Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules 53997

Executive Order 12988

The Department of the Interior has

conducted the reviews required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988

(Civil Justice Reform) and has

determined that, to the extent allowed

by law, this rule meets the applicable

standards of subsections (a) and (b) of

that section. However, these standards

are not applicable to the actual language

of State regulatory programs and

program amendments since each such

program is drafted and promulgated by

a specific State, not by OSM. Under

sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30

U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 30 CFR

730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),

decisions on proposed State regulatory

programs and program amendments

submitted by the States must be based

solely on a determination of whether the

submittal is consistent with SMCRA and

its implementing Federal regulations

and whether the other requirements of

30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have

been met.

National Environmental Policy Act

No environmental impact statement is

required for this rule since section

702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))

provides that agency decisions on

proposed State regulatory program

provisions do not constitute major

Federal actions within the meaning of

section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C)).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by OMB under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal

which is the subject of this rule is based

upon counterpart Federal regulations for

which an economic analysis was

prepared and certification made that

such regulations would not have a

significant economic effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Accordingly, this rule will ensure that

existing requirements previously

promulgated by OSM will be

implemented by the State. In making the

determination as to whether this rule

would have a significant economic

impact, the Department relied upon the

data and assumptions for the

counterpart Federal regulations.

Unfunded Mandates

OSM has determined and certifies

pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq.) that

this rule will not impose a cost of $100

million or more in any given year on

local, state, or tribal governments or

private entities.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 901

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: October 9, 1997.

Charles E. Sandberg,

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 97–27624 Filed 10–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX27–1–5945; FRL–5910–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality State Implementation Plans

(SIP); Texas; Disapproval of Texas

Clean Fuel Fleet Program Revision to

the State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed disapproval.

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing

disapproval of the Texas Clean Fuel

Fleet (CFF) SIP revision submitted on

August 9, 1996, by the State of Texas for

the purpose of establishing a substitute

CFF program. The EPA is disapproving

the State’s SIP revision due to changes

in the State law that altered the current

SIP revision submittal and because, in

EPA’s opinion, the State did not make

a convincing and compelling

equivalency determination with the

Federal CFF program.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before November 17, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Mr.

Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning

Section, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.

Copies of the documents about this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. Persons

interested in examining these

documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD–

L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,

Dallas, Texas, 78711–3087.

Texas Natural Resource Conservation

Commission, 12100 Park 35 Circle,

Austin, Texas 78711–3087.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Paul Scoggins, Air Planning Section

(6PD–L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,

telephone (214) 665–7354 or via e-mail

at scoggins.paul@epamail.epa.gov.

While information may be requested via

e-mail, all comments must be submitted

in writing to the EPA Region 6 address

above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On November 15, 1990, Congress

enacted amendments to the 1997 Clean

Air Act (the Act); Pub. L. 101–549, 104

Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–

7671q. The CFF program is contained

under part C, entitled, ‘‘Clean Fuel

Vehicles,’’ of Title II of the Act, as

amended November 15, 1990. Part C

was added to the Act to establish two

programs: a clean-fuel vehicle pilot

program in the State of California (the

California Pilot Test Program) and the

Federal CFF program in certain ozone

and carbon monoxide nonattainment

areas.

Section 182(c)(4) of the Act, 42 U.S.C.

7511a (c)(4), allows states to opt-out of

the Federal CFF program by submitting,

for EPA approval, a SIP revision

consisting of a substitute program

resulting in as much or greater long term

emissions reductions in ozone

producing and toxic air emissions as the

Federal CFF program. The EPA may

approve such a revision only if it

consists exclusively of provisions other

than those required under this Act for

the area.

The State of Texas chose to opt-out of

the Federal CFF program in a committal

SIP revision submitted to EPA on

November 15, 1992. In July 1994, Texas

submitted the State’s opt-out program in

a SIP revision to EPA and adopted rules

to implement the Texas CFF Program.

The Texas CFF SIP was revised based

upon changes to State law and

resubmitted to EPA on August 6, 1996.

On June 20, 1997, the Governor of Texas

signed into law Senate Bill 681 that

modified the supporting legislation

(Chapter 382 of the Texas Health and

Safety Code) for the current submitted

revision.

II. EPA Analysis of State Submittal

The EPA is proposing disapproval

based on the finding that changes to the

supporting legislation have altered the

August 6, 1996, submitted SIP revision.
53998 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules

As a result, the specific legislative

authority in the submission is no longer

in effect. In addition to the above

changes, Texas’s technical and

equivalency method has not identified

and quantified accurately the covered

fleets in the Federal and State covered

areas. The Texas CFF program has

excluded certain covered fleets from its

total fleet aggregation in the El Paso and

Houston/Galveston nonattainment

areas. Without an adequate determined

fleet baseline for comparison, the SIP

revision’s technical evaluation is not

sufficiently comprehensive to determine

equivalency with the Federal CFF

program. These and additional concerns

with the State CFF program and broad

compliance exemptions lead EPA to

conclude that the State has not made a

convincing and compelling

demonstration of equivalency with the

Federal CFF program. A more detailed

discussion of the Texas CFF program

elements and control strategy can be

found in the Technical Support

Document available from the EPA

Region VI office.

III. Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing disapproval of

the Texas CFF SIP revision submitted to

EPA on August 6, 1996. The State’s

proposed substitute program is codified

in 30 Texas Administrative Code,

Chapter 114, Sections 114.30, 114.32

through 114.34, and 114.36 through

114.40. The EPA is soliciting public

comments on the proposed action

discussed in this notice. These

comments will be considered before

taking final action. Interested parties

may participate in the Federal

rulemaking procedure by submitting

written comments to the EPA Regional

office listed in the ADDRESSES section of

this notice.

The regional office, with EPA’s Office

of Mobile Sources has initiated efforts to

help ensure that this action is consistent

with the Act and will not interfere with

any applicable requirement concerning

attainment or any other applicable

requirement of the Act.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP will be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. State Options

The following are options available to

Texas in the implementation of its CFF

Program. The State may choose to;

adopt the Federal CFF Program; or

revise the current Texas CFF program

and resubmit to EPA or substitute

another State program or control

strategy for the Texas CFF program.

Such a substitution could be a

stationary or mobile source control

program, but only if it consists

exclusively of provisions other than

those required under the Act.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. See 5 U.S.C.

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-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

The EPA’s disapproval of the State

request under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Act does not

affect any existing requirements

applicable to small entities. Any

preexisting Federal requirements remain

in place after this disapproval. Federal

disapproval of the State submittal does

not affect its State enforceability.

Moreover, EPA’s disapproval of the

submittal does not impose any new

Federal requirements. Therefore, EPA

certifies that this disapproval action

does not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities

because it does not remove existing

requirements and impose any new

Federal requirements.

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 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 estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate or to private sectors, of $100

million or more. Under section 205,

EPA must select the most cost-effective

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 EPA has determined that the

disapproval action proposed 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 Federal action

imposes no new requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and

Recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 8, 1997.

Jerry Clifford,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–27622 Filed 10–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

42 CFR Part 84

National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health; Certification of

Respiratory Devices Used to Protect

Workers in Hazardous Environments

AGENCY: National Institute for

Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention (CDC), Department of

Health and Human Services (DHHS).

ACTION: Notice of priorities for

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: In response to public

comments received from its May 16,

1996, request (61 FR 24740), NIOSH is

announcing the intended priority order

for the development of the next

proposed rule amendments (modules) to

the current NIOSH procedures for

certifying respiratory devices used to

protect workers in hazardous

environments. The priority order is

based on the comments and data in the

public record. The priority order of the

planned modules is provided to help

the respirator community plan for

potential changes.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roland Berry Ann, NIOSH, 1095

Willowdale Road, Morgantown, West