Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 20 / Thursday, January 30, 1997 / Notices 4531

below summarizes the life cycle costs

for the CRT–C kit that are incremental

to the cost associated with a standard

rebuild.

TABLE B.—CRT–C KIT LIFE CYCLE

COST SUMMARY

[1992 dollars]

Maximum CRT–C Equipment

Cost ....................................... $6,550

Maximum Installation Cost (2

hours catalyst installation) ..... 70

Fuel Economy Impact ............... 0

Maintenance Cost ..................... 0

Less Cost for Standard Camshafts ..................................... (785)

Maximum CRT–C Equipment

Cost ....................................... 6,550

Maximum Life Cycle Cost (Sum

of Above) ............................... 5,835

The Agency has determined that the

value of the maximum CRT–C

equipment cost ($6,550) is

approximately equivalent to $7,404 in

today’s dollars. This is determined by

multiplying the $6,550 from Table B

above by the Consumer Price Index for

All Urban Consumers (that is, the CPI–

U for all items) for November 1996, and

then dividing by the average CPI–U

determined for 1992. According to the

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CPI–

U before seasonal adjustment in

November is 158.6 (on a reference base

of 1982 to 1984 = 100), and the average

CPI–U for 1992 is 140.3. The value may

change as the CPI–U changes.

JMI indicates that the engine is to be

rebuilt according to the engine

manufacturer’s standard written rebuild

procedures and specifications except

where amended by JMI written

instructions. Therefore, JMI claims that

the life cycle cost ($5,835) of the CRT–

C kit is incremental to the cost of a

standard rebuild. Installation of the

CRT–C kit is essentially identical to a

standard engine rebuild and the

installation of a muffler. The life cycle

cost (in 1992 dollars) of the JMI kit is

stated to be $5,835, which includes the

maximum purchase cost for the kit of

$6,550, and maximum installation cost

of $70. The incremental maintenance

cost and fuel economy impact are stated

to be zero. The camshafts provided with

the CRT–C kit offset the need and cost

for camshafts otherwise replaced during

an engine rebuild ($785).

As noted above, the CRT–C kit would

be sold as complimentary to a standard

engine rebuild. The balance of the

specified parts for the standard rebuild

(excluding the cams) would be

purchased by the rebuilder from

traditional DDC or equivalent parts

sources. JMI indicates that because the

parts would typically be replaced

anyway during an engine rebuild,

purchase of the specified parts on the

list would not represent an incremental

life cycle cost. The list of the specific

emission-related parts are an essential

part of the CRT–C kit from an emissions

standpoint, although the parts, per se,

are not provided with the kit. The

Agency requests public comment

concerning whether the specified parts

present incremental costs to a standard

rebuild. This point is important because

the life cycle cost analysis provided by

JMI assumes that use of the listed part

numbers will not impact life cycle costs

of the candidate equipment.

JMI states in its notification that there

is no fuel economy penalty associated

with the candidate equipment. As

shown in Table A above, this is

supported by the data from the baseline

and retrofit tests on the 6V92TA engine

that indicate no fuel consumption

impact of the CRT–C kit. At this point,

the Agency has not determined whether

a fuel consumption penalty exists, and

requests comments concerning this

issue. The Agency will use information

gathered through public comment and

from the certifier to resolve this issue.

The JMI notification provides a

product warranty that references the

emissions performance and emissions

defect warranties required in

accordance with section 85.1409 of the

program regulations.

Even if ultimately certified by the

Agency, the equipment described in

JMI’s notification may require

additional review by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) before use in

California. The Agency recognizes that

special situations may exist in

California that are reflected in the

unique emissions standards, engine

calibrations, and fuel specifications of

the State. While requirements of the

federal urban bus program apply to

several metropolitan areas in California,

the Agency understands the view of

CARB that equipment certified under

the urban bus program, to be used in

California, must be provided with an

executive order exempting it from the

anti-tampering prohibitions of that

State. Those interested in additional

information should contact the

Aftermarket Part Section of CARB, at

(818) 575–6848.

If the Agency certifies the candidate

equipment and no other certification

triggers the 0.10 g/bhp-hr standard, then

urban bus operators who choose to

comply with compliance Option 1 of

this regulation will be required to use

equipment certified to the 0.10 g/bhp-hr

standard no later than six months after

certification, when applicable engines

are rebuilt or replaced. If certified, then

operators using Option 2 will use the

certification levels in calculations for

fleet level attained (FLA).

The date of this notice initiates a 45-

day period during which the Agency

will accept written comments relevant

to whether the equipment described in

the JMI notification of intent to certify

should be certified pursuant to the

urban bus retrofit/rebuild regulations.

Interested parties are encouraged to

review this notification, and provide

written comments during the 45-day

review period. Separate comments

should be provided in writing to each of

the addresses listed under the

Addresses section of this notice.

At a minimum, the Agency expects to

evaluate this notification of intent to

certify, and other materials submitted as

applicable, to determine whether there

is adequate demonstration of

compliance with: (1) the certification

requirements of § 85.1406, including

whether the testing accurately

substantiates the claimed emission

reduction or emission levels; and, (2)

the requirements of § 85.1407 for a

notification of intent to certify,

including whether the data provided by

JMI complies with the life cycle cost

requirements.

The Agency requests that those

commenting also consider these

regulatory requirements, plus provide

comments on any experience or

knowledge concerning: (a) problems

with installing, maintaining, and/or

using the equipment on applicable

engines; and, (b) whether the equipment

is compatible with affected vehicles.

The Agency will review this

notification of intent to certify, along

with comments received from the

interested parties, and attempt to

resolve or clarify issues as necessary.

During the review process, the Agency

may add additional documents to the

docket as a result of the review process.

These documents will also be available

for public review and comment within

the 45-day period.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 97–2324 Filed 1–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[FRL–5682–2]

Notice of Open Meeting of the

Environmental Financial Advisory

Board on March 19–20, 1997

The Environmental Protection

Agency’s (EPA) Environmental

Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) will
4532 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 20 / Thursday, January 30, 1997 / Notices

hold an open meeting of the full Board

in Washington, D.C. on March 19–20,

1997. The meeting will be held at EPA

Headquarters, 401 M St. S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460. The room

location is Conference Room 3 North in

the EPA North Conference area. The

March 19 session will run from 9:00

a.m. to 5:00 p.m., while the March 20

session will begin at 8:30 a.m. and end

at approximately 11:30 a.m.

EFAB is chartered with providing

authoritative analysis and advice to the

EPA Administrator on environmental

finance. This will be a working meeting

to discuss and review ongoing EFAB

advisories and reports under its

Strategic Action Agenda. These

advisories and reports address

important environmental financing

issues including brownfields

redevelopment, private sector

participation in delivering

environmental services, financing tools

to pay for community-based

environmental protection, and funding

options for drinking water systems.

The meeting will be open to the

public, but seating is limited. For

further information, please contact

Eugene Pontillo, U.S. EPA on 202–260–

6044, or Joanne Lynch, U.S. EPA on

202–260–1459.

Dated: January 23, 1997.

Peter Nobert,

Acting Director, Resource Management

Division.

[FR Doc. 97–2323 Filed 1–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE

CORPORATION

Sale of U.S. Government Guaranteed

Loans and Sale Premiums; Rescission

of Policy Statement

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Rescission of policy statement.

SUMMARY: As part of the FDIC’s

systematic review of its regulations and

written policies under section 303(a) of

the Riegle Community Development and

Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994

(CDRI), the FDIC is rescinding its policy

statement on the Sale of U.S.

Government Guaranteed Loans and Sale

Premiums (Policy Statement). The

Policy Statement provides guidance to

state nonmember banks purchasing or

selling loans guaranteed by the U.S.

government. The FDIC is rescinding the

Policy Statement because it is outmoded

and duplicative.

DATES: This Policy Statement is

rescinded January 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William A. Stark, Assistant Director,

(202/898–6972), Kenton Fox, Senior

Capital Markets Specialist, (202/898–

7119), Division of Supervision; Jamey

Basham, Counsel, (202/898–7265), Legal

Division, FDIC, 550 17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20429.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FDIC

is conducting a systematic review of its

regulations and written policies. Section

303(a) of the CDRI (12 U.S.C. 4803(a))

requires the FDIC, the Office of the

Comptroller of the Currency, the Board

of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, and the Office of Thrift

Supervision (federal banking agencies)

to each streamline and modify its

regulations and written policies in order

to improve efficiency, reduce

unnecessary costs, and eliminate

unwarranted constraints on credit

availability. Section 303(a) also requires

each of the federal banking agencies to

remove inconsistencies and outmoded

and duplicative requirements from its

regulations and written policies.

As part of this review, the FDIC has

determined that the Policy Statement is

outmoded and duplicative, and that the

FDIC’s written policies can be

streamlined by its elimination.

The Federal Financial Institutions

Examination Council (FFIEC) developed

the Policy Statement to provide general

supervisory guidance to insured

depository institutions that originate,

purchase, or sell loans guaranteed by

the U.S. government. The Policy

Statement also provides guidance on the

accounting treatment of servicing fees

and premiums associated with these

loans. Each of the federal banking

agencies adopted the Policy Statement,

with the FDIC’s original adoption taking

place on December 3, 1979, and the

adoption of certain amendments taking

place on April 15, 1985. 1 FDIC Law,

Regulations, and Related Acts’’ (FDIC)

5257 (1996).

In the time since the Policy Statement

was adopted, the market in governmentguaranteed loans has become more

established and well-known, and

insured depository institutions have

gained experience in dealing with it.

The supervisory guidance contained in

the Policy Statement, which is very

general in nature, is no longer necessary

in light of this experience. The

accounting guidance in the Policy

Statement is also no longer necessary in

light of subsequent clarifications in the

Instructions for Preparing Reports of

Condition and Income, and Financial

Accounting Standards Board Statement

91.

Section 303(a) of the CDRI also

requires the federal banking agencies to

work jointly towards uniformity of

guidelines implementing common

supervisory policies. FFIEC has

determined that the Policy Statement is

no longer necessary in light of the above

reasons, and the other federal banking

agencies will also take action to rescind

the Policy Statement.

For the above reasons, the Policy Statement

is rescinded.

By order of the Board of Directors.

Dated at Washington, DC, this 21st day of

January, 1997.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Jerry L. Langley,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–2321 Filed 1–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Sunshine Act; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

* * * * *

DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, February 4,

1997 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street NW., Washington,

DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to

the public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C.

§ 437g.

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C.

§ 437g, § 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.

Matters concerning participation in civil

actions or proceedings or arbitration.

Internal personnel rules and procedures or

matter affecting a particular employee.

* * * * *

DATE & TIME: Thursday, February 6, 1997

at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 999 E Street NW., Washington,

DC (Ninth Floor).

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the

public.

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

Correction and Approval of Minutes.

1997 Legislative Recommendations.

Administrative Matters.

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer,

Telephone: (202) 219–4155.

Marjorie W. Emmons,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–2490 Filed 1–28–97; 2:55 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715–01–M

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

The Commission hereby gives notice

of the filing of the following