67818 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 1997 / Proposed Rules

approaches may serve as improved

approaches for defining the mathematical

relation between the CEMS response and

reference method measured PM

concentrations. The basis and advantage for

developing and implementing such

alternative approaches for determining

compliance must be explicitly included in

the calibration relation test report with

supporting data demonstrating a better fit

than a linear relation. Use of these alternative

approaches is subject to approval by the

Administrator.

6.6 Example Accuracy Calculation.

Example calculations and illustration for the

RCA are available in Citation 1. Example

calculations for the ACA are available in

Citation 3 of Appendix F—Procedure 1 and

will be available in Citation 2.

7. Reporting Requirements

At the reporting interval specified in the

applicable regulation, report for each CEMS

the accuracy results from Section 6 and the

CD assessment results from Section 4. Report

the drift and accuracy information as a Data

Assessment Report (DAR), and include one

copy of this DAR for each quarterly audit

with the report of emissions required under

the applicable subparts of this part.

As a minimum, the DAR must contain the

following information:

1. Source owner or operator name and

address

2. Identification and location of monitors

in the CEMS.

3. Manufacturer and model number of each

monitor in the CEMS.

4. Assessment of CEMS data accuracy/

acceptability and date of assessment as

determined by a RCA, ACA, RAA, or SVA

described in Section 5 including the

acceptability determination for the RCA, the

A for the ACA or RAA or SVA, the RM

results, the calibration audit standards or

equivalent audit references, the CEMS

responses, and the calculation results as

defined in Section 6. If the accuracy audit

results show the CEMS to be out-of-control,

the CEMS operator shall report both the audit

results showing the CEMS to be out-ofcontrol and the results of the audit following

corrective action showing the CEMS to be

operating within specifications.

5. Summary of all corrective actions taken

when CEMS was determined out-of-control,

as described in Sections 4 and 5.

An example of a DAR format will be shown

later in Figure 1.

8. Bibliography

To Be Determined

Figure 1—Example Format For Data

Assessment Report: To Be Determined

[FR Doc. 97–33740 Filed 12–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 85 and 89

[AMS—FRL–5939–6 ]

Control of Air Pollution: Emission

Standards for New Nonroad

Compression-Ignition Engines at or

Above 37 Kilowatts; Preemption of

State Regulation for Nonroad Engine

and Vehicle Standards; Amendments

to Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: Today’s action, consistent

with an order and opinion from the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit, proposes

amendments to EPA’s regulations

setting emission standards for large (at

or above 37 kilowatts) nonroad

compression ignition engines and to

EPA’s regulations defining the scope of

preemption of state and local nonroad

emission standards and establishing

procedures for EPA authorization of

California nonroad emission standards.

Specifically, EPA proposes to withdraw

portions of an interpretive rule which

set forth the Agency’s position on the

Clean Air Act regarding the status of

certain internal combustion engines

manufactured before the effective date

of the final rulemaking promulgating

EPA’s definition of nonroad engine.

Additionally, consistent with the DC

Circuit opinion, EPA also is amending

the remaining text of this interpretive

rule, as well as EPA’s regulations issued

under section 209(e) of the Act

regarding the Agency’s California

nonroad standards authorization

process, to clarify that California must

seek authorization from EPA prior to

enforcing standards and other

requirements relating to emissions from

any nonroad vehicles or engines, and

not just new nonroad vehicles and

engines, which was the original

language used in these regulations.

In the final rule section of today’s

Federal Register, EPA is issuing these

amendments as a direct final rule

without prior proposal, because EPA

views the action as noncontroversial

and anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for the amendments

and for the decision to issue them as a

direct final rule is set forth in the

Preamble to the direct final rules. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to the direct final rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this proposed rule. If EPA

receives adverse comments, the direct

final rule will be withdrawn, and all

public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this proposed rule.

Additionally, EPA will hold a public

hearing on this proposed rule if one is

requested.

DATES: Any party who wishes to submit

comments must do so by March 2, 1998

unless a hearing is requested. Any party

can request EPA to hold a public

hearing on this action, but such request

must be received by January 29, 1998.

If a hearing is requested, it will take

place on March 2, 1998, and interested

parties will have an additional 30 days

after the hearing (until March 30, 1998)

to submit comments on any information

presented at the hearing. Because no

hearing will occur absent a request for

one, interested parties should contact

Robert M. Doyle at the number listed

below after January 29, 1998 to

determine whether a hearing will take

place.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be submitted (in duplicate if possible)

to: Air Docket Section (6102), Attention:

Docket No. A–91–24, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, or

hand-delivered to the Air Docket at the

above address, in Room M–1500,

Waterside Mall. A copy of written

comments should also be submitted to

Robert M. Doyle at the address below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert M. Doyle, Attorney/Advisor,

Engine Programs and Compliance

Division (6403J), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M. Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20560, (202) 564–9258,

FAX (202) 233–9596, E-Mail,

Doyle.Robert@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information, please see the

direct final rule published in the rules

section of today’s Federal Register.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 85

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Federal

preemption, Motor vehicle pollution,

Nonroad engine and vehicle pollution,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, State controls.

40 CFR Part 89

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Confidential

business information, Imports,

Incorporation by reference, Labeling,

Nonroad source pollution, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 30, 1997 / Proposed Rules 67819

Dated: December 17, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator .

[FR Doc. 97–33768 Filed 12–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA–7234]

Proposed Flood Elevation

Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: Technical information or

comments are requested on the

proposed base (1% annual chance) flood

elevations and proposed base flood

elevation modifications for the

communities listed below. The base

flood elevations and modified base

flood elevations are the basis for the

floodplain management measures that

the community is required either to

adopt or to show evidence of being

already in effect in order to qualify or

remain qualified for participation in the

National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP).

DATES: The comment period is ninety

(90) days following the second

publication of this proposed rule in a

newspaper of local circulation in each

community.

ADDRESSES: The proposed base flood

elevations for each community are

available for inspection at the office of

the Chief Executive Officer of each

community. The respective addresses

are listed in the following table.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frederick H. Sharrocks, Jr., Chief,

Hazard Identification Branch, Mitigation

Directorate, 500 C Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2796.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Federal Emergency Management Agency

proposes to make determinations of base

flood elevations and modified base

flood elevations for each community

listed below, in accordance with Section

110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act

of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR

67.4(a).

These proposed base flood and

modified base flood elevations, together

with the floodplain management criteria

required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the

minimum that are required. They

should not be construed to mean that

the community must change any

existing ordinances that are more

stringent in their floodplain

management requirements. The

community may at any time enact

stricter requirements of its own, or

pursuant to policies established by other

Federal, State, or regional entities.

These proposed elevations are used to

meet the floodplain management

requirements of the NFIP and are also

used to calculate the appropriate flood

insurance premium rates for new

buildings built after these elevations are

made final, and for the contents in these

buildings.

National Environmental Policy Act

This proposed rule is categorically

excluded from the requirements of 44

CFR Part 10, Environmental

Consideration. No environmental

impact assessment has been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Associate Director for Mitigation

certifies that this proposed rule is

exempt from the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act because

proposed or modified base flood

elevations are required by the Flood

Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42

U.S.C. 4104, and are required to

establish and maintain community

eligibility in the NFIP. No regulatory

flexibility analysis has been prepared.

Regulatory Classification

This proposed rule is not a significant

regulatory action under the criteria of

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of

September 30, 1993, Regulatory

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

This proposed rule involves no

policies that have federalism

implications under Executive Order

12612, Federalism, dated October 26,

1987.

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform

This proposed rule meets the

applicable standards of Section 2(b)(2)

of Executive Order 12778.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67

Administrative practice and

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 67—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 67

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

§ 67.4 [Amended]

2. The tables published under the

authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be

amended as follows:

State City/town/county Source of flooding Location

#Depth in feet above

ground. *Elevation in feet.

(NGVD)

Existing Modified

Arkansas ................ Pulaski County (Unincorporated

Areas).

Bringle Creek .................... Approximately 500 feet upstream of confluence with Maumelle River.None *300

At confluence with Bringle Creek Tributary A.None *345

Bringle Creek Tributary A At confluence with Bringle Creek ............. None *345

Approximately 1,600 feet above confluence with Bringle Creek.None *364

Ferndale Creek ................. At confluence with Maumelle River .......... *368 *368

Approximately 200 feet upstream of Ferndale Road.None *368

Just upstream of Ferncliff Road ............... None *442