14850 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 1997 / Proposed Rules

today’s proposal would merely

recognize an internal reorganization of

an existing approved RCRA State

program, EPA has determined that this

proposal contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

provides that, whenever an agency

promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C.

553, after being required to publish a

general notice of proposed rulemaking,

an agency must prepare a final

regulatory flexibility analysis unless the

head of the agency certifies that the final

rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 604

& 605. The Regional Administrator

today certifies, pursuant to section

605(b) of the RFA, that approval of any

revisions to Michigan’s RCRA program

resulting from the reorganization of the

Michigan environmental agencies will

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The basis for the certification is that

EPA’s approval would simply result in

an administrative change in the

structure of the approved RCRA

program, rather than a change in the

substantive requirements imposed on

any small entity in the State of

Michigan. Such an approval would not

affect the substantive regulatory

requirements under existing State law to

which small entities are already subject.

Additionally, approval of the RCRA

program modification would not impose

any new burdens on small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The proposal contains no requests for

information and consequently is not

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act,

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Confidential business information,

Hazardous materials transportation,

Hazardous waste, Indian lands,

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,

Reporting and record keeping

requirements, Water pollution control,

Water supply.

Authority: This notice is issued under the

authority of Sections 2002(a), 3006 and

7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as

amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

Dated: March 14, 1997.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–7817 Filed 3–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 799

[OPPTS–42187F; FRL–5598–4]

RIN 2070–AC76

Proposed Test Rule for Hazardous Air

Pollutants; Extension of Comment

Period on Proposed Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Extension of comment period on

proposed test rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the public

comment period from April 30, 1997 to

June 30, 1997 on the proposed rule to

require the testing of 21 hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs) for certain health

effects. This proposed rule was

published in the Federal Register on

June 26, 1996 (61 FR 33178)(FRL–4869–

1). On February 28, 1997, EPA extended

the public comment period from March

31, 1997 to April 30, 1997 (62 FR

9142)(FRL–5592–1).

DATES: Written comments on the

proposed rule must be received by EPA

on or before June 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit three copies of

written comments on the proposed

HAPs test rule, identified by document

control number (OPPTS–42187A; FRL–

4869–1) to: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Pollution

Prevention and Toxics (OPPT),

Document Control Office (7407), Rm. G–

099, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC

20460.

A public version of the official

rulemaking record supporting this

action, excluding confidential business

information (CBI), is available for

inspection at the TSCA Nonconfidential

Information Center, Rm. NE–B607, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, from

12 noon to 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except on legal holidays.

All comments that contain

information claimed as CBI must be

clearly marked as such. Three sanitized

copies of any comments containing

information claimed as CBI must also be

submitted and will be placed in the

public record for this rulemaking.

Persons submitting information that

they believe is entitled to treatment as

CBI must assert a business

confidentiality claim in accordance with

40 CFR part 2. This claim must be made

at the time that the information is

submitted to EPA. If a submitter does

not assert a confidentiality claim at the

time of submission, EPA will treat the

information as non-confidential and

may make it available to the public

without further notice to the submitter.

Comments and data may also be

submitted in electronic form by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: opptncic@epamail.epa.gov. Such comments

and data must be submitted in an ASCII

file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by (OPPTS–

42187A)(FRL–4869–1). No information

claimed as CBI should be submitted

through e-mail. Comments in electronic

form may be filed online at many

federal depository libraries.

The official record for this

rulemaking, as well as the public

version, will be maintained in paper

form. EPA will transfer all comments

received electronically into paper form

and will place the paper copies in the

official record. The official record is the

paper record maintained at the address

listed at the beginning of the

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ section of this

document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan B. Hazen, Director,

Environmental Assistance Division

(7408), Rm. ET–543B, Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460;

telephone (202) 554–1404; TDD: (202)

554–0551; e-mail: TSCAHotline@epamail.epa.gov.

For technical information contact:

Richard W. Leukroth, Jr , Project

Manager, Chemical Control Division

(7405), Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW,

Washington, DC, 20460; telephone:

(202) 260–0321; fax: (202) 260–8850; email: leukroth.rich@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June

26, 1996 (61 FR 33178), EPA proposed

health effects testing, under section 4(a)

of the Toxic Substances Control Act

(TSCA), of the following hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs): 1,1’-biphenyl,

carbonyl sulfide, chlorine,

chlorobenzene, chloroprene, cresols [3

isomers], diethanolamine, ethylbenzene,

ethylene dichloride, ethylene glycol,

hydrochloric acid, hydrogen fluoride,

maleic anhydride, methyl isobutyl

ketone, methyl methacrylate,

naphthalene, phenol, phthalic

anhydride, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene,

1,1,2-trichloroethane, and vinylidene

chloride. EPA would use the data

generated under the rule to implement

several provisions of section 112 of the

Clean Air Act and to meet other EPA

data needs and those of other Federal

agencies. In the HAPs proposal, EPA

invited the submission of proposals for
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14851

pharmacokinetics (PK) studies for the

HAPs chemicals, which could provide

the basis for negotiation of enforcable

consent agreements (ECAs). These PK

studies would be used to conduct routeto-route extrapolation of toxicity data

from routes other than inhalation to

predict the effects of inhalation

exposure, as an alternative to testing

proposed under the HAPs rule.

On October 18, 1996, EPA extended

the public comment period on the

proposed rule from December 23, 1996

to January 31, 1997 (61 FR 54383) (FRL–

5571–3). This extension was for the

purpose of allowing more time for the

submission of PK proposals and

adequate time for comments on the

proposed rule to be submitted after the

Agency had responded to the proposals.

EPA received several PK proposals. Due

to the complexity of the issues raised by

these proposals, EPA successively

extended the public comment period

(61 FR 67516, December 23, 1996 (FRL–

5580–6); 62 FR 9142, February 28, 1997)

to allow the Agency more time to

respond to the PK proposals and to

finalize the test guidelines to be

referenced in the proposed HAPs test

rule.

The HAPs proposed rule published on

June 26, 1996 (61 FR 33178) provides

that testing would be conducted using

the harmonized guidelines developed

by the Office of Prevention, Pesticides,

and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) that

were proposed on June 20, 1996 (61 FR

31522)(FRL–5367–7). The process of

developing these guidelines is

proceeding at the same time as the

development of the HAPs test rule. For

the purposes of the proposed HAPs test

rule and testing under TSCA section

4(a), the Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics (OPPT) intends to

promulgate final TSCA test guidelines.

The Agency will solicit public comment

on the applicability of the test

guidelines to the HAPs rule and will

follow this practice with respect to all

future TSCA section 4(a) test rules.

These guidelines will be published in

the Federal Register on or before May

30, 1997.

In addition, there has been a delay in

finalizing Agency reviews of the PK

proposals. EPA intends to provide

comments to all submitters of PK

proposals as soon as possible but, at any

event prior to the close of the comment

period. EPA also recognizes that

submitters may need to revise their

proposals based on EPA comments. In

addition, the Agency believes that the

public should have adequate

opportunity to comment on the

development of ECAs based on the PK

proposals. If the Agency finds the

original or revised PK proposals

acceptable, EPA will therefore

announce, in the Federal Register, one

or more public meetings to discuss the

proposals and to negotiate ECAs based

on the proposals. In that notice, the

Agency will solicit persons interested in

participating in or monitoring

negotiations for the development of

ECAs based on the revised PK testing

proposals. These negotiations will be

conducted under the process described

in subpart B of 40 CFR part 790.

The Agency emphasizes that the

submission of proposals to develop

ECAs to conduct alternative testing

using PK is no guarantee that EPA and

the submitters will, in fact, conclude

such agreements. Therefore, EPA urges

all submitters of PK proposals to

comment on the HAPs proposed rule as

an activity separate from the PK

proposal/ECA process. Comments on

the proposed rule should be submitted

as described in the ‘‘ADDRESSES’’

section of this document prior to the

close of the comment period.

Accordingly, EPA is extending the

comment period on the proposed rule to

June 30, 1997.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 799

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Hazardous substances, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 24, 1997.

Charles M. Auer,

Director, Chemical Control Division, Office

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

[FR Doc. 97–7815 Filed 3–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Health Care Financing Administration

42 CFR Part 413

[BPD–808–P]

RIN 0938–AG70

Medicare and Medicaid Programs;

Salary Equivalency Guidelines for

Physical Therapy, Respiratory

Therapy, Speech Language Pathology,

and Occupational Therapy Services

AGENCY: Health Care Financing

Administration (HCFA), HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule sets forth

proposed revisions to the salary

equivalency guidelines for Medicare

payment for the reasonable costs of

physical therapy and respiratory

therapy services furnished under

arrangements by an outside contractor.

The proposed rule also sets forth

proposed new salary equivalency

guidelines for Medicare payment for the

reasonable costs of speech language

pathology and occupational therapy

services furnished under arrangements

by an outside contractor. The proposed

guidelines do not apply to inpatient

hospital services and hospice services.

The guidelines would be used by

Medicare fiscal intermediaries to

determine the maximum allowable cost

of those services.

The guidelines will not be effective

until at least 60 days after the date of

publication of the final rule. However,

to illustrate how the schedules would

operate, we have calculated the

proposed revised schedules for physical

respiratory therapy services and

proposed new schedules for speechlanguage pathology and occupational

therapy services as if the guidelines

were effective on April 1, 1997.

DATES: Comments will be considered if

we receive them at the appropriate

address, as provided below, no later

than 5 p.m. on May 27, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Mail written comments (one

original and three copies) to the

following address: Health Care

Financing Administration, Department

of Health and Human Services,

Attention: BPD–808–P, PO. Box 7517,

Baltimore, MD 21244–0517.

If you prefer, you may deliver your

written comments (one original and

three copies) to one of the following

addresses:

Room 309–G, Hubert H. Humphrey

Building, 200 Independence Avenue,

SW, Washington, DC 20201, or

Room C5–09–26, 7500 Security

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–

1850.

Because of staffing and resource

limitations, we cannot accept comments

by facsimile (FAX) transmission.

If comments concern information

collection or recordkeeping

requirements, please address a copy of

comments to the following address:

Office of Management and Budget,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Room 3206, New Executive

Office Building, Washington, DC 20503,

Attention: Allison Herron Eydt.

In commenting, please refer to file

code BPD–808–P. Comments received

timely will be available for public

inspection as they are received,

generally beginning approximately 3

weeks after publication of a document,

in Room 309–G of the Department’s

offices at 200 Independence Avenue,

SW, Washington, DC, on Monday