issue-1996-04-02•Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-02
Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-02
issue-1996-04-02Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-02Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-8003 Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Texas; Correction of the Design Value and Classification for the Beaumont/Port Arthur Ozone Nonattainment Area
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14495-14497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8003]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14496]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[TX-59-1-7268; FRL-5451-1]
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of
Texas; Correction of the Design Value and Classification for the
Beaumont/Port Arthur Ozone Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces the Administrator's decision to
correct the design value and classification of the Beaumont/Port Arthur
ozone nonattainment area. The Beaumont/Port Arthur area (the area) was
classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area by EPA on November 6,
1991. However, EPA has determined that the ozone design value of 0.160
parts per million (ppm) published by EPA and used in classifying the
area as a serious ozone nonattainment area was incorrect. The correct
monitored ozone design value was 0.158 ppm. This design value falls
within the range of values considered as moderate nonattainment for
ozone under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). Pursuant to
section 110(k)(6) of the CAAA, which allows EPA to correct its actions,
EPA is today publishing the correct design value of 0.158 ppm and is
granting the State's request to correct the classification of the area
from serious to moderate.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will become effective on June 3, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mick Cote, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Prior to the CAAA, EPA identified and designated nonattainment
areas with respect to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). For such areas, States submitted State Implementation Plans
(SIPs) to control emissions and achieve attainment of the NAAQS. The
Beaumont/Port Arthur area, initially comprised of Jefferson and Orange
Counties, was originally designated as nonattainment for ozone on March
3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). Hardin County is part of the area's Metropolitan
Statistical Area, and as such was included in the Beaumont/Port Arthur
area with Jefferson and Orange Counties on November 6, 1991 (56 FR
56694). The SIP for the area was first adopted in the early 1970's.
Under the CAAA, the area retained its designation of nonattainment
and was classified as serious by operation of law pursuant to sections
107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAAA. See 56 FR
56694 (November 6, 1991). This classification was required to be based
on the design value for the area. The monitored design value was
rounded to two decimal places by the State and reported to EPA as 0.16
ppm. Section 179B defines the ranges of design values associated with
each classification. Moderate areas were defined by design values from
0.138 ppm to 0.160 ppm. Serious areas were defined by design value
ranges from 0.160 ppm to 0.180 ppm.
Since the reported design value for the area made it difficult to
determine the classification, the design value of a special purpose
monitor was used to assist EPA in determining whether the area should
be classified as moderate or serious. This special purpose monitor had
a design value of 0.180 ppm, which lead EPA to believe that the serious
classification was more appropriate. The EPA published the design value
as 0.160 ppm in its November 6, 1991 Federal Register document, and
classified the area as serious. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission recently discovered a data file which allowed the State to
recalculate the actual design value of the 4th highest hourly peak
ozone concentration at the State-run monitoring site in Beaumont to
three decimal places. The actual design value for the May 28, 1989
exceedance has been calculated at 0.158 ppm.
Correction of Error Under Section 110(k)(6)
Section 110(k)(6) of the Act provides whenever the Administrator
determines that the Administrator's action approving, disapproving, or
promulgating any plan or plan revision (or part thereof), area
designation, redesignation, classification, or reclassification was in
error, the Administrator may in the same manner as the approval,
disapproval, or promulgation revise such action as appropriate without
requiring any further submission from the State. Such determination and
the basis thereof shall be provided to the State and public. The EPA
interprets this provision to authorize the Agency to make corrections
to a promulgation when it is shown to EPA's satisfaction that an error
occurred in failing to consider or inappropriately considering
information available to EPA at the time of the promulgation, or the
information made available at the time of promulgation is subsequently
demonstrated to have been clearly inadequate.
The EPA's initial action classifying the Beaumont/Port Arthur area
was based on an ozone design value obtained from the State monitoring
network of 0.16 ppm, along with consideration of some data from a
special purpose monitor. The design value submitted to EPA by the State
at the time the classification was promulgated has subsequently been
proven to be inadequate. A corrected design value of 0.158 ppm obtained
from the State monitoring network during the initial classification
timeframe has recently been submitted to EPA by the State and deemed
accurate.
Further, the EPA has since determined that data from the special
purpose monitor (SPM) should not have been used for classification
purposes since 1) the SPM is not part of the State monitoring network,
2) the data from this monitor are for research purposes, 3) these data
are not reported to EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System, and
4) the SPM data used to assist in making the original design value
determination were collected in 1990, outside of the 1987-1989
timeframe generally associated with classification determinations.
Final Action
In the Federal Register of November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA
issued a final rule promulgating the designations, boundaries, and
classifications of ozone nonattainment areas (and for nonattainment
areas for other pollutants not addressed in this action). Accordingly,
in today's action, EPA is correcting this error by publishing the
correct design value of 0.158 ppm for the Beaumont/Port Arthur area,
and correcting the classification of the area from serious to moderate
for ozone in accordance with section 110(k)(6). In accordance with CAAA
sections 107(d)(2)(B), and 110(k)(6), this document is a final
publication of the ozone design value for the Beaumont/Port Arthur area
and the classification of the area to a moderate ozone nonattainment
area, and is not subject to the notice and comment provisions of
sections 553 through 557 of Title 5. Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes; State of Texas; Correction of the Design
Value and Classification for the Beaumont/Port Arthur Ozone
Nonattainment Area (Page 6 of 7).
[[Page 14497]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: March 26, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows:
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7871q.
2. In Sec. 81.344, the ozone table is amended by revising the entry
for the Beaumont/Port Arthur Area to read as follows:
Sec. 81.344 Texas.
* * * * *
Texas--Ozone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beaumont/Port Arthur Area:
Hardin County..................... ............... Nonattainment....... ............... Moderate
Jefferson County.................. ............... Nonattainment....... ............... Moderate
Orange County..................... ............... Nonattainment....... ............... Moderate
* * * * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-8003 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8002 Pesticide Reports for Pesticide-Producing Establishments (EPA Form 3540-16); Additional Time to Report
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8002]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 167
[OECA; FRL-5451-8]
Pesticide Reports for Pesticide-Producing Establishments (EPA
Form 3540-16); Additional Time to Report
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In Federal Register Volume 61, No. 43, appearing on pages 8221
and 8222 in the issue of Monday, March 4, 1996, make the following
correction to the date for reporting 1995 annual pesticide production
information.
On page 8221, in the third column, under DATES: should be changed
to read: ``Annual pesticide production reports for the calendar year
1995 will not be due until two (2) months after the reporting packages
are mailed out. A subsequent Federal Register notice will announce the
mail out date and will establish the due date for submission of the
1995 reports.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol L. Buckingham, (202) 564-5008,
fax (202) 564-0085, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 2225A,
401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460.
Dated: March 26, 1996.
Sylvia K. Lowarance,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance.
[FR Doc. 96-8002 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7998 List of Communities Eligible for the Sale of Flood Insurance
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14497-14499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7998]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
44 CFR Part 64
[Docket No. FEMA-7637]
List of Communities Eligible for the Sale of Flood Insurance
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule identifies communities participating in the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). These communities have applied to the
program and have agreed to enact certain floodplain management
measures. The communities' participation in the program authorizes the
sale of flood insurance to owners of property located in the
communities listed.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The dates listed in the third column of the table.
ADDRESSES: Flood insurance policies for property located in the
communities listed can be obtained from any licensed property insurance
agent or broker serving the eligible community, or from the NFIP at:
Post Office Box 6464, Rockville, MD 20849, (800) 638-6620.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert F. Shea, Jr., Division
Director, Program Implementation Division, Mitigation Directorate, 500
C Street, SW., room 417, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3619.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
flood insurance which is generally not otherwise available. In return,
communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management
measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future
flooding. Since the communities on the attached list have recently
entered the NFIP, subsidized flood insurance is now available for
property in the community.
In addition, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency has identified the special flood hazard areas in some of these
communities by publishing a Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) or Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of the flood map, if one has been
published, is indicated in the fourth column of the table. In the
communities listed where a flood map has been published, Section 102 of
the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
4012(a), requires the purchase of flood insurance as a condition of
Federal or federally related financial assistance for acquisition or
construction of buildings in the special flood hazard areas shown on
the map.
The Director finds that the delayed effective dates would be
contrary to the public interest. The Director also finds that notice
and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and
unnecessary.
National Environmental Policy Act
This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR
Part 10, Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact
assessment has been prepared.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Acting Associate Director certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities in accordance with the Regulatory
[[Page 14498]]
Flexibility Act, 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq., because the rule creates no
additional burden, but lists those communities eligible for the sale of
flood insurance.
Regulatory Classification
This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the
criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30,
1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not involve any collection of information for
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Executive Order 12612, Federalism
This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications
under Executive Order 12612, Federalism, October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987
Comp., p. 252.
Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets the applicable standards of section 2(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR 55195, 3 CFR, 1991
Comp., p. 309.
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64
Flood insurance, Floodplains.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:
PART 64--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 64 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp., p. 376.
Sec. 64.6 [Amended]
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec. 64.6 are
amended as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community
State/location No. Effective date of eligibility Current effective map date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Eligibles--Emergency Program
Michigan: Laingsburg, city of, 260950 February 8, 1996.
Shiawassee County.
South Dakota: Jerauld County, 460273 February 22, 1996.
unincorporated areas.
Texas:
Miles, city of, Runnels County. 480992 February 23, 1996............... August 13, 1976.
Cockrell Hill, city of, Dallas 480169 February 29, 1996............... June 11, 1976.
County.
New Eligibles--Regular Program
Pennsylvania: East Pittsburgh, 422662 February 7, 1996................ October 4, 1995.
borough of, Allegheny County.
Michigan: Lincoln, township of, 260828 February 21, 1996............... September 27, 1991.
Newaygo County.
Indiana:
Oldenburg, town of, Franklin 180509 February 29, 1996............... November 2, 1995.
County.
Mt. Carmel, town of, Franklin 180508 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Illinois: Shiloh, village of, St. 171043 ......do........................
Clair County 1.
Reinstatements
Pennsylvania:
Crescent, township of, 421060 January 24, 1975, Emerg.; July October 4, 1995.
Allegheny County. 16, 1981, Reg.; October 4,
1995, Susp.; February 5, 1996,
Rein.
Glenfield, borough of, 420039 July 9, 1975, Emerg.; March 18, Do.
Allegheny County. 1980, Reg.; October 4, 1995,
Susp.; February 5, 1996, Rein.
Rosslyn Farms, borough of, 420069 February 7, 1975, Emerg.; May Do.
Allegheny County. 19, 1981, Reg.; October 4,
1995, Susp.; February 5, 1996,
Rein.
Whitaker, borough of, Allegheny 420087 July 24, 1975, Emerg.; May 25, Do.
County. 1976, Reg.; October 4, 1995,
Susp.; February 6, 1996, Rein.
West Virginia: Pocahontas County, 540283 February 12, 1976, Emerg.; October 17, 1989.
unincorporated areas. October 17, 1989, Reg; October
17, 1989, Susp.; May 1, 1991,
Rein.; November 3, 1993, Susp.;
February 6, 1996, Rein.
Montana: Whitehall, town of, 300120 May 7, 1975, Emerg.; June 4, June 4, 1987.
Jefferson County. 1987, Reg.; March 4, 1988,
With.; February 8, 1996, Rein.
West Virginia: Oakvale, town of, 540127 July 1, 1975, Emerg.; December December 15, 1983.
Mercer County. 15, 1983, Reg.; December 17,
1991, Susp.; February 7, 1996,
Rein.
New York: Hannibal, town of, Oswego 360651 September 6, 1985, Emerg.; February 1, 1988.
County. February 1, 1988, Reg.;
November 4, 1982, Susp.;
February 7, 1996, Rein.
Illinois: Crete, village of, Will 170700 May 21, 1975, Emerg.; March 2, September 6, 1995.
County. 1981, Reg.; September 6, 1995,
Susp.; February 15, 1996, Rein.
Pennsylvania:
Greensborough, borough of, 420477 December 2, 1975, Emerg.; March Do.
Greene County. 2, 1989, Reg.; September 6,
1995, Susp.; February 20, 1996,
Rein.
[[Page 14499]]
Port Vue, borough of, Allegheny 420066 April 30, 1974, Emerg.; October 4, 1995.
County. September 28, 1979, Reg.;
October 4, 1995, Susp.;
February 29, 1996, Rein.
Regular Program Conversions
Region II:
New Jersey:
North Wildwood, city of, Cape 345308 February 16, 1996, Suspension February 16, 1996.
May County. Withdrawn.
Wildwood, city of, Cape May 345329 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Wildwood Crest, borough of, 345330 ......do-....................... Do.
Cape May County.
Region VI:
Wisconsin:
Verona, city of, Dane County... 550092 ......do........................ Do.
Watertown, city of, Dodge and 550107 ......do........................ Do.
Jefferson Counties.
Region VI:
Texas:
Balcones Heights, city of, 481094 ......do........................ Do.
Bexar County.
Bexar County, unincorporated 480035 ......do........................ Do.
areas.
Castle Hills, city of, Bexar 480037 ......do........................ Do.
County.
China Grove, city of, Bexar 481141 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Converse, city of, Bexar County 480038 ......do........................ Do.
Fair Oaks Ranch, city of, Bexar 481644 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Hollywood Park, town of, Bexar 480040 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Kirby, city of, Bexar County... 480041 ......do........................ Do.
Leon Valley, city of, Bexar 480042 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Live Oak, city of, Bexar County 480043 ......do........................ Do.
Shavano Park, city of, Bexar 480047 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Somerset, city of, Bexar County 481264 ......do........................ Do.
Universal City, city of, Bexar 480049 ......do........................ Do.
County.
Windcrest, city of, Bexar 480689 ......do........................ Do.
County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 The Village of Shiloh has adopted St. Clair County's (CID #170616) Flood Insurance Rate Map and study dated 8-
5-85 for floodplain management and insurance purposes (Panels number 0047B & 0070B).
Code for reading third column: Emerg.--Emergency; Reg.--Regular; Rein.--Reinstatement; Susp.--Suspension; With.--
Withdrawn.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.100, ``Flood
Insurance'')
Issued: March 11, 1996.
Richard W. Krimm,
Acting Associate Director Mitigation Directorate.
[FR Doc. 96-7998 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-05-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7993 Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Designation of Routine Management Measures
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14512-14513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7993]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 663
[Docket No. 960111002-6087-02; I.D. 112495B]
RIN 0648-AG31
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Designation of Routine
Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces regulations to designate certain management
measures as ``routine'' in the Pacific coast groundfish fishery off
Washington, Oregon, and California. Once management measures have been
designated as routine, they may be modified after a single meeting and
recommendation of the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council).
Such action is authorized under the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) and is intended to provide for responsive
inseason management of the groundfish resource.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William L. Robinson at 206-526-6140,
or Rodney R. McInnis at 310-980-4030.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP authorizes the designation of
certain management measures as ``routine.'' Routine management measures
are specific for species, gear types, and purposes. Implementation and
adjustment of those routine measures may occur after consideration at a
single Council meeting, approval by NMFS, and announcement in the
Federal Register. Adjustments must be within the scope of the analysis
performed when the management measure originally is designated routine.
This final rule makes additional routine designations, as follows: (1)
Trip limits for all groundfish species, separately or in any
combination, taken with open access gear; and (2) in the limited entry
(or open access) fisheries, trip and size limits for lingcod, and trip
limits for
[[Page 14513]]
canary rockfish, shortspine thornyheads, and longspine thornyheads.
NMFS issues this final rule under the authority of the FMP and the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act). NMFS
published a proposed rule at 61 FR 1739 (January 23, 1996), requesting
comments through March 8, 1996. The proposed rule was based on a
recommendation made by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council)
at its October 1994 meeting. NMFS concurs with the Council's
recommendation, and, as no written comments were received, the
regulatory text of this final rule is the same as proposed. The
proposed rule and Environmental Assessment and Regulatory Impact Review
(EA/RIR) prepared for this action contain relevant background and
rationale.
Classification
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA) has determined
that this final rule is necessary for management of the Pacific coast
groundfish fishery and that it is consistent with the Magnuson Act and
other applicable law.
The Council prepared an EA for this rule (contained in the EA/RIR)
and the AA concluded that there would be no significant impact on the
environment.
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
E.O. 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 663
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 27, 1996.
Charles Karnella,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 663 is amended
as follows:
PART 663--PACIFIC COAST GROUNDFISH FISHERY
l. The authority citation for part 663 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 663.23, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(G)through (I) and paragraph
(c)(1)(ii)(A) are revised, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(J), (K), and (L) are
added; paragraph (c)(2) is removed, and paragraph (c)(3) is
redesignated as paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 663.23 Catch restrictions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(G) Thornyheads (shortspine thornyheads or longspine thornyheads,
separately or combined)--all gear--trip landing and frequency limits;
(H) Bocaccio--all gear--trip landing and frequency limits;
(I) Pacific whiting--all gear--trip landing and frequency limits;
(J) Lingcod--all gear--trip landing and frequency limits; size
limits;
(K) Canary rockfish--all gear--trip landing and frequency limits;
and
(L) All groundfish, separately or in any combination--any legal
open access gear (including non-groundfish trawl gear used to harvest
pink shrimp, spot or ridgeback prawns, California halibut or sea
cucumbers in accordance with the regulations in this subpart)--trip
landing and frequency limits. (Size limits designated routine in this
section continue to apply.)
(ii) * * *
(A) Trip landing and frequency limits--to extend the fishing
season; to minimize disruption of traditional fishing and marketing
patterns; to reduce discards; to discourage target fishing while
allowing small incidental catches to be landed; to allow small
fisheries to operate outside the normal season; and, for the open
access fishery only, to maintain landings at historical (1984-88)
proportions.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-7993 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7986 Organization and Functions of the Board and Delegations of Authority
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
49 CFR Part 800
Organization and Functions of the Board and Delegations of
Authority
AGENCY: National Transportation Safety Board.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This revision corrects an inadvertent omission. By Federal
Register notice published November 30, 1995 (60 FR 61487), the Safety
Board revised a number of its organizational descriptions, including 49
CFR 800.2(g). The Board inadvertently failed to indicate in that rule
that the Office of Surface Transportation Safety also conducts
investigations concerning hazardous materials accidents. This notice
corrects that omission.
DATES: The new rule is effective on April 2, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jane F. Mackall, (202) 382-6540.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective January 2, 1996, and to reflect
current practice, the Safety Board updated the description of its
organization and the delegations of authority that are published at 49
CFR Part 800. Unintentionally, the newly adopted paragraph at Part
800.2(g) did not reflect the responsibility of the Office of Surface
Transportation to investigate accidents involving hazardous materials.
This notice corrects that omission.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 800
Authority delegations (Government agencies), Organization and
functions (Government agencies).
Accordingly, 49 CFR Part 800 is amended as set forth below.
PART 800--ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARD AND DELEGATIONS
OF AUTHORITY
1. The Authority citation for Part 800 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Independent Safety Board Act of 1974, as amended (49
U.S.C. 1101 et seq.); Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49
U.S.C. 40101 et seq.).
2. Section 800.2 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 800.2 Organization.
* * * * *
(g) The Office of Surface Transportation Safety, which conducts
investigations of highway, railroad, pipeline, marine, and hazardous
materials accidents within the Board's jurisdiction; prepares reports
for submission to the Board and release to the public setting forth the
facts and circumstances of such accidents, including a recommendation
as to the probable cause(s); determines the probable cause(s) of
accidents when delegated authority to do so by the Board; initiates
safety recommendations to prevent future surface transportation
accidents; participates in the investigation of accidents that occur in
foreign countries and involve U.S.-registered vessels; and conducts
special investigations into selected surface accidents involving safety
issues of concern to the Board.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, D.C. on this 28th day of March 1996.
Daniel D. Campbell,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 96-7986 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7977 New Animal Drugs for Use in Animal Feeds; Nicarbazin, Roxarsone, and Lincomycin; Nicarbazin and Lincomycin; Nicarbazin and Roxarsone
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7977]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 558
New Animal Drugs for Use in Animal Feeds; Nicarbazin, Roxarsone,
and Lincomycin; Nicarbazin and Lincomycin; Nicarbazin and Roxarsone
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of three abbreviated new animal
drug applications (ANADA's) filed by Planalquimica Industrial Ltda. The
ANADA's provide for use of single ingredient nicarbazin, roxarsone, and
lincomycin Type A medicated articles to make combination drug Type C
medicated broiler feeds containing nicarbazin, roxarsone, and
lincomycin; nicarbazin and lincomycin; or nicarbazin and roxarsone.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James F. McCormack, Center For
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-128), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-594-1607.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Planalquimica Industrial Ltda., Rua das
Magnolias nr. 2405, Jardim das Bandeiras, CEP 13053-120, Campinas, Sao
Paulo, Brazil, filed the following ANADA's:
ANADA 200-170: Nicarbazin with roxarsone and lincomycin, for Type C
medicated feeds, as an aid in preventing outbreaks of cecal (Eimeria
tenella) and intestinal (E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. necatrix, and E.
brunetti) coccidiosis; for increased rate of weight gain, in broiler
chickens;
ANADA 200-171: Nicarbazin and lincomycin, for Type C medicated
feeds, as an aid in preventing outbreaks of cecal (E. tenella) and
intestinal (E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. necatrix, and E. brunetti)
coccidiosis; for increased rate of weight gain, in broiler chickens;
ANADA 200-172: Nicarbazin and roxarsone, for Type C medicated
feeds, as an aid in preventing outbreaks of cecal (E. tenella) and
intestinal (E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. necatrix, and E. brunetti)
coccidiosis; for increased rate of weight gain, in broiler chickens.
The ANADA's provide for use of previously approved single
ingredient Type A medicated articles to make combination drug Type C
medicated feeds. Planalquimica's ANADA 200-170 is approved as a generic
copy of Merck Research Laboratories' NADA 107-997, ANADA 200-171 as a
generic copy of Merck's NADA 108-116, and ANADA 200-172 as a generic
copy of Merck's 108-115. The ANADA's are approved as of April 2, 1996,
and the regulations are amended in 21 CFR 558.366(c) to reflect the
approvals. The basis for approval is discussed in the freedom of
information summary.
These approvals are for use of Type A medicated articles to make
Type C medicated feeds. Nicarbazin and roxarsone are Catagory II drugs
which, as provided in 21 CFR 558.4, require an approved Form FDA 1900
for making a Type C medicated feed. Therefore, use of nicarbazin to
make combination drug Type C medicated feeds as provided in ANADA 200-
170, 200-171, and 200-172 require an approved Form FDA 1900.
In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of part 20
(21 CFR part 20) and Sec. 514.11(e)(2)(ii) (21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii)), a
summary of safety and effectiveness data and information submitted to
support approval of these applications may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 12420
Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23, Rockville, MD 20857, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.24(d)(1)(i) that this
action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 558
Animal drugs, Animal feeds.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 558 is
amended as follows:
PART 558--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 558 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 512, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b, 371).
Sec. 558.366 [Amended]
2. Section 558.366 Nicarbazin is amended in the table in paragraph
(c) under the ``Sponsor'' column for the entries ``Lincomycin 2
(0.00044 pct),'' ``Roxarsone 22.7 (0.0025),'' and ``Roxarsone 22.7
(0.0025) plus lincomycin 2 (0.0004)'' by removing ``000006'' and adding
in its place ``000006, 060728''.
Dated: March 19, 1996.
Stephen F. Sundlof,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 96-7977 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7966 General Information; Modification of Commission's Rules
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14499-14500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7966]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 0
[DA 96-290]
General Information; Modification of Commission's Rules
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission is modifying a section
of the Commission's Rules that implements the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) fee schedule. This modification pertains to the charge for
recovery of the full, allowable direct costs of searching for and
reviewing records requested under the FOIA and Sec. 0.460(e) or
Sec. 0.461 of the Commission's rules, unless such fees are restricted
or waived in accordance with Sec. 0.470. The fees are being revised to
correspond to modifications in the rate of pay approved by Congress.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 1996.
[[Page 14500]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Boley, Freedom of Information Act
Officer, Records Management Branch, Room 234, Federal Communications
Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, (202) 418-
0210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FCC is modifying Section 0.467(a) of the
Commission's Rules. This rule pertains to the charges for searching and
reviewing records requested under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA). The FOIA requires federal agencies to establish a schedule of
fees for the processing of requests for agency records in accordance
with fee guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
In 1987, OMB issued its Uniform Freedom of Information Act Fee Schedule
and Guidelines. However, because the FOIA requires that each agency's
fees be based upon its direct costs of providing FOIA services, OMB did
not provide a unitary, government-wide schedule of fees. The Commission
based its FOIA fee schedule on the grade level of the employee who
processes the request. Thus, the fee schedule was computed at a Step 5
of each grade level based on the General Schedule effected January
1996. The instant revisions correspond to modifications in the rate of
pay recently approved by Congress.
Regulatory Procedures
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order No. 12866 and has
been determined not to be a ``significant rule'' since it will not have
an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
In addition, it has been determined that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 0
Freedom of information.
Federal Communications Commission.
Andrew S. Fishel,
Managing Director.
Amendatory Text
Part 0 of chapter I of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:
PART 0--COMMISSION ORGANIZATION
1. The authority citation for Part 0 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 5, 48 Stat. 1068, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 155,
225, unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 0.467 is amended by revising the table in paragraph
(a)(1) and its note, and paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 0.467 Search and review fees.
(a)(1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grade Hourly fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GS-1....................................................... 8.56
GS-2....................................................... 9.31
GS-3....................................................... 10.50
GS-4....................................................... 11.78
GS-5....................................................... 13.19
GS-6....................................................... 14.70
GS-7....................................................... 16.33
GS-8....................................................... 18.08
GS-9....................................................... 19.98
GS-10...................................................... 22.00
GS-11...................................................... 24.17
GS-12...................................................... 28.97
GS-13...................................................... 34.45
GS-14...................................................... 40.72
GS-15...................................................... 47.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The fees in this table will be modified periodically to correspond
with modifications in the rate of pay approved by Congress.
(2) The fees in paragraph (a)(1) of this section were computed at
Step 5 of each grade level based on the General Schedule effective
January 1996 and include 20 percent for personnel benefits.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-7966 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7943 State-Administered Programs; General Education Provisions Act Enforcement
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14483-14484]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7943]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Part 76 and 81
RIN 1880-AA64
State-Administered Programs; General Education Provisions Act--
Enforcement
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Final Regulations; Correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On September 6, 1995, the Secretary of Education published in
the Federal Register (60 FR 46492) final regulations which made
technical amendments to the Education Department General Administrative
Regulations (EDGAR) to implement amendments to the General Education
Provisions Act (GEPA) made by the Improving America's Schools Act
(IASA). This document corrects authority cites under Part 76, State-
Administered Programs and Part 81, General Education Provisions Act--
Enforcement.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This correction is effective October 6, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronelle Holloman, U.S. Department of
Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 3636, ROB-3, Washington,
D.C. 20202-4248. Telephone: (202) 205-3501. Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final regulations published on September
6 stated authority citations for Secs. 76.703 and 76.704 incorrectly,
included an authority citation for Sec. 76.705, which was previously
redesignated, and failed to include authority citations for
Secs. 76.708, 76.709 and 76.710. Sections of Part 81 were also
previously redesignated on August 16, 1993 (58 FR
[[Page 14484]]
43472). The final regulations published on September 6, 1995 did not
reflect these redesignations. The final regulations are corrected as
follows:
Secs. 76.708, 76.703, 76.704 [Corrected]
1. On page 46494, column 1, amendment 19, Sec. 76.708 is added to
the list of sections for which the authority citation is revised and
Secs. 76.703 and 76.704 are removed from the list.
2. An amendment is added revising the authority citations for
Secs. 76.703 and 76.704 to read ``(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, 3474,
6511(a) and 31 U.S.C. 6503)''.
Secs. 76.705, 76.709, 76.710 [Corrected]
3. On page 46494, column 1, amendment 27, the reference to
Sec. 76.705 is removed and Secs. 76.709 and 76.710 are added in its
place.
4. On page 46494, column 2, amendment 30 is corrected by removing
``81.24'' and adding, in its place, ``81.34''.
5. On page 46494, column 3, and 46495, column 1, amendments 43
through 56, are corrected by renumbering the sections for which the
authority citations are revised from sections 81.21 through 81.34 to
sections 81.31 through 81.44, respectively.
Dated: March 25, 1996.
Donald R. Wurtz,
Chief Financial Officer, Office of The Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-7943 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7919 Change of Names and Addresses; Technical Amendment
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14481-14482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7919]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Parts 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 180, 181, and 189
Change of Names and Addresses; Technical Amendment
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its
regulations to reflect a change in the name and address for the
Association of Official Analytical Chemists International. In addition
the agency is also amending the regulations to reflect an
organizational change within its Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition (CFSAN). This action is
[[Page 14482]]
editorial in nature, and is intended to provide accuracy and clarity to
the agency's regulations.
DATES: Effective April 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaJuana D. Caldwell, Office of Policy
(HF-27), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD
20857, 301-443-2994.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is amending its regulations in parts
172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 180, 181, and 189 to reflect a change in
the name and address for the Association of Official Analytical
Chemists International. The current name and address listed in FDA's
regulations is Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 2300 Wilson
Blvd., Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201-3301. The new name and address is
Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, 481 North
Frederick Ave., suite 500, Gaithersburg, MD 20877-2504.
To reflect an organizational change within CFSAN, FDA is amending
the regulations to remove references to the Division of Food and Color
Additives.
Publication of this document constitutes final action on these
changes under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). FDA has
determined that notice and public comment are unnecessary because these
amendments are editorial and nonsubstantive in nature.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 172
Food additives, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Parts 173 and 180
Food additives.
21 CFR Part 175
Adhesives, Food additives, Food packaging.
21 CFR Parts 176, 177, and 178
Food additives, Food packaging.
21 CFR Parts 181 and 189
Food ingredients, Food packaging.
Therefore under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C.
301, et seq) and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 180, 181, and 189
are amended as follows:
1. In parts 172, 173, 176, 177, 178, and 189 remove the words
``Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 2200 Wilson Blvd., suite
400, Arlington, VA 22201-3301'' and add in its place the words
``Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, 481 North
Frederick Ave., suite 500, Gaithersburg, MD 20877-2504'' wherever it
appears.
2. In parts 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 180, and 181 remove the
phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives,'' and remove the mail
code ``(HFF-330)'' and add in its place ``(HFS-200)'' wherever it
appears.
Dated: March 26, 1996.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 96-7919 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7913 Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania-Emission Statement Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14493-14495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7913]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[PA028-5913a; FRL-5427-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania-Emission Statement Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the Allegheny County
portion of the SIP. This revision consists of an emission statement
program for stationary sources that emit volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and/or nitrogen oxides (NOX) at or above specified actual
emission threshold levels. The intended effect of this action is to
approve a regulation for annual reporting of actual emissions by
sources that emit VOC and/or NOX within the county of Allegheny in
accordance with the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA). This action is being
taken under section 110 of the CAA.
DATES: This action is effective June 3, 1996 unless notice is received
on or before May 2, 1996 that adverse or critical comments will be
submitted. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be
published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be mailed to Marcia L. Spink, Associate
Director, Air Programs, Mailcode 3AT00, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19107. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available
for public inspection during normal business hours at the EPA office
listed above; the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460;
and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of
Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania 17105; Allegheny County Health Department, Bureau of Air
Pollution Control, 301 39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 597-3164, at the
EPA Region III address above. Information can also be requested via E-
mail (Q[email protected]); however, comments must still be
submitted in writing.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 31, 1992, the Commonwealth
[[Page 14494]]
of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP)
submitted a SIP revision to EPA on Emission Statements. This revision
would add new section E to the Allegheny County Health Department-
Bureau of Air Pollution Control (ACHD) Rules and Regulations, Article
XX, Chapter II (Inspections, Reporting, Tests and Monitoring), Sec. 202
(Reporting Requirements).
I. Background
The air quality planning and SIP requirements for ozone
nonattainment and transport areas are set out in subparts I and II of
Part D of Title I of the CAA, as amended by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. EPA published a ``General Preamble'' describing
EPA's preliminary views on how it intends to review SIPs and SIP
revisions submitted under Title I of the CAA, including those state
submittals for ozone transport areas within the states {see 57 FR 13498
(April 16, 1992) [''SIP: General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990''], 57 FR 18070 (April
28, 1992) [''Appendices to the General Preamble''], and 57 FR 55620
(November 25, 1992) [''SIP: NOx Supplement to the General
Preamble'']}.
EPA also issued a draft guidance document describing the
requirements for the emission statement programs discussed in this
action, entitled ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program'' (GESP), July, 1992. EPA is also conducting a
rulemaking process to modify Title 40, Part 51 of the CFR to reflect
the requirements of the emission statement program.
Section 182 of the CAA sets out a graduated control program for
ozone nonattainment areas. Section 182(a) sets out requirements
applicable in marginal ozone nonattainment areas, which are also
applicable by sections 182(b), (c), (d), and (e) to all other ozone
nonattainment areas. Among the requirements in section 182(a) is a
program for stationary sources to prepare and submit to the state each
year emission statements certifying their actual emissions of VOCs and
NOX. This section of the CAA provides that the states are to
submit a revision to their SIPs by November 15, 1992 establishing this
emission statement program.
If a source emits either VOC or NOX at or above the designated
minimum reporting level, the other pollutant should be included in the
emission statement, even if it is emitted at levels below the specified
cutoffs.
States may waive, with EPA approval, the requirement for an
emission statement for classes or categories of sources with less than
25 tons per year of actual plant-wide NOX or VOC emissions in
nonattainment areas if the class or category is included in the base
year and periodic inventories and emissions are calculated using
emissions factors established by EPA, such as those found in the EPA
publication AP-42, ``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors''
(AP-42, Fifth Edition, January 1995), or other methods acceptable to
EPA.
At minimum, the emission statement data should include:
--certification of data accuracy;
--Source identification information;
--Operating schedule;
--Emissions information (to include annual and typical ozone season day
emissions);
--Control equipment information; and
--P rocess data.
EPA developed emission statements data elements to be consistent
with other source and state reporting requirements. This consistency is
essential to assist states with quality assurance for emission
estimates and to facilitate consolidation of all EPA reporting
requirements.
II. EPA's Evaluation of Pennsylvania's Submittal
A. Procedural Background
In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Sec. 51.102, ACHD
held a public hearing on August 27, 1992 to solicit public comments on
the implementation plan for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Following
the public hearing, the plan was adopted on September 16, 1992 and
submitted to EPA on December 31, 1992 as a revision to the SIP.
B. Components of Pennsylvania's Emission Statement Program
There are several key and specific components of an acceptable
emission statement program. Specifically, Pennsylvania must submit a
revision to its SIP consisting of an emission statement program that
meets the minimum requirements for reporting by the sources and the
state. For the emission statement program to be approvable,
Pennsylvania's SIP revision must include, at a minimum, definitions and
provisions for applicability, compliance, and specific source reporting
requirements and reporting forms.
Pennsylvania's emission statement report form has been revised by
amending and adding the definitions of the following terms: actual
emissions, annual fuel process rate, certifying individual, control
efficiency, emission factor, emission method code, emission units,
facility, oxides of nitrogen, peak ozone season, percent seasonal
throughput, process rate, and volatile organic compounds.
ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XX, Chapter II, Sec. 202,
section E requires that persons responsible for each stationary source
that emits 25 tpy or more of NOX or VOC per calendar year shall
report the levels of emissions from the sources in order to track
emission reductions and attain the National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). The reporting provisions waives the requirement for
sources that emit less than 25 tpy under the condition that the class
or category is included in the base year and periodic inventories, and
the emission factors established by EPA or other methods acceptable to
EPA. In addition, section E also requires that a certifying official
for each facility provide Pennsylvania with a statement reporting
emissions by April 30 of each year, beginning with April 30, 1993 for
the emissions discharged during the previous calendar year. Section E
in conjunction with the report form provisions, provide specific
requirements for the content of these annual emission statements.
C. Enforceability
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has provisions in its SIP which
ensure that the emission statement requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B)
and sections 184(b)(2) and 182(f) of the CAA, as required by new
section E to the ACHD Rules and Regulations, Article XX, Chapter II
(Inspections, Reporting, Tests and Monitoring), Sec. 202 (Reporting
Requirements), are adequately enforced.
EPA has determined that the submittal made by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania satisfies the relevant requirements of the CAA and EPA's
guidance document, ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program'' (GESP), July 1992. EPA's detailed review of
Pennsylvania's Emission Statement Program is contained in a Technical
Support Document (TSD) which is available, upon request, from the EPA
Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP to include an
Emission Statement Program consisting of the addition of new section E
to the Allegheny County Health Department-Bureau of Air Quality Control
(ACHD) Rules and Regulations, Article XX,
[[Page 14495]]
Chapter II (Inspections, Reporting, Tests and Monitoring), Sec. 202
(Reporting Requirements). This revision was submitted to EPA by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on December 31, 1992.
EPA is approving this SIP revision without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will become
effective June 3, 1996 unless, by May 2, 1996, adverse or critical
comments are received.
If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before
the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective on June 3, 1996.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision of any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA
do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that
the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP
approval does not impose any new requirements, the Administrator
certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small
entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State
relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427
U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a) (2).
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under state or local law, and imposes no new
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this
action.
This action has been classified as Table 3 action for signature by
the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 3, 1996. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action approving Pennsylvania's Emission Statement Program may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Volatile
organic compounds, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and SIP requirements.
Dated: February 2, 1996.
W. T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart NN--Pennsylvania
2. Section 52.2020 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(97) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(97) Revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan
submitted by the Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection on December 31, 1992.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter dated December 31, 1992 from the Secretary, Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection, submitting a revision to the
Allegheny County portion of the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan.
(B) Addition of new section E to the Allegheny County Health
Department-Bureau of Air Pollution Control (ACHD) Rules and
Regulations, Article XX, Chapter II (Inspections, Reporting, Tests and
Monitoring), Sec. 202 (Reporting Requirements) were effective on
October 8, 1992. This revision consists of an emission statement
program for stationary sources which emit volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and/or nitrogen oxides (NOX) at or above specified actual
emission threshold levels. This program applies to stationary sources
within the county of Allegheny.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Remainder of December 31, 1992 state submittal pertaining to
Pennsylvania Emission Statement Program.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-7913 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7911 Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Tennessee; Revision to New Source Review, Construction and Operating Permit Requirements for Nashville/Davidson County
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14491-14493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7911]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[TN-140-01-6910a; FRL-5443-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Tennessee; Revision to New Source Review, Construction and Operating
Permit Requirements for Nashville/Davidson County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Nashville/Davidson County
portion of the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by
the State of Tennessee through the Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation on September 27, 1994. The submittal included
revisions to Nashville/Davidson County's Regulation Three, New Source
Review (NSR), Sections 3-1, 3-2 and 3-3, which were made to bring the
Nashville/Davidson County regulations into compliance with the 1990
amendments to the Clean Air Act (the Act) and the Federal regulations.
EPA finds that the revised rules meet the Federal nonattainment NSR
permitting requirements of the Act for the State's ozone nonattainment
areas.
On April 15, 1994, EPA granted limited approval of revisions to the
Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee SIP. At that time
several deficiencies were identified which had to be corrected for
Nashville/Davidson County's NSR SIP to fully meet the requirements of
the CAA. EPA finds that this submittal corrects those previous
deficiencies in Nashville/Davidson County's Regulation Three, New
Source Review.
DATES: This final rule is effective June 3, 1996, unless adverse or
critical comments are received by May 2, 1996. If the effective date is
delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Ms. Karen Borel, at
the Regional Office Address listed below.
Copies of the material submitted by the State of Tennessee may be
examined during normal business hours at the following locations:
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Programs Branch, 345
Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Tennessee Division of Air Pollution Control, 9th Floor L&C Annex, 401
Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1531
Bureau of Environmental Health Services, Metropolitan Health
Department, Nashville-Davidson County, 311--23rd Avenue, North,
Nashville, Tennessee 37203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interested persons wanting to examine
documents relative to this action should make an appointment with the
Region 4 Air Programs Branch at least 24 hours before the visiting day.
To schedule the appointment or to request additional information,
contact Karen C. Borel, Regulatory Planning and Development Section,
Air Programs Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division,
Region 4 EPA, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365. The
telephone number is 404/347-3555 extension 4197. Reference file TN140-
01-6910.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 27, 1994, Nashville/Davidson
County submitted revisions to their portion of the Tennessee SIP in
order to correct deficiencies previously identified on April 15, 1994,
(59 FR 17398) and to fully satisfy the NSR and PSD requirements of the
1990 CAA. Previously, on July 13, 1990, and February 26, 1993,
Nashville/Davidson County, through the State of Tennessee Department of
Environment and Conservation, submitted various revisions to the
Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee SIP. These earlier
submittals included revisions to Regulation Three, New Source Review,
and were intended to bring Nashville/Davidson County's regulations into
conformity with EPA's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
increments for Nitrogen dioxides (NO2) and the EPA's current NSR
requirements. Nashville/Davidson County was granted limited approval on
the earlier submittals on April 15, 1994, (59 FR 17398) because those
submittals as a whole substantially strengthened the Nashville/Davidson
County portion of the Tennessee SIP. On September 27, 1994, Nashville/
Davidson County submitted additional revisions to Regulation Three,
Sections 3-1, 3-2 and 3-3. These revisions to their NSR regulations
were made to correct the deficiencies identified in the April 15, 1994,
Federal Register (59 FR 17938) and to bring Nashville/Davidson County's
rules into compliance with the Act, as amended in 1990, and revised
Federal regulations.
The current SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine
completeness, and a letter of completeness dated November 17, 1994, was
sent to the State of Tennessee. EPA finds that the revisions provide
for consistency with the Act and corresponding Federal regulations,
that the revisions meet the new nonattainment NSR provisions for
nonattainment areas, and that the revisions correct the previously
identified deficiencies. EPA is approving the following revisions to
the Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee SIP.
Regulation Three, New Source Review
(A) Section 3-1 Definitions
Section 3-1(i): The definition of ``commenced'' has been modified
by adding ``has all necessary preconstruction approvals or permits
and'' between the words ``operator'' and ``has''.
[[Page 14492]]
Section 3-1(l): The definition of ``emission offset'' has been
modified by adding ``actual'' between the words ``of'' and
``emissions''.
Section 3-1(s): The definition of ``lowest achievable emission rate
(LAER)'' has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following definition:
``(s) Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER)--means, for any
source, the more stringent rate of emissions based on the following:
(1) The most stringent emissions limitation which is contained in
the implementation plan of any state for such class or category of
stationary source, unless the owner or operator of the proposed
stationary source demonstrates that such limitations are not
achievable; or
(2) The most stringent emissions limitation which is achieved in
practice by such class or category of stationary sources. This
limitation, when applied to a modification, means the lowest achievable
emissions rate for the new or modified emissions units within the
stationary source. In no event shall the application of the term permit
a proposed new or modified stationary source to emit any pollutant in
excess of the amount allowable under an applicable new source standard
of performance.''
Section 3-1(t): The definition for ``major modification'' has been
modified by replacing ``new'' with ``net''.
Section 3-1(u)(2): The definition for ``major stationary source''
has been modified by adding ``or'' after ``1,000 lbs/day'' and before
``100 lbs/hour''.
Section 3-1(bb): The definition for ``reasonable further progress''
has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following
definition:
``(bb) Reasonable Further Progress--Means such annual incremental
reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required
by the Clean Air Act or may reasonably be required by the Director for
the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable national ambient
air quality standard by the applicable date.''
Section 3-1: The following definition for ``legally enforceable''
has been added:
``Legally Enforceable--means all limitations and conditions which
are enforceable by the Director and Administrator, which includes all
provisions of Chapter 10.56 ``Air Pollution Control'' of the
Metropolitan Code of Law, this Regulation, any provisions of the State
Implementation Plan, and any permit conditions.''
Section 3-1: This section has also been recodified to allow the new
definitions to be added in alphabetical order.
(B) Section 3-2 Registration and Permits
Section 3-2(b)(2)(ii): This subparagraph was modified by replacing
``request'' with ``represent'' between the words ``to'' and
``reasonable''.
Section 3-2(b)(3): This paragraph was modified by replacing the
phrase ``A major volatile organic compound stationary source'' with the
new phrase ``A stationary source of modification that is major due to
volatile organic compound or nitrogen oxide emissions''.
Section 3-2(d): This paragraph was modified by adding ``as though
construction had not yet commenced on the source or modification'' at
the end of the sentence.
Section 3-2(e): This paragraph was modified by adding ``the
Administrator and'' between the words ``notify'' and ``the''.
(C) Section 3-3 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Review
Section 3-3(e)(2)(i): This subparagraph was deleted in its entirety
and replaced with the following:
``(i) Particulate Matter--PM10:
Annual Arithmetic Mean 17 g/m\3\
24-Hour maximum 30 g/m\3\''
These limits are being revised appropriately to replace the former
limits for total suspended particulates (TSP), in accordance with the
requirements of the 1990 CAA.
Section 3-3(f): This paragraph was deleted in its entirety and
replaced with the following paragraph:
``(f) All applications of air quality modeling required under this
Section shall be based on the applicable models data bases and all
other requirements specified in Appendix W of 40 CFR Part 51
(``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)'' (1986), Supplement A
(1987) and Supplement B (1993)). Where an air quality model specified
in Appendix W of 40 CFR Part 51 is inappropriate, the model may be
modified or another model substituted on a case-by-case basis provided
that written approval is obtained from the Director for any such
modification or substitution. Furthermore, the use of a modified or
substitute model will be subject to notice and opportunity for public
comment under the provisions set forth in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart
51.102.''
This new paragraph meets the requirements set forth in 40 CFR Part
51.160(f)(1) and (2). New sources in the Nashville/Davidson County area
must now base their application of air quality modeling on the
requirements of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix W, which is the most up-to-
date guidance. If this model is not appropriate, a different air
quality model may be substituted, but only with written approval of
their Director.
Final Action
EPA is approving revisions to the Nashville/Davidson County
Regulation Number Three New Source Review. Specifically, EPA is
approving Nashville/Davidson County's submittal as meeting the NSR
requirements of the 1990 amendments to the Act for the State's ozone
nonattainment areas. EPA is also rescinding the previous limited
approval [59 FR 17938].
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be
effective on June 3, 1996, by May 2, 1996, adverse or critical comments
are received.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
action will be effective on June 3, 1996.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7607 (b)(1),
petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 3,
1996. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. [See section
307(b)(2) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7607 (b)(2).]
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and
[[Page 14493]]
Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small business, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,
due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the Act,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2) and 7410(k)(3).
Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have
elected to adopt the program provided for under Section 165 of the CAA.
These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments to perform
certain actions and also require the private sector to perform certain
duties. EPA has examined whether the rules being approved by this
action will impose no new requirements, since such sources are already
subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, result from this action, and therefore there will be no
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 4, 1996.
Phyllis P. Harris,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52, of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart RR--Tennessee
2. Section 52.2220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(133) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(133) On September 27, 1994, the State submitted revisions to the
Nashville/Davidson County portion of the Tennessee State Implementation
Plan (SIP) on behalf of Nashville/Davidson County. These were revisions
to the new source review requirements in the Nashville/Davidson County
regulations. These revisions incorporate changes to Regulation Number
Three, Sections 3-1, 3-2 and 3-3 of the Nashville/Davidson County
portion of the Tennessee SIP which bring this into conformance with the
new requirements which are required in 40 CFR part 52, subpart I.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
Metropolitan Health Department Division of Pollution Control
Regulation Number 3 New Source Review, as amended on August 9, 1994.
(ii) Other material. None.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-7911 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7908 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans Kentucky: Approval of Revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14489-14491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7908]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[KY20-1-9612a; FRL-5447-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans Kentucky:
Approval of Revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Kentucky State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on June 15, 1983, by the
Commonwealth of Kentucky through the Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection Cabinet (Cabinet). The revisions pertain to
Kentucky regulations 401 KAR 50:025, Classification of counties, and
401 KAR 61:015, Existing indirect heat exchangers. The purpose of these
revisions is to reclassify McCracken County from a Class I area to a
Class IA area, with respect to sulfur dioxide (SO2), and to allow
a relaxation of the SO2 emission limit in McCracken County.
DATES: This action is effective June 3, 1996, unless notice is received
by May 2, 1996, that someone wishes to submit adverse or critical
comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be
published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Scott M. Martin,
Regulatory Planning and Development Section, Air Programs Branch, Air,
Pesticides & Toxics Management Division, Region 4 Environmental
Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Copies of the documents relative to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the following
locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24
hours before the visiting day.
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345
Courtland Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Department for
Environmental Protection, Division for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel Lane,
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1403.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Scott M. Martin, Regulatory Planning and Development Section, Air
Programs Branch, Air Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region
4 Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta,
Georgia 30365. The telephone number is (404) 347-3555 ext. 4216.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 15, 1983, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky through the Cabinet submitted revisions to the SO2 SIP.
The revisions pertain to Kentucky regulations 401 KAR 50:025,
Classification of counties, and 401 KAR 61:015, Existing indirect heat
exchangers. The purpose of these revisions is to reclassify McCracken
County from a Class I area to a Class IA area, with respect to
SO2, and to allow a relaxation of the SO2 emission limit in
McCracken County. The revisions are described below:
(1) 401 KAR 50:025. Classification of Counties
On July 2, 1982, McCracken County was redesignated by the EPA from
non-attainment to attainment for SO2. The
[[Page 14490]]
Kentucky Division of Air Pollution has determined that the relaxed
emission limitations contained in these amendments will not affect the
SO2 air quality of McCracken County sufficiently to cause a threat
to its environment or to the health and welfare of its citizens.
Therefore, the revision changes McCracken County's classification, with
respect to SO2, from Class I to Class IA.
(2) 401 KAR 61:015. Existing Indirect Heat Exchangers
Paragraph 5 is added to Section 5. Standard for Sulfur Dioxide. The
paragraph reads as follows: In counties classified as IA with respect
to sulfur dioxide, at sources having a total rated heat input greater
than fifteen hundred million BTU per hour (1500 MM BTU/hr.) as
determined by Section 3(1), the department shall allow one (1) affected
facility, as specified on the operating permit, to emit sulfur dioxide
at a rate not to exceed a twenty-four (24) hour average of 8.0 pounds
per million BTU, during those periods of time when the affected
facility is being operated for the purpose of generating high sulfur
dioxide content flue gases for use in any experimental sulfur dioxide
removal system.
(3) Appendix B of 401 KAR 61:015
A new equation is added for the calculation of SO2 emission
limits for counties classified as Class IA.
The purpose of these revisions is to allow the TVA Shawnee Power
Plant to continue its scrubber research program by increasing the
allowable SO2 emission limit from 1.2 lbs to 8.0 lbs per million
BTU heat input for only one of its units while conducting scrubber
research and to allow the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to increase
its emission rate from 1.2 lb SO2 to 3.1 lbs SO2 per million
BTU heat input. After extensive air dispersion modeling using the
Multiple Point Gaussian Dispersion Algorithm with Terrain Adjustment
(MPTER) and the Single Source Dispersion Algorithm with Terrain
Adjustment (CRSTER), the Kentucky Division for Air Quality has
determined that the relaxed emission limitations proposed in these
amendments will not affect the air quality of McCracken County, as it
relates to SO2, in such a way as to cause a threat to its
environment or to the health and welfare of its citizens. The EPA
concurs with the determination by the Kentucky Division for Air
Quality.
Final Action
EPA is approving the above referenced revisions to the Kentucky
SIP. This action is being taken without prior proposal because the EPA
views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal Register
publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision should
adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be effective
June 3, 1996, unless, by May 2, 1996, adverse or critical comments are
received.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective June 3, 1996.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(1), petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed
in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by
June 3, 1996. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this
rule for purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within
which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
Section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2)).
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Nothing in this action shall be construed as permitting or allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for a revision to
any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to the state
implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific
technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to
relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not
create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements that the
State is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-approval
does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a
significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the
nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of
a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute federal inquiry into
the economic reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids EPA to
base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v.
U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)
and 7410(k)(3).
Unfunded Mandates
Under sections 202, 203 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995,
EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed or
final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to State,
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have
elected to adopt the program provided for under section 110 of the CAA.
These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments to perform
certain duties. EPA has examined whether the rules being approved by
this action will impose any mandate upon the State, local or tribal
governments either as the owner or operator of a source or as a
regulator, or would impose any mandate upon the private sector. EPA's
action will impose no new requirements; such sources are already
subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, result from this action. Therefore, this final action
does not include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to State, local, or
[[Page 14491]]
tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: March 13, 1996.
Phyllis P. Harris,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart S--Kentucky
2. Section 52.920, is amended by adding paragraph (c) (83) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.920 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(83) Revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan submitted
by the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet on June
15, 1983.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
401 KAR 50:025 Classification of Counties, and 401 KAR 61:015
Existing Indirect Heat Exchangers, effective June 1, 1983.
(ii) Additional material. None.
[FR Doc. 96-7908 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7907 Approval And Promulgation of Implementation Plan For Indiana
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14487-14489]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7907]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IN55-1-7076a; FRL-5435-8]
Approval And Promulgation of Implementation Plan For Indiana
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 25, 1994, the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) submitted a proposed amendment to the State
implementation plan (SIP) containing Source Specific Operating
Agreement (SSOA) regulations (326 IAC 2-9). This regulation has been
developed to establish federally enforceable conditions for industrial
or commercial surface coating operations, graphic arts operations, or
grain elevators by limiting potential emissions below the title V major
source threshold levels. In this action, USEPA approves 326 IAC 2-9-1
and 326 IAC 2-9-2(a), (b), and (e) of Indiana's SSOA regulation for
establishing federally enforceable conditions for these source
categories. In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register,
USEPA is proposing approval of and soliciting public comment on these
requested SIP revisions. If adverse comments are received on this
direct final rule, USEPA will withdraw this final rule and address the
comments received in a final rule on the related proposed rule which is
being published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register.
Unless this final rule is withdrawn, no further rulemaking will occur
on this requested SIP revision.
DATES: This action will be effective June 3, 1996, unless adverse or
critical comments are received by May 2, 1996. If the effective date is
delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Comments can be mailed to J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch, United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-
18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of the State's submittal and USEPA's technical support
document are available for inspection during normal business hours at
the following location: United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-
18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604.
A copy of this SIP revision is also available at the following
location: Office of Air and Radiation, Docket and Information Center
(Air Docket 6102), room M1500, USEPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sam Portanova, USEPA (AR-18J), 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-3189.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Indiana SSOA program will be a major mechanism in limiting
potential to emit for sources enabling them to remain below the
applicability threshold for the operating permits program of title V of
the Clean Air Act (CAA). The federal title V regulation is codified in
40 CFR part 70 and the State of Indiana's title V program is codified
in 326 IAC 2-7. The title V program could encompass a large number of
sources and could be a resource burden on the State and smaller title V
sources. State mechanisms to establish federally enforceable limits on
sources' potential to emit below the title V threshold will enable a
State to reduce resource burdens.
II. This Action
IDEM has adopted a SSOA program regulation in 326 IAC 2-9 to
provide certain source categories the opportunity to be subject to
generic enforceable limits on potential to emit. 326 IAC 2-9-1 applies
to all sources subject to the SSOA program, unless otherwise specified
in 326 IAC 2-9-2. The subsections of 326 IAC 2-9-2 apply to the
specific source categories. In this action, USEPA takes action on
subsections 326 IAC 2-9-2(a), (b), and (e). Sources will be able to
apply for an operating agreement under this program to limit their
potential to emit to below the title V threshold level(s). This will
provide a less resource-intensive alternative to the title V or
Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) programs for both
sources and the permitting authority for specific source categories
that typically have actual emissions far below their potential to emit.
The following is an analysis of the SSOA program for each source
category it entails. This analysis will compare the SSOA program to the
October 15, 1993, USEPA policy memorandum titled ``Guidance for State
Rules for Optional Federally-Enforceable Emissions Limits Based on
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Use'', from D. Kent Berry, Acting
Director of the Air Quality Management Division, where appropriate.
In this action, USEPA proposes approval of the SIP revision request
submitted to USEPA on October 25, 1994, and revised on January 16,
1996, for the 326 IAC 2-9 regulation because the regulation is adequate
to limit potential emissions of industrial or commercial surface
coating operations, graphic arts operations, and grain elevators to
below the title V threshold level.
1. Industrial or Commercial Surface Coating Operations or Graphic Arts
Operations
This portion of the SSOA regulation has been divided into 2
subcategories. The first subcategory (326 IAC 2-9-2(a)) is for eligible
surface coating or graphic arts sources which are not modifications to
major sources in Lake or Porter County subject to 326 IAC 2-3-3 and
which are not subject to 326 IAC 8-2 or 8-5-5. The second subcategory
(326 IAC 2-9-2(b)) is for any eligible surface coating or graphic arts
sources. USEPA proposes approval of 326 IAC 2-9-2(a) and (b).
a. 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)
This section allows industrial or commercial surface coating
operations or graphic arts operations who wish to opt into the SSOA
program to limit their VOC or hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions
to less than the major source threshold. 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)(1) limits the
total amount of VOC delivered to a source less the amount of VOC
shipped off the site to 2 tons per month (tpm) or less (this equals 24
tons per year (tpy)). 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)(1) limits the total amount of
HAPs delivered to a source less the amount of HAP shipped off the site
to 0.2 tpm (2.4 tpy) for a single HAP
[[Page 14488]]
and 0.5 tpm (6 tpy) for any combination of HAPs. The following are
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for sources subject to 326 IAC
2-9-2(a):
i. 326 IAC 2-9-1(f) requires sources to prepare and maintain (1)
monthly consumption records of all materials used that contain VOCs or
HAPs, including the VOC or individual HAP content of each such
material; (2) records summarizing all VOC and individual HAP emissions
on a monthly basis; and (3) all purchase orders and invoices for any
VOC or HAP containing material.
ii. 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)(4) requires sources to provide a summation of
VOC and individual HAP emissions to IDEM on a monthly basis. This
paragraph also requires an annual notice which includes an inventory
listing monthly VOC and HAP totals and total VOC and HAP emissions for
the previous 12 months.
iii. 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)(3) requires sources to maintain purchase
orders and invoices for any VOC or HAP containing material used.
iv. 326 IAC 2-9-1(g) states that any records required to be kept by
a source shall be maintained at the site for at least 5 years and shall
be made available for inspection by IDEM upon request.
v. 326 IAC 2-9-1(h) requires any source subject to a SSOA to report
to IDEM any exceedance of a requirement contain in the SSOA or the SSOA
regulation within one week of its occurrence.
vi. 326 IAC 2-9-1(c) requires SSOA requests to be signed by a
responsible official who shall certify that the information contained
in the request is accurate, true, and complete.
These requirements are consistent with the guidelines outlined in
the October 15, 1993, D. Kent Berry memorandum.
b. 326 IAC 2-9-2(b)
This section allows industrial or commercial surface coating
operations or graphic arts operations who wish to opt into the SSOA
program to limit their VOC or HAP emissions to less than 25 percent of
the major source threshold.
326 IAC 2-9-2(b)(1) limits the total amount of VOC delivered to a
source less the amount of VOC shipped off the site to 15 pounds per day
(lb/day) or less (2.74 tpy) for sources located outside Lake or Porter
County and to 7 lb/day (1.28 tpy) for sources located in Lake or Porter
County. 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)(1) limits the total amount of HAPs delivered
to a source less the amount of HAP shipped off the site to 3 lb/day
(0.55 tpy) for a single HAP and 7 lb/day (1.28 tpy) for any combination
of HAPs. 326 IAC 2-9-2(b) has the same requirements as 326 IAC 2-9-2(a)
except that a monthly summation of VOC and individual HAP emissions is
not required. An annual summation of VOC and HAP emissions is required
in this subsection. This is consistent with the guidelines outlined in
the October 15, 1993, D. Kent Berry memorandum.
2. Grain Elevators
This portion of the SSOA regulation has been divided into 2
subcategories. The first subcategory (326 IAC 2-9-2(e)(1)) is for grain
elevators with a storage capacity of less than 1,000,000 U.S. bushels
and an annual throughput of less than 3,000,000 U.S. bushels. The
second subcategory (326 IAC 2-9-2(e)(2)) is for grain elevators with a
storage capacity of between than 1,000,000 and 2,500,000 U.S. bushels
and an annual throughput of less than 10,000,000 U.S. bushels. USEPA
proposes approval of 326 IAC 2-9-2(e).
Title V applicability major source threshold level for particulate
matter is 100 tpy and will be based on PM10 emissions. The Indiana
Title V regulation allows source subject to 326 IAC 2-9 to be exempt
from Title V. The throughput limit of 326 IAC 2-9-2(e)(1), when
calculated with accepted emission factors for this type of source, is
sufficient to limit the potential to emit of PM10 from a grain
elevator to below the Title V threshold level. The throughput limit and
the control requirements of 326 IAC 2-9-2(e)(2), when calculated with
accepted emission factors for this type of source, are sufficient to
limit the potential to emit of PM10 from a grain elevator to below
the Title V threshold level.
Based on the issues outlined above, USEPA proposes approval of 326
IAC 2-9-2(e) in this action.
3. Conclusion
326 IAC 2-9 limits source emissions below the major source
threshold level and requires monthly or annual reporting requirements.
USEPA proposes approval of 326 IAC 2-9-1, 2-9-2(a), and 2-9-2(b) of the
Indiana SSOA program, which provide industrial or commercial surface
coating operations and graphic arts operations the opportunity to be
subject to generic enforceable limits on potential to emit. These
portions of the regulation are consistent with the October 15, 1993,
USEPA memorandum titled ``Guidance for State Rules for Optional
Federally-Enforceable Emissions Limits Based on Volatile Organic
Compound (VOC) Use''. EPA also proposes approval of 326 IAC 2-9-2(e),
which provides grain elevators the opportunity to be subject to generic
enforceable limits on potential to emit.
III. Rulemaking Action
The USEPA approves the plan revisions submitted on October 25,
1994, to implement 326 IAC 2-9-1 and 326 IAC 2-9-2(a), (b), and (e) of
the SSOA regulations. Each of the program elements mentioned above were
properly addressed. The USEPA is publishing this action without prior
proposal because USEPA views this action as a noncontroversial revision
and anticipates no adverse comments. However, USEPA is publishing a
separate document in this Federal Register publication, which
constitutes a ``proposed approval'' of the requested SIP revision and
clarifies that the rulemaking will not be deemed final if timely
adverse or critical comments are filed. The ``direct final'' approval
shall be effective on June 3, 1996, unless USEPA receives adverse or
critical comments by May 2, 1996.
If USEPA receives comments adverse to or critical of the approval
discussed above, USEPA will withdraw this approval before its effective
date, and publish a subsequent final rule which withdraws this final
action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a
subsequent rulemaking document.
Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time. If no such comments are received, USEPA hereby advises the
public that this action will be effective on June 3, 1996. The Office
of Management and Budget has exempted this action from review under
Executive Order 12866.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. The USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in
light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements
IV. Regulatory Flexibility
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 600 et seq.,
USEPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the
impact of any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C.
Secs. 603 and 604. Alternately, USEPA may certify that the rule will
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
[[Page 14489]]
SIP approvals under Section 110 and Subchapter I, Part D, of the
CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,
due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the CAA,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
CAA forbids USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).
V. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the
USEPA must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any
proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result
in estimated costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under
Section 205, the USEPA must select the most cost-effective and least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is
consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the USEPA
to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments
that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
The USEPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today
does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments
in the aggregate, or to the private sector.
This Federal action approves programs that are not Federal
mandates. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector, result from this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Lead, Particulate matter, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 12, 1996.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended to read as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart P--Indiana
2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(105) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(105) On October 25, 1994, the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management submitted a requested revision to the Indiana State
Implementation Plan in the form of Source Specific Operating Agreement
(SSOA) regulations. The SSOA regulations are intended to limit the
potential to emit for a source to below the threshold level of Title V
of the Clean Air Act. This revision took the form of an amendment to
title 326: Air Pollution Control Board of the Indiana Administrative
Code (326 IAC) 2-9-1, 2-9-2(a), 2-9-2(b), and 2-9-2(e) Source Specific
Operating Agreement Program.
(i) Incorporation by reference. 326 Indiana Administrative Code
2-9. Sections 1, 2(a), 2(b), and 2(e). Adopted by the Indiana Air
Pollution Control Board March 10, 1994. Signed by the Secretary of
State May 25, 1994. Effective June 24, 1994. Published at Indiana
Register, Volume 17, Number 10, July 1, 1994.
[FR Doc. 96-7907 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7904 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14484-14487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7904]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IL120-1-6819a; FRL-5424-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 23, 1995, and June 7, 1995, the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (IEPA) submitted an adopted rule and supporting
information for the control of batch processes as a requested State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision. This rule is part of the State's
control measures for volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, for the
Chicago and East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas, and is intended
to satisfy part of the requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the Clean
Air Act (Act), as amended in 1990. VOCs are air pollutants which
combine on hot summer days to form ground-level ozone, commonly known
as smog. Ozone pollution is of particular concern because of its
harmful effects upon lung tissue and breathing passages. This
regulation requires a reasonably available control technology (RACT)
level of control for batch processes, as required by the amended Act.
In this document, USEPA is approving Illinois' rule. The rationale for
the approval is set forth in this final rule; additional information is
available at the address indicated below. Elsewhere in this Federal
Register USEPA is proposing approval and soliciting public comment on
this requested revision to the SIP. If adverse comments are received on
this direct final rule, USEPA will withdraw the final rule and address
the comments received in a new final rule. Unless this final rule is
withdrawn, no further rulemaking will occur on this requested SIP
revision.
DATES: This final rule is effective June 3, 1996, unless adverse
comments are received by May 2, 1996. If the effective date is delayed,
timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments can be mailed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
Copies of the SIP revision request are available for inspection at
the following address: (It is recommended that you telephone Steven
Rosenthal at (312) 886-6052, before visiting the Region 5 office.)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Rosenthal, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J) (312) 886-6052.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under the Act, as amended in 1977, ozone nonattainment areas were
required to adopt RACT for sources of VOC emissions. USEPA issued three
sets of control technique guidelines (CTGs) documents, establishing a
``presumptive norm'' for RACT for various categories of VOC sources.
The three sets of CTGs were (1) Group I--issued before January 1978 (15
CTGs); (2) Group II--issued in 1978 (9 CTGs); and (3) Group III--issued
in the early 1980's (5 CTGs). Those sources not covered by a CTG were
called non-CTG sources. USEPA determined that an area's SIP-approved
attainment date established which RACT rules the area needed to adopt
and implement. In those areas where the State sought an extension of
the attainment date under section 172(a)(2) to as late as December 31,
1987, RACT was required for all CTG sources and for all major (100 tons
per year or more of VOC emissions under the pre-amended Act) non-CTG
sources. Illinois sought and received such an extension for the Chicago
area.
Section 182(b)(2) of the Act as amended in 1990 requires States to
adopt RACT rules for all areas designated nonattainment for ozone and
classified as moderate or above. There are three parts to the section
182(b)(2) RACT requirement: (1) RACT for sources covered by an existing
CTG--i.e., a CTG issued prior to the enactment of the amended Act of
1990; (2) RACT for sources covered by a post-enactment CTG; and (3) all
major sources not covered by a CTG. These section 182(b)(2) RACT
requirements are referred to as the RACT ``catch-up'' requirements.
Section 183 of the amended Act requires USEPA to issue CTGs for 13
source categories by November 15, 1993. A CTG was published by this
date for two source categories--Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Reactors and Distillation; however, the
CTGs for the remaining source categories have not been completed. The
amended Act requires States to submit rules for sources covered by a
post-enactment CTG in accordance with a schedule specified in a CTG
document. Accordingly, States must submit a RACT rule for SOCMI reactor
processes and distillation operations before March 23, 1994.
The USEPA created a CTG document as Appendix E to the General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. (57 FR 18070, 18077, April 28, 1992). In Appendix
E, USEPA interpreted the Act to allow a State to submit a non-CTG rule
by November 15, 1992, or to defer submittal of a RACT rule for sources
that the State anticipated would be covered by a post-enactment CTG,
based on the list of CTGs USEPA expected to issue to meet the
requirement in section 183. Appendix E states that if USEPA fails to
issue a CTG by November 15, 1993 (which it did for 11 source
categories), the responsibility shifts to the State to submit a non-CTG
RACT rule for those sources by November 15, 1994. In accordance with
section 182(b)(2), implementation of that RACT rule should occur by May
31, 1995.
[[Page 14485]]
On May 23, 1995, and June 7, 1995, IEPA submitted adopted VOC rules
and supporting information for the control of batch processes in the
Chicago ozone severe nonattainment area and the Metro-East (East St.
Louis) ozone moderate nonattainment area. These rules were intended to
satisfy, in part, the major non-CTG control requirements of section
182(b)(2).
Evaluation of Rules
Subpart B: Definitions
Illinois has added the following four definitions to Subpart B:
``Batch Operation,'' ``Batch Process Train,'' ``Process Vent,'' and
``Single Unit Operation.'' These definitions accurately describe the
specified terms and are necessary for implementation of the batch
process rules. These definitions are, therefore, approvable.
Subpart V: Batch Operations and Air Oxidation Processes
Subpart V of Part 218 (for the Chicago area) and Part 219 (for the
East St. Louis area) have been amended with rules covering batch
processes. USEPA guidance on batch processes is contained in ``Control
of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Batch Processes--
Alternative Control Techniques Information Document'' (ACT).
Section 218/219.500 Applicability for Batch Operations--This rule
applies to process vents associated with batch operations at sources
identified by specified standard industrial classification (SIC) codes
and to all batch operations at Stepan Company's Millsdale manufacturing
facility in Elwood, Illinois. This rule does not apply to any emission
unit included within the category specified in Subpart B: Organic
Emissions from Storage and Loading Operations and Subpart T:
Pharmaceutical Operations. A July 28, 1995, letter from Bharat Mathur,
Chief, Bureau of Air for IEPA, to Stephen Rothblatt, Chief Regulation
Development Branch for Region 5 USEPA clarifies that ``* * * for
purposes of the rule for Batch Operations, otherwise applicable unit
operations within a batch process remain subject to Subpart V (and not
B), even if the unit operation performs what could be considered
storage as some part of its operation. More specifically, those unit
operations which form the batch process train are covered by Subpart
V.'' The rule also does not apply to Air Oxidation processes, which are
regulated by sections 218/520-526, and emission units included within
an Early Reduction Program (as specified in 40 CFR Part 63) with a
timely enforceable commitment approved by USEPA. Any single unit
operation within a batch operation and any batch process train
containing process vents with de minimis emissions are exempt from the
control requirements of this Subpart.
The applicability equations in subsection (e) of Sections 218/
219.500, which require the calculation of uncontrolled total annual
mass emissions and flow rate value, are used to determine whether a
single unit operation or a batch process train is subject to the
control requirements in Sections 218/219.501. These applicability
equations, which are consistent with the equations in the ACT,
establish which vent streams are feasible to control.
Section 218/219.501 Control Requirements for Batch Operations--Any
individual unit operation within a batch process train determined to be
subject to these control requirements must reduce uncontrolled VOC
emissions by an overall efficiency of at least 90 percent or emit less
than 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv). Similarly, any batch
process train determined to be subject to these control requirements
must reduce uncontrolled VOC emissions by an overall efficiency of at
least 90 percent or emit less than 20 parts per million by volume
(ppmv). The ppmv limit is also clarified in IEPA's July 28, 1995,
letter. If a source has installed a control device prior to March 15,
1995, that source can meet an 81 percent control efficiency--as opposed
to 90 percent--until no later than December 31, 1999, at which time the
90 percent/20 ppmv requirement is put into effect. These control
requirements are generally consistent with the guidance in USEPA's ACT
document.
Section 218/219.502 Determination of Uncontrolled Total Annual mass
Emissions and Average Flow Rate Values for Batch Operations--This
section establishes the way in which total annual mass emissions and
average flowrate are to be determined. These parameters are used to
establish applicability of the control requirements to single unit
batch operation and a batch process train.
Section 218/219.503 Performance and Testing Requirements for Batch
Operations--Batch Operations must be run at representative operating
conditions and flow rates during any performance test and the methods
in 40 CFR 60 Appendix A must be used to determine compliance with the
percent reduction efficiency and ppmv requirement in Section 501.
Subsection 503(h) allows ``an alternative test method or procedures to
demonstrate compliance with the control requirements set forth in
Section 501 of this Subpart. Such method or procedures shall be
approved by the Agency and USEPA as evidenced by federally enforceable
permit conditions.'' The procedures for USEPA's review and approval of
these alternative test methods and procedures are specified in a
September 13, 1995, letter from IEPA to Region 5 of the USEPA.
Section 218.504 Monitoring requirements for Batch Operations--This
section specifies monitoring devices and parameters to be measured--
depending upon the control device used. Subsection 504(g) allows a
source to monitor by an alternative method and to monitor parameters
other than those listed in subsections (a) through (f) in this section.
``Such alternative method or parameters shall be contained in the
source's operating permit as federally enforceable permit conditions.''
The procedures for USEPA's review and approval of these alternative
monitoring methods and parameters are specified in a September 13,
1995, letter from IEPA to Region 5 of the USEPA.
Section 218/219.505--Reporting and Recordkeeping for Batch
Operations--Sources that are exempt because their emissions are lower
than the cut-off must keep records of, and document, their total annual
mass emissions and average flowrate. Sources subject to the control
requirements in Section 501 must keep the records specified in
Subsection 505(c) (which are dependent upon the type of control device
in use). Subsection 505(e) allows a source to maintain alternative
records other than those listed in subsection 505(c) and states ``Any
alternative recordkeeping shall be approved by the Agency and USEPA and
shall be contained in the source's operating permit as federally
enforceable permit conditions.'' The procedures for USEPA's review and
approval of these alternative monitoring methods and parameters are
specified in a September 13, 1995, letter from IEPA to Region 5 of
USEPA.
Section 218/219.506 Compliance Date--Compliance with this rule is
required by March 15, 1996.
Final Rulemaking Action
Illinois' rules for batch operations are generally consistent with
USEPA's guidance in the ACT for this category and are therefore
considered to constitute RACT. USEPA therefore approves these rules in
Part 218 (for the Chicago ozone nonattainment area), in
[[Page 14486]]
Part 219 (for the East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area) and the
related definitions in Part 211 that were submitted on May 23, 1995,
and June 7, 1995.
Because USEPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine,
we are approving it without prior proposal. The action will become
effective on June 3, 1996. However, if we receive adverse comments by
May 2, 1996, then USEPA will publish a document that withdraws this
final action. If no request for a public hearing has been received,
USEPA will address the public comments received in a new final rule on
the requested SIP revision based on the proposed rule located in the
proposed rules section of this Federal Register. If a public hearing is
requested, USEPA will publish a document announcing a public hearing
and reopening the public comment period until 30 days after the public
hearing. At the conclusion of this additional public comment period,
USEPA will publish a final rule responding to the public comments
received and announcing final action.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993,
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, former Acting Assistant
Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation. A July 10, 1995,
memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for the Office
of Air and Radiation explains that the authority to approve/disapprove
SIPs has been delegated to the Regional Administrators for Table 3
actions. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in light
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded
Mandates Act'') (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the
USEPA prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Section 203 requires
the USEPA to establish a plan for obtaining input from and informing,
educating, and advising any small governments that may be significantly
or uniquely affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the USEPA must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The USEPA must select from those alternatives the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the USEPA explains why this
alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative is
inconsistent with law.
Because this final rule is estimated to result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector of less
then $100 million in any one year, the USEPA has not prepared a
budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative.
Because small governments will not be significantly or uniquely
affected by this rule, the USEPA is not required to develop a plan with
regard to small governments. This rule only approves the incorporation
of existing state rules into the SIP. It imposes no additional
requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.)
Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements, but simply approve
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the
Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify
that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities
affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship
under the Act, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the
State action. The Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its actions
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA., 427 U.S.
246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Final Rule: Direct Final Approval of Illinois' Batch Operations
Rules. Page 11 of 13.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 3, 1996. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 17, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S. C. 7401 7671q.
Subpart O--Illinois
2. Section 52.720 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(121) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.720 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(121) On May 23, 1995, and June 7, 1995, the State submitted
volatile organic compound control regulations for incorporation in the
Illinois State Implementation Plan for ozone.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Title 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle B: Air Pollution,
Chapter I: Pollution Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission Standards
and Limitations for Stationary Sources, Part 211: Definitions and
General Provisions, Subpart B: Definitions, Sections 211.695, 211.696,
211.5245, 211.6025. These sections were adopted on May 4, 1995, Amended
at 19 Ill. Reg. 7344, and effective May 22, 1995.
(B) Title 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle B: Air Pollution,
[[Page 14487]]
Chapter I: Pollution Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission Standards
and Limitations for Stationary Sources, Part 218: Organic Material
Emission Standards and Limitations for the Chicago Area, Subpart V:
218.500, 218.501, 218.502, 218.503, 218.504, 218.505, 218.506. These
sections were adopted on May 4, 1995, Amended at 19 Ill. Reg. 7359, and
effective May 22, 1995.
(C) Title 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle B: Air Pollution,
Chapter I: Pollution Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission Standards
and Limitations for Stationary Sources, Part 219: Organic Material
Emission Standards and Limitations for the Metro East Area, Subpart V:
219.500, 219.501, 219.502, 219.503, 219.504, 219.505, 219.506. These
sections were adopted on May 4, 1995, Amended at 19 Ill. Reg. 7385, and
effective May 22, 1995.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-7904 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7901 Implantation or Injectable Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Trenbolone Acetate and Estradiol Benzoate
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14482-14483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7901]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 522
Implantation or Injectable Dosage Form New Animal Drugs;
Trenbolone Acetate and Estradiol Benzoate
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect approval of a new animal drug application
(NADA) filed by Syntex Animal Health. The NADA provides for use of an
ear implant containing trenbolone acetate and estradiol benzoate in
steers fed in confinement for slaughter for improved feed efficiency.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack Caldwell, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-126), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-0217.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Syntex Animal Health, Division of Syntex
Agribusiness, Inc., 3401 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94304, filed NADA
141-043, which provides for use of an ear implant consisting of 8
pellets, each pellet containing 25 milligrams (mg) of trenbolone
acetate and 3.5 mg of estradiol benzoate. The implant is used in steers
fed in confinement for slaughter for improved feed efficiency. The NADA
is approved as of February 22, 1996, and the regulations are amended by
adding new 21 CFR 522.2478 to reflect the approval. The basis for
approval is discussed in the freedom of information summary.
In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of part 20
(21 CFR part 20) and Sec. 514.11(e)(2)(ii) (21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii)), a
summary of safety and effectiveness data and information submitted to
support approval of this application may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, rm. 1-23,
12420 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
Under section 512(c)(2)(F)(ii) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(c)(2)(F)(ii)), this approval qualifies for
a 3-year period of marketing exclusivity beginning on February 22,
1996, because new clinical or field investigations (other than
bioequivalence or residue studies), or human food safety studies (other
than bioequivalence or residue studies) essential to the approval were
conducted or sponsored by the applicant.
The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental
effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have
a significant impact on the human environment, and that an
environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of
no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding,
contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (address above) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522
Animal drugs.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 522 is
amended as follows:
PART 522--IMPLANTATION OR INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 522 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 360b).
2. New Sec. 522.2478 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 522.2478 Trenbolone acetate and estradiol benzoate.
(a) Sponsor. See 000033 in Sec. 510.600(c) of this chapter.
(b) Related tolerance. See Secs. 556.240 and 556.739 of this
chapter.
(c) Conditions of use--(1) Steers--(i) Amount. 200 milligrams of
trenbolone acetate and 28 milligrams of estradiol benzoate (one implant
consisting of 8 pellets, each pellet containing 25 milligrams of
trenbolone acetate and 3.5 milligrams of estradiol benzoate) per
animal.
(ii) Indications for use. For improved feed efficiency in steers
fed in confinement for slaughter.
[[Page 14483]]
(iii) Limitations. Implant subcutaneously in ear only.
(2) [Reserved]
Dated: March 14, 1996.
Stephen F. Sundlof,
Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 96-7901 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7891 Radio Broadcasting Services; Machias, ME
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14503-14504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7891]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MM Docket No. 95-169; RM-8722]
Radio Broadcasting Services; Machias, ME
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document allots Channel 266B to Machias, Maine, in
response to a request from Dr. James Whalen. See 60 FR 62061, December
4, 1995. The coordinates for Channel 266B are 44-45-22 and 67-36-50.
There is a site restriction 12.8 kilometers (7.9 miles) west of the
community. Canadian concurrence has been obtained for this allotment.
With this action, this proceeding is terminated.
DATES: Effective May 10, 1996. The window period for filing
applications will open on May 10, 1996, and close on June 10, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau,
(202) 418-2180.
[[Page 14504]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 95-169, adopted March 15, 1996, and
released March 26, 1996. The full text of this Commission decision is
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in
the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International
Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140,
Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-3800.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio broadcasting.
Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 73--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154,
as amended.
Sec. 73.202 [Amended]
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Maine, is
amended by adding Channel 266B at Machias.
Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-7891 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7884 Foods and Drugs; Technical Amendments
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14477-14481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7884]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14478]]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Chapter I
Foods and Drugs; Technical Amendments
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its
regulations to correct mailing addresses for the Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN). This action is being taken to improve
the accuracy of the regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Corinne L. Howley, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-24), Food and Drug Administration,
200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-205-4272.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is amending its regulations in 21 CFR
Chapter I of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations to correct
certain mailing addresses in CFSAN.
Publication of this document constitutes final action on these
changes under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). Notice
and public procedure are unnecessary because FDA is merely correcting
nonsubstantive errors.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 1
Cosmetics, Drugs, Exports, Food labeling, Imports, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 70
Color additives, Cosmetics, Drugs, Labeling, Packaging and
containers.
21 CFR Part 71
Administrative practice and procedure, Color additives,
Confidential business information, Cosmetics, Drugs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 80
Color additives, Cosmetics, Drugs, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
21 CFR Part 101
Food labeling, Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 102
Beverages, Food grades and standards, Food labeling, Frozen foods,
Oils and fats, Onions, Potatoes, Seafood.
21 CFR Part 103
Beverages, Bottled water, Food grades and standards.
21 CFR Part 106
Food grades and standards, Infants and children, Nutrition,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 107
Food labeling, Infants and children, Nutrition, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Signs and symbols.
21 CFR Part 108
Administrative practice and procedure, Foods, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 109
Food packaging, Foods, Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's).
21 CFR Part 110
Food packaging, Foods.
21 CFR Part 161
Food grades and standards, Frozen foods, Seafood.
21 CFR Part 172
Food additives, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 173
Food additives.
21 CFR Part 176
Food additives, Food packaging.
21 CFR Part 177
Food additives, Food packaging.
21 CFR Part 178
Food additives, Food packaging.
21 CFR Part 508
Animal foods.-
21 CFR Part 730
Cosmetics, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 1250
Air carriers, Foods, Maritime carriers, Motor carriers, Public
health, Railroads, Water supply.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR
Chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 1--GENERAL ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 1 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 4, 5, 6 of the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act
(15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, 1455); secs. 201, 403, 502, 505, 512, 602,
701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 343,
352, 355, 360b, 362, 371); sec. 215 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 216).
Sec. 1.24 [Amended]
2. Section 1.24 Exemptions from required label statements is
amended in paragraphs (a)(6)(i), (a)(6)(ii), and (a)(6)(iii) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Regulatory Guidance,'' and by
removing the mail code ``(HFF-310)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-
150)''.
PART 70--COLOR ADDITIVES
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 70 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 401, 402, 403, 409, 501, 512, 601, 701,
721 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 341,
342, 343, 348, 351, 360b, 361, 371, 379e).
Sec. 70.3 [Amended]-
4. Section 70.3 Definitions is amended in paragraph (e) by removing
the phrase ``Bureau of Foods'' and adding in its place ``Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition''.
Sec. 70.19 [Amended]
5. Section 70.19 Fees for listing is amended in paragraph (p) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives, HFF-330,''
and by adding the mail code ``(HFS-200)'' before the comma and after
the word ``Nutrition''.
PART 71--COLOR ADDITIVE PETITIONS
6. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409, 501, 505, 506, 507, 510, 512-
516, 518-520, 601, 701, 721, 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 351, 355, 356, 357, 360,
360b-360f, 360h-360j, 361, 371, 379e, 381); secs. 215, 351 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262).
Sec. 71.1 [Amended]
7. Section 71.1 Petitions is amended in paragraph (c) by removing
the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives, HFF-330'' and adding
in its place the phrase ``Office of Premarket Approval (HFS-200)''.
[[Page 14479]]
PART 80--COLOR ADDITIVE CERTIFICATION
8. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 80 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 701, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 371, 379e).
Sec. 80.10 [Amended]
9. Section 80.10 Fees for certification services is amended in
paragraph (d) by removing the phrase ``Division of Color Technology,
HFF-430,'' and by inserting the mail code ``(HFS-100)'' before the
comma and after the word ``Nutrition''.
Sec. 80.21 [Amended]
10. Section 80.21 Request for certification is amended in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2), (j)(3), and (j)(4) by removing the phrase
``Division of Color Technology, HFF-430'' and adding in its place the
phrase ``Office of Cosmetics and Colors (HFS-100)''.
PART 101--FOOD LABELING
11. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 101 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 4, 5, 6 of the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act
(15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, 1455); secs. 201, 301, 402, 403, 409, 701 of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 342,
343, 348, 371).
Sec. 101.9 [Amended]
12. Section 101.9 Nutrition labeling of food is amended in
paragraph (c)(7)(ii) by removing the phrase ``Office of Food Labeling
(HFS-150),'' and by removing the mail code ``(HFF-260)'' and adding in
its place ``(HFS-150)'', and in paragraph (g)(9) by removing the phrase
``Office of Food Labeling'' and adding in its place ``Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition''.
Sec. 101.45 [Amended]
13. Section 101.45 Guidelines for the voluntary nutrition labeling
of raw fruit, vegetables, and fish is amended in paragraph (c) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Nutrition (HFF-260),'' and by adding
the mail code ``(HFS-150)'' in front of the comma and after the words
``Applied Nutrition'', and in paragraph (i) by removing the phrase
``Division of Nutrition,'' and by adding the mail code ``(HFS-150)''
before the comma and after the words ``Applied Nutrition''.
PART 102--COMMON OR USUAL NAME FOR NONSTANDARDIZED FOODS
14. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 102 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 403, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 343, 371).
Sec. 102.23 [Amended]
15. Section 102.23 Peanut spreads is amended in paragraph (c)(5) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Nutrition,'' and by removing the mail
code ``(HFF-260)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-150)''.
PART 103--QUALITY STANDARDS FOR FOODS WITH NO IDENTITY STANDARDS
16. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 103 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 401, 403, 409, 410, 701, 721 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 343, 348,
349, 371, 379e).
Sec. 103.35 [Amended]
17. Section 103.35 Bottled water is amended in paragraph (b) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Food Chemistry and Technology,'' and
by removing the mail code ``(HFF-410)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-
300)'' and in paragraphs (d)(3)(v), (d)(3)(v)(A)(3), (d)(3)(v)(E)(3),
(d)(3)(v)(G)(3), and (d)(3)(vi) by removing the phrase ``Office of
Plant and Dairy Foods and Beverages (HFS-305),'' and by removing the
word ``Nutrition'' and adding in its place ``Nutrition's Library''.
PART 106--INFANT FORMULA QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES
Sec. 106.120 [Amended]
18. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 106 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 412, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 350a, 371).
19. Section 106.120 New formulations and reformulations is amended
in paragraph (a) by removing the phrase ``Chief, Regulatory Affairs
Staff (HFF-204),'' and by adding the mail code ``(HFS-450)'' before the
comma and after the word ``Nutrition'' and in paragraph (b) by removing
the phrase ``Division of Regulatory Guidance (HFF-310),'' and by adding
the mail code ``(HFS-605)'' before the comma and after the word
``Nutrition''.
PART 107--INFANT FORMULA
20. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 107 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 403, 412, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 343, 350a, 371).
Sec. 107.50 [Amended]
21. Section 107.50 Terms and conditions is amended in paragraph
(e)(1) by removing the phrase ``Chief, Regulatory Affairs Staff (HFF-
204),'' and by adding the mail code ``(HFS-450),'' before the comma and
after the word ``Nutrition'' and in paragraph (e)(2) by removing the
phrase ``Division of Regulatory Guidance (HFF-310),'' and by adding the
mail code ``(HFS-605)'' before the comma and after the word
``Nutrition''.
Sec. 107.240 [Amended]
22. Section 107.240 Notification requirements is amended in
paragraph (b) by removing the phrase ``Division of Regulatory Guidance
(HFF-310),'' and by adding the mail code ``(HFS-605)'' before the comma
and after the word ``Nutrition''.
Sec. 107.250 [Amended]
23. Section 107.250 Termination of an infant formula recall is
amended in the introductory paragraph by removing the phrase ``Division
of Regulatory Guidance,'' the two times that it appears and by adding
the mail code ``(HFS-605)'' before the comma and after the word
``Nutrition'' the two times that it appears.
PART 108--EMERGENCY PERMIT CONTROL
24. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 108 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 402, 404, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 342, 344, 371).
Sec. 108.5 [Amended]
25. Section 108.5 Determination of the need for a permit is amended
in paragraph (a)(1) by removing the phrase ``Food and Drug
Administration,'' and the mail code ``(HFF-310),'' and by adding the
phrase ``Food and Drug Administration (HFS-605),'' after the word
``Nutrition''.
Sec. 108.25 [Amended]
26. Section 108.25 Acidified foods is amended in paragraphs (c)(1)
and (c)(2) by removing the address ``Food and Drug Administration,
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, LACF Registration
Coordinator (HFF-233),'' and adding in its place ``LACF Registration
Coordinator (HFS-618), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
Food and Drug Administration,'' and in paragraph (c)(1) by removing the
phrase ``Food and Drug Administration, Bureau of Foods, Industry
Guidance Branch (HFF-342)'' and adding in its place ``Center for Food
[[Page 14480]]
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-565), Food and Drug Administration''.
Sec. 108.35 [Amended]
27. Section 108.35 Thermal processing of low-acid foods packaged in
hermetically sealed containers is amended in paragraph (c)(1) and in
the introductory text of paragraph (c)(2) by removing the address
``Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, LACF Registration Coordinator HFF-233,'' and adding in its
place ``LACF Registration Coordinator (HFS-618), Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration'' each time that it
appears; and in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) by removing the address ``Food and
Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
DFCT, HFF-414'' and adding in its place ``Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition (HFS-617), Food and Drug Administration'' and in
paragraph (g) by removing the phrase ``and shall not apply until March
25, 1975 in any other State''.
PART 109--UNAVOIDABLE CONTAMINANTS IN FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION
AND FOOD-PACKAGING MATERIAL
28. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 109 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 306, 402, 406, 408, 409, 701 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 336, 342, 346,
346a, 348, 371).
Sec. 109.30 [Amended]
29. Section 109.30 Tolerances for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's)
is amended in paragraph (b) by adding the mail code ``(HFA-305)''
before the comma and after the word ``Branch'', by removing the phrase
``Department of Health and Human Services'' and adding in its place
``Food and Drug Administration'', and by moving ``rm. 1-23,'' to appear
after ``Dr.,'' and in paragraph (d) by removing the phrase
``Contaminants Program Unit (HFF-421, or its successor)'' and adding in
its place the phrase ``Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
(HFS-308)''.
PART 110--CURRENT GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE IN MANUFACTURING,
PACKING, OR HOLDING HUMAN FOOD
30. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 110 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 402, 701, 704 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 342, 371, 374); sec. 361 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264).
Sec. 110.110 [Amended]
31. Section 110.110 Natural or unavoidable defects in food for
human use that present no health hazard is amended in paragraph (e) by
removing the phrase ``Industry Programs Branch (HFF-326)'' and by
adding the mail code ``(HFS-565)'' before the comma and after the word
``Nutrition''.
PART 161--FISH AND SHELLFISH
32. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 161 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 401, 403, 409, 701, 721 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 343, 348, 371,
379e).
Sec. 161.190 [Amended]-
33. Section 161.190 Canned tuna is amended in paragraph (a)(7)(iii)
by removing the phrase ``Division of Food Chemistry and Technology,''
and by removing the mail code ``(HFF-410)'' and adding in its place
``(HFS-150)''.
PART 165--BEVERAGES
34. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 401, 403, 403A, 409, 410, 701, 721 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 343, 343A,
348, 349, 371, 379e).
Sec. 165.110 [Amended]
35. Section 165.110 Bottled water is amended in paragraphs (a)(2)
(iv), (a)(2)(vii), (b)(2), (b)(4)(i)(C), (b)(4)(iii)(E),
(b)(4)(iii)(E)(2)(iii), (b)(4)(iii)(E)(6)(iii),
(b)(4)(iii)(E)(11)(iii), and (b)(4)(iii)(F) by removing the word
``Nutrition'' and adding in its place ``Nutrition's Library,'' and in
paragraphs (b)(4)(iii)(E), (b)(4)(iii)(E)(2)(iii),
(b)(4)(iii)(E)(6)(iii)), (b)(4)(iii)(E)(11)(iii), and (b)(4)(iii)(F) by
removing the phrase ``Office of Plant and Dairy Foods and Beverages
(HFS-305).''
PART 172--FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED FOR DIRECT ADDITION TO FOOD FOR
HUMAN CONSUMPTION
36. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 172 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 401, 402, 409, 701, 721 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 348, 371,
379e).
Sec. 172.320 [Amended]
37. Section 172.320 Amino acids is amended in paragraphs (b)(2) and
(c)(1) by removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives,''
and by removing the mail code ``(HFF-330)'' and adding in its place
``(HFS-200)''.
Sec. 172.804 [Amended]
38. Section 172.804 Aspartame is amended in paragraph (c)(23) by
removing the phrase ``Office of Premarket Approval,'' and by adding the
mail code ``(HFS-200)'' before the comma and after the word
``Nutrition''.
Sec. 172.841 [Amended]
39. Section 172.841 Polydextrose is amended in paragraph (b) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Product Policy (HFS-205),'' and by
removing the word ``Nutrition'' and adding in its place the words
``Nutrition's Library''.
PART 173--SECONDARY DIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN FOOD FOR
HUMAN CONSUMPTION-
40. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 173 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348).
Sec. 173.69 [Amended]
41. Section 173.69 Chlorine dioxide is amended in paragraph (a) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Petition Control,'' and by removing
the mail code ``(HFS-215)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
PART 176--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: PAPER AND PAPERBOARD COMPONENTS
42. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 176 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 406, 409, 721 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 346, 348, 379e).
Sec. 176.170 [Amended]
43. Section 176.170 Components of paper and paperboard in contact
with aqueous and fatty foods is amended in the table in paragraph
(b)(2) in the entry for ``Cyclized rubber'' by removing the phrase
``Division of Food and Color Additives, Bureau of Foods (HFF-330)'' and
adding in its place ``Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
(HFS-200)''.
PART 177--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: POLYMERS
44. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 177 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 379e).
Sec. 177.1210 [Amended]
45. Section 177.1210 Closures with sealing gaskets for food
containers is amended in the table in paragraph (b)(5) in the entry for
``Brominated
[[Page 14481]]
isobutylene-isoprene copolymers'' by removing the phrase ``Division of
Food and Color Additives,'' and by removing the mail code ``(HFF-335)''
and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
Sec. 177.1345 [Amended]
46. Section 177.1345 Ethylene/1,3-phenylene oxyethylene
isophthalate/terephthalate copolymer is amended in paragraph (b)(1) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives, Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFF-330)'' and adding in its place
``Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Library''.
Sec. 177.1390 [Amended]
47. Section 177.1390 Laminate structures for use at temperatures of
250 deg.F and above is amended in paragraph (c)(3)(i)(a)(1) by
removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives,'' and by
removing the mail code ``(HFF-334)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-
200)''.
Sec. 177.1480 [Amended]
48. Section 177.1480 Nitrile rubber modified acrylonitrile-methyl
acrylate copolymers is amended in paragraph (b)(2) by removing the
phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives,'' and by removing the
mail code ``(HFF-334)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
Sec. 177.1500 [Amended]
49. Section 177.1500 Nylon resins is amended in paragraph (c)(5)(i)
by removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color Additives,'' and by
removing the mail code ``(HFF-335)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-
200)''.
Sec. 177.1520 [Amended]
50. Section 177.1520 Olefin polymers is amended in the table in
paragraph (b) by removing the phrase ``Division of Petition Control,''
each time it appears and by removing the mail code ``(HFS-216)'' each
time it appears and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
Sec. 177.1550 [Amended]
51. Section 177.1550 Perfluorocarbon resins is amended in paragraph
(d)(2)(ii) by removing the phrase ``Division of Food and Color
Additives (HFF-330)'' and adding in its place ``Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-200).''
Sec. 177.2450 [Amended]
52. Section 177.2450 Polyamide-imide resins is amended in
paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) by removing the phrase ``Division of Food
and Color Additives (HFF-330)'' and by adding in its place ``Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-200)''.
PART 178--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: ADJUVANTS, PRODUCTION AIDS, AND
SANITIZERS
53. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 178 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 379e).
Sec. 178.3297 [Amended]
54. Section 178.3297 Colorants for polymers is amended in paragraph
(c) by removing the phrase ``, Division of Petition Control (HFS-
215),'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
Sec. 178.3780 [Amended]
55. Section 178.3780 Polyhydric alcohol esters of long chain
monobasic acids is amended in paragraph (b)(1) by removing the phrase
``Division of Food and Color Additives,'' and by removing the mail code
``(HFF-334)'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-200)''.
PART 508--EMERGENCY PERMIT CONTROL
56. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 508 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 402, 404, 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 342, 344, 371).
Sec. 508.35 [Amended]
57. Section 508.35 Thermal processing of low-acid animal foods
packaged in hermetically sealed containers is amended in paragraph
(c)(1) by moving the phrase ``Food and Drug Administration,'' the first
time it appears in the second sentence to appear before ``200 C St.'',
by removing the phrase ``, Industry Programs Branch, HFF-326'' and
adding in its place ``(HFS-565)'', by removing the phrase ``Food and
Drug Administration,'' the first time it appears in the third sentence,
by removing the phrase ``, Division of Food Chemistry and Technology,
HFF-410'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-617), Food and Drug
Administration''; in the introductory text of paragraph (c)(2) by
removing ``Food and Drug Administration,'' the first time it appears in
the third sentence and in the fourth sentence by removing ``, Industry
Programs Branch, HFF-326'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-565), Food
and Drug Administration'', by removing ``, Division of Food Chemistry
and Technology, HFF-410'' and adding in its place ``(HFS-617), Food and
Drug Administration'', in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) by removing ``Food and
Drug Administration,'' in the third sentence by adding the mail code
``(HFS-617)'' in front of the comma after the word ``Nutrition'', and
by removing the mail code ``HFF-410,''.
PART 730--VOLUNTARY FILING OF COSMETIC PRODUCT EXPERIENCES
58. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 730 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 301, 601, 602, 701, 704 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 361, 362, 371,
374).
Sec. 730.3 [Amended]
59. Section 730.3 How and where to file is amended by removing the
phrase ``Division of Cosmetics Technology (HFF-444),'' and by adding
the mail code ``(HFS-100)'' in front of the comma and after the word
``Nutrition''.
PART 1250--INTERSTATE CONVEYANCE SANITATION
60. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 1250 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: Secs. 215, 311, 361, 368 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 243, 264, 271).
Sec. 1250.51 [Amended]
61. Section 1250.51 Railroad conveyances; discharge of wastes is
amended in paragraph (d) by removing the phrase ``Food and Drug
Administration,'' and by removing the phrase ``Nutrition, Manager,
Interstate Travel Sanitation Sub-Program, HFF-312'' and adding in its
place ``Nutrition (HFS-627), Food and Drug Administration''.
Dated: March 26, 1996.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 96-7884 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7828 Manufacturing Incentives for Alternative Fuel Vehicles
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14507-14512]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7828]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 538
[Docket No. 94-96; Notice 2]
RIN 2127-AF18
Manufacturing Incentives for Alternative Fuel Vehicles
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule establishes minimum driving range standards for dual
energy and natural gas dual energy passenger automobiles on non-
petroleum fuel and establishes gallons equivalent measurements for
certain gaseous fuels. Promulgation of minimum driving range standards
for these vehicles is required by the 1992 Energy Policy Act (P.L. 102-
486).
DATES: These requirements are effective June 3, 1996. Petitions for
reconsideration must be submitted within 45 days of publication.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Henrietta L. Spinner, Motor
Vehicle Requirements Division, Office of Market Incentives, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW,
Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4802.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Statutory Background
Section 6 of the Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988 (AMFA) (P.L.
100-494) amended the fuel economy provisions of the Motor Vehicle
Information and Cost Savings Act (Cost Savings Act) by adding a new
section, ``Manufacturing Incentives for Automobiles,'' now codified as
49 U.S.C. Sec. 32901(c). The section provided incentives for the
manufacture of vehicles designed to operate on alcohol or natural gas,
including dual energy vehicles, i.e., vehicles capable of operating on
one of those alternative fuels and either gasoline or diesel fuel.
Dual energy vehicles meeting specified criteria qualify for special
treatment in the calculation of their fuel economy for purposes of the
corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards issued by NHTSA under
49 U.S.C. Chapter 329. The fuel economy of a qualifying vehicle is
calculated in a manner that results in a relatively high fuel economy
value, thus encouraging its production as a way of facilitating a
manufacturer's compliance with the CAFE standards. One of the
qualifying criteria for passenger automobiles was to meet a minimum
driving range, which was to be established by NHTSA.
NHTSA was required to establish two minimum driving ranges, one for
dual energy (alcohol/gasoline or diesel fuel) passenger automobiles
when operating on alcohol, and the other for natural gas dual energy
(natural gas/gasoline or diesel fuel) passenger automobiles when
operating on natural gas. In establishing the driving ranges, NHTSA was
required to consider consumer acceptability, economic practicability,
technology, environmental impact, safety, driveability, performance,
and any other factors deemed relevant.
The Alternative Motor Fuels Act and its legislative history made
clear that the driving ranges were to be low enough to
[[Page 14508]]
encourage the production of dual energy passenger automobiles, yet not
so low that motorists would be discouraged by a low driving range from
actually fueling their vehicles with the alternative fuels. Section
513(h)(2)(C) of the Cost Savings Act, now codified as 49 U.S.C.
Sec. 32901(c)(2)(B), provided that the minimum driving range
established by the agency for dual energy passenger automobiles could
not be less than 200 miles. Section 513(h)(2)(B) of the Cost Savings
Act, now codified as 49 U.S.C. Sec. 32901(c)(2)(A), allowed passenger
automobile manufacturers to petition the agency to set a lower range
for a particular model or models than the range established by the
agency for all models. However, the minimum driving range could not be
reduced to less than 200 miles for any model of dual energy passenger
automobile.
On April 26, 1990, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (55 FR
17611) a final rule establishing 49 CFR Part 538, Driving Ranges for
Dual Energy and Natural Gas Dual Energy Passenger Automobiles. The
agency established a minimum driving range of 200 miles for dual energy
passenger automobiles, and a minimum driving range of 100 miles for
natural gas dual energy passenger automobiles. NHTSA did not specify
higher ranges because it was concerned that such ranges could
discourage manufacturers from producing dual energy vehicles, since the
manufacturers would need to redesign their vehicles to accommodate
additional or larger fuel tanks in order to meet the higher ranges.
In Part 538, NHTSA also established procedures by which
manufacturers may petition the agency to establish a lower driving
range for a specific model or models of ``natural gas dual energy''
passenger automobiles and by which the agency may grant or deny such
petitions.
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT) (P.L. 102-486) amended
section 513 of the Cost Savings Act to expand the scope of the
alternative fuels it promoted. In addition to the incentives for
alcohol and natural gas, the amended section provided incentives for
the production of vehicles using liquefied petroleum gas (LPG),
hydrogen, coal derived liquid fuels, fuels (other than alcohol) derived
from biological materials, electricity (including electricity from
solar energy), and any fuel NHTSA determines, by rule, is substantially
not petroleum and would yield substantial energy security benefits and
substantial environmental benefits.
As amended, section 513 continued to provide incentives for the
production of dual fuel vehicles, i.e., vehicles that operate on one of
a now expanded list of alternative fuels and on gasoline or diesel
fuel. NHTSA notes that some statutory terminology was changed by the
1992 amendments. Among other things, the terms ``dual energy'' and
``natural gas dual energy'' were dropped, and the terms ``alternative
fueled automobile,'' ``dedicated automobile,'' and ``dual fueled
automobile'' were added.
Section 513 continued to require dual fueled passenger automobiles
to meet specified criteria, including meeting a minimum driving range,
in order to qualify for special treatment in the calculation of their
fuel economy for purposes of the CAFE standards.
One change made by the 1992 amendments concerning driving ranges
was that, under section 513(h)(2), the minimum driving range set by
NHTSA may not be less than 200 miles for dual fueled automobiles other
than electric vehicles. The amendments also provided that the agency
may not, in response to petitions from manufacturers, set an
alternative range for a particular model or models that is lower than
200 miles, except for electric vehicles.
The 1992 amendments necessitate amending Part 538. First, the
existing 100 mile minimum driving range for vehicles previously
categorized as ``natural gas dual energy'' vehicles must be raised to
at least 200 miles. Also, NHTSA must establish a minimum driving range
for the expanded scope of dual fueled vehicles. Part 538's petition
procedures also need to be amended to conform to the new statutory
provisions.
In addition to necessitating amendments to Part 538's driving range
provisions, the 1992 amendments require NHTSA to ``determine the
appropriate gallons equivalent measurement for gaseous fuels other than
natural gas * * * '' Such a measurement is needed to carry out the
special fuel economy calculations that apply to alternative fuel
vehicles.
The Motor Vehicle and Cost Savings Act was rescinded in 1994
through legislation (P.L. 103-272) recodifying the Cost Savings Act in
Chapter 329 ``Automobile Fuel Economy'' of Title 49 of the United
States Code (49 U.S.C. Sec. 32901 et. seq.) This recodification adopted
the provisions of the Cost Savings Act without substantive change,
inluding those amendments contained in the 1992 Energy Policy Act.
2. Regulatory Background
NHTSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on December
19, 1994 (59 FR 65295) which proposed setting the minimum driving range
for all dual fueled passenger automobiles other than electric vehicles
at 200 miles. In that notice, NHTSA also proposed removing the petition
procedures until it sets a minimum driving range for electric dual
fueled passenger automobiles.
The NPRM stated that the complexity of the issues relating to
establishment of a minimum driving range for electric dual fueled
passenger automobiles, otherwise known as hybrid electric vehicles,
required NHTSA to address that issue in a separate rulemaking. On
September 22, 1994, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (59 FR
48589) a request for comments seeking information that would help it
develop a proposal in that area.
The NPRM also proposed to amend Part 538's gallons equivalent
measurements for compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas,
liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, and hythane.
As part of determining appropriate gallons equivalent measurements
for gaseous fuels, NHTSA consulted with the Department of Energy (DOE)
Fuels Utilization Data and Analysis Division. NHTSA and DOE agreed that
the following gaseous fuels could be potential transportation fuels by
2008: liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas and hydrogen.
Pursuant to a contract with DOE, Abacus Technology Corporation
prepared a report titled ``Energy Equivalent Values of Three
Alternative Fuels: Liquefied Natural Gas, Liquefied Petroleum Gas, and
Hydrogen.'' This report is available for review at the docket number
cited in the heading of this notice. The Abacus report develops gallons
equivalent measurements for LNG, LPG, and hydrogen gaseous fuels.
After reviewing the Abacus report, the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Office of Mobile Sources recommended adding hythane fuel
(a mixture of hydrogen and natural gas (principally methane)) as a
gaseous fuel for which a gallon equivalent should be calculated. EPA
stated that although hythane is currently being used and evaluated on a
limited basis, there is a possibility that hythane fuel may become
commercially available as a gaseous fuel. In a follow-up report, which
is also available in the docket, Abacus developed an appropriate gallon
equivalent measurement for hythane.
3. Dual Energy Driving Range Requirements
NHTSA received comments regarding the driving range proposed in the
NPRM from Minnegasco, Taylor-Wharton, the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association (AAMA), the Southern
[[Page 14509]]
California Gas Company (the Gas Company), and the American Gas
Association/Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition (AGA/NGV).
Minnegasco, a natural gas utility, is concerned about the increase
of the minimum driving range for natural gas dual fueled vehicle
because a large share of the fleet vehicles in its territory do not
need a 200 mile range. Minnegasco also stated its concerns that the
size of the tanks required to achieve a 200 mile range in compressed
natural gas vehicles would require significant and costly vehicle
modifications. The company believes that requiring a 200 mile or
greater range would discourage the production of natural gas dual
fueled vehicles.
Taylor-Wharton, a manufacturer of gas equipment, indicated that a
minimum driving range of 200 miles would be detrimental to the
compressed natural gas industry. Taylor-Wharton is concerned that
setting the minimum driving range above 100 miles for CNG dual fueled
vehicles would require the installation of two CNG fuel tanks, causing
increased weight and cost. Taylor-Wharton also believes that by
increasing the range, certain safe and cost effective CNG fuel tanks
would be eliminated from the market. This will also decrease the CNG
fuel tank competition and, therefore, increase fuel tank costs. Taylor-
Wharton indicated that, in the future, a minimum driving range should
not be mandated for fleet vehicles, since these vehicles do not require
traveling long distances, and these vehicles' bases are equipped with
refueling infrastructure.
The American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) believes
that the minimum driving requirement of 200 miles is too stringent for
natural gas vehicles but achievable for LPG and alcohol dual fueled
vehicles. The AAMA further discussed the uniqueness of natural gas and
the marketability and productivity of alternative vehicles. AAMA
contended that natural gas stored at 3,000 pounds per square inch (psi)
requires roughly four times the storage space to achieve a driving
range equivalent to gasoline vehicles. Further, because natural gas is
stored in cylinders that present greater challenges for installation
than gasoline tanks, less than optimum usage of space is achieved.
AAMA believes that the market for alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs)
remains limited. AAMA stated that in 1995 the purchases by mandated
federal fleets would result in less than 15,000 AFV sales or
conversions, and in 1999 and later, an estimated 40,000 units. AAMA
also noted that market growth remains uncertain, as do implementation
of further mandates under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. AAMA stated
that even though incentives, such as CAFE credits for AFVs, help offset
the cost of product programs, a 200 mile minimum driving range may
remove this support factor for most dual fueled natural gas
automobiles.
Southern California Gas Company (the Gas Company) indicated that it
believed the minimum driving range for dual-fueled natural gas vehicles
should not be raised above 200 miles. The Gas Company believes that use
of the congressionally-mandated minimum will allow for the
participation of the greatest number of natural gas vehicles.
The American Gas Association and the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition
submitted joint comments (AGA/NGV). AGA/NGV believe that the increased
driving range requirement of 200 miles will act as a disincentive for
manufacturers to produce natural gas vehicles. AGA/NGV contends that a
200 mile minimum driving range would increase vehicle costs by
necessitating additional and/or larger storage cylinders on natural gas
vehicles, which could require structural changes and possibly separate
safety testing. In their comments, the AGA/NGV stated that the natural
gas vehicle industry is conducting research to expand fuel storage
capacity without increasing weight or limiting storage space on these
vehicles; however, these cylinders cost more and require more space
than steel cylinders. They also observed that most natural gas vehicles
will be owned and operated by large fleets. Fleet vehicles typically
are refueled daily at a single location. Thus, a limited driving range
does not serve as a major disincentive for these operators. AGA/NGV
also commented that natural gas is more widely available and the need
for dual fueled NGVs use of gasoline is decreasing rapidly. For these
reasons, the intent of the statute--to ensure fueling on natural gas--
is not likely to be subverted if NHTSA maintains the minimum driving
range at 100 miles.
AGA/NGV believes that the congressional history associated with the
1992 amendment to Section 513(h)(2) does not demonstrate an intention
on the part of Congress to change the status of the manufacturing
incentives for natural gas vehicles and urged NHTSA not to increase the
requirements to 200 miles.
Two commenters, AAMA and AGA/NGV, believe that the minimum driving
range of 200 miles for natural gas dual fueled vehicles is too
stringent. Therefore, these vehicles should be allowed to maintain a
100-mile driving range. Taylor-Wharton and Minnegasco agreed that 200
miles would serve as a disincentive to the natural gas industry.
Taylor-Wharton's argument focused on the limited space availability in
these natural gas dual fueled vehicles and the increased cost and
safety concerns for these vehicles' fuel tanks.
Although the agency realizes that natural gas dual fueled vehicles'
driving range is shorter than that of gasoline-fueled vehicles and
several other alternative fuels, (CNG driving range is one-third to
one-half that of comparable gasoline-fueled vehicles, and LNG fuel tank
range is just under two-thirds that of gasoline), NHTSA's examination
of the 1992 amendments and the legislative history of these amendments
indicates that the agency is required by the amendment to Section
513(h)(2) to set a minimum driving range of not less than 200 miles for
all alternative fueled passenger automobiles other than electric
vehicles. The agency trusts that this 200-mile driving range for
natural gas dual fueled passenger vehicles is low enough to encourage
the production of these vehicles, yet not so low that motorists would
be discouraged by a low driving range from actually fueling their
vehicles with these alternative fuels.
In the NPRM, NHTSA asked for comments on whether there are any
potentially available liquid alternative fuels that have significantly
higher energy content than alcohol on a volume basis, and, if so,
whether a driving range higher than 200 miles should be set for such
fuels. The agency received no such comments; therefore, NHTSA elects to
set the minimum driving range for dual fueled passenger automobiles
other than electric vehicles at 200 miles.
NHTSA believes that although the majority of commenters preferred a
lower minimum driving range for dual fueled passenger vehicles, the law
requires the minimum driving range to be set at not less than 200
miles. NHTSA is therefore setting the minimum driving range for all
dual fueled vehicles other than electric vehicles at 200 miles to
encourage development of these vehicles to the maximum extent possible
permitted by law.
4. Proposed Gallon Equivalents for Gaseous Fuels
To carry out the special procedures for fuel economy calculations
that apply to alternative fuel vehicles, it is necessary, for gaseous
fuel vehicles, to have a gallon equivalent measurement. The 1992
amendments specified that 100 cubic feet of natural gas is deemed
[[Page 14510]]
to contain 0.823 gallon equivalent of natural gas. The 1992 amendments
required NHTSA to determine the appropriate gallon equivalent
measurement for gaseous fuels other than natural gas, and a gallon
equivalent of such gaseous fuel shall be considered to have a fuel
content of 15 one-hundredths of a gallon of fuel.
The NPRM examined gallon equivalency measurements for five gaseous
fuels: (1) compressed natural gas; (2) liquified natural gas; (3)
liquified propane gas; (4) hydrogen; and (5) hythane (Hy5). NHTSA
received comments regarding the gallon equivalency measurements
proposed in the NPRM from Minnegasco, the American Gas Association/
Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition (AGA/NGV), Reliance and the Propane
Vehicle Council.
A. Liquefied Natural Gas. The Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988
included natural gas as an alternative fuel, but did not specify its
physical state as a compressed gas or a liquefied gas. The Abacus
report recommended that the same 0.823 gallon equivalent of natural gas
established in the Alternative Motor Fuels Act be applied to LNG based
on energy content in British Thermal Unit (BTU)/Standard Cubic Feet
(SCF), because LNG composition and heat of combustion are similar to
compressed natural gas.
AGA/NGV recommended that NHTSA not apply the conversion ratio used
for CNG to LNG. However, AGA/NGV failed to describe what conversion
factor the agency should use for LNG.
AGA/NGV's comments also suggested that a different gallon
equivalency be used for CNG. AGA/NGV indicated that the current
conversion ratio of 0.823 is inappropriate for use with CNG and
presented data suggesting that a conversion ratio of 0.809 (92,370 low
heating value Btu per 100 SCF divided by 114,118.8 Btu for gasoline)
would be more accurate. The different energy contents of liquefied
natural gas and liquid methane (99.6% purity) is another issue of
concern to AGA/NGV and it suggested that the conversion ratio for
liquid methane should be 0.793 (based on 99.6% pure methane). The
differences in energy content, according to AGA/NGV, could have a
significant impact on vehicle range.
There were also concerns raised by AGA/NGV about potential
confusion caused by the conversion factor of 0.823 value for CNG. AGA/
NGV indicated that the National Conference of Weights and Measures
(NCW&M) is establishing a standard method of measuring amounts of
compressed natural gas sold at retail fueling stations. The NCW&M
measurement compares pounds, not cubic feet, of compressed natural gas
to gallons of gasoline. As this standard of equating natural gas to
gasoline differs from that used for calculating fuel economy, AGA/NGV
is concerned that the continued use of the cubic foot equivalency for
CAFE purposes will cause confusion. AGA/NGV believes that other
regulatory agencies and consumers could misconstrue that the 100 SCF of
compressed natural gas equals one gallon of gasoline. Therefore, AGA/
NGV urged NHTSA to note in its final rule that its calculations for the
cited gaseous fuels are only being promulgated for purposes of
performing CAFE calculations and should not be relied upon for other
purposes, such as establishing units of measurement for the dispensing
of fuel or taxation of alternative fuels.
The divergence between the gallon equivalent for CAFE purposes and
as a unit of measure for retail sales and other purposes was also
raised in the submission given by Minnegasco. Minnegasco observed that
the National Conference of Weights and Measures (NCW&M) adopted 100
Standard Cubic Feet (SCF) as the Gasoline Gallon Equivalent (GGE) for
the sale for CNG engine fuel. Minnegasco contends that it would reduce
confusion if this gallon equivalent was adopted for purposes of fuel
economy determination. Minnegasco also suggested that a similar GGE
should be determined for LNG which takes into account temperature,
purity and density using standard industry references.
NHTSA believes that it does not have the discretion to assign
different gallon equivalency values for LNG and CNG. Both the
Alternative Motor Fuels Act and the Energy Policy Act direct that the
0.823 gallon equivalency ratio be used with ``natural gas.'' As CNG and
LNG are both natural gases that differ principally in the way they are
stored, it is the agency's view that they are both subject to the
legislative determination that, for CAFE purposes, 100 SCF of these
gases are equivalent to 0.823 gallons of gasoline. Therefore, NHTSA
will continue to apply the conversion factor of 0.823 gallon equivalent
for LNG and CNG.
B. Liquefied Propane Gas (LPG). The Gas Processors Association
Standard 2140-92 specifies four grades of LPG. They are commercial
propane, commercial butane, commercial butane-propane mixtures, and
propane HD-5. Propane HD-5 is recognized as the most suitable fuel for
internal combustion engines operating at moderate to high engine
severity. In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed that one gallon of LPG, grade HD-
5, is equivalent to 0.732 gallon of gasoline, using a lower heating
value. Two commenters addressed the proposed gallon equivalent
measurement for LPG. The Propane Vehicle Council and Reliance stated
that they supported a gallon equivalency measurement of 0.732 for LPG.
The 0.732 gallon equivalency published in the NPRM was based on a
lower heating value recommended in the first Abacus report. After
publication of the NPRM, The Department of Energy suggested that the
use of a lower heating value for propane was inconsistent with the use
of a higher heating value in calculating the gallon equivalency for
natural gas. In addition, DOE also indicated that the use of a higher
heating value was more consistent with the heating values used by DOE
in compiling other energy related information and statistics.
NHTSA believes that the use of a higher heating value for
calculation of the gallon equivalency for propane is consistent with
the use of higher heating values for natural gas in AMFA and EPACT.
Therefore, the agency is setting the gallon equivalency for propane at
0.726 gallons of gasoline per gallon of propane.
C. Hydrogen. NHTSA did not receive any comments regarding the
proposed gallon equivalent of 100 SCF of hydrogen of 0.240 contained in
the NPRM. As is the case with the gallon equivalency for propane
contained in the same NPRM, the proposed value was based on a lower
heating value. The agency believes that the use of a lower heating
value to calculate the gallon equivalency for hydrogen is inconsistent
with the use of a higher heating value for natural gas. NHTSA is
therefore setting the gallon equivalency for hydrogen at 0.259 gallons
of gasoline per 100 SCF of hydrogen.
D. Hythane. Hythane is a combination of two gaseous fuels: hydrogen
and natural gas. The second Abacus report concluded that the gallon
equivalent of 100 SCF of this hythane mixture is 0.725 using the lower
heating value. NHTSA did not receive any comments regarding the
proposed gallon equivalent for hythane. The agency is adopting a value
of 0.741 gallons of gasoline per 100 SCF of hythane. This value
represents the equivalency at a higher heating value. As is the case
with hydrogen and propane, NHTSA believes that the use of this higher
heating value is consistent with the use of higher heating values in
calculating the gallon equivalency for natural gas.
[[Page 14511]]
Regulatory Impacts
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This notice has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action and has
determined that the action is not ``significant'' under the Department
of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. In this final
rule, the agency is setting the minimum driving range for all dual
fueled passenger automobiles other than electric vehicles at 200 miles
and is establishing gallon equivalents for specified gaseous fuels.
None of these changes will result in an additional burden on
manufacturers. They do not impose any mandatory requirements but
implement statutory incentives to encourage the manufacture of
alternative fuel vehicles. For these reasons, NHTSA believes that any
impacts on manufacturers are so minimal as not to warrant preparation
of a full regulatory evaluation.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking
action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The rationale for this certification is that, to the
extent that any passenger automobile manufacturers qualify as small
entities, their number would not be substantial. Moreover, conversion
of vehicles to dual fuel status with the minimum ranges that would be
established by this regulation would be voluntarily undertaken in order
to achieve beneficial CAFE treatment of those vehicles. Therefore, no
significant costs would be imposed on any manufacturers or other small
entities.
C. National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has also analyzed this rule for the purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act, and determined that it would not
have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
Increased evaporative emissions due to added fuel volume would be the
most important environmental impact of this rulemaking if it induced
manufacturers to enlarge the size of existing fuel tanks in order to
produce dual fuel vehicles operating on alcohol or other liquid fuel.
However, the minimum range would not make it necessary for these dual
fuel vehicles to have enlarged fuel tanks. Natural gas and other
gaseous dual fueled automobiles will not expect to increase evaporative
emissions since gaseous tanks do not normally vent to the atmosphere.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The procedures in this proposed rule for passenger automobile
manufacturers to petition for lower driving ranges are considered to be
information collection requirements as that term is defined by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR part 1320. The
information collection requirements for part 538 have been submitted to
and approved by the OMB, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) This collection of information has been assigned
OMB Control No. 2127-0554. (Minimum Driving Ranges for Dual Energy
Passenger Automobiles) and has been approved for use through June 30,
1996.
E. Federalism
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that the rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect and it
does not preempt any State law. 49 U.S.C. 32909 sets forth a procedure
for judicial review of automobile fuel economy regulations. That
section does not require submission of a petition for reconsideration
or other administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in
court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 538
Energy conservation, Gasoline, Imports, Motor vehicles.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 538 is revised to
read as follows:
PART 538--MANUFACTURING INCENTIVES FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES
Secs.
538.1 Scope.
538.2 Purpose.
538.3 Applicability.
538.4 Definitions.
538.5 Minimum driving range.
538.6 Measurement of driving range.
538.7 [Reserved]
538.8 Gallon Equivalents for Gaseous Fuels.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32901, 32905, and 32906; delegation of
authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
Sec. 538.1 Scope.
This part establishes minimum driving range criteria to aid in
identifying passenger automobiles that are dual fueled automobiles. It
also establishes gallon equivalent measurements for gaseous fuels other
than natural gas.
Sec. 538.2 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to specify one of the criteria in 49
U.S.C. chapter 329 ``Automobile Fuel Economy'' for identifying dual
fueled passenger automobiles that are manufactured in model years 1993
through 2004. The fuel economy of a qualifying vehicle is calculated in
a special manner so as to encourage its production as a way of
facilitating a manufacturer's compliance with the Corporate Average
Fuel Economy Standards set forth in part 531 of this chapter. The
purpose is also to establish gallon equivalent measurements for gaseous
fuels other than natural gas.
Sec. 538.3 Applicability.
This part applies to manufacturers of automobiles.
Sec. 538.4 Definitions.
(a) Statutory terms. (1) The terms alternative fuel, alternative
fueled automobile, and dual fueled automobile, are used as defined in
49 U.S.C. 32901(a).
(2) The terms automobile and passenger automobile, are used as
defined in 49 U.S.C. 32901(a), and in accordance with the
determinations in part 523 of this chapter.
(3) The term manufacturer is used as defined in 49 U.S.C.
32901(a)(13), and in accordance with part 529 of this chapter.
(4) The term model year is used as defined in 49 U.S.C.
32901(a)(15).
(b)(1) Other terms. The terms average fuel economy, fuel economy,
and model type are used as defined in subpart A of 40 CFR part 600.
(2) The term EPA means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Sec. 538.5 Minimum driving range.
(a) The minimum driving range that a passenger automobile must have
in order to be treated as a dual fueled automobile pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 32901(c) is 200 miles when operating on its nominal useable fuel
tank capacity of the alternative fuel, except when the alternative fuel
is electricity.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 538.6 Measurement of driving range.
The driving range of a passenger automobile model type is
determined by multiplying the combined EPA city/highway fuel economy
rating when operating on the alternative fuel, by the nominal usable
fuel tank capacity (in gallons), of the fuel tank containing the
[[Page 14512]]
alternative fuel. The combined EPA city/highway fuel economy rating is
the value determined by the procedures established by the Administrator
of the EPA under 49 U.S.C. 32904 and set forth in 40 CFR part 600.
Sec. 538.7 [Reserved]
Sec. 538.8 Gallon Equivalents for Gaseous Fuels.
The gallon equivalent of gaseous fuels, for purposes of
calculations made under 49 U.S.C. 32905, are listed in Table I:
Table I--Gallon Equivalent Measurements for Gaseous Fuels per 100
Standard Cubic Feet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gallon
Fuel equivalent
measurement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compressed Natural Gas................................ 0.823
Liquefied Natural Gas................................. 0.823
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Grade HD-5)*................. 0.726
Hydrogen.............................................. 0.259
Hythane (Hy5)......................................... 0.741
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Per gallon unit of measure.
Issued on: March 21, 1996.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 96-7828 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7749 Acquisition Regulation; Energy-Efficient Computer Equipment
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14506-14507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7749]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
48 CFR Parts 1523 and 1552
[FRL-5448-6]
Acquisition Regulation; Energy-Efficient Computer Equipment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adds coverage to the EPA Acquisition Regulation
(EPAAR) on energy-efficient computer equipment. This final rule is
necessary for ensuring that all purchases of microcomputers, including
personal computers, monitors, and printers meet ``EPA Energy Star''
requirements for energy efficiency, unless exempted.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 17, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Schaffer at (202) 260-9032,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C.
20460 (Mail Code 3802F).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Executive Order 12845 (April 23, 1993) requires the Federal
Government to purchase only microcomputers, including personal
computers, monitors and printers, which meet ``EPA Energy Star''
requirements for energy efficiency.
A proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on July 25,
1995 (60 FR 37982). No public comments were received.
B. Executive Order 12866
This rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866. Therefore no review is required at the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because this rule does
not propose any information collection requirements which would require
the approval of OMB under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA certifies this rule does not exert a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule establishes
EPA policy for purchasing microcomputers, including personal computers,
monitors, and printers which must meet ``EPA Energy Star'' requirements
for energy efficiency. The ``Energy Star Program'' is a voluntary
partnership effort with the computer industry, which includes small
entities, to promote the introduction of energy-efficient personal
computers, monitors, and printers which can reduce air pollution caused
by utility power generation. The ``Energy Star Program'' has no
barriers to entry for small entities to procure or develop the
necessary technology or components to manufacture Energy Star compliant
computers, monitors and printers. Therefore, no regulatory flexibility
analysis has been prepared.
E. Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose unfunded mandates on state or local
entities or others.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1523 and 1552
Environmental Conservation, Environmental Safety, Government
procurement, Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Chapter 15 of Title 48
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:
1. The authority citation for Parts 1523 and 1552 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: Sec 205(c), 63 Stat. 390, as amended, 40 U.S.C.
486(c).
1a. The heading for part 1523 is revised to read as follows:
PART 1523--ENVIRONMENT, CONSERVATION, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY, AND
DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE.
2. Subpart 1523.70 is added to read as follows:
Subpart 1523.70--Energy-Efficient Computer Equipment
1523.7000 Background.
(a) Executive Order 12845 requires the Federal Government to
purchase only microcomputers, including personal computers, monitors
and printers, which meet ``EPA Energy Star'' requirements for energy
efficiency. This equipment is often identified by the Energy
StarTM logo and is capable of entering and recovering from an
energy-efficient low power state.
(b) The EPA Energy Star Computer Program is a voluntary partnership
effort with the computer industry to promote the introduction of
energy-efficient personal computers, monitors, and printers which can
reduce air pollution caused by utility power generation, and ease the
burden on building air conditioning and electrical systems. The Energy
Star Program is designed to be a self-certifying computer industry
program, policed informally by the computer industry itself.
(c) FIRMR Bulletin C-35 (dated 11/19/93) describes procedures that
will promote the acquisition of energy-efficient microcomputers and
associated computer equipment.
1523.7001 Policy.
(a) The ``Energy Star'' Executive Order (E.O. 12845) applies to the
following equipment:
(1) Personal Computers (stand-alone).
(2) Personal Computers (end-user on network).
(3) Notebook and other portable computers.
(4) PC printers - laser, inkjet or dot matrix (stand-alone or
networked).
(5) High-speed printers used on a PC network (less than
approximately 20 pages per minute).
(6) Monitors (CRT or Flat-panel LCD).
(b) ``Energy Star'' requirements do not apply to the following
equipment:
(1) Workstations.
(2) File servers.
(3) Mainframe equipment.
(4) Minicomputers.
(5) High-speed printers used with mainframe computers (30 or more
pages per minute).
(6) Mainframe or ``dumb'' terminals.
(7) X-terminals.
(c) All new acquisitions for microcomputers, including personal
computers, monitors, and printers, shall
[[Page 14507]]
contain specifications which meet EPA Energy Star requirements for
energy efficiency unless a waiver has been obtained in accordance with
internal Agency procedures. The EPA Energy Star requirement applies in
instances where the Contracting Officer authorizes the contractor to
acquire property in accordance with FAR 45.302-1.
(d) The Energy Star requirement also applies to all applicable
equipment ordered from GSA Schedule Contracts, open market buys, and
Bankcard purchases.
1523.7002 Waivers.
(a) There are several types of computer equipment which technically
fall under the current Energy Star Program, but for which EPA
established blanket waivers because Energy Star compliant versions of
this equipment were unavailable in the marketplace. Blanket waivers
apply to the following types of equipment:
(1) LAN servers, including file servers; application servers;
communication servers; including bridges and routers;
(2) UNIX RISC based processors with their high-end monitors;
(3) Large LAN printers (greater than 19 pages/minute output); and
(4) Scientific computing equipment which is used for real-time data
acquisition and which, if subjected to a power down mode, would
jeopardize the research project.
(b) It is anticipated that there will be Energy Star models of this
equipment in the future, but in the near term EPA will not specify
Energy Star qualifications when purchasing the items listed in this
section.
1523.7003 Contract clause.
The Contracting Officer shall insert a clause substantially the
same as 48 CFR 1552.239-103, Acquisition of Energy Star Compliant
Microcomputers, Including Personal Computers, Monitors, and Printers,
in all solicitations and contracts for the acquisition of
microcomputers, including personal computers, monitors and printers.
The Contracting Officer shall also insert the clause in solicitations
and contracts where the Contracting Officer authorizes the contractor
to acquire property in accordance with FAR 45.302-1.
3. Section 1552.239-103 is added to read as follows:
1552.239-103 Acquisition of Energy Star Compliant Microcomputers,
Including Personal Computers, Monitors and Printers.
As prescribed in 1523.7003, insert the following clause:
ACQUISITION OF ENERGY STAR COMPLIANT MICROCOMPUTERS, INCLUDING PERSONAL
COMPUTERS, MONITORS, AND PRINTERS
(APRIL 1996)
(a) The Contractor shall provide computer products that meet EPA
Energy Star requirements for energy efficiency. By acceptance of
this contract, the Contractor certifies that all microcomputers,
including personal computers, monitors, and printers to be provided
under this contract meet EPA Energy Star requirements for energy
efficiency.
(b) The Contractor shall ship all products with the standby
feature activated or enabled.
(c) The Contractor shall provide models that have equivalent
functionality to similar non-power managed models. This
functionality should include as a minimum:
(1) The ability to run commercial off-the-shelf software both
before and after recovery from a low power state, including
retention of files opened (with no loss of data) before the power
management feature was activated.
(2) If equipment will be used on a local area network (LAN), the
contractor shall provide equipment that is fully compatible with
network environments, e.g., personal computers resting in a low-
power state should not be disconnected from the network.
(d) The contractor shall provide monitors that are capable of
being powered down when connected to the accompanying personal
computer.
(End of Clause)
Dated: March 18, 1996.
Betty L. Bailey,
Director, Office of Acquisition Management.
[FR Doc. 96-7749 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7747 Acquisition Regulation; Cost-Sharing Contracts
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14504-14506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7747]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
48 CFR Parts 1516 and 1552
[FRL-5449-9]
Acquisition Regulation; Cost-Sharing Contracts
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adds coverage to the EPA Acquisition Regulation
(EPAAR) on cost-sharing contracts. This rule is necessary to provide
Contracting Officers guidance for awarding and administering cost-
sharing contracts.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 17, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Schaffer at (202) 260-9032,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460
(Mail Code 3802F).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Cost-sharing applies only to contracts awarded by EPA in which the
Government and contractor agree to share in the costs of a project.
Cost-sharing is relevant when a contractor has the opportunity to
acquire technology, expertise or other benefits which will enable the
contractor to profit after contract completion. Generally, potential
benefits to the contractor are less likely where basic research is
involved and the extent of commercial application is unknown.
A proposed rule was published in the Federal Register for public
comment on August 17, 1995 (60 FR 42828). No comments were received.
B. Executive Order 12866
This rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, no review is required at the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because this rule does
not propose any information collection requirements which would require
the approval of OMB under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA certifies this rule does not exert a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule primarily
establishes EPA policies and internal procedures for awarding and
administering cost sharing contracts. The contract clause will require
small entities to maintain records for costs claimed as its cost share.
Most small entities should presently be compiling information in
their accounting systems for all costs incurred under cost reimbursable
contracts in order to monitor financial progress under a contract. Any
adjustments to existing accounting systems should require only minimal
cost and effort. The EPA certifies this rule will have no significant
impact on small entities. Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis
has been prepared.
E. Unfunded Mandates
This rule will not impose unfunded mandates on state or local
entities, or others.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1516 and 1552
Government procurement, Solicitation provisions and contract
clauses.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, Chapter 15 of Title 48
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:
1. The authority citation for Parts 1516 and 1552 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390, as amended, 40 U.S.C.
486(c).
2. Section 1516.303 is added to read as follows:
1516.303 Cost-sharing contracts.
1516.303-71 Definition.
Cost-sharing is a generic term denoting any situation where the
Government does not fully reimburse a contractor for all allowable
costs necessary to accomplish the project under the contract. This term
encompasses cost-matching and cost-limitations, in addition to cost-
sharing. Cost-sharing does not include usual contractual limitations
such as indirect cost ceilings in accordance with FAR 42.707, or
ceilings on travel or other direct costs. Cost-sharing contracts may be
required as a result of Congressional mandate.
1516.303-72 Policy.
(a) The Agency shall use cost-sharing contracts where the principal
purpose is ultimate commercialization and utilization of technologies
by the private sector. There should also be a reasonable expectation of
future economic benefits for the contractor and the Government beyond
the Government's contract.
(b) Cost-sharing may be accomplished by a contribution to either
direct or indirect costs, provided such costs are reasonable, allocable
and allowable in accordance with the cost principles of the contract.
Allowable costs which are absorbed by the contractor as its share of
contract costs may not be charged directly or indirectly to the Agency
or the Federal Government.
(c) Unsolicited proposals will be considered on a case-by-case
basis by the Contracting Officer as to the appropriateness of cost-
sharing.
1516.303-73 Types of cost-sharing.
(a) Cost-sharing may be accomplished in various forms or
combinations. These include, but are not limited to: cash outlays, real
property or interest therein, personal property or services, cost
matching, or other in-kind contributions.
[[Page 14505]]
(b) In-kind contributions represent non-cash contributions provided
by the performing contractor which would normally be a charge against
the contract. While in-kind contributions are an acceptable method of
cost-sharing, should the booked costs of property appear unrealistic,
the fair market value of the property shall be determined pursuant to
1516.303-74 of this chapter.
(c) In-kind contributions may be in the form of personal property
(equipment or supplies) or services which are directly beneficial,
specifically identifiable and necessary for the performance of the
contract. In-kind contributions must meet all of the following criteria
before acceptance.
(1) Be verifiable from the contractor's books and records;
(2) Not be included as contributions under any other Federal
contract;
(3) Be necessary to accomplish project objectives;
(4) Provide for types of charges that would otherwise be allowable
under applicable Federal cost principles appropriate to the
contractor's organization; and
(5) Not be paid for by the Federal Government under any contract,
agreement or grant.
1516.303-74 Determining the Value of In-Kind Contributions.
In-kind contributions accepted from a contractor will be addressed
on a case-by-case basis provided the established values do not exceed
fair market values.
(a) Where the Agency receives title to donated land, building,
equipment or supplies and the property is not fully consumed during
performance of the contract, the Contracting Officer should establish
the property's value based on the contractor's booked costs (i.e.,
acquisition cost less depreciation, if any) at the time of donation. If
the booked costs reflect unrealistic values when compared to current
market conditions, the Contracting Officer may establish another
appropriate value if supported by an independent appraisal of the fair
market value of the donated property or property in similar condition
and circumstances.
(b) The Contracting Officer will monitor reports of in-kind costs
as they are incurred or recognized during the contract period of
performance to determine that the value of in-kind services does not
exceed fair market values.
(c) The value of any services or the use of personal or real
property donated by a contractor should be established when necessary
in accordance with generally accepted accounting policies and Federal
cost principles.
1516.303-75 Amount of Cost-Sharing.
(a) Contractors should contribute a reasonable amount of the total
project cost covered under the contract. The ratio of cost
participation should correlate to the apparent advantages available to
performers and the proximity of implementing commercialization, i.e.,
the higher the potential for future profits, the higher the
contractor's share should be.
(b) Fee will not be paid to the contractor or any member of the
contractor team (subcontractors and consultants) which has a
substantial and direct interest in the contract, or is in a position to
gain long term benefits from the contract. A vulnerability the
Contracting Officer should consider in reviewing a prime contractor's
request for consent to subcontract is whether subcontractors under
prime cost-sharing contracts have a significant direct interest in the
contract to gain long-term benefits from the contract.
(c) The Contracting Officer, with the input of technical experts,
may consider the following factors in determining reasonable levels of
cost sharing:
(1) The availability of the technology to competitors;
(2) Improvements in the contractor's market share position;
(3) The time and risk necessary to achieve success;
(4) If the results of the project involve patent rights which could
be sold or licensed;
(5) If the contractor has non-Federal sources of funds to include
as cost participation; and
(6) If the contractor has the production and other capabilities to
capitalize the results of the project.
(d) A contractor's cost participation can be provided by other
subcontractors with which it has contractual arrangements to perform
the contract as long as the contractor's cost-sharing goal is met.
1516.303-76 Fee on cost-sharing contracts by subcontractors.
(a) Subcontractors under prime cost-sharing contracts who do not
have a significant direct interest in the contract or who are not in a
position to gain long-term benefits from the contract may earn a fee.
(b) Contracting Officers should be alert to a potential
vulnerability for the Government under cost-sharing contracts when
evaluating proposed subcontractors or consenting to a subcontract
during contract administration, where the subcontractor is a wholly-
owned subsidiary of the prime. The vulnerability consists of the
subsidiary earning a large amount of fee, which could be returned to
the prime through stock dividends or other intercompany transactions.
This could circumvent the objective of a cost-sharing contract.
1516.303-77 Administrative requirements.
(a) The initial Procurement Request shall reflect the total
estimated cost of the cost-sharing contract. The face page of the
contract award shall indicate the total estimated cost of the contract,
the Contractor's share of the cost, and the Government's share of the
cost.
(b) The manner of cost-sharing and how it is to be accomplished
shall be set forth in the contract. Additionally, contracts which
provide for cost-sharing shall require the contractor to maintain
records adequate to reflect the nature and extent of their cost-sharing
as well as those costs charged the Agency. Such records may be subject
to an Agency audit.
3. Section 1516.307 is amended to add paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
1516.307 Contract clauses.
* * * * *
(c) The Contracting Officer shall insert a clause substantially the
same as 48 CFR 1552.216-75, Estimated Cost and Cost-Sharing, in
solicitations and contracts where the total incurred costs are shared
by the contractor on a straight percentage basis. The Contracting
Officer may develop other clauses, as appropriate, following the same
approach, but reflecting different cost-sharing arrangements negotiated
on specific contract actions.
4. Subpart 1516.3 is amended by adding Section 1516.370 to read as
follows:
1516.370 Solicitation provision.
The solicitation document shall state whether any cost-sharing is
required, and may set forth a target level of cost-sharing. Although
technical considerations are normally most important, the degree of
cost-sharing may be considered in a selection decision when cost
becomes a determinative factor in a selection decision.
5. Part 1552 is amended to add Section 1552.216-76 to read as
follows:
1552.216-76 Estimated Cost and Cost-Sharing.
As prescribed in 1516.307(c), insert the following clause:
Estimated Cost and Cost-Sharing (Apr. 1996)
(a) The total estimated cost of performing the work under this
contract is $________. The Contractor's share of this cost shall not
[[Page 14506]]
exceed $________. The Government's share of this cost shall not
exceed $________.
(b) For performance of the work under the contract, the
Contractor shall be reimbursed for not more than ______ percent of
the cost of performance determined to be allowable under the
Allowable Cost and Payment clause. The remaining balance of
allowable cost shall constitute the Contractor's share.
(c) Fee shall not be paid to the prime contractor under this
cost-sharing contract.
(d) The Contractor shall maintain records of all costs incurred
and claimed for reimbursement as well as any other costs claimed as
part of its cost share. Those records shall be subject to audit by
the Government.
(e) Costs contributed by the Contractor shall not be charged to
the Government under any other contract, grant or agreement
(including allocation to other contracts as part of an independent
research and development program) nor be included as contributions
under any other Federal contract.
(End of Clause)
Dated: March 11, 1996.
Betty L. Bailey,
Director, Office of Acquisition Management.
[FR Doc. 96-7747 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7689 Operation above 40 GHz
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14500-14503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7689]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 2 and 15
[ET Docket No. 94-124; RM-8308; FCC 95-499]
Operation above 40 GHz
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this First Report and Order (``1st R&O''), the Commission
adopts revisions to the frequency allocation table and establishes
standards to permit the manufacture, importation and operation of
vehicle-mounted radar system transmitters in the 46.7-46.9 GHz and 76-
77 GHz bands and of general use, unlicensed transmitters in the 59-64
GHz band. Part of this action responds to petitions for rule making
filed by General Motors Research Corporation (GM) and VORAD Safety
Systems , Inc. (VORAD).
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 1996. The suspension of Sec. 15.255 is effective
until a final Commission decision is reached concerning appropriate
spectrum etiquette techniques. FCC will publish notice of the final
decision in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Reed, Office of Engineering and
Technology, (202) 418-2455, Richard Engelman, Office of Engineering and
Technology, (202) 418-2445, or Michael Marcus, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418-2470, or send an electronic mail message via
the Internet to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 1st
R&O, ET Docket 94-124, FCC 95-499, adopted December 15, 1995, and
released December 15, 1995. The full text of this Commission decision
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington,
D.C. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service,
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 246 or 2100 M Street,
N.W., Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
Summary of 1st R&O
1. On October 20, 1994, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making, 59 FR 61304, November 30, 1994, in this proceeding. The
Commission proposed to open for commercial development and use a
portion of the millimeter wave frequency bands above 40 GHz. In
particular, the Commission proposed to make available a total of 16 GHz
of spectrum in the frequency range between 47.2 and 153 GHz on a shared
basis with existing and future government users. The Commission also
proposed to make available 2 GHz of spectrum in the 40.5-42.5 GHz band
for non-government users.
2. In cooperation with the Department of Commerce's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the
Commission proposed twelve frequency bands in the region of the
spectrum from 47 GHz to 153 GHz for potential use by new millimeter
wave technologies. The frequency bands are: 47.2-48.2 GHz, 59.0-64.0
GHz, 71.0-72.0 GHz, 76.0-77.0 GHz, 84.0-85.0 GHz, 94.7-95.7 GHz, 103.0-
104.0 GHz, 116.0-117.0 GHz, 122.0-123.0 GHz, 126.0-127.0 GHz, 139.0-
140.0 GHz, and 152.0-153.0 GHz. The Commission also proposed to
designate three millimeter wave bands, as well as part of a fourth
band, for use by vehicular radar systems. These bands are: 47.2-47.4
GHz, 76.0-77.0 GHz, 94-7-95.7 GHz and 139.0-140.0 GHz.
[[Page 14501]]
3. This 1st R&O makes available a total of 6.2 GHz of spectrum in
the 46.7-46.9 GHz, 59-64 GHz, and 76-77 GHz bands for unlicensed
devices. These new frequency bands and associated standards will permit
the development of vehicle radar systems that could be used in
conjunction with Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and short-
range, high capacity wireless radio systems that could be used for
educational and medical applications, wireless access to libraries or
other information databases. Based on comments filed in this
proceeding, the Commission believes that the frequency band 46.7-46.9
GHz would be a better choice for vehicle radar operations in this
region of the spectrum than our original proposal of 47.2-47.4 GHz. The
use of this frequency band for vehicle radar systems addresses the
concerns of Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) and others,
and will provide additional flexibility in our decisions regarding
licensed operations. Therefore, we are making the 46.7-46.9 GHz and 76-
77 GHz bands available for vehicle radar systems. We are also making
the 59-64 GHz band available for use by general unlicensed devices
under Part 15 of our rules. Our decision is primarily motivated by the
physical characteristics of the spectrum and widespread support for
this aspect of our rule. We believe that licensing is not necessary
because of the limited potential for interference due to oxygen
absorption and the narrow beamwidth of point-to-point antennas likely
to be operating in this range. Moreover, we believe that by providing a
full 5 GHz bandwidth we will be making the spectrum more attractive for
novel broadband applications such as wireless computer-to-computer
communications.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 2
Communications equipment, Radio.
47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment, Highway safety, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Rules Changes
Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 2 and 15, are
amended as follows:
PART 2--FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 302, 303, and 307 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302, 303, and 307,
unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 2.106, the Table of Frequency Allocations, is amended by
revising the frequency bands 43.5-47.0 GHz, 59-64 GHz, 76-81 GHz, to
read as follows:
Sec. 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.
* * * * *
International table United States table FCC use designators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Government Non-
Region 2-- Region 3-- --------------- Government
Region 1-- allocation GHz allocation GHz --------------- Rule Special-use
allocation GHz Allocation Allocation part(s) frequencies
GHz GHz
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
43.5-45.5 43.5-45.5 43.5-45.5 43.5-45.5 43.5-45.5
MOBILE 902 MOBILE 902 MOBILE 902 FIXED-
SATELLITE
MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-
space)
RADIONAVIGATION RADIONAVIGATION RADIONAVIGATION MOBILE-
SATELLITE
RADIONAVIGATION- RADIONAVIGATION- RADIONAVIGATION- (Earth-to-
SATELLITE SATELLITE SATELLITE space)
903 903 903 G117
45.5-47.0 45.5-47.0 45.5-47.0 45.5-47.0 45.5-47.0
MOBILE 902 MOBILE 902 MOBILE 902 MOBILE MOBILE RADIO
FREQUENCY
DEVICES
(15)
MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE-SATELLITE MOBILE- MOBILE-
SATELLITE SATELLITE
RADIONAVIGATION RADIONAVIGATION RADIONAVIGATION (Earth-to- (Earth-to-
space) space)
RADIONAVIGATION- RADIONAVIGATION- RADIONAVIGATION- RADIONAVIGATI RADIONAVIGATI
SATELLITE SATELLITE SATELLITE ON-SATELLITE ON-SATELLITE
903 ................ 903 903
* * * * * * *
59-64 59-64 59-64 59-64 59-64
FIXED FIXED FIXED FIXED FIXED Radio 61.25 GHz250
devices MHz:
(15) Industrial,
scientific
and medical
frequency
INTER-SATELLITE INTER-SATELLITE INTER-SATELLITE INTER- INTER-
SATELLITE SATELLITE
MOBILE 909 MOBILE 909 MOBILE 909 MOBILE 909 MOBILE 909
RADIOLOCATION 910 RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION
911 911 911 911 911
[[Page 14502]]
* * * * * * *
76-77 76-77 76-77 76-77 76-77
RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIO
FREQUENCY
DEVICES
(15)
Amateur Amateur Amateur Amateur
Amateur-Satellite Amateur- Amateur-
Satellite Satellite
Space Research Space Research Space Research
(space-to-Earth) (space-to- (space-to-
Earth) Earth)
77-81 77-81 77-81 77-81 77-81
RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION RADIOLOCATION Amateur
(97)
Amateur Amateur Amateur Amateur
Amateur-Satellite Amateur- Amateur- Amateur-
Satellite Satellite Satellite
Space Research Space Research Space Research
(space-to-Earth) (space-to- (space-to-
Earth) Earth)
912 912
* * * * *
3. Section 2.997 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.997 Frequency spectrum to be investigated.
(a) In all of the measurements set forth in Secs. 2.991 and 2.993,
the spectrum shall be investigated from the lowest radio frequency
signal generated in the equipment, without going below 9 kHz, up to at
least the frequency shown below:
(1) If the equipment operates below 10 GHz: to the tenth harmonic
of the highest fundamental frequency or to 40 GHz, whichever is lower.
(2) If the equipment operates at or above 10 GHz and below 30 GHz:
to the fifth harmonic of the highest fundamental frequency or to 100
GHz, whichever is lower.
(3) If the equipment operates at or above 30 GHz: to the fifth
harmonic of the highest fundamental frequency or to 200 GHz, whichever
is lower.
(b) Particular attention should be paid to harmonics and
subharmonics of the carrier frequency as well as to those frequencies
removed from the carrier by multiples of the oscillator frequency.
Radiation at the frequencies of multiplier stages should also be
checked.
(c) The amplitude of spurious emissions which are attenuated more
than 20 dB below the permissible value need not be reported.
(d) Unless otherwise specified, measurements above 40 GHz shall be
performed using a minimum resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz.
PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES
1. The authority citation for Part 15 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 4, 302, 303, 304, 307, and 624A of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 302,
303, 304, 307, and 544A.
2. Section 15.31 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 15.31 Measurement standards.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) At frequencies equal to or above 30 MHz, measurements may be
performed at a distance other than what is specified provided:
measurements are not made in the near field; and, it can be
demonstrated that the signal levels needed to be measured at the
distance employed can be detected by the measurement equipment.
Measurements shall not be performed at a distance greater than 30
meters unless it can be further demonstrated that measurements at a
distance of 30 meters or less are impractical. When performing
measurements at a distance other than what is specified, the results
shall be extrapolated to the specified distance using one of the
following formulas: for measurements above 30 MHz but below 40 GHz, an
inverse linear-distance extrapolation factor (20 dB/decade); for
measurements above 40 GHz, an inverse linear-distance-squared
extrapolation factor (40 dB/decade).
* * * * *
3. Section 15.33 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 15.33 Frequency range of radiated measurements.
(a) For an intentional radiator, the spectrum shall be investigated
from the lowest radio frequency signal generated in the device, without
going below 9 kHz, up to at least the frequency shown in this
paragraph:
(1) If the intentional radiator operates below 10 GHz: to the tenth
harmonic of the highest fundamental frequency or to 40 GHz, whichever
is lower.
(2) If the intentional radiator operates at or above 10 GHz and
below 30 GHz: to the fifth harmonic of the highest fundamental
frequency or to 100 GHz, whichever is lower.
(3) If the intentional radiator operates at or above 30 GHz: to the
fifth harmonic of the highest fundamental frequency or to 200 GHz,
whichever is lower.
(4) If the intentional radiator contains a digital device,
regardless of whether this digital device controls the functions of the
intentional radiator or the digital device is used for additional
control or function purposes other than to enable the operation of the
intentional radiator, the frequency range shall be investigated up to
the range specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section
or the range applicable to the digital device, as shown in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section, whichever is the higher frequency range of
investigation.
* * * * *
4. Section 15.35 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 15.35 Measurement detector functions and bandwidths.
* * * * *
(b) On any frequency or frequencies above 1000 MHz, unless
otherwise
[[Page 14503]]
stated, the radiated limits shown are based on the use of measurement
instrumentation employing an average detector function. When average
radiated emission measurements are specified in the regulations,
including emission measurements below 1000 MHz, there is also a limit
on the radio frequency emissions, as measured using instrumentation
with a peak detector function, corresponding to 20 dB above the maximum
permitted average limit for the frequency being investigated. Unless
otherwise specified, measurements above 1000 MHz shall be performed
using a minimum resolution bandwidth of 1 MHz. Measurements of AC power
line conducted emissions are performed using a CISPR quasi-peak
detector, even for devices for which average radiated emission
measurements are specified.
* * * * *
5. Section 15.205 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d)(4) to
read as follows:
Sec. 15.205 Restricted bands of operation.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) Any equipment operated under the provisions of Sec. 15.253 or
Sec. 15.255.
* * * * *
6. A new Sec. 15.253 is added to Subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 15.253 Operation within the bands 46.7-46.9 GHz and 76.0-77.0
GHz.
(a) Operation within the bands 46.7-46.9 GHz and 76.0-77.0 GHz is
restricted to vehicle-mounted field disturbance sensors used as vehicle
radar systems. The transmission of additional information, such as
data, is permitted provided the primary mode of operation is as a
vehicle-mounted field disturbance sensor. Operation under the
provisions of this section is not permitted on aircraft or satellites.
(b) The radiated emission limits within the bands 46.7-46.9 GHz and
76.0-77.0 GHz are as follows:
(1) If the vehicle is not in motion, the power density of any
emission within the bands specified in this section shall not exceed
200 nW/cm \2\ at a distance of 3 meters from the exterior surface of
the radiating structure.
(2) For forward-looking vehicle-mounted field disturbance sensors,
if the vehicle is in motion the power density of any emission within
the bands specified in this section shall not exceed 60 W/cm
\2\ at a distance of 3 meters from the exterior surface of the
radiating structure.
(3) For side-looking or rear-looking vehicle-mounted field
disturbance sensors, if the vehicle is in motion the power density of
any emission within the bands specified in this section shall not
exceed 30 W/cm \2\ at a distance of 3 meters from the exterior
surface of the radiating structure.
(c) The power density of any emissions outside the operating band
shall consist solely of spurious emissions and shall not exceed the
following:
(1) For vehicle-mounted field disturbance sensors operating in the
band 46.7-46.9 GHz: 2 pW/cm \2\ at a distance of 3 meters from the
exterior surface of the radiating structure.
(2) For forward-looking vehicle-mounted field disturbance sensors
operating in the band 76-77 GHz: 600 pW/cm \2\ at a distance of 3
meters from the exterior surface of the radiating structure.
(3) For side-looking or rear-looking vehicle-mounted field
disturbance sensors operating in the band 76-77 GHz: 300 pW/cm \2\ at a
distance of 3 meters from the exterior surface of the radiating
structure.
(4) Radiated emissions below 40 GHz shall not exceed the general
limits in Sec. 15.209.
(d) The provisions in Sec. 15.35 limiting peak emissions apply.
(e) Fundamental emissions must be contained within the frequency
bands specified in this section during all conditions of operation.
Equipment is presumed to operate over the temperature range -20 to +50
degrees celsius with an input voltage variation of 85% to 115% of rated
input voltage, unless justification is presented to demonstrate
otherwise.
(f) Regardless of the power density levels permitted under this
section, devices operating under the provisions of this section must
comply with the requirements of the RF safety standards specified in
Sec. 1.1307(b) of this chapter. Compliance with these standards for the
fundamental emissions and the unwanted emissions must be demonstrated
in the application for certification.
7. A new Sec. 15.255 is added to Subpart C and suspended to read as
follows:
Sec. 15.255 Operation within the band 59.0-64.0 GHz.
(a) Operation under the provisions of this section is not permitted
for field disturbance sensors, including vehicle radar systems, nor is
the operation of this equipment permitted on aircraft or satellites.
(b) Within the 59.0-64.0 GHz band, the power density of any
emission shall not exceed 9 W/cm \2\ at a distance of 3
meters.
(c) The power density of any emissions outside the 59.0-64.0 GHz
band shall consist solely of spurious emissions and shall not exceed 90
pW/cm \2\ at a distance of 3 meters. The levels of the spurious
emissions shall not exceed the level of the fundamental emission.
(d) Radiated emissions below 40 GHz shall not exceed the general
limits in Sec. 15.209.
(e) The provisions in Sec. 15.35 limiting peak emissions apply.
(f) Fundamental emissions must be contained within the frequency
bands specified in this section during all conditions of operation.
Equipment is presumed to operate over the temperature range -20 to +50
degrees celsius with an input voltage variation of 85% to 115% of rated
input voltage, unless justification is presented to demonstrate
otherwise.
(g) Regardless of the power density levels permitted under this
section, devices operating under the provisions of this section must
comply with the requirements of the RF safety standards specified in
Sec. 1.1307(b) of this chapter. Compliance with these standards for the
fundamental emissions and the unwanted emissions must be demonstrated
in the application for certification. The use of professional
installation to install the equipment is not sufficient to provide this
demonstration.
[FR Doc. 96-7689 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-7625 Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Amendment 5
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14465-14477]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7625]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 2, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 14465]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Parts 611 and 655
[Docket No. 951208293-6065-02; I.D. 110995B]
RIN 0648-AF01
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Amendment 5
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement approved measures
contained in Amendment 5 to the Fishery Management Plan for the
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP). Amendment 5
(Amendment) is intended to further the Americanization of the fisheries
and to implement measures to prevent overfishing and avoid
overcapitalization of the domestic fleet. In addition, NMFS informs the
public of the approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of
the collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule and
publishes the OMB control numbers for these collections.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 2, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 5, final environmental impact statement,
regulatory impact review, and other supporting documents are available
upon request from David R. Keifer, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New
Street, Dover, DE 19901-6790.
Comments regarding the collection-of-information requirements
contained in this rule should be sent to Dr. Andrew Rosenberg,
Director, Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA
01930-2298, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 20503
(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myles Raizin, Fishery Policy Analyst,
508-281-9104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Amendment 5 was developed in response to concerns regarding
overcapitalization expressed by industry representatives at several
meetings of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) and
its Squid, Mackerel, and Butterfish Committee in the early 1990's.
Increases in domestic squid landings and a stagnation in the growth of
butterfish landings at well below the maximum sustainable yield (MSY)
for that species moved the Council to develop this comprehensive
amendment. Details concerning the development of the Amendment are
provided in the proposed rule which was published in the Federal
Register on December 20, 1995 (60 FR 65618).
Amendment 5, as adopted by the Council, contained moratoria on
entry into the Illex and the Loligo squid and butterfish fisheries
based on specified criteria. It also proposed a minimum mesh size for
the Loligo fishery with an exemption for the sea herring fishery and
the summer Illex fishery beyond the 50-fathom curve; an annual
specification process for all four species; reduction of the MSY for
Loligo from 44,000 metric tons (mt) to 36,000 mt; a modification of the
formula for arriving at the allowable biological catch for Atlantic
mackerel; elimination of joint venture processing and total allowable
level of foreign fishing for Loligo and Illex squid and butterfish; and
establishment of vessel operator permits, dealer permits and reporting,
and vessel reporting requirements.
In the proposed rule, NMFS noted that it had specific concerns
about the following proposed measures: (1) The moratorium entry
criteria, (2) the proposal to constrain the allowable biological catch
(ABC) specified for Atlantic mackerel by the long-term potential catch
(LTPC) estimate, and (3) the proposed exemptions from the Loligo
minimum mesh requirement. The proposed rule requested the public to
comment on all proposed measures, but to focus on these in particular.
NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, reviewed Amendment 5
in light of the administrative record underlying it and the public
comments received relative to the Amendment and the proposed rule. NMFS
has decided, based upon this review, that several provisions of the
Amendment are inconsistent with the national standards of the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act). Therefore, the
following measures have been disapproved: (1) The Illex moratorium, (2)
the use of LTPC to cap ABC for Atlantic mackerel, and (3) the exemption
from the minimum mesh requirement for the Loligo fishery for a vessel
fishing for sea herring whose catch is comprised of 75 percent or more
of sea herring.
Comments and Responses
A total of thirty commenters provided 14 substantively different
comments on the proposed rule to implement Amendment 5. The commenters
were members of Congress, industry associations, state agencies, the
New England Fishery Management Council, and various individuals.
Fourteen commenters supported and five opposed the Amendment in its
entirety. The remaining eleven commenters opposed at least one
management measure.
Comment 1: Seventeen commenters supporting the moratoria permit
measures believe the fisheries for Illex and Loligo squid are at full
harvesting capacity and urged quick approval.
Response 1: The fishery for Loligo is considered to be fully
utilized or fully exploited while the fishery for Illex remains
underutilized or underexploited. The Loligo moratorium was approved
while the Illex moratorium was disapproved for the reasons stated in
the following response.
Comment 2: Three commenters believed the Amendment satisfies
National Standards 1, 4, and 5.
Response 2: NMFS reviewed the Amendment and determined that most of
the Amendment was consistent with the Magnuson Act. However, NMFS
determined that three measures were inconsistent with the national
standards. NMFS disapproved the Illex moratorium, the minimum mesh
[[Page 14466]]
exemption for the sea herring fishery, and the use of LTPC to cap
Atlantic mackerel ABC. The Illex moratorium is not consistent with
National Standard 4, because the overall impact of the measure has
discriminatory effects that render the allocation of fishing privileges
in the Illex fishery unfair and inequitable. Specifically, the criteria
arbitrarily exclude vessels that may have historically landed Illex
catches smaller than 5,000 lb (2.27 mt) per trip. These vessels, which
may have routinely caught more than the 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) incidental
catch allowance specified in the Amendment, would be eliminated from
the directed fishery under the threshold catch criterion. Employing a
threshold catch criterion to qualify for the Illex moratorium that
operates on a per/trip basis is less inclusive of such vessels than the
Loligo/butterfish criteria, which required 20,000 lb (9.07 mt) of
cumulative landings within a 30-day period. This discriminatory impact
is further exacerbated by the fact that the extension of the qualifying
period back to 1981 allows larger-scale past participants to qualify,
even if they are not present participants in the fishery, while
smaller-scale present participants do not.
The criterion that allows vessels equipped with refrigerated sea
water systems (RSW) or plate or blast systems by May 1994 to qualify
for a moratorium permit has the effect of revising the control date for
a selected portion of the industry. There is no explanation as to why
this select group should be treated differently from others in the
fishery. As worded, the criterion would allow any vessel equipped with
an RSW system or plate or blast freezers before the relevant date to
qualify for a moratorium permit if the owner could demonstrate the
required number of landings prior to the implementation date of this
Amendment. This would allow vessels to enter the fishery that had never
fished for Illex squid. This is not fair and equitable to those that
have participated in the fishery and conflicts with the Council's goal
to prevent overcapitalization in the fishery.
NMFS disapproved the sea herring exemption from the minimum mesh
size for Loligo, because NMFS law enforcement officials advise that
this measure is not enforceable. Ascertaining at-sea the percentage of
herring in the entire catch is virtually impossible. The cost of
establishing a system or procedure to measure the percentage of herring
on board would be prohibitive. Consequently, this measure is
inconsistent with National Standard 7.
NMFS disapproved the measure to cap the annual ABC specification
for Atlantic mackerel, because such a cap on ABC would not allow the
annual specifications to reflect variations and contingencies in the
stock, which is inconsistent with National Standard 6. The most recent
stock assessment estimates mean spawning stock biomass (SSB) at
2,100,000 mt. The annual specifications for 1996, which were calculated
to maintain SSB at 900,000 mt, resulted in an ABC specification of
1,175,500 mt. The current stock assessment estimates LTPC at 150,000
mt/year. Consequently, the constrained level of ABC would not be
reasonably reflective of the size of the Atlantic mackerel stock.
Comment 3: Six commenters want to alter the vessel replacement
provisions proposed in Amendment 5 by allowing vessel upgrades to 10
percent and allowing vessel characteristics from multiple vessels to be
combined into one vessel. One commenter thought vessel replacement
should be based on carrying capacity.
Response 3: These proposed changes were not contained in the
proposed rule because they were not offered as measures in Amendment 5.
A further amendment to the FMP would be needed to accomplish these
changes. The commenters should direct these comments to the Council.
Comment 4: Ten commenters opposed Amendment 5, believing that the
Illex moratorium is discriminatory.
Response 4: The Illex moratorium was disapproved, as noted above.
Comment 5: Nine commenters opposed the Illex moratorium permit on
the basis that Illex is underutilized.
Response 5: The Illex moratorium was disapproved because of its
inconsistency with National Standard 4, not because the fishery is not
fully utilized. While recent harvest levels have not approached the
MSY, recent scientific information strongly suggests that the MSY
should be adjusted downward in response to new life history
information. This is likely to result in a revised assessment of the
utilization status of the species. In any event, the issue of whether
or not to impose a moratorium in the Illex fishery is within the
prerogative of the Council. If the Council believes that a moratorium
is necessary and appropriate for the conservation of the Illex fishery,
and develops an administrative record that leads NMFS to conclude that
the moratorium is consistent with the Magnuson Act and other applicable
law, it will be approved.
Comment 6: Six commenters believed that the moratorium on Illex
would deprive displaced groundfish vessels of an alternative fishery.
Response 6: See response to Comment 5.
Comment 7: Three commenters opposed both moratoria permits on the
grounds that they do not follow the limited entry guidelines discussed
in the Magnuson Act.
Response 7: The Council did consider the provisions of section
303(b)(6) expressly in the Amendment. The several factors noted in this
section merely have to be taken into account by the Council in
determining whether to limit access to a fishery. It is up to the
Council what weight, if any, should be accorded to any of these factors
or whether or not to make a provision in the Amendment for any of the
factors.
Comment 8: One commenter opposed the refrigerated seawater/blast
freezer provision for the Illex moratorium permit.
Response 8: The Illex moratorium was disapproved, as noted above.
Comment 9: One commenter felt that the Council can accomplish its
goals only by establishing a moratorium eligibility criterion that
considers the three moratorium species together as a unit for purposes
of qualifying for a moratorium permit. He proposed raising the
criterion to 50,000 lb (22.7 mt) of landings per year, in any 2 years
during the qualification period, for any one or any combination of the
three species.
Response 9: The Council analyzed the impact of using the same
qualifying criteria for all three fisheries and determined that it
would defeat the purpose of the limited entry provision and increase
the chances of overcapitalization in the industry. A 50,000 lb (22.7
mt) criterion as described in the comment, is not discussed as an
alternative in the Amendment. The Council may exercise its judgment as
to how best to accomplish its management goals. The Secretary will
support the Council's judgment if it is consistent with the Magnuson
Act and other applicable law.
Comment 10: Four commenters believed that the Illex moratorium
should be disapproved pending further scientific investigation.
Response 10: The Illex moratorium was disapproved. However, the
21st Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW 21) reassessed
both squid stocks and the results of the assessment and the SAW
members' management advice will be available soon.
Comment 11: One commenter believed the Council would use the
[[Page 14467]]
same qualifying criteria as was used to determine eligibility for the
summer flounder moratorium permit and invested money into refitting his
vessel. He protested the fact that his vessel will not qualify for the
squid fisheries under the criteria specified in the Amendment.
Response 11. The Council has the authority to propose regulations
that are unique to an individual fishery. It is unfortunate that the
commenter invested money without making inquiries about possible
qualifying criteria. The fact that the Council intended to use criteria
different than those in the summer flounder moratorium was well known
before Amendment 5 was taken to public hearings.
Comment 12: One commenter stated that Article 1, section 9 of the
United States Constitution states that ``no bill of Attainder or ex-
post facto Law shall be passed,'' yet the time frame for qualifying for
the moratorium permits was clearly retroactive, having been announced
in June of 1994. The commenter felt that this retroactive date
disqualified him for a moratorium permit without due process.
Response 12: The rule implementing the moratorium is not a bill of
Attainder; it neither rises to the level of a legislative act, nor
pronounces an individual guilty of a crime without due process. The use
of a date that precedes the publication date of this rule as a basis
for qualifying for a moratorium permit does not amount to an ``ex-post
facto Law.'' A control date document was published in the Federal
Register on August 13, 1992 (57 FR 36384). This legal document advised
the public that entry into the fishery after its publication date might
not guarantee future access to the fishery if the Council developed an
amendment to the FMP that limited access. The control date was later
changed by the Council when it adopted August 13, 1993, in the
Amendment as the end date for the qualifying period. Consequently, the
fact that the control date could be used as a qualifying criterion was
announced to the public long before this rule was published.
The publication of the control date signified the inception of a
long process that differentiates the legislative from the rulemaking
process. During this process, Amendment 5, which included the control
date and qualification period, was developed, debated, subjected to
public scrutiny, and finally adopted by the Council for submission to
NMFS. The control date criterion was not adopted after the fact, as the
public was aware of the control date throughout the process. To prevent
the Council from choosing a moratorium qualifying date that preceded
the date of the final rule would seriously impair the value of any
moratorium; the time needed to bring a fishery management plan or
amendment containing a moratorium provision to the implementation stage
would allow for a dramatic increase in effort in the fishery affected,
thereby thwarting the Council's ability to limit effort and conserve
the resource. This result runs contrary to the broad responsibility
invested in the Council by the framers of the Magnuson Act.
Comment 13: Two commenters believed that a mesh size of 2\3/8\
inches, as opposed to 1\7/8\ inches, is needed in the Loligo fishery to
address issues of juvenile escapement of Loligo and discard of small
scup and butterfish.
Response 13: No mesh selectivity studies have been done to analyze
the effect of different mesh sizes and configuration on the escapement
of juvenile squid. Thus, no scientific support exists for the
commenter's contention. New Jersey fishermen testified that they use
1\7/8\ inch mesh and experienced no problems of juvenile escapement.
The imposition of a minimum mesh size is an important first step in
conserving the resource. NMFS has encouraged the Council to investigate
the escapement issue and to adjust the mesh size through the framework
mechanism in Amendment 5, should the Council's conclusions warrant such
action.
Comment 14: The overfishing definitions for Loligo and Illex squid
are outdated and meaningless.
Response 14: Amendment 5 does not propose new overfishing
definitions for the squids. SAW 21 reassessed both squid species and
the results of that assessment will be used to establish new
overfishing definitions. Such definitions must be implemented by a
future plan amendment.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
Since three management measures published in the proposed rule are
disapproved, the following provisions have been removed: Provisions at
Sec. 655.4 and other appropriate sections regarding the issuance or use
of a Loligo moratorium permit; the provision at Sec. 655.22(b)(2) that
would use LTPC to constrain ABC for Atlantic mackerel; and the sea
herring exemption at Sec. 655.25(a)(2).
Classification
The Director, Northeast Region, NMFS, determined that the approved
measures of Amendment 5 are necessary for the conservation and
management of the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries
and that they are consistent with the Magnuson Act and other applicable
laws.
The Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulation of the
Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy,
Small Business Administration, that this rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The reasons were published in the proposed rule on December 20, 1995
(60 FR 65618). As such, no regulatory flexibility analysis was required
and none has been prepared.
This final rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). The collection of this information has been approved by OMB
under control numbers 0648-0229, 0648-0018, 0648-0212, 0648-0202, and
0648-0306. The response times for these requirements are estimated to
be: 2 minutes per response for dealer reporting, 6 minutes per response
for employment data, 30 minutes per response for vessel permits and
vessel permit appeals, 45 minutes per response for vessel I.D.
requirements, 1 hour per response for operator permits, 5 minutes per
response for dealer permits, and 2 minutes per response for the
observer notification requirement.
The response estimates shown include the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Send comments regarding any of these burden
estimates or any other aspect of the collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing burdens, to Dr. Andrew Rosenberg and
OMB (see ADDRESSES). Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no
person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information, subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 611
Fisheries, Foreign relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
[[Page 14468]]
50 CFR Part 655
Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 21, 1996.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902, 50 CFR
parts 611 and 655 are amended as follows:
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
2. In Sec. 902.1, paragraph (b) the table is amended by adding in
the left column under 50 CFR, in numerical order, ``655.4'', ``655.5'',
``655.6'', ``655.7'', and ``655.8'', and in the right column, in
corresponding positions, the control numbers ``and -0212'', `` -0202'',
``and -0229'', `` -0018'', and `` -0306''.
PART 611--FOREIGN FISHING
3. The authority citation for part 611 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., 22
U.S.C. 1971 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
4. In Sec. 611.50, paragraphs (b)(3), (b)(4)(i), and (b)(4)(ii) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 611.50 Northwest Atlantic Ocean fishery.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) TALFF. The Atlantic mackerel TALFF for the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean fishery is published in the Federal Register. Current TALFFs are
also available from the Regional Director. The procedure for
determining and adjusting the Atlantic mackerel TALFF is set forth in
50 CFR part 655.
(4) * * *
(i) The other allocated species, namely: Atlantic herring, Atlantic
mackerel, butterfish (as a bycatch of Atlantic mackerel), and river
herring (including alewife, blueback herring, and hickory shad); and
(ii) The prohibited species, namely: American plaice, American
shad, Atlantic cod, Atlantic menhaden, Atlantic redfish, Atlantic
salmon, all marlin, all spearfish, sailfish, swordfish, black sea bass,
bluefish, croaker, haddock, ocean pout, pollock, red hake, scup, sea
turtles, sharks (except dogfish), silver hake, spot, striped bass,
summer flounder, tilefish, yellowtail flounder, weakfish, white hake,
short-finned squid, long-finned squid, windowpane flounder, winter
flounder, witch flounder, Continental Shelf fishery resources, and
other invertebrates (except non-allocated squids).
* * * * *
5. Part 655 is revised to read as follows:
PART 655--ATLANTIC MACKEREL, SQUID, AND BUTTERFISH FISHERIES
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec.
655.1 Purpose and scope.
655.2 Definitions.
655.3 Relation to other laws.
655.4 Vessel permits.
655.5 Operator permit.
655.6 Dealer permit.
655.7 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
655.8 Vessel identification.
655.9 Prohibitions.
655.10 Facilitation of enforcement.
655.11 Penalties.
Subpart B--Management Measures
655.20 Fishing year.
655.21 Maximum optimum yields.
655.22 Procedures for determining initial annual amounts.
655.23 Closure of the fishery.
655.24 Time and area restrictions for directed foreign fishing.
655.25 Gear restrictions.
655.26 Minimum fish sizes. [Reserved]
655.27 Possession limits. [Reserved]
655.28 At-sea observer coverage.
655.29 Transfer-at-sea.
655.30 Experimental fishery.
Figure 1 to part 655--Exemption line to minimum net mesh-size
requirement for Loligo squid.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 655.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) The regulations in this part govern the conservation and
management of Atlantic mackerel, Illex squid, Loligo squid, and
butterfish.
(b) The regulations governing fishing for Atlantic mackerel, Illex
squid, Loligo squid, and butterfish by vessels other than vessels of
the United States are contained in 50 CFR part 611.
(c) This part implements the Fishery Management Plan for the
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries of the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean.
Sec. 655.2 Definitions.
In addition to the definitions in the Magnuson Act and in
Sec. 620.2 of this chapter, the terms used in this part have the
following meanings:
Atlantic butterfish or butterfish means the species Peprilus
triacanthus.
Atlantic mackerel or mackerel means the species Scomber scombrus.
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Monitoring Committee or
Monitoring Committee means a committee made up of staff representatives
of the Mid-Atlantic and New England Fishery Management Councils, and
the Northeast Regional Office and Northeast Fisheries Science Center of
NMFS. The Council Executive Director or a designee chairs the
Committee.
Being rerigged means physical alteration of the vessel or its gear
had begun to transform the vessel into one capable of fishing
commercially for Loligo squid or butterfish.
Charter or party boat means any vessel that carries passengers for
hire to engage in fishing.
Council means the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council.
Dealer means any person who receives squid, mackerel, or butterfish
for a commercial purpose, other than solely for transport on land, from
the owner or operator of a vessel issued a permit under Sec. 655.4.
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) means the Fishery Management Plan for
the Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish fisheries of the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean, as revised by subsequent amendments.
Fishing for commercial purposes means any fishing or fishing
activity that results in the harvest of Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish, one or more of which (or parts thereof) is sold, traded, or
bartered.
Fishing trip or trip means a period of time during which fishing is
conducted, beginning when the vessel leaves port and ending when the
vessel returns to port.
Gross registered tonnage (GRT) means the gross tonnage specified on
the U.S. Coast Guard documentation.
Illex means the species Illex illecebrosus (short-finned or summer
squid).
Joint venture harvest means U.S.-harvested Atlantic mackerel
transferred to foreign vessels in the EEZ.
Land means to begin offloading fish or to offload fish at sea or on
land, or to enter port with fish.
Liner means a piece of mesh rigged inside the main or outer net.
Loligo means the species Loligo pealei (long-finned or bone squid).
Metric ton (mt) means 1,000 kg or 2,204.6 lb.
Operator means the master, captain, or other individual aboard a
fishing vessel and in charge of that vessel's operations.
Personal use means use not for sale, barter, or trade.
[[Page 14469]]
Postmark means independently verifiable evidence of date of
mailing, such as U.S. Postal Service postmark, United Parcel Service
(U.P.S.) or other private carrier postmark, certified mail receipt,
overnight mail receipt, or receipt received upon hand delivery to an
authorized representative of NMFS.
Recreational fishing means fishing that neither is intended to, nor
results in, the barter, trade, or sale of fish.
Recreational fishing vessel means any vessel from which no fishing
other than recreational fishing is conducted. Charter and party boats
are not considered recreational fishing vessels.
Regional Director means the Director, Northeast Region, NMFS, 1
Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298, or a designee.
Reporting month means the period of time beginning at 0001 hours
local time on the first day of each calendar month and ending at 2400
hours local time on the last day of each calendar month.
Reporting week means a period of time beginning at 0001 hours local
time on Sunday and ending at 2400 hours local time the following
Saturday.
Squid means Loligo pealei and Illex illecebrosus.
Substantially similar harvesting capacity means the same or less
GRT and vessel registered length for commercial vessels.
Transfer means to begin to remove, to pass over the rail, or
otherwise take away fish from any vessel and move them to another
conveyance.
Under construction means that the keel has been laid.
Vessel registered length means the registered length specified on
U.S. Coast Guard Documentation, or state registration if the state
registered length is verified by a NMFS authorized official.
Sec. 655.3 Relation to other laws.
(a) The relation of this part to other laws is set forth in
Sec. 620.3 of this chapter and paragraphs (b) through (d) of this
section.
(b) Additional regulations governing domestic fishing for Northeast
Multispecies, which affect this part, are found at 50 CFR part 651.
(c) Additional regulations governing domestic fishing for summer
flounder, which affect this part, are found at 50 CFR part 625.
(d) Nothing in these regulations supersedes more restrictive state
management measures.
Sec. 655.4 Vessel permits.
(a) General--(1) Requirement. Beginning on January 1, 1997, any
vessel of the United States, including party or charter vessels, that
fishes for, possesses, or lands Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish
in or from the EEZ, must have been issued and carry on board a valid
Loligo squid and butterfish moratorium permit, or a valid incidental
catch permit, or a valid Atlantic mackerel and Illex squid permit, or a
valid party or charterboat permit issued under this section. This
requirement does not apply to recreational fishing vessels. Until
January 1, 1997, vessels that have been issued 1995 Federal squid,
mackerel, and butterfish permits and are not otherwise subject to
permit sanctions due to enforcement proceedings, may fish for, possess,
or land squid, Atlantic mackerel or butterfish in or from the EEZ.
(2) Condition. Vessel owners who apply for a fishing vessel permit
under this section must agree as a condition of the permit that the
vessel's fishing activities, catch and pertinent gear (without regard
to whether such fishing occurs in or from the EEZ or landward of the
EEZ, and without regard to where such fish or gear are possessed, taken
or landed) will be subject to all requirements of this part. All such
fishing activities, catch and gear will remain subject to all
applicable state requirements. If a requirement of this part differs
from a management measure required by state law, any vessel owner
permitted to fish in the EEZ must comply with the more restrictive
requirement.
(b) Moratorium permit--(1) Loligo squid and butterfish. A vessel is
eligible for a moratorium permit to fish for and retain Loligo squid or
butterfish in excess of the incidental catch allowance specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, if it meets any of the following
criteria:
(i) The vessel landed and sold at least 20,000 lb (9.07 mt) of
Loligo or butterfish in any 30-consecutive-day period between August
13, 1981, and August 13, 1993; or
(ii) The vessel is replacing a vessel of substantially similar
harvesting capacity that involuntarily left the Loligo or butterfish
fishery during the effective period of the moratorium, and both the
entering and replaced vessels are owned by the same person. Vessel
permits issued to vessels that involuntarily leave the fishery may not
be combined to create larger replacement vessels.
(iii) Vessels that are judged unseaworthy by the U.S. Coast Guard
for reasons other than lack of maintenance may be replaced by a vessel
of substantially similar harvesting capacity during the effective
period of the moratorium.
(2) Restriction. No one may apply for the permit specified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section more than 12 months after the
effective date of these regulations, or the event specified under
paragraph (i)(1) of this section. This section does not affect annual
permit renewals.
(3) Appeal of denial of permit. (i) Any applicant denied a
moratorium permit may appeal to the Regional Director within 30 days of
the notice of denial. Any such appeal shall be in writing. The only
ground for appeal is that the Regional Director erred in concluding
that the vessel did not meet the criteria in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
this section. The appeal shall set forth the basis for the applicant's
belief that the Regional Director's decision was made in error.
(ii) The appeal may be presented, at the option of the applicant,
at a hearing before an officer appointed by the Regional Director.
(iii) The hearing officer shall make a recommendation to Regional
Director.
(iv) The decision on the appeal by the Regional Director is the
final decision of the Department of Commerce.
(c) Incidental catch permit. (1) Any vessel of the United States
may obtain a permit to fish for or retain up to 2,500 lb (1.13 mt) of
Loligo squid or butterfish as an incidental catch in another directed
fishery.
(2) Adjustments to the incidental catch. The incidental catch
allowance may be revised by the Regional Director based upon a
recommendation by the Council following the procedure set forth in
Sec. 655.22. NMFS will publish an adjustment in the Federal Register.
The public may comment on the adjustment for 30 days after the date of
publication. After consideration of public comments, NMFS may publish a
notification of adjustment to the incidental catch allowance in the
Federal Register.
(d) Atlantic mackerel and Illex squid permit. The owner of any
vessel of the United States must obtain a permit under this part to
fish for or retain Atlantic mackerel or Illex squid in or from the EEZ.
(e) Party and charter boat permit. The owner of any party or
charter boat must obtain a permit under this part to fish for or retain
in or from the EEZ Atlantic mackerel, squid or butterfish while
carrying passengers for hire.
(f) Vessel permit application. (1) An application for a permit
under this section must be submitted and signed by the owner of the
vessel on an appropriate form obtained from the Regional Director at
least 30 days prior to the date on which the applicant desires to have
the permit made effective. The Regional Director will
[[Page 14470]]
notify the applicant of any deficiency in the application pursuant to
this section. Applicants for moratorium permits shall provide
information with the application sufficient for the Regional Director
to determine if the vessel meets any eligibility requirements. Dealer
weighout forms, joint venture receipts, and notarized statements from
marine architects or surveyors or shipyard officials will be considered
acceptable forms of proof.
(2) Information requirements. In addition to applicable information
required to be provided by paragraph (f)(1) of this section, an
application for a permit under this section must contain at least the
following information, and any other information required by the
Regional Director: Vessel name; owner name, mailing address, and
telephone number; U.S. Coast Guard documentation number and a valid
copy of the vessel's U.S. Coast Guard documentation or, if
undocumented, the state registration number and a copy of the current
state registration; home port and principal port of landing; overall
length; gross tonnage; net tonnage; engine horsepower; year the vessel
was built; type of construction; type of propulsion; approximate fish
hold capacity; type of fishing gear used by the vessel; number of crew;
permit category; if the owner is a corporation, a copy of the
Certificate of Incorporation showing the principals in the corporation,
and the names and addresses of all shareholders owning 25 percent or
more of the corporation's shares; if the owner is a partnership, a copy
of the Partnership Agreement and the names and addresses of all
partners; if there is more than one owner, names of all owners that
have acquired more than a 25-percent interest; the name and signature
of the owner or the owner's authorized representative; permit number of
any current or, if expired, previous Federal fishery permit issued to
the vessel; and a copy of the charter/party boat license and number of
passengers the vessel is licensed to carry (charter and party boats);
and any other information required by the Regional Director to manage
the fishery.
(g) Fees. The Regional Director may charge a fee to recover
administrative expenses of issuing a permit required under this
section. The amount of the fee is calculated in accordance with the
procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook (available from Regional
Director) for determining administrative costs of each special product
or service. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified on each
application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each application;
if it does not, the application will be considered incomplete for
purposes of paragraph (h) of this section. Any fee paid by an
insufficient commercial instrument shall render any permit issued on
the basis thereof null and void.
(h) Issuance. (1) Except as provided in subpart D of 15 CFR part
904, the Regional Director will issue a permit under this section
within 30 days of receipt of the application unless:
(i) The applicant has failed to submit a complete application as
described in paragraph (f) of this section. An application is complete
when all requested forms, information, documentation, and fees, if
applicable, have been received; or
(ii) The application was not received by the Regional Director by
the deadlines set forth in paragraph (b)(3) of this section; or
(iii) The applicant has failed to comply with all applicable
reporting requirements of Sec. 655.7 during the 12 months immediately
preceding the date of the application.
(2) Upon receipt of an incomplete application, or an application
from a person who has not complied with all applicable reporting
requirements of Sec. 655.7 during the 12 months immediately preceding
the application, the Regional Director will notify the applicant of the
deficiency. If the applicant fails to correct the deficiency within 30
days of the Regional Director's notification, the application will be
deemed abandoned.
(i) Expiration. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this
section, a permit expires:
(1) When the owner retires the vessel from the fishery;
(2) Upon the renewal date specified on the permit; or
(3) When the ownership of the vessel changes; however, the Regional
Director may authorize the continuation of a moratorium permit for the
Loligo squid and butterfish fisheries if the new owner requests.
Applications for permit continuations must be addressed to the Regional
Director.
(j) Duration. A permit is valid until it is revoked, suspended, or
modified under 15 CFR part 904, or until it otherwise expires, or
ownership changes, or the applicant has failed to report any change in
the information on the permit application to the Regional Director as
specified in paragraph (m) of this section.
(k) Replacement. Replacement permits for an otherwise valid permit
may be issued by the Regional Director when requested in writing by the
owner or authorized representative, stating the need for replacement,
the name of the vessel, and the Federal fisheries permit number
assigned. An application for a replacement permit will not be
considered a new application. An appropriate fee may be charged for
issuance of the replacement permit.
(l) Transfer. Permits issued under this part are not transferable
or assignable. A permit is valid only for the fishing vessel and owner
for which it is issued.
(m) Change in application information. Any change in the
information specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section must be
submitted by the applicant in writing to the Regional Director within
15 days of the change. If the written notice of the change in
information is not received by the Regional Director within 15 days,
the permit is null and void.
(n) Alteration. Any permit that has been altered, erased, or
mutilated is invalid.
(o) Display. The permit must be maintained in legible condition and
displayed for inspection upon request by any authorized officer.
(p) Sanctions. Procedures governing enforcement-related permit
sanctions and denials are found at subpart D of 15 CFR part 904.
Sec. 655.5 Operator permit.
(a) General. Beginning June 3, 1996, any operator of a vessel
issued a valid Federal Atlantic mackerel, Loligo, Illex, or butterfish
permit under this part, or any operator of a vessel fishing for
Atlantic mackerel, Loligo, Illex, or butterfish in the EEZ or in
possession of Atlantic mackerel, Loligo, Illex, or butterfish in or
harvested from the EEZ, must have and carry on board a valid operator's
permit issued under this part. An operator permit issued pursuant to
part 649, 650, or 651 shall satisfy the permitting requirement of this
section.
(b) Operator application. Applicants for a permit under this
section must submit a completed permit application on an appropriate
form obtained from the Regional Director. The application must be
signed by the applicant and submitted to the Regional Director at least
30 days prior to the date on which the applicant desires to have the
permit made effective. The Regional Director will notify the applicant
of any deficiency in the application pursuant to this section.
(c) Condition. Vessel operators who apply for an operator's permit
under this section must agree as a condition of this permit that the
operator and vessel's fishing, catch, and pertinent gear (without
regard to whether such fishing occurs in the EEZ or landward of the
EEZ, and without regard to where such fish or gear are possessed,
taken,
[[Page 14471]]
or landed), are subject to all requirements of this part while fishing
in the EEZ or on board a vessel permitted under Sec. 655.4. The vessel
and all such fishing, catch, and gear will remain subject to all
applicable state or local requirements. Further, such operators must
agree as a condition of this permit that, if the permit is suspended or
revoked pursuant to 15 CFR part 904, the operator cannot be aboard any
fishing vessel issued a Federal Fisheries Permit or any vessel subject
to Federal fishing regulations while the vessel is at sea or engaged in
offloading. If a requirement of this part and a management measure
required by state or local law differ, any operator issued a permit
under this part must comply with the more restrictive requirement.
(d) Information requirements. An applicant must provide at least
all the following information and any other information required by the
Regional Director: Name, mailing address, and telephone number; date of
birth; hair color; eye color; height; weight; social security number
(optional); and signature of the applicant. The applicant must also
provide two recent (no more than 1 year old) color passport-size
photographs.
(e) Fees. The Regional Director may charge a fee to recover the
administrative expense of issuing a permit required under this section.
The amount of the fee is calculated in accordance with the procedures
of the NOAA Finance Handbook for determining the administrative costs
of each special product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs
and is specified on each application form. The appropriate fee must
accompany each application; if it does not, the application will be
considered incomplete for purposes of paragraph (f) of this section.
Any fee paid by an insufficiently funded commercial instrument shall
render any permit issued on the basis thereof null and void.
(f) Issuance. Except as provided in subpart D of 15 CFR part 904,
the Regional Director shall issue an operator's permit within 30 days
of receipt of a completed application if the criteria specified herein
are met. Upon receipt of an incomplete or improperly executed
application, the Regional Director will notify the applicant of the
deficiency in the application. If the applicant fails to correct the
deficiency within 30 days following the date of notification, the
application will be deemed abandoned.
(g) Expiration. A Federal operator permit will expire upon the
renewal date specified in the permit.
(h) Duration. A permit is valid until it is revoked, suspended or
modified under 15 CFR part 904, or otherwise expires, or the applicant
has failed to report a change in the information on the permit
application to the Regional Director as specified in paragraph (k) of
this section.
(i) Replacement. Replacement permits, for otherwise valid permits,
may be issued by the Regional Director when requested in writing by the
applicant, stating the need for replacement and the Federal operator
permit number assigned. An applicant for a replacement permit must also
provide two recent color passport-size photos of the applicant. An
application for a replacement permit will not be considered a new
application. An appropriate fee may be charged.
(j) Transfer. Permits issued under this section are not
transferable or assignable. A permit is valid only for the person to
whom it is issued.
(k) Change in application information. Notice of a change in the
permit holder's name, address, or telephone number must be submitted in
writing to, and received by, the Regional Director within 15 days of
the change in information. If written notice of the change in
information is not received by the Regional Director within 15 days,
the permit is void.
(l) Alteration. Any permit that has been altered, erased, or
mutilated is invalid.
(m) Display. Any permit issued under this part must be maintained
in legible condition and displayed for inspection upon request by any
authorized officer.
(n) Sanctions. Vessel operators with suspended or revoked permits
may not be aboard a federally permitted fishing vessel in any capacity
while the vessel is at sea or engaged in offloading. Procedures
governing enforcement related permit sanctions and denials are found at
subpart D of 15 CFR part 904.
(o) Vessel owner responsibility. Vessel owners are responsible for
ensuring that their vessels are operated by an individual with a valid
operator's permit issued under this section.
Sec. 655.6 Dealer permit.
(a) General. Beginning on January 1, 1997, all dealers must have a
valid permit issued under this part in their possession.
(b) Dealer application. Applicants for a permit under this section
must submit a completed application on an appropriate form provided by
the Regional Director. The application must be signed by the applicant
and submitted to the Regional Director at least 30 days before the date
upon which the applicant desires to have the permit made effective. The
Regional Director will notify the applicant of any deficiency in the
application pursuant to this section.
(c) Information requirements. Applications must contain at least
the following information and any other information required by the
Regional Director: Company name, place(s) of business, mailing
address(es) and telephone number(s), owner's name; dealer permit number
(if a renewal); and name and signature of the person responsible for
the truth and accuracy of the report. If the dealer is a corporation, a
copy of the Certificate of Incorporation must be included with the
application. If the dealer is a partnership, a copy of the Partnership
Agreement and the names and addresses of all partners must be included
with the application.
(d) Fees. The Regional Director may charge a fee to recover the
administrative expense of issuing a permit required under this section.
The amount of the fee is calculated in accordance with the procedures
of the NOAA Finance Handbook for determining the administrative costs
of each special product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs
and is specified with each application form. The appropriate fee must
accompany each application; if it does not, the application will be
considered incomplete for purposes of paragraph (e) of this section.
Any fee paid by an insufficiently funded commercial instrument shall
render any permit issued on the basis thereof null and void.
(e) Issuance. Except as provided in subpart D of 15 CFR part 904,
the Regional Director will issue a permit at any time during the
fishing year to an applicant unless the applicant has failed to submit
a completed application. An application is complete when all requested
forms, information, and documentation have been received and the
applicant has submitted all applicable reports specified in
Sec. 655.7(a). Upon receipt of an incomplete or improperly executed
application, the Regional Director will notify the applicant of the
deficiency in the application. If the applicant fails to correct the
deficiency within 30 days following the date of notification, the
application will be deemed abandoned.
(f) Expiration. A permit will expire upon the renewal date
specified in the permit.
(g) Duration. A permit is valid until it is revoked, suspended, or
modified
[[Page 14472]]
under 15 CFR part 904, or otherwise expires, or ownership changes, or
the applicant has failed to report any change in the information on the
permit application to the Regional Director as required by paragraph
(j) of this section.
(h) Replacement. Replacement permits, for otherwise valid permits,
may be issued by the Regional Director when requested in writing by the
applicant, stating the need for replacement and the Federal dealer
permit number assigned. An application for a replacement permit will
not be considered a new application. An appropriate fee may be charged.
(i) Transfer. Permits issued under this part are not transferable
or assignable. A permit is valid only for the person to whom, or other
business entity to which, it is issued.
(j) Change in application information. Within 15 days after a
change in the information contained in an application submitted under
this section, a written report of the change must be submitted to, and
received by, the Regional Director. If written notice of the change in
information is not received by the Regional Director within 15 days,
the permit is void.
(k) Alteration. Any permit that has been altered, erased, or
mutilated is invalid.
(l) Display. Any permit, or a valid duplicate thereof, issued under
this part must be maintained in legible condition and displayed for
inspection upon request by any authorized officer.
(m) Federal versus state requirements. If a requirement of this
part differs from a fisheries management measure required by state law,
any dealer issued a Federal dealer permit must comply with the more
restrictive requirement.
(n) Sanctions. Procedures governing enforcement-related permit
sanctions and denials are found at subpart D of 15 CFR part 904.
Sec. 655.7 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(a) Dealers--(1) Weekly report. Beginning on January 1, 1997,
dealers must send by mail, to the Regional Director or official
designee, on a weekly basis, on forms supplied by or approved by the
Regional Director, a report of fish purchases. If authorized in writing
by the Regional Director, dealers may submit reports electronically or
through other media. The following information and any other
information required by the Regional Director must be provided in the
report: Name and mailing address of dealer; dealer number; name and
permit number of the vessels from which fish are landed or received;
dates of purchases; pounds by species; price by species; and port
landed. If no fish are purchased during the week, a report so stating
must be submitted. All report forms must be signed by the dealer or
other authorized individual.
(2) Annual report. All persons required to submit reports under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section are required to complete the
``Employment Data'' section of the Annual Processed Products Reports;
completion of the other sections on that form is voluntary. Reports
must be submitted to the address supplied by the Regional Director.
(3) Inspection. Upon the request of an authorized officer, or by an
employee of NMFS designated by the Regional Director to make such
inspections, the dealer must make immediately available for inspection
copies of the required reports that have been submitted, or should have
been submitted, and the records upon which the reports were based.
(4) Record retention. Copies of reports, and records upon which the
reports were based, must be retained and available for review for 1
year after the date of the last entry on the report. The dealer must
retain such reports and records at its principal place of business.
(5) Submitting reports. Reports must be received, or postmarked if
mailed, within 3 days after the end of each reporting week. Each dealer
will be sent forms and instructions, including the address to which to
submit reports, shortly after receipt of a dealer permit.
(6) At-sea activities. All persons purchasing, receiving, or
processing any mackerel, squid, or butterfish at sea for landing at any
port of the United States must submit information identical to that
required by paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section and provide those
reports to the Regional Director or designee on the same frequency
basis.
(b) Vessel owners--(1) Fishing log reports. Beginning on January 1,
1997, the owner of any vessel issued a Federal Atlantic mackerel,
Loligo squid, butterfish or Illex squid permit under Sec. 655.4 must
maintain on board the vessel, and submit, an accurate daily fishing log
report for all fishing trips, regardless of species fished for or
taken, on forms supplied by or approved by the Regional Director. If
authorized in writing by the Regional Director, vessel owners may
submit reports electronically. At least the following information, and
any other information required by the Regional Director, must be
provided: Vessel name, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) documentation number (or
state registration number if undocumented); permit number; date/time
sailed; date/time landed; trip type; number of crew; number of anglers
(if a charter or party boat); gear fished; quantity and size of gear;
mesh/ring size; chart area fished; average depth; latitude/longitude
(or loran station and bearings); total hauls per area fished; average
tow time duration; pounds by species of all species landed or
discarded; dealer permit number; dealer name; date sold; port and state
landed; and vessel operator's name, signature, and operator permit
number.
(2) When to fill in the log. Fishing log reports must be filled in,
except for information required but not yet ascertainable, before
offloading has begun. All information in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section must be filled in for each fishing trip before starting the
next fishing trip.
(3) Inspection. Upon the request of an authorized officer, or an
employee of NMFS designated by the Regional Director to make such
inspections, at any time during or after a trip, owners and operators
must make immediately available for inspection the fishing log reports
currently in use, or to be submitted.
(4) Record retention. Copies of the fishing log reports must be
retained and available for review for 1 year after the date of the last
entry on the report.
(5) Submitting reports. Fishing log reports must be received or
postmarked, if mailed, within 15 days after the end of the reporting
month. Each owner will be sent forms and instructions, including the
address to which to submit reports, shortly after receipt of a Federal
Fisheries Permit. If no fishing trip is made during a month, a report
so stating must be submitted.
Sec. 655.8 Vessel identification.
(a) Vessel name. Each fishing vessel owner subject to this part
must affix permanently the vessel's name on the port and starboard
sides of the bow and, if possible, on its stern if the vessel is over
25 ft (7.6 m) in length.
(b) Official number. Each fishing vessel owner subject to this
section must display the vessel's official number on the port and
starboard sides of its deckhouse or hull, and on an appropriate weather
deck, so as to be visible from above by enforcement vessels and
aircraft if the vessel is over 25 ft (7.6 m) in length. The official
number is the U.S. Coast Guard documentation number, or the vessel's
state registration number for vessels not required to be documented
under title 46 of the United States Code.
(c) Numerals. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section,
the official
[[Page 14473]]
number must be permanently affixed in block arabic numerals in
contrasting color at least 18 inches (45.7 cm) in height for vessels
over 65 ft (19.8 m) in length, and at least 10 inches (25.4 cm) in
height for all other vessels over 25 ft (7.6 m) in length.
(d) Duties of owner. Any vessel owner subject to this part will:
(1) Keep the vessel's name and official number clearly legible and
in good repair; and
(2) Ensure that no part of the vessel, its rigging, its fishing
gear, or any other object obstructs the view of the official number
from any enforcement vessel or aircraft.
(e) Nonpermanent marking. Vessels carrying recreational fishing
parties on a per capita basis or by charter must use markings that meet
the above requirements, except for the requirement that they be affixed
permanently to the vessel. The nonpermanent markings must be displayed
in conformity with the above requirements when the vessel is fishing
for Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish.
Sec. 655.9 Prohibitions.
(a) In addition to the general prohibitions specified in Sec. 620.7
of this chapter, it is unlawful for any person owning or operating a
vessel issued a valid Federal Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish
permit under Sec. 655.4, or issued an operator permit under Sec. 655.5,
to do any of the following:
(1) Possess more than the incidental catch allowance of Loligo
squid or butterfish unless issued a moratorium permit pursuant to
Sec. 655.4(b).
(2) Use any vessel for taking, catching, harvesting, or landing of
any Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish, except as provided in
Sec. 655.4(a), unless the vessel has on board a valid permit issued
under Sec. 655.4.
(3) Fail to report to the Regional Director within 15 days any
change in the information contained in the permit application for a
vessel, as specified in Sec. 655.4(m).
(4) Falsify or fail to affix and maintain vessel markings as
required by Sec. 655.8.
(5) Take, retain, or land Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish
in excess of a trip allowance specified under Sec. 655.23.
(6) Take, retain, or land Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish
after a total closure specified under Sec. 655.23.
(7) Make any false statement, written or oral, to an authorized
officer, concerning the taking, catching, landing, purchase, sale, or
transfer of any mackerel, squid, or butterfish.
(8) Fish with or possess nets or netting that do not meet the
minimum mesh requirement for Loligo specified in Sec. 655.25(a) or that
are modified, obstructed, or constricted, if subject to the minimum
mesh requirement, unless the nets or netting are stowed in accordance
with Sec. 655.25(b) or the vessel is fishing under an exemption
specified in Sec. 655.25(a).
(9) Sell or transfer Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish to
another person for a commercial purpose, other than transport, unless
that person has a dealer permit issued under Sec. 655.6.
(10) Falsify information in order to qualify a vessel for a
moratorium permit pursuant to Sec. 655.4(b).
(11) Transfer squid, or butterfish at sea to another vessel unless
that other vessel is issued a valid moratorium permit issued pursuant
to Sec. 655.4(b) or a letter of authorization issued by the Regional
Director.
(12) Fail to comply with any measures implemented pursuant to
Sec. 655.22.
(13) Refuse to embark an observer if requested by the Regional
Director.
(14) Assault, resist, oppose, impede, harass, intimidate, or
interfere with or bar by command, impediment, threat, coercion or
refusal of reasonable assistance an observer conducting his or her
duties aboard a vessel.
(15) Carry passengers for hire while fishing commercially under a
permit issued pursuant to Sec. 655.4(b), Sec. 655.4(c), or
Sec. 655.4(d).
(16) Fail to carry on board a letter of authorization if fishing in
an experimental fishery pursuant to Sec. 655.30.
(17) Employ an operator aboard a vessel who has not been issued an
operator permit that meets the requirements of Sec. 655.5.
(b) It is unlawful for the owner and operator of a party or charter
boat issued a permit (including a moratorium permit) pursuant to
Sec. 655.4, when the boat is carrying passengers for hire, to do any of
the following:
(1) Violate any recreational fishing measures established pursuant
to Sec. 655.22(d)
(2) Sell or transfer Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish to
another person for a commercial purpose.
(3) Refuse to embark an observer if requested by the Regional
Director.
(c) It is unlawful for any person to do any of the following:
(1) Possess in or harvest from the EEZ Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish unless the person is operating a vessel, other than a
recreational fishing vessel, issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 655.4,
and the permit is on board the vessel, and has not been surrendered,
revoked, or suspended.
(2) Possess nets or netting with mesh not meeting the minimum size
requirement of Sec. 655.25 that do not meet the net stowage provisions
of Sec. 655.25, if the person possesses Loligo squid harvested in or
from the EEZ.
(3) If subject to the permitting requirements in Sec. 655.4,
Sec. 655.5, or Sec. 655.6, to offload, to cause to be offloaded, sell
or buy, whether on land or at sea, as an owner, operator, dealer,
buyer, or receiver, without accurately and completely preparing and
submitting in a timely fashion the documents required by Sec. 655.7.
(4) Transfer Loligo squid or butterfish within the EEZ, unless the
vessels participating in the transfer are issued valid moratorium
permits pursuant to Sec. 655.4(b) or valid letters of authorization
pursuant to Sec. 655.29.
(5) Purchase or otherwise receive, except for transport on land,
Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish from the owner or operator of a
vessel issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 655.4, unless in possession of
a valid permit issued under Sec. 655.6.
(6) Purchase or otherwise receive for a commercial purpose,
Atlantic mackerel, squid, or butterfish caught by other than a vessel
issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 655.4, unless the vessel has not been
issued a permit under this part and is fishing exclusively within the
waters under the jurisdiction of any state.
(7) Make any false statements, oral or written, to an authorized
officer concerning the catching, taking, harvesting, landing, purchase,
sale, possession, or transfer of any Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish.
(8) Fail to report to the Regional Director within 15 days any
change in information contain in the permit application.
(9) Assault, resist, impede, oppose, harass, intimidate, or
interfere with or bar by command, impediment, threat, coercion, or
refusal of reasonable assistance to an observer conducting his or her
duties aboard a vessel.
(10) Operate a vessel fishing for Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish within the EEZ, unless issued an operator permit that meets
the requirements of Sec. 655.5.
(11) Violate any other provisions of this part, the Magnuson Act,
or any regulation or permit issued under the Magnuson Act.
(d) All Atlantic mackerel and butterfish possessed on board a party
or charter boat issued a permit under Sec. 655.4 are deemed to have
been harvested from the EEZ.
(e) It is unlawful for any person to violate any terms of a letter
authorizing experimental fishing pursuant to Sec. 655.30 or to fail to
keep such letter on
[[Page 14474]]
board the vessel during the period of the experiment.
Sec. 655.10 Facilitation of enforcement.
See Sec. 620.8 of this chapter.
Sec. 655.11 Penalties.
See Sec. 620.9 of this chapter.
Subpart B--Management Measures
Sec. 655.20 Fishing year.
The fishing year is the 12-month period beginning on January 1 and
ending on December 31.
Sec. 655.21 Maximum optimum yields.
The optimum yields (OYs) specified pursuant to Sec. 655.22 during a
fishing year may not exceed the following amounts:
(a) Atlantic mackerel: That quantity of mackerel that is less than
or equal to ABC specified pursuant to Sec. 655.22;
(b) Loligo squid: 36,000 mt (79,362,000 lb);
(c) Illex squid: 30,000 mt (66,135,000 lb); and
(d) Butterfish: 16,000 mt (35,272,000 lb).
Sec. 655.22 Procedures for determining initial annual amounts.
(a) Initial annual specifications. The Atlantic Mackerel, Squid,
and Butterfish Monitoring Committee (Monitoring Committee) will meet
annually to develop specifications regarding:
(1) The initial optimum yield (IOY), domestic annual harvest (DAH),
and domestic annual processing (DAP) for the squids;
(2) The IOY, DAH, DAP and bycatch level of the total allowable
level of foreign fishing (TALFF), if any, for butterfish; and
(3) The IOY, DAH, DAP, joint venture processing (JVP), if any, and
TALFF, if any, for Atlantic mackerel.
(4) The Monitoring Committee will recommend these specifications to
the Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Committee (Committee) of the
Council. As a basis for establishing these specifications and
restrictions, the Monitoring Committee will review available data
pertaining to the following:
(i) Commercial and recreational landings;
(ii) Current estimates of fishing mortality;
(iii) Stock status;
(iv) The most recent estimates of recruitment;
(v) Virtual population analysis results;
(vi) Levels of noncompliance by harvesters or individual states;
(vii) Impact of size/mesh regulations;
(viii) The results of a survey of domestic processors and joint
venture operators of estimated Atlantic mackerel processing capacity
and intent to use that capacity;
(ix) The results of a survey of fishermen's trade associations of
estimated Atlantic mackerel harvesting capacity and intent to use that
capacity;
(x) Any other relevant information.
(b) Guidelines. The specifications determined pursuant to paragraph
(a) by the Monitoring Committee will be consistent with the following
guidelines:
(1) Squid. (i) The most recent biological data, including data on
discards, will be reviewed annually under the procedures specified in
paragraph (a) of this section. ABC for any fishing year is either the
maximum OY specified in Sec. 655.21, or a lower amount if stock
assessments indicate that the potential yield is less than the maximum
OY.
(ii) IOY is a modification of ABC based on social and economic
factors.
(2) Atlantic mackerel. (i) Atlantic mackerel ABC, the allowable
biological catch in U.S. waters, is derived using the following terms:
C=the estimated catch of mackerel in Canadian waters for the upcoming
fishing year; S=the mackerel spawning stock size at the beginning of
the year for which quotas are specified; and T=a spawning stock size
that must be maintained in the year following the year for which quotas
are specified, where T900,000 mt(1,984,050,000 lbs).
Consequently, ABC=S-C-T.
(ii) IOY is less than or equal to ABC and represents a modification
of ABC, based on social and economic factors.
(iii) IOY is composed of DAH and TALFF. DAH, DAP and JVP are
projected by reviewing data from sources specified in this paragraph
(a) and other relevant data including past domestic landings, projected
amounts of mackerel necessary for domestic processing and for joint
ventures during the fishing year, projected recreational landings, and
other data pertinent for such a projection. The JVP component of DAH is
the portion of DAH that domestic processors either cannot or will not
use. In addition, IOY is based on such criteria as contained in the
Magnuson Act, specifically section 201(e), and the application of the
following economic factors:
(A) Total world export potential by mackerel producing countries;
(B) Total world import demand by mackerel consuming countries;
(C) U.S. export potential based on expected U.S. harvests, expected
U.S. consumption, relative prices, exchange rates, and foreign trade
barriers;
(D) Increased/decreased revenues to the U.S. from foreign fees;
(E) Increased/decreased revenues to U.S. harvesters (with/without
joint ventures);
(F) Increased/decreased revenues to U.S. processors and exporters;
(G) Increases/decreases in U.S. harvesting productivity due to
decreases/increases in foreign harvest;
(H) Increases/decreases in U.S. processing productivity; and
(I) Potential impact of increased/decreased TALFF on foreign
purchases of U.S. products and services and U.S.-caught fish, changes
in trade barriers, technology transfer, and other considerations.
(iv) The Council may also recommend that certain ratios of TALFF to
purchases of domestic harvested fish and/or domestic processed fish be
established in relation to the initial annual amounts.
(3) Butterfish. (i) The most recent biological data, including data
on discards, will be reviewed annually under the procedures specified
in paragraph (a) of this section. If this review indicates that the
stock cannot support a level of harvest equal to the maximum OY, the
Council will recommend establishing an ABC less than the maximum OY for
the fishing year. This level represents the modification of maximum OY
to reflect biological and ecological factors. If the stock is able to
support a harvest level equivalent to the maximum OY, the ABC is to be
set at that level.
(ii) IOY is a modification of ABC based on social and economic
factors. The IOY is composed of a DAH and bycatch TALFF which is equal
to 0.08 percent of the allocated portion of the Atlantic mackerel
TALFF.
(c) Adjustments. The specifications established pursuant to this
section may be adjusted by the Regional Director, in consultation with
the Council, during the fishing year by publishing a notification in
the Federal Register stating the reasons for such an action with a 30-
day comment period.
(d) Recommended measures. Based on the review of the data described
in paragraph (a) of this section, the Monitoring Committee will
recommend to the Committee the following measures it determines are
necessary to assure that the specifications are not exceeded:
(1) Commercial quotas;
(2) The amount of Loligo squid and butterfish that may be retained,
possessed and landed by vessels issued the incidental catch permit
specified in Sec. 655.4(c);
(3) Commercial minimum fish sizes;
[[Page 14475]]
(4) Commercial trip limits;
(5) Commercial seasonal quotas;
(6) Minimum mesh sizes;
(7) Commercial gear restrictions;
(8) Recreational harvest limit;
(9) Recreational minimum fish size;
(10) Recreational possession limits;
(11) Recreational season.
(e) Annual fishing measures. (1) The Committee shall review the
recommendations of the Monitoring Committee. Based on these
recommendations and any public comment, the Committee shall make its
recommendations to the Council with respect to the specifications and
any other measures necessary to assure that the specifications are not
exceeded. The Council shall review these recommendations. Based on
these recommendations, and any public comment, the Council shall make
recommendations to the Regional Director. Included in the
recommendation will be supporting documents, as appropriate, concerning
the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the proposed action.
The Regional Director will review these recommendations, and on or
about November 1 of each year, and will publish a notification in the
Federal Register of proposed specifications and any other measures
necessary to assure that the specifications are not exceeded. If the
specifications differ from those recommended by the Council, the
reasons for any differences must be clearly stated and the revised
specifications must satisfy the criteria set forth in this section. The
Federal Register notification of proposed specifications will provide
for a 30-day public comment period.
(2) The Council's recommendations will be available for inspection
at the office of the Regional Director during the public comment
period.
(3) On or about December 15 of each year, the Secretary will make a
final determination concerning the specifications for each species and
the other measures contained in the notification of proposed
specifications. After the Secretary considers all relevant data and any
public comments, a notification of final specifications and response to
public comments will be published in the Federal Register. If the final
amounts differ from those recommended by the Council, the reason(s) for
the difference(s) must be clearly stated and the revised specifications
must be consistent with the guidelines set forth in paragraph (b) of
this section.
Sec. 655.23 Closure of the fishery.
(a) General. The Secretary shall close the directed Atlantic
mackerel, Illex squid, Loligo squid, or butterfish fishery in the EEZ
when U.S. fishermen have harvested 80 percent of the DAH, if such
closure is necessary to prevent the DAH from being exceeded. The
closure will be in effect for the remainder of the fishing year, with
incidental catches allowed as specified in paragraph (c) of this
section, until the entire DAH is attained. When the Regional Director
projects that DAH will be attained for any of the species, the
Secretary shall close the fishery in the EEZ to all fishing for that
species, and the incidental catches specified in paragraph (c) of this
section will be prohibited.
(b) Notification. The Secretary will take the following actions if
it is determined that a closure is necessary:
(1) Notify, in advance, the Executive Directors of the Mid-
Atlantic, New England, and South Atlantic Councils;
(2) Mail notifications of the closure to all holders of permits
issued under Secs. 655.4, 655.5 and 655.6 at least 72 hours before the
effective date of the closure;
(3) Provide for adequate notification of the closure to
recreational participants in the fishery; and
(4) Publish a notification of closure in the Federal Register.
(c) Incidental catches. During a period of closure of a directed
fishery, the trip limit for the species for which the fishery is closed
is 10 percent by weight of the total amount of fish on board for
vessels with Loligo/butterfish moratorium permits or Illex or mackerel
commercial permits. During a period of closure of the directed fishery
for Loligo or butterfish, the trip limit for vessels issued an
incidental catch permit for those species is 10 percent by weight of
the total amount of fish on board, or the allowed level of incidental
catch specified in Sec. 655.4(c)(1), whichever is less.
Sec. 655.24 Time and area restrictions for directed foreign fishing.
Foreign fishing is regulated under the provisions specified in
Sec. 611.50(b)(2).
Sec. 655.25 Gear restrictions.
(a) Mesh restriction and exemption. Owners or operators of otter
trawl vessels possessing Loligo squid harvested in or from the EEZ may
only fish with nets having a minimum mesh size of 1\7/8\ inches (48 mm)
diamond mesh, inside stretch measure, applied throughout the entire net
unless they are fishing during the months of June, July, August, and
September for Illex seaward of the following coordinates (see Figure 1
to part 655):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Latitude Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point M1....................... 43 deg.58.0' N. 67 deg.22.0' W.
Point M2....................... 43 deg.50.0' N. 68 deg.35.0' W.
Point M3....................... 43 deg.30.0' N. 69 deg.40.0' W.
Point M4....................... 43 deg.20.0' N. 70 deg.00.0' W.
Point M5....................... 42 deg.45.0' N. 70 deg.10.0' W.
Point M6....................... 42 deg.13.0' N. 69 deg.55.0' W.
Point M7....................... 41 deg.00.0' N. 69 deg.00.0' W.
Point M8....................... 41 deg.45.0' N. 68 deg.15.0' W.
Point M9....................... 42 deg.10.0' N. 67 deg.10.0' W.
Point M10...................... 41 deg.18.6' N. 66 deg.24.8' W.
Point M11...................... 40 deg.55.5' N. 66 deg.38.0' W.
Point M12...................... 40 deg.45.5' N. 68 deg.00.0' W.
Point M13...................... 40 deg.37.0' N. 68 deg.00.0' W.
Point M14...................... 40 deg.30.0' N. 69 deg.00.0' W.
Point M15...................... 40 deg.22.7' N. 69 deg.00.0' W.
Point M16...................... 40 deg.18.7' N. 69 deg.40.0' W.
Point M17...................... 40 deg.21.0' N. 71 deg.03.0' W.
Point M18...................... 39 deg.41.0' N. 72 deg.32.0' W.
Point M19...................... 38 deg.47.0' N. 73 deg.11.0' W.
Point M20...................... 38 deg.04.0' N. 74 deg.06.0' W.
Point M21...................... 37 deg.08.0' N. 74 deg.46.0' W.
Point M22...................... 36 deg.00.0' N. 74 deg.52.0' W.
Point M23...................... 35 deg.45.0' N. 74 deg.53.0' W.
Point M24...................... 35 deg.28.0' N. 74 deg.52.0' W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels fishing under this exemption may not have ``available for
immediate use,'' as described in paragraph (b) of this section, any net
with mesh size less than 1\7/8\ inches (48 mm) diamond mesh when the
vessel is landward of the specified coordinates.
(b) Net stowage requirements. Otter trawl vessels possessing Loligo
squid that are subject to the minimum mesh size may not have
``available for immediate use'' any net, or any piece of net, not
meeting the minimum mesh size requirement, or any net, or any piece of
net, with mesh that is rigged in a manner that is inconsistent with the
minimum mesh size. A net that conforms to one of the following
specifications and that can be shown not to have been in recent use, is
considered not to be ``available for immediate use'':
(1) A net stowed below deck, provided:
(i) It is located below the main working deck from which the net is
deployed and retrieved;
(ii) The towing wires, including the leg wires, are detached from
the net; and
(iii) It is fan-folded (flaked) and bound around its circumference;
or
(2) A net stowed and lashed down on deck, provided:
(i) It is fan-folded (flaked) and bound around its circumference;
(ii) It is securely fastened to the deck or rail of the vessel; and
(iii) The towing wires, including the leg wires, are detached from
the net; or
(3) A net that is on a reel and is covered and secured, provided:
[[Page 14476]]
(i) The entire surface of the net is covered with canvas or other
similar material that is securely bound;
(ii) The towing wires, including the leg wires, are detached from
the net; and
(iii) The codend is removed from the net and stored below deck; or
(4) Nets that are secured in a manner authorized in writing by the
Regional Director and published in the Federal Register.
(c) Mesh obstruction or constriction. Any combination of mesh or
liners that effectively decreases the mesh below the minimum size is
prohibited, except that a liner may be used to close the opening
created by the rings in the rearmost portion of the net, provided the
liner extends no more than 10 meshes forward of the rearmost portion of
the net.
(d) Net obstruction or constriction. The owner or operator of a
fishing vessel shall not use any device, gear, or material, including,
but not limited to, nets, net strengtheners, ropes, lines, or chafing
gear, on the top of the regulated portion of a trawl net that results
in an effective mesh opening of less than 1\7/8\ inches (48 mm) (inside
stretch measure); Net strengtheners (covers), splitting straps and/or
bull ropes or wire may be used, provided they do not constrict the top
of the regulated portion of the net to less than an effective mesh
opening of 1\7/8\ inches (48 mm) (inside stretch measure). The ``top of
the regulated portion of the net'' means the 50 percent of the entire
regulated portion of the net which (in a hypothetical situation) would
not be in contact with the ocean bottom during a tow if the regulated
portion of the net were laid flat on the ocean floor. For the purpose
of this paragraph, head ropes shall not be considered part of the top
of the regulated portion of a trawl net. Net strengtheners (covers) may
not have an effective mesh opening of less than 4.5-inch (11.43-cm)
(inside stretch measure).
Sec. 655.26 Minimum fish sizes. [Reserved]
Sec. 655.27 Possession limits. [Reserved]
Sec. 655.28 At-sea observer coverage.
(a) The Regional Director may require observers for any vessel
holding a permit issued under Sec. 655.4.
(b) Owners of vessels selected for observer coverage must notify
the appropriate Regional or Center Director, as specified by the
Regional Director, before commencing any fishing trip that may result
in the harvest of Atlantic mackerel, Loligo squid, Illex squid, or
butterfish. Notification procedures will be specified in selection
letters to vessel owners.
(c) An owner or operator of a vessel on which a NMFS-approved
observer is embarked must:
(1) Provide accommodations and food that are equivalent to those
provided to the crew;
(2) Allow the observer access to and use of the vessel's
communications equipment and personnel upon request for the
transmission and receipt of messages related to the observer's duties;
(3) Allow the observer access to and use of the vessel's navigation
equipment and personnel upon request to determine the vessel's
position;
(4) Allow the observer free and unobstructed access to the vessel's
bridge, working decks, holding bins, weight scales, holds, and any
other space used to hold, process, weigh, or store fish; and
(5) Allow the observer to inspect and copy any records associated
with the catch and distribution of fish for that trip.
Sec. 655.29 Transfer-at-sea.
Only vessels issued a moratorium permit under Sec. 655.4(b) may
transfer Loligo or butterfish at sea. Unless authorized in writing by
the Regional Director, vessels issued an incidental catch permit under
Sec. 655.4(c) are prohibited from transferring or attempting to
transfer Loligo or butterfish from one vessel to another vessel.
Sec. 655.30 Experimental fishery.
(a) The Regional Director, in consultation with the Executive
Director of the Council, may exempt any person or vessel from the
requirements of this part for the conduct of experimental fishing
beneficial to the management of the Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish resource or fishery.
(b) The Regional Director may not grant such an exemption unless
he/she determines that the purpose, design, and administration of the
exemption is consistent with the objectives of the FMP, the provisions
of the Magnuson Act, and other applicable law, and that granting the
exemption will not:
(1) Have a detrimental effect on the Atlantic mackerel, squid, or
butterfish resource and fishery;
(2) Cause any quota to be exceeded; or
(3) Create significant enforcement problems.
(c) Each vessel participating in any exempted experimental fishing
activity is subject to all provisions of this FMP except those
necessarily relating to the purpose and nature of the exemption. The
exemption will be specified in a letter issued by the Regional Director
to each vessel participating in the exempted activity. This letter must
be carried on board the vessel seeking the benefit of such exemption.
4. Figure 1 to part 655 is added to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 14477]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02AP96.000
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Figure 1 to Part 655--Exemption Line to Minimum Net Mesh-size
Requirement for Loligo Squid
[FR Doc. 96-7625 Filed 4-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.