Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 18277

an alternate reserved transit slot, in the

following situations:

(1) If for whatever reason Canal

authorities cancel or significantly delay

the transit of a vessel booked for transit

that is otherwise ready to proceed as

scheduled;

(2) If for whatever reason Canal

authorities delay the transit of a vessel

booked for transit to such a degree that

the delay is likely to cause the vessel to

be unable to meet its required arrival

time for a later, second reserved transit,

booked before the delay of the first

reserved transit occurred; or

(3) If a vessel is booked for transit on

the assumption that the vessel will pay

the booking fee prescribed by § 104.6(a)

or (b) but, subsequently, a change in

traffic conditions occurs triggering the

higher booking fee prescribed by

§ 104.6(c).

(b) A vessel booked for transit will be

deemed to have transited the Canal on

its reserved transit date if the vessel

arrives at the first set of locks at either

terminus of the Canal prior to 2400

hours that day and its in-transit time

(ITT) is 18 hours or less. ITT begins

when the vessel enters the first set of

locks at either Canal terminus and ends

when the vessel departs the last set of

locks at the opposite terminus. No

booking fee will be charged if ITT,

through no fault of the vessel, exceeds

18 hours.

§ 104.9 Cancellations.

(a) A vessel agent may cancel the

transit reservation of a vessel by giving

notice prescribed by Canal authorities.

In such event, and except as otherwise

provided, a cancellation fee will be

charged. The amount of the fee will

depend on the amount of notice (days

or hours) received by Canal authorities

in advance of the vessel’s required

arrival time, according to the following

schedule:

Advance notice

periods

Cancellation fee

(the greater of)

31 days or more ........ None

30 to 11 days ............ 20% of booking fee

or $500

10 to 7 days .............. 40% of booking fee

or $750

6 to 2 days ................ 60% of booking fee

or $1,000

1 day to 8 hours ........ 80% of booking fee

or $1,200

(b) Receipt of notice of cancellation of

a transit reservation by Canal authorities

after the vessel’s required arrival time

will result in levy of a cancellation fee

equal to the entire prescribed booking

fee.

§ 104.10 Regular transits.

Vessels not booked for transit will be

scheduled for movement through the

Canal on the date and in the order

determined by Canal authorities. In

establishing the daily schedule of

vessels to be moved through the Canal,

the order in which vessels arrive is only

one of several considerations. In

general, regular transits will equal or

exceed in number, one-half the total

number of daily vessel transits.

§ 104.11 Temporary suspension of system.

(a) Canal authorities may temporarily

suspend, in whole or in part, for

whatever period of time deemed

necessary, the vessel transit reservation

system established by this part,

whenever Canal authorities determine

that such action is necessary to ensure

continued safe and efficient operation of

the Canal.

(b) No penalty or fee shall be levied

against any vessel booked for transit

whose reserved transit slot is cancelled

by reason of a temporary suspension of

the system pursuant to this section.

§ 104.12 Further implementation.

(a) In order to ensure safe and

efficient operation of the system, Canal

authorities may establish additional

policies and procedures, define

additional terms and issue clarifications

and interpretations not inconsistent

with the provisions of this part, which

will be published and distributed

periodically to Canal customers through

notices to shipping or other appropriate

means.

(b) In the event any provision of this

part conflicts with any implementation

provision issued pursuant to this

section, the provisions of this part shall

govern.

Dated: April 10, 1997.

John A. Mills,

Secretary, Panama Canal Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–9631 Filed 4–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3640–04–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[FRL–5811–1]

RIN 2060–AH16

Revision of New Source Performance

Standards for the Phosphate Fertilizer

Industry: Granular Triple

Superphosphate Storage Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On August 6, 1975 the

Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency) promulgated new source

performance standards (NSPS) to limit

emissions of total fluoride compounds

from several affected facilities in the

phosphate fertilizers industry. Amongst

the affected facilities covered by the

NSPS were triple superphosphate plants

and granular triple superphosphate

(GTSP) storage facilities. The NSPS for

GTSP fertilizer storage facilities in 40

CFR Part 60, Subpart X were

promulgated for the purpose of limiting

total fluoride emissions resulting from

the continuation during storage of the

chemical reactions through which GTSP

is manufactured. After an initial curing

period, the GTSP fertilizers cease to

emit appreciable quantities of fluorides.

As now written, the NSPS cover all

GTSP storage facilities and there is no

provision to exempt facilities storing

only cured fertilizers.

Today’s action clarifies the coverage

of the NSPS to limit its applicability to

those facilities which store fresh GTSP.

As a result of today’s action, the NSPS

will include a work practice through

which manufacturers will hold fresh

GTSP in storage until it has cured prior

to shipment to their customers. This

limits the testing and recordkeeping

requirements of Subpart X to only those

facilities associated with the

manufacture of GTSP and, thereby,

removes any recordkeeping burden

currently imposed upon downstream

distributors and users of this product.

DATES: This rule is effective June 16,

1997 unless notice is received by May

15, 1997 that adverse or critical

comments will be submitted, or that an

opportunity to submit such comments at

a public hearing is requested. If adverse

comments are received, the effective

date will be delayed and timely notice

will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may

submit written comments (in duplicate

if possible) to Public Docket No. A–97–

4 at the following address: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

and Radiation Docket and Information

Center (6102), 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20460. The Agency

requests that a separate copy also be

sent to the contact person listed below.

The docket is located at the above

address in Room M–1500, Waterside

Mall (ground floor), and may be

inspected from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday. The docket is an

organized and complete file of all the

information submitted to or otherwise

considered by the Agency in the

development of this rulemaking. For
18278 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

additional information on the

availability of electronic information,

see Supplementary Information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information concerning specific aspects

of this action, contact Mr. David Painter

(telephone number (919) 541–5515),

Minerals and Inorganic Chemicals

Group, Emission Standards Division

(MD–13), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina 27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

Today’s action amends Subpart X by

limiting its applicability to those

facilities which store fresh GTSP. The

practical effect of the revision is to

apply the provisions of the NSPS to

those storage facilities which are colocated with GTSP production facilities.

This is accomplished by a work practice

through which manufacturers will hold

fresh GTSP in storage until it has cured

prior to shipment to their customers. In

effect, this action excludes from

coverage those facilities which store and

distribute cured GTSP.

Electronic Information

An electronic copy of this document

is available on the Technology Transfer

Network (TTN), one of Agency’s

electronic bulletin boards. The TTN

provides information and technology

exchange in various areas of air

pollution control. The service is free,

except for the cost of a phone call. Dial

(919) 541–5742 for up to a 14,400 bps

modem. If more information on the TTN

is needed, call the TTN HELP line at

(919) 541–5384.

The information in this document is

organized as shown below.

I. Statutory Authority

II. Background

III. Selection of Revised Standards

IV. Impacts of Revised Standards

A. Applicability

B. Air Quality Impacts

C. Nonair Environmental and Energy

Impacts

D. Cost and Economic Impacts

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Public Participation and Effective Date

B. Executive Order 12866

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

D. Regulatory Flexibility

E. Submission to Congress and the General

Accounting Office

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

I. Statutory Authority

The statutory authority for this action

is provided by sections 101, 111, 114,

116, and 301 of the Clean Air Act, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414,

7416, and 7601).

II. Background

On August 6, 1975 (40 FR 33152), the

Agency promulgated NSPS to limit

emissions of total fluoride compounds

from several affected facilities in the

phosphate fertilizers industry including

GTSP storage facilities. The main

concern which prompted that inclusion

was the continued off-gassing of

fluorides from fresh GTSP during

storage subsequent to the initial

reactions associated with the

manufacture of GTSP. For the purposes

of the NSPS, fresh GTSP was defined as

that produced within the past ten days.

Recently, representatives of the

Missouri Farmers Association (MFA)

have advised the Agency that a literal

interpretation of the NSPS could lead to

application of the NSPS to its

distribution facilities which store only

cured GTSP and which are located far

from the point of manufacture. The

MFA posited that application of the

NSPS in this instance would provide no

appreciable benefit to the environment

while imposing unproductive

paperwork. To support their position,

the MFA provided the Agency test data

which indicated that one of their

warehouses, which is typical of

distribution facilities, emits less than

one pound per year of total fluorides.

As a part of the Agency’s

consideration of the concerns raised by

the MFA, it obtained data from two

companies that manufacture and store

GTSP. Those data were developed using

methods which differed from those

employed by the MFA and gave the

same results. That is, emissions of

fluorides were associated with storage of

fresh GTSP and those emissions were

inconsequential after three days. The

Agency concluded that cured GTSP

stored by facilities such as those of the

MFA does not emit appreciable

quantities of fluorides and that no

practical benefit could be derived by

applying Subpart X to distribution

facilities which store cured GTSP.

Consequently, today’s action limits the

applicability of Subpart X to only those

facilities which store fresh GTSP.

III. Selection of Revised Standards

The purpose of establishing the

existing NSPS was to control emissions

of total fluoride originating from storage

buildings containing fresh GTSP. The

total fluoride emissions result from

continuation of the chemical reactions

employed in the manufacture of GTSP.

These reactions cause the formation and

release of a variety of fluoride

compounds. The reactions continue for

a period of time after newly

manufactured GTSP is placed into

storage and are referred to as ‘‘curing’’

of the fertilizer. Thus, the need for

controlling emissions during storage

coincides with the curing period.

When the NSPS were developed,

conventional wisdom was that curing of

fresh GTSP occurred over a period of

three to five days. Test data which was

then available was for buildings storing

GTSP that was ten days old. The test

data became the technical basis for the

current standard which defines fresh

GTSP as that which is produced no

more than ten days prior to a

performance test.

In recent discussions with interested

parties, the Agency found consensus

that the language of the NSPS should be

amended to specifically limit their

applicability to those facilities storing

fresh GTSP. The most direct approach to

resolving the issue raised by MFA is to

include in the NSPS a work practice

that eliminates the shipment of fresh

GTSP from the manufacturer. This

approach clearly ensures that

downstream customers such as MFA

will not be storing fresh GTSP.

When the Agency first discussed this

approach with the manufacturers of

GTSP, they raised concerns about

storing fertilizer longer than needed

because of the definition of fresh

fertilizer in the current rule. They

provided the Agency with data which

directly relate the age of GTSP to its

potential for emissions of total fluorides.

After discussing the new data with State

agency and industry technical staffs, the

Agency concluded that curing reactions

causing significant air emissions are

complete within three days of the

completion of the manufacturing

process. Thus, today’s action changes

the definition of fresh GTSP such that

GTSP is defined as fresh for three,

instead of ten, days after production. In

keeping with this updated definition,

today’s action also changes the amount

of fresh GTSP that will satisfy the

performance testing requirement from

20 to six percent of the amount of GTSP

in storage. This change is proportional

to the change in the number of days

during which GTSP is defined as fresh.

The manufacturers have indicated that

they find the approach of holding GTSP

in storage until it is cured to be an

acceptable resolution to the problem

raised by the MFA. That is, this

approach clearly limits coverage of the

standards to only the time period when

emissions are actually occurring and

relieves their customers, such as MFA,

from the paperwork burden associated

with the NSPS as now implemented.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 18279

IV. Impacts of Revised Standards

A. Applicability

Today’s action will limit the

applicability of Subpart X to only those

facilities that store fresh GTSP. The

intent of today’s action is to remove

from the coverage of the NSPS those

facilities storing cured GTSP.

B. Air Quality Impacts

Today’s action will have no impact

upon air quality in relation to that

which was estimated for the NSPS when

they were first promulgated. The

original impact estimates of the NSPS

were based upon the assumption that

only those GTSP storage buildings

located at production facilities would be

subject to the standards. Further, today’s

action will have no measureable impact

upon actual air quality.

C. Nonair Environmental and Energy

Impacts

There will be no nonair

environmental and energy impacts.

D. Cost and Economic Impacts

There will be a cost savings resulting

from removal of recordkeeping and

reporting burdens associated with the

NSPS as now implemented. The Agency

has no information available upon

which to base an estimate of the savings

that will result.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Public Participation and Effective

Date

The Agency is publishing this action

as a direct final rule because it views it

as non-controversial and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in a

separate document in this issue of the

Federal Register, the Agency is

proposing to revise the NSPS should

adverse or critical comments be filed.

Thus, today’s direct final action will be

effective June 16, 1997 unless the

Agency receives notice by May 15, 1997

that adverse or critical comments will

be submitted or that a party requests the

opportunity to submit such oral

comments pursuant to section 307(d)(5)

of the Clean Air Act, as amended.

If the Agency 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 then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The Agency 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 June 16, 1997.

B. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR

51735 (October 4, 1993)], the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), and

the requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an

annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more or adversely affect in a

material way the economy, a sector of

the economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local, or tribal

governments or communities; (2) create

a serious inconsistency or otherwise

interfere with an action taken or

planned by another agency; (3)

materially alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs, or the rights and obligation of

recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in the Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, the Agency has

determined that this rule is not

‘‘significant’’ because none of the listed

criteria apply to this action.

Consequently, this action was not

submitted to OMB for review under

Executive Order 12866.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995 (109 Stat.

48), requires that the Agency prepare a

budgetary impact statement before

promulgating a rule that includes a

Federal mandate that may result in

expenditure by State, local, and tribal

governments, in aggregate, or by the

private sector, of $100 million or more

in any one year. Section 203 requires

the Agency to establish a plan for

obtaining input from and informing,

educating, and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely affected by the rule.

Under section 205 of the Unfunded

Mandates Act, the Agency must identify

and consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule for which a

budgetary impact statement must be

prepared. The Agency must select from

those alternatives the least costly, most

cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative for State, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector that

achieves the objectives of the rule,

unless the Agency explains why this

alternative is not selected or unless the

selection of this alternative is

inconsistent with law.

Because this rule is estimated to result

in the expenditure by State, local, and

tribal governments or the private sector

of less than $100 million in any one

year, the Agency has not prepared a

budgetary impact statement or

specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or

least burdensome alternative. Because

small governments will not be

significantly or uniquely affected by this

rule, the Agency is not required to

develop a plan with regard to small

governments. Therefore, the

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates

Act do not apply to this action.

D. Regulatory Flexibility

The Agency has determined that it is

not necessary to prepare a regulatory

flexibility analysis in connection with

this final rule. EPA has also determined

that this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This

determination has been made because

the effect of today’s action is to clarify

the NSPS to ensure that there are no

impacts upon small entities.

E. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 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. 804(2).

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

This regulation does not impose any

new information collection

requirements and results in no change

to the currently approved collection.

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has approved the information

collection requirements contained in

this rule under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB

control number 2060–0037 (EPA ICR #

1061.06). Burden means the total time,

effort, or financial resources expended

by persons to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide information to or

for a Federal agency. This includes the

time needed to review instructions;
18280 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

An Agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed

in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15. Send comments on the Agency’s

need for this information, the accuracy

of the provided burden estimates, and

any suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the Director, OPPE

Regulatory Information Division; U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(2137); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC

20460; and to the Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs, Office of

Management and Budget, 725 17th St.,

N.W., Washington, DC 20503, marked

‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’

Include the ICR number in any

correspondence.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Phosphate fertilizers

production, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 8, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 40 CFR Part 60 is amended as

follows:

PART 60—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 60

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414,

7416, 7601 and 7602.

Subpart X—[Amended]

2. In § 60.241, paragraphs (a) and (d)

are revised to read as follows:

§ 60.241 Definitions.

* * * * *

(a) Granular triple superphosphate

storage facility means any facility curing

or storing fresh granular triple

superphosphate.

* * * * *

(d) Fresh granular triple

superphosphate means granular triple

superphosphate produced within the

preceding 72 hours.

3. In § 60.242, paragraph (b) is added

to read as follows:

§ 60.242 Standard for fluorides.

* * * * *

(b) No owner or operator subject to

the provisions of this subpart shall ship

fresh granular triple superphosphate

from an affected facility.

4. In § 60.243, paragraphs (b) and (c)

are revised and paragraph (d) is added

to read as follows:

§ 60.243 Monitoring of operations.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator of any

granular triple superphosphate storage

facility subject to the provisions of this

subpart shall maintain a daily record of

total equivalent P2O5 stored by

multiplying the percentage P2O5

content, as determined by § 60.244(c)(3),

times the total mass of granular triple

superphosphate stored.

(c) The owner or operator of any

granular triple superphosphate storage

facility subject to the provisions of this

subpart shall install, calibrate, maintain,

and operate a monitoring device which

continuously measures and

permanently records the total pressure

drop across any process scrubbing

system. The monitoring device shall

have an accuracy of ± 5 percent over its

operating range.

(d) The owner or operator of any

granular triple superphosphate storage

facility subject to the provisions of this

subpart shall develop for approval by

the Administrator a site-specific

methodology including sufficient

recordkeeping for the purposes of

demonstrating compliance with § 60.242

(b).

5. In § 60.244, paragraph (a)(2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 60.244 Test methods and procedures.

(a) * * *

(2) Fresh granular triple

superphosphate is at least six percent of

the total amount of triple

superphosphate, or

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–9583 Filed 4–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 52

[CC Docket No. 95–116; FCC 97–74]

Telephone Number Portability

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The First Memorandum

Opinion and Order on Reconsideration,

(Order) released March 11, 1997, affirms

and clarifies the Commission’s rules

implementing section 251(b)(2) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, which requires all LECs to

offer long-term number portability in

accordance with requirements

prescribed by the Commission in the

First Report and Order, 61 FR 38605

(July 25, 1996). The First Report & Order

also requires all LECs to implement

long-term number portability in the 100

largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas

(MSAs) according to a five-phase

deployment schedule that commences

October 1, 1997, and concludes

December 31, 1998. The Commission

herein concludes, first, that Query on

Release (QOR) is not an acceptable longterm number portability method.

Second, the Commission extends the

completion deadlines in the

implementation schedule for wireline

carriers by three months for Phase I and

by 45 days for Phase II, clarifies the

requirements imposed thereunder,

concludes that LECs need only provide

number portability within the 100

largest MSAs in switches for which

another carrier has made a specific

request for portability, and addresses

issues raised by rural LECs and certain

other parties. Finally, the Commission

affirms and clarifies its implementation

schedule for wireless carriers.

DATES: Effective May 15, 1997.

Information collections, however, which

are subject to approval by the Office of

Mangement and Budget (OMB), shall

become effective upon approval by

OMB, but no sooner than September 12,

1997. A document announcing the

information collections approval by

OMB will be published in the Federal

Register at a later date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeannie Su, Attorney, Common Carrier

Bureau, Policy and Program Planning

Division, (202) 418–1580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

This is a summary of the

Commission’s Order on Reconsideration