# + 2

(,1 1/,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 ofa 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 ofGeneral Counsel concluded that States in case 1do 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 2and 3pose a more difficult problem. To some extent, therescission 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 ofthis added constraint. Consequently, we must require that each State in either case 2or 3meet thereserve requirements to the extent possible within the limits ofavailable funds. However,Ifthe Regional Administrator determines that itis impossible for a State to fully obligate either

reserve because ofthe 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 notleft in animpossible situation by the rescission. Therefore, for States In cases 1,2 and 3, Iam approving the following class deviation:

1.Case1States.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 Ofthe rescission.

2. Case2States.This deviation from 40 CFR 35.915-1 [b) and (e) permits theRegional Administration to reduce the amount of funds req~ired 'tomeet 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 ofeither
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.Case3States.This deviation from 40 CFR 35.915-1(b) permits the Regional Administrator to release case 3States from the I/A reserve requirement ifhe or she determines that the State cannot use its I/A

reserve because ofthe rescission. Tomake that determination, the Regional Administrator shall assure:

a. That, before the rescission, the State had enough I/Aprojects on the fundable portion ofthe project priority list to fully use the initial reserve;, and

,b. That the State used the I/Areserve for projects, or segments ofprojects, to the extent possible considering the unobligated balance remaining after the rescission.

Dated: July 24. 1981. Concur: EdwardJ.Hanley, AssistantAdministrator forAdmmlstration (PM-208).

Dated: July 24, 1981. Concur:. James N. Smith, ActingAssistant Administrator forWater (WH-556).

IFR Doc. 81-23248 Filed 8-7-81; 8:45aml 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 ofair quality surveillance plans submitted by the States ofArizona, 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 ofthe 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 ofTitle 40 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations and establish a now Part 58 entitled Ambient Air Quality Surveillance.



### The States ofArizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada submitted to the 

### EPA, S revisions to provide for modification ofthe existing air quality surveillance network. EPA has reviewed the submission and determined that it meets the requirements ofSections 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 qfproposed rulemaking published November 24,1980 (45 FR 77464]. The November 24 notice also discussed each State's submission, proposed approval 

### ofthe 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 Secti6

### n307(b](1) ofthe Clean AirAct,judicial review ofthis final action is available only by the filing ofa petition for review in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit within 60 days ofdate offinal rulemaking. Under Section 307(b)(2) of the Clean AirAct, 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 aregulation is "major" and therefore subject to the requirements ofa 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 ofManagement and Budget for review as required by Executive Order 12291.

Note.-lncorporation by reference of the 

### State Implementation Plan revisions for the States ofArizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada was approved by the Director,of the 

### Federal Register on July 1,1980, (Sections 110 and 301(a) ofthe 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. 

# .1Rules -and Regulations

Date&-july. .'1981 AnneMAGorsuch, 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 SubpartD-.Arizona

-1:.Sedtion!52.1205s anended~by addingparagraph {c)[41) .asfolow.s: §52.120 Identification ofplan.

(c)

** 

### i,41) Thelollo wng -amendments toithe plan were submittedfonNribruarya15. 1980,,byithe Governors :designee.

[i ir'0 Quality'Sureillance 

### Network.

Subpart F-California

2.*Section'52.'220 is amendea'by addingparagra.p'h c 90) asffllows:

§B5220 

### lderitificalion'ofplan.



### (c)

. . (90J TheToflowngamanenments to The 4ilan were subnfttedion:December 31. 1997yg.the'Govemoreszdesignee.

[ij10hapterI2-_AirQuality Monitorig by State andJLocalAir 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)Thefollowiig amenaments'io the -plan-were.submittedonA gust 21. 1980, by the -Govemor.

(i)XILAir QualityySurveillance :NetWo&k

SubpartDD--Nevada

4.Section 52:1470is amended,by adding paragraph (c)(19)asifollows: §52.1470 Identification ofplan..

* } * " * 

### :(dV (19) Ihefdllowing'amendments-to the planwere'submitted-on'june'24. 1980, by the Governor. (i)Seclion'1O-State.df Nevada AmbientAir'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;TE77-03,'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 dfitsnew raulation,.Phrl 512, ConfidentiIa BusinessInjornation, and conforming amendmentsjnadejoParts525. 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 oflheiregulation,(46FR 10969).,On;March 9, ,1981,,the.agency received.alpetition for reconsideration from the Motor'Vehicle Manufacturers Association. To,allowtheagency time to responddo:that petition, theagency delayed the effective date ofthe 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 Parts525,.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'StiL 718(15 U.S.C.-1392.-1407):'dcelegation'oT,authority at 49,CFR 1.50

Issued on'August6,'1981. Raymond A.'Peck. Jr., Admistrator. FRl)oc.m- Med &-:34 pi4
BILUNG CODE 4910-534M

INTERSTATECOMMERCE

COMMISSION

49 CFR Part 1033
[21st'Rev.'S.O. No. 1473]

Car:ServlceVariousRailroads Authorizedtolse Tracksand/or Facilities of:Chicago,iRocklsIand and Pacific RailroadCo.,iDebtor,(Willam M, Gibbons, Trustee)

AGENCY:nterstate Commerce Commission. ACTION:21stRevisedSerice frderTo. 1473.
SUMMARY: Twenty-first Revised Service Order No. 1473 authonzed-vaious railroads .toaisetracks md/orfacilities ofChicago. 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, 1 981

. 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"andtousesuch tracks -andfacilities 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'totheTrsteefis an integral fparto heinterim authority and 

### 40513