a proactive recycling minimize animal intrusion in the area or particles up to 1 cm in diameter. For program for solid and some hazardous to keep species in place and away from debris of larger sizes, current shielding wastes to minimize the amounts the launch location. ii • concepts may become impractical. generated. Building new habitat (habitat Advanced shielding concepts may make • Purchasing environmentally- substitution) or improving existing shielding against particles up to 2 cm friendly products whenever possible. habitat. diameter reasonable, but it is possible • Implementing an effective lighting • Maintaining appropriate site- that the only useful alternative strategy policy for management of exterior lights, specific clean-up materials in for large particles will be avoidance, emphasizing the use of low-pressure accordance with spill prevention and which is feasible for average size sodium lights as opposed to lights that preparedness procedures (e.g., pH spacecraft, but for very large spacecraft emit ultraviolet, violet-blue, and blue- neutralizers). collision probabilities are sufficiently • Developing a comprehensive green wavelengths. • Active monitoring (and high that an alternate means of Environmental Management System iii implementing appropriate action plans protection may be required. consistent with ISO 14000 guidelines. Launch planning may help to protect Cultural and Historical Resources. using the results of monitoring) to offset any unanticipated effects. launch vehicles and payloads from The most important mitigation action to • potential damage. Although there are no protect cultural and historical resources Optimally directing the launch pad flame duct so as to minimize impacts to measures to significantly modify the is to restrict activities and disturbances current debris environment, there are at launch sites, as much as is feasible, vegetation from scorching. • Coordinating early in the proposed options available to control, limit, or to limited areas in order to maintain project with U.S. Fish and Wildlife, reduce the growth of orbital debris in near-natural conditions on as much of NMFS, and/or state wildlife officials the future including: the site as possible. In addition, • regarding any concerns including: Local Obtaining a conjunction on launch consultation with appropriate state activities and monitoring of sensitive assessment from U.S. Space Command historic preservation offices, tribal species (e.g., conducting operations to (See 14 CFR 417.233). historic preservation offices, local • avoid sensitive breeding, spawning, or Booster and payload design to communities, and impacted populations weaning seasons). minimize release of debris. should be conducted to identify and Orbital Debris. Although orbital • Preventing spontaneous explosions further mitigate possible effects on debris is in outer space, it is possible of launch vehicle bodies and spacecraft. cultural and historical resources. that it could reenter Earth’s atmosphere. • Use of particle-free propellants. Specific mitigation actions should Likely impacts would be insignificant • Disposal or de-orbiting of spent include the following: upper stages or spacecraft. • but the FAA does require applicants to Whenever possible, avoid demonstrate certain safety measures in • Careful mission design to actively launching in culturally or historically order to receive license approval. While remove debris. sensitive areas. these launch plan features are not • Launch vehicles and spacecraft can • Relocate resources, if possible and required for environmental purposes be designed so that they are litter-free approved by stakeholders and public and the orbital debris outside the Earth’s (i.e., they dispose of separations authorities. atmosphere are not an impact category, devices, payload shrouds, and other • Protect resources from launch the requirements can have a beneficial expendable hardware at a low enough impacts with blast fences, enclosures, mitigating effect. The more orbital altitude and velocity that they do not and other physical control measures. debris, the greater the likelihood debris become orbital). • Coordinate with the state historic could reenter Earth’s atmosphere; and • Stage-to-stage separation devices preservation office, tribal historic therefore efforts to minimize the amount and spacecraft protective devices such preservation offices, and other local of debris have an added benefit beyond as lens covers and other potential debris authorities, as appropriate and meet safety as mitigating detrimental impacts. can be kept captive to the stage or proactively with members of the public. To obtain safety approval, an applicant spacecraft with lanyards or other Biological Resources. The most must demonstrate for any proposed provisions to minimize debris. important mitigation action to protect launch that for all launch vehicle stages • When stages and spacecraft do not biological resources is to restrict or components that reach Earth orbit— have the capability to de-orbit, they can activities and disturbances at launch (a) There will be no unplanned physical be made as inert as feasible by expelling sites, as much as is feasible, to limited contact between the vehicle or its all propellants and pressurants and areas in order to maintain near-natural components and the payload after conditions on as much of the site as payload separation; (b) Debris ii National Science and Technology Council. possible. Generic mitigation measures generation will not result from the Interagency Report on Orbital Debris. November 1995. i Ross, Martin. The Aerospace Corporation. conversion of energy sources into iii National Science and Technology Council. Rocket Impacts on Stratospheric Ozone: Program energy that fragments the vehicle or its Interagency Report on Orbital Debris. November Review. March 25, 1998 Briefing. components. Energy sources include 1995.
VerDate 11
assuring that batteries are protected purpose and need for commercial access Building 10A (the ‘‘FAA Building’’), 800 from spontaneous explosion. to space. In addition, although some Independence Ave., SW., Washington, • No unplanned physical contact environmental effects may be greater DC 20591. between the vehicle or its components under the preferred alternative as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and the payload after payload compared to the no action or more Linda Williams, Office of Rulemaking, separation. environmentally-friendly propellant 800 Independence Avenue, SW, • When the mission requires delivery combinations alternative, the impacts Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) of a spacecraft which itself has a are still expected to be less than 267–9685. maneuver capability, two alternatives significant. For the reasons summarized SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant are possible. earlier in this Record of Decision and to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 1. Leave the upper stage attached for supported by detailed discussion in the Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– delivery of the spacecraft to orbit to PEIS, the FAA has selected the preferred 463, 5 U.S.C. App II), notice is hereby maximize its maneuver capability. alternative. given of a meeting of the Aviation 2. Separate the spacecraft at suborbital The information in this PEIS is not Rulemaking Advisory Committee on Air velocity so that the stage decays intended to address all site-specific Carrier Operations to be held on October naturally and the spacecraft uses its launch issues. Appropriate site-specific 25, 2001. onboard propulsion to establish its environmental documentation would be The agenda will include: orbit. developed in conjunction with the • All launch sites would comply with Airplane Performance Working Group licensing process. The PEIS is intended final report. any permit conditions imposed by to serve as a tiering document to assist • regulatory authorities. Extended Range Operations with launch operators in preparing site- Two-Engine Aircraft (ETOPS) Prepared by Michon Washington. specific documentation. Dated: October 5, 2001. Working (ETOPS) Working Group I have carefully considered the FAA’s status report. Recommended by Herb Bachner. goals and objectives in relation to the Attendance is open to the interested Dated: October 5, 2001. programmatic launch actions discussed public but may be limited by the space in the PEIS, including the purpose and Decision and Order available. Members of the public must need to be served, the alternative means The more environmentally-friendly make arrangements in advance to of achieving them, the environmental propellant combinations alternative is present oral statements at the meeting or impacts of these alternatives at a broad, defined as preferentially licensing those may present written statements to the programmatic level, and the mitigation vehicles that are not solely propelled by committee at any time. Arrangements measures available to preserve and SRMs. The number of launches using may be made by contacting the person enhance the environment as needed on liquid, liquid/solid, or hybrid propellant listed under the heading FOR FURTHER a site-specific basis. Based upon the systems was assumed to remain INFORMATION CONTACT. record of this proposed Federal action, unchanged under this alternative. Thus, Sign and oral interpretation can be and under the authority delegated to me the total number of FAA-licensed made available at the meeting, as well by the Administrator of the FAA, I find launches in the U.S. would decrease as an assistive listening device, if that the action in this Record of substantially under this alternative. It requested 10 calendar days before the Decision is reasonably supported. was assumed that the decrease in U.S. meeting. licensed launches that use only solid Issued in Washington, DC on: October 5, If you are in need of assistance or propellants would be compensated for 2001. repair a reasonable accommodation for by an increase in these types of Patricia G. Smith, this event, please contact the person launches elsewhere in the world. Associate Administrator for Commercial listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Because 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, ch. Space Transportation. CONTACT. 701—Commercial Space Launch [FR Doc. 01–25754 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, Activities, formerly the Commercial BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 2001. Space Launch Act (CSLA) requires Louis C. Cusimano, launches by U.S. entities to be licensed, Assistant Executive Director for Air Carrier the U.S. launch industry would be DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Operations, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory unable to continue LV launch Committee. Federal Aviation Administration operations regardless of their location [FR Doc. 01–25756 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] under the no action alternative. Not Aviation Rulemaking Advisory BILLING CODE 4910–13–M licensing any U.S. launches would not Committee Meeting on Air Carrier be consistent with chapter 701 in this Operations context. Under the no action alternative DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION it was assumed that the same number of AGENCY: Federal Aviation worldwide commercial launches would Administration (FAA) DOT. Federal Aviation Administration take place. However, because the FAA ACTION: Notice of meeting. would cease issuing licenses for U.S. Research, Engineering and launches, the launches would take place SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice Development (R, E&D) Advisory using foreign launch providers and to advise the public of a meeting of the Committee Federal Aviation Administration locations. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Neither the more environmentally- Administration, DOT. Committee to discuss air carrier friendly propellant combinations ACTION: Notice of meeting. alternative nor the no action alternative operations issues. would enable the FAA to fully meet DATES: The meeting will be held on Pursuant to section 10(A)(2) of the projected demand for increased access October 25, 2001, at 10 a.m. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. to commercial space transportation. The ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in L. 92–463; 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is preferred alternative does fulfill the Conference Room 833, Federal Office hereby given of a meeting of the FAA
VerDate 11
Research, Engineering and Development collect information and also helps RSPA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (R, E&D) Advisory Committee. ensure that LNG facilities are operated Name: Research, Engineering & in a safe manner. Research and Special Programs Development Advisory Committee. DATES: Comments on this notice must be Administration Time and Date: October 30—9 a.m.– received by December 11, 2001 to be [Docket Number RSPA–98–4957; Notice 31] 5 p.m., October31—10 a.m.–5 p.m. assured of consideration. Place: Holiday Inn Rossyln Westpark ADDRESSES: Comments should identify Submission for OMB Review; Hotel, 1900 North Forth Myer Drive, the docket number of this notice, RSPA– Comment Request Arlington, Virginia 2209. Purpose: On October 30 from 9 a.m.– 98–4957. Comments can be mailed to Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of ACTION: Request for public comments 5 p.m. and October 31 from 10 a.m.–12 and OMB approval. noon the meeting agenda will include Transportation, Plaza 401, 400 Seventh receiving guidance from the Committee Street SW., Washington, DC 20590– AGENCY: Research and Special Programs for FAA’s research and development 0001. You should submit the original Administration, DOT. investments in the areas of air traffic and one copy. If you wish to receive SUMMARY: In accordance with the services, airports, aircraft safety, confirmation of receipts of your Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the security, human factors and comments you must include a stamped Research and Special Programs environment and energy. A joint session self-addressed postcard. The Dockets Administration (RSPA) is publishing a will be held on October 31 from 1 p.m. Facility is open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., notice in the Federal Register to 5 p.m. with NASA’s Aerospace Monday through Friday , except on announcing its intention to request a Technology Advisory Committee. The Federal holidays. In addition, the public renewal of a currently approved planned agenda includes briefings on may also submit or review comments by information collection in support of the NASA’s Blueprint for Aeronautics, a accessing the Docket Management Office of Pipeline Safety Recordkeeping budget synopsis by both NASA and System’s homepage at http:// for Gas Pipeline Operators. This notice FAA, and a discussion on issues and dms.dot.gov. requests comments from gas pipeline Type of Information Request: activities that impact both groups. operators regarding the burden Attendance is open to the interested Reinstatement of an information associated with providing public but limited to space available. collection. recordkeeping information to RSPA. Title of Information Collection: Persons wishing to attend the meeting The feedback provided in response to Recordkeeping for Liquid Natural Gas or obtain information should contact this notice will assist RSPA in assessing (LNG) Facilities. how it collects this information and also Gloria Dunderman at the Federal OMB Approval Number: 2137–0048. Aviation Administration, AAR–200, 800 Frequency: On occasion. will ensure that gas pipelines are Independence Avenue, SW., Use: This collection is used by RSPA operated in a safe manner. Washington, DC 20591 (202) 267–8937. to ensure that LNG facilities are being DATES: Comments on this notice must be Members of the public may present a operated in a safe manner. received by December 11, 2001, to be written statement to the Committee at Estimated Number of Respondents: assured of consideration. any time. 150. ADDRESSES: Comments should identify Issued in Washington, DC, on October 9, Respondents: LNG facility operators. the docket number of this notice, RSPA– 2001. Total Annual Hours Requested: 98–4957. Comments can be mailed to Herman A. Rediess, 18,000 hours. Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of Director, Office of Aviation Research. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Transportation, Plaza 401, 400 Seventh [FR Doc. 01–25757 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Marvin Fell, Office of Pipeline Safety, Street SW, Washington, DC 20590–0001. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Research and Special Programs You should submit the original and one Administration, Department of copy. If you wish to receive Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW, confirmation of receipt of you DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Washington, DC 20950, (202) 366–6205 comments you must include a stamped or by e-mail at [email protected]. self-addressed postcard. The Dockets Research and Special Programs Interested persons are invited to send Facility is open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Administration comments regarding the burden Monday through Friday, except on [Docket RSPA–98–4957; Notice 30] estimate or any other aspect of this Federal holidays. In addition, the public collection of information, including any may also submit or review comments by Submission for OMB Approval and of the following: (1) The necessity and accessing the Docket Management Public Comment Request utility of the proposed information System’s homepage at http:/ collection for the proper performance of dms.dot.gov. ACTION: Notice of request to renew an the agency’s functions; (2) the accuracy FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: existing information collection. of the estimated burden; (3) ways to Marvin Fell, Office of Pipeline Safety, enhance the quality, utility, and clarity SUMMARY: Research and Special Programs As required by the Paperwork of the information to be collected; and Administration, Department of Reduction Act the Research and Special (4) the use of automated collection Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW Programs Administration (RSPA) is techniques or other forms of information Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366–6205, announcing its intention to request technology to minimize the information or by e-mail at [email protected]. renewal of an existing information collection burden. collection, Recordkeeping for Liquid SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Natural Gas Facilities (LNG) . This Issued in Washington, DC on October 5, Title: Recordkeeping for Gas Pipeline notice requests that LNG operators 2001. Operators. submit comments to indicate the burden Stacey L. Gerard, OMB Number: 2137–0049. associated with submitting this Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. Type of Request: Renewal of a information. This information collection [FR Doc. 01–25652 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] currently approved information helps RSPA assess how it can better BILLING CODE 4910–60–P collection.
VerDate 11
Abstract: 49 U.S.C. 60117 explains these forms is used to calculate grants (2) the accuracy of the estimated that in order to enable the Secretary of to states to assist them in monitoring burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, Transportation to decide whether a pipeline safety. This notice requests that utility, and clarity of the information to person transporting gas is complying states submit comments to RSPA to be collected; and (4) the use of with Federal safety standards this statue indicate the burden associated with automated collection techniques or requires the maintenance of records and providing the information requested in other forms of information technology to reports and that these and other the certification and agreement forms. minimize the information collection requested information be provided to This information helps RSPA assess burden. the Department of Transportation upon how it can better collect information Issued in Washington, DC on October 5, request. These records help ascertain and also helps ensure that states are 2001. compliance and provide information for receiving adequate assistance to further Stacey L. Gerard, incident investigation. pipeline safety. Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. Estimate of Burden: The average FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 01–25654 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] burden hours per operator is 41.5. Marvin Fell, Office of Pipeline Safety, BILLING CODE 4910–60–P Respondents: Gas Pipeline operators. Research and Special Programs Estimated Number of Respondents: Administration, Department of 22,700. Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, Estimated Total Annual Burden on DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202) 366– Respondents: 940,991. Comments are invited on: (a) The 6205 or by e-mail at Surface Transportation Board [email protected]. need for the proposed collection of [STB Docket No. AB–55 (Sub–No. 598X)] information for the proper performance DATES: Comments on this notice must be of the functions of the agency, including received by December 11, 2001 to be CSX Transportation, Inc.— whether the information will have assured of consideration. Abandonment Exemption—in practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the ADDRESSES: Comments should identify Greenbrier County, WV agency’s estimate of the burden of the the docket number of this notice, RSPA– proposed collection of information 98–4957. Comments can be mailed to CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) has including the validity of the Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of filed a notice of exemption under 49 methodology and assumptions used; (c) Transportation, Plaza 401, 400 Seventh CFR 1152 Subpart F—Exempt ways to enhance the quality, utility and Street SW., Washington, DC 20590– Abandonments to abandon a 13.6-mile clarity of the information to be 0001. You should submit the original line of railroad between Rubert Junction collected; and (d) ways to minimize the and one copy. If you wish to receive at milepost CAH–7.2 and Clearco at burden of the collection of information confirmation of receipts of your milepost CAH–20.8 in Greenbrier on those who are to respond, including comments you must include a stamped County, WV. The line traverses United the use of appropriate automated, self-addressed postcard. The Dockets States Postal Service Zip Codes 25984, electronic, mechanical, or other Facility is open from 10 A.M. to 5 p.m., 25958 and possibly 24931. technological collection techniques. Monday through Friday , except on CSXT has certified that: (1) No local traffic has moved over the line for at Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, Federal holidays. In addition, the public may also submit or review comments by least 2 years; (2) there has been no 2001. overhead traffic on the line; (3) no Stacey L. Gerard, accessing the Docket Management System’s homepage at http:/ formal complaint filed by a user of rail Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. service on the line (or by a state or local [FR Doc. 01–25653 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] dms.dot.gov. Type of Information Collection government entity acting on behalf of BILLING CODE 4910–60–P Request: Renewal of Existing Collection. such user) regarding cessation of service Title of Information Collection: over the line either is pending with the Surface Transportation Board (Board) or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Certification and Agreement Forms for the Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline with any U.S. District Court or has been Research and Special Programs Safety Program. decided in favor of complainant within Administration OMB Approval Number: 2137–0584. the 2-year period; and (4) the Frequency: Annually. requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7 [Docket: RSPA–98–4957; Notice 32] Use: This collection is used by RSPA (environmental reports), 49 CFR 1105.8 to ensure that state agencies attesting (historic reports), 49 CFR 1105.11 Submission for OMB Review; they have regulatory jurisdiction over (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 Comment Request pipeline safety, have adopted and are (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental ACTION: Submission for OMB review; complying with minimum Federal comment request. safety standards. This information is agencies) have been met. used to calculate grants to states. As a condition to this exemption, any AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Estimated Number of Respondents: employee adversely affected by the Administration, DOT. 61. abandonment and discontinuance shall SUMMARY: In compliance with the Respondents: State Agencies. be protected under Oregon Short Line R. requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of Total Annual Hours Requested: 3,660. Co.—Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Interested persons are invited to send 91 (1979). To address whether this the Research and Special Programs comments regarding the burden condition adequately protects affected Administration (RSPA), is publishing its estimated or any other aspect of this employees, a petition for partial intention to renew the collection of collection of information, including any revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) information for Certification and of the following subjects: (1) The must be filed. Provided no formal Agreement Forms for the Gas and necessity and utility of the proposed expression of intent to file an offer of Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety information collection for the proper financial assistance (OFA) has been Program. The information provided on performance of the agency’s functions; received, this exemption will be
VerDate 11
effective on October 13, 2001, unless Decided: October 3, 2001. OMB Number: Unassigned. stayed pending reconsideration. By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Form Number: TD F 90–22.55. Petitions to stay that do not involve Director, Office of Proceedings. Type of Review: New information environmental issues,1 formal Vernon A. Williams, collection. Affected Public: Business or other for- expressions of intent to file an OFA Secretary. under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2),2 and trail profit institutions. [FR Doc. 01–25541 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Estimated Number of Respondents: use/rail banking requests under 49 CFR BILLING CODE 4915–00–P 1152.29 must be filed by October 22, 8500. Estimated Total Annual Responses: 2001. Petitions to reopen or requests for 1 public use conditions under 49 CFR 8500. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Estimated Total Annual Burden 1152.28 must be filed by November 1, Hours: Reporting average of 30 minutes 2001, with: Surface Transportation Financial Crimes Enforcement Network per response; recordkeeping average of Board, Office of the Secretary, Case 15 minutes per response. Estimated total Control Unit, 1925 K Street, NW., Agency Information Collection; annual burden hours: Reporting burden Washington, DC 20423. Submission for OMB Review; A copy of any petition filed with the Comment Request; Registration of of 4250 hours; recordkeeping burden of 2125 hours, for an estimated combined Board should be sent to CSXT’s Money Services Business 2 representative: Paul R. Hitchcock, total of 6375 hours. An agency may not conduct or Assistant General Counsel, CSX AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement sponsor, and a person is not required to Transportation, Inc., 500 Water Street Network (FinCEN), Treasury. respond to, a collection of information J150, Jacksonville, FL 32202. ACTION: Submission for OMB review; If the verified notice contains false or comment request. unless the collection of information misleading information, the exemption displays a valid OMB control number. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Records required to be retained under is void ab initio. requirements of the Paperwork CSXT has filed an environmental the Bank Secrecy Act must be retained Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. report which addresses the effects, if for five years. Generally, information chapter 35), FinCEN hereby gives notice any, of the abandonment and collected pursuant to the Bank Secrecy that it plans to submit to the Office of Act is confidential, but may be shared discontinuance on the environment and Management and Budget (OMB) a historic resources. SEA will issue an as provided by law with regulatory and request to review the information law enforcement authorities. environmental assessment (EA) by collection in Form TD F 90–22.55, October 17, 2001. Interested persons Registration of Money Services Request for Comments may obtain a copy of the EA by writing Business. On October 10, 2000, FinCEN Comments submitted in response to to SEA (Room 500, Surface requested public comment on Form TD this notice will be summarized and/or Transportation Board, Washington, DC F 90–22.55 (65 FR 60246). included in the request for OMB 20423) or by calling SEA, at (202) 565– DATES: Written comments should be approval. All comments will become a 1552. Comments on environmental and received on or before November 13, matter of public record. Comments are historic preservation matters must be 2001 to be assured of consideration. invited on: (a) Whether the collection of filed within 15 days after the EA information is necessary for the proper becomes available to the public. ADDRESSES: You are invited to submit Environmental, historic preservation, written comments to FinCEN. In performance of the functions of the public use, or trail use/rail banking addition, you should send a copy of agency, including whether the conditions will be imposed, where your comments to the OMB desk officer. information shall have practical utility; appropriate, in a subsequent decision. Direct all written comments to: (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR FinCEN: Office of Chief Counsel, of the burden of the collection of 1152.29(e)(2), CSXT shall file a notice of Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, information; (c) ways to enhance the consummation with the Board to signify Department of the Treasury, P.O. Box quality, utility, and clarity of the that it has exercised the authority 1618, Vienna, Virginia 22183–1618, information to be collected; (d) ways to granted and fully abandoned its line. If Attention: PRA Comments—Registration minimize the burden of the collection of consummation has not been effected by of Money Services Business. Comments information on respondents, including CSXT’s filing of a notice of also may be submitted by electronic through the use of automated collection consummation by October 12, 2002, and mail to the following Internet address: techniques or other forms of information [email protected] with the there are no legal or regulatory barriers technology; and (e) estimates of capital caption in the body of the text, to consummation, the authority to or start-up costs and costs of operation, ‘‘Attention: PRA Comments— abandon will automatically expire. maintenance and purchase of services to Board decisions and notices are Registration of Money Services provide information. Business.’’ available on our Web site at Dated: October 4, 2001. OMB: Alexander T. Hunt, Office of www.stb.dot.gov. Information and Regulatory Affairs, James F. Sloan, Office of Management and Budget, New Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed Network. decision on environmental issues (whether raised Executive Office Building, Room 3208, by a party or by the Board’s Section of Washington, DC 20503. BILLING CODE 4820–03–P Environmental Analysis (SEA) in its independent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: investigation) cannot be made before the 1 The estimated number of responses is for the exemption’s effective date. See Exemption of Out- Requests for additional information year in which a registration form must be filed; of-Service Rail Lines, 5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any should be directed to Patrice Motz, because the form is generally required to be filed request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible FinCEN (800) 949–2732, or Cynthia only every other year, the estimated annual number so that the Board may take appropriate action before Clark, FinCEN (703) 905–3590. of responses would be lower. the exemption’s effective date. 2 The estimated burden is for the year in which 2 Each offer of financial assistance must be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: a registration form must be filed; because the form accompanied by the filing fee, which currently is Title: Registration of Money Services is generally required to be filed only every other set at $1000. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). Business. year, the estimated annual burden would be lower.
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
[FR Doc. 01–25609 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] following agenda. The agenda may be ACTION: Notice and request for BILLING CODE 4820–03–C modified prior to the meeting. comments.
Agenda SUMMARY: The Department of the DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (1) Merchandise Processing Fee Treasury, as part of its continuing effort Subcommittee to reduce paperwork and respondent Treasury Advisory Committee on (2) Office of Rules & Regulations burden, invites the general public and Commercial Operations of the U.S. Subcommittee other Federal agencies to take this Customs Service (3) Compliance Assessment Team opportunity to comment on proposed Subcommittee and/or continuing information AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury. (4) Import Data & Customs Entry collections, as required by the ACTION: Notice of meeting. Subcommittee; ACE (Automated Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. Commercial Environment) L. 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). SUMMARY: This notice announces the development; impact of bill S. 1214; Currently, the IRS is soliciting date, time, and location for a meeting of ‘‘Port and Maritime Security Act of comments concerning an existing final the Treasury Advisory Committee on 2001’’ regulation, REG–118620–97 (TD 8855), Commercial Operations (COAC), (5) Impact on Customs Operations Communications Excise Tax; Prepaid combining both the fourth meeting of stemming from heightened alert in Telephone Cards. terrorist activities the first COAC year, and the first DATES: Written comments should be (6) Update on Other Customs Matters meeting of the second COAC year of the received on or before December 11, 2001 current charter, and the provisional SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The to be assured of consideration. agenda for consideration by the meeting is open to the public; however, ADDRESSES: Committee. participation in the Committee’s Direct all written comments deliberations is limited to Committee to Garrick R. Shear, Internal Revenue DATES: The next meeting of the Treasury members, Customs and Treasury Service, room 5244, 1111 Constitution Advisory Committee on Commercial Department staff, and persons invited to Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. Operations of the U.S. Customs Service attend the meeting for special FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: will be held on Thursday, November 15, presentations. A person other than an Requests for additional information or 2001, starting at 9 a.m., the Department Advisory Committee member who copies of the regulation should be of the Treasury, Secretary’s Diplomatic wishes to attend the meeting should directed to Larnice Mack, (202) 622– Reception Room (Rm. 3311), located at contact Theresa Manning at (202) 622– 3179, Internal Revenue Service, room 15th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, 0220 or Helen Belt at (202) 622–0230. 5244, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., NW., in Washington, DC. The duration Washington, DC 20224. of the meeting will be the entire day. Dated: October 2, 2001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Timothy E. Skud, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Title: Communications Excise Tax; Gordana S. Earp, Deputy Director, Tariff Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Regulatory, Tariff, and Trade (Enforcement). Prepaid Telephone Cards. and Trade Affairs (Enforcement), Office OMB Number: 1545–1628. of the Under Secretary (Enforcement), [FR Doc. 01–25749 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Regulation Project Number: REG– Telephone: (202) 622–0336. BILLING CODE 4810–25–P 118620–97. The morning meeting will replace the Abstract: Carriers must keep certain COAC meeting which had been DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY information documenting their sales of scheduled for September 14 in Detroit, prepaid telephone cards to other carriers but was cancelled due to travel Internal Revenue Service to avoid responsibility for collecting tax. disruptions following the terrorist The regulations provide rules for the attacks on September 11. The afternoon [REG–118620–97] application of the communications session will cover the meeting that had Proposed Collection; Comment excise tax to prepaid telephone cards. been tentatively scheduled for Request for Regulation Project Current Actions: There are no changes December of this year. being made to this existing regulation. At this meeting, the Advisory AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Type of Review: Extension of a Committee is expected to pursue the Treasury. currently approved collection.
VerDate 11
Affected Public: Business or other for- SUMMARY: In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget, New profit organizations. requirements of the Paperwork Executive Office Building, Room 3208, Estimated Number of Respondents: Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Washington, D.C. 20503. 104. chapter 35), the Board and the OTS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Estimated Time Per Respondent: 20 (collectively, the ‘‘agencies’’), may not Additional information or a copy of the min. conduct or sponsor, and the respondent collections may be requested from: Estimated Total Annual Burden is not required to respond to, an OTS: Sally W. Watts, OTS Clearance Hours: 34. information collection unless it displays Officer, (202) 906–7380, e-mail address An agency may not conduct or a currently valid OMB control number. [email protected]. Office of sponsor, and a person is not required to The agencies, under the auspices of the Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, N.W., respond to, a collection of information Federal Financial Institutions Washington, D.C. 20552. unless the collection of information Examination Council (FFIEC), propose Board: Mary M. West, Federal Reserve displays a valid OMB control number. the discontinuance of two information Board Clearance Officer, (202) 452– Books or records relating to a collection collections, the Annual Report of Trust 3829, Division of Research and of information must be retained as long Assets (FFIEC 001) and the Annual Statistics, Board of Governors of the as their contents may become material Report of International Fiduciary Federal Reserve System, 20th and C in the administration of any internal Activities (FFIEC 006), effective with Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551. revenue law. Generally, tax returns and the December 31, 2001, report date. At Telecommunications Device for the Deaf tax return information are confidential, the end of the comment period, the (TDD) users may contact Capria as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. comments and recommendations Mitchell (202) 872–4984, Board of Request for Comments received will be analyzed to determine Governors of the Federal Reserve whether the FFIEC and the agencies System, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Comments submitted in response to should proceed with their plan to Washington, D.C. 20551. this notice will be summarized and/or discontinue the information collections. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: included in the request for OMB The agencies will then submit this approval. All comments will become a action to OMB for review and approval. Proposal to discontinue the following matter of public record. Comments are DATES: Comments must be submitted on currently approved collections of invited on: (a) Whether the collection of or before December 11, 2001. information: information is necessary for the proper ADDRESSES: Interested parties are Report Titles: Annual Report of Trust performance of the functions of the invited to submit written comments to Assets and Annual Report of agency, including whether the any or all of the agencies. All comments International Fiduciary Activities. information shall have practical utility; should refer to the OMB control Form Numbers: FFIEC 001 and FFIEC (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate number(s) and will be shared among the 006. of the burden of the collection of agencies. Frequency of Response: Annual. information; (c) ways to enhance the OTS: Submit any written comments Affected Public: Business or other for quality, utility, and clarity of the concerning this notice to Information profit. information to be collected; (d) ways to Collection Comments, Chief Counsel’s For OTS: minimize the burden of the collection of Office, Office of Thrift Supervision, OMB Number: 1550–0026 information on respondents, including 1700 G Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Number of Respondents: 101 (FFIEC through the use of automated collection 20552, Attention: 1550–0026, fax 001) techniques or other forms of information number (202) 906–6518, or e-mail to Estimated Average Time per technology; and (e) estimates of capital [email protected]. Response: 4.08 burden hours or start-up costs and costs of operation, OTS will post any comments and the (FFIEC 001) maintenance, and purchase of services related index on the OTS Internet Site Estimated Total Annual Burden: 412 to provide information. at www.ots.treas.gov. burden hours Approved: October 5, 2001. Board: Written comments on the For Board: Garrick R. Shear, FFIEC 001 and 006 should be addressed OMB Number: 7100–0031 IRS Reports Clearance Officer. to Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board Number of Respondents: 22 (FFIEC [FR Doc. 01–25758 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] of Governors of the Federal Reserve 001) BILLING CODE 4830–01–P System, 20th and C Streets, N.W., 0 (FFIEC 006) Washington, D.C. 20551, or delivered to Estimated Average Time per the Board’s mailroom between 8:45 a.m. Response: 3.82 burden hours DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY and 5:15 p.m., and to the security (FFIEC 001) control room outside of those hours. 4.0 burden Office of Thrift Supervision Both the mailroom and the security hours (FFIEC 006) control room are accessible from the Estimated Total Annual Burden: 84 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM courtyard entrance on 20th Street burden hours between Constitution Avenue and C General Description of Reports:This Proposed Agency Information Street, N.W. Comments received may be information collection (FFIEC 001 and Collection Activities: Comment inspected in room M-P-500 between FFIEC 006) is mandatory: 12 U.S.C. Request 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except as 1464 (for thrift institutions), and 12 AGENCIES: Office of Thrift Supervision provided in section 261.12 of the U.S.C. 248(a)(1) and (2) and 1844(c) (for (OTS), Treasury; and Board of Board’s Rules Regarding Availability of state member banks and bank holding Governors of the Federal Reserve Information, 12 CFR 261.12(a). companies). The data on the FFIEC 001 System (Board). A copy of the comments may also be are publicly available with the submitted to the OMB desk officer for exception of Schedule E - Fiduciary ACTION: Joint notice and request for the agencies: Alexander T. Hunt, Office Income Statement. The FFIEC 006, comment. of Information and Regulatory Affairs, collected by the Board, is given
VerDate 11
confidential treatment [5 U.S.C. institutions with trust activities report agencies and will be summarized or 552(b)(8)]. Small businesses (i.e., small only annually, but only those with total included in the agencies’ requests for banks) are affected. fiduciary assets greater than $100 OMB approval. All comments will Abstract: These interagency reports million are required to report fiduciary become a matter of public record. collect information on fiduciary asset income and loss information on the Call Written comments should address the totals and activities. They are used to Reports. accuracy of the burden estimates and monitor changes in the volume and The new trust schedule will replace ways to minimize burden including the character of discretionary trust activity the Annual Report of Trust Assets use of automated collection techniques and the volume of nondiscretionary (FFIEC 001) in December 2001 for or the use of other forms of information trust activity and to determine resource institutions that file Call Reports and technology as well as other relevant needs for supervisory purposes. the FFIEC 002 and in March 2002 for aspects of the information collection Current Actions: Financial institutions that file Thrift Financial request. institutions that exercise fiduciary Reports. For national and state member September 25, 2001. powers and have fiduciary assets or banks, two items in the new schedule Deborah Dakin, accounts have reported information on will replace the Annual Report of their trust activities each December 31 International Fiduciary Activities Deputy Chief Counsel, Regulations & in the Annual Report of Trust Assets Legislation DivisionOffice of Thrift (FFIEC 006). However, federally Supervision. (FFIEC 001). Institutions with trust supervised state-chartered nondeposit operations in foreign offices also Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve trust companies that are subsidiaries of System, October 5, 2001. complete the Annual Report of holding companies do not file Call Jennifer J. Johnson, International Fiduciary Activities Reports or Thrift Financial Reports, but (FFIEC 006). The agencies propose to are currently required to complete the Secretary of the Board. discontinue the FFIEC 001 and the FFIEC 001. The agencies have [FR Doc. 01–25641 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] FFIEC 006 trust activities reports. determined that the information of BILLING CODES 6720–01–P 1⁄2; 6210Ð01ÐP 1⁄2 This proposed discontinuance is supervisory interest on trust activities prompted by the introduction of that these trust companies have reported Schedule RC-T, ‘‘Fiduciary and Related on the FFIEC 001 can be monitored by Services,’’ on the quarterly bank other means. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Consolidated Reports of Condition and At the beginning of 2001, the agencies AFFAIRS Income (Call Report) (FFIEC 031 and carried 2,828 hours of respondent 1 Performance Review Board Members 041, OMB No. 7100–0036), and burden for these two reports for 728 Schedule T, ‘‘Fiduciary and Related respondents. After Schedule RC-T was AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. Services’’ on the quarterly Report of added to the Call Reports and Schedule ACTION: Notice. Assets and Liabilities of U.S. Branches T to the FFIEC 002, the Board reduced and Agencies of Foreign Banks (FFIEC their FFIEC 001 and FFIEC 006 burden SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 5 002, OMB No. 7100–0032).2 Schedules estimates by 2,332 hours to avoid U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) agencies are required RC-T and T take effect as of December double counting. After OTS adds to publish a notice in the Federal 31, 2001. The OTS is adding Schedule Schedule FS to the TFR with the first Register of the appointment of FS - Fiduciary and Related Services to quarter 2002, and these reports have Performance Review Board (PRB) the Thrift Financial Report (OMB No. been discontinued, the remaining 496 members. This notice revises the list of 1550–0023) effective March 31, 2002. burden hours for the agencies associated members of the Department of Veterans This new trust schedule significantly with the FFIEC 001 will fall to zero. Affairs (VA) Performance Review reduces the amount of detail that Boards which was published in the institutions must report on their trust Request for Comment Federal Register on September 25, 2000 activities compared to the amount in the Comments are invited on: (65 FR 57655). current forms. However, the new a. Whether the information EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. schedule continues to collect collections are necessary for the proper information on the number of accounts performance of the agencies’ functions, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and market value of trust assets for including whether the information has Angel I. Wolfrey, Office of Human specified categories of fiduciary practical utility; Resources Management (052B), activities, fiduciary and related services b. The accuracy of the agencies’ Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 income (except for Schedule T), estimates of the burden of the Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC corporate trust activities, collective information collections, including the 20420, (202) 273– 4940. investment funds and common trust validity of the methodology and VA Performance Review Board (PRB) funds, fiduciary settlements and other assumptions used; losses, and types of managed assets held c. Ways to enhance the quality, Jacob Lozada, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary in personal trust and agency accounts. utility, and clarity of the information to for Human Resources and Institutions (including all nondeposit be collected; Administration (Chairperson) trust companies that file Call Reports) d. Ways to minimize the burden of Nora E. Egan, Chief of Staff with total fiduciary assets greater than information collections on respondents, Stanley R. Sinclair, Action Deputy $250 million or with fiduciary income including through the use of automated Under Secretary for Benefits, Veterans greater than 10 percent of their net collection techniques or other forms of Benefits Administration interest income plus noninterest income information technology;and John H. Thompson, Deputy General are required to report some of the trust e. Estimates of capital or start up costs Counsel information quarterly and the rest and costs of operation, maintenance, Frances M. Murphy, M.D., M.P.H., annually on the new schedule. Other and purchase of services to provide Deputy Under Secretary for Health, information. Veterans Health Administration 1 Federal Register, March 5, 2001 (66 FR 13369). Comments submitted in response to James S. Jones, Deputy Assistant 2 Federal Register, May 4, 2001 (66 FR 22556). this notice will be shared among the Secretary for Resolution Management
VerDate 11
Maureen P. Cragin, Assistant Secretary Terrence S. Batliner, D.D.S., Network Frederick L. Malphurs, Network for Public and Intergovernmental Director, VISN 19 Director, VISN 2 Affairs Alfonso R. Batres, Ph.D., Chief Steven M. Cohen, M.D., Acting Network D. Mark Catlett, Principal Deputy Readjustment Counseling Officer Director, VISN 10 Assistant Secretary for Management Linda W. Belton, Network Director, Kenneth J. Clark, Network Director, Michael G. Sullivan, Deputy Inspector VISN 11 VISN 22 General Lawrence A. Biro, Network Director, James J. Nocks, M.D., Network Director, Roger R. Rapp, Deputy Under Secretary VISN 4 VISN 5 for Operations, National Cemetery Jeanette A. Chirico-Post, MD., Network Jimmy A. Norris, Chief Financial Officer System Director, VISN 11 Gregg A. Pane, M.D., M.P.A., Chief Michael Walcoff, Associate Deputy Jose R. Coronado, Acting Network Policy and Planning Officer Under Secretary for Operations, Director, VISN 17 Robert A. Petzel, M.D., Network Veterans Benefits Administration Gary A. Christopherson, Chief Director, VISN 13 (Alternate) Information Officer Jonathan B. Perlin, M.D., Ph.D., Laura Miller, Assistant Deputy Under Patricia A. Crosetti, Network Director, M.S.H.A., Chief Quality and Secretary for Health (Alternate) VISN 15 Performance Officer Vincent L. Barile, Deputy Under Joan E. Cummings, M.D., Network Robert H. Roswell, M.D., Network Secretary for Management, National Director, VISN 12 Director, VISN 8 Cemetery System (Alternate) John Dandridge, Jr., Network Director, Robert L. Wiebe, M.D., Network VISN 9 Veterans Benefits Administration PRB Director, VISN 21 Larry R. Deal, Network Director, VISN 7 Gary L. Wilkinson, Acting Network Stanley R. Sinclair, Acting Deputy James H. Holley, Chief Communications Director, VISN 14 Under Secretary for Benefits, Officer Charles V. Yarbrough, Chief Facilities (Chairperson) James B. Donahoe, Director, Veterans Management Officer Robert J. Epley, Associate Deputy Under Canteen Service Thomas J. Sanders, Acting VHA Chief of Secretary for Policy & Program James J. Farsetta, Network Director, Staff Management VISN 3 Ronald R. Aument, Deputy Chief of R. Keith Pedigo, Jr., Director, Loan John R. Feussner, M.D., Chief Research Staff, Secretary’s Representative Guaranty Service and Development Officer Michael Walcoff, Associate Deputy Stephanie H. Pincus, M.D., M.B.A., Office of Inspector General PRB Under Secretary for Operations Chief Academic Affiliations Officer David A. Brinkman, Director, Audit James A. Whitson, Associate Deputy William T. Galey, M.D., Network Followup Directorate, Department of Under Secretary for Operations Director, VISN 20 Defense (Chairperson) Julius M. Williams, Jr., Director, Daniel F. Hoffmann, Network Director, Nancy Hendricks, Assistant Inspector Vocational Rehabilitation and VISN 6 General for Audit, Federal Emergency Counseling Service Thomas J. Hogan, Director, Management Management Agency Ronald R. Aument, Deputy Chief of Support Office (Ex Officio) George Grob, Deputy Inspector General Staff, Secretary’s Representative Thomas V. Holohan, M.D., Chief Patient for Evaluation and Inspections, Care Services Officer Veterans Benefits Administration PRB Department of Health and Human Smith Jenkins, Jr., Network Director, Services Frances M. Murphy, M.D. M.P.H., VISN 18 Deputy Under Secretary for Health Robert E. Lynch, M.D., Network Dated: October 4, 2001. (Chairperson) Director, VISN 16 Anthony J. Principi, Laura J. Miller, Assistant Deputy Under Susan H. Mather, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Secretary for Health (Vice- Public Health and Environmental [FR Doc. 01–25748 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Chairperson) Hazards Officer BILLING CODE 8320Ð01ÐM
VerDate 11
Corrections Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Tuesday, October 9, 2001, make the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE contains editorial corrections of previously following correction: published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, and Notice documents. These corrections are On page 51415, in the first column of [AAG/A Order No. 243–2001] prepared by the Office of the Federal the table, in the third entry, ‘‘84.325D’’ Register. Agency prepared corrections are should read, ‘‘84.325E’’. Privacy Act of 1974; System of issued as signed documents and appear in Records [FR Doc. C1–25130 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] the appropriate document categories elsewhere in the issue. BILLING CODE 1505–01–D Correction In notice document 01–22449 beginning on page 46812 in the issue of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Friday, September 7, 2001, make the HUMAN SERVICES following correction: Office of Special Education and On page 46813, in the first column, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Rehabilitative Services; Grant beginning in the sixth line, ‘‘(by 30 days Services Applications Under Part D, Subpart 2 from the publication date of this of the Individuals With Disabilities notice).’’ should read, ‘‘October 9, Education Act [CMS–1175–N] 2001.’’ Correction [FR Doc. C1–22449 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] RIN 0938–ZA08 BILLING CODE 1505–01–D In notice document 01–24403 beginning on page 49647 in the issue of Medicare Program; Hospice Wage Friday, September 28, 2001, make the Index Fiscal Year 2002 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE following correction: COMMISSION On page 49653, in the first column of Correction the table, in the sixth entry, ‘‘84.324A’’ should read, ‘‘84.327A’’. In notice document 01–23820 [Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rel. No. beginning on page 49454 in the issue of 44839/September 24, 2001] [FR Doc. C1–24403 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Thursday, September 27, 2001, make BILLING CODE 1505–01–D the following correction: Order Regarding Government Securities Reconciliations On page 49463, in the second column, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION in the ninth grouped entry, ‘‘Knox, TN’’ Correction should be added to follow ‘‘Blount, In notice document 01–24329 Office of Special Education and TN’’. appearing on page 49727 in the issue of Rehabilitative Services; Grant Friday, September 28, 2001, make the Applications Under Part D, Subpart 2 [FR Doc. C1–23820 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505–01–D following correction: of the Individuals With Dsabilities On page 49727, in the third column, Education Act the Release No. and subject title should Correction be as set forth above. In notice document 01–25130 [FR Doc. C1–24329 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] beginning on page 51408 in the issue of BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
VerDate 11
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Parts 124, 260, 267, and 270 Hazardous Waste Management System; Standardized Permit; Corrective Action; and Financial Responsibility for RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Facilities; Proposed Rule
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SPRP–FFFFF to: RCRA Docket will transfer all comments received AGENCY Information Center, Office of Solid electronically into paper form and place Waste (5305G), U.S. Environmental them in the official record, which will 40 CFR Parts 124, 260, 267, and 270 Protection Agency Headquarters (EPA, also include all comments submitted [FRL–7066–6] HQ), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, directly in writing. The official record is Washington, DC 20460. Hand deliveries the paper record maintained at the RIN 2050–8E44 of comments should be made to the RCRA Information Center. Arlington, VA, address below. You may Our responses to comments, whether Hazardous Waste Management also submit comments electronically the comments are written or electronic, System; Standardized Permit; through the Internet to: rcra- will be in a notice in the Federal Corrective Action; and Financial [email protected]. Comments in Register or in a response to comments Responsibility for RCRA Hazardous electronic format must also reference document we will place in the official Waste Management Facilities the docket number F–2001–SPRP– record for this rulemaking. EPA will not AGENCY: Environmental Protection FFFFF. If you choose to submit your immediately reply to commenters Agency. comments electronically, you must electronically other than to seek ACTION: Proposed rule; request for submit them as an ASCII file avoiding clarification of electronic comments that public comment. the use of special characters and any may be garbled in transmission or form of encryption. during conversion to paper form, as SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection You should not submit electronically discussed above. Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to any confidential business information Acronyms used in today’s preamble the RCRA hazardous waste permitting (CBI). An original and two copies of CBI are listed below: program to allow a ‘‘standardized must be submitted under separate cover APA: Administrative Procedures Act permit.’’ The standardized permit to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer, EAB: Environmental Appeals Board would be available to facilities that Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA: Environmental Protection Agency generate hazardous waste and then EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, CAMU: Corrective Action Management Unit manage the waste in units such as tanks, Washington, DC 20460. CFR: Code of Federal Regulations containers, and containment buildings. Public comments and supporting EO: Executive Order This proposed revision to the RCRA materials are available for viewing in FR: Federal Regulations HSWA: Hazardous and Solid Waste permitting program reflects one of the the RCRA Information Center (RIC), Amendments recommendations of EPA’s special task located at Crystal Gateway I, First Floor, MOU: Memorandum of Understanding force, known as the Permits 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, NTTAA: National Technology Transfer and Improvement Team (PIT), which was Arlington, VA. The RIC is open from 9 Advancement Act convened to evaluate permitting a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, OMB: Office of Management and Budget activities and to make specific excluding federal holidays. To review PIT: Permit Improvement Team recommendations to improve these docket materials, we recommend that PPE: Personal Protection Equipment activities. The standardized permit you make an appointment by calling RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act should streamline the permit process by 703–603–9230. You may copy a RFA: RCRA Facility Assessment allowing facilities to obtain and modify maximum of 100 pages from any SBREFA: Small Business Regulatory permits more easily while maintaining regulatory docket at no charge. Enforcement Fairness Act the protectiveness currently existing in Additional copies cost $0.15/page. The SWMU: Solid Waste Management Unit the individual RCRA permit process. In index and some supporting materials UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act addition to the requirements proposed are available electronically. See the The contents of today’s preamble are in this Federal Register document, we Supplementary Information section of listed in the following outline: also are soliciting comment on two this Federal Register document for issues related to RCRA treatment, information on accessing the index and I. Overview and Background storage, and disposal facilities. We are these supporting materials. A. Why do this Proposed Rule and Preamble requesting comment on how all FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Read so Differently From other facilities receiving permits For general information, contact the Regulations? (standardized, individual, and permits RCRA Hotline at 800–424–9346 or TDD B. Who is Potentially Affected by this by rule) can satisfy RCRA corrective Proposed Rule? 800–553–7672 (hearing impaired). In C. What is the Agency’s Proposal? action requirements by conducting the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, 1. What is a RCRA Standardized Permit? cleanup under the direction of call 703–412–9810 or TDD 703–412– 2. Why are we Proposing a RCRA appropriate alternative state cleanup 3323. Standardized Permit? programs. We also are requesting For more detailed information on 3. What would be the Advantages of a comment on the conclusions about specific aspects of this rulemaking, Standardized Permit? captive insurance in a March, 2001 contact Vernon Myers, Office of Solid 4. Who would be Eligible for a report by EPA’s Inspector General, and Waste, 5303W, U.S. Environmental Standardized Permit? on a requirement that insurers that Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania D. What are the Differences between the Existing Individual Permitting System provide financial assurance for Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460, and the Proposed Standardized hazardous waste and PCB facilities have (703–308–8660), Permitting Process? a minimum rating from commercial ([email protected]). 1. What are the Steps for Obtaining an rating services. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Individual Permit? DATES: Comments on this proposal must The index and some supporting 2. What are the Proposed Steps for be submitted by December 11, 2001. Obtaining a Standardized Permit? materials are available on the Internet: 3. How does the Proposed Process for ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/ Standardized Permits Compare to the this proposal, you must send an original hazwaste/permit/index.htm Process for Individual Permits? and two copies of your comments, The official record for this action will Process for Individual Permits? referencing docket number F–2001– be kept in paper form. Accordingly, we E. Public Comments on this Rulemaking
VerDate 11
1. How can I Influence EPA’s Thinking on 2. What is the proposed relationship to 3. Why are we proposing these this Rule? interim status standards? requirements? 2. What Topics are not Appropriate for 3. How would this subpart affect an 4. Why would the proposed corrective Public Comment? imminent hazard action? action requirements be included in the 3. What Topics are we Specifically C. Subpart B—General Facility Standards supplemental portion of the Requesting Public Comment on? 1. Would this subpart apply to me? standardized permit? F. What Law Authorizes this Proposed Rule? 2. How would I comply with this subpart? 5. Would I be able to utilize the flexibility II. Conforming Amendments to General 3. How would I obtain an identification provided by CAMUs, temporary units, Permit Process number? and staging piles when I conduct 4. What are the proposed waste analysis corrective action under a standardized A. What Changes would we Make to 40 CFR requirements? permit? Part 124 Subpart A—General Program 5. What are the proposed security H. Subpart G—Closure Requirements? requirements? 1. What general standards would I need to B. How would the RCRA Expanded Public 6. What are the proposed general meet when I stop operating the unit? Participation Requirements Change? inspection schedule requirements? 2. What procedures would I need to C. Where would I find the Procedures 7. What training would my employees be follow? Governing RCRA Standardized Permits? required to have? 3. After I stop operating, how long would III. Applying for a Standardized Permit 8. What are the proposed requirements for I have until I close the unit? 4. What would I have to do with A. How would I Apply for a Standardized managing ignitable, reactive, or incompatible waste? contaminated equipment, structures, and Permit? soils? 1. Conduct a pre-application meeting with 9. What are the proposed standards for selecting the location of my facility? 5. How would I certify closure? the community. I. Subpart H—Financial Requirements 2. Submit a Notice of Intent to operate 10. Would I be required to have a construction quality assurance program? 1. Who would have to comply with this under the standardized permit along subpart and briefly what would they with appropriate supporting documents. D. Subpart C—Preparedness and Prevention 1. What are the proposed general design have to do? B. How would I Switch from an Individual 2. Definitions. Permit to a Standardized Permit? and operation standards? 2. What equipment would I be required to 3. Closure cost estimates. IV. Issuing a Standardized Permit have? 4. Methods for estimating costs for units A. How would the Regulatory Agency 3. What are the proposed testing and eligible for standardized permits. 5. We considered six options for Prepare a Draft Standardized Permit? maintenance requirements for the developing cost estimates, but preferred 1. Drafting terms and conditions for the equipment? three of them for this proposal. supplemental portion. 4. When would personnel be required to 6. Option 4, Standard forms for estimating 2. Denying coverage under the have access to communication closure costs. standardized permit. equipment or an alarm system? 7. Option 5, Default estimates for 5. How would I ensure access for personnel 3. Preparing your draft permit decision in estimating closure costs. 120 days. and equipment during emergencies? 8. Option 6, Waiving the cost estimate for B. How would the Regulatory Agency 6. What arrangements would I be required facilities using the financial test or Prepare a Final Standardized Permit? to make with local authorities for corporate guarantee. C. In what Situations could Facility Owners emergencies? 9. Availability of information on EPA’s or Operators be Required to Apply for an E. Subpart D—Contingency Plan and proposed approaches. Individual Permit? Emergency Procedures 10. Financial assurance for closure. V. Proposed Opportunities for Public 1. What is the purpose of the proposed 11. Post closure financial responsibility. Involvement in the Standardized Permit contingency plan and how would I use 12. Liability requirements. Process it? 13. Other provisions of the financial 2. What would be required to be in my A. What are the Proposed Requirements for requirements. contingency plan? J. Subpart I—Use and management of Public Notices? 3. Who would be required to have copies B. What are the Proposed Opportunities for containers of the contingency plan? 1. Would this subpart apply to me? Public Comments and Hearings? 4. When would I have to revise the C. What are the Proposed Requirements for 2. What standards would apply to the contingency plan? containers? Responding to Comments? 5. What is the proposed role of the D. How could People Appeal a Final 3. What are the proposed inspection emergency coordinator? requirements? Standardized Permit Decision under the 6. What are the proposed emergency Proposal? 4. What proposed standards apply to the procedures for the emergency container storage area? VI. Maintaining a Standardized Permit coordinator? 5. What special requirements would I need A. What Types of Changes could Owners or F. Subpart E—Record Keeping, Reporting, to meet for ignitable or reactive waste? Operators Make? and Notifying 6. What special requirements would I need B. What are the Proposed Definitions of 1. When would I need to manifest my to meet for incompatible wastes? Routine And Significant Changes? waste? 7. What would I need to do when I want C. What are the Proposed Standardized 2. What information would I need to keep? to stop using the containers? Permit Procedures for Making Routine 3. What records would I provide to the 8. What air emission standards are Changes? permitting agency? proposed apply? D. What are the Proposed Standardized 4. What reports would I need to prepare K. Subpart J—Tank Systems Permit Procedures for Making Significant and who would I send them to? 1. Would this subpart apply to me? Changes? 5. What notifications would be required? 2. What are the proposed required design E. What would be the Proposed Process for G. Subpart F—Releases from Solid Waste and construction standards for new tank Renewing Standardized Permits? Management Units systems or components? 1. Would this proposed rule require me to 3. What are the proposed handling and VII. Proposed Part 267 Standards for Owners address releases of hazardous waste or inspection requirements for new tank and Operators of Hazardous Waste Facilities constituents from solid waste systems? Operating Under A Standardized Permit management units? 4. What testing would be required? A. Overview 2. Are the proposed corrective action 5. What installation requirements would be B. Subpart A—General requirements for standardized permits required? 1. What are the purpose, scope and different from the corrective action 6. What are the proposed preventative applicability of this proposed part? requirements for individual permits? requirements for containing a release?
VerDate 11
7. What are the proposed devices for B. What Information would I Need to Submit c. Description of potential costs of this secondary containment and what are to the Permitting Agency to Support my rule. their design, operating and installation Standardized Permit Application? d. Description of potential net benefits of requirements? 1. RCRA Part A application information. the rule. 8. What are the proposed requirements for 2. Preapplication meeting summary. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act. ancillary equipment? 3. Compliance with location standards. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 9. What are the proposed general operating 4. Compliance with other Federal laws. D. Paperwork Reduction Act. requirements for tank systems? 5. Solid waste management units. E. Executive Order 13045: Children’s Health 10. What are the proposed inspection 6. Certification of compliance with F. National Technology Transfer and requirements? proposed part 267 requirements. Advancement Act. 11. What would I do in case of a leak or C. What are the Proposed Certification G. Executive Order 12898: Environmental a spill? Requirements? Justice. 12. What would I do when I stop operating 1. Certification of compliance. H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and the tank system? 2. Certification of availability of Coordination with Indian Tribal 13. What are the proposed special information. Governments. requirements for ignitable or reactive 3. What happens if my facility is not in I. Executive Order 13132: Federalism. wastes? compliance with proposed part 267 J. Executive Order 13211: Energy Effects. 14. What are the proposed special requirements at the time I submit my XIII. List of References requirements for incompatible wastes? Notice of Intent? 15. What air emission standards are D. What Information would be Required to be I. Overview and Background proposed? Kept at my Facility? L. Subpart DD—Containment Buildings 1. General facility information. A. Why Do This Proposed Rule and 1. Would this subpart apply to me? 2. Container information. Preamble Read so Differently From 2. What are the proposed design and 3. Tank information. Other Regulations? operating standards for containment 4. Equipment information. buildings? 5. Air emission control information. We wrote today’s proposed 3. What additional design and operating E. How would I Modify my RCRA regulations and preamble in ‘‘readable standards would apply if liquids will be Standardized Permit? regulations’’ format. We tried to use the in my containment building? X. Public Comment on Corrective Action and active rather than the passive voice, 4. What are the proposed other plain language, a question-answer requirements to prevent releases? Financial Assurance Issues 5. What would I do if I detect a release? A. Corrective Action. format, and other techniques to make it 6. What would I do if my containment 1. Could I satisfy the RCRA corrective easier for the readers to find and building contains areas both with and action requirements for my site by understand information in today’s rule without secondary containment? conducting cleanup under an alternate and preamble. The pronoun ‘‘we’’ refers 7. Could a containment building be State program? to EPA and the pronoun ‘‘you’’ refers to considered secondary containment for 2. How would EPA and the authorized the person who would be subject to other units? States address the alternate authority these proposed requirements (which 8. How would I obtain a waiver from cleanup provisions in the RCRA permit? could be either a facility owner/operator secondary containment requirements? 3. How would EPA or the authorized State or a Director of a regulatory agency). 9. What would I do when I stop operating determine that cleanups conducted the containment building? under an alternate cleanup program Once promulgated in a final rule, all requirements, including those set forth VIII. Conforming Permit Changes to Part 270 would satisfy the requirements of section 264.101? in table format, will constitute binding, A. Overview of Part 270 Changes. B. Financial Assurance. enforceable requirements. B. Specific Changes to Part 270. 1. Overview of the RCRA Program XI. State Authorization B. Who Is Potentially Affected by This 2. Definitions. A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized Proposed Rule? 3. Permit applications. States. 4. Permit reapplication. B. Effect on State Authorization. Today’s action, if finalized, could 5. Transfer of permits. XII. Regulatory Assessments potentially affect an estimated 866 6. Modification or revocation and RCRA-permitted private sector facilities reissuance of permits. A. Executive Order 12866. which store and/or non-thermally treat 1. Assessment of Potential Costs and 7. Continuation of expiring permits. RCRA hazardous wastes on-site, using 8. Standardized permit. Benefits. a. Description of entities to which this rule tanks, containers and/or containment IX. RCRA Standardized Permits applies. buildings. Table 1 below displays the A. General Information about Standardized b. Description of potential benefits of this SIC/NAICS code economic sectors Permits. rule. associated with these facilities.
TABLE 1.—ECONOMIC SECTORS WHICH OWN AND OPERATE FACILITIES POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL [Facilities with eligible RCRA hazardous waste management units](a)
Count of Potentially Affected Facilities SIC (b) Economic Sector Description NAICS (b) equivalent Tank Contain- Containers systems ment Bldgs. Total
0 ...... Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries ...... 11 ...... 21 12 0 ...... 1 ...... Mining, Oil/Gas & Construction ...... 21, 23 ...... 26 16 0 ...... 2 ...... Manufacturing(c) ...... 31–33, 511 ...... 427 313 5 ...... 3 ...... Manufacturing (continued)(d) ...... 31–33 ...... 285 136 17 ...... 4 ...... Transport, Communication, Utilities ..... 22, 48, 49, 513, 562 ...... 272 201 10 ...... 5 ...... Wholesale & Retail Trade ...... 42, 44, 45 ...... 175 132 3 ...... 6 ...... Finance, Insurance & Real Estate ...... 52, 53 ...... 5 2 0 ...... 7 ...... Services(e) ...... 71, 72, 512, 514, 811, 812 ...... 221 183 2 ......
VerDate 11
TABLE 1.—ECONOMIC SECTORS WHICH OWN AND OPERATE FACILITIES POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL— Continued [Facilities with eligible RCRA hazardous waste management units](a)
Count of Potentially Affected Facilities SIC (b) Economic Sector Description NAICS (b) equivalent Tank Contain- Containers systems ment Bldgs. Total
8 ...... Services (continued)(f) ...... 54, 55, 561, 61, 62, 813, 814 ...... 90 38 0 ...... 9 ...... Public Admin, Environment & NEC ..... 92 ...... 200 85 4 ......
Non-duplicative column totals(g) =
800 623 22 866 Explanatory Notes: (a) Source: EPA Office of Solid Waste customized query of RCRIS and BRS databases (data as of March 2000). (b) SIC = ‘‘Standard Industrial Classification’’ system. NAICS = ‘‘North American Industry Classification System’’, adopted by the US Federal Government in 1997, replacing the SIC code system (for SIC/NAICS conversion tables see http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html). (c) SIC 2 Manufacturing = Food, Textile/Apparel, Lumber/Wood, Furniture/Fixtures, Paper, Printing/Publishing, Chemicals/Allied Products, & Petroleum/Coal. (d) SIC 3 Manufacturing = Rubber/Plastic, Leather, Stone/Clay/Glass, Primary Metals, Fabricated Metals, Industrial Machinery, Electronics, Transportation Equipment, Instruments, & Misc. Mfrg. (e) SIC 7 Services = Hotels, Personal, Automotive, Repair, Motion Pictures, & Recreation. (f) SIC 8 Services = Health, Legal, Social, Museums/Gardens, Membership Orgs & Engineering/Mngmnt. (g) Some facilities report multiple SIC codes for their operations to the EPA; consequently both the facility and unit total counts in this table ex- ceed the non-duplicative total numbers of facilities shown in the bottom row above.
C. What Is the Agency’s Proposal? discretion. The terms and requirements We are proposing that the documents that we are proposing as part of today’s and certification the permittee submits We are proposing revisions to the rulemaking would constitute the with the notice of intent to be covered RCRA hazardous waste permitting uniform portion of the standardized by the standardized permit would program to allow a type of general permit (see Section VII: Proposed Part become attachments to the RCRA permit, called a ‘‘standardized permit.’’ 267 Standards for Owners and standardized permit (see Section IX B: The standardized permit would be Operators of Hazardous Waste Facilities What Information would I need to available to facilities that generate Operating Under a Standardized Submit to the Permitting Agency to hazardous waste and then manage the Permit). All facilities that are authorized Support my Standardized Permit waste in units such as tanks, containers, to operate under the standardized Application). These documents and and containment buildings. In addition permit would need to comply with certification include the general RCRA to the requirements proposed today, we these applicable terms and conditions. Part A information, the pre-application also are soliciting comment on two In developing a permit process for the meeting summary, the location standard issues related to RCRA treatment, RCRA standardized permit, we need to information, the permittee’s self audit, storage, and disposal facilities. We are satisfy both the statutory requirements and the owner’s certification of requesting comment on how all in RCRA and Agency policy to provide compliance and information facilities receiving permits for local public participation and to availability. This is similar to the way (standardized, individual, and permits ensure that permits include all terms individual RCRA permits are issued by rule) can satisfy RCRA corrective and conditions necessary to protect with sections of the permit application action requirements by conducting human health and the environment. placed in appendices. cleanup under the direction of Under the proposed permitting scheme appropriate alternative state cleanup for standardized permits, the uniform 2. Why Are We Proposing a RCRA programs. We also are requesting terms of the standardized permit would Standardized Permit? comment on a requirement that insurers be the same nationwide, but there In 1984, the Agency proposed a that provide financial assurance for would be an opportunity to add standard permit application form and hazardous waste and PCB facilities have conditions tailored to each particular requirements (49 FR 29524, July 20, a minimum rating from commercial site. This would ensure that we meet the 1984) for facilities that generated rating services. statutory standard of protectiveness (see hazardous waste on-site and then stored 1. What Is a RCRA Standardized Permit? Section IV A 1: How would the it in above-ground tanks or containers. Regulatory Agency Prepare a Draft The 1984 proposal considered similar We are proposing to define a Standardized Permit?). In order to issues that are discussed in today’s ‘‘standardized permit’’ as a general satisfy the statutory standard and proposal. However, the 1984 proposal permit for facilities that generate waste agency policy for local public was never finalized at that time because and routinely manage the waste on-site participation, RCRA pre-application of the new requirements imposed by the in tanks, containers, and containment meeting requirements are included in Hazardous and Solid Waste buildings. The RCRA standardized the proposed standardized permit Amendments of 1984. permit would be a document that EPA process as well as other opportunities The Agency convened a special task or the authorized state issues. It would for public involvement that are force in 1994 to look at permitting consists of two components: A uniform traditionally part of the permit issuance activities throughout its different portion that is included in all cases, and process (see Section V: Proposed programs and to make specific a supplemental portion that would be Opportunities for Public Involvement in recommendations to improve these included at EPA’s or the Director’s the Standardized Permit Process). permitting programs. This task force,
VerDate 11
known as the Permits Improvement Second, such a standardized permit permit should be easier because the Team (PIT), spent two years working process takes into account the relative permit modification procedures would with stakeholders from the Agency, risks posed by the on-site storage and be less cumbersome for a standardized State permitting agencies, industry, and non-thermal treatment of hazardous permit than for an individual permit. the environmental community. The PIT waste in tanks, containers, and Although the standardized permit stakeholders suggested, among other containment buildings. These units are process would be more streamlined than things, that permitting activities should relatively simple to design and properly the process for individual permits, we be commensurate with the complexity construct. The engineering and are proposing that you must continue to of the activity. The stakeholders felt that construction knowledge and skills comply with waste management current Agency permitting programs necessary to design and construct these practices, day-to-day housekeeping, and were not flexible enough to allow units are relatively basic. These units judicious maintenance programs found streamlined procedures for routine are in common usage in many in the ‘‘individual’’ RCRA permit permitting activities. applications and are frequently bought program. As mentioned, one of the Under the RCRA program, facilities ‘‘off-the-shelf’’ or built from ‘‘off-the- benefits of the proposed standardized that store, treat, or dispose of hazardous shelf’’ designs. Industry associations permit would be the reduced paperwork waste currently must obtain site-specific and standards organizations have burden and effort associated with the ‘‘individual’’ permits prescribing developed standards for these units that permit application submittal and review conditions for each ‘‘unit’’ (e.g., tank, are in widespread use. Past experience process. Since, under the proposal, the container area, etc.) in which hazardous with these units indicates that they are permitting agency would no longer be waste is managed. Experience gained by simpler to design, construct, and involved with detailed review of permit the Agency and states over the past 15 manage than units such as combustion application material associated with years has shown that the complexity of units or land disposal units. Storage and waste management unit design and waste management varies by type of non-thermal treatment of waste in these operation, it would be incumbent on activity. Some activities, such as types of units is generally less you to properly design, operate, and thermal treatment or land disposal of complicated than thermal treatment of maintain the waste management units hazardous waste, are more complex waste (e.g. combustion of hazardous and facility operations subject to the than storage of hazardous waste. We waste in incinerators, boilers, or standardized permit. You should not construe the more believe that thermal treatment and land industrial furnaces) or disposal of waste efficient standardized permitting disposal activities continue to warrant (e.g. landfilling). It is easier to control process as a reduced compliance ‘‘individual’’ permits, prescribing unit- risks at these simpler storage and burden. Under today’s proposal, specific conditions. Similarly, we also treatment units. We believe that the streamlined standardized permit, as compliance with proper waste believe that the storage of hazardous management practices would be waste military munitions should proposed, would allow adequate interaction and oversight by the ensured by your operation, maintenance continue under the individual and inspection programs and routine permitting program. The site-specific regulating agency and would provide sufficient technical controls to protect inspection by the permitting agency. nature of the management of hazardous human health and the environment. Similar to the individual permitting waste military munitions generally are Third, although the proposed system, failure to maintain waste not routine activities the lend standardized permit would streamline management practices that protect themselves to standardized conditions. some of the administrative permitting human health and the environment However, we also believe that some process, we are not proposing to could result in revocation of the accommodation can be made for streamline the public participation standardized permit by the permitting hazardous waste management practices requirements and technical standards. agency, as well as in civil and/or in standardized units such as tanks, The proposed standards and criminal penalties. container storage areas, and requirements are for the most part the In addition the burden reductions for containment buildings. The PIT same requirements that apply under the facilities, permitting agencies should be recommended, among other things, that current hazardous waste permitting able to more efficiently administer the regulations be developed to allow system. We are only proposing minimal proposed standardized permit program. ‘‘standardized permits’’ for on-site changes to the general facility standards Since the application for a standardized storage and non-thermal treatment of and several minor changes to the permit is intended to be less hazardous waste in tanks, containers, technical requirements for tanks, burdensome than the current RCRA and containment buildings. containers, and containment buildings. permit requirements, the administrative Today, we are proposing to revise the Because the technical standards remain record should be easier to maintain. RCRA regulations to allow this type of substantially unchanged, the level of Also, the proposed permit modification standardized permit for several reasons. environmental protection that the procedures for a standardized permit First, this new permitting system is standardized permit offers would should reduce the administrative intended to streamline the remain high. burden on the permitting agency. EPA administrative permitting process and welcomes comments on the anticipated 3. What Would Be the Advantages of a shorten the time required to obtain a advantages—as well as any Standardized Permit? RCRA permit, without lessening the disadvantages—of a standardized environmental protection provided by The proposed standardized permit permit. the permit. The new permit system application procedures are less would also reduce the amount of time cumbersome than the procedures for an 4. Who Would Be Eligible for a and administrative resources required to individual permit. You would not have Standardized Permit? maintain a RCRA permit throughout the to submit the amount of information We are proposing to allow generators operating life of the facility by providing needed to support an individual permit to apply for standardized permits for streamlined permit modification and application; although you would need hazardous wastes that they non- renewal processes for the standardized to keep the required information at your thermally treat or store on-site in tanks, permit. facility. Maintaining your standardized containers, or containment buildings.
VerDate 11
Once a standardized permit rule is Decisions of the EAB are subject to conditions. (see Section V: Proposed promulgated, we would inform you of judicial review. Opportunities for Public Involvement in your eligibility when we make a the Standardized Permit Process.) 2. What Are the Proposed Steps for decision on your permit application. Obtaining a Standardized Permit? • Following the public comment Although you may be eligible for a We propose that the RCRA period (and public hearing, if any), the standardized permit, you would not Director would make a final permit have to apply for one if you choose not standardized permit process follow the steps laid out briefly below. We discuss decision. These requirements would to. Instead you would have the option include responding to public comments. of applying for an individual RCRA each of these steps in more detail in later sections of this preamble. (see Section IV B: How would the hazardous waste permit. In Section I E • Regulatory Agency Prepare a Final 3: What Topics are we Specifically First, you, as a facility owner or operator, would advertise and conduct a Standardized Permit? and Section V: Requesting Public Comment on?, we are Proposed Opportunities for Public taking comment on whether treatment/ meeting with your neighboring community to discuss potential Involvement in the Standardized Permit storage of off-site waste should be Process.) eligible for a standardized permit. operations. (see Section III A 1: Conduct a pre-application meeting with the • The standardized permit for your D. What Are the Differences Between the community.) facility typically would become Existing Individual Permitting System • Then you would submit to the effective 30 days after the final permit and the Proposed Standardized regulatory agency a Notice of Intent to decision. Also, we are proposing that Permitting Process? operate under the standardized permit. within 30 days after the Director makes We are proposing that you must include 1. What Are the Steps for Obtaining an a final decision on an EPA permit, an with the notice a summary of the Individual Permit? appeal of the decision to the meeting with the community, certain Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) Permits for the management of certifications required under proposed could be initiated. [Note: Although the hazardous waste are issued according to § 270.280, and the Part A information final EPA permit decision is subject to the procedures established in 40 CFR required under § 270.13. (see Section III appeal to the EAB, we are proposing parts 124 and 270. The permit process A 2: Submit a Notice of Intent to operate that the terms and conditions of the generally follows the steps laid out under the standardized permit with uniform portion of the standardized briefly below: appropriate supporting documents.) • • permit would not be subject to EAB You, as the owner or operator of a Within 120 days of receiving the review.] Decisions of the EAB are hazardous waste management facility, notice of intent and accompanying subject to judicial review. (see Section develop an individual site-specific information, the Director of the V D: How could People Appeal a Final permit application. regulatory agency would need to make • Standardized Permit Decision Under the Early in the permitting process (i.e., a preliminary decision to either grant or Proposal?) before submitting an application for a deny you coverage under the permit), you hold an informal public standardized permit. (see Section IV A: 3. How Does the Proposed Process for meeting to discuss proposed hazardous How would the Regulatory Agency Standardized Permits Compare to the waste management activities with Prepare a Draft Standardized Permit?) Process for Individual Permits? community members. • If the Director anticipates granting • You then send the permit coverage, he or she would prepare a We (or states authorized by us) application to the permitting agency and draft standardized permit. We are currently issue site-specific RCRA the permitting agency announces the proposing that the draft standardized permits to operate hazardous waste submission of a permit application by permit would consist of a uniform management facilities on an individual sending a notice to community portion that applies to all facilities, and basis. Each facility applies for a permit, members. any additional terms or conditions that and we (or the authorized state) write • The permitting agency then reviews the Director tentatively decides to apply the site-specific permit. The the application for completeness. to your specific facility. These site- requirements governing how we process • Following this review, the specific terms or conditions would a RCRA individual permit application permitting agency either begins to constitute a supplemental portion of are laid out in 40 CFR parts 124 and develop a draft permit applying the your standardized permit. (see Section 270. In general, the individual process section 3004 standards that are codified IV A: How would the Regulatory requires you to prepare a much more in 40 CFR part 264 or determines that Agency Prepare a Draft Standardized detailed permit application and the it intends to deny the permit. Permit?) regulatory agency to conduct a more • The permitting agency then gives • The Director would provide public extensive review. The ‘‘back and forth’’ public notice of the draft permit or notice of the draft permit. Under the between permit applicants and intent to deny, allows a 45-day proposal, the public notice would regulators that normally takes place as comment period, and holds a public initiates a 45-day public comment both parties come to agreement on the hearing, if requested, before it issues or period; any requests for a public hearing completeness and accuracy of the denies the permit. would need to be made during the application can impose a significant • The permit for your facility public comment period. We are workload and delay. Under our typically becomes effective 30 days after proposing that the public could proposed standardized permit the issuing agency serves notice of the comment on your facility’s eligibility as procedures, we streamline this activity. final permit decision. Within 30 days well as on the supplemental conditions Table 2 offers a step-by-step comparison after the final permit decision, an appeal that the Director tentatively identified. of the individual permitting process as of the decision to the Environmental The public could also offer comments administered by EPA and the proposed Appeals Board (EAB) may be initiated. on the need for additional supplemental standardized permitting process.
VerDate 11
TABLE 2.—PERMITTING PROCESS COMPARISON
Proposed Steps in the EPA permitting process Individual standardized permit permit
Advertise and conduct pre-application meeting (facility) ...... ✔✔ Submit permit application/Notice of Intent (facility) ...... ✔✔ Provide public notice at application submittal (agency) ...... ✔ Review application for completeness (agency) ...... ✔ Issue Notices of Deficiency (NODs) as necessary (agency) ...... ✔ Respond to NODs (facility) ...... ✔ Determine application is complete (agency) ...... ✔ Make draft permit decision (agency) ...... ✔✔
(no deadline) (within 120 days)
Prepare draft permit and statement of basis or fact sheet (agency) ...... ✔✔ Establish administrative record (agency) ...... ✔✔ Provide public notice of draft permit decision (agency) ...... ✔✔ 45 day public comment period; opportunity for public hearing ...... ✔✔ Make final permit determination; respond to comments (agency) ...... ✔✔ Final permit becomes effective; deadline for appeals to EAB ...... ✔✔ Note.—The blanks represent permitting process steps that are not explicit regulatory requirements under the proposed standardized permits. However, we are proposing that during the 120-day review and processing period of the application by the permitting Agency, the Director would determine the adequacy of the permit application including completeness.
We are also proposing new • Provide specific examples to corrective action and financial procedures for modifying standardized illustrate your concerns. assurance in Section X: Public Comment permits. In brief, these new procedures • Offer specific alternatives. on Corrective Action and Financial would allow you to make certain types • Refer your comments to specific Assurance Issues. of routine changes without prior sections of the proposal, such as the We are interested in the public’s approval, provided you inform both the units or page numbers of the preamble, views on the following items: regulatory agency and the public of the or the regulatory sections. a. Should a facility which manages changes. For more significant changes, • Make sure to submit your some of its hazardous waste in on-site you would have to request approval comments by the deadline in this storage and treatment units and some of from the regulatory agency before notice. its hazardous waste in other types of making the changes. The proposed • Be sure to include the name, date, waste management units be eligible for modification process is discussed in and docket number with your a standardized permit for the on-site detail in Section VI: Maintaining a comments. storage and treatment activities? There Standardized Permit. are currently facilities in the RCRA 2. What Topics Are Not Appropriate for hazardous waste universe that have E. Public Comments on This Public Comment? multiple waste management units. It is Rulemaking The proposed provisions for not uncommon for a hazardous waste 1. How Can I Influence EPA’s Thinking standardized permits are modeled on facility to have storage and treatment on This Rule? the existing permit requirements for units, and other units such as thermal storing hazardous waste. While tailored treatment units or disposal units. In developing this proposal, we tried specifically for standardized permits, Under the existing RCRA individual to address the concerns of all our many of the rules are restatements of the permitting system (see §§ 270.1(c)(4) stakeholders. Your comments will help existing regulations in plain language and 270.29), we can issue or deny a us improve this rule. We invite you to format to make them easier to permit for one or more units at a facility provide different views on options we understand. We welcome comment on without simultaneously issuing or propose, new approaches we haven’t whether these rules are appropriate for denying a permit for all units at the considered, new data, information on standardized permits and whether, in facility. In other words, a facility’s how this rule may effect you, or other restating and reorganizing the existing RCRA permit under the existing relevant information. We welcome your regulatory requirements, we permitting system does not necessarily views on all aspects of this proposed inadvertently changed their meaning. cover every unit at the facility. We rule, but we request comments in Nevertheless, we are not reopening the drafted the proposed standardized particular on the items in Section I D 3 existing regulations to public comment, permit regulations so that a facility below. Your comments will be most except those provisions explicitly could obtain both an individual permit effective if you follow the suggestions modified by this proposal. for any disposal or thermal treatment below: activities and a standardized permit for • Explain your views as clearly as 3. What Topics Are we Specifically any on-site storage and treatment possible and why you feel that way. Requesting Public Comment on? activities. Although it may be resource- • Provide solid technical and cost In addition to general comments intensive for a facility with multiple data to support your views. about the scope of the standardized types of units to choose to go through • If you estimate potential costs, permit and its impacts, EPA seeks the RCRA permitting process several explain how you arrived at the estimate. public comment on the specific times, facilities may see an advantage in • Tell us which parts you support, as regulatory provisions addressed below. obtaining a standardized permit for a well as those you disagree with. We are also requesting comment on portion of their operations. This is
VerDate 11
because continued maintenance of a the recycling process. Environmental 5. Section VII C 5: Is an exemption standardized permit should be less health and safety for the storage of these from security provisions appropriate for burdensome than following the current materials is addressed comprehensively facilities operating under standardized individual permit modification under part 264, subparts I, J and DD, permit? procedures because of the simplified respectively, as well as part 270. 6. Section VII C 9: Should we retain procedures. We encourage your Facilities must, at a minimum, manage the floodplain waste removal waiver in comments and supporting data on this these materials in units of good the standardized permit? topic. As currently proposed, condition, respond to releases in a 7. Section VII G 4: What standard standardized permits would not relieve timely manner, inspect units at least conditions might be used for corrective facilities of any substantive compliance weekly, and address concerns of action requirements under a requirements; rather, such permits ignitable, reactive and incompatible standardized permit? would only streamline the permitting wastes. 8. Section VII H: What policy and process. RCRA permitted hazardous waste procedure should be followed in the b. Should we expand the applicability recycling facilities frequently must event that a facility cannot submit a of the RCRA standardized permit to make changes to their business closure plan 180 days prior to last include facilities that treat or store operations that require a permit receiving the last volume of waste? waste generated off-site? Such situations modification from the EPA or State Should we drop the closure plan could include facilities that take off-site authorizing agency. Such changes requirement? waste from any source as well as a more usually do not pose a risk to human 9. Section VII H 1: What other options limited operation where companies health and the environment. However, should be available to facilities that with more than one manufacturing such changes can take months to cannot clean close? location would like to centralize their approve because of the backlog in 10. Section VII H 3: Is an 180 day management of any generated waste at permitting work. Therefore, in order to closure time period appropriate and one location. One of the concerns that facilitate hazardous waste recycling under what circumstances should it be we have heard about the management of activities, the Agency is interested in extended? waste generated off-site is that some obtaining the views from the public on 11. Section VII I 4: What information facilities’ owners or operators may not a proposal that would allow RCRA is available that compares the closure always have complete knowledge of the permitted hazardous waste recycling cost estimate with the actual cost compatibility of the different waste facilities to follow the modification incurred performing closure? streams that are brought onto their process that is described in Section VI: 12. Section VII I 6: What information facilities. Therefore, management of Maintaining a standardized Permit. is most crucial for estimating cost of such wastes may be more complicated d. We are also asking for comment on closure of an eligible unit? and require greater attention. In some additional opportunities within the 13. Section VII I 13: Do States cases, uncertainty regarding the full framework of the standardized permit, currently assume responsibility for chemical make-up of incoming wastes to reduce the burden and cost of the facility compliance and would they might pose additional risks not readily permitting process for facilities, while obtain standardized permits? apparent to the receiving facility. This still maintaining the protectiveness 14. Section VII K: Should potential situation may be less likely to afforded by the RCRA standardized underground and in-ground tank occur at a company managing only its permit process. Specifically, we are systems be excluded from standardized own waste generated at several interested in whether we should look permits? locations, since the company should into the feasibility of developing a ‘‘fill- 15. Section IX C 1: Are there know what specific wastes are generated in-the-blank’’ type standard format for significant benefits of a compliance by the company and be able to manage each type of covered unit that facilities audit and under what conditions would them properly at a centralized location. could then use to prepare required ‘‘Part such audits need to be performed by an We are interested in your views and B’’ information that would be required independent third party? supporting data on this topic. As to be retained at the facility. This fill-in- 16. Section IX C 2: Should a waste mentioned above, the proposed the-blank type standard format could be analysis plan be submitted? Under what standardized permits would not relieve offered to facilities as guidance to circumstances? facilities of any substantive compliance further reduce the permitting burden. 17. Section X A 1: For all types of requirements, including those that are e. Throughout the preamble we permits, should facilities be able to intended to ensure protection of human request comment on various topics. satisfy RCRA correction action health and the environment. Some of the sections that we are seeking requirements by conducting cleanup c. We are also interested in feedback comments on are: under an alternative State program? on a proposal to allow RCRA 1. Section I C 3: What are the Under what circumstances? standardized permits at RCRA permitted anticipated advantages and 18. Section X A 2: What methods off-site hazardous waste recycling disadvantages of a standardized permit? should EPA and the authorized States facilities. A major goal of EPA is to 2. Section IV A 3: Is 120 days an use to address the alternate authority eliminate regulatory disincentives to appropriate time frame for making a cleanup provisions in RCRA permits? safe hazardous waste recycling. draft permit decision? Should we allow 19. Section X A 3: How would EPA Providing regulatory relief for these a one time extension to the 120 day or the authorized State determine that types of facilities might encourage requirement? cleanups conducted under an alternate additional firms to enter the hazardous 3. Section IV B: Is it appropriate to cleanup program would satisfy waste recycling business. apply the current provisions for final corrective action requirements? Under current RCRA rules, recycling issuance of an individual permit to a 20. Section X B: Should pure captive units are not regulated. As a result, process for issuing standardized insurance be treated differently than existing requirements focus on the safe permits? third party liability? storage of hazardous recyclable 4. Section VI B: Are the categories for 21. Section XII A 1 b: What are the materials in tanks, containers and determining the significance of the potential benefits of permit containment buildings prior to entering permit change appropriate? streamlining?
VerDate 11
F. What Law Authorizes This Proposed already have one) to a standardized however, that there may be situations Rule? permit. We are also proposing where a community has a special need We are proposing these regulations amendments to 40 CFR 270.41(b) to add for access to information, and so are not under the authority of sections 1003, conversion to a standardized permit as precluding the use of the information 2002(a), 3004, 3005, 3006 and 3010 of a cause for revocation and reissuance. repository requirement in this proposed rule. the Solid Waste Disposal Action of B. How Would the RCRA Expanded Since the waste management 1970, as amended by the Resource Public Participation Requirements activities at facilities eligible for the Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 Change? (RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous proposed standardized permit are The current RCRA expanded public and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 relatively less controversial than other participation requirements are in 40 (HSWA), 42 U.S.C. 6902, 6912(a), 6924– types of management activities, we CFR part 124 subpart B—Specific 6926, and 6930. anticipate that people in nearby Procedures Applicable to RCRA Permits communities would generally not object II. Conforming Amendments to General (these are the procedures specific to the to going to a facility to review Permit Process RCRA program that apply in addition to information. However, if it is the public participation elements of the A. What Changes Would we Make to 40 impractical to go to the facility, people General Program Requirements in CFR Part 124 Subpart A—General could ask the Director to require a subpart A). We propose conforming Program Requirements? separate information repository. The changes in both §§ 124.31 and 124.32 way the requirement is currently The General Program Requirements governing pre-application meeting and worded (see § existing 124.33(d)), you (subpart A) in part 124 apply to many notice requirements and public notice would get a ‘‘first choice’’ at selecting a of our permitting programs, not just to requirements at the application stage, location, although the Director would RCRA Permits. Consequently, we could respectively.1 The proposed have the authority to select an alternate not rewrite all of this subpart according amendments clarify the applicability of location. According to § 124.33(d), if the to plain language guidelines. We are the requirements in those sections to the Director found the site unsuitable for proposing, however, to amend certain standardized permit (in brief, the pre- the purposes and persons who need the sections to accommodate RCRA application requirements apply under repository, then the Director could standardized permit procedures. We the proposal, but the public notice at specify a more appropriate site, such as refer to these types of amendments as application does not since we are the local library. conforming changes. The proposed proposing to incorporate other notice standardized permit procedures requirements into proposed § 124.207). C. Where Would I Find the Procedures themselves would be in a separate We are not proposing any changes to Governing RCRA Standardized Permits? subpart, which we discuss later. § 124.33 Information repository (or to We are proposing a new subpart G to The conforming changes we propose existing § 270.30(m) Information 40 CFR part 124 that would contain the to the General Program Requirements repository). Under the proposal, the procedural requirements for the RCRA would ensure that we have fully Director of a regulatory agency could standardized permit. Although existing incorporated the standardized permit require you to establish and maintain an subpart B is reserved for specific into the existing regulations. For information repository whether you are procedures applicable to RCRA permits, example, we are proposing changes to applying for an individual permit or a there are an insufficient number of § 124.1 Purpose and Scope and § 124.2 standardized permit. Since we are available sections in that subpart to Definitions to include references to the proposing that anyone seeking accommodate all of the standardized RCRA standardized permit. standardized permits must certify that permit requirements. We are proposing We are also proposing to amend the information being maintained onsite to leave the RCRA expanded public § 124.5(c) to have the standardized is readily available to both the involvement requirements in subpart B, permit procedures apply in regulatory agency and the public (see and establish the RCRA standardized circumstances where an individual proposed § 270.280), we anticipate the permit procedures in subpart G, starting permit is being ‘‘revoked and reissued.’’ Director generally would not need to with § 124.200. Proposed Subpart G is This change would allow you to convert invoke the information repository organized into several subdivisions from an individual permit (if you requirement. We acknowledge, shown in Table 3.
TABLE 3.—SUBPART G ORGANIZATION
Centered headings Section numbers
General Information about Standardized Permits ...... §§ 124.200–124.201 Applying for a Standardized Permit ...... §§ 124.202–124.203 Issuing a Standardized Permit ...... §§ 124.204–124.206 Opportunities for Public Involvement in the Standardized Permit Process ...... §§ 124.207–124.210 Maintaining a Standardized Permit ...... §§ 124.211–124.213
1 Although we are proposing the conforming standardized permit procedures, we are not requirements into plain language during this rule changes necessary to accommodate the rewriting all of the expanded public participation development effort.
VerDate 11
III. Applying for a Standardized Permit discussions could also include such these materials should provide topics as planned procedures and sufficient information for the Director to A. How Would I Apply for a equipment for preventing or responding make a draft permit decision. Standardized Permit? to accidents or releases. Of course, the We are proposing that you submit We are proposing that you must public retains the opportunity to submit with your Notice of Intent a compliance follow the applicable requirements in 40 comments during the proposed formal certification as described in § 270.280. CFR part 124 subparts A, B, and G, as public comment period as well. These proposed regulations governing well as the requirements in 40 CFR part We would like to reaffirm our the compliance certification would 270 subpart I. The first activity you commitment to the policies we require you either to (1) certify would need to do is conduct a pre- expressed in the RCRA Public compliance with part 267 or, (2) if you application meeting with your Participation Manual (EPA530–R–96– determine that your facility is not in neighboring community (see § 124.31). 007, September 1996, available from the compliance, provide a description of After you hold the meeting, we are RCRA Hotline or at http://www.epa.gov/ what aspects of your operations are not proposing that you would submit a epaoswer/hazwaste/permit/pubpart/ in compliance with the part 267 notice of intent to operate under the manual.htm) for promoting successful regulations (specifying which standardized permit, along with a and equitable public involvement in regulations) and provide a schedule summary of the meeting and the RCRA permitting activities. We indicating when your facility will certifications and supporting documents encourage facilities, communities, and achieve compliance with RCRA we require under § 270.275, to the permitting agencies to refer to that regulations. As required by current Director of the appropriate regulatory Manual when planning public regulations, the schedule would be agency. In the remainder of this section involvement activities. The Manual subject to approval by the permitting we provide additional information on emphasizes the need to tailor activities authority and the permitting authority the proposal for a pre-application to the needs of the situation at hand. For would not make a final permit meeting and the Notice of Intent. example, if the community around a determination until after you have 1. Conduct a Pre-Application Meeting facility includes people who do not achieved compliance. speak English as their primary language, With the Community Under the proposal, you would have we encourage both facilities and to conduct an internal audit to complete We continue to be firmly committed permitting agencies to provide the compliance certification. We to public involvement in the permitting multilingual notices. process. As mentioned in Section II B: propose that this audit would be a How would the RCRA Public 2. Submit a Notice of Intent To Operate systematic, documented, and objective Participation Requirements Change?, we Under the Standardized Permit Along review of your operations and practices are proposing to apply the pre- With Appropriate Supporting related to meeting environmental application meeting requirement to Documents requirements to assess the compliance owners or operators of facilities seeking If you want to operate under a status prior to submitting the Notice of coverage under a RCRA standardized standardized permit, we are proposing Intent. You would need to include the permit. If we apply the requirements of that you must let the regulatory agency audit results with the compliance § 124.31 to the standardized permit know of your intent to do so. We are certification when you submit the process, you as the facility owner or proposing in § 124.202 to require certification to the regulatory agency as operator would be obligated to advertise owners or operators of facilities seeking a supporting document to your Notice of and host a meeting with your coverage under a RCRA standardized Intent. neighboring community before permit to submit a ‘‘notice of intent to B. How Would I Switch From an submitting your Part B application. This operate under the standardized permit.’’ Individual Permit to a Standardized meeting is intended as an important first This is consistent with the process and Permit? step in establishing good relations terminology currently used for NPDES between you and the community. general permits. We are proposing that you could As we said in the preamble for the We are also proposing you send in request the Director of the regulatory RCRA Expanded Public Participation with your notice of intent several agency to revoke your individual permit Final Rule (see 60 FR 63422–63423, supporting documents: The and reissue you a standardized permit. December 11, 1995), we do not expect certifications required under proposed We anticipate that some of you who such a meeting to be a forum for §§ 270.275 (which include the Part A currently operate under an individual examining technical aspects of your information, and pre-application permit may wish to convert to the facility operations in extensive detail. meeting summary with ancillary standardized permit, once regulations to Instead, the meeting should provide an materials) and 270.280 (which include establish such permits are promulgated. open, flexible, and informal occasion for the required certifications and audit We believe there would be advantages you and the public to share ideas, report). Section 270.280 would require to switching to the standardized permit. educate each other, and start building you to certify that your facility meets For example, the proposed technical the framework for a solid working the performance standards and waste requirements for the standardized relationship. Although we did not management unit design requirements permit (see part 267) would impose prescribe required discussion topics for of proposed Part 267. Section 124.31 significantly fewer reporting a pre-application meeting in the 1995 would require you to submit a summary requirements than part 264 (e.g. no Part final rule, we encourage you to address, of the pre-application meeting where B application submittal required at at the level of detail that is practical at you discussed with the community your initial permit stage or for permit the time of the meeting, such topics as: planned waste management activities. renewal), which in turn would reduce The type of facility, the location, the The RCRA Part A permit information your paperwork burden. Also, under general processes involved, the types of includes the types and volumes of today’s proposal, you would be able to wastes generated and managed, and hazardous waste that you will manage take advantage of the proposed implementation of waste minimization and the types of units that you will use. streamlined modification procedures for and pollution control measures. The As discussed later, we anticipate that any future changes to your facility.
VerDate 11
We are proposing that you could decision. Of course, you would not have the community’s concerns or proposed initiate the conversion at any point. If to wait until the end of the 120 days to conditions in the meeting summary that there is a substantial amount of time make your draft permit decision, and the facility owner or operator submits remaining in your permit term, you could provide notice of your decision with their notice of intent. For example, could initiate the conversion by earlier. You would need to follow many the community may express concern requesting to have your individual of the proposed requirements in part that certain waste management units are permit revoked and reissued as a 124 subpart A in processing the too close to the facility’s boundaries. To standardized permit. We propose this standardized permit application and address the concern, you might specify provision in § 124.203, which refers to preparing your draft permit decision. To how far back from the boundaries to the procedures in § 124.5 governing help you determine which requirements place the units. As another example, the revocation and reissuance of permits. apply, we propose in § 124.204(d), the community might have concerns or Under existing regulations (§ 124.5(a)), applicability of relevant subpart A pertinent information about the any interested person, including the sections in the context of the RCRA facility’s location in relation to local permittee, can request the regulatory standardized permit, as it would be flood patterns, especially if the facility agency to revoke and reissue a permit, administered by EPA. is located in a 100-year floodplain area. as long as the reasons are specified in In this section, we concentrate our (Under the § 267.18 locations standards, § 270.41. We are proposing to amend the discussion on three areas of the facilities can locate in the 100-year causes for revocation and reissuance in proposal: drafting terms and conditions floodplain only if the waste § 270.41(b) to add conversion from an for the supplemental portion, denying management units are properly individual permit to the standardized coverage under the standardized permit, designed, constructed and operated to permit. Once a permittee submits this and preparing your draft permit prevent damage during flooding events.) request, we propose applying the decision in 120 days. You may need to address this situation procedures for RCRA standardized 1. Drafting Terms and Conditions for the by imposing site-specific conditions permits in 40 CFR part 124 subpart G. Supplemental Portion similar to what would be considered If, on the other hand, you are nearing under the current individual permit If you, as the Director, decide to grant the end of your permit term, you could process. coverage under the standardized permit, convert simply by deciding to pursue Of course, under the proposal, a we are proposing that you must your permit renewal as a standardized facility owner or operator could tentatively identify appropriate facility- permit rather than as an individual voluntarily suggest additional permit specific conditions, if any, to impose in permit (see Section VIII B 4: Permit requirements in response to community the supplemental portion of the reapplication). concerns or to address corrective action. standardized permit, and include those We are proposing that a facility owner IV. Issuing a Standardized Permit conditions as part of the draft permit. or operator could include a statement (Note: If a need for additional facility- A. How Would the Regulatory Agency with their Notice of Intent specifying specific conditions arises after you make Prepare a Draft Standardized Permit? additional conditions they would like a permit determination, or any of the you to attach to their standardized We are proposing that you, as the facility-specific conditions you initially permit. Director of a regulatory agency, would included need to be amended at a later If you found that some of the general have to follow three steps to prepare a time, you could modify the permit at design or management standards of 40 draft standardized permit.2 First, you that time, in accordance with existing CFR part 267 are not adequate for a would review the incoming Notice of provisions in § 270.41.) These proposed particular facility, we are proposing that Intent and supporting information and facility-specific conditions would go you could determine that more stringent determine whether the facility is eligible beyond the nationwide conditions in standards would be necessary. We do for the standardized permit. Second, the uniform portion of the standardized not anticipate that more stringent you would tentatively decide whether to permit. We propose that the site-specific standards would be necessary in most grant or deny coverage under the conditions that you impose would be standardized situations. However, if you standardized permit. We are proposing those that, in your discretion, are determine more stringent standards are that, if you decide to grant coverage, you necessary for corrective action purposes necessary for a particular facility, then would then propose appropriate terms or otherwise to ensure protection of you would add conditions in the and conditions, if any, to include in the human health and the environment. supplemental portion of the supplemental portion of the permit. Your authority to impose permit standardized permit. Finally, you would prepare your draft conditions necessary for corrective We are proposing that you could permit decision within 120 days after action purposes comes from RCRA determine, in some situations, that there receiving the notice of intent and section 3004(u) and (v) and EPA is no need for additional site-specific supporting information. We propose in regulations at 40 CFR 267.101. Your conditions to satisfy regulatory § 124.204(c) that your tentative authority (and your obligation) to requirements or to ensure protection of determination either to grant coverage impose permit conditions that ensure human health and the environment, and under the standardized permit, protection of human health and the that a facility could operate under the including any tentatively identified environment (including conditions terms of the uniform portion of the facility-specific conditions in a requiring cleanup of any contamination permit alone. In these situations, you supplemental portion, or to deny not subject to 3004(u) and (v)) comes would simply not include any coverage under the standardized permit, from the ‘‘omnibus’’ provision of RCRA conditions, beyond those in the uniform would constitute a draft permit section 3005(c)(3) and EPA regulations portion, as part of the draft permit. This at 40 CFR 270.32(b)(2). scenario is certainly plausible, since 2 We are proposing that you would follow the We anticipate that in certain cases existing regulatory controls for the types standardized permit procedures if you are issuing communities may raise the need for site- of units eligible for the proposed an EPA standardized permit; you would follow equivalent state permitting procedures if you are specific conditions, or actually propose standardized permit (e.g., tanks, issuing a state permit in a state authorized to issue such conditions, during the proposed containers) generally do not need much standardized permits. pre-application meeting. You would see site-specific variation. Where a site
VerDate 11
requires corrective action, however, the believe it is appropriate to propose a the Director, would make a final corrective action requirements, which time limit for preparing standardized determination on your draft permit are generally not uniform among sites, permits. On the other hand, it is decision. In other words, you would could drive the need for supplemental important to allow a sufficient period of decide whether to grant or deny permit conditions. time for you to review the supporting coverage to a facility to operate under documents for information that may 2. Denying Coverage Under the the standardized permit. In arriving at influence your decision on a facility’s Standardized Permit your decision you would need to eligibility for the standardized permit or consider all significant comments on the We are proposing that you, as the prompt you to develop facility-specific draft decision that were raised during Director, could decide to tentatively conditions to include in a supplemental the public comment period or the public deny coverage under the standardized portion. We suggest that a limit of 120 hearing, if one took place. If you decide permit—for example, if a facility owner days would still provide a reasonable to grant coverage, you would, as part of or operator failed to submit all the amount of time for you to review the your final permit decision, make a final information required under § 270.275, supporting documents to (1) determine determination on the facility’s or if the facility does not meet the that the facility is in compliance with eligibility, and on the terms and eligibility requirements for a applicable regulations (in the case of conditions to include in the standardized permit (e.g., the facility’s existing facilities); (2) propose supplemental portion, if any. As we activities are outside the scope of the conditions that might be necessary for discuss below, we propose applying the standardized permit). We also propose corrective action purposes, or to current procedures for final issuance of that you could consider the facility’s otherwise ensure protection of public an individual permit, codified in compliance history, in situations where health and the environment; or (3) § 124.15, to the standardized permit as the facility is operating under RCRA propose conditions to address well. interim status or already has an community concerns raised in the early Once you issue a draft standardized individual permit and is choosing to public meeting. This time would also permit, we are proposing that you convert to the standardized permit. afford you the opportunity to consult would follow the same procedures for Given the self-implementing nature of with the community or the facility, if finalizing the permit that you use to the proposed requirements in the necessary to expand on the information finalize a draft individual permit for a uniform portion of the standardized submitted with the Notice of Intent. facility—i.e., you would generally permit, we believe that it is important We request your comments on follow the procedures of 40 CFR part that the facility demonstrate its ability whether 120 days is an appropriate time 124, subpart A, with the exception of to adhere to the regulations. If a facility frame for a draft permit decision, or certain steps as modified in subpart G. has a demonstrated history of not whether a longer or shorter time frame complying with applicable would be more suitable. We anticipate We propose in § 124.205 which requirements, it may not be a viable that the proposed 120-day period sections of part 124 subpart A would candidate for a standardized permit. We leading up to the draft permit decision apply to the preparation of your final welcome your comments on this issue. would provide sufficient time for you, permit decisions, in the context of a We are also proposing that you may as the Director, to decide whether to RCRA standardized permit process, as decide not to allow a facility to operate grant or deny coverage under the administered by EPA. These proposed under the standardized permit where standardized permit. We would also like procedures include, among other things, such a permit cannot ensure protection comments on whether we should allow requirements for responding to of human health and the environment, for a one-time extension to the time comments, establishing an even if additional site-specific limit, and what an appropriate amount administrative record, and the issuance conditions were imposed. We are of time for such an extension might be. and effective date of the final permit. proposing that facilities that you For example, if state and EPA regional For example, by applying the provisions determine are ineligible for the permitting authorities anticipate that in § 124.15 Issuance and effective date standardized permit would, of course, they might continue to have joint of the permit, we are proposing that still have the option of applying for an permitting issues under the your final permit decision would individual permit. standardized permit scenario (such as become effective 30 days after you those that currently exist under the announce it, with three possible 3. Preparing Your Draft Permit Decision exceptions: (1) You specify a later date in 120 Days individual permit scenario), how much additional time would be sufficient to in your notice of final determination; (2) Under proposed § 124.204(c), you, as address joint permitting or other types someone requests an appeal under the Director, would need to make a draft of permitting issues? Would a one-time, § 124.19 Appeal of RCRA, UIC, and PSD permit decision within 120 days of 90-day extension period be an Permits (§ 124.19 is referenced by receiving a notice of intent and appropriate amount of time to address § 124.210 May I, as an interested party supporting documents from the facility concerns? Is some other time period in the permit process, appeal a final owner or operator. The proposed 120- more appropriate? We would also like standardized permit?); or, (3) you day time frame for issuing the draft comments on whether to suspend the received no comments requesting a permit is a new concept in the RCRA 120 day ‘‘clock’’ if site-specific change in the terms and conditions in program. Although the existing process conditions require a comprehensive site the supplemental portion. In this third for RCRA individual permits requires visit and follow up by the permitting situation, the permit would become EPA to determine the completeness of authority. Under this approach the effective immediately upon issuance of an application within a set time frame review ‘‘clock’’ would be restarted after your notice. We welcome comments on (60 days), it does not impose any time the site-specific issues were resolved. whether it is appropriate to apply the limit for issuing a draft permit. To current provisions of § 124.15 for final ensure that the standardized permitting B. How Would the Regulatory Agency issuance of an individual permit to the process does, in fact, streamline the Prepare a Final Standardized Permit? process for issuing standardized administrative process and shorten the We are proposing that, after the close permits. However, we are not reopening time required to obtain the permit, we of the public comment period, you, as for comment the provisions of § 124.15
VerDate 11
or the Part 124 permit procedures more the public notice requirements are hold a public hearing whenever you generally. sufficient. find, on the basis of requests, a The public notice requirements we significant degree of public interest in C. In What Situations Could Facility are proposing in § 124.207 for your draft permit decision. You could Owners or Operators Be Required To announcing your draft permit decision also hold a public hearing at your Apply for an Individual Permit? for RCRA standardized permits mirror discretion, whenever, for instance, such the public notice requirements for We are proposing to provide the a hearing might clarify one or more individual RCRA permits that are flexibility for you, as the Director of a issues involved in your permit decision. specified in § 124.10(c). These current permitting agency, to require a facility However, as is the case for RCRA requirements specify how you must owner or operator to obtain an individual permits, we are proposing develop and maintain facility mailing individual permit (see § 124.206). We that you must hold a public hearing lists and to whom you must send public are also proposing to allow any whenever you receive written notice of notices. We are likewise proposing to interested person to petition you to opposition to a standardized permit and mirror the methods for distributing a request for a hearing within the public require a facility to get an individual public notices. For example, under comment period. The hearing should be permit. We do not anticipate that you proposed § 124.207, you would need to held at a location that is convenient to would invoke this provision very often. publish public notices in a local the community, for example, at a town There are at least two reasons for such newspaper and broadcast them over hall or school auditorium. As is the case a situation. The first is if the facility is local radio stations. in the individual permitting process, not eligible for the standardized permit. Section 124.207(c) lays out the you would need to automatically extend The second is if the facility has a poor proposed content for the notice, such as the public comment period to the close compliance record while operating contact people at both the facility and of any public hearing you schedule. under the standardized permit. Given the permitting agency, the location We also propose that the requirements the self-implementing nature of the where you put the draft standardized for providing public notice of the technical requirements applicable to the permit and the supporting information, hearing, and governing the manner in facility, we believe it will be important a brief description of the facility and its which the hearing will be conducted, be that the facility demonstrate its ability operations (including an address or a the same as those followed by the to adhere to the regulations. If a facility map showing the facility’s location), individual RCRA permitting process has consistently failed to fulfill this and an address people can write to join (see §§ 124.10(c), 124.12(b), (c), and (d)). obligation in the past, then it likely the facility’s mailing list. The notice We propose in § 124.208(d) that you warrants the more in-depth review that would also provide a mailing address to provide the public notice at least 30 occurs under the individual permit which people may direct comments, days before the hearing. This scenario. We are proposing that if you information, opinions and inquiries. We requirement is consistent with the decide to invoke this provision, you are also proposing that you would timing requirements in 124.10(b) for would have to provide notice to the provide public notice of your final individual permits. Under the proposal, facility of your decision, including a permit determination according to the you could give notice of the hearing at description of the reasons that led up to requirements in § 124.207. We believe the same time you provide public notice your decision. We are interested in you the information in this notice will of your draft permit decision, and you comments on this topic. provide the public an adequate could combine the two notices. V. Proposed Opportunities for Public opportunity to stay involved in the During the public comment period, Involvement in the Standardized standardized permitting process beyond we are proposing that interested parties could provide comments on your draft Permit Process the initial meeting with the facility owners or operators. We are interested permit decision, including the facility’s A. What Are the Proposed Requirements in your comments on the eligibility for the standardized permit. for Public Notices? appropriateness of this proposed public For example, they could ask you to notice procedure which is modeled after reconsider a facility’s eligibility to We propose in § 124.207 that you (the the existing individual RCRA permit operate under the standardized permit. Director) would issue a public notice public notice procedure. They could also comment on any site- announcing your draft permit decision, specific conditions, either those you and place in a location accessible to the B. What Are the Proposed Opportunities proposed in a draft supplemental community near the facility or at your for Public Comments and Hearings? portion, or those the commenters would office a copy of: the draft permit denial We are proposing that the notice like you to impose when you make your or the draft standardized permit described in § 124.207 would initiate a final permit decision. We discuss (including both the uniform portion and 45-day public comment period (see examples of site-specific conditions in the supplemental portion, if any); the proposed § 124.208). Anyone who Section IV A 1: Drafting terms and statement of basis or fact sheet; the chooses to comment on your draft conditions for the supplemental portion. facility’s notice of intent to operate standardized permit decision would We are also proposing that people could under the standardized permit; and the need to submit their comments to you also comment on your decision to deny supporting documents. We are limiting in writing. We are proposing a 45 days the permit because sufficient conditions these proposed requirements to the because it parallels the existing public could not be imposed. information that the facility owner or comment period on a draft individual Although we are proposing the terms operator actually submits to you, since RCRA permit. and conditions of the uniform portion we are proposing in § 270.280 that you During the public comment period, on a national basis in Part 267 (see would certify that the information that we are proposing that anyone could ask Section VII: Proposed Part 267 supports the Notice of Intent and the you to hold a public hearing. They Standards for Owners and Operators of certifications (e.g., all the technical would need to submit their request for Hazardous Waste Facilities Operating design information for the units) would a hearing to you in writing and would Under a Standardized Permit), which be available for review at the facility state the nature of the issues they want makes them subject to public comment itself. We request comments on whether to address in the hearing. You could and challenge as part of this rulemaking,
VerDate 11
we are also proposing that the public you may need to add to the or you may need to reflect may comment on the adequacy of those standardized permit for a particular administrative changes, like name terms and conditions in the context of facility. This provision parallels the changes or changes in ownership. a particular facility. In other words, if authority we have under 40 CFR We believe many changes to people believe there are site-specific 270.10(k). We are requesting your standardized permits, as proposed, can factors that impact the effectiveness of comments on this topic. occur without regulatory oversight or those national standards in protecting with greatly reduced regulatory human health and the environment, D. How could People Appeal a Final oversight and processing time. We also they can submit comments to this effect. Standardized Permit Decision Under the recognize that not all potential changes In this situation, the terms of the Proposal? are of the same magnitude, and thus not uniform portion would still apply to the We propose in § 124.210 to allow all potential changes need to follow one facility, but you could impose interested parties to appeal your final prescribed set of procedures. additional conditions in the EPA permit decision to EPA’s Consequently, we propose categorizing supplemental portion to ensure that the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) potential modifications to your facility indeed operates in a manner that within 30 days. Anyone who filed standardized permit into two categories: is protective of human health and the comments on the draft permit decision, Routine changes and significant environment. We request your either in writing or orally at the public changes. comments on the adequacy of the hearing, if one took place, could initiate B. What Are the Proposed Definitions of proposed opportunities for public an appeal. We are proposing that the Routine and Significant Changes? comments and hearings, and whether procedures for appealing permit they should be strengthened or even decisions in § 124.19 also apply to We are proposing to define routine relaxed (given that the management standardized permits. A petition to the changes as any changes that qualify as units potentially eligible for the EAB is currently a prerequisite to class 1 or 2 permit modifications under standardized permits are more seeking judicial review of a final permit 40 CFR 270.42 Appendix I (commonly straightforward). determination. Appeals of RCRA permit referred to as the permit modification actions are often resolved at the table). These types of changes typically C. What Are the Proposed Requirements include things such as: Administrative for Responding to Comments? administrative appeal step, and do not progress to judicial appeal. We believe and informational changes, changes in We are proposing that, at the time you the administrative appeal is important ownership or operational control, make your final decision on the draft to propose as part of the RCRA changes to allow less than 25% increase permit, you must also provide a standardized permitting procedures. in capacity of a hazardous waste response to comments you received Under today’s proposal, people could management unit, and changes to allow during the public comment period. We appeal the standardized permit, you to store different wastes at your propose in § 124.209 that the including any terms and conditions in facility as long as they undergo similar requirements for the response to the supplemental portion, only after you waste management processes. We are proposing to define significant comments under the standardized make your final permit decision. They changes as: (1) Any changes that qualify permit process be consistent with the could also appeal your decision about as class 3 permit modifications under 40 requirements under the individual the facility’s eligibility for the CFR 270.42 Appendix I, (2) any changes permit process. That is, your response standardized permit at this time (e.g., that are not specifically identified in would (1) specify any additional site- someone may challenge that the unit is Appendix I, or (3) any changes that specific conditions that you changed in not a tank but a thermal treatment unit, amend terms or conditions in the the final permit, and the reasons for the and thus not eligible for coverage under supplemental portion of your change, and (2) describe and respond to the proposed standardized permit). standardized permit. These types of all significant comments on the facility’s People could not, however, appeal the changes typically include such things as ability to meet the general requirements, terms and conditions of the uniform a greater than 25% increase in a unit’s and on any additional conditions portion. As we point out in Section V necessary to protect human health and capacity, as well as managing wastes B: What are the Proposed Opportunities the environment. You would make your that you did not previously identify and for Public Comments and Hearings?, we response to comments available to the which require different management are proposing to promulgate the uniform public. We are also proposing that you processes than those you currently use. portion of the permit as regulation, would include in the administrative We decided to propose categorizing which would make it subject to public record for your final permit decision modifications in this way because it is notice and comment procedures that are any documents cited in your response to consistent with the approach we used in an integral component of our rule- comments. If new points are raised or the existing RCRA pre-application making process. Once the uniform new material supplied during the public meeting requirements in § 124.31(a). In portion becomes a final rule, it could comment period, you could document applying those requirements, we are not be challenged after 90 days under your response to those matters by proposing that the pre-application RCRA section 7006(a)(1). adding new materials to the meeting would only apply to renewal administrative record. VI. Maintaining a Standardized Permit applications in cases where the facility We are also proposing to allow you to owner or operator was proposing a request additional information from the A. What Types of Changes Could significant change in facility operations. facility (i.e., information beyond that Owners or Operators Make? Additionally, in § 124.31(a) we said that submitted with their notice of intent Regardless of what type of permit you for the purposes of that section, ‘‘a and supporting documents). We are (the owner or operator) may have, you ‘significant change’ is any change that including this provision to address will likely need to modify your permit would qualify as a class 3 permit situations that may arise when you need over time to reflect changes in your modification under 40 CFR 270.42.’’ additional information to adequately facility’s design or operations. For We would like people to comment on respond to the comments, or to make example, you may add new units or whether these categories are decisions about additional conditions start managing a different waste stream, appropriate, and whether the
VerDate 11
procedures we describe in the following application, it would not make sense to post a sign-in sheet or otherwise provide two sections correctly reflect the submit modifications to that a voluntary opportunity for attendees to appropriate level of regulatory oversight information. In other words, the provide their names and addresses. necessary for these levels of changes. Of information would not be part of a We are proposing that, after the public particular interest to us is whether permit application and would not result meeting on the modifications you want changes in ownership or operational in any facility-specific permit to make, you would submit a control should be included with routine conditions that the Director would need modification request to the Director. In changes. Is there a need for the to modify. We are proposing that, your request, you would describe the permitting authority to evaluate the regardless of what routine changes you exact changes you want to make, impacts of owner or operator changes on make, you would still need to operate identify whether they are changes to the existing permits prior to such changes your facility in accordance with the information you submitted under 40 being made (as currently provided for in proposed design and management CFR 270.275 or to terms and conditions §§ 270.40 and 270.42), to confirm that standards of part 267, and you would in the supplemental portion of your the new owner(s) or operator(s) are still be bound by the certifications standardized permit, and you would legitimate and financially capable of submitted with the notice of intent to explain why you need to make the complying with the facility’s closure operate under the standardized permit. changes. You would also include a and post-closure care responsibilities We request your comments on these summary of the meeting, the list of and corrective action obligations, if any? proposed procedures. attendees, and copies of any written comments or materials people C. What Are the Proposed Standardized D. What Are the Proposed Standardized submitted at the meeting. We propose Permit Procedures for Making Routine Permit Procedures for Making that the Director would then have 120 Changes? Significant Changes? days to make a tentative determination We propose in § 124.212 to allow you If you want to make significant to approve or not approve your to make routine changes without prior changes to your facility, you would modification request. approval by the regulatory agency. If the need to follow a set of procedures we The proposed 120-day time frame for changes amend any of the information are proposing in § 124.213 that closely the Director to make a tentative you submitted under proposed resemble the initial standardized determination on the modification § 270.275, however, you would need to permitting process. Under the proposed request is the same as the proposed 120- submit the revised information to the § 124.213 procedures, you would day time frame that the Director would Director before you make the change. initiate the process for making have to make a draft decision about your For example, § 270.275(a) would require significant changes by publishing a initial standardized permit. We solicit you to provide the Part A information to notice announcing a public meeting on comments in Section IV A 3: Preparing the Director. The Part A form includes your permit modification request. Since your draft permit decision in 120 days, information such as your name and the site-specific conditions by their very on the appropriateness of the 120-day address. If you change ownership or nature relate directly to your facility and time frame. If we adopt a different time operational control of your facility, this your neighboring community, and could frame in the initial process in response would be a routine change (it is a type be the direct result of community input, to comments on this proposal, we plan of class 1 modification in § 270.42 we believe it is important to make sure to make the same change in the Appendix I) which you can make the community is aware of potential modification process as well. without obtaining approval from the changes to those conditions. Therefore, Nevertheless, we request comments on Director. However, the Director would we propose requiring you to advertise our assumption that the modification need to know of these types of changes and conduct a meeting with the public process would require the same level of (for purposes including accountability about the proposed modifications. This effort as the initial process. and liability), and so it would be meeting would be similar to the pre- We are proposing that, once the important for the Director to have the application meeting you must conduct Director makes a tentative revised information. In cases where you as part of the initial standardized determination on your modification have to provide notice to the Director, permitting process.3 For example, as request, the remaining procedures you would also provide notice of the proposed, you would hold both governing the initial standardized changes to the facility mailing list and meetings prior to submitting the notice permitting process, i.e., the procedures to appropriate units of state and local of intent either to operate under the for providing public notice of the government before putting the changes standardized permit or to modify the tentative determination, public in place. standardized permit. As in the case of comment, public hearings, final We are not proposing to require you the initial meeting, you would provide determination, response to comments, to provide advance notice of all routine notice of the meeting about the and appeals, would apply to the changes. Some types of modifications proposed changes at least 30 days modification process as well. We that qualify as routine may not amend beforehand and in the same manner request your comments on the information submitted under § 270.275. (i.e., as required by § 124.31(d). During applicability of these proposed For example, some changes could be the meeting, you would solicit questions procedures to the modification process. within the scope of the uniform portion from the community and inform the of your standardized permit (e.g., a less community of the proposed changes to E. What Would Be the Proposed Process than 25% capacity increase in a unit). your facility’s hazardous waste for Renewing Standardized Permits? Under the proposed standardized management activities. Also, as in the We examined the possibility of having permit scheme, you would not provide case with the initial meeting, you would a standardized permit remain in effect detailed information about the technical for the entire life of a facility. The aspects of your operations. You would 3 The meeting we propose here is also consistent Agency’s Permits Improvement Team instead certify that you meet the with current class 3 modification regulations for (PIT) included this as a possible individual permits. Those regulations include a technical standards in part 267. Since requirement for you to conduct a public meeting as approach for streamlined permitting you would not submit the detailed part of the modification process (see 40 CFR procedures in its recommendation for a information as part of the permit 270.42(c)(4)). RCRA standardized permit. However,
VerDate 11
we are bound by statute (under RCRA waste requirements that we propose on how your facility is meeting the Section 3005(c)(3), see also § 270.50)) to standardized permitted facilities must performance standards and unit-specific limit the lifetime of a RCRA permit to meet. The specific topics that will be requirements found in part 267, and a maximum of 10 years in length, and discussed are: would keep this information on-site at so are not proposing any new provisions 1. General Facility Standards the facility. You would not have to to govern renewals of standardized 2. Preparedness and Prevention submit this information to the permits. 3. Contingency Plans and Emergency permitting agency for review and Under current regulations (see Procedures approval. Table 4 offers a comparison of §§ 270.11(h) and 270.30(b)), if you wish 4. Record Keeping, Reporting, and the waste management standards found to continue an activity regulated by your Notifying in part 264 (for the individual permit) permit after the expiration date of your 5. Releases from Solid Waste and in part 267 (for the standardized permit you must submit a new Management Units permit). 6. Closure of Units application at least 180 days before the We request comment on all aspects of expiration date unless you have 7. Financial Requirements 8. Use of Management of Containers the proposed part 267 rules. Since many obtained permission for a later date. 9. Tank Systems, and of these provisions are restatements of This same provision applies to you if 10. Containment Buildings. the existing part 264 regulations in plain you operate under an individual permit, We are proposing to add a new part language format, we particularly invite and would apply if you had a to the RCRA hazardous waste standards comment on whether, in rewriting and standardized permit. To renew a that specifies the general facility reorganizing the existing part 264 standardized permit, you would follow requirements and the unit specific requirements, we inadvertently changed the same procedures as you would to standards for RCRA hazardous waste their meaning. As noted previously, initially obtain coverage under the facilities operating under a standardized however, we are not reopening the standardized permit (those in 40 CFR permit. These proposed requirements existing regulations to public comment, part 124 subpart G). would form the basis of the ‘‘uniform’’ except those provisions explicitly VII. Proposed Part 267 Standards for portion of the standardized permit. modified by this proposal. Nevertheless, Owners and Operators of Hazardous Specifically, during the standardized we request comments on whether each Waste Facilities Operating under a permit application process, you, as the of these existing requirements should Standardized Permit facility owner or operator, would certify apply (and to what extent) to units that you are meeting the performance covered by standardized permits, which A. Overview standards and waste management unit we consider inherently more This section of the preamble discusses design requirements of part 267. You straightforward than other types of the specific part 267 RCRA hazardous would prepare specific documentation management units.
TABLE 4.—TECHNICAL STANDARD COMPARISON
Individual permits Proposed Standardized Permit
Applicability: Facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste ...... ✔ Only for facilities that store or non-thermally treat hazardous waste on-site in ✔ tanks, containers, or containment buildings. General Facility Standards: EPA identification numbers ...... ✔✔ Waste analysis plans ...... ✔✔ Security ...... ✔✔ Inspection schedules ...... ✔✔ Personnel training ...... ✔✔ Preventive measures ...... ✔✔ Floodplain and seismic location standards ...... ✔✔ Construction quality assurance ...... ✔ Preparedness/Prevention: Requirements for minimizing threats from unplanned events ...... ✔✔ Contingency Plan and Emergency Procedures: Requirements for contingency plans that describe how hazards from fire/explo- ✔✔ sion/and other releases will be minimized. Manifest system, record keeping and reporting: Requirements for keeping: manifests for wastes accepted from off-site ...... ✔ Operating records ...... ✔✔ Other records ...... ✔✔ Releases from Solid Waste Management Units: Requirements for ground water monitoring ...... ✔ solid waste management unit corrective action ...... ✔✔ Closure: Requirements for facility closure including: Closure performance standards ...... ✔✔ A closure plan ...... ✔✔ However, closure plan not submitted until 6 months prior to closure. Time for closure ...... ✔✔ Post-closure ...... ✔ Financial Assurance:
VerDate 11
TABLE 4.—TECHNICAL STANDARD COMPARISON—Continued
Individual permits Proposed Standardized Permit
Requirements for financial assurance for closure, post-closure, and liability ...... ✔✔ Except financial assurance for post-clo- sure and non-sudden liability require- ments are not applicable. Management Standards for Containers: Requirements for management of containers and container storage areas, and ✔✔ closure. Tank Systems: Requirements for design and installation of tanks, containment of releases, oper- ✔✔ ating standards, inspections, and closure. Except no waiver provision from sec- ondary containment, no underground tanks allowed, and clean closure re- quired. Containment Buildings: Requirements for design and operation, and closure ...... ✔✔ Except, clean closure required.
We believe that the current minimum categories of facilities are exempt from subjected to RCRA permitting, and who national requirements for hazardous the part 264 regulations, and the submit appropriate notification and a waste management in tanks, containers, proposed part 267 regulations would Part A permit application have ‘‘interim and containment buildings found in 40 include the same exemptions. status.’’ The proposed § 267.2 CFR Part 264 are appropriate for First, the existing part 261 regulations provisions are similar to those found in facilities covered under the proposed contain requirements for the the current § 264.3. Under the proposed standardized permit. Therefore, we are identification and listing of hazardous provisions, if you are currently proposing to incorporate most of the waste and also discuss several waste complying with the requirements for part 264 standards for owners and streams that are not hazardous waste. interim status as defined in section operators of hazardous waste facilities Facilities that manage these exempted 3005(e) of RCRA and qualifying for into the proposed part 267 standards wastes and non-hazardous waste are not interim status under § 270.70, you with minor changes necessary to currently subject to the part 264 would be required to continue to accommodate the intent of the standards. Similarly, we are proposing comply with the interim status standardized permit. For example, we that facilities managing these excluded standards specified in part 265 until made some changes to accommodate the wastes would not be subject to the final disposition of your standardized reduced level of interaction under the proposed part 267 standards. permit application. standardized permit between the Second, § 264.1(f) currently provides 3. How Would This Subpart Affect an permitting agency and the facility owner an exemption from the part 264 Imminent Hazard Action? or operator. Other changes were made to regulations for facilities that manage make the part 267 standards more hazardous waste if the state in which Proposed § 267.3 repeats the readable. We believe that the proposed the hazardous waste management provisions found currently in § 264.4 part 267 standards provide the same activity is occurring has a RCRA concerning imminent and substantial baseline of protection that the part 264 hazardous waste program authorized hazards. As this proposed provision standards do. under part 271 of this chapter. The states, the permitting agency could issue B. Subpart A—General proposed part 267 regulations would enforcement orders to a facility if an also contain this provision. imminent and substantial endangerment 1. What Are the Purpose, Scope, and Finally, existing § 264.1(g) to human health or the environment is Applicability of This Proposed Part? requirements provide an exemption present, even if the facility is complying In § 267.1, we discuss the purpose, from the part 264 regulations for various with the proposed part 267 provisions. facilities and individuals who manage scope, and applicability of the part 267 C. Subpart B—General Facility hazardous waste, such as small quantity regulations. The purpose of proposed Standards part 267 would be to establish minimum waste generators, certain recyclers, national standards for facilities farmers disposing of waste pesticides, to This section of the preamble discusses managing waste under a standardized name a few. The proposed part 267 the general facility standards that we are permit. As discussed previously in regulations would also contain the proposing for standardized permitted Section I C 4: Who would be Eligible for § 264.1(g) exemption provisions. facilities. These proposed general a Standardized Permit?, facilities that facility standards are similar to the 2. What Is the Proposed Relationship to generate waste and then manage the general facility standards currently Interim Status Standards? waste on-site in tanks, containers, or found in the 40 CFR part 264 subpart B. containment buildings would be eligible The provisions of proposed § 267.2 They describe how you would obtain an for a standardized permit under today’s discuss the relationship of the EPA identification number, and what proposal. The proposed part 267 standardized permit requirements to the the proposed requirements would be for regulations would apply to owners and interim status standards. Under section waste analysis, site security, general operators of facilities who non- 3005(e) of RCRA, owners and operators inspection schedule, employee training, thermally treat or store waste under a of hazardous waste treatment, storage, managing ignitable, reactive, or standardized permit as described in and disposal facilities in existence on incompatible waste, and locations § 270.67. We explain that three November 19, 1980 or when they are standards. We are requesting your
VerDate 11
comments on the appropriateness of be required to develop a waste analysis requirements. We invite comment on these proposed general facility plan and keep it at your facility. You the inclusion of this proposed standards. can find the proposed waste analysis exemption for standardized permits. Do plan requirements in § 267.13(b). The you believe that the exemption from 1. Would This Subpart Apply to Me? waste analysis plan would describe security provisions is appropriate for Section 267.10 contains the proposed sampling and analytical procedures. facilities operating under standardized applicability language of this subpart. The purpose of the waste analysis plan permits? This section states that ‘‘this subpart would be to ensure that you possess applies to you if you own or operate a sufficient information on the properties 6. What Are the Proposed General facility that treats or stores hazardous of the waste to be able to treat or store Inspection Schedule Requirements? waste under a part 270 subpart I the waste in a safe manner. The waste We propose requiring you to make the standardized permit, except as provided analysis plan required by proposed general inspection schedule, as well as in § 267.1(b).’’ We repeat this § 267.13 (b) should be the same level of the inspection logs or summaries, as applicability language in all the detail as the existing plan currently described in proposed § 267.15, readily proposed subparts of part 267. required by § 264.13. You would be required to specify in the plan the level available at your facility. You would 2. How Would I Comply With This of analysis you would perform on your generally develop and follow your own Subpart? waste and the frequency with which written inspection schedules. You Proposed § 267.11 lists the steps that you would repeat the analysis. would be required to base the written you would take if this subpart applies inspection schedule described in to you. Specifically, you would obtain 5. What Are the Proposed Security proposed § 267.15 on your facility’s an EPA identification number, and Requirements? critical processes, equipment, and follow prescribed requirements for The facility security procedures we structures, and on the potential for waste analysis, security, inspections, proposed in § 267.14 are important failure and the rate of deterioration training, special waste handling, and factors in the safe management of processes (for example, corrosion) that location standards. hazardous waste. These proposed may lead to failure (just as is required requirements are similar to the security currently in § 264.15). We are proposing 3. How Would I Obtain an Identification requirements found in current § 264.14. to retain minimum inspection Number? The provisions of § 267.14 would requirements and schedules for tanks, Proposed § 267.12 repeats the require you to have security procedures containers, and containment buildings. requirement found currently in § 264.11 that prevent the unknowing entry of You would be required to incorporate on identification numbers with the people and minimize the potential for these inspection schedules into your addition of who to contact for the unauthorized entry of people or written inspection schedules. You information. Permitting agencies use a livestock onto the active portion of the would document all repairs and facility’s identification number to track facility. We are proposing that, during responses to problems noted during the operations at the facility and to enter inspection of the facility, the permitting inspections in your inspection log and the facility in their hazardous waste agency could review the security keep the documentation with the facility data system. The existing notice procedures and determine if the inspection schedule. Several of the requirements of § 264.12(a) and (b) are components of the security system are regulatory citations currently in not applicable to the proposed in place and in working order. § 264.15(b)(4) are not appropriate standardized permit situation because, If you wish an exemption to any because they refer to units that are not under this proposal, no waste would be component of the security system, as eligible for the proposed standardized coming onto a standardized permitted provided under the proposed provisions permit (for example, thermal treatment facility from any off-site sources. The in § 267.14(a) (similar to provisions of units and land disposal units); therefore, existing requirements of § 264.12(c), § 264.14), you would be required to we are not including these citations in stipulating that you notify a new owner prepare a written justification and keep the proposed § 267.15(b)(3) or operator of your facility of the it readily available on-site at your requirements. requirements of both this part and part facility. This procedure is different from 270, are included in proposed subpart E the existing § 264.14 provisions in that 7. What Training Would my Employees (Record keeping, reporting, and you would not make the demonstration be Required to Have? notifications). to the Director, but instead self-certify that you qualify for the exemption. This The purpose of the training 4. What Are the Proposed Waste self-certification is similar to the requirement is to reduce the potential Analysis Requirements? demonstration currently available to for mistakes that might threaten human Proposed § 267.13 discusses general interim status facilities under § 265.14. health or the environment by ensuring waste analysis requirements and repeats The proposed § 267.14 provision that facility personnel are most of the requirements currently contains two conditions for the knowledgeable in the areas to which found in § 264.13 except for those exemption: (1) If unauthorized entry they are assigned. The proposed specific to off-site generated waste and will not result in injury to people or standards found in § 267.16 are land disposal units, which are not livestock who might enter the facility, essentially the same as the training proposed to be eligible for standardized and (2) if such entry will not result in standards currently in § 264.16, and permits. We are not proposing to injury to the environment (for example, include requirements that specify what include in § 267.13 off-site waste and as a result of disturbing the waste or the training your personnel would be disposal units discussed in equipment within the active portion of required to have and when they need to §§ 264.13(a)(3)(ii), (a)(4), (b)(5), (b)(7), the facility). Because past experience receive training to do their jobs. You and (c). shows us that these two conditions are would be required to keep a description Under the standardized permit rarely satisfied, we do not expect many of the training program and individual procedures proposed in § 270.67, you, of you would be able to qualify for the personnel training logs with the other as the facility owner or operator, would proposed exemption from security required records at your facility.
VerDate 11
8. What Are the Proposed Requirements allowing facilities to locate within a 1. What Are the Proposed General for Managing Ignitable, Reactive, or 100-year floodplain as long as the Design and Operation Standards? Incompatible Waste? facility meets proper design, Proposed § 267.31 would require you We propose general requirements for construction, and operating to design, construct, maintain, and handling ignitable, reactive, or requirements to prevent washout, and to operate your facility to minimize threats incompatible waste in § 267.17 which seek a waiver if the facility can remove to human health and the environment are similar to the existing requirements the waste before flood waters can reach caused by the release of waste being found in § 264.17. These general the facility. If a waiver is granted, the managed at the facility from a fire, requirements minimize the potential for facility to where the waste is moved explosion or any unplanned event. This accidents when you handle ignitable or would be required to either have a is the same provision that is found in reactive waste, or when you mix RCRA permit to manage that particular existing § 264.31. incompatible wastes. Extreme heat or waste or have interim status. We invite 2. What Equipment Would I Be pressure, fires, explosions, violent comments on whether we should retain Required To Have? reactions, or damage to the structural the floodplain waste removal waiver in Proposed § 267.32 would require you integrity of the device or unit containing the standardized permit. It has been our to have certain equipment at the facility, the waste are clearly undesirable experience that the submittal and because of the likelihood that they will including an alarm system, approval of any waiver involves a communication equipment, fire cause injury or death or release lengthy review process. This review hazardous waste into the environment. extinguishers and fire control process may defeat the streamlined equipment, and either water for hose 9. What Are the Proposed Standards for permitting goal of the standardized streams, foam equipment, or water spray Selecting the Location of my Facility? permit. systems. This proposed provision would The proposed technical standards The § 264.18(b)(ii) provisions are also allow you to not have certain would require you to comply with specific to land disposal waste equipment if the potential hazards at the location standards described in management activities and is not facility don’t warrant having the § 267.18. These standards are similar to applicable to the standardized permit equipment. This proposed section the location standards currently found situation. Therefore, these requirements differs from the existing § 264.32 in that in § 264.18. We believe that the location have not been added to the proposed the Director would not have to make a determination about whether your characteristics of a facility are an § 267.18(b) provisions. important consideration in ensuring safe facility can be exempt from having some waste management. The hazards a 10. Would I Be Required To Have a of the required equipment. However, facility could present to human health Construction Quality Assurance you would be required to keep and the environment may be increased Program? documentation supporting any by locating a facility in certain areas. equipment exemption at the facility and No, under the proposed rule, you These proposed location standards are you would make the documentation would not need a construction quality designed to reduce these additional available for review by the permitting agency and the public. In this respect, risks. We believe that you should be assurance program because you are not the proposed § 267.32 is the same as the required to submit the information managing waste in land disposal units. current § 265.32 regulation governing required by the location standards to the The existing § 264.19 construction interim status facilities. permitting agency, because the location quality assurance program has of the facility is a site-specific factor that provisions that are applicable to surface 3. What Are the Proposed Testing and determines its suitability for hazardous impoundments, waste piles, and landfill Maintenance Requirements for the waste management activities. We units. Because these units are Equipment? considered land disposal units and not discuss the submittal of this information Proposed § 267.33 would require you to the permitting agency in more detail eligible for a proposed standardized to test and maintain, as necessary, all later in Section IX B: What Information permit, the construction quality the equipment proposed in § 267.32 so would I need to submit to the Permitting assurance program is not included in that it would be ready when needed. Agency to Support my Standardized the proposed part 267 requirements. This provision is the same as the Permit Application? Therefore, we did not include a section requirements currently found in The proposed location standards containing those provisions. § 264.33. found in § 267.18 would restrict the siting and waste management activities D. Subpart C—Preparedness and 4. When Would Personnel Be Required of facilities in floodplains and seismic Prevention To Have Access to Communication Equipment or an Alarm System? zones. We determined in 1981 that This proposed subpart contains waste management activities should be standards that would require you, as the Proposed § 267.34 would require all restricted in those two areas because of personnel involved in waste handling to owner or operator of a hazardous waste the risks that these locations pose. have ready access to the communication The existing § 264.18(c) provision that facility, to minimize threats to human equipment and alarms, including sets forth location standards for salt health and the environment caused by situations when only one employee is domes, salt bed formations, and the release of waste from a fire, working at the facility. The requirement underground mines and caves is not explosion or any unplanned event. would not apply when the equipment is included in the proposed location Except where noted, the proposed not required under proposed § 267.32. standards of § 267.18 because this requirements of this subpart are the As opposed to the existing requirements provision deals with hazardous waste same as those currently found in in § 264.34, no prior determination by disposal which is not eligible for a subpart C of part 264. We are requesting the Regional Administrator would be proposed standardized permit. your comments on these proposed required for the exemption. However, The proposed § 267.18 standards preparedness and prevention you should keep documentation retain the existing § 264.18(b) provisions requirements. supporting the exemption at your
VerDate 11
facility, and would be required to make 1. What Is the Purpose of the Proposed 3. Who Would Be Required To Have it available for review by the public and Contingency Plan and How Would I Use Copies of the Contingency Plan? the permitting Agency. This is the same it? Section 267.53, as proposed, would approach applicable to interim status require that you keep a current copy of The proposed provisions of § 267.51 facilities under existing § 265.34. the plan at your facility and give copies would require you to have a to all local authorities, including 5. How Would I Ensure Access for contingency plan at your facility. The hospitals, that may be called in the Personnel and Equipment During purpose of the plan is to minimize event of an emergency. This Emergencies? hazards to human health or the requirement is the same as the provision environment whenever a fire, explosion Proposed § 267.35 would require you in current § 264.53. You may choose, in or unplanned event results in the to maintain sufficient aisle space to the interests of promoting good release of hazardous waste or hazardous allow for rapid remediation of any community relations, to provide a copy waste constituents. You would be emergency. The aisle space should be of the plan to the heads of any local required to comply with the proposed community groups as well. EPA has wide enough to allow personnel, fire requirements of § 267.51 immediately learned anecdotally that communities protection equipment, spill control whenever there is a fire, explosion, or can be very interested in this type of equipment, and decontamination release of hazardous waste or hazardous information. equipment to move to any facility constituents that could threaten human operation in the case of an emergency. 4. When Would I Have To Revise the health or the environment. The This provision is the same as the current Contingency Plan? proposed requirements in § 267.51 are § 264.35 requirement, except for the Proposed § 267.54 lists the criteria the same as the provisions currently provision for a waiver in § 264.35. We that dictate when you would need to found in § 264.51. have not provided for a waiver in revise the contingency plan. The proposed § 267.35 because we do not 2. What Would Be Required To Be in proposed § 267.54 requirements are the believe, under the proposed my Contingency Plan? same as provisions currently found in standardized permit, that a situation § 264.54. Factors that would require you would arise when sufficient aisle space Under proposed § 267.52, you would to modify the contingency plan include should not nor could not be provided. be required to include the following in changes in any of the lists of equipment your contingency plan: a description of or emergency coordinators, a failure of 6. What Arrangements Would I Be the planned response to emergencies at the plan when it was implemented, Required To Make With Local your facility; any arrangements with permit revision, and changes in design, Authorities for Emergencies? local and state agencies to provide construction, operation, or maintenance emergency response support (§ 267.36); that materially increase the potential for The proposed § 267.36 provisions a list of your facility’s emergency harm to human health or the would require you to attempt to make coordinators, a list of your facility’s environment. arrangements with local police, fire and emergency equipment; and an emergency response authorities, and 5. What Is the Proposed Role of the evacuation plan, where necessary. The Emergency Coordinator? hospitals to assist in responding to primary purpose of the proposed emergencies. These requirements are Section 267.55, as proposed, would contingency plan is to ensure that you similar to those found in existing require at least one employee to be have anticipated potential emergencies § 264.37 and include provisions on responsible for coordinating all and have developed appropriate familiarizing emergency response emergency responses. The employee response plans. Under EPA’s existing personnel with the facility layout, may be either at the facility or on call, ‘‘one-plan’’ guidance for contingency properties of the wastes you manage, and would be required to be planning (61 FR 28641, June 5, 1996), knowledgeable of all aspects of the possible evacuation routes, and types of you are currently allowed to consolidate contingency plan, the facility injuries or illnesses that could result multiple plans that may be required operations, the waste handled, location from fires, explosions, or releases at the under various regulations into one of records, and facility layout. Equally facility. You would be required to functional emergency response plan. important, the employee should be able document, in the facility’s operating Facilities that are required to comply to commit necessary resources to record, any refusal on the part of any of with the existing § 264.52 requirements, implement the contingency plan. the State or local authorities to enter are allowed to meet these requirements Existing § 264.55 has the same into such arrangements. by following the ‘‘one-plan’’ guidance. requirements. E. Subpart D—Contingency Plan and Likewise, if you need to comply with 6. What Are the Proposed Emergency Emergency Procedures proposed § 267.52 requirements, you Procedures for the Emergency would not need to prepare a separate Coordinator? This proposed subpart contains plan if you already had a contingency standards that would require your Proposed § 267.56, which elaborates plan that followed the ‘‘one-plan’’ on the responsibilities of the emergency facility to have a contingency plan that guidance. The proposed requirements of coordinator, is the same as the existing describes how hazards to human health § 267.52 are similar to the current provisions found in § 264.56. and the environment will be minimized. provisions of § 264.52. However, Applicable responsibilities vary with The requirements of this proposed proposed § 267.52 does not include the type and variety of waste handled and subpart are similar to the provisions existing requirement of § 264.52(d) to the complexity of the facility. The currently found in subpart D of part 264, submit the compliance plan information responsibilities include the following: with the exception that you would not at the time of certification. However, activating alarms; notifying appropriate be required to submit the plan with your this information would be kept at the State and local authorities, as needed; application. facility as proposed by § 270.290(g). identifying the nature, source, and extent of any release; assessing possible
VerDate 11
hazards to human health or the 2. What Information Would I Need To 4. What Reports Would I Need To environment; and monitoring for leaks, Keep? Prepare and Who Would I Need To pressure buildups, gas generation, or Send Them to? Proposed § 267.71 would require you ruptures, as appropriate. Proposed § 267.73 contains the same to maintain a record of operations at Proposed § 267.57 discusses actions requirement for submitting a biennial your facility. This provision is similar to that the emergency coordinator would report as the existing requirements of be required to take after an emergency. the current requirements found in § 264.75. As with 264.75, the report These actions include the following: the § 264.73. You would be required to keep covers a facility’s activities including: treatment, storage, or disposal of any the operating record at your facility the method of treating or storing waste, materials or waste that result from a until final closure of your facility. The the most recent cost estimate for release, fire, or explosion at the facility; information that you would place in the closure, waste reduction efforts, and and the examination and replacement, if operating record includes the following: changes in waste volume and toxicity. necessary, of any emergency equipment descriptions and quantities of waste Section 264.75(c) and (d), which applies you use in response to the emergency. handled, location of the wastes at the to off-site facilities and wastes received, This provision corresponds to existing facility, results of waste analyses and have not been included in proposed § 264.56(g) and (h). determinations, reports of incidents that § 267.73, because the proposed Proposed § 267.58 identifies your required implementing the contingency standardized permit does not apply to responsibilities, as the owner or plan, inspection reports, monitoring and such facilities. operator of a hazardous waste testing data, closure cost estimates, Because the existing § 264.76 management facility, operating under a waste minimization certification, and provision for unmanifested waste report standardized permit. You would be information required under the land applies to facilities that receive waste required to notify the Director and disposal restrictions found in part 268 from off-site, which is not currently appropriate state and local authorities of this chapter. Under existing § 268.7, allowed under the proposed about details of the incident that if a generator sends waste off-site for standardized permit rule, that section required implementing the contingency land disposal, the generator must has not been included in proposed plan. This provision corresponds to determine if the waste has to be treated § 267.73. Proposed § 267.73 also lists reports, in existing § 264.56 (i) and (j) . before it can be land disposed. The addition to the biennial report, that you generator must keep records that were F. Subpart E—Recordkeeping, would have to submit in special Reporting, and Notifying used to make this determination. circumstances. You would report on Because proposed part 267 only applies fires, releases, and explosions at your This proposed subpart of 267 contains to the on-site storage and treatment of facility and report when your facility the standardized permit record keeping, hazardous waste, certain existing closes. You would also submit any other reporting and notifying requirements. paragraphs in § 264.73 were not reports required for container storage included in the proposed § 267.71 1. When Would I Need To Manifest my units, tanks, and containment buildings, standards. Waste? and reports required under the air 3. What Records Would I Provide to the standards in part 264 subparts AA, BB, and CC. Because the part 267 standardized Permitting Agency? permit regulations, as proposed, would 5. What Notifications Would Be not apply to facility owners and Proposed § 267.72 stipulates that you Required? operators who receive waste from off- would furnish all records required in site, the requirements currently found in this part upon request to the permitting If your facility changes owner or operator, you would be required to § 264.71 (a), (b), and (d) are not included authority. This is the same requirement notify that person, in writing, of the in § 267.71. Existing regulations that currently found in § 264.74. It should be apply to waste sent from the generator proposed requirements of § 267.74 as noted that proposed part 270 subpart I well as those in proposed part 270. § 264.71(c), has been retained in requires many of the same records be proposed § 267.70. This is because there made available to the public for review. G. Subpart F—Releases From Solid could be situations where waste However, the Agency is not proposing Waste Management Units generated, stored, or treated at a facility to make the entire operating record operating under a standardized permit 1. Would This Proposed Rule Require available for public review. This is the could be shipped off-site for final me To Address Releases of Hazardous treatment or disposal. Also this same as the current situation; a RCRA Waste or Constituents From Solid Waste proposed subpart has been renamed facility’s operating record is not subject Management Units? (compared to subpart E of part 264) to to public review. However, the This proposed rule would require you reflect that no manifest system is information described in part 270 to undertake corrective action to address involved. The existing provisions of subpart I is subject to public disclosure. releases of hazardous waste or § 264.72, which cover manifest See Section IX B: What Information constituents from solid waste discrepancies, apply only to wastes would I Need to Submit to the management units (SWMUs) ( the received from off-site sources. Because Permitting Agency to Support my ‘‘facility-wide corrective action the proposed rule does not currently Standardized Permit Application?, and requirement imposed by section apply to off-site shipments, we did not Section IX D: What Information would 3004(u)) if your facility, or a portion of include that section in Part 267. As be Required to be Kept at My Facility?. your facility, as a condition of your mentioned earlier in Section I E 3, we The existing provisions in § 264.74(c) standardized permit (unless of course, are interested in your comments on are not proposed for § 267.71, because standardized permit conditions are whether the scope of the proposed they apply to land disposal, which is being added to an existing permit that standardized permit regulations should not currently covered by the proposed already addresses corrective action). be expended to include facilities that standardized permit. The corrective action requirements treat or store waste generated off-site. proposed for standardized permits for
VerDate 11
storage facilities are identical in only because they treat, store, or dispose determinations for corrective action substance to the existing corrective of hazardous waste in the course of remedies are typically vital to assuring action requirements for non- conducting a cleanup are not subject to the best remedy is selected at each site. standardized permits for such facilities4 the facility-wide proposed corrective Based on this experience, rather than and, as in the case of non-standardized action requirements of § 267.101. attempting to develop generic standards permits, site-specific cleanup 3. Why Are we Proposing These for corrective action, we chose early in requirements would be required to be Requirements? the development of this proposed rule determined on a site-by-site basis. to utilize the same site-specific Because corrective action requirements In the 1984 Hazardous and Solid flexibility for corrective action under are site-specific, EPA or the authorized Waste Amendments (HSWA) to the standardized permits as is currently State would include them in the Resource Conservation and Recovery available under non-standardized supplemental portion of your Act (RCRA), Congress directed EPA to permits. That corrective action process standardized permit. require corrective action as necessary to provides us with considerable flexibility protect human health and the to fashion remedies that are protective 2. Are the Proposed Corrective Action environment for releases from all solid Requirements for Standardized Permits of human health and the environment waste management units (SWMUs) at and that reflect the conditions and the Different From the Corrective Action hazardous waste treatment, storage, and Requirements for Individual Permits? complexities of each facility. disposable facilities seeking a permit. We solicit comment on this proposed The proposed corrective action Section 3004(u) of RCRA requires that approach to corrective action in requirements for standardized permits any permit issued under section 3005(c) standardized permits. Further, though are specified in § 267.101 of part 267 of RCRA to such a facility after we have not proposed standardized subpart F and are analogous in November 8, 1984, address corrective permit conditions for corrective action, substance to the current requirements of action for releases of hazardous wastes we specifically request suggestions for § 264.101, which otherwise would apply or hazardous constituents from any standardized permit conditions that to the facilities addressed in this SWMU at the facility. Section 3004(u) might be used for corrective action proposed rule.5 Proposed § 267.101(a) requires that schedules of compliance under standardized permits. (analogous to existing § 264.101(a)) (where corrective action cannot be would impose the general RCRA section completed prior to permit issuance) and 5. Would I Be Able To Utilize the 3004(u) requirement that all facilities financial assurances for completing Flexibility Provided by CAMUs, seeking a permit must conduct such corrective action be included in Temporary Units, and Staging Piles corrective action as necessary to protect the permit. In addition, section 3004(v) When I Conduct Corrective Action human health and the environment for directs EPA to require corrective action Under a Standardized Permit? all releases of hazardous wastes or beyond the facility boundary, where constituents from solid waste permission to conduct such corrective All of the flexible mechanisms management units at the facility. action can be obtained. Because available under non-standardized Proposed § 267.101(b) (analogous to standardized permits, like non- permits for corrective action would be existing § 264.101(b)) would require that standardized permits (individual available to you under a standardized the permit specify a schedule of permits and permits-by-rule), would be permit. To utilize any of these compliance for completing corrective issued under the authority of section mechanisms, you would be required to action at the facility (where corrective 3005 of RCRA to facilities seeking a comply with the existing requirements action is not completed prior to permit permit, these corrective action in part 264 that are applicable to them. issuance), and provide assurances of requirements extend to standardized H. Subpart G—Closure financial responsibility for completing permits as well and EPA has included corrective action. Proposed § 267.101(c) these requirements for corrective action The title of this subpart has been (analogous to existing § 264.101(c)) in proposed part 267. changed from the current part 264 generally would require you to conduct subpart G title: ‘‘Closure and Post- 4. Why Would the Proposed Corrective corrective action beyond the facility Closure’’ because we are proposing that Action Requirements Be Included in the boundary, and to provide financial facilities with standardized permits be Supplemental Portion of the assurance for such corrective action. required to meet clean closure standards Standardized Permit? Proposed § 267.101(d) (analogous to (or obtain individual RCRA post-closure existing § 264.101(d)) provides that One of EPA’s objectives in developing permits instead). Also, land disposal facilities that require a RCRA permit this proposed rule was to streamline the facilities (which are subject to post- permit application and permit issuance closure care) are not proposed to be 4 The specific language of the provisions, processes by developing generic design eligible for standardized permits. however, differs from the language in Part 264 and operating standards for storage For most cases, the basic proposed because of the Agency’s recent efforts to use ‘‘plain requirements of subpart G in part 267 language’’ techniques when drafting regulations and permits, thereby avoiding detailed other documents. review of permit applications. To the parallel the existing provisions in part 5 You should note that there are significant extent possible, we have developed 264 subpart G. However, we propose differences between existing part 264 subpart F and such standards and proposed them in several changes to the closure proposed part 267 subpart F, because the hazardous provisions in part 267. These proposed waste management units that are proposed to be this rule. However, in developing this eligible for standardized permits are not subject to proposal, we had to balance our desire changes include the following: the most existing provisions of part 264 Subpart F. The for a streamlined permitting process closure plan not being submitted until existing requirements of §§ 264.91–100, apply to against the need for flexibility in the at least 180 days prior to closure, not ‘‘regulated units,’’ which are currently defined in § 264.90 as surface impoundments, waste piles, and corrective action program. In the past 16 allowing the option to close as a landfill land treatment units or landfills that receives years, since we began implementing the and therefore requiring clean closure, hazardous waste after July 26, 1982. Since these corrective action mandates of HSWA, and not allowing time extensions for units are not proposed to be eligible for the EPA has been reminded consistently closure. The policy considerations standardized permits, proposed part 267 Subpart F does not contain provisions analogous to sections that most sites in the RCRA universe are prompting these changes are discussed 264.91–100. unique, and that site-specific in further detail below.
VerDate 11
The purpose of these proposed that approach, if you are in a type of independent professional engineer can changes is to streamline the closure business in which it is difficult to be present. process in appropriate areas by predict when the final shipment of We invite comments on the feasibility eliminating unnecessary review and waste might occur, we would encourage of not requiring a closure plan and on approval of plans by the permitting you to consider submitting your closure the enforecability of performance agency. By not requiring a closure plan plan early to minimize potential standards in the permit. We note that, until 180 days before closing, you noncompliance. if you select option 4 as a means of would have better knowledge of what We also intend to simplify the closure estimating closure cost (see Section steps and procedures should be taken to plan requirements, by proposing to VII.I.6.) you would have collected all of ensure closure of each waste require the units covered by the the information necessary to prepare a management unit. This would preclude standardized permit to meet ‘‘clean detailed closure plan. the necessity of changing the plan and closure requirements.’’ We believe that Operations at the units affected by modifying the permit, which is typically in most cases the units can meet these this proposed rule should not effect the sequence of events under the requirements and therefore would not your ability to clean closure because existing individual permit process. require post-closure care. Consequently, spills should not occur. The Once a standardized permit rule is part 267 subpart G, as proposed, containment standards for container promulgated, we would recommend contains no provisions for units to close storage areas in section § 267.173 are that you begin preparing your closure as a landfill or to undergo post-closure designed to prevent releases from plan as early as possible prior to the care. If your facility could not be clean- accidental spills. Furthermore, the submittal of the plan, preferably when closed, you would be required to apply proposed standards do not allow a the other documents that are normally for an individual ‘‘post-closure care’’ waiver from secondary containment for part of the existing Part B application permit under the proposed rule. No tanks systems, which will also prevent are prepared. This would allow you to separate provisions are proposed for releases from accidental spills. Finally, update and change the plan as more modifying the closure plan. We believe the proposed standards require that any details become available. We are that a plan submitted at least 180 days releases be quickly collected and proposing that the plan be required to before clean closing a container storage contained. For these reasons, a detailed be submitted at least 180 days before area, tank system, or containment closure plan may also not be necessary. you expect to begin closure, and you building would not require modifying. 1. What General Standards Would I may not know that date until shortly Since the closure plan would become Need To Meet When I Stop Operating before the 180-day period. Once a final part of the permit, we are proposing that the Unit? rule is in place, preparing the plan early any changes to the closure plan would would better enable you to meet the be required to follow the permit The proposed closure performance deadline. modification procedures found in standards of part 267 subpart G are the We are asking comments and §§ 124.211–213. We solicit comments same as the performance standards suggestions for procedures to be on this requirement and whether our currently found in part 264 subpart G. followed in the event that you do not assumptions are valid. Tanks, container storage areas, and know you are to receive the last volume We are also considering an option of containment buildings are required in of hazardous waste until you are within not requiring a closure plan. A written both part 264 and under today’s the 180-day period. As the proposed plan may not be necessary because we proposal to ‘‘clean close.’’ Both parts regulations read, you would be required are proposing to require clean closure of 264 and 267, however, allow you to to submit the closure plan at least 180 all units, and because the procedures for close tanks and containment buildings days before you begin closure, and you clean closing the types of units subject as landfills if you cannot attain clean would be required to complete closure to this rule should not vary greatly. closure. Under the proposed part 267 within 180 days of receiving the last Instead, we would use inspections and standards, you would be required to hazardous waste shipment, but you certifications to assure that the unit(s) obtain an individual post-closure would not be able to begin closure were closed in accordance with the permit, separate from the standardized without an approved closure plan. If, clean closure performance standards in permit, if you do not clean close. Thus, because of circumstances that you could § 267.111 (general closure standards), for these types of units to continue to be not have foreseen, you were unable to § 267.176 (containers), § 267.201 (tanks), eligible for the standardized permit, you submit a closure plan in the time and § 267.1108 (containment buildings). would be required to remove all waste, required, you could be in violation of Under this proposed option, the clean decontaminate the containment unit, the regulations. closure requirements, including any and clean up any spills during closure. We have considered several options site-specific requirements, would be The proposed performance standard for addressing this situation, and we written as conditions into the permit. found in § 267.111 would require you to invite comments on these as well as The permitting agency inspectors would minimize the need for further suggestions for other possible options. verify that all remaining hazardous maintenance and to minimize or One option would be to require the waste was properly removed and that eliminate the potential for post-closure closure plan to be submitted with the decontamination and removal of escape of hazardous waste, hazardous original permit application, as in equipment was accomplished according constituents, leachate, contaminated individual permits. Another approach to the permit conditions. The run-off, or hazardous waste would be a waiver limited to narrow independent professional engineer decomposition products to the extent circumstances, such as a bankruptcy would also certify that the facility was necessary to protect human health and forcing an unexpected final shipment of closed according to the permit the environment. We propose minor waste. Alternatively, we could attempt conditions, rather than the closure plan citation changes in § 267.111(c) to to develop a standardized closure plan as currently proposed in § 267.117. You remove inapplicable regulatory for each type of unit. The Agency could would still be required to notify the references that were in the existing also leave this aspect of the proposal director 45 days before you expect to requirements in § 264.111. unchanged, which would place the begin final closure of a unit, so that the We invite comments on whether to burden of compliance on you. Under permitting agency inspectors and the make other options available to facilities
VerDate 11
that cannot meet the clean closure found in § 264.112(b) with a few factors are intended to greatly simplify standards. Under the Post-Closure rule exceptions. You would be required to the closure notification provisions (63 FR 56710, October 22, 1998), if you describe in the plan how you would currently found in § 264.112(d). own or operate a facility with land close each hazardous waste We used provisions similar to those disposal units, you would have the management unit in accordance with found in the current part 265 interim options of obtaining a post-closure the closure performance standards of status requirements as a model for the permit or integrating the closure of the proposed § 267.111. You would also proposed provisions found in unit with on-going corrective action include, in the plan, an estimate of the § 267.112(d). We modified slightly in activities in progress at the facility. We maximum inventory of hazardous waste proposed § 267.112(c) and § 267.113 the are interested in comments on whether on-site at the facility and a detailed existing § 265.112 (d)(4) process for a similar process should be available to description of the method you would submitting and approving the closure storage and treatment units covered by use during final closure for removing, plan. Proposed § 267.113 requires the the standardized permit that have transporting, treating, storing, or Director to make the closure plan difficulty clean closing. Under this disposing of all hazardous waste and available for public review and option, you may not have to obtain an identify the types of off-site hazardous comment. This provision is necessary individual post-closure permit if you waste units you plan to use. You would because the closure plan is not available can address the residual contamination describe the steps needed to remove or for comment by the public at the time at the closing unit by on-going decontaminate hazardous waste the ‘‘notice of intent’’ is submitted to the corrective action activities at your residues, contaminated containment permitting agency. facility. system components, contaminated soils, 3. After I Stop Operating, How Long and contaminated ground water. You 2. What Procedures Would I Need To Would I Have Until I Close the Unit? would also include a schedule for Follow? closure of each hazardous waste We are proposing to simplify the You would need to follow the management unit and the total time for requirements for the time allowed for procedures listed in proposed closure of each unit. closure in proposed § 267.115 from §§ 267.111–267.113. These requirements No provisions are included in those found in existing § 264.113. As for a written closure plan in proposed proposed § 267.112 for closing land proposed, § 267.115(a) would require § 267.112 parallel those in existing disposal units or combustion facilities you to begin closure of the unit § 264.112, for the most part. One notable because they are not proposed to be following the approved closure plan exception is that you would not have to eligible for a standardized permit. We within 90 days after you receive the submit the plan until at least 180 days would retain the provision that allows final volume of hazardous waste. before you expect to begin closure. you to modify the closure plan before Because we are proposing to require you Generally, closure of a unit begins you notify the Director of your intent to to clean close the hazardous waste within 90 days of receiving the last close. Even though you do not have to management units, and because you volume of waste. Under today’s submit a closure plan until 180 days would not have to submit the closure proposal, you would be required to before you begin closing, we understand plan until six months prior to closure notify the permitting authority 45 days that unusual circumstances could cause under this proposal, we do not expect prior to beginning the final closure of a you to change how you plan to close you to need any extension to the closure unit. You would still have your closure your facility. To allow for that situation, period. Additionally, the nature of the plan approved by the Director before we have included procedures for units subject to this rulemaking reduces you begin closure. In addition, because modifying your closure plan through a the likelihood of any unforseen you would not submit the plan with the permit modification. Proposed circumstances making the closure take Notice of Intent described in Section III § 267.112(c) includes procedures for longer than planned. We have therefore A 2: Submit a Notice of Intent to operate amending the closure plan. As with the decided to propose that no time under the standardized permit along original plan, you would have to submit extensions for closing are appropriate with appropriate supporting documents, the modified plan to the Director of the for the standardized permit. The the Director would provide the public permitting authority for approval before § 267.115(b) provisions, as proposed, an opportunity to comment on the plan. you could begin closure. Proposed require you to complete final closure You would provide persons on the § 267.112 does not contain provisions activities in accordance with your facility mailing list with a copy of the that require you to modify the closure approved closure plan within 180 days closure plan at the same time you plan. We do not anticipate that we after receiving the final volume of submit a copy to the permitting would need to require you to change the waste. We do not believe that the authority. You would also place a notice plan given the fact you are submitting existing § 264.113(c) provisions are in the local newspaper notifying the it just six months prior to closure of the appropriate for standardized permitting public of the opportunity to comment units. because they focus on the timing of on the plan. The comment period would We are proposing in § 267.112(d) to demonstrations for extending the be open for 30 days. After review of the greatly simplify the existing closure period. Existing § 264.113 (d) public comments, the permitting agency § 264.112(d) requirement for you to and (e) have not been incorporated into would approve, modify, or disapprove notify the Regional Administrator when proposed part 267 because they apply to the plan. The permitting authority closure is expected to begin. This land disposal units which are not would have 60 days after receipt of the simplification results from several considered in this proposed rule. closure plan to make its decision on it. factors. First, we are proposing to limit The Agency invites comments on the You would identify and describe in the applicability of the standardized requirement for closure within 180 the plan all steps necessary to perform permit to on-site storage and treatment days. Extensive ground water partial and/or final closure of the units. Second, we are proposing to contamination may prevent the owner facility. The proposed § 267.112(b) allow only clean closure of the units or operator from completing clean provisions describe the contents of the covered by a standardized permit. closure within 180 days. Under this closure plan. These provisions are Third, we are proposing to prohibit any situation, should the Agency allow for similar to the current requirements extensions to the start of closure. These extending the closure time period or
VerDate 11
should the owner or operator be mechanism for more than one facility, proceeding under Title 11(Bankruptcy), required to apply for a post-closure thus eliminating the expense of a U.S. Code. permit (or use the corrective action separate mechanism. EPA expects that 2. Definitions process)? several firms using the proposed standardized permit could have other The definitions and terms proposed in 4. What Would I Have To Do With facilities operating under existing part § 267.141 largely follow those currently Contaminated Equipment, Structures, used in § 264.141. As discussed below, and Soils? 265 interim status or part 264 permitting standards. the proposed regulatory text includes a We are proposing to adopt the Second, unlike many other permitting financial test as a method of complying requirements for disposal or regulations, the responsibilities in the with the financial assurance decontamination of equipment, financial assurance regulations often requirements that reflects the test that structures, and soils that are currently extend to parties other than EPA (or the EPA has proposed for other hazardous found in § 264.114 for standardized state permitting agency) and the waste TSDFs. Because this proposed test permits. Proposed § 267.116 repeats permittee. For example, a trustee agrees does not use some of the terms in the most of the existing part 264 to perform certain functions as part of current financial test, EPA has not requirements. You would have to a trust agreement where EPA is the included all of the definitions in the properly dispose of or decontaminate all beneficiary, but EPA is not a signatory. current part 264 regulations in the equipment, structures, and soils. You Third, parties must fulfill these proposed part 267. If EPA promulgates the current Subtitle C financial test would be required to handle any waste responsibilities and the language used that is removed during closure of a unit instead, EPA will include those for the documents often must conform according to the generator standards of definitions when it promulgates this to specific industry standards such as existing part 262. Several regulatory rule in final form. the Uniform Commercial Code. Because citations found in existing § 264.114 third parties are integral to the operation 3. Closure Cost Estimates were not repeated in proposed § 267.114 of the financial responsibility because they are applicable to land For the financial assurance portion of regulations, EPA has not proposed disposal or combustion situations. the standardized permit rule proposal, regulatory language based upon first and EPA has tried to develop a process that 5. How Would I Certify Closure? second person subjects. takes into account the differing The provision for certifying closure is If in the future EPA revises the regulatory and operating status of in proposed § 267.117 and is similar to language of existing parts 264 and 265, facilities that will seek a standardized the current provision in § 264.115. This including the financial requirements permit. The first group is facilities that proposed provision would require you sections, then EPA will make already are subject to part 265 subpart to submit a certification, signed by you corresponding changes in proposed part H interim status standards and are and by an independent registered 267 requirements. This would allow the already providing financial assurance. professional engineer, that you have changes to be consistent across The second group of facilities may closed your facility following the facilities. At present, EPA believes that already be permitted and providing approved closure plan. it is more important to maintain financial assurance under the part 264 consistency with the existing part 264 subpart H requirements, but wish to I. Subpart H—Financial Requirements and part 265 standards than to switch to a standardized permit. Both of Much of the regulatory language in introduce substantially different these types of facilities will already this proposed rule uses a format of proposed regulatory language in part have closure plans, cost estimates and questions and answers that refers to the 267 for the financial requirements. financial assurance instruments in place permittee as ‘‘you’’ and to EPA as ‘‘we.’’ 1. Who Would Have To Comply With before receiving a standardized permit. Except for the introduction to the This Subpart and Briefly What Would EPA believes that the regulations regulations (§ 267.140), the proposed They Have To Do? proposed here will not cause conflicts language in Subpart H does not follow for facilities that are already complying the question and answer format, and it The financial responsibility with the existing part 264 and 265 does not use these first and second requirements proposed for the standards. EPA requests comments on person pronouns to identify the subject. standardized permit largely mirror the any aspects of this proposal that appears There are two main reasons for this provisions found currently in 40 CFR to cause conflicts for facilities switching difference. First, the underlying current part 264 subpart H. Under proposed from either part 264 or part 265 financial responsibility regulations in § 267.140 you would have to comply requirements to a proposed subpart H of 40 CFR 264 and 265, which with these regulations if you are the standardized permit. remain integral to the proposed part 267 owner or operator of a facility that treats The third group is new facilities that regulations, do not use first and second or stores waste under a standardized will adopt the standardized permit so person pronouns, and EPA has not permit, except as provided under that they can begin operation. The rewritten the existing part 264 and 265 proposed § 267.1(b), and § 267.140(d), proposed standardized permit rule regulations to conform to the question which similarly to current part 264 would require them to have a closure and answer format. The regulations subpart H, would exempt the States and cost estimate even if they do not yet proposed here cross reference the the Federal government from the have a closure plan. There is no separate existing part 264 regulations requirements of this proposed subpart. deadline for the initial estimate. The extensively, and often provide that If you are subject to these proposed cost estimate is necessary to comply compliance with an existing part 264 regulations, you would be required to with the requirement for a financial provision would constitute compliance prepare a closure cost estimate, responsibility instrument which has its with proposed part 267. This linkage of demonstrate financial assurance for own deadline. the regulations is necessary so that firms closure, and demonstrate financial Similar to the requirements for other with facilities under both existing part assurance for liability. You would also permitted facilities, you would be 264 (or part 265 regulations) and notify the Regional Administrator if you required to develop and keep at the proposed part 267 could use the same are named as a debtor in a bankruptcy facility a detailed written estimate, in
VerDate 11
current dollars, of the cost of closing the by the U.S. Department of Commerce. quotes or cost estimates from facility in accordance with the proposed This is a slightly different specification contractors to perform various closure closure requirements of §§ 267.111 for the adjustment than is currently in activities. Whichever method of cost through 267.117, and applicable closure § 264.142 because the existing estimating you choose, you would be proposed requirements in §§ 267.176, regulations currently specify the use of required to have a cost estimate that 267.201, and 267.1108. Unlike the the Implicit Price Deflator for Gross meets all of the proposed requirements requirements for facilities operating National Product rather than the Gross of § 267.142, and you would need to under individual permits, initially you Domestic Product. We are proposing to demonstrate that it meets the would not have to base these cost use the Gross Domestic Product deflator requirements. since it is more readily available. estimates upon a closure plan, since 4. Methods for Estimating Costs for Generally, the differences between the treatment and storage facilities with a Units Eligible for Standardized Permits standardized permit need not have a two series are not significant and we closure plan until six months before believe using the more readily available We would not require owners or closure begins. However, we propose information will help you comply with operators of units eligible for retaining the other requirements for this requirement. standardized permits to submit to the closure cost estimates. Under proposed Under proposed § 267.142(a)(5), you implementing agency a complete § 267.142(a)(1) the estimate would equal would be required to revise your closure closure plan as part of the initial the cost of final closure at the point in cost estimate in accordance with the standardized permitting process. your facility’s active life when the closure plan within 30 days after However, we would still require you to extent and manner of its operation submitting your closure plan. You prepare a cost estimate for closure as would make closure the most expensive. would also adjust this revised closure part of the initial standardized We are proposing in § 267.142(a)(2) that cost estimate for inflation as proposed permitting process and under proposed you base the closure cost estimate on in § 267.142(b). These requirements § 267.112(a) to submit the closure plan the cost to hire a third party to close the mirror those currently in part 264 for at least 180 days prior to closure. In facility. The closure cost estimate may facilities operating under individual addition, under proposed not incorporate any salvage value from permits. § 267.142(a)(5) you would be required to the sale of hazardous waste, non- Unlike the current § 264.142(c) submit a revised closure cost estimate hazardous waste, facility structures or requirement, you do not have to update no later than 30 days after submitting a closure plan. In conjunction with equipment, land, or other assets the closure cost estimate when a today’s proposed rule, we are assessing associated with the facility at the time modification to the closure plan has different options that would provide to of partial or final closure (proposed been approved. This is because there is no provision for updating an existing owners and operators several methods § 267.142(a)(3)). Further, your cost closure plan. Since you only need to for preparing closure cost estimates for estimate may not incorporate a zero cost submit a closure plan 180 days before units eligible for standardized permits. for hazardous waste or non-hazardous closure, there is no need to have a Use of the methods would be optional. waste that you might be able to sell provision allowing for modification of We intend to design methods that because they have an economic value the plan, or for updating the cost would reduce the burden on the (proposed § 267.142(a)(4)). estimate as a result of the modification. regulated community of complying with In proposed § 267.142(b) you would However, this absence of a modification proposed requirements under § 267.142 be required to adjust the closure cost requirement does not change your by enabling you to generate estimates estimate for inflation within 60 days responsibility to maintain a current cost that you and the permitting agency can before the anniversary of the date you estimate. If you modify your operations accept as reasonably accurate without established the financial instruments to so that the cost of closure would preparing an accompanying closure comply with § 267.143. Proposed increase, you would be required to plan for those units. To facilitate the use § 267.143, which we discuss below, increase the closure cost estimate and of any of these alternative methods, we would require an instrument to provide financial assurance for that expect to provide guidance explaining demonstrate financial assurance for amount under proposed § 267.143. the methods in detail and identifying closure. If you use the financial test or Similarly, the proposed requirements the types of information that you will corporate guarantee to demonstrate in § 267.142(c) correspond to the need to use them. financial responsibility, you would be existing requirements in § 264.142(d) We recognize that estimating closure required to update your closure cost and would require you to maintain the costs before developing a closure plan estimate for inflation within 30 days latest cost estimate at the facility, and, means that you might potentially have after the close of the firm’s fiscal year when the cost estimate has been less information to factor into your and before submitting the updated adjusted for inflation as proposed under estimates, which could make them less financial test information to the § 267.142, the latest adjusted closure accurate. We are interested in obtaining Regional Administrator. We are asking cost estimate. information on the practical difference for public comment on whether to Currently, we are aware of various between the quality of cost estimates change the deadline for updating the methods that owners or operators use to without closure plans and the quality of cost estimate for inflation for users of prepare closure cost estimates. You may costs estimates currently received by the financial test to 90 days after the base cost estimates for closure, in part, permitting agencies. While we believe close of the fiscal year. Changing to 90 on your past experience closing other that the closure plan can lead to more days would make this requirement facilities. You also may use handbooks accurate estimates, we also have some consistent with the deadline for to estimate costs for labor, materials, information that even with closure updating the financial test. In adjusting and equipment associated with plans, cost estimates can be incomplete your cost estimate, you could performing closure activities, such as or low. recalculate the maximum costs in decontamination, sampling and analysis We compared closure cost estimates current dollars or use an inflation factor of wastes or residues, or the off-site submitted to states in one of our regions derived from the Implicit Price Deflator transportation and disposal of wastes. In to an estimate we developed using a for Gross Domestic Product published addition, you may reference specific cost estimating methodology. This
VerDate 11
comparison showed a fairly consistent demonstrate financial assurance for governmental agency or another entity pattern of lower estimates from the closure and post-closure care for all closed specific units, (2) be specific owners and operators than from the other types of units using the financial whether the facilities were abandoned methodology. Overall, the cost estimates test or corporate guarantee. or not, (3) be in sufficient detail to from the owner or operator were about Further information on these options identify costs for specific closure one-half of the estimates generated by appears in the docket to this rule. activities, and (4) state when the closure the methodology’s model. We believe that Options 1 and 2: activities occurred. Being able to relate We recognize that our evaluation of would remove from the owner or specific costs to specific activities is an closure cost estimates only compares operator the responsibility of preparing important factor in ensuring that we use estimates developed by owners or a cost estimate for closure, would the data properly when developing operators to estimates generated using impose a significant administrative methods to estimate closure costs for our methodology. We did not compare burden on the implementing agency, units at facilities, particularly because cost estimates from either of these and might prevent the owner or operator the total costs incurred to effect sources with the actual costs incurred from providing financial assurance for ‘‘closure’’ at abandoned facilities by viable owners and operators, or by the unit immediately upon submitting frequently include costs of both States which have had to perform its permit application because the corrective action and closure activities. closures on facilities with non-viable owner or operator would have to wait Because the distinction between (bankrupt) owners or operators. We seek for the implementing agency to generate corrective action and closure activities information from owners or operators or a cost estimate before the amount of is not always clear, it can be difficult to state permitting agencies which assurance required for closure of the differentiate between costs that pertain compares the closure cost estimates unit could be determined. only to closure activities for the with the costs actually incurred in Under Option 3, we would use actual regulated unit and all other costs performing closure, either by the owner costs government agencies incurred associated with the cleanup of a site. or operator, or the state permitting when performing closure at abandoned However, we can only use those cost authority. For more information on facilities to develop default cost data that differentiate the closure EPA’s comparison of closure cost estimates. We believe that we might be activities to support the development of estimates please see the document able to obtain such data from the files less burdensome methods for estimating entitled ‘‘Revised Draft Report on of authorized states or EPA regions that closure costs. Analysis of Cost Estimates for Closure managed closures at facilities when the owners or operators were unwilling or 6. Option 4, Standard Forms for and Post-Closure Care,’’ PRC Estimating Closure Costs Environmental Management, Inc., unable to do so. Because the cost data October 15, 1996 in the docket, and also would reflect actual third-party Under Option 4, EPA developed draft on the Internet. See Supplementary expenditures incurred by the standard forms that you could use to Information. Because adequate cost government, default cost estimates estimate the costs of closing those units estimates are an essential component of based on this research might provide a proposed to be eligible for a the financial responsibility program, more realistic basis for demonstrations standardized permit. (See the report of financial assurance than cost EPA considered several options for entitled ‘‘Closure Cost Estimates for estimates prepared under more improving cost estimates. Standardized Permits, Background traditional methods. Document—Option 4,’’ prepared by 5. We Considered Six Options for We have considered this option Tetra Tech EM Inc., December 31, 1998, Developing Cost Estimates, but Prefer carefully because it might provide us available in the docket to this Three of Them for This Proposal cost data for closure that are more rulemaking and also electronically. See We considered six options for accurate than those currently available Supplementary Information.) Because guidance for developing closure cost from other widely-used cost estimating cost data derived from private, estimates for units eligible for the methodologies. We may wish to nationally recognized sources often are standardized permit. Under each of the undertake efforts to gather historical proprietary, the draft forms do not options we considered, our goal was to cost data for closures of abandoned contain suggested costs for specific reduce the burden on owners and facilities in the future. At this time, closure activities. The draft forms, operators of developing such cost however, we have elected not to however, provide you with a estimates. The options we considered propose Option 3 because we do not methodology that would help reduce were: currently have this information. If we the burden on you by standardizing the (1) Have owners or operators provide receive sufficient information during the cost estimating process. Use of the draft to the permitting agency specific data public comment period to support it, we forms also would help to ensure that from which the agency will calculate may use such information in the final you recognize all applicable closure cost estimates for closure; rule. We requests comments on the activities and incorporate them into (2) Prepare a methodology for the advisability of pursuing this option. your cost estimates for those activities. agency to use to generate ‘‘default’’ cost As noted above, however, we are Use of the draft forms would reduce estimates for closure; requesting that anyone who may have the burden of complying with the (3) Develop a cost estimate matrix historical cost data regarding the closure applicable regulations because the draft based on historical data; of any type of RCRA hazardous waste forms would provide a step-by-step (4) Provide to owners or operators facility (not just facilities with only the approach for developing cost estimates standard forms that they can use to types of units eligible for the for closure. The draft forms would calculate cost estimates for closure; standardized permit), or who knows identify the specific activities required (5) Prepare a methodology for owners how we might readily access such data, for closure in a standard format, so or operators to prepare ‘‘default’’ cost submit it to us for further consideration. using the forms also would also reduce estimates for closure; and To be useful for this effort, the historical the burden on the regulatory agency of (6) Waive requirements to develop cost data should be: (1) Be specific to reviewing and evaluating cost estimates cost estimates for eligible units based on the actual costs and whether these costs that you submit. It would be easier for the owners or operators ability to were incurred when either the the agency to review and evaluate the
VerDate 11
adequacy of cost estimates based on the closure; (11) a prediction of whether eligible units. The methodology uses forms because the agency could more you will close the tanks in place or will only a minimal amount of key, unit- easily check the costs of specific disassemble and remove them; and (12) specific data, you would use those data activities for reasonableness. However, methods you anticipate using to treat to calculate costs for all closure we recognize that some may wish for a and dispose of all wastes you remove activities for each unit. (See the report larger reduction of burden associated and all residues you generate during entitled ‘‘Closure Cost Estimates for with cost estimating and so in addition closure. Standard Permits, Background to this option we have also developed Document—Option 5,’’ prepared by What Information Would I Need To an Option 5, discussed below, that has Tetra Tech EM Inc., December 31, 1998, Develop Cost Estimates for Containment a larger burden reduction, but tends to available in the docket to this Buildings? produce higher cost estimates than this rulemaking.) To use this methodology, option. In the case of containment buildings, you would only need the following data: information you would need to use the (1) Type of unit; (2) maximum capacity What Information Would I Need To draft forms to develop cost estimates of each waste that would be managed at Develop Cost Estimates for Containers? would include: (1) Type and physical the unit; and, (3) type and physical state In the case of container storage areas, state of each waste you plan to store at of each waste that would be managed at information you would need to use the the unit; (2) maximum capacity of each the unit. draft forms to develop closure cost waste you plan to store at the unit; (3) We have developed a possible estimates would include: (1) Type and interior surface area of the containment methodology for container storage areas physical state of each waste you plan to building; (4) types of heavy equipment and tank systems. (We do not have store; (2) maximum capacity of each you plan to use during closure sufficient information to develop this waste you plan to manage; (3) types of activities; (5) level of PPE you anticipate methodology for containment containers that you plan to use (for needing during closure activities; (6) buildings.) The methodology for tank example, 55-gallon drums); (4) surface methods of decontamination you plan to systems differentiates the costs based on area of all pads, berms, or other use for the unit and for heavy whether you close the tanks in place or secondary containment structures; (5) equipment; (7) number and types of remove them. The approach further types of heavy equipment you plan to samples you plan to take and differentiates the costs based on use during closure activities; (6) level of appropriate analytical procedures you whether the wastes are ignitable or non- personal protective equipment (PPE) anticipate using to be performed to ignitable. For both container storage and you anticipate needing during closure determine ‘‘clean’’ closure; (8) a tank systems, costs per gallon can vary activities; (7) methods of prediction of whether you will close the by the volume of waste in gallons. To decontamination you plan to use for the containment building in place or will determine the cost of closing the unit unit and for heavy equipment; (8) remove the containment building; and (exclusive of the cost of treating and number and types of samples you plan (9) methods you anticipate using to treat disposing of the waste), you would to take and appropriate analytical and dispose of all wastes you removed multiply the cost per gallon for the size procedures you anticipate using to and all residues you generate during and type of unit by the maximum determine ‘‘clean’’ closure; (9) a closure. number of gallons of waste. prediction of whether you will close Using the draft forms and the To determine the cost of treating and with the containment system in place or information listed above, you would be disposing of the waste in the units, we will remove the containment system; able to estimate costs for all applicable developed a table showing these costs and (10) methods you anticipate using closure activities for each of the three per gallons for different types of waste. to treat and dispose of all wastes you proposed types of eligible units. In First, you would have to determine remove and all residues you generate addition to all basic closure activities, whether the waste is an aqueous waste during closure. the forms would allow you to estimate or a non-aqueous waste. For an aqueous waste, a table shows a different What Information Would I Need To costs for items such as certification of multiplier depending upon whether the Develop Cost Estimates for Tanks? closure, contingencies, and management and design that frequently are waste is in drums or in bulk, because In the case of tanks, information you overlooked during the preparation of waste in bulk form is less expensive to would need to use the draft forms to cost estimates for closure. treat and dispose of. For several dry develop closure cost estimates would We request comments on the potential wastes there is also a table that provides include: (1) Types of tanks; (2) type and for further development of Option 4. We a cost per gallon for treatment and physical state of each waste you plan to recognize that of the information needs disposal. Again, you would produce a store or treat in the tanks; (3) maximum listed above for each proposed type of cost estimate for treating and disposing capacity of each type of waste you plan eligible unit, certain factors may be of the waste by multiplying the quantity to store or treat in the tanks; (4) interior more crucial than others in increasing of waste by the estimated cost per surface area of the tanks; (5) length and the accuracy of estimated costs. Some gallon. The total estimated cost for the nominal diameter of all ancillary piping; factors might not be necessary at all, or facility would be the costs of closing the (6) surface area of all pads, berms, or would not be cost-effective. Therefore, units plus the cost of treating and other secondary containment structures; we also request comments on which of disposing of the maximum amount of (7) types of heavy equipment you the information needs listed above to waste you plan to handle. anticipate using during closure require for use in estimating the costs We compared the costs using Option activities; (8) level of PPE you anticipate for closure for the proposed eligible 5 with those using industry standard needing during closure activities; (9) units. costs in Option 4. Our comparison methods of decontamination you expect shows that except for the smallest to use for the unit and for heavy 7. Option 5, Default Estimates for operations, the cost estimates in Option equipment; (10) number and types of Estimating Closure Costs 5 are higher by an average of one-quarter samples you plan to take and Option 5 uses data from available cost to one-third. Thus, if you would want to appropriate analytical procedures you estimating methodologies to develop minimize the amount of time necessary anticipate using to determine ‘‘clean’’ ‘‘default’’ cost estimates for proposed to derive a cost estimate, you could
VerDate 11
simply use the information in Option 5. to provide guidance on how to estimate annual payments into the trust fund Using Option 5 could be especially closure costs for facilities with a over the remaining life of your facility, useful for those of you who would use standardized permit which have not as estimated by your closure plan, or the financial test and so do not incur the already developed a closure plan. (Once over the life of the permit which is expense of obtaining a third party the facility has submitted a closure plan, usually ten years, whichever is shorter. instrument whose costs depends upon EPA proposes that the facility must Under the proposed standardized the amount assured. Alternatively, if update the closure cost estimate within permit procedures, however, you would you would prefer to use a more involved 30 days to reflect the information in the not have to provide a closure plan as method to obtain a more accurate closure plan). We have included in the part of the initial permitting process. closure cost estimate, you could use docket to this rulemaking information Without the requirement for a closure Option 4 or a more complicated explaining more fully the approaches plan as part of the initial process, we approach of your choice. Currently, we for estimating costs under options 4 and needed a time period over which to believe that additional efforts by us to 5. We seek comments on the compute the pay-in period, and so are make the estimates generated using advisability of these options (and on proposing a period of three years. We Option 5 (which is quick and easy to option 6 which we discuss more fully chose this time period, which is shorter use) closer to the estimates generated by below) and on whether the use of than the life of the permit as currently Option 4 or other methods are not guidance for cost estimating in the allowed for individual permits under warranted. Variations can occur around absence of a closure plan is advisable. § 264.143(a)(3), because the current any closure cost estimates. If the commenter believes that we requirements in § 264.143(a)(3) were While we have discussed these should require the use of a particular selected to accommodate types of alternative methods of estimating cost estimating techniques in the operations, such as landfills, which closure costs, the purpose of the standardized permit regulations, we would normally be receiving waste over proposed regulatory requirement for would like information on how to a period of years, with potentially those of you operating under the maintain current costing methodologies increasing closure costs over that time standardized permit remains the same in regulations. Since methodologies period. Conversely, we do not expect as for a facility currently operating change over time, this approach could facilities proposing to operate under the under a Part 264 permit or under obligate us to update the regulations standardized permit to build up their interim status. Under proposed periodically and authorized states to waste volumes, and the resulting § 267.142 you would be required to have adopt the updated language. closure costs, over time. Moreover, the a closure cost estimate that ensures you 10. Financial Assurance for Closure cost for closing a facility operating have sufficient funds available to close under the standardized permit would We designed the requirements your facility properly. While options 4 not include the costs of ground water proposed in § 267.142(a)(1)–(4) to and 5 provide simplified methods of monitoring, covers, or post-closure ensure that the cost estimate which estimating these costs, you would still monitoring, so we would expect the cost forms the basis for determining the be responsible for ensuring that the use to be less than for many of the other amount of the financial assurance of these methods provides an estimate types of facilities with individual instrument required in § 267.143 would that will cover the costs of closure by a permits that are currently subject to provide sufficient funds to close the third party. § 264.143. Therefore, we anticipate that facility properly at any time. We want 8. Option 6, Waiving the Cost Estimate to ensure that there would be sufficient the burden of the three year pay-in for Facilities Using the Financial Test or financial resources to close the facility period will not be excessive. Further, Corporate Guarantee properly even in the event that you we note that requiring a three year pay- Under Option 6, we would waive the enter bankruptcy. The requirements in period can preclude some potential requirement that you develop cost proposed in § 267.143 specify the problems that can arise under the longer estimates if you are able to demonstrate mechanisms from which you can choose pay-in period. For example, a long pay- financial assurance for closure and post- to demonstrate financial assurance for in period can lead to insufficient funds closure care using the financial test or closure obligations. being available at the time of closure. If the corporate guarantee. We discuss the The proposed § 267.143 provides you the financial condition of the permittee actual requirements of the financial test the same mechanisms that are available were to deteriorate toward the beginning in a later section of the preamble. As to owners and operators of facilities of the period, the owner or operator discuss more fully latter, under this operating under permits currently would not yet have funded a substantial approach we presume a firm that passes issued under part 264. However, we fraction of the trust, and the permitting the financial test has the financial have made modifications to these authority could be left with insufficient wherewithal to close the facility. We requirements (from the analogous funds for closure in the event of the base our presumption on the fact that a requirements in part 264) to account for permittee’s failure to perform closure. firm that passes the financial test has a the particular circumstances of the Furthermore, the three year period is very low probability of bankruptcy, and standardized permit. The differences consistent with the requirements for because the closure costs would not between the requirements under financial assurance for commercial represent a significant outlay for the §§ 264.143 and 267.143 are discussed storers of PCB wastes. See firm in comparison with its net worth. below. § 761.65(g)(1)(i). EPA requests comment Closure Trust Fund (§ 267.143(a)). on the proposed use of three years as the 9. Availability of Information on EPA’s Under the proposed § 267.143(a) the pay-in period for a trust fund in the Proposed Approaches pay-in period for the closure trust fund absence of a closure plan. The regulatory language in this for the standardized permit facility We are proposing to simplify the proposal does not specify any of the six would differ slightly from the requirements for the pay-in period for a options outlined above. Instead the requirement for facilities with permits trust fund for existing facilities seeking proposed regulatory language in issued under part 264. Currently, if you coverage under the standardized permit § 267.142 includes only the requirement have a new facility seeking coverage and wishing to use a trust fund to to develop the cost estimate. We intend under a part 264 permit, you must make demonstrate financial assurance. An
VerDate 11
existing facility whose trust fund’s value owner or operator in effect terminates financial test when we proposed a is less than its closure cost estimate the pay-in period. After the pay-in financial test for private owners and when it receives a standardized permit period which would end at the end of operators of municipal solid waste would have 60 days to increase the the life of the initial Part 264 permit, an landfill facilities (MSWLFs). It is value of the trust to the amount of the owner or operator using a trust must important to understand how the closure cost estimate. The requirement comply with existing § 264.143(a)(6) proposed changes to the financial test proposed in § 267.143(a)(3) clarifies that and maintain within 60 days the value could affect the proposed standardized the 60 days will apply both to existing of the trust to at least the amount of the permit rule. facilities under interim status and under closure cost estimate (or obtain other The proposed changes to the financial individual permits, regardless of when financial assurance). Therefore the 60 test would make the test less available they obtain a standardized permit. This day requirement in the proposed to firms more likely to enter bankruptcy. means that it would effectively have a standardized permit regulations is the The test would do this by changing the 60 day pay-in period. same as in the current 264 standards. financial test ratios to make the test less The Agency arrived at this proposed Surety Bonds (§ 267.143(b) and (c)). available to firms with large debts requirement by considering the two The proposed rule would allow you to compared with their cash flow or net classes of existing facilities that could use surety bonds guaranteeing either worth. However, the proposed test use a trust fund with the standardized payment or performance as mechanisms allows firms that pass to assure a higher permit: Those currently operating under for demonstrating compliance with level of obligations than the current interim status (part 265 standards) and proposed § 267.143(b) or (c) RCRA Subtitle C financial test. Under those operating under part 264 permits. respectively. As in the existing part 264 the current financial test, companies A facility operating under interim status subpart H standards, you must also must have tangible net worth at least six and using a trust fund must fully fund establish a standby trust fund. times the amount of the obligations its trust by July 6, 2002, which is twenty Letter of Credit (§ 267.143(d). The covered, and also at least $10 million. years after the effective date of the proposed regulations would allow you Firms that pass the proposed test can § 265.143 standards. See § 265.143(a)(3), to use an irrevocable standby letter of assure an amount of obligations up to and 47 FR 15432. For such a facility, the credit, and a standby trust fund as $10 million less than their tangible net deadline for a fully funded trust under specified in existing § 264.143(d). worth. interim status would probably be close Closure Insurance (§ 267.143(e)). We anticipate that companies passing to the effective date of their Under proposed § 267.143(e), we would the proposed financial test will be much standardized permit. The effective date allow you to use insurance as a more likely to cover all of their of a standardized permit would be after mechanism for demonstrating financial obligations than under the current rule. we promulgate this proposed rule in assurance for closure. The requirements This occurs because the additive final form, and, in authorized States, of this section reference the requirement (tangible net worth of at after the State has adopted the rule and corresponding existing requirements in least $10 million more than the amount begun to issue these permits. Therefore, § 264.143(e). of obligations covered) covers a larger EPA proposes a 60 day pay-in period for Some companies which do not qualify amount of obligations that the six times an existing interim status facility for the financial test (discussed more multiple of the current rule. With this seeking a standardized permit and using fully latter) for any or all of their in mind, we are seeking public a trust fund to demonstrate financial obligations, have sought to use captive comment on not requiring a firm to assurance. This 60 day period is the insurance as a method of self insurance. prepare a closure cost estimate for units same deadline facing an interim status These companies can establish a pure covered by the standardized permit if it facility that must increase the amount of captive insurer subsidiary to provide passes the financial test and can cover a trust fund after the end of the pay-in insurance for the parent company’s all of its other obligations with the period. costs of closure, or third party liability financial test. By all of their other A facility that already has an requirements. The pure captive obligations, we mean to include costs individual permit based on the existing insurance company provides insurance for liability, closure, post-closure care part 264 requirements must fully fund for the parent, and the parent can have and corrective action under RCRA the trust over the term of the initial direct involvement and influence over Subtitle C; costs for closure, post- permit (or over the remaining life of the the insurance company’s major closure care, and, if necessary, facility, whichever is shorter). See operations such as underwriting, claims corrective action obligations for § 264.143(a)(3). Thus a facility that management, and investment. We municipal solid waste landfills under wishes to convert to a standardized discuss captive insurance in more detail RCRA Subtitle D; closure costs for PCB permit rather than renew its existing in Section X B: Financial assurance. storage facilities; plugging and permit should already have funded its Financial Test (§ 267.143(f)) and abandonment costs for Class I wells trust fully. A permitted facility using a Corporate Guarantee (§ 267.143(g)). The under the UIC program; financial trust could also decide to convert to a proposed regulation in § 267.143(f) assurance obligations for underground standardized permit before the normal would allow the use of a financial test storage tanks; financial assurance for end of its current permit’s life by asking by you or by a corporate guarantor as actions under the Comprehensive to have its individual permit revoked currently provided in § 264.143(f) Environmental Response, Compensation and reissued as a standardized permit. though the tests proposed here differ and Liability Act (CERCLA); and any Under existing § 264.143(a)(3), owners from those currently in effect in parts other environmental obligations (see or operators must make payments into 264 and 265. We proposed changes to proposed § 267.143(f)(2)(i)(A)(1)). If the trust annually over the ‘‘term of the the financial test on July 1, 1991 (56 FR such a company could no longer pass initial permit,’’ or the remaining 30201) for owners and operators of the financial test, it would have to operating life of the facility, whichever treatment, storage and disposal prepare a cost estimate and provide a is shorter. This is the ‘‘pay-in period’’ facilities. In addition, on October 12, financial assurance mechanism through for an existing permitted facility. By 1994 (59 FR 51523) we proposed a third party. terminating its permit early (in order to changes to the domestic asset We promulgated a final regulation convert to the standardized permit), the requirement for the RCRA Subtitle C establishing a financial test for private
VerDate 11
owners and operators of municipal solid test. Another advantage to this approach of legal costs (§ 267.147(a)). These waste landfill facilities April 10, 1998 might be that requiring standard proposed requirements are the same as (63 FR 17706). That financial test differs language could make compliance easier, for facilities with individual permits, from the regulatory text in the rule since the chief financial officer would and apply to the facility or a group of proposed for RCRA Subtitle C facilities. not have to choose the wording of the facilities. Thus, if the owner or operator To assist the reader in determining what letter. EPA could also promulgate a final of facilities with individual permits had the proposed financial test for the regulation that includes the language the required liability coverage for them, standardized permit could look like if requirement similar or identical to that the addition of facilities under the we were to adopt the test proposed for currently in § 264.151. We request standardized permit would not increase Subtitle C and adopted for municipal information from States and the the dollar amount of the liability solid waste landfill facilities, we have regulated community on the need for coverage. included proposed regulatory text in specific language, or whether the The proposed mechanisms available this notice. We could also determine current arrangement used in the for demonstrating financial assurance that we would use the financial test municipal solid waste landfill for third party liability would be the currently in existing § 264.143(f), regulations (§ 258.74), which does not same under the standardized permit § 264.147(f), and the associated language specify the language of the letter, is rule as for units covered by individual for the instruments in § 264.151(f) and appropriate. Second, today’s proposed permits. In this proposed rule, we have (g) if we should promulgate the language follows the model of the arranged the mechanisms in the same standardized permit rule in final form existing part 258 regulations by giving a order as they appear for closure, even before promulgating revisions to the separate section for the regulations though this is different from the order RCRA Subtitle C financial test. governing the use of a corporate currently in § 264.147. We request In the record keeping and reporting guarantee. comments on whether this makes the requirements of today’s proposal we Use of Multiple Mechanisms. Under regulation easier to follow, or if we have proposed the requirements for a proposed § 267.143(h) you could utilize should organize proposed § 267.147 in special report from the firm’s a combination of mechanisms at your the same order as existing § 264.147. independent certified public accountant facility. In the proposed revisions to the The mechanisms for third party liability consistent with those in existing RCRA Subtitle C financial test (56 FR would be a trust fund (§ 267.147(a)(1), § 258.74(e)(2)(i)(C) rather than the 30201), EPA proposed to allow the surety bond (§ 267.147(a)(2), letter of existing § 264.143(f)(3)(i). Under the combination of the financial test with credit (§ 267.147(a)(3), insurance existing financial test for hazardous another mechanism for demonstrating (§ 267.147(a)(4), financial test waste facilities, we always require a financial responsibility for closure at a (§ 267.147(a)(5), or guarantee special report from the firm’s single location. We propose to allow (§ 267.147(a)(6). Furthermore, we would independent certified public accountant this same flexibility for facilities also allow the use of multiple (§ 264.143(f)(3)(i)), even if the data in qualifying for the standardized permit. mechanisms under proposed the chief financial officer’s letter come Under proposed § 267.143(i), if you § 267.147(a)(7), as allowed under directly from the annual report. The have multiple facilities with a existing § 264.147(a)(6). proposed requirement standardized permit you would be able As noted above, we are considering (§ 267.143(f)(2)(i)(C)) would only require to use a single mechanism for more than whether to disallow the use of captive a special report from the independent one of your facilities. This provides the insurance as a mechanism for providing certified public accountant in instances same flexibility that owners or operators financial assurance for closure. where we cannot verify financial data in of facilities with individual permits or However, we believe that liability the chief financial officer’s letter from interim status facilities have under requirements are generally better suited the firm’s financial report. This change existing §§ 264.143 and 265.143. to the use of insurance. Insurance is a could reduce the reporting burden for mechanism for protecting from risk, or users of the financial test whose 11. Post Closure Financial the probability that an unfortunate event submissions of information could be Responsibility may occur. Closure is a certain event verified from their audited financial Because the proposed standardized because an owner or operator (or the statements, and eliminate for these permit rule would only be available to permitting authority in the event of the companies the expense of requiring a facilities that can clean close, the permittee’s bankruptcy) will have to letter from the outside auditor. We are proposed standardized permit close its hazardous waste facility and so interested in comments on the regulation does not anticipate a need for the risk only involves the timing of the appropriateness of reducing this post-closure cost estimates, or financial closure, and not whether it might occur. reporting burden, whether this would assurance for post-closure care. Because the hazardous waste also be appropriate for facilities Similarly there is no need for regulations are designed to protect currently regulated under part 264 or mechanisms for combining financial human health and the environment, a 265, and whether this change would assurance for closure and post-closure release from a facility that could affect significantly reduce the reporting care. Therefore, the proposed a third party is not a certainty, and in burden and by how much. regulations in part 267 do not have fact, there can be a low probability of a Today’s proposed regulatory language provisions reflecting the existing facility having a release that could affect has some other differences from the requirements of § 264.144–146. a third party. We request comments on current RCRA Subtitle C test whether pure captive insurance should regulations. The first is that we do not 12. Liability Requirements be treated differently for third party prescribe language for the chief We are proposing to require financial liability where there is a risk of an event financial officer’s letter as we currently assurance for third party liability for occurring than for closure where the do under § 264.151(f). The advantage of sudden accidental occurrences. We risk involves the timing of an event that this approach would be the additional propose that you have and maintain will occur. flexibility it provides to facilities that liability coverage of at least $1 million We are proposing that the could operate under the standardized per occurrence, with an annual standardized permit would not be permit and who would use the financial aggregate of at least $2 million exclusive available for land disposal units such as
VerDate 11
surface impoundments, landfills, land In the financial responsibility § 264.171. This provision would require treatment facilities, or disposal regulations covering facilities with you, as the facility owner or operator, to miscellaneous units. Therefore, permits under part 264, States can transfer hazardous waste from a leaking requirements for land disposal units assume responsibility for an owner or container to a container in good under existing § 264.147(b) to maintain operator’s compliance with existing condition, or otherwise manage the third party liability for non-sudden §§ 264.143 and 147 (§ 264.150). We have waste in a manner that complies with accidental occurrences should not be included a similar provision (§ 267.150) the proposed part 267 requirements. necessary for standardized permit units. in this proposal, but request comment Proposed § 267.171 would require The proposed regulation reserves on whether such a provision is that the container be made of materials § 267.147(b). appropriate. Do States in fact undertake or lined with materials that will not Because the proposed standardized such responsibilities, and would they react with the hazardous wastes being permit is intended to rely upon limited for holders of a standardized permit? stored. We are proposing this interaction between the permittee and The proposed language of §§ 267.143 requirement, which is the same as that the permitting agency, we believe it and 267.147 references existing in existing § 264.172, to ensure that the would not be appropriate to include the § 264.151, and would require the use of container is suitable for managing the provisions of existing § 264.147(c) and the language in existing § 264.151. wastes. (d). These provisions, respectively, Section 264.151 contains the exact Proposed § 267.171 would further allow the owner or operator to request wording of the instruments used to require you to close (keep covered) all a variance from the amounts required in demonstrate financial assurance. In light containers that store hazardous waste § 264.147(a), or allow the Regional of the substantial amount of text in except when necessary to handle the Administrator to require a different existing § 264.151, we have decided not waste, and that care be taken not to amount. Thus, there are no to propose the creation of a § 267.151. rupture the container or somehow create corresponding provisions in the This is similar to our decision not to a leak. This proposed provision is the proposed § 264.147 and the include the instrument language in the same as the existing § 264.173 corresponding paragraphs are reserved. current interim status standards in part standards. Note that the U.S. Along with the proposed changes to 265. We request comments on suggested Department of Transportation the financial test for closure, we have changes to the language of § 264.151 regulations, including those in 49 CFR previously proposed changes to the that we should make for consistency 173.28, govern the reuse of containers in financial test for liability coverage (56 with the proposed standardized permit transportation. FR 30201 and 59 FR 51523). Under the rule. proposed test, we expect that more 3. What Are the Proposed Inspection owners and operators will be able to J. Subpart I—Use and Management of Requirements? pass the liability financial test than Containers Section 267.172, as proposed, would under the current financial test. We The proposed standards for the use require you to inspect at least once a expect that when we promulgate these and management of containers in this week to check for leaking containers. tests in final form that they would also subpart of part 267 are similar to the This proposed requirement is the same apply to the standardized permit. We existing provisions in subpart I of part as the current § 264.174 provision. If are publishing the language of the 264. However, we are proposing you find a leak, you would need to proposed liability financial test here for conforming changes to reflect the follow the proposed procedures in your convenience. If we promulgate the standardized permit rather than the §§ 267.15(c) and 267.171. standardized permit rule in final form individual permit. We also are 4. What Proposed Standards Apply to before final promulgation of the revised proposing changes to make the the Container Storage Area? RCRA Subtitle C financial test, we may requirements more readable. We request use the current RCRA Subtitle C comments on these changes, and Section 267.173, of the proposed rule, financial test in the final standardized whether additional modifications are specifies the design and operation permit rule. warranted. requirements of a system for containing any leaks, spills, or precipitation. These 13. Other Provisions of the Financial 1. Would This Subpart Apply to Me? requirements would apply if you are Requirements These proposed standards would storing free liquids in the containers. As We are proposing that the apply to you if you own or operate a proposed, they would also apply, even requirements in existing § 264.148 to facility that stores hazardous waste if no free liquids are present, for F020, notify the permitting authority in the under a standardized permit, except as F021, F022, F023, F026, and F027 event of a bankruptcy would apply also provided in proposed § 267.1(b). Note wastes. The containment system would to the standardized permit (see that, under existing §§ 261.7 and need to contain 10 percent of the proposed § 267.148). We have also 261.33(c), if you empty a hazardous volume of all the containers or the referenced this requirement in proposed waste from a container, the residue volume of the largest container, § 267.140(c). remaining in the container is not whichever is greater. Also, you would Under existing § 264.149, if your considered a hazardous waste if the need to prevent run-on to the storage facility is in a state where EPA container is ‘‘empty’’ as defined in area unless the containment system is administers the program but the state § 261.7. If the container is ‘‘empty’’ we large enough to contain that container imposes its own financial assurance are proposing that the management of volume and the run-on. You would mechanism, you may continue to use the container would be exempt from the need to remove any spills or leaks as the state approved mechanism. There requirements of this subpart. soon as possible to avoid overflowing are only three states where we the containment system. These administer the program, and we do not 2. What Standards Would Apply to the proposed provisions are the same as the expect that these states have their own Containers? requirements in existing § 264.175. mechanisms. Therefore, we are not We are proposing that the Note that if the collected material is including an analogous provision, and requirements of § 267.171 would be the a hazardous waste under part 261 of this have reserved § 267.149. same as standards currently found in chapter, we are proposing that you must
VerDate 11
manage it as a hazardous waste in waste, you would become a generator of We are not requiring integrity testing accordance with all applicable hazardous waste and would need to for tanks managing free liquids and requirements of parts 262 through 266 manage it in accordance with all operating under a standardized permit of this chapter. If the collected material applicable requirements of parts 262 because we would require secondary is discharged through a point source to through 266 of this chapter. This containment. Under the existing part waters of the United States, it would be provision would apply to any solid 264 tank standards, we only require subject to the requirements of section waste you remove from the container tanks that don’t have secondary 402 of the Clean Water Act, as amended, system during closure as well as during containment to undergo annual integrity under our proposed rule. the operating period. testing. Also, we are proposing that the standardized permit only apply to above 5. What Special Requirements Would I 8. What Air Emission Standards Are ground or on ground tanks (for example, Need To Meet for Ignitable or Reactive Proposed? tanks raised off the ground or resting on Waste? We are proposing that the air a pad or the ground surface). Therefore, Under proposed § 267.174, we would emission standards in § 267.177 be as proposed, underground or in-ground require that you store ignitable or similar to those currently in § 264.179. tank systems would not be eligible for reactive waste no closer than 50 feet Under the proposed rule, you would a standardized permit. This is because from your facility’s property line. The need to comply with the requirements we would rely on inspections to ensure general requirements proposed in of subparts AA, BB, and CC of part 264. compliance with the standardized § 267.17(a) provide additional There is a one notable difference permit. Underground and in-ground requirements for ignitable or reactive between proposed § 267.177 and the tank systems are inherently harder to wastes. This proposed standard is the current § 264.179. Section 267.177, as inspect than above ground or on ground same as the provision currently in proposed, would only allow the tanks. We are soliciting comments on § 264.176. following control devices: thermal vapor the merits of excluding underground incinerator, catalytic vapor incinerator, and in-ground tank systems from 6. What Special Requirements Would I flame, boiler, process heater, condenser, Need To Meet for Incompatible Wastes? obtaining standardized permits. and carbon absorption unit. This is Finally, as explained above in the Under proposed § 267.175, we would because performance testing and preamble for subpart G, you would be stipulate that you cannot place reporting is required in part 264 subpart required to clean close all units at the incompatible wastes in the same AA and BB to support alternative facility. We believe that a properly container. This provision would also control devices. This requires close designed, constructed, and operated apply to an unwashed container that interaction on the part of the facility tank system with secondary previously held an incompatible waste. owner/operator and the permitting containment should always be able to The exception to this prohibition is agency. Because this proposed rule is clean close with minimal unforseen found in proposed § 267.17(b), which intended to reduce the burdens of such contingencies. would stipulate precautions that you interactions, we have chosen to limit the would need to take if you have to mix type of control devices. We welcome 1. Would This Subpart Apply to Me? incompatible wastes. public comment on this decision. Subpart J of part 267 would apply to Section 267.175, as proposed, would you if you own or operate a facility that K. Subpart J—Tank Systems further require that you physically treats or stores hazardous wastes in separate incompatible wastes from other We believe that most of the tank above ground or on ground tanks under wastes and protect them with barriers system standards in subpart J of part 264 a standardized permit. We would, such as dikes, berms, or walls. The would be appropriate for tank units however, provide exemptions from purpose of this proposed section is to operating under a standardized permit. some requirements of subpart J for prevent fires, explosions, gaseous However, some provisions in today’s special situations. Specifically, the emissions, leaching, or other discharge proposed tank requirements are requirement for secondary containment, of hazardous waste or hazardous waste different from those in part 264. Today’s as specified in § 267.195, would not constituents which could result from proposal would require secondary apply to you if you have tanks that do the mixing of incompatible waste or containment for all tank systems not contain free liquids and are inside materials if containers break or leak. All managing free liquids, with no of a building or for tanks or sumps that of these proposed provisions are the provisions for waivers. The waiver you are using as secondary containment. same as the existing § 264.177 provision in the part 264 standards All other tanks that manage hazardous requirements. requires significant work on the part of waste, whether it’s a free liquid or not, you, as the facility owner or operator, to would require secondary containment. 7. What Would I Need To Do When I justify that secondary containment is Want To Stop Using the Containers? not necessary. It also requires that the 2. What Are the Proposed Design and Section 267.176, as proposed, would permitting agency review the waiver Construction Standards for New Tank require clean closure of the facility. This demonstration and determine its Systems or Components? proposed requirement would require appropriateness. The close review and The proposed § 267.191 provisions you to remove all hazardous waste and exchange of materials taking place differs from existing § 264.192 residues and to decontaminate or during the waiver process do not fit the requirements in several areas. First, remove all components that came in intent of the standardized permit. Part under the proposed standardized contact with the hazardous wastes, of our premise in developing the permitting process there would be no including soils. These proposed standardized permit is that a high level ‘‘part B application’’ therefore we did requirements are the same as the of interaction between the permittee and not include any references to the part B existing provisions in § 264.178. Under the permitting agency is not necessary. application in the proposed § 267.191 our proposal, unless you can In addition, our experience is that few standards. Under this section, you demonstrate, following § 261.3(d), that owners or operators have availed would still be required to obtain a the solid waste removed from the themselves of this waiver provision. We written assessment, reviewed and containment system is not a hazardous welcome public comment on this topic. certified by an independent, registered
VerDate 11
professional engineer, attesting to the systems (except indoor tanks that do not 10. What Are the Proposed Inspection structural integrity and acceptability of contain free liquids.) Neither the age of Requirements? tank system. However, instead of the tank nor the waste it contains would The inspection requirements of requiring you to submit this estimate to be taken into consideration when proposed § 267.199 are the same as the Regional Administrator, this section deciding when a tank needs secondary current provisions in § 264.195, noting, would require you to retain it at your containment; the secondary however, that today’s proposed part 267 facility. The assessment would be containment requirement would apply standards apply to above ground tank required to show that the foundation, to all new and existing tanks for which systems only. You would be required to structural support, seams, and you would be seeking a standardized inspect your tank system daily to detect connections are adequately designed permit. All proposed design, corrosion or releases and to check data and that the tank system has sufficient installation, and operating requirements from monitoring and leak detection structural strength to ensure that it will of § 267.195 are identical to the current equipment. These provisions would also not collapse, rupture or fail. The design provisions § 264.193, except for the require you to inspect any cathodic and construction requirements in current part 264 requirement to submit protection systems on a regular proposed § 267.191 would be the same a demonstration to the Director when schedule. Note that proposed § 267.15(c) as the current § 264.192 provisions. the leak detection and removal system would require you to fix any However, the proposed requirements in cannot detect a leak within 24 hours of deterioration or malfunction that you proposed § 267.191 differ from the part it occurring. Instead, you would self- find. Further, proposed § 267.200 would 264 standards in that facilities with certify and document that a leak or spill require you to notify the Director within underground tank systems or cannot be detected and/or removed 24 hours of confirming a leak, and 40 components not be eligible for a within 24 hours. You would keep this CFR part 302 and part 355 may require standardized permit. Therefore, we documentation on-site and make it you to notify the National Response would not be carrying over the existing available for review by the permitting Center or state and local emergency provisions in §§ 264.192(a)(4) and agency. responders of a release. You would be 264.192(c) in today’s proposal. The required to document all inspections in 7. What Are the Proposed Devices for Agency invites comments on whether your facility’s operating record. we should allow underground piping Secondary Containment and What Are connecting above ground or in-ground Their Design, Operating, and 11. What Would I Do in Case of a Leak tank systems under a standardized Installation Requirements? or a Spill? permit. The proposed regulations in the Proposed § 267.196 lists the specific Proposed § 267.200 specifies the part 267 tank standards do not allow procedures you would be required to any underground tank components, devices that you would be required to use in providing secondary follow in the event of a leak or spill including piping. If, in the final rule, the from a tank system or secondary Agency chooses to include underground containment, as well as the design, operating, and installation requirements containment system, or if a tank system tanks, part 267 would include provision or secondary containment system is similar currently found in § 264.192. for each one. These requirements are the same as those in existing § 264.193 (d) unfit for use. The proposed § 267.200 3. What Are the Proposed Handling and and (e). provisions are similar to the current Inspection Requirements for New Tank requirements found in § 264.196 with a Systems? 8. What Are the Proposed Requirements few modifications. We did not propose for Ancillary Equipment? in § 267.200 the current provisions of Proposed § 267.192 retains the same § 264.196 related to releases from a tank requirements as existing § 264.192(b). The proposed requirements for system without secondary containment You would be required to follow these ancillary equipment in § 267.197 are the because all tank systems operating requirements during the installation same as the existing provisions in under a standardized permit would be phase of the new tank system to ensure § 264.193 (f). We have retained the required to have secondary that the integrity of the system is requirement for secondary containment containment. maintained. for all ancillary equipment, such as The proposed § 267.200 provisions 4. What Testing Would Be Required? piping, valves and pumps. We have also require that, in the case of a leak or a retained the exemption from secondary As with existing § 264.192(d), you spill you would be required to containment for four particular immediately remove the tank systems or would be required to test for leaks as situations. proposed in § 267.193. secondary containment systems from 9. What Are the Proposed General service. These provisions also identify 5. What Installation Requirements Operating Requirements for Tank the steps you would be required to take Would Be Required? Systems? to stop the flow of hazardous waste and In addition to the general find the source of the release, and to requirements proposed in § 267.192 and The proposed requirements in remove the released waste within 24 § 267.193 regarding installation, you § 267.198 are identical to those hours. You would have to report any would be required to follow the specific currently in § 264.194. This section releases to the Director within 24 hours installation requirements proposed in stipulates that you manage your tanks to of detection. We have included in this § 267.194. These are the same prevent the tank system from rupturing, section the same exception that is requirements found in existing leaking, corroding, or failing in any currently available in § 264.196 for 264.192(e), (f), and (g). manner. Also, proposed § 267.198 reporting small releases that you clean specifies controls and practices for up quickly. The proposed § 267.200 6. What Are the Proposed Preventative preventing spills and overflows from provisions would require you to submit Requirements for Containing a Release? occurring. It includes spill prevention a more detailed report on any release to The proposed § 267.195 standards controls, overfill prevention controls, the environment to the Director within would require secondary containment and the maintenance of freeboard in 30 days of the release. This section and a leak detection system for all tank uncovered tanks. would also require you to close the tank
VerDate 11
system unless you satisfy specified 15. What Air Emission Standards Are the land disposal restrictions in RCRA repair requirements. Any major repairs Proposed? section 3004(k). must be certified by an independent, Proposed § 267.204 contains similar 2. What Are the Proposed Design and qualified, registered, professional requirements to those currently in Operating Standards for Containment engineer, in accordance with § 264.200 for complying with subparts Buildings? § 270.11(d), before you return the tank AA, BB, and CC of part 264 of this system to service. Proposed § 267.1101 stipulates design chapter. There is one notable difference and operating standards similar to those 12. What Would I Do When I Stop between proposed § 267.204 and currently in § 264.1101. We are Operating the Tank System? existing § 264.200. Proposed § 267.204 proposing specific design requirements When you stop operating the tank only allows the following control for floor, walls, doors, and windows, as system you would be required to clean devices: thermal vapor incinerator, well as for the primary barrier which close it. The proposed § 267.201 catalytic vapor incinerator, flame, would come in contact with the waste. requirements differ from § 264.197 boiler, process heater, condenser, and 3. What Additional Design and standards in two important areas. As carbon absorption unit. This is because Operating Standards Would Apply if stated earlier, we are not proposing to performance testing and reporting is Liquids Will Be in my Containment allow any waivers from secondary required in part 264 subpart AA and BB Building? containment for tank systems operating to support alternative control devices. under a standardized permit. Therefore, This requires close interaction on the If you plan to use your containment we would not carry over the existing part of the facility owner/operator and building to treat or store hazardous § 264.197 provisions for closing a tank the permitting agency, which is not wastes that contain free liquids, then the system that does not have secondary appropriate for the standardized permit. primary barrier would be required to be containment to proposed § 267.201. L. Subpart DD—Containment Buildings able to prevent the migration of Another important difference is that if hazardous constituents into the barrier. you cannot clean close a tank system, The Agency is proposing to adopt You could accomplish this, for example, you would be required to close it as a most of the design and operating by putting a geomembrane on top of a landfill under part 264. Therefore, you requirements for containment buildings concrete surface. You would also be would have to submit a RCRA part B in part 264 directly into the required to install a secondary application described in § 270.14 and standardized permit standards of part containment system. The function of the follow the RCRA individual permitting 267. However, we are proposing secondary containment would be to process to obtain a post-closure permit. changes to several of the existing part allow the use of a leak detection system 264 requirements as we tailor the capable of detecting leaks in the primary 13. What Are the Proposed Special analogous part 267 requirements to the barrier, and to collect the liquids that Requirements for Ignitable or Reactive standardized permit. First, containment could penetrate the primary barrier. Waste? buildings that would be managing free Proposed § 267.1102 stipulates the same The proposed § 267.202 provisions liquids would need to have secondary design requirements for the secondary are the same as the existing § 264.198 containment measures in place. You containment system as does existing standards. This section would require would not be allowed to delay the § 264.1101. This proposed section special handling of ignitable or reactive installation of secondary containment would also require a certification by a wastes before you can store them in measures. As with the secondary qualified registered professional tanks. The section would require that containment requirement for tanks, we engineer that the unit meets all design you: (1) Manage the wastes so that they believe that the part 264 secondary and operating requirements. are no longer ignitable or reactive containment waiver demonstration and The existing § 264.1101 provisions (before or after being placed in the tank); its subsequent review by the permitting allow you to delay implementation of (2) store or treat the waste to prevent the agency does not fit with the intent of the secondary containment for existing waste from igniting or reacting; or (3) standardized permit. We are, however, containment buildings and describe the use the tank system strictly for proposing to retain the provision that process for granting the delay. We are emergencies. Additionally, you would allows you to request a waiver if the not proposing such a delay for be required to adhere to all only liquids in the building are the containment buildings under a requirements for maintenance of result of required dust suppression standardized permit. We believe that, in protective distances as specified in the measures. Another change from the part the interest of streamlining the National Fire Protection Association’s 264 standards that we are proposing standardized permitting process, the ‘‘Flammable and Combustible Liquids would be to require clean closure of permitting agency should not have to Code.’’ containment buildings. We believe if review any demonstrations. The your containment buildings have standardized permitting process does 14. What Are the Proposed Special secondary containment, and they are not provide for an iterative process of Requirements for Incompatible Wastes? properly designed, constructed and submitting a demonstration for a waiver, Proposed § 267.203 stipulates, as does operated, you should be able to clean and responding to comments. existing § 264.199, that you could not close them with minimal problems. place incompatible wastes in the same 4. What Are the Proposed Other tank system, or in a tank system that 1. Would This Subpart Apply to me? Requirements To Prevent Releases? previously held an incompatible waste This subpart would apply to you if The proposed § 267.1103 would and has not been decontaminated, you own or operate a facility that stores require you to use certain controls and unless you follow the provisions or treats hazardous wastes on-site in practices to make certain any hazardous proposed in § 267.17(b). Proposed containment buildings. As with the waste stored in your containment § 267.17(b) specifies precautions that current requirements in subpart DD of building does not leave the building. you would be required to take if you part 264, if the unit was designed and These are the same requirements have to store incompatible wastes in the operated according to proposed currently in § 264.1101(c). These same tank system. § 267.1101, you would not be subject to requirements include maintenance of
VerDate 11
the primary barrier and of the height of without an iterative process with the We request comment on the changed the waste in relation to the wall height. permitting agency. This is the same sections and added sections of part 270 Also, you would be required to take waiver allowed currently in rules. As noted previously, however, we measures to prevent tracking of the § 264.1101(e). are not reopening the existing waste by personnel and equipment, regulations to public comment, except 9. What Would I Do When I Stop including decontamination procedures. those provisions explicitly modified by Operating the Containment Building? Finally, this section would require this proposal. methods of containing fugitive The proposed § 267.1108 closure B. Specific Changes Proposed for Part emissions so that you could meet a ‘‘no provisions would require the clean 270 visible emissions’’ standard. closure of containment buildings. This is similar to the proposed standardized We are proposing certain ancillary 5. What Would I Do if I Detect a changes to other sections of part 270 to Release? permit requirements for container storage areas and tanks. During closure ensure we have fully incorporated the The proposed § 267.1106 provisions of the containment building, you would standardized permit into the existing specify procedures for responding to have to remove or decontaminate all regulations. These include: Proposed releases of hazardous waste that are the waste residues from subsoils and changes to § 270.1 (b) Overview of the same as those currently in containment system components. You RCRA Permit Program, § 270.2 § 264.1101(c)(3). These procedures should have no problem meeting clean Definitions, § 270.10(a) Applying for a would require you to enter all such closure requirements for a properly permit, § 270.10(h) Reapplying for a incidents in your facility’s operating designed and operated containment permit, § 270.40 (a) and (b) Transfer of record, and to notify the Regional building. However, if for some reason Permits, § 270.41 Modify or revoking Administrator both of the release and of you cannot clean close your facility, you and reissuing permits, and § 270.51 the repairs. would be required to submit a part B Continuation of expiring Permits. 6. What Would I Do if My Containment application for an individual post- 1. Overview of the RCRA Program closure care permit for closure as a Building Contains Areas Both With and We are proposing to add a sentence to landfill. We discussed this before in Without Secondary Containment? § 270.1(b) that briefly mentions that a more detail in Section VII H: Subpart Proposed § 267.1105 addresses those facility that treats or stores hazardous G—Closure. buildings with areas where you would waste on-site could be eligible for a manage wastes with free liquids and VIII. Conforming Permit Changes to standardized permit. areas where you either would manage Part 270 wastes without free liquids or you 2. Definitions would have a waiver from secondary A. Overview of Proposed Part 270 We are proposing to add containment requirements in proposed Changes ‘‘standardized permit’’ to the definition 267.1104. For buildings with this type We are proposing to modify the list in § 270.2. This definition for of ‘‘mixed use’’, you could construct a hazardous waste permit program standardized permit is the same portion without secondary containment. requirements by adding a new type of definition that we are proposing to add The requirements in proposed permit: The standardized permit. The to part 124: ‘‘Standardized permit § 267.1105, which are the same as those hazardous waste permit program means a RCRA permit authorizing currently in § 264.1101(d), and are requirements are in part 270. This part management of hazardous waste under designed to prevent migration of the of the RCRA hazardous waste part 124 subpart G and part 270 subpart wastes that require secondary regulations contains specific I. The standardized permit may have containment to the areas that do not. requirements for permit applications, two parts: A uniform portion issued in all cases and a supplemental portion 7. Could a Containment Building Be permit conditions, changes to permits, expiration and continuation of permits, issued at the Director’s discretion.’’ We Considered Secondary Containment for are also proposing to modify the Other Units? interim status, and special forms of permits. definition of ‘‘permit’’ to include a Proposed § 267.1107 addresses the standardized permit. specific instance of a tank being inside Under the existing hazardous waste of a containment building. In this permitting system, facility owners and 3. Permit Applications situation, the containment building operators must obtain an ‘‘individual’’ We are proposing to modify would be the secondary containment permit based on site-specific § 270.10(a) to make it more readable and system for the tank if it meets the information in order to manage to add a sentence to the Permit proposed requirements of § 267.1107. hazardous waste. We briefly described application section clarifying that the This provision is the same as currently the existing individual permitting procedures for application, and issuance in § 264.1101(b)(3)(iii). system in Section I D 1: What are the of a standardized permit are in part 124 steps in Obtaining an Individual subpart G and part 270 subpart I. 8. How Would I Obtain a Waiver From Permit?. As previously discussed, we However, as noted in Table 5: Permit Secondary Containment Requirements? propose allowing standardized permits program comparison, many of the Proposed § 267.1104 would allow for for certain types of hazardous waste current part 270 permit administration a waiver from secondary containment if management activities: The storage and requirements would still be applicable the only liquids in the building were a non-thermal treatment of hazardous for the standardized permit. result of required dust suppression and waste in tanks, containers, and you could assure the containment of containment buildings at facilities that 4. Permit Reapplication liquids and wastes without secondary generate the waste. We are proposing to We are proposing to modify containment. This would be the only add § 270.67 to part 270 subpart F and § 270.10(h) to make it more readable and waiver from secondary containment. We to add part 270 subpart I that would to take into account the standardized are providing it because we believe you allow a special form of permit, a RCRA permit. If your facility is operating could easily make the demonstration standardized permit. under an individual permit and
VerDate 11
manages waste on-site in tanks, permit and issuance of a standardized APA and § 270.51 for an administrative containers, or containment buildings, permit. The causes for modification continuance of the permit. We view the then you could meet the reapplication (§ 270.41(a)), modification or revocation later reapplication for an individual requirement for these units by and reissuance (§ 270.41(b)), and facility permit as simply a part of the ongoing submitting a notice of intent to operate siting (§ 270.41(c)) that apply to an reapplication process. under a standardized permit at least 180 individual permit would also apply to a 8. Standardized Permit days prior to expiration of your standardized permit. individual permit. Likewise, if your 7. Continuation of Expiring Permits As discussed above in Section I C: facility is operating under a What is the Agency’s Proposal, we are standardized permit, you would submit We are proposing to modify § 270.51 proposing to add a new type of permit a notice of intent at least 180 days by adding a new subsection (e) which (e.g. ‘‘standardized permit’’) to part 270 before the expiration date of the permit. discusses continuation of expiring subpart F: Special Forms of Permits. 5. Transfer of Permits standardized permits. This new Section 270.67 contains the general paragraph is similar to the requirements statement allowing the permitting We are proposing to make changes to in existing § 270.51(a) except we have authority the ability to issue § 270.40 (b) that would allow transfer of replaced references to the permit, standardized permits. a standardized permit to a new owner permit application, and §§ 270.14 or operator. The change to this through 270.29 citations with references IX. RCRA Standardized Permits paragraph adds applicable reference to to the standardized permit, notice of §§ 270.320 and 124.212. A transfer of a A. General Information About Proposed intent, and part 124 as appropriate. We Standardized Permits standardized permit to a new owner or are proposing this provision under the operator would qualify as a routine authority of the Administrative In proposed §§ 270.250 and 270.255, permit modification and would follow Procedures Act (APA). we describe what a proposed appropriate procedures for this category We are also proposing to add standardized permit is and who would of standardized permit modification. paragraph (2) to this subsection because be eligible for one. This has been 6. Modification or Revocation and we want to give you the opportunity to discussed earlier in Section I C: What is Reissuance of Permits continue to operate under an existing the Agency’s Proposal. Although proposed regulatory language on these We are proposing to make two permit if you submit an individual two topic is already in part 124 and 267, changes to § 270.41. First, we would add permit application following the a reference to § 270.320, which includes Regional Administrator’s decision that we have repeated these requirements in the requirements for modifying you are not eligible for a standardized part 270 to give Subpart I better context. standardized permits. Also, we are permit. In proposed § 270.260, we describe proposing a new paragraph (b)(3) which Under this paragraph, you would be what sections and subparts of part 270 would specify another reason for able to continue to operate by would be applicable to standardized revocation and reissuance of a permit. submitting an application for an permits. Table 5 offers a comparison of This new paragraph would apply where individual permit within 60 days of the the hazardous waste permit program a facility owner or operator with an Director giving you notice of your provisions of part 270 that are individual RCRA permit wishes to ineligibility for the standardized permit. applicable to individual permits and operate under a standardized permit. This would be the case even if the proposed standardized permits. Most of This was discussed earlier in Section III Director provides the notice after your the part 270 requirements applicable to B: How would I Switch from an previous permit has expired. Under this individual permits would also be Individual Permit to a Standardized proposed scheme, as long as your applicable to standardized permits Permit. Under this situation, you would reapplication for a standardized permit except where noted in Table 4 and request revocation of the individual is timely, you would qualify under the proposed § 270.260.
TABLE 5.—COMPARISON OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PERMIT PROGRAM AND THE PROPOSED STANDARDIZED PERMIT PROGRAM
Proposed Individual standardized permits permits
General Information: Definitions ...... ✔✔ Consideration under Federal laws ...... ✔✔ Effect of permit ...... ✔✔ Noncompliance and reporting program by the Director ...... ✔✔ Permit Application: General application requirements ...... ✔✔ Special form of permit procedures specific to standardized permits ...... ✔ Confidentiality of information ...... ✔✔ Signatories on permit application and reports ...... ✔✔ Contents of part A of permit application ...... ✔✔ Contents of Part B of permit application submitted ...... ✔✔ Permit information kept at facility ...... ✔ Permit Denial ...... ✔✔ Permit Conditions: Conditions Applicable to all permits ...... ✔✔ Requirements for recording and reporting of monitoring results ...... ✔✔ Establishing permit conditions ...... ✔✔ Schedule of compliance ...... ✔✔
VerDate 11
TABLE 5.—COMPARISON OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PERMIT PROGRAM AND THE PROPOSED STANDARDIZED PERMIT PROGRAM—Continued
Proposed Individual standardized permits permits
Changes to Permits: Transfer of permits ...... ✔✔ Modification or revocation and reissuance of permits ...... ✔✔ Permit modification requirements ...... ✔✔ Special modification requirements for standardized permits ...... ✔ Termination of permits ...... ✔✔ Expiration and Continuation of Permits: Duration of permits ...... ✔✔ Continuation of expiring permits ...... ✔✔ Interim Status: Qualifying for interim status ...... ✔✔ Operation during interim status ...... ✔✔ Changes during interim status ...... ✔✔ Termination of interim status ...... ✔✔
B. What Information Would I Need to delineating waste management address topics such as: the type of Submit to the Permitting Agency to structures, (h) a description of the facility, the location, the types of waste Support My Standardized Permit processes you use to manage the waste, generated and managed, and waste Application? (i) a specification of the hazardous minimization and pollution control We are proposing that you submit waste you treat or store at the facility, measures. You would submit a certain information to the permitting (j) an estimate of volumes of hazardous summary of the meeting, along with a authority. Under proposed § 270.275, waste your facility manages annually, list of the attendees and their addresses, you would submit with the notice of (k) a listing of all permits approved or and copies of any comments or intent: (1) The part A information applied for including federal and state materials submitted at the meeting. Permits, (l) a topographic map which required by § 270.13, (2) A meeting 3. Compliance With Location Standards summary and other materials required extends at least 1 mile beyond the by § 124.31, (3) Documentation of facility boundary in all directions and We are proposing under § 270.275(c), compliance with the location standards indicates the location of the facility, the that you submit documentation that of § 267.18 and § 270.14(b)(11), (4) waste management areas, surface your facility is in compliance with the Information that allows the Director to waters, and drinking water wells, and location standards described in § 267.18 carry out our obligations under other (m) a description of nature of the and § 270.14(b)(11). We believe that the Federal laws as required by § 270.3, (5) business. We published a document, location of a facility is an important site- Solid waste management unit RCRA Part A Permit Application (EPA specific aspect of safe waste information § 270.14(d), and (6) A form 8700–23 (October 1999), which management. Therefore, we propose to certification meeting the requirements describes the Part A application in continue to require the submittal of the of proposed § 270.280. detail and includes instructions for documentation of compliance with the filling out the application form. You location standards. This documentation 1. RCRA Part A Application Information would be able to comply with proposed would include several analyses. Section 270.275(a) would require you § 270.275(a) requirements by attaching a First, if you have a new facility, you to submit the information required by completed EPA Form 8700–23 or State would have to determine the § 270.13. This information is the general equivalent form to the notice of intent applicability of the seismic standard by Part A application information required to be covered by the standardized checking if your facility is in a political currently from all facility owners or permit. jurisdiction listed in the regulations at operators seeking a RCRA individual appendix VI of part 264. The permit. The Part A information 2. Preapplication Meeting Summary demonstration should show no recent includes: (a) General information on the Proposed § 270.275(b) would require faults are present within 3000 feet of the hazardous waste management activity you to submit a copy of the meeting facility. If you find evidence of a recent requiring a permit, the name and summary and ancillary materials fault, then your demonstration would mailing address of your facility along required by § 124.31. This is the pre- need to show that no fault exists within with its latitude and longitude, (b) SIC application meeting that you host with 200 feet of an area where you are going codes that best reflect the products or the community before submitting a to manage waste. services your facility provides, (c) the Notice of Intent. This meeting is also Second, you (whether your facility is operator’s name, address, phone required if you are seeking an new or already existing) would need to number, and the ownership status of the individual RCRA hazardous waste determine whether your facility is facility, (d) the owner’s name , address, permit. As discussed above in Section located in a 100-year floodplain. If your and phone number, (e) whether your III A 1: Conduct a pre-application facility is in a 100-year floodplain, you facility is located on Indian lands, (f) an meeting with the community, the would provide information on indication of whether your facility is meeting should provide an informal engineered structures which are new or existing, (g) for existing occasion for you and the public to share designed to prevent washout or facilities, a scale drawing showing past, ideas, educate each other, and start emergency procedures to remove present and future waste management building the framework for a working hazardous waste to safety prior to areas along with photographs clearly relationship. We encourage you to flooding.
VerDate 11
4. Compliance With Other Federal laws operating under RCRA interim status or on audit reporting concurrent with We are proposing in § 270.275(d) that an individual RCRA permit, and so issuance of the final rule. We are asking for public comments on you submit information necessary for would have already completed a RCRA the benefits of such an audit and the Regional Administrator to carry out Facility Assessment. Therefore, you whether the audit should be performed his/her duties under other federal laws should have this information available by an independent third party. Our as required by existing § 270.3. This for all solid waste management units at current proposal allows the facility requirement is similar to the provision your facility. In situations where you do owner or operator to perform the found in § 270.14(b)(20). Specifically, not have this information available compliance audit. the Regional Administrator would need when you apply for a standardized to meet various obligations under permit, we will either develop the 2. Certification of Availability of several Federal laws: the Wild and information (e.g., by conducting a RCRA Information Facility Assessment) or may require you Scenic Rivers Act. 16 U.S.C. 1273 et. Proposed § 270.280 also would seq., the National Historic Preservation to develop and submit it prior to issuing your permit. require you to certify that the Act of 1966. 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq., the information required by proposed Endangered Species Act. 16 U.S.C. 1531 6. Certification of Compliance With §§ 270.290–270.315 would be available et seq., the Coastal Zone Management Proposed Part 267 Requirements at your facility for review by the public Act. 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq., and the Fish and the permitting authority. This and Wildlife Coordination Act. 16 Proposed § 270.275(f) would require would be a major departure from the U.S.C. 611 et seq. You should discuss you to submit a certification meeting the existing RCRA permitting program. with the Regional Administrator the requirements of proposed § 270.280. Under the proposed standardized specific information that you would Submittal of this certification would put permit, you would not have to submit need to submit with your notice of you on record that you understand your most of the information contained in intent for him/her to meet the obligation to comply with all the individual RCRA permit Part B obligations of these Federal laws. proposed requirements of part 267. applications currently required by Failure to submit this information could C. What Are the Proposed Certification § 270.14. Instead of submitting detailed either significantly delay the issuance of Requirements? Part B type information to the the standardized permit or result in permitting authority, you would retain denying the standardized permit and 1. Certification of Compliance this information on-site at your facility. requiring you to obtain an individual Proposed § 270.280 would require you Furthermore, you would certify when RCRA permit. to certify that your facility is either in submitting the notice of intent to be 5. Solid Waste Management Units compliance with all applicable covered by a standardized permit that proposed requirements of part 267 or the Part B type information would be Under current regulations in available for on-site for review by the § 270.14(d), permit applicants must would come into compliance with all applicable requirements. You would public and the permitting agency. include certain information about solid As previously mentioned, we are not also certify that you would continue to waste management units in their permit proposing to require you to submit the remain in compliance with proposed applications. Under the approach we are waste analysis plan with your notice of part 267 during the term of your permit. proposing today, you would need to intent because of the relatively simple The Resource Conservation and submit this information to the waste management practices that take Recovery Act (RCRA) provides for permitting agency. As discussed in place at the proposed type of facilities severe penalties for submitting false Section VII G: Subpart F—Releases from eligible for a standardized permit. We information on application forms. If you Solid Waste Management Units, do not feel that it would be necessary knowingly submit false information or corrective action requirements depend for you to submit the waste analysis make a false representation you would on site specific circumstances. The plan with the notice of intent or for the be subject to significant monetary information that would be required to permitting agency to review the waste penalties and possible imprisonment. be submitted on solid waste analysis plan prior to permit issuance. The proposed certification that you management units includes: (1) The However, we are interested in the would be in compliance with proposed location of the unit on the facility public’s views on the submittal of the part 267 requirements would apply to topographic map; (2) a designation of waste analysis plan. Specifically, are new facilities and existing facilities the type of unit (e.g., storage, treatment, there waste management situations that currently operating under interim status disposal); (3) a description of the may occur at an on-site hazardous waste or an individual RCRA permit. Your general dimensions and structure of the treatment or storage facility that warrant certification would be based on an unit, with any available drawings; (4) the review of the waste analysis plan internal audit of your facility’s the dates over which the unit was prior to permitting the facility? For operations. You would submit the operated; (5) to the extent available, a example, does a waste analysis plan for certification of compliance along with a list of the types of wastes that have been a large facility with many different copy of the audit to the Director. managed in the unit; and (6) all waste streams warrant prior review? We available information pertaining to any We are aware that the level of detail encourage the public to provide detailed releases of hazardous wastes or in compliance audits can range from the descriptions of any situation that they hazardous constituents from the unit. very general to the very specific. are aware of in their comments to us. We would use this information to make Although we don’t expect the audit decisions about the specific types of reports to consist of only a few pages of 3. What Happens if my Facility Is Not corrective actions, if any, that might be findings, they should not involve in Compliance With the Proposed Part necessary to protect human health and extensive documentation. The audits 267 Requirements at the Time I Submit the environment at your facility. should be comprehensive and the my Notice of Intent? We believe that most of the facilities reports should include supporting Your standardized permit would not which would operate under a materials such as completed audit be issued until you are in compliance standardized permit are currently checklists. We expect to issue guidance with proposed part 267 requirements. If
VerDate 11
your facility is not in compliance with maintain an information repository, and standardized permit. In addition, we applicable part 267 requirements when keep it up to date with information have omitted references and regulatory you submit your notice of intent, you relevant to the standardized permit. citations to the post-closure plan would submit a certification stating that Although you could initially choose the currently found in § 270.14(b)(13) from your facility would come into location, the Director could override proposed § 270.290(m) because the post- compliance and provide a schedule your choice. The Director would have closure plan would no longer be detailing when your facility would final say in where the repository is applicable. As discussed above in achieve compliance with applicable established and could require it to be Section VII H: Subpart G—Closure, all requirements. Your suggested schedule located at an off-site location, such as a units that receive a standardized permit would be required to meet the public library. We would not require would be required to either clean close requirements of existing § 270.33 and that the information be maintained off- or apply for an individual RCRA post- include an enforceable sequence of site in all cases. As discussed in Section closure permit. Since existing actions with specific milestones. The I: Overview and Background, waste § 270.14(b)(14) refers to disposal units, milestones should clearly delineate management activities at facilities which would not be eligible for a when compliance would be attained for eligible for the standardized permit have proposed standardized permit, we have each proposed part 267 requirement that traditionally posed relatively less risk not carried over this requirement and your facility would currently not be in than other types of management have reserved § 270.290(n) to maintain a compliance with. Delay in coming into activities, so we anticipate that people parallel regulatory structure. We have compliance with applicable regulations in nearby communities would generally modified the proposed regulatory text in would delay issuance of the not object to going to the facility to § 270.290(o) from the text in existing standardized permit and could be a review the information. § 270.14(b)(15). This is because the last reason for the Director to extend the 120 phrase referring to the Part B in 1. General Facility Information day time period for making a draft paragraph § 270.14(b)(15) would not be permit decision (see Section IV: Issuing The proposed requirements in applicable to proposed standardized a Standardized Permit). A poor § 270.290 are the same as the existing permits. Since existing § 270.14(b)(16) compliance history could also § 270.14(b) requirements with minor refers to post-closure cost estimates, contribute to a Director’s decision to not exceptions. We believe that it is there is no parallel requirement allow coverage under the standardized appropriate to clearly articulate the proposed for standardized permits. permit. information requirements with which Therefore, § 270.290(p) has been facility owners or operators would have reserved. D. What Information Would Be Required to comply. Therefore, we repeat many of Requirements in existing paragraphs To Be Kept at my Facility? the general information requirements of § 270.14 (b)(20), (b)(21) and (b)(22) are We are proposing that information existing § 270.14(b) verbatim in these either not appropriate for the proposed that you would normally submit to the proposed § 270.290 requirements. We standardized permit or are already permitting agency in a Part B permit made minor changes in the addressed. Existing paragraph application be kept at your facility. The requirements to make appropriate § 270.14(b)(20) requires an information specific information that you would citation changes and for readability submittal for the purposes of the keep at your facility would be based on reasons. Existing part 264 citations were Regional Administrator to carry out his/ the general and specific Part B permit in most cases changed to part 267 her duties under other Federal Laws. application requirements currently citations. We propose this requirement in found in §§ 270.14–270.27. You will notice that there is no § 270.275(d), which would require that We are proposing that you keep this parallel reference in proposed paragraph information to be submitted to the information at the facility (and make it § 270.290(c) to existing § 264.13(c) as permitting agency to support your available for review by agency there is in existing § 270.14(b)(3) application. The current requirements of inspectors and the public) instead of because § 264.13(c) is applicable to § 270.14(b)(21) are not applicable submitting it to the permitting agency. facilities treating or storing waste because they are for land disposal We expect that you would consolidate generated off-site. As discussed facilities. The existing requirements of the information in one area at the previously, the proposed standardized § 270.14(b)(22) discuss the pre- facility to the extent practicable to permit is only applicable to on-site application meeting and the submittal of facilitate access. Maintaining the facilities. Also, we did not include the meeting summary along with other information on-site would streamline several of the inspection schedules items. We proposed these requirements the administrative permitting process currently required by § 270.14(b)(5) in in § 270.275(b), specifying that you and should shorten the time required to proposed § 270.290(e) because they are would be required to submit these items obtain a RCRA permit, without for units not eligible for the proposed with the Notice of Intent as discussed lessening the environmental protection standardized permit (e.g. surface previously. We are not proposing to provided by the permit. There could be impoundments, landfills, waste piles, include the requirements of § 270.14(c) some situations where people in the land treatment unit, and miscellaneous because they address ground water community may need special access to units). In addition, you would be monitoring that we believe is the information (i.e., beyond having it required to submit the facility location unnecessary for the types of units that available on-site). For example, there information currently required by would be eligible for proposed could be facility safety issues that § 270.14(b)(11) with your Notice of standardized permits. necessitate the information being kept at Intent. Therefore, we are proposing to an off-site location. To address these reserve § 270.290(k) in order to maintain 2. Container Information situations, we propose to apply the the parallel structure between this The container information information repository requirements section and existing § 270.14(b). We requirements we are proposing today in codified in existing §§ 124.33 and have omitted several of the regulatory § 270.300 are similar to the current 270.30(m) to standardized permits. In citations in existing § 270.14(b)(13) from requirements in § 270.15. In developing other words, the permitting agency proposed § 270.290(m) because they are the proposed language for proposed could require you to set up and for units not eligible for the proposed § 270.300, we modified the existing
VerDate 11
§ 270.15 requirements to make them 5. Air Emission Control Information adopt a policy that would promote the more readable. You would be required We are also proposing to have you use of cleanup programs other than the to keep information at your facility on keep onsite the information required for authorized RCRA program to satisfy the design and operation of the tanks and containers subject to the part corrective action requirements at container storage area including its 264 subpart CC standards (air emission permitted facilities. In the discussion containment system. You would also standards for tanks, surface below, EPA presents several issues and keep diagrams showing the location of impoundments and containers). The options related to the use of such ignitable, reactive, and incompatible proposed § 270.315 requirements for air alternate authorities. You should note waste at your facility along with emission controls would be similar to that these issues and options are drawings showing compliance with the existing § 270.27 requirements for presented by the Agency for the purpose appropriate buffer zones. facilities seeking individual permits. of soliciting ideas. In developing this These information requirements discussion, EPA did not develop an 3. Tank Information concern compliance with the air Agency position on these issues—rather, emission controls that apply to facilities the Agency chose to present for Under today’s proposal, you would comment the options and issues it managing hazardous waste in tanks and have to keep tank system information currently is considering. Thus, the containers. The proposed § 270.315 onsite at the facility. This information following discussion does not represent requirements contain minor changes to deals with design, construction, and the Agency’s position on the use of the current § 270.27 provisions because operation parameters. The proposed alternate authorities, and should not be surface impoundments would not be § 270.305 requirements are similar to used as guidance on the issues eligible for standardized permits. the individual permit requirements discussed. currently in § 270.16. However, we E. How Would I Modify my RCRA Currently, when an alternate State would not carry over to proposed Standardized Permit? authority is used to address corrective § 270.305, the current requirements You would modify your RCRA action at a facility, the provisions of the from § 270.16(h). The existing standardized permit by following the cleanup order issued by the alternate authority are typically either written § 270.16(h) requirements deal with procedures found in proposed into the RCRA permit as conditions, or tanks with variances from secondary §§ 124.211–213. As mentioned above in are incorporated by reference in the containment. As discussed previously, Section VI: Maintaining a Standardized permit. In both cases, the provisions of we are proposing that tanks have Permit, today’s proposed modification the cleanup order become RCRA permit secondary containment to be eligible for procedures are separated into: (1) conditions, which are subject to the standardized permit. Routine changes to the standardized administrative and judicial review at the permit; and (2) significant changes. You 4. Equipment Information time of permit issuance and may be would follow these procedures in lieu of enforced under RCRA. Under today’s proposal, you would be the permit modification procedures EPA is considering issuing a policy to required to keep onsite the information found in existing § 270.42, which address the use, in appropriate required for equipment subject to the describe permittee initiated permit circumstances, of alternate cleanup part 264 subpart BB requirements (air modifications for individual permits. authorities to satisfy the corrective emissions standards for equipment X. Public Comment on Corrective action requirements of a permit. Under leaks). These information requirements Action and Financial Assurance Issues such a policy, EPA would recommend concern emission standards for As was discussed previously, in general guidelines for determining equipment that contains or comes in addition to requesting public comment whether action under an alternate contact with hazardous waste with on the proposed provisions of this rule, authority will result in cleanups that organic concentrations of at least 10 we are requesting public comment on meet the requirements of § 264.101, and percent by weight. The proposed some additional issues related to would specify how the alternate § 270.310 requirements are similar to corrective action and financial authority cleanup generally should be the individual permit requirements assurance requirements. These addressed in the permit to ensure currently found in § 270.25. The additional issues potentially affect the enforceability of cleanup requirements. proposed § 270.315 requirements differ universe of RCRA treatment, storage, This policy, if adopted, would likely from the existing § 270.25 provisions in and disposal, including those that apply at all facilities receiving RCRA one main area. The performance test would receive standardized permits. We permits, including standardized plan currently required by § 270.25(c) have discussed these issues, and our permits. It should be noted that, for alternative control devices is not reasons for soliciting comment on them, although the Agency currently is included in proposed § 270.315 in detail below. contemplating issuing policy guidance requirements because proposed on the alternate authority issue, the A. Corrective Action §§ 267.177 and 267.204 would only Agency may decide instead to issue the allow the following control devices: 1. Could I Satisfy the RCRA Corrective guidance provisions discussed in this section as final regulations. EPA solicits thermal vapor incinerator, catalytic Action Requirements for my Site by comment on whether such a policy, if vapor incinerator, flame, boiler, process Conducting Cleanup Under an Alternate adopted, should be promulgated as heater, condenser, and carbon State Program? 6 regulations or issued as guidance. absorption unit. This is because the EPA is soliciting comment on whether EPA believes that many alternate performance testing and reporting to and under what conditions it should State cleanup programs conduct support alternative control devices cleanups that are protective of human would require close interaction on the 6 The discussion in this notice addresses only health and the environment, and that part of the facility owner/operator and alternate State cleanup authorities. For information many alternate State cleanup authorities the permitting agency, which would not on conducting cleanup under non-RCRA Federal authorities see a memorandum dated September 24, be appropriate for the standardized 1996 from Steven A. Herman and Elliott P. Laws to ‘‘Coordination between RCRA Corrective Action permit. RCRA/CERCLA National Policy Managers entitled and Closure and CERCLA Site Activities.’’
VerDate 11
offer features such as streamlined 2. How Would EPA and the Authorized Agency would incorporate a schedule of procedures, provisions for voluntary States Address the Alternate Authority compliance into the permit that, among cleanup, and provisions for collection of Cleanup Provisions in the RCRA other things, postpones the final user fees to pay for State oversight Permit? decision on whether specific cleanup which, if used at RCRA facilities, could At facilities where cleanup is conditions need to be included in the help speed the pace of RCRA cleanups completed satisfactorily prior to permit RCRA permit until completion of the nationwide. At the same time, EPA issuance, EPA or the State authorized cleanup under the alternate authority recognizes its responsibility to ensure for corrective action must make a (the schedule of compliance should also that cleanups conducted at facilities determination that no additional include requirements, as appropriate, to subject to RCRA corrective action corrective action is necessary to protect report to EPA on the progress of the requirements satisfy the requirements of human health and the environment and alternative state cleanup). EPA or the RCRA sections 3004(u) and (v) and the consequently includes no provisions authorized State issuing the permit ‘‘omnibus’’ provision of section requiring corrective action in the permit would make the decision to postpone 3005(c)(3) (i.e., are protective of human (except those necessary to address imposition of specific cleanup permit health and the environment). EPA future releases). Where corrective action requirements based on an analysis, believes that by developing a policy that is not completed satisfactorily prior to considering the recommended criteria, recommends guidelines for the use of permit issuance, there may be a number of either the specific corrective action alternate authorities at permitted of approaches to allow cleanups contemplated by the alternate cleanup facilities, the Agency would be able to conducted under alternate State cleanup program, on a review of the alternate leverage the potential offered by programs to satisfy the RCRA permit program itself, or both, as appropriate. alternate authorities, while at the same requirements for corrective action under Where the agency determines that the time ensuring that cleanups conducted section 3004(u) and (v). cleanup under the alternate program, or under those authorities satisfy the EPA is soliciting comment on whether the alternate program itself, would not statutory requirements of RCRA. to recommend, under certain likely result in a cleanup that is Whether cleanup at facilities subject protective of human health and the to RCRA corrective action is conducted circumstances, two methods of addressing, within the RCRA permit, the environment, there would be no under a Federal cleanup program (e.g., postponement and specific cleanup RCRA corrective action or CERCLA), an cleanups conducted pursuant to alternate State authorities. Both conditions would be required in the authorized RCRA corrective action RCRA permit at the outset. program, or an alternate State cleanup methods address situations where program, EPA is responsible for corrective action is determined by the As described above, if the agency reporting the progress of cleanups at Agency to be necessary to protect finds that specific permit cleanup RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal human health and the environment at conditions are not necessary at the time facilities to Congress and to the public, the time of permit issuance. Under the of permit issuance, the agency would and for overseeing implementation of first method, referred to as include in the permit a schedule under the RCRA corrective action program in ‘‘postponement,’’ the permit issuing which the agency would make a authorized States. To meet these agency would postpone the determination, upon completion of the responsibilities, EPA regularly solicits determination of RCRA-specific alternative cleanup, whether the information from the States regarding corrective action provisions until after a requirements of § 264.101 have been the progress of cleanups at RCRA cleanup under an alternate State satisfied. At that time, if the agency treatment, storage, and disposal authority is completed. Under the were to determine that the cleanup did facilities, regardless of the authority second method, referred to in this notice not satisfy the requirements of under which they are being conducted, as ‘‘deferral,’’ the permit issuing agency § 264.101, it would impose further and includes this information in a would make a determination that a corrective action as necessary to protect national data base for reporting progress cleanup conducted under an alternate human health and the environment, and at those facilities. It should be noted authority will satisfy the corrective modify the permit to reflect that that, if EPA develops a policy regarding action requirements at the site, then determination (using the procedures in the use of alternate authorities in completely defer corrective action § 270.41 for modifications based on new permits, that practice would not requirements to the alternate program. information). The basis for the agency’s change—EPA would still expect States Both of these methods are discussed determination at the time of permit to provide this information to the below. issuance that it is reasonable to Agency. Postponement. Using the postpone a determination on the need It also should be noted that postponement method, the agency for RCRA-specific cleanup requirements § 264.101(b) requires financial assurance issuing the RCRA permit would until completion of cleanup under the for corrective action, and use of an determine, considering the alternate State authority would be part alternate cleanup program at a RCRA recommended criteria (see discussion of the administrative record for the permitted facility would not modify that below), whether the planned or ongoing permit, and the public would have requirement. If an alternate cleanup cleanup under the alternate program opportunity to comment on the program were used to address corrective would satisfy the requirements of postponement decision prior to permit action at a RCRA permitted facility, the § 264.101 (i.e., whether it would result issuance. Similarly, the basis for the permit issuing agency (EPA or the in a cleanup that is protective of human determination, upon completion of the authorized State) would be responsible health and the environment). The alternative state program cleanup, for ensuring that adequate financial agency would determine that, while whether additional corrective action is assurance was available to satisfy the corrective action is necessary at the required would be part of the requirement of § 264.101 (or authorized facility, the requirements of § 264.101 administrative record for the permit; the State equivalent). will likely be satisfied by the planned or Agency would include in the permit Issues related to potential adoption of ongoing cleanup, so specific permit procedures for making such a this policy, and specific requests for cleanup conditions are not necessary at determination, including an opportunity comment are detailed below. the time of permit issuance. Instead, the for public notice and comment. These
VerDate 11
Agency decisions would be subject to Deferral. A second approach, referred situations where deferral may or may applicable administrative and judicial to in this notice as ‘‘deferral,’’ would not be appropriate. review. It is important to note that allow EPA or the authorized State to 3. How Would EPA or the Authorized under this approach, during the course completely defer corrective action State Determine That Cleanups of the cleanup, the conditions of the requirements to an alternate cleanup Conducted Under an Alternate Cleanup order or other mechanism issued under program. To implement the deferral the alternate State authority would not approach, upon permit issuance, EPA or Program Would Satisfy the be enforceable RCRA permit conditions the authorized State would make the Requirements of § 264.101? and, therefore, would not be enforceable finding that corrective action is Upon issuing a permit at a facility under RCRA by EPA or citizens. necessary, and that the appropriate where the Agency has determined that However, under § 270.41(a) (or the corrective action at the site would be the corrective action is necessary, EPA or authorized State equivalent), EPA or the State action run by the State alternate the authorized State must make a authorized State would have authority program. Under this approach, the determination that the provisions of the to modify the permit if new information permit issuing agency would include in permit addressing corrective action revealed that the cleanup under the the permit a condition requiring the satisfy the requirements of § 264.101, alternate authority was not protective, facility to meet all requirements of an i.e., that they require ‘‘corrective action and that RCRA-specific conditions were alternate State cleanup program order or as necessary to protect human health necessary to protect human health and agreement (or whatever legal and the environment * * *’’(see the environment at that time. mechanism is used by the State program § 264.101(a)). This determination would Further, as a condition to allowing to document the facility’s cleanup be no different where the requirements postponement of corrective action, EPA obligations). The permit would clearly of § 264.101 are to be satisfied by a or the authorized State would include in state that the State alternate program is cleanup conducted through an alternate the permit schedule of compliance some the sole implementer of the cleanup, in cleanup program at a RCRA permitted type of conditions to assure that the other words, it would be the State facility. In order to make the Agency or State agency would be made program that is responsible for the day- determination that the permit requires aware of changed conditions at the site, to-day implementation of the cleanup corrective action ‘‘as necessary to so that the decision to postpone could without intervention by EPA. It should protect human health and the be reviewed and corrective action be noted, however, that because the environment,’’ (or, in the case of conditions incorporated into the permit, cleanup requirements imposed by the postponement, that the alternate if necessary. These conditions could be State alternate authority would, under program cleanup is likely to be structured in several ways. For example, this approach, become RCRA permit adequate, and it therefore is reasonable the permit might include a requirement conditions, they would be enforceable to set a schedule that postpones the that the permittee notify EPA or the by EPA and by citizens. For example, if determination of whether specific authorized State if the conditions upon the alternate authority order specified a corrective action requirements are which the determination to postpone is deadline for completion of specific necessary to protect human health and made change (e.g., if cleanup under the interim measures, if such measures were the environment), the Agency or the alternate authority is not proceeding for not implemented by that deadline, EPA authorized State would either: (1) some reason). Alternatively, the permit (or a citizen) could bring an action for Review the alternate program and make might require periodic reporting to the enforcement of that requirement under a determination that cleanups Agency or State agency; at that time the RCRA. conducted under that program will, or decision to postpone the inclusion of Unlike under the postponement likely will, satisfy the requirements of specific corrective action conditions approach, the permitting agency’s § 264.101 8; or (2) review the provisions could be reviewed. If necessary, specific deferral would not be conditioned on a of an existing site-specific cleanup order corrective action conditions could then review conducted at the end of the (or equivalent) and find that it will be incorporated into the permit. cleanup. Rather, it would be based on satisfy the requirements of § 264.101. Another option would be to include in an analysis at the time of permitting, Therefore, EPA believes that a policy the permit schedule of compliance considering the recommended criteria, supporting use of alternate authorities at conditions such that EPA or the of the specific corrective action permitted sites should include guidance authorized State agency would receive contemplated by the alternate cleanup for assessment of alternate cleanup notice prior to and after the completion program, or on a review of the alternate programs. of significant milestones of the cleanup. program itself, and demonstrating that EPA is soliciting comment on: (1) This also would allow for the the cleanup at the facility will be What assessment factors should be opportunity to review the decision to protective of human health and the recommended for assessing an alternate postpone imposition of specific cleanup environment. The review of the program (or site-specific cleanup); and provisions in the RCRA permit.7 alternate program could include a (2) what role should EPA assume in EPA solicits comment on whether it general prior review (see discussion reviewing and approving alternate State should, as a general matter, recommend below) with a particular determination cleanup programs. use of the postponement method and on about deferral when issuing the permit. Assessment Criteria. EPA believes situations where postponement may or The basis for the agency’s decision to may not be appropriate. defer would be part of the that a policy addressing use of alternate administrative record for the permit, State cleanup programs at RCRA 7 EPA does not intend that the decision to and the public would have opportunity 8 It should be noted that although the decision postpone normally would be revisited. Moreover, to comment on the decision prior to EPA would not expect permits to require that the whether it is appropriate to postpone or defer in cleanup under the non-RCRA program wait for permit issuance. The final deferral any particular instance will be informed by the approval from the RCRA authorized program before decision would be subject to applicable results of prior program review (and EPA does not proceeding with the cleanup. Instead, it would be administrative and judicial review. generally expect that additional review of a incumbent upon the RCRA program to undertake EPA solicits comment on whether it previously reviewed program will be necessary at affirmative steps if it was concerned with how the the time of permit issuance), that decision will be cleanup was proceeding under the non-RCRA should, as a general matter, recommend made on a case-by-case basis in the course of permit program. the use of the deferral method and on issuance.
VerDate 11
permitted facilities should recommend • Opportunities for meaningful sufficiently broad to: (1) Require criteria for assessment and evaluation of public involvement; facility-wide assessments; (2) address all those programs. EPA already has • Response actions that are protective releases of hazardous wastes or provided guidance on assessment and of human health and the environment; constituents to all media for all SWMUs review of alternate programs on two • Adequate resources to ensure that within the facility boundary as well as occasions. In a memorandum dated response actions are conducted in an off-site releases to the extent required November 14, 1996 from Elliot P. Laws appropriate and timely manner, and that under RCRA section 3004(v) (to the and Steven A. Herman to Superfund both technical assistance and extent that releases pose a threat to National Policy Members entitled streamlined procedures, where human health and the environment); ‘‘Interim Approaches for Regional appropriate, are available; and (3) impose remedies that are • Relations with State Voluntary Cleanup Mechanisms for the written protective of human health and the Programs,’’ (the VCP guidance) EPA approval of response action plans and a environment. In promulgating that final recommended six baseline criteria for certification or similar documentation rule, EPA determined that these criteria evaluating the adequacy of State indicating that response actions are are appropriate for evaluation of complete; alternate authorities that would be used voluntary cleanup programs. (A copy of • the VCP guidance is available in the Adequate oversight to ensure that in lieu of post-closure permits to satisfy docket for today’s proposal.) In the response actions are conducted in such corrective action requirements. EPA a manner to assure protection of human October 22, 1998 final Post-Closure rule solicits comments on whether these health and the environment; and (see 63 FR 56710 at 56792), EPA • factors are appropriate for reviewing Capability, through enforcement or alternate programs for use at permitted established criteria to evaluate the other authorities, of ensuring alternate authorities that would be used facilities. completion of response actions if the Over the years, EPA has provided in lieu of a post-closure permit to party conducing the response action address corrective action. The criteria guidance on imposing remedies that are fails or refuses to complete the protective of human health and the from the VCP guidance and the Post- necessary response actions, including Closure rule are outlined below. EPA environment, and that will achieve operation and maintenance or long-term corrective action cleanup objectives. On solicits comment on recommending the monitoring activities. use of the VCP guidance criteria and/or May 1, 1996, EPA published an Many of these listed criteria are the Advance Notice of Proposed the Post-Closure rule criteria to evaluate same as those used in the authorization alternate programs for use in RCRA Rulemaking (ANPR) (see 61 FR 19432), process for state RCRA corrective action which serves as the primary guidance permits. EPA also solicits comment on programs. However, it should be noted other criteria that might be appropriate. for the corrective action program. EPA that the review of resources available to expects that any policy issued on the It should be noted that EPA would not voluntary cleanup programs during the use of alternate cleanup programs at necessarily deny the use of an alternate MOA process is typically significantly RCRA permitted facilities would cleanup program at a RCRA permitted less detailed than the capability provide that, when evaluating a State’s facility because it does not meet all of assessment associated with State alternate cleanup program, EPA or the the criteria developed by the Agency. authorization. Regardless of which authorized State should consider EPA believes that inadequacies of an criteria may ultimately be used, EPA whether cleanups conducted under the alternate State program could be does not believe the level of overall program are at least as protective as the addressed by supplementing the review of the alternate program would EPA corrective action program or the program through conditions in the be the same level as an authorization equivalent State corrective action RCRA permit. For example, if the review. Instead, the review would program authorized by EPA, as Agency determined that an alternate simply need to be sufficient to support implemented under the ANPR program did not provide for meaningful a determination that the use of the guidelines. public involvement, the Agency could alternate program will, or in the case of In addition to the criteria discussed still use the approaches outlined above, postponement likely will, result in above, the Post-Closure final rule but also include specific permit protective cleanups, i.e., will satisfy the required that a cleanup conducted provisions requiring such public requirements of § 264.101. under an alternate authority include participation (or ask the alternate state EPA solicits comment on whether meaningful opportunity for public program to enhance public participation these factors are appropriate to consider involvement (see § 265.121(b)). EPA at the specific site in question). EPA in the context of reviewing alternate believes that public involvement is a solicits comment on this approach. cleanup programs for use at permitted critical component of a corrective action VCP Guidance Criteria. In the facilities. In particular, EPA solicits process that assures that cleanups are November 14, 1996 VCP guidance, EPA comment on to what extent the protective of human health and the established the baseline criteria for reviewing agency should consider the environment, and that any policy evaluating adequacy of State voluntary practices, resources, and oversight supporting use of alternate authorities at cleanup programs. These criteria are capability of the alternate program when permitted facilities must include used by the Agency in negotiating determining whether cleanups meaningful involvement of the public. Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) with conducted under the program will The final Post-Closure rule established States for purposes of dividing cleanup satisfy the requirements of § 264.101. criteria for meaningful public responsibilities between EPA’s Finally, EPA solicits comment on involvement—at a minimum, public Superfund program and the States. By whether other aspects of the alternate notice and opportunity for comment at negotiating these MOAs, EPA seeks to program, not listed above, also should three key stages of cleanup: (1) When develop partnerships with the States to be considered. EPA or the authorized State agency first encourage cleanups at non-NPL sites, Post-Closure Rule Criteria. In the final becomes involved in the cleanup including brownfields. Post-Closure rule, the Agency process as a regulatory or enforcement Under the guidance, voluntary established that an assessment of a matter, (2) when EPA or the authorized cleanup programs should be evaluated cleanup program must demonstrate, at a State agency is ready to approve a to assure they have the following: minimum, that the authority is remedy for the site (this opportunity
VerDate 11
must include a chance to comment on and States. Under the first option, EPA corrective action is responsible for the assumptions on which the remedy is could use an authorization approach, implementing the program, the Agency based), and (3) when EPA or the where the State would submit, among retains oversight responsibility in authorized State is ready to decide that other things, copies of the statutes and authorized States; EPA believes that remedial action is complete at the regulations for the alternate cleanup review and assessment of alternate facility. EPA solicits comment on authority, to demonstrate that the cleanup programs used in the ways whether these are the appropriate public program would result in protective outlined above, should be considered involvement criteria to recommend for cleanups. Under the second option, EPA part of the Agency’s oversight cleanups conducted under alternate and the State could enter into an MOU, responsibility. EPA solicits comment on authorities at permitted facilities. or other agreement, regarding permit to what extent review and assessment of The final Post-Closure rule also determinations and the use of a alternate programs should be considered discussed the need for the alternate particular alternate authority for RCRA part of the Agency’s oversight authority to have adequate enforcement corrective action facilities (e.g., a VCP responsibilities, and on what its role authority. EPA specifically stated in the MOA for RCRA corrective action). EPA should be in evaluating alternate State preamble to that rule, that the alternate solicits comment on these two options, cleanup programs. authorities ‘‘must include the authority when they should be used, and whether B. Financial Assurance to sue in court, and to assess penalties, other options should be considered. In consistent with § 271.16’’ (see 62 FR either case, the purpose of this up-front EPA’s Office of Inspector General 56710 at 56730). The referenced review would be to make an early (OIG) recently issued an audit report on regulation specifically requires that the assessment of the fitness of an alternate financial assurance for closure (RCRA alternate program have the authority to cleanup program for use at permitted Financial Assurance for Closure and enjoin any threatened or continuing facilities in the State. Of course, Post-Closure, Audit Report No. 2001–P– violation of the requirements, and the although the decision whether it is 007, U.S. Environmental Protection authority to compel compliance with appropriate to postpone or defer in any Agency Office of Inspector General, requirements for corrective action or particular instance will be informed by March 30, 2001. (Available at http:// other emergency response measures the results of this prior program review www.epa.gov/oigearth/audit/list301/ deemed necessary to protect human (and EPA does not generally expect that finalreport330.pdf, and in the docket to health and the environment. These additional review of a previously today’s proposed rulemaking). The provisions assure that program reviewed program will be necessary at report raised several issues regarding conducting the cleanup will be able to the time of permit issuance) that the use of pure captive insurance for enforce the cleanup requirements decision will be made on a case-by-case closure. The report states: imposed at the facility in a timely basis in the course of permit issuance. We believe that insurance policies issued manner. As in the case of the Post- In some cases, EPA may already have by a ‘‘captive’’ insurance company do not closure rule, EPA wants to assure that, reviewed an alternate State cleanup provide an adequate level of assurance where a cleanup is conducted through authority for other purposes. For because we found no independence between an alternate cleanup program at a RCRA example, EPA may have reviewed and facility failure and the failure of the permitted facility, the Agency or the approved the authority during mechanism. authorized State will be able to enforce authorization of the State RCRA In addition, the report concluded that the cleanup requirements in a timely program for the Post-Closure Rule. In the sampled captive insurance policies manner. other cases, EPA may have reviewed the did not allow assignment to a new General Process for Review of authority during the process of owner or operator as required by the Alternate Cleanup Programs. EPA authorizing the State RCRA program for regulations. EPA has sent a letter to the believes that, as a general matter, the section 3004(u) corrective action. EPA Vermont Department of Banking, Agency should review state alternate solicits comment on whether alternate Insurance, Securities and Health Care program in advance of relying on them cleanup authorities that have been Administration requesting information at individual sites in the state. EPA reviewed during the authorization on the assignment of captive insurance believe such an up-front review would process should be evaluated again. EPA policies issued by insurers domiciled result in faster permit decisions overall, also solicits comments on other there. The docket to this rulemaking since it would provide, in advance, situations where the Agency may have includes copies of EPA’s letter and useful record support for a reviewed the alternate authority and Vermont’s response. The audit report postponement of deferral decision at a where it might be unnecessary to also recommends that the Agency specific site. In addition, any potential conduct additional review. investigate complex insurance issues issues associated with alternate Process for Review of Alternate with the States to determine the States’ authority would be worked out in Cleanup Programs In States Authorized need for guidance. EPA requests advance of individual permit decisions. for RCRA Corrective Action. EPA comments on the conclusions in the EPA therefore solicits comment on two solicits comment on what is an OIG report. EPA also requests options for documenting the up-front appropriate level of participation for the information from States, the insurance review of an alternate program. EPA Agency in the review and assessment of industry, and the regulated community approves RCRA cleanup programs an alternate program in a state on the need for the guidance suggested through the corrective action authorized for RCRA corrective action. by OIG, appropriate topics, and authorization process (and reviews In particular, EPA solicits comment on information that should be included. alternate authorities as part of whether it is necessary for EPA to The OIG report considers captive authorization for the Post-Closure rule). review and approve an alternate insurance to be a form of ‘‘self EPA also conducts less formal reviews program before a State authorized for insurance,’’ and in that sense is similar as part of program oversight, and as part corrective action defers to that program to the financial test. For the financial of Federal-State joint implementation in a permit, or postpones corrective test, EPA has information on the efforts. These less formal reviews action under a permit pending a probability that a company which typically result in site-specific or cleanup conducted under the alternate passes the financial test could enter program-wide agreements between EPA program. While a State authorized for bankruptcy and so be unable financially
VerDate 11
to fulfill its closure obligations. This allowable mechanism for demonstrating the State requirements authorized by information comes from data on financial assurance for the costs of EPA apply in lieu of equivalent Federal bankruptcy rates, and default rates on plugging and abandonment of Class I requirements and become Federally bonds of various ratings. For captive hazardous waste injection wells under enforceable as requirements of RCRA. insurance, we have no specific § 144.63. EPA maintains independent authority to information, and therefore would like Specifically, EPA is considering a bring enforcement actions under RCRA States, organizations, companies, or requirement that an insurer, in addition sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003. individuals to provide us with any to being ‘‘licensed to transact the Authorized States also have information they may have on the risks business of insurance or eligible to independent authority to bring associated with captive insurers, and provide insurance as an excess or enforcement actions under State law. experience with their payment of claims surplus lines insurer, in one or more After a State receives initial for closure, post-closure care, or third States,’’ meet at least one of the authorization, new Federal party liability under RCRA. following requirements: a rating of Aaa, requirements promulgated under RCRA The financial status of the parent Aa or A by Moody’s, or a rating of AAA, authority existing prior to the 1984 company and the pure captive insurer is AA or A by Standard & Poor’s, or a Hazardous and Solid Waste potentially important because regulatory rating of A++, A+, A or A¥ from A.M. Amendments (HSWA) do not apply in agencies might be forced to perform Best Company. that State until the State adopts and closure at a facility if the parent were to EPA recognizes that these ratings may receives authorization for equivalent enter bankruptcy without having closed appear to be more stringent than the State requirements. In contrast, under the facility and if the captive insurance requirements it has established for RCRA section 3006 (g)(42 U.S.C. company could not afford to close the companies that qualify on the basis of 6926(g)), new Federal requirements and facility promptly or properly. While the a bond rating to self-insure under the prohibitions imposed pursuant to proposed financial test requires a financial test in, for example, subpart H HSWA provisions take effect in company have a tangible net worth of at of parts 264 and 265. This is appropriate authorized States at the same time they least $10 million more than the amount because a company that previously take effect in unauthorized States. As of obligations covered, the capitalization qualified to use the financial test and such, EPA carries out HSWA requirements for captive insurers can be then becomes ineligible because of a requirements and prohibitions in much smaller. Vermont, for example, reduced bond rating is still likely to authorized States, including the has a minimum capitalization qualify for a third party instrument such issuance of new permits implementing requirement for a pure captive as a surety bond or a letter of credit. those requirements, until EPA insurance company of $250,000. The However, third party providers of authorized the State to do so. cost of a RCRA closure could surpass financial assurance generally service a Authorized States are required to that amount. group of owners and operators that are modify their programs when EPA In addition, we are not aware of any financially weaker than those qualifying promulgates Federal requirements that state that covers captive insurance with for the financial test (otherwise they are more stringent or broader in scope State insurance funds that pay off would have used the less expensive than existing Federal requirements. claims in the event of the failure of the financial test as a mechanism to comply RCRA section 3009 allows States to insurer. Because the captive insurer is with the financial assurance impose standards more stringent than providing insurance for its parent requirements). If a third party provider, those in the Federal program. See also company, a State that would provide such as an insurer, loses its qualification 40 CFR 271.1(i). Therefore, authorized such coverage for claims might be to provide assurance, its customers can States are not required to adopt Federal creating a disincentive for prudent risk find it very difficult to obtain another regulations, both HSWA and non- management. However, this means that instrument within the 60 day period HSWA, that are considered equivalent in the event of bankruptcy by the required by the regulations. Until the or less stringent than existing Federal company and the default of the captive customers obtain a new instrument, the requirements. insurer, EPA or the State might not have policy remains in force, but the the funds available for closure. B. Effect of State Authorizations certainty of payment is less than with a Therefore, we request comments on the Today’s proposal, if finalized, will more qualified company. By imposing use of captive insurance as a financial promulgate regulations that are not an additional requirement on the assurance mechanism for closure. HSWA-related. Thus, the standards We also request comments on any financial strength of the insurer, EPA proposed today will be applicable on additional requirements for insurers in expects to reduce the possibility that a the effective date only in those States general, such as minimum ratings (and permitting authority is faced with that do not have final authorization. In appropriate rating agencies), beyond the having a claim on a third party for authorized States, the requirements current requirement to ‘‘be licensed to closure which the third party cannot would not be applicable until the State transact the business of insurance or fund. revises its program to adopt equivalent eligible to provide insurance as an XI. State Authorization requirements under State law. excess or surplus lines insurer, in one Authorized States are required to or more States.’’ (See § 264.143(e)(1)). A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized modify their programs only when EPA We are interested in this information States promulgates Federal regulations that are not only for potential users of the Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA more stringent or broader in scope than standardized permit, but also for other may authorize qualified States to the authorized State regulations. For facilities that demonstrate financial administer the RCRA hazardous waste those changes that are less stringent or assurance for environmental obligations program within the State. A State may reduce the scope of the Federal through the use of insurance. Insurance receive authorization by following the program, States are not required to is currently an allowable mechanism for approval process described under part modify their programs. This is a result demonstrating financial assurance for 271. See 40 CFR part 271 for the overall of section 3009 of RCRA, which allows closure in §§ 258.74, 264.143, 265.143 standards and requirements for States to impose more stringent as well as 761.65. Insurance is also an authorization. Following authorization, regulations than the Federal program.
VerDate 11
Today’s rule however, is considered to Agencies are required to conduct a estimate that an average of 55% of be neither more nor less stringent than ‘‘Regulatory Impact Assessment’’ of annual permit actions will involve the current standards. Therefore, potential costs and benefits of the container systems, 43% will involve authorized States would not be required regulation. Although OMB has not tank systems, and 2% containment to modify their programs to adopt designated this proposed rule as buildings. Aggregated over an average regulations consistent with and economically significant, we have annual 135 RCRA standardized permit equivalent to today’s proposed completed a preliminary economic actions (11% of which are expected to standards. analysis of the proposed rule, the results consist of conversion of existing As in the case of individual permit of which we summarize below and permits, 61% of interim status and new procedures, a state that chooses to adopt present for public review and comment. facility permit applications, 18% and request authorization for issuing a. Description of entities to which this modification permit applications, and standardized permits must adopt rule applies. This rule potentially 10% permit renewal applications upon permitting procedures equivalent, but applies to approximately 866 existing expiration), produces an expected not identical to those promulgated by private sector facilities which non- national cost savings benefit for RCRA EPA. The authorization regulations in thermally treat and/or store RCRA permitting of between $0.36 to $0.53 40 CFR 271.14 lists several provisions of hazardous waste in tanks, containers, million annually. This annual savings the permitting regulations which EPA and containment buildings. The rule consists of 76% of benefits to the private determined are necessary for an only applies to on-site treatment and sector eligible facilities, and 24% of equivalent permitting program. States storage of hazardous waste, not to off- benefits to EPA/state permit authorities. would need to adopt a similar scope of site commercial treatment and storage Potential cost savings benefits are legal authorities for issuing facilities. Eligible facilities may incremental to the average annual cost standardized permits as for individual voluntarily participate in the RCRA associated with the current RCRA permits. standardized permit program. We permitting program. designed the proposed rule to reduce c. Description of potential costs of this XII. Regulatory Assessments the information reporting requirements rule. We believe that the costs to EPA A. Executive Order 12866 for eligible facilities, as well as to and states of implementing the Under Executive Order 12866, [58 FR reduce EPA and state administrative standardized permit option will be 51735 (October 4, 1993)] we must review time for these permit activities. minimal, and therefore we did not determine whether a regulatory action is Eligible facilities are a mix of small, estimate them in the economic analysis. ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to medium and large facilities. Private sector costs associated with this OMB review and the requirements of b. Description of potential benefits of rule have been included and netted-out the Executive Order. The Order defines this rule. The RCRA standardized in the incremental cost comparison of ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one permit proposal is an optional rule the preliminary economic analysis. that is likely to result in a rule that may: designed to streamline the regulatory d. Description of potential net benefits (1) Have an annual effect on the burden to EPA/states as well as to of the rule. Because implementation economy of $100 million or more or private sector facilities covered by the costs are relatively minimal or have adversely affect in a material way the rule, by reducing the amount of otherwise been netted-out from the cost economy, a sector of the economy, information collected, submitted and savings analysis as explained above, the productivity, competition, jobs, the reviewed for RCRA permit actions (i.e., $0.36 to $0.56 million in average annual environment, public health or safety, or new RCRA permit applications, RCRA national cost savings benefits identified State, local, or tribal governments or permit modifications, and RCRA permit above, also represent the potential net communities; renewals). Because the rule proposes to benefits associated with implementation (2) Create a serious inconsistency or streamline existing RCRA regulation, of this rule. rather than add new RCRA regulation, otherwise interfere with an action taken B. Regulatory Flexibility Act or planned by another agency; we expect implementation of the rule by (3) Materially alter the budgetary the EPA and by states with EPA- Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility impact of entitlement, grants, user fees, authorized permitting programs to result Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by or loan programs or the rights and in economic benefits in the form of the Small Business Regulatory obligations of recipients thereof; or national cost savings from reducing both Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues government and private sector resources 1996) whenever an agency is required to arising out of legal mandates, the required for the RCRA permit process. publish a notice of rulemaking for any President’s priorities, or the principles The public is particularly encouraged to proposed or final rule, it must prepare set forth in the Executive Order. comment on desired permit and make available for public comment Pursuant to the terms of Executive streamlining benefits. a regulatory flexibility analysis that Order 12866, OMB has determined that Based on an economic analysis, we describes the effect of the rule on small this proposed rule is a ‘‘significant estimate that the potential average entities (i.e., small businesses, small regulatory action’’ because it raises annual cost savings to eligible facilities organizations, and small governmental novel legal or policy issues. As such, we resulting from implementation of this jurisdictions). However, no regulatory submitted this action to OMB for review rule will range from approximately $100 flexibility analysis is required if the before publishing it in the Federal to $5,800 per permit action (i.e., head of an agency certifies the rule will Register. Changes made in response to between two to 140 administrative not have a significant adverse economic OMB suggestions or recommendations burden hours reduction per permit impact on a substantial number of small are documented in the public record in action, which is equivalent to 4% to entities. support of this proposal. 14% reduction in burden hours SBREFA amended the Regulatory compared to the baseline (existing) Flexibility Act to require Federal 1. Assessment of Potential Costs and RCRA permit program), depending on agencies to provide a statement of the Benefits the type of individual permit they’re factual basis for certifying that a rule For regulations that are projected to converting from and the type of eligible will not have a significant economic have significant economic impacts, treatment and storage equipment. We impact on a substantial number of small
VerDate 11
entities. The following discussion Today’s proposed rule contains no standardized permit must keep at their explains EPA’s determination. Federal mandates (under the regulatory facilities general types of information The Agency has determined that provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for (§ 267.290), as well as unit-specific today’s proposed rule will not have a State, local, or tribal governments or the information for containers (§ 267.300), significant adverse economic impact on private sector. The proposed rule tanks (§ 267.305), equipment subject to a substantial number of small entities, imposes no enforceable duty on any part 264, subpart BB (§ 270.310), and since the rule has direct effects only on State, local or tribal governments or the tanks and containers subject to part 264, state agencies. Otherwise, the proposal private sector. Thus, today’s proposed subpart CC (§ 270.315). EPA anticipates is expected to provide net annual rule is not subject to the requirements that the owner or operator will use this benefits (in the form of administrative of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. information to ensure that tanks, paperwork burden reduction cost EPA has determined that this containers, and other equipment are in savings) from the voluntary proposed rule contains no regulatory good condition and that operating participation by eligible facilities in the requirements that might significantly or requirements are being satisfied, and to private sector. Therefore, we did not uniquely affect small governments. prevent placing in proximity wastes that prepare an RFA. Based on the foregoing Small governments are not authorized are incompatible with other wastes that discussion, I hereby certify that this rule for the RCRA program and therefore will are likely to ignite or explode. EPA will not have a significant adverse not be implementing these rules. needs this information to evaluate economic impact on a substantial compliance of facilities with the number of small entities. D. Paperwork Reduction Act permitting standards. These The information collection C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requirements contribute to EPA’s goal of requirements in this proposed rule have insuring that hazardous waste Title II of the Unfunded Mandates been submitted for approval to the management facilities are operated in a Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Office of Management and Budget manner fully protective of human health Law 104–4, establishes requirements for (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction and the environment. Federal Agencies to assess the effects of Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information collection requirements their regulatory actions on State, local Information Collection Request (ICR) in the standardized permit proposal are and tribal governments and the private document has been prepared by EPA authorized by sections 2002 and 3007 of sector. Under Section 202 of UMRA, we (ICR No. 1935.01) and a copy may be RCRA, as amended. In particular, generally must prepare a written obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at section 2002 gives the Administrator the statement, including a cost-benefit OPPE Regulatory Information Division; authority to promulgate such analysis, for proposed and final rules U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations as are necessary to carry out with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may (2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC the functions of this subchapter. Section result in expenditures to State, local, 20460, by e-mail at 3007 gives EPA the authority to compel and tribal governments, in the aggregate, [email protected], or by anyone who generates, stores, treats, or to the private sector, of $100 million calling (202) 260–2740. A copy may also transports, disposes of or otherwise or more in any one year. Before be downloaded off the Internet at http:/ handles or has handled hazardous promulgating an EPA rule which must /www.epa.gov/icr. wastes to ‘‘furnish information related have a written statement, section 205 of Section 270.275 requires that to such wastes’’ and make such the UMRA generally requires EPA to applicants for a standardized permit information available to the government identify and consider a reasonable submit to the permitting agency for ‘‘the purposes of * * *enforcing the number of regulatory alternatives and information that will be used as the provisions of this chapter.’’ EPA adopt the least costly, most cost- basis of the standardized permit believes the information collection effective, or least burdensome application. This information includes: requirements in the proposal are alternative that achieves the objectives • Part A permit information required consistent with the Agency’s of the rule. The provisions of section by section 270.13; responsibility to protect human health 205 do not apply when they are • A summary of the pre-application and the environment. inconsistent with applicable law. public meeting and other materials Section 3007(b) of RCRA and 40 CFR Moreover, section 205 allows us to required by section 124.31; part 2, subpart B, which define EPA’s adopt an alternative other than the least • Documentation of compliance with general policy on public disclosure of costly, most cost-effective, or least the location standards of sections 267.18 information, contain provisions for burdensome alternative if the and 270.14(b)(11); confidentiality. However, the Agency Administrator publishes an explanation • Information that allows the Director does not anticipate that businesses will with the final rule. Before we establish to carry out his obligations under other assert a claim of confidentiality covering any regulatory requirements that may Federal laws required in § 270.3; all or part of the information that would significantly or uniquely affect small • Solid waste management unit be requested pursuant to the proposed governments, including tribal information required by § 270.14(d); and information collection requirements. If governments, we must develop, under • A signed certification of the such a claim were asserted, EPA must section 203 of the UMRA, a small facility’s compliance with part 267, as and will treat the information in government agency plan. The plan must specified at § 270.280. accordance with the regulations cited provide for notifying potentially EPA needs this information to above. EPA also will assure that this affected small governments, enabling comprehensively evaluate the potential information collection complies with officials of affected small governments risk posed by facilities seeking permits. the Privacy Act of 1974 and OMB to have meaningful and timely input in This information aids EPA in meeting Circular 108. Further, no questions of a the development of our regulatory its goal of ascertaining and minimizing sensitive nature are included in the proposals with significant Federal risks to human health and the proposed information collection intergovernmental mandates, and environment from hazardous waste requirements. informing, educating, and advising management facilities. EPA estimates that a total of 175 small governments on compliance with In addition, facilities that store or (permitted, interim status, and new) the regulatory requirements. treat hazardous waste under a captive TSDFs per year will apply for a
VerDate 11
RCRA standardized permit in the initial E. Executive Order 13045: Children’s justice into our policies and programs. few years after its implementation. EPA Health We are committed to addressing estimates that the annual respondent ‘‘Protection of Children from environmental justice concerns and burden to be approximately 13,367 Environmental Health Risks and Safety have assumed a leadership role in hours, at an annual cost of $1,307,512. Risks’’ (62 F.R. 19885, April 23, 1997) environmental justice initiatives to enhance environmental quality for all Assuming each eligible TSDF responds applies to any rule that: (1) is once annually (i.e. process a RCRA residents of the United States. Our goals determined to be ‘‘economically permit action), the average burden per are to ensure that no segment of the significant’’ as defined under Executive response would be 76 hours. (Note that population, regardless of race, color, Order 12866, and (2) concerns an this burden estimate does not net-out national origin, or income bears environmental health or safety risk that the baseline burden of the existing disproportionately high and adverse EPA has reason to believe may have a RCRA permit program, as was done in human health and environmental effects disproportionate effect on children. If the economic analysis summarized a as a result of our policies, programs, and the regulatory action meets both criteria, few sections above). activities, and that all people live in the Agency must evaluate the Burden means the total time, effort, or clean and sustainable communities. To financial resources expended by persons environmental health or safety effects of address this goal, we considered the to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose the planned rule on children, and impacts of this rule on low-income or provide information to or for a explain why the planned regulation is populations and minority populations. Federal agency. This includes the time preferable to other potentially effective We concluded that today’s final rule needed to review instructions; develop, and reasonably feasible alternatives will potentially advance environmental acquire, install, and utilize technology considered by the Agency. justice goals because the public and systems for the purposes of This proposed rule is not subject to involvement process set forth in today’s collecting, validating, and verifying the Executive Order because it is not rule improves the opportunity for all information, processing and economically significant as defined in potentially affected segments of the maintaining information, and disclosing Executive Order 12866, and because the population to participate in public and providing information; adjust the Agency does not have reason to believe hearings and/or to provide comment on existing ways to comply with any the environmental health or safety risks health and environmental concerns that previously applicable instructions and addressed by this action present a may arise pursuant to a proposed requirements; train personnel to be able disproportionate risk to children. Agency action under this rule. to respond to a collection of F. National Technology Transfer and H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation information; search data sources; Advancement Act and Coordination With Indian Tribal complete and review the collection of Governments information; and transmit or otherwise Section 12(d) of the National disclose the information. Technology Transfer and Advancement Executive Order 13175, entitled An Agency may not conduct or Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Pubic Law No. ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with sponsor, and a person is not required to 104–113, section 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272 Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR respond to a collection of information note) directs EPA to use voluntary 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA unless it displays a currently valid OMB consensus standards in its regulatory to develop an accountable process to control number. The OMB control activities unless to do so would be ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed inconsistent with applicable law or tribal officials in the development of in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter otherwise impractical. Voluntary regulatory policies that have tribal 15. consensus standards are technical implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal Comments are requested on the standards (e.g., materials specifications, implications’’ is defined in the Agency’s need for this information, the test methods, sampling procedures, and Executive Order to include regulations accuracy of the provided burden business practices) that are developed or that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on estimates, and any suggested methods adopted by voluntary consensus one or more Indian tribes, on the for minimizing respondent burden, standards bodies. The NTTAA directs relationship between the Federal including through the use of automated us to provide Congress, through OMB, government and the Indian tribes, or on collection techniques. Send comments explanations when the Agency decides the distribution of power and on the ICR to the Director, OPPE not to use available and applicable responsibilities between the Federal Regulatory Information Division; U.S. voluntary consensus standards. This government and Indian tribes.’’ Environmental Protection Agency proposed rulemaking does not involve This proposed rule does not have (2137); 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC technical standards. Therefore, we are tribal implications. It will not have 20460; and to the Office of Information not considering the use of any voluntary substantial direct effects on tribal and Regulatory Affairs, Office of consensus standards. governments, on the relationship Management and Budget, 725 17th St., between the Federal government and G. Executive Order 12898: NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Environmental Justice ‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’ power and responsibilities between the Include the ICR number in any Under Executive Order 12898, Federal government and Indian tribes, correspondence. Since OMB is required ‘‘Federal Actions to Address as specified in Executive Order 13175. to make a decision concerning the ICR Environmental Justice in Minority There is no impact to tribal governments between 30 and 60 days after October Populations and Low-Income as the result of the standard permit. 12, 2001, a comment to OMB is best Populations,’’ as well as through EPA’s Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not assured of having its full effect if OMB April 1995, ‘‘Environmental Justice apply to this rule. receives it by November 13, 2001. The Strategy, OSWER Environmental Justice In the spirit of Executive Order 13175, final rule will respond to any OMB or Task Force Action Agenda Report,’’ and and consistent with EPA policy to public comments on the information National Environmental Justice promote communications between EPA collection requirements contained in Advisory Council, we have initiated and tribal governments, EPA this proposal. efforts to incorporate environmental specifically solicits additional comment
VerDate 11
on this proposed rule from tribal provide more flexibility for States to From: Steven A. Herman and Elliott P. officials. implement already-existing Laws, To: RCRA/CERCLA National requirements. Thus, the requirements of Policy Manages Region I-X, 24 I. Executive Order 13132: Federalism section 6 of the Executive Order do not September 1996. Executive Order 13132, entitled apply to this rule. 10. EPA Memorandum: Interim ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, Nevertheless, EPA worked closely Approaches for Regional Relations 1999), requires EPA to develop an with state governments in the with State Voluntary Cleanup accountable process to ensure development of this proposed rule. We Programs, From Elliot P. Laws and ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State distributed drafts of the proposed rule to Steven A. Herman, To: Superfund and local officials in the development of California and Wisconsin for their National Policy Members, 14 regulatory policies that have federalism review and comment. We also November 1996. implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have distributed copies of the proposed rule 11. Final Post Closure Rule, 63 FR federalism implications’’ is defined in to the Association of State and 56710, October 22, 1998. the Executive Order to include Territorial Solid Waste Management 12. Advance Notice of Proposed regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct Officials. These states and state Rulemaking on RCRA Corrective effects on the States, on the relationship organizations provided meaningful and Action Program, 61 FR 19432, May 1, between the national government and timely input to the agency in the 1996. the States, or on the distribution of development of this proposal. power and responsibilities among the List of Subjects J. Executive Order 13211: Energy Effects various levels of government.’’ Under 40 CFR Part 124 Executive Order 13132, EPA may not This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy Administrative practice and issue a regulation that has federalism action’’ as defined in Executive Order procedure, Hazardous waste, RCRA implications, that imposes substantial 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations permits. direct compliance costs, and that is not That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, required by statute, unless the Federal Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 40 CFR Part 260 government provides the funds 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to Hazardous waste. necessary to pay the direct compliance have a significant adverse effect on the costs incurred by State and local supply, distribution, or use of energy. 40 CFR Part 267 governments, or EPA consults with Further, we have concluded that this Corrective action, Financial State and local officials early in the rule is not likely to have any adverse assurance, Hazardous waste, Reporting process of developing the proposed energy effects regulation. EPA also may not issue a and recordkeeping requirements, regulation that has federalism XIII. List of References Standardized permit requirements. implications and that preempts State 1. The EPA Permit Improvement Team 40 CFR Part 270 law unless the Agency consults with Final Draft of Concept Paper on Administrative practice and State and local officials early in the Environmental Permitting and Task procedure, Hazardous waste, Permit process of developing the proposed Force Recommendations. EPA, April application and modification regulation. 1996. If EPA complies by consulting, procedures, RCRA permits, 2. The Nation’s Hazardous Waste Standardized permit requirements. Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to Management Program at a provide to the Office of Management Crossroads: The RCRA Dated: September 20, 2001. and Budget (OMB), in a separately Implementation Study. EPA/530–SW– Christine Todd Whitman, identified section of the preamble to the 90–069, Office of Solid Waste and Administrator. rule, a federalism summary impact Emergency Response, July 1990. For reasons stated in the preamble, statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include 3. RCRA Part A Application. EPA/8700– title 40 chapter I of the Code of Federal a description of the extent of EPA’s 23, October 1999. Regulations is proposed to be amended prior consultation with State and local 4. RCRA Public Participation Manual. as follows: officials, a summary of the nature of EPA/530–R–96–007, Office of Solid their concerns and the agency’s position Waste and Emergency Response, PART 124—PROCEDURES FOR supporting the need to issue the September 1996. DECISIONMAKING regulation, and a statement of the extent 5. Summary of Standardized Permit to which the concerns of State and local Forum Meeting held in Arlington, 1. The authority citation for part 124 officials have been met. Also, when EPA Virginia. October 1997. continues to read as follows: transmits a draft final rule with 6. Closure Cost Estimates for Standard Authority: Resource Conservation and federalism implications to OMB for Permits, Background Document— Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; Safe review pursuant to Executive Order Option 5. EPA, December 1998. Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300(f) et seq.; 12866, EPA must include a certification 7. Closure Cost Estimates for Standard Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; and from the agency’s Federalism Official Permits, Background Document— Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq. stating that EPA has met the Option 4. EPA, December 1998. 2. Section 124.1 is amended by requirements of Executive Order 13132 8. Economics Background Document: revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: in a meaningful and timely manner. Estimate of Potential National Cost This proposed rule will not have Savings for the Industrial Hazardous § 124.1 Purpose and scope. substantial direct effects on the States, Waste ‘‘Standardized’’ RCRA Permit * * * * * on the relationship between the national Proposal, EPA Office of Solid Waste, (b) This part 124 is organized into six government and the States, or on the Economics, Methods & Risk Analysis subparts. Subpart A contains general distribution of power and Division, 03 May 2000, 73pp. procedural requirements applicable to responsibilities among the various 9. EPA Memorandum: Coordination all permit programs covered by these levels of government, as specified in between RCRA Corrective Action and regulations. Subparts B through G Executive Order 13132. Rather, it would Closure and CERCLA Site Activities, supplement these general provisions
VerDate 11
with requirements that apply to only portion issued at the Director’s permit (see 40 part 270, subpart I). The one or more of the programs. Subpart A discretion. requirements of this section do not describes the steps EPA will follow in * * * * * apply to permit modifications under 40 receiving permit applications, preparing 4. Section 124.5(c) is amended by CFR 270.42 or to applications that are draft permits, issuing public notice, revising paragraph (c) heading and submitted for the sole purpose of inviting public comment and holding paragraph (c)(1) as follows: conducting post-closure activities or public hearings on draft permits. post-closure activities and corrective Subpart A also covers assembling an § 124.5 Modification, revocation and action at a facility. reissuance, or termination of permits. administrative record, responding to (b) Prior to the submission of a part comments, issuing a final permit * * * * * B RCRA permit application for a facility, decision, and allowing for (c) (Applicable to State programs, see or to the submission of a written notice administrative appeal of the final permit 40 CFR 123.25 (NPDES), 145.11 (UIC), of intent to be covered by a RCRA 233.26 (404), and 271.14 (RCRA)). (1) If decision. Subpart B contains public standardized permit (see 40 CFR part the Director tentatively decides to participation requirements applicable to 270, subpart I), the applicant must hold modify or revoke and reissue a permit all RCRA hazardous waste management at least one meeting with the public in under 40 CFR 122.62 (NPDES), 144.39 facilities. Subpart C contains definitions order to solicit questions from the (UIC), 233.14 (404), or 270.41 (other and specific procedural requirements community and inform the community than 270.41(b)(3)) or 270.42(c) (RCRA), for PSD permits. Subpart D applies to of proposed hazardous waste he or she shall prepare a draft permit NPDES permits until an evidentiary management activities. The applicant under § 124.6 incorporating the hearing begins, when subpart E shall post a sign-in sheet or otherwise proposed changes. The Director may procedures take over for EPA-issued provide a voluntary opportunity for request additional information and, in NPDES permits and EPA-terminated the case of a modified permit, may attendees to provide their names and RCRA permits. Subpart F, which is require the submission of an updated addresses. based on the ‘‘initial licensing’’ application. In the case of revoked and (c) The applicant shall submit a provisions of the Administrative reissued permits, other than under 40 summary of the meeting, along with the Procedure Act (APA), can be used CFR 270.41(b)(3), the Director shall list of attendees and their addresses instead of subparts A through E in require the submission of a new developed under paragraph (b) of this appropriate cases. Subpart G contains application. In the case of revoked and section, and copies of any written specific procedural requirements for reissued permits under 40 CFR comments or materials submitted at the RCRA standardized permits, which, in 270.41(b)(3), the Director and the meeting, to the permitting agency as a some instances, change how the General permittee shall comply with the part of the part B application, in Program Requirements of subpart A appropriate requirements in 40 CFR part accordance with 40 CFR 270.14(b), or apply in the context of the RCRA 124, subpart G for RCRA standardized with the written notice of intent to be standardized permit. permits. covered by a RCRA standardized permit * * * * * (see 40 CFR part 270, subpart I). * * * * * 3. Section 124.2 is amended by 5. Section 124.31 is amended by * * * * * revising the definition of ‘‘permit’’ in revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) as 6. Section 124.32 is amended by paragraph (a) and adding a definition for follows: revising paragraph (a) as follows: a standardized permit in alphabetical order as follows: § 124.31 Pre-application public meeting § 124.32 Public notice requirements at the and notice. application stage. § 124.2 Definitions. (a) Applicability. The requirements of (a) Applicability. The requirements of (a) * * * this section shall apply to all RCRA part this section shall apply to all RCRA part Permit means an authorization, B applications seeking initial permits B applications seeking initial permits license or equivalent control document for hazardous waste management units for hazardous waste management units issued by EPA or an ‘‘approved State’’ over which EPA has permit issuance over which EPA has permit issuance to implement the requirements of this authority. The requirements of this authority. The requirements of this part and parts 122, 123, 144, 145, 233, section shall also apply to RCRA part B section shall also apply to RCRA part B 270, and 271 of this chapter. ‘‘Permit’’ applications seeking renewal of permits applications seeking renewal of permits includes RCRA ‘‘permit by rule’’ for such units, where the renewal for such units under 40 CFR 270.51. For (§ 270.60), UIC area permit (§ 144.33), application is proposing a significant the purposes of this section only, RCRA standardized permit (§ 270.67), change in facility operations. For the ‘‘hazardous waste management units NPDES or 404 ‘‘general permit’’ purposes of this section, a ‘‘significant over which EPA has permit issuance (§§ 270.61, 144.34, and 233.38). Permit change’’ is any change that would authority’’ refers to hazardous waste does not include RCRA interim status qualify as a class 3 permit modification management units for which the State (§ 270.70), UIC authorization by rule under 40 CFR 270.42. For the purposes where the units are located has not been (§ 144.21), or any permit which has not of this section only, ‘‘hazardous waste authorized to issue RCRA permits yet been the subject of final agency management units over which EPA has pursuant to 40 CFR part 271. The action, such as a ‘‘draft permit’’ or a permit issuance authority’’ refers to requirements of this section do not ‘‘proposed permit.’’ hazardous waste management units for apply to hazardous waste units for * * * * * which the State where the units are which facility owners or operators are Standardized permit (RCRA) means a located has not been authorized to issue seeking coverage under a RCRA RCRA permit authorizing management RCRA permits pursuant to 40 CFR part standardized permit (see 40 CFR part of hazardous waste issued under 271. The requirements of this section 270, subpart I)). The requirements of subpart G of this part and 40 part 270, shall also apply to hazardous waste this section do not apply to permit subpart I. The standardized permit may management facilities for which facility modifications under 40 CFR 270.42 or have two parts: A uniform portion owners or operators are seeking permit applications submitted for the issued in all cases and a supplemental coverage under a RCRA standardized sole purpose of conducting post-closure
VerDate 11
activities or post-closure activities and standardized permit consists of terms Issuing a Standardized Permit corrective action at a facility. and conditions, relevant to the unit(s) you are operating at your facility, that § 124.204 What must I do as the Director * * * * * of the regulatory agency to prepare a draft 7. Subpart G is added to read as EPA has promulgated in 40 CFR part standardized permit? follows: 267 (Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Facilities (a) You must review the notice of Subpart G—Procedures for RCRA Operating under a Standardized Permit). intent and supporting information Standardized Permit If you intend to operate under the submitted by the facility owner or standardized permit, you must comply operator. Sec. (b) You must determine whether the with these nationally applicable terms facility is or is not eligible to operate General Information About Standardized and conditions. Permits (b) What comprises the supplemental under the standardized permit. (1) If the facility is eligible for the 124.200 What is a RCRA standardized portion? The supplemental portion of a standardized permit, you must propose permit? standardized permit consists of site- terms and conditions, if any, to include 124.201 Who is eligible for a standardized specific terms and conditions, beyond in a supplemental portion. If you permit? those of the uniform portion, that the determine that these terms and Applying for a Standardized Permit Director may impose on your particular conditions are necessary to protect facility, as necessary to protect human 124.202 How do I as a facility owner or human health and the environment but operator apply for a standardized health and the environment. If the for some reason cannot be imposed, you permit? Director issues you a supplemental must tentatively deny coverage under 124.203 How may I switch from my portion, you must comply with the site- the standardized permit. individual RCRA permit to a specific terms and conditions it (2) If the facility is not eligible for the standardized permit? imposes. standardized permit, you must Issuing a Standardized Permit (1) If the Director determines that it is tentatively deny coverage under the necessary, he or she must include terms 124.204 What must I do as the Director of standardized permit. the regulatory agency to prepare a draft and conditions in your supplemental (c) You must prepare your draft standardized permit? portion to institute corrective action permit decision within 120 days after 124.205 What must I do as the Director of under 40 CFR 267.101 (or State receiving a notice of intent and the regulatory agency to prepare a final equivalent) or to otherwise protect standardized permit? supporting documents from a facility 124.206 In what situations may I require a human health and the environment. (2) Unless otherwise specified, these owner or operator. Your tentative facility owner or operator to apply for an determination under this section to individual permit? supplemental permit terms and conditions apply to your facility in deny or grant coverage under the Opportunities for Public Involvement in the addition to the terms and conditions of standardized permit, including any Standardized Permit Process the uniform portion of the standardized proposed site-specific conditions in a 124.207 What are the requirements for permit and not in place of any of those supplemental portion, constitutes a public notices? terms and conditions. draft permit decision. 124.208 What are the opportunities for (d) Many requirements in subpart A of public comments and hearings on draft § 124.201 Who is eligible for a this part apply to processing the permit decisions? standardized permit? standardized permit application and 124.209 What are the requirements for preparing your draft permit decision. responding to comments? If you generate hazardous waste and 124.210 May I, as an interested party in the then non-thermally treat or store the For example, your draft permit decision permit process, appeal a final hazardous waste in tanks, containers, or must be accompanied by a statement of standardized permit? containment buildings, you may be basis or fact sheet and must be based on the administrative record. In preparing Maintaining a Standardized Permit eligible for a standardized permit. We will inform you of your eligibility when your draft permit decision, the 124.211 What types of changes may I make following provisions of subpart A of this to my standardized permit? we make a decision on your permit. part apply (subject to the following 124.212 What procedures must I follow to Applying for a Standardized Permit make routine changes? modifications): 124.213 What procedures must I follow to § 124.202 How do I as a facility owner or (1) Section 124.1 Purpose and Scope. make significant changes? operator apply for a standardized permit? All paragraphs. (a) You must follow the requirements (2) Section 124.2 Definitions. All Subpart G—Procedures for RCRA in this subpart as well as those in paragraphs. Standardized Permit § 124.31, 40 CFR 270.10 and 40 CFR (3) Section 124.3 Application for a permit. All paragraphs except General Information About part 270, subpart I. paragraphs (c), (d), (f) and (g) of this Standardized Permits (b) You must submit to the Director a written notice of your intent to operate section apply. § 124.200 What is a RCRA standardized under the standardized permit. You (4) Section 124.4 Consolidation of permit? must also include the information and permit processing. All paragraphs apply, The standardized permit is a special certifications required under 40 CFR however, in the context of the RCRA form of RCRA permit, that may consist part 270, subpart I. standardized permit use the reference to of two parts: A uniform portion that the § 124.208 instead of the reference to Director issues in all cases, and a § 124.203 How may I switch from my § 124.10. supplemental portion that the Director individual RCRA permit to a standardized (5) Section 124.6 Draft permits. This issues at his or her discretion. We permit? section does not apply to the RCRA formally define the term ‘‘Standardized You may request that your individual standardized permit; procedures in this permit’’ in § 124.2. permit be revoked and reissued as a subpart apply instead. (a) What comprises the uniform standardized permit, in accordance with (6) Section 124.7 Statement of basis. portion? The uniform portion of a § 124.5. The entire section applies.
VerDate 11
(7) Section 124.8 Fact sheet. All reference to § 124.208 instead of Opportunities for Public Involvement in paragraphs apply, however, in the § 124.10. the Standardized Permit Process context of the RCRA standardized (h) Section 124.16 Stays of contested permit use the reference to § 124.208 permit conditions. All paragraphs apply. § 124.207 What are the requirements for public notices? instead of the reference to § 124.10. (i) Section 124.17 Response to (8) Section 124.9 Administrative comments. This section does not apply (a) You, as the Director, must provide record for draft permits when EPA is the to the RCRA standardized permit; public notice of your draft permit permitting authority. All paragraphs procedures in § 124.209 apply instead. decision and must provide an apply, however, in the context of the (j) Section 124.18 Administrative opportunity for the public to submit RCRA standardized permit use the record for final permit when EPA is the comments and request a hearing on that reference to § 124.204(c) instead of permitting authority. All paragraphs decision. You must provide the public § 124.6. apply, however, use references to notice to: (9) Section 124.10 Public notice of § 124.209 instead of § 124.17. (1) The applicant; permit actions and public comment (k) Section 124.19 Appeal of RCRA, (2) Any other agency which you know period. Only §§ 124.10(c)(1)(ix) and UIC, and PSD permits. All paragraphs has issued or is required to issue a (c)(1)(x)(A) apply to the RCRA apply. RCRA permit for the same facility or standardized permit. Most of § 124.10 (l) Section 124.20 Computation of activity (including EPA when the draft does not apply to the RCRA time. All paragraphs apply. permit is prepared by the State); standardized permit; §§ 124.207, (3) Federal and State agencies with § 124.206 In what situations may I require 124.208, and 124.209 apply instead. jurisdiction over fish, shellfish, and a facility owner or operator to apply for an wildlife resources and over coastal zone § 124.205 What must I do as the Director individual permit? management plans, the Advisory of the regulatory agency to prepare a final (a) If you determine that a facility is Council on Historic Preservation, State standardized permit? not eligible for the standardized permit, Historic Preservation Officers, including As Director of the regulatory agency you must inform the facility owner or any affected States; you must consider all comments operator that they must apply for an (4) To everyone on the facility mailing received during the public comment individual permit. list developed according to the period (see § 124.208) in making your (b) You may require any facility that requirements in § 124.10(c)(1)(ix); and final permit decision. In addition, many has a standardized permit to apply for (5) To any units of local government requirements in subpart A apply of this and obtain an individual RCRA permit. having jurisdiction over the area where part to the public comment period, Any interested person may petition you the facility is proposed to be located and public hearings, and preparation of your to take action under this paragraph. to each State agency having any final permit decision. In preparing a Cases where you may require an authority under State law with respect final permit decision, the following individual RCRA permit include, but to the construction or operation of the provisions of subpart A of this part are not limited to, the following: facility. apply (subject to the following (1) The facility is not in compliance (b) You must issue the public notice modifications): with the terms and conditions of the according to the following methods: (a) Section 124.1 Purpose and Scope. standardized RCRA permit. (1) Publication in a daily or weekly All paragraphs. (2) Circumstances have changed since major local newspaper of general (b) Section 124.2 Definitions. All the time the facility owner or operator circulation and broadcast over local paragraphs. applied for the standardized permit, so radio stations; (c) Section 124.11 Public comments that the facility’s hazardous waste (2) When the program is being and requests for public hearings. This management practices are no longer administered by an approved State, in a section does not apply to the RCRA appropriately controlled under the manner constituting legal notice to the standardized permit; the procedures in standardized permit. public under State law; and § 124.208 apply instead. (c) You may require any facility (3) Any other method reasonably (d) Section 124.12 Public hearings. authorized by a standardized permit to calculated to give actual notice of the Paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) apply. apply for an individual RCRA permit draft permit decision to the persons (e) Section 124.13 Obligation to raise only if you have notified the facility potentially affected by it, including issues and provide information during owner or operator in writing that an press releases or any other forum or the public comment period. The entire individual permit application is medium to elicit public participation. section applies, however, in the context required. You must include in this (c) You must include the following of the RCRA standardized permit use notice a brief statement of the reasons information in the public notice: references to § 124.208 instead of for your decision, a statement setting a (1) The name and telephone number references to § 124.10. deadline for the owner or operator to of the contact person at the facility. (f) Section124.14 Reopening of the file the application, and a statement that (2) The name and telephone number public comment period. All paragraphs on the effective date of the individual of your contact office, and a mailing apply, however, in the context of the RCRA permit the standardized permit as address to which people may direct RCRA standardized permit, use the it applies to their facility automatically comments, information, opinions, or following references: in § 124.14(b)(1) terminates. You may grant additional inquiries. use reference to § 124.204 instead of time upon request from the facility (3) An address to which people may § 124.6; in § 124.14(b)(3) use reference owner or operator. write to be put on the facility mailing to § 124.208 instead of § 124.10; in (d) When you issue an individual list. § 124.14(c) use references to § 124.207 RCRA permit to an owner or operator (4) The location where people may instead of § 124.10. otherwise subject to a standardized view and make copies of the draft (g) Section 124.15 Issuance and RCRA permit, the standardized permit standardized permit and the notice of effective date of permit. All paragraphs for their facility will automatically cease intent and supporting documents. apply, however, in the context of the to apply on the effective date of the (5) A brief description of the facility RCRA standardized permit use the individual permit. and proposed operations, including the
VerDate 11
address or a map (for example, a (f) In their written comments and Maintaining a Standardized Permit sketched or copied street map) of the during the public hearing, if held, facility location on the front page of the interested parties may provide § 124.211 What types of changes may I make to my standardized permit? notice. comments on the draft permit decision. (6) The date that the facility owner or These comments may include, but are You may make both routine and operator submitted the notice of intent not limited to, the facility’s eligibility significant changes. For the purposes of and supporting documents. for the standardized permit, the this section: (a) ‘‘Routine changes’’ are any changes (d) At the same time that you issue tentative supplemental conditions you that qualify as a class 1 or 2 permit the public notice under this section, you proposed, and the need for additional modification under 40 CFR 270.42, must place the draft standardized supplemental conditions. Appendix I, and permit (including both the uniform portion and the supplemental portion, if § 124.209 What are the requirements for (b) ‘‘Significant changes’’ are any responding to comments? any), the notice of intent and supporting changes that (1) Qualify as a class 3 permit documents, and the statement of basis (a) At the time you issue a final modification under 40 CFR 270.42, or fact sheet in a location accessible to standardized permit, you must also Appendix I, the public in the vicinity of the facility respond to comments received during (2) Are not explicitly identified in 40 or at your office. the public comment period on the draft CFR 270.42, Appendix I, or permit. Your response must: § 124.208 What are the opportunities for (3) Amend any terms or conditions in public comments and hearings on draft (1) Specify which additional the supplemental portion of your permit decisions? conditions (i.e., those in the standardized permit. (a) The public notice that you issue supplemental portion), if any, you changed in the final permit, and the § 124.212 What procedures must I follow under § 124.207 must allow at least 45 to make routine changes? days for people to submit written reasons for the change. comments on your draft permit (2) Briefly describe and respond to all (a) You can make routine changes without obtaining approval from the decision. This time is referred to as the significant comments on the facility’s Director. public comment period. You must ability to meet the general requirements (b) If the routine changes you make automatically extend the public (i.e., those terms and conditions in the amend the information you submitted comment period to the close of any uniform portion) and on any additional under 40 CFR 270.275 with your notice public hearing under this section. The conditions necessary to protect human of intent to operate under the hearing officer may also extend the health and the environment raised standardized permit, then before you comment period by so stating at the during the public comment period or make the routine changes you must: hearing. during the hearing. (1) Submit to the Director the revised (b) During the public comment (3) Be available to the public. information pursuant to 40 CFR period, any interested person may 270.275(a), and submit written comments on the draft (b) You may request additional (2) Provide notice of the changes to permit and may request a public information from the facility owner or the facility mailing list and to state and hearing. If someone wants to request a operator or inspect the facility if you local governments in accordance with public hearing, they must submit their need additional information to the procedures in § 124.10(c)(1)(ix) and request in writing to you. Their request adequately respond to significant (x). must state the nature of the issues they comments or to make decisions about propose to raise during the hearing. conditions you may need to add to the § 124.213 What procedures must I follow (c) You must hold a public hearing supplemental portion of the to make significant changes? standardized permit. whenever you receive a written notice (a) You must first provide notice of of opposition to a standardized permit (c) If you are the Director of an EPA and conduct a public meeting. and a request for a hearing within the permitting agency, you must include in (1) Public Meeting. You must hold a public comment period under paragraph the administrative record for your final meeting with the public to solicit (a) of this section. You may also hold a permit decision any documents cited in questions from the community and public hearing at your discretion, the response to comments. If new points inform the community of your proposed whenever, for instance, such a hearing are raised or new material supplied modifications to your hazardous waste might clarify one or more issues during the public comment period, you management activities. You must post a involved in the permit decision. may document your response to those sign-in sheet or otherwise provide a (d) Whenever possible, you must matters by adding new materials to the voluntary opportunity for people schedule a hearing under this section at administrative record. attending the meeting to provide their a location convenient to the nearest names and addresses. population center to the facility. You § 124.210 May I, as an interested party in (2) Public Notice. At least 30 days must give public notice of the hearing the permit process, appeal a final standardized permit? before you plan to hold the meeting you at least 30 days before the date set for must issue a public notice in accordance the hearing. (You may give the public You may petition for administrative with the requirements of § 124.31(d). notice of the hearing at the same time review of the Director’s final permit (b) After holding the public meeting, you provide public notices of the draft decision, including his or her decision you must submit a modification request permit, and you may combine the two that the facility is eligible for the to the Director that: notices). standardized permit, according to the (1) Describes the exact change(s) you (e) You must give public notice of the procedures of § 124.19. However, the want and whether they are changes to hearing according to the methods in terms and conditions of the uniform information you provide under 40 CFR § 124.207(a) and (b). The hearing must portion of the standardized permit are 270.275 or to terms and conditions in be conducted according to the not subject to administrative review the supplemental portion of your procedures in § 124.12(b), (c), and (d). under this provision. standardized permit;
VerDate 11
(2) Explains why the modification is 267.15 What are my general inspection 267.115 After I stop operating, how long needed, and requirements? until I must close? (3) Includes a summary of the public 267.16 What training must my employees 267.116 What must I do with contaminated equipment, structure, and soils? meeting under paragraph (a) of this have? 267.17 What are the requirements for 267.117 How do I certify closure? section, along with the list of attendees managing ignitable, reactive, or Subpart H—Financial Requirements and their addresses and copies of any incompatible wastes? written comments or materials they 267.18 What are the standards for selecting 267.140 Who must comply with this submitted at the meeting. the location of my facility? subpart, and briefly, what do they have (c) Once the Director receives your to do? Subpart C—Preparedness and Prevention 267.141 Definitions of terms as used in this modification request, he or she must subpart. make a tentative determination within 267.30 Does this subpart apply to me? 267.31 What are the general design and 267.142 Cost estimate for closure. 120 days to approve or disapprove your 267.143 Financial assurance for closure. request. operation standards? 267.32 What equipment am I required to 267.144–267.146 [Reserved] 267.147 Liability requirements. (d) After the Director makes this have? 267.148 Incapacity of owners or operators, tentative determination, the procedures 267.33 What are the testing and guarantors, or financial institutions. in § 124.205 and §§ 124.207 through maintenance requirements for the 267.149 [Reserved] 124.210 for processing an initial request equipment? 267.150 State assumption of responsibility. for coverage under the standardized 267.34 When must personnel have access to permit apply to making the final communication equipment or an alarm Subpart I—Use and Management of determination on the modification system? Containers request. 267.35 How do I ensure access for 267.170 Does this subpart apply to me? personnel and equipment during 267.171 What standards apply to the PART 260—HAZARDOUS WASTE emergencies? containers? MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL 267.36 What arrangements must I make 267.172 What are the inspection with local authorities for emergencies? requirements? 267.173 What standards apply to the 8. The authority citation for Part 260 Subpart D—Contingency Plan and container storage areas? continues to read as follows: Emergency Procedures 267.174 What special requirements must I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921– 267.50 Does this subpart apply to me? meet for ignitable or reactive waste? 6927, 6930, 6934, 6935, 6937, and 6974. 267.51 What is the purpose of the 267.175 What special requirements must I 9. In § 260.10, the first sentence of contingency plan and how do I use it? meet for incompatible wastes? 267.52 What must be in the contingency 267.176 What must I do when I want to paragraph (2) of the definition of plan? stop using the containers? ‘‘facility’’ is revised to read as follows: 267.53 Who must have copies of the 267.177 What air emission standards apply? § 260.10 Definitions contingency plan? Subpart J—Tank Systems 267.54 When must I amend the contingency * * * * * plan? 267.190 Does this subpart apply to me? Facility *** 267.55 What is the role of the emergency 267.191 What are the required design and (2) For the purpose of implementing coordinator? construction standards for new tank corrective action under 40 CFR 264.101 267.56 What are the required emergency systems or components? 267.192 What handling and inspection or 267.101, all contiguous property procedures for the emergency coordinator? procedures must I follow during under the control of the owner or installation of new tank systems? operator seeking a permit under subtitle 267.57 What must the emergency coordinator do after an emergency? 267.193 What testing must I do? C of RCRA. * * * 267.58 What notification and recordkeeping 267.194 What installation requirements * * * * * must I do after an emergency? must I follow? 267.195 What are the secondary 10. Part 267 is added to read as Subpart E—Recordkeeping, Reporting, and containment requirements? follows: Notifying 267.196 What are the required devices for secondary containment and what are PART 267—STANDARDS FOR 267.70 Does this subpart apply to me? 267.71 What information must I keep? their design, operating and installation OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF requirements? HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES 267.72 Who sees the records and how long do I keep them? 267.197 What are the requirements for ancillary equipment? OPERATING UNDER A 267.73 What reports must I prepare and to 267.198 What are the general operating STANDARDIZED PERMIT whom who do I send them? requirements for my tank systems? 267.74 What notifications must I make? Subpart A—General 267.199 What inspection requirements Sec. Subpart F—Releases from Solid Waste must I meet? 267.1 What are the purpose, scope and Management Units 267.200 What must I do in case of a leak or applicability of this part? 267.90 Who must comply with this section? a spill? 267.2 What is the relationship to interim 267.91–267.100 [Reserved] 267.201 What must I do when I stop status standards? 267.101 What must I do to address operating the tank system? 267.3 How does this part affect an corrective action for solid waste 267.202 What special requirements must I meet for ignitable or reactive wastes? imminent hazard action? management units? 267.203 What special requirements must I Subpart B—General Facility Standards Subpart G—Closure meet for incompatible wastes? 267.10 Does this subpart apply to me? 267.110 Does this subpart apply to me? 267.204 What air emission standards apply? 267.11 What must I do to comply with this 267.111 What general standards must I Subparts K Through CC [Reserved] subpart? meet when I stop operating the unit? 267.12 How do I obtain an identification 267.112 What procedures must I follow? Subpart DD—Containment buildings number? 267.113 Will the public have the 267.1100 Does this subpart apply to me? 267.13 What are my waste analysis opportunity to comment on the plan? 267.1101 What design and operating requirements? 267.114 What happens if the plan is not standards must my containment building 267.14 What are my security requirements? approved? meet?
VerDate 11
267.1102 What other requirements must I waste analysis, security, inspections, § 267.14 What are my security meet to prevent releases? training, special waste handling, and requirements? 267.1103 What additional design and location standards. operating standards apply if liquids will (a) You must prevent, and minimize be in my containment building? § 267.12 How do I obtain an identification the possibility for, livestock and 267.1104 How may I obtain a waiver from number? unauthorized people from entering the secondary containment requirements? You must apply to EPA for an EPA active portion of your facility, unless 267.1105 What do I do if my containment identification number following the you are exempt from the requirements building contains areas both with and because: without secondary containment? EPA notification procedures and using 267.1106 What do I do if I detect a release? EPA form 8700–12. You may obtain (1) Physical contact with the waste, 267.1107 Can a containment building itself information and required forms from structures, or equipment within the be considered secondary containment? your state hazardous waste regulatory active portion of the facility will not 267.1108 What must I do when I stop agency or from your EPA regional office. injure people or livestock; and operating the containment building? § 267.13 What are my waste analysis (2) Disturbing the waste or equipment Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6902, 6912(a), 6924– requirements? will not cause a violation of the 6926, and 6930. (a) Before you treat or store any requirements of this part. Subpart A—General hazardous wastes, you must obtain a (b) You must keep records at the detailed chemical and physical analysis facility justifying the reasons for your § 267.1 What are the purpose, scope and of a representative sample of the wastes. applicability of this part? waiver under paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) At a minimum, the analysis must of this section. (a) The purpose of this part is to contain all the information needed to establish minimum national standards treat or store the waste to comply with (c) Unless you are exempt under which define the acceptable this part and 40 CFR part 268. paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section, management of hazardous waste under (1) You may include data in the your facility must have: a 40 CFR part 270, subpart I analysis that was developed under 40 (1) A 24-hour surveillance system (for standardized permit. CFR part 261, and published or example, television monitoring or (b) This part applies to owners and documented data on the hazardous surveillance by guards or facility operators of facilities who treat or store waste or on hazardous waste generated personnel) that continuously monitors hazardous waste under a 40 CFR part from similar processes. and controls entry onto the active 270, subpart I standardized permit, (2) You must repeat the analysis as portion of the facility; or except as provided otherwise in 40 CFR necessary to ensure that it is accurate part 261, subpart A, or 40 CFR 264.1(f) and up to date. At a minimum, you (2) An artificial or natural barrier (for and (g). must repeat the analysis if the process example, a fence in good repair or a or operation generating the hazardous fence combined with a cliff) that § 267.2 What is the relationship to interim wastes has changed. completely surrounds the active portion status standards? (b) You must develop and follow a of the facility; and If you are a facility owner or operator written waste analysis plan that (3) A means to control entry, at all who has fully complied with the describes the procedures you will times, through the gates or other requirements for interim status—as follow to comply with paragraph (a) of entrances to the active portion of the defined in section 3005(e) of RCRA and this section. You must keep this plan at facility (for example, an attendant, regulations under 40 CFR 270.70—you the facility. At a minimum, the plan television monitors, locked entrance, or must comply with the regulations must specify all of the following: controlled roadway access to the specified in 40 CFR part 265 instead of (1) The hazardous waste parameters facility). the regulations in this part, until final that you will analyze and the rationale (d) Unless you are exempt under administrative disposition of the for selecting these parameters (that is, paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section, standardized permit application is how analysis for these parameters will you must post a sign at each entrance to made, except as provided under 40 CFR provide sufficient information on the the active portion of a facility, and at part 264, subpart S. waste’s properties to comply with other prominent locations, in sufficient paragraph (a) of this section). § 267.3 How does this part affect an numbers to be seen from any approach imminent hazard action? (2) The test methods you will use to test for these parameters. to this active portion. The sign must Notwithstanding any other provisions (3) The sampling method you will use bear the legend ‘‘Danger—Unauthorized of this part, enforcement actions may be to obtain a representative sample of the Personnel Keep Out.’’ The legend must brought pursuant to section 7003 of waste to be analyzed. You may obtain a be in English and in any other language RCRA. representative sample using either: predominant in the area surrounding the facility (for example, facilities in Subpart B—General Facility Standards (i) One of the sampling methods described in appendix I of 40 CFR part counties bordering the Canadian § 267.10 Does this subpart apply to me? 261; or province of Quebec must post signs in This subpart applies to you if you (ii) An equivalent sampling method. French, and facilities in counties own or operate a facility that treats or (4) How frequently you will review or bordering Mexico must post signs in stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR repeat the initial analysis of the waste Spanish), and must be legible from a part 270, subpart I standardized permit, to ensure that the analysis is accurate distance of at least 25 feet. You may use except as provided in § 267.1(b). and up to date. existing signs with a legend other than (5) Where applicable, the methods ‘‘Danger—Unauthorized Personnel Keep § 267.11 What must I do to comply with you will use to meet the additional Out’’ if the legend on the sign indicates this subpart? waste analysis requirements for specific that only authorized personnel are To comply with this subpart, you waste management methods as specified allowed to enter the active portion, and must obtain an identification number, in 40 CFR 264.17, 264.1034(d), that entry onto the active portion can be and follow the requirements below for 264.1063(d), and 264.1083. dangerous.
VerDate 11
§ 267.15 What are my general inspection § 267.16 What training must my employees continuing training that will be given to requirements? have? each person filling a position listed (a) You must inspect your facility for (a) Your facility personnel must under paragraph (d)(1) of this section; malfunctions and deterioration, operator successfully complete a program of (4) Records that document that facility errors, and discharges that may be classroom instruction or on-the-job personnel have received and completed causing, or may lead to: training that teaches them to perform the training or job experience required their duties in a way that ensures the under paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this (1) Release of hazardous waste facility’s compliance with the section. constituents to the environment; or requirements of this part. You must (e) You must keep training records on (2) A threat to human health. You ensure that this program includes all the current personnel until your facility must conduct these inspections often elements described in the documents closes. You must keep training records enough to identify problems in time to that are required under paragraph (d)(3) on former employees for at least three correct them before they result in harm of this section. years from the date the employee last to human health or the environment. (1) A person trained in hazardous worked at your facility. Personnel waste management procedures must (b) You must develop and follow a training records may accompany direct this program, and must teach personnel transferred within your written schedule for inspecting facility personnel hazardous waste company. monitoring equipment, safety and management procedures (including emergency equipment, security devices, contingency plan implementation) § 267.17 What are the requirements for and operating and structural equipment managing ignitable, reactive, or relevant to their employment positions. incompatible wastes? (such as dikes and sump pumps) that (2) At a minimum, the training are important to preventing, detecting, program must be designed to ensure that (a) You must take precautions to or responding to environmental or facility personnel are able to respond prevent accidental ignition or reaction human health hazards. effectively to emergencies by including of ignitable or reactive waste by (1) You must keep this schedule at the instruction on emergency procedures, following these requirements: facility. emergency equipment, and emergency (1) You must separate these wastes and protect them from sources of (2) The schedule must identify the systems, including all of the following, where applicable: ignition or reaction such as: open equipment and devices you will inspect flames, smoking, cutting and welding, and what problems you look for, such (i) Procedures for using, inspecting, repairing, and replacing facility hot surfaces, frictional heat, sparks as malfunctions or deterioration of (static, electrical, or mechanical), equipment (for example, inoperative emergency and monitoring equipment. (ii) Key parameters for automatic spontaneous ignition (for example, from sump pump, leaking fitting, etc.). waste feed cut-off systems. heat-producing chemical reactions), and (3) The frequency of your inspections (iii) Communications or alarm radiant heat. may vary for the items on the schedule. systems. (2) While ignitable or reactive waste is However, the frequency should be based (iv) Response to fires or explosions. being handled, you must confine on the rate of deterioration of the (v) Response to ground water smoking and open flames to specially equipment and the probability of an contamination incidents. designated locations. environmental or human health (vi) Shutdown of operations. (3) ‘‘No Smoking’’ signs must be incident if the deterioration, (b) Facility personnel must conspicuously placed wherever there is malfunction, or any operator error goes successfully complete the program a hazard from ignitable or reactive undetected between inspections. Areas required in paragraph (a) of this section waste. subject to spills, such as loading and within six months after the date of their (b) If you treat or store ignitable or unloading areas, must be inspected employment or assignment to a facility, reactive waste, or mix incompatible daily when in use. At a minimum, the or to a new position at a facility, waste or incompatible wastes and other inspection schedule must include the whichever is later. Employees hired materials, you must take precautions to items and frequencies required in after the effective date of your prevent reactions that: §§ 267.174, 267.193, 267.195, 267.1103, standardized permit must not work in (1) Generate extreme heat or pressure, and 40 CFR 264.1033, 264.1052, unsupervised positions until they have fire or explosions, or violent reactions. 264.1053, 264.1058, and 264.1083 completed the training requirements of (2) Produce uncontrolled toxic mists, through 264.1089, where applicable. paragraph (a) of this section. fumes, dusts, or gases in sufficient (c) Facility personnel must take part quantities to threaten human health or (c) You must remedy any in an annual review of the initial the environment. deterioration or malfunction of training required in paragraph (a) of this (3) Produce uncontrolled flammable equipment or structures that the section. fumes or gases in sufficient quantities to inspection reveals in time to prevent (d) You must maintain the following pose a risk of fire or explosions. any environmental or human health documents and records at your facility: (4) Damage the structural integrity of hazard. Where a hazard is imminent or (1) The job title for each position at the device or facility. has already occurred, you must take the facility related to hazardous waste (5) Threaten human health or the remedial action immediately. management, and the name of the environment in any similar way. (d) You must record all inspections. employee filling each job; (c) You must document compliance You must keep these records for at least (2) A written job description for each with paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. three years from the date of inspection. position listed under paragraph (d)(1) of You may base this documentation on At a minimum, you must include the this section. This description must references to published scientific or date and time of the inspection, the include the requisite skill, education, or engineering literature, data from trial name of the inspector, a notation of the other qualifications, and duties of tests (for example bench scale or pilot observations made, and the date and employees assigned to each position; scale tests), waste analyses (as specified nature of any repairs or other remedial (3) A written description of the type in § 267.13), or the results of the actions. and amount of both introductory and treatment of similar wastes by similar
VerDate 11
treatment processes and under similar water that could threaten human health § 267.35 How do I ensure access for operating conditions. or the environment. personnel and equipment during emergencies? § 267.18 What are the standards for § 267.32 What equipment am I required to You must maintain enough aisle selecting the location of my facility? have? space to allow the unobstructed (a) You may not locate portions of Your facility must be equipped with movement of personnel, fire protection new facilities where hazardous waste all of the following, unless none of the equipment, spill control equipment, and will be treated or stored within 61 hazards posed by waste handled at the decontamination equipment to any area meters (200 feet) of a fault that has had facility could require a particular kind of facility operation in an emergency. displacement in Holocene time. of equipment specified below: (1) ‘‘Fault’’ means a fracture along § 267.36 What arrangements must I make which rocks on one side have been (a) An internal communications or with local authorities for emergencies? displaced with respect to those on the alarm system capable of providing (a) You must attempt to make the other side. immediate emergency instruction (voice following arrangements, as appropriate (2) ‘‘Displacement’’ means the relative or signal) to facility personnel. for the type of waste handled at your movement of any two sides of a fault (b) A device, such as a telephone facility and the potential need for the measured in any direction. (immediately available at the scene of services of these organizations: (1) Arrangements to familiarize (3) ‘‘Holocene’’ means the most recent operations) or a hand-held two-way police, fire departments, and emergency epoch of the Quaternary period, radio, capable of summoning emergency response teams with the layout of the extending from the end of the assistance from local police facility, properties of hazardous waste Pleistocene to the present. departments, fire departments, or State handled at the facility and associated or local emergency response teams. Note to paragraph (a)(3): Procedures for hazards, places where facility personnel demonstrating compliance with this standard (c) Portable fire extinguishers, fire would normally be working, entrances are specified in 40 CFR 270.14(b)(11). control equipment (including special Facilities which are located in political to and roads inside the facility, and jurisdictions other than those listed in extinguishing equipment, such as that possible evacuation routes. appendix VI of 40 CFR part 264, are assumed using foam, inert gas, or dry chemicals), (2) Agreements designating primary to be in compliance with this requirement. spill control equipment, and emergency authority to a specific police decontamination equipment. and a specific fire department where (b) If your facility is located in a 100- more than one police and fire year flood plain, it must be designed, (d) Water at adequate volume and department might respond to an constructed, operated, and maintained pressure to supply water hose streams, emergency, and agreements with any to prevent washout or any hazardous or foam-producing equipment, or others to provide support to the primary waste by a 100-year flood, unless you automatic sprinklers, or water spray systems. emergency authority. can demonstrate to the Director’s (3) Agreements with State emergency satisfaction that you will safely remove § 267.33 What are the testing and response teams, emergency response the waste, before flood waters can reach maintenance requirements for the contractors, and equipment suppliers. the facility, to a location where the equipment? (4) Arrangements to familiarize local wastes will not be vulnerable to flood hospitals with the properties of You must test and maintain all waters. hazardous waste handled at the facility required facility communications or (1) ‘‘100-year flood plain’’ means any and the types of injuries or illnesses that alarm systems, fire protection land area that is subject to a one percent could result from fires, explosions, or equipment, spill control equipment, and or greater chance of flooding in any releases at the facility. given year from any source. decontamination equipment, as (b) If State or local authorities decline (2) ‘‘Washout’’ means the movement necessary, to assure its proper operation to enter into such arrangements, you of hazardous waste from the active in time of emergency. must document the refusal in the portion of the facility as a result of § 267.34 When must personnel have operating record. flooding. access to communication equipment or an (3) ‘‘100-year flood’’ means a flood alarm system? Subpart D—Contingency Plan and that has a one percent chance of being Emergency Procedures equaled or exceeded in any given year. (a) Whenever hazardous waste is being poured, mixed, spread, or § 267.50 Does this subpart apply to me? Subpart C—Preparedness and otherwise handled, all personnel This subpart applies to you if you Prevention involved in the operation must have own or operate a facility that treats or immediate access to an internal alarm or stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR § 267.30 Does this subpart apply to me? emergency communication device, part 270, subpart I standardized permit, This subpart applies to you if you either directly or through visual or voice except as provided in § 267.1(b). own or operate a facility that treats or contact with another employee, unless stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR § 267.51 What is the purpose of the the device is not required under contingency plan and how do I use it? part 270, subpart I standardized permit, § 267.32. except as provided in § 267.1(b). (a) You must have a contingency plan (b) If just one employee is on the for your facility. You must design the § 267.31 What are the general design and premises while the facility is operating, plan to minimize hazards to human operation standards? that person must have immediate access health or the environment from fires, You must design, construct, maintain, to a device, such as a telephone explosions, or any unplanned sudden or and operate your facility to minimize (immediately available at the scene of non-sudden release of hazardous waste the possibility of a fire, explosion, or operation) or a hand-held two-way or hazardous waste constituents to air, any unplanned sudden or non-sudden radio, capable of summoning external soil, or surface water. release of hazardous waste or hazardous emergency assistance, unless not (b) You must implement the waste constituents to air, soil, or surface required under § 267.32. provisions of the plan immediately
VerDate 11
whenever there is a fire, explosion, or fire departments, hospitals, and state (2) Assess possible hazards to human release of hazardous waste or hazardous and local emergency response teams health or the environment that may waste constituents which could threaten that may be called upon to provide result from the release, fire, or human health or the environment. emergency services. explosion. This assessment must consider both direct and indirect effects § 267.52 What must be in the contingency § 267.54 When must I amend the of the release, fire, or explosion. For plan? contingency plan? example the assessment would consider (a) Your contingency plan must: You must review, and immediately the effects of any toxic, irritating, or (1) Describe the actions facility amend the contingency plan, if asphyxiating gases that are generated, or personnel will take to comply with necessary, whenever: the effects of any hazardous surface (a) The facility permit is revised. §§ 267.51 and 267.56 in response to water run-off from water or chemical (b) The plan fails in an emergency. fires, explosions, or any unplanned agents used to control fire and heat- sudden or non-sudden release of (c) You change the facility (in its design, construction, operation, induced explosions. hazardous waste or hazardous waste (c) If the emergency coordinator constituents to air, soil, or surface water maintenance, or other circumstances) in a way that materially increases the determines that the facility has had a at the facility. release, fire, or explosion which could (2) Describe all arrangements agreed potential for fires, explosions, or releases of hazardous waste or threaten human health, or the upon under § 267.36 by local police environment, outside the facility, he departments, fire departments, hazardous waste constituents, or changes the response necessary in an must report his findings as follows: hospitals, contractors, and state and (1) If his assessment indicates that emergency. local emergency response teams to evacuation of local areas may be coordinate emergency services. (d) You change the list of emergency coordinators. advisable, he must immediately notify (3) List names, addresses, and phone appropriate local authorities. He must numbers (office and home) of all (e) You change the list of emergency equipment. be available to help appropriate officials persons qualified to act as emergency decide whether local areas should be coordinator (see § 267.55), and you must § 267.55 What is the role of the emergency evacuated; and keep the list up to date. Where more coordinator? (2) He must immediately notify either than one person is listed, one must be At least one employee must be either the government official designated as named as primary emergency on the facility premises or on call at all the on-scene coordinator for that coordinator and others must be listed in times (that is, available to respond to an geographical area, or the National the order in which they will assume emergency by reaching the facility Response Center (using their 24-hour responsibility as alternates. within a short period of time) who has toll-free number 800/424–8802). The (4) Include a current list of all the responsibility for coordinating all report must include: emergency equipment at the facility emergency response measures. This (i) Name and telephone number of the (such as fire extinguishing systems, spill emergency coordinator must be reporter. control equipment, communications thoroughly familiar with all aspects of (ii) Name and address of facility. and alarm systems (internal and the facility’s contingency plan, all (iii) Time and type of incident (for external), and decontamination operations and activities at the facility, example, a release or a fire). equipment), where this equipment is the location and characteristics of waste (iv) Name and quantity of material(s) required. In addition, you must include handled, the location of all records involved, to the extent known. the location and a physical description within the facility, and the facility (v) The extent of injuries, if any. of each item on the list, and a brief layout. In addition, this person must (vi) The possible hazards to human outline of its capabilities. have the authority to commit the health or the environment outside the (5) Include an evacuation plan for resources needed to carry out the facility. facility personnel where there is a contingency plan. (d) During an emergency, the possibility that evacuation could be emergency coordinator must take all necessary. You must describe signal(s) § 267.56 What are the required emergency reasonable measures necessary to ensure to be used to begin evacuation, procedures for the emergency coordinator? that fires, explosions, and releases do evacuation routes, and alternate (a) Whenever there is an imminent or not occur, recur, or spread to other evacuation routes (in cases where the actual emergency situation, the hazardous waste at the facility. These primary routes could be blocked by emergency coordinator (or his designee measures must include, where releases of hazardous waste or fires). when the emergency coordinator is on applicable, stopping processes and (b) If you have already prepared a call) must immediately: operations, collecting and containing Spill Prevention, Control, and (1) Activate internal facility alarm or release waste, and removing or isolating Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan under 40 communication systems, where containers. CFR part 112, or some other emergency applicable, to notify all facility (e) If the facility stops operations in or contingency plan, you need only personnel, and response to a fire, explosion, or release, amend that plan to incorporate (2) Notify appropriate State or local the emergency coordinator must hazardous waste management agencies with designated response roles monitor for leaks, pressure buildup, gas provisions that will comply with the if their help is needed. generation, or ruptures in valves, pipes, requirements of this part. (b) Whenever there is a release, fire, or other equipment, when appropriate. or explosion, the emergency coordinator § 267.53 Who must have copies of the must: § 267.57 What must the emergency contingency plan? (1) Immediately identify the character, coordinator do after an emergency? (a) You must maintain a copy of the exact source, amount, and areal extent (a) Immediately after an emergency, plan with all revisions at the facility; of any released materials. He may do the emergency coordinator must provide and this by observation or review of facility for treating, storing, or disposing of (b) You must submit a copy with all records or manifests, and, if necessary, recovered waste, contaminated soil or revisions to all local police departments, by chemical analysis. surface water, or any other material that
VerDate 11
results from a release, fire, or explosion and the method(s) and date(s) of its § 267.73 What reports must I prepare and at the facility. storage and/or treatment at the facility to whom who do I send them? (b) The emergency coordinator must as required by Appendix I of 40 CFR You must prepare a biennial report ensure that, in the affected area(s) of the part 264; and other reports listed in paragraph (b) facility: (2) The location of each hazardous of this section. (1) No waste that may be incompatible waste within the facility and the with the released material is treated, (a) Biennial report. You must prepare quantity at each location; and submit a single copy of a biennial stored, or disposed of until cleanup (3) Records and results of waste procedures are completed. report to the Regional Administrator by analyses and waste determinations you March 1 of each even numbered year. (2) All emergency equipment listed in perform as specified in §§ 267.13, the contingency plan is cleaned and fit The biennial report must be submitted 267.17, and 40 CFR 264.1034, 264.1063, on EPA form 8700–13B. The report must for its intended use before operations 264.1083, and 268.7; are resumed. cover facility activities during the (4) Summary reports and details of all previous calendar year and must § 267.58 What notification and incidents that require you to implement include: recordkeeping must I do after an the contingency plan as specified in emergency? (1) The EPA identification number, § 267.858(b)); name, and address of the facility; (a) You must notify the Regional (5) Records and results of inspections Administrator, and appropriate State as required by § 267.15(d) (except you (2) The calendar year covered by the and local authorities, that the facility is need to keep these data for only three report; in compliance with § 267.57 (b) before years); (3) The method of treatment or storage operations are resumed in the affected (6) Monitoring, testing or analytical for each hazardous waste; area(s) of the facility. data, and corrective action when (4) The most recent closure cost (b) You must note the time, date, and required by subpart F of this part and estimate under § 267.142; and, details of any incident that requires §§ 267.191, 267.193, 267.195, and 40 (5) A description of the efforts implementing the contingency plan in CFR 264.1034(c) through 264.1034(f), undertaken during the year to reduce the operating record. Within 15 days 264.1035, 264.1063(d) through the volume and toxicity of generated after the incident, you must submit a 264.1063(i), 264.1064, 264.1088, waste. written report on the incident to the 264.1089, and 264.1090; Regional Administrator. You must (6) A description of the changes in (7) All closure cost estimates under volume and toxicity of waste actually include the following in the report: § 267.142; (1) The name, address, and telephone achieved during the year in comparison (8) Your certification, at least number of the owner or operator. to previous years to the extent such (2) The name, address, and telephone annually, that you have a program in information is available for the years number of the facility. place to reduce the volume and toxicity prior to 1984. (3) The date, time, and type of of hazardous waste that you generate to (7) The certification signed by you. incident (e.g., fire, explosion). the degree that you determine to be economically practicable; and that the (b) Additional reports. In addition to (4) The name and quantity of submitting the biennial reports, you material(s) involved. proposed method of treatment or storage is that practicable method currently must also report to the Regional (5) The extent of injuries, if any. Administrator: (6) An assessment of actual or available to you that minimizes the potential hazards to human health or present and future threat to human (1) Releases, fires, and explosions as the environment, where this is health and the environment; specified in § 267.58(b) ; applicable. (9) For an on-site treatment facility, (2) Facility closures specified in (7) The estimated quantity and the information contained in the notice § 267.117; and, disposition of recovered material that (except the manifest number), and the (3) As otherwise required by subparts resulted from the incident. certification and demonstration if I, J, and DD of this part and part 264, applicable, required by you under 40 subparts AA, BB, CC. Subpart E—Recordkeeping, Reporting, CFR 268.7; and and Notifying (10) For an on-site storage facility, the § 267.74 What notifications must I make? § 267.70 Does this subpart apply to me? information in the notice (except the Before transferring ownership or This subpart applies to you if you manifest number), and the certification operation of a facility during its own or operate a facility that treats or and demonstration if applicable, operating life, you must notify the new stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR required by you under 40 CFR 268.7. owner or operator in writing of the requirements of this part and 40 CFR part 270, subpart I standardized permit, § 267.72 Who sees the records and how except as provided in § 267.1(b). In long do I keep them? part 270, subpart I. addition, you must comply with the (a) You must furnish all records, Subpart F—Releases from Solid Waste manifest requirements of 40 CFR part including plans, required under this 262 whenever a shipment of hazardous Management Units part upon the request of any officer, waste is initiated from your facility. employee, or representative of EPA who § 267.90 Who must comply with this section? § 267.71 What information must I keep? is duly designated by the Administrator, (a) You must keep a written operating and make them available at all This subpart applies to you if you record at your facility. reasonable times for inspection. own or operate a facility that treats or (b) You must record the following (b) The retention period for all records stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR information, as it becomes available, required under this part is extended part 270, subpart I standardized permit, and maintain the operating record until automatically during the course of any except as provided in § 267.1(b), or you close the facility: unresolved enforcement action unless your facility already has a permit (1) A description and the quantity of involving the facility or as requested by that imposes requirements for corrective each type of hazardous waste generated, the Administrator. action under 40 CFR 264.101.
VerDate 11
§§ 267.91–267.100 [Reserved] health and the environment, post- (5) A detailed description of other closure escape of hazardous waste, activities necessary during the closure § 267.101 What must I do to address corrective action for solid waste hazardous constituents, leachate, period to ensure that partial or final management units? contaminated run-off, or hazardous closure satisfies the closure performance (a) You must institute corrective waste decomposition products to the standards. (6) A schedule for closure of each action as necessary to protect human ground or surface waters or to the hazardous waste management unit, and health and the environment for all atmosphere; and (c) Meets the closure requirements of for final closure of the facility. The releases of hazardous waste or this subpart and the requirements of schedule must include, at a minimum, constituents from any solid waste §§ 267.176, 267.201, and 267.1108. the total time required to close each management unit at the facility, hazardous waste management unit and regardless of the time at which waste § 267.112 What procedures must I follow? the time required for intervening closure was placed in such unit. To close a facility, you must have an activities that allow tracking of progress (b) The Regional Administrator will approved closure plan and follow specify corrective action in the of partial or final closure. notification requirements. (c) You may submit a written request supplemental portion of your (a) Submit a written closure plan. to the Director for a permit standardized permit in accordance with (1) You must have a written closure modification, following applicable this section and 40 CFR part 264, plan. You must submit the plan at least procedures in 40 CFR 124.211 to amend subpart S. The Regional Administrator 180 days prior to closure. The Director the closure plan at any time before the will include in the supplemental must approve the closure plan before notification of final closure of the portion of your standardized permit closure work at the facility begins, and facility. You must include a copy of the schedules of compliance for corrective the plan will become a condition of any amended closure plan with the written action (where corrective action cannot RCRA permit. request for review or approval by the be completed prior to issuance of the (2) The Director’s approval of the plan Director. The Director will approve, permit) and assurances of financial must ensure that the approved plan is disapprove, or modify this amended responsibility for completing corrective consistent with §§ 267.111 through plan in accordance with the procedures action. 267.115, 267.176, 267.201, and (c) You must implement corrective in 40 CFR 124.211 and 270.320. 267.1108. (d) Notification before final closure. action beyond the facility property (b) Satisfy the requirements for (1) You must notify the Director in boundary, where necessary to protect content of closure plan. The closure writing at least 45 days before the date human health and the environment, plan must identify steps necessary to that you expect to begin final closure of unless you demonstrate to the perform partial and/or final closure of a treatment or storage tank, container satisfaction of the Regional the facility. The closure plan must storage, or containment building. Administrator that, despite your best include, at least: (2) The date when you ‘‘expect to efforts, you were unable to obtain the (1) A description of how each begin closure’’ must be no later than 30 necessary permission to undertake such hazardous waste management unit at days after the date that any hazardous actions. You are not relieved of all the facility subject to this subpart will waste management unit receives the responsibility to clean up a release that be closed following § 267.111. known final volume of hazardous has migrated beyond the facility (2) A description of how final closure wastes. boundary where off -site access is of the facility will be conducted in (3) If your facility’s permit is denied. On-site measures to address accordance with § 267.111. The terminated, or if you are otherwise such releases will be determined on a description must identify the maximum ordered, by judicial decree or final order case-by-case basis. You must provide extent of the operations which will be under Section 3008 of RCRA, to cease assurances of financial responsibility for unclosed during the active life of the receiving hazardous wastes or to close, such corrective action. facility. then the requirements of this paragraph (d) You do not have to comply with (3) An estimate of the maximum (d) do not apply. However, you must this section if you are the owner or inventory of hazardous wastes ever on close the facility following the deadlines operator of a remediation waste site site during the active life of the facility established in § 267.115. unless your site is part of a facility that and a detailed description of the is subject to a permit for treating, methods you will use during partial § 267.113 Will the public have the storing, or disposing of hazardous and/or final closure, such as methods opportunity to comment on the plan? wastes that are not remediation wastes. for removing, transporting, treating, (a) The Director will provide you and storing, or disposing of all hazardous the public, through a newspaper notice, Subpart G—Closure wastes, and identification of the type(s) the opportunity to submit written § 267.110 Does this subpart apply to me? of off-site hazardous waste management comments on the plan and to request units to be used, if applicable. This subpart applies to you if you modifications to the plan no later than (4) A detailed description of the steps own or operate a facility that treats or 30 days from the date of the notice. The needed to remove or decontaminate all stores hazardous waste under a 40 CFR Director will also, in response to a hazardous waste residues and part 270, subpart I standardized permit, request or at his/her own discretion, contaminated containment system except as provided in § 267.1(b). hold a public hearing whenever such a components, equipment, structures, and hearing might clarify one or more issues § 267.111 What general standards must I soils during partial or final closure. concerning the closure plan. meet when I stop operating the unit? These might include procedures for (b) The Director will give public You must close the storage and cleaning equipment and removing notice of the hearing 30 days before it treatment units in a manner that: contaminated soils, methods for occurs. Public notice of the hearing may (a) Minimizes the need for further sampling and testing surrounding soils, be given at the same time as notice of maintenance; and and criteria for determining the extent the opportunity for the public to submit (b) Controls, minimizes, or eliminates, of decontamination required to satisfy written comments, and the two notices to the extent necessary to protect human the closure performance standard; may be combined.
VerDate 11
(c) The Director will approve, modify, closure plan. Both you and an most recent of the estimates prepared in or disapprove the plan within 60 days independent registered professional accordance with § 144.62(a), (b), and (c) of its receipt. engineer must sign the certification. You of this chapter. must furnish documentation supporting (3) Independently audited refers to an § 267.114 What happens if the plan is not the independent registered professional approved? audit performed by an independent engineer’s certification to the Director certified public accountant in (a) If the Director does not approve upon request until he releases you from accordance with generally accepted the plan, he must provide you with a the financial assurance requirements for auditing standards. detailed written statement of reasons for closure under § 267.143(i). the refusal and you must then modify (4) Liabilities means probable future sacrifices of economic benefits arising the plan or submit a new plan for Subpart H—Financial Requirements approval within 30 days after receiving from present obligations to transfer this written statement. The Director will § 267.140 Who must comply with this assets or provide services to other approve or modify this new plan in subpart, and briefly, what do they have to entities in the future as a result of past writing within 60 days. do? transactions or events. (b) If the Director modifies the plan, (a) The regulations in this subpart (5) Tangible net worth means the this modified plan becomes the apply to owners and operators who treat tangible assets that remain after approved closure plan. The Director or store hazardous waste under a deducting liabilities; such assets would must assure that the approved plan is standardized permit, except as provided not include intangibles such as goodwill consistent with §§ 267.111 through in § 267.1(b), or paragraph (d) of this and rights to patents or royalties. 267.115, §§ 267.176, 267.201, and section. (g) In the liability insurance 267.1108. The Director must mail a copy (b) The owner or operator must: requirements the terms bodily injury of the modified plan with a detailed (1) Prepare a closure cost estimate as and property damage shall have the statement of reasons for the required in § 267.142, meanings given these terms by modifications to you. (2) Demonstrate financial assurance applicable State law. However, these for closure as required in § 267.143, and terms do not include those liabilities § 267.115 After I stop operating, how long (3) Demonstrate financial assurance which, consistent with standard until I must close? for liability as required in § 267.147. industry practices, are excluded from (a) Within 90 days after the final (c) The owner or operator must notify coverage in liability policies for bodily volume of hazardous waste is sent to a the Regional Administrator if the owner injury and property damage. The unit, you must treat or remove from the or operator is named as a debtor in a Agency intends the meanings of other unit all hazardous wastes following the bankruptcy proceeding under Title 11 terms used in the liability insurance approved closure plan. (Bankruptcy), U. S. Code. (See also requirements to be consistent with their (b) You must complete final closure § 267.148) common meanings within the insurance activities following the approved (d) States and the Federal government industry. The definitions given below of closure plan within 180 days after the are exempt from the requirements of several of the terms are intended to final volume of hazardous wastes is sent this subpart. assist in the understanding of this part to the unit. (c) Nothing in this section precludes § 267.141 Definitions of terms as used in and are not intended to limit their this subpart. you from removing hazardous wastes meanings in a way that conflicts with and decontaminating or dismantling (a) Closure plan means the plan for general insurance industry usage. equipment in accordance with the closure prepared in accordance with the (1) Accidental occurrence means an approved final closure plan at any time requirements of § 267.112. accident, including continuous or before or after notification of final (b) Current closure cost estimate repeated exposure to conditions, which closure. means the most recent of the estimates results in bodily injury or property prepared in accordance with § 267.142 damage neither expected nor intended § 267.116 What must I do with (a), (b), and (c). from the standpoint of the insured. contaminated equipment, structure, and (c) [Reserved] (2) Legal defense costs means any soils? (d) Parent corporation means a expenses that an insurer incurs in corporation which directly owns at least You must properly dispose of or defending against claims of third parties 50 percent of the voting stock of the decontaminate all contaminated brought under the terms and conditions corporation which is the facility owner equipment, structures, and soils during of an insurance policy. the partial and final closure periods. By or operator; the latter corporation is removing any hazardous wastes or deemed a ‘‘subsidiary’’ of the parent (3) Sudden accidental occurrence hazardous constituents during partial corporation. means an occurrence which is not and final closure, you may become a (e) [Reserved] continuous or repeated in nature. generator of hazardous waste and must (f) The following terms are used in the (h) Substantial business relationship handle that waste following all specifications for the financial tests for means the extent of a business applicable requirements of 40 CFR part closure and liability coverage. The relationship necessary under applicable 262. definitions are intended to assist in the State law to make a guarantee contract understanding of these regulations and issued incident to that relationship § 267.117 How do I certify closure? are not intended to limit the meanings valid and enforceable. A ‘‘substantial Within 60 days of the completion of of terms in a way that conflicts with business relationship’’ must arise from a final closure of each unit under a part generally accepted accounting practices: pattern of recent or ongoing business 270 subpart I standardized permit, you (1) Assets means all existing and all transactions, in addition to the must submit to the Director, by probable future economic benefits guarantee itself, such that a currently registered mail, a certification that each obtained or controlled by a particular existing business relationship between hazardous waste management unit or entity. the guarantor and the owner or operator facility, as applicable, has been closed (2) Current plugging and is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the following the specifications in the abandonment cost estimate means the applicable EPA Regional Administrator.
VerDate 11
§ 267.142 Cost estimate for closure. the inflation factor. The result is the subsequent payment by subtracting the (a) The owner or operator must have adjusted closure cost estimate. current value of the trust fund from the at the facility a detailed written (2) Subsequent adjustments are made current closure cost estimate, and estimate, in current dollars, of the cost by multiplying the latest adjusted dividing this difference by the number of closing the facility in accordance closure cost estimate by the latest of years remaining in the pay-in period. with the requirements in §§ 267.111 inflation factor. Mathematically, the formula is: through 267.115 and applicable closure (c) The owner or operator must keep Next Payment = (Current Closure requirements in §§ 267.176, 267.201, the following at the facility during the Estimate—Current Value of the Trust 267.1108. operating life of the facility: The latest Fund) Divided by Years Remaining in (1) The estimate must equal the cost closure cost estimate prepared in the Pay-In Period. of final closure at the point in the accordance with paragraph (a) of this (3) The owner or operator of a facility facility’s active life when the extent and section and, when this estimate has existing on the effective date of this manner of its operation would make been adjusted in accordance with paragraph can establish a trust fund to closure the most expensive; and paragraph (b) of this section, the latest meet this paragraph’s financial (2) The closure cost estimate must be adjusted closure cost estimate. assurance requirements. If the value of based on the costs to the owner or the trust fund is less than the current § 267.143 Financial assurance for closure. operator of hiring a third party to close closure cost estimate when a final the facility. A third party is a party who The owner or operator must establish approval of the permit is granted for the is neither a parent nor a subsidiary of financial assurance for closure of each facility, the owner or operator must pay the owner or operator. (See definition of storage or treatment unit that he owns the difference into the trust fund within parent corporation in § 267.141(d).) The or operates. In establishing financial 60 days. owner or operator may use costs for on- assurance for closure, the owner or (4) The owner or operator may site disposal if he can demonstrate that operator must choose from the financial accelerate payments into the trust fund on-site disposal capacity will exist at all assurance mechanisms in paragraphs or deposit the full amount of the closure times over the life of the facility. (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of this cost estimate when establishing the trust (3) The closure cost estimate may not section. The owner or operator can also fund. However, he must maintain the incorporate any salvage value that may use a combination of mechanisms for a value of the fund at no less than the be realized with the sale of hazardous single facility if they meet the value that the fund would have if wastes, or non-hazardous wastes, requirement in paragraph (h) of this annual payments were made as facility structures or equipment, land, or section, or may use a single mechanism specified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of other assets associated with the facility for multiple facilities as in paragraph (i) this section. at the time of partial or final closure. of this section. The Regional (5) The owner or operator must (4) The owner or operator may not Administrator will release the owner or submit a trust agreement with the incorporate a zero cost for hazardous operator from the requirements of this wording specified in 40 CFR wastes, or non-hazardous wastes that section after the owner or operator 264.151(a)(1). might have economic value. meets the criteria under paragraph (j) of (b) Surety bond guaranteeing payment (5) Within 30 days after submitting a this section. into a closure trust fund. Owners and closure plan under § 267.112, revise the (a) Closure Trust Fund. Owners and operators can use the ‘‘surety bond closure cost estimate so that it is in operators can use the ‘‘closure trust guaranteeing payment into a closure accordance with the plan. fund,’’ that is specified in 40 CFR trust fund,’’ as specified in 40 CFR (b) During the active life of the 264.143(a)(1), (2),and (a)(6) through (11). 264.143(b), including the use of the facility, the owner or operator must For purposes of this paragraph, the surety bond instrument specified at 40 adjust the closure cost estimate for following provisions also apply: CFR 264.151(b), and the standby trust inflation within 60 days prior to the (1) Payments into the trust fund for a specified at 40 CFR 264.143(b)(3). anniversary date of the establishment of new facility must be made annually by (c) Surety bond guaranteeing the financial instrument(s) used to the owner or operator over the performance of closure. Owners and comply with § 267.143. For owners and remaining operating life of the facility as operators can use the ‘‘surety bond operators using the financial test or estimated in the closure plan, or over 3 guaranteeing performance of closure,’’ corporate guarantee, the closure cost years, whichever period is shorter. This as specified in 40 CFR 264.143(c), the estimate must be updated for inflation period of time is hereafter referred to as submission and use of the surety bond within 30 days after the close of the the ‘‘pay-in period.’’ instrument specified at 40 CFR firm’s fiscal year and before submission (2) For a new facility, the first 264.151(c), and the standby trust of updated information to the Regional payment into the closure trust fund specified at 40 CFR 264.143(c)(3). Administrator as specified in must be made before the facility may (d) Closure letter of credit. Owners § 267.143(f)(2)(iii). The adjustment may accept the initial placement of waste. A and operators can use the ‘‘closure letter be made by recalculating the maximum receipt from the trustee must be of credit’’ specified in 40 CFR costs of closure in current dollars, or by submitted by the owner or operator to 264.143(d), the submission and use of using an inflation factor derived from the Regional Administrator before this the irrevocable letter of credit the most recent Implicit Price Deflator initial storage of waste. The first instrument specified in 40 CFR for Gross Domestic Product published payment must be at least equal to the 264.151(d), and the standby trust by the U.S. Department of Commerce in current closure cost estimate, divided by specified in 40 CFR 264.143(d)(3). its Survey of Current Business, as the number of years in the pay-in (e) Closure insurance. Owners and specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of period, except as provided in paragraph operators can use ‘‘closure insurance,’’ this section. The inflation factor is the (h) of this section for multiple as specified in 40 CFR 264.143(e), result of dividing the latest published mechanisms. Subsequent payments utilizing the certificate of insurance for annual Deflator by the Deflator for the must be made no later than 30 days after closure specified at 40 CFR 264.151(e). previous year. each anniversary date of the first (f) Corporate financial test. An owner (1) The first adjustment is made by payment. The owner or operator or operator that satisfies the multiplying the closure cost estimate by determines the amount of each requirements of this paragraph may
VerDate 11
demonstrate financial assurance up to (iii) Current plugging cost estimates financial officer’s letter derived from the the amount specified in this paragraph: required for UIC facilities under 40 CFR independently audited, year-end (1) Financial component. (i) The 144.62; financial statements for the latest fiscal owner or operator must satisfy one of (iv) Cost estimates required for year with the amounts in such financial the following three conditions: petroleum underground storage tank statements, the findings of that (A) A current rating for its senior facilities under 40 CFR 280.93; comparison, and the reasons for any unsecured debt of AAA, AA, A, or BBB (v) Cost estimates required for PCB differences. as issued by Standard and Poor’s or Aaa, storage facilities under 40 CFR 761.65; (D) If the chief financial officer’s letter Aa, A or Baa as issued by Moody’s; or (vi) Any financial assurance required provides a demonstration that the firm (B) A ratio of less than 1.5 comparing under, or as part of an action has assured for environmental total liabilities to net worth; or undertaken under, the Comprehensive obligations as provided in paragraph (C) A ratio of greater than 0.10 Environmental Response, (f)(1)(ii)(B) of this section, then the letter comparing the sum of net income plus Compensation, and Liability Act; and shall include a report from the (vii) Any other environmental depreciation, depletion and independent certified public accountant obligations that are assured through a amortization, minus $10 million, to total that verifies that all of the financial test. environmental obligations covered by a liabilities. (2) Provides evidence demonstrating (ii) The tangible net worth of the financial test have been recognized as that the firm meets the conditions of liabilities on the audited financial owner or operator must be greater than: either paragraph (f)(1)(i)(A) or (f)(1)(i)(B) (A) The sum of the current statements, how these obligations have or (f)(1)(i)(C) of this section and been measured and reported, and that environmental obligations (see paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(1)(iii) of this paragraph (f)(2)(i)(A)(1) of this section), the tangible net worth of the firm is at section. least $10 million plus the amount of any including guarantees, covered by a (B) A copy of the independent financial test plus $10 million except as guarantees provided. certified public accountant’s (ii) The owner or operator of a new provided in paragraph (f)(1)(ii)(B) of this unqualified opinion of the owner’s or section. facility must submit the items specified operator’s financial statements for the in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section to (B) $10 million in tangible net worth latest completed fiscal year. To be the Regional Administrator at least 60 plus the amount of any guarantees that eligible to use the financial test, the days before placing waste in the facility. have not been recognized as liabilities owner’s or operator’s financial (iii) After the initial submission of on the financial statements provided all statements must receive an unqualified items specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of of the environmental obligations (see opinion from the independent certified this section, the owner or operator must paragraph (f)(2)(i)(A)(1) of this section) public accountant. An adverse opinion, send updated information to the covered by a financial test are disclaimer of opinion, or other qualified Regional Administrator within 90 days recognized as liabilities on the owner’s opinion will be cause for disallowance, following the close of the owner or or operator’s audited financial with the potential exception for operator’s fiscal year. The Regional statements, and subject to the approval qualified opinions provided in the next Administrator may provide up to an of the Regional Administrator. sentence. The Regional Administrator additional 45 days for an owner or (iii) The owner or operator must have may evaluate qualified opinions on a operator who can demonstrate that 90 assets located in the United States case-by-case basis and allow use of the days is insufficient time to acquire amounting to at least the sum of financial test in cases where the audited financial statements. The environmental obligations covered by a Regional Administrator deems that the updated information must consist of all financial test as described in paragraph matters which form the basis for the items specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of (f)(2)(i)(A)(1) of this section. qualification are insufficient to warrant this section. (2) Recordkeeping and reporting disallowance of the test. If the Regional (iv) The owner or operator is no requirements. (i) The owner or operator Administrator does not allow use of the longer required to submit the items must submit the following items to the test, the owner or operator must provide specified in this paragraph (f)(2) of this Regional Administrator: alternate financial assurance that meets section or comply with the requirements (A) A letter signed by the owner’s or the requirements of this section within of this paragraph (f) when: operator’s chief financial officer that: 30 days after the notification of (A) The owner or operator substitutes (1) Lists all the applicable current disallowance. alternate financial assurance as types, amounts, and sums of (C) If the chief financial officer’s letter specified in this section that is not environmental obligations covered by a providing evidence of financial subject to these recordkeeping and financial test. These obligations include assurance includes financial data reporting requirements; or both obligations in the programs which showing that owner or operator satisfies (B) The Regional Administrator EPA directly operates and obligations paragraph (f)(1)(i)(B) or (f)(1)(i)(C) of this releases the owner or operator from the where EPA has delegated authority to a section that are different from data in requirements of this section in State or approved a State’s program. the audited financial statements referred accordance with paragraph (j) of this These obligations include, but are not to in paragraph (f)(2)(i)(B) of this section section. limited to: or any other audited financial statement (v) An owner or operator who no (i) Liability, closure, post-closure and or data filed with the SEC, then a longer meets the requirements of corrective action cost estimates required special report from the owner’s or paragraph (f)(1) of this section cannot for hazardous waste treatment, storage, operator’s independent certified public use the financial test to demonstrate and disposal facilities under 40 CFR accountant to the owner or operator is financial assurance. Instead an owner or 264.101, 264.142, 264.144, 264.147, required. The special report shall be operator who no longer meets the 265.142, 265.144, and 265.147.; based upon an agreed upon procedures requirements of paragraph (f)(1)of this (ii) Cost estimates required for engagement in accordance with section, must: municipal solid waste management professional auditing standards and (A) Send notice to the Regional facilities under 40 CFR 258.71, 258.72, shall describe the procedures performed Administrator of intent to establish and 258.73; in comparing the data in the chief alternate financial assurance as
VerDate 11
specified in this section. The owner or (i) If the owner or operator fails to (h) Use of Multiple Financial operator must send this notice by perform closure at a facility covered by Mechanisms. An owner or operator may certified mail within 90 days following the guarantee, the guarantor will: use more than one mechanism at a the close of the owner or operator’s (A) Perform, or pay a third party to particular facility to satisfy the fiscal year for which the year-end perform closure (performance requirements of this section. The financial data show that the owner or guarantee); or acceptable mechanisms are trust funds, operator no longer meets the (B) Establish a fully funded trust fund surety bonds guaranteeing payment into requirements of this section. as specified in paragraph (a) of this a trust fund, letters of credit, insurance, (B) Provide alternative financial section in the name of the owner or the financial test, and the guarantee, assurance within 120 days after the end operator (payment guarantee). except owners or operators cannot of such fiscal year. (ii) The guarantee will remain in force combine the financial test with the (vi) The Regional Administrator may, for as long as the owner or operator guarantee. The mechanisms must be as based on a reasonable belief that the must comply with the applicable specified in paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (e), owner or operator may no longer meet financial assurance requirements of this (f), and (g) of this section, except it is the requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of Subpart unless the guarantor sends prior the combination of mechanisms rather this section, require at any time the notice of cancellation by certified mail than a single mechanism that must owner or operator to provide reports of to the owner or operator and to the provide assurance for an amount at least its financial condition in addition to or Regional Administrator. Cancellation equal to the cost estimate. If an owner including current financial test may not occur, however, during the 120 or operator uses a trust fund in documentation as specified in days beginning on the date of receipt of combination with a surety bond or letter paragraph (f)(2) of this section. If the the notice of cancellation by both the of credit, he may use the trust fund as Regional Administrator finds that the owner or operator and the Regional the standby trust for the other owner or operator no longer meets the Administrator as evidenced by the mechanisms. A single trust fund can be requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this return receipts. established for two or more section, the owner or operator must (iii) If notice of cancellation is given, mechanisms. The Regional provide alternate financial assurance the owner or operator must, within 90 Administrator may use any or all of the that meets the requirements of this days following receipt of the mechanisms to provide for closure of section. the facility. (g) Corporate guarantee. (1) An owner cancellation notice by the owner or operator and the Regional (i) Use of a financial mechanism for or operator may meet the requirements multiple facilities. An owner or operator of this section by obtaining a written Administrator, obtain alternate financial assurance, and submit documentation may use a financial mechanism for guarantee. The guarantor must be the multiple facilities, as specified in direct or higher-tier parent corporation for that alternate financial assurance to § 264.143(h) of this chapter. of the owner or operator, a firm whose the Regional Administrator. If the owner or operator fails to provide alternate (j) Release of the owner or operator parent corporation is also the parent from the requirements of this section. corporation of the owner or operator, or financial assurance and obtain the written approval of such alternative Within 60 days after receiving a firm with a ‘‘substantial business certifications from the owner or operator relationship’’ with the owner or assurance from the Regional Administrator within the 90-day period, and an independent registered operator. The guarantor must meet the professional engineer that final closure requirements for owners or operators in the guarantor must provide that has been completed in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section and must alternate assurance in the name of the the approved closure plan, the Regional comply with the terms of the guarantee. owner or operator and submit the Administrator will notify the owner or The wording of the guarantee must be necessary documentation for the operator in writing that the owner or identical to the wording in 40 CFR alternative assurance to the Regional operator is no longer required by this 264.151(h). The certified copy of the Administrator within 120 days of the section to maintain financial assurance guarantee must accompany the letter cancellation notice. for final closure of the facility, unless from the guarantor’s chief financial (4) If a corporate guarantor no longer the Regional Administrator has reason officer and accountants’ opinions. If the meets the requirements of paragraph to believe that final closure has not been guarantor’s parent corporation is also (f)(1) of this section, the owner or completed in accordance with the the parent corporation of the owner or operator must, within 90 days, obtain approved closure plan. The Regional operator, the letter from the guarantor’s alternative assurance, and submit the Administrator shall provide the owner chief financial officer must describe the assurance to the Regional Administrator or operator with a detailed written value received in consideration of the for approval. If the owner or operator statement of any such reasons to believe guarantee. If the guarantor is a firm with fails to provide alternate financial that closure has not been conducted in a ‘‘substantial business relationship’’ assurance within the 90-day period, the accordance with the approved closure with the owner or operator, this letter guarantor must provide that alternate plan. must describe this ‘‘substantial business assurance within the next 30 days, and relationship’’ and the value received in submit it to the Regional Administrator § 267.144—267.146 [Reserved] consideration of the guarantee. for approval. (2) For a new facility the guarantee (5) The guarantor is no longer § 267.147 Liability requirements. must be effective and the guarantor required to meet the requirements of (a) Coverage for sudden accidental must submit the items in paragraph this paragraph (g) when: occurrences. An owner or operator of a (g)(1) of this section and the items (i) The owner or operator substitutes hazardous waste treatment or storage specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this alternate financial assurance as facility, or a group of such facilities, section to the Regional Administrator at specified in this section; or must demonstrate financial least 60 days before the owner or (ii) The owner or operator is released responsibility for bodily injury and operator places waste in the facility. from the requirements of this section in property damage to third parties caused (3) The terms of the guarantee must accordance with paragraph (j) of this by sudden accidental occurrences provide that: section. arising from operations of the facility or
VerDate 11
group of facilities. The owner or damage caused by a sudden accidental qualified opinions provided in the next operator must have and maintain occurrence arising from the operation of sentence. The Regional Administrator liability coverage for sudden accidental a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or may evaluate qualified opinions on a occurrences in the amount of at least $1 disposal facility is issued against the case-by-case basis and allow use of the million per occurrence with an annual owner or operator or an instrument that financial test in cases where the aggregate of at least $2 million, is providing financial assurance for Regional Administrator deems that the exclusive of legal defense costs. This liability coverage under paragraphs matters which form the basis for the liability coverage may be demonstrated (a)(1) through (a)(7) of this section. qualification are insufficient to warrant as specified in paragraphs (a) (1) (b)—(d) [Reserved] disallowance of the test. If the Regional through (a)(7) of this section: (e) Period of coverage. Within 60 days Administrator does not allow use of the (1) Trust fund for liability coverage. after receiving certifications from the test, the owner or operator must provide An owner or operator may meet the owner or operator and an independent alternate financial assurance that meets requirements of this section by registered professional engineer that the requirements of this section within obtaining a trust fund for liability final closure has been completed in 30 days after the notification of coverage as specified in 40 CFR accordance with the approved closure disallowance. 264.147(j). plan, the Regional Administrator will (C) If the chief financial officer’s letter (2) Surety bond for liability coverage. notify the owner or operator in writing providing evidence of financial An owner or operator may meet the that he is no longer required by this assurance includes financial data requirements of this section by section to maintain liability coverage showing that owner or operator satisfies obtaining a surety bond for liability from that facility, unless the Regional paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (ii) of this coverage as specified in 40 CFR Administrator has reason to believe that section that are different from data in 264.147(i). closure has not been in accordance with the audited financial statements referred (3) Letter of credit for liability the approved closure plan. to in paragraph (f)(2)(i)(B) of this section coverage. An owner or operator may (f) Financial test for liability coverage. or any other audited financial statement meet the requirements of this section by An owner or operator that satisfies the or data filed with the SEC, then a obtaining a letter of credit for liability requirements of this paragraph (f) may special report from the owner’s or coverage as specified in 40 CFR demonstrate financial assurance for operator’s independent certified public 264.147(h). liability up to the amount specified in accountant to the owner or operator is (4) Insurance for liability coverage. An this paragraph (f): required. The special report shall be owner or operator may meet the (1) Financial component. (i) If using based upon an agreed upon procedures requirements of this section by the financial test for only liability engagement in accordance with obtaining liability insurance as specified coverage, the owner or operator must professional auditing standards and in 40 CFR 264.147(a)(1). have tangible net worth greater than the shall describe the procedures performed (5) Financial test for liability sum of the liability coverage to be in comparing the data in the chief coverage. An owner or operator may demonstrated by this test plus $10 financial officer’s letter derived from the meet the requirements of this section by million. independently audited, year-end passing a financial test as specified in (ii) The owner or operator must have financial statements for the latest fiscal paragraph (f) of this section. assets located in the United States year with the amounts in such financial (6) Guarantee for liability coverage. amounting to at least the amount of statements, the findings of that An owner or operator may meet the liability covered by this financial test. comparison, and the reasons for any requirements of this section by (iii) An owner or operator who is differences. obtaining a guarantee as specified in demonstrating coverage for liability and (ii) The owner or operator of a new paragraph (g) of this section. any other environmental obligations, facility must submit the items specified (7) Combination of mechanisms. An including closure under § 267.143(f), in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section to owner or operator may demonstrate the through a financial test must meet the the Regional Administrator at least 60 required liability coverage through the requirements of § 267.143(f). days before placing waste in the facility. use of combinations of mechanisms as (2) Recordkeeping and reporting (iii) After the initial submission of allowed by 40 CFR 264.147(a)(6). requirements. (i) The owner or operator items specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of (8) An owner or operator shall notify must submit the following items to the this section, the owner or operator must the Regional Administrator in writing Regional Administrator: send updated information to the within 30 days whenever: (A) A letter signed by the owner’s or Regional Administrator within 90 days (i) A claim results in a reduction in operator’s chief financial officer that following the close of the owner or the amount of financial assurance for provides evidence demonstrating that operator’s fiscal year. The Regional liability coverage provided by a the firm meets the conditions of Administrator may provide up to an financial instrument authorized in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this additional 45 days for an owner or paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(7) of this section. operator who can demonstrate that 90 section; or (B) A copy of the independent days is insufficient time to acquire (ii) A Certification of Valid Claim for certified public accountant’s audited financial statements. The bodily injury or property damages unqualified opinion of the owner’s or updated information must consist of all caused by a sudden accidental operator’s financial statements for the items specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of occurrence arising from the operation of latest completed fiscal year. To be this section. a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or eligible to use the financial test, the (iv) The owner or operator is no disposal facility is entered between the owner’s or operator’s financial longer required to submit the items owner or operator and third-party statements must receive an unqualified specified in this paragraph (f)(2) or claimant for liability coverage under opinion from the independent certified comply with the requirements of this paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(7) of this public accountant. An adverse opinion, paragraph (f) when: section; or disclaimer of opinion, or other qualified (A) The owner or operator substitutes (iii) A final court order establishing a opinion will be cause for disallowance, alternate financial assurance as judgment for bodily injury or property with the potential exception for specified in this section that is not
VerDate 11
subject to these recordkeeping and these items must be the letter from the naming the owner or operator as debtor, reporting requirements; or guarantor’s chief financial officer. If the within 10 days after commencement of (B) The Regional Administrator guarantor’s parent corporation is also the proceeding. A guarantor of a releases the owner or operator from the the parent corporation of the owner or corporate guarantee as specified in requirements of this section in operator, this letter must describe the §§ 267.143(g) and 267.147(g) must make accordance with paragraph (j) of this value received in consideration of the such a notification if he is named as section. guarantee. If the guarantor is a firm with debtor, as required under the terms of (v) An owner or operator who no a ‘‘substantial business relationship’’ the corporate guarantee (§ 264.151(h)). longer meets the requirements of with the owner or operator, this letter (b) An owner or operator who fulfills paragraph (f)(1) of this section cannot must describe this ‘‘substantial business the requirements of § 267.143 or use the financial test to demonstrate relationship’’ and the value received in § 267.147 by obtaining a trust fund, financial assurance. An owner or consideration of the guarantee. surety bond, letter of credit, or operator who no longer meets the (i) If the owner or operator fails to insurance policy will be deemed to be requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this satisfy a judgment based on a without the required financial assurance section, must: determination of liability for bodily or liability coverage in the event of (A) Send notice to the Regional injury or property damage to third bankruptcy of the trustee or issuing Administrator of intent to establish parties caused by sudden accidental institution, or a suspension or alternate financial assurance as occurrences arising from the operation revocation of the authority of the trustee specified in this section. The owner or of facilities covered by this corporate institution to act as trustee or of the operator must send this notice by guarantee, or fails to pay an amount institution issuing the surety bond, certified mail within 90 days following agreed to in settlement of claims arising letter of credit, or insurance policy to the close the owner or operator’s fiscal from or alleged to arise from such injury issue such instruments. The owner or year for which the year-end financial or damage, the guarantor will do so up operator must establish other financial data show that the owner or operator no to the limits of coverage. assurance or liability coverage within 60 longer meets the requirements of this (ii) [Reserved]. days after such an event. section. (2)(i) In the case of corporations (B) Provide alternative financial incorporated in the United States, a § 267.149 [Reserved] assurance within 120 days after the end guarantee may be used to satisfy the § 267.150 State assumption of of such fiscal year. requirements of this section only if the (vi) The Regional Administrator may, responsibility. Attorneys General or Insurance based on a reasonable belief that the (a) If a State either assumes legal Commissioners of the State in which the owner or operator may no longer meet responsibility for an owner’s or guarantor is incorporated; and each the requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of operator’s compliance with the closure State in which a facility covered by the this section, require at any time the care or liability requirements of this part guarantee is located have submitted a owner or operator to provide reports of or assures that funds will be available written statement to EPA that a its financial condition in addition to or from State sources to cover those guarantee executed as described in this including current financial test requirements, the owner or operator will section and 40 CFR 264.151(h)(2) is a documentation as specified in be in compliance with the requirements legally valid and enforceable obligation paragraph (f)(2) of this section. If the of § 267.143 or § 267.147 if the Regional in that State. Regional Administrator finds that the Administrator determines that the (ii) In the case of corporations owner or operator no longer meets the State’s assumption of responsibility is at incorporated outside the United States, requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this least equivalent to the financial a guarantee may be used to satisfy the section, the owner or operator must mechanisms specified in this subpart. requirements of this section only if: The Regional Administrator will provide alternate financial assurance (A) The non-U.S. corporation has evaluate the equivalency of State that meets the requirements of this identified a registered agent for service guarantees principally in terms of section. of process in each State in which a (g) Guarantee for liability coverage. (1) certainty of the availability of funds for facility covered by the guarantee is Subject to paragraph (g)(2) of this the required closure care activities or located and in the State in which it has section, an owner or operator may meet liability coverage and the amount of its principal place of business; and the requirements of this section by (B) The Attorney General or Insurance funds that will be made available. The obtaining a written guarantee, Commissioner of each State in which a Regional Administrator may also hereinafter referred to as ‘‘guarantee.’’ facility covered by the guarantee is consider other factors as he deems The guarantor must be the direct or located and the State in which the appropriate. The owner or operator higher-tier parent corporation of the guarantor corporation has its principal must submit to the Regional owner or operator, a firm whose parent place of business, has submitted a Administrator a letter from the State corporation is also the parent written statement to EPA that a describing the nature of the State’s corporation of the owner or operator, or guarantee executed as described in this assumption of responsibility together a firm with a ‘‘substantial business section and 40 CFR 264.151(h)(2) is a with a letter from the owner or operator relationship’’ with the owner or legally valid and enforceable obligation requesting that the State’s assumption of operator. The guarantor must meet the in that State. responsibility be considered acceptable requirements for owners or operators in for meeting the requirements of this paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3) of this § 267.148 Incapacity of owners or subpart. The letter from the State must section. The wording of the guarantee operators, guarantors, or financial include, or have attached to it, the must be identical to the wording institutions. following information: the facility’s EPA specified in 40 CFR 264.151(h)(2). A (a) An owner or operator must notify Identification Number, name, and certified copy of the guarantee must the Regional Administrator by certified address, and the amount of funds for accompany the items sent to the mail of the commencement of a closure care or liability coverage that are Regional Administrator as specified in voluntary or involuntary proceeding guaranteed by the State. The Regional paragraph (f)(2) of this section. One of under Title 11 (Bankruptcy), U.S. Code, Administrator will notify the owner or
VerDate 11
operator of his determination regarding § 267.172 What are the inspection containers holding FO20, FO21, FO22, the acceptability of the State’s guarantee requirements? FO23, FO26, and FO27 wastes , even if in lieu of financial mechanisms At least weekly, you must inspect the wastes do not contain free liquids. specified in this subpart. The Regional areas where you store containers , looking for leaking containers and for § 267.174 What special requirements must Administrator may require the owner or I meet for ignitable or reactive waste? operator to submit additional deterioration of containers and the information as is deemed necessary to containment system caused by corrosion You must locate containers holding make this determination. Pending this or other factors. ignitable or reactive waste at least 15 determination, the owner or operator meters (50 feet) from your facility § 267.173 What standards apply to the property line. You must also follow the will be deemed to be in compliance container storage areas? general requirements for ignitable or with the requirements of § 267.143 or reactive wastes that are specified in § 267.147, as applicable. (a) You must design and operate a § 267.17(a). (b) If a State’s assumption of containment system for your container storage areas according to the responsibility is found acceptable as § 267.175 What special requirements must specified in paragraph (a) of this section requirements in paragraph (b) of this I meet for incompatible wastes? section, except as otherwise provided by except for the amount of funds (a) You must not place incompatible paragraph (c) of this section. available, the owner or operator may wastes, or incompatible wastes and (b) The design and operating satisfy the requirements of this subpart materials (see appendix V to 40 CFR requirements for a containment system by use of both the State’s assurance and part 264 for examples), in the same are: additional financial mechanisms as container, unless you comply with (1) A base must underlie the specified in this subpart. The amount of § 267.17(b). containers that is free of cracks or gaps funds available through the State and (b) You must not place hazardous and is sufficiently impervious to contain Federal mechanisms must at least equal waste in an unwashed container that leaks, spills, and accumulated the amount required by this subpart. previously held an incompatible waste precipitation until the collected material or material. Subpart I—Use and Management of is detected and removed. (c) You must separate a storage Containers (2) The base must be sloped or the container holding a hazardous waste containment system must be otherwise that is incompatible with any waste or § 267.170 Does this subpart apply to me? designed and operated to drain and with other materials stored nearby in This subpart applies to you if you remove liquids resulting from leaks, other containers, piles, open tanks, or own or operator a facility that treats or spills, or precipitation, unless the surface impoundments from the other stores hazardous waste in containers containers are elevated or are otherwise materials, or protect the containers by under a 40 CFR part 270, subpart I protected from contact with means of a dike, berm, wall, or other standardized permit, except as provided accumulated liquids. device. in § 267.1(b). (3) The containment system must have sufficient capacity to contain 10% § 267.176 What must I do when I want to § 267.171 What standards apply to the of the volume of containers, or the stop using the containers? containers? volume of the largest container, You must remove all hazardous waste Standards apply to the condition of whichever is greater. This requirement and hazardous waste residues from the the containers, to the compatibility of does not apply to containers that do not containment system. You must waste with the containers, and to the contain free liquids. decontaminate or remove remaining management of the containers. (4) You must prevent run-on into the containers, liners, bases, and soil (a) Condition of containers. If a containment system unless the containing, or contaminated with, container holding hazardous waste is collection system has sufficient excess hazardous waste or hazardous waste not in good condition( for example, it capacity, in addition to that required in residues. exhibits severe rusting or apparent paragraph (b)(3) of this section, to structural defects) or if it begins to leak, § 267.177 What air emission standards contain the liquid. apply? you must either: (5) You must remove any spilled or You must manage all hazardous waste (1) Transfer the hazardous waste from leaked waste and accumulated placed in a container according to the this container to a container that is in precipitation rom the sump or collection requirements of subparts AA, BB, and good condition; or area as promptly as is necessary to CC of 40 CFR part 264. Under a (2) Manage the waste in some other prevent overflow of the collection standardized permit, the following way that complies with the system. control devices are permissible: requirements of this part. (c) Except as provided in paragraph Thermal vapor incinerator, catalytic (b) Compatibility of waste with (d) of this section, you do not need a vapor incinerator, flame, boiler, process containers. To ensure that the ability of containment system as defined in heater, condenser, and carbon the container to contain the waste is not paragraph (b) of this section for storage absorption unit. impaired, you must use a container areas that store containers holding only made of or lined with materials that are wastes with no free liquids, if: Subpart J—Tank Systems compatible and will not react with the (1) The storage area is sloped or is hazardous waste to be stored. otherwise designed and operated to § 267.190 Does this subpart apply to me? (c) Management of containers. (1) You drain and remove liquid resulting from This subpart applies to you if you must always keep a container holding precipitation, or own or operate a facility that treats or hazardous waste closed during storage, (2) The containers are elevated or are stores hazardous waste in above-ground except when you add or remove waste. otherwise protected from contact with or on-ground tanks under a 40 CFR part (2) You must never open, handle, or accumulated liquid. 270, subpart I standardized permit, store a container holding hazardous (d) You must have a containment except as provided in § 267.1(b). waste in a manner that may rupture the system defined by paragraph (b) of this (a) You do not have to meet the container or cause it to leak. section for storage areas that store secondary containment requirements in
VerDate 11
§ 267.195 if your tank systems do not the integrity of the tank system during recommended by an independent contain free liquids and are situated the use of the tank system or corrosion expert, based on the inside a building with an impermeable component, consisting of one or more of information provided under floor. You must demonstrate the the following: § 267.191(c), to ensure the integrity of absence or presence of free liquids in (i) Corrosion-resistant materials of the tank system during use of the tank the stored/treated waste, using Method construction such as special alloys, system. An independent corrosion 9095 (Paint Filter Liquids Test) as fiberglass reinforced plastic, etc. expert must supervise the installation of described in ‘‘Test Methods for (ii) Corrosion-resistant coating (such a corrosion protection system that is Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ as epoxy, fiberglass, etc.) with cathodic field fabricated to ensure proper Chemical Methods,’’ EPA Publication protection (for example, impressed installation. SW–846, as incorporated by reference in current or sacrificial anodes) and (c) You must obtain, and keep at the 40 CFR 260.11. (iii) Electrical isolation devices such facility, written statements by those (b) You do not have to meet the as insulating joints, flanges, etc. persons required to certify the design of secondary containment requirements of (d) Design considerations to ensure the tank system and to supervise the § 267.195(a) if your tank system, that: installation of the tank system as (1) Tank foundations will maintain including sumps, as defined in 40 CFR required in §§ 267.192, 267.193, and the load of a full tank. paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. 260.10, is part of a secondary (2) Tank systems will be anchored to The written statement must attest that containment system to collect or contain prevent flotation or dislodgment where releases of hazardous wastes. the tank system is placed in a saturated the tank system was properly designed zone, or is located within a seismic fault and installed and that you made repairs § 267.191 What are the required design under § 267.192 and 267.193. These and construction standards for new tank zone subject to the standards of systems or components? § 267.18(a). written statements must also include the (3) Tank systems will withstand the certification statement as required in 40 You must ensure that the foundation, CFR 270.11(d). structural support, seams, connections, effects of frost heave. and pressure controls (if applicable) are § 267.192 What handling and inspection § 267.195 What are the secondary adequately designed and that the tank procedures must I follow during installation containment requirements? system has sufficient structural strength, of new tank systems? To prevent the release of hazardous compatibility with the waste(s) to be (a) You must ensure that you follow waste or hazardous constituents to the stored or treated, and corrosion proper handling procedures to prevent environment, you must provide protection to ensure that it will not damage to a new tank system during secondary containment that meets the collapse, rupture, or fail. You must installation. Before placing a new tank requirements of this section for all new obtain a written assessment, reviewed system or component in use, an and existing tank systems. and certified by an independent, independent, qualified installation (a) Secondary containment systems qualified registered professional inspector or an independent, qualified, must be: engineer, following 40 CFR 270.11(d), registered professional engineer, either (1) Designed, installed, and operated attesting that the tank system has of whom is trained and experienced in to prevent any migration of wastes or sufficient structural integrity and is the proper installation of tank systems accumulated liquid out of the system to acceptable for the storing and treating of or components, must inspect the system the soil, groundwater, or surface water hazardous waste. This assessment must for the presence of any of the following at any time during the use of the tank include, at a minimum, the following items: system; and information: (1) Weld breaks. (2) Capable of detecting and collecting (a) Design standard(s) for the (2) Punctures. releases and accumulated liquids until construction of tank(s) and/or the (3) Scrapes of protective coatings. the collected material is removed. ancillary equipment. (4) Cracks. (b) To meet the requirements of (b) Hazardous characteristics of the (5) Corrosion. paragraph (a) of this section, secondary waste(s) to be handled. (6) Other structural damage or containment systems must be, at a (c) For new tank systems or inadequate construction/installation. minimum: components in which the external shell (b) You must remedy all discrepancies (1) Constructed of or lined with of a metal tank or any external metal before the tank system is placed in use. materials that are compatible with the component of the tank system will be in § 267.193 What testing must I do? wastes(s) to be placed in the tank system and must have sufficient strength and contact with the soil or with water, a You must test all new tanks and determination by a corrosion expert of: ancillary equipment for tightness before thickness to prevent failure owing to (1) Factors affecting the potential for you place them in use. If you find a tank pressure gradients (including static head corrosion, such as: system that is not tight, you must and external hydrological forces), (i) Soil moisture content. perform all repairs necessary to remedy physical contact with the waste to (ii) Soil pH. the leak(s) in the system before you which it is exposed, climatic conditions, (iii) Soil sulfides level. cover, enclose, or place the tank system and the stress of daily operation (iv) Soil resistivity. into use. (including stresses from nearby (v) Structure to soil potential. vehicular traffic). (vi) Influence of nearby underground § 267.194 What installation requirements (2) Placed on a foundation or base metal structures (for example, piping). must I follow? capable of providing support to the (vii) Existence of stray electric (a) You must support and protect secondary containment system, current. ancillary equipment against physical resistance to pressure gradients above (viii) Existing corrosion-protection damage and excessive stress due to and below the system, and capable of measures (for example, coating, settlement, vibration, expansion, or preventing failure due to settlement, cathodic protection). contraction. compression, or uplift. (2) The type and degree of external (b) You must provide the type and (3) Provided with a leak-detection corrosion protection needed to ensure degree of corrosion protection system that is designed and operated so
VerDate 11
that it will detect the failure of either compatible with the stored waste and overflows from tank or containment the primary or secondary containment that will prevent migration of waste into systems. These include, at a minimum: structure or the presence of any release the concrete. (1) Spill prevention controls (for of hazardous waste or accumulated (5) Provided with a means to protect example, check valves, dry disconnect liquid in the secondary containment against the formation of and ignition of couplings). system within 24 hours, or at the vapors within the vault, if the waste (2) Overfill prevention controls (for earliest practicable time. being stored or treated: example, level sensing devices, high (4) Sloped or otherwise designed or (i) Meets the definition of ignitable level alarms, automatic feed cutoff, or operated to drain and remove liquids waste under 40 CFR 261.21. bypass to a standby tank). resulting from leaks, spills, or (ii) Meets the definition of reactive (3) Sufficient freeboard in uncovered precipitation. You must remove spilled waste under 40 CFR 261.21, and may tanks to prevent overtopping by wave or or leaked waste and accumulated form an ignitable or explosive vapor. wind action or by precipitation. precipitation from the secondary (6) Provided with an exterior moisture (c) You must comply with the containment system within 24 hours, or barrier or be otherwise designed or requirements of § 267.200 if a leak or as promptly as possible to prevent harm operated to prevent migration of spill occurs in the tank system. to human health and the environment. moisture into the vault if the vault is subject to hydraulic pressure. § 267.199 What inspection requirements must I meet? § 267.196 What are the required devices (d) Double-walled tanks must be: for secondary containment and what are (1) Designed as an integral structure You must comply with the following their design, operating and installation requirements for scheduling, requirements? (that is, an inner tank completely enveloped within an outer shell) so that conducting, and documenting (a) Secondary containment for tanks any release from the inner tank is inspections. must include one or more of the contained by the outer shell. (a) Develop and follow a schedule and following: (2) Protected, if constructed of metal, procedure for inspecting overfill (1) A liner (external to the tank). from both corrosion of the primary tank controls. (2) A vault. interior and of the external surface of (b) Inspect at least once each (3) A double-walled tank. the outer shell. operating day: (4) An equivalent device; you must (3) Provided with a built-in (1) Aboveground portions of the tank maintain documentation of equivalency continuous leak detection system system to detect corrosion or releases of at the facility. capable of detecting a release within 24 waste. (b) External liner systems must be: hours, or at the earliest practicable time. (2) Data gathered from monitoring and (1) Designed or operated to contain leak detection equipment (for example, 100 percent of the capacity of the largest § 267.197 What are the requirements for pressure or temperature gauges, tank within its boundary. ancillary equipment? monitoring wells) to ensure that the (2) Designed or operated to prevent You must provide ancillary tank system is being operated according run-on or infiltration of precipitation equipment with secondary containment to its design. into the secondary containment system (for example, trench, jacketing, double- (3) The construction materials and the unless the collection system has walled piping) that meets the area immediately surrounding the sufficient excess capacity to contain requirements of § 267.196 (a) and (b), externally accessible portion of the tank run-on or infiltration. The additional except for: system, including the secondary capacity must be sufficient to contain (a) Piping (exclusive of flanges, joints, containment system (for example, dikes) precipitation from a 25-year, 24-hour valves, and other connections) that are to detect erosion or signs of releases of rainfall event. visually inspected for leaks on a daily hazardous waste (for example, wet (3) Free of cracks or gaps. basis. spots, dead vegetation). (4) Designed and installed to surround (b) Welded flanges, welded joints, and (c) Inspect cathodic protection the tank completely and to cover all welded connections, that are visually systems, if present, according to, at a surrounding earth likely to come into inspected for leaks on a daily basis. minimum, the following schedule to contact with the waste if the waste is (c) Sealless or magnetic coupling ensure that they are functioning released from the tank(s) (that is, pumps and sealless valves, that are properly: capable of preventing lateral as well as visually inspected for leaks on a daily (1) Confirm that the cathodic vertical migration of the waste). basis. protection system is operating properly (c) Vault systems must be: (d) Pressurized aboveground piping within six months after initial (1) Designed or operated to contain systems with automatic shut-off devices installation and annually thereafter. 100 percent of the capacity of the largest (for example, excess flow check valves, (2) Inspect and/or test all sources of tank within its boundary. flow metering shutdown devices, loss of impressed current, as appropriate, at (2) Designed or operated to prevent pressure actuated shut-off devices) that least every other month. run-on or infiltration of precipitation are visually inspected for leaks on a (d) Document, in the operating record into the secondary containment system daily basis. of the facility, an inspection of those unless the collection system has items in paragraphs (a) through (c) of sufficient excess capacity to contain § 267.198 What are the general operating this section. run-on or infiltration. Such additional requirements for my tank systems? capacity must be sufficient to contain (a) You must not place hazardous § 267.200 What must I do in case of a leak precipitation from a 25-year, 24-hour wastes or treatment reagents in a tank or a spill? rainfall event. system if they could cause the tank, its If there has been a leak or a spill from (3) Constructed with chemical- ancillary equipment, or the containment a tank system or secondary containment resistant water stops in place at all system to rupture, leak, corrode, or system, or if either system is unfit for joints (if any). otherwise fail. use, you must remove the system from (4) Provided with an impermeable (b) You must use appropriate controls service immediately, and you must interior coating or lining that is and practices to prevent spills and satisfy the following requirements:
VerDate 11
(a) Immediately stop the flow of (3) of this section, you must close the comply with the requirements for the hazardous waste into the tank system or tank system according to § 267.201. maintenance of protective distances secondary containment system and (2) If the cause of the release was a between the waste management area inspect the system to determine the spill that has not damaged the integrity and any public ways, streets, alleys, or cause of the release. of the system, you may return the an adjoining property line that can be (b) Remove the waste from the tank system to service as soon as you remove built upon as required in Tables 2–1 system or secondary containment the released waste and make any through 2–6 of the National Fire system. necessary repairs. Protection Association’s ‘‘Flammable (1) If the release was from the tank (3) If the cause of the release was a and Combustible Liquids Code,’’ (1977 system, you must, within 24 hours after leak from the primary tank system into or 1981), (incorporated by reference, see detecting the leak, remove as much of the secondary containment system, you 40 CFR 260.11). the waste as is necessary to prevent must repair the system before returning further release of hazardous waste to the the tank system to service. § 267.203 What special requirements must environment and to allow inspection (f) If you have made extensive repairs I meet for incompatible wastes? and repair of the tank system to be to a tank system in accordance with (a) You may not place incompatible performed. paragraph (e) of this section (for wastes, or incompatible wastes and (2) If the material released was to a example, installation of an internal materials, in the same tank system, secondary containment system, you liner; repair of a ruptured primary unless you comply with § 267.17(b). must remove all released materials containment or secondary containment (b) You may not place hazardous within 24 hours or as quickly as vessel), you may not return the tank waste in a tank system that has not been possible to prevent harm to human system to service unless the repair is decontaminated and that previously health and the environment. certified by an independent, qualified, held an incompatible waste or material, (c) Immediately conduct a visual registered, professional engineer in unless you comply with § 267.17(b). inspection of the release and, based accordance with 40 CFR 270.11(d). upon that inspection: (1) The engineer must certify that the § 267.204 What air emission standards apply? (1) Prevent further migration of the repaired system is capable of handling leak or spill to soils or surface water. hazardous wastes without release for the You must manage all hazardous waste (2) Remove, and properly dispose of, intended life of the system. placed in a tank following the any visible contamination of the soil or (2) You must submit this certification requirements of subparts AA, BB, and surface water. to the Regional Administrator within CC of 40 CFR part 264. Under a (d) Report any release to the seven days after returning the tank standardized permit, the following environment, except as provided in system to use. control devices are permissible: thermal paragraph (d)(2) of this section, to the vapor incinerator, catalytic vapor Regional Administrator within 24 hours § 267.201 What must I do when I stop incinerator, flame, boiler, process of its detection. If you have reported the operating the tank system? heater, condenser, and carbon release pursuant to 40 CFR part 302, When you close a tank system, you absorption unit. that report will satisfy this requirement. must remove or decontaminate all waste (1) You need not report on a leak or residues, contaminated containment Subparts K through CC [Reserved] spill of hazardous waste if it is: system components (liners, etc.), (i) Less than or equal to a quantity of contaminated soils, and structures and Subpart DD—Containment buildings one (1) pound, and equipment contaminated with waste, § 267.1100 Does this subpart apply to me? (ii) Immediately contained and and manage them as hazardous waste, cleaned up. unless 40 CFR 261.3(d) applies. The This subpart applies to you if you (2) Within 30 days of detection of a closure plan, closure activities, cost own or operate a facility that treats or release to the environment, you must estimates for closure, and financial stores hazardous waste in containment submit a report to the Regional responsibility for tank systems must buildings under a 40 CFR part 270, Administrator containing the following meet all of the requirements specified in subpart I standardized permit, except as information: subparts G and H of this part. provided in § 267.1(b). Storage and/or (i) The likely route of migration of the treatment in your containment building release. § 267.202 What special requirements must is not land disposal as defined in 40 (ii) The characteristics of the I meet for ignitable or reactive wastes? CFR 268.2 if your unit meets the surrounding soil (soil composition, (a) You may not place ignitable or requirements of §§ 267.1101, 267.1102, geology, hydrogeology, climate). reactive waste in tank systems, unless: and 267.1103. (iii) The results of any monitoring or (1) You treat, render, or mix the waste sampling conducted in connection with before or immediately after placement § 267.1101 What design and operating the release (if available). If sampling or in the tank system so that: standards must my containment building monitoring data relating to the release (i) You comply with § 267.17(b), and meet? are not available within 30 days, you (ii) The resulting waste, mixture, or Your containment buildings must must submit these data to the Regional dissolved material no longer meets the comply with the design and operating Administrator as soon as they become definition of ignitable or reactive waste standards in this section. EPA will available. under §§ 261.21 or 261.23 of this consider standards established by (iv) The proximity to downgradient chapter, or professional organizations generally drinking water, surface water, and (2) You store or treat the waste in recognized by the industry such as the populated areas. such a way that it is protected from any American Concrete Institute (ACI) and (v) A description of response actions material or conditions that may cause the American Society of Testing taken or planned. the waste to ignite or react; or Materials (ASTM) in judging the (e) Either close the system or make (3) You use the tank system solely for structural integrity requirements of this necessary repairs. emergencies. section. (1) Unless you satisfy the (b) If you store or treat ignitable or (a) The containment building must be requirements of paragraphs (e)(2) and reactive waste in a tank, you must completely enclosed with a floor, walls,
VerDate 11
and a roof to prevent exposure to the §§ 267.1102, 267.1103, and paragraphs head on the containment system at the elements, (e.g., precipitation, wind, run- (a) through (f) of this section. earliest practicable time. on), and to assure containment of (c) A secondary containment system, managed wastes. § 267.1102 What other requirements must including a secondary barrier designed I meet to prevent releases? (b) The floor and containment walls of and constructed to prevent migration of the unit, including the secondary You must use controls and practices hazardous constituents into the barrier, containment system, if required under to ensure containment of the hazardous and a leak detection system capable of § 267.1103, must be designed and waste within the unit; and must, at a detecting failure of the primary barrier constructed of manmade materials of minimum: and collecting accumulated hazardous sufficient strength and thickness to: (a) Maintain the primary barrier to be wastes and liquids at the earliest (1) Support themselves, the waste free of significant cracks, gaps, practical time. contents, and any personnel and heavy corrosion, or other deterioration that (1) You may meet the requirements of equipment that operates within the unit. could cause hazardous waste to be the leak detection component of the (2) Prevent failure due to: released from the primary barrier. secondary containment system by (i) Pressure gradients, settlement, (b) Maintain the level of the stored/ installing a system that is, at a compression, or uplift. treated hazardous waste within the minimum: (ii) Physical contact with the containment walls of the unit so that the (i) Constructed with a bottom slope of hazardous wastes to which they are height of any containment wall is not 1 percent or more; and exposed exceeded. (ii) Constructed of a granular drainage (iii) Climatic conditions. (c) Take measures to prevent material with a hydraulic conductivity ¥ (iv) Stresses of daily operation, personnel or by equipment used in of 1 ×10 2 cm/sec or more and a including the movement of heavy handling the waste from tracking thickness of 12 inches (30.5 cm) or equipment within the unit and contact hazardous waste out of the unit. You more, or constructed of synthetic or of such equipment with containment must designate an area to decontaminate geonet drainage materials with a ¥ walls. equipment, and you must collect and transmissivity of 3 ×10 5 m2/sec or (v) Collapse or other failure. properly manage any rinsate. more. (c) All surfaces to be in contact with (d) Take measures to control fugitive (2) If you will be conducting hazardous wastes must be chemically dust emissions such that any openings treatment in the building, you must compatible with those wastes. (doors, windows, vents, cracks, etc.) design the area in which the treatment (d) You must not place incompatible exhibit no visible emissions (see 40 CFR will be conducted to prevent the release hazardous wastes or treatment reagents part 60, appendix A, Method 22—Visual of liquids, wet materials, or liquid in the unit or its secondary containment Determination of Fugitive Emissions aerosols to other portions of the system if they could cause the unit or from Material Sources and Smoke building. secondary containment system to leak, Emissions from Flares). In addition, you (3) You must construct the secondary corrode, or otherwise fail. must operate and maintain all containment system using materials that (e) A containment building must have associated particulate collection devices are chemically resistant to the waste and a primary barrier designed to withstand (for example, fabric filter, electrostatic liquids managed in the containment the movement of personnel, waste, and precipitator) with sound air pollution building and of sufficient strength and handling equipment in the unit during control practices. You must effectively thickness to prevent collapse under the the operating life of the unit and maintain this state of no visible pressure exerted by overlaying materials appropriate for the physical and emissions at all times during routine and by any equipment used in the chemical characteristics of the waste to operating and maintenance conditions, containment building. be managed. including when vehicles and personnel § 267.1104 How may I obtain a waiver from (f) If appropriate to the nature of the are entering and exiting the unit. secondary containment requirements? waste management operation to take Notwithstanding any other provision place in the unit, an exception to the § 267.1103 What additional design and of this subpart the Regional structural strength requirement may be operating standards apply if liquids will be Administrator may waive requirements made for light-weight doors and in my containment building? for secondary containment for a windows that meet these criteria: If your containment building will be (1) They provide an effective barrier used to manage hazardous wastes permitted containment building where against fugitive dust emissions under containing free liquids or treated with you: (a) Demonstrate that the only free § 267.1102(d). free liquids, as determined by the paint (2) The unit is designed and operated filter test, by a visual examination, or by liquids in the unit are limited amounts in a fashion that assures that wastes will other appropriate means, you must of dust suppression liquids required to not actually come in contact with these include: meet occupational health and safety openings. (a) A primary barrier designed and requirements, and (b) Containment of managed wastes (g) You must inspect and record in the constructed of materials to prevent the and dust suppression liquids can be facility’s operating record, at least once migration of hazardous constituents into assured without a secondary every seven days, data gathered from the barrier (for example, a geomembrane containment system. monitoring equipment and leak covered by a concrete wear surface). detection equipment as well as the (b) A liquid collection and removal § 267.1105 What do I do if my containment containment building and the area system to minimize the accumulation of building contains areas both with and immediately surrounding the liquid on the primary barrier of the without secondary containment? containment building to detect signs of containment building. For these containment buildings, you releases of hazardous waste. (1) The primary barrier must be must: (h) You must obtain certification by a sloped to drain liquids to the associated (a) Design and operate each area in qualified registered professional collection system; and accordance with the requirements engineer that the containment building (2) You must collect and remove enumerated in §§ 267.1101 through design meets the requirements of liquids and waste to minimize hydraulic 267.1103.
VerDate 11
(b) Take measures to prevent the provided it meets the requirements of this part). Permit does not include release of liquids or wet materials into § 267.196(a). RCRA interim status (subpart G of this areas without secondary containment. (b) The containment building must part), or any permit which has not been (c) Maintain in the facility’s operating also meet the requirements of the subject of final agency action, such log a written description of the § 267.195(a), (b)(1) and (2) to be as a draft permit or a proposed permit. operating procedures used to maintain considered an acceptable secondary * * * * * the integrity of areas without secondary containment system for a tank. Standardized permit means a RCRA containment. § 267.1108 What must I do when I stop permit issued under part 124, subpart G § 267.1106 What do I do if I detect a operating the containment building? of this chapter and subpart I of this part authorizing the facility owner or release? When you close a containment operator to manage hazardous waste. Throughout the active life of the building, you must remove or The standardized permit may have two containment building, if you detect a decontaminate all waste residues, parts: a uniform portion issued in all condition that could lead to or has contaminated containment system cases and a supplemental portion issued caused a release of hazardous waste, components (liners, etc.) contaminated at the Director’s discretion. you must repair the condition promptly, subsoils, and structures and equipment in accordance with the following contaminated with waste and leachate, * * * * * and manage them as hazardous waste procedures. Subpart B—Permit Application (a) Upon detection of a condition that unless 40 CFR 261.3(d) applies. The has lead to a release of hazardous waste closure plan, closure activities, cost 14. Section 270.10 is amended by (for example, upon detection of leakage estimates for closure, and financial revising paragraphs (a) and (h) to read from the primary barrier) you must: responsibility for containment buildings as follows: (1) Enter a record of the discovery in must meet all of the requirements the facility operating record; specified in subparts G and H of this § 270.10 General application requirements. (2) Immediately remove the portion of part. (a) Applying for a permit. Below is the containment building affected by the information on how to obtain a permit condition from service; PART 270—EPA ADMINISTERED and where to find requirements for (3) Determine what steps you must PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE specific permits: take to repair the containment building, HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT (1) If you are covered by RCRA to remove any leakage from the PROGRAM permits by rule (§ 270.60), you need not secondary collection system, and to apply. 11. The authority citation for part 270 (2) If you currently have interim establish a schedule for accomplishing continues to read as follows: the cleanup and repairs; and status, you must apply for permits when (4) Within 7 days after the discovery Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924, required by the Director. of the condition, notify the Regional 6925, 6927, 6939, and 6974. (3) If you are required to have a permit (including new applicants and Administrator of the condition, and Subpart A—General Information within 14 working days, provide a permittees with expiring permits) you written notice to the Regional 12. Section 270.1(b) is amended by must complete, sign, and submit an Administrator with a description of the adding a sentence after the second application to the Director as described steps taken to repair the containment sentence of paragraph (b) to read as in this section and §§ 270.70 through building, and the schedule for follows: 270.73. accomplishing the work. (4) If you are seeking an emergency § 270.1 Purpose and scope of these permit, the procedures for application, (b) The Regional Administrator will regulations. review the information submitted, make issuance, and administration are found a determination regarding whether the * * * * * exclusively in § 270.61. containment building must be removed (b) * * * Facilities that generate (5) If you are seeking a research, from service completely or partially hazardous waste and then non- development, and demonstration until repairs and cleanup are complete, thermally treat or store the hazardous permit, the procedures for application, and notify you of the determination and waste in tanks, containers, or issuance, and administration are found the underlying rationale in writing. containment buildings, may be eligible exclusively in § 270.65. (6) If you are seeking a standardized (c) Upon completing all repairs and for a standardized permit under subpart permit, the procedures for application cleanup, you must notify the Regional I of this part. * * * and issuance are found in part 124, Administrator in writing and provide a * * * * * subpart G of this chapter and subpart I verification, signed by a qualified, 13. Section 270.2 is amended by of this part. registered professional engineer, that the revising the definition for ‘‘Permit’’ and repairs and cleanup have been adding a definition for ‘‘Standardized * * * * * completed according to the written plan permit’’ in alphabetical order to read as (h) Reapplying for a permit. If you submitted in accordance with paragraph follows: have an effective permit and you want (a)(4) of this section. to reapply for a new one, you have two § 270.2 Definitions. options: § 267.1107 Can a containment building * * * * * (1) You may submit a new application itself be considered secondary Permit means an authorization, at least 180 days before the expiration containment? license, or equivalent control document date of the effective permit, unless the Containment buildings can serve as issued by EPA or an approved State to Direction allows a later date; or secondary containment systems for implement the requirements of this part (2) If you intend to be covered by a tanks placed within the building under and parts 271 and 124 of this chapter. standardized permit, you may submit a certain conditions. Permit includes permit by rule Notice of Intent as described in (a) A containment building can serve (§ 270.60), emergency permit (§ 270.61) § 270.51(e)(1) at least 180 days before as an external liner system for a tank, and standardized permit (subpart I of the expiration date of the effective
VerDate 11
permit, unless the Director allows a later (2) In some cases, the Director may Modifying a Standardized Permit date. (The Director may not allow you notify you that you are not eligible for 270.320 How do I modify my RCRA to submit applications or Notices of a standardized permit (see 40 CFR standardized permit? Intent later than the expiration date of 124.206). In those cases, the conditions the existing permit, except as allowed of your expired permit will continue if Subpart I—RCRA Standardized by § 270.51(e)(2)). you submit the information specified in Permits for Storage and Treatment * * * * * paragraph (a)(1) of this section (that is, Units a complete application for a new General Information About Subpart D—Changes to Permits permit) within 60 days after you receive Standardized Permits our notification that you are not eligible 15. Section 270.40(b) is amended by for a standardized permit. § 270.250 What is a RCRA standardized revising the first sentence of paragraph permit? (b) to read as follows: Subpart F—Special Forms of Permits A RCRA standardized permit (RCRA) is a special type of permit that § 270.40 Transfer of permits. 18. Add § 270.67 to subpart F to read authorizes you to manage hazardous * * * * * as follows: (b) Changes in the ownership or waste. It is issued under 40 CFR part operational control of a facility may be § 270.67 RCRA standardized permits for 124, subpart G and subpart I of this part. storage and treatment units. made as a Class 1 modification with § 270.255 Who is eligible for a prior written approval of the Director in RCRA standardized permits are standardized permit? accordance with § 270.42 or as a routine special forms of permits for facility If you generate hazardous waste and change under 40 CFR 124.212. owners or operators that generate then non-thermally treat or store the * * * * * hazardous waste and then non- hazardous waste in tanks, containers, or 16. Section 270.41 is amended by thermally treat or store the hazardous containment buildings, you may be revising the next to last sentence of the waste in tanks, containers, or eligible for a standardized permit. We introductory paragraph and adding containment buildings. Standardized will inform you of your eligibility when paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: permit facility owners or operators are we make a decision on your permit regulated under subpart I of this part, application. § 270.41 Modification or revocation and part 124 subpart G of this chapter, and reissuance of permits. part 267 of this chapter. § 270.260 What requirements of part 270 * * * If a permit modification is 19. Subpart I is added to part 270 to apply to a standardized permit? requested by the permittee, the Director read as follows: The following subparts and sections shall approve or deny the request of this part 270 apply to a standardized according to the procedures of § 270.42, Subpart I—RCRA Standardized permit: or § 270.320 and 40 CFR part 124, Permits for Storage and Treatment (a) Subpart A—General Information: subpart G. * * * * Units all sections. (b) Subpart B—Permit Application: * * * * * Sec. (b) * * * §§ 270.10, 270.11, 270.12, 270.13 and (3) The Director has received General Information About Standardized 270.29. notification under 40 CFR 124.202 (b) of Permits (c) Subpart C—Permit Conditions : all a facility owner or operator’s intent to 270.250 What is a RCRA standardized sections. be covered by a standardized permit. permit? (d) Subpart D—Changes to Permit: 270.255 Who is eligible for a standardized * * * * * §§ 270.40, 270.41, and 270.43. permit? (e) Subpart E—Expiration and 270.260 What requirements of Part 270 Continuation of Permits: all sections. Subpart E—Expiration and apply to a standardized permit? Continuation of Permits (f) Subpart F—Special Forms of Applying for a Standardized Permit Permits: § 270.67. 17. Section 270.51 is amended by 270.270 How do I apply for a standardized (g) Subpart G—Interim Status: all adding paragraph (e) as follows: permit? sections. 270.275 What information must I submit to (h) Subpart H—Remedial Action § 270.51 Continuation of expiring permits. the permitting agency to support my Plans: does not apply. * * * * * standardized permit application? (i) Subpart I—Standardized Permits: (e) Standardized permits. (1) The 270.280 What are the certification all sections. conditions of your expired standardized requirements? permit continue until the effective date 270.285 What happens if my facility is not Applying for a Standardized Permit in compliance with 40 CFR part 267 of your new permit (see 40 CFR 124.15) § 270.270 How do I apply for a if all of the following are true: requirements at the time I submit my notice of intent? standardized permit? (i) If EPA is the permit-issuing You apply for a standardized permit authority. Information That Must Be Kept at Your Facility by following the procedures in 40 CFR (ii) If you submit a timely and part 124, subpart G and this subpart. complete notice of intent under 40 CFR 270.290 What general types of information 124.202(b) requesting coverage under a must I keep at my facility? § 270.275 What information must I submit RCRA standardized permit; and 270.300 What container information must I to the permitting agency to support my (iii) If the Director, through no fault keep at my facility? standardized permit application? 270.305 What tank information must I keep on your part, does not issue your permit at my facility? The information in paragraphs (a) before your previous permit expires (for 270.310 What equipment information must through (f) of this section will be the example, where it is impractical to make I keep at my facility? basis of your standardized permit the permit effective by that date because 270.315 What air emissions control application. You must submit it to the of time or resource constraints). information must I keep at my facility? Director when you submit your Notice
VerDate 11
of Intent under 40 CFR 124.202(b) Notice of Intent, you must submit a (i) A description of precautions to requesting coverage under a RCRA compliance schedule to the Director. prevent accidental ignition or reaction standardized permit: This schedule must include an of ignitable, reactive, or incompatible (a) The Part A information described enforceable sequence of actions with wastes as required by 40 CFR 267.17. in § 270.13. milestones, leading to compliance with (j) Traffic pattern, estimated volume (b) A meeting summary and other the requirements for which your facility (number, types of vehicles) and control materials required by 40 CFR 124.31. is in noncompliance at the time your (for example, show turns across traffic (c) Documentation of compliance with Notice of Intent submittal. lanes, and stacking lanes; describe the location standards of 40 CFR 267.18 (b) Before the Director issues your access road surfacing and load bearing and § 270.14(b)(11). permit, your facility must be in capacity; show traffic control signals). (d) Information that allows the compliance with applicable 40 CFR part (k) [Reserved] Director to carry out our obligations 267 requirements. (l) An outline of both the introductory under other Federal laws required in and continuing training programs you § 270.3. Information That Must Be Kept at Your will use to prepare employees to operate (e) Solid waste management unit Facility or maintain your facility safely as information required by § 270.14(d). § 270.290 What general types of required by 40 CFR 267.16. A brief (f) A certification meeting the information must I keep at my facility? description of how training will be requirements of § 270.280 and an audit designed to meet actual job tasks under of the facility’s compliance status with You must keep the following information at your facility: 40 CFR 267.16(a)(3) requirements. 40 CFR part 267 as required by (m) A copy of the closure plan (a) A general description of the § 270.280. required by 40 CFR 267.112. Include, facility. where applicable, as part of the plans, § 270.280 What are the certification (b) Chemical and physical analyses of specific requirements in 40 CFR requirements? the hazardous waste and hazardous 267.176, 267.201, and 267.1108. You must submit a signed debris handled at the facility. At a (n) [Reserved] certification based on your audit of your minimum, these analyses must contain (o) The most recent closure cost facility’s compliance with 40 CFR part all the information you must know to estimate for your facility prepared under 267. treat or store the wastes properly under 40 CFR 267.142 and a copy of the (a) Your certification must read: the requirements of 40 CFR part 267. documentation required to demonstrate I certify under penalty of law that: (c) A copy of the waste analysis plan financial assurance under 40 CFR (1) My facility (include paragraph required by 40 CFR 267.13(b). 267.143. For a new facility, you may (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section, whichever (d) A description of the security gather the required documentation 60 applies): procedures and equipment required by days before the initial receipt of (i) Complies with all applicable 40 CFR 267.14, or a justification hazardous wastes. requirements of 40 CFR part 267 and will demonstrating the reasons for your (p) [Reserved] continue to comply until the expiration of waiver from these requirements. (q) Where applicable, a copy of the the permit; or (e) A copy of the general inspection insurance policy or other (ii) Will come into compliance before schedule required by 40 CFR 267.15(b). documentation that complies with the permit issuance with all applicable You must include in the inspection liability requirements of 40 CFR requirements of 40 CFR part 267 and will schedule applicable requirements of 40 267.147. For a new facility, then continue to comply until expiration of CFR 267.174, 267.193, 267.195, the permit. documentation showing the amount of (2) I will make all information that I am 264.1033, 264.1052, 264.1053, 264.1058, insurance meeting the specification of required to maintain at my facility by and 264.1088. 40 CFR 267.147(a) that you plan to have §§ 270.290 through 277.315 readily available (f) A justification of any modification in effect before initial receipt of for review by the permitting agency and the of the preparedness and prevention hazardous waste for treatment or public; and, requirements of 40 CFR part 267, storage. (3) I will continue to make all information subpart C. (r) Where appropriate, proof of required by §§ 270.290 through 277.315 (g) A copy of the contingency plan coverage by a State financial mechanism available until the permit expires. I am aware required by 40 CFR part 267, subpart D. as required by 40 CFR 267.149 or that there are significant penalties for (h) A description of procedures, submitting false information, including the 267.150. possibility of fine and imprisonment for structures, or equipment used at the (s) A topographic map showing a knowing violation. facility to: distance of 1000 feet around your (1) Prevent hazards in unloading facility at a scale of 2.5 centimeters (1 (b) You must sign this certification operations (for example, use ramps, inch) equal to not more than 61.0 meters following the requirements of special forklifts), (200 feet). The map must show elevation § 270.11(a)(1) through (3). (2) Prevent runoff from hazardous contours. The contour interval must (c) This certification must be based waste handling areas to other areas of show the pattern of surface water flow upon an audit that you conduct of your the facility or environment, or to in the vicinity of and from each facility’s compliance status with 40 CFR prevent flooding (for example, with operational unit of the facility. For part 267. You must submit this audit to berms, dikes, trenches), example, contours with an interval of the Director with the 40 CFR 124.202(b) (3) Prevent contamination of water 1.5 meters (5 feet), if relief is greater notice of intent. supplies, than 6.1 meters (20 feet), or an interval § 270.285 What happens if my facility is (4) Mitigate effects of equipment of 0.6 meters (2 feet), if relief is less than not in compliance with 40 CFR part 267 failure and power outages, 6.1 meters (20 feet). If your facility is in requirements at the time I submit my notice (5) Prevent undue exposure of a mountainous area, you should use of intent? personnel to hazardous waste (for large contour intervals to adequately (a) If your facility is not in compliance example, requiring protective clothing), show topographic profiles of facilities. with applicable requirements of 40 CFR and The map must clearly show the part 267 at the time you submit your (6) Prevent releases to atmosphere, following:
VerDate 11
(1) Map scale and date. (c) Sketches, drawings, or data § 270.310 What equipment information (2) 100-year floodplain area. demonstrating compliance with 40 CFR must I keep at my facility? (3) Surface waters including 267.174 (location of buffer zone (15m or If your facility has equipment to intermittent streams. 50ft) and containers holding ignitable or which 40 CFR part 264, subpart BB (4) Surrounding land uses reactive wastes) and 40 CFR 267.175(c) applies, you must keep the following (residential, commercial, agricultural, (location of incompatible wastes in information at your facility: recreational). relation to each other), where (a) For each piece of equipment to (5) A wind rose (i.e., prevailing wind- applicable. which 40 CFR part 264 subpart BB speed and direction). (d) Where incompatible wastes are applies: (6) Orientation of the map (north stored or otherwise managed in (1) Equipment identification number arrow). containers, a description of the and hazardous waste management unit (7) Legal boundaries of your facility procedures used to ensure compliance identification. site. with 40 CFR 267.175 (a) and (b), and (2) Approximate locations within the (8) Access control (fences, gates). 267.17 (b) and (c). facility (e.g., identify the hazardous (9) Injection and withdrawal wells (e) Information on air emission waste management unit on a facility both on-site and off-site. control equipment as required by plot plan). (10) Buildings; treatment, storage, or § 270.315. (3) Type of equipment (e.g., a pump disposal operations; or other structure or a pipeline valve). (recreation areas, runoff control systems, § 270.305 What tank information must I keep at my facility? (4) Percent by weight of total organics access and internal roads, storm, in the hazardous waste stream at the If you use tanks to store or treat sanitary, and process sewerage systems, equipment. hazardous waste, you must keep the loading and unloading areas, fire control (5) Hazardous waste state at the facilities, etc.) following information at your facility: (a) A written assessment that is equipment (e.g., gas/vapor or liquid). (11) Barriers for drainage or flood (6) Method of compliance with the control. reviewed and certified by an independent, qualified, registered standard (e.g., monthly leak detection (12) Location of operational units and repair, or equipped with dual within your facility, where hazardous professional engineer on the structural integrity and suitability for handling mechanical seals). waste is (or will be) treated or stored. (b) For facilities that cannot install a (Include equipment cleanup areas). hazardous waste of each tank system, as required under 40 CFR 267.191 and closed-vent system and control device § 270.300 What container information must 267.192. to comply with 40 CFR Part 264, subpart I keep at my facility? (b) Dimensions and capacity of each BB on the effective date that the facility If you store or treat hazardous waste tank. becomes subject to the subpart BB in containers, you must keep the (c) Description of feed systems, safety provisions, an implementation schedule following information at your facility: cutoff, bypass systems, and pressure as specified in 40 CFR 264.1033(a)(2). (a) A description of the containment controls (e.g., vents). (c) Documentation that demonstrates system to demonstrate compliance with (d) A diagram of piping, compliance with the equipment container storage area provisions of 40 instrumentation, and process flow for standards in 40 CFR 264.1052 and CFR 267.173. This description must each tank system. 264.1059. This documentation must show the following: (e) A description of materials and contain the records required under 40 (1) Basic design parameters, equipment used to provide external CFR 264.1064. dimensions, and materials of corrosion protection, as required under (d) Documentation to demonstrate construction. 40 CFR 267.191. compliance with 40 CFR 264.1060 must (2) How the design promotes drainage (f) For new tank systems, a detailed include the following information: or how containers are kept from contact description of how the tank system(s) (1) A list of all information references with standing liquids in the will be installed in compliance with 40 and sources used in preparing the containment system. CFR 267.192 and 267.194. documentation. (3) Capacity of the containment (g) Detailed plans and description of (2) Records, including the dates, of system relative to the number and how the secondary containment system each compliance test required by 40 volume of containers to be stored. for each tank system is or will be CFR 264.1033(j). (4) Provisions for preventing or designed, constructed, and operated to (3) A design analysis, specifications, managing run-on. meet the requirements of 40 CFR drawings, schematics, and piping and (5) How accumulated liquids can be 267.195 and 267.196. instrumentation diagrams based on the analyzed and removed to prevent (h) [Reserved]. appropriate sections of ‘‘ATPI Course overflow. (i) Description of controls and 415: Control of Gaseous Emissions’’ (b) For storage areas that store practices to prevent spills and (incorporated by reference as specified containers holding wastes that do not overflows, as required under 40 CFR in 40 CFR 260.11) or other engineering contain free liquids, a demonstration of 267.198. texts acceptable to the Director that compliance with 40 CFR 267.173(c), (j) For tank systems in which present basic control device design including: ignitable, reactive, or incompatible information. The design analysis must (1) Test procedures and results or wastes are to be stored or treated, a address the vent stream characteristics other documentation or information to description of how operating procedures and control device operation parameters show that the wastes do not contain free and tank system and facility design will as specified in 40 CFR liquids. achieve compliance with the 264.1035(b)(4)(iii). (2) A description of how the storage requirements of 40 CFR 267.202 and (4) A statement you signed and dated area is designed or operated to drain 267.203. certifying that the operating parameters and remove liquids or how containers (k) Information on air emission used in the design analysis reasonably are kept from contact with standing control equipment as required by represent the conditions that exist when liquids. § 270.315. the hazardous waste management unit is
VerDate 11
operating at the highest load or capacity CFR part 264, subpart CC and your information as specified in § 270.24 (c) level reasonable expected to occur. certification that the requirements of and (d). (5) A statement you signed and dated this subpart are met. (f) An emission monitoring plan for certifying that the control device is (c) Documentation for each enclosure both Method 21 in 40 CFR Part 60, designed to operate at an efficiency of used to control air pollutant emissions appendix A and control device 95 weight percent or greater. from tanks or containers under monitoring methods. This plan must § 270.315 What air emissions control requirements of 40 CFR 264.1084(d)(5) include the following information: information must I keep at my facility? or 264.1086(e)(1)(ii). You must include monitoring point(s), monitoring If you have air emission control records for the most recent set of methods for control devices, monitoring equipment subject to 40 CFR part 264, calculations and measurements you frequency, procedures for documenting subpart CC, you must keep the performed to verify that the enclosure exceedences, and procedures for following information at your facility: meets the criteria of a permanent total mitigating noncompliances. (a) Documentation for each floating enclosure as specified in ‘‘Procedure Modifying a Standardized Permit roof cover installed on a tank subject to T—Criteria for and Verification of a 40 CFR 264.1084(d)(1) or (d)(2) that Permanent or Temporary Total § 270.320 How do I modify my RCRA includes information you prepared or Enclosure’’ under 40 CFR 52.741, standardized permit? the cover manufacturer/vendor appendix B. You can modify your RCRA provided describing the cover design, (d) [Reserved] standardized permit by following the and your certification that the cover procedures found in 40 CFR 124.211 (e) Documentation for each closed- meets applicable design specifications through 124.213. listed in 40 CFR 264.1084(e)(1) or (f)(1). vent system and control device installed (b) Identification of each container under requirements of 40 CFR 264.1087 [FR Doc. 01–24204 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] area subject to the requirements of 40 that includes design and performance BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Part III
Office of Management and Budget 14 CFR Chapter VI and Part 1300 Regulations for Air Carrier Guarantee Loan Program Under Section 101(a)(1) of the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act; Final Rule
VerDate 11
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND 11, 2001, prohibiting all flights to, from, Reserve System (who is Chairman of the BUDGET and within the United States. Airports Board), the Secretary of Transportation, did not reopen until September 13 the Secretary of the Treasury, and the 14 CFR Chapter VI and Part 1300 (except for Reagan National Airport, Comptroller General (who is a which partially reopened on October 4, nonvoting member), or their designees. Regulations for Air Carrier Guarantee 2001). Consumer demand for passenger Title I of the Act establishes a number Loan Program Under Section 101(a)(1) air services has declined significantly of conditions and restrictions for the of the Air Transportation Safety and since the terrorist attacks. issuance of loan guarantees and other System Stabilization Act In response to the terrorist attacks, Federal credit instruments. AGENCY: Office of Management and Congress passed and President Bush Section 102(c)(2)(B) of the Act directs Budget, Executive Office of the signed into law on September 18, 2001, the Director of OMB to ‘‘issue President. the Emergency Supplemental regulations setting forth procedures for Appropriations Act for Recovery From ACTION: Final rule. application and minimum requirements and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the * * * for the issuance of Federal credit SUMMARY: These regulations are issued United States (Public Law 107–38). The instruments under Section 101(a)(1)’’ of under Section 102(c)(2)(B) of the Air Emergency Supplemental the Act. Consistent with this Transportation Safety and System Appropriations Act provided $40 billion requirement, OMB issues these Stabilization Act. That section states for the Federal response to the terrorist regulations on a final basis, effective that ‘‘the Director of the Office of attacks, assistance to the victims of the upon publication. Based on the very Management and Budget shall issue attacks, and other consequences of the short deadline imposed upon it by the regulations setting forth procedures for attacks. statute, OMB has determined it is application and minimum requirements The U.S. commercial aviation appropriate to publish these rules * * * for the issuance of Federal credit industry suffered severe losses as a without first obtaining public comment. instruments under Section 101(a)(1)’’ of result of the terrorist attacks. As noted Section 553(a) of the Administrative the Act. Section 101(a)(1) authorizes the in the legislative history of the Act, Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’) exempts from Air Transportation Stabilization Board, these losses have placed the financial its rulemaking requirements those which is established by section survival of many air carriers at risk, in agency actions that concern ‘‘loans, 102(b)(1) of the Act, to issue Federal part because these carriers do not have grants, benefits, or contracts.’’ 5 U.S.C. credit instruments (as defined in section adequate access to credit markets. To 553(a). This loan guarantee program 107(2) of the Act) that, in the aggregate, address this problem, Congress passed falls squarely within this exception to do not exceed $10 billion. The purpose and President Bush signed into law on the requirements otherwise imposed by of these Federal credit instruments is to September 22, 2001, the Air section 553. assist air carriers who suffered losses Transportation Safety and System Moreover, to the extent that section due to the terrorist attacks of September Stabilization Act (Public Law 107–42) 553’s notice-and-comment requirements 11, 2001, and to whom credit is not (the ‘‘Act’’). may apply to this action, we conclude otherwise reasonably available, in order The Act addresses airline that there is ‘‘good cause’’ under to facilitate a safe, efficient, and viable stabilization, aviation insurance, tax sections 553(b)(B) and 553(d), to issue commercial aviation system in the provisions, victim compensation, and the rule without prior public comment, United States. The Act was signed into air transportation safety. Section effective immediately. The tight 101(a)(2) of the Act provides $5 billion law on September 22, 2001, and directs timeframe dictated by the statute makes to compensate air carriers for the direct the Office of Management and Budget compliance with these requirements losses incurred as a result of the Federal (‘‘OMB’’) to issue implementing impracticable and contrary to the public ground stop order and incremental regulations ‘‘[n]ot later than 14 days interest. See Methodist Hospital v. losses that they incur through December after the date of enactment of this Act.’’ Shalala, 38 F.3d 1225, 1235 (D.C. Cir. 31, 2001, as a result of the terrorist Consistent with this requirement, these 1994); Petry v. Block, 737 F.2d 1193, attacks. Section 101(a)(1) of the Act regulations are issued on a final basis 1203 (D.C. Cir. 1984); Valiant Steel & authorizes the issuance to air carriers of and are effective upon publication. Equipment v. Goldschmidt, 499 F. Federal credit instruments that, in the Supp. 410, 412 (D.D.C. 1980). In EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 2001. aggregate, shall not exceed $10 billion. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The purpose of these Federal credit requiring OMB to issue the regulations Clare Doherty, Office of Management instruments is to assist air carriers who within 14 days, Congress plainly and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. suffered losses due to the terrorist intended to ensure that the loan Telephone (202) 395–5704. attacks of September 11, 2001, and to guarantee program be implemented as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On the whom credit is not otherwise reasonably swiftly as possible. The public interest morning of September 11, 2001, available, in order to facilitate a safe, is therefore served by having these terrorists hijacked four commercial efficient, and viable commercial regulations become effective upon passenger airliners. Two of the planes aviation system in the United States. publication, so that the Board can begin crashed into the World Trade Center in These final regulations are issued to operations, and air carriers can submit New York City, causing the two towers implement section 101(a)(1) of the applications to the Board at their to collapse and killing more than 5,000 statute. earliest convenience. people. A third plane crashed into the The Air Transportation Stabilization Regulatory Impact Pentagon, killing nearly 200 people. The Board (the ‘‘Board’’), which is fourth plane, apparently heading toward established by Section 102(b) of the Act, A. Executive Order 12866 another target, crashed in western is empowered to enter into agreements OMB’s Office of Information and Pennsylvania, killing its crew and to issue these loan guarantees and other Regulatory Affairs (‘‘OIRA’’) has dozens of passengers. In response to Federal credit instruments authorized determined that this rule is an these terrorist attacks, the Federal under section 102(b) of the Act. The economically significant regulatory Aviation Administration issued a Board is composed of the Chairman of action under Executive Order 12866, Federal ground stop order on September the Board of Governors of the Federal Regulatory Planning and Review, based
VerDate 11
on its finding that the rule will have an Protected Property Rights. The rule et seq.) under emergency approval annual effect on the economy of $100 meets applicable standards in sections procedures at 5 CFR 1320.13. The OMB million or more. The Director of OMB 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order control number assigned to this is required to issue implementing 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize collection is 0348–0059. OMB estimates regulations under the Act not later than litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and that there may be up to 150 respondents 14 days after the enactment of this reduce burden. This rule does not under this program and estimates that statute. In accordance with the concern an environmental risk to health the total annual burden to the public of procedures regarding such emergency or risk to safety that may the information collection activities regulatory actions as discussed in disproportionately affect children under associated with this rule would be 6,000 section 6(a)(3)(D) of Executive Order Executive Order 13045, Protection of hours using that high-end estimate of 12866, OMB has, to the extent Children from Environmental Risks and respondents. Based on a cost of $50 per practicable, complied with the Safety Risks. hour, the monetized hour cost of this requirements of this Executive Order. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act information collection is $300,000. The This rule establishes the application Paperwork Reduction Act provides that procedure and minimum requirements The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 an agency may not conduct or sponsor, that will apply to up to $10 billion in (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires a review and a person is not required to respond loan guarantees (or other Federal credit of rules to assess their impact on small to, a collection of information unless it instruments) to air carriers to entities. OMB has conducted a review of displays a currently valid OMB control compensate them for the losses they this final rule and certifies that it will number. incurred as a result of the terrorist not have a significant impact on a attacks on the United States that substantial number of small entities. F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act It is possible that small entities will occurred on September 11, 2001. The This rule is not subject to the seek Federal credit instruments under loan guarantees will translate into a analytical requirements of the Unfunded this program. However, the cost to these ‘‘credit subsidy’’ of some amount not yet Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1531– entities of applying for this assistance determined. This program is expected to 1538, because it will not result in the program should be minimal since generate social benefits by mitigating expenditure by a State, local, or tribal borrowers will normally have available the costs incurred by the airline government, in the aggregate, or by the the information needed to prepare industry as a result of the September 11 private sector of $100 million or more applications for funding. In addition, attacks. Such costs include the in any one year. transaction costs associated with participation in this program is business closings due to short-run voluntary. As such, OMB concludes that G. Federalism and Indian Tribal financial or economic dislocations this rule will not have a significant Implications caused by the September 11 attacks, impact on a substantial number of small Executive Order 13132, entitled, which could be followed by start-up entities. ‘‘Federalism,’’ was issued on August 4, costs when demand for air service D. Congressional Review Act increases and other financial problems 1999, and took effect November 2, 1999. resulting from the terrorist attacks ease. This is a major rule under Section OMB has reviewed this rule for Such transaction costs for the airline 804(2) of the Congressional Review Act federalism implications, and certifies industry may be more significant than (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Under the that this rule will not have a substantial for other industries, and society will Congressional Review Act, major rules, effect on the States, the relationship benefit to the extent these costs are in general, can not take effect until 60 between the Federal Government and avoided through the loan guarantee days after the rule is published in the the States, or the distribution of power program. In addition to the benefits that Federal Register. However, Section and responsibilities among the various will result from the loan guarantee 808(2) of the Congressional Review Act levels of government. Also, this rule program, there will be some states that agencies may waive this does not have tribal implications under administrative costs of this rule to effective date requirement for ‘‘good Executive Order 13175, entitled participants in the loan guarantee cause’’ and establish an earlier effective ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with program. There are also unknown date. As explained above, to the extent Indian Tribal Governments.’’ The rule opportunity costs associated with this that section 553’s notice-and-comment does not have a substantial direct effect rule, because it may mean that finite requirements apply to this rulemaking, on one or more Indian tribes, on the resources, which would have been spent OMB has determined that there is ‘‘good relationship between the Federal elsewhere absent this rule, are allocated cause’’ to issue this final rule without Government and Indian tribes, or on the to loan guarantees. There is also a risk seeking prior public comment, effective distribution of power and responsibility of loss to the Federal government in the immediately upon publication, because between the Federal Government and event of default on loans. OMB is statutorily required to issue the Indian tribes. regulations within 14 days of the B. Other Regulatory Analyses H. National Environmental Policy Act enactment of the Act, and because it is This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy important that the loan guarantee OMB has determined that this action’’ under Executive Order 13211, program began operations as soon as rulemaking does not constitute a major because it is not likely to have a possible. For these same reasons, there Federal action significantly affecting the significant adverse effect on the supply, is ‘‘good cause’’ under section 808(2) to quality of the human environment distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, make this rule effective immediately under the National Environmental a Statement of Energy Effects under upon publication. Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et Executive Order 13211 is not required. seq., Public Law 91–190 (NEPA). If This rule will not effect a taking of E. Paperwork Reduction Act necessary, loans sought to be guaranteed private property or otherwise have The information collection under the program will be assessed by implications under Executive Order requirements of this rule have been the Board to determine appropriate 12630, Governmental Actions and approved by OMB under the Paperwork compliance with NEPA. In this regard, Interference with Constitutionally Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 we note that the Board is authorized to
VerDate 11
issue supplemental regulations for the actions in making, disbursing, servicing or more lenders, pursuant to which the air carrier loan guarantee program. (including, but not limited to care, Federal government guarantees preservation and maintenance of repayment of a specified percentage of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 1300 collateral), monitoring, collecting, and the principal of and/or interest on the Air carriers, Disaster assistance, Loan liquidating a loan and security. loan. Unless otherwise specified, programs—transportation, Reporting (c) Agent means that lender guarantee includes any other pledge and recordkeeping requirements. authorized to take such actions, exercise issued under a Federal credit Dated: October 5, 2001. such powers, and perform such duties instrument. Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., on behalf and in representation of all (k) Lender means any non-Federal Director, Office of Management and Budget. lenders party to a guarantee of a single qualified institutional buyer, as defined loan, as is required by, or necessarily in Section 102(a)(3) of the Act, that For the reasons set forth in the incidental to, the terms and conditions funds a financial obligation subject to a preamble, the Office of Management and of the guarantee. guarantee issued by the Board. With Budget establishes in title 14 of the (d) Air carrier means an air carrier as Code of Federal Regulations a new respect to a guarantee of a single loan defined in 49 U.S.C. 40102. to which more than one lender is a chapter VI consisting of part 1300 to (e) Applicant means one or more air read as follows: party, the term lender means agent. carriers applying for a Federal credit (l) Loan, unless otherwise specified, Chapter VI—Office of Management and instrument issued by the Board under includes any financial obligation (i.e., Budget the program. note, bond, debenture, or other debt (f) The Board, for purposes of any obligation) issued by a borrower. PART 1300—AVIATION DISASTER operational and decisionmaking (m) Loan documents mean the loan RELIEF—AIR CARRIER GUARANTEE functions in connection with individual agreement and all other instruments, LOAN PROGRAM loan guarantees, means the voting and all documentation between the members of the Air Transportation Subpart A—General lender and the borrower evidencing the Stabilization Board established under making, disbursing, securing, collecting, Sec. Section 102 of the Act. The voting or otherwise administering of the loan. 1300.1 Purpose. members of the Board are the Chairman 1300.2 Definitions. (References to loan documents also of the Board of Governors of the Federal include comparable agreements, Subpart B—Minimum Requirements and Reserve System (who is the Chairman of instruments, and documentation for Application Procedures the Board), the Secretary of the Treasury other financial obligations for which a 1300.10 General standard for Board and the Secretary of Transportation, or guarantee is requested or issued.) issuance of Federal credit instruments. their designees. The Comptroller (n) Program means the air carrier 1300.11 Eligible borrower. General, who is a nonvoting member, 1300.12 Eligible lender. guarantee loan program established by will not participate in the review, section 101(a)(1) and the related 1300.13 Guarantee amount. operations, or deliberations of the Board 1300.14 Guarantee percentage. provisions of Title I of the Act. 1300.15 Loan terms. in connection with individual loan (o) Security means all property, real or 1300.16 Application process. guarantees, or otherwise participate in personal, required by the provisions of 1300.17 Application evaluation. the Board’s exercise of any executive the guarantee or by the loan documents 1300.18 Issuance of the guarantee. power, but may provide such audit, to secure repayment of any 1300.19 Assignment or transfer of loans. evaluation and other support to the indebtedness of the borrower under the 1300.20 Lender responsibilities. Board as the Board may request, loan documents or guarantee. 1300.21 Guarantee. consistent with applicable auditing 1300.22 Termination of obligations. 1300.23 Participation in guaranteed loans. standards. Subpart B—Minimum Requirements (g) Borrower means an ‘‘Obligor,’’ as and Application Procedures Authority: Title I of Pub. L. 107–42, 115 defined in Section 102(a)(4) of the Act, Stat. 230 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note). and includes an air carrier that is § 1300.10 General standards for Board issuance of Federal credit instruments. Subpart A—General primarily liable for payment of the principal of and interest on a Federal (a) In accordance with section § 1300.1 Purpose. credit instrument, which party may be 102(c)(1) of the Act, the Board may enter This part is issued by the Office of a corporation, partnership, joint into agreements with one or more Management and Budget, (OMB) venture, trust, or governmental entity, borrowers to issue Federal credit pursuant to Title I of the Air agency, or instrumentality. instruments only if the Board Transportation Safety and System (h) Federal credit instrument, as determines, in its discretion and in Stabilization Act, Public Law 107–42, defined in Section 107(2) of the Act, accordance with the minimum 115 Stat. 230 (‘‘Act’’). Specifically, means any guarantee or other pledge by requirements set forth in this part, Section 102(c)(2)(B) directs OMB to the Board issued under the program to that— issue regulations setting forth pledge the full faith and credit of the (1) The borrower is an air carrier for procedures for application and United States to pay all or part of any which credit is not reasonably available minimum requirements for the issuance of the principal of and interest on a loan at the time of the transaction; of Federal credit instruments under issued by a borrower and funded by a (2) The intended obligation by the section 101(a)(1) of the Act. lender. borrower is prudently incurred; and (i) Financial obligation, as defined in (3) Such agreement is a necessary part § 1300.2 Definitions. Section 102(a)(2) of the Act, means any of maintaining a safe, efficient, and (a) Act means the Air Transportation note, bond, debenture, or other debt viable commercial aviation system in Safety and System Stabilization Act, obligation issued by a borrower in the United States. Public Law 107–42, 115 Stat. 230 (49 connection with financing under the (b) In accordance with section U.S.C. 40101 note). program. 102(c)(2)(A) of the Act, the Board shall (b) Administer, administering and (j) Guarantee means the written enter into an agreement to issue a administration, mean the lender’s agreement between the Board and one Federal credit instrument in such form
VerDate 11
and on such terms and conditions and an independent auditor acceptable to of principal and accrued interest of the subject to such covenants, the Board or by the Comptroller loan guaranteed. representations, warranties, and General; requirements (including requirements (5) In conducting audits and reviews § 1300.15 Loan terms. for audits) as the Board determines are pursuant to paragraphs (a) (3) and (4) of (a) A loan guaranteed under the appropriate for satisfying the this section, it has agreed to provide program shall be due and payable in full requirements of this part and any access to the officers and employees, no later than seven years from the date supplemental requirements issued by books, records, accounts, documents, on which the first disbursement of the the Board under section 102(c)(2)(B) of correspondence, and other information loan is made. the Act. of the borrower, its subsidiaries, (b) Loans guaranteed under the (c) In accordance with section affiliates, financial advisers, program must bear a rate of interest 102(d)(1) of the Act, in entering into consultants, and independent certified determined by the Board to be agreements to issue Federal credit accountants that the Board or the reasonable. In determining the instruments, the Board shall, to the Comptroller General consider necessary. reasonableness of an interest rate, the extent feasible and practicable and in (b) Status as an eligible borrower Board shall consider the percentage of accordance with the requirements in under this section does not ensure that the guarantee, any collateral, other loan this part, ensure that the Federal the Board will issue the guarantee terms, and current average yields on Government is compensated for the risk sought or preclude the Board from outstanding obligations of the United assumed in making guarantees. declining to issue a guarantee. States with maturity comparable to the term of the loan guaranteed. The Board (d) In accordance with Section § 1300.12 Eligible lender. 102(d)(2) of the Act, the Board is may reject an application to guarantee a (a) A lender eligible to receive a authorized to enter into contracts under loan if it determines the interest rate on Federal credit instrument approved by which the Federal Government, such loan to be unreasonable. the Board must be a non-Federal contingent on the financial success of (c) An eligible lender may assess and qualified institutional buyer as defined the air carrier, would participate in the collect from the borrower such other in Section 102(a)(3) of the Act. gains of the air carrier or its security fees and costs associated with the (b) If more than one institution application and origination of the loan holders through the use of such participates as a lender in a single loan instruments as warrants, stock options, as are reasonable and customary, taking for which a Federal credit instrument is into consideration the amount and common or preferred stock, or other requested, each one of the institutions appropriate equity instruments, except complexity of the credit. The Board may on the application must meet the take such other fees and costs into that the Board shall not accept an equity requirements to be an eligible lender. interest in an air carrier that gives the consideration when determining An application for a guarantee of a whether to offer a guarantee to the Federal Government voting rights. single loan, for which there is more than lender. (e) In accordance with Section 104(a) one lender, must identify one of the of the Act, the Board may only issue a institutions to act as agent for all. This § 1300.16 Application process. Federal credit instrument to an air agent is responsible for administering (a) Applications are to be submitted carrier after the air carrier enters into a the loan and shall have those duties and legally binding agreement with the by the borrower. Borrowers may submit responsibilities required of an agent, as applications to the Board any time after Board regarding certain employee set forth in the guarantee. compensation. October 12, 2001 through June 28, 2002. (c) Each lender, irrespective of any All applications must be received by the § 1300.11 Eligible borrower. indemnities or other agreements Board no later than 5 p.m. EDT, June 28, between the lenders and the agent, shall (a) An eligible borrower must be an 2002, in the Board’s offices. Borrowers be bound by all actions, and/or failures air carrier that can demonstrate, to the should submit an original application to act, of the agent. The Board shall be satisfaction of the Board, that: and four copies. Applications will not (1) It has incurred (or is incurring) entitled to rely upon such actions and/ be accepted via facsimile machine losses as a result of the terrorist attacks or failures to act of the agent as binding transmission or electronic mail. No on the United States that occurred on the lenders. application will be accepted for review (d) Status as an eligible lender under September 11, 2001, which may include if it is not received by the Board on or this section does not assure that the losses due to the unavailability of credit before June 28, 2002. Board will issue the guarantee sought, or the decrease in demand for that air (b) Applications shall contain the or otherwise preclude the Board from carrier’s services; following: declining to issue a guarantee. (2) It is not under bankruptcy (1) A completed Form ‘‘Application protection or receivership when the § 1300.13 Guarantee amount. for Air Carrier Guaranteed Loan’; application is submitted or when the (a) Under Section 101(a)(1) of the Act, (2) All loan documents that will be Board issues the guarantee, unless the the Board is authorized to enter into signed by the lender and the borrower, guarantee and the underlying financial agreements to issue Federal credit if the application is approved, including obligation is to be part of a bankruptcy instruments that, in the aggregate, do all terms and conditions of, and security court-certified reorganization plan; not exceed $10 billion. or additional security (if any), to assure (3) It has agreed to permit such audits (b) The loan amount guaranteed to a the borrower’s performance under, the and reviews prior to the issuance of a single air carrier may not exceed that loan; guarantee, as the Board may deem amount that, in the Board’s sole (3) A certification by the borrower appropriate, by an independent auditor discretion, the air carrier (or its that the borrower meets each of the acceptable to the Board; successor) needs in order for it to requirements of the program as set forth (4) It has agreed to permit such audits provide commercial air services. in the Act, the regulations in this part, and reviews during the period the loan and any supplemental requirements is outstanding and three years after § 1300.14 Guarantee percentage. issued by the Board; payment in full of the guaranteed loan, A guarantee issued by the Board must (4) A certification by the lender that as the Board may deem appropriate, by be less than 100 percent of the amount the lender meets each of the
VerDate 11
requirements of the program as set forth (vi) If appropriate, a description of a § 1300.17 Application evaluation. in the Act, the regulations in this part, plan to restructure the borrower’s (a) Eligibility screening. Applications and any supplemental requirements obligations, contracts, and costs. In will be reviewed to determine whether issued by the Board, and that the lender preparing this description, the borrower the lender and borrower are eligible, the will provide the loan under the terms shall jointly develop, with its existing information required under § 1300.16(b) outlined in the loan documents if the secured and unsecured creditors, is complete, and the proposed loan Board approves the requested guarantee; employees, or vendors, an agreed-upon complies with applicable statutes and (5) A statement that the borrower is plan to restructure the borrower’s regulations. The Board may at any time not under bankruptcy protection or obligations, contracts and costs and reject an application that does not meet receivership when the application is incorporate this into the business plan these requirements. submitted, unless the guarantee and the submitted; (b) Evaluation criteria. Applications underlying financial obligation is to be (9) A description of the losses that the that are determined to be eligible part of a bankruptcy court-certified borrower incurred (or is incurring) as a pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section reorganization plan; result of the terrorist attacks on the shall be subject to a substantive review (6) Consolidated financial statements United States that occurred on by the Board. In addition to the general of the borrower for the previous five September 11, 2001, including losses standards for Board issuance of Federal years that have been audited by an due to the unavailability of credit on credit instruments set forth in § 1300.10, independent certified public reasonable terms or a decrease in the Board shall consider the following accountant, including any associated demand for the air carrier’s services; evaluation factors: (1) Reasonable assurance that the notes, as well as any interim financial (10) An analysis that demonstrates borrower will be able to repay the loan statements and associated notes for the that the issuance of the guaranteed loan by the date specified in the loan current fiscal year; is a necessary part of maintaining a safe, document, which shall be no later than (7) Copies of the financial evaluations efficient, and viable commercial seven years from the date on which the and forecasts concerning the air carrier’s aviation system in the United States and air service operations that were first disbursement of the loan is made; that credit is not reasonably available at (2) The adequacy of the proposed prepared by or for the air carrier within the time of the transaction; the three months prior to September 11, provisions to protect the Federal (11) A description of all security (if 2001; Government, including sufficiency of any) for the loan, including, as (8) The borrower’s business plan on any security provided by the borrower applicable, current appraisals of real which the loan is based that includes and the percentage of guarantee and personal property, copies of any the following: requested; appropriate environmental site (i) A description of how the loan fits (3) The ability of the lender to assessments, and current personal and within the borrower’s business plan, the administer the loan in full compliance corporate financial statements of any purposes for which the borrower will with the requisite standard of care. In guarantors for the same period as use the loan, and an analysis showing making this determination, the Board required for the borrower. Appraisals of that the loan is prudently incurred. If will assess: real property shall be prepared by State loan funds are to be used to purchase an (i) The lender’s level of regulatory licensed or certified appraisers, and be existing firm (or the substantial assets of capital, in the case of banking consistent with the ‘‘Uniform Standards an existing firm), the business plan of institutions, or net worth, in the case of of Professional Appraisal Practice,’’ the combined entity shall contain a other institutions; promulgated by the Appraisal Standards (ii) Whether the lender possesses the discussion of the way in which any Board of the Appraisal Foundation. ability to administer the loan, including required regulatory or judicial approvals Financial statements of guarantors shall its experience with loans to air carriers; will be obtained, including antitrust be prepared by independent certified and approval for any proposed acquisition; public accountants; (iii) Any other matter the Board (ii) A discussion of a complete cost (12) If appropriate, a description of deems material to its assessment of the accounting and a range of revenue, lender; and operating cost, and credit assumptions; the Federal government’s ability to participate, contingent on the financial (4) The ability of the borrower to (iii) A discussion of the financing demonstrate, to the Board’s satisfaction, plan on which the loan is based, success of the borrower, in the gains of the borrower or its security holders one or more of the following criteria. showing that the operational needs of The Board shall give preference to the borrower will be met during the through the use of such instruments as warrants, stock options, common or applications that satisfy one or more of term of the plan; these criteria, giving greater preference (iv) An analysis demonstrating that, at preferred stock, or other appropriate equity instruments; and to those applications that meet the the time of the application, there is a greatest number of these criteria, as (13) Any other information requested reasonable assurance that the borrower follows: will be able to repay the loan according by the Board. (i) A demonstration that the air carrier to its terms, and a complete description (c) The collections of information in has presented a plan demonstrating that of the operational and financial this section and elsewhere in this part its business plan is financially sound; assumptions on which this that are subject to the Paperwork (ii) A demonstration of greater demonstration is based; Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) participation in the loan by non-Federal (v) A discussion of the borrower’s have been approved by OMB and entities; five-year history and five-year assigned control number 0348–0059. (iii) A demonstration of greater projection for revenue, cash flow, Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, an participation in the loan by private average realized prices, and average agency may not conduct or sponsor, and entities, as opposed to public non- realized operating costs and a a person is not required to respond to, Federal entities; demonstration that the borrower will be a collection of information unless it (iv) A demonstration that the able to continue operations if the displays a currently valid OMB control proposed instruments would ensure that requested guarantee is approved; and number. the Federal Government will, contingent
VerDate 11
on the financial success of the air (3) Other arrangements, satisfactory to that such annual escalation reflects the carrier, participate in the gains of the air the agency responsible for collecting the borrower’s potential ability to obtain carrier and its security holders; debt are made. credit in the private credit markets, in (v) A demonstration of concessions by (d) Decisions by the Board. The Board addition to any other factors the Board the air carrier’s security holders, other shall approve or deny applications may deem appropriate. creditors, or employees that will received on or before June 28, 2002, in improve the financial condition of the a timely manner as such applications § 1300.19 Assignment or transfer of loans. air carrier in a manner that will enable are received. The Board may limit the Neither the loan documents nor the it to repay the loan in accordance with amount of a loan guarantee made to guarantee of the Board, or any interest its terms and provide commercial air initial applicants to ensure that therein, may be modified, assigned, services on a financially sound basis sufficient funds remain available for conveyed, sold or otherwise transferred after repayment; subsequent applicants. The Board shall by the lender, in whole or in part, (vi) A demonstration that guaranteed notify the borrower in writing of the without the prior written approval of loan proceeds will be used for a purpose approval or denial of an application. the Board. other than the payment or refinancing of Approvals for loan guarantees shall be § 1300.20 Lender responsibilities. existing debt; conditioned upon compliance with (vii) A demonstration that the § 1300.18. The lender shall have such proposed instruments contain financial obligations and duties to the Board as structures that minimize the Federal § 1300.18 Issuance of the guarantee. are set forth in the guarantee. government’s risk and cost associated (a) The Board’s decisions to approve § 1300.21 Guarantee. with making loan guarantees. Examples any application for a guarantee under include, but are not limited to, requests § 1300.17 is conditioned upon: The Board shall adopt a form of for guarantees that contain the (1) The lender and borrower obtaining guarantee to be used by the Board under following: any required regulatory or judicial the program. Modifications to the (A) A maturity period that is less than approvals; provisions of the form of guarantee must the maximum permitted under the rules (2) Evidence showing, to the Board’s be approved and adopted by the Board. satisfaction, that the lender and in this part; § 1300.22 Termination of obligations. (B) Pledges of collateral; borrower are legally authorized to enter (C) Agreements by the borrower’s into the loan under the terms and The Board shall have such rights to parent or other entities to reimburse the conditions submitted to the Board in the terminate the guarantee as are set forth Federal government for any payments application; in the guarantee. that the Federal government may make (3) The Board’s receipt of the loan documents and any related instruments, § 1300.23 Participation in guaranteed under the guarantee; loans. (D) A grant to the Federal government in form and substance satisfactory to the of favorable priority in the event of Board, and the guarantee, all properly (a) Subject to paragraph (b) of this bankruptcy reflecting other creditors’ executed by the lender, borrower, and section, a lender may distribute the risk agreement to subordinate their debts as any other required party other than the of a portion of a loan guaranteed under a condition of the loan guarantee; Board; and the program by sale of participations (E) Limitation of the borrower’s (4) No material adverse change in the therein if: issuance of dividends and/or the borrower’s ability to repay the loan or (1) Neither the loan note nor the borrower’s payments to its parent or any of the representations and guarantee is assigned, conveyed, sold, or subsidiaries or related companies; warranties made in the application transferred in whole or in part; (F) Limitation of the borrower’s ability between the date of the Board’s (2) The lender remains solely to incur additional debt, and/or the approval and the date the guarantee is responsible for the administration of the borrower’s ability to incur capital to be issued. loan; and expenditures, beyond that set forth in (b) The Board may withdraw its (3) The Board’s ability to assert any the business and financial plans that the approval of an application and rescind and all defenses available to it under the Borrower submitted with the its offer of guarantee if the Board guarantee and the law is not adversely application; determines that the lender or the affected. (G) A demonstration of reasonable borrower cannot, or is unwilling to, (b) The following categories of entities liquidity; provide adequate documentation and may purchase participations in loans (H) A demonstration of favorable debt proof of compliance with paragraph (a) guaranteed under the program: ratios; and of this section within the time provided (1) Eligible lenders; (I) A demonstration that any proceeds for in the offer. (2) Private investment funds and raised from private sector financing (c) Only after receipt of all the insurance companies that do not usually subsequent to disbursement of the documentation required by this section, invest in commercial loans; federally guaranteed loan be used to will the Board sign and deliver the (3) Air Carrier company suppliers or repay the federally guaranteed loan. guarantee. customers, who are interested in (d) A borrower receiving a loan (c) No guarantee will be made if either participating as a means of commencing guaranteed by the Board under this the borrower or lender has an or solidifying the supplier or customer program shall pay an annual fee, in an outstanding delinquent Federal debt, relationship with the borrower; or amount and payable as determined by including tax liabilities, until: (4) Any other entity approved by the (1) The delinquent debt has been paid the Board. At the time that the guarantee Board on a case-by-case basis. in full; is issued, the Board shall ensure that (2) A negotiated repayment schedule this annual fee will escalate for each [FR Doc. 01–25648 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] is established; or year that the loan is outstanding and BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
VerDate 11
Part IV
Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 121, 135, and 142 Temporary Extension of Time Allowed for Certain Training and Testing; Final Rule
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION identify the amendment number or calendar-month period preceding the docket number of this final rule. month the applicant completes the Federal Aviation Administration practical test, if a knowledge test is Small Entity Inquiries required. This action extends the 14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 121, 135, and 142 The Small Business Regulatory validity of those aeronautical knowledge Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of [Docket No. FAA–2001–10797; SFAR 93] test results with an expiration date of 1996 requires the FAA to comply with September 30, 2001 to November 30, RIN 2120–AH 51 small entity requests for information 2001. advice about compliance with statutes Temporary Extension of Time Allowed and regulations within the FAA’s Justification for Immediate Adoption for Certain Training and Testing jurisdiction. Therefore, any small entity Because the circumstances described that has a question regarding this AGENCY: Federal Aviation herein warrant immediate action, the Administration (FAA), DOT. document may contact its local FAA Administrator finds that notice and official. Internet users can find public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) ACTION: Final rule. additional information on SBREFA on are impracticable and contrary to the SUMMARY: This action extends the time the FAA’s Web page at http:// public interest. Further, the allowed to meet certain qualification www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm and Administrator finds that the urgent need requirements. The action is being taken send electronic inquiries to the for this relief is good cause under 5 because the affected persons may not following Internet address: 9-AWA- U.S.C. 553(d) for making this rule have been able to timely fulfill [email protected]. effective upon publication. requirements due to the circumstances Background International Compatibility in the wake of the September 11, 2001 In the wake of the September 11, terrorist attacks. The action will In keeping with U.S. obligations 2001, terrorist attacks against four U.S. under the Convention on International temporarily extend the time allowed to commercial aircraft resulting in the complete the requirements needed to Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to tragic loss of human life at the World comply with International Civil remain qualified or to become qualified Trade Center, the Pentagon, and to perform certain functions. Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards southwest Pennsylvania, the U.S. airline and Recommended Practices to the DATES: This action is effective October transportation system was severely maximum extend practicable. The FAA 1, 2001. hampered in conducting normal determined that there are no ICAO FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent operations. Standards and Recommended Practices Stephens, Air Transportation Division, Part 121 and 135 check airmen that relate to this SFAR. Flight Standards Service, Federal (simulator), part 121 and 135 flight Aviation Administration, 800 instructors (simulator), part 121 aircraft Paperwork Reduction Act Independence Avenue, SW., dispatchers and part 142 training center In accordance with the Paperwork Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) instructors are required to successfully Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 267–9518. complete certain qualification 3507(d)), the FAA has determined that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: requirements, inflight line observation there are no new requirements for programs, or operating familiarization, information collection associated with Availability of This Action as part of their periodic qualifications. this SFAR. You can get an electronic copy using The FAA realizes that due to the critical the Internet by taking the following circumstances and disruption of airline Regulatory Analyses steps: operations, it may have been impossible Executive Order 12866, Regulatory (1) Go to search function of the for some of these persons who needed Planning and Review, directs the FAA Department of Transportation’s to complete the necessary requirements to assess both the costs and benefits of electronic Docket Management System during the month of September to do so. a regulatory change. We are not allowed (DMS) Web page (http://dms.dot.gov./ Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this to propose or adopt a regulation unless search). SFAR to allow those persons additional we make a reasoned determination that (2) On the search page type in the last time to complete the inflight the benefits of the intended regulation four digits of the Docket number shown requirements. justify its costs. This rulemaking action at the beginning of this notice. Click on This action will not adversely affect is not a significant regulatory action ‘‘search’’. aviation safety. It will only allow certain under section 3(f) of Executive order (3) On the next page, which contains individuals, who do not directly operate 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. the Docket summary information for the the aircraft, additional time to complete The Office of Management and Budget Docket you selected, click on the final the inflight requirements. This one-time ha not review it under that Order. It is rule. 60-day extension does not change the not significant under the Department of You can also get an electronic copy 12-calendar month requirement for Transportation (DOT) Regulatory using the Internet through FAA’s Web aircraft dispatchers or the anniversary Policies and Procedures. The FAA page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ month for check airmen, flight expects the economic impact of this rule armhome.htm or the Federal Register’s instructors, or training center to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Web page at http:// instructors. Therefore, if you were due Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the www.access.gpo.gov.su_docs/aces/ to complete one of the specified regulatory policies and procedures of aces140html. requirements in September 2000 you DOT is unnecessary. You can also get a copy by submitting will be due again to meet that a request to the Federal Aviation requirement in September 2002, Regulatory Flexibility Act Administration, Office of Rulemaking, regardless of this extension for 2001. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, Certain applicants for a certificate or of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, directs the SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by rating under parts 61 must pass a FAA to fit regulatory requirements to calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to required knowledge test within the 24- the scale of the business, organizations,
VerDate 11
and governmental jurisdictions subject determined that this final rule does not Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– to the regulation. We are required to have federalism implications. 44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, determine whether a proposed or final 45301–45302. Environmental Analysis action will have a ‘‘significant economic 2. The authority citation for part 63 FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA impact on a substantial number of small continues to read as follows: entities’’ as defined in the Act. If we actions that may be categorically find that the action will have a excluded from preparation of a National Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 44703, 44707, 44709–44711, 45102–45103, significant impact, we must do a 45301–45302. ‘‘regulatory flexibility analysis.’’ environmental impact statement. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, 3. The authority citation for part 121 This final rule temporarily extends continues to read as follows: the time certain training and testing appendix 4, paragraph 4(j) this requirements must be completed. Its rulemaking action qualifies for a Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, economic impact is minimal. Therefore, categorical exclusion. 41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709– 44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901, we certify that this action will not have Energy Impact 44903–44904, 44912, 46105. a significant economic impact on a The energy impact of this SFAR has substantial number of small entities. been assessed in accordance with the 4. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as follows: Trade Impact Assessment Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Pub. L. 94–163, as amended (42 Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 44113, The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. It 44701–44702, 44705, 44705, 44709, 44711– prohibits Federal agencies from has been determined that this SFAR is 44713, 44715–44717, 44722. engaging in any standards or related not a major regulatory action under the 5. The authority citation for part 142 activities that create unnecessary provisions of the EPCA. obstacles to the foreign commerce of the continues to read as follows: United States. Legitimate domestic List of Subjects Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113m, objectives, such as safety, are not 14 CFR Part 61 40119, 44101, 44701–44703, 44705, 44707, considered unnecessary obstacles. The 44709–44711, 45102–45103, 45301–45302. statute also requires consideration of Airmen, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 6. Add Special Federal Aviation international standards and where Regulation (SFAR) No. 93 to parts 61, appropriate, that they be the basis for 14 CFR Part 63 63, 121, 135, and 142 to read as follows: U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed Airmen. the potential effect of this rulemaking Special Federal Aviation Regulation and has determined that it will not have 14 CFR Part 121 No. 93—Temporary Extension of Time an effect on any trade-sensitive activity. Airmen, Air carriers, Aviation safety. To Allow for Certain Training and Testing Unfunded Mandates Assessment 14 CFR Part 135 1. Applicability. This SFAR applies to The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Aircraft, Aviation safety. all part 121 and 135 check airmen of 1995 (the Act), enacted as Pub. L. 14 CFR Part 142 (simulator) and flight instructors 104–4 on March 22, 1995, is intended, (simulator), part 121 aircraft among other things, to curb the practice Airmen, Schools, Educational dispatchers, and part 142 training center of imposing unfunded Federal mandates facilities. instructors who were required to on State, local, and tribal governments. The Amendment complete qualification requirements, an Title II of the Act requires each Federal inflight line observation program, or agency to prepare a written statement For the reasons stated in the operating familiarization in September assessing the effects of any Federal preamble, the Federal Aviation 2001 to become qualified, or remain mandate in a proposed or final agency Administration amends 14 CFR chapter qualified, to perform their assigned rule that may result in a $100 million or I as follows: duties. It also applies to persons who more expenditure (adjusted annually for PART 61—CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, have satisfactorily accomplished the inflation) in any one year by State, local, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND part 61 aeronautical knowledge test or and tribal governments, in the aggregate, INSTRUCTORS the part 63 written test, either one of or by the private sector; such a mandate which has an expiration date of is deemed to be a ‘‘significant regulatory PART 63—CERTIFICATION: FLIGHT September 2001 for pilot, flight action.’’ CREWMEMBERS OTHER THAN instructor, or flight engineer This final rule does not contain such PILOTS certification. a mandate. Therefore, the requirements 2. Special Qualification of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates PART 121—OPERATING Requirements. The sections of 14 CFR Reform Act of 1995 do not apply. REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG that prescribes these requirements are sections 61.39(a)(1); 63.35(d); 121.411(f); Executive Order 13132, Federalism AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 121.412(f); 121.463(a)(2); 121.463(c); The FAA has analyzed this final rule PART 135—OPERATING 135.337(f); 135.338(f); 142.53(b)(2) and under the principles and criteria of REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND (b)(3). Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 3. Extension of Time to Fulfill Certain determined that this action will not RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON Qualification Requirements. Persons have a substantial direct effect on the BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT identified in paragraph 1 of this SFAR States, or the relationship between the who had until the end of September national Government and the States, or PART 142—TRAINING CENTERS 2001 to complete the specified on the distribution of power and qualification requirements in September responsibilities among the various 1. The authority citation for part 61 2001 will be deemed to have completed levels of government. Therefore, we continues to read as follows: those requirements in September 2001
VerDate 11
provided they satisfactorily complete aircraft dispatcher, or training center 4. Termination Date. This Special those requirements by November 30, instructor, as appropriate. This Federal Aviation Regulation expires 2001. For those persons identified in extension does not change the 12- November 30, 2001. paragraph 1, who are qualifying for the calendar-month requirement for aircraft Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, first time to be a check airmen dispatchers or the anniversary month 2001. (simulator), flight instructor (simulator), for check airmen, flight instructors and aircraft dispatcher, or training center training center instructors. Therefore, if Jane F. Garvey, instructor, they must fulfill the you were due for qualification in Administrator. applicable qualification requirements September 2001 you will be due for [FR Doc. 01–25724 Filed 10–9–01; 4:16 am] before they may serve as a check airmen qualification September 2002, regardless BILLING CODE 4910–13–M (simulator), flight instructor (simulator), of this extension for 2001.
VerDate 11
Part V
Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 10 General Provisions; Revised List of Migratory Birds; Proposed Rule
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in 16 newly covered (the other 25 having U.S.C. 703–711, the Fish and Wildlife previously been covered as subspecies Fish and Wildlife Service Improvement Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. of a listed species). 712, and 16 U.S.C. 742a–j. The MBTA The List of Migratory Birds (50 CFR 50 CFR Part 10 implements treaties between the United 10.13) was last revised on April 5, 1985 RIN 1018–AB72 States and four neighboring countries (50 FR 13710). In a proposed rule for the protection of migratory birds, as published May 9, 1995 (60 FR 24686), General Provisions; Revised List of follows: we suggested adding 20 species, Migratory Birds (1) Canada: Convention for the removing 1 species, and revising the Protection of Migratory Birds, August common (English) or scientific names of AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 16, 1916, United States-Great Britain (on 23 previously listed species to conform Interior. behalf of Canada), 39 Stat. 1702, T.S. with the most recent nomenclature. The ACTION: Proposed rule. No. 628; proposed amendments were a response (2) Mexico: Convention for the to five published supplements to the 6th SUMMARY: We propose to revise the List Protection of Migratory Birds and Game (1983) edition of the American of Migratory Birds by (1) adding 1 Mammals, February 7, 1936, United Ornithologists’ Union’s (AOU’s) Check- species that belongs to a family covered States-United Mexican States (=Mexico), list of North American birds. Knowing by the Canadian and Mexican treaties 50 Stat. 1311, T.S. No. 912; that additional amendments would be and that is now known to occur and (3) Japan: Convention for the necessary following the anticipated breed regularly in the United States; (2) Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds publication of a 7th edition of the adding 2 species covered by the in Danger of Extinction, and Their Check-list, we elected to delay Japanese and Russian treaties that were Environment, March 4, 1972, United publication of a final rule until after the mistakenly omitted from previous lists; States-Japan, 25 U.S.T., 3329 T.I.A.S. appearance of the revised Check-list. (3) adding 1 species of regular No. 7990; and The 1995 proposed rule generated just occurrence in the United States that (4) Russia: Convention for the two public comments, from the now belongs to a protected family as a Conservation of Migratory Birds and American Ornithologists’ Union and the result of a recent taxonomic revision; (4) Their Environment, United States- Association of Scientific Collections. adding 26 newly recognized species; (5) Union of Soviet Socialist Republics The comments of those organizations, removing 1 species that is no longer (=Russia), November 26, 1976, 92 Stat. mostly editorial in nature, are considered valid; (6) changing the 3110, T.I.A.S. 9073, 16 U.S.C. 703–712. incorporated into this document, as English (common) and scientific names appropriate. What Is the Purpose of The Proposed of 78 species to conform with modern Following publication of the 7th Rulemaking? nomenclature; and (7) correcting an edition of the Check-list in July 1998, error in the common (English) name of Our purpose is to inform the public of administrative workloads and staff 1 species. The net result of these the species protected by regulations shortages prevented work on a final rule proposed changes is the addition of 29 designed to enforce the terms of the until September 2000. Because of the 5- species (25 by name only), which will MBTA. These regulations are found in year delay since publication of the bring the total number of protected Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations proposed rule, plus the many new species to 861; only 4 of the 29 (CFR), Parts 10, 20, and 21. We regulate changes necessitated by the 7th edition proposed additions are not currently most aspects of the taking, possession, of the Check-list, we are issuing another covered by the existing list as former transportation, sale, purchase, barter, proposed rule. This will provide the subspecies of a listed species. exportation, and importation of public with an opportunity to review DATES: Comments must be submitted on migratory birds. An accurate and up-to- and comment on all of the desired or before November 13, 2001. date list of species protected by the changes that have come to light since MBTA is essential for regulatory ADDRESSES: Written comments may be publication of the 1995 proposed rule. purposes. mailed to the Chief, Division of What Scientific Authorities Does the Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish Why Is The Proposed Amendment to Service Use To Amend the List of and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax the List of Migratory Birds Necessary? Migratory Birds? Drive, Room 634, Arlington, VA 22203. The proposed amendment is needed Although bird names (common and Alternatively, comments may be e- to (1) add a species that belongs to a scientific) are relatively stable, there is mailed, with Migratory Birds in the protected family and that is now known still a need for standardized usage to subject line, to John L. Trapp to occur and breed regularly in the avoid confusion in communications. We ([email protected]). The complete file United States, (2) add two species follow the Check-list of North American for this rule will be available for public covered by the Japanese and Russian birds (AOU 1998), as amended (AOU inspection during normal business treaties that were mistakenly omitted 1999, 2000), on matters of taxonomy, hours, by appointment, at the above from previous lists, (3) add a species of nomenclature, and the sequence of address. regular occurrence in the United States species and other higher taxonomic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon that now belongs to a protected family categories (orders, families, Andrew, Chief, Division of Migratory as a result of recent taxonomic subfamilies). For the few species that Bird Management, U.S. Fish and revisions, (4) add 26 newly recognized occur outside the geographic area Wildlife Service, telephone: (703) 358– species by name, (5) remove a species covered by the Check-list (AOU 1998, 1714. that is no longer considered valid, (6) 1999, and 2000), we follow Monroe and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: change the common (English) and Sibley (1993). Citations for these scientific names of 78 species to authorities follow: What Statutory Authority Does the conform with modern nomenclature, Service Have for This Rulemaking? American Ornithologists’ Union. 1998. and (7) correct an error in the existing Check-list of North American birds. 7th We have statutory authority and list. Twenty-nine species will be added Edition. American Ornithologists’ Union, responsibility for enforcing the by name, but in fact only four will be Washington, DC. 829 pp.
VerDate 11
American Ornithologists’ Union. 1999. Charadrius morinellus (Eurasian Dotterel) is Gull, Black-tailed, Larus crassirostris Notice from the Committee on listed as Eudromias morinellus (J & R); Classification and Nomenclature. Auk 116: Chen canagica (Emperor Goose) is listed as (3) One species would be added 282–283. Anser canagicus (J), and Philacte canagica because it occurs regularly in the United American Ornithologists’ Union. 2000. Forty- (R); States, and recent taxonomic changes second supplement to the American Chen caerulescens (Snow Goose) is listed as place it in a family (Sylviidae) covered Ornithologists’ Union Check-list of North Anser caerulescens (J); by the Canadian and Mexican treaties: American birds. Auk 117: 847–858. Cygnus columbianus (Tundra Swan) Millerbird, Acrocephalus familiaris Monroe, B. L., Jr., and C. G. Sibley. 1993. A incorporates Cygnus bewickii (R); world checklist of birds. Yale University Egretta sacra (Pacific Reef-Egret) is listed as (4) Twenty-six species would be Press, New Haven, Conn. 393 pp. Demigretta sacra (J); added because of recent taxonomic Fratercula cirrhata (Tufted Puffin) is listed as changes; what was once considered a What Criteria Does the Service Use To Lunda cirrhata (J & R); single species is now recognized by Identify Species Eligible for Protection Gallinago gallinago (Common Snipe) is listed authorities as two or more species. by the MBTA? as Capella gallinago (R); These additions will not change the The treaties with Canada and Mexico Gallinago megala (Swinhoe’s Snipe) is listed protective status of these taxa, only the indicate, by scientific names of families as Capella megala (R); names by which they are known: or groups or by the common (English) Gallinago stenura (Pin-tailed Snipe) is listed as Capella stenura (R); Coot, Hawaiian, Fulica alai (formerly names of species or groups of species, Heterosceles brevipes (Gray-tailed Tattler) is included in Fulica americana, American which birds were intended to be included as part of Tringa incana (J); Coot); covered. We generally do not include Heterosceles incanus (Wandering Tattler) is Flicker, Gilded, Colaptes chrysoides species of purely accidental or casual listed as Tringa incana (J); (formerly included in Colaptes auratus, occurrence in the United States, even if Luscinia calliope (Siberian Rubythroat) is Northern Flicker); they belong to one of the named families listed as Erithacus calliope (J); Flycatcher, Cordilleran, Empidonax or groups. Similarly, we do not list Melanitta fusca (White-winged Scoter) occidentalis (formerly included in incorporates Melanitta deglandi (J); Empidonax difficilis, Western Flycatcher); species whose occurrence in the United Gnatcatcher, California, Polioptila californica States is strictly the result of intentional Mergellus albellus (Smew) is listed as Mergus albellus (J & R); (formerly included in Polioptila melanura, human introduction(s). Milvus migrans (Black Kite) is listed as Black-tailed Gnatcatcher); The Japanese and Russian treaties list Milvus korschun (R); Golden-Plover, Pacific, Pluvialis fulva individual species of birds that are Motacilla lugens (Black-backed Wagtail) is (formerly included in Pluvialis dominica, covered. For 35 of these species, the included as part of Motacilla alba (J & R); Lesser Golden-Plover); scientific (genus or species) name Numenius borealis (Eskimo Curlew) is Grebe, Clark’s, Aechmophorus clarkii currently recognized by scientific included as part of Numenius minutus (J); (formerly included in Aechmophorus authorities (AOU 1998 and 1999, Phalaropus lobatus (Red-necked Phalarope) occidentalis, Western Grebe); Monroe and Sibley 1993) differs from is listed as Lobipes lobatus (R); Kamao, Myadestes myadestinus (formerly Phoebastria albatrus (Short-tailed Albatross) included in Phaeornis obscurus, Hawaiian that which appears in the treaties. The Thrush); following cross-reference provides a is listed as Diomedea albatrus (J & R); Phoebastria immutabilis (Laysan Albatross) Loon, Pacific, Gavia pacifica (formerly linkage between the scientific names is listed as Diomedea immutabilis (J & R); included in Gavia arctica, Arctic Loon); used in this list and those that appear Phoebastria nigripes (Black-footed Albatross) Olomao, Myadestes lanaiensis (formerly in the appendices to the Japanese and is listed as Diomedea nigripes (J & R); included in Phaeornis obscurus, Hawaiian Russian treaties. The first name is the Pterodroma hypoleuca (Bonin Petrel) is listed Thrush); modern equivalent adopted here, and as Pterodroma leucoptera (R); Oriole, Bullock’s, Icterus bullockii (formerly the second name is that which appears Tachycineta bicolor (Tree Swallow) is listed included in Icterus galbula, Northern in one or another of the treaties. These as Iridoprocne bicolor (R); and Oriole); Petrel, White-necked, Pterodroma cervicalis changes do not revise the appendices to Turdus obscurus (Eyebrowed Thrush) is listed as Turdus pallidus (R) (formerly included in Pterodroma externa, either the Japanese or the Russian treaty White-necked Petrel, currently known as (indicated by J or R): How Will the Changes Proposed Here Juan Fernandez Petrel); Accipiter gularis (Japanese Sparrowhawk) is Affect the List of Migratory Birds? Rosy-Finch, Black, Leucosticte atrata listed as Accipiter virgatus (J & R); The proposed amendments address a (formerly included in Leucosticte arctoa, Actitis hypoleucos (Common Sandpiper) is Rosy Finch); grand total of 109 species and would Rosy-Finch, Brown-capped, Leucosticte listed as Tringa hypoleucos (J & R); result in a net addition of 30 species to Aethia psittacula (Parakeet Auklet) is listed australis (formerly included in Leucosticte as Cyclorrhynchus psittacula (R); the List of Migratory Birds, bringing the arctoa, Rosy Finch); Anas americana (American Wigeon) is listed species total to 862. Only four species, Rosy-Finch, Gray-crowned, Leucosticte as Mareca americana (J); though, are not already covered. Under tephrocotis (formerly included in Anas clypeata (Northern Shoveler) is listed these amendments, as proposed: Leucosticte arctoa, Rosy Finch); as Spatula clypeata (J); (1) One species would be added Sapsucker, Red-naped, Sphyrapicus nuchalis Anas penelope (Eurasian Wigeon) is listed as because of recent evidence that it occurs (formerly included in Sphyrapicus varius, Mareca penelope (J); regularly in the United States: Yellow-bellied Sapsucker); Scrub-Jay, Island, Aphelocoma insularis Anthus rubescens (American Pipit) is listed Tanager, Flame-colored, Piranga as Anthus spinoletta (J & R); (formerly included in Aphelocoma Branta bernicla (Brant) incorporates Branta bidentata coerulescens, Scrub Jay); nigricans (R); (2) Two species would be added Scrub-Jay, Western, Aphelocoma californica Calidris alba (Sanderling) is listed as because they are included in the (formerly included in Aphelocoma Crocethia alba (J); Appendix of the Russian treaty and in coerulescens, Scrub Jay); Calidris subminuta (Long-toed Stint) is listed the Annex to the Japanese treaty, Sparrow, Nelson’s Sharp-tailed, as part of Calidris minutilla (J); respectively; the omission of these Ammodramus nelsoni (formerly included in Ammodramus caudacutus, Sharp-tailed Carduelis flammea (Common Redpoll) is species in previous lists is considered listed as Acanthis flammea (J); Sparrow); Carduelis hornemanni (Hoary Redpoll) is an oversight: Thrush, Bicknell’s, Catharus bicknelli included as part of Carduelis flammea (J), Duck, Spot-billed, Anas poecilorhyncha; (formerly included in Catharus minimus, and is listed as Acanthis hornemanni (R); and Gray-cheeked Thrush);
VerDate 11
Titmouse, Juniper, Baeolophus ridgwayi Curlew, Least, will be changed to Curlew, Skua, Great, Catharacta skua, will be (formerly included in Parus inornatus, Little; changed to Stercorarius skua; Plain Titmouse); Duck, Masked, Oxyura dominica, will be Skua, South Polar, Catharacta maccormicki, Towhee, California, Pipilo crissalis (formerly changed to Nomonyx dominica; will be changed to Stercorarius included in Pipilo fuscus, Brown Towhee); Egret, Great, Casmerodius albus, will be maccormicki; changed to Ardea alba; Towhee, Spotted, Pipilo maculatus (formerly Skylark, Eurasian, will be changed to Lark, included in Pipilo erythrophthalmus, Egret, Plumed, Egretta intermedia, will be Sky; Rufous-sided Towhee); changed to Egret, Intermediate, Mesophoyx Vireo, Cassin’s, Vireo cassinii (formerly intermedia; Sparrow, Five-striped, Amphispiza included in Vireo solitarius, Solitary Flycatcher, Olive-sided, Contopus borealis, quinquestriata, will be changed to Vireo); will be changed to Contopus cooperi; Aimophila quinquestriata; Vireo, Plumbeous, Vireo plumbeus (formerly Flycatcher, Western, will be changed to Sparrow, Harris’, will be changed to Sparrow, included in Vireo solitarius, Solitary Flycatcher, Pacific-slope; Harris’s; Vireo); Gannet, Northern, Sula bassanus, will be Sparrow, Sharp-tailed, Ammodramus Vireo, Yellow-green, Vireo flavoviridis changed to Morus bassanus; caudacutus, will be changed to Sparrow, (formerly included in Vireo olivaceus, Red- Golden-Plover, Lesser, will be changed to Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed; eyed Vireo); and Golden-Plover, American; Starling, Ashy, will be changed to Starling, Goose, Hawaiian, Nesochen sandvicensis, Woodpecker, Arizona, Picoides arizonae White-cheeked; (formerly included in Picoides stricklandi, will be changed to Branta sandvicensis; Starling, Violet-backed, will be changed to Strickland’s Woodpecker) Goose, Ross’, will be changed to Goose, Ross’s; Starling, Chestnut-cheeked; (5) One species would be removed Gull, Common Black-headed, will be Storm-Petrel, Sooty, will be changed to because of uncertainty about its changed to Gull, Black-headed; Storm-Petrel, Tristram’s; biological authenticity (but remain Gull, Ross’, will be changed to Gull, Ross’s; Swallow, Cave, Hirundo fulva, will be protected as the Black Rosy-Finch, Gray- Hawk, Asiatic Sparrow, will be changed to changed to Petrochelidon fulva; crowned Rosy-Finch, and Brown- Sparrowhawk, Japanese; Swallow, Cliff, Hirundo pyrrhonota, will be capped Rosy-Finch; see above): Hawk, Gray, Buteo nitidus, will be changed changed to Petrochelidon pyrrhonota; Finch, Rosy, Leucosticte arctoa to Asturina nitida; Swift, Antillean Palm, will be changed to Hawk, Harris’, will be changed to Hawk, (6) The common (English) or scientific Palm-Swift, Antillean; Harris’s; Tanager, Stripe-headed, Spindalis zena, will (genus or species) names of 78 species Hawk-Owl, Northern, will be changed to be changed to Spindalis, Puerto Rican, will be revised to conform with the most Owl, Northern Hawk; recent nomenclature. These revisions Heron, Green-backed, Butorides striatus, will Spindalis portoricensis; Teal, Falcated, will be changed to Duck, will not change the protective status of be changed to Heron, Green, Butorides Falcated; any of these taxa, only the names by virescens; Thrush, Eye-browed, will be changed to which they are known: Heron, Pacific Reef, Egretta sacra, will be changed to Reef-Egret, Pacific; Thrush, Eyebrowed; Albatross, Black-footed, Diomedea nigripes, Hoopoe will be changed to Hoopoe, Eurasian; Thrush, Hawaiian, Phaeornis obscurus, will will be changed to Phoebastria nigripes; Jay, Gray-breasted, will be changed to Jay, be changed to Omao, Myadestes obscurus; Albatross, Laysan, Diomedea immutabilis, Mexican; Thrush, Small Kauai, Phaeornis palmeri, will will be changed to Phoebastria Jay, Scrub, will be changed to Scrub-Jay, be changed to Puaiohi, Myadestes palmeri; immutabilis; Florida; Tit, Siberian, Parus cinctus, will be changed Albatross, Short-tailed, Diomedea albatrus, Kite, American Swallow-tailed, will be to Chickadee, Gray-headed, Poecile cincta; will be changed to Phoebastria albatrus; changed to Kite, Swallow-tailed; Titmouse, Bridled, Parus wollweberi, will be Albatross, Yellow-nosed, Diomedea Kite, Black-shouldered, Elanus caeruleus, chlororhynchos, will be changed to will be changed to Kite, White-tailed, changed to Baeolophus wollweberi; Thalassarche chlororhynchos; Elanus leucurus; Titmouse, Plain, Parus inornatus, will be Auklet, Parakeet, Cyclorrhynchus psittacula, Magpie, Black-billed, Pica pica, will be changed to Titmouse, Oak, Baeolophus will be changed to Aethia psittacula; changed to Pica hudsonia; inornatus; Barn-Owl, Common, will be changed to Owl, Murrelet, Xantus’, will be changed to Titmouse, Tufted, Parus bicolor, will be Barn; Murrelet, Xantus’s; changed to Baeolophus bicolor; Bittern, Chinese, will be changed to Bittern, Night-Heron, Japanese, Nycticorax goisagi, Towhee, Brown, will be changed to Towhee, Yellow; will be changed to Gorsachius goisagi Canyon; Caracara, Crested, Polyborus plancus, will be Night-Heron, Malay, Nycticorax Towhee, Rufous-sided, will be changed to changed to Caracara cheriway (this melanolophus, will be changed to Night- Towhee, Eastern; supersedes the proposed change to Heron, Malayan, Gorsachius Tree-Pipit, Olive, will be changed to Pipit, Caracara plancus); melanolophus; Olive-backed; Chickadee, Black-capped, Parus atricapillus, Night-Heron, Yellow-crowned, Nycticorax will be changed to Poecile atricapilla; violaceus, will be changed to Nyctanassa Vireo, Solitary, will be changed to Vireo, Chickadee, Boreal, Parus hudsonicus, will be violacea; Blue-headed; changed to Poecile hudsonica; Oldsquaw will be changed to Duck, Long- Warbler, Elfin Woods, will be changed to Chickadee, Carolina, Parus carolinensis, will tailed; Warbler, Elfin-woods; and be changed to Poecile carolinensis; Oriole, Black-cowled, will be changed to Woodpecker, Lewis’, will be changed to Chickadee, Chestnut-backed, Parus Oriole, Greater Antillean; Woodpecker, Lewis’s. rufescens, will be changed to Poecile Oriole, Northern, will be changed to Oriole, rufescens; Baltimore; (7) The common (English) name of Chickadee, Mexican, Parus sclateri, will be Petrel, White-necked, Pterodroma externa, one species will be revised to correct a changed to Poecile sclateri; will be changed to Petrel, Juan Fernandez; misspelling: Chickadee, Mountain, Parus gambeli, will be Pipit, Water, Anthus spinoletta, will be changed to Poecile gambeli; changed to Pipit, American, Anthus Redstart, Slaty-throated, will be changed to Cormorant, Olivaceous, Phalacrocorax rubescens; Redstart, Slate-throated. olivaceus, will be changed to Cormorant, Reed-Bunting, Common, will be changed to Neotropic, Phalacrocorax brasilianus; Bunting, Reed; For ease of comparison, the proposed Crow, Mexican, will be changed to Crow, Reed-Bunting, Pallas’, will be changed to changes are summarized in the Tamaulipas; Bunting, Pallas’s; following table:
VerDate 11
Remove Add (alphabetically)
Albatross, Black-footed, Diomedea nigripes ...... Albatross, Black-footed, Phoebastria nigripes. Albatross, Laysan, Diomedea immutabilis ...... Albatross, Laysan, Phoebastria immutabilis. Albatross, Short-tailed, Diomedea albatrus ...... Albatross, Short-tailed, Phoebastria albatrus. Albatross, Yellow-nosed, Diomedea chlororhynchos ...... Albatross, Yellow-nosed, Thalassarche chlororhynchos. Auklet, Parakeet, Cyclorrhynchus psittacula ...... Auklet, Parakeet, Aethia psittacula. Barn-Owl, Common, Tyto alba. Bittern, Chinese, Ixobrychus sinensis ...... Bittern, Yellow, Ixobrychus sinensis. Bunting, Pallas’s, Emberiza pallasi. Bunting, Reed, Emberiza schoeniculus. Caracara, Crested, Polyborus plancus ...... Caracara, Crested, Caracara cheriway. Chickadee, Black-capped, Parus atricapillus ...... Chickadee, Black-capped, Poecile atricapillus. Chickadee, Boreal, Parus hudsonicus ...... Chickadee, Boreal, Poecile hudsonicus. Chickadee, Carolina, Parus carolinensis ...... Chickadee, Carolina, Poecile carolinensis. Chickadee, Chestnut-backed, Parus rufescens ...... Chickadee, Chestnut-backed, Poecile rufescens. Chickadee, Gray-headed, Poecile cincta. Chickadee, Mexican, Parus sclateri ...... Chickadee, Mexican, Poecile sclateri. Chickadee, Mountain, Parus gambeli ...... Chickadee, Mountain, Poecile gambeli. Coot, Hawaiian, Fulica alai. Cormorant, Olivaceous, Phalacrocorax olivaceus ...... Cormorant, Neotropic, Phalacrocorax brasilianus. Crow, Mexican, Corvus imparatus ...... Crow, Tamaulipas, Corvus imparatus. Curlew, Least, Numenius minutus ...... Curlew, Little, Numenius minutus. Duck, Falcated, Anas falcata. Duck, Long-tailed, Clangula hyemalis. Duck, Masked, Oxyura dominica ...... Duck, Masked, Nomonyx dominica. Duck, Spot-billed, Anas poecilorhyncha. Egret, Great, Casmerodius albus ...... Egret, Great, Ardea alba. Egret, Plumed, Egretta intermedia ...... Egret, Intermediate, Mesophoyx intermedia. Finch, Rosy, Leucosticte arctoa. Flicker, Gilded, Colaptes chrysoides. Flycatcher, Cordilleran, Empidonax occidentalis. Flycatcher, Olive-sided, Contopus borealis ...... Flycatcher, Olive-sided, Contopus cooperi. Flycatcher, Western, Empidonax difficilis ...... Flycatcher, Pacific-slope, Empidonax difficilis. Gannet, Northern, Sula bassanus ...... Gannet, Northern, Morus bassanus. Gnatcatcher, California, Polioptila californica. Golden-Plover, Lesser, Pluvialis dominica ...... Golden-Plover, American, Pluvialis dominica. Golden-Plover, Pacific, Pluvialis fulva. Goose, Hawaiian, Nesochen sandvicensis ...... Goose, Hawaiian, Branta sandvicensis. Goose, Ross’, Chen rossii ...... Goose, Ross’s, Chen rossii. Grebe, Clark’s, Aechmophorus clarkii. Gull, Common Black-headed, Larus ridibundus ...... Gull, Black-headed, Larus ridibundus. Gull, Black-tailed, Larus crassirostris. Gull, Ross’, Rhodostethia rosea ...... Gull, Ross’s, Rhodostethia rosea. Hawk, Asiatic Sparrow, Accipiter gularis. Hawk, Gray, Buteo nitidus ...... Hawk, Gray, Asturina nitida. Hawk, Harris’, Parabuteo unicinctus ...... Hawk, Harris’s, Parabuteo unicinctus. Hawk-Owl, Northern, Surnia ulula. Heron, Green-backed, Butorides striatus ...... Heron, Green, Butorides virescens. Heron, Pacific Reef, Egretta sacra. Hoopoe, Upupa epops ...... Hoopoe, Eurasian, Upupa epops. Jay, Gray-breasted, Aphelocoma ultramarina ...... Jay, Mexican, Aphelocoma ultramarina. Jay, Scrub, Aphelocoma coerulescens. Kamao, Myadestes myadestinus. Kite, American Swallow-tailed, Elanoides forficatus ...... Kite, Swallow-tailed, Elanoides forficatus. Kite, Black-shouldered, Elanus caeruleus ...... Kite, White-tailed, Elanus leucurus. Lark, Sky, Alauda arvensis. Loon, Pacific, Gavia pacifica. Magpie, Black-billed, Pica pica ...... Magpie, Black-billed, Pica hudsonia. Millerbird, Acrocephalus familiaris. Murrelet, Xantus’, Synthliboramphus hypoleucus ...... Murrelet, Xantus’s, Synthliboramphus hypoleucus. Night-Heron, Japanese, Nycticorax goisagi ...... Night-Heron, Japanese, Gorsachius goisagi. Night-Heron, Malay, Nycticorax melanolophus ...... Night-Heron, Malayan, Gorsachius melanolophus. Night-Heron, Yellow-crowned, Nycticorax-violaceus ...... Night-Heron, Yellow-crowned, Nyctanassa violacea. Oldsquaw, Clangula hyemalis. Olomao, Myadestes lanaiensis. Omao, Myadestes obscurus. Oriole, Black-cowled, Icterus dominicensis. Oriole, Northern, Icterus galbula ...... Oriole, Baltimore, Icterus galbula. Oriole, Bullock’s, Icterus bullockii. Oriole, Greater Antillean, Icterus dominicensis. Owl, Barn, Tyto alba. Owl, Northern Hawk, Surnia ulula. Palm-Swift, Antillean, Tachornis phoenicobia. Petrel, White-necked, Pterodroma externa ...... Petrel, Juan Fernandez, Pterodroma externa. Petrel, White-necked, Pterodroma cervicalis.
VerDate 11
Remove Add (alphabetically)
Pipit, Water, Anthus spinoletta ...... Pipit, American, Anthus rubescens. Pipit, Olive-backed, Anthus hodgsoni. Puaiohi, Myadestes palmeri. Redstart, Slaty-throated, Myioborus miniatus ...... Redstart, Slate-throated, Myioborus miniatus. Reed-Bunting, Common, Emberiza schoeniculus. Reed-Bunting, Pallas’, Emberiza pallasi. Reef-Egret, Pacific, Egretta sacra. Rosy-Finch, Black, Leucosticte atrata. Rosy-Finch, Brown-capped, Leucosticte australis. Rosy-Finch, Gray-crowned, Leucosticte tephrocotis. Sapsucker, Red-naped, Sphyrapicus nuchalis. Scrub-Jay, Florida, Aphelocoma coerulescens. Scrub-Jay, Island, Aphelocoma insularis. Scrub-Jay, Western, Aphelocoma californica. Skua, Great, Catharacta skua ...... Skua, Great, Stercorarius skua. Skua, South Polar, Catharacta maccormicki ...... Skua, South Polar, Stercorarius maccormicki. Skylark, Eurasian, Alauda arvensis. Sparrow, Five-striped, Amphispiza quinquestriata ...... Sparrow, Five-striped, Aimophila quinquestriata. Sparrow, Harris’, Zonotrichia querula ...... Sparrow, Harris’s, Zonotrichia querula. Sparrow, Nelson’s Sharp-tailed, Ammodramus nelsoni. Sparrow, Sharp-tailed, Ammodramus caudacutus ...... Sparrow, Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed, Ammodramus caudacutus. Sparrowhawk, Japanese, Accipiter gularis. Spindalis, Puerto Rican, Spindalis portoricensis. Starling, Ashy, Sturnus cineraceus ...... Starling, White-cheeked, Sturnus cineraceus. Starling, Violet-backed, Sturnus philippensis ...... Starling, Chestnut-cheeked, Sturnus philippensis. Storm-Petrel, Sooty, Oceanodroma tristrami ...... Storm-Petrel, Tristram’s, Oceanodroma tristrami. Swallow, Cave, Hirundo fulva ...... Swallow, Cave, Petrochelidon fulva. Swallow, Cliff, Hirundo pyrrhonota ...... Swallow, Cliff, Petrochelidon pyrrhonota. Swift, Antillean Palm, Tachornis phoenicobia. Tanager, Stripe-headed, Spindalis zena. Tanager, Flame-colored, Piranga bidentata. Teal, Falcated, Anas falcata. Thrush, Bicknell’s, Catharus bicknelli. Thrush, Eye-browed, Turdus obscurus ...... Thrush, Eyebrowed, Turdus obscurus. Thrush, Hawaiian, Phaeornis obscurus. Thrush, Small Kauai, Phaeornis palmeri. Tit, Siberian, Parus cinctus. Titmouse, Bridled, Parus wollweberi ...... Titmouse, Bridled, Baeolophus wollweberi. Titmouse, Juniper, Baeolophus ridgwayi. Titmouse, Plain, Parus inornatus ...... Titmouse, Oak, Baelophus inornatus. Titmouse, Tufted, Parus bicolor ...... Titmouse, Tufted, Baelophus bicolor. Towhee, California, Pipilo crissalis. Towhee, Brown, Pipilo fuscus ...... Towhee, Canyon, Pipilo fuscus. Towhee, Rufous-sided, Pipilo erythrophthalmus ...... Towhee, Eastern, Pipilo erythrophthalmus. Towhee, Spotted, Pipilo maculatus. Tree-Pipit, Olive, Anthus hodgsoni. Vireo, Solitary, Vireo solitarius ...... Vireo, Blue-headed, Vireo solitarius. Vireo, Cassin’s, Vireo cassinii. Vireo, Plumbeous, Vireo plumbeus. Vireo, Yellow-green, Vireo flavoviridis. Warbler, Elfin Woods, Dendroica angelae ...... Warbler, Elfin-woods, Dendroica angelae. Woodpecker, Arizona, Picoides arizonae. Woodpecker, Lewis’, Melanerpes lewis ...... Woodpecker, Lewis’s, Melanerpes lewis.
How Do the Changes Proposed Here As a result of taxonomic and We also propose to revise the Differ From Those Discussed in the nomenclatural changes incorporated common (English) or scientific names of 1995 Proposed Rule? into the 7th edition of the Check-list of an additional 57 species previously The proposal to add Green Sandpiper North American birds, as amended listed in 50 CFR 10.13. The proposal to (Tringa ochropus) and Oriental Turtle- (AOU 1998, 1999, and 2000), we shorten the English name of the Dove (Streptopelia orientalis) on the propose adding 11 more newly Common Pauraque (Nyctidromus basis of recent distributional records is recognized species (Arizona albicollis) to Pauraque is no longer withdrawn pending additional evidence Woodpecker, Bicknell’s Thrush, necessary due to a name change adopted that they occur regularly in the United Bullock’s Oriole, Cassin’s Vireo, Gilded by the AOU (2000). States. We propose adding the Flame- Flicker, Plumbeous Vireo, Island Scrub- How Is the List of Migratory Birds colored Tanager to the list on the basis Jay, Juniper Titmouse, Nelson’s Sharp- Organized? of recent evidence that it occurs and tailed Sparrow, Spotted Towhee, and breeds regularly in the United States, Western Scrub-Jay). These birds were The species are listed in two formats and because it belongs to a family formerly covered by the MBTA as to suit the needs of different segments (Thraupidae) covered by the Canadian subspecies of other species. of the public: alphabetically in Section and Mexican treaties. 10.13(c)(1) and taxonomically in Section
VerDate 11
10.13(c)(2). In the alphabetical listing, A species is not protected by the accordance with the criteria in species will be listed by common MBTA if it falls into one or more of the Executive Order 12866, this proposed (English) name groups, with the following categories: rule is not a significant regulatory scientific name of each species (1) Species intentionally or action. following the English name. This unintentionally introduced into the This proposed rule is not a major rule format, which is similar to that used in United States, even those that belong to under the terms of 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the modern telephone directories, will be a family or group covered by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Canadian or Mexican treaties. Examples most useful to members of the lay Fairness Act. public. In the taxonomic listing, species include Mute Swan (Cygnus olor), a will be listed in phylogenetic sequence member of the family Anatidae, and The proposed rule does not contain by scientific name, with the English Rock Dove (Columba livia), a member of information collection requirements that name following the scientific name. To the family Columbidae. must be approved by the Office of help clarify species relationships, we (2) Species that may have been Management and Budget under the will also list the higher level taxonomic sighted but are of purely accidental Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 categories of Order, Family, and occurrence in the United States, unless U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Subfamily. This format, which follows either the Japanese or Russian treaty We find and certify, in compliance the sequence adopted by the AOU (both of which list birds by individual with the requirements of the Unfunded (1998), will be most useful to species) specifically includes it. Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. ornithologists and other scientists. Examples include Green Sandpiper and 1502 et seq.), that the proposed rule is Japanese Turtle-Dove. not a significant regulatory action and What Species Are Not Protected by the (3) Members of families or groups not Migratory Bird Treaty Act? will not impose a cost of $100 million specified by the Canadian or Mexican or more in any given year on local or The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service treaties. Examples include species in the State government or private entities. and our predecessors have interpreted families Phasianidae (grouse and As noted above, the proposed rule the MBTA and the underlying treaties as turkeys), Odontophoridae (quail), will not have sufficient federalism applying only to species of natural (but Psittacidae (parrots), Todidae (todies), implications to warrant the preparation not accidental or casual) occurrence in Meliphagidae (honeyeaters), of a Federalism Assessment under North America or United States territory Monarchidae (monarchs), Timaliidae Executive Order 13132. outside North America, and not to non- (wrentits), and Coerebidae native species. One of the reasons for (bananaquits); and the subfamily We have determined that these this is that the MBTA and the treaties Drepanidinae (Hawaiian regulations will meet the applicable are silent regarding the inclusion of honeycreepers). standards provided in sections 3(a) and non-native species and none of the four Does the Proposed Rule Comply With 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 for treaties expressly lists any non-native NEPA? civil justice reform. species. The treaties list only species, This regulation is categorically This rule will not have significant families, or groups of birds containing takings implications for private members native to the United States. excluded from further National Environmental Policy Act requirements property, as defined in Executive Order An example is the fact that the treaty under Part 516 of the Department 12630. A takings implication assessment with Canada, in elaborating on a family Manual, Chapter 2, Appendix 1.10. is not required because migratory birds that is large enough to include species are a Federally managed resource under not native to North America, references Does the Proposed Rule Comply With laws implementing international treaties only those species or groups of species the Endangered Species Act? and are not personal property. that are native to North America. Also, Yes. A number of species appearing Regarding Government-to- this treaty does not list any of the many on the List of Migratory Birds are also Government relationships with Tribes groups of insectivorous birds that are designated as endangered or threatened (59 FR 22951) and Executive Order native only to areas outside North under provisions of the Endangered 13175, the proposed revisions to America; rather, all of the groups of this Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531, et existing regulations are purely type that are listed occur in North seq.; see 50 CFR 17.11). No legal administrative in nature. They will have America. The later treaties also are complications arise from the dual listing no effect on Federally recognized Tribes consistent with this interpretation. The since the two lists are developed under or Tribal trust resources. treaties with Japan and Russia actually separate authorities and for different list the species covered (as opposed to purposes. Public Comments Invited listing families or groups) and all of the species exist naturally in United States What About Other Required We invite interested parties to submit territory. Determinations? written comments, suggestions, or This interpretation is also based on Because the proposed revision to the objections regarding this proposal to one the overall purposes and goals of the List of Migratory Birds will merely re- of the locations identified in the treaties, which are to protect birds from describe the birds already protected by ADDRESSES section above. Following extinction, protect their value as a food Federal treaties with Canada, Japan, review and consideration of the supply, and protect agricultural Mexico, and Russia, we determined that comments, we will issue a final rule on interests and forests from pests this document will not have a these proposed amendments to the List controlled by birds. If the MBTA were significant economic effect on a of Migratory Birds. applied to protect introduced non- substantial number of small entities Author native birds it would likely not further under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 any of these goals. Moreover, it would U.S.C. 601 et seq.). John L. Trapp, U.S. Fish and Wildlife promote competition with native This document has not been reviewed Service, Division of Migratory Bird species for resources needed for by the Office of Management and Management, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, survival. Budget under Executive Order 12866. In Room 634, Arlington, VA 22203.
VerDate 11
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 10 (c)(1) of this section and taxonomically Yellow-headed, Xanthocephalus Exports, Fish, Imports, Law in section (c)(2). Taxonomy and xanthocephalus enforcement, Plants, Transportation, nomenclature follow the 7th (1998) Yellow-shouldered, Agelaius Wildlife. edition of the American Ornithologists’ xanthomus Union’s Check-list of North American BLUEBIRD, Eastern, Sialia sialis Regulation Promulgation birds, as amended. Species not listed Mountain, Sialia currucoides For the reasons discussed in the here, and therefore not protected by the Western, Sialia mexicana preamble, we propose to amend title 50, MBTA, include any species introduced BLUETHROAT, Luscinia svecica chapter I, subchapter B, part 10 of the in the United States or any of its BOBOLINK, Dolichonyx oryzivorus Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: territory by humans, regardless of BOOBY, Blue-footed, Sula nebouxii whether the introduction was Brown, Sula leucogaster PART 10—[PROPOSED] intentional or unintentional. Also Masked, Sula dactylatra generally not listed and thus not Red-footed, Sula sula 1. The authority citation for part 10 protected are species of purely BRAMBLING, Fringilla montifringilla continues to read as follows: accidental or casual occurrence in the BRANT, Branta bernicla Authority: 18 U.S.C. 42; 16 U.S.C. 703– United States or its territory unless it is BUFFLEHEAD, Bucephala albeola 712; 16 U.S.C. 668a–d; 19 U.S.C. 1202; 16 a particular species specifically BULLFINCH, Eurasian, Pyrrhula U.S.C. 1531–1543; 16 U.S.C. 1361–1384, referenced in a treaty. A species of pyrrhula 1401–1407; 16 U.S.C. 742a–742j–l; 16 U.S.C. Puerto Rican, Loxigilla portoricensis 3371–3378. accidental or casual occurrence is one whose the normal range is far enough BUNTING, Indigo, Passerina cyanea 2. Revise Section 10.13 to read as removed from the United States as to Lark, Calamospiza melanocorys follows: make regular occurrence unlikely or Lazuli, Passerina amoena McKay’s, Plectrophenax hyperboreus § 10.13 List of Migratory Birds. ‘‘improbable’’ (The A.O.U. Check-list of North American birds, 6th edition, Painted, Passerina ciris (a) What is the legal authority for this 1983:xxv). Pallas’s, Emberiza pallasi list? The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1) Alphabetical listing. Species are Reed, Emberiza schoeniculus (MBTA) in 16 U.S.C. 703–711, the Fish listed alphabetically by common Rustic, Emberiza rustica and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978, (English) name groups, with the Snow, Plectrophenax nivalis 16 U.S.C. 712, and 16 U.S.C. 742a–j. The scientific name of each species Varied, Passerina versicolor MBTA implements treaties between the following the common name. BUSHTIT, Psaltriparus minimus United States and four neighboring ACCENTOR, Siberian, Prunella CANVASBACK, Aythya valisneria countries for the protection of migratory montanella CARACARA, Crested, Caracara birds, as follows: ALBATROSS, Black-footed, Phoebastria cheriway (1) Canada: Convention for the nigripes CARDINAL, Northern, Cardinalis Protection of Migratory Birds, August Laysan, Phoebastria immutabilis cardinalis 16, 1916, United States-Great Britain (on Short-tailed, Phoebastria albatrus CARIB, Green-throated, Eulampis behalf of Canada), 39 Stat. 1702, T.S. Yellow-nosed, Thalassarche holosericeus No. 628; chlororhynchos CATBIRD, Gray, Dumetella carolinensis (2) Mexico: Convention for the ANHINGA, Anhinga anhinga CHAT, Yellow-breasted, Icteria virens Protection of Migratory Birds and Game ANI, Groove-billed, Crotophaga CHICKADEE, Black-capped, Poecile Mammals, February 7, 1936, United sulcirostris atricapilla States-United Mexican States (=Mexico), Smooth-billed, Crotophaga ani Boreal, Poecile hudsonica 50 Stat. 1311, T.S. No. 912; AUKLET, Cassin’s, Ptychoramphus Carolina, Poecile carolinensis (3) Japan: Convention for the aleuticus Chestnut-backed, Poecile rufescens Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds Crested, Aethia cristatella Gray-headed, Poecile cincta in Danger of Extinction, and Their Least, Aethia pusilla Mexican, Poecile sclateri Environment, March 4, 1972, United Parakeet, Aethia psittacula Mountain, Poecile gambeli States-Japan, 25 U.S.T., 3329 T.I.A.S. Rhinoceros, Cerorhinca monocerata CHUCK-WILL’S-WIDOW, Caprimulgus No. 7990; and Whiskered, Aethia pygmaea carolinensis (4) Russia: Convention for the AVOCET, American, Recurvirostra CONDOR, California, Gymnogyps Conservation of Migratory Birds and americana californianus Their Environment, United States- BEARDLESS-TYRANNULET, Northern, COOT, American, Fulica americana Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Camptostoma imberbe Caribbean, Fulica caribaea (=Russia), November 26, 1976, 92 Stat. BECARD, Rose-throated, Pachyramphus Eurasian, Fulica atra 3110, T.I.A.S. 9073, 16 U.S.C. 703, 712. aglaiae Hawaiian, Fulica alai (b) What is the purpose of this list? BITTERN, American, Botaurus CORMORANT, Brandt’s, Phalacrocorax The purpose is to inform the public of lentiginosus penicillatus the species protected by regulations Least, Ixobrychus exilis Double-crested, Phalacrocorax auritus designed to enforce the terms of the Schrenk’s, Ixobrychus eurhythmus Great, Phalacrocorax carbo MBTA. These regulations are found in Yellow, Ixobrychus sinensis Neotropic, Phalacrocorax brasilianus Parts 10, 20, and 21 of this Chapter. We BLACK-HAWK, Common, Buteogallus Pelagic, Phalacrocorax pelagicus regulate most aspects of the taking, anthracinus Red-faced, Phalacrocorax urile possession, transportation, sale, BLACKBIRD, Brewer’s, Euphagus COWBIRD, Bronzed, Molothrus aeneus purchase, barter, exportation, and cyanocephalus Brown-headed, Molothrus ater importation of migratory birds. Red-winged, Agelaius phoeniceus Shiny, Molothrus bonariensis (c) What species are protected as Rusty, Euphagus carolinus CRAKE, Corn, Crex crex migratory birds? The species are listed Tawny-shouldered, Agelaius Yellow-breasted, Porzana flaviventer in two formats to suit the varying needs humeralis CRANE, Common, Grus grus of the user: alphabetically in paragraph Tricolored, Agelaius tricolor Sandhill, Grus canadensis
VerDate 11
Whooping, Grus americana FALCON, Aplomado, Falco femoralis Emperor, Chen canagica CREEPER, Brown, Certhia americana Peregrine, Falco peregrinus Greater White-fronted, Anser albifrons CROSSBILL, Red, Loxia curvirostra Prairie, Falco mexicanus Hawaiian, Branta sandvicensis White-winged, Loxia leucoptera FIELDFARE, Turdus pilaris Ross’s, Chen rossii CROW, American, Corvus FINCH, Cassin’s, Carpodacus cassinii Snow, Chen caerulescens brachyrhynchos House, Carpodacus mexicanus GOSHAWK, Northern, Accipiter gentilis Fish, Corvus ossifragus Purple, Carpodacus purpureus GRACKLE, Boat-tailed, Quiscalus major Hawaiian, Corvus hawaiiensis FLAMINGO, Greater, Phoenicopterus Common, Quiscalus quiscula Northwestern, Corvus caurinus ruber Great-tailed, Quiscalus mexicanus Tamaulipas, Corvus imparatus FLICKER, Gilded, Colaptes chrysoides Greater Antillean, Quiscalus niger White-necked, Corvus Northern, Colaptes auratus GRASSHOPPER-WARBLER, leucognaphalus FLYCATCHER, Acadian, Empidonax Middendorff’s, Locustella CUCKOO, Black-billed, Coccyzus virescens ochotensis erythropthalmus Alder, Empidonax alnorum GRASSQUIT, Black-faced, Tiaris bicolor Common, Cuculus canorus Ash-throated, Myiarchus cinerascens Yellow-faced, Tiaris olivacea Mangrove, Coccyzus minor Brown-crested, Myiarchus tyrannulus GREBE, Clark’s, Aechmophorus clarkii Oriental, Cuculus saturatus Buff-breasted, Empidonax fulvifrons Eared, Podiceps nigricollis Yellow-billed, Coccyzus americanus Cordilleran, Empidonax occidentalis Horned, Podiceps auritus CURLEW, Bristle-thighed, Numenius Dusky, Empidonax oberholseri Least, Tachybaptus dominicus tahitiensis Dusky-capped, Myiarchus tuberculifer Pied-billed, Podilymbus podiceps Eskimo, Numenius borealis Fork-tailed, Tyrannus savana Red-necked, Podiceps grisegena Far Eastern, Numenius Gray, Empidonax wrightii Western, Aechmophorus occidentallis madagascariensis Gray-spotted, Muscicapa griseisticta GREENFINCH, Oriental, Carduelis Little, Numenius minutus Great Crested, Myiarchus crinitus sinica Long-billed, Numenius americanus Hammond’s, Empidonax hammondii GREENSHANK, Common, Tringa DICKCISSEL, Spiza americana Least, Empidonax minimus nebularia DIPPER, American, Cinclus mexicanus Narcissus, Muscicapa narcissina GROSBEAK, Black-headed, Pheucticus DOTTEREL, Eurasian, Charadrius Nutting’s, Myiarchus nuttingi melanocephalus morinellus Olive-sided, Contopus cooperi Blue, Guiraca caerulea DOVE, Inca, Columbina inca Pacific-slope, Empidonax difficilis Crimson-collared, Rhodothraupis Mourning, Zenaida macroura Puerto Rican, Myiarchus antillarum celaeno White-tipped, Leptotila verreauxi Scissor-tailed, Tyrannus forficatus Evening, Coccothraustes vespertinus White-winged, Zenaida asiatica Sulphur-bellied, Myiodynastes Pine, Pinicola enucleator Zenaida, Zenaida aurita luteiventris Rose-breasted, Pheucticus DOVEKIE, Alle alle Vermilion, Pyrocephalus rubinus ludovicianus DOWITCHER, Long-billed, Willow, Empidonax traillii Yellow, Pheucticus chrysopeplus Limnodromus scolopaceus Yellow-bellied, Empidonax GROUND-DOVE, Common, Columbina Short-billed, Limnodromus griseus flaviventris passerina DUCK, American Black, Anas rubripes FRIGATEBIRD, Great, Fregata minor Ruddy, Columbina talpacoti Falcated, Anas falcata Lesser, Fregata ariel GUILLEMOT, Black, Cepphus grylle Harlequin, Histrionicus histrionicus Magnificent, Fregata magnificens Pigeon, Cepphus columba Hawaiian, Anas wyvilliana FULMAR, Northern, Fulmarus glacialis GULL, Black-headed, Larus ridibundus Laysan, Anas laysanensis Black-tailed, Larus crassirostris GADWALL, Anas strepera Long-tailed, Clangula hyemalis Bonaparte’s, Larus philadelphia GALLINULE, Purple, Porphyrula Masked, Nomonyx dominica California, Larus californicus martinica Mottled, Anas fulvigula Franklin’s, Larus pipixcan Ring-necked, Aythya collaris GANNET, Northern, Morus bassanus Glaucous, Larus hyperboreus Ruddy, Oxyura jamaicensis GARGANEY, Anas querquedula Glaucous-winged, Larus glaucescens Spot-billed, Anas poecilorhyncha GNATCATCHER, Black-capped, Great Black-backed, Larus marinus Tufted, Aythya fuligula Polioptila nigriceps Heermann’s, Larus heermanni Wood, Aix sponsa Black-tailed, Polioptila melanura Herring, Larus argentatus DUNLIN, Calidris alpina Blue-gray, Polioptila caerulea Iceland, Larus glaucoides EAGLE, Bald, Haliaeetus leucocephalus California, Polioptila californica Ivory, Pagophila eburnea Golden, Aquila chrysaetos GODWIT, Bar-tailed, Limosa lapponica Laughing, Larus atricilla White-tailed, Haliaeetus albicilla Black-tailed, Limosa limosa Lesser Black-headed, Larus fuscus EGRET, Cattle, Bubulcus ibis Hudsonian, Limosa haemastica Little, Larus minutus Chinese, Egretta eulophotes Marbled, Limosa fedoa Mew, Larus canus Great, Ardea alba GOLDEN-PLOVER, American, Pluvialis Ring-billed, Larus delawarensis Intermediate, Mesophoyx intermedia dominica Ross’s, Rhodostethia rosea Reddish, Egretta rufescens Pacific, Pluvialis fulva Sabine’s, Xema sabini Snowy, Egretta thula GOLDENEYE, Barrow’s, Bucephala Slaty-backed, Larus schistisagus EIDER, Common, Somateria mollissima islandica Thayer’s, Larus thayeri King, Somateria spectabilis Common, Bucephala clangula Western, Larus occidentalis Spectacled, Somateria fischeri GOLDFINCH, American, Carduelis Yellow-footed, Larus livens Steller’s, Polysticta stelleri tristis GYRFALCON, Falco rusticolus ELAENIA, Caribbean, Elaenia martinica Lawrence’s, Carduelis lawrencei HARRIER, Northern, Circus cyaneus EMERALD, Puerto Rican, Chlorostilbon Lesser, Carduelis psaltria HAWFINCH, Coccothraustes maugaeus GOOSE, Barnacle, Branta leucopsis coccothraustes EUPHONIA, Antillean, Euphonia Bean, Anser fabalis HAWK, Broad-winged, Buteo musica Canada, Branta canadensis platypterus
VerDate 11
Cooper’s, Accipiter cooperii Loggerhead, Tyrannus caudifasciatus Marbled, Brachyramphus marmoratus Ferruginous, Buteo regalis Thick-billed, Tyrannus crassirostris Xantus’s, Synthliboramphus Gray, Asturina nitidus Tropical, Tyrannus melancholicus hypoleucus Harris’s, Parabuteo unicinctus Western, Tyrannus verticalis NEEDLETAIL, White-throated, Hawaiian, Buteo solitarius KINGFISHER, Belted, Ceryle alcyon Hirundapus caudacutus Red-shouldered, Buteo lineatus Green, Chloroceryle americana NIGHT-HERON, Black-crowned, Red-tailed, Buteo jamaicensis Ringed, Ceryle torquata Nycticorax nycticorax Rough-legged, Buteo lagopus KINGLET, Golden-crowned, Regulus Japanese, Gorsachius goisagi Sharp-shinned, Accipiter striatus satrapa Malayan, Gorsachius melanolophus Short-tailed, Buteo brachyurus Ruby-crowned, Regulus calendula Yellow-crowned, Nyctanassa violacea Swainson’s, Buteo swainsoni KISKADEE, Great, Pitangus sulphuratus NIGHTHAWK, Antillean, Chordeiles White-tailed, Buteo albicaudatus KITE, Black, Milvus migrans gundlachii Zone-tailed, Buteo albonotatus Hook-billed, Chondrohierax Common, Chordeiles minor HAWK-CUCKOO, Hodgson’s, Cuculus uncinatus Lesser, Chordeiles acutipennis fugax Mississippi, Ictinia mississippiensis NIGHTJAR, Buff-collared, Caprimulgus HERON, Great Blue, Ardea herodias Snail, Rostrhamus sociabilis ridgwayi Green, Butorides virescens Swallow-tailed, Elanoides forficatus Puerto Rican, Caprimulgus Little Blue, Egretta caerulea White-tailed, Elanus leucurus noctitherus Tricolored, Egretta tricolor KITTIWAKE, Black-legged, Rissa Jungle, Caprimulgus indicus HOOPOE, Eurasian, Upupa epops tridactyla NODDY, Black, Anous minutus HOUSE-MARTIN, Common, Delichon Red-legged, Rissa brevirostris Blue-gray, Procelsterna cerulea urbica KNOT, Great, Calidris tenuirostris Brown, Anous stolidus HUMMINGBIRD, Allen’s, Selasphorus Red, Calidris canutus Lesser, Anous tenuirostris sasin LAPWING, Northern, Vanellus vanellus NUTCRACKER, Clark’s, Nucifraga Anna’s, Calypte anna LARK, Horned, Eremophila alpestris columbiana Antillean Crested, Orthorhynchus Sky, Alauda arvensis NUTHATCH, Brown-headed, Sitta cristatus LIMPKIN, Aramus guarauna pusilla Berylline, Amazilia beryllina LIZARD-CUCKOO, Puerto Rican, Pygmy, Sitta pygmaea Black-chinned, Archilochus alexandri Saurothera vieilloti Red-breasted, Sitta canadensis Blue-throated, Lampornis clemenciae LONGSPUR, Chestnut-collared, White-breasted, Sitta carolinensis Broad-billed, Cynanthus latirostris Calcarius ornatus OLOMAO, Myadestes lanaiensis Broad-tailed, Selasphorus platycercus Lapland, Calcarius lapponicus OMAO, Myadestes obscurus Buff-bellied, Amazilia yucatanensis McCown’s, Calcarius mccownii ORIOLE, Altamira, Icterus gularis Calliope, Stellula calliope Smith’s, Calcarius pictus Audubon’s, Icterus graduacauda Costa’s, Calypte costae LOON, Arctic, Gavia arctica Baltimore, Icterus galbula Lucifer, Calothorax lucifer Common, Gavia immer Black-vented, Icterus wagleri Magnificent, Eugenes fulgens Pacific, Gavia pacifica Bullock’s, Icterus bullockii Ruby-throated, Archilochus colubris Red-throated, Gavia stellata Greater Antillean, Icterus Rufous, Selasphorus rufus Yellow-billed, Gavia adamsii dominicensis Violet-crowned, Amazilia violiceps MAGPIE, Black-billed, Pica hudsonia Hooded, Icterus cucullatus White-eared, Hylocharis leucotis Yellow-billed, Pica nuttalli Orchard, Icterus spurius IBIS, Glossy, Plegadis falcinellus MALLARD, Anas platyrhynchos Scott’s, Icterus parisorum Scarlet, Eudocimus ruber MANGO, Antillean, Anthracothorax Streak-backed, Icterus pustulatus White, Eudocimus albus dominicus OSPREY, Pandion haliaetus White-faced, Plegadis chihi Green, Anthracothorax viridis OVENBIRD, Seiurus aurocapillus JABIRU, Jabiru mycteria MARTIN, Caribbean, Progne OWL, Barn, Tyto alba JACANA, Northern, Jacana spinosa dominicensis Barred, Strix varia JAEGER, Long-tailed, Stercorarius Cuban, Progne cryptoleuca Boreal, Aegolius funereus longicaudus Gray-breasted, Progne chalybea Burrowing, Athene cunicularia Parasitic, Stercorarius parasiticus Purple, Progne subis Elf, Micrathene whitneyi Pomarine, Stercorarius pomarinus MEADOWLARK, Eastern, Sturnella Flammulated, Otus flammeolus JAY, Blue, Cyanocitta cristata magna Great Gray, Strix nebulosa Brown, Cyanocorax morio Western, Sturnella neglecta Great Horned, Bubo virginianus Gray, Perisoreus canadensis MERGANSER, Common, Mergus Long-eared, Asio otus Green, Cyanocorax yncas merganser Northern Hawk, Surnia ulula Mexican, Aphelocoma ultramarina Hooded, Lophodytes cucullatus Northern Saw-whet, Aegolius Pinyon, Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus Red-breasted, Mergus serrator acadicus Steller’s, Cyanocitta stelleri MERLIN, Falco columbarius Short-eared, Asio flammeus JUNCO, Dark-eyed, Junco hyemalis MILLERBIRD, Acrocephalus familiaris Snowy, Nyctea scandiaca Yellow-eyed, Junco phaeonotus MOCKINGBIRD, Northern, Mimus Spotted, Strix occidentalis KAMAO, Myadestes myadestinus polyglottos OYSTERCATCHER, American, KESTREL, American, Falco sparverius MOORHEN, Common, Gallinula Haematopus palliatus Eurasian, Falco tinnunculus chloropus Black, Haematopus bachmani KILLDEER, Charadrius vociferus MURRE, Common, Uria aalge PALM-SWIFT, Antillean, Tachornis KINGBIRD, Cassin’s, Tyrannus Thick-billed, Uria lomvia phoenicobia vociferans MURRELET, Ancient, PARULA, Northern, Parula americana Couch’s, Tyrannus couchii Synthliboramphus antiquus Tropical, Parula pitiayumi Eastern, Tyrannus tyrannus Craveri’s, Synthliboramphus craveri PAURAQUE, Common, Nyctidromus Gray, Tyrannus dominicensis Kittlitz’s, Brachyramphus brevirostris albicollis
VerDate 11
PELICAN, American White, Pelecanus King, Rallus elegans SEA-EAGLE, Steller’s, Haliaeetus erythrorhynchos Virginia, Rallus limicola pelagicus Brown, Pelecanus occidentalis Yellow, Coturnicops noveboracensis SEEDEATER, White-collared, PETREL, Black-capped, Pterodroma RAVEN, Chihuahuan, Corvus Sporophila torqueola hasitata cryptoleucus SHEARWATER, Audubon’s, Puffinus Bonin, Pterodroma hypoleuca Common, Corvus corax lherminieri Bulwer’s, Bulweria bulwerii RAZORBILL, Alca torda Black-vented, Puffinus opisthomelas Cook’s, Pterodroma cookii REDHEAD, Aythya americana Buller’s, Puffinus bulleri Dark-rumped, Pterodroma phaeopygia REDPOLL, Common, Carduelis flammea Christmas, Puffinus nativitatis Herald, Pterodroma arminjoniana Hoary, Carduelis hornemanni Cory’s, Calonectris diomedea Juan Fernandez, Pterodroma externa REDSHANK, Spotted, Tringa erythropus Flesh-footed, Puffinus carneipes Kermadec, Pterodroma neglecta REDSTART, American, Setophaga Greater, Puffinus gravis Mottled, Pterodroma inexpectata ruticilla Little, Puffinus assimilis Murphy’s, Pterodroma ultima Painted, Myioborus pictus Manx, Puffinus puffinus White-necked, Pterodroma cervicalis Slate-throated, Myioborus miniatus Pink-footed, Puffinus creatopus PEWEE, Greater, Contopus pertinax REEF-EGRET, Pacific, Egretta sacra Short-tailed, Puffinus tenuirostris Lesser Antillean, Contopus latirostris ROADRUNNER, Greater, Geococcyx Sooty, Puffinus griseus PHAINOPEPLA, Phainopepla nitens californianus Townsend’s, Puffinus auricularis PHALAROPE, Red, Phalaropus fulicaria ROBIN, American, Turdus migratorius Wedge-tailed, Puffinus pacificus Red-necked, Phalaropus lobatus Clay-colored, Turdus grayi SHOVELER, Northern, Anas clypeata Wilson’s, Phalaropus tricolor Rufous-backed, Turdus rufopalliatus SHRIKE, Loggerhead, Lanius PHOEBE, Black, Sayornis nigricans ROSEFINCH, Common, Carpodacus ludovicianus Eastern, Sayornis phoebe erythrinus Northern, Lanius excubitor Say’s, Sayornis saya ROSY-FINCH, Black, Leucosticte atrata SISKIN, Pine, Carduelis pinus PIGEON, Band-tailed, Columba fasciata Brown-capped, Leucosticte australis SKIMMER, Black, Rhynchops niger Plain, Columba inornata Gray-crowned, Leucosticte tephrocotis SKUA, Great, Stercorarius skua Red-billed, Columba flavirostris RUBYTHROAT, Siberian, Luscinia South Polar, Stercorarius Scaly-naped, Columba squamosa calliope maccormicki White-crowned, Columba RUFF, Philomachus pugnax SMEW, Mergellus albellus leucocephala SANDERLING, Calidris alba SNIPE, Common, Gallinago gallinago PINTAIL, Northern, Anas acuta SANDPIPER, Baird’s, Calidris bairdii Jack, Lymnocryptes minimus White-cheeked, Anas bahamensis Broad-billed, Limicola falcinellus Pin-tailed, Gallinago stenura PIPIT, American, Anthus rubescens Buff-breasted, Tryngites subruficollis Swinhoe’s, Gallinago megala Olive-backed, Anthus hodgsoni Common, Actitis hypoleucos SOLITAIRE, Townsend’s, Myadestes Pechora, Anthus gustavi Curlew, Calidris ferruginea townsendi Red-throated, Anthus cervinus Least, Calidris minutilla SORA, Porzana carolina Sprague’s, Anthus spragueii Marsh, Tringa stagnatilis SPARROW, American Tree, Spizella PLOVER, Black-bellied, Pluvialis Pectoral, Calidris melanotos arborea squatarola Purple, Calidris maritima Bachman’s, Aimophila aestivalis Common Ringed, Charadrius Rock, Calidris ptilocnemis Baird’s, Ammodramus bairdii hiaticula Semipalmated, Calidris pusilla Black-chinned, Spizella atrogularis Greater Sand, Charadrius Sharp-tailed, Calidris acuminata Black-throated, Amphispiza bilineata leschenaultii Solitary, Tringa solitaria Botteri’s, Aimophila botterii Little Ringed, Charadrius dubius Spoonbill, Eurynorhynchus pygmeus Brewer’s, Spizella breweri Mongolian, Charadrius mongolus Spotted, Actitis macularia Cassin’s, Aimophila cassinii Mountain, Charadrius montanus Stilt, Calidris himantopus Chipping, Spizella passerina Piping, Charadrius melodus Terek, Xenus cinereus Clay-colored, Spizella pallida Semipalmated, Charadrius Upland, Bartramia longicauda Field, Spizella pusilla semipalmatus Western, Calidris mauri Five-striped, Aimophila Snowy, Charadrius alexandrinus White-rumped, Calidris fuscicollis quinquestriata Wilson’s, Charadrius wilsonia Wood, Tringa glareola Fox, Passerella iliaca POCHARD, Baer’s, Aythya baeri SAPSUCKER, Red-breasted, Golden-crowned, Zonotrichia Common, Aythya ferina Sphyrapicus ruber atricapilla POORWILL, Common, Phalaenoptilus Red-naped, Sphyrapicus nuchalis Grasshopper, Ammodramus nuttallii Williamson’s, Sphyrapicus thyroideus savannarum PUAIOHI, Myadestes palmeri Yellow-bellied, Sphyrapicus varius Harris’s, Zonotrichia querula PUFFIN, Atlantic, Fratercula arctica SCAUP, Greater, Aythya marila Henslow’s, Ammodramus henslowii Horned, Fratercula corniculata Lesser, Aythya affinis Lark, Chondestes grammacus Tufted, Fratercula cirrhata SCOTER, Black, Melanitta nigra Le Conte’s, Ammodramus leconteii PYGMY-OWL, Ferruginous, Glaucidium Surf, Melanitta perspicillata Lincoln’s, Melospiza lincolnii brasilianum White-winged, Melanitta fusca Nelson’s Sharp-tailed, Ammodramus Northern, Glaucidium gnoma SCREECH-OWL, Eastern, Otus asio nelsoni PYRRHULOXIA, Cardinalis sinuatus Puerto Rican, Otus nudipes Olive, Arremonops rufivirgatus QUAIL-DOVE, Bridled, Geotrygon Western, Otus kennicottii Rufous-crowned, Aimophila ruficeps mystacea Whiskered, Otus trichopsis Rufous-winged, Aimophila carpalis Key West, Geotrygon chrysia SCRUB-JAY, Florida, Aphelocoma Sage, Amphispiza belli Ruddy, Geotrygon montana coerulescens Savannah, Passerculus sandwichensis RAIL, Black, Laterallus jamaicensis Island, Aphelocoma insularis Seaside, Ammodramus maritimus Clapper, Rallus longirostris Western, Aphelocoma californica Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed,
VerDate 11
Ammodramus caudacutus Cinnamon, Anas cyanoptera Blue-headed, Vireo solitarius Song, Melospiza melodia Green-winged, Anas crecca Cassin’s, Vireo cassinii Swamp, Melospiza georgiana TERN, Aleutian, Sterna aleutica Gray, Vireo vicinior Vesper, Pooecetes gramineus Arctic, Sterna paradisaea Hutton’s, Vireo huttoni White-crowned, Zonotrichia Black, Chlidonias niger Philadelphia, Vireo philadelphicus leucophrys Black-naped, Sterna sumatrana Plumbeous, Vireo plumbeus White-throated, Zonotrichia albicollis Bridled, Sterna anaethetus Puerto Rican, Vireo latimeri Worthen’s, Spizella wortheni Caspian, Sterna caspia Red-eyed, Vireo olivaceus SPARROWHAWK, Japanese, Accipiter Common, Sterna hirundo Warbling, Vireo gilvus gularis Elegant, Sterna elegans White-eyed, Vireo griseus SPINDALIS, Puerto Rican, Spindalis Forster’s, Sterna forsteri Yellow-green, Vireo flavoviridis portoricensis Gray-backed, Sterna lunata Yellow-throated, Vireo flavifrons SPOONBILL, Roseate, Ajaia ajaja Gull-billed, Sterna nilotica VULTURE, Black, Coragyps atratus STARLING, Chestnut-cheeked, Sturnus Least, Sterna antillarum Turkey, Cathartes aura philippensis Little, Sterna albifrons WAGTAIL, Black-backed, Motacilla White-cheeked, Sturnus cineraceus Roseate, Sterna dougallii lugens STARTHROAT, Plain-capped, Royal, Sterna maxima Gray, Motacilla cinerea Heliomaster constantii Sandwich, Sterna sandvicensis White, Motacilla alba STILT, Black-necked, Himantopus Sooty, Sterna fuscata Yellow, Motacilla flava mexicanus White, Gygis alba WARBLER, Adelaide’s, Dendroica STINT, Little, Calidris minuta White-winged, Chlidonias adelaidae Long-toed, Calidris subminuta leucopterus Arctic, Phylloscopus borealis Red-necked, Calidris ruficollis THRASHER, Bendire’s, Toxostoma Bachman’s, Vermivora bachmanii Temminck’s, Calidris temminckii bendirei Bay-breasted, Dendroica castanea STORK, Wood, Mycteria americana Brown, Toxostoma rufum Black-and-white, Mniotilta varia STORM-PETREL, Ashy, Oceanodroma California, Toxostoma redivivum Black-throated Blue, Dendroica homochroa Crissal, Toxostoma crissale caerulescens Band-rumped, Oceanodroma castro Curve-billed, Toxostoma curvirostre Black-throated Gray, Dendroica Black, Oceanodroma melania Le Conte’s, Toxostoma lecontei nigrescens Fork-tailed, Oceanodroma furcata Long-billed, Toxostoma longirostre Black-throated Green, Dendroica Leach’s, Oceanodroma leucorhoa Pearly-eyed, Margarops fuscatus virens Least, Oceanodroma microsoma Sage, Oreoscoptes montanus Blackburnian, Dendroica fusca Tristram’s, Oceanodroma tristrami THRUSH, Aztec, Ridgwayia pinicola Blackpoll, Dendroica striata Wedge-rumped, Oceanodroma tethys Bicknell’s, Catharus bicknelli Blue-winged, Vermivora pinus White-faced, Pelagodroma marina Blue Rock, Monticola solitarius Canada, Wilsonia canadensis Wilson’s, Oceanites oceanicus Dusky, Turdus naumanni Cape May, Dendroica tigrina SURFBIRD, Aphriza virgata Eyebrowed, Turdus obscurus Cerulean, Dendroica cerulea SWALLOW, Bahama, Tachycineta Gray-cheeked, Catharus minimus Chestnut-sided, Dendroica cyaneoviridis Hermit, Catharus guttatus pensylvanica Bank, Riparia riparia Red-legged, Turdus plumbeus Colima, Vermivora crissalis Barn, Hirundo rustica Swainson’s, Catharus ustulatus Connecticut, Oporornis agilis Cave, Petrochelidon fulva Varied, Ixoreus naevius Elfin-woods, Dendroica angelae Cliff, Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Wood, Hylocichla mustelina Golden-cheeked, Dendroica Northern Rough-winged, TITMOUSE, Bridled, Baeolophus chrysoparia Stelgidopteryx serripennis wollweberi Golden-crowned, Basileuterus Tree, Tachycineta bicolor Juniper, Baeolophus ridgwayi culicivorus Violet-green, Tachycineta thalassina Oak, Baeolophus inornatus Golden-winged, Vermivora SWAN, Trumpeter, Cygnus buccinator Tufted, Baeolophus bicolor chrysoptera Tundra, Cygnus columbianus TOWHEE, Abert’s, Pipilo aberti Grace’s, Dendroica graciae Whooper, Cygnus cygnus California, Pipilo crissalis Hermit, Dendroica occidentalis SWIFT, Black, Crypseloides niger Canyon, Pipilo fuscus Hooded, Wilsonia citrina Chimney, Chaetura pelagica Eastern, Pipilo erythrophthalmus Kentucky, Oporornis formosus Common, Apus apus Green-tailed, Pipilo chlorurus Kirtland’s, Dendroica kirtlandii Fork-tailed, Apus pacificus Spotted, Pipilo maculatus Lucy’s, Vermivora luciae Vaux’s, Chaetura vauxi TROGON, Eared, Euptilotus neoxenus MacGillivray’s, Oporornis tolmiei White-collared, Streptoprocne zonaris Elegant, Trogon elegans Magnolia, Dendroica magnolia White-throated, Aeronautes saxatalis TROPICBIRD, Red-billed, Phaethon Mourning, Oporornis philadelphia TANAGER, Flame-colored, Piranga aethereus Nashville, Vermivora ruficapilla bidentata Red-tailed, Phaethon rubricauda Olive, Peucedramus taeniatus Hepatic, Piranga flava White-tailed, Phaethon lepturus Orange-crowned, Vermivora celata Puerto Rican, Neospingus speculiferus TURNSTONE, Black, Arenaria Palm, Dendroica palmarum Scarlet, Piranga olivacea melanocephala Pine, Dendroica pinus Summer, Piranga rubra Ruddy, Arenaria interpres Prairie, Dendroica discolor Western, Piranga ludoviciana VEERY, Catharus fuscescens Prothonotary, Protonotaria citrea TATTLER, Gray-tailed, Heteroscelus VERDIN, Auriparus flaviceps Red-faced, Cardellina rubrifrons brevipes VIOLET-EAR, Green, Colibri thalassinus Rufous-capped, Basileuterus rufifrons Wandering, Heteroscelus incanus VIREO, Bell’s, Vireo bellii Swainson’s, Limnothlypis swainsonii TEAL, Baikal, Anas formosa Black-capped, Vireo atricapillus Tennessee, Vermivora peregrina Blue-winged, Anas discors Black-whiskered, Vireo altiloquus Townsend’s, Dendroica townsendi
VerDate 11
Virginia’s, Vermivora virginiae YELLOWTHROAT, Common, Puffinus bulleri, Buller’s Shearwater Willow, Phylloscopus trochilus Geothlypis trichas Puffinus griseus, Sooty Shearwater Wilson’s, Wilsonia pusilla Gray-crowned, Geothlypis Puffinus tenuirostris, Short-tailed Worm-eating, Helmitheros vermivorus poliocephala Shearwater Yellow, Dendroica petechia (2) Taxonomic listing. Species are Puffinus nativitatis, Christmas Yellow-rumped, Dendroica coronata listed in phylogenetic sequence by Shearwater Yellow-throated, Dendroica dominica scientific name, with the common Puffinus puffinus, Manx Shearwater WATERTHRUSH, Louisiana, Seiurus (English) name following the scientific Puffinus auricularis, Townsend’s motacilla name. To help clarify species Shearwater Northern, Seiurus noveboracensis relationships, we also list the higher- Puffinus opisthomelas, Black-vented WAXWING, Bohemian, Bombycilla level taxonomic categories of Order, Shearwater garrulus Family, and Subfamily. Puffinus lherminieri, Audubon’s Cedar, Bombycilla cedrorum Shearwater Order GAVIIFORMES WHEATEAR, Northern, Oenanthe Puffinus assimilis, Little Shearwater Family GAVIIDAE oenanthe Family HYDROBATIDAE WHIMBREL, Numenius phaeopus Gavia stellata, Red-throated Loon Oceanites oceanicus, Wilson’s Storm- Gavia arctica, Arctic Loon WHIP-POOR-WILL, Caprimulgus Petrel vociferus Gavia pacifica, Pacific Loon Pelagodroma marina, White-faced Gavia immer, Common Loon WHISTLING-DUCK, Black-bellied, Storm-Petrel Dendrocygna autumnalis Gavia adamsii, Yellow-billed Loon Oceanodroma furcata, Fork-tailed Order PODICIPEDIFORMES Fulvous, Dendrocygna bicolor Storm-Petrel West Indian, Dendrocygna arborea Family PODICIPEDIDAE Oceanodroma leucorhoa, Leach’s Tachybaptus dominicus, Least Grebe WIGEON, American, Anas americana Storm-Petrel Eurasian, Anas penelope Podilymbus podiceps, Pied-billed Oceanodroma homochroa, Ashy WILLET, Catoptrophorus semipalmatus Grebe Storm-Petrel WOOD-PEWEE, Eastern, Contopus Podiceps auritus, Horned Grebe Oceanodroma castro, Band-rumped virens Podiceps grisegena, Red-necked Grebe Storm-Petrel Western, Contopus sordidulus Podiceps nigricollis, Eared Grebe Oceanodroma tethys, Wedge-rumped WOODCOCK, American, Scolopax Aechmophorus occidentallis, Western Storm-Petrel minor Grebe Oceanodroma melania, Black Storm- Eurasian, Scolopax rusticola Aechmophorus clarkii, Clark’s Grebe Petrel WOODPECKER, Acorn, Melanerpes Order PROCELLARIFORMES Oceanodroma tristrami, Tristram’s formicivorus Family DIOMEDEIDAE Storm-Petrel Arizona, Picoides arizonae Thalassarche chlororhynchos, Oceanodroma microsoma, Least Black-backed, Picoides arcticus Yellow-nosed Albatross Storm-Petrel Downy, Picoides pubescens Phoebastria immutabilis, Laysan Order PELECANIFORMES Gila, Melanerpes uropygialis Albatross Family PHAETHONTIDAE Golden-fronted, Melanerpes aurifrons Phoebastria nigripes, Black-footed Phaethon lepturus, White-tailed Hairy, Picoides villosus Albatros Tropicbird Ivory-billed, Campephilus principalis Phoebastria albatrus, Short-tailed Phaethon aethereus, Red-billed Ladder-backed, Picoides scalaris Albatross Tropicbird Lewis’s, Melanerpes lewis Family PROCELLARIIDAE Phaethon rubricauda, Red-tailed Nuttall’s, Picoides nuttallii Fulmarus glacialis, Northern Fulmar Tropicbird Pileated, Dryocopus pileatus Pterodroma neglecta, Kermadec Petrel Family SULIDAE Puerto Rican, Melanerpes Pterodroma arminjoniana, Herald Sula dactylatra, Masked Booby portoricensis Petrel Sula nebouxii, Blue-footed Booby Red-bellied, Melanerpes carolinus Pterodroma ultima, Murphy’s Petrel Sula leucogaster, Brown Booby Red-cockaded, Picoides borealis Pterodroma inexpectata, Mottled Sula sula, Red-footed Booby Red-headed, Melanerpes Petrel Morus bassanus, Northern Gannet erythrocephalus Pterodroma hasitata, Black-capped Family PELECANIDAE Strickland’s, Picoides stricklandi Petrel Pelecanus erythrorhynchos, American Three-toed, Picoides tridactylus Pterodroma externa, Juan Fernandez White Pelican White-headed, Picoides albolarvatus Petrel Pelecanus occidentalis, Brown WOODSTAR, Bahama, Calliphlox Pterodroma phaeopygia, Dark-rumped Pelican evelynae Petrel Family PHALACROCORACIDAE WREN, Bewick’s Thryothorus bewickii Pterodroma cervicalis, White-necked Phalacrocorax penicillatus, Brandt’s Cactus, Campylorhynchus Petrel Cormorant brunneicapillus Pterodroma hypoleuca, Bonin Petrel Phalacrocorax brasilianus, Neotropic Canyon, Catherpes mexicanus Pterodroma cookii, Cook’s Petrel Cormorant Carolina, Thryothorus ludovicianus Bulweria bulwerii, Bulwer’s Petrel Phalacrocorax auritus, Double-crested House, Troglodytes aedon Calonectris diomedea, Cory’s Cormorant Marsh, Cistothorus palustris Shearwater Phalacrocorax carbo, Great Cormorant Rock, Salpinctes obsoletus Puffinus creatopus, Pink-footed Phalacrocorax urile, Red-faced Sedge, Cistothorus platensis Shearwater Cormorant Winter, Troglodytes troglodytes Puffinus carneipes, Flesh-footed Phalacrocorax pelagicus, Pelagic WRYNECK, Eurasian, Jynx torquilla Shearwater Cormorant YELLOWLEGS, Greater, Tringa Puffinus gravis, Greater Shearwater Family ANHINGIDAE melanoleuca Puffinus pacificus, Wedge-tailed Anhinga anhinga, Anhinga Lesser, Tringa flavipes Shearwater Family FREGATIDAE
VerDate 11
Fregata magnificens, Magnificent Branta sandvicensis, Hawaiian Goose Elanus leucurus, White-tailed Kite Frigatebird Branta bernicla, Brant Rostrhamus sociabilis, Snail Kite Fregata minor, Great Frigatebird Branta leucopsis, Barnacle Goose Ictinia mississippiensis, Mississippi Fregata ariel, Lesser Frigatebird Cygnus buccinator, Trumpeter Swan Kite Order CICONIIFORMES Cygnus columbianus, Tundra Swan Milvus migrans, Black Kite Family ARDEIDAE Cygnus cygnus, Whooper Swan Haliaeetus leucocephalus, Bald Eagle Botaurus lentiginosus, American Subfamily Anatinae Haliaeetus albicilla, White-tailed Bittern Aix sponsa, Wood Duck Eagle Ixobrychus sinensis, Yellow Bittern Anas strepera, Gadwall Haliaeetus pelagicus, Steller’s Sea- Ixobrychus exilis, Least Bittern Anas falcata, Falcated Duck Eagle Ixobrychus eurhythmus, Schrenk’s Anas penelope, Eurasian Wigeon Circus cyaneus, Northern Harrier Bittern Anas americana, American Wigeon Accipiter gularis, Japanese Ardea herodias, Great Blue Heron Anas rubripes, American Black Duck Sparrowhawk Ardea alba, Great Egret Anas platyrhynchos, Mallard Accipiter striatus, Sharp-shinned Mesophoyx intermedia, Intermediate Anas fulvigula, Mottled Duck Hawk Egret Anas wyvilliana, Hawaiian Duck Accipiter cooperii, Cooper’s Hawk Egretta eulophotes, Chinese Egret Anas laysanensis, Laysan Duck Accipiter gentilis, Northern Goshawk Egretta sacra, Pacific Reef-Egret Anas poecilorhyncha, Spot-billed Asturina nitida, Gray Hawk Egretta thula, Snowy Egret Duck Buteogallus anthracinus, Common Egretta caerulea, Little Blue Heron Anas discors, Blue-winged Teal Black-Hawk Egretta tricolor, Tricolored Heron Anas cyanoptera, Cinnamon Teal Parabuteo unicinctus, Harris’s Hawk Egretta rufescens, Reddish Egret Anas clypeata, Northern Shoveler Buteo lineatus, Red-shouldered Hawk Bubulcus ibis, Cattle Egret Anas bahamensis, White-cheeked Buteo platypterus, Broad-winged Butorides virescens, Green Heron Pintail Hawk Nycticorax nycticorax, Black-crowned Anas acuta, Northern Pintail Buteo brachyurus, Short-tailed Hawk Night-Heron Anas querquedula, Garganey Buteo swainsoni, Swainson’s Hawk Nyctanassa violacea, Yellow-crowned Anas formosa, Baikal Teal Buteo albicaudatus, White-tailed Night-Heron Anas crecca, Green-winged Teal Hawk Gorsachius goisagi, Japanese Night- Aythya valisneria, Canvasback Buteo albonotatus, Zone-tailed Hawk Heron Aythya americana, Redhead Buteo solitarius, Hawaiian Hawk Gorsachius melanolophus, Malayan Aythya ferina, Common Pochard Buteo jamaicensis, Red-tailed Hawk Night-Heron Aythya baeri, Baer’s Pochard Buteo regalis, Ferruginous Hawk Family THRESKIORNITHIDAE Aythya collaris, Ring-necked Duck Buteo lagopus, Rough-legged Hawk Subfamily Threskiornithinae Aythya fuligula, Tufted Duck Aquila chrysaetos, Golden Eagle Eudocimus albus, White Ibis Aythya marila, Greater Scaup Family FALCONIDAE Eudocimus ruber, Scarlet Ibis Aythya affinis, Lesser Scaup Subfamily Caracarinae Plegadis falcinellus, Glossy Ibis Polysticta stelleri, Steller’s Eider Caracara cheriway, Crested Caracara Plegadis chihi, White-faced Ibis Somateria fischeri, Spectacled Eider Subfamily Falconinae Subfamily Plataleinae Somateria spectabilis, King Eider Falco tinnunculus, Eurasian Kestrel Ajaia ajaja, Roseate Spoonbill Somateria mollissima, Common Eider Falco sparverius, American Kestrel Family CICONIIDAE Histrionicus histrionicus, Harlequin Falco columbarius, Merlin Jabiru mycteria, Jabiru Duck Falco femoralis, Aplomado Falcon Mycteria americana, Wood Stork Melanitta perspicillata, Surf Scoter Falco rusticolus, Gyrfalcon Family CATHARTIDAE Melanitta fusca, White-winged Scoter Falco peregrinus, Peregrine Falcon Coragyps atratus, Black Vulture Melanitta nigra, Black Scoter Falco mexicanus, Prairie Falcon Cathartes aura, Turkey Vulture Clangula hyemalis, Long-tailed Duck Order GRUIFORMES Gymnogyps californianus, California Bucephala albeola, Bufflehead Family RALLIDAE Condor Bucephala clangula, Common Coturnicops noveboracensis, Yellow Order PHOENICOPTERIFORMES Goldeneye Rail Family PHOENICOPTERIDAE Bucephala islandica, Barrow’s Laterallus jamaicensis, Black Rail Phoenicopterus ruber, Greater Goldeneye Crex crex, Corn Crake Flamingo Mergellus albellus, Smew Rallus longirostris, Clapper Rail Order ANSERIFORMES Lophodytes cucullatus, Hooded Rallus elegans, King Rail Family ANATIDAE Merganser Rallus limicola, Virginia Rail Subfamily Dendrocygninae Mergus merganser, Common Porzana carolina, Sora Dendrocygna autumnalis, Black- Merganser Porzana flaviventer, Yellow-breasted bellied Whistling-Duck Mergus serrator, Red-breasted Crake Dendrocygna arborea, West Indian Merganser Porphyrula martinica, Purple Whistling-Duck Nomonyx dominica, Masked Duck Gallinule Dendrocygna bicolor, Fulvous Oxyura jamaicensis, Ruddy Duck Gallinula chloropus, Common Whistling-Duck Order FALCONIFORMES Moorhen Subfamily Anserinae Family ACCIPITRIDAE Fulica atra, Eurasian Coot Anser fabalis, Bean Goose Subfamily Pandioninae Fulica alai, Hawaiian Coot Anser albifrons, Greater White-fronted Pandion haliaetus, Osprey Fulica americana, American Coot Goose Subfamily Accipitrinae Fulica caribaea, Caribbean Coot Chen canagica, Emperor Goose Chondrohierax uncinatus, Hook- Family ARAMIDAE Chen caerulescens, Snow Goose billed Kite Aramus guarauna, Limpkin Chen rossii, Ross’s Goose Elanoides forficatus, Swallow-tailed Family GRUIDAE Branta canadensis, Canada Goose Kite Grus canadensis, Sandhill Crane
VerDate 11
Grus grus, Common Crane Curlew Stercorarius parasiticus, Parasitic Grus americana, Whooping Crane Numenius madagascariensis, Far Jaeger Order CHARADRIIFORMES Eastern Curlew Stercorarius longicaudus, Long-tailed Family CHARADRIIDAE Numenius americanus, Long-billed Jaeger Subfamily Vanellinae Curlew Subfamily Larinae Vanellus vanellus, Northern Lapwing Limosa limosa, Black-tailed Godwit Larus atricilla, Laughing Gull Subfamily Charadriinae Limosa haemastica, Hudsonian Larus pipixcan, Franklin’s Gull Pluvialis squatarola, Black-bellied Godwit Larus minutus, Little Gull Plover Limosa lapponica, Bar-tailed Godwit Larus ridibundus, Black-headed Gull Pluvialis dominica, American Golden- Limosa fedoa, Marbled Godwit Larus philadelphia, Bonaparte’s Gull Plover Arenaria interpres, Ruddy Turnstone Larus heermanni, Heermann’s Gull Pluvialis fulva, Pacific Golden-Plover Arenaria melanocephala, Black Larus crassirostris, Black-tailed Gull Charadrius mongolus, Mongolian Turnstone Larus canus, Mew Gull Plover Aphriza virgata, Surfbird Larus delawarensis, Ring-billed Gull Charadrius leschenaultii, Greater Calidris tenuirostris, Great Knot Larus californicus, California Gull Sand Plover Calidris canutus, Red Knot Larus argentatus, Herring Gull Charadrius alexandrinus, Snowy Calidris alba, Sanderling Larus thayeri, Thayer’s Gull Plover Calidris pusilla, Semipalmated Larus glaucoides, Iceland Gull Charadrius wilsonia, Wilson’s Plover Sandpiper Larus fuscus, Lesser Black-backed Charadrius hiaticula, Common Calidris mauri, Western Sandpiper Gull Ringed Plover Calidris ruficollis, Red-necked Stint Larus schistisagus, Slaty-backed Gull Charadrius semipalmatus, Calidris minuta, Little Stint Larus livens, Yellow-footed Gull Semipalmated Plover Calidris temminckii, Temminck’s Larus occidentalis, Western Gull Charadrius melodus, Piping Plover Stint Larus glaucescens, Glaucous-winged Charadrius dubius, Little Ringed Calidris subminuta, Long-toed Stint Gull Plover Calidris minutilla, Least Sandpiper Larus hyperboreus, Glaucous Gull Charadrius vociferus, Killdeer Calidris fuscicollis, White-rumped Larus marinus, Great Black-backed Charadrius montanus, Mountain Sandpiper Gull Plover Calidris bairdii, Baird’s Sandpiper Xema sabini, Sabine’s Gull Charadrius morinellus, Eurasian Calidris melanotos, Pectoral Rissa tridactyla, Black-legged Dotterel Sandpiper Kittiwake Family HAEMATOPODIDAE Calidris acuminata, Sharp-tailed Rissa brevirostris, Red-legged Haematopus palliatus, American Sandpiper Kittiwake Oystercatcher Calidris maritima, Purple Sandpiper Rhodostethia rosea, Ross’s Gull Haematopus bachmani, Black Calidris ptilocnemis, Rock Sandpiper Pagophila eburnea, Ivory Gull Oystercatcher Calidris alpina, Dunlin Subfamily Sterninae Family RECURVIROSTRIDAE Calidris ferruginea, Curlew Sandpiper Sterna nilotica, Gull-billed Tern Himantopus mexicanus, Black- Calidris himantopus, Stilt Sandpiper Sterna caspia, Caspian Tern necked Stilt Eurynorhynchus pygmeus, Spoonbill Sterna maxima, Royal Tern Recurvirostra americana, American Sandpiper Sterna elegans, Elegant Tern Avocet Limicola falcinellus, Broad-billed Sterna sandvicensis, Sandwich Tern Family JACANIDAE Sandpiper Sterna dougallii, Roseate Tern Jacana spinosa, Northern Jacana Tryngites subruficollis, Buff-breasted Sterna hirundo, Common Tern Family SCOLOPACIDAE Sandpiper Sterna paradisaea, Arctic Tern Subfamily Scolopacinae Philomachus pugnax, Ruff Sterna forsteri, Forster’s Tern Tringa nebularia, Common Limnodromus griseus, Short-billed Sterna albifrons, Little Tern Greenshank Dowitcher Sterna antillarum, Least Tern Tringa melanoleuca, Greater Limnodromus scolopaceus, Long- Sterna sumatrana, Black-naped Tern Yellowlegs billed Dowitcher Sterna aleutica, Aleutian Tern Tringa flavipes, Lesser Yellowlegs Lymnocryptes minimus, Jack Snipe Sterna lunata, Gray-backed Tern Tringa stagnatilis, Marsh Sandpiper Gallinago gallinago, Common Snipe Sterna anaethetus, Bridled Tern Tringa erythropus, Spotted Redshank Gallinago stenura, Pin-tailed Snipe Sterna fuscata, Sooty Tern Tringa glareola, Wood Sandpiper Gallinago megala, Swinhoe’s Snipe Chlidonias leucopterus, White- Tringa solitaria, Solitary Sandpiper Scolopax rusticola, Eurasian winged Tern Catoptrophorus semipalmatus, Willet Woodcock Chlidonias niger, Black Tern Heteroscelus incanus, Wandering Scolopax minor, American Woodcock Anous stolidus, Brown Noddy Tattler Phalaropodinae Anous minutus, Black Noddy Heteroscelus brevipes, Gray-tailed Phalaropus tricolor, Wilson’s Anous tenuirostris, Lesser Noddy Tattler Phalarope Procelsterna cerulea, Blue-gray Actitis hypoleucos, Common Phalaropus lobatus, Red-necked Noddy Sandpiper Phalarope Gygis alba, White Tern Actitis macularia, Spotted Sandpiper Phalaropus fulicaria, Red Phalarope Subfamily Rynchopinae Xenus cinereus, Terek Sandpiper Family LARIDAE Rynchops niger, Black Skimmer Bartramia longicauda, Upland Subfamily Stercorariinae Family ALCIDAE Sandpiper Stercorarius skua, Great Skua Alle alle, Dovekie Numenius minutus, Little Curlew Stercorarius maccormicki, South Uria aalge, Common Murre Numenius borealis, Eskimo Curlew Polar Skua Uria lomvia, Thick-billed Murre Numenius phaeopus, Whimbrel Stercorarius pomarinus, Pomarine Alca torda, Razorbill Numenius tahitiensis, Bristle-thighed Jaeger Cepphus grylle, Black Guillemot
VerDate 11
Cepphus columba, Pigeon Guillemot Ani Tachornis phoenicobia, Antillean Brachyramphus marmoratus, Marbled Order STRIGIFORMES Palm-Swift Murrelet Family TYTONIDAE Family TROCHILIDAE Brachyramphus brevirostris, Kittlitz’s Tyto alba, Barn Owl Subfamily Trochilinae Murrelet Family STRIGIDAE Colibri thalassinus, Green Violet-ear Synthliboramphus hypoleucus, Otus flammeolus, Flammulated Owl Anthracothorax dominicus, Antillean Xantus’s Murrelet Otus kennicottii, Western Screech- Mango Synthliboramphus craveri, Craveri’s Owl Anthracothorax viridis, Green Mango Murrelet Otus asio, Eastern Screech-Owl Eulampis holosericeus, Green- Synthliboramphus antiquus, Ancient Otus trichopsis, Whiskered Screech- throated Carib Murrelet Owl Orthorhynchus cristatus, Antillean Ptychoramphus aleuticus, Cassin’s Otus nudipes, Puerto Rican Screech- Crested Hummingbird Auklet Owl Chlorostilbon maugaeus, Puerto Rican Aethia psittacula, Parakeet Auklet Bubo virginianus, Great Horned Owl Emerald Aethia pusilla, Least Auklet Nyctea scandiaca, Snowy Owl Cynanthus latirostris, Broad-billed Aethia pygmaea, Whiskered Auklet Surnia ulula, Northern Hawk Owl Hummingbird Aethia cristatella, Crested Auklet Glaucidium gnoma, Northern Pygmy- Hylocharis leucotis, White-eared Cerorhinca monocerata, Rhinoceros Owl Hummingbird Auklet Glaucidium brasilianum, Ferruginous Amazilia beryllina, Berylline Fratercula arctica, Atlantic Puffin Pygmy-Owl Hummingbird Fratercula corniculata, Horned Puffin Micrathene whitneyi, Elf Owl Amazilia yucatanensis, Buff-bellied Fratercula cirrhata, Tufted Puffin Athene cunicularia, Burrowing Owl Hummingbird Order COLUMBIFORMES Strix occidentalis, Spotted Owl Amazilia violiceps, Violet-crowned Family COLUMBIDAE Strix varia, Barred Owl Hummingbird Columba squamosa, Scaly-naped Strix nebulosa, Great Gray Owl Lampornis clemenciae, Blue-throated Pigeon Asio otus, Long-eared Owl Hummingbird Columba leucocephala, White- Asio flammeus, Short-eared Owl Eugenes fulgens, Magnificent crowned Pigeon Aegolius funereus, Boreal Owl Hummingbird Columba flavirostris, Red-billed Aegolius acadicus, Northern Saw- Heliomaster constantii, Plain-capped Pigeon whet Owl Starthroat Columba inornata, Plain Pigeon Order CAPRIMULGIFORMES Calliphlox evelynae, Bahama Columba fasciata, Band-tailed Pigeon Family CAPRIMULGIDAE Woodstar Zenaida asiatica, White-winged Dove Subfamily Chordeilinae Calothorax lucifer, Lucifer Zenaida aurita, Zenaida Dove Chordeiles acutipennis, Lesser Hummingbird Zenaida macroura, Mourning Dove Nighthawk Archilochus colubris, Ruby-throated Columbina inca, Inca Dove Chordeiles minor, Common Hummingbird Columbina passerina, Common Nighthawk Archilochus alexandri, Black-chinned Ground-Dove Chordeiles gundlachii, Antillean Hummingbird Columbina talpacoti, Ruddy Ground- Nighthawk Calypte anna, Anna’s Hummingbird Dove Subfamily Capimulginae Calypte costae, Costa’s Hummingbird Leptotila verreauxi, White-tipped Nyctidromus albicollis, Common Stellula calliope, Calliope Dove Pauraque Hummingbird Geotrygon chrysia, Key West Quail- Phalaenoptilus nuttallii, Common Selasphorus platycercus, Broad-tailed Dove Poorwill Hummingbird Geotrygon mystacea, Bridled Quail- Caprimulgus carolinensis, Chuck- Selasphorus rufus, Rufous Dove will’s-widow Hummingbird Geotrygon montana, Ruddy Quail- Caprimulgus ridgwayi, Buff-collared Selasphorus sasin, Allen’s Dove Nightjar Hummingbird Order CUCULIFORMES Caprimulgus vociferus, Whip-poor- Order TROGONIFORMES Family CUCULIDAE will Family TROGONIDAE Subfamily Cuculinae Caprimulgus noctitherus, Puerto Subfamily Trogoninae Cuculus canorus, Common Cuckoo Rican Nightjar Trogon elegans, Elegant Trogon Cuculus saturatus, Oriental Cuckoo Caprimulgus indicus, Jungle Nightjar Euptilotus neoxenus, Eared Trogon Cuculus fugax, Hodgson’s Hawk- Order APODIFORMES Order UPUPIFORMES Cuckoo Family APODIDAE Family UPUPIDAE Subfamily Coccyzinae Subfamily Cypseloidinae Upupa epops, Eurasian Hoopoe Coccyzus erythropthalmus, Black- Crypseloides niger, Black Swift Order CORACIIFORMES billed Cuckoo Streptoprocne zonaris, White-collared Family ALCEDINIDAE Coccyzus americanus, Yellow-billed Swift Subfamily Cerylinae Cuckoo Subfamily Chaeturinae Ceryle torquata, Ringed Kingfisher Coccyzus minor, Mangrove Cuckoo Chaetura pelagica, Chimney Swift Ceryle alcyon, Belted Kingfisher Saurothera vieilloti, Puerto Rican Chaetura vauxi, Vaux’s Swift Chloroceryle americana, Green Lizard-Cuckoo Hirundapus caudacutus, White- Kingfisher Subfamily Neomorphinae throated Needletail Order PICIFORMES Geococcyx californianus, Greater Subfamily Apodinae Family PICIDAE Roadrunner Apus apus, Common Swift Subfamily Jynginae Subfamily Crotophaginae Apus pacificus, Fork-tailed Swift Jynx torquilla, Eurasian Wryneck Crotophaga ani, Smooth-billed Ani Aeronautes saxatalis, White-throated Subfamily Picinae Crotophaga sulcirostris, Groove-billed Swift Melanerpes lewis, Lewis’s
VerDate 11
Woodpecker Flycatcher Vireo philadelphicus, Philadelphia Melanerpes portoricensis, Puerto Empidonax hammondii, Hammond’s Vireo Rican Woodpecker Flycatcher Vireo olivaceus, Red-eyed Vireo Melanerpes erythrocephalus, Red- Empidonax wrightii, Gray Flycatcher Vireo flavoviridis, Yellow-green Vireo headed Woodpecker Empidonax oberholseri, Dusky Vireo altiloquus, Black-whiskered Melanerpes formicivorus, Acorn Flycatcher Vireo Woodpecker Empidonax difficilis, Pacific-slope Family CORVIDAE Melanerpes uropygialis, Gila Flycatcher Perisoreus canadensis, Gray Jay Woodpecker Empidonax occidentalis, Cordilleran Cyanocitta stelleri, Steller’s Jay Melanerpes aurifrons, Golden-fronted Flycatcher Cyanocitta cristata, Blue Jay Woodpecker Empidonax fulvifrons, Buff-breasted Cyanocorax yncas, Green Jay Melanerpes carolinus, Red-bellied Flycatcher Cyanocorax morio, Brown Jay Woodpecker Sayornis nigricans, Black Phoebe Aphelocoma coerulescens, Florida Sphyrapicus thyroideus, Williamson’s Sayornis phoebe, Eastern Phoebe Scrub-Jay Sapsucker Sayornis saya, Say’s Phoebe Aphelocoma insularis, Island Scrub- Sphyrapicus varius, Yellow-bellied Pyrocephalus rubinus, Vermilion Jay Sapsucker Flycatcher Aphelocoma californica, Western Sphyrapicus nuchalis, Red-naped Subfamily Tyranninae Scrub-Jay Sapsucker Myiarchus tuberculifer, Dusky-capped Aphelocoma ultramarina, Mexican Sphyrapicus ruber, Red-breasted Flycatcher Jay Sapsucker Myiarchus cinerascens, Ash-throated Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus, Pinyon Picoides scalaris, Ladder-backed Flycatcher Jay Woodpecker Myiarchus nuttingi, Nutting’s Nucifraga columbiana, Clark’s Picoides nuttallii, Nuttall’s Flycatcher Nutcracker Woodpecker Myiarchus crinitus, Great Crested Pica hudsonia, Black-billed Magpie Picoides pubescens, Downy Flycatcher Pica nuttalli, Yellow-billed Magpie Woodpecker Myiarchus tyrannulus, Brown-crested Corvus brachyrhynchos, American Picoides villosus, Hairy Woodpecker Flycatcher Crow Picoides arizonae, Arizona Myiarchus antillarum, Puerto Rican Corvus caurinus, Northwestern Crow Woodpecker Flycatcher Corvus leucognaphalus, White- Picoides stricklandi, Strickland’s Pitangus sulphuratus, Great Kiskadee necked Crow Woodpecker Myiodynastes luteiventris, Sulphur- Corvus imparatus, Tamaulipas Crow Picoides borealis, Red-cockaded bellied Flycatcher Corvus ossifragus, Fish Crow Woodpecker Tyrannus melancholicus, Tropical Corvus hawaiiensis, Hawaiian Crow Picoides albolarvatus, White-headed Kingbird Corvus cryptoleucus, Chihuahuan Woodpecker Tyrannus couchii, Couch’s Kingbird Raven Picoides tridactylus, Three-toed Tyrannus vociferans, Cassin’s Corvus corax, Common Raven Woodpecker Kingbird Family ALAUDIDAE Picoides arcticus, Black-backed Tyrannus crassirostris, Thick-billed Alauda arvensis, Sky Lark Woodpecker Kingbird Eremophila alpestris, Horned Lark Colaptes auratus, Northern Flicker Tyrannus verticalis, Western Kingbird Family HIRUNDINIDAE Colaptes chrysoides, Gilded Flicker Tyrannus tyrannus, Eastern Kingbird Subfamily Hirundininae Dryocopus pileatus, Pileated Tyrannus dominicensis, Gray Progne subis, Purple Martin Woodpecker Kingbird Progne cryptoleuca, Cuban Martin Campephilus principalis, Ivory-billed Tyrannus caudifasciatus, Loggerhead Progne dominicensis, Caribbean Woodpecker Kingbird Martin Order PASSERIFORMES Tyrannus forficatus, Scissor-tailed Progne chalybea, Gray-breasted Family TYRANNIDAE Flycatcher Martin Subfamily Elaeniinae Tyrannus savana, Fork-tailed Tachycineta bicolor, Tree Swallow Camptostoma imberbe, Northern Flycatcher Tachycineta thalassina, Violet-green Beardless-Tyrannulet Pachyramphus aglaiae, Rose-throated Swallow Elaenia martinica, Caribbean Elaenia Becard Tachycineta cyaneoviridis, Bahama Subfamily Fluvicolinae Family LANIIDAE Swallow Contopus cooperi, Olive-sided Lanius ludovicianus, Loggerhead Stelgidopteryx serripennis, Northern Flycatcher Shrike Rough-winged Swallow Contopus pertinax, Greater Pewee Lanius excubitor, Northern Shrike Riparia riparia, Bank Swallow Contopus sordidulus, Western Wood- Family VIREONIDAE Petrochelidon pyrrhonota, Cliff Pewee Vireo griseus, White-eyed Vireo Swallow Contopus virens, Eastern Wood-Pewee Vireo latimeri, Puerto Rican Vireo Petrochelidon fulva, Cave Swallow Contopus latirostris, Lesser Antillean Vireo bellii, Bell’s Vireo Hirundo rustica, Barn Swallow Pewee Vireo atricapillus, Black-capped Vireo Delichon urbica, Common House- Empidonax flaviventris, Yellow- Vireo vicinior, Gray Vireo Martin bellied Flycatcher Vireo flavifrons, Yellow-throated Family PARIDAE Empidonax virescens, Acadian Vireo Poecile carolinensis, Carolina Flycatcher Vireo plumbeus, Plumbeous Vireo Chickadee Empidonax alnorum, Alder Vireo cassinii, Cassin’s Vireo Poecile atricapilla, Black-capped Flycatcher Vireo solitarius, Blue-headed Vireo Chickadee Empidonax traillii, Willow Flycatcher Vireo huttoni, Hutton’s Vireo Poecile gambeli, Mountain Chickadee Empidonax minimus, Least Vireo gilvus, Warbling Vireo Poecile sclateri, Mexican Chickadee
VerDate 11
Poecile rufescens, Chestnut-backed Luscinia svecica, Bluethroat Anthus rubescens, American Pipit Chickadee Monticola solitarius, Blue Rock Anthus spragueii, Sprague’s Pipit Poecile hudsonica, Boreal Chickadee Thrush Family BOMBYCILLIDAE Poecile cincta, Gray-headed Oenanthe oenanthe, Northern Bombycilla garrulus, Bohemian Chickadee Wheatear Waxwing Baeolophus wollweberi, Bridled Sialia sialis, Eastern Bluebird Bombycilla cedrorum, Cedar Titmouse Sialia mexicana, Western Bluebird Waxwing Baeolophus inornatus, Oak Titmouse Sialia currucoides, Mountain Family PTILOGONATIDAE Baeolophus ridgwayi, Juniper Bluebird Phainopepla nitens, Phainopepla Titmouse Myadestes townsendi, Townsend’s Family PEUCEDRAMIDAE Baeolophus bicolor, Tufted Titmouse Solitaire Peucedramus taeniatus, Olive Family REMIZIDAE Myadestes myadestinus, Kamao Warbler Auriparus flaviceps, Verdin Myadestes lanaiensis, Olomao Family PARULIDAE Family AEGITHALIDAE Myadestes obscurus, Omao Vermivora bachmanii, Bachman’s Psaltriparus minimus, Bushtit Myadestes palmeri, Puaiohi Warbler Family SITTIDAE Catharus fuscescens, Veery Vermivora pinus, Blue-winged Subfamily Sittinae Catharus minimus, Gray-cheeked Warbler Sitta canadensis, Red-breasted Thrush Vermivora chrysoptera, Golden- Nuthatch Catharus bicknelli, Bicknell’s Thrush winged Warbler Sitta carolinensis, White-breasted Catharus ustulatus, Swainson’s Vermivora peregrina, Tennessee Nuthatch Thrush Warbler Sitta pygmaea, Pygmy Nuthatch Catharus guttatus, Hermit Thrush Vermivora celata, Orange-crowned Sitta pusilla, Brown-headed Nuthatch Hylocichla mustelina, Wood Thrush Warbler Family CERTHIIDAE Turdus obscurus, Eyebrowed Thrush Vermivora ruficapilla, Nashville Subfamily Certhiinae Turdus naumanni, Dusky Thrush Warbler Certhia americana, Brown Creeper Turdus pilaris, Fieldfare Vermivora virginiae, Virginia’s Family TROGLODYTIDAE Turdus grayi, Clay-colored Robin Warbler Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus, Turdus rufopalliatus, Rufous-backed Vermivora crissalis, Colima Warbler Cactus Wren Robin Vermivora luciae, Lucy’s Warbler Salpinctes obsoletus, Rock Wren Turdus migratorius, American Robin Parula americana, Northern Parula Catherpes mexicanus, Canyon Wren Turdus plumbeus, Red-legged Thrush Parula pitiayumi, Tropical Parula Thryothorus ludovicianus, Carolina Ixoreus naevius, Varied Thrush Dendroica petechia, Yellow Warbler Wren Ridgwayia pinicola, Aztec Thrush Dendroica pensylvanica, Chestnut- Thryothorus bewickii, Bewick’s Wren Family MIMIDAE sided Warbler Troglodytes aedon, House Wren Dumetella carolinensis, Gray Catbird Dendroica magnolia, Magnolia Troglodytes troglodytes, Winter Wren Mimus polyglottos, Northern Warbler Cistothorus platensis, Sedge Wren Mockingbird Dendroica tigrina, Cape May Warbler Cistothorus palustris, Marsh Wren Oreoscoptes montanus, Sage Thrasher Dendroica caerulescens, Black- Family CINCLIDAE Toxostoma rufum, Brown Thrasher throated Blue Warbler Cinclus mexicanus, American Dipper Toxostoma longirostre, Long-billed Dendroica coronata, Yellow-rumped Family REGULIDAE Thrasher Warbler Regulus satrapa, Golden-crowned Toxostoma bendirei, Bendire’s Dendroica nigrescens, Black-throated Kinglet Thrasher Gray Warbler Regulus calendula, Ruby-crowned Toxostoma curvirostre, Curve-billed Dendroica chrysoparia, Golden- Kinglet Thrasher cheeked Warbler Family SYLVIIDAE Toxostoma redivivum, California Dendroica virens, Black-throated Subfamily Sylviinae Thrasher Green Warbler Locustella ochotensis, Middendorff’s Toxostoma crissale, Crissal Thrasher Dendroica townsendi, Townsend’s Grasshopper-Warbler Toxostoma lecontei, Le Conte’s Warbler Acrocephalus familiaris, Millerbird Thrasher Dendroica occidentalis, Hermit Phylloscopus borealis, Arctic Warbler Margarops fuscatus, Pearly-eyed Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus, Willow Thrasher Dendroica fusca, Blackburnian Warbler Family STURNIDAE Warbler Subfamily Polioptilinae Sturnus philippensis, Chestnut- Dendroica dominica, Yellow-throated Polioptila caerulea, Blue-gray cheeked Starling Warbler Gnatcatcher Sturnus cineraceus, White-cheeked Dendroica graciae, Grace’s Warbler Polioptila californica, California Starling Dendroica adelaidae, Adelaide’s Gnatcatcher Family PRUNELLIDAE Warbler Polioptila melanura, Black-tailed Prunella montanella, Siberian Dendroica pinus, Pine Warbler Gnatcatcher Accentor Dendroica kirtlandii, Kirtland’s Polioptila nigriceps, Black-capped Family MOTACILLIDAE Warbler Gnatcatcher Motacilla flava, Yellow Wagtail Dendroica discolor, Prairie Warbler Family MUSCICAPIDAE Motacilla cinerea, Gray Wagtail Dendroica palmarum, Palm Warbler Muscicapa narcissina, Narcissus Motacilla alba, White Wagtail Dendroica castanea, Bay-breasted Flycatcher Motacilla lugens, Black-backed Warbler Muscicapa griseisticta, Gray-spotted Wagtail Dendroica striata, Blackpoll Warbler Flycatcher Anthus hodgsoni, Olive-backed Pipit Dendroica cerulea, Cerulean Warbler Family TURDIDAE Anthus gustavi, Pechora Pipit Dendroica angelae, Elfin-woods Luscinia calliope, Siberian Rubythroat Anthus cervinus, Red-throated Pipit Warbler
VerDate 11
Mniotilta varia, Black-and-white Sparrow Family CARDINALIDAE Warbler Aimophila cassinii, Cassin’s Sparrow Rhodothraupis celaeno, Crimson- Setophaga ruticilla, American Aimophila aestivalis, Bachman’s collared Grosbeak Redstart Sparrow Cardinalis cardinalis, Northern Protonotaria citrea, Prothonotary Aimophila botterii, Botteri’s Sparrow Cardinal Warbler Aimophila ruficeps, Rufous-crowned Cardinalis sinuatus, Pyrrhuloxia Helmitheros vermivorus, Worm-eating Sparrow Pheucticus chrysopeplus, Yellow Warbler Aimophila quinquestriata, Five- Grosbeak Limnothlypis swainsonii, Swainson’s striped Sparrow Pheucticus ludovicianus, Rose- Warbler Spizella arborea, American Tree breasted Grosbeak Seiurus aurocapillus, Ovenbird Sparrow Pheucticus malanocephalus, Black- Seiurus noveboracensis, Northern Spizella passerina, Chipping Sparrow headed Grosbeak Waterthrush Spizella pallida, Clay-colored Guiraca caerulea, Blue Grosbeak Seiurus motacilla, Louisiana Sparrow Passerina amoena, Lazuli Bunting Waterthrush Spizella breweri, Brewer’s Sparrow Passerina cyanea, Indigo Bunting Oporornis formosus, Kentucky Spizella pusilla, Field Sparrow Passerina versicolor, Varied Bunting Warbler Spizella wortheni, Worthen’s Sparrow Passerina ciris, Painted Bunting Oporornis agilis, Connecticut Warbler Spizella atrogularis, Black-chinned Spiza americana, Dickcissel Oporornis philadelphia, Mourning Sparrow Family ICTERIDAE Warbler Pooecetes gramineus, Vesper Sparrow Dolichonyx oryzivorus, Bobolink Oporornis tolmiei, MacGillivray’s Chondestes grammacus, Lark Sparrow Agelaius phoeniceus, Red-winged Warbler Amphispiza bilineata, Black-throated Blackbird Geothlypis trichas, Common Sparrow Agelaius tricolor, Tricolored Yellowthroat Amphispiza belli, Sage Sparrow Blackbird Geothlypis poliocephala, Gray- Calamospiza melanocorys, Lark Agelaius humeralis, Tawny- crowned Yellowthroat Bunting shouldered Blackbird Wilsonia citrina, Hooded Warbler Passerculus sandwichensis, Savannah Agelaius xanthomus, Yellow- Wilsonia pusilla, Wilson’s Warbler Sparrow shouldered Blackbird Wilsonia canadensis, Canada Warbler Ammodramus savannarum, Sturnella magna, Eastern Meadowlark Cardellina rubrifrons, Red-faced Grasshopper Sparrow Sturnella neglecta, Western Warbler Ammodramus bairdii, Baird’s Meadowlark Myioborus pictus, Painted Redstart Sparrow Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus, Myioborus miniatus, Slate-throated Ammodramus henslowii, Henslow’s Yellow-headed Blackbird Redstart Sparrow Euphagus carolinus, Rusty Blackbird Basileuterus culicivorus, Golden- Ammodramus leconteii, Le Conte’s Euphagus cyanocephalus, Brewer’s crowned Warbler Sparrow Blackbird Basileuterus rufifrons, Rufous-capped Ammodramus nelsoni, Nelson’s Quiscalus quiscula, Common Grackle Warbler Sharp-tailed Sparrow Quiscalus major, Boat-tailed Grackle Icteria virens, Yellow-breasted Chat Ammodramus caudacutus, Saltmarsh Quiscalus mexicanus, Great-tailed Family THRAUPIDAE Sharp-tailed Sparrow Grackle Neospingus speculiferus, Puerto Rican Ammodramus maritimus, Seaside Quiscalus niger, Greater Antillean Tanager Sparrow Grackle Piranga flava, Hepatic Tanager Passerella iliaca, Fox Sparrow Molothrus bonariensis, Shiny Piranga rubra, Summer Tanager Melospiza melodia, Song Sparrow Cowbird Piranga olivacea, Scarlet Tanager Melospiza lincolnii, Lincoln’s Molothrus aeneus, Bronzed Cowbird Piranga ludoviciana, Western Tanager Sparrow Molothrus ater, Brown-headed Piranga bidentata, Flame-colored Melospiza georgiana, Swamp Sparrow Cowbird Tanager Zonotrichia albicollis, White-throated Icterus wagleri, Black-vented Oriole Spindalis portoricensis, Puerto Rican Sparrow Icterus dominicensis, Greater Spindalis Zonotrichia querula, Harris’s Sparrow Antillean Oriole Euphonia musica, Antillean Euphonia Zonotrichia leucophrys, White- Icterus spurius, Orchard Oriole Family EMBERIZIDAE crowned Sparrow Icterus cucullatus, Hooded Oriole Sporophila torqueola, White-collared Zonotrichia atricapilla, Golden- Icterus pustulatus, Streak-backed Seedeater crowned Sparrow Oriole Tiaris olivacea, Yellow-faced Junco hyemalis, Dark-eyed Junco Icterus bullockii, Bullock’s Oriole Grassquit Junco phaeonotus, Yellow-eyed Junco Icterus gularis, Altamira Oriole Tiaris bicolor, Black-faced Grassquit Calcarius mccownii, McCown’s Icterus graduacauda, Audubon’s Loxigilla portoricensis, Puerto Rican Longspur Oriole Bullfinch Calcarius lapponicus, Lapland Icterus galbula, Baltimore Oriole Arremonops rufivirgatus, Olive Longspur Icterus parisorum, Scott’s Oriole Sparrow Calcarius pictus, Smith’s Longspur Family FRINGILLIDAE Pipilo chlorurus, Green-tailed Towhee Calcarius ornatus, Chestnut-collared Subfamily Fringillinae Pipilo maculatus, Spotted Towhee Longspur Fringilla montifringilla, Brambling Pipilo erythrophthalmus, Eastern Emberiza rustica, Rustic Bunting SubFamily Carduelinae Towhee Emberiza pallasi, Pallas’s Bunting Leucosticte tephrocotis, Gray-crowned Pipilo fuscus, Canyon Towhee Emberiza schoeniculus, Reed Bunting Rosy-Finch Pipilo crissalis, California Towhee Plectrophenax nivalis, Snow Bunting Leucosticte atrata, Black Rosy-Finch Pipilo aberti, Abert’s Towhee Plectrophenax hyperboreus, McKay’s Leucosticte australis, Brown-capped Aimophila carpalis, Rufous-winged Bunting Rosy-Finch
VerDate 11
Pinicola enucleator, Pine Grosbeak Carduelis hornemanni, Hoary Redpoll Coccothraustes coccothraustes, Carpodacus erythrinus, Common Carduelis pinus, Pine Siskin Hawfinch Rosefinch Carduelis psaltria, Lesser Goldfinch Carpodacus purpureus, Purple Finch Carduelis lawrencei, Lawrence’s Dated: September 19, 2001. Carpodacus cassinii, Cassin’s Finch Goldfinch Joseph E. Doddridge, Carpodacus mexicanus, House Finch Carduelis tristis, American Goldfinch Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Loxia curvirostra, Red Crossbill Carduelis sinica, Oriental Greenfinch Parks. Loxia leucoptera, White-winged Pyrrhula pyrrhula, Eurasian Bullfinch [FR Doc. 01–25525 Filed 10–11–01; 8:45 am] Crossbill Coccothraustes vespertinus, Evening BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Carduelis flammea, Common Redpoll Grosbeak
VerDate 11
Part VI
The President Proclamation 7484—General Pulaski Memorial Day, 2001
VerDate 11
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 66, No. 198
Friday, October 12, 2001
Title 3— Proclamation 7484 of October 10, 2001
The President General Pulaski Memorial Day, 2001
By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation
I came here, where freedom is being defended, to serve it, and to live and die for it. -General Casimir Pulaski in a letter to General George Washington Every year, on October 11, we honor the memory of Brigadier General Casimir Pulaski, a courageous soldier of liberty who bravely gave his life 222 years ago fighting for America’s independence. The stories of General Pulaski’s heroism during the Revolutionary War have been a source of inspiration for many generations of Americans, and his gallant sacrifice serves as a poignant reminder of the price patriots paid to obtain our liberty. Pulaski, who was born in Poland in 1745, joined his first fight against tyranny and oppression at age 21, defending his beloved Poland against Prussian and Imperial Russian invaders. In numerous battles, Pulaski achieved fame as a calvary officer, earning promotion to commander of an army of Polish freedom fighters. But the aggressors ultimately overcame the Poles, and Pulaski was forced into exile. In 1777, Pulaski offered his services to America’s fight for freedom and set sail from France to join the war for independence. Far from his native land, Pulaski showed the same courageous combativeness on American soil that had gained him fame at home. Distinguishing himself in battle after battle, Pulaski earned a commission from the Continental Congress as a Brigadier General, and he was assigned by General Washington to command the Continental Army’s calvary. In 1779, during the siege of Savannah, General Pulaski made the ultimate sacrifice, giving his life in battle so that our Nation might win its freedom. General Pulaski’s valiant leadership earned him recognition as the ‘‘Father of the American cavalry’’. Ever since his heroic death, America has honored General Pulaski’s memory in many ways, including the naming of counties, towns, and streets after him. Since 1910, a statue of General Pulaski has stood in Washington, D.C., permanently memorializing his patriotic contributions and noble sac- rifice. Today, as we respond to the atrocities committed against the United States on September 11, we have been deeply moved by the tremendous outpouring of sympathy, support, and solidarity from our Polish friends, from the highest levels of the government to the thousands of Poles who placed flowers and candles at our Embassy gate. Our two nations, united by the virtues and ideals that General Pulaski embodied, will always remain friends and allies. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Thursday, October 11, 2001, as General Pulaski Memorial Day. I encourage all Americans to com- memorate this occasion with appropriate programs and activities paying tribute to Casimir Pulaski and honoring all those who defend the freedom of our great Nation.
VerDate 11
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this tenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-sixth. W
[FR Doc. 01–25940 Filed 10–11–01; 8:57 am] Billing code 3195–01–P
VerDate 11
Part VII
Department of Defense Department of the Navy
Meeting of the Naval Research Advisory Committee; Notice
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: simulation systems and venture capital Diane Mason-Muir, Program Director, initiatives. Department of the Navy Naval Research Advisory Committee, These briefings and discussions will 800 North Quincy Street, Arlington, VA contain proprietary information and Meeting of the Naval Research 22217–5660, telephone number (703) classified information that is Advisory Committee 696–6769. specifically authorized under criteria AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. established by Executive Order to be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This ACTION: Notice of closed meeting. kept secret in the interest of national notice of closed meetings is provided in defense and are in fact properly SUMMARY: The Naval Research Advisory accordance with the provisions of the classified pursuant to such Executive Committee will meet to discuss basic Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 Order. The proprietary, classified and and advanced research and technology. U.S.C. App. 2). All sessions of the non-classified matters to be discussed All sessions of the meetings will be meetings will be devoted to briefings, are so inextricably intertwined as to devoted to briefings, discussions and discussions and technical examination preclude opening any portion of the technical examination of information of information related to the application meeting. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. related to the application of electric of electric power to naval platforms, App. 2, section 10(d), the Secretary of power to naval platforms, weapons and weapons and auxiliary systems, the Navy has determined in writing that auxiliary systems; and life cycle including power network stability, the public interest requires that all technology insertion strategies for integrated power systems, CVX power sessions of the meeting be closed to the current and future Naval weapons systems, CVNX/SSN power systems, public because they will be concerned platforms. These meetings will be fuel cells and superconductivity, high with matters listed in 5 U.S.C. section closed to the public. power microwave systems, rail gun 552b(c)(1) and (4). Due to an DATES: The meeting dates are Monday, technology, future radars, and lessons unavoidable delay in administrative October 1, 2001, through Friday, learned from the British Royal Navy processing, the 15 days advance notice October 5, 2001, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Electric Ship Program; and life cycle could not be provided. Monday, October 8, 2001, through technology insertion strategies for Dated: October 9, 2001. Thursday, October 11, 2001, from 8 a.m. current and future Naval weapons T.J. Welsh, to 5 p.m.; and Friday, October 12, 2001, platforms, including industrial Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. technology insertion processes, General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at submarine technologies, radar and Liaison Officer. the Space and Naval Warfare Systems communications systems, research and [FR Doc. 01–25914 Filed 10–11–01; 10:57 Center San Diego, 53560 Hull Street, development programs, manufacturing am] San Diego, CA. technologies, avionics systems, BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
VerDate 11
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 198 Friday, October 12, 2001
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–523–5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the revision date of each title. Laws 523–5227 13138 (Amended by EO 13226)...... 50291 3 CFR Presidential Documents 13168 (Revoked by Executive orders and proclamations 523–5227 Proclamations: EO 13225)...... 50291 The United States Government Manual 523–5227 7471...... 50097 13225...... 50291 7472...... 50099 13226...... 50523 7473...... 50287 Other Services 13227...... 51287 7474...... 50289 13228...... 51812 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523–3447 7475...... 50525 13229...... 52013 Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 7476...... 50527 Administrative Orders: Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 7477...... 51295 Presidential TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229 7478...... 51297 Determinations: 7479...... 51807 No. 2001–27 of 7480...... 51808 September 18, ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 7481...... 51810 2001 ...... 50807 World Wide Web 7482...... 52011 No. 2001–28 of 7483...... 52015 September 22, Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 7484...... 52303 2001 ...... 50095 is located at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara Executive Orders: No. 2001–30 of Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 11145 (Amended by September 28, Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: EO 13225)...... 50291 2001 ...... 51291 http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 11183 (Amended by No. 2001–31 of September 28, E-mail EO 13225)...... 50291 11287 (Amended by 2001 ...... 51293 FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is EO 13225)...... 50291 5 CFR an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 12131 (Amended by form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form EO 13225)...... 50291 1604...... 50712 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 12382 (Amended by 7 CFR PDF links to the full text of each document. EO 13225)...... 50291 12196 (Amended by Proposed Rules: To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 330...... 51340 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list EO 13225)...... 50291 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 12216 (Amended by 10 CFR EO 13225)...... 50291 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 12345 (Amended by Proposed Rules: 15...... 50860 service for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. To EO 13225)...... 50291 431...... 50355 subscribe, send e-mail to [email protected] 12367 (Amended by with the text message: EO 13225)...... 50291 8 CFR 12656 (Amended by subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name 204...... 51819 EO 13228)...... 51812 212...... 51821 Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe. 12882 (Revoked by EO 13226)...... 50523 10 CFR FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 12900 (Amended by respond to specific inquiries. 30...... 51823 EO 13225)...... 50291 70...... 51823 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 12905 (Amended by 72...... 51823 Federal Register system to: [email protected] EO 13225)...... 50291 150...... 51823 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 12907 (Revoked by Proposed Rules: regulations. EO 13226)...... 50523 50...... 51884, 52065 12994 (Amended by EO 13225)...... 50291 11 CFR FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER 13021 (Amended by Proposed Rules: EO 13225)...... 50291 49823–50094...... 1 100...... 50359 13045 (Amended by 114...... 50359 50095–50286...... 2 EO 13229)...... 52013 117...... 50359 50287–50524...... 3 13075 (Revoked by 50525–50808...... 4 EO 13225)...... 50291 12 CFR 50809–51290...... 5 13080 (Revoked by 950...... 50293 51291–51554...... 9 EO 13225)...... 50291 951...... 50296 51555–51818...... 10 13090 (Revoked by 952...... 50293 51819–52014...... 11 EO 13225)...... 50291 Proposed Rules: 52015–52306...... 12 13134 (Amended by Ch. IX...... 50366 EO 13225)...... 50291 13138 (Amended by 14 CFR EO 13225)...... 50523 Ch. VI...... 52270
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:16 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\12OCCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2001 / Reader Aids
23...... 50809, 50819 163...... 50534 38 CFR 46 CFR 25...... 51299, 52017 20 CFR Proposed Rules: 32...... 49877 35...... 50302 3...... 49886 39 ...... 49823, 49825, 50304, 655...... 51095 4...... 49886 47 CFR 50306, 50307, 50529, 51555, 21 CFR 17...... 50594 0...... 50833 51843, 51849, 51853, 51856, 20...... 50318 1...... 50834 51857, 51860, 52020, 52023, 101...... 50824 36...... 51893 2...... 50834 52027 1308...... 51530, 51539 22...... 50841 61...... 52278 Proposed Rules: 39 CFR 24...... 50841 63...... 52278 589...... 50929 Proposed Rules: 27...... 51594 71...... 50101 1308...... 51535 111...... 51617 64...... 50841 73...... 50310 73 ...... 50576, 50843, 51322 22 CFR 40 CFR 91...... 50531 Proposed Rules: 97...... 50821, 50823 41...... 49830 52 ...... 50319, 50829, 51312, 2...... 51905 121...... 51546, 52278 51566, 51568, 51570, 51572, 24 CFR 21...... 51905 135...... 51546, 52278 51574, 51576, 51578, 51868, 64...... 50139, 50140 142...... 51546, 52278 888...... 50024 51869, 52044, 52050, 52055 73 ...... 50602, 50991, 51360, 382...... 51556 985...... 50004 60...... 49830, 50110 51361, 51905 1300...... 51546, 52270 61...... 50110 25 CFR 76...... 51905 Proposed Rules: 62...... 49834, 52060 39 ...... 50125, 50578, 50580, Proposed Rules: 63 ...... 50110, 50116, 50504 48 CFR 50582, 50584, 50586, 50588, 580...... 50127 70 ...... 49837, 49839, 50321, 202...... 49860 50325, 50574, 51312, 51318, 50870, 50872, 50873, 50875, 26 CFR 204...... 49860 50877, 50880, 50872, 50884, 51581 211...... 49860 50886, 50888, 50891, 50894, 301...... 50541 180 ...... 50329, 50829, 51585, 212...... 49860, 49862 50897, 50899, 50901, 50903, 602...... 50541 51587 215...... 49862 261...... 50332 50906, 50910, 50912, 50915, 27 CFR 219...... 49860, 49863 50917, 51358, 51607, 51611, 271...... 49841, 50833 223...... 49864 52066, 52068, 52070, 52072, 9...... 50564 403...... 50334 225...... 49862 Proposed Rules: 52073 28 CFR 226...... 50504 71...... 52076 51...... 50135 232...... 49864 2...... 51301 52 ...... 50252, 50375, 51359, 236...... 49860 15 CFR Proposed Rules: 51619 237...... 49860 14...... 49827 100...... 50931 60...... 49894 242...... 49860 62...... 49895, 52077 742...... 50090 243...... 49865 29 CFR 63...... 50135, 50768 744...... 50090 245...... 49860 Ch. XL...... 51864 70 ...... 49895, 50136, 50375, 248...... 49865 Proposed Rules: 102...... 50310 50378, 50379, 51359, 51360, 990...... 50919 252 ...... 49860, 49862, 49864, 1904...... 52031 51620, 51895 49865, 50504, 51515 16 CFR Proposed Rules: 89...... 51098 253...... 49862, 51515 470...... 50010 90...... 51098 442...... 49866 6...... 51862 91...... 51098 Proposed Rules: 30 CFR 93...... 50954 49 CFR 1633...... 51886 210...... 50827 94...... 51098 27...... 51556 124...... 52192 17 CFR 218...... 50827 325...... 49867 920...... 50827 136...... 51518 355...... 49867 141...... 50961 230...... 50102 Proposed Rules: 356...... 49867 142...... 50961 232...... 49829 904...... 50952 360...... 49867 228...... 51628 239...... 50102 950...... 51891 365...... 49867 240...... 50103 260...... 52192 366...... 49867 261...... 50379 270...... 50102 31 CFR 367...... 49867 267...... 52192 274...... 50102 285...... 51867 370...... 49867 270...... 52192 Proposed Rules: 586...... 50506 371...... 49867 271...... 49896 1...... 50786 372...... 49867 587...... 50506 281...... 50963 41...... 50720, 50786 373...... 49867 190...... 50786 33 CFR 300...... 50380 1048...... 51098 374...... 49867 230...... 50744 110...... 50315 375...... 49867 232...... 50744 1051...... 51098 117 ...... 51302, 51313, 51304, 1065...... 51098 376...... 49867 239...... 50744 51305, 51557 1068...... 51098 377...... 49867 240 ...... 49877, 50744, 50786 160...... 50565 378...... 49867 242...... 50720 165 ...... 50105, 50106, 50108, 41 CFR 379...... 49867 249...... 50744 50315, 51305, 51307, 51309, 61–250...... 51998 381...... 49867 269...... 50744 51558, 51562, 52035, 52036, 101–46...... 51095 383...... 49867 52038, 52039, 52041, 52043 384...... 49867 18 CFR 102–39...... 51095 Proposed Rules: 385...... 49867 Proposed Rules: 117...... 51614 42 CFR 386...... 49867 Ch. 1 ...... 50591 155...... 49877 51d...... 51873 387...... 49867 37...... 50919 156...... 49877 Proposed Rules: 388...... 49867 161...... 50919 81...... 50967 389...... 49867 36 CFR 250...... 50919 82...... 50978 390...... 49867 284...... 50919 Proposed Rules: 391...... 49867 358...... 50919 1234...... 51740 44 CFR 392...... 49867 64...... 51320 393...... 49867 19 CFR 37 CFR 395...... 49867 10...... 50534, 51864 Proposed Rules: 45 CFR 396...... 49867 122...... 50103 260...... 51617 Ch. V...... 49844 397...... 49867
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:16 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\12OCCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2001 / Reader Aids iii
398...... 49867 177...... 50147 50 CFR 17...... 50383, 51362 399...... 49867 178...... 50147 17 ...... 50340, 51322, 51598 20...... 51919, 52077 572...... 51880 209...... 51362 18...... 50843 21...... 52077 Proposed Rules: 234...... 51362 223...... 50350 222...... 50148 171...... 50147 236...... 51362 600...... 50851 223...... 50148 173...... 50147 571...... 51629 660 ...... 49875, 50851, 52062 229 ...... 49896, 50160, 50390 174...... 50147 579...... 51907 679...... 50576, 50858 648...... 51000 175...... 50147 587...... 51629 Proposed Rules: 660...... 51367 176...... 50147 10...... 52282 679 ...... 49908, 51001, 52090
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:16 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\12OCCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2001 / Reader Aids
REMINDERS COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Energy conservation FARM CREDIT The items in this list were National Oceanic and standards— ADMINISTRATION editorially compiled as an aid Atmospheric Administration Central air conditioners Farm credit system: to Federal Register users. Fishery conservation and and heat pumps; Loan policies and Inclusion or exclusion from management: comments due by 10- operations— this list has no legal Alaska; fisheries of 19-01; published 9-27- Loans to designated significance. Exclusive Economic 01 [FR 01-24227] parties; approval; Zone— Energy conservation: comments due by 10- Bering Sea and Aleutian Commercial and industrial 18-01; published 9-18- RULES GOING INTO Islands groundfish; equipment; energy 01 [FR 01-23208] EFFECT OCTOBER 12, comments due by 10- efficiency program— Organization, and loan 2001 15-01; published 8-15- Underwriters Laboratories policies and operations— 01 [FR 01-20436] Inc.; electric motor Farm credit status ENVIRONMENTAL Northeastern United States efficiency; classification termination; comments PROTECTION AGENCY fisheries— petition; comments due due by 10-19-01; by 10-18-01; published published 8-20-01 [FR Air quality implementation Small-mesh multispecies; 10-3-01 [FR 01-24682] 01-20907] plans; approval and default management promulgation; various measures date change; ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERAL States: comments due by 10- PROTECTION AGENCY COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Montana; published 8-13-01 17-01; published 9-17- Air pollutants, hazardous; 01 [FR 01-23177] national emission standards: Frequency allocations and HEALTH AND HUMAN West Coast States and Hazardous waste radio treaty matters: SERVICES DEPARTMENT Western Pacific combustors; comments New advanced mobile and Centers for Medicare & fisheries— due by 10-16-01; fixed terrestrial services; Medicaid Services Pacific Coast groundfish; published 8-17-01 [FR 01- frequencies below 3 GHz; Medicare: comments due by 10- 20897] comments due by 10-19- 01; published 10-11-01 Medicare+Choice program— 16-01; published 10-1- ENVIRONMENTAL [FR 01-25640] Providers; recredentialing 01 [FR 01-24498] PROTECTION AGENCY Radio stations; table of requirements; published Marine mammals: Air programs: assignments: 9-12-01 Incidental taking— Stratospheric ozone Michigan and Texas; Vandenberg Air Force OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT protection— comments due by 10-15- Base, CA; missile and AND BUDGET Methyl bromide; 01; published 9-5-01 [FR rocket launches, aircraft Management and Budget quarantine and 01-22207] flight test operations, Office preshipment Texas; comments due by and helicopter applications; Air Transportation Safety and operations; Pacific 10-15-01; published 9-5- System Stabilization Act: exemptions; comments 01 [FR 01-22201] harbor seals; comments due by 10-17-01; Aviation disaster relief; air due by 10-15-01; published 7-19-01 [FR FEDERAL DEPOSIT carrier guarantee loan published 9-14-01 [FR 01-17907] INSURANCE CORPORATION program; published 10-12- 01-23038] Community Reinvestment Act 01 ENVIRONMENTAL regulations; review; Ocean and coastal resource PROTECTION AGENCY TRANSPORTATION management: comments due by 10-17-01; Air programs: State authority DEPARTMENT published 7-19-01 [FR 01- Marine sanctuaries— delegations: Federal Aviation 18033] Submarine cable permit; Pennsylvania; comments Administration FEDERAL RESERVE fair market value due by 10-15-01; Airworthiness directives: analysis; comments due SYSTEM published 9-13-01 [FR 01- Community Reinvestment Act Raytheon; published 9-6-01 by 10-16-01; published 22991] 9-28-01 [FR 01-24345] regulations; review; ENVIRONMENTAL comments due by 10-17-01; DEFENSE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS DUE NEXT PROTECTION AGENCY published 7-19-01 [FR 01- Federal Acquisition Regulation Air programs; State authority 18033] WEEK (FAR): delegations: GENERAL SERVICES Claim and terms relating to Pennsylvania; comments ADMINISTRATION AGRICULTURE termination; definitions; due by 10-15-01; Federal Acquisition Regulation DEPARTMENT comments due by 10-15- published 9-13-01 [FR 01- (FAR): Animal and Plant Health 01; published 8-15-01 [FR 22990] Inspection Service 01-20486] Claim and terms relating to ENVIRONMENTAL termination; definitions; Privacy Act; implementation Exportation and importation of PROTECTION AGENCY comments due by 10-15- animals and animal National Reconnaissance Air quality implementation 01; published 8-15-01 [FR products: Office; comments due by plans; approval and 01-20486] 10-16-01; published 8-17- Bovine spongiform promulgation; various HEALTH AND HUMAN 01 [FR 01-20367] encephalopathy; States: SERVICES DEPARTMENT importation prohibitions; DEFENSE DEPARTMENT California; correction; Centers for Medicare & comments due by 10-15- Navy Department comments due by 10-15- Medicaid Services 01; published 8-14-01 [FR Privacy Act; implementation; 01; published 9-13-01 [FR 01-20399] Medicaid: comments due by 10-16-01; 01-22999] Managed care; comments COMMERCE DEPARTMENT published 8-17-01 [FR 01- Superfund program: due by 10-19-01; Census Bureau 20366] Natonal oil and hazardous published 8-20-01 [FR 01- Age search program: ENERGY DEPARTMENT contingency plan— 20715] Program requirements; Energy Efficiency and National priorities list HOUSING AND URBAN comments due by 10-17- Renewable Energy Office update; comments due DEVELOPMENT 01; published 9-17-01 [FR Consumer products; energy by 10-17-01; published DEPARTMENT 01-23164] conservation program: 9-17-01 [FR 01-22998] Public and Indian housing:
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:16 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\12OCCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2001 / Reader Aids v
Public housing agency Claim and terms relating to Boeing; comments due by published 7-19-01 [FR 01- plans— termination; definitions; 10-19-01; published 8-20- 18033] Poverty deconcentration; comments due by 10-15- 01 [FR 01-20807] Established Income 01; published 8-15-01 [FR TRANSPORTATION Range definition; 01-20486] DEPARTMENT amendments; comments NUCLEAR REGULATORY Federal Aviation LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS due by 10-15-01; COMMISSION Administration published 8-15-01 [FR Production and utilization Airworthiness directives: This is a continuing list of 01-20565] facilities; domestic licensing: Boeing; comments due by public bills from the current INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Light-water cooled nuclear 10-19-01; published 9-4- session of Congress which Fish and Wildlife Service power plants, 01 [FR 01-22092] have become Federal laws. It Endangered and threatened components; construction may be used in conjunction TRANSPORTATION species: and inservice inspection with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws DEPARTMENT Critical habitat and testing; industry Update Service) on 202–523– designations— codes and standards; Federal Aviation 6641. This list is also Monterey spineflower; comments due by 10-17- Administration available online at http:// comments due by 10- 01; published 8-3-01 [FR Airworthiness directives: www.nara.gov/fedreg/ 19-01; published 9-19- 01-19414] Bombardier; comments due plawcurr.html. 01 [FR 01-23248] SMALL BUSINESS by 10-15-01; published 9- Robust spineflower; ADMINISTRATION 14-01 [FR 01-23068] The text of laws is not comments due by 10- Business loans: TRANSPORTATION published in the Federal 19-01; published 9-19- Microloan program; DEPARTMENT Register but may be ordered 01 [FR 01-23249] comments due by 10-15- Federal Aviation in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual Scotts Valley spineflower; 01; published 9-14-01 [FR Administration pamphlet) form from the comments due by 10- 01-22959] Superintendent of Documents, Airworthiness directives: 19-01; published 9-19- SOCIAL SECURITY U.S. Government Printing Dornier; comments due by 01 [FR 01-23247] ADMINISTRATION Office, Washington, DC 20402 INTERIOR DEPARTMENT 10-15-01; published 9-14- (phone, 202–512–1808). The Social security benefits, and 01 [FR 01-23070] Minerals Management organization and text will also be made Service procedures: Honeywell; comments due available on the Internet from by 10-15-01; published 8- GPO Access at http:// Outer Continental Shelf; oil, Federal old age, survivors, 16-01 [FR 01-20591] www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ gas, and sulphur operations: and disability insurance— Offshore cranes; American McDonnell Douglas; nara005.html. Some laws may Applications and related not yet be available. Petroleum Institute’s forms; comments due comments due by 10-15- Specification 2C; by 10-16-01; published 01; published 8-29-01 [FR incorporation by reference; 8-17-01 [FR 01-20156] 01-21751] H.R. 2510/P.L. 107–47 comments due by 10-17- TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION 01; published 7-19-01 [FR Defense Production Act DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT 01-18022] Amendments of 2001 (Oct. 5, Coast Guard Federal Aviation JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 2001; 115 Stat. 260) Drawbridge operations: Administration Immigration and Louisiana; comments due by Class E airspace; comments Last List October 10, 2001 Naturalization Service 10-15-01; published 8-16- due by 10-15-01; published Immigration: 01 [FR 01-20317] 8-29-01 [FR 01-21826] Legal Immigration Family Regattas and marine parades: TRANSPORTATION Equity Act; DEPARTMENT implementation— Eighth Coast Guard District; Public Laws Electronic comments due by 10-17- Federal Aviation ‘‘K’’ nonimmigrant Notification Service 01; published 9-17-01 [FR Administration classification for (PENS) 01-22812] spouses of U.S. citizens Class E airspace; comments and their children; TRANSPORTATION due by 10-15-01; published comments due by 10- DEPARTMENT 8-29-01 [FR 01-21819] PENS is a free electronic mail 15-01; published 8-14- Federal Aviation TREASURY DEPARTMENT notification service of newly 01 [FR 01-20302] Administration Comptroller of the Currency enacted public laws. To LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Air carrier certification and Community Reinvestment Act operations: subscribe, go to http:// Copyright Office, Library of regulations; review; hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ Fractional aircraft ownership Congress comments due by 10-17-01; publaws-l.html or send E-mail programs and on-demand Copyright arbitration royalty published 7-19-01 [FR 01- to [email protected] operations; comments due panel rules and procedures: 18033] with the following text by 10-16-01; published 7- Digital performance of message: 18-01 [FR 01-17503] TREASURY DEPARTMENT sound recordings; Customs Service reasonable rates and Airworthiness directives: SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L Administrative rulings; terms determination; BAE Systems (Operations) Your Name. comments due by 10-17- Ltd.; comments due by comments due by 10-17-01; 01; published 10-10-01 10-15-01; published 9-14- published 8-28-01 [FR 01- 21659] Note: This service is strictly [FR 01-25392] 01 [FR 01-23069] for E-mail notification of new NATIONAL AERONAUTICS TRANSPORTATION TREASURY DEPARTMENT laws. The text of laws is not AND SPACE DEPARTMENT Thrift Supervision Office available through this service. ADMINISTRATION Federal Aviation Community Reinvestment Act PENS cannot respond to Federal Acquisition Regulation Administration regulations; review; specific inquiries sent to this (FAR): Airworthiness directives: comments due by 10-17-01; address.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 19:16 Oct 11, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\12OCCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 12OCCU