+(,121/,1(

Citation: 46 Fed. Reg. 40512 1981 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Mon Sep 16 11:18:34 2013

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register / Vol. 46, No. 153 / Monday, August 10, 1981 / Rules and Regulations

Case 2: The unobligated balance returned

to the State was less than the amount needed

to meet the reserve requirements.

Case 3: The unobligated balance returned

to the State was sufficient to meet the reserve requirements but- not large enough to make

the grants under Section 202(a)(1) needed to use the I/A reserve (Section 205(i))..(The I/A reserve can be used only to increase the

Federal share of a project using I/A

technology from 75% to 85%.)

Case 4: The amount of the unobligated

balance returned to the State was sufficient

to fully meet the reserve requirements and to

rise the I/A reserve to increase grants under

Section 202(a)(1).

Based upon a review of hase law in similar

situations, our Office of General Counsel

concluded that States in case 1 do not have to

meet the Section 205 (h) and (i) reserve requirements because the rescission made it

impossible for them to comply. Also, States

need not deobligate any awards made from

either reserve before the rescission even-if

the total amount obligated for Section 205 (h) or (i) before the rescission exceeds the new

reserve amount(s).

Cases 2 and 3 pose a more difficult

problem. To some extent, the rescission made

it impossible for those States to comply with

" the reserve requirements. However, we are still required to implement the original

statutory scheme as much as possible within

the limits of this added constraint.

Consequently, we must require that each

State in either case 2 or 3 meet the reserve requirements to the extent possible within the

limits of available funds. However, If the

Regional Administrator determines that it is

impossible for a State to fully obligate either reserve because of the rescission, the

Regional Administrator can permit the State

to use-he reserve funds for grants under

Section 202(a)(1).

The regulatory requirements for the I/A

and small community reserves are in 40 CFR

35.915-1(b) and (e). States in'case 4 must

comply with both provisions. However, a class deviation from these provisions is

necessary to provide flexibility to assure that

other States are not left in an impossible

situation by the rescission. Therefore, for

States In cases 1, 2 and 3, I am approving the

following class deviation:

1. Case 1 States. This deviation from 40

CFR 35.915-1 (b) and (e) releases States in case I from those reserve requirements, since

they cannot comply because Of the rescission.

2. Case 2 States. This deviation from 40

CFR 35.915-1 [b) and (e) permits the Regional

Administration to reduce the amount of funds

req~ired 'to meet the reserve requirements in case 2 States to the extent that their

unobligated balance after the rescission was not enough to meet that requirement. Also, if

the Regional Administrator determines that a

case 2 State cannot use any part of either reserve because of the rescission, he or she

may release the remaining reserve. To make

that determination, the Regional

Administrator shall assure: a. That, before the rescission, the State had

enough projects on the fundable portion of

the project priority list to fully use the initial

-reserve; and

b. That the State used the unobligated

balance remaining after the rescission to

meet the reserve requirement to the extent

possible.

3. Case 3 States. This deviation from 40

CFR 35.915-1(b) permits the Regional

Administrator to release case 3 States from

the I/A reserve requirement if he or she

determines that the State cannot use its I/A reserve because of the rescission. To make

that determination, the Regional

Administrator shall assure: a. That, before the rescission, the State had

enough I/A projects on the fundable portion

of the project priority list to fully use the

initial reserve;, and

,b. That the State used the I/A reserve for

projects, or segments of projects, to the

extent possible considering the unobligated

balance remaining after the rescission.

Dated: July 24. 1981.

Concur:

Edward J. Hanley,

Assistant Administrator forAdmmlstration

(PM-208).

Dated: July 24, 1981.

Concur:.

James N. Smith,

ActingAssistant Administrator for Water

(WH-556).

IFR Doc. 81-23248 Filed 8-7-81; 8:45 aml

BILLING CODE 6560-29-M

40 CFR Part 52

[A-9-FRL 1887-5]

Approval and Promulgation of

"Implementation Plans; Ambient Air

Quality Surveillance Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final Rulemaking.

SUMMARY: On November 24; 1980, the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

proposed approval of air quality

surveillance plans submitted by the

States of Arizona, California, Hawaii,

and Nevada. This notice announces

EPA's final approval of the air quality

surveillance plans. The intended effect

of this action is to update revisions and

to correct certain deficiencies in the'

State Implementation Plan, and to

impleient certain provisions of the

.Clean Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 9,-1981.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Louise P Giersch, Director, Air and

Hazardous Materials Division,

Environmental Protection Agency, 215

Fremont Street, San Francisco, CA

94105, Attn: Douglas Grano, (415] 556--

2938.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

319 of the Clean Air Act, as amended,

requires the EPA to establish monitoring

criteria to be followed uniformly across

the Nation. Pursuant to this requirement

and the recommendations of the

Standing Air Monitoring Work Group

(SAMWG), EPA on May 10, 1979 (44 FR

27558), promulgated rules and

regulations for Ambient Air Quality

Monitoring Data Reporting, and

Surveillance Provisions, The regulations

revoke Part 51 of Title 40 of the Code of

Federal Regulations and establish a now

Part 58 entitled Ambient Air Quality

Surveillance.

The States of Arizona, California,

Hawaii, and Nevada submitted to the

EPA, S revisions to provide for

modification of the existing air quality

surveillance network. EPA has reviewed

the submission and determined that it

meets the requirements of Sections

110(a)(2)(C), 319, 313, and 127 of the

Clean Air Act, as amended, and EPA

regulations in 40 CFR Part 58. The

complete requirements for an air quality

surveillance plan are outlined in 40 CFR

58.20 and were summarized In EPA's

notice qf proposed rulemaking published

November 24,1980 (45 FR 77464]. The

November 24 notice also discussed each

State's submission, proposed approval

of the air quality surveillance plans, and

provided a 60-day public comment

period. No comments were received.

Therefore, this notice takes final action

to approve the air quality surveillance

plan as revisions to the Arizona,

California, Hawaii, and Nevada State

Implementation Plans (SIPs).

Under Secti 6 n 307(b](1) of the Clean

Air Act, judicial review of this final

action is available only by the filing of a

petition for review in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit within 60 days of date of final

rulemaking. Under Section 307(b)(2) of

the Clean Air Act, the requirements

which are the subject of today's notice

may not be challenged later In civil or

criminal proceedings brought by EPA to

enforce these requirements,

Under Executive Order 12291, EPA

must judge whether a regulation is "major" and therefore subject to the

requirements of a Regulatory Impact

Analysis. This regulation is not major

because it only approves state actions.

It imposes no new regulatory

requirements.

This regulation was submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget for

review as required by Executive Order

12291.

Note.-lncorporation by reference of the

State Implementation Plan revisions for the

States of Arizona, California, Hawaii, and

Nevada was approved by the Director, of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1980,

(Sections 110 and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act

as amended (41 U.S.C. 7410 and 7001(a)].

40512
Fedieral Register / vol.D46, .No. 153 j Monday;'.ugust 0, 1981. .1 Rules -and Regulations

Date&-july. .'1981

Anne MAGorsuch,

Administrator.

Subparts,F. -.y, anrdLDof-Partt52tof

Chapter:I,- Title-4O. mf'itheCode cof

Federal Regulafions 'arenamended :as

follows:

PART'52-APPROVAL AND

PROMULGATION OF

IMPLEMENTATION'PLANS

Sub partD-.Arizona

-1:.Sedtion!52.1205s anended~by

adding paragraph {c) [41) .asfolow.s:

§52.120 Identification of plan.

(c) **

i,41) Thelollo wng -amendments to ithe

plan were submittedfonNribruarya15.

1980,,byithe Governors :designee. [i ir'0 Quality'Sureillance

Network.

Subpart F-California

2.*Section'52.'220 is amendea'by adding paragra.p'h c 90) as f fllows:

§B5220 lderitificalion'ofplan.

(c) . .

(90J TheToflowngamanenments to The

4ilan were su bnfttedion:December 31.

1997yg.the'Govemoreszdesignee.

[ij10hapterI2-_AirQuality

Monitorig by State and JLocalAir

MonritoringStations'SLAMSJ.

SubpartI'--Hawail

3. Section 52.620 is.amend.i.y

adding paragraph (c)(12) as follows:

§ 52.120 Idertifcation.f-plan.

(c)

,(12) The followiig amenaments'io the

-plan-were.submittedonA gust 21. 1980,

by the -Govemor.

(i) X ILAir QualityySurveillance

:NetWo&k

SubpartDD--Nevada

4.Section 52:1470 is amended,by

adding paragraph (c)(19)asifollows:

§52.1470 Identification of plan..

* } * " *

:(dV

(19) Ihefdllowing'amendments-to the

planwere'submitted-on'june'24. 1980, by

the Governor.

(i) Seclion'1O-State.df Nevada

Ambient Air'Quality'Monitofing and

Surveillance.

BILNG CODE,'6560-3"4I

DEPARTMENT OFITRANSPORTATION

National Iilghway Traffic Safety

Administration

.49 CFRBParts512,525,;537, and-555

[Docket'Nos.78-10, Notice'6; FE76-:04,

Notice 7;TE 77-03,'Notlce'6, 80:21, Notice

3]

ConfidentialiBusiness Information;

Deferraeof!EffectiveDates

AGENCY. NationdlfEghway TrafMc

Safety.Am miistratlon, DOT.

ACTON:TmJn1 rules;ideferraoft'effective

dates.

SUMMARY:.By this notice, the agency

defers thq effective date df its new

raulation,.Phrl 512, ConfidentiIa

Business Injornation, and conforming

amendments jnade joParts525. 537, and 555. Theiagency pulblisheaPartsi12 on

January 8, 1981({46"FR2049J. Conforming

amendments .were .maae o other agency

regulations'simultaneously,[4F0063).

SuBsequently,the agencyextendedihe

time for filingpetitions for

reconsideration of lheiregulation,(46FR

10969)., On;March 9, ,1981,,the .agency

received.alpetition for reconsideration

from the Motor'Vehicle Manufacturers

Association. To,allowtheagency time to

respond do:that petition, theagency

delayed the effective date of the

regulation.to 'August,7. 1981,(46FR

211.,. Todate, theagencyhas.been

unable o:respond tto the petition for

xrecongideration'andconsiders it

appropriate!to defer theeffectivedate of

the-egulationoncetagainuntilta

responsecanbeussued.In accordance

with the iforegoing.'the teffective dateas

extendedfor- odays.,Given the

des'rabilityiofxespondingto thepetition

for reconsideration before the regulation

becomes effectiverandthe uniminence.of

the'effective date.,the agency'lor good

causeflndsithatnoticeandoopporturity

forcommentnnithisdeferral are

impracticable andcontraryto thepublic

interest anditherefore notrequired.

EFFECTVE'DATE:"rhe newreffectivedate

forfPart'512.ana the-amendments:to

Parts 525,.537. and'5 isNovember.O.

-1981.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Roger'Tilton, Office ofClief

Counsel. National Highway'Trazffic

Safety Admimtration40o SeventhSt.

S.W.. Was'hington.-D.C.I[Z0Z-426-:9511].

(Secs. 103.lg..Pub.L-89-563,8o'St iL 718(15

U.S.C.-1392.-1407):'dcelegation'oT,authority at

49,CFR 1.50

Issued on'August6,'1981.

Raymond A.'Peck. Jr.,

A dmistrator.

FRl)oc.m- Med &-:34 pi4

BILUNG CODE 4910-534M

INTERSTATECOMMERCE

COMMISSION

49 CFR Part 1033

[21st'Rev.'S.O. No. 1473]

Ca r:ServlceVariousRailroads

Authorizedtolse Tracksand/or

Facilities of:Chicago,iRocklsIand and

Pacific RailroadCo.,iDebtor,(Willam M,

Gibbons, Trustee)

AGENCY:nterstate Commerce

Commission.

ACTIO N: 21stRevisedSerice frderTo.

1473.

SUMMARY: Twenty-first Revised Service

Order No. 1473 authonzed-vaious

railroads .toaise tracks md/or facilities

of Chicago. Rock Island and-Pacific

Railroad Company, Debtor,[.William-M.

Gibbons,'Trustee].

EFFECTIVEDATE: 12!01 am...Auust 3.

1981. andcontinuing ineffectintil -11:59

p.m., September'30,1981.mnless

otherwise modified.,amended or

vacated by order!of this Commission.

FOR FURTHER'INFORMATIONCONTACT.

M. F. Clemens. Jr. (202}275--784o.

SUPPLEMENTARY 'INFORMATION

Decided:jtuly'31, 1 98

1.

Pursuant to Section 122 nfthe Rock

Island Transition nd Emjiloyee

Assistance Act, Pub.L.96-2541RITEA),

the Commissionis aithorizing various

railroads'to provide-interim'service'over

Chicago, RockIsTland- anLPadific

Railroad Company. febtor (William M.

Gibbons.'Trusteel. (RIJ "andtouse such

tracks -and facilities as arenecessary for

that-operation.

In view of-the urgentneed for

implementation-oflong'range solutions

for continued'rail service'overdlRines,

and m consideration of a recent

complaint'by :theTrustee regarding the

absence26fdcompensation'for the use-of

his propertyby certam rail carriers.the

REiIroadSrnice'Board (RSB] hereby

reminds any carriers -which haven't

negotiated such compensation to do so

in the interest'df'coritinued operations.

Compensaion'tothe Trsteefis an

integral fparto he interim authority and

40513