34348 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules

procedures to certify contact-handled

stored TRU waste. The ‘‘INEEL TRU

Waste Characterization, Transportation,

and Certification Quality Program Plan’’

sets forth the quality assurance program

that the DOE purports to comply with

the requirements of § 194.22. After the

EPA reviews these documents for

adequacy, the EPA will conduct an

inspection of a DOE audit of the site to

determine whether the requirements set

out in these documents are being

adequately implemented in accordance

with Conditions 2 and 3 of the EPA’s

WIPP certification decision (Appendix

A to 40 CFR Part 194). In accordance

with § 194.8 of the WIPP compliance

criteria, the EPA is providing the public

30 days to comment on the documents

placed in the EPA’s docket relevant to

the site approval process.

If the EPA determines that the

provisions in the documents are

adequately implemented, the EPA will

notify the DOE by letter and place the

letter in the official Air Docket in

Washington, D.C., and in the

informational docket locations in New

Mexico. A positive approval letter will

allow the DOE to begin shipping TRU

waste from INEEL. The EPA will not

make a determination of compliance

prior to the inspection or before the 30-

day comment period has closed.

Information on the EPA’s radioactive

waste disposal standards (40 CFR Part

191), the compliance criteria (40 CFR

Part 194), and the EPA’s certification

decision is filed in the official EPA Air

Docket, Dockets No. R–89–01, A–92–56,

and A–93–02, respectively, and is

available for review in Washington,

D.C., and at the three EPA WIPP

informational docket locations in New

Mexico. The dockets in New Mexico

contain only major items from the

official Air Docket in Washington, D.C.,

plus those documents added to the

official Air Docket after the October

1992 enactment of the WIPP LWA.

Dated: June 16, 1998.

Richard D. Wilson,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 98–16798 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 763

[OPPTS–62155; FRL–5762–3]

Asbestos-Containing Materials in

Schools; State Request for Waiver

from Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed waiver.

SUMMARY: EPA has received from the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts a

request for a waiver from the

requirements of 40 CFR part 763,

subpart E, Asbestos-Containing

Materials in Schools regulations. This

document announces an opportunity for

public review and comment on the

Massachusetts waiver request.

DATES: Comments on the waiver request

must be received by July 24, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be

sent in triplicate, identified by the

docket control number OPPTS–62155

to: James M. Bryson, Regional

Abatement Coordinator, Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Ecosystem

Protection, CPT Region 1, John F.

Kennedy Federal Building, Boston, MA

02203-0001. Copies of the

Massachusetts waiver request are on file

and may be reviewed at the EPA Region

I Office.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically to

bryson.jamesm@epamail.epa.gov.

Follow the instructions under

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of

this document. No Confidential

Business Information (CBI) should be

submitted through e-mail.

All comments which 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 document.

Persons submitting information on any

portion of which they believe is entitled

to treatment as CBI by EPA must assert

a business confidentiality claim in

accordance with 40 CFR 2.203(b) for

each such portion. 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 consider

this as a waiver of any confidentiality

claim and the information may be made

available to the public by EPA without

further notice to the submitter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James M. Bryson at 617–565–3836.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

document is issued under the authority

of Title II of the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2641, et

seq. TSCA Title II was enacted as part

of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency

Response Act (AHERA), Pub. L. 99-519.

AHERA is the name commonly used to

refer to the statutory authority for EPA’s

rules affecting asbestos in schools. For

purposes of this document, EPA will

use the AHERA designation.

In the Federal Register of October 30,

1987 (52 FR 41946), EPA issued a final

rule as required in AHERA, the

Asbestos-Containing Materials in

Schools Rule (40 CFR part 763, subpart

E), which requires all Local Education

Agencies (LEAs) to identify AsbestosContaining Building Materials (ACBMs)

in their school buildings and to take

appropriate actions to control the

release of asbestos fibers. The LEAs are

required to describe their asbestos

control activities in management plans,

which must be available to all

concerned persons and submitted to the

State Governor’s Designee. The rule

requires LEAs to use specially trained

and accredited persons to conduct

inspections for asbestos, develop

management plans, and design and

conduct actions to control asbestos. The

recordkeeping and reporting burden

associated with waiver requests was

approved under OMB control number

2070-0091. This document merely

announces the Agency’s receipt of a

waiver request and therefore, imposes

no additional burden beyond that which

was covered under existing OMB

control number 2070-0091. Send any

comments regarding the burden

estimate or any other aspect of this

collection to Chief, Information Policy

Branch (2136), Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460 and to the Office

of Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget,

Washington, DC 20503, ‘‘Attention:

Desk Officer.’’

Under section 203 of AHERA, EPA

may, upon request of a State Governor

and after notice and comment and

opportunity for a public hearing in the

State, waive in whole or in part the

requirements of the rule promulgated

under section 203, if the State has

established and is implementing or

intends to implement a program of

asbestos inspection and management

which is at least as stringent as the

requirements of 40 CFR part 763,

subpart E. The AHERA rule requires

that specific information be included in

a waiver request. The rule establishes a

process for EPA to review waiver

requests, and sets forth procedures for
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules 34349

oversight and rescission of waivers

granted to the States.

The rule requires States seeking

waivers to submit requests to the

Regional Administrator for the EPA

Region in which the State is located.

EPA is hereby issuing a notice in the

Federal Register announcing receipt of

the request and soliciting written

comments from the public pertaining to

the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’

AHERA waiver request. Comments must

be submitted by August 24, 1998. If

during the comment period, EPA

receives a written objection to the

State’s request, EPA will schedule a

hearing to be held in the affected State

after the close of the comment period.

On September 26, 1997, Acting

Governor Argeo Paul Cellucci submitted

to John P. DeVillars, Regional

Administrator, EPA Region I, a request

for a waiver under 40 CFR 763.98. The

request was received by the EPA

Regional Office on September 27, 1997.

The State’s submittal requested a waiver

from all requirements of 40 CFR part

763, subpart E.

The Massachusetts waiver request

was deemed complete by EPA on

October 14, 1997, in that it contained all

of the following provisions which are

required by the AHERA regulations.

1. A copy of the State provisions and

proposed provisions relating to its

program of asbestos inspection and

management in schools for which the

request is made.

2. The name of the State agency that

is responsible for administering and

enforcing the requirements for which a

waiver is requested. The names and job

titles of responsible officials in that

agency, and telephone numbers whom

the officials can be contacted.

3. Detailed reasons, supporting

papers, and the rationale for concluding

that the State’s asbestos inspection and

management program provisions, for

which the request is made, are at least

as stringent as the requirements of 40

CFR part 763, subpart E.

4. A discussion of any special

situations, problems, and needs

pertaining to the waiver request

accompanied by an explanation of how

the State intends to handle them.

5. A statement of the resources that

the State intends to devote to the

administration and enforcement of the

provisions relating to the waiver

request.

6. Copies of any specific or enabling

State laws and regulations relating to

the request, including provisions for

assessing criminal and/or civil

penalties.

7. Assurance from the Governor,

Attorney General, or the legal counsel of

the lead agency that has the legal

authority necessary to carry out the

requirements relating to the request.

EPA may waive some or all of the

requirements of 40 CFR part 763,

subpart E if:

1. The State has the legal authority

necessary to carry out the provisions of

asbestos inspection and management in

schools relating to the waiver request.

The Massachusetts Department of Labor

and Workforce Development recognizes

that asbestos exposure in schools (and

elsewhere) is a serious concern. The

Massachusetts General Assembly also

recognized this, and during a 1987

legislative session a bill was passed—

Mass Gen. Laws ch. 149, Sec. 6Cauthorizing the Air Pollution Control

Division, Massachusetts Department of

Labor and Workforce Development, to

implement State requirements under

AHERA to establish a certification

program for abatement contractors,

develop and implement asbestos work

practices and exposure standards,

collect fees, and levy fines. Effective

June 30, 1993, the revised

Massachusetts asbestos regulation

required the certification of all persons

engaging in asbestos-related work. The

requirement applies to all public and

commercial buildings as well as

schools. The revised regulation also

contains more stringent work practices

for asbestos abatement and expands the

enforcement capabilities of the State in

regards to false training documents

submitted to obtain certification. The

Massachusetts General Assembly has

enacted authority for the Massachusetts

Department of Labor and Work Force

Development to enforce rules and

regulations to minimize the risk to the

public from exposure to asbestos,

including requirements for asbestos

management plans to be submitted and

implemented by schools. All requisite

legislative/legal authority to implement

the AHERA waiver program has been

adopted, and no problems are

anticipated in meeting waiver

objectives.

2. The State’s program of asbestos

inspection and management in schools

relating to the waiver request and

implementation of the program will be

at least as stringent as the requirements

of 40 CFR part 763, subpart E. On

August 25, 1997, Massachusetts adopted

the requirements of 40 CFR part 763,

subpart E in their entirety, with the

exception of §§ 763.97 and 763.98, into

the Massachusetts Department of Labor

and Workforce Development Regulation

No. 453 CMR 6.00 ‘‘The Removal,

Containment or Encapsulation of

Asbestos School Requirements.’’ The

State indicated in its August 25, 1997

letter that it intends to administer these

regulations in a manner that will be at

least as stringent as the requirements of

40 CFR part 763, subpart E.

3. The State has an enforcement

mechanism to allow it to implement the

program described in the waiver

request. The State conducts routine

AHERA inspections and abatement

inspections. Routine AHERA

inspections result in a determination of

compliance regarding the creation,

maintenance and implementation of an

adequate, updated management plan.

Abatement inspections focus on

assessing compliance with the AHERA

and State asbestos requirements,

including such things as

implementation of appropriate work

practices, compliance with accreditation

(State Certification) requirements and

proper recordkeeping.

Abatement inspections are initiated as

a result of tips or complaints, to assess

compliance with any applicable State or

EPA asbestos rules. In addition, the

State will continue to update its existing

Neutral Administrative Inspection

Scheme (NAIS) in support of targeting

LEAs and other persons for AHERA

compliance inspections. The NAIS will

include a specific method or criteria for

selecting inspection targets and will

comply with EPA’s National

Compliance Monitoring Strategies for

AHERA. The State also has completed

an enforcement response policy to

determine the most appropriate

enforcement action for each violation of

the State’s laws and regulations.

4. The State has qualified personnel to

carry out the provisions relating to the

waiver request. The State has 18

employees trained to stringently

enforce, the requirements of 40 CFR part

763, subpart E. The program will be

carried out by staff in the Massachusetts

Department of Labor and Workforce

Development. Of these, four staff work

full-time under the EPA TSCA Asbestos

Enforcement Grant. These staff are fullytrained and certified as Building

Inspector/Management Planners and

Contractor/Supervisors. Two of four

staff persons are conducting full AHERA

inspections. One staff person is

conducting Worker Protection Rule (40

CFR part 763, subpart E) inspections

and is currently training to conduct full

AHERA inspections. The fourth person

administers the grant with EPA and

works on case development resulting

from inspections.

5. The State will devote adequate

resources to the administration and

enforcement of the asbestos inspection

and management provisions relating to

the waiver request. Based upon review

by the EPA Region I Office, the Agency
34350 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Proposed Rules

feels that the resources developed by the

Massachusetts Department of Labor and

Workforce Development are adequate to

effectively implement and administer

the asbestos program in Massachusetts.

6. Final approval of the program by

EPA will require effective

implementation and continued use of

the EPA-approved NAIS, logging and

tracking system, enforcement strategy

and standard operating procedures,

enforcement response policy, and

communication strategy. EPA’s final

approval of the State’s program will

require the State to continue to provide

adequate resources to support the

administration of the program.

The reporting and recordkeeping

provisions relating to State waivers from

the requirements of the AsbestosContaining Materials in Schools Rule at

40 CFR part 763 have been approved by

OMB under the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 and its

implementing regulations at 5 CFR part

1320 and assigned OMB control number

2070–0091.

With this notice, EPA is hereby

announcing receipt of the State’s request

and soliciting written comments from

the public pertaining to the

Commonwealth of Massachusetts’

AHERA waiver request. Comments must

be submitted by July 24, 1998. If during

the comment period, EPA receives a

written objection to the State’s request,

EPA will schedule a hearing to be held

in the Commonwealth after the close of

the comment period.

The official record for this document,

as well as the public version, has been

established for this document under

docket control number ‘‘OPPTS–62155’’

(including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

below). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not

include any information claimed as CBI,

is available for inspection from 8:30

a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The official

record is located at the address in

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of this

document.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

bryson.jamesm@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption, Comment and data will

also be accepted on disks in

Wordperfect 5.1/6.1 or ASCII file

format. All comments and data in

electronic form must be identified by

the docket control number ‘‘OPPTS–

62155.’’ Electronic comments on this

document may be filed online at many

Federal Depository Libraries.

List of Subjects in Part 763

Environmental protection, Asbestos,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Hazardous substances, Imports,

Intergovernmental relations, Labeling,

Occupational safety and health,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Schools.

Dated: June 15, 1998.

John P. DeVillars,

Regional Administrator, Region I.

[FR Doc. 98–16770 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA 98–3967; Notice 1]

RIN 2127–AG88

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards; Lamps, Reflective Devices,

and Associated Equipment

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

amend the Federal motor vehicle safety

standard on lighting to relieve design

restrictions that may inadvertently

prevent the implementation of certain

new-technology light sources in motor

vehicle lamps. These are light emitting

diodes (LEDs) and miniature halogen

bulbs. The standard would be amended

to add two paragraphs reflecting SAE

specifications for measurement of

photometrics in taillamps and in certain

stop and turn signal lamps with more

than one lighted section and for LED

heat testing. The agency issued a

proposal on these issues in 1994, but

terminated rulemaking the following

year. These issues are being revisited in

response to a petition for rulemaking

from Reitter & Schefenacker GmbH &

Co. KG.

DATES: Comments are due on the

proposal August 10, 1998. The proposed

effective date is one year after

publication of the final rule. However,

the agency is soliciting comments on

whether optional compliance should be

allowed in advance of that date.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to

the docket number and notice number,

and be submitted to: Docket

Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20590 (Docket hours are from 10:00 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chris Flanigan, Office of Safety

Performance Standards (202–366–4918).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

On April 8, 1994, the agency

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Federal

Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108,

‘‘Lamps, Reflective Devices, and

Associated Equipment,’’ to relieve

design restrictions that may

inadvertently prevent the

implementation of certain newtechnology light sources in lamps (59

FR 16788). These new lamp

technologies include light-emitting

diodes (LEDs), miniature halogen bulbs,

and other light sources with a limited

luminous flux. Luminous flux is the

total light emitted from a light source,

in all directions. All these light sources

will be referred to as ‘‘limited flux light

sources’’ hereafter. Compared with light

sources with traditional filaments, nonfilament light sources such as LED and

miniature halogen light sources emit

only a fraction of the luminous flux of

filament light sources. Consequently, to

achieve the same performance as a

single traditional filament light source,

it is necessary to use multiple nontraditional light sources, hence their

identification as ‘‘limited flux light

sources.’’ In the 1994 proposal, the

agency asked for comment on how it

might specify a means of determining

the number of equivalent lighted

sections for lamps equipped with these

new lamp technologies. The agency

wishes Standard No. 108 to be

responsive to new technologies and to

remove inadvertent impediments to

their implementation. The notice also

proposed a performance requirement to

determine an LED lamp’s ability to

maintain photometric compliance under

increased temperature conditions.

The requirements contained in

Standard No. 108 for signal lamps are

based on Society of Automotive

Engineers (SAE) Standards and

Recommended Practices that were

developed to accommodate

incandescent bulbs, i.e., those with

filaments. These were developed many

years before LEDs when incandescent

bulbs were the only light sources in use

at that time. New lighting source

technologies have arisen that have

fundamentally different characteristics

than incandescent lamps. Thus, it is

difficult to apply the specifications of

Standard No. 108 to the new