66822 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

§ 901.16 Removed and [Reserved]

3. The text of § 901.16 is removed and

the section and section heading are

reserved.

[FR Doc. 97–33335 Filed 12–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Part 202

[Docket No. 97–8]

Registration of Claims to Copyright:

Group Registration of Serials

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of

Congress.

ACTION: Final rule; technical

amendment.

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is

making a technical amendment to one of

the addresses designated in the group

registration procedures.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent

Dunlap, Principal Legal Advisor to the

General Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R P.O.

Box 70400, Southwest Station,

Washington, D.C. 20024. Telephone:

(202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 707–

8366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1990,

the Copyright Office adopted a new

registration procedure which permitted

group registration of serial publications

under certain conditions. 55 FR 50556

(1990). This procedure is part of the

regulations of the Copyright Office at 37

CFR Chap. II, §§ 202.3(b)(5) and

202.20(c)(2)(xvii). This document

amends the address to which the

complimentary subscriptions must be

mailed.

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 202

Claims, Copyright, Registration.

Technical Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Copyright Office is amending part 202

of 37 CFR, chapter II in the manner set

forth below.

PART 202—REGISTRATION OF

CLAIMS TO COPYRIGHT

1. The authority citation for part 202

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.

§ 202.3 [Amended]

2. Section 202.3(b)(5)(iii) is amended

to add ‘‘–4161,’’ after ‘‘20540’’.

Dated: December 17, 1997.

Marilyn J. Kretsinger,

Assistant General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 97–33313 Filed 12–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region 2 Docket No. NY 26–2–176a; FRL–

5936–8]

Determination of Attainment of the

One-Hour Ozone Standard for the

Poughkeepsie, New York Ozone

Nonattainment Area and Determination

Regarding Applicability of Certain

Reasonable Further Progress and

Attainment Demonstration

Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is determining,

through direct final procedure, that the

Poughkeepsie moderate ozone

nonattainment area in New York has

attained the one-hour National Ambient

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for

ozone. This determination is based

upon three years of complete, quality

assured ambient air monitoring data for

the years 1995–97. This data

demonstrates that the one-hour ozone

NAAQS has been attained in this area.

On the basis of this determination, EPA

is also determining that certain

reasonable further progress and

attainment demonstration requirements,

along with certain other related

requirements, of Part D of Title 1 of the

Clean Air Act are not applicable to this

area.

In the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register, EPA is proposing this

determination and soliciting public

comment on it. If adverse comments are

received on this direct final rule, EPA

will withdraw this final rule and

address these comments in a final rule

on the related proposed rule which is

being published in the proposed rules

section of this Federal Register.

DATES: This action will be effective

Febraury 5, 1998 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by

January 21, 1998. If the effective date is

delayed, a timely document will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed to Ronald Borsellino, Chief,

Air Programs Branch, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 2, 290

Broadway, New York, NY 10007–1866.

Copies of the relevant material for this

notice are available for inspection

during normal business hours at:

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch,

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,

New York 10007–1866.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert F. Kelly, Air Programs Branch,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 2, at the above address. Phone:

212–637–4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Subpart 2 of Part D of Title I of the

Clean Air Act (CAA) contains various

air quality planning and state

implementation plan (SIP) submission

requirements for ozone nonattainment

areas. EPA has interpreted provisions

regarding reasonable further progress

(RFP) and attainment demonstrations,

along with certain other related

provisions, so as not to require SIP

submissions if an ozone nonattainment

area subject to those requirements is

monitoring attainment of the one-hour

ozone standard (i.e., attainment of the

NAAQS is demonstrated with three

consecutive years of complete, quality

assured air quality monitoring data). As

described below, EPA has previously

interpreted the general provisions of

subpart 1 of part D of Title I (sections

171 and 172) so as not to require the

submission of SIP revisions concerning

RFP, attainment demonstrations, or

contingency measures. As explained in

a memorandum dated May 10, 1995

from John Seitz to the Regional Air

Division Directors, entitled ‘‘Reasonable

Further Progress, Attainment

Demonstration, and Related

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment

Areas Meeting the Ozone National

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ EPA

has interpreted the more specific RFP,

attainment demonstration and related

provisions of subpart 2 in the same

manner.

First, with respect to RFP, section

171(1) states that, for purposes of part D

of Title I, RFP ‘‘means such annual

incremental reductions in emissions of

the relevant air pollutant as are required

by this part or may reasonably be

required by the Administrator for the

purpose of ensuring attainment of the

applicable national ambient air quality

standard by the applicable date.’’ Thus,

whether dealing with the general RFP

requirement of section 172(c)(2), or the

more specific RFP requirements of

subpart 2 for classified ozone

nonattainment areas (such as the 15

percent plan requirement of section

182(b)(1)), the stated purpose of RFP is
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 66823

1EPA notes that paragraph (1) of subsection

182(b) is entitled ‘‘PLAN PROVISIONS FOR

REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS’’ and that

subparagraph (B) of paragraph 182(c)(2) is entitled

‘‘REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS

DEMONSTRATION,’’ thereby making it clear that

both the 15 percent plan requirement of section

182(b)(1) and the 3 percent per year requirement of

section 182(c)(2) are specific varieties of RFP

requirements.

2See also ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ from John

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management

Division, to Regional Air Division Directors,

September 4, 1992, at page 6 (stating that the

‘‘requirements for reasonable further progress * * *

will not apply for redesignations because they only

have meaning for areas not attaining the standard’’)

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘September 1992

Calcagni memorandum’’).

to ensure attainment by the applicable

attainment date.1 If an area has in fact

attained the one-hour standard, the

stated purpose of the RFP requirement

will have already been fulfilled and EPA

does not believe that the area needs to

submit revisions providing for the

further emission reductions described in

the RFP provisions of section 182(b)(1).

EPA notes that it took this view with

respect to the general RFP requirement

of section 172(c)(2) in the General

Preamble for the Interpretation of Title

I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992), and

it is now extending that interpretation to

the specific provisions of subpart 2. In

the General Preamble, EPA stated, in the

context of a discussion of the

requirements applicable to the

evaluation of requests to redesignate

nonattainment areas to attainment, that

the ‘‘requirements for RFP will not

apply in evaluating a request for

redesignation to attainment since, at a

minimum, the air quality data for the

area must show that the area has already

attained. Showing that the State will

make RFP towards attainment will,

therefore, have no meaning at that

point.’’ (57 FR at 13564.) 2

Second, with respect to the

attainment demonstration requirements

of section 182(b)(1) an analogous

rationale leads to the same result.

Section 182(b)(1) requires that the plan

provide for ‘‘such specific annual

reductions in emissions * * * as

necessary to attain the national primary

ambient air quality standard by the

attainment date applicable under this

Act.’’ As with the RFP requirements, if

an area has in fact monitored attainment

of the one-hour standard, EPA believes

there is no need for an area to make a

further submission containing

additional measures to achieve

attainment of the one-hour standard.

This is also consistent with the

interpretation of certain section 172(c)

requirements provided by EPA in the

General Preamble to Title I, as EPA

stated there that no other measures to

provide for attainment would be needed

by areas seeking redesignation to

attainment since ‘‘attainment will have

been reached.’’ (57 FR at 13564; see also

September 1992 Calcagni memorandum

at page 6.) Upon attainment of the

NAAQS, the focus of state planning

efforts shifts to the maintenance of the

NAAQS and the development of a

maintenance plan under section 175A.

Similar reasoning applies to the

contingency measure requirements of

section 172(c)(9). EPA has previously

interpreted the contingency measure

requirement of section 172(c)(9) as no

longer being applicable once an area has

attained the one-hour standard since

those ‘‘contingency measures are

directed at ensuring RFP and attainment

by the applicable date.’’ (57 FR at 13564;

see also September 1992 Calcagni

memorandum at page 6.) As the section

172(c)(9) contingency measures are

linked with the RFP requirements of

section 182(b)(1), the requirement no

longer applies once an area has attained

the one-hour standard.

This action is only a suspension of the

requirements to submit the SIP revisions

discussed above. If the area were to

violate the one-hour ozone NAAQS, the

basis for the determination that the area

need not make the pertinent SIP

revisions would no longer exist. The

EPA would notify the state of that

determination and would also provide

notification to the public in the Federal

Register. Such a determination would

mean that the area would have to

address the pertinent SIP requirements

within a period of time, which EPA

would establish taking into account the

individual circumstances surrounding

the particular SIP submissions at issue.

However, EPA recently promulgated a

new eight-hour ozone standard. The

President’s Directive of July 16, 1997

outlines how EPA will make the

transition from the old one-hour

standard to the new SIP requirements

for the eight-hour standard. The

Directive states that EPA will revoke the

one-hour standard once an area has air

monitoring data showing attainment of

the one-hour standard. If EPA revokes

the one-hour standard for an area, the

requirement for the area to submit RFP

requirements and an attainment

demonstration for the one-hour standard

will be permanently ended.

The state must continue to operate an

appropriate air quality monitoring

network, in accordance with 40 CFR

part 58, to verify the attainment status

of the area. The air quality data relied

upon to determine that the area is

attaining the ozone standard must be

consistent with 40 CFR part 58

requirements and other relevant EPA

guidance and recorded in EPA’s

Aerometric Information Retrieval

System (AIRS).

The determination that is being made

with this Federal Register document

that air quality data shows attainment of

the one-hour standard is not equivalent

to the redesignation of the area to

attainment. Using monitoring data to

show attainment of the ozone NAAQS is

only one of the criteria set forth in

section 107(d)(3)(E) that must be

satisfied for an area to be redesignated

to attainment. To be redesignated the

state must submit and receive full

approval of a redesignation request for

the area that satisfies all of the criteria

of that section, including the

requirement of a demonstration that the

improvement in the area’s air quality is

due to permanent and enforceable

reductions and the requirements that

the area have a fully-approved SIP

meeting all of the applicable

requirements under section 110 and Part

D and a fully-approved maintenance

plan.

Furthermore, the determination made

in this notice does not shield an area

from future EPA action. EPA can require

emissions reductions from sources in

the area where there is evidence, such

as photochemical grid modeling,

showing that emissions from sources in

the area contribute significantly to

nonattainment in, or interfere with

maintenance by, other nonattainment

areas. EPA has authority under section

110(a)(2) to require such emission

reductions if necessary and appropriate

to deal with transport situations. Also,

EPA can require SIPs from this area if

EPA or the state proposes, in future

actions, that the area is in violation of

the eight-hour standard.

II. Analysis of Air Quality Data

On November 17, 1997, New York

requested that EPA find that air

monitoring data from New York State

for the Poughkeepsie ozone

nonattainment area shows that the area

is attaining the one-hour ozone

standard. New York State, also on

November 17, 1997, submitted quality

assured data (consistent with the

requirements contained in 40 CFR part

58 and recorded in AIRS) through the

end of the 1997 ozone season and

certified that these data met EPA’s

requirements. The EPA has reviewed

the ambient air monitoring data for

ozone from 1995 through 1997 for the

Poughkeepsie ozone nonattainment

area, which includes Dutchess, Putnam

and northern Orange Counties in New

York. The data were taken from the
66824 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

EPA-approved New York State air

quality monitoring network. It should be

noted that New York expanded air

monitoring in the Poughkeepsie area

from one to three monitors during the

1990s. The monitors in these locations

were sited to measure ozone

concentrations typical of concentrations

across the area. New York did this to

better define the extent of ozone

nonattainment in the area. Expanding

the network increased the opportunity

for finding violations of the ozone

standard in the Poughkeepsie area. EPA

believes that these data are

representative of the Poughkeepsie

ozone nonattainment area. This is

especially true since ozone is not

emitted directly from sources, but is

formed from pollutants that react in

sunshine over a period of time. The

ozone air quality data for the

Poughkeepsie ozone nonattainment

area, summarized in Table I, shows that

the area has met the one-hour NAAQS.

TABLE I.—EXCEEDANCES OF THE ONE-HOUR OZONE STANDARD FOR MONITORING SITES IN THE POUGHKEEPSIE OZONE

NONATTAINMENT AREA

[From EPA AIRS]

Site

Number of exceedances

(in parentheses)

Number of expected

exceedances in bold

Total number

of expected

exceedances

1995–7

Average number of expected

exceedances

1995–7

Attainment

status

1995–7

1995 1996 1997

Millbrook .............................................................................................. (0) (0) (0) 0.0 0.0 Attain.

0.0 0.0 0.0 ........................ ........................

Mt. Ninham .......................................................................................... (2) (1) (0) 3.1 1.0 Attain.

2.0 1.1 0.0 ........................ ........................

Valley Central ...................................................................................... (0) (1) (0) 1.0 0.3 Attain.

0.0 1.0 0.0 ........................ ........................

Note: Expected exceedances are calculated from the actual number of exceedances ( ), adjusted for missing data as required by Appendix H.

The 0.12 ppm one-hour average ozone standard is attained when the three year average of expected exceedances is 1.0 or less. The expected

and average number of exceedances are rounded to the nearest tenth. [See CFR Part 51, Appendix H.]

As noted in Table I, attainment of the

one-hour ozone standard is achieved

when an area’s monitoring sites have 1.0

or less exceedances per year, averaged

over a three year period from 1995

through 1997. Since all of the monitors

in the Poughkeepsie ozone

nonattainment area average 1.0 or less

exceedances per year, the Poughkeepsie

area is attaining the one-hour NAAQS

for ozone. Attaining the ozone standard

would relieve New York from

submitting a reasonable further progress

plan whose purpose was to bring the

area into attainment. Likewise, New

York would not have to submit an

attainment demonstration since the area

has attained the one-hour ozone

standard.

III. Final Action

EPA determines that the

Poughkeepsie ozone nonattainment area

has attained the one-hour ozone

standard based on three years of qualityassured monitoring data at all three sites

in the area. As a consequence of EPA’s

determination that the Poughkeepsie

area has attained the one-hour ozone

standard, the requirements of section

182(b)(1) concerning the submission of

the 15 percent plan and ozone

attainment demonstration and the

requirements of section 172(c)(9)

concerning contingency measures shall

not be applicable to the area. This is

effective as long as the area continues to

attain the one-hour ozone standard, or

until EPA revokes the one-hour

standard.

EPA emphasizes that as long as the

one-hour standard applies to the

Poughkeepsie area, these determinations

are contingent upon the continued

monitoring and continued attainment

and maintenance of the one-hour ozone

NAAQS in this affected area. If while

the one-hour standard is still in effect,

a violation of the one-hour ozone

NAAQS is monitored in the

Poughkeepsie area (consistent with the

requirements contained in 40 CFR part

58 and recorded in AIRS), EPA will

provide notice to the public in the

Federal Register. Then EPA would

reinstate the requirements of section

182(b)(1) and section 172(c)(9) for the

Poughkeepsie area since the basis for

the determination that they are not

needed would not exist.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

action and anticipates no adverse

comments. EPA is strictly acting on the

basis of real data, without modification

or interpretation that impels EPA to

make the determination in this

document. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve this action in case adverse or

critical comments be filed. This action

will be effective February 5, 1998

unless, by January 21, 1998, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

action serving as a proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective February 5, 1998.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revisions to any SIP. Each

request for revision of the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from E.O. 12866 review.

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. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 245 / Monday, December 22, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 66825

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

This action removes a requirement

that the Clean Air Act required the State

to address. Therefore, because this

action does not impose any new

requirements, I certify that it does not

have an impact on any small entities.

Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), 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 annual costs to

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to private sector, 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.

EPA has determined that this action

does not include a federal mandate that

may result in estimated annual 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, and accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

Submission to Congress and the General

Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. section 801(a)(1)(A) as

added by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. section 804(2).

Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by February 20,

1998. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Nitrogen oxides,

Ozone, Volatile organic compounds,

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 4, 1997.

William J. Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart HH—New York

2. Section 52.1683 is amended by

adding new paragraph (f) to read as

follows:

52.1683 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(f) Attainment Determination—EPA

has determined that, as of February 5,

1998, the Poughkeepsie ozone

nonattainment area (consisting of

Dutchess and Putnam Counties and

northern Orange County) has air

monitoring data that attains the onehour ozone standard and that the

requirements of section 182(b)(1)

(reasonable further progress and

attainment demonstration) and related

requirements of section 172(c)(9)

(contingency measures) of the Clean Air

Act do not apply to the area.

[FR Doc. 97–33080 Filed 12–19–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

45 CFR Part 1110

Nondiscrimination in Federally

Assisted Programs; Technical

Amendment

AGENCY: National Foundation on the

Arts and the Humanities.

ACTION: Final rule; technical

amendment.

SUMMARY: This final rule incorporates

the new name of the Institute of

Museum and Library Services (the

‘‘Institute’’), established by the Museum

and Library Services Act of 1996, into

the regulations promulgated by the

National Foundation on the Arts and the

Humanities regulations regarding

nondiscrimination in federally assisted

programs. These regulations implement

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

thereby prohibiting discrimination on

the grounds of race, color, or national

origin, in federally funded programs.

DATES: This final rule is effective

December 22, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Ann Bittner, Director of

Legislative and Public Affairs, Institute

of Museum and Library Services, 1100

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20405. Telephone:

(202) 606–8536.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Museum and Library Services Act of

1996, set forth as 20 U.S.C. 961 et seq.,

expanded the functions of the Institute

of Museum Services to create a new

agency, The Institute of Museum and

Library Services. The Institute, like its

sister agencies The National Foundation

on the Arts and the Humanities, is a

subdivision of the National Foundation

on the Arts and the Humanities.

The National Foundation on the Arts

and the Humanities regulations

governing nondiscrimination in

federally assisted programs and

implementing Title VI of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, are set forth in 45

CFR Part 1110. This rule conforms these

regulations to the Museum and Library

Services Act of 1996, by incorporating

the new name of the agency into the

regulations’ provisions.

The National Foundation on the Arts

and the Humanities considers this rule

to be a technical amendment which is

exempt from notice-and-comment under

5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). This rule is not a

significant rule for purposes of

Executive Order 12866 and has not been

reviewed by the Office of Management

and Budget. As required by the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, The

Foundation certifies that these

regulatory amendments will not have a

significant impact on small business

entities.

List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 1110

Civil rights.

For the reasons stated in the summary

and pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 961 et seq.,

45 CFR, Chapter XI, Part 1110 is

amended as follows: