issue-1996-02-01•Federal Register final rules — 1996-02-01
Federal Register final rules — 1996-02-01
issue-1996-02-01Federal Register final rules — 1996-02-01Regulation
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. X96-10201 Removal of CFR Chapter
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3539]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-10201]
========================================================================
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. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 3539]]
ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES
1 CFR Chapter III
Removal of CFR Chapter
Effective February 1, 1996, the Administrative Conference of the
United States (ACUS) is terminated by Public Law 104-52, 104 Stat. 480
(see 5 U.S.C. note preceding 591). Therefore, the Office of the Federal
Register is removing ACUS regulations from the Code of Federal
Regulations pursuant to its authority to maintain an orderly system of
codification under 44 U.S.C. 1510 and 1 CFR part 8.
Accordingly, 1 CFR is amended by removing parts 301 through 326 and
vacating Chapter III.
BILLING CODE 1505-1D-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2168 Additional Frequencies for Cordless Telephones
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2168]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 15 and 90
[ET Docket 93-235; FCC 95-486]
Additional Frequencies for Cordless Telephones
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final Rule; petition for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this action, the Commission denies the Petition for
Reconsideration filed by the American Petroleum Institute (API). The
cordless telephone rules are intended to improve the operation and
convenience of cordless telephones. The Commission finds that API
presents no new information in its petition that would justify a
further change in our requirements for cordless telephones.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Serafini, Office of
Engineering and Technology, (202) 418-2456.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Memorandum Opinion and Order, in ET Docket 93-235, Adopted December 1,
1995 and released December 12, 1995. The complete Memorandum Opinion
and Order 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., and also may be purchased from the Commission's
duplication contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-
3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
1. On June 5, 1995, the American Petroleum Institute (API) filed a
Petition for Reconsideration requesting that the Commission amend its
cordless telephone rules adopted in the Report and Order, 60 FR 21984
(May 4, 1995), on April 5, 1995. API stated that the rules do not fully
protect against interference to PLMRS and requested changes to the
requirements for automatic channel selection in cordless telephones.
Alternately, API requested that cordless telephones operating on the
new frequencies be required to place a 2-inch by 3-inch label on both
the exterior packaging and the actual equipment. The label, which would
include specific language proposed by API, would warn consumers of
possible interference from the PLMRS and inform them that they must
accept interference.
2. In the Report and Order, the Commission found that it was
neither necessary nor desirable to impose specific design standards for
the automatic channel selection mechanism, and the Commission permitted
manufacturers the flexibility to implement the requirement in a manner
that best suits the design of their equipment. API has presented no new
information in this regard, and we continue to believe that the
concerns of API have been addressed. Commenters opposed API's petition
stating that the concerns raised by API have already been adequately
addressed by the Commission and that any further action is unnecessary.
Regarding API's alternative request for additional labelling, we note
that our existing Part 15 rules already require cordless telephones to
be labelled regarding potential interference.
3. Based on the comments, the Commission adopted the Memorandum
Opinion and Order denying API's petition for reconsideration.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration filed
by the American Petroleum Institute IS DENIED. This action is taken
pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 4(i), 302, 303(e),
303(f), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 15
Communications equipment.
47 CFR Part 90
Communications equipment.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-2168 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2155 Student Assistance General Provisions and Federal Pell Grant Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3776]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2155]
[[Page 3775]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Department of Education
_______________________________________________________________________
34 CFR Parts 668 and 690
Student Assistance General Provisions and Federal Pell Grant Program;
Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 3776]]
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 668 and 690
Student Assistance General Provisions and Federal Pell Grant
Program
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document corrects errors in the Student Assistance
General Provisions and the Federal Pell Grant Program regulations
published in the Federal Register on December 1, 1995.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rachael Sternberg, U.S. Department
of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 3053, ROB-3,
Washington, D.C. 20202. Telephone (202) 708-7888. 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: On December 1, 1995, final regulations were
published in the Federal Register (60 FR 61796) as part of the
Secretary's response to the President's March 4, 1995 Regulatory Reform
Initiative. This document corrects errors in the text of the amendments
to sections 668.37, 668.164, 668.165, and 690.83.
Dated: January 29, 1996.
David A. Longanecker,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
The following corrections are made in FR Doc. 95-29180 published on
December 1, 1995 (60 FR 61796):
PART 668--STUDENT ASSISTANCE GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 668.37 [Corrected]
1. On page 61812, column 3, Sec. 668.37 is corrected by removing
``and/'' in paragraph (a)(2)(iii).
2. On page 61814, column 1, amendment 11 to Sec. 668.164 did not
reflect prior amendments to paragraph (a), which are repeated here for
the convenience of the public. In order to correctly incorporate
amendment 11, Sec. 668.164 is corrected by revising paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
Sec. 668.164 Maintaining funds.
* * * * *
(a) General. (1) The requirements in this section apply only to
title IV, HEA program funds an institution receives under the campus-
based, Direct Loan, and Federal Pell Grant programs. An institution
that receives FFEL program funds through electronic funds transfer or
by master check must maintain those funds as provided under 34 CFR
682.207(b).
(2)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, an
institution is not required to maintain a separate account for funds an
institution receives under the campus-based, Direct Loan, and Federal
Pell Grant programs, but must maintain these funds in a bank account
that meets the requirements of this paragraph and under paragraph (b)
or (c) of this section. An institution must--
(ii) Ensure that the name of the account includes the phrase
``Federal Funds'' to clearly identify that title IV, HEA program funds
are maintained in that account; or
(iii)(A) Notify the bank of the accounts that contain Federal funds
and retain a record of that notice in its recordkeeping system; and
(B) Except for public institutions, file with the appropriate State
or municipal government entity a UCC-1 statement disclosing that the
account contains Federal funds and maintain a copy of that statement in
its records.
* * * * *
Sec. 668.165 [Corrected]
3. On page 61814, column 1, amendment 12 to Sec. 668.165 is
corrected by redesignating paragraphs (e)(3) as (e)(3)(i) and (e)(4) as
(e)(3)(ii).
PART 690--FEDERAL PELL GRANT PROGRAM
Sec. 690.83 [Corrected]
4. On page 61816, column 2, amendment 47 to Sec. 690.83 is
corrected by adding ``, and removing paragraph (e)'' after ``(d)''in
the amendatory language.
[FR Doc. 96-2155 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2142 Montana; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3599-3600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2142]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 281
[FRL-5406-6]
Montana; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of final determination on State of Montana application
for final approval.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The State of Montana has applied for final approval of its
underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has reviewed the Montana application and has reached a
final determination that Montana's underground storage tank (UST)
program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for
final approval. Thus, EPA is granting final approval to the State to
operate its program in lieu of the Federal program.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Final approval for Montana shall be effective at 1:00
pm Eastern Time on March 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris Knutson, U.S. EPA, Region 8,
Montana Office, DWR 10096, 301 South Park, Helena, Montana 59626-0096,
phone: (406) 441-1130, extension 225.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Section 9004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
enables EPA to approve state underground storage tank programs to
operate in the State in lieu of the Federal underground storage tank
(UST) program. Program approval is granted by EPA if the Agency finds
that the State program: (1) is ``no less stringent'' than the Federal
program in all seven elements, and includes notification requirements
of section 9004(a)(8), 42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)(8); and (2) provides for
adequate enforcement of compliance with UST standards (section 9004(a),
42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)).
On February 22, 1995, Montana submitted an application for
``complete'' program approval which includes regulation of both
petroleum and hazardous substance tanks. The State of Montana
established authority through an amendment to the 1981 Montana
Hazardous Waste Act to implement an underground storage tank program.
The State changed the title of the Act to the Montana Hazardous Waste
and Underground Storage Tank Act in April 1985, and further amended the
Act in 1989 to expand rulemaking authority. Another amendment in 1993
provided the State with rulemaking authority to assess civil penalties.
On September 22, 1995, EPA published a tentative decision
announcing its intent to grant Montana final approval. Further
background on the tentative decision to grant approval appears at 60 FR
49239, September 22, 1995. Along with the tentative determination, EPA
announced the availability of the application for public comment and
provided notice that a public hearing would be provided if significant
public interest was shown. EPA received only one comment on the
application and no request for a public hearing. Therefore, a hearing
was not held.
B. Decision
I conclude that Montana's application for final approval meets all
of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by Subtitle I
of RCRA. Accordingly, Montana is granted final approval to operate its
underground storage tank program in lieu of the Federal program.
Montana now has the responsibility for managing underground storage
tank facilities within its borders and carrying out all aspects of the
UST program except with regard to ``Indian Country,'' as defined in 18
U.S.C. 1151, where EPA will retain and otherwise exercise regulatory
authority. ``Indian Country'' includes the following Indian
reservations in the State of Montana:
1. Blackfeet;
2. Crow;
3. Flathead;
4. Fort Belknap;
5. Fort Peck;
6. Northern Cheyenne; and
7. Rocky Boys.
The Environmental Protection Agency retains all underground storage
tank authority under RCRA which applies to ``Indian Country'' in
Montana.
Before EPA would be able to approve the State of Montana UST
program for any portion of ``Indian Country,'' the State would have to
provide an appropriate analysis of the State's jurisdiction to enforce
in these areas. In order for a state to satisfy this requirement, it
must demonstrate to the EPA's satisfaction that it has authority
pursuant to applicable principles of Federal Indian Law to enforce its
laws against existing and potential pollution sources within any
geographical area for which it seeks program approval. EPA has reason
to believe that disagreement exists with regard to the State's
jurisdiction over ``Indian Country,'' and EPA is not satisfied that
Montana has, at this time, made the requisite showing of its authority
with respect to such lands.
In withholding program approval for these areas, EPA is not making
a determination that the State either has adequate jurisdiction or
lacks such jurisdiction. Should the State of Montana choose to submit
analysis with regard to its jurisdiction over all or part of ``Indian
Country'' in the State, it may do so without prejudice.
EPA's future evaluation of whether to approve the Montana program
for ``Indian Country,'' to include Indian reservation lands, will be
governed by EPA's judgement as to whether the State has demonstrated
adequate authority to
[[Page 3600]]
justify such approval, based upon its understanding of the relevant
principles of Federal Indian law and sound administrative practice. The
State may wish to consider EPA's discussion of the related issue of
tribal jurisdiction found in the preamble to the Indian Water Quality
Standards Regulation (see 56 FR 64876, December 12, 1991).
Montana also has primary enforcement responsibility, although EPA
retains the right to conduct inspections under section 9005 of RCRA 42
U.S.C. 6991d and to take enforcement actions under section 9006 of RCRA
42 U.S.C. 6991e.
Compliance with Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Certification under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify
that this approval will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The approval effectively suspends
the applicability of certain Federal regulations in favor of Montana's
program, thereby eliminating duplicative requirements for owners and
operators of underground storage tanks in the State. It does not impose
any new burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does not
require a regulatory flexibility analysis.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 281
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Hazardous materials, State program approval, Underground storage tanks.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 7004(b), and 9004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6974(b), and 6991(c).
Dated: December 14, 1995.
Jack McGraw,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-2142 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2118 Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pollock in Statistical Area 63 of the Central Regulatory Area
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3602-3603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2118]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 672
[Docket No. 951120272-5272-02; I.D. 012696D]
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pollock in Statistical Area 63
of the Central Regulatory Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Modification of a closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is terminating the closure to directed fishing for
pollock in Statistical Area 63 in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action
is necessary to fully utilize the interim total allowable catch (TAC)
of pollock in that area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), January 29, 1996,
until superseded by the final 1996 specifications.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew N. Smoker, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
economic zone is managed by NMFS
[[Page 3603]]
according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council
under authority of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management
Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed by regulations implementing
the FMP at 50 CFR parts 620 and 672.
The interim specification of pollock TAC in Statistical Area 63 was
established by the Interim 1996 Harvest Specifications (60 FR 61492,
November 30, 1996) as 3,250 metric tons (mt), determined in accordance
with Sec. 672.20(c)(1)(ii)(A). The directed fishery for pollock in
Statistical Area 63 of the GOA was closed under Sec. 672.20(c)(2)(ii)
on January 23, 1996 (61 FR 2457, January 26, 1996).
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined that the
remaining interim specification of pollock TAC in Statistical Area 63
has not been reached. Therefore, NMFS is terminating the previous
closure to directed fishing for pollock in Statistical Area 63 of the
GOA. All other closures remain in full force and effect.
Classification
This action is taken under 50 CFR 672.20, and is exempt from review
under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: January 29, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-2118 Filed 1-29-96; 2:10 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2066 Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida; and Import Regulations (Grapefruit); Relaxation of the Minimum Size Requirement for Red Grapefruit
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3544-3546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2066]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Parts 905 and 944
[Docket No. FV95-905-3FIR]
Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida;
and Import Regulations (Grapefruit); Relaxation of the Minimum Size
Requirement for Red Grapefruit
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
revising requirements under the Florida citrus marketing order and
grapefruit import regulations. This rule relaxes the minimum size
requirement for red seedless grapefruit to 3\5/16\ inches in diameter
(size 56). The Citrus Administrative Committee (Committee), the agency
that locally administers the marketing order for oranges, grapefruit,
tangerines, and tangelos grown in Florida, unanimously recommended this
change. This change will enable handlers and importers to continue to
ship size 56 red seedless grapefruit for
[[Page 3545]]
the entire 1995-96 season. As required under section 8e of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, this final rule also
changes the citrus import regulation so that it conforms with the
requirements established under the Florida citrus marketing order.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William G. Pimental, Marketing
Specialist, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable
Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 2276, Winter Haven, Florida 33883-2276;
telephone: 813-299-4770; or Caroline C. Thorpe, Marketing Specialist,
Marketing Order Administration Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, room 2522-S,
P.O. Box 96456, Washington, D.C. 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-8139.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order
No. 905 (7 CFR Part 905), as amended, regulating the handling of
oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in Florida,
hereinafter referred to as the order. The order is effective under the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-
674), hereinafter referred to as the Act.
This final rule is also issued under section 8e of the Act, which
provides that whenever specified commodities, including grapefruit, are
regulated under a Federal marketing order, imports of these commodities
into the United States are prohibited unless they meet the same or
comparable grade, size, quality, or maturity requirements as those in
effect for the domestically produced commodities. Section 8e also
provides that whenever two or more marketing orders regulate the same
commodity produced in different areas of the United States, the
Secretary shall determine which area the imported commodity is in most
direct competition with and apply regulations based on that area to the
imported commodity. The Secretary has determined that grapefruit
imported into the United States are in most direct competition with
grapefruit grown in Florida regulated under Marketing Order No. 905,
and has found that the minimum grade and size requirements for imported
grapefruit should be the same as those established for grapefruit under
Marketing Order No. 905.
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.
This rule will not preempt any state or local laws, regulations, or
policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this
rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under Section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the
petition. After the hearing, the Secretary would rule on the petition.
The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her
principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review the
Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted
prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of import regulations
issued under section 8e of the Act.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small
entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility. Import regulations issued under
the Act are based on those established under Federal marketing orders.
There are approximately 100 handlers of Florida citrus who are
subject to regulation under the marketing order, approximately 12,000
producers of citrus in the regulated area, and about 25 grapefruit
importers. Small agricultural service firms are defined by the Small
Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those having annual
receipts of less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are
defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $500,000. The
majority of these handlers, producers, and importers may be classified
as small entities.
An interim final rule was issued on November 20, 1995, and
published in the Federal Register (60 FR 58497, November 28, 1995).
That rule provided a 30-day comment period which ended December 28,
1995. No comments were received.
The order for Florida citrus provides for the establishment of
minimum grade and size requirements. The minimum grade and size
requirements are designed to provide fresh markets with fruit of
acceptable quality, thereby maintaining consumer confidence for fresh
Florida citrus. This helps create buyer confidence and contributes to
stable marketing conditions. This is in the interest of producers,
packers, and consumers, and is designed to increase returns to Florida
citrus growers.
This final rule finalizes changes to regulations implemented
through an interim final rule that relaxed the minimum size requirement
for red seedless grapefruit allowing for the continued shipment of size
56 grapefruit.
The Committee met September 14, 1995, and unanimously recommended
this action.
This rule finalizes a relaxation of the minimum size from size 48
(3\9/16\ inches diameter) to size 56 (3\5/16\ inches diameter) for the
period November 13, 1995, through November 10, 1996.
Section 905.52, in part, authorizes the Committee to recommend
minimum grade and size regulations to the Secretary. Section 905.306 (7
CFR 905.306) specifies minimum grade and size requirements for
different varieties of fresh Florida grapefruit. Such requirements for
domestic shipments are specified in Section 905.306 in Table I of
paragraph (a), and for export shipments in Table II of paragraph (b).
Minimum grade and size requirements for grapefruit imported into the
United States are currently in effect under Section 944.106 (7 CFR
944.106), as reinstated on July 26, 1993 (58 FR 39428, July 23, 1993).
Export requirements are not changed by this rule.
In making its recommendation, the Committee considered estimated
supply and current shipments. The Committee reports that it expects
that fresh market demand will be sufficient to permit the shipment of
size 56 red seedless grapefruit grown in Florida during the entire
1995-96 season. The Committee believes that markets have been developed
for size 56 and that they should continue to supply those markets.
Finalizing this size relaxation will enable Florida grapefruit
shippers to continue shipping size 56 red seedless grapefruit to the
domestic market. This rule will have a beneficial impact on producers
and handlers, since it will
[[Page 3546]]
permit Florida grapefruit handlers to continue to make available those
sizes of fruit needed to meet consumer needs. This is consistent with
current and anticipated demand in those markets for the 1995-96 season,
and will provide for the maximization of shipments to fresh market
channels.
There are several exemptions to these regulations provided under
the order. Handlers may ship up to 15 standard packed cartons (12
bushels) of fruit per day, and up to 2 standard packed cartons of fruit
per day in gift packages which are individually addressed and not for
resale. Fruit shipped for animal feed is also exempt under specific
conditions. Fruit shipped to commercial processors for conversion into
canned or frozen products or into a beverage base are not subject to
the handling requirements.
Section 8e of the Act provides that when certain domestically
produced commodities, including grapefruit, are regulated under a
Federal marketing order, imports of that commodity must meet the same
or comparable grade, size, quality, and maturity requirements. Since
this rule will finalize the relaxation of the minimum size requirement
under the domestic handling regulations, a corresponding change to the
import regulations must also be considered.
Minimum grade and size requirements for grapefruit imported into
the United States are currently in effect under Section 944.106 (7 CFR
944.106), as reinstated on July 26, 1993 (58 FR 39428, July 23, 1993).
This rule finalizes the relaxation of the minimum size requirements for
imported red seedless grapefruit to 3-\5/16\ inches in diameter (size
56) for the period November 13, 1995, through November 10, 1996, to
reflect the relaxation being made under the order for grapefruit grown
in Florida. The minimum grade and size requirements for Florida
grapefruit are specified in Section 905.306 (7 CFR 905.306) under
Marketing Order No. 905.
In accordance with section 8e of the Act, the United States Trade
Representative has concurred with the issuance of this final rule.
Based on these considerations, the Administrator of the AMS has
determined that this rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the Committee's recommendation, and other available information, it is
found that finalizing this interim final rule without change, as
published in the Federal Register (60 FR 58497, November 28, 1995) as
hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of
the Act.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 905
Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, Oranges, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.
7 CFR Part 944
Avocados, Food grades and standards, Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports,
Kiwifruit, Limes, Olives, Oranges.
For the reasons set forth above, 7 CFR parts 905 and 944 are
amended as follows:
PART 905--ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS GROWN IN
FLORIDA
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR part 905 which
was published at 60 FR 58497 on November 28, 1995, is adopted as a
final rule without change.
PART 944--FRUITS; IMPORT REGULATIONS
Accordingly, the interim final amending 7 CFR part 944 which was
published at 60 FR 58497 on November 28, 1995, is adopted as a final
rule without change.
Dated: January 25, 1996.
Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,
Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-2066 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2065 Irish Potatoes Grown in Certain Designated Counties in Idaho, and Malheur County, Oregon; Modification of the Handling Regulation
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3546-3547]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2065]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 945
[FV95-945-2FIR]
Irish Potatoes Grown in Certain Designated Counties in Idaho, and
Malheur County, Oregon; Modification of the Handling Regulation
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
which changed pack requirements and established marking requirements
for Idaho-Eastern Oregon potatoes. These changes are expected to
improve the marketing of such potatoes and increase returns to
producers. These changes were recommended by the Idaho-Eastern Oregon
Potato Committee (Committee), the agency responsible for local
administration of the marketing order program. The rule also included
several conforming changes to recognize that the marketing order
regulates shipments of potatoes within, as well as outside, the
production area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule becomes effective March 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary D. Olson, Northwest Marketing
Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1220 SW Third Avenue, room 369,
Portland, Oregon 97204-2807; telephone: (503) 326-2724 or FAX (503)
326-7440; or Valerie L. Emmer, Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523-S,
Washington, D.C. 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 205-2829, or FAX (202)
720-5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 945 (7 CFR part 945), as amended, hereinafter
referred to as the ``order,'' regulating the handling of Irish potatoes
grown in certain designated counties in Idaho, and Malheur County,
Oregon. The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing
Agreement Act of 1937, as amended, (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter
referred to as the ``Act.''
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.
This final rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations,
or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this
rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the
petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the petition.
The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her
principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review the
Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
[[Page 3547]]
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small
entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 65 handlers of Idaho-Eastern Oregon
potatoes that are subject to regulation under the order and
approximately 1,600 producers in the production area. Small
agricultural service firms, which include handlers of Idaho-Eastern
Oregon potatoes, have been defined by the Small Business Administration
(13 CFR 121.601) as those whose annual receipts are less than
$5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those whose
annual receipts are less than $500,000. A majority of potato handlers
regulated under the order may be classified as small entities. A
majority of producers may also be classified as small entities.
This rule finalizes an interim final rule which amended the
handling regulation in Sec. 945.341 by specifying that: (1) All cartons
(except when used as master containers) be conspicuously marked as to
size of the potatoes in the carton; (2) for all varieties, when 50-
pound containers are marked with a count, size, or similar designation,
the potatoes contained therein must meet the count, average count, and
weight ranges established within the handling regulation; and (3) all
Idaho-Eastern Oregon potatoes packed in cartons of any size (except
when cartons are used as master containers) shall be U.S. No. 1 grade
or better. The interim final rule also included several conforming
changes to recognize that the order regulates shipments of potatoes
within, as well as outside, the production area.
These changes were recommended by the Committee at its August 9,
1995, meeting. The Committee's recommendations are authorized pursuant
to Secs. 945.51 and 945.52 of the order. This rule will continue the
improvement in the marketing of Idaho-Eastern Oregon potatoes and
improve returns to producers.
A recent order amendment (60 FR 29724; June 5, 1995), added
authority to Sec. 945.52 to require accurate and uniform marking and
labeling of containers in which Idaho-Eastern Oregon potatoes are
shipped. With this authority in the order, the Committee recommended
requiring that all cartons shall be conspicuously marked as to potato
size; i.e., marked so that the potato size is noticeable on the carton.
The Committee recommended this requirement to reduce confusion in the
marketplace as to the size of the potatoes in cartons. While most
cartons already are marked as to size, the Committee reported that
there have been many instances when product size in unmarked cartons
was misrepresented through the marketing chain; (e.g., 100-count size
potatoes in 50-pound cartons being represented as 90-count size). This
type of misrepresentation created market confusion, damaged buyer
acceptance, and depressed prices. The marking requirement should
continue in effect to prevent such problems.
In addition, the interim final rule changed the pack requirements
in Sec. 945.341(c). For several decades, the handling regulation
specified that when long varieties of potatoes in 50-pound containers
are marked with a count, size or similar designation, the potatoes
contained therein must meet the count, average count and weight ranges
established within the handling regulation. This benefitted buyers and
sellers by reducing market confusion and misrepresentation related to
the marking of count and weight ranges on 50-pound containers. In
recent years, there has been an increase in the number of plantings of
round varieties grown in the Idaho-Eastern Oregon production area.
Therefore, the Committee recommended that this pack requirement, which
the industry has found to be beneficial for long varieties, be extended
to all varieties. The extension of the pack requirement to all
varieties should be continued to further the marketing of potatoes from
the production area.
The second aspect of the change in pack requirements recommended by
the Committee was the establishment of a requirement that all Idaho-
Eastern Oregon potatoes packed in cartons of any size (except when
cartons are used as master containers) shall be U.S. No. 1 grade or
better. Previously, the handling regulation required this only of
potatoes packed in 50-pound cartons (except when used as master
containers). Some buyers had indicated that a smaller carton size is
more desirable than the 50-pound carton. Those buyers indicated that
they need a smaller carton that takes up less storage space and is
easier to lift and handle. However, those buyers still want to be
provided with the same quality of potatoes; i.e., U.S. No. 1 grade or
better. Previously, the grade of potatoes packed in other than 50-pound
cartons had to be U.S. No. 2 grade or better. This finalization of
change in the handling regulation reflects the industry's intention to
provide a high quality product, regardless of carton size used. The
change should remain in effect so that goal can be met.
Another order amendment revised Sec. 945.9 to broaden the scope of
the order to authorize regulating shipments of potatoes within, as well
as outside, the production area. Conforming changes were made in
Sec. 945.341(d)(3) regarding inspection and certification procedures so
these procedures cover all shipments of potatoes, not only shipments
made outside the production area.
The changes to the handling regulation were published in the
Federal Register as an interim final rule on November 24, 1995 (60 FR
57904). That rule provided that interested persons could file comments
through December 26, 1995. No comments were received.
Based on available information, the Administrator of the AMS has
determined that this action will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the Committee's recommendation and other available information, it is
found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate
the declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 945
Marketing agreements, Potatoes, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 945 is
amended as follows:
PART 945--IRISH POTATOES GROWN IN CERTAIN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN
IDAHO, AND MALHEUR COUNTY, OREGON
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR part 945 which
was published at 60 FR 57904 on November 24, 1995, is adopted as a
final rule without change.
Dated: January 24, 1996.
Sharon Bomer Lauritsen
Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-2065 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2063 Reporting Requirements for Vessels, Vehicles, and Individuals; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3568-3569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2063]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Customs Service
19 CFR Part 4
[T.D. 93-96]
RIN 1515-AB31
Reporting Requirements for Vessels, Vehicles, and Individuals;
Correction
AGENCY: Customs Service, Treasury.
ACTION: Correcting amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final regulations
(T.D. 93-96), which were published on Tuesday, December 21, 1993 (58 FR
67312). The regulations related to the reporting requirements for
vessels, vehicles, and individuals.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry L. Burton, Attorney, Entry and
Carrier Rulings Branch (202) 482-6933.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On Tuesday, December 21, 1993, Customs published a document in the
Federal Register (T.D. 93-96, 58 FR 67312), that amended the Customs
Regulations to implement certain provisions of the Customs Enforcement
Act of 1986, a part of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, designed to
strengthen Federal efforts to improve the enforcement of Federal drug
laws and enhance the interdiction of illegal drug shipments. The
regulatory changes pertained to the arrival, entry, and departure
reporting requirements applicable to vessels, vehicles, and
individuals, and informed the public regarding applicable penalty,
seizure and forfeiture provisions for violation of the provisions.
As set forth in the Federal Register, the document contained an
error in an amendatory instruction resulting in the inadvertent removal
of two paragraphs from Sec. 4.30(a). At the time the document was
published, Sec. 4.30(a) consisted of three paragraphs: introductory
paragraph (a), paragraph (a)(1), and paragraph (a)(2). The amendatory
instruction which was in error stated that paragraph (a) was being
revised, rather than stating that introductory paragraph (a) was being
revised. Because only the text of introductory paragraph (a) followed
that instruction, paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) were deleted from future
editions of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR). The intent of Customs was
to revise the language of introductory paragraph (a), but to retain
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2). This document corrects that error by
reinserting those two paragraphs.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 4
Cargo vessels, Coastal zone, Customs duties and inspection, Fishing
vessels, Harbors, Imports, Maritime carriers, Passenger vessels,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seamen, Vessels, Yachts.
Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, Title 19, Chapter I, part 4 of the Customs Regulations
(19 CFR part 4) is corrected by making the following amendments:
PART 4--VESSELS IN FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC TRADES
1. The general authority citation for part 4 and the specific
authority citation for Sec. 4.30 continue to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 66, 1431, 1433, 1434, 1624;
46 U.S.C. App. 3, 91;
* * * * *
[[Page 3569]]
Section 4.30 also issued under 19 U.S.C. 288, 1433, 1446, 1448,
1450-1454, 1490;
* * * * *
2. Section 4.30(a) is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 4.30 Permits and special licenses for unlading and lading.
(a) * * *
(1) U.S. and foreign vessels arriving at a U.S. port directly from
a foreign port or place are required to make entry, whether it be
formal or, as provided in Sec. 4.8, preliminary, before the port
director may issue a permit or special license to lade or unlade.
(2) U.S. vessels arriving at a U.S. port from another U.S. port at
which formal entry was made may be issued a permit or special license
to lade or unlade without having to make either preliminary or formal
entry at the second and subsequent ports. Foreign vessels arriving at a
U.S. port from another U.S. port at which formal entry was made may be
issued a permit or special license to lade or unlade at the second and
subsequent ports prior to formal entry without the necessity of making
preliminary entry. In these circumstances, after the master has
reported arrival of the vessel, the port director may issue the permit
or special license or may, in his discretion, require the vessel to be
boarded, the master to make an oath or affirmation to the truth of the
statements contained in the vessel's manifest to the Customs officer
who boards the vessel, and require delivery of the manifest prior to
issuing the permit.
* * * * *
Dated: January 26, 1996.
Stuart P. Seidel,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Regulations and Rulings.
[FR Doc. 96-2063 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2043 General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Closes Block Island Sound to All Fishing
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3601-3602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2043]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3602]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 620
[Docket No. 9601-26016-6016-01; I.D. 012696C]
RIN 0648-XX41
General Provisions for Domestic Fisheries; Closes Block Island
Sound to All Fishing
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Emergency interim rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has determined that, in order to protect public health ,
safety, and welfare, it is necessary to close a portion of Federal
waters in Block Island Sound off the coast of the State of Rhode
Island, to all fishing. Closure of this area is made at the request of
the State of Rhode Island. The closure will be in effect for a period
of 90 days beginning on the effective date of this rule, unless
conditions allow NMFS to terminate it sooner. This closure is
implemented due to the adverse environmental conditions created by the
recent grounding of an oil barge, and subsequent oil spill. This action
will prevent fishermen from harvesting fish which may be contaminated.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 26, 1996 through May 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regina L. Spallone at (508) 281-9221.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This emergency action is taken in response
to the January 19, 1996, grounding of an oil barge, and subsequent
spill of more than 700,000 gallons (2.6 million L.) of fuel oil into
the waters of Block Island Sound. The closed area is defined as Federal
waters of Block Island Sound bounded as follows: From the point where
LORAN line 25740 intersects with the 3 nautical mile line south of
Easton Point, RI, proceeding southwesterly along the 25740 line to its
intersection with the 43870 line, thence southwesterly along the 43870
line to the intersection of the 3 nautical mile line east of Block
Island, RI, thence northwesterly along said 3 nautical mile line to the
intersection of the 14540 line, thence northwesterly along the 14540
line to the intersection of the 3 nautical mile line, thence
northeasterly along the 3 nautical mile line to the starting point.
Vessels fishing outside of this area may pass through the closed area,
provided that all fishing gear is stowed and unavailable for immediate
use in accordance with 50 CFR sections 625.24(f), 650.21(a)(2)(iii),
and 651.20(c)(4)(i).
The complete extent of the ecological damage due to the spill is
not known at this time. Oil exposure has been shown to be lethal to
marine life, and can accumulate and linger in the food chain. The
purpose of this action is to prevent vessels from harvesting
contaminated fish from the area of the spill in the interest of public
health. The emergency nature of the adverse environmental condition
created by the presence of oil in the area renders prior notice and
opportunity to comment on a proposed closure contrary to the public
interest. Consequently, the emergency action authority vested in the
Secretary of Commerce under section 305(c) of the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1855(c) is invoked to make
the closure effective immediately.
The closure prohibits all fishing in the area beginning on January
26, 1996, through April 29, 1996, unless circumstances exist that
permit earlier reopening of the area. The are may reopen earlier if
NMFS, in association with other State and Federal agencies, determines
that the environmental degradation of the marine environment
represented by the presence of the oil, and the consequential negative
impact on fishing operations, and risk to public health, safety, and
welfare has ended.
This action has the support of the State of Rhode Island, the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration, and U.S. Coast Guard. The New England
Fishery Management Council was informed of the planned action and made
no comment.
Classification
The Secretary finds for good cause that the reasons justifying
promulgation of this rule on an emergency basis also make it
impracticable and contrary to the public interest to provide notice and
opportunity for comment or to delay for 30 days the effective date of
these emergency regulations under the provisions of sections 553 (b)
and (d) of the Administrative Procedures Act.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 620
Fisheries, Fishing.
Dated: January 26, 1996.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 620 is amended
as follows:
PART 620--GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR DOMESTIC FISHERIES
1. The authority citation for part 620 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 620.7, paragraph (i) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 620.7 General prohibitions.
* * * * *
(i) Fish in Federal waters of Block Island Sound bounded as
follows: From the point where LORAN line 25740 intersects with the 3
nautical mile line south of Easton Point, Rhode Island, proceeding
southwesterly along the 25740 line to its intersection with the 43870
line, thence, southwesterly along the 43870 line to the intersection of
the 3 nautical mile line east of Block Island, Rhode Island, thence
northwesterly along said 3 nautical mile line to the intersection of
the 14540 line, thence northwesterly along the 14540 line to the
intersection of the 3 nautical mile line, thence northeasterly along
the 3 nautical mile line to the starting point. Vessels fishing outside
of this area may pass through the closed area, provided that all
fishing gear is stowed and unavailable for immediate use in accordance
with the regulations cited in 50 CFR 625.24(f), 650.21(a)(1)(iii), and
651.20(c)(4)(i).
[FR Doc. 96-2043 Filed 1-29-96; 11:54 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-2009 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Alternatives to Miller Act Bonds
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3600-3601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2009]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
48 CFR Parts 228 and 252
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Alternatives
to Miller Act Bonds
AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Interim rule with request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Director of Defense Procurement is amending the Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to revise the interim
rule which was published in the Federal Register on August 31, 1995,
providing alternative payment protections for construction contracts
between $25,000 and $100,000.
DATES: Effective Date: Februar 1, 1996.
Comments Date: April 1, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties should submit written comments to:
Defense Acquisition Regulations Council, Attn: Ms. Amy Williams,
PDUSD(A&T)DP(DAR), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301-3062. Telefax number (703) 602-0350. Please cite DFARS Case 95-
D305 in all correspondence related to this issue.
[[Page 3601]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Amy Williams, (703) 602-0131.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
This interim DFARS rule revises the interim rule which was
published in the Federal Register on August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45376). It
provides alternative payment protections for construction contracts
between $25,000 and $100,000, pending implementation of Section
4104(b)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Pub. L.
103-355) in the FAR. This rule has been revised to require that the
contracting officer select two or more alternative payment protections,
and encourages the contracting officer to include irrevocable letters
of credit as one of the selected alternatives. In addition, this rule
excludes payment bonds from the provisions authorizing the contracting
officer to access funds under the payment protection.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This interim rule may have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., because the rule
provides alternatives to payment bonds as payment protection for
construction contracts between $25,000 and $100,000. The objective of
the rule is to make it easier for small businesses to provide payment
protections under construction contracts. An Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) has been prepared and may be obtained from
the address specified herein. A copy of the IRFA has been submitted to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
Comments are invited from small businesses and other interested
parties. Comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS
subparts will be considered in accordance with Section 610 of the Act.
Such comments must be submitted separately and cite DFARS Case 95-D305
in correspondence.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act applies. The applicable OMB Control
Number is 9000-0045.
D. Determination To Issue an Interim Rule
A determination has been made under the authority of the Secretary
of Defense to issue this rule as an interim rule. Urgent and compelling
reasons exist to promulgate this rule without prior opportunity for
further public comment because it is necessary to revise the payment
protections for construction contracts between $25,000 and $100,000,
based on comments received on the interim rule published in the Federal
Register on August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45376). The wording of the initial
interim rule regarding contracting officer access to funds under
payment bonds erroneously resulted in a ``forfeiture type'' payment
bond rather than a traditional type payment bond consistent with the
terms and conditions of the Miller Act. However, comments received in
response to this interim rule will be considered in formulating the
final rule.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 228 and 252
Government procurement.
Michele P. Peterson,
Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations Council.
Therefore, 48 CFR Parts 228 and 252 are amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Parts 228 and 252 continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1.
PART 228--BONDS AND INSURANCE
2. Section 228.171-1 is revised to read as follows:
228.171-1 General.
(a) For construction contracts greater than $25,000, but not
greater than $100,000, the contracting officer shall select two or more
of the following payment protections, giving particular consideration
to inclusion of an irrevocable letter of credit as one of the selected
alternatives:
(1) A payment bond.
(2) An irrevocable letter of credit.
(3) A tripartite escrow agreement. The prime contractor establishes
an escrow account in a Federally insured financial institution and
enters into a tripartite escrow agreement with the financial
institution, as escrow agent, and all of the suppliers of labor and
material. The escrow agreement shall establish the terms of payment
under the contract and of resolution of disputes among the parties. The
Government makes payments to the contractor's escrow account, and the
escrow agent distributes the payments in accordance with the agreement,
or triggers the disputes resolution procedures if required.
(4) Certificates of deposit. The contractor deposits certificates
of deposit from a federally insured financial institution with the
contracting officer, in an acceptable form, executable by the
contracting officer.
(5) A deposit of the types of security listed in FAR 28.204.
(b) The contractor shall submit to the Government one of the
payment protections selected by the contracting officer.
3. Section 228.171-2 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read
as follows:
228.171-2 Amount required.
(a) The requirements at FAR 28.102-2(b), for the amount of payment
bonds, also apply to the alternative payment protections described in
228.171-1.
* * * * *
4. Section 228.171-3 is revised to read as follows:
228.171-3 Contract clause.
Use the clause at 252.228-7007, Alternative Payment Protections, in
solicitation and contracts for construction, when the estimated or
actual value exceeds $25,000 but does not exceed $100,000. Complete the
clause by specifying the payment protections selected (see 228.171-
1(a)), the penal amount required, and the deadline for submission.
PART 252--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
5. Section 252.228-7007 is amended by revising the clause date and
by revising paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
252.228-7007 Alternative Payment Protections.
As prescribed in 228.171-3, use the following clause:
ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT PROTECTIONS (FEB 1996)
* * * * *
(d) The payment protection shall provide protection for the full
contract performance period plus a one-year period.
(e) Except for escrow agreements and payment bonds, which provide
their own protection procedures, the Contracting Officer is authorized
to access funds under the payment protection when it has been alleged
in writing by a supplier of labor or material that a nonpayment has
occurred, and to withhold funds pending resolution by administrative or
judicial proceedings or mutual agreement of the parties.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-2009 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1992 Export Certificates for Beef Subject to Tariff-Rate Quota
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1992]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Part 132
[T.D. 96-12]
RIN 1515-AB73
Export Certificates for Beef Subject to Tariff-Rate Quota
AGENCY: Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adopts as a final rule, without change, the
interim amendment to the Customs Regulations setting forth the form and
manner by which an importer may make a declaration that a valid export
certificate is in effect for imported beef which is the subject of a
tariff-rate quota and the product of a participating country, as
defined in regulations of the United States Trade Representative, in
accordance with the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Cooper, Quota Branch, (202) 927-
5401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
As a result of the Uruguay Round Agreements, approved by Congress
in Sec. 101 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), the
President, by Presidential Proclamation No. 6763, established a tariff-
rate quota for imported beef.
The specific imported beef, as well as the various countries
eligible for the in-quota tariff rate are set forth in Additional U.S.
Note 3, Schedule XX, Chapter 2, of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States. The eligible countries which may export such beef to
the United States and avail themselves of the preferential, in-quota
tariff rate include Australia, New Zealand and Japan.
As part of the implementation of the tariff-rate quota for beef,
the United States, specifically, the United States Trade Representative
(USTR), offered these exporting countries that have an allocation of
the in-quota quantity the opportunity to use export certificates for
their qualifying beef exports to the United States. Although countries
that have an allocation of the in-quota quantity are referred to in the
statutory law as ``participating countries'', for purposes of the
interim rule and now for this final rule, a participating country
constitutes an allocated country that has been authorized to
participate in the export certificate program. To this end, New Zealand
has requested the opportunity to participate in this program.
An exporting country using export certificates in this regard must
notify the USTR and provide the necessary supporting information.
Customs is then responsible for ensuring that no imports of beef from
that country are counted against the country's in-quota allocation
unless such beef is covered by a proper export certificate.
Accordingly, the USTR undertook rulemaking in this matter (15 CFR
2012.2 and 2012.3).
In addition, Customs issued an interim rule published in the
Federal Register (60 FR 39108) on August 1, 1995, in order to set forth
the form and manner by which an importer declares that a valid export
certificate exists, including a unique number therefor which must be
referenced on the entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption.
This interim rule also included a record retention period for the
certificate and required the submission of such certificate to Customs
upon request.
No comments were received from the public in response to the
invitation therefor set forth in the interim rule, and Customs has
determined to adopt this rule as a final rule without change.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
Because this document involves a foreign affairs function of the
United States and implements an international agreement, it is not
subject to E.O. 12866. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking was
required in this case, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this document was Russell Berger, Office of
Regulations and Rulings, U.S. Customs Service. However, personnel from
other offices participated in its development.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 132
Customs duties and inspection, Imports, Postal service, Quotas.
Amendment to the Regulations
PART 132--QUOTAS
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 19 CFR part 132 to add a new
Sec. 132.15, which was published in the Federal Register at 60 FR 39108
on August 1, 1995, is adopted as a final rule without change.
George J. Weise,
Commissioner of Customs.
Approved: December 22, 1995.
John P. Simpson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 96-1992 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1991 Changes to Customs List of Designated Public International Organizations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3569-3571]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1991]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Part 148
[T.D. 96-13]
Changes to Customs List of Designated Public International
Organizations
AGENCY: Customs Service, Treasury.
[[Page 3570]]
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the Customs Regulations by updating
Customs list of designated public international organizations entitled
to certain free entry privileges provided for under provisions of the
International Organizations Immunities Act. The last time the list was
updated was in 1993 and since then the President has issued several
Executive Orders which designate certain organizations as entitled to
this free entry privilege. Accordingly, Customs deems it appropriate to
update the list at this time.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Sequeira, Director,
International Organizations & Agreements Division, Office of
International Affairs, (202) 927-1480.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The International Organizations Immunities Act, 22 U.S.C. 288,
generally provides that certain international organizations, agencies,
and committees, those in which the United States participates or
otherwise has an interest and which have been designated by the
President through appropriate Executive Order as public international
organizations, are entitled to enjoy certain privileges, exemptions,
and immunities conferred by the Act. The Department of State lists the
public international organizations, designated by the President as
entitled to enjoy any measure of the privileges, exemptions, and
immunities conferred by the Act, in the notes following the provisions
of Section 288.
One of the privileges provided for under the Act is that the
baggage and effects of alien officers, employees, and representatives--
and their families, suites, and servants--to the designated
organization, are admitted free of duty and without entry. Those
designated organizations entitled to this duty-free entry privilege are
delineated at Sec. 148.87(b), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 148.87(b)).
Thus, the list of public international organizations maintained by
Customs is for the limited purpose of identifying those organizations
entitled to the duty-free entry privilege; it does not necessarily
include all of the international organizations that are on the list
maintained by the Department of State, which delineates all of the
international organizations designated by the President regardless of
the extent of the privileges conferred.
Since the last revision of Sec. 148.87(b) in 1993 (T.D. 93-45),
four Executive Orders have been issued designating certain
organizations as public international organizations. Collectively,
these Executive Orders add 7 international organizations to Customs
list of public international organizations entitled to the duty-free
entry privilege--bringing the total of designated international
organizations to 68, as follows:
1. Executive Order 12842 of March 29, 1993, 58 FR 17081, 3 CFR 1993
Comp., p. 592, 29 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 505, designated the
International Development Law Institute;
2. Executive Order 12894 of January 26, 1994, 59 FR 4237, 3 CFR
1994 Comp., p. 857, 30 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 159, designated the
North Pacific Marine Science Organization;
3. Executive Order 12895 of January 26, 1994, 50 FR 4237, 3 CFR
1994 Comp., p. 857, 30 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 159, designated the
North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission; and
4. Executive Order 12904 of March 16, 1994, 59 FR 13179, 3 CFR 1994
Comp., p. 880, 30 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 550, designated the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation, the Commission for Labor
Cooperation, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission, and the
North American Development Bank pursuant to the North American Free
Trade Agreement Implementation Act.
Inapplicability of Public Notice and Comment Requirements, Delayed
Effective Date Requirements, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and
Executive Order 12866
Because this amendment merely corrects the listing of designated
organizations entitled by law to free entry privileges as public
international organizations, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), good cause
exists for dispensing with notice and public procedure thereon as
unnecessary. For the same reason, good cause exists for dispensing with
a delayed effective date under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) (1) and (3). Since this
document is not subject to the notice and public procedure requirements
of 5 U.S.C. 553, it is not subject to provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This document does not meet the
criteria for a ``significant regulatory action'' as specified in E.O.
12866.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this document was Gregory R. Vilders,
Attorney, Regulations Branch, Office of Regulations and Rulings.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 148
Foreign officials, Government employees, International
organizations, Privileges and immunities, Taxes.
Amendment to the Regulations
For the reasons stated above, part 148, Customs Regulations (19 CFR
part 148), is amended as set forth below:
PART 148--PERSONAL DECLARATIONS AND EXEMPTIONS
1. The general authority citation for part 148 is revised to read
as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1496, 1498, 1624. The provisions of
this part, except for subpart C, are also issued under 19 U.S.C.
1202 (General Note 20, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States);
* * * * *
2. Section 148.87(b) is amended by adding the following, in
appropriate alphabetical order, to the table, to read as follows:
Sec. 148.87 Officers and employees of, and representatives to, public
international organizations.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive
Organization order Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Border Environmental Cooperation 12904 Mar. 16, 1994.
Commission.
* * * * *
Commission for Environmental 12904 Mar. 16, 1994.
Cooperation.
* * * * *
Commission for Labor Cooperation.. 12904 Mar. 16, 1994.
* * * * *
International Development Law 12842 Mar. 29, 1993.
Institute.
* * * * *
North American Development Bank... 12904 Mar. 16, 1994.
* * * * *
North Pacific Anadromous Fish 12895 Jan. 26, 1994.
Commission.
* * * * *
North Pacific Marine Science 12894 Jan. 26, 1994.
Organization.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3571]]
* * * * *
George J. Weise,
Commissioner of Customs.
Approved: December 22, 1995.
John P. Simpson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 96-1991 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1977 Color Additive Certification; Increase in Fees For Certification Services
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3571-3572]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1977]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 80
[Docket No. 94C-0041]
Color Additive Certification; Increase in Fees For Certification
Services
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the color
additive regulations by increasing the fees for certification services.
The change in fees will allow FDA to continue to maintain an adequate
color certification program as required by the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the act). The fees are intended to recover the full costs
of operation of FDA's color certification program, including the
unfunded liability of the Civil Service Retirement Fund and the
appropriate overhead costs of the Public Health Service (PHS) and the
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
DATES: Effective March 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David R. Petak, Accounting Branch
(HFA-120), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville,
MD 20857, 301-443-1766.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In the Federal Register of November 29, 1994 (59 FR 60898), FDA
issued an interim rule to amend the color additive regulations by
increasing the fee for certification services. The change in fees was
necessary so that FDA could recover the full costs of operation of its
color certification program, including the unfunded liability of the
Civil Service Retirement Fund and the appropriate overhead costs of PHS
and DHHS. The fee schedule in effect before publication of the interim
rule had been in place since 1982. While costs of the certification
program have increased through the years, until 1991, the steady growth
of the color additive market and corresponding increase in the batches
certified generated sufficient revenue to cover these increased costs.
The fee schedule is designed to cover the costs involved in the
certifying of batches of color additive. These costs include both the
cost of specific tests required by the regulations and the general
costs associated with the certification program, such as costs of
accounting, reviewing data, issuing certificates, and conducting
research and establishment inspections.
Since 1991, however, the volume of batches certified has leveled
off, while the costs have continued to rise at approximately 10 percent
per year. Moreover, the old fee schedule did not reflect all applicable
overhead costs for the program. It did not reflect the costs of
management support provided by both PHS and DHHS, personnel costs for
the unfunded liability portion of the Civil Service Retirement Fund,
and ancillary costs of space, equipment, travel, and supplies. The
agency announced in the November 1994 notice that it concluded that it
is necessary to include these costs in the calculation of the fees to
ensure that the fees fully cover the costs of certification. Because
section 721(e) of the act (21 U.S.C. 379e(e)) requires payment of such
fees necessary to provide, maintain, and equip an adequate
certification service, an immediate increase was necessary.
The fee for straight colors including lakes is $.30 per pound (a
$.05 per pound increase) with a minimum fee of $192. There are similar
increases in fees for repacks of certified color additives and color
additive mixtures. In addition, the interim rule announced the agency's
tentative conclusion that fees would increase at a rate that is
proportional to Federal salary increases, commencing with pay raises on
or after January 1, 1996. This provision would permit FDA to set
initial fees lower than they would otherwise be set. Interested persons
were given until February 13, 1995, to comment on the interim rule. One
letter was received in response to the interim rule from the
International Association of Color Manufacturers (IACM). A description
of the comment and the agency's response is as follows.
II. Comment
IACM, a trade association representing firms that manufacture
certified color additives for use in foods, drugs, cosmetics, and
medical devices, objected to the fee escalation provision, supported
refunds of surplus fees, and suggested alternatives to the
certification program.
In support of its objection to the escalator provision, IACM stated
that it was opposed to an automatic annual increase in the color
certification fees because it was contrary to section 721(e) of the
act. IACM argued that Congress clearly intended that such fee increases
would have to be specified in a proposed regulation with an opportunity
for public notice and comments. IACM further stated that the fee study
that FDA made available does not support the need for automatic fee
increases and requested clarification of all the factors (e.g., local
pay rate increase) that FDA intended to use as a basis for the
automatic fee increase. IACM also requested more time to comment on
these factors. In addition, IACM supported refunds of surplus fees but
requested that FDA include a statement that it is ``* * * committed to
making refunds.'' Lastly, IACM suggested that, in light of FDA's
decision to increase the fee and provide for an automatic fee
escalator, FDA should consider alternative methods of certification
such as certifying private laboratories or certifying an individual
company to conduct its own certification.
After due consideration FDA finds that it is persuaded by IACM's
comments in support of its objection to the escalator provision, and
the agency will not implement this provision. The agency will continue
with its past policy of monitoring color certification costs and set
fees as required by section 721(e) of the act as necessary to provide,
maintain, and equip an adequate certification service. FDA will
continue to closely monitor the certification fee structure and will
continue with its policy of refunding any excess of funds in proportion
to workload of each company that sought color certification.
Accordingly, FDA is removing Sec. 80.10(c) (21 CFR 80.10(c)) from the
regulations.
IACM's request that FDA consider alternatives to the certification
program are outside the scope of interim rule, and since the agency is
returning to the past procedure for determining color additive
certification fees, the issue needs no further consideration at this
time. Thus, FDA is not making any additional modifications to
Sec. 80.10. The interim rule adopted on November 29, 1994, is therefore
permanent, with the only modification that Sec. 80.10(c) is withdrawn,
and Sec. 80.10(d) is redesignated as Sec. 80.10(c) to replace it.
III. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive
Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354).
Executive Order 12866
[[Page 3572]]
directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The agency believes that
this final rule is consistent with the regulatory philosophy and
principles identified in the Executive Order. In addition, the final
rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by the Executive
Order and so is not subject to review under the Executive Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. The entire cost of this fee increase would be
approximately $450,000 per year and would be distributed among
approximately 30 companies who would pay an increased fee that is
proportional to the number of pounds of color that they certify.
Because the great majority of these costs will be borne by a few firms
that have a dominant share of the market, the agency certifies that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, no further analysis is required.
IV. Environmental Impact
The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.24 (a)(8) 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 80
Color additives, Cosmetics, Drugs, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Foods and Drugs, the interim
rule published in the Federal Register of November 29, 1994 (59 FR
60898) is confirmed with the following changes to 21 CFR part 80:
PART 80--COLOR ADDITIVE CERTIFICATION
1. 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]
2. Section 80.10 Fees for certification services is amended by
removing paragraph (c) and by redesignating paragraphs (d), (e), and
(f) as paragraphs (c), (d), and (e), respectively.
Dated: January 25, 1996.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 96-1977 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1972 Document Filing
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3548-3550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1972]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3549]]
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Parts 100, 104, 105, 109, 110 and 114
[Notice 1996-3]
Document Filing
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; Technical amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 28, 1995, the President signed a bill that amended
the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (``FECA'' or ``Act'') to
improve the electoral process, inter alia, by requiring candidates, and
the authorized committees of the candidates, to the United States House
of Representatives (``House'') to file campaign finance reports with
the Federal Election Commission. The Commission today is publishing
technical amendments to conform its regulations to the statute.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Susan E. Propper, Assistant
General Counsel, or Ms. Teresa A. Hennessy, Attorney, 999 E Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20463, (202) 219-3690 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FECA governs, inter alia, the filing of
campaign finance reports by candidates for Federal office. 2 U.S.C.
432(g). As amended in 1979, the FECA required that all designations,
statements, and reports required to be filed under the Act by a
candidate, authorized committee(s) of the candidate, or principal
campaign committee of the candidate for the House be filed with the
Clerk of the House as custodian for the Commission. The FECA specified
that a House candidate includes a candidate for the Office of
Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the
Congress. Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1979, Public Law
No. 96-187, section 102, 93 Stat. 1339, 1346, codified at 2 U.S.C.
Sec. 432(g)(1). At 11 CFR 105.1, the Commission implemented this
requirement and provided that all other reports by committees that
support only candidates to the House be filed with the Clerk of the
House.
On December 28, 1995, Public Law No. 104-79, 109 Stat. 791 (1995)
amended the FECA to require that these reports instead be filed with
the Federal Election Commission. See Section 3. The new law made no
changes to the filing requirements for candidates to the United States
Senate. The law became effective with the first reports required to be
filed after December 31, 1995. However, since the law was enacted
shortly before this date, under agreement with the Clerk, authorized
committees of candidates for the House will file year-end reports for
1995 with the Clerk. The Clerk will date stamp and forward these
reports to the Commission. Thereafter, the candidates and committees
formerly filing with the Clerk will file all documents required to be
filed under FECA with the Commission.
Therefore, the Commission is publishing this Notice to make
necessary technical and conforming amendments to its regulations. The
Notice amends 11 CFR 105.1 to conform to the statute and includes
conforming amendments to several provisions that refer to the
regulation: 11 CFR 100.5(e)(3)(i), 104.3(e)(5), 104.4(c)(3), 104.5(f),
104.14(c), 104.15(a), 105.4, 105.5, 109.2(a), 110.6(c)(1) (i) and (ii),
and 114.6 (d)(3)(i) and (d)(5). Please note that the sale or use
restriction on information in campaign finance reports, set forth at 11
CFR 104.15(a), still would apply to all reports, including those
previously filed with the Clerk.
Because the amendments are merely technical, they are exempt from
the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure
Act. See 5 U.S.C.553(b)(B). They are also exempt from the legislative
review provisions of the FECA. See 2 U.S.C. Sec. 438(d). These
exemptions allow the amendments to be made effective immediately upon
publication in the Federal Register. As a result, these amendments are
made effective on February 1, 1996.
Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory
Flexibility Act)
I certify that the attached final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The basis of
this certification is that the rule is necessary to conform to the Act
and that the rule changes only the location of filing reports.
Therefore, no significant economic impact is caused by the final rule.
List of Subjects
11 CFR Part 100
Elections.
11 CFR Part 104
Campaign funds, Political committees and parties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 105
Campaign funds, Political candidates, Political committees and
parties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 109
Elections, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
11 CFR Part 110
Campaign funds, Political committees and parties.
11 CFR Part 114
Business and industry, Elections, Labor.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, subchapter A, chapter I,
title 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 100--SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS (2 U.S.C. 431)
1. The authority citation for Part 100 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431, 438(a)(8).
Sec. 100.5(e)(3)(i) [Amended]
2. Section 100.5(e)(3)(i) is amended by removing ``, Clerk of the
House''.
PART 104--REPORTS BY POLITICAL COMMITTEES (2 U.S.C. 434)
3. The authority citation for Part 104 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(1), 431(8), 431(9), 432(i), 434,
438(a)(8), 438(b).
Sec. 104.3(e)(5) [Amended]
4. Section 104.3(e)(5) is amended by removing all references to
``Clerk of the House of Representatives,'' and by removing the comma
after ``Secretary of the Senate'' in the first and third sentences.
Sec. 104.4(c)(3) [Amended]
5. Section 104.4(c)(3) is amended by revising all references to
``Clerk of the House'' to read ``Federal Election Commission''.
Sec. 104.5(f) [Amended]
6. Section 104.5(f) is amended by removing ``the Clerk of the
House,''.
Sec. 104.14(c) [Amended]
7. Section 104.14(c) is amended by removing ``, the Clerk of the
House,''.
Sec. 104.15(a) [Amended]
8. Section 104.15(a) is amended by revising ``with the Commission,
Clerk of the House, Secretary of the Senate, or any Secretary of State
or other equivalent State officer'' to read ``under the Act''.
[[Page 3550]]
PART 105--DOCUMENT FILING (2 U.S.C. 432(g))
9. The authority citation for Part 105 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 432(g), 438(a)(8).
10. Section 105.1 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 105.1 Place of filing; House candidates and their authorized
committees (2 U.S.C. 432(g)(1)).
All designations, statements, reports, and notices, as well as any
modification(s) or amendment(s) thereto, required to be filed under 11
CFR parts 101, 102, and 104 by a candidate for nomination or election
to the office of Representative in, or Delegate or Resident
Commissioner to, the Congress, or by his or her authorized
committee(s), shall be filed in original form with, and received by,
the Federal Election Commission.
Sec. 105.4 [Amended]
11. Section 105.4 is amended by removing ``105.1,'' and by removing
the comma after ``105.2''.
12. Section 105.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 105.5 Transmittal of microfilm copies and photocopies of original
reports filed with the Secretary of the Senate to the Commission (2
U.S.C. 432(g)(3)).
(a) Either a microfilmed copy or photocopy of all original
designations, statements, reports, modifications or amendments required
to be filed pursuant to 11 CFR 105.2 shall be transmitted by the
Secretary of the Senate to the Commission as soon as possible, but in
any case no later than two (2) working days after receiving such
designations, statements, reports, modifications, or amendments.
(b) The Secretary of the Senate shall then forward to the
Commission a microfilm copy and a photocopy of each designation,
statement, and report, or any modification or amendment thereto, filed
with the Secretary pursuant to 11 CFR 105.2.
(c) The Secretary of the Senate shall place a time and date stamp
on each original designation, statement, report, modification or
amendment received.
PART 109--INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES (2 U.S.C. 431(17), 434(c))
13. The authority citation for Part 109 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(17), 434(c), 438(a)(8), 441d.
Sec. 109.2(a) [Amended]
14. Section 109.2(a) is amended by removing ``, the Clerk of the
House''.
PART 110--CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS AND PROHIBITIONS
15. The authority citation for Part 110 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8), 431(9), 432(c)(2), 437d(a)(8),
438(a)(8), 441a, 441b, 441d, 441e, 441f, 441g and 441h.
Sec. 110.6(c)(1) (i) and (ii) [Amended]
16. Section 110.6 is amended by removing ``, the Clerk of the House
of Representatives,'' from paragraph (c)(1)(i) and by removing ``,
Clerk'' from paragraph (c)(1)(ii).
PART 114--CORPORATE AND LABOR ORGANIZATION ACTIVITY
17. The authority citation for Part 114 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B), 431(9)(B), 432,
437d(a)(8),438(a)(8), and 441b.
Sec. 114.6(d)(3)(i) and (d)(5) [Amended]
18. Section 114.6 is amended by removing ``, the Clerk of the
House'' from paragraph (d)(3)(i) and by removing ``, the Clerk of the
House,'' from paragraph (d)(5).
Dated:January 26, 1996.
Lee Ann Elliott,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 96-1972 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1939 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, North Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3589-3591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1939]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[NC-73-1-7225a; NC-77-2-7726a; FRL-5337-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, North
Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 15, 1994, and May 24, 1995, the State of North
Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources, submitted revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions include the adoption of new
air quality rules and amendments to existing air quality rules.
The major rule changes include the addition of new sections for
Vapor Return Piping for Stage II Vapor Recovery and Stage II Vapor
Recovery. Other major revisions to the SIP include the amendments of
regulation for Sources in Nonattainment Areas, Applicability,
Compliance Schedules for Sources in Nonattainment Areas, Alternative
Compliance Schedules, Exception from Compliance Schedules, Gasoline
Service Stations Stage I, Gasoline Truck Tanks, and Vapor Collection
Systems, Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks, and
Petition for Alternative Controls.
DATES: This action is effective April 1, 1996 unless notice is received
by March 4, 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:
Randy Terry, 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 material submitted by the NCDEHNR 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
[[Page 3590]]
Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345
Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Terry, 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. The telephone number is
404/347-3555 x4212.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 15, 1994, the State of North
Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources, submitted revisions covering the adoption of new
air quality rules, and amendments to existing air quality rules that
were the subject of public hearings held on February 24, and 28, 1994.
This submittal led to several EPA comments that were addressed in a
second submittal received by EPA on May 26, 1995. The second submittal
was the subject of a public hearing on February 1, 1995.
EPA is approving the following new rules and revisions of existing
rules in the North Carolina SIP. These new rules and revisions are
consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance.
.0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas
This rule has been amended to extend its coverage to a 1992 ozone
nonattainment area that has been redesignated attainment if a violation
of the ambient air quality standard occurs after the redesignation to
attainment. The coverage would be extended by the Director noticing in
the North Carolina Register that the area is in violation of the
ambient air quality standard for ozone.
.0902 Applicability
This rule has been amended to extend coverage of section 15A NCAC
2D. .0900 Volatile Organic Compounds, to a 1992 ozone nonattainment
area that has been redesignated attainment if a violation of the
ambient air quality standard occurs after the redesignation to
attainment. Permitted facilities within the area of violation that are
or may be subject to this section will also receive written
notification.
.0907 Compliance Schedules for Source in Nonattainment Areas
This rule has been amended to clarify its applicability.
.0909 Compliance Schedules for Sources in New Attainment Areas
This rule has been amended to provide compliance schedules by which
sources brought under the rules in section 15A NCAC 2D .0900, Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs), because of the Director's notice in the North
Carolina Register, can come into compliance.
.0928 Gasoline Service Stations Stage I
This rule has been amended to clarify Stage I control requirements.
The rule has been clarified to show that it applies to both the
delivery vessels and the station and that the delivery vessel and vapor
collection system at the station are to meet the pressure and vacuum
specifications of 15A NCAC 2D .0932 Gasoline Truck Tanks and Vapor
Collections Systems. An exemption has been added for farm tanks less
than 2000 gallons and for tanks used exclusively to test fuel
dispensing meters.
.0932 Gasoline Truck Tanks and Vapor Collection Systems
This rule has been amended to clarify that annual testing of vapor
collection systems is required only at bulk gasoline plants and bulk
gasoline terminals.
.0933 Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks
This rule has been amended to exempt external floating tanks of
welded construction equipped with a metallic type shoe primary seal and
a shoe mounted secondary seal from the secondary seal requirement and
not from the entire rule.
.0952 Petition for Alternative Controls
This rule has been amended to extend it to areas that become
subject to section 15A NCAC 2D .0900, VOCs, because of notice that the
area is in violation of the ambient air quality standard for ozone.
.0953 Vapor Return Piping for Stage II Vapor Recovery
This rule has been adopted to require piping for Stage II vapor
recovery controls to be installed at new gasoline service stations and
tanks in the 1992 ozone nonattainment areas. This rule contains the
specifications for Stage II vapor recovery piping.
.0954 Stage II Vapor Recovery
This rule has been adopted because it contains the specifications
for stage II vapor recovery controls. This rule is a contingency
measure that applies to all facilities, in areas that are or will be
designated nonattainment for ozone, that dispense gasoline unless the
facility has met the criteria to be exempted. The following gasoline
dispensing facilities are exempt from this rule.
1. Any facility which dispenses 10,000 gallons or less of gasoline
during calendar month;
2. Any facility which dispenses 50,000 gallons or less during
calendar month and is an independent small business marketer of
gasoline;
3. Any facility which dispenses gasoline exclusively for refueling
marine vehicles, aircraft, farm equipment, and emergency vehicles; or
4. Any tanks used exclusively to test the fuel dispensing meters.
In addition to the above revisions EPA is approving a revision
applicable to the following Sections: 15A NCAC 2D .0902, .0907, .0910,
.0911, .0952, and.0954. This revision adjusts final compliance dates,
for VOC sources located in nonattainment areas, to allow reasonable
time frames for implementation.
Final Action
EPA is approving the above referenced revisions to the North
Carolina 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 April 1, 1996 unless, March 4, 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 separate 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 April 1, 1996.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the 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 April 1,
1996. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
[[Page 3591]]
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 Act, 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
Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments
to perform certain duties. To the extent that 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. EPA has also determined that
this final action does not include a mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: November 3, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
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 II--North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(88) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(88) The VOC RACT regulations, NSR regulations, and other
miscellaneous revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
which were submitted on August 15, 1994. The Stage II regulations and
other miscellaneous revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan which were submitted on May 24, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0531, .0909, .0928, .0932, .0933, and
.0953 effective on July 1, 1994.
(B) Regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0902, .0907, .0910, .0911, .0952, and
.0954 effective on May 1, 1995.
(ii) Other material. None.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1939 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1937 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Florida
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3572-3575]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1937]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FL-064-1-7179a; FRL-5305-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Florida
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to Florida's State Implementation
Plan (SIP) to allow the State of Florida to issue Federally enforceable
state operating permits (FESOP). On December 21, 1994, the State of
Florida through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP), submitted a SIP revision fulfilling the requirements necessary
for a state FESOP program to become Federally enforceable. In order to
extend the Federal enforceability of Florida's FESOP program to
hazardous air pollutants (HAP), EPA is also approving Florida's FESOP
program pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990
(CAA) so that Florida may issue Federally enforceable state operating
permits for HAP.
DATES: This final rule is effective April 1, 1996 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by March 4, 1996. If the effective date
is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to Gracy R. Danois, at
the EPA Regional Office listed below. 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, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Twin Towers Office
Building, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gracy R. Danois, Air Programs Branch,
Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division, Region 4 Environmental
Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.
The telephone number is 404/347-3555, extension 4150. Reference file
FL-064-1-7179a.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of State Submittal
On December 21, 1994, the State of Florida through the FDEP
submitted a SIP revision designed to make certain permits issued under
the State's existing minor source operating permit program Federally
enforceable pursuant to EPA requirements as specified in a Federal
Register notice, ``Requirements for the preparation, adoption, and
submittal of implementation plans; air quality, new source review;
final rules.'' (see 54 FR 22274, June 28, 1989). Additional materials
were provided by FDEP to EPA in a supplemental submittal on April 24,
1995.
Florida will continue to issue permits which are not Federally
enforceable under its existing minor source operating permit rules as
it has done in the past. The SIP revision, which is the subject of this
document, adds requirements to Florida's current minor source operating
permit program, which allows the State to issue FESOP. This voluntary
SIP revision allows EPA and citizens under the CAA to enforce terms and
conditions of Florida's FESOP program. Operating permits that are
issued under the State's FESOP program that is approved into the SIP
and under section 112(l), will provide Federally enforceable limits to
an air pollution source's potential to emit. Limiting a source's
potential to emit through Federally enforceable operating permits can
affect the applicability of Federal regulations, such as title V
operating permits, New Source Review (NSR) preconstruction permits,
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permits
for criteria pollutants and federal air toxics requirements mandated
under section 112 of the CAA, to a source.
In the aforementioned June 28, 1989, Federal Register document, EPA
listed
[[Page 3573]]
five criteria necessary to make a State's minor source operating permit
program Federally enforceable and, therefore, approvable into the SIP.
This revision satisfies the five criteria for Federal enforceability of
Florida's FESOP program.
The first criterion for a state's operating permit program to be
Federally enforceable is EPA's approval of the permit program into the
SIP. On December 21, 1994, the State of Florida submitted through FDEP
a SIP revision designed to meet the five criteria for Federal
enforceability. The State supplemented their submittal with additional
information on April 24, 1995. Today's action will approve these
regulations into the Florida SIP, and therefore satisfy the first
criterion for Federal enforceability.
The second criterion for a state's operating permit program to be
Federally enforceable is that the regulations approved into the SIP
must impose a legal obligation that operating permit holders adhere to
the terms and limitations of such permits. Florida's program meets this
criterion in Rule 62-210.300(2)(b)1.d. of the Florida Administrative
Code (F.A.C.), by stating that ``each permit shall be conditioned such
that the owner or operator is legally obligated to adhere to the terms
and limitations of such permit, and of any revision or renewal of such
permit made in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph * *
*'' Moreover, F.A.C. 62-210.300(2)(b)1., states that only permits
issued, renewed or revised in accordance with the requirements of this
rule shall be deemed Federally enforceable. Hence, the second criterion
for Federal enforceability is satisfied.
The third criterion for a state's operating permit program to be
Federally enforceable is that the state operating permit program must
require all emissions limitations, controls, and other requirements
imposed by permits to be at least as stringent as any other applicable
limitations and requirements contained in the SIP or enforceable under
the SIP, and the program may not issue permits that waive, or make less
stringent, any limitations or requirements contained in or issued
pursuant to the SIP, or that are otherwise ``Federally enforceable''
(e.g., standards established under sections 111 and 112 of the CAA).
The first paragraph of F.A.C. Rule 62-210.300, requires that ``all
emissions limitations, controls, and other requirements imposed by such
permits shall be at least as stringent as any applicable limitations
and requirements contained in or enforceable under the SIP or that are
otherwise Federally enforceable''. Additionally, this paragraph
specifies that ``issuance of a permit does not relieve the owner or
operator of any emission unit from complying with applicable emission
limiting standards or other requirements of the air pollution rules of
the Department or any other applicable requirements under Federal,
state, or local law.'' Therefore, this section of Florida's permits
rule satisfies the third criterion for Federal enforceability.
The fourth criterion for a state's operating permit program to be
Federally enforceable is that limitations, controls, and requirements
in the operating permits must be permanent, quantifiable, and otherwise
enforceable as a practical matter. With respect to this criterion,
enforceability is essentially provided on a permit-by-permit basis,
particularly by writing practical and quantitative enforcement
procedures into each permit. EPA will review the Federal enforceability
of Florida's permits by using the policy memorandum entitled, ``Options
for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary Source Under
Section 112 and title V of the Clean Air Act (Act),'' dated January 25,
1995, which describes the types of limitations that reduce potential to
emit in a Federally enforceable manner. Florida's F.A.C. Section 62-
210.300(2)(b)1.e. provides for fully enforceable permit requirements.
Concerning permanence, F.A.C. Section 62-210.300(2)(b)(2), establishes
that once a facility obtains a synthetic non-title V permit, the
facility is subject to its requirements unless the source becomes a
title V source or the facility can demonstrate that is ``naturally
minor'' without any Federally enforceable limitations. Consequently,
Florida's rules provide for the degree of permanence necessary for
enforcement of the applicable provisions, and provide that the permit
limitations will be fully enforceable. Hence, the fourth criterion for
Federal enforceability is met.
The fifth criterion for a state's operating permit program to be
Federally enforceable is providing EPA and the public with timely
notice of the proposal and issuance of such permits, and providing EPA,
on a timely basis, with a copy of each proposed (or draft) and final
permit intended to be Federally enforceable. This process must also
provide for an opportunity for public comment on the permit
applications prior to issuance of the final permit. Florida satisfies
this criteria in F.A.C. Sections 62-210.300(2)(b)1.b., 62-
210.350(1)(a)2. and 62-210.350(4), which require the State to provide a
30 day public comment period of proposed permitting actions, and to
provide a copy of each proposed (or draft) and final permit to the
Administrator. EPA notes that any permit which has not gone through an
opportunity for public comment and EPA review under the Florida FESOP
program will not be Federally enforceable.
In addition to requesting approval into the SIP, Florida has also
requested approval of its FESOP program under section 112(l) of the Act
for the purpose of creating Federally enforceable limitations on the
potential to emit of HAP through the issuance of Federally enforceable
state operating permits. Approval under section 112(l) is necessary
because the proposed SIP approval discussed above only extends to the
control of criteria pollutants.
EPA believes that the five criteria for Federal enforceability are
also appropriate for evaluating and approving FESOP programs under
section 112(l). The June 28, 1989, Federal Register document did not
specifically address HAPs because it was written prior to the 1990
amendments to section 112, not because it establishes requirements
unique to criteria pollutants.
In addition to meeting the criteria in the June 28, 1989, document,
a FESOP program that addresses HAP must meet the statutory criteria for
approval under section 112(l)(5). Section 112(l) gives EPA authority to
approve a program only if it: (1) contains adequate authority to assure
compliance with any section 112 standards or requirements; (2) provides
for adequate resources; (3) provides for an expeditious schedule for
assuring compliance with section 112 requirements; and (4) is otherwise
likely to satisfy the objectives of the CAA. The January 25, 1995,
memorandum cited above, provides further discussion of these criteria
and of the extent to which limits on criteria pollutants such as
volatile organic compounds and particulate matter may be considered to
limit sources' potential to emit HAP.
EPA plans to codify the approval criteria for programs limiting the
potential to emit for HAP, such as FESOP programs, through amendments
to Subpart E of Part 63, the regulations promulgated to implement
section 112(l) of the CAA. (See 58 FR 62262, November 26, 1993). EPA
anticipates that these regulatory criteria, as they apply to FESOP
programs, will mirror those set forth in the June 28, 1989, Federal
Register document. The EPA also anticipates that since FESOP programs
approved pursuant to section 112(l) prior to the planned Subpart E
[[Page 3574]]
revisions will have been approved as meeting these criteria, further
approval actions for those programs will not be necessary.
EPA has authority under section 112(l) to approve programs to limit
the potential to emit of HAP directly under section 112(l) prior to the
Subpart E revisions. Section 112(l)(5) requires the EPA to disapprove
programs that are inconsistent with guidance required to be issued
under section 112(l)(2). This might be read to suggest that the
``guidance'' referred to in section 112(l)(2) was intended to be a
binding rule. Even under this interpretation, EPA does not believe that
section 112(l) requires this rulemaking to be comprehensive. That is to
say, it need not address every possible instance of approval under
section 112(l). EPA has already issued regulations under section 112(l)
that would satisfy any section 112(l)(2) requirement for rulemaking.
Given the severe timing problems posed by impending deadlines set forth
in ``maximum achievable control technology'' (MACT) emission standards
under section 112 and for submittal of title V permit applications, EPA
believes it is reasonable to read section 112(l) to allow for approval
of programs to limit potential to emit prior to promulgation of a rule
specifically addressing this issue. Therefore, EPA is approving
Florida's FESOP program so that Florida may begin to issue Federally
enforceable operating permits as soon as possible.
Regarding the statutory criteria of section 112(l)(5) referred to
above, EPA believes Florida's FESOP program contains adequate authority
to assure compliance with section 112 requirements because the third
criterion of the June 28, 1989, Federal Register document is met. That
is to say, Florida's program does not allow for the waiver of any
section 112 requirements. Sources that become minor through a permit
issued pursuant to this program would still be required to meet the
section 112 requirements applicable to non-major sources.
Regarding the requirement for adequate resources, EPA believes
Florida has demonstrated that it will provide adequate resources to
support the FESOP program. EPA expects that resources will continue to
be adequate to administer that portion of the State's minor source
operating permit program under which Federally enforceable operating
permits will be issued since Florida has administered a minor source
operating permit program for several years. EPA will monitor Florida's
implementation of its FESOP program to ensure that adequate resources
are in fact available.
EPA also believes that Florida's FESOP program provides for an
expeditious schedule to assure compliance with section 112
requirements. This program will be used to allow a source to establish
a voluntary limit on potential to emit to avoid being subject to a CAA
requirement applicable on a particular date. Nothing in Florida's FESOP
program would allow a source to avoid or delay compliance with a CAA
requirement if it fails to obtain an appropriate Federally enforceable
limit by the relevant deadline. Finally, EPA believes Florida's program
is consistent with the intent of section 112 and the CAA for states to
provide a mechanism through which sources may avoid classification as
major sources by obtaining Federally enforceable limits on potential to
emit.
Eligibility for Federally enforceable permits extends not only to
permits issued after the effective date of this rule, but also to
permits issued under the State's current rule prior to the effective
date of today's rulemaking. If the State followed its own regulation,
each issued permit that established a title I condition (e.g. for a
source to have minor source potential to emit) was subject to public
notice and prior EPA review. Therefore, EPA will consider all such
operating permits which were issued in a manner consistent with both
the State regulations and the five criteria as federally enforceable
upon the effective date of this action provided that any permits that
the State wishes to make federally enforceable are submitted to EPA and
accompanied by documentation that the procedures approved today have
been followed. EPA will expeditiously review any individual permits so
submitted to ensure their conformity with the program requirements.
With Florida's addition of these provisions and EPA's approval of
this revision to the SIP, Florida's FESOP program satisfies the
criteria described in the June 28, 1989, Federal Register document.
II. Final Action
In this action, EPA is approving Florida's FESOP program. EPA is
publishing this action 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 be effective
April 1, 1996 unless, within 30 days of its publication, 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 April 1, 1996.
The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. EPA has determined that
this action conforms with those requirements.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the 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 April 1,
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 Executive Order 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 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
[[Page 3575]]
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, 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. section 7410(a)(2) and 7410(R).
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 has elected to adopt the program provided for under
Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind the State
government to perform certain actions and also require the private
sector to perform certain duties. To the extent that the rules being
approved by this action would impose no new requirements, such sources
are already subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly,
no additional costs to the State government, or to the private sector,
result from this action. EPA has also determined that this final action
does not include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to the State government in the aggregate or to the
private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: September 20, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
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 K--Florida
2. Section 52.520 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(90) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(90) Revisions to Chapter 62-210, Stationary Sources--General
Requirements, submitted by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection on December 21, 1994 and April 24, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Revised Sections 62-210.300, ``Permits Required'', except 62-
210.300(2)(b)1., and 62-210.350, ``Public Notice and Comment'',
effective November 23, 1994. Revised Section 62-210.300(2)(b)1.,
effective April 18, 1995.
[FR Doc. 96-1937 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1935 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3575-3578]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1935]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IL112-1-6759a; FRL-5331-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 24, 1994, the State of Illinois submitted a site-
specific State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for Alumax
Incorporated's Morris, Illinois facility, as part of the State's
requirement under the Clean Air Act (Act) to adopt Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) rules controlling Volatile Organic Material
(VOM) for sources in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area which have
the potential to emit 25 tons of VOM per year and are not covered under
a USEPA Control Techniques Guideline (CTG) document. VOM, as defined by
the State of Illinois, is identical to ``volatile organic compounds''
(VOC), as defined by USEPA. Emissions of VOC react with other
pollutants, such as oxides of nitrogen, 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. Chicago area RACT rules are intended to establish
for each particular major stationary source in the Chicago ozone
nonattainment area the lowest VOC emission limitation it is capable of
meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably
available, considering technological and economic feasibility. RACT
controls are a major component of the Chicago ozone nonattainment
area's overall strategy to achieve and maintain attainment with the
ozone standard. A final approval action is being taken because the
submittal meets all pertinent Federal requirements.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request and USEPA's analysis
(Technical Support Document) are available for inspection at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Mark J. Palermo at (312)
886-6082 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Palermo at (312) 886-6082.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 182(b)(2) of the Act requires States with moderate and
above ozone nonattainment areas to adopt VOC RACT rules covering
``major'' sources not already covered by a CTG for all areas designated
nonattainment for ozone and classified as moderate or above. Under
Section 182(d), sources located in areas classified as ``severe'' are
considered ``major'' sources if they have the potential to emit 25 tons
per year or more of VOC.
On October 21, 1993, the State of Illinois submitted ``generic''
RACT rules covering non-CTG major sources in the Chicago severe ozone
nonattainment
[[Page 3576]]
area, which includes subparts PP, QQ, RR, TT, and UU of part 218 of the
35 Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), as a revision to the Illinois
SIP. This SIP revision is soon to be promulgated by USEPA.
On December 20, 1993, Alumax and the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (IEPA) filed a joint petition for an adjusted
standard for Alumax's Morris, Illinois facility with the Illinois
Pollution Control Board (Board). The adjusted standard petition sought
relief for the Morris facility's hot and cold aluminum rolling mills
from VOM control requirements found in part 218, subpart TT. Subpart TT
would require the Morris facility's rolling mills to meet an 81 percent
(%) reduction in uncontrolled VOM emissions. A public hearing on the
adjusted standard was held on March 1, 1994, in Morris, Illinois.
Alumax and IEPA contended that alternative control requirements for the
Morris facility are necessary due to Alumax's finding that placing add-
on control equipment to the facility's hot and cold rolling mills in
order to meet the 81% control requirement would be technically and
economically infeasible. On September 1, 1994, the Board adopted a
Final Opinion and Order, AS 92-13, granting the adjusted standard,
replacing the 81% control requirement with less stringent requirements,
which include lubricant selection and temperature control. The adjusted
standard also became effective on September 1, 1994.
The IEPA formally submitted the adjusted standard for Alumax on
October 24, 1994, as a site-specific revision to the Illinois SIP for
ozone. In doing so, IEPA intends to cover the Act's section 182(b)(2)
major non-CTG RACT requirement for Alumax's Morris, Illinois facility.
USEPA made a finding of completeness of this SIP submittal in a letter
dated November 30, 1994.
II. State Submittal
The site-specific SIP revision would alter application of
regulations contained within subpart TT, section 218.986 of the 35 IAC,
as they apply to the Alumax facility's hot and cold aluminum rolling
mills. The regulations in section 218.986 address ``other emission
units.'' The request for an adjusted standard deals solely with the
requirements found in subsections (a), (b), and (c), which require
installation and maintenance of emission capture and control equipment
which achieves an overall reduction in uncontrolled VOM emissions of at
least 81%, an independent requirement for coating lines (not applicable
in this case), or an alternative control plan which has been approved
by the IEPA and the USEPA.
The site-specific SIP revision submittal contains a study conducted
by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) which reviewed possible VOM
emission control strategies and associated costs for the Alumax
facility's hot and cold aluminum rolling mills. This study considered
five process modification and treatment technologies to demonstrate
RACT for the facility, including thermal incineration, oil absorption,
carbon adsorption, steam concentration, and rolling lubricant selection
with temperature control. Also considered was mill hooding, but hooding
is ineffectual without connection to an add-on control device. The
study found thermal incineration, oil absorption, carbon adsorption,
and steam concentration to be technically and economically infeasible
for the Alumax facility. Rolling lubricant selection with temperature
control, however, was found to be the most appropriate VOM control
method for the facility. The use of inherently low volatility rolling
oils as lubricants in the cold rolling mills, and oil and water
emulsions which maximizes water, instead of oil in lubricating the hot
rolling mills, could achieve lower VOM emissions in the Alumax
facility. Likewise, the study recommended temperature control of these
lubricants so that the vapor pressure exerted by the system does not
cause excessive VOM emission while maximizing the sensible heat
capacity of the system. The Board's adjusted standard reflects these
recommendations, by exempting the Alumax facility from the 81% control
requirement, and, instead, requiring that lubricant selection and
temperature control be used at the facility, along with requiring
certain monitoring, test methods, and recordkeeping/recording be
performed to demonstrate compliance. Based upon the ERM study, the
USEPA finds acceptable the justification for not requiring the use of
add-on control technology at the Alumax facility, and establishing for
the facility instead lubricant selection and temperature control as
RACT.
III. Analysis of Adjusted Standard
The adjusted standard's requirements for the Alumax facility are as
follows:
A. Hot Rolling Mill
The Alumax Morris facility's hot rolling mill must use an oil/water
emulsion rolling lubricant not to exceed 10%, by weight, of petroleum-
based oil and additives, and a maximum inlet sump rolling lubricant
temperature of 200 Fahrenheit (F). Compliance shall be demonstrated by
a monthly analysis of a grab rolling lubricant sample from the hot mill
and continuous temperature reading in the inlet sump feeding the mill.
The lubricants at the hot mill must be sampled and tested, for the
percentage of oil and water, on a monthly basis. ASTM Method D95-83
(Reapproved 1990), ``Standard Test Method for Water in Petroleum
Products and Bituminous Materials by Distillation,'' shall be used to
determine the percent by weight for petroleum-based oil and additives.
B. Cold Rolling Mills
The Morris facility's cold rolling mills must use low vapor
pressure lubricants composed of highly paraffinic oils and additives
(rolling lubricant) and a maximum inlet sump rolling lubricant
temperature of 150 degrees F. Stoddard solvent shall be the only
solvent additive used in rolling lubricants. Compliance shall be
demonstrated by a monthly analysis of a grab rolling lubricant sample
from each operating mill and continuous temperature readings of the
rolling lubricant temperature of the inlet sump feeding each mill.
All incoming shipments of the rolling lubricants for the cold mills
must be sampled and each sample must undergo a distillation range test
using ASTM method D86-90, ``Standard Test Method for Distillation of
Petroleum Products''. The initial and final boiling points of oils must
be between 440 and 650 degrees F. Also, for the cold mills, samples of
the as-applied rolling lubricants must be taken on a monthly basis to
verify, using ASTM D86-90, that the initial boiling point is greater
than 310 degrees F and no more than 10.0 % of as-applied rolling
lubricants shall boil off between the initial boiling point and 440
degrees F.
In addition, Stoddard solvent shall be the only solvent additive
used in the cold mill rolling lubricants. All incoming shipments of
Stoddard solvent must be sampled like the rolling lubricants using ASTM
method D86-90, and the initial and final boiling points of the solvent
additive must be between 310 and 390 degrees F.
C. Coolant Temperature Monitoring
Coolant temperature shall be monitored at all of the rolling mills
by use of thermocouple probes and computer data system which
automatically record values at least every five (5) minutes.
[[Page 3577]]
D. Recordkeeping and Reporting
All percent oil test results for hot mill lubricants, all
distillation test results for cold mill lubricants and Stoddard
solvent, all coolant temperature recording data, and all oil/water
emulsion formulations with identification of all oils and solvent
additives shall be kept on file, and be available for inspection by the
Agency (IEPA or USEPA), for three years.
If Alumax deviates from these control requirements for any reason,
it must submit a written report providing a description of the
deviation, along with a date and time, cause of the deviation, if
known, and any corrective action taken. Unless more frequent or
detailed reporting is required under other provisions, including permit
conditions, such written report shall be submitted, for each calendar
year, by February 15 of the following year.
E. Compliance Date
Alumax shall comply with the above requirements listed above by
October 31, 1994.
II. Final Rulemaking Action
The USEPA has undertaken its analysis of the site-specific SIP
revision request based on a review of the materials presented by Alumax
and IEPA, and has determined that the VOM control requirements
specified for the Alumax Morris facility's aluminum rolling mills does
constitute RACT and are fully enforceable. On this basis, the site-
specific SIP revision request for Alumax's Morris facility is
approvable.
This adjusted standard, AS 92-13, was adopted on September 1, 1994,
and became effective on September 1, 1994, and replaces the
requirements of section 218.986 of the 35 IAC as they apply to Alumax's
Morris, Illinois hot and cold rolling operations.
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
April 1, 1996, unless USEPA receives adverse or critical comments by
March 4, 1996. If USEPA receives comments adverse to or critical of the
approval discussed above, USEPA will withdraw this approval before its
effective date by publishing a subsequent Federal Register document
which withdraws this final action. All public comments received will
then be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking document. Please be aware
that USEPA will institute another comment period on this action only if
warranted by significant revisions to the rulemaking based on any
comments received in response to today's action. 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 April 1, 1996.
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 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).
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 April 1, 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, Incorporation by
reference.
[[Page 3578]]
Dated: October 27, 1995.
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)(118) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.720 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(118) On October 24, 1994, the State submitted a site-specific
revision to the State Implementation Plan establishing lubricant
selection and temperature control requirements for Alumax Incorporated,
Morris, Illinois facility's hot and cold aluminum rolling mills, as
part of the Ozone Control Plan for the Chicago area.
(i) Incorporation by reference. September 1, 1994, Opinion and
Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board AS 92-13, effective
September 1, 1994.
[FR Doc. 96-1935 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1933 Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans, and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3591-3599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1933]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[OH60-1-6377a; FRL-5410-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans,
and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USEPA is approving the ozone State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision and redesignation requests submitted by the State of
Ohio for the purpose of redesignating Franklin, Delaware, and Licking
Counties (Columbus area) from marginal nonattainment to attainment for
ozone; and revising Ohio's SIP to include a 1990 base-year ozone
precursor emissions inventory for the Columbus ozone nonattainment
area. Ground-level ozone, commonly known as smog, is an air pollutant
which forms on hot summer days which harmfully affects lung tissue and
breathing passages. The redesignation to attainment of the health-based
ozone air quality standard is based on a request from the State of Ohio
to redesignate this area and approve its maintenance plan, and on the
supporting data the State submitted in support of the requests. Under
the Clean Air Act, designations can be changed if sufficient data are
available to warrant such change, and a maintenance plan is put in
place which is designed to ensure the area maintains the ozone air
quality standard for the next ten years. The emissions inventory was
submitted to satisfy a Federal requirement that States containing ozone
nonattainment areas submit
[[Page 3592]]
inventories of actual ozone precursor emissions for the year 1990. Data
from emission inventories aide States in developing plans to meet and/
or maintain the ozone air quality standard.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request and USEPA's analysis
(Technical Support Document) are available for inspection at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. (It is recommended that you telephone William Jones at (312)
886-6058 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Jones at (312) 886-6058.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 were enacted (CAA). Pub. L. 101-549, codified at 42
U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Pursuant to Section 107(d)(4)(A) of the CAA,
Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties (Columbus area) were
designated as nonattainment for ozone, see 56 FR 56694 (November 6,
1991). At the same time, the Columbus area was classified as a marginal
ozone nonattainment area.
I. Emissions Inventories
Section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Act)
requires States with ozone nonattainment areas to submit a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual ozone precursor
emissions [which include volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen
oxides (NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO)] for each ozone
nonattainment area by November 15, 1992. This inventory must include
anthropogenic base-year (1990) emissions from stationary point, area,
non-road mobile, and on-road mobile sources, as well as biogenic
(naturally occurring) emissions in all ozone nonattainment areas. The
emissions inventory must be based on conditions that exist during the
peak ozone season (generally the period when peak hourly ozone
concentrations occur in excess of the primary ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--NAAQS). Ohio's annual ozone season is from April
1 to October 31.
A. Criteria for Evaluating Ozone Emissions Inventories
Guidance for preparing and reviewing the emission inventories is
provided in the following USEPA guidance documents or memoranda:
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Act,'' (Preamble) published in the April 16, 1992
Federal Register (57 FR 13498); ``Emission Inventory Requirements for
Ozone State Implementation Plans,'' (EPA-450/4-91-010) dated March
1991; a memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, entitled
``Public Hearing Requirements for the 1990 Base-Year Emissions
Inventories for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' dated
September 29, 1992; ``Procedures for the Preparation of Emissions
Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Volumes I and
II,'' (EPA-450/4-91-016 and EPA-450/4-91-014) dated May 1991;
``Procedures for Emissions Inventories Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile
Sources,'' (EPA-450/4-81-026d) dated 1992; and ``Supplement C to
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary
Point and Area Sources,'' (AP-42) dated September 1990.
As a primary tool for the review of the quality of emission
inventories, the USEPA has also developed three levels (I, II, and III)
of emission inventories checklists. The Level I and II checklists are
used to determine that all required components of the base-year
emission inventory and associated documentation are present. These
reviews also evaluate the level of quality of the associated
documentation and the data provided by the State and assess whether the
emission estimates were developed according to the USEPA guidance. The
Level III review evaluates crucial aspects and the overall
acceptability of the emission inventory submittal. Failure to meet one
of the ten crucial aspects would lead to disapproval of the emissions
inventory submittal.
Detailed Level I and II review procedures can be found in the USEPA
guidance document entitled ``Quality Review Guidelines for 1990 Base
Year Emissions Inventories,'' (Quality Review) (EPA-454/R-92-007) dated
August 1992. Level III criteria were attached to a memorandum from John
S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
entitled ``Emission Inventory Issue,'' dated June 24, 1993. The Level
I, II, and III checklists used in reviewing this emissions inventory
submittal are attached to a USEPA technical support document (TSD)
dated October 3, 1995.
B. State Submittal
On March 15, 1994, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA)
submitted a revision to the ozone portion of Ohio's SIP which consisted
of the 1990 base-year ozone emissions inventory for the following ozone
nonattainment areas in Ohio: Canton, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus,
Dayton, Toledo and Youngstown. The emissions inventory for the Columbus
area was deemed complete on September 13, 1994. The USEPA has completed
its review of the emissions inventory submitted for the Columbus ozone
nonattainment area. The 1990 base-year emissions inventories submitted
for all other areas are addressed in separate rulemakings.
Inventory Preparation Plan/Quality Assurance Plan
All States were required to submit an Inventory Preparation Plan
(IPP) to USEPA for review and approval by October 1, 1991. The IPP
documents the procedures utilized in the development of an emissions
inventory and contains the quality assurance and quality control plan
(QA/QC). On March 19, 1992, the State of Ohio submitted a final ozone
emissions IPP. On April 15, 1992, USEPA informed the State that the IPP
was not approvable at the time. The USEPA has worked with the State
since that time in order to correct deficiencies in the IPP. With the
March 1994 SIP revision request, the State submitted documentation as
to how the emissions inventory was prepared, as well as a quality
assurance report for the point, area, and mobile source portions of the
emissions inventory. The USEPA finds that this documentation and
quality assurance reports are acceptable to meet the requirements of an
IPP.
Point Source Emissions Inventory
The State submitted a point source emissions inventory of all
facilities that emit at least 10 tons per year (tpy) of VOC, or 100 tpy
NOX or CO in the nonattainment area. The State also included
sources that emit 100 tpy of VOC, CO, or NOX located in a 25-mile
boundary surrounding the nonattainment area. The point source emissions
inventory contains general facility information, number of sources,
production schedules and related emissions for each source, emissions
limitation, control efficiency and rule
[[Page 3593]]
effectiveness (RE), as applicable, and total emissions on an annual and
daily ozone season basis. (Rule effectiveness is a factor designed to
take into account the assumption that control equipment does not
operate at 100 percent all of the time of source operation, due to
maintenance, malfunction, etc.)
The following methods were employed by the State to identify
sources to be included in the 1990 base-year emissions inventory: the
1989 records for plants in the Emissions Inventory System (EIS) were
checked and plants meeting the VOC, CO or NOX criteria were
updated with 1990 emissions data; the air permit records were reviewed
for plants that may be candidates for inclusion in the point source
inventory; and current industrial directories and the Toxic Release
Information System (TRIS) database were checked for additional sources.
For facilities in the point source inventory, the State acquired the
emissions data by means of the following: mail surveys; plant
inspections; telephone calls; and air permit files.
The USEPA reviewed the point source emissions data by cross
referencing the point source inventory to the following sources: (1)
USEPA's guidance document entitled ``Major CO, NO2, and VOC
Sources in the 25-Mile Boundary Around Ozone Nonattainment Areas,
Volume I: Classified Ozone Nonattainment Areas,'' (EPA-450/4-92-005a)
February 1992; a 1990 TRIS Retrieval; and a 1990 Aerometric Inventory
Retrieval System (AIRS) Facility Subsystem (AFS) AFS--Emission to
Compliance Comparison Report. The State was notified of any potentially
missing sources or discrepancies in their reported emissions and
provided any corrections necessary.
Where a source was governed by a regulation or a control device,
the emissions limit was stated. A RE factor was then applied in the
determination of emissions. In accordance with USEPA guidance, a
standard RE factor of 80 percent was utilized unless otherwise
justified.
Area Source Emissions Inventory
Area source emissions were calculated using State-specific data as
well as USEPA guidance documents and technical memoranda developed for
various categories. The State utilized emission factors from
``Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories of Carbon
Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Volume I: General Guidance for
Stationary Sources, and IV: Mobile Sources,'' and AP-42 and provided
necessary documentation. The following area source categories were
included in the emissions inventory: Gasoline loading and distribution,
dry cleaning, degreasing, architectural surface coatings, traffic
markings, automobile refinishing, graphic arts, cutback asphalt,
pesticide application, commercial/consumer solvents, bakeries, waste
management practices (landfills), leaking underground storage tanks,
incineration of solid waste, stationary fossil fuel combustion, and
fires (structural, open burn, etc.). Vehicle refueling emissions were
included as part of the mobile source emissions inventory.
The area source inventory was reviewed utilizing USEPA's guidance
documents, and the Level I and II checklists, to ensure that all source
categories and their related emissions (and emission factors) were
included in the area source emissions inventory. Seasonal adjustments,
rule effectiveness, and rule penetration factors were applied as
indicated in the State submittal.
On-Road Mobile Source Emissions Inventory
In the development of the mobile source emissions inventory, the
State of Ohio utilized USEPA's mobile source emissions model, Mobile
5a, for the determination of the emission factors for all eight vehicle
types. Hard-copy documentation of the input and output files were
provided in the submittal. Where available, State-specific inputs were
utilized in the development of the input files for Mobile 5a.
The 1990 vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for each of the twelve
roadway types were developed by the Ohio Department of Transportation
(ODOT). ODOT maintains data on each section of highway in the State of
Ohio. VMT values were developed by ODOT and entered in the State Road
Inventory System (SRIS). The data from the SRIS was reported to the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by utilizing the Highway
Performance Monitoring System (HPMS).
The daily VMT (dVMT) for each roadway section was computed as the
annual average daily traffic (AADT) count for that section multiplied
by the length of the section. The total county DVMT is the sum of the
dVMTs for each of the twelve highway classifications in the county. The
total county DVMTS are then summed to determine the statewide total
DVMTS.
In order to determine consistency between the SRIS and the HPMS,
the statewide total DVMTS are then compared by functional class to the
HPMS submittal. For those classifications where traffic counts are
available for all or nearly all their sections, the totals between the
two systems were essentially the same. For those with more off-systems
roads, the resulting SRIS totals were larger than the HPMS's submittal
value (as expected). Correction factors were computed from the two sets
of totals and applied to the individual cells.
ODOT used permanent and portable vehicle classification equipment
to develop the vehicle mix by functional classification of highway.
Traficomp III vehicle classification equipment are used to support the
HPMS data collection effort. A software program called OHIO CONVERT
formats vehicle classification data into the FHWA Vehicle
Classification categories.
Off-Road Mobile Source Emissions Inventory
The State developed emissions estimates for the following off-road
categories according to USEPA guidance: aircraft, railroad locomotives,
recreational boating, off-road motorcycles, agricultural equipment,
construction equipment, industrial equipment, and lawn and garden
equipment. Documentation was provided as to the sources of emissions
factors utilized and were submitted in the area source emissions
inventory portion of the submittal.
The off-road mobile source inventory was reviewed utilizing the
Level I and II checklists and USEPA's guidance documents to ensure that
all source categories and their related emissions factors were included
in the off-road mobile source emissions inventory.
Biogenic Emissions Inventory
The State of Ohio determined the biogenic emissions for the
Columbus area according to a USEPA's guidance document entitled
``User's Guide to the Personal Computer Version of the Biogenic
Emissions Inventory System (PC-BEIS),'' (EPA-450/4-91-017) dated July,
1991. Meteorological data utilized in PC-BEIS was collected in
accordance with USEPA guidance. Data from the ten warmest days from the
period between 1988 to 1990 with the highest hourly peak ozone
concentrations in each ozone nonattainment area was collected and
reviewed. As required by USEPA guidance, the fourth highest daily
maximum ozone concentration for each nonattainment area was selected
and utilized in the model. The State provided hard copy documentation
as to the meteorological inputs utilized and PC-BEIS output files for
the biogenic emissions inventory for the Columbus nonattainment areas.
[[Page 3594]]
C. Summary of Ozone Emissions Inventory
A summary has been prepared of the emissions inventory for an
average ozone summer weekday for the Columbus ozone nonattainment area
as follows. The emissions are stated in tons per ozone season weekday:
Table 1.--Columbus Ozone Nonattainment Area, 1990 Base-Year Emissions
Inventory
[tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source type VOC CO NOx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources.......................... 16.44 8.52 13.79
Area Sources........................... 53.56 9.09 7.37
On-Road Mobile Sources................. 94.73 580.75 78.65
Off-Road Mobile Sources................ 47.62 438.21 89.31
Biogenic Sources....................... 105.92
--------------------------------
Totals............................... 318.27 1,036.57 189.12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Ozone Redesignation Request
The OEPA requested that the area be redesignated in a letter dated
January 7, 1994, and received by USEPA on January 14, 1994. The public
hearing information portion was transmitted to USEPA in a letter from
Robert Hodanbosi, Chief of the Division of Air Pollution Control, OEPA,
dated April 11, 1994, and received by USEPA on April 14, 1994.
The State provided monitoring, and emissions data to support its
redesignation request. The review criteria and a review of the request
are provided below.
A. Redesignation Review Criteria
Under the CAA, designations can be changed if sufficient data are
available to warrant such change. The CAA provides the requirements for
redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, Section
107(d)(3)(E) provides for redesignation if: (i) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS); (ii) The Administrator has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the area under Section 110(k); (iii)
The Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions; (iv) The Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of Section
175A; and (v) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under Section 110 and Part D.
The USEPA has provided guidance on processing redesignation
requests in documents including the following:
1. ``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Mary D. Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994.
2. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993.
3. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on
or after November 15, 1992,'' Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993.
4. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992.
5. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992.
6. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, June 1, 1992.
7. State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57
FR 13498), April 16, 1992.
B. Review of the Redesignation Request
1. The Area Must Have Attained the Ozone NAAQS
For ozone, an area may be considered attaining the NAAQS if there
are no violations, as determined in accordance with the regulation
codified at 40 CFR Sec. 50.9, based on three (3) consecutive calendar
years of quality assured monitoring data. A violation occurs when the
ozone air quality monitoring data show greater than one (1) average
expected exceedance per year at any site in the area at issue. An
exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly ozone concentration exceeds
0.124 parts per million (ppm). The data should be collected and
quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, and recorded in the
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) in order for it to be
available to the public for review.
The redesignation request for the Columbus area relies on ozone
monitoring data for the years 1990 through 1992, to show that they are
meeting the NAAQS for ozone. Ozone monitoring data for 1993 and 1994
continue to show that the area has reached attainment. The Columbus
area is currently meeting the requirement of attaining the ozone NAAQS.
The ozone monitoring network consists of three monitors. Two of the
monitors are located in Franklin County and one is located in Licking
County. No monitors are currently located in Delaware County; however,
the other monitors in Franklin and Licking Counties adequately
represent the entire Columbus area. Two exceedances of the ozone
standard have been monitored since 1990, both of these occurred at the
Maple Canyon monitor in Franklin County. At this site, the first
exceedance of 0.128 ppm occurred in 1990, and the second exceedance of
0.131 ppm occurred in 1991. Data stored in AIRS was used to determine
the annual average expected exceedances for the years 1992, 1993, and
1994. Data contained in AIRS have undergone quality assurance review by
the State and USEPA. Since the annual average number of expected
exceedances for each monitor during the most recent three years is less
than 1.0, the Columbus-Springfield area is considered to have attained
the standard.
2. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k); and
the Area Must Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110
and Part D
Before the Columbus area may be redesignated to attainment for
ozone, it must have fulfilled the applicable requirements of section
110 and part D. USEPA interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that,
for a redesignation request to be approved, the State must have met all
requirements that became applicable to the subject area prior to or at
the time of the submission of the redesignation
[[Page 3595]]
request. As the Columbus redesignation request was submitted to USEPA
in January, 1994, requirements that came due prior to that time must be
met for the request to be approved. Section 110 and Part D requirements
of the CAA that come due subsequent to the submission of the
redesignation request continue to be applicable to the area (see
section 175A(c)) and, if the redesignation is disapproved, the State
remains obligated to fulfill those requirements.
Section 110 Requirements
General SIP elements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of Title
I, Part A. These requirements include but are not limited to the
following: submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after
reasonable notice and public hearing, provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate apparatus, methods, systems and procedures
necessary to monitor ambient air quality, implementation of a permit
program, provisions for Part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD), and D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs, criteria for
stationary source emission control measures, monitoring and reporting,
provisions for modeling, and provisions for public and local agency
participation. For purposes of redesignation, the Ohio SIP was reviewed
to ensure that all requirements under the amended Act were satisfied.
On October 31, 1980, the USEPA conditionally approved Ohio's SIP under
Part D of Title I (as amended in 1977) (45 FR 27122). The Ohio VOC
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements, or
requirements for certain stationary sources to use technically and
economically feasible technology to reduce emissions of VOC, are being
addressed in a separate TSD and Federal Register actions, (59 FR 23796
and 60 FR 15235), except for a few outstanding requirements in the
Cleveland and Cincinnati areas. There are no outstanding VOC RACT
requirements for the Columbus area, as explained under ``Part D
Requirements'' below.
Part D Requirements
Under part D, an area's classification determines the requirements
to which it is subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Subpart 2 of part D establishes additional requirements for
nonattainment areas classified under table 1 of section 181(a). As
described in the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I,
specific requirements of subpart 2 may override subpart 1's general
provisions [57 FR at 13501 (April 16, 1992)]. The Columbus area was
classified as marginal. Therefore, in order to be redesignated to
attainment, the State must meet the applicable requirements of subpart
1 of part D--specifically sections 172(c) and 176, as well as the
applicable requirements of subpart 2 of part D that apply to marginal
areas such as Columbus.
(a) Section 172(c) Requirements
Section 172(c) sets forth general requirements applicable to all
nonattainment areas. Under section 172(b), the section 172(c)
requirements are applicable as determined by the Administrator, but no
later than 3 years after an area has been designated as nonattainment
under the amended CAA. Furthermore, as noted above, some of these
section 172(c) requirements are superseded by more specific
requirements in subpart 2 of part D. In the case of Columbus, the State
has satisfied all of the section 172(c) requirements necessary for
Columbus to be redesignated upon the basis of the redesignation request
submitted on January 7, 1994, and April 14, 1994.
The Columbus area was designated marginal nonattainment on November
6, 1991 (56 FR at 56694), effective January 6, 1992). In the case of
marginal ozone nonattainment areas, the section 172(c)(1) Reasonably
Available Control Measures requirement was superseded by the section
182(a)(2) RACT requirements, which did not require nonattainment areas
designated marginal after enactment of 1990 CAA amendments to submit
RACT corrections. See General Preamble for the Implementation of Title
I, 57 FR at 13503, and the VOC RACT Fix-up rulemaking published at 58
FR 49458. Thus, no additional RACT submissions were required for the
Columbus area to be redesignated. Also, by virtue of provisions of
section 182(a), which provides that any area designated as marginal
does no have to submit an attainment demonstration.
With respect to the section 172(c)(2) Reasonable Further Progress
(RFP) requirement, as Columbus has attained the ozone NAAQS no RFP
requirements apply. See General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I, 57 FR at 13564.
The section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement has been met
by the submission and approval (in this action) of the 1990 base year
inventory required under subpart 2 of part D, section 182(a)(1).
As for the section 172(c)(5) NSR requirement, USEPA has determined
that areas being redesignated need not comply with the NSR requirement
prior to redesignation provided that the area demonstrates maintenance
of the standard without part D NSR in effect. A memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October
14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements
for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' fully describes the
rationale for this view, and is based on the Agency's authority to
establish de minimis exceptions to statutory requirements. See Alabama
Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F. 2d 323, 360-61 (D.C. Cir. 1979). As
discussed below, the State of Ohio has demonstrated that the Columbus
area will be able to maintain the standard without part D NSR in effect
and, therefore, the State need not have a fully-approved part D NSR
program prior to approval of the redesignation request for Columbus.
Once the area is redesignated to attainment, the PSD program
(applicable to attainment areas), which has been delegated to Ohio,
will become effective immediately. The PSD program was delegated to
Ohio on May 1, 1980, and amended November 7, 1988. See 40 C.F.R.
52.21(u)
The section 172(c)(9) contingency measure requirements also do not
apply to marginal ozone nonattainment areas. See section 182(a) and 57
FR at 13571.
Finally, for purposes of redesignation, the Columbus SIP was
reviewed to ensure that all requirements of section 110(a)(2),
containing general SIP elements, were satisfied. As noted above, USEPA
believes the SIP satisfies all of those requirements.
(b) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
Section 176(c) of the Act requires States to revise their SIPs to
establish criteria and procedures to ensure that, before they are
taken, Federal actions conform to the air quality planning goals in the
applicable State SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies
to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or
approved under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act
(``transportation conformity''), as well as to all other Federal
actions (``general conformity'').
The USEPA promulgated final transportation conformity regulations
on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and general conformity regulations
on November 30, 1993 (58 FR 63214). Pursuant to section 51.396 of the
[[Page 3596]]
transportation conformity rule and section 51.851 of the general
conformity rule, the State of Ohio is required to submit a SIP revision
containing transportation conformity criteria and procedures consistent
with those established in the Federal rule by November 25, 1994, and
November 30, 1994, respectively. Because the redesignation request was
submitted before these SIP revisions came due, they are not applicable
requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and, thus, do not affect
approval of this redesignation request.
(c) Subpart 2 Requirements
Marginal ozone nonattainment areas are subject to the requirements
of section 182(a) of subpart 2. Ohio has met all of the applicable
requirements of that subsection with respect to the Columbus area. The
emissions inventory required by section 182(a)(1) is being approved in
this action. The emission statement SIP required by section
182(a)(3)(B) was approved on October 13, 1994. See 59 FR 51863. As
noted above, RACT corrections are not required under section 182(a)(2)
for areas such as Columbus that were not designated nonattainment until
after the 1990 CAA Amendments. Similarly, section 182(a)(2) does not
require the submission of inspection and maintenance SIP revisions for
Columbus since the area was not required to have an I/M program before
the enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments. Finally, the State need not
comply with the requirements of section 182(a) concerning revisions to
the part D NSR program in order for the Columbus area to be
redesignated for the reasons explained above in connection with the
discussion of the section 172(c)(5) NSR requirement.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Must Be Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From the SIP, Federal
Measures and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
The submittal demonstrates that the improvement in air quality is
due to emissions reductions due to the Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions
Control Program (FMVECP). This program is codified in 40 CFR Part 86.
Between 1988 and 1990 the area's volatile organic compound emissions
were reduced by 2.7 percent, due to FMVECP. This trend is expected to
continue in the area with a ten (10) percent reduction in overall
emissions by 1996 due to the FMVECP program and Federal restrictions on
gasoline volatility. Based on this reduction, the State has shown that
the improvement in air quality is based on permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions.
As was already discussed, this area is not required to adopt new
enforceable regulations in order to meet the CAA requirements of
section 110 and Part D. Therefore, USEPA believes that it is reasonable
to attribute the improvement in air quality to be due just to Federal
measures and it is not necessary in this case to link emission
reduction to enforceable regulations in the SIP.
4. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Meeting the
Requirements of Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
The maintenance plan is a SIP revision which provides for maintenance
of the relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after
redesignation. A September 4, 1992, USEPA memorandum from the Director
of the Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, to Directors of Regional Air Divisions regarding
redesignation provides further guidance on the required content of a
maintenance plan.
An ozone maintenance plan should address the following five areas:
the attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring
network, verification of continued attainment and a contingency plan.
The attainment emissions inventory identifies the emissions level in
the area which is sufficient to attain the ozone NAAQS, and includes
emissions during the time period which had no monitored violations.
Maintenance is demonstrated by showing that future emissions will not
exceed the level established by the attainment inventory. Provisions
for continued operation of an appropriate air quality monitoring
network are to be included in the maintenance plan. The State must show
how it will track and verify the progress of the maintenance plan.
Finally, the maintenance plan must include contingency measures which
ensure prompt correction of any violation of the ozone standard.
The State has included a copy of the base year 1990 emissions
inventory as the attainment inventory. The Columbus maintenance plan
provides emissions estimates from 1990 to 2005 for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and from 1990 to 2005 for oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) for the Columbus area. These emissions estimates have been
revised based on comments that Ohio received from USEPA, and the tables
reflect the revised emissions estimates. These estimates are consistent
with the base year 1990 emissions inventory for the area. The emissions
in the Columbus area are projected to decrease. The results of this
analysis show that the area is expected to maintain the air quality
standard for at least ten (10) years into the future.
The emissions summary for VOCs and NOX are provided below for
the Columbus area:
Table 2.--VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Mobile
Year Sources Area Sources Sources Totals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990......... 16.44 101.18 94.73 212.35
1996......... 17.52 107.47 63.36 188.35
2005......... 19.33 117.30 61.38 198.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3. NOX Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Mobile
Year Sources Area Sources Sources Totals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990......... 13.79 96.68 78.65 189.12
1996......... 14.35 102.62 68.85 185.82
2005......... 15.27 111.82 61.24 188.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3597]]
The State also commits to continuing the operation of the monitors
in the area. It will also track the maintenance of the area by
regularly updating the emissions inventory for the area. The emission
projections for 2005 are the budgets for transportation conformity.
The State commits to Automobile Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) as
the first contingency measure. This first measure would be triggered by
a violation of the NAAQS. The second contingency measure is Stage II
vapor recovery. If both measures are implemented, the area will choose
additional measures. The State also provided the following schedule in
Table 4 for implementing the I/M measure. Based on these measures, the
maintenance requirement has been met.
Table 4.--Schedule for Implementing I/M
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Action/Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency Triggered........ Initiate contingency I/M plan measures.
New legislative authority will not be
necessary for implementation.
Month 1/Day 1................ Begin revisions to Request for Proposals
(RFP). Coordinate with appropriate
agencies. Begin drafting rules for I/M
program, procedures and guidelines.
Month 2/Day 1................ Release RFP for centralized contractor.
Month 3/Day 1................ File draft rule rev. with Legislative
Serv. Commission.
Month 4/Day 15............... Public hearing on program rule revisions.
Month 4/Day 30............... Rules approved by Joint Committee on
Agency Rule Review. RFP responses for
centralized contract due.
Month 5/Day 1................ Begin evaluation of RFP responses.
Month 6/Day 15............... Award centralized contract. Seek
Controlling Board approval of
contract(s) by end of month 7.
Month 6/Day 30............... Program rule revisions become effective.
Month 7/Day 1................ Draft RFPs for Ohio EPA (BAR 90) approved
analyzer certification, if necessary,
and inspector certification training in
the Columbus metropolitan area.
Month 8/Day 1................ Release RFPs for inspector certification
training and analyzer certification
services.
Month 9/Day 15............... Proposals for analyzer certification
services (ACS) and inspector
certification training (ICT) due.
Month 9/Day 16............... Begin evaluation of proposals for ACS and
ICT.
Month 10/Day 1............... Award contracts for ACS and ICT.
Month 11/Day 1............... Begin licensing process for reinspection
stations.
Month 12/Day 1............... New Analyzer spec. issued. Begin
certifying four-gas analyzers.
Month 14/Day 1............... Inspector certification begins
Month 15/Day 1............... Begin final licensing of reinspection
stations.
Month 16/Day 1............... Initiate Public Relations program
including media blitz.
Month 16/D 15................ Initiate motorist notification mailings.
Month 17/Day 1............... Begin limited voluntary inspections at
centralized test stations. Reinspection
stations begin to perform retests.
Month 18/Day 1............... Begin mandatory testing at centralized
test stations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transport of Ozone Precursors to Downwind Areas
Preliminary modeling results utilizing USEPA's regional oxidant
model (ROM) indicate that ozone precursor emissions from various States
west of the ozone transport region (OTR) in the northeastern United
States contribute to increases in ozone concentrations in the OTR. The
State of Ohio has provided documentation that VOC and NOX
emissions in the Columbus area will remain below attainment levels for
the next ten years. If the monitored air quality levels exceed the
NAAQS, then the contingency plan will be triggered. In addition, Ohio
is required to submit a revision to the maintenance plan eight years
after redesignation to attainment which demonstrates that the NAAQS
will be maintained until the year 2015. The USEPA is currently
developing policy which will address long range impacts of ozone
transport. The USEPA is working with the States and other organizations
to design and complete studies which consider upwind sources and
quantify their impacts. The USEPA intends to address the transport
issue through section 110 based on a domain-wide modeling analysis.
Rulemaking Action
The USEPA is approving the 1990 base-year ozone precursor emissions
inventories for the Columbus nonattainment area as meeting the
requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA based upon the evidence
presented by the State and the State's compliance with the requirements
outlines in the applicable USEPA guidance. In addition, the USEPA is
also approving the redesignation of the Columbus ozone nonattainment
area to attainment for ozone since Ohio's request meets the conditions
of the CAA in section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation.
VI. Comment and Approval Procedure
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 of the Columbus area
emissions inventory shall be effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If USEPA
receives comments adverse to or critical of the approval discussed
above, USEPA will withdraw that approval before its effective date by
publishing a subsequent Federal Register document which withdraws this
final action. It should be noted, however, that an adverse or critical
comment on the approval of the Columbus area redesignation request or
maintenance plan will not result in a withdrawal of the approval of the
Columbus emission inventory, unless USEPA receives adverse or critical
comments on the emission inventory approval, as well. All public
comments received will 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 April 1, 1996.
[[Page 3598]]
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 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).
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 April 1, 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Hydrocarbons,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Note:--Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of Ohio was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: November 30, 1995.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
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 KK--Ohio
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding new paragraph (u) to read
as follows: Sec. 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(u) Approval--The 1990 base-year ozone emissions inventory
requirement of Section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act has been
satisfied for the Columbus ozone nonattainment area (which includes the
Counties of Delaware, Franklin, and Licking).
3. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties.
* * * * *
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PURPOSES--OHIO
1. The authority citation of Part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q, unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 81.336 ozone table is amended by revising entries for
the Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties to read as follows:
Sec. 81.336 Ohio.
* * * * *
[[Page 3599]]
Ohio--Ozone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated Area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Columbus Area
Delaware County............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
Franklin County............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
Licking County.............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. 96-1933 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1931 Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Prevention of Significant Deterioration: PM-10 Increments
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3582-3584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1931]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MD043-3005; FRL-5339-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Prevention of Significant Deterioration: PM-10 Increments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland which amends Code of Maryland
Administrative Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.01.01, 26.11.02.10 (C)(9), and
26.11.06.14. The intended effect of this action is to approve an
amendment to Maryland's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program. This revision makes these regulations consistent with the
currently effective version of 40 CFR part 52.21, including
establishing the maximum increases in ambient particles with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM-10) concentration allowed in an area above the baseline
concentrations. This action is being taken in accordance with section
110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), and in satisfaction of the June 3, 1993
promulgation of the PM-10 increment regulations requiring that existing
state PSD programs be modified to replace the total suspended
particulate (TSP) increments with the new PM-10 increment provisions.
[[Page 3583]]
DATES: This action is effective April 1, 1996 unless notice is received
on or before March 4, 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 may 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 Air,
Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107;
the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; and
Maryland Department of the Environment, 2500 Broening Highway,
Baltimore Maryland 21224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Donahue, (215) 597-2923.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: From 1991 to 1993, EPA promulgated
amendments to the regulations for the prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality from emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, and particulate matter. These regulations establish the maximum
increases, or increments, in ambient concentrations of these criteria
pollutants. In 1991, EPA amended the definition of significant at
Sec. 52.21(b)(23)(i) (56 FR 5506). In 1992, EPA promulgated two
revisions to 40 CFR Part 52.21. On February 3, 1992 EPA amended the
definition of VOC at Sec. 52.21(b)(30) (57 FR 3946), and on July 21,
1992 EPA adopted a New Source Review (NSR) exclusion for utility
pollution control projects and amended Sec. 52.21(b)(2), (21), and
(31)-(38) (57 FR 32314-32339).
On June 3, 1993, EPA promulgated regulations under Section 166 of
the Clean Air Act to prevent significant deterioration of air quality
due to emissions of particles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than
or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM-10), establishing increments
for PM-10. EPA added the PM-10 increments to the PSD program elements
in 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21, which replaced the original increments that
were based on total suspended particulate (TSP) (58 FR 31637). On July
20, 1993, EPA revised Sec. 52.21(l)(1) and (2), which adds Supplement B
to the ``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)'' (57 FR 38816).
Summary of SIP Revision
On July 17, 1995, the State of Maryland submitted a formal revision
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revisions consist of
changes to Maryland's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
Program at the Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations (COMAR)
26.11.01.01, 26.11.02.10 (C)(9), and 26.11.06.14, which update
references to 40 CFR Part 52.21 to the 1993 edition. The SIP would be
revised to remove references to the 1990 edition of the CFR and replace
those references with 1993.
EPA Evaluation
EPA evaluated Maryland's SIP revision and concluded the following:
(1) Updating the regulations provides updated definitions and model
guidelines, establishes a New Source Review (NSR) exclusion for utility
pollution control projects, and provides protection of the PSD
increment for PM-10; and (2) all of the applicable requirements of 40
CFR Part 51 and 52 are met. A more detailed evaluation is provided in a
Technical Support Document available upon request from the Regional EPA
office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
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 be
effective April 1, 1996 unless, by March 1, 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 notice 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 April 1, 1996.
Final Action
EPA is approving as revisions to the Maryland SIP changes to the
Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations (COMAR) which were
submitted on July 17, 1995. The submitted revision updates the
reference to 40 CFR 52.21. This actions make Maryland's SIP
regulations, COMAR 26.11.01.01, 26.11.02.10 (C)(9) and 26.11.06.14,
consistent with the currently effective version of 40 CFR 52.21.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
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 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, 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 flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act 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.
[[Page 3584]]
EPA has determined that the approval action proposed/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 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.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action to approve revisions to the Maryland SIP
which make Maryland's SIP regulations, COMAR 26.11.01.01, 26.11.02.10
(C)(9) and 26.11.06.14, consistent with the currently effective version
of 40 CFR 52.21 must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 1, 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, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Oxides.
Dated: November 3, 1995.
Stanley L. Laskowski,
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 V--Maryland
2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(119) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(119) Revisions to the Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations
for prevention of significant deterioration submitted on July 17, 1995
by the Maryland Department of the Environment:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter of July 17, 1995 from the Maryland Department of the
Environment transmitting revisions to the Maryland State Implementation
Plan.
(B) Amendments to regulations 26.11.01.01, 26.11.02.10 (C)(9) and
26.11.06.14 under the Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations
(COMAR) revising Maryland's prevention of significant deterioration
program to incorporate changes to 40 CFR 52.21 made between 1992 and
1993. The amendments were effective on May 8, 1995 in the State of
Maryland.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Remainder of July 17, 1995 State of Maryland submittal.
[FR Doc. 96-1931 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1930 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County Division of Air Pollution Control
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3578-3579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1930]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[AZ 13-2-7096; FRL-5297-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona State
Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County Division of Air Pollution
Control
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the Arizona
State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on
October 4, 1994. The revisions concern rules from the Maricopa County
Division of Air Pollution Control (MCDAPC). This approval action will
incorporate these rules into the federally approved SIP. The intended
effect of approving these rules is to regulate emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). The revised rules
control VOC emissions from solvent degreasing operations, petroleum
solvent dry cleaning, gasoline transfer, and the use of roadway
asphalt. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of these revisions into
the Arizona SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP
submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards and plan requirements for nonattainment areas.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on March 4, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA's evaluation report for
each rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule revisions
are available for inspection at the following locations:
Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street
SW., Washington, D.C. 20460.
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 3033 N. Central Avenue,
Phoenix, AZ 85012.
Maricopa County Division of Air Pollution Control, 2406 South 24th
Street, Suite E-214, Phoenix, AZ 85034.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia A. Bowlin, Rulemaking
Section, Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone:
(415) 744-1188.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 4, 1994 in 59 FR 50533, EPA proposed to approve the
following MCDAPC rules into the Arizona SIP: Rule 331, Solvent
Cleaning; Rule 333, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning; Rule 340, Cutback
and Emulsified Asphalt; and Rule 353, Transfer of Gasoline into
Stationary Dispensing Tanks. Rule 331 and Rule 333 were adopted by
MCDAPC on June 22, 1992. Rule 340 was adopted on September 21, 1992,
and Rule 353 was adopted on April 6, 1992. These rules were submitted
by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to EPA on
June 29, August 10, and November 13, 1992. These rules were submitted
in response to EPA's 1988 SIP-Call and the CAA section 182(a)(2)(A)
requirement that nonattainment areas fix their reasonably available
control technology (RACT) rules for ozone in accordance with EPA
guidance that interpreted the requirements of the pre-amendment Act. A
detailed discussion of the background for each of the above rules and
the nonattainment area is provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) cited above.
EPA has evaluated all of the above rules for consistency with the
requirements of the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA interpretation of
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance
documents referenced in the NPRM cited above. EPA has found that the
rules meet the applicable EPA requirements. A detailed discussion of
the rule provisions and evaluations has been provided in 59 FR 50533
and in technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX
office.
Response to Public Comments
A 30-day public comment period was provided in 59 FR 50533. EPA
received no comments regarding the NPRM.
EPA Action
EPA is finalizing action to approve the above rules for inclusion
into the Arizona SIP. EPA is approving the submittal under section
110(k)(3) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and Part D of
the CAA. This approval action will incorporate these rules into the
federally approved SIP. The intended effect of approving these rules is
to regulate emissions of VOCs in accordance with the requirements of
the CAA.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
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.
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 Part D of the Clean Air
Act. These rules may bind State, local, and tribal governments to
[[Page 3579]]
perform certain actions and also require the private sector to perform
certain duties. The rules being approved by this action will impose no
new requirements because affected sources are already subject to these
regulations under State law. Therefore, no additional costs to State,
local, or tribal governments or to the private sector result from this
action. EPA has also determined that this final action does not include
a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private
sector.
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 Executive Order 12866 review.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of Arizona was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: September 5, 1995.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
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 D--Arizona
2. Section 52.120 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(72) and by
adding paragraphs (c) (79) and (80) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(72) New and amended plans and regulations for the following
agencies were submitted on November 13, 1992 by the Governor's
designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Small Business Stationary Source Technical and Environmental
Compliance Assistance Program, adopted on November 13, 1992.
(B) Maricopa County Environmental Quality and Community Services
Agency.
(1) Rule 340, adopted on September 21, 1992.
* * * * *
(79) New and amended regulations for the following agencies were
submitted on June 29, 1992 by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Maricopa County Environmental Quality and Community Services
Agency.
(1) Rule 353, adopted on April 6, 1992.
* * * * *
(80) New and amended regulations for the following agencies were
submitted on August 10, 1992 by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Maricopa County Environmental Quality and Community Services
Agency.
(1) Rules 331 and 333, adopted on June 22, 1992.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1930 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-W
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1924 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the Forsyth County Air Quality Control Ordinance and Technical Code
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3586-3588]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1924]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[NC-075-1-7221a; FRL-5317-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the Forsyth County Air Quality
Control Ordinance and Technical Code
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 7, 1995, the Forsyth County Environmental Affairs
Department, through the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources, submitted recodifications to the Forsyth
County Air Quality Control Ordinance and Technical Code. These
recodifications make the Forsyth County Air Quality Control Ordinance
and Technical Code more directly comparable to the North Carolina Air
Quality Regulations.
DATES: This action is effective April 1, 1996 unless notice is received
by March 4, 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 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, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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. The telephone number is
404/347-3555 extension 4216.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 7, 1995, the Forsyth County
Environmental Affairs Department, through the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, submitted recodifications
to the Forsyth County Air Quality Control Ordinance and Technical Code.
These recodifications make the Forsyth County Air Quality Control
Ordinance and Technical Code more directly comparable to the North
Carolina Air Quality Regulations. EPA has not reviewed the substance of
these regulations at this time. These rules were approved into the
State implementation plan in previous rulemakings. The EPA is now
merely approving the renumbering system, as well as any new language,
submitted by the Forsyth County Environmental
[[Page 3587]]
Affairs Department. The EPA's approval of the renumbering system and
new language, at this time, does not imply any position with respect to
the approvability of the substantive rules. To the extent EPA has
issued any SIP calls to the State with respect to the adequacy of any
of the rules subject to this recodification, EPA will continue to
require the Forsyth County Environmental Affairs Department to correct
any such rule deficiencies despite EPA's approval of this
recodification.
Final Action
EPA is approving the above referenced revisions to the Forsyth
County Air Quality Control Ordinance and Technical Code. 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 April 1, 1996
unless, within 30 days of its publication, 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 April 1, 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
April 1, 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 Act, 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. Section
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 tribal governments in the aggregate
or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation
by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: October 3, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
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 II--North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(87) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(87) Recodifications to the Forsyth County Air Quality Control
Ordinance and Technical Code and other miscellaneous revisions to the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan which were submitted on March
7, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
Forsyth County Air Quality Control Ordinance and Technical Code
effective on December 19, 1994. Subchapter 3A, Air Quality Control;
Subchapter 3B, Relationship to State Code; Subchapter 3D, Air Pollution
Control Requirements; Subchapter 3H, Section .0600 Air
[[Page 3588]]
Quality Permits; and Subchapter 3Q, Air Quality Permits.
(ii) Other material. None.
[FR Doc. 96-1924 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1847 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District; South Coast Air Quality Management District
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3579-3581]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1847]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 144-3-7121; FRL-5331-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District; South Coast Air Quality Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on
March 28, 1995 and on April 20, 1995. The revisions concern San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 4403 and
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1164.
SJVUAPCD Rule 4403 controls volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
from components at light crude oil and gas production facilities and at
natural gas processing facilities. SCAQMD Rule 1164 covers VOC
emissions from semiconductor manufacturing operations. This approval
action will incorporate the rules into the Federally approved SIP. The
intended effect of approving these rules is to regulate VOC emissions
in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act). In addition, this action will serve as a final
determination that deficiencies identified by EPA in limited approval/
limited disapproval actions on August 30, 1993 and September 29, 1993
have been corrected and that any sanctions or Federal Implementation
Plan obligations are permanently stopped. EPA is finalizing the
approval of these rules into the California SIP under provisions of the
CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary
and secondary ambient air quality standards and plan requirements for
nonattainment areas.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on March 4, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of these rules and EPA's evaluation report for each
rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rules are
available for inspection at the following locations:
Rulemaking Section (A-5-3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street
SW., Washington, DC. 20460.
California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule
Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182.
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999
Tuolumne Street, Suite 200, Fresno, CA 93721.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, Rulemaking Section (A-5-3),
Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-
1200.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 28, 1995 in 60 FR 15891, EPA proposed to approve the
following rule into the California SIP: SJVUAPCD Rule 4403, Components
Serving Light Crude Oil and Gases at Light Crude Oil and Gas Production
Facilities and Components at Natural Gas Processing Facilities. Rule
4403 was adopted by SJVUAPCD on February 16, 1995. On
[[Page 3580]]
April 20, 1995 in 60 FR 19701, EPA proposed to approve SCAQMD Rule
1164, Semiconductor Manufacturing, into the California SIP. SCAQMD Rule
1164 was adopted on January 13, 1995. Both of these rules were
submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to EPA on
February 24, 1995.
The rules were submitted in response to EPA's 1988 SIP-Call and the
CAA section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement that nonattainment areas fix their
reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for ozone in
accordance with EPA guidance that interpreted the requirements of the
pre-amendment Act. A detailed discussion of the background for the
above rules and nonattainment areas is provided in the appropriate
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) cited above.
EPA has evaluated the above rules for consistency with the
requirements of the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA interpretation of
these requirements as expressed in the various EPA policy guidance
documents referenced in the NPRMs cited above. EPA has found that the
rules meet the applicable EPA requirements. A detailed discussion of
each rule and its evaluation has been provided in the NPRMs and in the
technical support documents (TSDs) available at EPA's Region IX office.
(TSDs dated March 7, 1995 and April 7, 1995, respectively.)
Response to Public Comments
A 30-day public comment period was provided in each NPRM. No
comments were received regarding SCAQMD Rule 1164. EPA received letters
from two commenters regarding SJVUAPCD Rule 4403. The comments, listed
below, have not affected EPA's decision to take final approval action
on this rule.
Comment: Annual inspection of flanges goes beyond RACT. Data are
available which demonstrate that flange leaks are rare, and therefore
annual flange inspections are not cost-effective. Flanges should be
exempted from inspection requirements.
Response: A requirement that flanges be inspected annually is
consistent with similar requirements in several other California
district rules covering this source category. District rules are not
precluded from requiring controls which may exceed Federal RACT. The
SJVUAPCD is conducting a field study to gather additional data on the
historical leak frequency of flanges in order to determine if the
annual flange inspection requirement should be amended. If the District
determines that this requirement should be amended, the District may
revise Rule 4403 and submit the revised version for incorporation into
the SIP.
Comment: The definitions of ``component'' and ``component type''
should be amended to reference pump seals and compressor seals rather
than the pump and compressor itself. The current definitions create
enforcement confusion as to how a leak on a pump or compressor device
will count towards the leak thresholds.
Response: SJVUAPCD is in the process of writing an enforcement
policy to clarify and formalize the District's inspection practices
regarding pumps and compressors.
Comment: Small oil and gas producers should be exempt from annual
instrument inspection due to cost-effectiveness considerations.
Response: This concern, along with supporting evidence, should be
presented to the SJVUAPCD in order for the District to determine if a
small producer exemption is appropriate.
Comment: Rule 4403 should be amended prior to EPA's final
rulemaking action.
Response: The decision to amend Rule 4403 lies with the SJVUAPCD.
The current submitted version of Rule 4403 is consistent with the CAA
and EPA policy. EPA has determined that it is appropriate to approve
this rule into the SIP.
EPA Action
EPA is finalizing action to approve the above rules for inclusion
into the California SIP. EPA is approving the submittals under section
110(k)(3) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a) and Part D of
the CAA.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
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.
Regulatory Process
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
Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments
to perform certain actions and also require the private sector to
perform certain duties. To the extent that the rules being finalized
for approval by this 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. EPA has
also determined that this final action does not include a mandate that
may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local,
or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
The OMB has exempted this action from review under Executive Order
12866.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: October 31, 1995.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
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 F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(215)(i)(A)(4)
and (c)(215)(i)(C) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(215) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Rule 1164, adopted on January 13, 1995.
* * * * *
(C) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
[[Page 3581]]
(1) Rule 4403, adopted on February 16, 1995.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1847 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-W
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1843 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3581-3582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1843]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IN57-1-7204a; FRL-5333-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 25, 1995, the State of Indiana submitted a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for open burning as part of the
State's 15 percent (%) Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan control measures for
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). VOC is one of the 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. These ROP
plans are intended to bring areas which have been exceeding the public
health based Federal ozone air quality standard closer toward the goal
of attaining and maintaining this standard. The control measures
specified in this open burning SIP revision prohibit residential open
burning in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties beginning June 1,
1995. Indiana expects that these measures will reduce VOC emissions by
921 pounds per day in Lake and Porter Counties, and 704 pounds per day
in Clark and Floyd Counties.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request and USEPA's analysis
(Technical Support Document) are available for inspection at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. (It is recommended that you telephone David Pohlman at (312)
886-3299 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Pohlman at (312) 886-3299.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 182(b)(1) of the Act requires all moderate and above ozone
nonattainment areas to achieve a 15 percent reduction of 1990 emissions
of volatile organic compounds by 1996. In Indiana, Lake and Porter
Counties are classified as ``Severe'' nonattainment for ozone, while
Clark and Floyd Counties are classified as ``Moderate'' nonattainment.
As such, these areas are subject to the 15 percent Rate of Progress
(ROP) requirement. On August 25, 1995, the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted a SIP revision request which
amends Title 326 Indiana Administrative Code Article 4 Rule 1 Section 3
(326 IAC 4-1-3), to include a ban on residential open burning in Clark,
Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties. In doing so, IDEM believes that these
control measures will help reduce VOC emissions enough to meet the 15%
ROP requirements. The USEPA is undertaking a separate analysis to
determine whether the 15% ROP requirement has been met as a result of
this and other States submissions, and will make that determination in
a separate rulemaking action.
Public hearings were held on this rule on May 4, 1994, September 7,
1994, and April 5, 1995, in Indianapolis, Indiana. The rules were
finally adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board on April 5,
1995, became effective on June 23, 1995, and were published in the
Indiana Register on July 1, 1995.
II. Analysis of State Submittal
The USEPA first approved an Indiana open burning rule on June 22,
1978, (43 FR 26721) as rule APC-2. (Indiana has since recodified APC-2
as 326 IAC 4-1.) Changes in the rule since USEPA's approval include the
addition of an exemption for prescribed burning by the Department of
Natural Resources for wildlife habitat maintenance, forestry purposes,
and Natural Area management (326 IAC 4-1-3(a)(8)), and an exemption for
United States Department of the Interior burning in order to facilitate
a National Park Service Fire Management Plan for the Indiana Dunes
National Lakeshore (326 IAC 4-1-3(a)(9)). These exemptions have been in
place on the State level for several years, but had not been submitted
for USEPA approval before the August 25, 1995, submittal.
The major change in the new rule is the addition of a ban on
residential open burning for Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties.
The rule continues to allow residential open burning, with certain
restrictions, in other parts of the State. There are no specific
requirements or criteria for the USEPA to use in reviewing a ban
against open burning. However, it is reasonable to conclude that this
rule will provide reductions in VOC emissions. Therefore, this rule is
approvable as part of Indiana's 15% ROP plan.
III. Final Rulemaking Action
Revised 326 IAC 4-1-3, contains a ban on residential burning in
Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties, and has been submitted as part
of Indiana's 15% ROP Plan for VOC. The USEPA has undertaken an analysis
of this SIP revision request based on a review of the materials
presented by IDEM and has determined that it is approvable because it
provides an enforceable mechanism for reducing VOCs and ozone. USEPA
will take separate action on Indiana's ROP Plan in a future Federal
Register document.
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
April 1, 1996, unless USEPA receives adverse or critical comments by
March 4, 1996. If USEPA receives comments adverse to or critical of the
approval discussed above, USEPA will withdraw this approval before its
effective date by publishing a subsequent Federal Register document
which withdraws this final action. All public comments received will
then be addressed in subsequent rulemaking. Please be aware that USEPA
will institute another comment period on this action only if warranted
by significant revisions to the rulemaking based on any comments
received in response to today's action. 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 April 1, 1996.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the
[[Page 3582]]
procedures published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR
2214-2225), as revised by a July 9, 1995, memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. 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).
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 April 1, 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, Incorporation by
reference.
Dated: October 31, 1995.
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 P--Indiana
2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(100) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of Plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(100) On August 25, 1995, Indiana submitted a regulation which bans
residential open burning in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties in
Indiana. The regulation allows residential open burning, with certain
restrictions, in other parts of the State, and describes other types of
open burning which are allowed in Indiana.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Indiana Administrative Code Title 326: Air Pollution Control
Board, Article 4: Burning Regulations, Rule 1: Open Burning, Section 3:
Exemptions. Added at 18 In. Reg. 2408 Effective June 23, 1995.
[FR Doc. 96-1843 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1841 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, North Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3588-3589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1841]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[NC-77-1-7728a & NC-74-1-7727a; FRL-5325-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, North
Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 3, 1995, and May 24, 1995, the State of North
Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources, submitted revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions adopt three source-specific
volatile organic compound rules; Thread Bonding Manufacturing, Glass
Christmas Ornament Manufacturing, Commercial Bakeries, delete textile
coating, Christmas ornament manufacturing, and bakeries from the list
of sources that must follow interim standards, define di-acetone
alcohol as a non-photochemically reactive solvent, and place statutory
requirements for adoption by reference for referenced ASTM methods into
a single rule rather than each individual rule that references ASTM
methods.
DATES: This action is effective April 1, 1996 unless notice is received
by March 4, 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: Randy Terry,
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, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Terry, 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. The telephone number is
404/347-3555 extension 4212.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 24, 1995, the State of North
Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources, submitted revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions affect several sections in
the ozone regulations. EPA is approving the revisions to sections 15A
NCAC 2D .0104 Incorporation by Reference, .0950 Interim Standards for
Certain Source Categories, .0955 Thread Bonding Manufacturing, .0956
Glass Christmas Ornament Manufacturing, and .0957 Commercial Bakeries,
because these revisions are consistent with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act and EPA guidance.
15A NCAC 2D .0104, Incorporation by Reference
These amendments involve the placement of statutory requirements
for adoption by reference for referenced American Society for Testing
and Materials methods (ASTM) into a single rule rather than each
individual rule that references ASTM methods.
15A NCAC 2D .0950, Interim Standards for Certain Source Categories
This section, is being revised to delete textile coating, bakeries
and Christmas ornament manufacturing from the list of sources that are
required to follow the interim standards. The sources removed have had
permanent rules adopted and are now subject to those requirements. The
final revision in this section adds a sentence that defines di-acetone
alcohol and perchloroethylene as a non-photochemically reactive solvent
for these interim standards.
The permanent rules adopted were 15A NCAC 2D .0955 THREAD BONDING
MANUFACTURING, .0956 GLASS CHRISTMAS ORNAMENT MANUFACTURING, and .0957
COMMERCIAL BAKERIES. These sections adopted rules to reduce the
emission level by requiring at least a 95% reduction by weight and/or
by installing a thermal incinerator with a temperature of at least 1600
F and a residence time of at least 0.75 seconds.
The submitted revisions also included amendments to 15A NCAC 2D
.0902 Applicability; .0907 Compliance Schedules For Sources In
Nonattainment Areas; .0910 Alternative Compliance Schedules; .0911
Exception From Compliance Schedules; .0952 Petition For Alternative
Controls; .0954 Stage II Vapor Recovery; .1401-.1415; Reasonably
Available Control Technology for Sources of Nitrogen Oxides (Nox
RACT); .1501-.1504 Transportation Conformity; and .1601-.1603; General
Conformity. These revisions are being addressed in separate Federal
Register Notices.
Final Action
EPA is approving the above referenced revisions to the North
Carolina 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 April 1, 1996 unless, within 30 days of its publication,
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 April 1, 1996.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the 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 April 1,
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
[[Page 3589]]
enforce its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2) of the Act, 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 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 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. section 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
Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments
to perform certain duties. To the extent that 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. EPA has also determined that
this final action does not include a mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Dated: October 20, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
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 II--North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(85) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(85) The VOC revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation
Plan which were submitted on March 3, 1995, and on May 24, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0955, .0956, and .0957 effective on
April 1, 1995.
(B) Regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0950, and .0104 effective on May 1,
1995.
(ii) Other material. None.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1841 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1840 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3584-3586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1840]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[NC-070-1-6962a; FRL-5295-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina: Approval of Revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 15, 1994, the State of North Carolina, through the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
(NCDEHNR) submitted revisions to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions are the adoption of new air
quality rules, amendments to existing air quality rules and repeals of
existing air quality rules that were the subject of public hearings
held on March 21 and 30, 1994. These major rule changes include the
addition of new sections 15A NCAC 2Q .0100 through .0111 General
Provisions, 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 through .0311 (except 302) Construction
and Operation Permits, and 15A NCAC 2Q .0600 through .0606
Transportation Facility Procedures. Other major revisions to the SIP
include the repealing of sections 15A NCAC 2H .0601 through .0607,
Purpose and Scope, and .0609 Permit Fees. Additional rule changes
include modification to existing rules to correct cross references.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective April 1, 1996 unless notice is
received by March 4, 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: Randy Terry,
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 material submitted by the NCDEHNR 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
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Terry, 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. The telephone number is
404/347-3555 extension 4212.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 15, 1994, the State of North
Carolina, through the NCDEHNR submitted revisions to the North Carolina
SIP covering the adoption of new air quality rules, amendments to
existing air quality rules and repeals of existing air quality rules
that were the subject of public hearings held on March 21 and 30, 1994.
These rules address permitting and transportation.
EPA is approving the following new rules and revisions of existing
rules in the North Carolina SIP. These new rules and revisions are
consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance.
[[Page 3585]]
Section 15A NCAC 2Q .0100 General Provisions
This Section contains rules that apply to the entire subchapter. It
requires a permit to be issued before constructing, operating or
modifying a source that emits a regulated air contaminant or before
entering into an irrevocable contract to construct, operate, or modify
an air cleaning device. It identifies two types of air quality permits:
the stationary source construction and operation air permit and the
transportation facility (parking lots, parking decks and airports)
construction and operation air permit. It also
1. Identifies activities exempted from air permit requirements;
2. defines terms used in this subchapter;
3. Provides information regarding where to obtain and file permit
applications and where to inspect referenced documents;
4. describes procedures to follow for requesting and declaring
confidential treatment of information;
5. authorizes the Director of the Division of Environmental
Management to delegate his permit issuance authority;
6. contains a compliance schedule for sources that have been
previously exempted from permitting but are now required to be
permitted;
7. requires permits to be kept on site; and
8. allows the owner or operator of a facility to request a
determination whether a particular facility or source requires a
permit.
Section 15A NCAC 2Q .0600 Transportation Facility Procedures
This section contains permitting procedures for transportation
sources (complex sources). These rules are, for the most part, a
recodification of rules contained in section 15A NCAC 2D .0800 and 2H
.0600. This section
1. Identifies who needs a permit under this section
2. defines terms used in this section;
3. describes items to be submitted with the application;
4. explains public participation procedures;
5. describes final action that may be taken on a permit
application; and
6. explains when a permit may be terminated, modified, or revoked
and reissued.
The following rules have been amended primarily to correct cross
references. Other changes are noted where applicable.
15A NCAC 2D .0101 Definitions
Rule .0101 has also been amended to change the definition of ``air
pollutant'' to one more consistent with the EPA definition
15A NCAC 2D .0501 Compliance With Emission Control Standards
Rule .0501 has been amended to include the paragraph previously
listed in 15A NCAC 2H .0603 that describes emissions trading
procedures.
15A NCAC 2D .0503 Particles From Fuel Burning Indirect Heat Exchangers
15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration
15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas
15A NCAC 2D .0532 Sources Contributing to an Ambient Violation
15A NCAC 2D .0533 Stack Height
15A NCAC 2D .0601 Purpose and Scope
Section 15A NCAC 2D .0800 Transportation Sources
The parts of this section that pertain to permitting procedures
have been transferred to section 15A NCAC 2Q .0600. Other changes
include the addition of new definitions for construction, modify (or
modification), owner (or developer) and transportaion facility. Two new
rules, 15A NCAC 2D .0805 Parking Facilities (explains in more detail
the types of parking facilities required to be evaluated and permitted)
and 15A NCAC 2D .0806 Ambient Monitoring and Modeling Analysis
(authorizes the Director to require modeling or monitoring), have been
added.
EPA is approving that the following rules in the North Carolina SIP
be repealed. These rules have been recodified into Section 15A NCAC 2Q
.0600 Transportation Facility Procedures.
15A NCAC 2H .0601 Purpose and Scope
15A NCAC 2H .0602 Definitions
15A NCAC 2H .0603 Application
15A NCAC 2H .0604 Final Action on Permit Applications
15A NCAC 2H .0606 Delegation of Authority
15A NCAC 2H .0607 Copies of Referenced Documents
15A NCAC 2H .0609 Permit Fees
This following sections are being addressed in separate Federal
Register Notices.
SECTION 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 Annual Emissions Reporting
SECTION 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction and Operating Permit
Final Action
In this notice, EPA is approving the revisions to the North
Carolina Environmental Management regulations listed above. This action
is being taken without prior proposal because the changes are
noncontroversial and EPA anticipates no significant comments on them.
The public should be advised that this action will be effective on
April 1, 1996. However, if notice is received by March 4, 1996 that
someone wishes to submit adverse or critical comments, this action will
be withdrawn and two subsequent notices will be published before the
effective date. One notice will withdraw the final action and another
will begin a new rulemaking by announcing a proposal of the action and
establishing a comment period.
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 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 April 1,
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 Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607 (b)(2)).
The OMB has exempted these actions from review under Executive
Order 12866.
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
[[Page 3586]]
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. Section
7410(a)(2).
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
Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments
to perform certain duties. To the extent that 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. EPA has also determined that
this final action does not include a mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: August 14, 1995.
Patrick M. Tobin,
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 II--North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(84) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(84) The VOC RACT regulations, NSR regulations, and other
miscellaneous revisions to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
which were submitted on August 15, 1994.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Addition of new North Carolina regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0805
and .0806 and 15A NCAC 2Q .0101 through .0111, and .0601 through .0607.
effective on July 1, 1994.
(B) Amendments to North Carolina regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0101,
.0501, .0503, .0530, .0531, .0532, .0533, .0601, .0801, .0802, .0803,
and .0804 effective on July 1, 1994.
(ii) Other material. None.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1840 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1835 Pay Under the General Schedule; Termination of Interim Geographic Adjustments
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3539-3544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1835]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Parts 530, 531, 534, 550, 575, 581, 582, and 630
RIN: 3206-AH09
Pay Under the General Schedule; Termination of Interim Geographic
Adjustments
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing interim
regulations to implement the termination of interim geographic
adjustments (IGA's) payable to certain Federal employees. The IGA's
were terminated by the President because the locality-based
comparability payments he authorized for January 1996 exceed 8 percent
in both of the two remaining IGA areas (New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA, and Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA).
DATES: The regulations are effective on January 1, 1996, and are
applicable on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or
after January 1, 1996. Comments must be received on or before April 1,
1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent or delivered to Donald J. Winstead,
Assistant Director for Compensation Policy, Human Resources Systems
Service, Office of Personnel Management, Room 6H31, 1900 E Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20415 (FAX: (202) 606-0824).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanne D. Jacobson, (202) 606-2858 or
FAX: (202) 606-0824.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 31, 1995, the President
transmitted to Congress a plan for fixing alternative levels of
locality-based comparability payments affecting General Schedule (GS)
employees in January 1996 under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 5304a. The
alternative plan provides an 8.05-percent comparability payment for the
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA, locality pay
area and an 8.15-percent comparability payment for the Los Angeles-
Riverside-Orange County, CA, locality pay area. These locality payments
will exceed the 8-percent interim geographic adjustment (IGA)
authorized for the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-
PA, and Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA, interim geographic
adjustment areas. Consequently, the President issued Executive Order
12984 of December 28, 1995, which includes no IGA pay schedules. This
action has the effect of terminating the IGA's previously established
for the New York and Los Angeles Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (CMSA's). These interim regulations implement the termination of
IGA's.
Section 302 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990
(FEPCA) (Pub. L. 101-509) authorized the President to establish IGA's
of up to 8 percent of basic pay for GS employees in geographic areas
with significant disparities between Federal and non-Federal pay. On
December 12, 1990, the President issued Executive Order 12736,
designating the (1) New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT
CMSA (changed to the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-
CT-PA CMSA as of December 31, 1992); (2) Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside,
CA CMSA (changed to the Los-Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA CMSA as
of December 31, 1992); and (3) San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA
as geographic areas in which IGA's should be paid. Payment of IGA's in
these geographic areas began in January 1991.
Interim geographic adjustments were intended to be an interim
measure pending the implementation of locality-based comparability
payments in January 1994. Because locality pay is to be phased in over
several years, section 302(d)(2)(A) of FEPCA provides that employees
receiving IGA's may not have their pay reduced as a result of the
implementation of locality pay. Therefore, the regulations governing
IGA's under 5 CFR part 531, subpart A, provided that an employee's IGA
entitlement terminates when his or her locality rate of pay exceeds his
or her IGA rate of pay.
In January 1995, the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA was
terminated as an IGA area because the locality payment for that area
exceeded 8 percent. (See Executive Order 12944 of December 29, 1994.)
Since locality pay will exceed 8 percent in the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA, and Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange
County, CA, IGA areas in January 1996, the President has terminated
IGA's for these areas, as well.
As a result of the termination of IGA's, OPM is removing 5 CFR part
531, subpart A, ``Interim Geographic Adjustments.'' However, because
some employees in the former IGA areas will continue to receive
``continued rates of pay'' (a form of saved pay established in January
1994 for employees who previously received an IGA on top of a worldwide
or nationwide special rate), we are retaining--in a new subpart G of
part 531--several provisions previously found in subpart A concerning
the administration of continued rates of pay.
These interim regulations also make conforming changes in other
parts of the regulations to reflect the termination of IGA's. For
example, the interim regulations revise the definition of rate of basic
pay in Sec. 550.103 relating to premium pay by removing the reference
to ``interim geographic adjustment'' and
[[Page 3540]]
adding ``continued rate adjustment'' to the list of payments included
in an employee's rate of basic pay for premium pay purposes.
Waiver of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Delay in Effective Date
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), I find that good cause exists
for waiving the general notice of proposed rulemaking. Also, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), I find that good cause exists to make this
amendment effective in less than 30 days. These interim regulations
reflect the termination of IGA's effective on the first day of the
first pay period beginning on or after January 1, 1996, as required by
the President's Executive Order 12984 of December 28, 1995.
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review
This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with E.O. 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that these regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they
will apply only to Federal agencies and employees.
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 530, 531, 534, 550, 575, 581, 582, and
630
Administrative practice and procedure, Alimony, Child support,
Claims, Government employees, Hospitals, Law enforcement officers,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Students, and Wages.
Office of Personnel Management,
James B. King,
Director.
Accordingly, OPM is proposing to amend parts 530, 531, 534, 550,
575, 581, and 582, and 630 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
PART 530--PAY RATES AND SYSTEMS (GENERAL)
1. The authority citation for part 530 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5305 and 5307; E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 316;
Subpart B also issued under secs. 302(c) and 404(c) of the
Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509),
104 Stat. 1462 and 1466, respectively;
Subpart C also issued under sec. 4 of the Performance Management
and Recognition System Termination Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-89), 107
Stat. 981.
2. In Sec. 530.202, paragraph (2) in the definition of aggregate
compensation is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 530.202 Definitions.
* * * * *
Aggregate compensation means the total of--
(2) Locality-based comparability payments under 5 U.S.C. 5304;
continued rate adjustments under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter;
or special pay adjustments for law enforcement officers under section
404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L.
101-509);
* * * * *
PART 531--PAY UNDER THE GENERAL SCHEDULE
3. The authority citation for part 531 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, and 5338; sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103-
89, 107 Stat. 981; and E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.
316;
Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5303(g), 5333, 5334(a), and
7701(b)(2);
Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553;
sections 302 and 404 of FEPCA, Pub. L. 101-509, 104 Stat. 1462 and
1466; and section 3(7) of Pub. L. 102-378, 106 Stat. 1356;
Subpart D also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5335(g) and 7701(b)(2);
Subpart E also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5336;
Subpart F also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305(g)(1), and 5553;
and E.O. 12883, 58 FR 63281, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 682;
Subpart G also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, 5305, and 5553;
section 302 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990
(FEPCA), Pub. L. 101-509, 104 Stat. 1462; and E.O. 12786, 56 FR
67453, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 376.
4. Subpart A consisting of Secs. 531.101-531.106 is removed and
reserved.
5. In Sec. 531.301, paragraph (1) in the definition of scheduled
annual rate of pay is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 531.301 Definitons.
* * * * *
Scheduled annual rate of pay means--
(1) The General Schedule rate of basic pay for the employee's grade
and step (or relative position in the rate range), including a special
rate for law enforcement officers under section 403 of the Federal
Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA) (Pub. L. 101-509), but
exclusive of a special salary rate established under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or
similar provision of law (other than section 403 of FEPCA), a continued
rate of pay under subpart G of this part, a special law enforcement
adjusted rate of pay under this subpart (including a rate continued
under Sec. 531.307), a locality rate of pay under subpart F of this
part, or additional pay of any kind;
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 531.304, paragraphs (a)(2) and (k) are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 531.304 Administration of special law enforcement adjusted rates
of pay.
(a) * * *
(2) A continued rate of pay under subpart G of this part;
* * * * *
(k) When an employee's special law enforcement adjusted rate of pay
under this subpart is greater than any applicable locality rate of pay
under subpart F of this part, a continued rate of pay under subpart G
of this part, or special salary rate under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar
provision of law (other than section 403 of FEPCA), the payment of the
rate resulting from the comparison required by paragraph (a) of this
section shall be deemed to have reduced the special pay adjustment for
law enforcement officers payable under section 404 of FEPCA, as
authorized by section 404(a) of FEPCA.
7. Section 531.306 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 531.306 Effect of special pay adjustments for law enforcement
officers on retention payments under FBI demonstration project.
As required by section 406 of the Federal Employees Pay
Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), a retention payment
payable to an employee of the New York Field Division of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation under section 601(a)(2) of Public Law 100-453,
as amended, shall be reduced by the amount of any special any
adjustment for law enforcement officers payable to that employee under
this subpart. For the purpose of applying this section, the amount of
the special pay adjustment for law enforcement officers shall be
determined by subtracting the employee's scheduled annual rate of pay
from his or her special law enforcement adjusted rate of pay.
8. In Sec. 531.602, paragraph (1) in the definition of scheduled
annual rate of pay is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 531.602 Definitions.
* * * * *
Scheduled annual rate of pay means--
(1) The General Schedule rate of basic pay for the employee's grade
and step (or relative position in the rate range), including a special
rate for law enforcement officers under section 403 of the Federal
Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA)
[[Page 3541]]
(Pub. L. 101-509, 104 Stat. 1465), but exclusive of a special salary
rate established under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law (other
than section 403 of FEPCA), a continued rate of pay under subpart G of
this part, a special law enforcement adjusted rate of pay under subpart
C of this part (including a rate continued under Sec. 531.307), a
locality rate of pay under this subpart, or additional pay of any kind;
* * * * *
9. In Sec. 531.606, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 531.606 Administration of locality rates of pay.
(a) * * *
(2) A continued rate of pay under subpart G of this part;
* * * * *
10. A new subpart G is added to read as follows:
Subpart G--Continued Rates of Pay
Sec.
531.701 Definitions.
531.702 Computation of hourly, daily, weekly, and biweekly
continued rates of pay.
531.703 Administration of continued rates of pay.
531.704 Effect of continued rates of pay on retention payments
under FBI demonstration project.
531.705 Reports.
Subpart G--Continued Rates of Pay
Sec. 531.701 Definitions.
In this subpart:
Continued rate of pay means a rate of pay first established in
January 1994 for an employee who previously received an interim
geographic adjustment on top of a worldwide or nationwide special rate
authorized under 5 U.S.C. 5305.
Employee means an employee in a position in whom subchapter III of
chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code applies, whose official duty
station is located in an interim geographic adjustment area and who is
receiving a continued rate of pay.
General Schedule means the basic pay schedule established under 5
U.S.C. 5332.
Interim geographic adjustment area means one of the following
Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (CMSA's), as defined by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), that was an interim geographic
adjustment area when continued rates of pay first became applicable in
January 1994:
(1) New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA;
(2) Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA; or
(3) San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA.
Official duty station means the duty station for an employee's
position of record as indicated on his or her most recent notification
of personnel action.
Sec. 531.702 Computation of hourly, daily, weekly, and biweekly
continued rates of pay.
When it is necessary to convert a continued rate of pay from an
annual rate to an hourly, daily, weekly, or biweekly rate, the
following methods apply:
(a) To derive an hourly rate, divided the continued rate by 2,087
and round to the nearest cent, counting one-half cent and over as a
whole cent;
(b) To derive a daily rate, multiply the hourly rate by the number
of daily hours of service required by the employee's basic daily tour
of duty;
(c) To derive a weekly or biweekly rate, multiply the hourly rate
by 40 or 80, as the case may be.
Sec. 531.703 Administration of continued rates of pay.
(a) An employee shall receive the greatest of--
(1) His or her rate of basic pay, including any applicable special
salary rate established under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law
or special rate for law enforcement officers under section 403 of
FEPCA;
(2) A continued rate of pay under this subpart;
(3) A special law enforcement officer adjusted rate of pay under
subpart C of this part, where applicable, including a special law
enforcement adjusted rate of pay continued under Sec. 531.307; or
(4) A locality rate of pay under subpart F of this part, where
applicable.
(b) A continued rate of pay is considered basic pay for the same
purposes as described in Sec. 531.606(b), as applicable.
(c) A continued rate of pay is paid only for those hours for which
an employee is in a pay status, except that it shall be included in a
lump-sum payment for annual leave under 5 U.S.C. 5551 or 5552.
(d) A continued rate of pay is included in an employee's ``total
remuneration,'' as defined in Sec. 551.511(b) of this chapter, and
``straight time rate of pay,'' as defined in Sec. 551.512(b) of this
chapter, for the purpose of computations under the Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938, as amended.
(e) At the time of an adjustment in pay under 5 U.S.C. 5303, a
continued rate of pay shall be increased by the lesser of--
(1) The dollar amount of the adjustment (including a zero
adjustment) made under 5 U.S.C. 5303 in the General Schedule rate of
basic pay for the employee's grade and step (or relative position in
the rate range); or
(2) The dollar amount of the adjustment (including a zero
adjustment) in the special salary rate applicable to the employee as a
result of the annual review of special rates required by Sec. 530.304
of this chapter.
(f) An increase in a continued rate of pay under paragraph (e) of
this section is not an equivalent increase in pay within the meaning of
section 5335 of title 5, United States Code.
(g) A continued rate of pay terminates on the date--
(1) An employee's official duty station is no longer located in one
of the interim geographic adjustment areas;
(2) An employee is no longer in a position covered by this subpart;
(3) An employee separates from Federal service;
(4) An employee's special salary rate under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or
similar provision of law (other than section 403 of FEPCA) exceeds his
or her continued rate of pay;
(5) An employee's special law enforcement adjusted rate of pay
under subpart C of this part exceeds his or her continued rate of pay;
(6) An employee's locality rate of pay under subpart F of this part
exceeds his or her continued rate of pay;
(7) An employee is reduced in grade; or
(8) An employee is no longer in a position covered by a nationwide
or worldwide special rate authorization (or, in the event of the
conversion of a nationwide or worldwide special rate authorization to a
local special rate authorization, a position covered by the new local
special rate authorization).
(h) Termination of a continued rate of pay under paragraph (g) of
this section is not an adverse action for the purpose of subpart D of
part 752 of this chapter.
(i) An employee's entitlement to a continued rate of pay is not
affected by a temporary promotion or a temporary reassignment.
Sec. 531.704 Effect of continued rates of pay on retention payments
under FBI demonstration project.
As required by section 406 of the Federal Employees Pay
Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), a retention payment
payable to an employee of the New York Field Division of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation under section 601(a)(2) of Public Law 100-453,
as amended, shall
[[Page 3542]]
be reduced by the amount of any continued rate adjustment payable to
that employee under this subpart. For the purpose of applying this
section, the amount of any continued rate adjustment shall be
determined by subtracting the employee's scheduled annual rate of pay
(as defined in Sec. 531.602 of this part from his or her continued rate
of pay.
Sec. 531.705 Reports.
The Office of Personnel Management may require agencies to report
pertinent information concerning the administration of payments under
this subpart.
PART 534--PAY UNDER OTHER SYSTEMS
11. The authority citation for part 534 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1104, 5307, 5351, 5352, 5353, 5376, 5383,
5384, 5385, 5541, and 5550a.
12. In Sec. 534.401, paragraph (b)(3) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 534.401 Definitions and setting individual basic pay.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) For the purpose of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, rate of
basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or administrative action
for the position held by an employee or, in the case of an employee
entitled to grade or pay retention, the employee's retained rate of
pay, before any deductions and exclusive of additional pay of any other
kind, such as locality-based comparability payments under 5 U.S.C. 5304
or special pay adjustments for law enforcement officers under section
404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L.
101-509).
* * * * *
PART 550--PAY ADMINISTRATION (GENERAL)
Subpart A--Premium Pay
13. The authority citation for subpart A of part 550 continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5304 note, 5305 note, 5541(2)(iv), 5548 and
6101(c); E.O. 12748, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 316.
14. In Sec. 550.103, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 550.103 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position held by an employee, including
any applicable special pay adjustment for law enforcement officers
under section 404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of
1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), locality-based comparability payment under 5
U.S.C. 5304, or continued rate adjustment under subpart G of part 531
of this chapter, before any deductions and exclusive of additional pay
of any other kind.
* * * * *
15. In Sec. 550.105, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 550.105 Biweekly maximum earnings limitation.
(a) * * *
(1) A locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; and
* * * * *
16. In Sec. 550.106, paragraph (c)(1) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 550.106 Annual maximum earnings limitation for work in connection
with an emergency.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(a) A locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; and
* * * * *
17. In Sec. 550.107, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 550.107 Special maximum earnings limitation for law enforcement
officers.
* * * * *
(a) 150 percent of the minimum rate for GS-15, including a
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special law
enforcement adjustment under section 404 of the Federal Employees Pay
Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509) and any special salary rate
established under 5 U.S.C. 5305, rounded to the nearest whole cent,
counting one-half cent and over as a whole cent; or
* * * * *
18. In Sec. 550.111, the first sentence in paragraph (d)(2) is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 550.111 Authorization of overtime pay.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) Performed by an employee, when the employee's basic pay exceeds
the minimum rate for GS-10 (including any applicable special rate of
pay for law enforcement officers or special pay adjustment for law
enforcement officers under section 403 or 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), respectively; a
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; and any
applicable special rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision
of law) or when the employee is engaged in professional or technical,
engineering or scientific activities. * * *
19. In Sec. 550.113, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 550.113 Computation of overtime pay.
(a) For each employee whose rate of basic pay does not exceed the
minimum rate for GS-10 (including any applicable special rate of pay
for law enforcement officers or special pay adjustment for law
enforcement officers under section 403 or 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), respectively; a
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; and any
applicable special rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision
of law), the overtime hourly rate is 1\1/2\ times his or her hourly
rate of basic pay.
* * * * *
20. In Sec. 550.114, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 550.114 Compensatory time off.
* * * * *
(c) The head of an agency may provide that an employee whose rate
of basic pay exceeds the maximum rate for GS-10 (including any
applicable special rate of pay for law enforcement officers or special
pay adjustment for law enforcement officers under section 403 or 404 of
the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509),
respectively; a locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C.
5304; and any applicable special rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or
similar provision of law) shall be compensated for irregular or
occasional overtime work with an equivalent amount of compensatory time
off from the employee's tour of duty instead of payment under
Sec. 550.113 of this part.
* * * * *
21. In Sec. 550.141, the second sentence is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 550.141 Authorization of premium pay on an annual basis.
* * * Premium pay under this section is determined as an
appropriate percentage, not in excess of 25 percent, of that part of
the employee's rate of basic pay which does not exceed the minimum rate
of basic pay for GS-10 (including any applicable locality-based
comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special rate of pay under
5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law).
22. In Sec. 550.144, paragraph (a), introductory text, is revised
to read as follows:
[[Page 3543]]
Sec. 550.144 Rates of premium pay payable under Sec. 550.141.
(a) An agency may pay the premium pay on an annual basis referred
to in Sec. 550.141 to an employee who meets the requirements of that
section, at one of the following percentages of that part of the
employee's rate of basic pay which does not exceed the minimum rate of
basic pay for GS-10 (including any applicable locality-based
comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special rate of pay under
5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law):
* * * * *
23. In Sec. 550.151, the second sentence is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 550.151 Authorization of premium pay on an annual basis.
* * * Premium pay under this section is determined as an
appropriate percentage, not less than 10 percent nor more than 25
percent, of the employee's rate of basic pay (as defined in
Sec. 550.103).
24. In Sec. 550.154, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 550.154 Rates of premium pay payable under Sec. 550.151.
(a) An agency may pay the premium pay on an annual basis referred
to in Sec. 550.151 to an employee who meets the requirements of that
section, at one of the following percentages of the employee's rate of
basic pay (as defined in Sec. 550.103):
* * * * *
Subpart B--Advances in Pay
25. The authority citation for subpart B of part 550 is revised to
read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5524a, 5545a(h)(2)(B); sections 302 and 404
of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Public Law
101-509), 104 Stat. 1462 and 1466, respectively; E.O. 12748, 3 CFR,
1992 Comp., p. 316.
26. In Sec. 550.202, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 550.202 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position held by an employee, including,
as applicable, annual premium pay under 5 U.S.C. 5545(c), availability
pay under 5 U.S.C. 5545a, night differential for prevailing rate
employees under 5 U.S.C. 5343(f), and any special pay adjustment for
law enforcement officers under section 404 of the Federal Employees Pay
Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509) or locality-based
comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304, but not including additional
pay of any kind.
Subpart G--Severance Pay
27. The authority citation for subpart G of part 550 is revised to
read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5595; E.O. 11257, 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp., p.
357.
28. In Sec. 550.703, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 550.703 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position held by an employee, including,
as applicable, annual premium pay for standby duty under 5 U.S.C.
5545(c)(1), availability pay under 5 U.S.C. 5545a, night differential
for prevailing rate employees under 5 U.S.C. 5343(f), and any continued
rate adjustment under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter, special
pay adjustment for law enforcement officers under section 404 of the
Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), or
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304, but not
including additional pay of any kind.
* * * * *
PART 575--RECRUITMENT AND RELOCATION BONUSES; RETENTION ALLOWANCES;
SUPERVISORY DIFFERENTIALS
29. The authority citation for part 575 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1104(a)(2), 5753, 5754, and 5755; sec. 302
and 404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub.
L. 101-509), 104 Stat. 1462 and 1466, respectively; E.O. 12748, 3
CFR, 1992 Comp., p. 316.
30. In Sec. 575.103, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 575.103 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position to which the employee is or will
be newly appointed before deductions and exclusive of additional pay of
any kind, such as locality-based comparability payments under 5 U.S.C.
5304 or special pay adjustments for law enforcement officers under
section 404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990
(Pub. L. 101-509).
* * * * *
31. In Sec. 575.203, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 575.203 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position to which the employee is being
relocated or, in the case of an employee who is entitled to grade or
pay retention, the employee's retained rate of pay, before deductions
and exclusive of additional pay of any kind, such as locality-based
comparability payments under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special pay adjustments
for law enforcement officers under section 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509).
* * * * *
32. In Sec. 575.303, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 575.303 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative action for the position held by an employee or, in the
case of an employee who is entitled to grade or pay retention, the
employee's retained rate of pay, before deductions and exclusive of
additional pay of any kind, such as locality-based comparability
payments under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special pay adjustments for law
enforcement officers under section 404 of the Federal Employees Pay
Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509).
33. In Sec. 575.402, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 575.402 Delegation of authority.
* * * * *
(b) A supervisory differential may not be paid on the basis of
supervising a civilian employee whose rate of basic pay exceeds the
maximum rate of basic pay established for grade GS-15 on the pay
schedule applicable to the GS supervisor, including a schedule for any
applicable locality rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. 5304, a special law
enforcement adjusted rate of pay under section 404 of the Federal
Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), or any
applicable special rate of pay under 5 U.S.C. 5305.
34. In Sec. 575.403, the definition of rate of basic pay is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 575.403 Definitions.
* * * * *
Rate of basic pay means the rate of pay fixed by law or
administrative
[[Page 3544]]
action for the position held by an employee before deductions and
exclusive of additional pay of any kind, such as locality-based
comparability payments under 5 U.S.C. 5304 or special pay adjustments
for law enforcement officers under section 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509).
* * * * *
35. In Sec. 575.405, paragraphs (c)(2) and (d)(2) are revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 575.405 Calculation and payment of supervisory differential.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) A locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304, a
continued rate adjustment under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter,
or a special pay adjustment for law enforcement officers under section
404 of the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L.
101-509);
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) A locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304, a
special law enforcement adjusted rate of pay under section 404 of the
Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), or
another locality-based payment under similar authority, excluding a
continued rate adjustment under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter;
* * * * *
PART 581--PROCESSING GARNISHMENT ORDERS FOR CHILD SUPPORT AND/OR
ALIMONY
36. The authority citation for part 581 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1673; 42 U.S.C. 659, 661-662; E.O. 12105,
43 FR 59465, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 262; E.O. 12953, 60 FR 11013.
37. In Sec. 581.103, paragraph (a)(24) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 581.103 Moneys which are subject to garnishment.
(a) * * *
(24) Locality-based comparability payments or continued rate
adjustments;
* * * * *
PART 582--COMMERCIAL GARNISHMENT OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' PAY
38. The authority citation for part 582 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5520a; 15 U.S.C. 1673; E.O. 12897.
39. In Sec. 582.102, paragraph (5) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 582.102 Definitions.
In this part--* * *
(5) In conformance with 5 U.S.C. 5520a, pay means basic pay;
premium pay paid under chapter 55, subchapter V, of title 5 of the
United States Code; any payment received under chapter 55, subchapters
VI, VII, and VIII, of title 5 of the United States Code; severance pay
and back pay under chapter 55, subchapter IX, of title 5 of the United
States Code; sick pay, and any other paid leave; incentive pay;
locality pay (including special pay adjustments for law enforcement
officers and locality-based comparability payments); back pay awards;
and any other compensation paid or payable for personal services,
whether such compensation is denominated as pay, wages, salary, lump-
sum leave payments, commission, bonus, award, or otherwise; but does
not include amounts received under any Federal program for compensation
for work injuries; awards for making suggestions, reimbursement for
expenses incurred by an individual in connection with employment, or
allowances in lieu of thereof as determined by the employing agency.
PART 630--ABSENCE AND LEAVE
40. The authority citation for part 630 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 6311; Sec. 630.301 also issued under Pub. L.
103-356, 108 Stat. 3410; Sec. 630.303 also issued under 5 U.S.C.
6133(a); Secs. 630.306 and 630.308 also issued under 5 U.S.C.
6403(d)(3), Pub. L. 102-484, 106 Stat. 2722, and Pub. L. 103-337,
108 Stat. 2663; subpart D also issued under Pub. L. 103-329, 108
Stat. 2423; Sec. 630.501 and subpart F also issued under E.O. 11228,
30 FR 7739, 3 CFR, 1974 Comp., p. 163; subpart G also issued under 5
U.S.C. 6305; subpart H also issued under 5 U.S.C. 6326; subpart I
also issued under 5 U.S.C. 6332, Pub. L. 100-566, 102 Stat. 2834,
and Pub. L. 103-103, 107 Stat. 1022; subpart J also issued under 5
U.S.C. 6362, Pub. L. 100-566, and Pub. L. 103-103; subpart K also
issued under Pub. L. 102-25, 105 Stat. 92; and subpart L also issued
under 5 U.S.C. 6387 and Pub. L. 103-3, 107 Stat. 23.
41. In Sec. 630.1204, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 630.1204 Intermittent leave or reduced leave schedule.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) An equivalent grade or pay level, including any applicable
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; special rate
of pay for law enforcement officers or special pay adjustment for law
enforcement officers under section 403 or 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), respectively;
continued rate of pay under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter; or
special salary rate under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law;
* * * * *
42. In Sec. 630.1208, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 630.1208 Protection of employment and benefits.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) An equivalent grade or pay level, including any applicable
locality-based comparability payment under 5 U.S.C. 5304; special rate
of pay for law enforcement officers or special pay adjustment for law
enforcement officers under section 403 or 404 of the Federal Employees
Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-509), respectively;
continued rate of pay under subpart G of part 531 of this chapter; or
special salary rate under 5 U.S.C. 5305 or similar provision of law;
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-1835 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1575 Revision to the Commerce Control List: Items Controlled for Nuclear Nonproliferation Reasons, Addition of Argentina, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, and South Korea to GNSG Eligible Countries
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3555-3568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1575]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Export Administration
15 CFR Parts 771 and 799
[Docket No. 960111006-6006-01]
RIN 0694-AB29
Revision to the Commerce Control List: Items Controlled for
Nuclear Nonproliferation Reasons, Addition of Argentina, New Zealand,
Poland, South Africa, and South Korea to GNSG Eligible Countries
AGENCY: Bureau of Export Administration, Commerce.
ACTION: Interim rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) maintains the
Commerce Control List (CCL), which identifies those items subject to
the Export Administration Regulations. The items on the CCL that are
subject to nuclear nonproliferation controls are referred to as the
Nuclear Referral List (NRL). This interim rule amends a number of
Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) on the CCL in order to
make the NRL conform more closely with the items contained in the Annex
to the ``Nuclear-Related Dual-Use Equipment, Materials, and Related
Technology List'' (the Annex) published by the International Atomic
Energy Agency and adhered to by the United States and other subscribing
governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
In addition, this rule removes Poland from General License GNSG
national security item country restrictions. In May 1994, Poland was
moved from Country Group W to Country Group V to conform with changes
in licensing policies for national security-based proscribed countries.
Lastly, this rule adds Argentina, New Zealand, South Africa and
South Korea to the countries that are eligible to receive exports under
General License GNSG, because they were admitted to the Nuclear
Suppliers Group. The subscribing governments have agreed to establish
export licensing procedures for the transfer of items identified on the
Annex.
While some of the changes in this rule increase the validated
license requirements for certain commodities and technology, the fact
that other member countries of the Nuclear Suppliers Group have agreed
to implement equivalent export licensing procedures for these items and
the addition of GNSG eligible countries should limit the economic
impact on U.S. exporters.
DATES: This rule is effective February 1, 1996. Comments must be
received by March 4, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Written comments (six copies) should be sent to Sharron
Cook, Department of Commerce, Bureau of Export Administration, Office
of Exporter Services, Regulation Policy Division, P.O. Box 273,
Washington, DC 20044.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions of a general nature,
call Sharron Cook, Regulatory Policy Division, at (202) 482-2440.
For questions of a technical nature, the following persons in the
Bureau of Export Administration are available:
Category 1: Jeff Tripp--(202) 482-4188
Category 2: George Loh--(202) 482-3570
Category 3: Robert Lerner--(202) 482-3710
Category 4: Joseph Young--(202) 482-4197
Category 5: Dale Jensen--(202) 482-4188
Category 6: Joseph Chuchla--(202) 482-4188
Categories 7, 8 and 9: Steve Clagett--(202) 482-4188
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This rule amends a number of entries on the Commerce Control List
(CCL) by revising the items that are subject to nuclear non-
proliferation controls, i.e., the Nuclear Referral List (NRL). As more
fully described in Sec. 778.2 of the EAR, NRL items are defined as
those ``that could be of significance for nuclear explosive purposes if
used for activities other than those authorized at the time of
export''. The changes made by this rule are intended to revise the NRL
to conform more closely with the items contained in the Annex to the
``Nuclear-Related Dual-Use Equipment, Materials, and Related Technology
List'' (the Annex), as published by the International Atomic Energy
Agency in INFCIRC/254/Part 2. The adherents to INFCIRC/254/Part 2,
which include the Nuclear Suppliers Guidelines, have agreed to
establish export licensing procedures for the transfer of items
identified in the Annex.
In addition, this rule removes Poland from General License GNSG
national security item country restrictions. There are some ECCNs that
have both National Security (NS) and Nuclear Proliferation (NP) reasons
for control. For these ECCNs, GNSG eligibility stated ``Yes, except
Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, or Russia'', i.e., all NP items in that ECCN
were eligible for General License GNSG to all GNSG eligible countries,
except Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, or Russia. Although Poland is a NSG
member, the more restrictive control, in this case NS, was applied. In
May 1994, Poland was moved from Country Group W to Country Group V to
conform with changes in licensing policies for proscribed countries.
Therefore, NS reasons for control no longer apply to Poland and GNSG
privileges now extend to all ECCNs that have both NS and NP controls
for Poland.
Lastly, this rule will add Argentina, New Zealand, South Africa,
and South Korea to the countries that are eligible to receive exports
under General License GNSG, because they were admitted to the Nuclear
Suppliers Group. General License GNSG permits certain items subject to
nuclear nonproliferation controls to be exported under general license
to a number of countries whose governments have subscribed to the Annex
to the ``Guidelines for Transfers of Nuclear-Related Dual-Use
Equipment, Material,
[[Page 3556]]
and Related Technology'' (the Annex) published by the International
Atomic Energy Agency and adhered to by the United States and other
subscribing governments. The subscribing governments have agreed to
establish export licensing procedures for the transfer of items
identified on the Annex.
Saving Clause
Shipments of items removed from general license authorizations as a
result of this regulatory action that were on dock for loading, on
lighter, laden aboard an exporting carrier, or en route aboard carrier
to a port of export pursuant to actual orders for export before
February 15, 1996 may be exported under the previous general license
provisions up to and including February 29, 1996. Any such items not
actually exported before midnight, February 29, 1996, require a
validated export license in accordance with this regulation.
Summary of ECCNs Added and Revised by This Rule
The following listing is intended to serve as a guide to the
revisions to the Commerce Control List contained in this rule. It is
not a complete summary of all the CCL changes made by this rule.
Specific questions concerning these changes should be answered by
referring to the actual entries in the CCL.
I. The following ECCNs are amended to revise the items subject to
nuclear nonproliferation controls (Unless specifically stated the scope
of the ECCN is not revised):
1A46B Aluminum and titanium alloys in the form of tubes or solid
forms; a clarification to scope of control of solid forms was added
1B16A Plants for the production of uranium hexafluoride (UF6)
and specially designed or prepared equipment (including UF6
purification equipment); Poland was added to GNSG eligibility
1B17 Electrolytic cells for the production of fluorine with a
production capacity greater than 250 grams of fluorine per hour;
Poland was added to GNSG eligibility
1B50B Furnaces; the ECCN title is expanded to include ``(inert gas)
induction'' furnaces and clarifications are added that define which
furnaces are controlled in paragraph (a)--result will be a decrease
in scope of controls
1B51B Pressure sensing elements/measuring instruments; the entry
was restructured to remove controls on differential pressure
transducers and stainless steel was removed as a material of
construction--result will be a decontrol in these areas
1B52B Water-hydrogen sulfide exchange tray columns; materials of
construction is clarified
1B53B Hydrogen-cryogenic distillation columns; materials of
construction is clarified
1B54B Ammonia synthesis converters; clarification is made to the
entry and a technical note is removed
1B58B Facilities or plants for prod/recovery/extract/concentration/
handling of tritium; the entry is reorganized for better clarity
1C10A ``Fibrous and filamentary materials'' that may be used in
organic ``matrix'', metallic ``matrix'' or carbon ``matrix''
``composite'' structures or laminates; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility and GCT is corrected to state ``Yes, except NP items''
1C19A Items on the International Atomic Energy List (e.g.,
zirconium, nickel powder, lithium, beryllium, wet-proofed platinized
catalysts, hafnium); Poland is added to GNSG eligibility; the scope
is narrowed by applying the hafnium content parameter to all entries
of Zirconium in paragraph (a); in paragraph (b), pertaining to
porous nickel metal, the exception is increased from 930 cm\2\ to
1000 cm\2\ per sheet and a technical note is revised; and in
paragraph (d), an exception for bore-hole logging devices and Beryl
(silicate of beryllium and aluminum) in the form of emeralds or
aquamarines is added--the result of these changes will be a decrease
in licensing requirements
1C50B Fibrous and filamentary materials not controlled by 1C10; an
exception for certain aramid ``fibrous or filamentary materials'' is
added--result will be a decrease in licenses; the controls on
prepregs is clarified; and definitions are added to the technical
note
1C54B Alpha-emitting radionuclides; minor clarifications are made
to the entry
1C55B Helium isotopically enriched in the helium-3 isotope; the
entry is restructured for clarification purposes
1C58B Radium-226; the entry is restructured for clarification
purposes
1D01A ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the
``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of equipment controlled
by 1B01, 1B02, 1B03, 1B16, 1B17, or 1B18; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
1E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' or ``production'' of equipment or materials
controlled by 1A01.b, 1A01.c, 1A02, 1A03, 1B01, 1B02, 1B03, 1B18,
1C01, 1C02, 1C03, 1C04, 1C05, 1C06, 1C07, 1C08, 1C09, 1C10, or 1C18;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
1E19A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of equipment or
materials controlled by 1B16, 1B17, or 1C19; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
1E41B Technology for items controlled by 1A44, 1A45, 1A46, 1A47,
1A50, 1B41, 1B42, 1B50, 1B51, 1B52, 1B53, 1B54, 1B58, 1B59, 1C48,
1C49, 1C50, 1C51, 1C52, 1C53, 1C54, 1C55, 1C56, 1C57, or 1C58; 1B55
and 1B57 are added to entry title to reflect new ECCNs
2A19A Commodities on the International Atomic Energy List (e.g.,
power generating and/or propulsion equipment, neutron generator
systems, and valves for gaseous diffusion separation process);
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
2A48B Valves not controlled by 2A19.c that are made of or lined
with aluminum, aluminum alloy, nickel, or alloy containing 60
percent or more nickel; revisions are made to the title and
technical note for clarification purposes
2A50B Equipment related to nuclear material handling and processing
and to nuclear reactors; in paragraph (c), a clarification is made
to the parameters; in paragraph (e), the paragraph is restructured
and a note added for clarification purposes
2A52B Vacuum pumps; the title is corrected, and a technical note
added for clarification
2B01A ``Numerical control'' units, ``motion control boards''
specially designed for ``numerical control'' applications on machine
tools, machine tools, and specially designed components therefor;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility and a note added to the
Requirement section
2B06A Dimensional inspection or measuring systems or equipment;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility and a note added to the
Requirement section
2B07A Robots, controllers, and end-effectors; Poland is added to
GNSG eligibility
2B08A Assemblies, units or inserts for machine tools; NP controls
have been removed because of NSG October 1995 agreement on machine
tools
2B09A Specially designed printed circuit boards with mounted
components and software therefor, or ``compound rotary tables'' or
``tilting spindles'', capable of upgrading, according to the
manufacturer's specifications, ``numerical control'' units, machine
tools or feed-back devices to or above the levels specified in ECCNs
2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, and 2B08; NP controls have
been removed because of NSG October 1995 agreement on machine tools
2B41B ``Numerically controlled'' machine tools not controlled by
ECCN 2B01A; turning capacity parameter has been increased from 2m to
2.5m
2B50B Spin-forming and flow-forming machines; a new parameter and
note are added to clarify the scope of control and the scope of GNSG
eligibility is amended to reflect the clarifying revisions made to
the list of items controlled
2D01A Software for equipment controlled by 2A01, 2A02, 2A03, 2A04,
2A05, 2A06, 2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, 2B08, or 2B09;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility and GNSG eligibility is
clarified to include revisions made by this rule
2D19A ``Software'' for the ``development'', ``production'', or
``use'' of equipment controlled by 2A19; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
2D50B Software for the equipment controlled by 2A50B or 2B50B; GNSG
eligibility is clarified
2E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' of equipment or ``software'' controlled by 2A01,
2A02, 2A03, 2A04, 2A05, 2A06,
[[Page 3557]]
2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, 2B08, 2B09, 2D01, or 2D02;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
2E02A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``production'' of equipment controlled by 2A01, 2A02, 2A03, 2A04,
2A05, 2A06, 2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, 2B08, or 2B09;
Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
2E03A Other technology; Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
2E19A Technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or
``use'' of equipment controlled by 2A19; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
2E50B Technology for the equipment controlled by 2A50B or 2B50B;
the Reason for control is corrected to include MT controls; and NP
and MT notes are added for clarification
3A01A Electronic devices and components; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
3D01A ``Software'' specially designed for the ``development'' or
``production'' of equipment controlled by 3A01.b to 3A01.f, 3A02,
and 3B01; Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
3E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' or ``production'' of equipment or materials
controlled by 3A01, 3A02, 3B01, 3C01, 3C02, 3C03, or 3C04; Poland is
added to GNSG eligibility
6A03A Cameras; Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
6A05A ``Lasers'', components and optical equipment; Poland is added
to GNSG eligibility
6A43B Cameras and components not controlled by 6A03--includes
radiation-hardened television cameras; paragraphs (a) and (c) are
restructured and a note added to paragraph (a) for clarification
6E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' of equipment, materials or ``software'' controlled
by 6A01, 6A02, 6A03, 6A04, 6A05, 6A06, 6A07, 6A08, 6B04, 6B05, 6B07,
6B08, 6C02, 6C04, 6C05, 6D01, 6D02, or 6D03; Poland is added to GNSG
eligibility
6E02A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``production'' of equipment or materials controlled by 6A01, 6A02,
6A03, 6A04, 6A05, 6A06, 6A07, 6A08, 6B04, 6B05, 6B07, 6B08, 6C02,
6C04, or 6C05; Poland is added to GNSG eligibility
9B26B Other vibration test equipment; the reason for controls is
corrected to add NP controls which was inadvertently omitted in a
previous rule; NP controls are increased by adding all of paragraph
(a) to the NP scope--the result will not be an increase in
licensing, because these entries are already controlled for MT
reasons; and a NP note is clarified
II. The following new ECCNs are added to control items listed in
the Annex, but not previously controlled on the CCL:
1B55B Turboexpanders or turboexpander-compressor sets designed for
operation below 35K and a throughput of hydrogen gas of 1000 kg/hr
or greater
1B57B Lithium isotope separation facilities, plants and equipment.
III. Although Commerce will retain unilateral nuclear
nonproliferation controls on the following items, the United States
Government will continue to urge multilateral adoption of comparable
controls. Please note that ECCNs 2A49E, 2A50B, 2D49E, and 2E49E are the
only entries revised in this list.
1A48B Depleted uranium
2A49E The following items, previously requiring a validated license
to Country Groups S&Z, South African military and police, and
countries listed in Supplement No. 4 to Part 778, now only require a
validated license to Country Groups S, Z and countries listed in
Supplement No. 4 to Part 778: Generators, turbine generator sets,
steam turbines, heat exchangers, and heat exchanger type condensers
and process control systems therefor
2A50B Reactor and power plant simulators and analytical models for
reactor and power plant simulators; in paragraph (c), clarification
to parameters; in paragraph (e), restructured and note added for
clarification
2A51B Piping, fittings, and valves made of, or lined with,
stainless steel, copper-nickel alloy or other alloy steel containing
10% or more nickel and/or chromium
2A53B Pumps designed to move molten metals by electromagnetic
forces
2D49E The following items, previously requiring a validated license
to Country Groups S & Z, South African military and police, and
countries listed in Supplement No. 4 to Part 778, now only require a
validated license to Country Groups S, Z and countries listed in
Supplement No. 4 to Part 778: Software for equipment controlled by
2A49E
2E49E The following items, previously requiring a validated license
to Country Groups S & Z, South African military and police, and
countries listed in Supplement No. 4 to Part 778, now only require a
validated license to Country Groups S, Z and countries listed in
Supplement No. 4 to Part 778: Technology for equipment controlled by
2A49E
4A01A Electronic computers that are radiation-hardened, specially
designed for operation at extreme temperatures, or capable of
performing functions exceeding the limits of the ``information
security'' entries in Category 5 (NP controls apply to computers
with a CTP of 500 Mtops or more to countries listed in Supplement
No. 4 to Part 778)
4A02A Hybrid computers (NP controls apply to computers with a CTP
of 500 Mtops or more to countries listed in Supplement No. 4 to Part
778)
4A03A Digital computers (NP controls apply to computers with a CTP
of 500 Mtops or more to countries listed in Supplement No. 4 to Part
778)
Although the Export Administration Act (EAA) expired on August 20,
1994, the President invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act and continued in effect, to the extent permitted by law, the
provisions of the EAA and the EAR in Executive Order 12924 of August
19, 1994, and extended by a notice published in the Federal Register on
August 15, 1995.
Rulemaking Requirements
1. This interim rule has been determined to be significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. This rule
involves collections of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). These collections have been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control numbers
0694-0005, and 0694-0010.
3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
sufficient to warrant preparation of a Federalism assessment under
Executive Order 12612.
4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, (5 U.S.C.
553), requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable
because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function
of the United States. No other law requires that a notice of proposed
rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment be given for this
rule.
5. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for
public comment are not required to be given for this rule under 5
U.S.C. 553 or by any other law, under sections 3(a) and 4(a) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603(a) and 604(a)) no initial or
final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has to be or will be prepared.
However, because of the importance of the issues raised by these
regulations, this rule is issued in interim form and comments will be
considered in the development of final regulations. Accordingly, the
Department encourages interested persons who wish to comment to do so.
The period for submission of comments will close March 4, 1996. The
Department will consider all comments received on or before the close
of the comment period in developing final regulations. Comments
received after the end of the comment period will be considered if
possible, but their
[[Page 3558]]
consideration cannot be assured. The Department will not accept public
comments accompanied by a request that a part or all of the material be
treated confidentially because of its business proprietary nature or
for any other reason. The Department will return such comments and
materials to the person submitting the comments and will not consider
them in the development of final regulations. All public comments on
these regulations will be a matter of public record and will be
available for public inspection and copying. In the interest of
accuracy and completeness, the Department requests comments in written
form.
Oral comments should be followed by written memoranda, which will
also be a matter of public record and will be available for public
review and copying. Communications from agencies of the United States
Government or foreign governments will not be made available for public
inspection.
The public record concerning these regulations will be maintained
in the Bureau of Export Administration Freedom of Information Records
Inspection Facility, Room 4525, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Records in this
facility, including written public comments and memoranda summarizing
the substance of oral communications, may be inspected and copied in
accordance with regulations published in Part 4 of Title 15 of the Code
of Federal Regulations. Information about the inspection and copying of
records at the facility may be obtained from Theodore Zois, Bureau of
Export Administration Freedom of Information Officer, at the above
address or by calling (202) 482-1525.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Parts 771 and 799
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, Parts 771 and 799 of the Export Administration
Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730-799) are amended as follows:
PART 771--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR Parts 771 and 799 continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. App. 5, as amended; Pub. L. 264, 59 Stat.
619 (22 U.S.C. 287c), as amended; Pub. L. 90-351, 82 Stat. 197 (18
U.S.C. 2510 et seq.), as amended; sec. 101, Pub. L. 93-153, 87 Stat.
576 (30 U.S.C. 185), as amended; sec. 103, Pub. L. 94-163, 89 Stat.
877 (42 U.S.C. 6212), as amended; secs. 201 and 201(11)(e), Pub. L.
94-258, 90 Stat. 309 (10 U.S.C. 7420 and 7430(e)), as amended; Pub.
L. 95-223, 91 Stat. 1626 (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); Pub. L. 95-242,
92 Stat. 120 (22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq. and 42 U.S.C. 2139a); sec. 208,
Pub. L. 95-372, 92 Stat. 668 (43 U.S.C. 1354); Pub. L. 96-72, 93
Stat. 503 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.), as amended; sec. 125, Pub.
L. 99-64, 99 Stat. 156 (46 U.S.C. 466c); Pub. L. 102-484, 106 Stat.
2575 (22 U.S.C. 6004); E.O. 11912 of April 13, 1976 (41 FR 15825,
April 15, 1976); E.O. 12002 of July 7, 1977 (42 FR 35623, July 7,
1977), as amended; E.O. 12058 of May 11, 1978 (43 FR 20947, May 16,
1978); E.O. 12214 of May 2, 1980 (45 FR 29783, May 6, 1980); E.O.
12851 of June 11, 1993 (58 FR 33181, June 15, 1993); E.O. 12867 of
September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51747, October 4, 1993); E.O 12918 of May
26, 1994 (59 FR 28205, May 31, 1994); E.O. 12924 of August 19, 1994
(59 FR 43437 of August 23, 1994); and E.O. 12938 of November 14,
1994 (59 FR 59099 of November 16, 1994); and Notice of August 15,
1995 (60 FR 42767).
2. In Sec. 771.24 paragraphs (b) and (c) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 771.24 General License GNSG.
(a) * * *
(b) Eligible countries. The countries that are eligible to receive
exports under this general license are Argentina, Australia, Austria,
Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea (Republic of),
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Russia, the Slovak Republic, South Africa, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Canada is also a member of the
Nuclear Suppliers Group, but generally there is no license requirement
for shipments to Canada (see Sec. 770.3).
(c) Eligible commodities, software, and technology. The items that
are eligible for export under this General License GNSG are indicated
in the GNSG paragraph under the Requirements heading for each entry on
the CCL that contains eligible items. Entries that contain no eligible
items do not have a GNSG paragraph. General License GNSG may only be
used for items controlled for nuclear proliferation reasons. Items that
are subject to the missile technology controls described in Sec. 778.7
are not eligible for General License GNSG. Items controlled for
national security reasons (i.e., entries that end in the code letter
``A'') are not eligible for shipment under General License GNSG to
Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia. All shipments under General License GNSG
are subject to the prohibitions contained in Sec. 771.2(c), except that
the prohibitions in Sec. 771.2(c)(2) do not apply to Russia for items
controlled by entries that do not end in the code letter ``A''.
* * * * *
PART 799--[AMENDED]
Supplement No. 1 to Sec. 799.1 [Amended]
The following amendments are made to Supplement No. 1 to
Sec. 799.1:
3. In Category 1 (Materials), ECCNs 1A46B, 1B50B and heading,
1B51B, 1B52B, 1B53B, 1B54B, 1B58B, 1C19A, 1C50B, 1C54B, 1C55B, 1C58B,
and 1E41B and heading are revised, ECCNs 1B16A, 1B17A, 1C10A, 1D01A,
1E01A, 1E19A are amended by revising the requirements sections and new
ECCNs 1B55B and 1B57B are added, as follows:
1A46B Aluminum and titanium alloys in the form of tubes or cylindrical
solid forms (including forgings) with an outside diameter of more than
75 mm (3 inches).
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
Alloys in the form of tubes or cylindrical solid forms (including
forgings) with an outside diameter of more than 75 mm (3 inches), as
follows:
a. Aluminum alloys capable of an ultimate tensile strength of 460
MPa (0.46 x 109 N2) or more at 293 K (20 deg. C);
b. Titanium alloys capable of an ultimate tensile strength of 900
MPa (0.9 x 109 N/m2) (130,500 lbs./in2) or more at 293
K (20 deg. C).
Technical Note: Alloys ``capable of'' a specified tensile
strength include those having that strength at the time of export,
as well as those capable of attaining that strength as a result of
heat treatment.
1B16A Plants for the production of uranium hexafluoride (UF6) and
specially designed or prepared equipment (including UF6
purification equipment), and specially designed parts and accessories
therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, NPP (items appear on International Atomic
Energy List).
GLV: $0.
[[Page 3559]]
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note).
Note: See 10 CFR Part 110 for nuclear plants subject to the
export licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(i.e., fuel fabrication facilities, enrichment facilities,
reprocessing facilities, and heavy water production facilities).
* * * * *
1B17A Electrolytic cells for the production of fluorine with a
production capacity greater than 250 grams of fluorine per hour, and
specially designed parts and accessories therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
* * * * *
1B50B Vacuum or controlled environment (inert gas) induction furnaces.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
a. Vacuum or controlled environment (inert gas) induction furnaces
capable of operation above 850 deg. C and having induction coils 600 mm
(24 in.) or less in diameter, and designed for power inputs of 5kW or
more; and power supplies specially designed therefor with a specified
power output of 5 kW or more;
b. Vacuum and controlled atmosphere metallurgical melting and
casting furnaces, as follows, and specially configured computer control
and monitoring systems therefor:
b.1. Arc remelt and casting furnaces with consumable electrode
capacities equal to or greater than 1,000 cm3, and less than or
equal to 20,000 cm3, and capable of operating with melting
temperatures above 1,700 deg. C;
b.2. Electron beam melting and plasma atomization and melting
furnaces with a power of 50 kW or greater and capable of operating with
melting temperatures above 1,200 deg. C.
Note: This ECCN does not control furnaces designed for
semiconductor wafer manufacturing or processing (see ECCN 3B96).
1B51B Pressure transducers which are capable of measuring absolute
pressure at any point in the range 0 to 13 kPa, with pressure sensing
elements made of or protected by nickel, nickel alloys with more than
60% nickel by weight, aluminum or aluminum alloys as follows:
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
a. Transducers with a full scale of less than 13 kPa and an
accuracy of better than 1% of full scale;
b. Transducers with a full scale of 13 kPa or greater and an
accuracy of better than 130 Pa.
Technical Notes: 1. Pressure transducers are devices that
convert pressure measurements into an electrical signal.
2. For the purposes of this entry, ``accuracy'' includes non-
linearity, hysteresis and repeatability at ambient temperature.
1B52B Water-hydrogen sulfide exchange tray columns constructed from
fine carbon steel with a diameter of 1.8 m (6 ft.) or greater, which
can operate at a nominal pressure of 2 Mpa (300 psi) or greater, and
internal contactors therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Note: This ECCN does not control columns specially designed or
prepared for the production of heavy water. See 10 CFR Part 110 for
heavy water production equipment subject to the export licensing
authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Technical Notes: 1. For columns which are especially designed or
prepared for the production of heavy water, see INFCIRC/254/Part 1.
2. Internal contactors of the columns are segmented trays with
an effective assembled diameter of 1.8 m (6 ft.) or greater, are
designed to facilitate countercurrent contacting and constructed of
materials resistant to corrosion by hydrogen sulfide/water mixtures.
These may be sieve trays, valve trays, bubble cap trays or turbogrid
trays.
3. Fine carbon steel in this entry is defined to be steel with
the austenitic ASTM (or equivalent standard) grain size number of 5
or greater.
4. Materials resistant to corrosion by hydrogen sulfide/water
mixtures in this entry are defined to be stainless steels with a
carbon content of 0.03% or less.
1B53B Hydrogen-cryogenic distillation columns.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
Hydrogen-cryogenic distillation columns having all of the following
characteristics:
a. Designed to operate at internal temperatures of -238 deg. C (35
K) or less;
b. Designed to operate at internal pressure of 0.5 to 5 MPa (5 to
50 atmospheres);
c. Constructed of fine-grain stainless steels of the 300 series
with low sulfur content or equivalent cryogenic and H2-compatible
materials; and
d. With internal diameters of 1 m or greater and effective lengths
of 5 m or greater.
Technical Note: Fine-grain stainless steels in this item are
defined to be fine-grain austenitic stainless steels with an ASTM
(or equivalent standard) grain size number of 5 or greater.
Note: See 10 CFR 110 for heavy water production equipment
subject to the export licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
1B54B Ammonia synthesis converters or synthesis units in which the
synthesis gas (nitrogen and hydrogen) is withdrawn from an ammonia/
hydrogen high-pressure exchange column and the synthesized ammonia is
returned to said column.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
1B55B Turboexpanders or turboexpander-compressor sets designed for
operation below 35K
[[Page 3560]]
and a throughput of hydrogen gas of 1000 kg/hr or greater.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
1B57B Lithium isotope separation facilities, plants and equipment.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Lithium isotope separation facilities, plants and equipment, as
follows:
a. Facilities or plants for the separation of lithium isotopes;
b. Equipment for the separation of lithium isotopes, as follows:
b.1. Packed liquid-liquid exchange columns specially designed for
lithium amalgams;
b.2 Mercury and/or lithium amalgam pumps;
b.3 Lithium amalgam electrolysis cells;
b.4 Evaporators for concentrated lithium hydroxide solution.
1B58B Tritium facilities, plants and equipment, as follows:
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
a. Facilities or plants for the production, recovery, extraction,
concentration, or handling of tritium;
b. Equipment for tritium facilities or plants, as follows:
b.1. Hydrogen or helium refrigeration units capable of cooling to
23 K (-250 deg.C) or less, with heat removal capacity greater than 150
watts;
b.2. Hydrogen isotope storage and purification systems using metal
hydrides as the storage, or purification medium.
Note: This ECCN 1B58B does not control tritium, tritium
compounds, and mixtures containing tritium, or products or devices
thereof. Tritium is subject to the export licensing authority of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
1C10A ``Fibrous and filamentary materials'' that may be used in
organic ``matrix'', metallic ``matrix'' or carbon ``matrix''
``composite'' structures or laminates.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: kilograms.
Reason for Control: NS, MP (see Note).
GLV: $1500, except $0 for NP items (see Note).
GCT: Yes, except NP items (see Note).
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note).
Notes: NP controls apply to 1C10.a (all aramid ``fibrous and
filamentary materials''), 1C10.b. (all carbon ``fibrous and
filamentary materials''), 1C10.c. (all glass ``fibrous and
filamentary materials''), and 1C10.e.1.
* * * * *
1C19A Zirconium, nickel powder and porous nickel metal, lithium,
beryllium metal, wet-proofed platinized catalysts, and hafnium.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Kilograms.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Notes).
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. NP controls apply to entire entry, except shipments of
zirconium foil or strip having a thickness not exceeding 0.10 mm.
2. NS controls apply to entire entry, except for zirconium
metal, alloys, or compounds in shipments of 5 kg or less and
shipments of 200 kg or less of zirconium foil or strip having a
thickness not exceeding 0.10 mm.
List of Items Controlled
a. Zirconium, with a hafnium content of less than 1 part hafnium to
500 parts zirconium by weight, in the form of:
a.1. Zirconium metal;
a.2. Alloys containing more than 50% zirconium by weight;
a.3. Compounds;
a.4. Manufactures wholly of zirconium metal, alloys, or compounds
described in 1C19.a.1, a.2, or a.3;
a.5. Waste and scrap from zirconium metal, alloys, compounds, or
manufactures wholly thereof controlled by 1C19.a.1, a.2, a.3, or a.4.
Note 1: This ECCN 1C19 does not control zirconium in the form of
foil having a thickness not exceeding 0.10 mm (0.004 in.).
Note 2: Zirconium metal and alloys in the form of tubes or
assemblies of tubes, specially designed or prepared for use in a
reactor are subject to the export licensing authority of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (see 10 CFR Part 110).
b. Nickel powder and porous nickel metal, as follows:
b.1. Powder with a nickel purity content of 99.0% or more and a
mean particle size of less than 10 micrometers measured by the ASTM B
330 standard, except filamentary nickel powders;
b.2. Porous nickel metal produced from materials controlled for
export by 1C19.b.1, except single porous nickel metal sheets not
exceeding 1000 cm\2\, per sheet.
Note: 1C19.b.2 controls porous nickel metal formed by compacting
and sintering nickel powder, described in 1C19.b.1, to form a metal
material with fine pores interconnected throughout the structure.
c. Lithium (isotopically enriched in lithium-6), as follows:
c.1. Metal, hydrides, or alloys containing lithium enriched in the
6 isotope (\6\Li) to a concentration higher than the one existing in
nature (7.5% on an atom percentage basis);
c.2. Any other materials containing lithium enriched in the 6
isotope (including compounds, mixtures, and concentrates), except
lithium enriched in the 6 isotope incorporated in thermoluminescent
dosimeters.
d. Beryllium, as follows:
d.1. Beryllium metal;
d.2. Alloys containing more than 50% beryllium by weight;
d.3. Beryllium compounds;
d.4. Manufactures of beryllium metal, alloys, or compounds
described in 1C19.d.1, d.2, or d.3;
d.5. Waste and scrap from beryllium metal, alloys, compounds, or
manufactures thereof described in 1C19.d.1, d.2, d.3, or d.4.
Note: 1C19.d does not control:
a. Metal windows for X-ray machines, or for bore-hole logging
devices;
b. Oxide shapes in fabricated or semi-fabricated forms specially
designed for electronic component parts or as substrates for
electronic circuits; and
c. Beryl (silicate of beryllium and aluminum) in the form of
emeralds or aquamarines.
e. Wet-proofed platinized catalysts specially designed or prepared
for promoting the hydrogen isotope exchange reaction between hydrogen
and water for the recovery of tritium from heavy water or for heavy
water production.
f. Hafnium, as follows:
f.1. Hafnium metal;
f.2. Alloys and compounds of hafnium containing more than 60
percent hafnium by weight;
[[Page 3561]]
f.3. Manufactures of hafnium metal, alloys, or compounds described
in f.1 or f.2.
1C50B ``Fibrous or filamentary materials'' not controlled by 1C10.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Kilograms.
Reason for Control: NP, FP (see Note).
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Note: FP controls apply to Iran and Syria for the items
described in 1C50.b.
List of Items Controlled
``Fibrous or filamentary materials'' not controlled by 1C10, as
follows:
a. Carbon or aramid ``fibrous and filamentary materials'' having:
a.1. A ``specific modulus'' of 12.7 x 10\6\ m or greater; or
a.2. A ``specific tensile strength'' of 23.5 x 10\6\ m or greater;
Note: 1C50.a does not include aramid ``fibrous or filamentary
materials'' having 0.25 percent or more by weight of an ester based
fiber surface modifier.
b. Glass ``fibrous or filamentary materials'' having:
b.1. A ``specific modulus'' of 3.18 x 10 \6\ m or greater; and
b.2. A ``specific tensile strength'' of 7.62 x 10 \4\ m or greater;
c. Thermoset resin impregnated continuous yarns, rovings, tows or
tapes with a width no greater than 15 mm (prepregs), made from carbon
or glass ``fibrous or filamentary materials'' described in 1C50.a or
.b;
Note: The resin forms the matrix of the composite.
d. Composite structures in the form of tubes with an inside
diameter greater than 75 mm (3 in.), but less than 400 mm (16 in.),
made with ``fibrous or filamentary materials'' described in 1C50.a or
carbon prepreg materials described in 1C50.c.
Technical Note: 1. For the purpose of this entry, the term
``fibrous or filamentary materials'' means continuous monofilaments,
strands, rovings, yarns, tows or tapes.
Definitions
Filament or Monofilament is the smallest increment of fiber,
usually several m in diameter.
Strand is a bundle of filaments (typically over 200) arranged
approximately parallel.
Roving is a bundle (typically 12-120) of approximately parallel
strands.
Yarn is a bundle of twisted stands.
Tow is a bundle of filaments, usually approximately parallel.
Tape is a material constructed of interlaced or unidirectional
filaments, strands, rovings, tows or yarns, etc., usually
preimpregnated with resin.
2. Specific modulus is the Young's modulus in N/m2 divided by
the specific weight in M/m3, measured at a temperature of
232 deg. C and a relative humidity of 505
percent.
3. Specific tensile strength is the ultimate tensile strength in N/
m2 divided by specific weight in N/m3, measured at a
temperature of 232 deg. C and a relative humidity of
505 percent.
1C54B Alpha-emitting radionuclides having an alpha half-life of 10 days
or greater but less than 200 years, compounds or mixtures containing
any of these radionuclides with a total alpha activity of 1 curie per
kilogram (37 GBq/kg) or greater, and products or devices containing any
of the forgoing.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Millicuries.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Technical Note: This ECCN does not control products or devices
containing less than 3.7 GBq (100 millicuries) of alpha activity.
Note: See 10 CFR Part 110 for alpha-emitting radionuclides
subject to the export licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
1C55B Helium-3 or helium isotopically enriched in the helium-3
isotope, mixtures containing helium-3, and products or devices
containing any of the foregoing.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Liters.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Note: 1C55 does not control a product or device containing less
than 1g of helium-3.
1C58B Radium-226, radium-226 compounds, or mixtures containing radium-
226, and products or devices containing any of the foregoing.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Technical Note: This ECCN does not control radium contained in
medical applicators, or a product or device containing not more than
0.37 GBq (10 millicuries) of radium-226 in any form.
1D01A ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the
``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of equipment controlled by
1B01, 1B02, 1B03, 1B16, 1B17, or 1B18.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT and NP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to software for the ``development'',
``production'', or ``use'' of equipment controlled by 1B01 (except
1B01.d.4 and 1B01.f) and 1B18.a.
2. NP controls apply to software for the ``development'',
``production'', or ``use'' of filament winding machines described in
1B01.a that are capable of winding cylindrical rotors with diameters
between 75 mm (3 in.) and 400 mm (16 in.) and lengths of 600 mm (24
in.) or greater.
* * * * *
1E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' or ``production'' of equipment or materials controlled
by 1A01.b, 1A01.c, 1A02, 1A03, 1B01, 1B02, 1B03, 1B18, 1C01, 1C02,
1C03, 1C04, 1C05, 1C06, 1C07, 1C08, 1C09, 1C10, 1C18 or 1C50.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, NP, MT, FP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except NP, MT, and FP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. NP controls apply to exports to all destinations of
technology for the ``development'' or ``production'' of the
following:
a. Filament winding machines controlled by 1B01.a that are
capable of winding cylindrical rotors having a diameter between 3
inches and 16 inches and a length of 24 inches or greater;
b. ``Fibrous or filamentary materials'' controlled by 1C10 or
1C50.
[[Page 3562]]
2. MT controls apply to technology for items controlled for missile
technology reasons by 1A02 or 1B01 (except 1B01.d.4 and f).
3. FP controls apply to all technology described in this entry for
Iran and Syria.
Related ECCNs: See 1E40B for NP controls on technology for the
``use'' of filament winding machines controlled by 1B01A.a.
* * * * *
1E19A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of equipment or materials
controlled by 1B16, 1B17, or 1C19.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note).
Note: NP controls apply to technology for the ``development'',
``production'', or ``use'' of plants controlled by 1B16, equipment
controlled by 1B17, or materials controlled by 1C19.
* * * * *
1E41B Technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use''
of items controlled by 1A44B, 1A45B, 1A46B, 1A47B, 1A48B, 1A50B, 1B41B,
1B42B, 1B50B, 1B51B, 1B52B, 1B53B, 1B54B, 1B55B, 1B57B, 1B58B, 1B59B,
1C49B, 1C50B, 1C51B, 1C52B, 1C53B, 1C54B, 1C55B, 1C56B, 1C57B, or 1C58B
or for the ``use'' of items controlled by 1C10.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NP, FP (see Note).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Note: FP controls apply to Iran and Syria for technology for the
``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of glass ``fibrous and
filamentary materials'' controlled by 1C50.b.
4. In Category 2 (Materials Processing), ECCNs 2A48B and heading,
2A49E, 2A50B, 2A52B and heading, 2B01A, 2B08A, 2B41B, 2B50B, 2D01A,
2D49E, 2D50B, 2E49E, and 2E50B are revised, and ECCNs 2A19A, 2B06A,
2B07A, 2B09A, 2D19A, 2E01A, 2E02A, 2E03A, and 2E19A are amended by
revising the Requirements sections as follows:
2A19A Commodities on the International Atomic Energy List (e.g., power
generating and/or propulsion equipment, neutron generator systems, and
valves for gaseous diffusion separation process).
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NS and NP (see Note).
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes for 2A19.b and c, except to Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
Note: NP controls apply to items described in 2A19.b or c.
* * * * *
2A48B Valves not controlled by 2A19.c that are 5 mm (0.2 in.) or
greater in nominal size, with a bellows seal, wholly made of or lined
with aluminum, aluminum alloy, nickel, or alloy containing 60 percent
or more nickel, either manually or automatically operated.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Technical Note: For valves with different inlet and outlet
diameter, the nominal size parameter above refers to the smallest
diameter.
Note: See 10 CFR Part 110 for valves subject to the export
licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2A49E Generators and other equipment specially designed, prepared, or
intended for use with nuclear plants.
Requirements
Validated License Required: SZ, and countries listed in Supplement
No. 4 to Part 778.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
List of Items Controlled
a. Generators, turbine-generator sets, steam turbines, heat
exchangers, and heat exchanger type condensers designed or intended for
use in a nuclear reactor;
b. Process control systems intended for use with the equipment
controlled by 2A49.a.
Note: See 10 CFR Part 110 for nuclear equipment subject to the
export licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2A50B Equipment related to nuclear material handling and processing
and to nuclear reactors.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
a. Reactor and power plant simulators and analytical models for
reactor and power plant simulators, models or mock-ups;
b. Process control systems, except those controlled by 2A49.b,
intended for use with nuclear reactors;
c. High density (lead glass or other) radiation shielding windows
greater than 0.09 m2 on cold area and with a density greater than
3 g/cm3 and a thickness of 100 mm or greater; and specially
designed frames therefor;
d. Casks that are specially designed for transportation of high
level radioactive material and that weigh more than 1,000 kg;
e. Remote manipulators that can be used to provide remote actions
in radiochemical separation operations and ``hot cells'', as follows:
1. Having a capability of penetrating 0.6 m or more (2 ft. or more)
of hot cell wall (`through-the-wall' operation); or
2. Having a capability of bridging over the top of a hot cell wall
with a thickness of 0.6 m or more (2 ft. or more) (`over-the-wall'
operation).
Note: Remote manipulators provide translation of human operator
actions to a remote operating arm and terminal fixture.
They may be of a `master/slave' type or operated by joystick or
keypad.
f. Commodities, parts and accessories specially designed or
prepared for use with nuclear plants (e.g., snubbers, airlocks, reactor
and fuel inspection equipment), except items licensed by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission pursuant to 10 CFR, part 110.
Note: See 10 CFR part 110 for nuclear equipment subject to the
export licensing authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2A52B Vacuum pumps with an input throat size of 38 cm (15 in.) or
greater with a pumping speed of 15,000 liters/second or greater and
capable of producing an ultimate vacuum better than 10-4 Torr
(1.33 x 10-4 mbar).
[[Page 3563]]
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
Technical Notes: 1. The ultimate vacuum is determined at the
input of the pump with the input of the pump blocked off.
2. The pumping speed is determined at the measurement point with
nitrogen gas or air.
Note: See 10 CFR part 110 for vacuum pumps for gaseous diffusion
separation process subject to the export licensing authority of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2B01A ``Numerical control'' units, specially designed ``motion control
boards'' for ``numerical control'' applications on machine tools,
``numerically controlled'' machine tools and specially designed
components therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NS and NP (See Note).
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
Note: NP controls apply to entire entry except 2B01.a and .b
unless controlled software in 2D01 or 2D02.b resides there in,
2B01.c.1.b.1 (turning machines only), c.1.b.2, c.1.b.3, c.1.b.4,
c.1.b.5.a, c.2 and c.4, milling machines with greater than 2 meters
travel and worse than 30 micron accuracy, or crankshaft and camshaft
grinding machines.
List of Items Controlled
Technical Notes: 1. Secondary parallel contouring axes, e.g.,
the w-axis on horizontal boring mills or a secondary rotary axis the
center line of which is parallel to the primary rotary axis, are not
counted in the total number of contouring axes.
Note: Rotary axes need not rotate over 360 deg.. A rotary axis
can be driven by a linear device, e.g., a screw or a rack-and-
pinion.
2. Axis nomenclature shall be in accordance with International
Standard ISO 841, `Numerical Control Machines--Axis and Motion
Nomenclature'.
a. ``Numerical control'' units for machine tools, as follows, and
specially designed components therefor:
a.1. Having more than four interpolating axes that can be
coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring control''; or
a.2. Having two, three or four interpolating axes that can be
coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring control'' and one or more
of the following:
a.2.a. Capable of ``real-time processing'' of data to modify the
tool path during the machining by automatic calculation and
modification of part program data for machining in two or more axes by
means of measuring cycles and access to source data;
a.2.b. Capable of receiving directly (on-line) and processing
computer-aided-design (CAD) data for internal preparation of machine
instructions; or
a.2.c. Capable, without modification, according to the
manufacturer's technical specifications, of accepting additional boards
that would permit increasing the number of interpolating axes that can
be coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring control'', above the
control levels specified in 2B01, even if they do not contain these
additional boards;
b. ``Motion control boards'' specially designed for machine tools
and having any of the following characteristics:
b.1. Providing interpolation in more than four axes;
b.2. Capable of ``real time processing'' as described in
2B01.a.2.a; or
b.3. Capable of receiving and processing CAD data as described in
2B01.a.2.b;
Note: 2B01.a does not control ``numerical control'' units and
``motion control boards'' if:
a. Modified for and incorporated in uncontrolled machines; or
b. Specially designed for uncontrolled machines.
c. Machine tools, as follows, for removing or cutting metals,
ceramics or composites, which, according to the manufacturer's
technical specifications, can be equipped with electronic devices
for simultaneous ``contouring control'' in two or more axes:
Technical Note: a. The c-axis on jig grinders used to maintain
grinding wheels normal to the work surface is not considered a
contouring rotary axis.
b. Not counted in the total number of contouring axes are
secondary parallel contouring axes, e.g., a secondary rotary axis,
the center line of which is parallel to the primary rotary axis.
c. Axis nomenclature shall be in accordance with International
Standard ISO 841, ``Numerical control Machines Axis and Motion
Nomenclature.''
d. Rotary axes do not necessarily have to rotate over 360 deg..
A rotary axis can be driven by a linear device, e.g., a screw or a
rack-and-pinion.
c.1. Machine tools for turning, grinding, milling or any
combination thereof that:
c.1.a. Have two or more axes that can be coordinated simultaneously
for ``contouring control''; and
c.1.b. Have any of the following characteristics:
c.1.b.1. Two or more contouring rotary axes;
c.1.b.2. One or more contouring ``tilting spindles'';
Note: 2B01.c.1.b.2 applies to machine tools for grinding or
milling only.
c.1.b.3. ``Camming'' (axial displacement) in one revolution of the
spindle less (better) than 0.0006 mm total indicator reading (TIR);
Note: 2B01.c.1.b.3 applies to machine tools for turning only.
c.1.b.4. ``Run out'' (out-of-true running) in one revolution of the
spindle less (better) than 0.0006 mm total indicator reading (TIR);
c.1.b.5. The ``positioning accuracies'', with all compensations
available, are less (better) than:
c.1.b.5.a. 0.001 deg. on any rotary axis; or
c.1.b.5.b.1. 0.004 mm along any linear axis (overall positioning)
for grinding machines;
c.1.b.5.b.2. 0.006 mm along any linear axis (overall positioning)
for milling or turning machines; or
Note: 2B01.c.1.b.5.b.2 does not control milling or turning
machine tools with a positioning accuracy along one linear axis,
with all compensations available, equal to or greater (worse) than
0.005 mm.
Technical Note: The positioning accuracy of ``numerically
controlled'' machine tools is to be determined and presented in
accordance with ISO/DIS 230/2, paragraph 2.13, in conjunction with
the requirements below:
a. Test conditions (paragraph 3):
1. For 12 hours before and during measurements, the machine tool
and accuracy measuring equipment will be kept at the same ambient
temperature. During the premeasurement time, the slides of the
machine will be continuously cycled identically to the way they will
be cycled during the accuracy measurements;
2. The machine shall be equipped with any mechanical,
electronic, or software compensation to be exported with the
machine;
3. Accuracy of measuring equipment for the measurements shall be
at least four times more accurate than the expected machine tool
accuracy;
4. Power supply for slide drives shall be as follows:
a. Line voltage variation shall not be greater than
10% of nominal rated voltage;
b. Frequency variation shall not be greater than 2
Hz of normal frequency;
c. Lineouts or interrupted service are not permitted.
b. Test program (paragraph 4):
1. Feed rate (velocity of slides) during measurement shall be
the rapid traverse rate;
Note: In the case of machine tools that generate optical quality
surfaces, the feed rate shall be equal to or less than 50 mm per
minute.
[[Page 3564]]
2. Measurements shall be made in an incremental manner from one
limit of the axis travel to the other without returning to the starting
position for each move to the target position;
3. Axes not being measured shall be retained at mid travel during
test of an axis.
c. Presentation of test results (paragraph 2): The results of the
measurement must include:
1. ``Positioning accuracy'' (A); and
2. The mean reversal error (B).
Note 1: 2B01.c.1 does not control cylindrical external,
internal, and external-internal grinding machines having all of the
following characteristics:
a. Not centerless (shoe-type) grinding machines;
b. Limited to cylindrical grinding;
c. A maximum workpiece outside diameter or length of 150 mm;
d. Only two axes which can be coordinated simultaneously for
``contouring control''; and
e. No contouring c axis.
Note 2: 2B01.c.1 does not control machines designed specifically
as jig grinders having both of the following characteristics:
a. Axes limited to x, y, c and a, where the c-axis is used to
maintain the grinding wheel normal to the work surface and the a-
axis is configured to grind barrel cams; and
b. A spindle ``run out'' not less (not better) than 0.0006 mm.
Note 3: 2B01.c.1 does not control tool or cutter grinding
machines having all of the following characteristics:
a. Shipped as a complete system with ``software'' specially
designed for the production of tools or cutters;
b. No more than two rotary axes that can be coordinated
simultaneously for ``contouring control'';
c. ``Run out'' (out-of-true running) in one revolution of the
spindle not less (not better) than 0.0006 mm total indicator reading
(TIR); and
d. The ``positioning accuracies'', with all compensations
available, are not less (not better) than:
1. 0.004 mm along any linear axis for overall positioning; or
2. 0.001 deg. on any rotary axis.
c.2. Electrical discharge machines (EDM):
c.2.a. Of the wire feed type that have five or more axes that can
be coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring control'';
c.2.b. Non-wire EDMs that have two or more contouring rotary axes
and that can be coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring control'';
c.3. Other machine tools for removing metals, ceramics or
composites:
c.3.a. By means of:
c.3.a.1. Water or other liquid jets, including those employing
abrasive additives;
c.3.a.2. Electron beam; or
c.3.a.3. ``Laser'' beam; and
c.3.b. Having two or more rotary axes that:
c.3.b.1. Can be coordinated simultaneously for ``contouring
control''; and
c.3.b.2. Have a ``positioning accuracy'' of less (better) than
0.003 deg.;
2B06A Dimensional inspection or measuring systems or equipment.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number.
Reason for Control: NS and NP (see Note).
GLV: $0.
GCT: Yes, for 2B06.d only.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes for 2B06.a, b, and c, except Bulgaria, Romania, or
Russia.
Note: NP controls apply to items described in 2B06.a, b or c.
* * * * *
2B07A ``Robots'' or ``end-effectors'' and specially designed
controllers therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS and NP (see Note).
GLV: $5,000, except for $0 for NP (see Note).
GCT: Yes, except NP (see Note).
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note)
Note: NP controls apply to 2B07.b robots, to specially designed
or rated as radiation hardened robots to withstand greater than 5
x 104 grays (Silicon) (5 x 106 rad (Silicon)) without
operational degradation, and to specially designed controllers and
``end-effectors'' therefor.
* * * * *
2B08A Assemblies, units or inserts specially designed for machine
tools, or for equipment controlled by 2B06 or 2B07.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
List of Items Controlled
a. Spindle assemblies, consisting of spindles and bearings as a
minimal assembly, with radial (``run out'') or axial (``camming'') axis
motion in one revolution of the spindle less (better) than 0.0006 mm
total indicator reading (TIR);
b. Linear position feedback units, e.g., inductive type devices,
graduated scales, infrared systems or ``laser'' systems, having with
compensation an overall ``accuracy'' less (better) than (800 + (600 x
L x 10-3))nm (L equals the effective length in millimeters of
the linear measurement);
c. Rotary position feedback units, e.g., inductive-type devices,
graduated scales, ``laser'', or infrared systems, having with
compensation an ``accuracy'' less (better) than 0.00025 deg. of arc;
d. Slide way assemblies consisting of a minimal assembly of ways,
bed and slide having all of the following characteristics:
d.1. A yaw, pitch or roll of less (better) than 2 seconds of arc
total indicator reading (reference: ISO/DIS 230-1) over full travel;
d.2. A horizontal straightness of less (better) than 2 micrometer
per 300 mm length; and
d.3. A vertical straightness of less (better) than 2 micrometer
over full travel per 300 mm length;
e. Single point diamond cutting tool inserts, having all of the
following characteristics:
e.1. Flawless and chip-free cutting edge when magnified 400 times
in any direction;
e.2. Cutting radius out-of-roundness less (better) than 0.002 mm
total indicator reading (TIR) (also peak-to-peak); and
e.3. Cutting radius from 0.1 to 5 mm inclusive;
Note: This ECCN does not control measuring interferometer
systems, without closed or open loop feedback, containing a
``laser'' to measure slide movement errors of machine-tools,
dimensional inspection machines or similar equipment.
2B09A Specially designed printed circuit boards with mounted
components and software therefor, or ``compound rotary tables'' or
``tilting spindles'', capable of upgrading, according to the
manufacturer's specifications, ``numerical control'' units, machine
tools or feed-back devices to or above the levels specified in ECCNs
2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, and 2B08.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
* * * * *
[[Page 3565]]
2B41B ``Numerically controlled'' machine tools not controlled by ECCN
2B01A.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
Numerically controlled machine tools for vertical or horizontal
turning, milling, or boring that, according to the manufacturer's
technical specifications, can be equipped with ``numerical control''
units controlled for export under ECCN 2B01A (even if not equipped with
such units at the time of delivery) and that have:
a. Turning machines or combination turning/milling machines which
are capable of machining diameters greater than 2.5 m.
2B50B Flow forming machines and spin forming machines capable of flow
forming functions, and mandrels.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NP, MT (see Notes).
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, for 2B50.a and .b only.
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to items described by 2B50.a.2,
except those that are not usable in the production of propulsion
components and equipments (e.g., motor cases) for ``missile''
systems.
2. NP controls apply to items described by 2B50.a.1 and .b.
List of Items Controlled
a. Spin-forming and flow-forming machines, and specially designed
components therefor, that according to the manufacturer's technical
specifications, can be equipped with ``numerical control'' units or a
computer control; and
1. Have three or more rollers (active or guiding); and
Note: This entry includes machines which have only a single
roller designed to deform metal plus two auxiliary rollers which
support the mandrel, but do not participate directly in the
deformation process.
2. Have two or more axes that can be coordinated simultaneously for
``contouring control''.
b. Rotor-forming mandrels designed to form cylindrical rotors of
inside diameter between 75 mm (3 in.) and 400 mm (16 in.).
Note: The only spin-forming machines controlled by this ECCN
2B50B are those capable of flow forming functions.
2D01A ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the
``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of equipment controlled by
2A01, 2A02, 2A03, 2A04, 2A05, 2A06, 2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06,
2B07, 2B08, or 2B09.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, and NP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT and NP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes for software for 2B01, 2B06.a, .b, and .c, and 2B07.b and
.c, (see Notes), except to Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia. ``Software''
(including documentation) for ``numerical control'' units must be:
a. In machine executable form only; and
b. Limited to the minimum necessary for the use (i.e.,
installation, operation, and maintenance) of the units.
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to ``software'' specially designed
or modified for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of
equipment described in 2B04.
2. NP controls apply to ``software'' described in this ECCN for
the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of equipment
described in ECCNs 2B01, 2B04, 2B06.a, .b, and .c, and 2B07.b and
.c. Specially designed ``software'' for the systems described in
2B06.c includes ``software'' for simultaneous measurements of wall
thickness and contour.
2D19A ``Software'' for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use''
of equipment controlled by 2A19.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note)
Note: NP controls apply to Country Groups QSTVWYZ for
``software'' for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of
neutron generator systems and valves described in 2A19.b and c,
respectively.
* * * * *
2D49E ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the
``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of equipment controlled by
2A49E.
Requirements
Validated License Required: SZ, and countries listed in Supp. No. 4
to Part 778.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP.
GTDR: No.
GTDU: Yes, except destinations listed under Validated License
Required:
2D50B ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the
``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of equipment controlled by
2A50 or 2B50.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NP, MT (see Notes).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No
GNSG: Yes, for NP only (see Note).
Note: 1. NP controls apply to ``software'' specially designed or
modified for the ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of items
controlled by 2A50 and 2B50.a and .b.
2. MT controls apply to `software' specially designed or
modified for the ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of items
controlled by 2B50.a, except those that are not usable in the
production of propulsion components and equipments (e.g., motor
cases) for ``missile'' systems.
2E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' of equipment or ``software'' controlled by 2A01, 2A02,
2A03, 2A04, 2A05, 2A06, 2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, 2B08,
2B09, 2D01, or 2D02.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT and NP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes for NP, except technology for 2B04 (see Notes) and except
Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to technology for the
``development'' of commodities controlled by 2B04.
2. NP controls apply to technology for the ``development'' of
commodities controlled by 2B01, 2B04, 2B06.a, .b, and .c, and 2B07.b
[[Page 3566]]
and .c, and technology for the ``development'' of ``software''
controlled by 2D01 for NP reasons.
Related ECCNs: See 2E40B for NP controls on technology for the
``use'' of equipment controlled by 2B04, 2B06.a, b, or c, or 2B07.b.
* * * * *
2E02A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``production'' of equipment controlled by 2A01, 2A02, 2A03, 2A04, 2A05,
2A06, 2B01, 2B02, 2B03, 2B04, 2B05, 2B06, 2B07, 2B08, or 2B09.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT and NP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes for NP, except technology for 2B04 (see Notes) and except
Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to technology for the ``production''
of commodities controlled by 2B04.
2. NP controls apply to technology for the ``production'' of
commodities controlled by 2B01, 2B04, 2B06.a, .b, and .c, and 2B07
.b and .c.
Related ECCNs: See 2E40B for NP controls on technology for the
``use'' of equipment controlled by 2B04, 2B06.a, b, or c, or 2B07.b.
* * * * *
2E03A Other technology.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GTDR: Yes, except 2E03.a, a.3, b, and d.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for 2E03.a and a.3
only (see Note).
Note: NP controls apply to technology described in 2E03.a or
a.3.
* * * * *
2E19A Technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use''
of equipment controlled by 2A19.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia.
Note: NP controls apply to Country Groups QSTVWYZ for technology
for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use'' of neutron
generator systems and valves described in 2A19.b and c,
respectively.
* * * * *
2E49E Technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or ``use''
of equipment controlled by 2A49E.
Requirements
Validated License Required: SZ and countries listed in Supp. No. 4
to Part 778.
Reason for Control: NP.
GTDR: No.
GTDU: Yes, except destinations listed under Validated License
Required.
2E50B Technology for the ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of
equipment controlled by 2A50 or 2B50.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NP, MT (see Notes).
GTDR: No.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, for NP only.
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to ``technology'' specially designed
or modified for the ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of
items described by 2B50.a.2, except those that are not usable in the
production of propulsion components and equipments (e.g., motor
cases) for ``missile'' systems.
2. NP controls apply to ``technology'' specially designed or
modified for the ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of items
controlled by 2B50.a.1 and .b.
5. In Category 3, (Electronics Design, Development and Production),
ECCNs 3A01A, 3D01A, and 3E01A are amended by revising the Requirements
sections to read as follows:
3A01A Electronic devices and components.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP (see Notes).
GLV: $1,500: 3A01.c; $3,000: 3A01.b.1 to b.3, 3A01.d to 3A01.f;
$5,000: 3A01.a, 3A01.b.4 to b.7.
GCT: Yes, except 3A01.a.1.a and 3A01.e.5 (see Notes).
GFW: Yes, except 3A01.a.1.a, 3A01.b.1 and b.3 to b.7, 3A01.c to f.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to 3A01.a.1.a.
2. NP controls apply to 3A01.e.5.
* * * * *
3D01A ``Software'' specially designed for the ``development'' or
``production'' of equipment controlled by 3A01.b to 3A01.f, 3A02, and
3B01.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GTDR: Yes, except 3A01.e.5 (see Note).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for ``software''
for 3A01.e.5 only (see Note).
Note: NP controls apply to ``software'' for the ``development''
or ``production'' of items controlled by 3A01.e.5.
* * * * *
3E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' or ``production'' of equipment or materials controlled
by 3A01, 3A02, 3B01, 3C01, 3C02, 3C03, or 3C04.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ value.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, and NP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT and NP.
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for technology for
3A01.e.5 only (see Notes).
Note 1: MT controls apply to technology specially designed for
the ``development'' or ``production'' of items described in
3A01.a.1.a.
Note 2: NP controls apply to technology specially designed for
the ``development'' or ``production'' of items described in
3A01.e.5.
Note 3: 3E01 does not control technology for the ``development''
or ``production'' of:
a. Microwave transistors operating at frequencies below 31 GHz;
b. Integrated circuits controlled by 3A01.a.3 to a.11, having
both of the following characteristics:
1. Using technology of one micrometer or more, and
2. Not incorporating multi-layer structures.
N.B.: This Note does not preclude the export of multilayer
technology for devices incorporating a maximum of two metal layers and
two polysilicon layers.
* * * * *
In Category 6 (Sensors), ECCN 6A43B is revised, and ECCNs 6A03A,
6A05A, 6E01A and 6E02A are amended by revising the Requirements
sections as follows:
6A03A Cameras.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
[[Page 3567]]
Unit: Number.
Reason for Control: NS, FP and NP (see Notes).
GLV: $1,500, except $0 for 6A03.a.2 through a.5, b.1, b.3 and b.4.
GCT: Yes, except NP and FP (see Notes).
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. FP controls for regional stability apply to items
controlled in 6A03.b.3 and b.4.
2. NP controls apply to items controlled in 6A03.a.2, a.3, a.4,
a.5 and b.1.
3. The items listed in 6A03.b.3 and b.4 are subject to the
United Nations Security Council arms embargo against Rwanda
described in Sec. 785.4(a) of this subchapter.
* * * * *
6A05A ``Lasers'', components and optical equipment, as follows.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NS, NP (see Note).
GLV: $0 for NP items (see Note); $3,000 for all other items.
GCT: Yes, except NP (see Note).
GFW: Yes, except NP (see Note), for items in Advisory Notes 5.3 and
5.4.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Note).
Note: NP controls apply to lasers described in 6A05.a.1.c,
a.2.a, a.4.c, a.6 (argon ion lasers only), a.7.b, c.1.b, c.2.c.2,
c.2.c.3, c.2.d.2, and d.2.c.
Related ECCNs: See 6A50B for NP controls on lasers, laser
amplifiers, and oscillators not controlled by 6A05A.
* * * * *
6A43B Cameras and components not controlled by ECCN 6A03A.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: Number; $ value for parts and accessories.
Reason for Control: NP.
GLV: $0.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: Yes.
List of Items Controlled
a. Mechanical rotating mirror cameras, as follows; and specially
designed components therefor:
a.1. Framing cameras with recording rates greater than 225,000
frames per second;
a.2. Streak cameras with writing speeds greater than 0.5 mm per
microsecond;
Technical Note: Components of such cameras include their
synchronizing electronics units and rotor assemblies consisting of
turbines, mirrors, and bearings.
b. Electronic streak and framing cameras and tubes, as follows:
b.1. Electronic streak cameras capable of 50 ns or less time
resolution and streak tubes therefor;
b.2. Electronic (or electrically shuttered) framing cameras capable
of 50 ns or less frame exposure time;
b.3. Framing tubes and solid state imaging devices for use with
cameras described in 6A43.b.2, as follows:
b.3.a. Proximity focused image intensifier tubes having a
photocathode deposited on a transparent conductive coating to decrease
photocathode sheet resistance;
b.3.b. Gated silicon intensifier target (SIT) vidicon tubes, where
a fast system allows gating the photoelectrons from the photocathode
before they impinge on the SIT plate;
b.3.c. Kerr or pocket cell electro-optical shuttering; or
b.3.d. Other framing tubes and solid-state imaging devices having a
fast-image gating time of less than 50 ns specially designed for
cameras controlled by 6A43.b.2;
c. Radiation-hardened Television cameras, or lenses therefor,
specially designed or rated as radiation hardened to withstand greater
than 5 x 10 \4\ grays (Silicon) (5 x 10 \6\ rad (Silicon)) without
operational degradation.
6E01A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``development'' of equipment, materials or ``software'' controlled by
6A01, 6A02, 6A03, 6A04, 6A05, 6A06, 6A07, 6A08, 6B04, 6B05, 6B07, 6B08,
6C02, 6C04, 6C05, 6D01, 6D02, or 6D03.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP, and FP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT, NP, and FP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Romania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes: 1. MT controls apply to technology for the
``development'' of equipment controlled by 6A02.a, a.3, or a.4,
6A07.b or c, or 6A08. MT controls on technology for 6A08 equipment
apply only when the equipment is designed for airborne applications
and is usable in the systems described in Sec. 778.7(a) of this
subchapter.
2. FP controls for regional stability apply to technology for
the ``development'' of items controlled by 6A02.a, a.2, a.3, or c
and 6A03.b.3 and b.4 (see Sec. 776.16(b) of this subchapter).
3. FP controls for human rights apply to all destinations except
Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and members of NATO for technology
for the ``development'' of police-model infrared viewers controlled
by 6A02.c (see Sec. 776.14 of this subchapter).
4. NP controls apply to technology for the ``development'' of
equipment controlled by 6A03.a.2, a.3, a.4, a.5, or b.1 or
6A05.a.1.c., a.2.a, a.4.c, a.6 (argon ion lasers only), a.7.b,
c.1.b, c.2.c.2, c.2.c.3, c.2.d.2, or d.2.c.
5. Technology for the ``development'' of items controlled by
6A02.a, a.2, a.3, or c and 6A03.b.3 or b.4 is subject to the United
Nations Security Council arms embargo against Rwanda described in
Sec. 785.4(a) of this subchapter.
Related ECCNs: See 6E21B for MT controls on technology for the
``development'' of equipment controlled by 6A22, 6A28, 6A29, or 6A30.
See 6E40B for NP controls on technology for the ``use'' of cameras or
lasers controlled by 6A03 or 6A05, respectively. See 6E41B for NP
controls on technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or
``use'' of cameras or lasers controlled by 6A43 or 6A50, respectively.
* * * * *
6E02A Technology according to the General Technology Note for the
``production'' of equipment or materials controlled by 6A01, 6A02,
6A03, 6A04, 6A05, 6A06, 6A07, 6A08, 6B04, 6B05, 6B07, 6B08, 6C02, 6C04,
or 6C05.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Reason for Control: NS, MT, NP, and FP (see Notes).
GTDR: Yes, except MT, NP, and FP (see Notes).
GTDU: No.
GNSG: Yes, except Bulgaria, Rumania, or Russia, for NP only (see
Notes).
Notes:
1. MT controls apply to technology for the ``production'' of
equipment controlled by 6A02.a, a.3, or a.4, 6A07.b or c, or 6A08.
MT controls on technology for 6A08 equipment apply only when the
equipment is designed for airborne applications and is usable in the
systems described in Sec. 778.7(a) of this subchapter.
2. FP controls for regional stability apply to technology for
the ``development'' of items controlled by 6A02.a, a.2, a.3, or c
and 6A03.b.3 and b.4 (see Sec. 776.16(b) of this subchapter).
3. FP controls for human rights apply to all destinations except
Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and members of NATO for technology
for the ``development'' of police-model infrared viewers controlled
by 6A02.c (see Sec. 776.14 of this subchapter).
4. NP controls apply to technology for the ``development'' of
equipment controlled by 6A03.a.2, a.3, a.4, a.5, or b.1 or
6A05.a.1.c., a.2.a, a.4.c, a.6 (argon ion lasers only), a.7.b,
c.1.b, c.2.c.2, c.2.c.3, c.2.d.2, or d.2.c.
5. Technology for the ``development'' of items controlled by
6A02.a, a.2, a.3, or c and
[[Page 3568]]
6A03.b.3 or b.4 is subject to the United Nations Security Council arms
embargo against Rwanda described in Sec. 785.4(a) of this
subchapter.
Related ECCNs: See 6A22B for MT controls on technology for the
``production'' of equipment controlled by 6A22, 6A28, 6A29, or 6A30.
See 6E40B for NP controls on technology for the ``use'' of cameras
or lasers controlled by 6A03 or 6A05, respectively. See 6E41B for NP
controls on technology for the ``development'', ``production'', or
``use'' of cameras or lasers controlled by 6A43 or 6A50,
respectively.
* * * * *
7. In Category 9 (Propulsion systems and transportation equipment),
ECCN 9B26B is revised, as follows:
9B26B Vibration test systems, equipment, and components therefor.
Requirements
Validated License Required: QSTVWYZ.
Unit: $ Value.
Reason for Control: MT, NP (See Notes).
GLV: $0 for 9B26.a; $3,000 for 9B26.b.
GCT: No.
GFW: No.
GNSG: No.
Notes: 1. NP controls apply to 9B26.a, and in paragraph 9B26.a
NP controls only apply to electrodynamic vibration test systems
meeting all of the parameters in paragraph 9B26.a.1.
2. MT controls apply to 9B26.a and .b, and in paragraph 9B26.a
MT controls only apply to vibration test systems employing feedback
or closed loop techniques and incorporating a digital controller,
capable of vibrating a system at 10 g RMS or more over the entire
range 20 Hz to 2,000 Hz and imparting forces of 50 kN (11,250 lbs.),
measured ``bare table'', or greater.
List of Items Controlled
a. Vibration test systems and components therefor, as follows:
a.1. Vibration test systems employing feedback or closed loop
techniques and incorporating a digital controller, capable of vibrating
a system at 10 g RMS or more between 20 Hz and 2,000 Hz and imparting
forces of 50 kN (11,250 lbs.), measured ``bare table'', or greater;
a.2. Digital controllers, combined with specially designed
vibration test software, with a real-time bandwidth greater than 5 kHz
and designed for use with vibration test systems described in 9B26.a.1;
a.3. Vibration thrusters (shaker units), with or without associated
amplifiers, capable of imparting a force of 50 kN (11,250 lbs.),
measured ``bare table'', or greater, which are usable for the vibration
test systems described in 9B26.a.1;
a.4. Test piece support structures and electronic units designed to
combine multiple shaker units into a complete shaker system capable of
providing an effective combined force of 50 kN, measured ``bare
table'', or greater, and usable in vibration test systems described in
9B26a.1.
Note: The term ``digital control'' refers to equipment, the
functions of which are, partly or entirely, automatically controlled
by stored and digitally coded electrical signals.
b. Environmental chambers and anechoic chambers.
b.1. Environmental chambers and anechoic chambers capable of
simulating the following flight conditions:
b.1.a. Altitude of 15,000 meters or greater; or
b.1.b. Temperature of at least minus 50 degrees C to plus 125
degrees C; and either
b.1.c. Vibration environments of 10 g RMS or greater between 20 Hz
and 2,000 Hz imparting forces of 5 kN or greater, for environmental
chambers; or
b.1.d. Acoustic environments at an overall sound pressure level of
140 dB or greater (referenced to 2 x 10-5 N per square meter) or
with a rated power output of 4 kiloWatts or greater, for anechoic
chambers.
Dated: January 24, 1996.
Sue E. Eckert,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-1575 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1572 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747 Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3550-3552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1572]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-276-AD; Amendment 39-9496; AD 96-03-01]
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to certain Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. This action
requires inspections of the lower engine mount to determine if the
tangential link upper bolt and nut are oriented properly, and if the
tangential link upper bolt nut is torqued within certain limits. This
action also requires replacement of the bolt and nut with serviceable
parts, if necessary, and requires certain follow-on actions for
airplanes on which the upper bolt is missing. Terminating action is
also provided by this AD. This amendment is prompted by reports of
migration of bolts completely from the tangential link of the aft
engine mount, a condition which would reduce the capability of the
retention system for the engine. The actions specified in this AD are
intended to prevent separation of the engine from the airplane due to
migration of the tangential link upper bolt.
DATES: Effective February 16, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of February 16, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before April 1, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-276-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056.
The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from
Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at
the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tammy L. Dow, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; telephone (206) 227-2771; fax
(206) 227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Recently, the FAA received reports
indicating that the upper bolt and nut of the tangential link of the
aft engine on Model 747 airplanes were found to have migrated out of
proper position. In three cases, the bolt had completely backed out of
the hole. Analysis conducted by the manufacturer demonstrated that the
nuts used to secure the bolts may not provide adequate run-on torque.
Additionally, there was evidence that lubricants were used on the
threads of some of the bolts. These conditions can allow the nut to
rotate and disengage from the bolt. With no nut or other retention for
the bolt, normal vibration causes the bolt to loosen and migrate out of
the tangential link. Loss of the bolt would reduce the capability of
the engine retention system, and could result in cracking of the engine
turbine exhaust case due to the increased load. This condition, if not
corrected, could
[[Page 3551]]
result in separation of the engine from the airplane.
The FAA has reviewed and approved Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-71A2277, dated November 29, 1995, which describes procedures for
repetitive inspections of the lower engine mount to verify if the
tangential link upper bolt nut is properly oriented and to verify that
the tangential link upper bolt nut is torqued within certain limits.
Additionally, the service bulletin describes procedures for the
replacement of the bolt and nut with serviceable parts, if necessary.
The alert service bulletin also describes certain other follow-on
procedures for airplanes on which the tangential link upper bolt is
missing. Those procedures involve a visual inspection to detect damage
and deformation of the lower engine mount lugs that attach the affected
safety link; magnetic particle inspections to detect cracking of the
lower engine mount lugs; detail visual inspections to detect cracking,
bulging, discoloration, and corrosion of the engine mounts and adjacent
structures; and replacement of the lower engine mount fittings with
serviceable parts, if necessary; installation of new safety links,
bolts, and nuts; and installation of the tangential link upper bolt.
The FAA also has reviewed and approved Boeing Service Bulletin 747-
71-2206, Revision 1, dated November 12, 1987 (as revised by Boeing 747
Notice of Status Change No. 747-71-2206 NSC 1, dated December 4, 1987,
and Boeing 747 Notice of Status Change No. 747-71-2206 NSC 2, dated
March 17, 1988). This service information describes procedures for
replacement of the safety links with modified safety links.
Accomplishment of this replacement eliminates the need for repetitive
inspections of lower engine mount bolt and nut.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other Boeing Model 747 series airplanes of the same
type design, this AD is being issued to prevent possible separation of
the engine from the airplane due to consequences associated with the
complete migration of the tangential link upper bolt. This action
requires repetitive visual inspections to verify if the tangential link
upper bolt is correctly oriented; inspections to determine if the
tangential link upper bolt nut is torqued within certain limits; and
replacement of the bolt and nut with serviceable parts, if necessary.
This action also requires certain other follow-on procedures for
airplanes on which the tangential link upper bolt is missing.
Additionally, this AD provides for replacement of the safety links as
optional terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements.
The actions are required to be accomplished in accordance with the
service bulletins described previously.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
This is considered to be interim action. Once final action is
identified, the FAA may consider further rulemaking.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-NM-276-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-03-01 Boeing: Amendment 39-9496. Docket 95-NM-276-AD.
Applicability: Model 747 series airplanes, as listed in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-71A2277, dated November 29, 1995;
certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (c) of this AD to request approval from the
FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the
[[Page 3552]]
current configuration eliminates the unsafe condition; or different
actions necessary to address the unsafe condition described in this
AD. Such a request should include an assessment of the effect of the
changed configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD.
In no case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or
repair remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent separation of the engine from the airplane,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this
AD in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-71A2277,
dated November 29, 1995.
(1) Perform a visual inspection to ensure that installation of
the tangential link upper bolt nut is on the forward side of the
engine mount fitting.
(i) If the tangential link upper bolt nut is installed on the
forward side of the engine mount fitting, repeat the visual
inspection at intervals not to exceed 18 months.
(ii) If the tangential link upper bolt is not installed on the
forward side of the engine mount fitting, prior to further flight,
remove the nut, bolt, and washers and reinstall the nut, bolt, and
washers in accordance with the alert service bulletin. Thereafter,
repeat the visual inspection at intervals not to exceed 18 months.
(iii) If the tangential link upper bolt is missing from the
engine mount fitting, prior to further flight, perform the various
follow-on actions in accordance with the alert service bulletin.
(The follow-on actions include visual inspections, magnetic particle
inspections, replacement of the lower engine mount fitting with a
serviceable part, if necessary; installation of new safety links,
bolts, and nuts; and installation of a new tangential link upper
bolt.) Thereafter, repeat the visual inspection at intervals not to
exceed 18 months.
(2) Perform an inspection to verify that the torque value of the
tangential link upper bolt (on both sides of the mount) is within
the limits specified in the alert service bulletin.
(i) If the torque value of the tangential link upper bolt nut is
within the limits specified in the alert service bulletin, repeat
the inspection (verification) at intervals not to exceed 18 months.
(ii) If the torque value of the tangential link upper bolt nut
is outside the limits specified in the alert service bulletin, prior
to further flight, perform a visual inspection of the tangential
link upper bolt and washer for any damage or discrepancy, in
accordance with the alert service bulletin.
(A) If no damage or discrepancy of the tangential link upper
bolt and washers is found, prior to further flight, replace the bolt
nut with a new or serviceable part in accordance with the alert
service bulletin. Thereafter, repeat the inspection (verification)
specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this AD at intervals not to exceed
18 months.
(B) If any damage or discrepancy of the tangential link upper
bolt and washers is found, prior to further flight, replace the
damaged or discrepant part with a new or serviceable part, and
replace the bolt nut with a new or serviceable part, in accordance
with the alert service bulletin. Thereafter, repeat the inspection
(verification) specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this AD at intervals
not to exceed 18 months.
(b) Replacement of the safety links with modified safety links
in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 747-71-2206, dated April
16, 1987; or Boeing Service Bulletin 747-71-2206, Revision 1, dated
November 12, 1987, as revised by Boeing Notice of Status Change No.
747-71-2206 NSC 1, dated December 4, 1987, and Boeing Notice of
Status Change No. 747-71-2206 NSC 2, dated March 17, 1988;
constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspection
requirements of this AD.
(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(e) The inspections, replacement, and follow-on actions shall be
done in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-71A2277,
dated November 29, 1995. This incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from
Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124-2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
(f) This amendment becomes effective on February 16, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 22, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-1572 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1568 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3552-3555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1568]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-02-AD; Amendment 39-9497; AD 96-03-02]
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
is applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series airplanes. This action
requires inspections to detect cracking and corrosion of the aft
trunnion of the outer cylinder of the main landing gear (MLG) and
various follow-on actions. This action provides for termination of the
inspections by repairing the outer cylinder and installing new aft
trunnion bushings. This amendment is prompted by a report of the
collapse of the right MLG due to fracture of the aft trunnion outer
cylinder. The actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent the
collapse of the MLG due to stress corrosion cracking of the aft
trunnion of the outer cylinder.
DATES: Effective February 16, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of February 16, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before April 1, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-02-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056.
The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from
Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington
98124-2207. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at
the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James G. Rehrl, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 227-2783; fax (206) 227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA recently received a report of the
collapse of the right main landing gear (MLG) of a Boeing Model 767-
300ER airplane while the airplane was taxiing in a low speed right-hand
turn. Investigation revealed that the cause of the collapse of the MLG
was attributed to the fracture of the aft trunnion outer cylinder due
to stress corrosion cracking. The cracking initiated at the crossbolt
hole, which is approximately
[[Page 3553]]
five inches from the aft trunnion bushing flange. This condition, if
not corrected, could result in the collapse of the MLG due to ductile
fracture of the aft trunnion of the outer cylinder.
The FAA has reviewed and approved Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-32A0151, dated November 30, 1995. The alert service bulletin places
affected airplanes into three categories:
Category 1 airplanes have outer cylinders of the MLG that
have accumulated 2\1/2\ years or less since the cylinder was new or
overhauled.
Category 2 airplanes have outer cylinders of the MLG that
have accumulated between 2\1/2\ years and 4 years since new or
overhauled.
Category 3 airplanes have outer cylinders of the MLG that
have accumulated 4 years or more since new or overhauled.
This categorization reflects the time-related phenomenon of
corrosion; i.e., the risk of developing corrosion (or stress corrosion
cracking) increases with the length of time that an outer cylinder has
been in service. Therefore, Category 3 comprises airplanes that are
generally at the greatest risk of experiencing stress corrosion
cracking .
The alert service bulletin describes the procedures necessary for
performing various visual, eddy current, and ultrasonic inspections;
and when appropriate, for performing chemical spot testing of the aft
trunnion of the outer cylinder of the MLG (hereinafter referred to as
the ``aft trunnion''). It also includes the following actions for all
three categories of airplanes:
1. replacement of the outer cylinder, if cracking is found;
2. replacement of the aft trunnion bushing and crossbolt bushings;
or repeat the visual, eddy current, and ultrasonic inspections of the
immediate area in which corrosion is found in the aft trunnion;
3. application of plating and finish to the outer cylinder, if the
finish is found to be damaged or missing;
4. functional testing of the lock link actuator;
5. repetitive visual inspections, or termination of the inspections
by repairing the outer cylinder and installing flangeless aft trunnion
bushings and new crossbolt bushings;
6. repetitive 360-degree close visual inspection of the aft
trunnion, including the crossbolt area;
7. application of corrosion inhibiting compound on the aft
trunnion; and
8. eventual repair of the outer cylinder and replacement of the
existing aft trunnion and crossbolt bushings with new bushings, which
terminates the inspections specified in the alert service bulletin.
The alert service bulletin refers to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-32A0148, dated December 21, 1995, which describes procedures for
repair of the outer cylinder and replacement of the existing bushings
of the aft trunnion and crossbolt of the MLG with new bushings. The FAA
has also reviewed and approved this alert service bulletin.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other Model 767 series airplanes of the same type
design, this AD is being issued to prevent the collapse of the MLG due
to stress corrosion cracking of the aft trunnion of the outer cylinder.
This AD requires various inspections to detect cracking and corrosion
of the aft trunnion and various follow-on actions. The actions are
required to be accomplished in accordance with Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-32A0151, described previously.
The compliance times for accomplishing these inspections are
dependent upon the age of the outer cylinders of the MLG. Category 3
airplanes, which have the oldest cylinders, are to be inspected within
30 days (the alert service bulletin recommends inspecting these
airplanes within 60 days). Category 2 airplanes are to be inspected
within 90 days (the alert service bulletin recommends inspecting these
airplanes within 120 days). Category 1 airplanes, which have the
youngest cylinders, are to be inspected within 150 days (the alert
service bulletin recommends inspecting these airplanes within 180
days).
In developing an appropriate compliance time for this action, the
FAA considered not only the degree of urgency associated with
addressing the subject unsafe condition, but the manufacturer's
recommendation as to an appropriate compliance time, the availability
of required parts, and the practical aspects of performing the
inspections. The FAA points out that the varying compliance times allow
the manufacturer sufficient time to produce all the eddy current
probes, ultrasonic transducers, and non-destructive inspection (NDI)
reference standards that operators need to accomplish the inspections.
Further, the FAA took into account the compliance times recommended by
the manufacturer, as well as the number of days required for the
rulemaking process; in consideration of these factors, the FAA finds
that the compliance times required by this AD will fall approximately
at the same time as those recommended by the manufacturer.
Operators should note that, although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-32A0151 specifies eventual repair of the outer cylinder and
replacement of the existing bushings with new bushings, this AD does
not require such replacement. The FAA is considering further rulemaking
action to require eventual replacement of the bushings. However, the
planned compliance time for the replacement is sufficiently long so
that prior notice and time for public comment will be practicable.
This AD does provide operators with the option of terminating the
requirement for the repetitive inspections by replacing the bushings
with new bushings in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
32A0148, dated December 21, 1995. Accomplishment of this bushing
replacement also terminates the requirements of the following AD's:
AD 95-19-10, amendment 39-9372 (60 FR 47689, September 14,
1995), and
AD 95-20-51, amendment 39-9398 (60 FR 53109, October 12,
1995). [The comment period for AD 95-20-51 was extended by an AD action
that was issued on November 28, 1995 (60 FR 62321, December 6, 1995.)]
Operators should also note that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
32A0148 refers to Component Maintenance Manual (CMM) 32-11-40, which,
in turn, provides instructions for plugging the aft trunnion
lubrication fitting with a rivet. This AD, however, does not require
plugging this lube fitting to terminate the requirements of this AD, AD
95-19-10, or AD 95-20-51.
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
[[Page 3554]]
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-02-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-03-02 Boeing: Amendment 39-9497. Docket 96-NM-02-AD.
Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes having line numbers
001 through 609, on which the terminating action described in
paragraph (e) of this AD has not been accomplished; certificated in
any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (g) of this AD to request approval from the
FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the current
configuration eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions
necessary to address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such
a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent the collapse of the main landing gear (MLG) due to
stress corrosion cracking of the aft trunnion of the outer cylinder,
accomplish the following:
(a) Perform the inspections described in Part 3 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
32A0151, dated November 30, 1995, to detect cracking and corrosion
of the aft trunnion of the outer cylinder of the MLG at the time
specified in paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this AD, as
applicable. These inspections are to be accomplished in accordance
with Figure 1 of that alert service bulletin. Repeat these
inspections thereafter at the intervals specified in that alert
service bulletin. To determine the category in which an airplane
falls, the age of the outer cylinder of the MLG is to be calculated
as of the effective date of this AD. For airplanes on which the age
of the right MLG differs from the age of the left MLG, an operator
may place the airplane into a category that is the higher
(numerically) of the two categories to ease its administrative
burden, and to simplify the recordkeeping requirements imposed by
this AD. Once the category into which an airplane falls is
determined, operators must obtain approval from the Manager, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, to move that airplane into another category.
Note 2: The broken (dash) lines used in Figure 1 of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated November 30, 1995, denote ``go
to'' actions for findings of discrepancies detected during any of
the inspections required by this AD.
Note 3: Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated
November 30, 1995, refers to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-
32A0148, dated December 21, 1995, for procedures to repair the outer
cylinder and replace the bushings in the outer cylinder of the MLG
with new bushings.
(1) For airplanes identified as Category 3 in paragraph I.C. of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated November 30, 1995:
Perform the initial inspections within 30 days after the effective
date of this AD.
(2) For airplanes identified as Category 2 in paragraph I.C. of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated November 30, 1995:
Perform the initial inspections within 90 days after the effective
date of this AD.
(3) For airplanes identified as Category 1 in paragraph I.C. of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated November 30, 1995:
Perform the initial inspections prior to the accumulation of 2\1/2\
years since the MLG outer cylinder was new or overhauled, or within
150 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later.
(b) If no cracking or corrosion is detected, accomplish the
follow-on actions described in the Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-32A0151, November 30, 1995, at the time specified in the alert
service bulletin. These follow-on actions are to be accomplished in
accordance with that alert service bulletin.
(c) If any cracking is detected, prior to further flight,
replace the outer cylinder with a new or serviceable outer cylinder
in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated
November 30, 1995.
(d) If any corrosion is detected, accomplish the follow-on
actions at the time specified in the ``Corrosion Flowchart,'' in
Figure 1 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated
November 30, 1995. The follow-on actions are to be accomplished in
accordance with that alert service bulletin.
(e) Repair of the outer cylinder and replacement of the bushings
in the aft trunnion and crossbolt of the MLG with new bushings in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0148, dated
December 21, 1995, constitutes terminating action for the inspection
requirements of this AD, and for the requirements of AD 95-19-10,
amendment 39-9372, and AD 95-20-51, amendment 39-9398. Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767-32A0148, dated December 21, 1995, refers to
Component Maintenance Manual (CMM) 32-11-40. Operators should note
that, although the CMM specifies plugging the aft trunnion
lubrication fitting with a rivet, this AD does not require plugging
the lube fitting to terminate the requirement of this AD, AD 95-19-
10, or AD 95-20-51.
(f) Accomplishment of the requirements of this AD is considered
acceptable for compliance with AD 95-19-10, amendment
[[Page 3555]]
39-9372, and AD 95-20-51, amendment 39-9398.
(g) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO. Operators shall submit
their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance
Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Seattle ACO.
Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
(h) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(i) The inspections and follow-on actions shall be done in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0151, dated
November 30, 1995. Certain replacements and repairs shall be done in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-32A0148, dated
December 21, 1995. This incorporation by reference was approved by
the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing
Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
(j) This amendment becomes effective on February 16, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 22, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-1568 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-1206 Agreements for the Development of Foreign Markets for Agricultural Commodities
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3547-3548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1206]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3548]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
7 CFR Part 1485
Agreements for the Development of Foreign Markets for
Agricultural Commodities
AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule amends regulations implementing the
Market Promotion Program (MPP) authorized by Section 203 of the
Agricultural Trade Act of 1978. This rule revises procedural and
documentation requirements pertaining to program participants'
contracts with third parties. The rule also corrects an erroneous
cross-reference.
DATES: This interim rule is effective on February 1, 1996. Comments
must be received in writing by February 15, 1996 to be assured of
consideration.
ADDRESSES: Sharon L. McClure, Director, Marketing Operations Staff,
Foreign Agricultural Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
14th and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-1042.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon L. McClure, (202) 720-5521.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This interim final rule is issued in
conformance with Executive Order 12866. It has been determined to be
significant for the purposes of E.O. 12866 and, therefore, has been
reviewed by the Office of Mangement and Budget (OMB).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
It has been determined that the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not
applicable to the interim final rule since CCC is not required by 5
U.S.C. 553 or any other provision of law to publish a notice of
rulemaking with respect to the subject matter of this rule.
Executive Order 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and
local officials. See notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,
published at 48 FR 29115 (June 24, 1983).
Executive Order 12778
This rule has been reviewed under the Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. The rule would have preemptive effect with respect to
any state or local laws, regulations, or policies which conflict with
such provisions or which otherwise impede their full implementation.
The rule would not have retroactive effect. The rule does not require
that administrative remedies be exhausted before suit may be filed.
Background
The Department of Agriculture is committed to carrying out its
statutory and regulatory mandates in a manner that best serves the
public interest. Therefore, where legal discretion permits, the
Department actively seeks to promulgate regulations that promote
economic growth, create jobs, are minimally burdensome and are easy for
the public to understand, use or comply with. In short, the Department
is committed to issuing regulations that maximize net benefits to
society and minimize costs imposed by those regulations.
On February 1, 1995, Commodity Credit Corporation (``CCC'')
published final rules governing the MPP. These new rules were
applicable beginning with a participant's 1995 marketing year.
Following publication, CCC participated with interested parties in five
information sessions designed to familiarize participants with the new
regulations and offer participants an additional opportunity to
identify any problem areas. At these sessions, participants expressed
concern that new regulatory requirements applicable to a participant's
contracts with third parties imposed an undue administrative burden
and, because of the relatively late announcement of 1995 MPP
allocations, could significantly delay effective implementation of some
participants' 1995 programs. Specifically, participants expressed
concern regarding the requirements for a price or cost analysis for
each contract, 7 CFR 1485.23(c)(2)(v), and for certain procedural
requirements in the solicitation of bids, 7 CFR 1485.23(c)(2)(vi).
CCC agrees that these requirements may unnecessarily increase costs
to participants and may delay implementation of many activities and
thereby be detrimental to the operation of an efficient market
development program. Consequently, this rule will eliminate the current
requirements in 7 CFR 1485.23(c)(2)(vi) regarding specific procurement
procedures. In addition, the regulation regarding price or cost
analysis is revised to indicate that CCC is not requiring a specific
type of analysis or formal procedure for such analysis. Rather, the
regulation makes it clear that various types of informal analysis
should suffice, e.g., a simple comparison of price quotes with present
market conditions. In this way, CCC requires the participant to act in
a reasonable manner when entering into obligations to be reimbursed
with project funds, without imposing any undue administrative burden on
the participant.
This rule also revises an erroneous cross-reference presently in
Sec. 1485.16(c)(24).
Information Collection Requirements
The amendment set forth in this interim final rule does not impose
any new reporting or record keeping requirements. The information
collection requirements for participating in the MPP were approved for
use by the Office of Management and Budget under OMB control number
00551-0027.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1485
Agricultural commodities, Exports.
PART 1485--AGREEMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOREIGN MARKETS FOR
AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES
1. The authority citation for Part 1485 continues to read:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 5623, 5662-5664 and sec. 1302, Pub. L. 103-
66, 107 Stat. 330.
Subpart B--Market Promotion Program
2. Section 1485.16(c)(24) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1485.16 Reimbursement rules.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(24) Generic commodity promotions (see Sec. 1486.16(f));
* * * * *
3. Section 1485.23 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2)(v) to
read as follows and by deleting paragraph (c)(2)(vi):
Sec. 1485.23 Miscellaneous provisions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(v) Perform some form of price or cost analysis such as a
comparison of price quotations to market prices or other price indicia,
to determine the reasonableness of the offered prices.
* * * * *
Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of January 1996.
August Schumacher, Jr.,
Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service and Vice President,
Commodity Credit Corporation.
[FR Doc. 96-1206 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-10-P
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.