No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part I

Administrative practice and

procedure, Courts, Inventions and

patents.

PART 1-RULES OF PRACTICE IN

PATENT CASES

1. The authority citation for 37 CFR

part I would continue to read as

follows:

Authority: 35 U.S.C. 6, unless otherwise

noted.

2. Section 1.601 is amended by

adding paragraph (q) to read as follows:

§ 1.601 Scope of rules, definitions.

(q) A final decision is a decision

awarding judgment as to all counts. An

interlocutory order is any other action

taken by an examiner-in-chief or a panel

of the Board in an interference,

including the notice declaring an

interference.

3. Section 1.63 7 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 1.637 Content of motion*.

(a) A party filing a motion has the

burden of proof to show that it is

entitled to the relief sought in the

motion. Every motion shall include (1)

a statement of the precise relief

requested, (2) a statement of the material

facts in support of the motion, and (3)

a full statement of the reasons why the

relief requested should be granted.

4. Section 1.639 is amended by

revising paragraph (c) and by adding

paragraphs (d) through (g) as follows:

§ 1.639 Evidence In support of motion,

opposition, or reply.

(c) If a party believes that additional

evidence in the form of testimony that

is unavailable to the party is necessary

to support or oppose a preliminary

motion under § 1.633 or a motion to

correct inventorship under § 1.634, the

party shall describe the nature of any

proposed testimony as specified in

paragraphs (d) through (g) of this

section. If the examiner-in-chief finds

that testimony is needed to decide the

motion, the examiner-in-chief may grant

appropriate interlocutory relief and

enter an order authorizing the taking of

testimony and deferring a decision on

the motion to final hearing. (d) When additional evidence in the

form of expert-witness testimony is

needed in support of or opposition to a

preliminary motion, the moving party or

opponent should:

U1) Identify the person whom it

expects to call as an expert;

(2) State the field in which the person

is alleged to be an expert; and

(3) State:

(i) The subject matter on which the

person is expected to testify;

(ii) The facts and opinions to which

the person is expected to testify; and

(iii) A summary of the grounds and

basis for each opinion.

(e) When additional evidence in the

form of fact-witness testimony is

necessary, state the facts to which the

witness is expected to testify.

(f) If the opponent is to be called, or

if evidence in the possession of the

opponent is necessary, explain the

evidence sought, what it will show, and

why it is needed.

(g) When inter partes tests are to be

performed, describe the tests stating

what they will be expected to show.

5. Section 1.655 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§1.655 Matters considered In rendering a

final decision.

(a) In rendering a final decision, the

Board may consider any properly raised

issue including (1) priority of invention,

(2) derivation by an opponent from a

party who filed a preliminary statement

under § 1.625, (3) patentability of the

invention, (4) admissibility of evidence,

(5) any interlocutory matter deferred to

final hearing, and (6) any other matter

necessary to resolve the interference.

The Board may also consider whether

any interlocutory order was erroneous

or an abuse of discretion. All

interlocutory orders shall be presumed

to have been correct and the burden of

showing error or an abuse of discretion

shall be on the party attacking the order.

When two or more interlocutory orders

involve the same issue, the last entered

order shall be presumed to have been

correct.

Dated: September 16, 1993.

Bruce A. Lehman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce and

Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.

[FR Doc. 93-23304 Filed 9-22-93; 8:45 am]

BILUNG COoE 3610-16-M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CO34-1-6052; FRL-4735-41

Clean Air Act Approval and

Promulgation ofAIr Quality

Implementation Plan for

Colorado;Amblent Air Quality Surveillance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to

Colorado's State Implementation Plan

(SIP) for Air Quality Monitoring, as

submitted by the Governor with a letter

dated July 7, 1993. The revisions update

the SIP to bring it into compliance with

the Federal requirements for monitoring

criteria. This submittal completely

replaces the previous version of the air

quality monitoring plan.

EFFECTlVE.DATES: This action will

become effective on November 22, 1993

unless notice is received by October 25,

1993 that someone wishes to submit

adverse or critical comments. If the

effective date is delayed, timely notice

will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Notice of adverse or critical

comments should be submitted to Amy

Platt at the EPA Region VIII Office.

Copies of the State's submittal and other

information are available for inspection

during normal business hours at the

following locations: Air Programs

Branch, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street,

Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-

2405; and Colorado Department of

Health, Air Pollution Control Division,

4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver,

Colorado 80222-1530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amy Platt, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region VIII, (303) 293-1769.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In a May 10, 1979 Federal Register

notice (44 FR 27558), EPA set forth

ambient air quality monitoring and data

reporting requirements to satisfy the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) of

the 1977 Clean Air Act. The May 10,

1979 notice revoked the requirements

for air quality monitoring in 40 CFR part

51 and established a new part 58

entitled Ambient Air Quality

Surveillance. Pursuant to the May 10,

1979 revisions, States were required,

among other things, to revise their SIPs

to meet the requirements of 40 CFR

• I

49434 Federal Register / Vol. 58,

HeinOnline -- 58 Fed. Reg. 49434 1993
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 183 / Thursday, September 23, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 49435

58.20. On December 14, 1979, the

Colorado Air Pollution Control Division

submitted a revision to the Colorado SIP

concerning compliance with these

Federal monitoring regulations. EPA

determined that the submittal met the

requirements of 40 CFR 58.20, and on

July 9, 1980 the revisions were

approved (45 FR 46072).

H. Revisions Submitted July 7, 1993

After a review of its monitoring SIP,

the State deemed necessary further

revisions to the plan to conform it to all

the requirements of 40 CFR part 58.

Therefore, in a letter dated July 7, 1993,

the Governor of Colorado submitted a

revised Air Quality Monitoring SIP,

which had been adopted on March 18,

1993 by the Colorado Air Quality

Control Commission. This submittal

updates the State's air quality

monitoring plan and makes it consistent

with 40 CFR part 58.

The revisions address air quality

surveillance network design, network

description, station designations, air

quality monitoring criteria, data

reporting, annual review of the State's

monitoring network, prevention of

significant deterioration monitoring,

and public notification. No public

comments were received by the State on

this SIP. The State believes that the

monitoring SIP revisions will provide

for the continued implementation,

maintenance and enforcement of the

state air pollution control program

aimed at meeting the National Ambient

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), as well

as bring the SIP into conformance with

Federal requirements for ambient air

quality monitoring.

EPA is acting on these revisions

without prior proposal because the

Agency views these amendments as

noncontroversial and anticipates no

adverse comments. This action will be

effective November 22, 1993 unless, by

October 25, 1993, notice is received that

adverse or critical comments will be

submitted.

If such notice is received, this action

will be withdrawnbefore the effective

date by publishing two subsequent

notices. One notice will withdraw the

final action and another will begin a

new rulemaking by announcing a

proposal of the action and establishing

a comment period. If no such comments

are received, the public is advised that

this action will be effective November

22, 1993.

M. This Action

EPA is approving Colorado's SIP

revision, submitted by the Governor

with a letter dated July 7, 1993. These

revisions amend the Air Quality

Monitoring SIP to bring it into

conformance with Federal requirements

in 40 CFR part 58. This submittal

completely replaces the previous

version of the Air Quality Monitoring

plan. EPA is approving these revisions

ecause they provide for the continued

implementation, maintenance and

enforcement of the NAAQS. This action

was requested by the State of Colorado.

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 a SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Executive Order (EO) 12291

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225). On

January 6, 1989, the Office of

Management and Budget waived Table

2 and 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from

the requirements of section 3 of

Executive Order 12291 for a period of

two years. EPA has submitted a request

for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and

Table 3 SIP revisions. OMB has agreed

to continue the temporary waiver until

such time as it rules on EPA's request.

V. Regulatory Flexibility

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

that the rule will not have a significant

economic 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.

Approvals of SIP submittals under

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of

the Clean Air Act do not create any new

requirements, but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because the , Federal SIP-approval does not impose

any new requirements, I certify that it

does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the Federal-state

relationship under the Clean Air Act,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

VI. Petitions

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 November 22,

1993. 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 must 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

Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Environmental protection,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: September 15, 1993.

Jack W. McGraw,

Acting Regional Administrator.

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 G-Colorado

2. Section 52.346 is added to read as

follows:

§52.346 Air quality monitoring

requirements.

In a letter and submittal dated July 7,

1993, from the Governor of Colorado to

the EPA Region VIII Administrator, the

State submitted a revised Air Quality

Monitoring State Implementation Plan.

The plan was adopted by the State on

March 18, 1993 and completely replaces

the previous version of the Air Quality

Monitoring plan as identified at 40 CFR

52.320 (c)(17). The revisions updated

the plan to bring it into conformance

with the Federal requirements for air

quality monitoring as found in 40 CFR

part 58. The State commits to meet these

Federal requirements.

[FR Doc. 93-23391 Filed 9-22-93; 8:45 am)

BILLNG CODE 6560-50-F *

HeinOnline -- 58 Fed. Reg. 49435 1993