Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64661

§ 375.303 Delegations to the Chief 

Accountant. 

The Commission authorizes the Chief 

Accountant or the Chief Accountant’s 

designee to: 

(a) Sign all correspondence with 

respect to financial accounting and 

reporting matters on behalf of the 

Commission. 

(b) Pass upon actual legitimate 

original cost and depreciation thereon 

and the net investment in jurisdictional 

companies and revisions thereof.

* * * * *

(h) Deny or grant, in whole or in part, 

requests for waiver of the requirements 

of parts 352 and 356 of this chapter, 

except if the matters involve unusually 

large transactions or unique or 

controversial features, the Chief 

Accountant must present the matters to 

the Commission for consideration.

§ 375.312 [Amended]

■ 3. Section 375.312 is amended by 

removing paragraphs (a) through (e), and 

by redesignating paragraphs (f) through 

(n) as paragraphs (a) through (i).

§ 375.314 [Amended]

■ 4. Section 375.314 is amended by 

removing the phrase ‘‘non-financial’’

from paragraphs (i) and (k), and by 

revising paragraph (j) and adding new 

paragraph (l) to read as follows:

§ 375.314 Delegations to the Director of 

the Office of Market Oversight and 

Investigations.

* * * * *

(j) Pass upon actual legitimate original 

cost and depreciation thereon and the 

net investment in jurisdictional 

companies and revisions thereof, and 

sign audit reports involving 

jurisdictional companies, 

(1) If the company agrees with the 

audit report, or 

(2) If the company does not agree with 

the audit report, provided that any 

notification of the opportunity for a 

hearing required under Section 301(a) of 

the Federal Power Act or Section 8(a) of 

the Natural Gas Act accompanies the 

audit report.

* * * * *

(l) With regard to billing errors noted 

as a result of the Commission staff’s 

examination of automatic adjustment 

tariffs approved by the Commission, 

approve corrective measures, including 

recomputation of billings and refunds, 

to the extent the company agrees.

[FR Doc. 04–24813 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[R05–OAR–2004–IN–0004; FRL–7820–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving 

revisions to volatile organic compound 

(VOC) requirements for Eli Lilly and 

Company (Eli Lilly) for a facility which 

it owns and operates in Marion County, 

Indiana. On February 11, 2004, the 

Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

Commissioner’s Order requesting the 

revision as an amendment to the 

Indiana State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The February 11, 2004 submission 

supplements a December 19, 2001 

submission. 

Eli Lilly owns and operates a 

synthesized pharmaceutical 

manufacturing facility in Marion 

County. This SIP revision covers new 

and existing sources in Eli Lilly’s 

Building 110 pilot plant. Eli Lilly is 

seeking an exemption from 326 Indiana 

Administrative Code (IAC) 8–5–3, 

control requirements for synthesized 

pharmaceutical manufacturing, under 

the site-specific reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) rule, 326 

IAC 8–1–5. Eli Lilly is seeking this 

exemption for reactors, filters, 

centrifuges, and vacuum dryers at 

Building 110. Other Building 110 

sources, such as air dryers, in-process 

tanks, and storage tanks, comply with 

326 IAC 8–5–3. The total VOC annual 

emissions from Building 110 are limited 

to less than 10 tons per year (TPY).

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

7, 2005, unless the EPA receives 

relevant adverse written comments by 

December 8, 2004. If adverse comment 

is received, the EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal of the rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. R05–OAR–

2004–IN–0004 by one of the following 

methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

E-mail: bortzer.jay@epa.gov.

Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

Mail: You may send written 

comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch, (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

Hand delivery: Deliver your 

comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. R05–AR–2004–N–0004. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov, or email. The Federal regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of the related proposed rule which is 

published in the Proposed Rules section 

of this Federal Register.

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either 

electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at Environmental Protection 

64662 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. (We recommend 

that you telephone Matt Rau, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886–

6524 before visiting the Region 5 office.) 

This Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Criteria 

Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, Telephone: (312) 886–6524, email: rau.matthew@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used we mean 

the EPA.

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. What Is EPA approving? 

III. What are the changes from the current 

rule? 

IV. What is the EPA’s analysis of the 

supporting materials? 

V. What are the environmental effects of 

these actions? 

VI. What rulemaking actions is the EPA 

taking? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. General Information 

A. How Can I Get Copies of This 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. The Regional Office has established 

an electronic public rulemaking file 

available for inspection on EDOCKET 

and a hard copy file which is available 

for inspection at the Regional Office. 

EPA has established an official public 

rulemaking file for this action under 

Docket ID No. R05–AR–2004–IN–0004. 

The official public file consists of the 

documents specifically referenced in 

this action, any public comments 

received, and other information related 

to this action. Although a part of the 

official docket, the public rulemaking 

file does not include Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. The official public 

rulemaking file is the collection of 

materials that is available for public 

viewing at the Air Programs Branch, Air 

and Radiation Division, EPA Region 5, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

excluding Federal holidays. 

2. Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the 

regulations.gov Web site located at

http://www.regulations.gov where you 

can find, review, and submit comments 

on Federal rules that have been 

published in the Federal Register, the 

Government’s legal newspaper, and are 

open for comment. 

For public commenters, it is 

important to note that EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing at the EPA Regional Office, as 

EPA receives them and without change, 

unless the comment contains 

copyrighted material, CBI, or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. When EPA 

identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

the official public rulemaking file. The 

entire printed comment, including the 

copyrighted material, will be available 

at the Regional Office for public 

inspection. 

B. How and To Whom Do I Submit 

Comments? 

You may submit comments 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier. To ensure proper 

receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 

rulemaking identification number by 

including the text ‘‘Public comment on 

proposed rulemaking Region 5 Air 

Docket ‘‘R05–OAR–2004–IN–0004’’ in 

the subject line on the first page of your 

comment. Please ensure that your 

comments are submitted within the 

specified comment period. Comments 

received after the close of the comment 

period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not 

required to consider these late 

comments. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting public comments and on 

what to consider as you prepare your 

comments see the ADDRESSES section 

and the section I General Information of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of the related proposed rule which is 

published in the Proposed Rules section 

of this Federal Register.

II. What Is EPA Approving? 

EPA is approving revisions to VOC 

control requirements for the Eli Lilly 

pharmaceutical manufacturing facility 

in Marion County, Indiana. Indiana 

submitted Commissioner’s Order 

#2003–02 on February 11, 2004, 

requesting revisions as an amendment 

to its SIP. The February 11, 2004 

submission supplements a December 19, 

2001 submission. 

Indiana is seeking an exemption from 

326 IAC 8–5–3 for reactors, centrifuges, 

filters, and vacuum dryers in Building 

110, the pilot plant for Eli Lilly. This 

exemption can be granted under 326 

IAC 8–1–5, which allows site-specific 

RACT plans as an alternative to 326 IAC 

Article 8 requirements. Other Building 

110 sources such as the air dryers and 

the storage tanks comply with 326 IAC 

8–5–3. 

Indiana has determined that using 

primary reactor condensers operating at 

¥10° Celsius on the reactors is RACT. 

Indiana has also determined that no 

emissions controls are feasible for the 

vacuum dryers. Eli Lilly must enclose 

all Building 110 centrifuges and filters 

having an exposed solvent surface. The 

RACT control level is the condensers set 

at ¥10°C, which meets the required 

control level for most VOCs that Eli 

Lilly will be using. However, some 

VOCs may be used for which 326 IAC 

8–5–3 requires a lower temperature on 

the condensers. The temperature 

requirement is based on the vapor 

pressure of the solvent. Eli Lilly will 

operate its primary reactor condensers 

at a steady temperature, ¥10°C, instead 

of adjusting for the vapor pressure of the 

VOC being used because of the frequent 

solvent changes. Eli Lilly is required to 

certify that the condensers were 

operating at all required times.

Even with these relaxations from 326 

IAC 8–5–3, the total VOC emissions 

from this facility will remain low 

because VOC emissions for Building 110 

are limited to less than 10 tons per 12 

consecutive months period rolled on a 

monthly basis. IDEM determines the 

Building 110 emissions using the 

detailed batch records kept by Eli Lilly. 

The records consist of the amount of 

each solvent contained in each input, 

product, and waste stream for each 

batch operation including: New solvent 

added, solvent generated during the 

process reactions, solvent added from 

another batch, waste solvent generated, 

solvent sent to the sewer, solvent 

consumed during process reactions, 

solvent drummed for later use, and 

solvent collected and emitted during 

product drying. Eli Lilly measures the 

new and recovered solvent used, the 

solvent in the liquid waste, and the 

material collected from the condenser 

during drying. The amount of each 

solvent that is generated or consumed 

by the chemical reactions is calculated 

using information found in process 

notebooks that are available for 

inspection. The air emissions are 

obtained by a material balance 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64663

calculation by subtracting the measured 

waste solvent and dryer collected 

product and the calculated solvent 

consumed from the measured solvent 

added and the calculated solvent 

generated. Eli Lilly tallies the VOC 

emission amounts for all batches to 

determine the monthly VOC emissions 

from Building 110. 

III. What Are the Changes From the 

Current Rule? 

Indiana requested VOC rule revisions 

for sources in Eli Lilly’s Building 110. 

Eli Lilly is also now allowed to add 

equipment to and move equipment 

around Building 110 without the need 

for approval of a new SIP revision. 

Previously, Eli Lilly had listed its 

equipment and the module where it was 

being used. Equipment changes required 

a permit and a SIP revision. The new 

process simplifies the addition of new 

equipment within certain parameters, 

while establishing a strict building-wide 

VOC limit. Other changes include 

allowing the condensers on the reactors 

to maintain a steady temperature. This 

is a change from the requirements of 326 

IAC 8–5–3 (b)(1)(A), which varies the 

condenser temperature based on the 

solvent vapor pressure. 

IV. What Is the EPA’s Analysis of the 

Supporting Materials? 

Indiana has submitted Technical 

Support Documents in support of the 

requested SIP revision. It has also 

provided a listing of the solvents used 

in the reactors. The two technically 

feasible control techniques for Eli Lilly 

to meet the 326 IAC 8–5–3 requirements 

are absorption and condensation. 

Indiana found these to be economically 

infeasible for both absorption and for 

condensation at ¥25°C, a level that 

ensures compliance with 326 IAC 8–5–

3 (b)(1)(A). Indiana determined that 

RACT for Eli Lilly’s pilot plant is 

operating condensers at ¥10°C on the 

reactors, enclosing all centrifuges and 

filters, and no controls on vacuum 

dryers. Air dryers, storage tanks, and inprocess tanks in Building 110 comply 

with 326 IAC 8–5–3. 

Indiana also replaced an equipment 

list for each module in the pilot plant 

as contained in a 1994 construction 

permit (CP 097–3341), with the 

requirement that Eli Lilly can add 

sources without a SIP revision if: 

• They are part of Eli Lilly’s research 

and development (R&D) process;

• They comply with the RACT plan 

provided in Commissioner’s Order 

#2003–02, Appendix A; and, 

• The total Building 110 VOC 

emissions remain limited to less than 10 

TPY. 

This gives Eli Lilly more flexibility 

with its R&D equipment and eliminates 

the need for both Indiana and EPA to 

review numerous SIP revisions for 

sources with low emissions levels. 

EPA finds that these revisions can be 

approved. Building 110 sources are used 

for R&D activities. The pharmaceutical 

products made there are used to test 

more efficient production processes and 

to develop new pharmaceutical 

products. This means there are frequent 

changes in the equipment and solvents 

used in production. EPA believes that 

the requested revisions are appropriate 

considering the operations occurring in 

Building 110 and the annual buildingwide VOC limit of less than 10 TPY. 

V. What Are the Environmental Effects 

of These Actions? 

Reactions involving VOCs and 

nitrogen oxides in warm air form 

tropospheric (ground level) ozone. The 

highest concentrations of ozone occur in 

the warm months of the year. Ozone 

decreases lung function causing chest 

pain and coughing. It can aggravate 

asthma and other respiratory diseases. 

Children playing outside and healthy 

adults who work or exercise outside 

also may be harmed by elevated ozone 

levels. Ozone also reduces vegetation 

growth and reproduction including 

economically important agricultural 

crops. 

Eli Lilly’s Building 110 VOC 

emissions are limited to less than 10 

tons per 12 consecutive months period 

rolled on a monthly basis. Eli Lilly must 

keep its VOC emissions below 10 TPY, 

even if it adds more R&D equipment to 

Building 110. This should continue to 

protect the air quality of Marion County, 

Indiana. In addition, Eli Lilly remains 

subject to all applicable New Source 

Review requirements. 

VI. What Rulemaking Actions Is the 

EPA Taking? 

The EPA is approving, through direct 

final rulemaking, revisions to VOC 

emissions regulations for the Eli Lilly 

pharmaceutical manufacturing facility 

in Marion County, Indiana. The 

revisions include an exemption from the 

control requirements of 326 IAC 8–5–3 

for reactors, centrifuges, filters, and 

vacuum dryers in Building 110, the 

pilot plant. This exemption can be 

approved under Indiana’s site-specific 

RACT rule, 326 IAC 8–1–5. Eli Lilly is 

also authorized to add R&D equipment 

to Building 110 without additional 

rulemaking. Eli Lilly will follow the 

appropriate RACT plan for the new 

equipment and keep the total annual 

VOC limit for Building 110 to less than 

10 TPY. 

We are publishing this action without 

a prior proposal because we view these 

as noncontroversial revisions and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’

section of today’s Federal Register, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if written adverse 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective on January 7, 2005 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comment by December 

8, 2004. If the EPA receives adverse 

written comment, we will publish a 

final rule informing the public that this 

rule will not take effect. We will address 

all public comments in a subsequent 

final rule based on the proposed rule. 

The EPA does not intend to institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on these actions must do so at this time. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

For this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This action merely approves State law 

as meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law 

and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by State law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

64664 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

approves a State rule implementing a 

Federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

Clean Air Act. 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. Section 804, 

however, exempts from section 801 the 

following types of rules: Rules of 

particular applicability; rules relating to 

agency management or personnel; and 

rules of agency organization, procedure, 

or practice that do not substantially 

affect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is 

not required to submit a rule report 

regarding today’s action under section 

801 because this is a rule of particular 

applicability. 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

StatesCourt of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 7, 2005. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: September 16, 2004 . 

Norman Niedergang, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart P—Indiana

■ 2. Section 52.770 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(157) to read as 

follows:

§ 52.770 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(157) On December 19, 2001, and 

February 11, 2004, Indiana submitted 

revised volatile organic compound 

(VOC) emissions regulations for Eli Lilly 

and Company in Marion County. The 

submission provides alternate VOC 

control requirements for reactors, 

vacuum dryers, centrifuges, and filters 

in the pilot plant. The alternate control 

requirements are being approved under 

site-specific Reasonably Available 

Control Technology standards. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Commissioner’s Order #2003–02 

as issued by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management on 

February 11, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04–24821 Filed 11–5–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 13 and 80

[WT Docket No. 00–48; PR Docket No. 92–

257; RM–9499; FCC 04–3] 

Maritime Communications

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: In this document the 

Commission amends parts 13 and 80 of 

the Commission’s rules to update and 

streamline the rules governing the 

maritime radio services. The paramount 

goals of these amendments are to 

enhance maritime safety, promote the 

efficient use of the maritime radio 

spectrum, and, to the extent it is 

consistent with these first two 

objectives, remove unnecessary 

regulatory burdens on the users and 

manufacturers of maritime radio 

equipment. The amendments also 

conform part 80 of the Commission’s 

rules with international standards 

where doing so will not undermine 

domestic regulatory objectives.

DATES: Effective January 7, 2005. The 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in the regulations is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register, as of January 7, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Tobias, Jeff.Tobias@FCC.gov, 

Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure 

Division, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau, (202) 418–0680, or TTY (202) 

418–7233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Federal 

Communications Commission’s 

consolidated Second Report and Order

in WT Docket No. 00–48 and Sixth