issue-1996-04-11•Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-11
Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-11
issue-1996-04-11Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-11Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-9068 Office of the Secretary; Combined Income and Rent; Extension of Effective Period of Interim Regulatory Provisions
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9068]
[[Page 16171]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Housing and Urban Development
_______________________________________________________________________
24 CFR Part 215, et al.
Office of the Secretary; Combined Income and Rent; Extension of
Effective Period of Interim Regulatory Provisions; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 16172]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Parts 215, 236, 813, 913, and 950
[Docket No. FR-3324-N-02]
Office of the Secretary; Combined Income and Rent; Extension of
Effective Period of Interim Regulatory Provisions
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of extension of interim regulatory provisions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 5, 1995 (60 FR 17388), HUD published an interim rule
amending its regulations governing public housing, Indian housing, and
assisted housing programs by adding nine exclusions to the definition
of annual income. The April 5, 1995 interim rule contains a ``sunset
provision'' which provides that the interim rule will expire on May 6,
1996, unless prior to that date HUD publishes a Federal Register notice
extending the rule's effective period. This notice extends the
effective period of the April 5, 1995 interim rule to such time that a
final rule is issued and becomes effective.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of the following provisions remains
in effect until the date the final rule becomes effective: Sec. 215.21
(c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), and (c)(11) through (c)(15);
Sec. 236.3 (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), and (c)(11) through
(c)(15); Sec. 813.106 (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), (c)(11),
(c)(12), (c)(14), and (c)(15); Sec. 913.106 (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv)
through (v), (c)(11), (c)(12), (c)(15), and (c)(16); and Sec. 950.102
(2)(ii), (2)(vi), (2)(viii) (D) through (E), (2)(xi), (2)(xii),
(2)(xv), and (2)(xvi) of the definition of Annual income.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For Public Housing: Bruce Vincent, Room 4206, telephone number (202)
708-0744; for Native American Programs: Dominic A. Nessi, Room P8204,
telephone number (202) 755-0032; for Housing: Barbara D. Hunter, Room
6182, telephone number (202) 708-3944; Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410. Hearing or
speech-impaired individuals may access these numbers by calling the
Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339. (Except for the
``800'' number, these telephone numbers are not toll-free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 5, 1995 (60 FR 17388), HUD
published for public comment an interim rule amending HUD's regulations
governing public housing, Indian housing, Section 8 housing, and other
assisted housing programs by adding nine exclusions to the definition
of annual income. Specifically, the interim rule excludes from annual
income the following: (1) Residential service stipends; (2) adoption
assistance payments; (3) student financial assistance; (4) earned
income of full-time students; (5) adult foster care payments; (6)
compensation from State or local job training programs and training of
resident management staff; (7) property tax rebates; (8) homecare
payments for developmentally disabled children or adult family members;
and (9) deferred periodic payments of supplemental security income and
social security benefits that are received in a lump sum.
With regard to the first eight exclusions to the definition of
income, the Secretary is merely exercising the discretion conferred
upon him to define family income by section 3(b)(4) of the U.S. Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(4)), section 101(c)(2) of the Housing
and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s(c)(2)), and section
236(m) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(m)). HUD believes
these exclusions are essential for achieving its goals of ensuring
economic opportunity, empowering the poor and expanding affordable
housing opportunities.
The ninth exclusion to the definition of annual income is
statutorily mandated. Section 103(a)(1) of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-550, approved October 28, 1993)
amended section 3(b)(4) of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 to exclude from
annual income, ``any amounts which would be eligible for exclusion
under section 1613(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1382b(a)(7).'' Section 1613(a)(7) of the Social Security Act covers
deferred periodic payments received in a lump sum from supplemental
security income (SSI) and social security benefits.
Among other parts, the April 5, 1995 interim rule amended part 905.
On April 10, 1995 (60 FR 18174), the Department published a final rule
amending the Indian Housing consolidated regulations and moving these
regulations from part 905 to a new part 950. On July 18, 1995 (60 FR
36666), the Department published a final rule amending part 950 to
incorporate the revisions made by the April 5, 1995 Combined Income and
Rent interim rule.
It is HUD's policy to establish a ``sunset date'' for its interim
rules. Accordingly, the April 5, 1995 interim rule and the July 18,
1995 final rule contain ``sunset provisions'' which provide that the
interim and final rules will expire on May 6, 1996, unless prior to
that date HUD publishes a rule finalizing the amendments made by the
April 5, 1995 and July 18, 1995 rules or a notice extending their
effective period.
The final rule adopting the amendments made by the April 5, 1995
and July 18, 1995 rules is in its final stages of development. However,
in order to prevent a period in which HUD will be without effective
regulations, HUD is extending the effective period of these amendments
until the final rule is published and becomes effective.
For the reasons described above, the following provisions of title
24 of the Code of Federal Regulations will remain in effect until the
date the final rule adopting these regulatory provisions, with or
without changes, is published and becomes effective:
Sec. 215.21 [Amended]
1. Paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), and (c)(11)
through (c)(15) of Sec. 215.21;
Sec. 236.3 [Amended]
2. Paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), and (c)(11)
through (c)(15) of Sec. 236.3;
Sec. 813.106 [Amended]
3. Paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), (c)(11),
(c)(12), (c)(14), and (c)(15) of Sec. 813.106;
Sec. 913.106 [Amended]
4. Paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8) (iv) through (v), (c)(11),
(c)(12), (c)(15), and (c)(16) of Sec. 913.106; and
Sec. 950.102 [Amended]
5. Paragraphs (2)(ii), (2)(vi), (2)(viii) (D) through (E), (2)(xi),
(2)(xii), (2)(xv), and (2)(xvi) of the definition of Annual income in
Sec. 950.102.
Dated: March 25, 1996.
Henry G. Cisneros,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-9068 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-32-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-9018 Amendment to Memorandum Describing the Authority and Assigned Responsibilities of the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9018]
========================================================================
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. 71 / Thursday, April 11, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 16043]]
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
5 CFR Ch. XIV
Amendment to Memorandum Describing the Authority and Assigned
Responsibilities of the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority
AGENCY: Federal Labor Relations Authority.
ACTION: Amendment to appendix to rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends Appendix B to 5 CFR Ch. XIV--Memorandum
Describing the Authority and Assigned Responsibilities of the General
Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority. It clarifies the
General Counsel's delegated authority to appoint acting Regional
Directors when Regional Director positions become vacant.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This amendment was effective Wednesday, April 3, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Solly Thomas, Executive Director,
Federal Labor Relations Authority, at (202) 482-6560.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Labor Relations Authority and
the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority were
established by Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978, effective January 1,
1979. Since January 11, 1979, the provisions of the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute (5 U.S.C. 7101-7135) (Statute) have
governed the operations of the Authority and its General Counsel. The
Authority separately stated and published in the Federal Register (44
FR 44777) on July 30, 1979, and republished on January 17, 1980 (45 FR
3255), a memorandum of the Authority describing the authority and
assigned responsibilities of its General Counsel. The Authority
subsequently published an amendment to the memorandum on June 23, 1983
(48 FR 28814). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1), the Authority hereby
states and publishes in the Federal Register the following further
amendment to the memorandum.
Accordingly, under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1), Section
III, Personnel, of appendix B to 5 CFR Ch. XIV is revised to read as
follows:
Appendix B to 5 CFR Ch. XIV--Memorandum Describing the Authority and
Assigned Responsibilities of the General Counsel of the Federal Labor
Relations Authority
* * * * *
III. Personnel. Under 5 U.S.C. 7105(d), the Authority is
authorized to appoint Regional Directors. In order better to ensure
the effective exercise of the duties and responsibilities of the
General Counsel described above, the General Counsel is delegated
authority to recommend the appointment, transfer, demotion or
discharge of any Regional Director. However, such actions may be
taken only with the approval of the Authority. In the event of a
vacant Regional Director position, the General Counsel may, without
the approval of the Authority, detail personnel as acting Regional
Director for a total period of up to 120 days commencing on the day
the position becomes vacant. If the position remains vacant for more
than 120 days, a detail must be approved by the Authority. Other
details of personnel to act as Regional Director during periods when
there is an incumbent in the position shall be accomplished by the
General Counsel without the approval of the Authority. The General
Counsel shall have authority to direct and supervise the Regional
Directors. Under 5 U.S.C. 7104(f)(3), the General Counsel shall have
direct authority over, and responsibility for all employees in the
Office of the General Counsel and all personnel of the General
Counsel in the field offices of the Authority. This includes full
and final authority subject to applicable laws and rules,
regulations and procedures of the Office of Personnel Management and
the Authority over the selection, retention, transfer, promotion,
demotion, discipline, discharge and in all other respects of such
personnel except the detail in the event of a vacancy for a period
in excess of 120 days, appointment, transfer, demotion or discharge
of any Regional Director. Further, the establishment, transfer, or
elimination of any Regional Office or non-Regional Office duty
location may be accomplished only with the approval of the
Authority. The Authority will provide such administrative support
functions, including personnel management, financial management and
procurement functions, through the Office of Administration of the
Authority as are required by the General Counsel to carry out the
General Counsel's statutory and prescribed functions.
Dated: April 4, 1996.
For the Authority.
Solly Thomas,
Executive Director, Federal Labor Relations Authority.
[FR Doc. 96-9018 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6727-01-P]
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8975 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner: Regulatory Reinvention; Tax Exemption of Obligations of Public Housing Agencies and Related Amendments; Final Rule; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16045-16046]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8975]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 811
[Docket No. FR-3985-C-02]
RIN 2502-AG64
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner: Regulatory Reinvention; Tax Exemption of Obligations of
Public Housing Agencies and Related Amendments; Final Rule; Correction
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14456), HUD published a final rule
streamlining its regulations governing the tax exemption of obligations
of public housing agencies. The preamble to the April 1, 1996 final
rule stated that HUD was removing subpart B of 24 CFR part 811.
However, the rule's regulatory text did not contain an amendatory
instruction removing this subpart. The purpose of this document is to
correct the April 1, 1996 final rule by removing 24 CFR part 811,
subpart B.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Mitchell, Director, Financial
Services Division, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 470
L'Enfant Plaza East, room 3120, Washington, DC 20024, telephone number
(202) 708-7450, ext. 125 (this is not a toll-free number). For hearing-
and speech-impaired persons, this number may be accessed via TTY by
calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 4, 1995, President Clinton issued a
memorandum to all Federal departments and agencies regarding regulatory
reinvention. In response to this memorandum, HUD conducted a page-by-
page review of its regulations to determine which could be eliminated,
consolidated, or otherwise improved. As part of this review, HUD
examined its regulations at 24 CFR part 811, which govern the tax
exemption of obligations of public housing agencies. HUD determined
that 24 CFR part 811 could be improved and streamlined by eliminating
unnecessary provisions.
On April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14456), HUD published a final rule which
streamlined part 811 by eliminating provisions that were redundant of
statutes or otherwise unnecessary. The program described in subpart B
of part 811, concerning the purchase of GNMA
[[Page 16046]]
guaranteed mortgage-backed securities with tax exempt obligations, had
never been implemented by HUD. Accordingly, the preamble to the April
1, 1996 final rule stated that HUD was removing this subpart. However,
the regulatory text of the final rule did not contain an amendatory
instruction removing 24 CFR part 811, subpart B. This document makes
the necessary correction.
Accordingly, FR-Doc. 7949, a final rule published in the Federal
Register on April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14456) is corrected by adding an
amendatory instruction number 13 to the end of the document on page
14463 to remove subpart B of 24 CFR part 811, to read as follows:
Subpart B--[Removed]
13. Subpart B, consisting of Secs. 811.201 through 811.211, is
removed.
Dated: April 5, 1996.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 96-8975 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-27-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8970 Medical Devices; Medical Device User Facility and Manufacturer Reporting, Certification and Registration; Office of Management and Budget Approval; Extension of Effective Date
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16043-16045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8970]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 803 and 807
[Docket No. 91N-0295]
RIN 0910-AA09
Medical Devices; Medical Device User Facility and Manufacturer
Reporting, Certification and Registration; Office of Management and
Budget Approval; Extension of Effective Date
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; notification of approval of information collection
requirements.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the collection of
information requirements in the final rule on medical device user
facility and manufacturer reporting, certification and registration. In
addition, FDA is extending to July 31, 1996, the effective date of the
final rule in response to requests and in order to allow sufficient
time for user facilities and manufacturers to implement procedures to
comply with the final rule. The final rule was published in the Federal
Register of December 11, 1995 (60 FR 63578).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earl W. Robinson, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health (HFZ-530), Food and Drug Administration, 1350
Piccard Dr., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-2735.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of December 11, 1995
[[Page 16044]]
(60 FR 63578), FDA published a final rule (21 CFR parts 803 and 807)
requiring medical device user facilities and manufacturers to report
adverse events related to medical devices under a uniform reporting
system. In the preamble to the final rule (60 FR 63578 at 63596), FDA
announced that the collection of information requirements contained in
the final rule had been submitted to OMB for approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). The agency also
requested public comment on the information collection requirements by
January 10, 1996. The agency further stated that these collection of
information requirements would not become effective until FDA obtained
OMB approval of them, and that FDA would publish in the Federal
Register a notice of OMB's decision to approve, modify, or disapprove
them.
FDA received 26 comments regarding the information collection
requirements. Comments were reviewed by both FDA and OMB. On February
23, 1996, OMB sent FDA a notice of action stating that the collection
of information requirements are approved for use through February 28,
1999, under OMB control number 0910-0059. Persons are not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
In response to comments to the information collection requirements,
FDA is changing the effective date of the final rule and providing
certain clarifications and guidance regarding requirements of the final
rule.
1. Several comments requested that the date of the final rule be
extended to allow manufacturers and user facilities additional time to
set up procedures to implement the new requirements. These comments
stated that the effective date of the final rule, April 11, 1996, would
not allow them enough time after approval of the forms to set up
reporting procedures, databases, and train personnel. FDA agrees that
reporting entities need additional time to set up reporting procedures.
FDA, on the basis of these comments on the information collection, is
extending that comment period to July 31, 1996, without further notice
and comment procedures.
The Administrative Procedure Act and FDA regulations provide that
the agency may issue a regulation without notice and comment procedures
when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and
a brief statement of reasons thereof in the rules issued) that notice
and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(8); 21 CFR
10.40(e)(1)). FDA finds that there is good cause for dispensing with
notice and comment procedures to extend the effective date of the final
rule because such procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, and
contrary to the public interest.
First, notice and comment rulemaking on the extension of the
effective date is impracticable. FDA was unable to prepare and issue
notice of the extension of the effective date until April 11, 1996.
Because the final rule's effective date is April 11, 1996, there is not
enough time for FDA to solicit a new round of notice and comment before
the effective date. Although the final rule informing reporting
entities of the new requirements was published on December 11, 1995,
reporters have not known what forms would be required until the
issuance of this notice. Without the forms, reporting entities have
heretofore been unable to set up their reporting procedures and
databases or train personnel. Adequate procedures and training will
ensure that reporters generate reports that contain meaningful
information that will allow FDA efficiently evaluate adverse events.
FDA believes that reporting entities need until July 31, 1996, to set
up adequate procedures to implement the new reporting requirements.
Second, engaging in notice and comment rulemaking is unnecessary.
The public has already had two separate opportunities to comment on the
effective date; the first in response to the request in the tentative
final rule for comments, and the second in response to the request in
the request in the final rule for comments relating to the information
collection requirements. All of the comments FDA has received are in
favor of extending the effective date to allow reporters adequate time
to set up procedures to implement the new regulations. FDA does not
believe another round of notice and comment is necessary on an issue
that has already received two rounds of public comment.
Third, notice and comment rulemaking is contrary to the public
interest. Extending the effective date of the rule without notice and
comment allows reporters immediate certainty as to the timeframes that
they have to set up procedures to implement the new reporting
requirements. If FDA did not provide a definite effective date,
reporters may bear additional expense and hardship in setting up
inefficient interim procedures in order to be ready to report on a
certain date, when that date may ultimately be extended. Moreover,
because reports generated under interim procedures would be processed
without adequate time to implement proper training and procedures, such
reports may be of poor quality that would preclude both reporters and
FDA from obtaining information to evaluate adverse events effectively.
Certain knowledge of the date the regulation will be effective will
allow reporters to know the exact timeframe that will allow them to
implement procedures to effectively evaluate and submit reports.
For all the reasons stated above, FDA concludes, under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and 21 CFR 10.40(e)(1), there is good cause for extending the
effective date of the final rule without notice and comment procedures.
Consistent with its own procedural regulations, however, FDA is
providing an opportunity for comment on its decision to delay the
effective date of the final regulation until July 31, 1996.
2. Several comments stated that FDA should reconsider requiring a
baseline report (FDA Form 3417) for each model number because reporters
would have to submit many separate baseline reports for virtually
identical devices that have option and accessory packages that are
identified by a model number variation, such as a prefix or suffix.
Section 803.55 requires that a manufacturer shall submit a baseline
report for a device when the device model is first reported under
Sec. 803.50. The regulation does not require a baseline report for
every model number variation. FDA does not believe that the regulation
requires a separate baseline report for every model number variation,
if the variation could not affect the device's safety or effectiveness.
If a manufacturer groups model numbers, it should list each model
number variation on the baseline report that is included (e.g., basic
model number 900; model number variations, R900, 900C, 900D, and
R900C). FDA will match the variations of the model number reported on
form 3500A to the list of model numbers provided on the baseline
reports.
3. Comments requested further clarification on the definition of
``device family'' (Sec. 803.3(e)) that is used to identify similar
groups of devices on the manufacturer baseline report. FDA classified
and revised Sec. 803.3(e) to define ``device family'' as devices that
have the same basic design and performance characteristics related to
safety and effectiveness, intended use and function, and device
classification and product code. Devices that differ only in minor ways
not related to safety or effectiveness can be considered to be in the
same device family. Factors such as brand name and common name of the
device and whether the devices were
[[Page 16045]]
introduced into commercial distribution under the same 510(k) or
premarket approval application, may be considered in grouping products
into device families.As part of implementation of the final regulation,
FDA will provide further information, guidance and examples.
4. Comments objected to the requirement on the annual certification
form for manufacturers (FDA Form 3381) that the firm certify not only
the number of reports submitted during the 12-month period for which
the certification is submitted, but also that this number constitutes
all the reportable events for which the firm is responsible during that
period.
FDA responded to similar comments in the preamble to the final rule
(60 FR 63578 at 63591). For the reasons stated therein, FDA still
believes that it is necessary and within FDA's statutory authority to
require that manufacturers certify that they have submitted all
reportable events to FDA. FDA believes that certification is an
important means of increasing the effectiveness of the Medical Device
Reporting (MDR) system. FDA, however, realizes that there may be
situations, hopefully rare, when a manufacturer, for example, did not
``become aware,'' as defined in 803.1(c) (21 CFR 803.1(c)), of
information reasonably suggesting a reportable event has occurred, and
therefore could not have submitted a report, or there may be an
occasional instance of miscounting the number of reports. FDA,
therefore, has determined that it is appropriate for manufacturers to
state that they are certifying the statements on FDA Form 3381 to the
best of their knowledge. FDA has revised the form accordingly. It now
states:
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the firms listed in
item 3. above either submitted the MDR indicated above during the
stated reporting period and that this number represents the
submissions for all appropriately reportable MDR events or that the
firm listed above did not receive any MDR reportable events during
this time period. I also certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
the statements and information presented in this submission are
truthful and accurate.
5. Comments objected to the requirement that annual updates to
baseline reports be submitted on the anniversary date of the initial
baseline report. The comments noted that, for companies who submit
baseline reports for numerous devices, they would have to keep track of
many different submission dates for update baseline reports. The
comments suggested that manufacturers be allowed to submit all baseline
updates on a single date, e.g., the date on which annual certification
is required.
FDA agrees with the comments and believes that it is an acceptable
interpretation of the regulation to allow an annual update on the date
on which the annual certification is due.
Section 803.55(a) requires that a manufacturer shall submit its
first baseline report ``for a device when the device model is first
reported under Sec. 803.50'' (i.e., an individual adverse event
report). Section 803.55(b) requires that each baseline report shall be
updated annually, on the anniversary month of the initial submission.
The time a manufacturer is required to submit the update of their
baseline report under Sec. 803.55(b), is therefore contingent upon the
time a manufacturer is considered to have ``first reported'' an adverse
event for a particular device model.
FDA believes that a manufacturer could interpret Sec. 803.55(a) to
mean that the first baseline report update could be submitted on the
date a firm is required to submit its next certification. Accordingly,
the firm could thereafter submit its annual baseline update report on
the date of the firm's next annual certification. For example, if a
manufacturer submits its first adverse event baseline report for a
device on March 1, 1996, it could submit its first baseline report on
the date of its next certification report, November 1, 1996.
Thereafter, it would submit its update baseline report on November 1,
1997.
FDA intends to make a guidance document on the final rule available
during April 1996, and will announce it's availability in the Federal
Register. FDA also intends to hold a nationwide teleconference by
satellite on May 7, 1996, during which FDA officials will speak on the
final rule and be available to answer questions. When more details are
available, FDA will publicize these initiatives through the Facts-on-
Demand system administered by FDA's Division of Small Manufacturers
Assistance, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, and the
electronic docket. To access this information through Facts-on-Demand
dial 1-800-899-0381 (outside MD) or 1-301-827-0111 (inside MD) and
enter document number 799.
Dated: March 30, 1996.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 96-8970 Filed 4-5-96; 3:26 pm]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8850 Removal of Obsolete Regulations for Determination of Avoidable Losses Under the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16065-16066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8850]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16066]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
49 CFR Part 1154
[STB Ex Parte No. 540]
Removal of Obsolete Regulations for Determination of Avoidable
Losses Under the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970
AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation Board is removing from the Code of
Federal Regulations obsolete regulations used to determine passenger
train avoidable losses.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 11, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beryl Gordon, (202) 927-5610. [TDD for
the hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Rail Passenger Service Act, 45 U.S.C.
501 et seq., established the National Railroad Passenger Corporation
(Amtrak) as the principal operator of intercity rail passenger service.
It permitted railroads then performing passenger service to relieve
themselves of their common carrier obligation by paying certain sums to
Amtrak. 45 U.S.C. 561(a). As compensation for being relieved of this
responsibility, the rail carrier was to pay Amtrak an amount computed
under one of three options pursuant to section 561(a)(2) and (3). Two
of these three methods used an amount called ``avoidable loss.'' In
Losses Under the Rail Pass. Serv. Act of 1970, 343 I.C.C. 379 (1973),
the Interstate Commerce Commission (the predecessor of the Surface
Transportation Board) issued regulations for developing avoidable
losses, which are now found in Part 1154.
Section 561(a) was repealed by Pub. L. No. 103-272, section 7(b),
July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 745, 1379.\1\ Because the statutory basis for
49 CFR Part 1154 has been repealed, we are removing these regulations
from the Code of Federal Regulations effective immediately.
\1\ See H.R. Rep. No. 180, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. 585, reprinted
in 1994 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 818, 1402. We note that former 45
U.S.C. 561(b) and (c) are now incorporated in 49 U.S.C. 24701.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the
human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1154
Administrative practice and procedure, Railroads, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Decided: April 2, 1996.
By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice Chairman Simmons, and
Commissioner Owen.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
PART 1154--[REMOVED]
For the reasons set forth in the preamble and under the authority
of 49 U.S.C. 721(a), title 49, chapter X of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended by removing part 1154.
[FR Doc. 96-8850 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8744 Control of Air Pollution; Removal and Modification of Obsolete, Superfluous or Burdensome Rules
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16050-16063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8744]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 51 and 52
[FRL-5450-9]
Control of Air Pollution; Removal and Modification of Obsolete,
Superfluous or Burdensome Rules
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is determining,
through ``direct final'' procedure, that certain rules in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 should be deleted or
modified. Deleting or modifying these rules will clarify their legal
status and remove unnecessary, obsolete or burdensome regulations.
In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is
proposing these determinations and soliciting public comment on them.
If adverse comments are received on the direct final rule, EPA will
withdraw the portions of the final rule that triggered the comments.
EPA will address those comments in a final rule on the related proposed
rule, which is being published in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register. See, for example, EPA's partial withdrawal of a
direct final rule in 60 FR 6030 (Feb. 1, 1995). Any portions of the
final rule for which no adverse or critical comment is received will
become final after the designated period.
DATES: This action will be effective June 10, 1996 unless notice is
received by May 13, 1996 that any person wishes to submit adverse or
critical comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will
be published in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Delaney, Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Policy Analysis and Review, (202) 260-7431.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On March 4, 1995, the President directed all Federal Agencies and
departments to conduct a comprehensive review of the regulations they
administer, to identify those rules that are obsolete or unduly
burdensome. EPA conducted such a review, including rules issued under
the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) On June
29, 1995, EPA published a notice deleting more than 200 Clean Air Act
rules that were no longer legally in effect. 60 FR 33915 (June
29,1995).
In this document, EPA tackles the next phase of its revision
effort, deleting or modifying: additional regulations that are legally
obsolete in whole or in part; regulations which duplicate the statute
or guidance; and regulations that do not add significantly to statutory
provisions, are unduly restrictive or inhibitive of Agency flexibility,
or otherwise are overly burdensome.
EPA's philosophy in this rulemaking is to delete those regulations
which there is no compelling reason to retain, even though no clear
harm results from retention. For example, some regulations are being
deleted because the same substantive provisions exist in the form of
policy guidance. In the case of these regulations, EPA has concluded
that the policy guidance is sufficient to inform the public of EPA's
regulatory interpretations, while allowing the Agency to be more
quickly responsive to unforeseen circumstances that may call for
increased flexibility in EPA's positions. Where EPA has determined that
a regulation does not add substantial value to what is already
contained in the law, or where there are alternative means to
accomplish the regulatory end without restricting EPA's ability to
respond to factual peculiarities in a timely and appropriate way, EPA
has determined that the regulation should be deleted.
EPA has included in this phase of its regulatory streamlining
effort those regulations which can readily be deleted or modified
without a major or complicated regulatory overhaul, and which do not
raise issues on which EPA anticipates adverse comment. These are
therefore appropriate for direct final rulemaking. In the next phase of
its rulemaking effort, EPA anticipates addressing the modifications and
deletions that require a comprehensive approach to more complex or
potentially controversial revisions.
The removal of these rules from the CFR is not intended to affect
the status of any civil or criminal actions that were initiated prior
to the publication of this rule, or which may be initiated in the
future to redress violations of the rules that occurred when the rules
were still legally in effect. Removal of provisions on the ground that
they reiterate or are redundant of statutory provisions does not affect
any obligation or requirement to comply with such statutory provision.
Finally, this rule deletes several state-specific regulations that
no longer have any use or legal effect. For example, the rule deletes
several federal implementation plan provisions that were promulgated in
the 1970's for states that subsequently achieved approval of corrective
state plans. Those approvals removed EPA's authority to retain the
federal provisions, and therefore the federal provisions should have
been deleted at that time. This rule accomplishes those and other
similar deletions.
II. Deletion and Modification of Unnecessary or Burdensome Rules
The following deletions/modifications have been divided into two
basic types of regulations found in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 52: (1) rules
applicable on a national basis; (2) rules applicable to a specific
state. This notice looks in turn at each of the categories, setting
forth the reasons that EPA seeks today to remove them from the CFR.
Any deletion of provisions that state implementation plans
(``SIPs'') currently reference is not intended to disturb those
references, and EPA interprets those references to be to the version
that was in the CFR when the state adopted the reference, unless the
state subsequently provides otherwise and EPA approves such
subsequently adopted provision as a SIP revision.
[[Page 16051]]
1. National Rules
The following regulations apply on a national basis. EPA has
reviewed these rules and found that they should be deleted (or, where
indicated, modified) for the reasons set forth below.
Part 51
40 CFR 51.100(o) and 51.110(c): Section 51.100(o) defines
reasonably available control technology (``RACT'') for the purpose of
implementing secondary national ambient air quality standards
(``NAAQS''). This definition is only used in the establishment of
secondary NAAQS attainment dates [see Sec. 51.110(c)] and in the
evaluation of State requests for extensions of SIP submittals [see
Sec. 51.341(b)] for secondary NAAQS.
Section 51.110(c) requires plans to provide for the attainment of a
secondary standard within a reasonable time after the date of the
Administrator's approval of the plan, and for maintenance of the
standard after it has been attained.
Under the Clean Air Act of 1977, the test for approval of the
attainment date in a SIP implementing a secondary NAAQS was contained
in section 110(a)(2)(A)(ii). This required that the SIP attain the
secondary NAAQS within a ``reasonable time''. Under the CAA of 1990,
this was changed. The new test for approval of a secondary NAAQS
attainment date is contained in section 172(a)(2)(B) and requires
attainment ``as expeditiously as practicable after the date such area
was designated nonattainment.''
As a result of this statutory change, Sec. 51.110(c) is obsolete
and is being deleted from the CFR to eliminate any possible confusion
regarding the appropriate tests for approval of a secondary NAAQS
attainment date. Further, the Sec. 51.100(o) definition of RACT, which
was the sole factor in the evaluation of the approvability of secondary
NAAQS attainment dates or requests for extension of SIP submittal
dates, is no longer necessary and is being deleted. The EPA believes
that evaluation of the approvability of the expeditiousness of
attainment dates for secondary nonattainment areas requires a case-by-
case analysis of the nature and extent of the problem. For example,
this analysis could consider the number of affected sources, the nature
of the emissions (stack or fugitive), the feasibility of controls, the
costs of controls, and other relevant factors. The EPA does not believe
that the availability and effectiveness of RACT should be a
determinative factor in implementing secondary NAAQS. In addition this
will eliminate potential confusion, since the current Agency definition
of RACT is contained in a December 9, 1976 memorandum from R. Strelow
to Regional Administrators, Regions I-X, entitled ``Guidance to
Determining Acceptability of SIP Regulations in Nonattainment Areas.''
40 CFR 51.101 Stipulations: Section 51.101 states that nothing in
Part 51 should be construed to encourage states: to adopt
implementation plans that do not protect the environment; to adopt
plans that do not take into consideration cost-effectiveness and social
and economic impact; to limit appropriate techniques for estimating air
quality or demonstrating adequacy of control strategies; and otherwise
to limit state flexibility to adopt appropriate control strategies or
to attain and maintain air quality better than that required by a
national standard.
While EPA wholeheartedly endorses the policies embodied in
Sec. 51.101, EPA does not believe it necessary to clutter the CFR with
such precatory language, particularly since the Clean Air Act and
judicial interpretations construing the Act provide for state
flexibility. For example, Section 110(a)(2)(A) provides in part that
implementation plans shall ``include enforceable emission limitations
and other control measures, means or techniques (including economic
incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions
rights) * * *. as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the
applicable requirements of this Act. * * *'' Section 101(a)(3) of the
Clean Air Act provides that air pollution prevention and control is
``the primary responsibility of States and local governments; * * *''
The Supreme Court, in construing the Clean Air Act, has also made clear
that the state has broad discretion in constructing attainment plans.
Train v. NRDC, 421 U.S. 60, 78-79 (1975) Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 427
U.S. 246, 256-57 (1976). There is thus no compelling legal or policy
reason to retain this section, and accordingly it is deleted.
40 CFR 51.104 Revisions: Section 51.104(a). Section 51.104(a)
provides that an implementation plan shall be revised from time to time
as necessary to take into account revisions of national standards, the
availability of improved methods of attaining standards, or a finding
that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the
standards, or comply with the requirements of the Act.
This provision is superfluous because its requirements are
superseded by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments which set forth the
conditions and specific schedules according to which plan revisions
should take place. See CAA section 110(k)(5), the general authority of
sections 110(k) and (l). See also section 110(a)(2)(H), which requires
plans to provide for revisions under the same circumstances set forth
in Sec. 51.104(a). Accordingly, Sec. 51.104(a) is deleted.
Section 51.104(b). Section 51.104(b) provides that the State must
revise a plan within 60 days after notice by the Administrator, or such
later date as is set by the Administrator.
This regulation has been superseded by Section 110(k)(5) of the
Clean Air Act, which sets up a different timetable for revisions.
Section 51.104(b) is legally obsolete, and accordingly is deleted.
Section 51.104(e). Section 51.104(e) requires the state to identify
and describe revisions other than those covered by Sec. 51.101(a) and
(d). Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act governs SIP revisions to EPA,
and therefore this section is unnecessary, superfluous, and overly
restrictive. Accordingly, it is being deleted.
Note: Sections 51.104 (c), (d), (f) and (g) are being retained,
and are being redesignated Sec. 51.104 (a) and (b), (c), and (d),
respectively.
40 CFR 51.110 (a) through (l) Attainment and Maintenance of
National Standards: These sections set forth various requirements for
state implementation plans (``SIPs'') providing for attainment of the
primary and secondary national ambient air quality standards.
(``NAAQS'').
Section 51.110(a). Section 51.110(a) requires SIPs to provide for
emissions reductions sufficient to offset any increase in air quality
concentrations resulting from an emissions increase due to projected
growth of population, industrial activity, motor vehicle traffic, or
other factors.
This section is at odds with the approach taken in current law,
under section 110(l). Section 110(l) establishes as a test of
approvability of a SIP revision that the revision may not ``interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of this Act.'' It thus calls into play, and must be read
with, the Act's highly specific requirements in areas such as
reasonable further progress and conformity. EPA interprets section
110(l) by applying it to each SIP revision, in light of the
circumstances presented by each case. Thus, in contrast to
Sec. 51.110(a), and statutory provisions such as section 193 of the
Clean Air Act (which applies to modifications of pre-1990 SIP
[[Page 16052]]
components) section 110(l) does not call for a ``one-size-fits-all''
equivalence standard. EPA therefore concludes that the rigid
equivalence test of Sec. 51.110(a) conflicts with the current statute.
To the extent that this regulation remains consistent with new law, it
is superfluous. EPA has not issued general guidance on section 110(l),
because it views each type of SIP revision as presenting unique issues
that should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Accordingly,
Sec. 51.110(a) is being deleted.
Section 51.110(b). Section 51.110(b) requires that plans for
attainment of the primary standard, or revisions to such plans, provide
for attainment as expeditiously as practicable, but no longer than
three years after the date of approval by the Administrator, unless the
state obtains an exemption under Subpart R. Section 51.110(b) further
requires that each plan provide for maintenance of the standard.
As to basic or original SIPs, the requirements of Sec. 51.110(b)
have been superseded by sections 172(c)(l), 181-182, 186-187(CO), 188-
189 (PM10), 191-192 (SO2, NOX, lead) as enacted as part
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. As to revisions, this section
is superseded by section 110(l) and new statutory provision 175A, which
addresses how states are supposed to assure maintenance. With respect
to section 110(a)(l) of the CAA, Sec. 51.110(b) is redundant and
therefore unnecessary. Section 51.110(b) is accordingly being deleted.
Section 51.110(c). See the discussion above under Sec. 51.100(o).
Section 51.110(d). Retained.
Section 51.110(e). Section 51.110(e) requires plans to ensure that
stationary sources within one region will not prevent attainment and
maintenance of standards in any other region, or interfere with PSD or
visibility measures required to be included in other regions' plans.
Section 51.110(e) is duplicative of the statute, which states that
any plan must meet section 110(a)(2)(D), and with section 110(l), which
provides that any plan revision shall not interfere with statutory
requirements, including section 110(a)(2)(D).
Section 51.110(f). Section 110(f) provides that, for purposes of
developing a control strategy, data derived from measurements of
existing ambient levels of a pollutant may be adjusted to reflect the
extent to which occasional natural or accidental phenomena demonstrably
affected such measured levels.
This section restates the general position that data used to
develop control strategies may be adjusted to reflect occasional
natural or accidental phenomena. This section is unnecessary, since it
is redundant of other guidance. To the extent that natural or
accidental phenomena affect measured levels of pollutants, pollutant-
specific legislative or policy guidance is available to deal with the
impact of these phenomena. For example, section 188(f) of the Clean Air
Act of 1990 provides waivers for certain areas affected by
nonanthropogenic sources of PM10. In addition, EPA has provided
specific guidance regarding the interpretation and implementation of
this section in the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: State Implementation Plans for
serious PM10 nonattainment areas and attainment date waivers for
PM10 nonattainment areas, generally 59 FR 157, 41998-42017.
Accordingly, this section is being deleted as superfluous and
redundant.
Section 51.110(g). Section 51.110(g) states that EPA encourages
States, in developing their attainment plans, to identify alternative
control strategies and the costs and benefits thereof.
While EPA endorses the policies embodied in this regulation, EPA
does not believe it necessary to clutter the CFR with such precatory
language. Sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 101(a)(3), as well as Train v.
NRDC, supra and Union Electric v. EPA, supra, make clear that the state
is free to consider a broad range of factors in constructing its
attainment plans. Accordingly, Sec. 51.110(g) is being deleted.
Section 51.110(h). Section 51.110(h) requires a state plan, to be
submitted by 1974, to identify areas which may have the potential for
exceeding any national standard within the subsequent ten-year period.
This section deals with plan requirements that were due in the
1970's. The statute now sets up a comprehensive scheme that governs how
states should address maintenance. Section 110(a)(l) and Section 175A.
Section 51.110(h) is a relic of an outmoded statutory framework. EPA
believes it is not necessary or warranted for this section to remain on
the books in light of the maintenance requirements in the current
statute. Accordingly it is being deleted.
Section 51.110(i). This section states that the Administrator will
publish by August, 1975, a list of the areas that shall be subject to
the requirements of Sec. 51.110(g).
Section 51.110(i) is obsolete because in the 1977 Clean Air Act
Amendments, and then again in the 1990 Amendments, Congress statutorily
prescribed the contents of new plans for attainment. Sections
172(c)(l), Sections 181-182 (ozone), 186-187 (CO) 188-189 (PM10),
191-192 (SO2, NOX, lead). Accordingly, Sec. 51.110(I) is
being deleted.
Section 51.110(j). Section 51.110(j) provides that for each area
identified under Sec. 51.110(f), the State must submit an air quality
analysis and, if necessary, a plan revision.
Section 51.110(j) is obsolete because in the 1977 Clean Air Act
Amendments, and then again in the 1990 Amendments, Congress statutorily
prescribed the requirements for new plans for attainment and for
revisions. Sections 172(c)(l), 181-182 (ozone), 182(b)(l), 182(c)(2)(A)
(ozone), 186-187 (CO), 188-189 (PM10), 191-192 (SO2,
NOX, lead. Accordingly, Sec. 51.110(j) is being deleted.
Section 51.110(k). Section 51.110(k) applies to state plans
required to be submitted by May, 1978, and includes maintenance
provisions and requirements for data collection and assessment that
include a requirement that the State notify the Administrator if an
area is ``undergoing an amount of development such that it presents the
potential for a violation of national standards within a period of 20
years.'' This section also requires that state plans provide for
assessing all areas of the State every five years to determine if any
areas need plan revision.
This section is a relic of a previous statutory framework and
related round of SIP revisions. The current statute sets forth a
different, and detailed scheme for plan revisions. Section 110(k)(5)
provides that the Administrator may call for SIP revisions based on a
range of findings. EPA does not believe that Sec. 51.110(k) should
remain in the CFR to limit the flexibility embodied in sections
110(k)(5) and 175A. Accordingly Sec. 51.110(k) is being deleted.
Section 51.110(l). Section 51.110(l) provides that whenever the
Administrator calls for a plan revision she may require it to be
developed in accordance with Subpart D without publishing the area in
part 52.
Section 110(k)(5) of the current Clean Air Act adequately governs
the circumstances under which the Administrator may call for plan
revisions. EPA will determine on a case-by-case basis the procedures it
will apply in implementing SIP calls. Accordingly, Sec. 51.110(l) is
unnecessary and is being deleted.
40 CFR 51.213 Transportation Control Measure: Section 51.213(a):
Section 51.213(a) provides that plans must
[[Page 16053]]
contain procedures for obtaining and maintaining data on actual
emissions reductions achieved as a result of implementation of
transportation control measures.
Section 51.213(b). Section 51.213(b) provides that, for measures
based on traffic flow changes or reductions in vehicle use, data must
include observed changes in vehicle miles traveled and average speeds.
Section 51.213(c). Section 51.213(c) requires data to be kept so as
to facilitate comparison of the planned and actual efficacy of
transportation control measures.
Section 51.213(a-c) are generally addressed in section III, SIP
requirements, of the General Preamble for Title I of the 1990 CAA. The
procedural elements of the SIP submittals are specifically required by
sections 182 and 187 of the CAAA. The requirements are incorporated in
Agency regulation and guidance on each required SIP submittal that is
related to transportation control. For example, guidance documents such
as ``Transportation Control Measure: State Implementation Plan Guidance
(September, 1990), ``Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking
Guidance'' (January, 1992), and ``Transportation Control Measure
Information Documents'' (March, 1992), discuss the same requirements
that are set forth in Sec. 51.213. Thus, this section is redundant of
other EPA guidance regarding transportation control measures, and
accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 51.241(b)-(f); 51.242-252 Subpart M--Intergovernmental
Consultation: (Includes the following rules:)
51.241 Nonattainment areas for carbon monoxide and ozone
51.242 [Reserved]
51.243 Consultation process objectives
51.244 Plan elements affected
51.245 Organizations and officials to be consulted
51.246 Timing
51.247 Hearings on consultation process violations
51.248 Coordination with other programs
51.249 [Reserved]
51.250 Transmittal of information
51.251 Conformity with Executive Order 12372
51.252 Summary of plan development participation
The requirements described in this subpart are generally addressed
in section III, SIP requirements, of the General Preamble for Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). The requirements of
Sec. 51.241 regarding Section 174 of the CAAA and designation of a lead
planning organization are specifically addressed in a guidance document
required by section 108(3) of the CAAA. EPA issued the guidance
entitled, ``The 1992 Transportation and Air Quality Planning
Guidelines'' in July, 1992.
The requirements of Secs. 51.243 through 51.252 regarding the
planning consultation process are incorporated in Agency regulation and
guidance on each SIP submittal required by the CAAA. For example, the
EPA regulation, ``Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity to
State or Federal Implementation Plans or Transportation Plans,
Programs, and Projects Funded or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the
Federal Transit Act'' (November, 1993), contains specific requirements
for the planning and consultation process that States must adhere to
and incorporate into their SIP submittal. Thus, these requirements are
redundant of other EPA rules regarding air quality planning, and
consequently are being deleted.
40 CFR 51.325 Contingency Plan Actions: Section 51.325 requires
states to report any measures taken to stop emissions contributing to
any incident of air pollution which corresponds to a stage of episode
criteria as established in the state's contingency plan. States are
also required to report an account of any episode stage during which no
action was taken, and an explanation for the failure to take action.
This section imposes a reporting burden on states that is no longer
appropriate and necessary. This section was promulgated at a time when
EPA did not have routine access to state air quality data. Currently,
EPA has access to State air quality data and has the ability to
initiate the appropriate regulatory response to these high
concentrations, e.g., redesignation to nonattainment. In addition, this
regulation reflects an era when many State air pollution control
agencies were new and may have needed EPA support in dealing with
elevated air pollution levels. State agencies have progressed to the
extent that they do not need EPA assistance in dealing with this type
of event. Moreover, the reporting of how exactly every state responds
to each of these events does not yield a significant enough benefit to
justify the reporting burden, since that information would be publicly
available in any event. The EPA believes that the CFR should reflect
these developments and is therefore removing this regulation as
unnecessary.
40 CFR 51.341 Request for 18-month Extension: Section 51.341(a)
states that the Administrator may, whenever she determines necessary,
extend the submittal date for the portion of a SIP which implements a
secondary NAAQS.
This section merely restates the statutory language contained in
section 110(b) of the Clean Air Act of 1990. Since this section is
redundant, EPA is deleting it from the CFR.
Sections 51.341 (b), (c) and (d) impose certain requirements on any
State request for an extension of the submittal date for a SIP
implementing a secondary NAAQS. Section 51.341(b) requires, at a
minimum, the application of RACT as defined in Sec. 51.100(o). Section
51.341(c) requires that any request for an extension involving an
interstate area either be accompanied by requests from all affected
States in the area or show that all other States in the area were
notified of the request. Finally, Sec. 51.341(d) requires that any
request must be submitted sufficiently in advance to permit SIP
development prior to the original SIP submittal deadline in the event
the request is denied.
These sections place unnecessary limits on the exercise of
discretion by the Administrator in acting on State requests for
extensions of the submittal date for SIPs to implement secondary NAAQS.
While these sections reflect general principles which the Administrator
may wish to consider, they are not compelled by the statutory language
of the Clean Air Act of 1990. EPA believes that such restrictions are
unnecessary and that they may unduly inhibit State flexibility.
Consequently, these sections are being deleted from the CFR.
Part 52
40 CFR 52.02(d) Introduction: Section 52.02(d) provides that
approved plans are available for inspection at the Office of the
Federal Register and at listed EPA headquarters and regional addresses.
The EPA addresses listed in Sec. 52.02(d) are no longer correct.
Accordingly Sec. 52.02(d)(1) through (d)(3) are being revised to
reflect current addresses.
40 CFR 52.03 Extensions: Section 52.03 states that each subpart
includes the Administrator's determination with respect to requests for
extensions under section 110(b) for submitting secondary standard
attainment plans, and requests under section 110(e) for extensions of
the 3-year deadline for attaining the primary standard.
Section 110(e) has been repealed, and thus there are no longer any
determinations of requests for extensions under that section. With
respect to any other extension of attainment dates or extensions under
section 110(b) for submitting secondary
[[Page 16054]]
standard attainment plans, there is no need for a requirement to put
such determinations in the CFR. EPA will provide notice of any such
extension.
40 CFR 52.16 Submission to Administrator: Section 52.16 provides
that communications and submissions to the Administrator pursuant to
part 52 shall be addressed to the appropriate regional office of the
EPA. It supplies addresses for each regional office, and directs that
submissions be addressed to the attention of the Director, Enforcement
Division.
This section provides incorrect addresses, and accordingly is being
revised.
40 CFR 52.19 Revision of Plans by Administrator: Section 52.19
provides that, after notice and opportunity for hearing in each
affected State, the Administrator may revise any provision of an
applicable plan if the provision was promulgated by the Administrator
and the revised plan will be consistent with the Clean Air Act and the
requirements of Part 51 of the CFR.
This section is superfluous, since it is redundant of the statute
section 307(d)(5), and also more restrictive than the statute, which
does not require a hearing in each affected state.
With respect to Sec. 52.19(b), section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act
applies to revisions to FIPs as well as SIPs, and provides a standard
for the acceptability of a plan revision different from that set forth
in Sec. 52.19(b). Section 110(l) provides that plan revisions may not
``interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress * * * or any other applicable requirement
of this Act.'' Accordingly, Sec. 52.19 is being deleted.
2. State Specific Rules
The following regulations include rules applicable on a state-
specific basis. EPA has reviewed these rules and found that they should
be deleted (or, where indicated, modified) for the reasons set forth
below.
Part 52
Region 3 (Delaware, Washington, DC, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
West Virginia)
Maryland
40 CFR 52.1073(b), (c) Approval Status: Sections 52.1073(b) and
(c) state exceptions to EPA's approval of Maryland's implementation
plan for attaining and maintaining national air quality standards
regarding an outdated O3CO control strategy. EPA has approved and
incorporated by reference Maryland's new control strategy regulations
at Secs. 52.1070(c)(110)-(c)(112), 60 FR 2067 (Jan. 6, 1995);
Sec. 52.1070(c)(72), 49 FR 35500 (Sept. 10, 1984);
Sec. 52.1070(c)(102), 59 FR 60908 (Nov. 29, 1994); and
Secs. 52.1070(c)(103) and (c)(104), 59 FR 46180 (Sept. 7, 1994). The
requirements of Secs. 52.1073(b) and (c) cross-reference obsolete
regulations. They are therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly are
being deleted.
40 CFR 52.1082 Rules and regulations: Section 52.1082 cross-
references Sec. Sec. 52.1073 (b) and (c), both obsolete regulations.
EPA has approved and incorporated by reference Maryland's new control
strategy regulations at Sec. Sec. 52.1070(c)(110)-(c)(112), 60 FR 2067
(Jan. 6, 1995); Sec. 52.1070(c)(72), 49 FR 35500 (Sept. 10, 1984);
Sec. 52.1070(c)(102), 59 FR 60908 (Nov. 29, 1994); and Secs.
52.1070(c)(103) and (c)(104), 59 FR 46180 (Sept. 7, 1994). Section
52.1082 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.1086, 40 CFR 52.1101 Gasoline transfer vapor control:
Sections 52.1086 and 52.1101 describe control strategy requirements for
gasoline transfer vapor. The 1990 CAAA provisions supersede those
requirements. EPA has approved and incorporated by reference revised
Maryland regulations. See Sec. Sec. 52.1070(c)(110)-(c)(112), 60 FR
2067 (Jan. 6, 1995). Sections 52.1086 and 52.1101 are therefore legally
obsolete, and accordingly are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.1087, 40 CFR 52.1102 Control of evaporative emissions
from the filling of vehicular tanks: Sections 52.1087 and 52.1102
describe the EPA promulgated control strategy for evaporative emissions
from the filling of vehicular tanks. The provisions of Section
182(b)(3)(A) of the CAA, as amended in 1990, supersede their
requirements. EPA has approved and incorporated by reference revised
Maryland regulations. See Sec. 52.1070(c)(107), 59 FR 29730 (June 9,
1994). Sections 52.1087 and 52.1102 are therefore legally obsolete, and
accordingly are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.1088, 40 CFR 52.1107 Control of dry cleaning solvent
evaporation: Sections 52.1088 and 52.1107 describe the EPA promulgated
control strategy for dry cleaning solvent evaporation. The provisions
of sections 182(b)(2)and 182(b)(2)(A) in the CAA, as amended in 1990,
supersede their requirements. EPA has approved and incorporated by
reference revised Maryland regulations. See Sec. Sec. 52.1070(c)(72),
49 FR 35500 (Sept. 10, 1994); Sec. 52.1070(c)(102), 59 FR 60908 (Nov.
29, 1994); and Secs. 52.1070(c)(103) and (c)(104), 59 FR 46180 (Sept.
7, 1994). Sections 52.1088 and 52.1107 are therefore legally obsolete,
and accordingly are being deleted.
Pennsylvania
40 CFR 52.2023 (b)-(d), (f), (g) Approval status: Sections
52.2023(f) and (g) state exceptions to EPA's approval of Pennsylvania's
implementation plan for attaining and maintaining national air quality
standards. EPA has subsequently approved all official SIP submittals by
Pennsylvania DER to correct the listed deficiencies. See
Secs. 52.2020(c)(41), 47 FR 8358 (Feb. 26, 1982); (c)(48), 48 FR 2319
(Jan 19, 1983); and (c)(49), 48 FR 2768 (Jan. 21, 1983). Sections (b)-
(d) reflect EPA requirements prior to the 1977 CAA amendments. Pursuant
to the 1977 CAA amendments, EPA approved and incorporated by reference
revised Pennsylvania regulations at Sec. Sec. 52.2420(c)(63), 50 FR
7772 (Feb. 26, 1985). All part 52 regulations cross-referenced in these
sections have been determined to be obsolete. Sections 52.2036,
52.2040, 52.2044 through 52.2048, and 52.2052 had previously been
removed. (45 FR 33607 (May 20, 1980). Sections 52.2030, 52.2031,
52.2038, 52.2040, 52.2041, 52.2043, 52.2049 through 52.2051, and
52.2053 are being removed elsewhere in this action. These sections are
therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2030 (b) Source surveillance: Section 52.2030(b)
disapproves Pennsylvania's source surveillance portion of the
implementation plan. Pennsylvania has submitted and EPA has approved a
continuous emission monitoring program as well as additional measures
which require periodic source testing. See Secs. 52.2020(c)(48), 48 FR
2319 (Jan. 19, 1983); (c)(74), 57 FR 43905 (Sept. 23, 1992); and
(c)(81), 58 FR 34911 (June 30, 1993). Section 52.2030(b) is therefore
legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2031 Resources: Section 52.2031 states that the
Pennsylvania implementation plan failed to meet the requirements of
Sec. 51.280 by showing a lack of manpower resources and funds necessary
to carry out the plan five years after its submission. Since 1973,
Pennsylvania has submitted over 90 SIP revisions which EPA has approved
and incorporated by reference in Sec. 52.2020(c). EPA's approval
actions include comprehensive submittals made pursuant to the 1977 and
1990 CAA amendments, portions of which are referenced elsewhere in
today's actions. Those approved submittals evidence
[[Page 16055]]
that the state has adequate resources to implement its plans. Section
52.2031 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.2034 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.2034 states dates by which national ambient air quality standards
are to be attained for Pennsylvania. All of the attainment dates in the
regulation have been superseded by dates in the 1990 CAAA provisions
except with regard to the attainment and maintenance of the secondary
sulfur dioxide standards. Pennsylvania has not submitted a secondary
SO2 plan, as of December 31, 1979, for Nothumberland County,
Snyder County and Allegheny County. All of the attainment dates, except
the date for attainment of the secondary SO2 standard in those
counties, are therefore deleted.
40 CFR 52.2038 Inspection and maintenance: Section 52.2038
reflects inspection and maintenance requirements predating the 1977
CAAA. Pennsylvania has an EPA- approved I/M program reflecting the 1977
CAAA provisions. See Sec. 52.2020(c)(66), 52 FR 11259 (April 8, 1987).
Section 52.2038 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.2039 Air bleed to intake manifold retrofit: Section
52.2039 describes emission control requirements that apply to pre-1968
model year vehicles. Current EPA provisions no longer require these
vehicles to be tested under a State's I/M program. See
Sec. Sec. 51.351(a)(4) and 51.352(a)(4), 57 FR 52950 (Nov. 5, 1992).
Section 52.2039 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.2041, 52.2043, 52.2049, 52.2050, 52.2051 Transportation
control measures FIP: These regulations are made obsolete by 40 CFR
52.2020. The following miscellaneous provisions for Pennsylvania arise
from a FIP, and have been superseded by approved SIP control
strategies. See Sec. 52.2020(c)(63), 50 FR 7772 (Feb. 26, 1985):
Sec.
52.2041 Study and establishment of bikeways
52.2043 Computer carpool matching system
52.2049 Specific express busways in Allegheny County
52.2050 Exclusive bus lanes for Pittsburgh suburbs and outlying
areas
52.2051 Regulation for the limitation of public parking
These sections are therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly are
being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2042 Gasoline transfer vapor control: Section 52.2042
describes the control strategy requirements for gasoline transfer
vapor. The 1977 and 1990 CAAA provisions supersede these requirements.
EPA has approved and incorporated by reference revised Pennsylvania
regulations. See Secs. 52.2020(c)(23), 45 FR 33607 (May 20, 1980) and
(c)(79), 58 FR 28362 (May 13, 1993). Section 52.2042 is therefore
legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2053 Monitoring transportation mode trends: Section
52.2053 should have been deleted as part of EPA's approval action at
Sec. 52.2020(c)(22) et seq., 45 FR 33607 (May 20, 1980). Section
52.2053 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
Virginia
40 CFR 52.2423(b), (c) Approval status: Sections 52.2423 (b) and
(c) state exceptions to EPA's approval of Virginia's implementation
plan for attaining and maintaining national air quality standards
regarding an outdated O3/CO control strategy. Its requirements
cross-reference other obsolete regulations. The 1977 and 1990 CAAA
provisions supersede these requirements. EPA has approved and
incorporated by reference revised Virginia regulations. See
Secs. 52.2420(c)(47), 46 FR 57282 (Nov. 23, 1981); (c)(55), 47 FR 2769
(Jan. 19, 1982); (c)(73), 48 FR 7579 (Feb. 23, 1983); (c)(74), (c)(78)
and (c)(79), 49 FR 3083 (Jan. 25, 1984). Section 52.2423 (b) and (c)
are therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2430 Legal authority: Section 52.2430 states that
Virginia failed to satisfy Sec. 51.231(a), identification of legal
authority. EPA has approved and incorporated by reference revised
Virginia regulations correcting those deficiencies. See
Secs. 52.2420(c)(47), 46 FR 57282 (Nov. 23, 1981); (c)(73), 48 FR 7579
(Feb. 23, 1983); (c)(74), (c)(78) and (c)(79), 49 FR 3083 (Jan. 25,
1984). Section 52.2430 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly
is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2431 Control strategy: carbon monoxide and ozone:
Section 52.2431(a)-(c) states disapproval of Virginia's implementation
plan regarding the control strategy for carbon monoxide and ozone.
These provisions reflect EPA requirements prior to the 1977 CAA
amendments. Pursuant to the 1977 CAAA, EPA has approved and
incorporated by reference revised Virginia regulations. See
Secs. 52.2420(c)(55), 47 FR 2769 (Jan. 19, 1982); (c)(74) and (c)(78),
49 FR 3083 (Jan. 25, 1984). Section 52.2431(d) cross-references 40 CFR
52.2438, gasoline transfer vapor control, an obsolete regulation.
Pursuant to the 1990 CAA amendments, EPA has approved and incorporated
by reference revised Virginia regulations at Sec. 52.2420(c)(99) 59 FR
15117 (Mar. 31, 1994). Section 52.2431 is therefore legally obsolete,
and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2435 Compliance schedules: Section 52.2435 describes the
compliance schedule for the Eisenhower Avenue Incinerator in
Alexandria, Virginia. According to the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, this facility was physically dismantled in 1988.
Since the facility no longer exists and any reopening would be subject
to new requirements under NSR or PSD, this regulation is obsolete.
Accordingly, Sec. 52.2435 is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2436(a) Rules and regulations: Section 52.2436(a) refers
to an outdated O3 control strategy. Its requirements cross
reference Secs. 52.2438, 52.2439 and 52.2440, all legally obsolete.
Section 52.2436(a) is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is
being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2438 Gasoline transfer vapor control: Section 52.2438
describes the control strategy requirements for gasoline transfer
vapor. The 1977 and 1990 CAAA provisions supersede these requirements.
EPA has approved and incorporated by reference revised Virginia
regulations meeting the new requirements. See Secs. 52.2420(c)(55), 47
FR 2769 (Jan. 19, 1982); and (c)(99), 59 FR 15117 (Mar. 31, 1994).
Section 52.2438 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.2440 Control of dry cleaning solvent evaporation:
Section 52.2440 describes the control strategy requirements for dry
cleaning solvent evaporation. The provisions of Secs. 182(b)(2) and
182(b)(2)(A) in the 1990 CAAA supersede their requirements. EPA has
approved and incorporated by reference revised Virginia regulations
meeting those statutory requirements. See Sec. 52.2420(c)(99), 59 FR
15117 (Mar. 31, 1994). Section 52.2440 is therefore legally obsolete,
and accordingly is being deleted.
West Virginia
40 CFR 52.2523 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.2523 states dates by which national ambient air quality standards
are to be attained for West Virginia. The attainment dates in the
regulation have been superseded by new dates in the 1990 CAAA
provisions, except with regard to attainment and maintenance of the
secondary sulfur dioxide standards. The superseded attainment dates are
being deleted, since they are legally inoperative.
[[Page 16056]]
Region 5 (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin)
Illinois
40 CFR 52.727 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.727 states dates by which national ambient air quality standards are
to be attained for Illinois. All of the attainment dates in the
regulation have been superseded by new dates in 1990 CAAA provisions,
with the exception of the secondary sulfur dioxide attainment dates.
Illinois' remaining SO2 secondary nonattainment area, Hollis
township in Peoria County, was redesignated as attaining the SO2
standard on April 4, 1995 (60 FR 10734) at which time EPA also approved
a maintenance plan. The EPA conditionally approved the State's SO2
nonattainment area plan on February 21, 1980 (45 FR 11472) and codified
its satisfaction of the final conditional approval element on September
2, 1992 (57 FR 40126). This regulation is therefore obsolete, and
accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.729 Control strategy: Carbon monoxide: Illinois contains
no carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas. This was most recently
confirmed by the November 15, 1995 reexamination of the CO attainment
status mandated by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. EPA did
conditionally approve the State's CO nonattainment area plans for the
Chicago and Peoria areas on September 22, 1980 (45 FR 62804). The
satisfaction of these conditional approvals is codified at 40 CFR
52.720(c) (25), (33) and (34). Section 52.729 is therefore legally
obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.731 Inspection and maintenance of vehicles: Section
52.731 contains a federally promulgated I/M program which has been
superseded by a State program which was incorporated in the SIP at 40
CFR 52.720(c)(79). Section 52.731 is therefore legally obsolete, and
accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.732 Traffic flow improvements: Section 52.732 has been
satisfied by transportation control plans codified as received and
approved at Sec. 52.720(c) (25), (33), and (34). This section is
therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.733 Restriction of on-street parking: This section
contains a federally promulgated regulation which has been replaced by
State developed and adopted transportation control plans which were
codified and approved at Secs. 52.720(c) (25), (33), and (34). This
regulation is therefore obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.734 Monitoring transportation mode trends: This section
contains a federally promulgated regulation which has been replaced by
State developed and adopted transportation control plans which were
codified and approved at Secs. 52.720(c) (25), (33) and (34). This
regulation is therefore obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
Minnesota
40 CFR 52.1227 Transportation and land use controls: Section
52.1227 requires Minnesota to submit information relating to its
transportation control plan by December 30, 1973. Receipt of a
transportation control plan on May 20, 1985 and April 17, 1986 is
codified at Sec. 52.1220(c)(23). Section 52.1227 is therefore legally
obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
Ohio
40 CFR 52.1875 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.1875 states dates by which national ambient air quality standards
are to be attained for Ohio. All of the attainment dates in the
regulation have been superseded by new dates in 1990 CAAA provisions,
with the exception of the secondary sulfur dioxide attainment dates.
Therefore, references to the attainment of other national standards
should be deleted from this section of the CFR.
40 CFR 52.1878 Inspection and maintenance program: Paragraphs (a)
through (g) of this section are used to codify a federally promulgated
I/M program which has been superseded by a State operated and approved
I/M section. Paragraph (h) is a conditional approval which should have
been removed during the recent full approval action. EPA's most recent
approval of Ohio's I/M program is codified at Sec. 52.1870(c)(101).
This submittal satisfied the conditional approval of the program
contained in Sec. 52.1878(h). This section is therefore obsolete, and
accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.1885(e)-(q) Control strategy: ozone: Paragraphs (e)
through (q) list numerous site-specific SIP submittals which have been
disapproved. The applicable requirements for these sources are
initially codified as Sec. 52.1870(c)(15) and other provisions contain
the subsequent modifications to the SIP as approved by EPA. Paragraphs
(e) through (q) of Sec. 52.1885 should be removed because they do not
alter the contents of the SIP. These sections are therefore legally
obsolete, and accordingly are being deleted.
Region 6 (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas)
Arkansas
40 CFR 52.175 Resources: Section 52.175 states that the (January
1972) Arkansas implementation plan failed to meet the requirements of
Sec. 51.280, by showing a lack of manpower resources and funds
necessary to carry out the plan in the five years after its submission
on January 1972. The State has now demonstrated that it has adequate
resources by attaining and maintaining all National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. See Sec. 81.304, 56 FR 5671 (Nov. 6, 1991). Further, the
State has carried out an adequate air pollution control program, thus
demonstrating the lack of manpower and funding has been remedied.
Section 52.175 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
Louisiana
40 CFR 52.972 Approval status: Section 52.972 states exceptions to
EPA's approval of Louisiana's implementation plan for attaining and
maintaining national air quality standards. The exceptions relate to
certain RACT rules that were required of the State. Louisiana adopted
RACT rules for the sources covered by CTGs and EPA has approved the
regulations. See Sec. 52.970(c)(60), 59 FR 23164 (May 5, 1994). Section
52.972 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.978 Resources: Section 52.978 states that the (January
1972) Louisiana implementation plan failed to meet the requirements of
Sec. 51.280 by showing a lack of manpower and funds necessary to carry
out the plan (during the five years after its submission). Since
January 1972, Louisiana has submitted over 62 SIP revisions which EPA
has approved and incorporated-by-reference in Sec. 52.970(c). EPA's
approval actions include comprehensive submittals made pursuant to the
1977 and 1990 CAA Amendments, portions of which are referenced
elsewhere in today's actions. Section 52.978 is therefore legally
obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.988 Rules and regulations: Section 52.988 (a) states
that the requirements of Sec. 51.281 are not met since the definitions
of ``particulate matter'' and ``suspended particulate matter'', as
provided in LAC:33:III:111 (formerly Secs. 4.47 and 4.72,
respectively), could make applicable emission limitations of the
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) unenforceable in
some circumstances. Therefore,
[[Page 16057]]
LAC:33:III:111 ``particulate matter'' and ``suspended particulate
matter'' were disapproved. Sections 52.988 (b) and (c) respectively
prescribe definitions of particulate matter applicable to the following
chapters in LAC:33:III: 1) Chapters 13 and 56 (formerly Regulation 9.0
and 27.0 respectively); and 2) Chapter 13 (formerly Regulations 19.0,
20.0, 21.0) and Chapter 23, Subchapters A and B (formerly Regulations
23.0 and 28.0 respectively). The State of Louisiana has since adopted
definitions to cover these areas and EPA has approved them, making
Sec. 52.988 obsolete. See Sec. 52.970(c)(50); 54 FR 25451 (June 15,
1989). Specifically, LDEQ revised its definition of particulate matter
and total suspended particulate and added definitions for particulate
matter emissions, PM10, and PM10 emissions. These definitions
are essentially identical to the Federal definitions. LDEQ also deleted
its definition for suspended particulate matter, which EPA had
disapproved in a March 28, 1979 rulemaking notice. EPA approved all
these changes in the June 15, 1989 rulemaking action. Section
Sec. 52.988 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
New Mexico
40 CFR 52.1625 Control strategy: particulate matter: Section
52.1625 states that the New Mexico plan for total suspended
particulates (TSP) for the Albuquerque nonattainment area was
conditionally approved on five conditions as indicated. EPA may no
longer require development of control strategies designed to attain the
TSP standard after the July 1, 1987 promulgation of the particulate
matter (PM10) standard and the repeal of the TSP standard. See 52
FR 24634 (July 1, 1987). Section 52.1625 is therefore legally obsolete,
and accordingly is being deleted. Also, the Albuquerque/Bernalillo
County area is currently designated as unclassifiable for the PM10
NAAQS (see Sec. 81.332, PM10 table; 58 FR 67334, Dec. 21, 1993).
Oklahoma
40 CFR 52.1922 Approval status (last sentence): Section 52.1922
states exceptions to EPA's 1979 approval of Oklahoma's implementation
plan for attaining and maintaining national air quality standards. EPA
approved Oklahoma's post-1982 SIP revision (including State adopted
rules) for attainment of the ozone NAAQS in Tulsa County, and approved
the State's request to redesignate Tulsa County from nonattainment to
attainment for the ozone NAAQS (effective immediately upon signature of
the EPA Administrator on October 31, 1990). See Sec. 52.1920(c)(39) and
Sec. 81.337--Ozone; 56 FR 3777 (Jan. 31, 1991). The last sentence of
section 52.1922 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.1932 Control strategy and regulations: ozone: On June
16, 1975, the Governor of Oklahoma submitted to EPA revisions of
Oklahoma Regulation No. 15 for control of emissions of organic
materials as adopted (effective date) December 31, 1974. See
Sec. 52.1920(c)(11). Section 52.1932 states that subsection 15.27c of
Oklahoma Revised Regulation 15 (effective date of December 31, 1974) is
disapproved. Subsection 15.27c exempts ``agricultural purposes'' from
all provisions for hydrocarbon control. The previous (1972) regulation
did not exempt such sources. See Sec. 52.1920(c)(4). In its June 16,
1975 submittal, the State did not provide EPA with justification for
relaxation of the 1972 regulation or with an analysis of the air
quality impact of exempting previously controlled sources. The EPA
could not approve relaxation of an approved SIP regulation without such
an analysis. Thus, subsection 15.27c was disapproved on March 31, 1978,
at 43 FR 13574.
Since March 1978, when this rule was published, the State has shown
sufficient justification for relaxation of the 1972 regulation (i.e.,
for approval of the subsection 15.27c exemption). Specifically, EPA
approved Oklahoma's post-1982 SIP revision (including State adopted
rules) for attainment of the ozone NAAQS in Tulsa County, and approved
the State's request to redesignate Tulsa County from nonattainment to
attainment for the ozone NAAQS (effective immediately upon signature of
the EPA Administrator on October 31, 1990). (Oklahoma Regulation 15.27c
was subsequently renumbered as State Regulation 3.7.1.(d)(3), and again
renumbered as State Regulation 310:200-37-4(c).)
Specifically, the post-1982 Oklahoma ozone nonattainment SIP
demonstrated attainment of the ozone NAAQS in Tulsa County by December
31, 1987, without taking credit for the emission reductions from
Sec. 52.1932 promulgated by EPA in March 1978. The emission reductions
from the federally promulgated measure were not included in either a)
the State's base-year (1984) emission inventory or b) the anticipated
emission reductions, from the post-1982 SIP demonstrating attainment of
the ozone standard for Tulsa County. Also the State did not take any
such credit in the modeling input parameters they used in the plan.
Consequently, EPA's rationale for disapproving Regulation 15.27c became
moot with EPA's approval of the post-1982 ozone attainment
demonstration, and this rule Sec. 52.1932 is now obsolete.
For example, the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) curve submitted
with the post-1982 ozone SIP predicted sufficient VOC emission
reductions would be achieved with the implementation of the State
regulations and the continuation of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control
Program to attain the ozone NAAQS. The curve shows that a VOC emissions
decrease of 19.7 percent was to occur in Tulsa County between 1984 and
1986. This anticipated decrease was without taking credit for the
federally promulgated measure at Sec. 52.1932. The State demonstrated
that a 12 percent decrease of VOC emissions was required to attain the
ozone NAAQS, which was more than met with its post-1982 ozone SIP.
Thus, the federally promulgated measure at Sec. 52.1932 is obsolete
and has been superseded by SIP control strategies approved by EPA in
June and October 1990 (see Sec. 52.1920(c)(36), 55 FR 23734 (June 12,
1990) and Sec. 52.1920(c)(39), 56 FR 3777 (Jan. 31, 1991)). Section
52.1932 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
Texas
40 CFR 52.2273 Approval status (last sentence of first paragraph
and paragraph (a)): Section 52.2273 states exceptions to EPA's approval
of Texas' implementation plan for attaining and maintaining national
air quality standards. The disapproval of the lead SIP was superseded
by a later lead SIP approval by EPA. See Sec. 52.2770(c)(65), 53 FR
16261 (May 6, 1988). Texas has also adopted RACT rules for the sources
covered by CTGs and EPA has approved them. See Sec. 52.2270(c)(77), 57
FR 44124 (Sept. 24, 1992). The last sentence of the first paragraph and
paragraph (a) of section 52.2273 are therefore legally obsolete, and
accordingly are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2294, 40 CFR 52.2296, 40 CFR 52.2297, 40 CFR 52.2298
Transportation control measures (TCM's) FIP: These regulations were
made obsolete by 40 CFR 52.2270. The following miscellaneous provisions
for the State of Texas, which date back to the early 1970's and arise
from a FIP, are obsolete because they have been superseded by approved
SIP control strategies (see Sec. 52.2270(c)(20), 45 FR 19244 (Mar. 25,
1980) and Sec. 52.2770(c)(24), 45 FR 52148 (Aug. 6, 1980):
[[Page 16058]]
Sec.
52.2294 Texas Incentive Program to Reduce Vehicle Emissions Through
Increased Bus and Carpool Use.
52.2296 Texas Carpool Matching and Promotion System.
52.2297 Texas Employer Mass Transit and Carpool Incentive Program.
52.2298 Texas Monitoring Transportation Mode Trends.
Specifically, the 1979 Texas ozone nonattainment SIP demonstrated
attainment of the ozone NAAQS in Bexar, Dallas and Tarrant Counties by
0December 31, 1982, and in Harris County by December 31, 1987, without
taking credit for the EPA transportation control measures (TCM's)
promulgated July 21, 1977. The emission reductions from the federally
promulgated TCM's were not included in either a) the State's base-year
(1977) emission inventories or b) the anticipated emission reductions,
from the 1979 SIP demonstrating attainment of the ozone standard for
the above four counties. Also, the State did not take any such credit
in the modeling input parameters they used in the plan. (Note: the
State used modified rollback to determine the percent of VOC emissions
reductions required.)
Thus, the four federally promulgated TCM's are obsolete and have
been superseded by SIP control strategies approved by EPA in March and
August 1980 (see Sec. 52.2270(c)(20), and Sec. 52.2270(c)(24)).
Accordingly, Sec. 52.2294, and Secs. 52.2296-52.2298 are being deleted.
40 CFR 52.2305 Lead control plan: Section 52.2305 sets a
compliance date for the owner or operator of any copper or zinc smelter
located in El Paso County, Texas, to comply with the requirements of
TACB Rule 113.53; the final compliance date is August 13, 1987. Thus
these facilities were required to have come into compliance eight years
ago and Sec. 52.2305 is now obsolete. Any remaining issues with regards
to compliance will be dealt with under the currently applicable
requirements. Accordingly, Sec. 52.2305 is being deleted.
Note: The disapproval of the lead SIP was superseded by a later
lead SIP approval by EPA. See Sec. 52.2270(c)(65); 53 FR 16261 (May
6, 1988). The State demonstrated attainment by August 1987, more
than eight years ago. In the May 6, 1988 Federal Register action,
EPA announced approval of the demonstration of attainment by August
14, 1987, of the Texas Lead SIP for El Paso County and the limited
area surrounding ASARCO. That Federal Register action approved the
entire lead SIP for El Paso.
Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska)
Iowa
40 CFR 52.826 Control strategy: particulate matter: Section 52.826
states conditions under which EPA can approve Iowa nonattainment plans
for the secondary air quality standard for total suspended particulates
(TSP). EPA may no longer require development of control strategies
designed to attain the TSP standard after the July 1, 1987 promulgation
of the particulate matter (PM10) standard and the repeal of the
TSP standard. See 52 FR 24634 (July 1, 1987). Section 52.826 is
therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.829 Review of new sources and modifications: Section
52.829 rescinds approval of Iowa's NSR program for nonattainment areas
(after December 31, 1980) if the State fails to submit a revised NSR
regulation by that date. The State submitted revised regulations for
NSR in nonattainment areas. EPA gave full final approval to the State's
NSR program. See 50 FR 37176 (Sept. 12, 1985) and 51 FR 25199 (July 11,
1986). Section 52.829 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is
being deleted.
Kansas
40 CFR 52.873(a) (retain (b)) Approval status: Section 52.873(a)
states exceptions to EPA's approval of Kansas' implementation plan for
attaining and maintaining national air quality standards. Kansas
submitted the necessary corrections to its CAA Part D SIP. EPA gave
full and final approval to this SIP revision on January 12, 1984. See
49 FR 1491. Section 52.873(a) is therefore legally obsolete, and
accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.879 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.879 sets forth the dates by which national air quality standards are
to be attained. All of the dates in the regulation have been superseded
by new dates in the 1990 CAAA provisions. Section 52.879 is therefore
legally obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
Missouri
40 CFR 52.1324 General requirements: Section 52.1324 states
procedures whereby the Regional Administrator can obtain emissions data
in instances where Missouri has inadequate legal authority to do so.
Missouri submitted a rule which provided for the submission of
emissions data. On April 17, 1986, EPA approved the rule as a revision
to the Missouri SIP, thus correcting the plan deficiency. See 51 FR
13000. Section 52.1324 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly
is being deleted.
Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming)
Montana
40 CFR 52.1374 Review of new source and modification: Section
52.1374 implements the provisions of Sec. 52.22(b), which included
provisions for indirect source review and for disapproving SIPs for
failing to meet indirect source review requirements contained in
Sec. 51.12 (no longer exists). In the June 29, 1995 regulatory
streamiling notice, section 52.22(b) was determined to be legally
obsolete; therefore, Sec. 52.1374 is also obsolete. Accordingly, EPA is
deleting Sec. 52.1374 from the CFR.
40 CFR 52.1375 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.1375 states the dates by which national ambient air quality
standards are to be attained for Montana. The dates in the regulation
have been superseded by new dates in the 1990 CAAA provisions, except
with respect to attainment and maintenance of the sulfur dioxide
secondary NAAQS. Pursuant to the 1970 amended CAA, States were to
submit plans that provided for implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the national ambient air quality standards within each
air quality control region in the State. Such plan was to specify the
projected dates of attainment for the primary and secondary standards.
Montana submitted its plan on March 22, 1972 with supplemental
information submitted on May 10, 1972. EPA approved, with some
exceptions, that SIP and created the format for the current table found
in Sec. 52.1375 in a May 31, 1972 Federal Register action (37 FR
10842). For areas that did not have specified attainment dates in the
SIP, EPA established attainment dates.
Pursuant to the 1977 amended CAA, States were to submit a list of
the NAAQS attainment status of all areas within the State. The
Administrator was to promulgate the State lists with any necessary
modifications. The attainment status for Montana was published on March
3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). The only two areas listed as not meeting the
secondary sulfur dioxide NAAQS were the East Helena and Anaconda areas.
The fact that EPA only designated two areas (Anaconda and East
Helena) as not meeting the secondary sulfur dioxide NAAQS in March 1978
evidences that all the other areas listed in the table in Sec. 52.1375
that show a specific attainment date for the secondary sulfur
[[Page 16059]]
dioxide NAAQS had attained the NAAQS. These old secondary sulfur
dioxide attainment dates may be deleted as obsolete for those areas
that have since attained the NAAQS.
With respect to the two areas listed in table Sec. 52.1375 that
were also listed as nonattainment areas for the secondary sulfur
dioxide NAAQS in the March 3, 1978 notice, EPA approved the SIP for the
Anaconda area on January 10, 1980 (45 FR 2034) and redesignated the
area to attainment on July 15, 1982 (47 FR 30763). Therefore, for
Anaconda, since EPA has determined that the area has attained the
NAAQS, the attainment date may be deleted as obsolete. For the East
Helena area, the secondary SIP has not yet been submitted nor has EPA
determined that the area has attained the NAAQS. Since the
Administrator has not established a new attainment date for the area
pursuant to the 1990 CAAA, the attainment date for the secondary sulfur
dioxide NAAQS for the area remains as December 31, 1982.
Therefore, the table and paragraph preceding the table should be
deleted and replaced with the following: The attainment date for the
secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide for East Helena is December 31,
1982.
40 CFR 52.1376 (a) and (c) Extensions: Section 52.1376 extends the
attainment date for the national standards for sulfur oxides in the
Helena Intrastate Region of Montana. The attainment date extensions are
superseded by new dates in the 1990 CAAA provisions, except with regard
to the secondary sulfur dioxide NAAQS. Sections 52.1376(a) and (c) are
therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly are being deleted. Section
52.1376(b) is renumbered (a) and is modified: On October 7, 1993 (58 FR
52237), EPA granted the request by the State for the full three years
allowed by section 172(b) of the CAA, as amended in 1990, for submittal
of the SIP for the East Helena area to attain and maintain the sulfur
dioxide secondary NAAQS. Therefore, the SIP for the area was due
November 15, 1993. The SIP was not submitted by that date.
North Dakota
40 CFR 52.1824(a), (b) Review of new source and modification:
Section 52.1824(a) and (b) implement the provisions of Sec. 52.22(b),
which included provisions for indirect source review and for
disapproving SIPs for failing to meet indirect source review
requirements contained in Sec. 51.12 (no longer exists). Section
52.22(b) has been determined to be obsolete; therefore, Sec. 52.1824(a)
and (b) is also obsolete. Accordingly, Secs. 52.1824(a) and (b) are
being deleted.
Utah
40 CFR 52.2322 Extensions: Section 52.2322 extends the attainment
date for the national standards for CO in the Wasatch Front intrastate
region of Utah. The attainment date extensions are superseded by new
dates in the 1990 CAAA provisions. The secondary sulfur dioxide NAAQS
SIP requirements were met. See 59 FR 64329 (Dec. 14, 1994). Section
52.2322 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
40 CFR 52.2331 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.2331 states dates by which national ambient air quality standards
are to be attained for Utah. The dates in the regulation have been
superseded by new dates in 1990 CAAA provisions, except relating to the
secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide. Section 52.2331 is being deleted
and replaced with the following statement: The attainment date for the
secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide for Salt Lake County and portions of
Tooele County is December 31, 1994. December 31, 1994 is the attainment
date because the PM10 SIP for Salt Lake County, approved by EPA on
July 8, 1994 (59 FR 35036), requires Kennecott to meet a certain
SO2 emission limit by December 31, 1994, by either adding a double
contact acid plant or plant operation restrictions. The SO2 SIP
indicates that at the SO2 limit mentioned in the PM10 SIP,
the area will attain the SO2 NAAQS.
Wyoming
40 CFR 52.2623 Review of new source and modification: Section
52.2623 implements the provisions of Sec. 52.22(b), which included
provisions for indirect source review and for disapproving SIPs for
failing to meet indirect source review requirements contained in
Sec. 51.12 (no longer exists). Section 52.22(b) has been determined to
be obsolete, therefore, Sec. 52.2623 is also obsolete. Accordingly,
Sec. 52.2623 is being deleted.
Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington)
Alaska
40 CFR 52.74 Legal Authority: Section 52.74 relates to a required
indirect source review in the carbon monoxide area in Alaska. Indirect
source requirements as a condition of SIP approval were made obsolete
by CAA Sec. 110(a)(5)(A). Section 52.74 is therefore legally obsolete,
and accordingly it is being deleted.
Idaho
40 CFR 52.676 Control strategy: sulfur oxides: Section 52.676
states implementation plan requirements for control of sulfur dioxide
emissions for the Bunker Hill Company lead and zinc smelter in Idaho.
Since the Bunker Hill Company no longer exists and any reopening of the
facility would be subject to new requirements under NSR or PSD, this
regulation is obsolete. Accordingly, Sec. 52.676 is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.680 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.680 states all of dates by which national ambient air quality
standards are to be attained for Idaho. All of the attainment dates in
the regulation have been superseded by new dates in 1990 CAAA
provisions. This regulation is therefore obsolete, and accordingly is
being deleted.
40 CFR 52.684 Control Strategy: carbon monoxide: Section 52.684
(45 FR 70261 (Oct. 23, 1980), 40 CFR 52.670 (c)(19)) states the
implementation plan requirements for controlling carbon monoxide in
Idaho. The control strategy was put in place to assure that the
standards were met prior to December 31, 1987, and the SIP has since
been approved. See Sec. 52.670(c)(23),(24), 50 FR 23810 and 23811 (June
6, 1985); 51 FR 22808 (June 23, 1986). This regulation is therefore
obsolete, and accordingly is being deleted.
40 CFR 52.686 Inspection and maintenance program: Section 52.686
(45 FR 70261 (Oct 23, 1980), 40 CFR 52.670 (c)(19)) requires an Idaho
I/M implementation plan revision. The I/M SIP was submitted and
approved at Sec. 52.670(c)(23), 50 FR 23810 and 23811 (June 6, 1985).
Therefore, Sec. 52.686 is being deleted.
Oregon
40 CFR 52.1973 Attainment dates for national standards: Section
52.1973 states all of dates by which national ambient air quality
standards are to be attained for Oregon. All of the attainment dates in
the regulation have been superseded by new dates in 1990 CAAA
provisions. This regulation is therefore obsolete, and accordingly is
being deleted.
40 CFR 52.1981 Extensions: Section 52.1981 extends the attainment
date for the national standards for CO for certain areas in Oregon. The
attainment date extensions are superseded by the 1990 CAAA provisions.
This regulation is therefore obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
Washington
40 CFR 52.2483 Resources: Section 52.2483 states that the
Washington
[[Page 16060]]
implementation plan failed to meet the requirements of Sec. 51.280
because the transportation control plan does not contain a sufficient
description of resources available to the State and local agencies to
carry out the plan during the five year period following submittal.
This section is obsolete and has been superseded by approved SIP
control strategies for all CO and ozone nonattainment areas. See 40 CFR
52.2470(22) (Seattle) and 40 CFR 52.2470(24) Spokane, 46 FR 45607
(Sept. 24, 1981) (Seattle) and 47 FR 1266 (March 22, 1982). Section
52.2483 is therefore legally obsolete, and accordingly is being
deleted.
III. Final Action
EPA determines that the above-referenced rules should be deleted or
modified at this time. This action will become effective on June 10,
1996. However, if the EPA receives adverse comments by May 13, 1996,
then the EPA will publish a notice that withdraws the portions of the
action on which EPA received the adverse comments, and will address
those comments in a separate final action.
IV. Analyses Under E.O. 12866, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Paperwork Reduction
Act
Because the withdrawal of these rules from the CFR merely withdraws
obsolete, duplicative, or superfluous requirements, this action is not
a ``significant'' regulatory action within the meaning of Executive
Order 12866.
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. Today's
determination does not create any new requirements, but allows deletion
or modification of existing requirements which are obsolete,
duplicative, superfluous, unnecessary, or otherwise unduly burdensome.
I therefore certify that it does not have any significant impact on any
small entities affected.
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.
EPA's final action here does not impose upon the states any federal
intergovernmental
FR Doc. 96-8744 Control of Air Pollution; Removal and Modification of Obsolete, Superfluous or Burdensome Rules
mandate, as defined in section 101 of the Unfunded
Mandates Act. No additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action, which
deletes or eases the indicated requirements. Thus, EPA has determined
that this final action does not include a 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.
Finally, EPA here is merely removing or revising superfluous
requirements, their deletion from the CFR does not affect requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 10, 1996.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Environmental Protection
Agency, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 15, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of
42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 51--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Sec. 51.100 [Removed]
2. Section 51.100(o) is removed.
Sec. 51.101 [Removed]
3. Section 51.101 is removed.
Sec. 51.104 [Amended]
4. In Sec. 51.104, paragraphs (a), (b) and (e) are removed, and
paragraphs (c), (d), (f), and (g) are redesignated (a), (b), (c) and
(d) respectively.
Sec. 51.110 [Amended]
5. In Sec. 51.110, paragraphs (a), (c), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i),
(j), (k), and (l) are removed, and paragraph (d) is redesignated as (a)
and paragraph (b) is removed and reserved.
Sec. 51.213 [Removed]
6. Section 51.213 is removed.
Sec. 51.241 [Amended]
7. Section 51.241 (b) through (f) are removed and reserved.
Secs. 51.243-51.248 [Removed]
8. Sections 51.243 through 51.248 are removed.
Secs. 51.250-51.252 [Removed]
9. Sections 51.250 through 51.252 are removed.
Sec. 51.325 [Removed]
10. Section 51.325 is removed.
PART 52--[AMENDED]
11. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
12. In Sec. 52.02, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.02 Introduction.
* * * * *
(d) All approved plans and plan revisions listed in subparts B
through DDD of this part and on file at the Office of the Federal
Register are approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. Notice of amendments to the plans will be published in the Federal
Register. The plans and plan revisions are available for inspection at
the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W.,
suite 700, Washington, D.C. In addition the plans and plan revisions
are available at the following locations:
(1) Office of Air and Radiation, Docket and Information Center (Air
Docket), EPA, 401 M Street, S.W., Room M1500, Washington, D.C. 20460.
(2) The appropriate EPA Regional Office as listed below:
(i) Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
and Vermont. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, John F. Kennedy
Federal Building, One Congress Street, Boston, MA 02203.
(ii) New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, New York, NY
10007-1866.
[[Page 16061]]
(iii) Delaware, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, and West Virginia. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3,
841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107.
(iv) Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30365.
(v) Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604-3507.
(vi) Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Fountain Place, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas TX 75202-2733.
(vii) Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS
66101.
(viii) Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 999 18th Street,
Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466.
(ix) Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, and Guam.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
(x) Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10, 1200 6th Avenue Seattle, WA 98101.
* * * * *
Sec. 52.03 [Removed]
13. Section 52.03 is removed.
14. Section 52.16 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.16 Submission to Administrator.
(a) All requests, reports, applications, submittals, and other
communications to the Administrator pursuant to this part shall be
submitted in duplicate and addressed to the appropriate Regional Office
of the Environmental Protection Agency.
(b) The Regional Offices are as follows:
(1) Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
and Vermont. EPA Region 1, John F. Kennedy Federal Building, One
Congress Street, Boston, MA 02203.
(2) New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands. EPA
Region 2, 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866.
(3) Delaware, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, and West Virginia. EPA Region 3, 841 Chestnut Building,
Philadelphia, PA 19107.
(4) Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. EPA Region 4, 345 Courtland
Street, N.E., Atlanta, GA 30365.
(5) Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
EPA Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3507.
(6) Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. EPA
Region 6, Fountain Place, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX
75202-2733.
(7) Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. EPA Region 7, 726
Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101.
(8) Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and
Wyoming. EPA Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-
2466.
(9) Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, and Guam.
EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
(10) Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. EPA, Region 10, 1200
6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
Sec. 52.19 [Removed]
15. Section 52.19 is removed.
Sec. 52.74 [Removed and reserved]
16. Section 52.74 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.175 [Removed and reserved]
17. Section 52.175 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.676 [Removed and reserved]
18. Section 52.676 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.680 [Removed and reserved]
19. Section 52.680 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.684 [Removed and reserved]
20. Section 52.684 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.686 [Removed and reserved]
21. Section 52.686 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.727 [Removed and reserved]
22. Section 52.727 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.729 [Removed and reserved]
23. Section 52.729 is removed and reserved.
Secs. 52.731-734 [Removed and reserved]
24. Sections 52.731 through 52.734 are removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.826 [Removed and reserved]
25. Section 52.826 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.829 [Removed and reserved]
26. Section 52.829 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.873 [Removed and reserved]
27. In Sec. 52.873, paragraph (a) is removed and paragraph (b) is
redesignated as paragraph (a).
Sec. 52.879 [Removed and reserved]
28. Section 52.879 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.972 [Removed and reserved]
29. Section 52.972 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.978 [Removed and reserved]
30. Section 52.978 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.988 [Removed and reserved]
31. Section 52.988 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1073 [Amended]
32. In Sec. 52.1073, paragraphs (b) and (c) are removed and
paragraphs (d), (e) and (f) are redesignated paragraphs (b), (c) and
(d), respectively.
Sec. 52.1082 [Removed and reserved]
33. Section 52.1082 is removed and reserved.
Secs. 52.1086-52.1088 [Removed and reserved]
34. Sections 52.1086 through 52.1088 are removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1101 [Removed and reserved]
35. Section 52.1101 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1102 [Removed and reserved]
36. Section 52.1102 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1107 [Removed and reserved]
37. Section 52.1107 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1127 [Removed and reserved]
38. Section 52.1227 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1324 [Removed and reserved]
39. Section 52.1324 is remvoed and reserved.
Sec. 52.74 [Removed and reserved]
40. Section 52.1374 is removed and reserved.
41. Section 52.1375 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1375 Attainment dates for national standards.
The attainment date for the secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide for
East Helena is December 31, 1982.
42. Section 52.1376 is revised as follows:
[[Page 16062]]
Sec. 52.1376 Extensions.
On October 7, 1993, EPA granted the request by the State for the
full three years allowed by section 172(b) of the CAA, as amended in
1990, for submittal of the SIP for the East Helena area to attain and
maintain the sulfur dioxide secondary NAAQS. Therefore, the SIP for the
area was due November 15, 1993. The SIP was not submitted by that date.
Sec. 52.1625 [Removed and reserved]
43. Section 52.1625 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1824 [Amended]
44. In Sec. 52.1824, paragraphs (a) and (b) are removed and
reserved.
45. Section 52.1875 is revised as follows:
Sec. 52.1875 Attainment dates for achieving the sulfur dioxide
secondary standard.
The attainment date for achieving the sulfur dioxide (SO2)
secondary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) is August 27,
1979 except as follows. The following sources are required to achieve
the secondary SO2 NAAQS by June 17, 1980: Youngstown Sheet & Tube
Co.; PPG Industries, Inc.; Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp.; Pittsburgh-
Canfield Corporation; The Timken Company; The Sun Oil Co.; Sheller-
Globe Corp.; The B.F. Goodrich Company; Phillips Petroleum Co.; Shell
Oil Co.; Federal Paper Board Co.; The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.;
Republic Steel Corp.; Chase Bag Co.; White-Westinghouse Corp.; U.S.
Steel Corp.; Interlake, Inc.; Austin Power Co.; Diamond Crystal Salt
Co.; The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; The Gulf Oil Co.; The Standard Oil
Co.; Champion International Corp.; Koppers Co., Inc.; General Motors
Corp.; E.I. duPont de Nemours and Co.; Coulton Chemical Corp.; Allied
Chemical Corp.; Specialty Chemical Division; The Hoover Co.; Aluminum
Co. of America; Ohio Greenhouse Asso.; Armco Steel Corp.; Buckeye
Power, Inc.; Cincinnati Gas and Electric; Cleveland Electric
Illuminating Co.; Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric; Dayton Power and
Light Co.; Duquesne Light Co.; Ohio Edison Co.; Ohio Electric Co.;
Pennsylvania Power Co.; Toledo Edison Co.; Ohio Edison Co.; RCA Rubber
Co. The Ashland Oil Company is subject to a secondary SO2 NAAQS
attainment date of September 14, 1982. The following sources located in
Summit County are required to achieve the secondary SO2 NAAQS by
January 4, 1983: Diamond Crystal Salt; Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.;
General Tire & Rubber Co.; General Tire & Rubber; B.F. Goodrich Co.;
Goodyear Aerospace Corp.; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Chrysler Corp.;
PPG Industries Inc.; Seiberling Tire & Rubber; Terex Division of
General Motors Corp.; Midwest Rubber Reclaiming; Kittinger Supply Co.
The boiler of PPG Industries, Inc. located in Summit County must
achieve attainment of the secondary SO2 NAAQS by August 25, 1983.
The Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Pike County is required to
attain the secondary SO2 NAAQS by November 5, 1984. The Ohio Power
Company Galvin Plant located in Gallia County is required to attain the
secondary SO2 NAAQS by August 25, 1985.
Sec. 52.1878 [Removed and reserved]
46. Section 52.1878 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1885 [Amended]
47. In Sec. 52.1885, paragraphs (e) through (q) are removed.
Sec. 52.1992 [Amended]
48. Section 52.1922 is amended by removing the last sentence of the
paragraph.
Sec. 52.1932 [Removed and reserved]
49. Section 52.1932 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1973 [Removed and reserved]
50. Section 52.1973 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.1981 [Removed and reserved]
51. Section 52.1981 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2023 [Amended]
52. In Sec. 52.2023 paragraphs (b) through (d), (f) and (g) are
removed and paragraph (e) is redesignated paragraph (b) and paragraphs
(h) and (i) are redesignated (c) and (d), respectively.
Sec. 52.2030 [Removed and reserved]
53. Section 52.2030(b) is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2031 [Removed and reserved]
54. Section 52.2031 is removed and reserved.
55. Section 52.2034 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2034 Attainment dates for national standards.
With regard to Northumberland County, Snyder County, and Allegheny
County, Pennsylvania has not submitted a plan, as of December 31, 1979,
providing for the attainment and maintenance of the secondary sulfur
dioxide (SO2) standards.
Sec. 52.2038 [Removed and reserved]
56. Section 52.2038 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2039 [Removed and reserved]
57. Section 52.2039 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2041 [Removed and reserved]
58. Section 52.2041 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2042 [Removed and reserved]
59. Section 52.2042 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2043 [Removed and reserved]
60. Section 52.2043 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2049 [Removed and reserved]
61. Section 52.2049 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2050 [Removed and reserved]
62. Section 52.2050 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2051 [Removed and reserved]
63. Section 52.2051 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2053 [Removed and reserved]
64. Section 52.2053 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2273 [Amended]
65. Section 52.2273 is amended by removing the last sentence of the
first paragraph and all of paragraph (a).
Sec. 52.2294 [Removed and reserved]
66. Section 52.2294 is removed and reserved.
Secs. 52.2296-52.2298 [Removed and reserved]
67. Sections 52.2296 through 52.98 are removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2305 [Removed and reserved]
68. Section 52.2305 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2322 [Removed and reserved]
69. Section 52.2322 is removed and reserved.
70. Section 52.2331 is revised as follows:
Sec. 52.2331 Attainment dates for national standards.
The attainment date for the secondary NAAQS for sulfur dioxide for
Salt Lake County and portions of Tooele County is December 31, 1994.
Sec. 52.2423 [Removed and reserved]
71. Section 52.2423(b) and (c) are removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2430 [Removed and reserved]
72. Section 52.2430 is removed and reserved.
[[Page 16063]]
Sec. 52.2431 [Removed and reserved]
73. Section 52.2431 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2435 [Removed and reserved]
74. Section 52.2435 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2436 [Amended]
75. In Sec. 52.2436, paragraph (a) is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2438 [Removed and reserved]
76. Section 52.2438 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2440 [Removed and reserved]
77. Section 52.2440 is removed and reserved.
Sec. 52.2483 [Removed and reserved]
78. Section 52.2483 is removed and reserved.
79. Section 52.2523 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2523 Attainment dates for national standards.
The New Manchester and Grant Magisterial Districts in Hancock
County are expected to attain and maintain the secondary sulfur dioxide
(SO2) standards as soon as the Sammis Power Plant meets the
SO2 limitations in the Ohio State Implementation Plan.
Sec. 52.2623 [Removed and reserved]
80. Section 52.2623 is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 96-8744 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8697 Personnel Review Boards
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16046-16050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8697]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
32 CFR Part 865
RIN 0701-AA43
Personnel Review Boards
AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DOD.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force has revised Part 865, Subpart
A of Subchapter G, Title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which
provides for making application, and the consideration of applications,
for the correction of military records by the Secretary of the Air
Force acting through the Air Force Board for Correction of Military
Records.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John J. D'Orazio, Chief Examiner,
(301) 981-3502.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 26, 1994, the Department of the Air
Force published (at 59 FR 37953) a proposed rule changing the
procedures for making applications, and consideration of applications,
for the correction of military records by the Secretary of the Air
Force acting through the Air Force Board for Correction of Military
Records. The following summarizes the major comments received and
action taken:
Two commentors stated that the rule should be amended to include
specific references concerning other administrative remedies which must
be exhausted prior to the submission of an application to the Board
(Sec. 865.4(l)(3)). Information related to this rule is contained in
Air Force Pamphlet (AFP) 36-2607, Applicant's Guide to the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), dated 3 November
1994. In addition, it is normally expected that an active member would
be made aware of any available administrative remedies by seeking
advice from personnel at their local Military Personnel Flight (MPF).
Furthermore, exhausting administrative remedies also refers to cases
where an application for correction of records is submitted by members
or former members and authorities at the MPF or the Air Force Personnel
Center, Randolph AFB, Texas, determine that an error exists and that
administrative relief may be effected by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility without referring the appeal to the Board. The
only other organization to which a former member must apply prior to
submitting an application to the AFBCMR is the Air Force Discharge
Review Board (AFDRB), which operates under its own statute (10 U.S.C.
1553) and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2023, dated 14 October 1994.
In view of the above, and, since the cited information is already
available through other sources and would be made known to applicants
who are inquiring about the Board process, amendment of the rule to
include this information is deemed unnecessary.
Two commentors suggested that the rule should be amended to state
that time spent exhausting administrative remedies tolls the three-year
time limit (Sec. 865.3(f)). The Board takes the position that, for
practical reasons, efforts to seek other administrative remedies should
not toll the three-year statute of limitations found at 10 U.S.C.
1552(b). This rule works no hardship on potential applicants since the
Board may waive the failure to file within the three-year period if it
determines it is in the interest of justice to do so. Whether to waive
an untimely filing is a discretionary judgment to be made by the Board.
One commentor complained that the page limitation on briefs and
rebuttals was too severe, was unrealistic, and did not define ``brief''
(Sec. 865.3 (i) and (j)). The Board considers the term ``brief'' to be
self-explanatory. The rule already states that the limitation does not
apply to evidence submitted in support of the appeal. The Board does
not believe that the page limitations on briefs in support of an
application and in rebuttal to the Air Staff evaluations are too
severe. This rule was established to ensure that applicants and their
counsels briefly and succinctly state their cases; prolixity hinders,
rather than helps, the Board. In recognition that there exist cases of
unusual complexity, the rule allows for a waiver of the page
limitations by the Executive Director of the Board. Since the page
limitation requirement was established in 1985, the authority to
approve requests for waivers of this requirement has been liberally
exercised to ensure adequate briefing of issues the Board considers
important.
Two commentors stated that the rule should be changed (at
Sec. 865.8c) to provide for the payment of attorney's fees, with
interest, asserting that such payments are authorized by 5 U.S.C.
5596(b). 5 U.S.C. 5596(b) applies to employees as defined in 5 U.S.C.
2105. The cited provision of law does not apply to members of the Armed
Forces.
One commentor recommended that the rule be amended to place
limitations on the writers of advisory opinions with respect to the
number of pages, type of spacing, and ``unprofessional'' comments
(Sec. 865.8(a)(2)). Air Staff advisories rarely exceed more than two or
three pages except in cases where the issues are extremely complicated.
Furthermore, while the applicant has two opportunities to state his or
her case (in the initial submission and rebuttal), ordinarily, the
staff must state their position all at once. What constitutes
``Unprofessional comments'' is in the eye of the beholder. The Board
requires that the Air Staff provide unfettered opinions. If the Air
Staff provides information not relevant to the case, the Board can and
does elect not to rely on that information in making its final
determination, in the same way it does when similar information is
provided by an applicant or counsel.
Two commentors suggested that the rule be amended to include (at
Sec. 865.9) advice concerning appeals to Federal courts. The AFBCMR was
established to correct military records. A discussion of Post-Board
avenues of relief is not required by law nor would it be appropriate in
a rule pertaining to nonadversarial proceedings for the purpose of
securing administrative relief.
One commentor recommended that the rule be changed to include a
statement that, during its consideration of the case in executive
session, the Board gave genuine consideration to
[[Page 16047]]
permitting the applicants the opportunity to be heard (Sec. 865.4(d))
and requiring that the Board reply in a meaningful fashion to
meritorious issues raised by an applicant (Sec. 865.4(f)). Any decision
to grant an applicant's request for a personal appearance is at the
discretion of the Board. The Board gives careful and meaningful
consideration to every request made by an applicant, including a
request for a personal appearance. The Stipulation of Dismissal of the
lawsuit by the Urban Law Institute of Antioch College required that the
Board make a brief written statement of the grounds for its
determination to grant or deny relief. The Board is in compliance with
this requirement and addresses issues raised by the applicant in the
level of detail which, in the Board's opinion, they warrant.
Accordingly, the recommendations that the rule be amended as
suggested in the above were not adopted.
The Department of the Air Force has determined that this rule is
not a major rule because it will not have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more. The Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force (Manpower, Reserve Affairs, Installations and Environment)
certifies that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-611, because this rule does
not have a significant economic impact on small entities as defined by
the Act. This rule imposes no obligatory information requirements
beyond internal Air Force use.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 865
Administrative practices and procedures, Military personnel,
Records.
Accordingly, 32 CFR Part 865, Subpart A is revised to read as
follows:
PART 865--PERSONNEL REVIEW BOARDS
Subpart A--Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
Sec.
865.0 Purpose.
865.1 Setup of the Board.
865.2 Board responsibilities.
865.3 Application procedures.
865.4 Board actions.
865.5 Decision of the Secretary of the Air Force.
865.6 Reconsideration of applications.
865.7 Action after final decision.
865.8 Miscellaneous provisions.
Subpart A--Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
Authority: 10 U.S.C. 1034, 1552.
Sec. 865.0 Purpose.
This subpart sets up procedures for correction of military records
to remedy error or injustice. It tells how to apply for correction of
military records and how the Air Force Board for Correction of Military
Records (AFBCMR, or the Board) considers applications. It defines the
Board's authority to act on applications. It directs collecting and
maintaining information subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 authorized
by 10 U.S.C. 1034 and 1552. System of Records notice F035 SAFCB A,
Military Records Processed by the Air Force Correction Board, applies.
Sec. 865.1 Setup of the Board.
The AFBCMR operates within the Office of the Secretary of the Air
Force according to 10 U.S.C. 1552. The Board consists of civilians in
the executive part of the Department of the Air Force who are appointed
and serve at the pleasure of the Secretary of the Air Force. Three
members constitute a quorum of the Board.
Sec. 865.2 Board responsibilities.
(a) Considering applications. The Board considers all individual
applications properly brought before it. In appropriate cases, it
directs correction of military records to remove an error or injustice,
or recommends such correction.
(b) Recommending action. When an applicant alleges reprisal under
the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. 1034, the Board
may recommend to the Secretary of the Air Force that disciplinary or
administrative action be taken against those responsible for the
reprisal.
(c) Deciding cases. The Board normally decides cases on the
evidence of the record. It is not an investigative body. However, the
Board may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or call for additional
evidence or opinions in any case.
Sec. 865.3 Application procedures.
(a) Who may apply:
(1) In most cases, the applicant is a member or former member of
the Air Force, since the request is personal to the applicant and
relates to his or her military records.
(2) An applicant with a proper interest may request correction of
another person's military records when that person is incapable of
acting on his or her own behalf, is missing, or is deceased. Depending
on the circumstances, a child, spouse, parent or other close relative,
an heir, or a legal representative (such as a guardian or executor) of
the member or former member may be able to show a proper interest.
Applicants will send proof of proper interest with the application when
requesting correction of another person's military records.
(b) Getting forms. Applicants may get a DD Form 149, ``Application
for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10,
U.S.C., Section 1552,'' and Air Force Pamphlet 36-2607, ``Applicants'
Guide to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
(AFBCMR),'' from:
(1) Any Air Force Military Personnel Flight (MPF) or publications
distribution office.
(2) Most veterans' service organizations.
(3) The Air Force Review Boards Office, SAF/MIBR, 550 C Street
West, Suite 40, Randolph AFB TX 78150-4742.
(4) The AFBCMR, 1535 Command Drive, EE Wing 3rd Floor, Andrews AFB
MD 20331-7002.
(c) Preparation. Before applying, applicants should:
(1) Review Air Force Pamphlet 36-2607.
(2) Discuss their concerns with MPF, finance office, or other
appropriate officials. Errors can often be corrected administratively
without resort to the Board.
(3) Exhaust other available administrative remedies (otherwise the
Board may return the request without considering it).
(d) Submitting the application. Applicants should complete all
applicable sections of the DD Form 149, including at least:
(1) The name under which the member served.
(2) The member's social security number or Air Force service
number.
(3) The applicant's current mailing address.
(4) The specific records correction being requested.
(5) Proof of proper interest if requesting correction of another
person's records.
(6) The applicant's signature.
(e) Applicants should mail the original signed DD Form 149 and any
supporting documents to the Air Force address on the back of the form.
(f) Meeting time limits. Ordinarily, applicants must file an
application within three years after the error or injustice was
discovered, or, with due diligence, should have been discovered. An
application filed later is untimely and may be denied by the Board on
that basis.
(1) The Board may excuse untimely filing in the interest of
justice.
(2) If the application is filed late, applicants should explain why
it would
[[Page 16048]]
be in the interest of justice for the Board to waive the time limits.
(g) Stay of other proceedings. Applying to the AFBCMR does not stay
other proceedings.
(h) Counsel representation. Applicants may be represented by
counsel, at their own expense.
(1) The term ``counsel'' includes members in good standing of the
bar of any state, accredited representatives of veterans' organizations
recognized under 38 U.S.C. 3402, and other persons determined by the
Executive Director of the Board to be competent to represent the
interests of the applicant.
(2) See Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 7050.6,
Whistleblower Protection Act, 3 September 1992,1 for special
provisions for counsel in cases processed under 10 U.S.C. 1034.
\1\ Copies of the publication are available, at cost, from the
National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Page limitations on briefs. Briefs in support of applications:
(1) May not exceed twenty-five double-spaced typewritten pages.
(2) Must be typed on one side of a page only with not more than
twelve characters per inch.
(3) Must be assembled in a manner that permits easy reproduction.
(j) Responses to advisory opinions must not exceed ten double-
spaced typewritten pages and meet the other requirements for briefs.
(k) These limitations do not apply to supporting documentary
evidence.
(l) In complex cases and upon request, the Executive Director of
the Board may waive these limitations.
(m) Withdrawing applications. Applicants may withdraw an
application at any time before the Board's decision. Withdrawal does
not stay the three-year time limit.
Sec. 865.4 Board actions.
(a) Board information sources. The applicant has the burden of
providing sufficient evidence of probable material error or injustice.
However, the Board:
(1) May get additional information and advisory opinions on an
application from any Air Force organization or official.
(2) May require the applicant to furnish additional information
necessary to decide the case.
(b) Applicants will normally be given an opportunity to review and
comment on advisory opinions and additional information obtained by the
Board.
(c) Consideration by the Board. A panel consisting of at least
three board members considers each application. One panel member serves
as its chair. The panel's actions and decisions constitute the actions
and decisions of the Board.
(d) The panel may decide the case in executive session or authorize
a hearing. When a hearing is authorized, the procedures in paragraph
(f) of this section apply.
(e) Board deliberations. Normally only members of the Board and
Board staff will be present during deliberations. The panel chair may
permit observers for training purposes or otherwise in furtherance of
the functions of the Board.
(f) Board hearings. The Board in its sole discretion determines
whether to grant a hearing. Applicants do not have a right to a hearing
before the Board.
(g) The Executive Director will notify the applicant or counsel, if
any, of the time and place of the hearing. Written notice will be
mailed thirty days in advance of the hearing unless the notice period
is waived by the applicant. The applicant will respond not later than
fifteen days before the hearing date, accepting or declining the offer
of a hearing and, if accepting, provide information pertaining to
counsel and witnesses. The Board will decide the case in executive
session if the applicant declines the hearing or fails to appear.
(h) When granted a hearing, the applicant may appear before the
Board in person, represented by counsel, or in person with counsel and
may present witnesses. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify
witnesses, arrange for their attendance at the hearing, and pay any
associated costs.
(i) The panel chair conducts the hearing, maintains order, and
ensures the applicant receives a full and fair opportunity to be heard.
Formal rules of evidence do not apply, but the panel observes
reasonable bounds of competency, relevancy, and materiality. Witnesses
other than the applicant will not be present except when testifying.
Witnesses will testify under oath or affirmation. A recorder will
record the proceedings verbatim. The chair will normally limit hearings
to two hours but may allow more time if necessary to ensure a full and
fair hearing.
(j) Additional provisions apply to cases processed under 10 U.S.C.
1034. See DoDD 7050.6.\2\
\2\ See footnote 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(k) The Board will not deny or recommend denial of an application
on the sole ground that the issue already has been decided by the
Secretary of the Air Force or the President of the United States in
another proceeding.
(l) Board decisions. The panel's majority vote constitutes the
action of the Board. The Board's decision will be in writing and will
include determinations on the following issues:
(1) Whether the provisions of the Military Whistleblowers
Protection Act apply to the application. This determination is needed
only when the applicant invokes the protection of the Act, or when the
question of its applicability is otherwise raised by the evidence.
(2) Whether the application was timely filed and, if not, whether
the applicant has demonstrated that it would be in the interest of
justice to excuse the untimely filing. When the Board determines that
an application is not timely, and does not excuse its untimeliness, the
application will be denied on that basis.
(3) Whether the applicant has exhausted all available and effective
administrative remedies. If the applicant has not, the application will
be denied on that basis.
(4) Whether the applicant has demonstrated the existence of a
material error or injustice that can be remedied effectively through
correction of the applicant's military record and, if so, what
corrections are needed to provide full and effective relief.
(5) In Military Whistleblowers Protection Act cases only, whether
to recommend to the Secretary of the Air Force that disciplinary or
administrative action be taken against any Air Force official whom the
Board finds to have committed an act of reprisal against the applicant.
Any determination on this issue will not be made a part of the Board's
record of proceedings and will not be given to the applicant, but will
be provided directly to the Secretary of the Air Force under separate
cover (Sec. 865.2(b)).
(m) Record of proceedings. The Board staff will prepare a record of
proceedings following deliberations which will include:
(1) The name and vote of each Board member.
(2) The application.
(3) Briefs and written arguments.
(4) Documentary evidence.
(5) A hearing transcript if a hearing was held.
(6) Advisory opinions and the applicant's related comments.
(7) The findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Board.
(8) Minority reports, if any.
(9) Other information necessary to show a true and complete history
of the proceedings.
(n) Minority reports. A dissenting panel member may prepare a
minority
[[Page 16049]]
report which may address any aspect of the case.
(o) Separate communications. The Board may send comments or
recommendations to the Secretary of the Air Force as to administrative
or disciplinary action against individuals found to have committed acts
of reprisal prohibited by the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act
and on other matters arising from an application not directly related
to the requested correction of military records. Such comments and
recommendations will be separately communicated and will not be
included in the record of proceedings or given to the applicant or
counsel.
(p) Final action by the Board. The Board acts for the Secretary of
the Air Force and its decision is final when it:
(1) Denies any application (except under 10 U.S.C. 1034).
(2) Grants any application in whole or part when the relief was
recommended by the official preparing the advisory opinion, was
unanimously agreed to by the panel, and does not involve an appointment
or promotion requiring confirmation by the Senate.
(q) The Board sends the record of proceedings on all other
applications to the Secretary of the Air Force or his or her designee
for final decision.
Sec. 865.5 Decision of the Secretary of the Air Force.
(a) The Secretary may direct such action as he or she deems
appropriate on each case, including returning the case to the Board for
further consideration. Cases returned to the Board for further
reconsideration will be accompanied by a brief statement of the reasons
for such action. If the Secretary does not accept the Board's
recommendation, the decision will be in writing and will include a
brief statement of the grounds for denial.
(b) Decisions in cases under the Military Whistleblowers Protection
Act. The Secretary will issue decisions on such cases within 180 days
after receipt of the case and will, unless the full relief requested is
granted, inform applicants of their right to request review of the
decision by the Secretary of Defense (SecDef). Applicants will also be
informed:
(1) Of the name and address of the official to whom the request for
review must be submitted.
(2) That the request for review must be submitted within ninety
days after receipt of the decision by the Secretary of the Air Force.
(3) That the request for review must be in writing and include the
applicant's name, address, and telephone number; a copy of the
application to the AFBCMR and the final decision of the Secretary of
the Air Force; and a statement of the specific reasons the applicant is
not satisfied with the decision of the Secretary of the Air Force.
(4) That the request must be based on the Board record; requests
for review based on factual allegations or evidence not previously
presented to the Board will not be considered under this section but
may be the basis for reconsideration by the Board under Sec. 865.6.
(c) Decisions in cases filed under Section 507, Public Law 103-160.
The Secretary will issue a decision within 60 days of receipt of the
case of an officer who:
(1) Was offered the opportunity to be discharged or separated from
active duty under the Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI) or Special
Separation Benefit (SSB) programs,
(2) Elected not to accept such discharge or separation,
(3) Was thereafter discharged or separated from active duty, after
September 30, 1990, as a result of selection by a board convened to
select officers for early separation (a ``RIF board''),
(4) Files an application with the Board within two years of the
date of separation or discharge, or one year after March 1, 1996,
whichever is later, alleging that the officer was not effectively
counseled, before electing not to accept discharge or separation under
the VSI/SSB programs, concerning the officer's vulnerability to
selection for involuntary discharge or separation (``RIF''), and
(5) Requests expedited consideration under this section.
(d) Upon finding of ineffective counseling, the Secretary will
provide the officer with an opportunity to participate, at the
officer's option, in the VSI or SSB programs or, if eligible, in an
early retirement program.
(e) In cases under Secs. 865.5(b) and 865.5(c) which involve
additional issues not cognizable under those sections, the additional
issues may be considered separately by the Board under Secs. 865.3 and
865.4. The special time limits in Secs. 865.5(b) and 865.5(c) do not
apply to the decision concerning these additional issues.
Sec. 865.6 Reconsideration of applications.
The Board may reconsider an application if the applicant submits
newly discovered relevant evidence that was not available when the
application was previously considered. The Executive Director will
screen each request for reconsideration to determine whether it
contains new evidence.
(a) If the request contains new evidence, the Executive Director
will refer it to a panel of the Board for a decision. The Board will
decide the relevance and weight of any new evidence, whether it was
reasonably available to the applicant when the application was
previously considered, and whether it was submitted in a timely manner.
The Board may deny reconsideration if the request does not meet the
criteria for reconsideration. Otherwise the Board will reconsider the
application and decide the case either on timeliness or merit as
appropriate.
(b) If the request does not contain new evidence, the Executive
Director will return it to the applicant without referral to the Board.
Sec. 865.7 Action after final decision.
(a) Action by the Executive Director. The Executive Director will
inform the applicant or counsel, if any, of the final decision on the
application. If any requested relief was denied, the Executive Director
will advise the applicant of reconsideration procedures and, for cases
processed under the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act, review by
the SecDef. The Executive Director will send decisions requiring
corrective action to the Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force, for necessary
action.
(b) Settlement of claims. The Air Force is authorized, under 10
U.S.C. 1552, to pay claims for amounts due to applicants as a result of
correction of military records.
(c) The Executive Director will furnish the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service (DFAS) with AFBCMR decisions potentially affecting
monetary entitlement or benefits. DFAS will treat such decisions as
claims for payment by or on behalf of the applicant.
(d) DFAS settles claims on the basis of the corrected military
record. Computation of the amount due, if any, is a function of DFAS.
Applicants may be required to furnish additional information to DFAS to
establish their status as proper parties to the claim and to aid in
deciding amounts due.
(e) Public access to decisions. After deletion of personal
information, AFBCMR decisions will be made available for review and
copying at a public reading room in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan
area.
Sec. 865.8 Miscellaneous provisions.
(a) At the request of the Board, all Air Force activities and
officials will furnish the Board with:
[[Page 16050]]
(1) All available military records pertinent to an application.
(2) An advisory opinion concerning an application. The advisory
opinion will include an analysis of the facts of the case and of the
applicant's contentions, a statement of whether or not the requested
relief can be done administratively, and a recommendation on the
timeliness and merit of the request. Regardless of the recommendation,
the advisory opinion will include instructions on specific corrective
action to be taken if the Board grants the application.
(b) Access to records. Applicants will have access to all records
considered by the Board, except those classified or privileged. To the
extent practicable, applicants will be provided unclassified or
nonprivileged summaries or extracts of such records considered by the
Board.
(c) Payment of expenses. The Air Force has no authority to pay
expenses of any kind incurred by or on behalf of an applicant in
connection with a correction of military records under 10 U.S.C. 1034
or 1552.
Patsy J. Conner,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-8697 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3910-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-8664 Clean Air Act (CAA) Final Interim Approval of Operating Permits Program and Delegation of 112(l) Authority; State of Missouri
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 71 (Thursday, April 11, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16063-16065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8664]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[AD-FRL-5454-2]
Clean Air Act (CAA) Final Interim Approval of Operating Permits
Program and Delegation of 112(l) Authority; State of Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final interim approval.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is granting final interim approval of an operating
permit program submitted by the state of Missouri for the purpose of
complying with federal requirements for an approvable state program to
issue operating permits to all major stationary sources and to certain
other sources. The EPA is also giving interim approval, under section
112(l) of the Act, to the state program for accepting delegation of the
section 112 standards to enforce air toxics regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective on May 13, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the state submittal and other supporting
information used in developing the final interim approval are available
for inspection during normal business hours at the following location:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Air Branch, 726
Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Tapp at (913) 551-7606.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Purpose
A. Introduction
Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (sections 501-507 of
the Clean Air Act (``the Act'')), and implementing regulations at 40
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 70, require that states develop
and submit operating permits programs to EPA by November 15, 1993, and
that the EPA act to approve or disapprove each program within one year
after receiving the submittal. The EPA's program review occurs pursuant
to section 502 of the Act and the Part 70 regulations, which together
outline criteria for approval or disapproval. Additionally, section
502(g) of the Act and the Part 70 regulations outline criteria for
granting interim approval where a program substantially, but not fully,
meets the requirements of the Act and Part 70. The EPA may grant
interim approval to such a program for a period of up to two years.
On January 13, 1995, the state of Missouri submitted an operating
permits program to the EPA. Supplemental submissions were made by the
state on August 14, 1995; September 19, 1995; and October 16, 1995. The
state of Missouri has demonstrated that its program meets the minimum
elements required for interim approval as specified in 40 CFR 70.4(d).
The rationale for the EPA's determination that interim approval is
appropriate is contained in the December 15, 1995, Federal Register
document (60 FR 64404) which proposed interim approval of the program.
In order to receive full approval, the state must adopt and submit to
the EPA within 18 months of the effective date of this document certain
rule revisions which were identified in the proposed interim approval
and which are discussed later in this document.
B. Response to Comments
On January 16, 1996, the EPA received a request to extend the
comment period for its proposed interim approval of Missouri's program,
due to the unavailability of the docket during federal furloughs which
overlapped the comment period. The EPA granted a 30-day extension of
the comment period in a February 5, 1996, Federal Register document. On
February 13, 1996, the EPA received two comments regarding its proposed
action from one commentor. The first comment requested clarification of
the status of the permit application forms which Missouri submitted
with its operating permit program. Specifically, the commentor feels
that the state should be able to modify the forms as necessary to
collect the information required for developing operating permits. The
EPA agrees with the commentor that it is important for the state to
have the ability to modify the permit application forms in order to
collect the appropriate information. The EPA wishes to clarify that
although 40 CFR 70.4(b)(4) requires the submission of such forms with
the initial operating permit package, as a part of the program
documentation, the EPA is not taking formal action on the forms
themselves. The state can modify the forms to the extent that the
modification is appropriate and sufficient to collect the required
information.
The second comment pertains to Missouri's exemption from
application requirements for ``insignificant activities.'' The
commentor has requested that the EPA provide the state of Missouri with
the same flexibility in establishing thresholds for insignificant
activities which the EPA has extended to other states which were given
interim approval. In response, the EPA notes that the levels which
Missouri has established for insignificant activities in its January
13, 1995, submission are fully approvable by the EPA and are a specific
element, among other elements, which must be present in order for the
EPA to take an approval action. The state of Missouri may modify this
or any other element of its operating permit program to the extent that
those modifications are consistent with the Clean Air Act, 40 CFR Part
70 regulations, and applicable EPA guidance. However, the EPA supports
Missouri's choice to establish insignificant activity levels which are
fully approvable.
C. Federal Oversight and Sanctions
This interim approval will extend for 18 months following the
effective date of final interim approval and cannot be renewed. During
the interim approval period, the state of Missouri is protected from
sanctions for failure to have an approved program, and the EPA is not
obligated to promulgate, administer, and
[[Page 16064]]
enforce a federal permits program for Missouri. Permits issued under a
program with interim approval have full standing with respect to Part
70, and the one-year time period for submittal of permit applications
by subject sources begins upon the effective date of interim approval,
as does the three-year time period for processing the initial permit
applications.
If Missouri fails to submit a complete corrective program for full
approval by the date six months before expiration of the interim
approval, an 18-month clock for mandatory sanctions will commence. If
Missouri then fails to submit a corrective program that the EPA finds
complete before the expiration of that 18-month period, the EPA will
apply sanctions as required by section 502(d)(2) of the Act, which will
remain in effect until the EPA determines that the state of Missouri
has corrected the deficiency by submitting a complete corrective
program.
If the EPA disapproves Missouri's complete corrective program, the
EPA will be required under section 502(d)(2) to apply sanctions on the
date 18 months after the effective date of the disapproval, unless
prior to that date Missouri had submitted a revised program and the EPA
had determined that it corrected the deficiencies that prompted the
disapproval.
If the EPA has not granted full approval to Missouri's program by
the expiration of this interim approval, the EPA must promulgate,
administer, and enforce a federal permits program for Missouri upon
interim approval expiration.
II. Final Interim Action and Implications
A. Missouri's Submission and EPA-Requested Modifications
The December 15, 1995, Federal Register document proposing interim
approval of the Missouri program discussed two rules which are a part
of the operating permit program that require revisions in order for the
program to qualify for full approval. These rules are 10 CSR 10-6.020,
``Definitions and Common Reference Tables'', and 10 CSR 10-6.065,
``Operating Permits.'' Specifically, Missouri must make the following
program revisions for full approval: (1) for rule 10 CSR 10-6.020: (a)
revise (2)(I)7 to update a reference to the Standard Industrial
Classification Manual, and (b) revise (3)(B), Table 2--List of Named
Installations, to make it consistent with the list in the definition of
major source in Sec. 70.2; and (2) for rule 10 CSR 10-6.065: (a) revise
(1)(D)2 to clarify the meaning of ``fugitive air pollutant'' as it
relates to Part 70 installations; (b) revise (3)(D) to clarify Part 70
applicability with respect to emissions from exempt installations and
emission units; (c) revise (6)(C)1.C.(II)(b) to clarify the retention
of records requirements in permits, consistent with Sec. 70.6(a)(3);
(d) revise (6)(C)1.G.(I) to clarify the general requirements for permit
compliance and noncompliance, consistent with Sec. 70.6(a)(6); (e)
revise (6)(C)4.A. to correct a citation error and to clarify that the
requirement for the EPA and affected state review applies to general
permits, consistent with Sec. 70.6(d)(1); (f) revise (6)(C)7.B.(IV) to
make the emergency provision notice consistent with Sec. 70.6(g)(3);
(g) revise (6)(C)8, operational flexibility provisions, to clarify the
term ``emissions allowable under the permit''; (h) revise
(6)(E)5.B.(I), minor permit modification criteria, to be consistent
with Sec. 70.7(e)(2)(i)(A)(3); (i) revise (6)(E)5.B.(I) to add a
paragraph (b) to incorporate the economic incentive provisions
consistent with Sec. 70.7(e)(2)(i)(B); (j) revise (6)(E)5.C.(I)(b) to
correct the threshold for group processing of minor permit
modifications to be consistent with Sec. 70.7(e)(2)(i)(B); and (k)
revise (6)(E)5.D.(II)(a), significant permit modification procedures,
to be consistent with Secs. 70.4(b)(2) and 70.5(c), and make minor
citation corrections to (6)(B)3.I.(IV), (6)(E)5.B.(II)(a),
(6)(E)5.C.(V), and (6)(E)6.C.
Additionally, Missouri has the authority to issue a variance from
state requirements under Sec. 643.110 of the state statutes. This
provision was not included by the state in its operating permit program
submittal, and the EPA regards this provision as wholly external to the
program submitted for approval under Part 70, and consequently is not
taking action on this provision of state law. The EPA has no authority
to approve provisions of state law, such as the variance provision
referred to, which are inconsistent with the Act. The EPA does not
recognize the ability of a permitting authority to grant relief from
the duty to obtain or comply with a federally enforceable Part 70
permit, except where such relief is granted through the procedures
allowed by Part 70. A Part 70 permit may be issued or revised
(consistent with Part 70 permitting procedures) to incorporate those
terms of a variance that are consistent with applicable requirements. A
Part 70 permit may also incorporate, via Part 70 permit issuance or
modification procedures, the schedule of compliance set forth in a
variance. However, the EPA reserves the right to pursue enforcement of
applicable requirements, notwithstanding the existence of a compliance
schedule in a permit to operate. This is consistent with
Sec. 70.5(c)(8)(iii)(C), which states that a schedule of compliance
``shall be supplemental to, and shall not sanction noncompliance with,
the applicable requirements on which it is based.''
The Technical Support Document describes in detail the revisions to
these rules which are required for full approval of the program. The
reader should refer to this document which is located in the public
docket for further information.
B. Final Interim Action
The EPA is granting interim approval for 18 months to the operating
permits program submitted by the state of Missouri on January 13, 1995,
with supplemental information submitted on August 14, 1995; September
19, 1995; and October 16, 1995. The state of Missouri has demonstrated
that its program meets the minimum elements required for interim
approval as specified in 40 CFR Part 70. In order to receive full
approval, the state must adopt and submit to the EPA certain rule
changes within 12 months of receiving final interim approval.
Specifically, the state must amend rules 10 CSR 10-6.020, Definitions,
and 10 CSR 10-6.065, Operating permits, for consistency with Part 70,
as described above.
1. Regulations. This interim approval of the Missouri operating
permits program includes the following regulations, solely as they
relate to the Missouri Part 70 operating permit program: 10 CSR 10-
6.065, Operating Permits; 10 CSR 10-6.110, Submission of Emission Data,
Emission Fees and Process Information; and 10 CSR 10-6.020, Definitions
and Common Reference Tables.
2. Jurisdiction. The scope of the Part 70 program approved in this
document applies to all Part 70 sources (as defined in the approved
program), within the state of Missouri, except sources of air
pollution, if any, over which an Indian Tribe has jurisdiction. See 59
FR 55813, 55815-18 (November 9, 1994). The term ``Indian Tribe'' is
defined under the Act as ``any Indian Tribe, Band, Nation, or other
organized group or community, including any Alaska Native village,
which is federally recognized as eligible for the special programs and
services provided by the United States to Indians, because of their
status as Indians.'' See section 302(r) of the CAA;
[[Page 16065]]
59 FR 43956, 43962 (August 25, 1994); 58 FR 54364 (October 21, 1993).
3. CAA section 112(l). Requirements for approval, specified in 40
CFR 70.4(b), encompass section 112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a
program for delegation of section 112 standards as promulgated by the
EPA as they apply to Part 70 sources. Section 112(l)(5) requires that
the state's program contain adequate authorities, adequate resources
for implementation, and an expeditious compliance schedule, which are
also requirements under Part 70. Therefore, the EPA is also approving
under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR 63.91 the state's program for
receiving delegation of section 112 standards for both Part 70 and non-
Part 70 sources that are unchanged from federal standards as
promulgated.
4. CAA section 112(g). The EPA issued an interpretive notice on
February 14, 1995 (60 FR 8333), which outlines the EPA's revised
interpretation of 112(g) applicability. The notice postpones the
effective date of 112(g) until after the EPA has promulgated a rule
addressing that provision. The notice sets forth in detail the
rationale for the revised interpretation.
The section 112(g) interpretive notice explains that the EPA is
still considering whether the effective date of section 112(g) should
be delayed beyond the date of promulgation of the federal rule so as to
allow states time to adopt rules implementing the federal rule, and
that the EPA will provide for any such additional delay in the final
section 112(g) rulemaking. Unless and until the EPA provides for such
an additional postponement of section 112(g), Missouri must have a
federally enforceable mechanism for implementing section 112(g) during
the period between promulgation of the federal section 112(g) rule and
adoption of implementing federal regulations.
The EPA is aware that Missouri lacks a program designed
specifically to implement section 112(g). However, Missouri does have a
program for review of new and modified hazardous air pollutant sources
that can serve as an adequate implementation vehicle during the
transition period, because it would allow Missouri to select control
measures that would meet the maximum achievable control technology, as
defined in section 112, and incorporate these measures into a federally
enforceable preconstruction permit.
The EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's preconstruction
permitting program under the authority of Title V and Part 70, solely
for the purpose of implementing section 112(g) to the extent necessary
during the transition period between 112(g) promulgation and adoption
of a state rule implementing the EPA's section 112(g) regulations.
Although section 112(l) generally provides authority for approval of
state air programs to implement section 112(g), Title V and section
112(g) provide for this limited approval because of the direct linkage
between the implementation of section 112(g) and Title V. The scope of
this approval is narrowly limited to section 112(g) and does not confer
or imply approval for purposes of any other provision under the Act
(e.g., section 110). This approval will be without effect if the EPA
decides in the final section 112(g) rule that sources are not subject
to the requirements of the rule until state regulations are adopted.
The duration of this approval is limited to 18 months following
promulgation by the EPA of the 112(g) rule to provide adequate time for
the state to adopt regulations consistent with the federal
requirements.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
Copies of the state submittal and other information relied upon for
the final interim approval are contained in a docket maintained at the
EPA Regional Office. The docket is an organized and complete file of
all the information submitted to, or otherwise considered by, the EPA
in the development of this final interim approval. The docket is
available for public inspection at the location listed under the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
B. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory
action from Executive Order 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any
new requirements, but simply address operating permits programs
submitted to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR Part 70. Because this
action does not impose any new requirements, it does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. 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, the 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 operating permit program the state
has elected to adopt the program provided for under Title V of the CAA.
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 program approved by this action will impose
new requirements, 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.
The EPA has also determined that this proposed 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 70
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 27, 1996.
William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 70, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 70--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401--7671q.
2. Appendix A to Part 70 is amended by adding the entry for
Missouri in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Appendix A to Part 70--Approval Status of State and Local Operating
Permits Programs
* * * * *
Missouri
(a) The Missouri Department of Natural Resources program
submitted on January 13, 1995; August 14, 1995; September 19, 1995;
and October 16, 1995. Interim approval effective on May 13, 1996.
(b) Reserved.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-8664 Filed 4-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.