32172 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 / Proposed Rules

* * * Certainly, publication of the final

federal (and Indian) gas valuation rule

should be facilitated to the maximum

extent possible.’’ (b) ‘‘ * * * it would be

extremely beneficial for MMS to publish

its proposed rule implementing the

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission’s (FERC) Order 636 as soon

as possible because of its impact on and

relationship to the federal gas valuation

rule.’’

Action Taken or Planned—For (a)

above, we are in the process of

finalizing the Indian gas valuation rule.

As for the final Federal Register (62 FR

19536) that withdrew the proposed rule

because of changes occurring in the gas

market. MMS is developing a framework

for offshore gas valuation and will

conduct workshops to obtain

constituent input. We will work with

the States to develop an onshore

perspective.

New language in the Act will cause a

number of changes in the Payor Liability

rule and the Administrative Offset and

Limitations on Credit Adjustments rule.

We are working to incorporate the

effects of the Act in these rules.

For (b) above, the final rule

implementing FERC Order 636 was

published on December 16, 1997 (62 FR

65753).

Timetable—Ongoing.

10. The Appeals Process

Comments Received—‘‘Current

appeals process is too long.’’

Action Taken or Planned—The Act

imposed a 33-month time frame for the

Department of the Interior to decide

appeals involving royalties on Federal

oil and gas leases. This deadline does

not apply to appeals on royalties

involving Indian leases and Federal

leases for minerals other than oil and

gas.

On October 28, 1996 (61 FR 55607),

MMS published a proposed rule

establishing a 16-month deadline for

MMS to decide all appeals to the

Director, including Indian leases and

appeals for royalties on minerals other

than oil and gas. After MMS’s decision,

the appellants can further appeal to the

Interior Board of Land Appeals. The

comment period for this proposed rule

ended on March 27, 1997.

The Royalty Policy Committee, a

Federal Advisory Committee reporting

to the Secretary, established a

subcommittee of State, Indian, and

industry representatives to study the

appeals process. The Royalty Policy

Committee reported its

recommendations to the Secretary in

March 1997, and the Secretary accepted

the recommendations, with minor

changes, in September 1997. The

Department now is preparing a revised

proposed rule to implement these

recommendations.

Timetable—We plan to issue a revised

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the

Administrative Appeals Process by late

1998, and a Notice of Final Rulemaking

in 1999.

11. Valuation of Coal From Federal

Leases

Comments Received—‘‘* * *

[A]mending this section to allow the use

of the lessee’s arm’s length contracts to

support the value for a nonarm’s-length

contract would make this section more

effective and also eliminate the need to

use third-party proprietary information

in many instances.’’ ‘‘* * * [T]he use of

the lessee’s arm’s-length contracts is the

best evidence of the comparable value of

any nonarm’s-length sales by the

lessee.’’

Action Taken or Planned—The

Royalty Policy Committee’s Coal

Subcommittee is reviewing issues

related to coal valuation, and we will

use the Royalty Policy Committee’s

recommendations to make

improvements to the coal royalty

valuation and reporting procedures and

associated regulations.

Timetable—Ongoing.

12. Other MMS/Royalty Management

Program Regulatory Actions

This past year we published proposed

rules that would amend the valuation of

oil produced from Federal and Indian

leases and held a number of public

meetings to receive input on the

proposals. After analyzing the

comments received, we plan to issue

final rules in late 1998.

The Act expanded the authorities and

responsibilities that the Secretary of the

Interior may delegate to the States. To

implement this, we published a final

rule on August 12, 1997 (62 FR 43076),

for Delegation of Royalty Management

Functions to the States.

We invite you to comment on our

existing regulations and also the actions

we have taken in response to comments

and enacted legislation. And, we invite

you to stay further informed on many of

the topics discussed in this status report

by visiting the MMS Internet Website at

www.mms.gov.

Cynthia Quarterman,

Director, Minerals Management Service

[FR Doc. 98–15626 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[SIPTRAX NO. PA108–4073b; FRL–6107–5]

Proposed Approval and Promulgation

of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; Source Specific Control

Measures and a Revised Episode Plan

for USX Clairton in the Liberty

Borough PM–10 Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of

Pennsylvania for the purpose of

establishing control measures at USX’s

Clairton Coke Works in Clairton,

Pennsylvania and enhancing the

Allegheny County Health Department’s

(ACHD) episode plan by requiring that

USX develop and maintain a sourcespecific episode plan subject to ACHD

approval. In the Final Rules section of

this Federal Register, EPA is approving

the State’s SIP revision as a direct final

rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

SIP revision and anticipates no adverse

comments. A detailed rationale for the

approval is set forth in the direct final

rule and the technical support

document for this rulemaking. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to this proposed rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this proposed rule. If EPA

receives adverse comments, it will

publish a document informing the

public that the direct final rule did not

take effect and EPA will address all

public comments received in a

subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in

writing by July 13, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Makeba Morris, Chief, Technical

Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air Protection Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; the

Air and Radiation Docket and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 / Proposed Rules 32173

1The Liberty Borough PM–10 nonattainment area

is comprised of the City of Clairton and the

Boroughs of Glassport, Liberty, Lincoln, and Port

Vue.

2See 61 FR 29664.

Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20460; and the

Allegheny County Health Department,

Bureau of Environmental Quality,

Division of Air Quality, 301 39th Street,

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denis M. Lohman, (215) 566–2192, or by

e-mail at

lohman.denny@epamail.epa.gov. While

requests for information may be made

via e-mail, comments for EPA

consideration regarding this proposal

must be submitted in writing to the

address indicated above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the

information provided in the Direct Final

action of the same title (pertaining to

source-specific requirements for the

USX Clairton Coke Works in the Liberty

Borough PM–10 nonattainment area)

which is located in the Rules and

Regulations Section of this Federal

Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Particulate matter.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: May 28, 1998.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 98–15584 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[SIPTRAX PA039/067–4072; FRL–6107–9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania: Attainment

Demonstration and Contingency

Measures for the Liberty Borough PM–

10 Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule and withdrawal

of proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

state implementation plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Protection

(PADEP) consisting of an attainment

demonstration and contingency

measures for Allegheny County,

Pennsylvania’s Liberty Borough

particulate matter nonattainment area.

In fact, EPA is reproposing to approve

the attainment demonstration because

the Allegheny County Health

Department’s (ACHD) modeling analysis

(submitted as a SIP revision by PADEP)

adequately demonstrates that the

regulatory portion of the attainment

plan is sufficient to attain and maintain

the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for particulate

matter that was in effect at the time of

the submittal, and because its analyses

have been corroborated by monitored air

quality data. EPA is proposing to

approve the contingency measures for

the area because they satisfy the

requirements of the Clean Air Act (the

Act). EPA approved the regulatory

portion of the attainment plan for the

Liberty Borough area as a SIP revision

in an earlier rulemaking action.

Because EPA is reproposing approval

of the attainment demonstration portion

of the attainment plan for the Liberty

Borough area, it is withdrawing its

earlier April 11, 1995 (60 FR 18385)

proposal to approve the County’s

attainment demonstration. Any

interested parties who would like to

comment on EPA’s reproposal to

approve the attainment demonstration

and its proposal to approve the

contingency measures for the Liberty

Borough area should do so at this time

by following the directions below.

Elsewhere in the Proposed Rules

section of today’s Federal Register, EPA

is also proposing to find that the Liberty

Borough area has attained the NAAQS

for particulate matter and is

withdrawing an earlier proposal to find

that the area did not attain the NAAQS.

In the Final Rules section of today’s

Federal Register, EPA is taking direct

final action to approve source-specific

control requirements for the USX

Clairton Coke Works which further

strengthen the SIP for Liberty Borough

area.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 13, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Makeba Morris, Chief, Technical

Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air Protection Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; the

Allegheny County Health Department,

Department of Air Quality, 301 39th

Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201;

and Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air

Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denis M. Lohman, (215) 566–2192, or by

e-mail at

lohman.denny@epamail.epa.gov. While

requests for information may be made

via e-mail, comments for EPA

consideration regarding this proposal

must be submitted in writing to the

address indicated above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On January 6, 1994, the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Protection

(PADEP) submitted an attainment plan

to EPA on behalf of Allegheny County

for the Liberty Borough PM–10

nonattainment area.1 (PM–10 is

particulate matter smaller than 10

microns in diameter.) The purpose of

this revision to the PADEP’s SIP is to

fulfill the requirements under section

189 of the Act for a regulatory plan to

attain the PM–10 NAAQS and to submit

a demonstration (including air quality

modeling) that the plan is sufficient to

attain this goal. These ‘‘Part D’’

requirements are described in more

detail in the technical support

document (TSD) to this rulemaking.

Copies of the TSD are available, upon

request, from the EPA Regional office

listed in the ADDRESSES section of this

document.

On April 11, 1995, EPA proposed to

approve the January 1994 attainment

plan submittal, as well as two SIP

revisions that the Commonwealth had

submitted previously (see 60 FR 18385).

The attainment plan consisted of

regulatory requirements to reduce PM–

10 emissions and an attainment

demonstration. After EPA proposed to

approve the demonstration, the County

reported that the PM–10 NAAQS had

been exceeded twice in March of 1995.

These exceedances called the County’s

attainment demonstration into question,

and, although EPA took final action 2 to

approve the regulatory portion of the

attainment plan (which included limits

on a variety of industrial sources), to

make these regulations part of the SIP

and federally enforceable, EPA took no

action on the attainment demonstration

at that time.

On July 12, 1995, PADEP submitted

contingency measures to EPA for the

Liberty Borough area. Contingency

measures, as required by section

172(c)(9) of the Act, are enforceable

emission limitations and/or emission

reduction measures, beyond what was