31932 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 112 /Thursday, June 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

PART 524—OPHTHALMIC AND

TOPICAL DOSAGE FORM NEW

ANIMAL DRUGS

3. The authority citation for 21 CFR

part 524 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.

§ 524.1044g [Amended]

4. Section 524.1044g Gentamicin

sulfate, betamethasone valerate,

clotrimazole ointment is amended in

paragraph (b) by removing ‘‘000061’’

and adding in its place ‘‘000061 and

051259’’.

Dated: May 27, 1998.

Stephen F. Sundlof,

Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.

[FR Doc. 98–15554 Filed 6–10–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 141

[FRL–6109–7]

Removal of the Prohibition on the Use

of Point of Use Devices for Compliance

with National Primary Drinking Water

Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Today’s action removes the

prohibition on point of use (POU)

devices as compliance technologies for

National Primary Drinking Water

Regulations that is set forth in the Code

of Federal Regulations in section

141.101. EPA is removing the

prohibition on the POU devices because

it conflicts with section 1412(b)(4)(E)(ii)

of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

as amended on August 6, 1996. No other

part of section 141.101 is affected by

today’s action.

DATES: This action is effective June 11,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

Safe Drinking Water Hotline, toll free

(800) 426–4791, or Tara Chhay

Cameron; Targeting and Analysis

Branch; Office of Ground Water and

Drinking Water; EPA (4607), 401 M

Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460;

telephone (202) 260–3702.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

A. Regulated Entities

B. Explanation of Today’s Action

C. Administrative Requirements

1. Executive Order 12866

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

3. Paperwork Reduction Act

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and

Executive Order 12875

5. Executive Order 13045—Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks

6. Submission to Congress and the General

Accounting Office

7. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

8. Administrative Procedure Act

A. Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by this

action are those which meet the criteria

of the Public Water Systems (PWS)

definition. Regulated categories and

entities include:

Category Example of Regulated Entities

Industry ...................................................................................................................... Public Water Systems

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

the type of entities that EPA is now

aware of that could potentially be

regulated by this action. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also

be regulated. To determine whether

your entity is regulated by this action,

you should carefully examine the

applicability criteria in §§ 141.2, 142.2,

142.3, and 142.10 of title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations. If you have

questions regarding the applicability of

this action to a particular entity, consult

the person listed in the preceding FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. Explanation of Today’s Action

On July 8, 1987 (52 FR 25716) EPA

promulgated a requirement in section 40

CFR 141.101 that public water systems

shall not use POU devices to achieve

compliance with a maximum

contaminant level (MCL) of a National

Primary Drinking Water Regulations.

On August 6, 1996, amendments to

the SDWA were enacted into law.

Section 1412(b)(4)(E)(ii) of the SDWA,

as amended, authorizes the use of POU

devices by public water systems to

comply with an MCL under certain

circumstances. In order to make the

regulatory provisions consistent with

the new statutory language, with today’s

action, EPA removes the prohibition on

the use of POU devices by public water

systems to comply with an MCL. No

other provision of section 141.101 is

affected by this action.

C. Administrative Requirements

1. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51,735 (October 4, 1993)), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to OMB review 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:

(a) 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;

(b) Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency;

(c) Materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof; or

(d) Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in the Executive Order.

It has been determined that this rule

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order

12866 and is therefore not subject to

OMB review.

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Agency has determined that the

rule being issued today is not subject to

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),

which generally requires an Agency to

conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis

of any significant impact the rule will

have on a substantial number of small

entities. By its terms, the RFA applies

only to rules subject to notice and

comment rulemaking requirements
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 112 /Thursday, June 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 31933

under the Administrative Procedure Act

(APA) or any other statute. Today’s rule

is not subject to notice and comment

requirements under the APA or any

other statute because it falls into the

interpretative statement exception

under APA section 553(b) and because

the Agency has found ‘‘good cause’’ to

publish without prior notice and

comment.

3. Paperwork Reduction Act

There are no information collection

requirements in this rule.

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and

Executive Order 12875

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L.

104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,

EPA generally must prepare a written

statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may

result in expenditures to State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any one year. Before

promulgating an EPA rule for which a

written statement is needed, section 205

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to

identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives and

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule.

The provisions of section 205 do not

apply when they are inconsistent with

applicable law. Moreover, section 205

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other

than the least costly, most cost-effective

or least burdensome alternative if the

Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including tribal

governments, it must have developed

under section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially

affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in

the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal

intergovernmental mandates, and

informing, educating, and advising

small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements.

Today’s rule merely codifies a

statutory amendment authorizing the

use of certain treatment technology

under the SDWA. It thus contains no

Federal mandates (under the regulatory

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for

State, local, or tribal governments or the

private sector. Thus, today’s rule is not

subject to the requirements of sections

202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Similarly, EPA has determined that

this rule contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments,

including tribal governments. Therefore,

this action does not require a small

government agency plan under UMRA

section 203.

Because this rule imposes no

intergovernmental mandate, it also is

not subject to Executive Order 12875

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership).

5. Executive Order 13045—Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks

Today’s action is not subject to

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885

(April 23, 1997)) which requires

agencies to identify and assess the

environmental health and safety risks of

their rules on children. Pursuant to the

definitions in section 2–202, Executive

Order 13045 only applies to rules that

are economically significant as defined

under Executive Order 12866 and

concern an environmental health or

safety risk that may disproportionately

affect children. This rule is not

economically significant and does not

concern a risk disproportionately

affecting children.

6. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

The Congressional Review Act, (5

U.S.C. 801 et seq.) as added by the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA),

generally provides that before a rule

may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a

rule report, which includes a copy of

the rule, to each House of the Congress

and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. However, section 808

provides that any rule for which the

issuing agency for good cause finds that

notice and public procedure thereon are

impracticable, unnecessary or contrary

to the public interest, shall take effect at

such time as the agency promulgating

the rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As

discussed in section C.8., EPA has made

such a good cause finding for this rule,

including the reasons therefor, and

established an effective date of June 11,

1998. EPA will submit 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 United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

7. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Under section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act, the Agency is required to use

voluntary consensus standards in its

regulatory and procurement activities

unless to do so would be inconsistent

with applicable law or otherwise

impractical. Voluntary consensus

standards are technical standards (e.g.,

material specifications, test methods,

sampling procedures, business

practices, etc.) that are developed or

adopted by voluntary consensus

standard bodies. Where available and

potentially applicable voluntary

consensus standards are not used by

EPA, the Act requires the Agency to

provide Congress, through the Office of

Management and Budget, an

explanation of the reasons for not using

such standards. Because this rule does

not involve or require the use of any

technical standards, EPA does not

believe that this Act is applicable to this

rule. Moreover, EPA is unaware of any

voluntary consensus standards relevant

to this rulemaking. Therefore, even if

the Act were applicable to this kind of

rulemaking, EPA does not believe that

there are any ‘‘available or potentially

applicable’’ voluntary consensus

standards.

8. Administrative Procedure Act

Because this rule merely codifies and

interprets a statute, the amended

SDWA, it is an ‘‘interpretative rule.’’ As

a result, it is exempt from the notice and

comment requirements for rulemakings

under section 553 of the APA (See

section 553(b)(3)(A)). In addition,

because this rule merely codifies

statutory requirements and makes

clarifying changes to the rules necessary

to implement the amended statute,

notice and comment is ‘‘unnecessary’’

and thus the Agency has ‘‘good cause’’

to publish this rule without prior notice

and comment (APA section

553(b)(3)(B)). For the same reasons, EPA

is making the provisions of this rule

effective upon promulgation, as

authorized under the APA (See sections

553(d)(2) and (3)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 141

Environmental protection, Water

supply.
31934 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 112 /Thursday, June 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Dated: June 3, 1998.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Environmental Protection

Agency amends 40 CFR Part 141 as

follows:

PART 141—NATIONAL PRIMARY

DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 141

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f, 300g, 300g–1,

300g–2, 300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6,

300j–4, and 300j–9.

2. Revise § 141.101 to read as follows:

§ 141.101 Use of bottled water.

Public water systems shall not use

bottled water to achieve compliance

with an MCL. Bottled water may be

used on a temporary basis to avoid

unreasonable risk to health.

[FR Doc. 98–15448 Filed 6–10–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 76

[CS Docket No. 96–46; FCC 97–130]

Open Video Systems

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Correcting amendments.

SUMMARY: This document contains

corrections to the final rules which were

published in the Federal Register of

Tuesday, May 13, 1997 (62 FR 26235).

These regulations related to the filing

requirements for open video system

certification applications.

DATES: Effective date is May 13, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carolyn A. Fleming, 202–418–1026.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The final regulations that are the

subject of these corrections were

adopted in Implementation of Section

302 of the Telecommunications Act of

1996, Open Video Systems (‘‘Fourth

Report and Order’’). The Fourth Report

and Order amended our regulations to

reflect the provisions of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the

‘‘1996 Act’’) which pertain to the filing

requirements for certification

applications, comments and

oppositions, Notices of Intent and

complaints concerning channel carriage.

Need For Correction

As published, the final regulations

contain errors which may prove to be

misleading and need to be clarified.

Certain language was inadvertently

omitted from § 76.1502(d) as published

in the rule changes.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76

Cable television service, Open video

systems, Certification.

Accordingly, 47 CFR Part 76 is

corrected by making the following

correcting amendments:

PART 76—CABLE TELEVISION

SERVICE

1. The authority citation for part 76

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154,

301, 302, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315,

317, 325, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 533, 534,

535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 552,

554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573.

§ 76.1502 [Corrected]

2. In 76.1502, paragraph (d) is

redesignated as paragraph (d)(2) and a

new paragraph (d)(1) is added to read as

follows:

* * * * *

(d)(1) On or before the date an FCC

Form 1275 is filed with the

Commission, the applicant must serve a

copy of its filing on all local

communities identified pursuant to

paragraph (c)(6) of this section and must

include a statement informing the local

communities of the Commission’s

requirements in paragraph (e) of this

section for filing oppositions and

comments. Service by mail is complete

upon mailing, but if mailed, the served

documents must be postmarked at least

three days prior to the filing of the FCC

Form 1275 with the Commission.

* * * * *

Federal Communications Commission

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–15496 Filed 6–10–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

48 CFR Part 204

[DFARS Case 97–D039]

Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement; Contract

Distribution to Defense Finance and

Accounting Service Offices

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Director of Defense

Procurement has issued a final rule

amending the Defense Federal

Acquisition Regulation Supplement

(DFARS) to update requirements for

distribution of contracts to the Defense

Finance and Accounting Service and the

Defense Contract Audit Agency, and to

update references to publications and

activity names and addresses.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 11, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melissa Rider, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council, PDUSD (A&T) DP

(DAR), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense

Pentagon, Washington DC 20301–3062.

Telephone (703) 602–0131; telefax (703)

602–0350. Please cite DFARS Case 97–

D039.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

This final rule amends DFARS

Subpart 204.2 to add a requirement to

distribute copies of contracts and

modifications to the cognizant Defense

Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)

accounting station, in addition to the

DFAS funding office; to add an Internet

address for obtaining the Directory of

Defense Contract Audit Agency Offices;

to clarify the types of fixed-price

contracts that must be distributed to the

Defense Contract Audit Agency; to

reflect the change in name of the

‘‘Defense Subsistence Region, Europe’’

to the ‘‘Defense Supply Center

Philadelphia European Region’’ and to

remove an obsolete reference to a

directory of contract administration

services.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The final rule does not constitute a

significant revision within the meaning

of FAR 1.501 and Public Law 98–577

and publication for public comment is

not required. However, comments from

small entities concerning the affected

DFARS subpart will be considered in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such

comments should cite DFARS Case 97–

D039.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the final rule does not

impose any information collection

requirements that require the approval

of the Office of Management and Budget

under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.