P.8 9 

36506 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 

relieved of the transportation 

conformity rule's requirements for 

regional analysis of NOx emissions. 

However, once the maintenance plan for 

the middle Tennessee ozone 

nonattainment area is approved, any 

previously approved NOx conformity 

exemption no longer applies. The area 

must then demonstrate as part of its 

conformity determinations .that the 

transportation plan arid .Transportation 

Improvement Plan (TIP) are consistent 

with the motor vehicle emissions budget 

for NOx where such a budget is 

established by the maintenance plan. 

Final Action 

The EPA is approving Tennessee's 

request to exempt the Middle Tennessee 

moderate O3 nonattainment area from 

the section 182(f) NOx RACT and NOx. 

conformity requirements without a prior 

proposal for approval because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. This approval is based upon 

the evidence provided by Tennessee 

showing compliance witii the 

requirements outlined in-the CAA and 

in applicable EPA guidance; If a 

violation ofthe O3 NAAQS occurs in 

any portion of the Middle Tennessee 

area while the area is designated 

nonattainment, the exemption from the 

NOx RACT and NOx conformityrequirements of section 182(f) ofthe 

CAA in the applicable area shall no 

longer apply. 

This action is not a SIP revision and 

- is not subject to the requirements of 

section 110 ofthe CAA. The authority 

to approve or disapprove exemptions . 

from NOx requirements under section 

182 of the CAA was delegated to the 

Regional Administrator from the 

Administrator in a memo dated July .6, 

1994, from Jonathan Cannon, Assistant 

Administrator, to the Administrator, 

titled, "Proposed Delegation of 

Authority: 'Exemptions from Nitrogen . 

Oxide Requirements Under Clean Air 

Act section 182(0 and Related . 

Provisions of the Transportation and 

General Conformity Rules' Decision 

Memorandum." In a separate document 

in this Federal Register publication, the 

EPA is proposing to approve the request 

should adverse or critical comments be 

filed. This action will be effective 

September 9,1996 unless, by August 12, 

'1996, adverse or critical comments are 

received. 

If the EPA receives such comments, 

this action will be withdrawn before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the separate proposed rule. 

The EPA will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting on this 

action should do so at this time. If no 

such comments are received, the public 

is advised that this action will be 

effective September 9,1996. 

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean 

Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(1), 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the .United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by September 9,1996. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not -

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.C. 

7607(b)(2).) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

5 U.S.C. 601 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. . 

sections 603 and 604. Alternatively, 

EPA may certify that the rule will not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

government entities with jurisdiction 

over populations of less than 50,000. 

This rule approves an~exemption from 

a CAA requirement. Therefore, I certify 

that it does not have a significant impact 

on any small entities affected. 

Unfunded Mandates 

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 ("Unfunded Mandates Act"), 

signed into law on March 22,1995, EPA 

must undertake various actions in . 

association with proposed or final rules 

that include a Federal mandate that may 

result in estimated costs of $100 million 

or more to the private sector, or to State, 

local, or tribal governments in the 

Through submission of this state 

implementation plan or plan revision, 

the State and any affected local or tribal 

governments have elected to adopt the 

program provided for under Section 182 

ofthe CAA. These rules may bind State, 

local and tribal governments to perform 

certain actions and also require the 

private sector to perform certain duties. 

EPA has examined whether the rules 

being approved by this action will 

impose any new requirements. Since 

such sources are already subject to these 

regulations under State law, no new 

requirements are imposed by this 

approval. Accordingly, no additional 

costs to State, local, or tribal 

governments, or to the private sector, 

result from this action, and therefore 

there will be no significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. . 

Dated: June 18,1996. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator. 

Part 52 of chapter-I, title 40, Code of 

Federal Regulations, is amended as 

follows: . 

PART 52—{AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. 

Subpart RR—Tennessee 

2. Section 52.2237 is added to read as 

follows: 

§52.2237 NOx RACT and NOx conformity 

exemption. 

Approval—EPA is approving the 

section 182(f) oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) and NOx conformity exemption 

request submitted by the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation on March 21,1995, for the 

five county middle Tennessee 

(Nashville) ozone moderate 

nonattainment area. This approval 

exempts the area from implementing 

federal NOx RACT on major sources of 

NOx and exempts Tennessee from NOx 

conformity. This approval does not 

exempt sources from any State required 

or State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

approved NOx controls. If a violation of 

the ozone NAAQS occurs in the area, 

the exemption from the requirement of 

section 182(f) ofthe CAA in the 

applicable area shall not apply. 

(FR Doc. 96-17644 Filed 7-10-96; 8:45 am] 

BILLING COOE 6560-6O-P 

40 CFR Part 79 

[FRL-5532-4] 

Registration of Fuels and Fuei 

Additives: Minor Changes to the 

Testing Requirements for Registration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 
hlf- *A 

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 36507 

P.91 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency ("EPA" or the "Agency") is 

issuing, as a direct final rule, minor 

changes to the health-effects testing 

requirements at 40 CFR Part 79, Subpart 

F. These requirements deal with the 

exposure of animals to evaporate and 

exhaust emissions from motor vehicles. 

The changes allow for increased 

flexibility,in engine selection, correct an 

inconsistency with respect to mixing 

chamber quality assurance, establish 

clearer exposure timing requirements, 

provide a necessary option for the units 

in which emissions data are reported forheavy-duty vehicle engines, clarify 

oxygen purity requirements, make some 

minor syntax changes, clarify the 

handling of the measurements of 

background chemical species in the 

ambient air used by the engine 

generating emissions, clarify the driving 

schedules, clarify the exposure 

concentration requirements in the 

inhalation chamber, clarify dilution 

system requirements, and clarify the 

requirements for the collection of 

particulates and semi-volatiles. These 

changes will reduce the testing costs 

without affecting the environmental 

objectives. This action is being taken 

without prior notice because EPA 

believes that the minor changes in the 

testing requirements will be 

noncontroversial. 

The rule implementing the testing 

. requirements was finalized on May 27, 

1994 (59 FR 33042, June 27,1994). The 

test data will be used by the Agency to 

determine if the emissions of certain 

gasolines and/or diesel fuels present an 

unacceptable risk to public health. For 

additional background information see 

the procedure in this issue of the 

Federal Register proposing changes to 

the registration regulations. The changes 

in this direct final rule have also been 

incorporated into that notice of , 

proposed rulemaking. If an adverse 

comment or a request for a public 

hearing is received on this direct final 

rule, EPA will withdraw the direct final 

rule and address the comment(s) in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. 

DATES: This action will be effective on " 

August 26,1996 unless EPA receives an 

adverse comment or a request for a 

public hearing byj^upust 12,199§. If 

EPA receives an adverse comment or 

hearing request by that date, EPA will 

withdraw this action via a document in 

the Federal Register. All 

correspondence should be directed to 

the addresses below. 

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this 

rulemaking have been placed in Docket 

A-90-07. The docket is located at the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Docket Section (LE-131), 401M 

Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460 in 

Room M-1500 of Waterside Mall. 

Documents may be inspected between 

the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday. A reasonable 

fee may be charged for copying. Those 

wishing to notify EPA of tiieir intent to 

submit an adverse comment or request 

a public hearing should contact Joseph 

Fernandes (202) 233-9756 or Jim 

Caldwell (202) 233-9303 at the EPA. . 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Fernandes (202) 233-9756 or Jim 

Caldwell (202) 233-9303, USEPA, 

Office of Mobile Sources, Fuels and 

Energy Division, Mail Code 6406J, 401 

M Street, S.W.; Washington, DC 20460. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Regulated Entities 

Regulated Categories and entities 

potentially affected by this action 

include: 

'Category 

Industry 

Examples of regulated entities 

Manufacturers of gasoline and diesel 

fuel. 

Manufacturers of additives for gasoline 

and diesel fuel. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. This table lists 

the types of entities that EPA is now 

aware could be potentially regulated by 

this action. Other types of entities not 

listed in the table could also be 

regulated. To determine whether your 

entity would be regulated by this action, 

you should carefully examine this 

preamble and the proposed changes to 

the regulatory text. You should also 

carefully examine the existing 

provisions of the registration program at 

40 CFR part 79. 

II. Background 

For program background, see the 

notice in this issue of the Federal 

Register proposing non-minor changes 

to the registration regulations for fuels 

and fuel additives (F/FA). The changes 

to the testing requirements in this direct 

final rule are minor and 

noncontroversial. 

HI. Requirements for New Vehicles/ 

Engines 

To ensure that the tests conducted on 

the emissions of one F/FA are not 

affected by "carryover" emissions from 

other F/FAs previously used in the test 

vehicle, § 79.57 ofthe registration 

regulations requires that a new vehicle 

or engine be used in the testing of each 

F/FA. The regulations also recommend 

that one or more identical new vehicles 

or engines be acquired as backup 

emission generators for each F/FA. 

The regulated industry has 

commented to EPA that this 

requirement is burdensome, expensive, 

and unnecessary. They argue that 

suitable conditioning procedures can 

satisfactorily "flush out" the remnants 

of one F/FA and its emissions, so that 

the same vehicle or engine can be used 

in testing another F/FA without fear of 

carryover effects. If this were permitted, 

a substantially smaller fleet of initial 

test vehicles/engines might suffice for a 

given series of F/FAs. Also, a relatively 

small number of additional vehicles 

could be acquired to serve as shared 

backups for the testing of more than one 

F/FA. 

A previous technical communication' 

discussed in detail the possibility of 

short-term and long-term carryover 

effects due to test vehicles/engines 

being used for multiple F/FAs, It also. 

described the restrictions and 

procedural safeguards which could be 

adopted to minimize potential carryover 

problems. Based on that earlier 

discussion, EPA believes it is now 

appropriate to ease some of the 

restrictions on test vehicle Use in some 

circumstances. 

Under this revision, the requirement 

that only new vehicles be used in the 

test program (specified in § 79.57(a)(1)) 

has been retained, since it would not be 

possible to know how, and with what 

range of F/FA products, a vehicle had 

been operated in general use. However, 

it is now acceptable for a single test 

vehicle or engine to be used 

sequentially by different F/FA 

manufacturers for tests on different F/ 

FAs, assuming that adequate 

documentation is furnished to 

demonstrate that the test vehicle/engine 

had not been used for purposes other 

than testing under this program and that 

such previous testing was restricted to 

F/FA types (see below) for which such 

test vehicle sharing was allowed. The 

responsibility for assuring the adequacy 

of such documentation falls to the fuel 

manufacturer who secondarily acquires 

the test vehicle. '•• 

As discussed in the previously-cited 

technical memorandum, concerns about 

possible long-term carryover effects 

arise primarily in regard to "atypical" 

1

1 . Memo to Docket A-90-07 from James D. 

Greaves, "A Preconditioning Cycle for Potential Use 

in the Fuels and Fuel Additives Registration 

Program," 1992,(Docket Item II-B-8). 
P.92 

V ,-

36508 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rule? and Regulations 

elements. Consistent with that 

discussion, EPA believes that the 

current prohibition against using test 

vehicles/engines for more than one F/ 

FA should be retained in the case of 

atypical F/FAs. However, in the case of 

F/FAs which belong to the same fuel 

family (as defined in § 79.56(e)(1)) and 

which contain no elements other than 

carbon, hydrogen, oxygert, nitrogen, and 

sulfur, EPA beUeves tiiat long-term 

carryover effects are of minimal 

concern, and thus believes that it is 

acceptable to permit test vehicles to be 

used for more than one such F/FA. 

. ThuS, for example, a given test vehicle/ 

engine could be used in testing base 

gasoline and one or more nonbaseline 

gasoline formulations. A vehicle that 

had been used for baseline and/or 

nonbaseline gasoline testing may be 

used in testing one a typical F/FA 

formulation, but may not subsequently 

be used for additional baseline/ 

nonbaseline F/FA testing nor for testing 

of other atypical F/FAs. 

To prevent short-term carryover 

effects, a preconditioning procedure is 

required to "flush out" the remnants of 

a previously tested F/FA and its 

emissions from a vehicle's fiiel system, 

engine, exhaust system, and emission ' 

control system, before that vehicle is 

used in the testing of another F/FA. A 

suitable "intermediate preconditioning 

cycle" was described in the technical 

memorandum cited previously, and 

EPA has adopted this cycle, to prevent 

short-term carryover effects between 

tested F/FAs. Section 79.52(b)(2) is 

revised accordingly. 

IV. Mixing Chamber Quality Assurance 

The method specified in the F/FA 

program regulations for generating 

combustion emissions to be used in 

biological testing (§ 79.57(e)(2)) requires 

a mixing chamber or other apparatus to 

smooth out the variability in emission 

concentrations related to transient-cycle 

operations. As a quality assurance 

mechanism, § 79.57(e)(2)(iii)(C) states 

that this apparatus "must function such 

that the average concentration of total 

hydrocarbons leaving the apparatus 

shall be within 10 percent ofthe average 

concentration of hydrocarbons entering 

the chamber." EPA has noted that this, 

language is inconsistent with 

§ 79.57(e)(2)(iv)(C), which allows 

intentional dilution of the exhaust 

stream to occur "in the mixing chamber 

(and/or after leaving the chamber) to 

achieve the desired biological exposure, 

concentrations." 

To correct this inconsistency, the 

language in § 79.57(e)(2)(iii)(C) is 

changed to account for intentional 

exhaust dilution. Specifically, the . 

following phrase has been added to the 

end of the provision cited above: 

"* * \ taking into account any further 

intentional dilution occurring in the 

apparatus pursuant to paragraph 

(e)(2)(iv)(C) of this section." 

V. Exposure Interruptions 

Section 79.57(e)(2)(vii) ofthe 

regulations specifies how long . 

biological exposures may be interrupted 

without voiding a test-in-progress. EPA 

has received feedback from the . 

regulated industry that the language in 

this section is confusing and that, 

furthermore, it is inconsistent with 

customary laboratory practices. EPA 

agrees with this criticism and has 

revised the cited section, substituting 

new exposure time requirements. 

Specifically, EPA has incorporated 

into the regulations'the following 

minimum requirements: (1) A daily 

exposure must be at least 6 hours plus 

the time necessary to build the chamber 

atmosphere to 90percent ofthe target 

exposure atmosphere; (2) A day in 

which the minimum exposure time has 

not been achieved does not. count as an 

exposure day; (3) Exposures must be 

conducted at least 4 days per week; (4) 

' No more than two non-exposure days 

may occur consecutively during the 

exposure period, including weekends 

and days on which the minimum 

exposure time has not been met. 

These exposure rules purposely do 

not make allowance for Federal 

holidays. EPA beUeves that additional 

"down" days for holidays could impact 

the results of the 90-day test periods 

required under Tier 2, and could -

interfere with EPA's abitity to compare 

the results with other F/FAs tested 

during cycles in which holidays did not 

occur. Furthermore,, if a particular 

health effects test guideline contains 

exposure requirements that differ from 

these general rules, then the specific 

requirements would take precedence. 

An example is the Fertitity and 

Teratology assessment at § 79:63(c)(l), 

which requires exposures to pregnant 

animal subjects each day during the first 

15 days of gestation.; 

. Under this change, biological tests 

which did not achieve exposures 

consistent with the above rules would 

be considered void. The same rules 

would be applied to both evaporative 

emission and exhaust emission tests. 

See the revised langukge at ' . 

§§ 79.57(f)(3), 79.57(e)(2)(vii) and 

79.61(d)(5). A new § 79.63(e)(4)(iii) has 

been added to emphasize the special 

exposure requirements of § 79.63(c)(1). 

VI, Units for Reporting Emissions Data 

Section 79.52(b)(l)(iv) specifies that 

manufacturers report emissions data in 

units of grams per mile and weight 

percent total hydrocarbons. These units 

are typically used to report emissions 

data from light-duty vehicles operating 

on chassis dynamometers, but may be 

inappropriate for reporting emissions 

data.from other engine/vehicle classes 

operating on engine dynamometers. As 

such, the wording of paragraph 

- 79.52(b)(l)(iv) has been changed to 

specify that F/FA manufacturers should., 

use brake-specific emission values in 

units of grams per brake-horsepower/ 

hour (gm/BHP-HR) where these units 

are appropriate to the emissions test 

configuration and the vehicle/engine 

being tested. 

If brake-specific emissions data are 

reported, then corresponding changes . 

are needed at several other points in the 

regulations. Section 79.52 (b)(2) (iii) (D) 

specified that the concentration of 

individual polyaromatic hydrocarbons 

(PAHs) and nitrated-polyaromatic 

hydrocarbons (NPAHs) identified in. 

Tier 1 emissions analyses shall be 

reported only in units of microgram (jig) 

per mile, witii 0.001 ng per mile as the 

minimum threshold for identifying and 

reporting on a particular PAH or NPAH 

compound. Similarly, 

§ 79.52(b)(2)(iii)(E) specified that the 

concentration of each polychlorinated 

dibenzodioxin/polychlorinated 

dibenzofuran (PCDD/PCDF) identified 

in the Tier 1 emissions stream shall be 

reported in units of picograms (pg) per 

mile, with 0.5 pg per mile or more as the 

minimum threshold for identifying and 

reporting on a particular PCDD/PCDF 

compound. 

These sections have been revised to 

allow reporting of PAH, NPAH, and 

PCDD/PCDF emissions data in units of 

grams per BHP-HR, where appropriate. 

The counterpart to the g/mile reporting 

tiireshold for PAH and NPAH 

compounds, expressed in terms of 

brake-specific emissions, would be 0.5 

nanograms per BHP-HR or more. 

Likewise, the counterpart to the g/mile 

reporting threshold for PCDD/PCDF ' 

compounds would be 0.3 pg per BHPHR or more. These counterpart values 

were derived by applying fleet average 

conversion-factors-lor'Converting grams 

per mile to grams per BHP-HR, specified 

in EPA Technical Report EPA-AASDSB-89-1. . 

For similar reasons, §§ 79.68 (f)(1) and 

(f)(5)(vi) ofthe Salmonella typhimurium 

reverse mutation assay'guidelines have 

been modified to permit data from this 

assay to be presented in units of either 

revert^n,ts per kilometer (mile) QX*^^*. 
n 

P.93 

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 36509 

revertants per BHP-HR, whichever is 

appropriate to the case at hand. 

VII. Oxygenate Purity 

Section 79.51(i) specifies that a fuel 

manufacturer who reports the potential 

use of more than one oxygenating 

additive in his non-baseline fuel is 

' responsible for testing (or participating 

in group testing) of a separate fuel 

formulation for each such oxygenating 

additive. This provision has caused 

some concern that the occurrence in an 

oxygenate additive of unintended 

oxygenate byproducts of the 

manufacturing process could multiply . 

the testing responsibilities of a fuel 

manufacturer. For example, concern has 

been expressed that the occurrence of a 

small amount of tertiary-amyl-ethyl 

ether (TAEE) as an unintended 

byproduct of ethyl-tertiary-butyl ether 

(ETBE) production will affect the 

grouping of an ETBE additive and will 

cause a fuel manufacturer who blends 

ETBE into his fuel to be responsible for 

testing TAEE as well as ETBE (see 

docket item VI-D-10). This was'not 

EPA's intention in promulgating this 

provision. Section 79.51(i)(4) has been 

revised to state that small amounts of 

unintended oxygenate compounds 

occurring as byproducts ofthe 

manufacturing process of an 

oxygenating additive do not affect the 

grouping of the affected F/FAs nor the 

testing responsibilities of their 

manufacturers. 

E. Minor Syntax Changes and 

Clarifications 

Minor changes.to the regulations are 

also needed to correct some specific 

syntax errors. The phrase "Within May 

27,1997," occurring at the beginning of 

both §§ 79.51(c)(l)(ii) (A) and (B), has 

been changed to "No later than May 27, 

1997". Similarly, the phrase "within 

May 26,2000," occurring within 

§ 79.51(c)(l)(ii)(B), has been changed to 

"by May 26, 2000." The language at the 

beginning of § 79.51(e)(1), which read, 

"A testing faciUty, emissions analysis or 

health and/or welfare effects, shall 

permit * * * " has been changed to: "A 

testing faciUty, whether engaged in 

emissions analysis or health and/or 

welfare effects testing under these 

regulations, shall permit * * * " Some 

ofthe wording in,§.§ 79.57(e) (2)(i), 

(2)(ii) (2)(ii)(B), (3)(i), and (3)(i)(A) has ' 

been changed to clarify the driving 

schedules to be used when operating the 

vehicle or engine to generate 

combustion emissions for biological 

testing. The wording in §§ 79.51(h), 

(h}(l)(ii),and(h)(l)(ii)(A)and(B) 

dealing with additives belonging to 

more than one fuel family, has been 

revised to make this provision easier to 

understand, without changing the 

substance of the requirements. 

VIII. Background Concentrations 

Section 79.5 2 (b)(1) (iii) requires that 

the ambient/dilution air to the engine 

generating emissions for 

characterization be analyzed for levels 

of background chemical species present 

at the time of emission sampling (for 

both combustion and evaporative 

emissions). These background chemical 

species concentrations are to be 

reported with emissions speciation data. 

This information is necessary so that it 

can be subtracted from the measured 

combustion and evaporative 

concentrations in order to detennine the 

contribution for the F/FA. Section 

79.5 2(b)(1) (iii) is revised to clarify this 

and require that only the corrected 

values be reported. 

IX. Repetitive Driving Schedules 

Section 79.57(e)(l)(I) requires the 

Light-Duty Urban Dynamometer Driving 

Schedule (UDDS) or the Heavy Duty 

Engine Dynamometer Schedule (EDS) as 

per 40 CFR part. 86. Both of these 

driving schedules require cold starts at 

the beginning of the cycle, and they 

include extended engine-off times (10 

minutes between bags 2 and 3 for light 

duty and 20 minutes between cold and 

hot cycles for heavy duty). While the 

. inclusion of cold starts and extended 

engine-off times are appropriate for the 

certification of new vehicles and 

engines, these two requirements pose 

significant impracticalities from the 

standpoint of generating combustion 

emissions for animal exposures. 

First, if the UDDS were repeated as 

per the new vehicle certification 

procedure, an eight hour animal 

exposure would require 24 engines 

sequenced for; a cold start every 20 

minutes. Second, the engine-off time 

requirements from the certification 

procedure typically involve extended 

periods of zero emissions. If these were 

incorporated into the Tier 2 biological 

testing, the later requirements for a 

"settling chamber" which will dampen 

out transients to the point that exposure 

concentrations are held constant within 

±10%, would result in the need for a 

huge settling chamber. 

Thus it is appropriate to allow the 

engine used for animal exposures to be 

operated over repeated "hot" driving 

cycles. This would entail repeated Bags 

2 and 3 ofthe UDDS for light-duty 

vehicles and back-to-back repeats of the 

heavy-duty transient cycle for heavyduty engines. Both of these should be 

run without extended idles or engine-off 

periods. 

Repeated operation of the engine over 

the hot portions (bags 2 and 3) ofthe 

FTP will avoid the extended engine-off 

periods which do not contribute 

anything to animal exposure. This 

would minimize the transients in the 

species concentrations, and reduce the 

need for a large settling chamber, 

without changing the nature of the 

species present for the animal exposure. 

A new § 79.57(e)(l)(i)(C) has been added 

to reflect this. 

X. Exposure Concentration 

Section 79.57(e)[2)(yi)(B) requires that 

the mean exposure concentration in the 

inhalation chamber be within 10 

percent of the target concentration on 90 

percent or more of the days. This 

implies that target concentrations must 

be estabUshed for CO, C02, NOx, SOx, 

and total HC, and none can vary by 

more than 10% ofthe targets on 90% or 

more of the exposure days. Given the 

fundamentals of engine combustion and 

the transient nature of the driving 

cycles, it is impossible to maintain all 

combustion emission products at a 

constant level all ofthe time. The focus 

should be on the pollutants which are 

limiting for the animals in terms of 

exposure, which is CO for gasoline and 

NOx for diesel. The engine operator will 

only be able to vary the exhaust dilution 

ratio, and thus control is assured for 

only one pollutant (CO or NOx) at a 

time. Section 79.57(e)(2)(vi)(B) has been 

revised accordingly. 

XI. Dilution System 

Section 79.57(e)(2)(I) states that the 

biological tests are to be performed 

"* * * using emissions generated from 

the test vehicle or engine operated in 

general accordance with the FTP 

procedures cited in this section." Later 

in this section (at § 79.57(e)(2)(iii)), the 

regulations state that "An apparatues to 

integrate the large concentration swings 

typical of transient-cycle exhaust is to 

be used between the FTP-Constant 

Volume Sampler (CVS) source of 

emissions and the exposure chamber 

containing the animal test cages." These 

statements imply that a CVS is required 

to be used as a first stage of dilution in 

the delivery of combustion emissions 

for animal exposure. However, we have 

received a comment that the dilution 

needed for gasoline blends and for 

diesel fuels will be more than can be 

accomplished with a CVS. Therfore, 

the test laboratory should not be 

required to use a CVS as a first stage of 

dilution. In fact, it may be most 

practical to use a constant dilution 

(rather than volume) sampler to 

minimize transient concentrations for 

the animal exposures. Section 
36510 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 /Rule s and Regulations 

P.94 

^'\. 

§ 79.57(e)(2)(iii) has been revised to 

allow the use of any dilution system 

design that achieves the necessary 

concentration of CO or NOx (whichever 

is limiting) and reduces transient 

concentration exposure. 

XII. Collection of Particulates and 

Semi-volatiles 

Section 79.57(e)(l)(ii) states that 

emissions of particulates and semivolatiles are to be collected over 

triplicate FTP tests for light-duty 

vehicles and analyzed as part of the 

requirements for the characterization of 

combustion emissions. However, the 

regulatory language in 

§ 79.57(e)(l)(iii)(A) further states that "If 

the mass of particulate emissions or 

semi-volatile emissions obtained during 

one driving cycle is not sufficient for 

, characterization, then the driving cycle 

may be performed again and the 

extracted fractions combined prior to 

chemical analysis." The number of 

driving cycles that "may be performed" 

is left unclear and potentially conflicts 

with the tripUcate FTP requirements. 

We have received a comment that the 

available literature on gasoline blends 

suggests that the amount of particulate 

and semi-volatile emissions collected 

from one FTP test on a Ught-duty 

vehicle is extremely minute, if not less 

than the detection limits afforded by 

measurement and analytical procedures 

currently in use. Thus 

§ 79.57(e)(1)(iii)(A) has been revised to 

clarify that no more than the three FTP 

tests are required to be performed for 

the collection of particulate and semivolatile .emissions. And, the test 

laboratory should focus on the 

characterization of the Umit detection 

for particulates and semi-volatile 

emissions. 

XIII. Environmental and Economic 

Impacts 

The environmental impacts of today's 

action are minimal, as discussed above. 

Additionally, economic impacts are 

beneficial to affected manufacturers due 

to the additional flexibility afforded in 

today's notice. Minimal anticompetitive effects are expected. A 

regulatory support document which 

presents EPA's analysis of the cost 

impacts ofthe May 1994 rule is 

available in PubUc Docket A-90-07 

located at Room M-1500, Waterside 

Mall (giGund floor), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 401M St. S.W., 

Washington, D.C. 20460. 

XIV. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

EPA has determined that it is not 

necessary to prepare a regulatory 

fiexibiUty analysis in connection with 

this final rule.'This rule will reduce 

regulatory burdens on small businesses 

by reducing or eliminating the reporting 

and testing requirements for many small 

businesses. EPA has determined that 

this rule wiU not have a significant 

adverse economic impact on a 

substantial number of small businesses. 

XV. Administrative Designation 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866 

(58 FR 51735 [October 4,1993]), the 

Agency must determine whether a 

regulatory action is "significant" and 

therefore subject to OMB review and the 

requirements ofthe executive order. The 

order defines "significant regulatory 

actions as one that is likely to result in 

a rule that may: 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 milUon or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local or tribal governments or 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

. or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impact 6f entitlement, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the '. 

President's priorities; or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

Pursuant to the terms of Executive 

Order 12866, it has been determined 

that this direct final rule is not a 

"significant regulatory action": The 

regulatory revisions in this notice will 

reduce testing the requirements and 

costs. 

XVI. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of • 

1980,44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and 

implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 

1320, do not apply to this action as it 

does not involve the collection of 

information as defined therein. 

XVII. Submission to Congress and the 

General Accounting Office 

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) ofthe 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) as 

amended by the SmaU Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996, EPA submitted report containing 

this rule and other required information 

to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives and the Comptroller 

General of the General Accounting 

Office prior to publication of the rule in 

today's Federal Register. The rule is not 

a "major rule" as defined by section 

804(2) ofthe APA as amended. 

XVIII. Unfunded Mandates Act 

Under section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

("Unfunded Mandates Act"), signed 

into law on March 22,1995, EPA must, 

prepare a budgetary impact statement to 

accompany any proposed or final rule 

that includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in expenditure by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate; or by the private sector, of 

$100 million or more. Under Section 

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

The Agency has determined that the 

action promulgated today does not • 

include a federal mandate that may 

result in estimated costs of $100 million 

or more to either State, local, or tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector. This proposed action 

does not establish regulatory . 

requirements that may significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. In 

fact, this proposed action has the net 

effect of reducing the burden ofthe fuei 

and fuel additive registration program 

on regulated entities. Therefore, the 

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates 

Act do not apply to this action. 

XIX. Statutory Authority 

' The statutory authority for this direct 

final rule is provided by sections 205 (b) 

and (c), 211, and 301(a) ofthe Clean Air 

Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7524 (b) and 

(c), 7545, and 7601(a), PubUc Law 95-

95). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 79 

Environmental protection, Fuel, Fuel 

additive, Gasoline, Motor vehicle 

pollution, Penalties. 

Dated: June 27,1996. 

Carol M. Browner, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, part 79 of title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 79—{AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 79 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7524, 7545 and 

7601. 

2. Section 79.51 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (c)(l)(ii)(A), 

(c)(l)(ii)(B), the first sentence of 

paragraphs (e)(1), (h) introductory text, 
P.95 

Federal Register / Vol.. 61, No. 134 /Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 36511 

(h)(l)(ii); and by a.dding a new 

paragraph (i)(4) to read as follows: 

§79.51 General requirements and 

provisions. 

**** * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * *. 

(ii) * * * 

(A) No later than May 27,1997, all 

applicable Tier 1 and Tier 2 

requirements must be submitted to EPA, 

pursuant to §§ 79.52, 79.53, and 79.59; 

or 

(B) No later than May 27,1997, all 

applicable Tier 1 requirements 

(pursuant to §§ 79.52 and 79.59), plus 

evidence of a contract with a qualified 

laboratory (or other suitable 

arrangement) for completion of all 

applicable Tier 2 requirements, must be 

submitted to EPA. For this purpose, a 

qualified laboratory is one which can 

demonstrate the capabilities and 

credentials specified in § 79.53(c)(1). In 

addition, by May 26, 2000, all 

applicable Tier 2 requirements 

(pursuant to §§ 79.53 and 79.59) must be 

submitted to EPA. 

**** * 

(e) Inspection of a testing facility. (1) 

A testing facility, whether engaged in 

emissions analysis or health and/or 

welfare effects testing under the 

regulations in this subpart, shall permit 

an authorized employee or duly 

designated representative of EPA, at 

reasonable times and in a reasonable 

manner, to inspect the facility and to 

inspect (and in the case of records also 

to copy) all records and specimens 

required to be maintained regarding 

studies to which this subpart 

applies. * * * 

**** * 

(h) Special Requirements for 

Additives. When an additive is the test 

subject, the following rules apply: 

**** * 

(1)* * * 

(ii) Additives belonging to more than 

one fuel family. 

(A) If an additive product is registered 

in two or more fuel families as of May 

27,1994, then the manufacturer of that 

additive is responsible for testing (or 

participating in group testing of) the 

respective additive/base fuel mixtures 

in compliance with the requirements of 

this subpart for each fuel family in 

which the manufacturer wishes to 

maintain a registration for its additive. 

(B) If a manufacturer is seeking to 

register such additive in two or more 

fuel families then, for testing and 

registration purposes, the additive shall 

be considered to-be a member of each 

fuel family in which the manufacturer is 

seeking registration. The manufacturer 

is responsible for testing (or 

participating in group testing of) the 

respective additive/base fuel mixture in 

compliance with the requirements of 

this subpart for each fuel family in 

which the manufacturer wishes to 

obtain a product registration for its 

additive. 

**** * 

(i)

 * * * 

(4) The presence in a particular 

oxygenating additive of small amounts 

of other unintended oxygenate 

compounds as byproducts of the 

manufacturing process of the given 

oxygenating additive does not affect the 

grouping of that additive and does not 

create multiple testing responsibilities 

for manufacturers who blend that 

additive into fuel. 

* * * *. * 

3. Section 79.52 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(l)(iii) and 

(b)(l)(iv), (b)(2)(iii)(D) introductory text, 

and (b)(2)(iii)(E) introductory text, to 

read as follows: 

§79.52 Tien. 

**** * 

(b) * * * 

( 1 )

 * * * 

(iii) Measurement of background 

emissions: It is required that ambient/ 

dilution air be analyzed for levels of . 

background chemical species present at 

the time of emissions sampling (for both 

combustion and evaporative emissions) 

and that sample values be corrected by 

substracting the concentrations 

contributed by the ambient/dilution air.. 

Background chemical species 

measurement/analysis during the FTP is 

specified in §§86.109-94(c)(5) and 

86.135-94 of this chapter. 

• (iv) Concentrations of emission 

products shall be reported either in 

units of grams per mile (g/mi) or grams 

per brake-horsepower/hour (g/bhp-hr) 

(for chassis dynamometer and engine 

dynamometer test configurations, 

respectively), as well as in units of 

weight percent of measured total 

hydrocarbons. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

- (iii) * * * 

(D) The analytical method used to 

measure species of PAHs and NPAHs 

should be capable of detecting at least 

1 ppm (equivalent to 0.001 microgram 

(ug) of compound per milligram of 

organic extract) of these compounds in 

the extractable organic matter. The 

concentration of each individual PAH or 

NPAH compound identified shall be 

reported in units of microgram per mile 

or nanograms per brake-horsepower/ 

hour (for chassis dynamometer and 

engine dynamometer test 

configurations, respectively). Each 

compound which is present at 0.001 \i% 

per mile (0.5 nanograms per brakehorsepower/hour) or more must be 

identified, measured, and reported. The 

following individual species shall be 

. measured: 

**** * 

.(E) The analytical method used to 

measure species and classes of PCDD/ 

PCDFs should be capable of detecting at 

least.l part per trillion (ppt) (equivalent 

to 0.001 picogram (pg) of compound per 

milligram of organic extract) of these 

compounds in the extractable organic 

matter. The concentration of each 

individual PCDD/PCDF compound 

identified shall be reported in units of 

picograms (pg) per mile or picograms 

per brake-horsepower/hour (for chassis 

dynamometer and engine dynamometer 

test configurations, respectively). Each 

compound which is present at 0.5 pg/ 

mile (0.3 pg/bhp-hr) or more must be 

identified, measured, and reported. 

**** * 

4. Section 79.57 is amended by 

- adding paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), 

(b)(2)(iii)and(e)(l)(i)(C);andby 

revising paragraphs (e)(l)(iii)(A), 

(e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(ii) introductory text, 

(e)(2)(ii)(B), (e)(2)(iii) introductory text, 

(e)(2)(iii)(C), (e)(2)(vi)(B), (e)(2)(vii), . 

(e)(3)(i)(A), and (f)(3); and by revising 

the word "cycle" to read "schedule" in 

paragraph (e)(3)(i) introductory text; to 

read as follows: 

§79.57 Emission generation. 

* * * * * 

(b)* * * 

(2)* * * 

(i) A vehicle or engine may be used 

to generate emissions for the testing of 

more than one fuel or additive, provided 

that all such fuels and additives belong 

to the same fuel family pursuant to 

§ 79.56(e)(i), and that, once a vehicle or . 

engine has been used to generate 

emissions for an atypical fuel or 

additive (pursuant to § 79.56(e)(2)(iii)), 

it shall not be used in the testing of any 

other fuel or additive. Paragraphs (a) (2) 

and (3) of this section shall apply only 

to the first fuel or additive tested. 

(ii) Prior to being used to generate 

emissions for testing an additional fuel 

or additive, a vehicle or engine which 

has previously been used for testing a 

different fuel or additive shall undergo 

an effective intermediate 

preconditioning cycle to remove the 

previously used fuel and its emissions 

from the vehicle's fuel and exhaust 

systems and from the combustion 

emission and evaporative emission 

control systems, if any. 
P.96 

36512 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 

(iii) Such preconditioning shall ' 

include, at a minimum, the following 

steps: 

(A) The canister (ifany) shall be 

removed from the vehicle and purged 

with 300 °F nitrogen at 20 liters per 

minute until the incremental weight 

loss of the canister is less than 1 gram 

in 30 minutes. This typically takes 3-4 

hours and removes 100 to 120 grams of 

adsorbed gasoline vapors. 

(B) The fuel tank shall be drained and 

filled to capacity with the new test fuel 

or additive/fuel mixture. 

(C) The vehicle or engine shall be 

operated until at least 95% ofthe fuel 

tank capacity is consumed. 

(D) The purged canister shall be 

returned to the vehicle. 

(E) The fuel tank shall be drained and 

filled to 40% capacity with test fuel. 

(F) Two-hour fuel tank heat builds 

from 72-120 °F shall be performed 

- repeatedly as necessary to achieve 

canister breakthrough. The fuel tank 

must be drained and filled prior to each 

heat build. . 

* *' ' * * * 

.(e)* * * (!)*,* * 

(i)* * * 

(C) For Tier 2 testing, the engines 

shall operate on repeated bags 2 and 3 

ofthe UDDS or back to back repeats of 

the heavy-duty transient cycle of the 

EDS. 

* • * * * * 

(iii)* * * 

(A) In the case of combustion 

emissions generated from light-duty 

vehicles/engines, the samples consist of 

three bags of vapor emissions (one from 

each segment of the light-duty exhaust 

emission cycle) plus one sample of 

particulate-phase emissions and one 

sample of semi-volatile-phase emissions 

(collected over all segments ofthe 

exhaust emission cycle). If the mass of . 

particulate emissions or semi-volatile 

emissions obtained during one driving. 

cycle is not sufficient for 

characterization, up to three driving 

cycles may be performed and the 

extracted fractions combined prior to 

chemical analysis. Particulate-phase 

emissions shall not be combined with 

semi-volatile-phase emissions. The test 

laboratory should focus on the 

characterization of the Umit of detection 

for particulates and semi-volatile 

emissions. 

**** * 

(2) * * * Generating whole' 

combustion emissions for biological 

testing, (i) Biological tests requiring 

whole combustion emissions shall be 

conducted using emissions generated 

from the test vehicle or engine operated 

in accordance with general FTP 

requirements. 

(ii) Light-duty test vehicles/engines 

shall be repeatedly operated over the 

Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule 

(UDDS) (or equivalent engine 

dynamometer trace, per paragraph 

(e)(l)(i)(A) of this section} and heavyduty test engines shall be repeatedly 

operated over the Engine Dynamometer-. 

Schedule (EDS) (see 40 CFR part 86, 

appendix I). 

**** * 

. (B) The UDDS or EDS shall be 

repeated as many times as required for 

the biological test session. 

**** * 

(iii) An apparatus to integrate the 

large concentration swings typical of 

transient-cycle exhaust is to be used 

between the source of emissions and the 

exposure chamber containing the 

animal test cages(s). The purpose of 

such apparatus is to decrease the , 

variabiUty of the biological exposure 

atmosphere and achieve the necessary 

concentration of CO or NOx, whichever 

is limiting. 

* * * * * 

(C) The mixing chamber (or any 

alternative emission moderation 

apparatus) must function such that the 

average concentration of total 

hydrocarbons leaving the apparatus' 

shall be within 10 percent of the average 

concentration of hydrocarbons entering 

the chamber, taking into account any 

further intentional dilution.occurring in 

the apparatus pursuant to paragraph 

(e)(2)(iv)(C) of this section. 

* * * * *-

(vi)* * * 

(B) These procedures include 

requirements that the mean exposure 

concentration in the inhalation test 

chamber shall be within 10 percent of 

the target concentration for the single 

species being controlled (establish in 

the development phase of testing) on 90 

percent or more of exposure days and 

that daily monitoring of CO, C02, NOx, 

SOx, and total hydrocarbons in the . 

exposure chamber shall be required. 

Analysis of the particle size distribution 

shall also be performed to established 

the stability,and consistency of particle 

size distribution inthetest exposure. 

* * * * * 

(vii) To allow for customary 

laboratory scheduling and unforeseen 

problems affecting the combustion 

emission generation or dilution 

equipment, biological exposures may be 

interrupted on limited occasions, as 

specified in § 79.61(d)(5). Interruptions 

exceeding these limitations shall cause 

the affected test(s) to be void. Testers 

shall be aware of concerns for backup 

vehicles/engines cited in paragraph 

(a)(7)(ii) of tiiis section. 

***** * 

( 3 )

 * * * 

(i)* * * 

**** * 

(A) Particulate emissions shall be 

collected on particulate filters and 

extracted from the collection equipment 

for use in biological tests. The number 

of, repetitions ofthe applicable driving 

schedule required to collect sufficient 

quantities ofthe particulate emissions 

will vary, depending on the 

characteristics of the engine, the test 

fuel, and the requirements ofthe 

biological test protocol. The particulate 

sample may be collected on one or more 

filters, as necessary. 

**** * 

ffl * * * 

(3) For biological testing, vapor shall 

be withdrawn from the EEG at a 

constant rate, diluted with air as 

required for the particular study, and 

conducted immediately to the biological 

testing chamber(s) in a manner similar 

to the method used in § 79.57(e), 

excluding the mixing chamber therein. 

The rate of emission generation shall be 

high enough to supply the biological 

exposure chamber with sufficient 

emissions to allow for a minimum of 

fifteen air changes per exposure 

chamber per hour. To allow for 

customary laboratory scheduling and for 

unforeseen problems with the -

evaporative emission generation or 

dilution equipment, biological 

exposures may be interrupted on 

limited occasions, as specified in 

§ 79.61(d)(5). Interruptions exceeding 

these limitations shall cause the affected 

test(s) to be void. 

* * • * * * 

5. Section 79.61 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d)(5) to read as 

follows: 

§ 79.61 Vehicle emissions, in halation 

exposure guideline. 

(d) 

. (5) Exposure Conditions. The 

preferred exposure regimen consists of 

exposing the study animals to the test 

atmosphere on a repeated basis for. at 

least 6 hours per day on a 7-day per 

Week basis for the exposure period. 

However, unless precluded by the 

requirements of a particular test 

protocol, exposures based on a nominal 

5-day-per-week regimen will be 

considered acceptable, subject to the 

following rules: 

(i) Each daily exposure during the 

exposure period,must be'at least 6 hours 
If* 

4 /* ' 

P.97 

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 134 / Thursday, July 11, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 3651 3 

plus the time necessary to build the 

chamber atmosphere to 90 percent of 

the target exposure atmosphere. A day 

in which this minimum exposure time 

has not been achieved does not count as 

an exposure day. 

(ii) Nominally, animal exposures 

should be conducted for six hours per 

day for five days per week. In no case 

should the exposures occur less than 

four days per week for a total of 65±2 

exposure days. • 

(iii) No more than two non-exposure 

days may occur consecutively during 

the exposure period, including days on 

which the minimum exposure time has 

not been met. 

* • * * A * 

6. Section 79.63 is amended by 

adding a new paragraph (e)(4)(iii) to 

read as follows: 

§ 79.63 Fertility assessment/teratology. 

**** * 

(e)* * * 

(4) * * * . 

(iii) Pregnant females shall be exposed 

to the test atmosphere on each and 

every day between (and including) the 

first and fifteenth day of gestation. 

**** * 

7. Section 79:68 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (f)(1) and ffl(5)(vi) 

to read as follows: 

§ 79.68 Salmonella typhimurium reverse 

mutation assay. 

**** * 

(f) Data and report—(1) Treatment of 

results. Data shall be presented as 

number of revertaht colonies per plate, 

revertants per kilogram (or liter) of fuel, 

and as revertants per kilometer (or mile, 

or brake-horsepower/hour, as 

appropriate) for each replicate and dose. 

These same measures shall be recorded 

on both the negative and positive 

control plates. The mean number of 

revertant colonies per plate, revertants 

per kilogram (or liter) of fuel, and 

revertants per kilometer (or mile, or 

brake-horsepower/hour), as well as 

individual plate counts and standard 

deviations shall be presented for the test 

substance, positive control, and negative 

control plates. 

**** * 

(5)* * * 

(vi) Individual plate counts, mean -

number of revertant colonies per plate, 

number of revertants per kilometer (or 

mile, or brake-horsepower/hour), and 

standard deviation; and 

**** * 

(ER Doc. 96-1754 9 Filed 7-10-96 ; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P - _. 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY 

MANAGEMENT AGENCY 

44 CFR Part 62 

RIN 3067-AC47 

National Flood Insurance Program; 

Allocated Loss Adjustment Expense 

AGENCY: Federal Insurance 

Administration (FEMA). 

ACTION: Technical amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document amends the 

interim final rule published on 

Wednesday, May 15,1996, 61 FR 

24462-24464, FR Doc. 96-12019, which 

revised the allocated loss adjustment 

expense fee schedule of the National 

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Write 

Your Own (WYO) Program under the 

Financial Assistance/Subsidy 

Arrangement (the Arrangement). This 

technical amendment revises the fee 

schedule ofthe interim final rule, 

restoring the previous basis for 

determining the amount of the flood 

loss and the resulting fees. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11,1996. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles M. Plaxico, Jr., Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 

Federal Insurance Administration, 500 

C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646-3422. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On May 15,1996, the Federal 

Insurance Administration (FIA) 

published an interim final rule (FR Doc. 

96-12019) that modified the allocated 

loss adjustment fee schedule of the 

National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP) Write Your Own Program under 

the Financial Assistance/Subsidy 

Arrangement (the Arrangement). That ' 

interim final rule added new loss ranges 

and revised the fees for adjusting claims 

in the higher ranges under the NFIP. 

The revised fee schedule also contained 

footnotes establishing a new basis 

(replacement cost, not to exceed policy 

limits, in all cases) for determining the 

amount of loss. 

Before the May 15,1996 changes, the 

amount of loss reported and used for 

determining the allocated loss 

adjustment fee was either on an actual 

cash value or a replacement cost basis, 

depending on how the loss was 

adjusted. Standard deductibles were 

applied in all cases. The May 15,1996 

changes required WYO companies to 

report losses, regardless of how they 

were adjusted, on a replacement cost 

basis. This requirement, however, is 

inconsistent with current systems 

reporting and recording capabiUties. 

Need To Correct Publication 

A number of WYO companies 

reported that they could not meet the 

reporting requirement of the May 15, 

1996 interim final rule in a timely 

manner. In order to meet the reporting 

requirement, WYO companies need 

additional time to reprogram their data 

processing systems. FEMA agrees, and 

by this amendment reverts to the 

methods for calculating the amount of 

loss in effect before the May 15,1996 

interim final rule. The new loss ranges 

and revised fees for the higher ranges 

remain the same as in the May 15,1996 

rule. 

The basis for determining fees . 

contained in the May 15,1996 interim 

final rule will be honored from May 15, 

1996 until today, the effective date of 

this revised interim final rule. FIA will 

provide separate guidance to WYO 

companies on how to handle financial 

reporting from May 15,1996 until 

today. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, Exhibit A, Fee Schedule, 

ofthe publication of May 15,1996, at 

61 FR 24463-24464, (FR Doc. 96-12019) 

is corrected to read as follows: 

EXHIBIT A.—FEE SCHEDULE 

Range (by covered 

loss) 

Erroneous Assignment. 

Closed Without Pay- . 

ment. 

Minimum for UptonJones Claims. 

$0.01 to $600.00 

$600.01 to $1,000.00 

$1,000.01 to 

$2,000.00. 

$2,000.01 to 

$3,500.00. 

$3,500.01 to 

$5,000.00. 

$5,000.01 to 

$7,000.00. 

$7,000.01 to 

$10,000.00. 

$10,000.01 to 

$15,000.00. 

$15,000.01 to 

$25,000.00. 

$25,000.01 to 

$35,000.00. 

$35,000.01 to 

$50,000.00. 

$50,000.01 to 

$100,000.00. 

$100,000.01 to 

$250,000.00. 

$250,000.01 and up 

Fee. 

$40.00 

125.00 • 

800.00 

150.00 

175.00 

225.00 

' • 

.275.00 

350.00 

425.00 

500.00 

550.00 

600.00 

675.00 

750.00 

3.0% 

2.3% but not less 

than $3,000. 

2.1% 

but not less than 

$5,750.