40054 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

all part 70 sources were included

without regard to the approval status of

individual programs. The action in this

proposed rulemaking action, which

would simply provide for an extension

of the interim approval of certain

programs, would not alter the

assumptions of the approved part 70

ICR used in determining the burden

estimate. Furthermore, this proposed

action would not impose any additional

requirements which would add to the

information collection requirements for

sources or permitting authorities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.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 1 year.

The EPA has determined that the

action in this proposed rulemaking

notice would not contain a Federal

mandate that may result in expenditures

of $100 million or more for State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or the private sector, in any 1 year.

Although the part 70 regulations

governing State operating permit

programs impose significant Federal

mandates, this proposed action would

not amend the part 70 regulations in a

way that would significantly alter the

expenditures resulting from these

mandates. Therefore, the Agency

concludes that it is not required by

section 202 of the UMRA of 1995 to

provide a written statement to

accompany this proposed regulatory

action.

F. Applicability of Executive Order

13045

Executive Order 13045 applies to any

rule that EPA determines (1)

‘‘economically significant’’ as defined

under Executive Order 12866, and (2)

the environmental health or safety risk

addressed by the rule has a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency.

This proposed rule is not subject to

E.O. 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it is not an

economically significant regulatory

action as defined by Executive Order

12866, and it does not address an

environmental health or safety risk that

would have a disproportionate effect on

children.

Dated: July 17, 1998.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–19933 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[FRL–6128–9]

RIN 2060–AF70

Extension of Operating Permits

Program Interim Approval Expiration

Dates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: This action amends Appendix

A of the operating permits regulations

codified in part 70 of chapter I of title

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Those regulations were originally

promulgated on July 21, 1992. These

amendments to Appendix A extend up

to June 1, 2000 all operating permits

program interim approvals. This action

will allow the program revisions

necessary to correct interim approval

deficiencies to be combined with

program revisions necessary to

implement the revisions to part 70 that

are anticipated to be promulgated in

December 1999.

DATES: The direct final revisions to

Appendix A will become effective on

September 10, 1998. The direct final

revisions will become effective without

further notice unless EPA receives

relevant adverse comments on or before

August 26, 1998. Should the Agency

receive such comments, it will publish

a timely withdrawal and will inform the

public that this rule will not take effect.

For those programs whose interim

approval dates are amended by this

action, interim approval will expire on

June 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments

should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center (6102),

Attention Docket Number A–93–50 (see

docket section below), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

The EPA requests that a separate copy

also be sent to the contact person listed

below.

Docket. Supporting material used in

developing the proposal and final

regulatory revisions is contained in

Docket Number A–93–50. This docket is

available for public inspection and

copying between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, at the

address listed above, or by calling (202)

260–7548. The Docket is located at the

above address in Room M–1500,

Waterside Mall (ground floor). A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roger Powell, Mail Drop 12, United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards, Information Transfer

and Program Integration Division,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711 (telephone 919–541–5331, e-mail:

powell.roger@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

companion proposal to this direct final

rule is being published in today’s

Federal Register. If relevant adverse

comments are timely received by the

date specified in this rule, EPA will

publish a document informing the

public that this rule will not take effect

and the comments will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. If no relevant adverse

comments on this direct final rule are

timely filed, then the direct final rule

will become effective on September 10,

1998, and no further action will be

taken on the companion proposal

published today.

I. Background

On August 29, 1994 (59 FR 44460)

and August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45530), EPA

proposed revisions to the part 70

operating permits regulations. Primarily,

the proposals addressed changes to the

system for revising permits. A number

of other less detailed proposed changes

were also included. Altogether, State

and local permitting authorities will

have a complex package of program

revisions to prepare in response to these

changes once promulgated. The part 70

revisions are anticipated to take place in

December 1999.

Contemporaneous with permitting

authorities revising their programs to

meet the revised part 70, many

programs have been granted interim

approval which will require permitting

authorities to prepare program revisions
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 40055

1Several States have been granted source-category

limited interim approvals. Under that type

approval, a subset of the part 70 source population

is to submit permit applications during the first

year of the program. The application submittal

period for the remaining sources begins upon full

approval of the program. The Agency concludes

this second group of sources should still submit

permit applications during a period beginning on

the original expiration date of a State’s interim

approval as opposed to any extension of that date.

to correct those deficiencies identified

in the interim approval action. The

preamble to the August 31, 1995

proposal noted the concern of many

permitting authorities over having to

revise their programs twice; once to

correct interim approval deficiencies,

and again to address the revisions to

part 70. In the August 1995 preamble,

the Agency proposed that States with

interim approval ‘‘‘* * * should be

allowed to delay the submittal of any

program revisions to address program

deficiencies previously listed in their

notice of interim approval until the

deadline to submit other changes

required by the proposed revisions to

part 70’’ (60 FR 45552). The Agency also

proposed ‘‘* * * to exercise its

discretion under proposed

§ 70.4(i)(1)(iv) to provide States 2 years

to submit program revisions in response

to the proposed part 70 revisions

* * *’’ (60 FR 45551).

II. Discussion

A. Purpose of Interim Approval

Extensions

On October 31, 1996 (61 FR 56368),

EPA amended § 70.4(d)(2) to allow the

Administrator to grant extensions to

interim approvals so permitting

authorities could take advantage of the

opportunity to combine program

revisions as proposed August 31, 1995.

The Agency does not believe, however,

that the August 31, 1995 blanket

proposal to extend all interim approval

program revision submittal dates until

up to 2 years after part 70 is revised is

appropriate. Program deficiencies that

caused granting of interim approval of

permitting programs vary from a few

problems that can be easily corrected to

complex problems that will require

regulatory changes and, in some cases,

legislative action. Where an undue

burden will be encountered by

developing two program revisions,

combining program revisions and thus

granting a longer time period for

submission of the program revision to

correct interim approval deficiencies is

warranted. Where no such burden will

occur, the Agency encourages

permitting authorities to proceed with

correcting their interim approval

program deficiencies and not wait for

the revised part 70.

Due to controversial issues yet to be

resolved, the revisions to part 70 have

been delayed beyond the date

contemplated by the August 31, 1995

proposal. For permitting authorities to

be able to combine program revisions,

an agency’s program interim approval

cannot expire. The Agency must

therefore extend any interim approval

that may expire before the part 70

revisions are promulgated.

B. Original Action

In the original October 31, 1996 action

addressing this subject, all interim

approvals granted prior to the date of

issuance of a memorandum announcing

EPA’s position on this issue

(memorandum from Lydia N. Wegman

to Regional Division Directors,

‘‘Extension of Interim Approvals of

Operating Permits Programs,’’ June 13,

1996) were extended by 10 months. This

action was to encourage permitting

authorities to proceed with program

revisions within their interim approval

timeframes, rather than wait for the

revised part 70. The June 1996

memorandum is in the docket for this

action.

The reason for this automatic

extension was that permitting

authorities, upon reading the August

1995 proposed action, may have

delayed their efforts to develop program

revisions to address interim approval

deficiencies because they believed the

proposed policy to extend interim

approvals until revised part 70 program

revisions are due would be adopted for

all programs. The EPA has been

informed that this was the case in many

States. Approximately 10 months

passed since the August 1995 proposal

until the June 1996 memorandum was

issued. The additional 10-month

extension to all interim approvals offset

any time lost in permitting authority

efforts to develop program revisions

addressing interim approval

deficiencies. This 10-month extension

was not applicable to application

submittal dates for the second group of

sources covered by a source-category

limited interim approval.1

C. Process for Combining Program

Revisions

As noted in the June 1996

memorandum, where the permitting

authority applies for it after part 70 is

revised, EPA may grant a longer

extension to an interim approval so that

the program revision to correct interim

approval program deficiencies may be

combined with the program revision to

meet the revised part 70. Such a request

must be made within 30 days of

promulgation of the part 70 revisions.

This will make it possible for EPA to

take a single rulemaking action to adopt

new interim approval deadlines for all

programs for which such an application

has been made.

As required by § 70.4(f)(2), program

revisions addressing interim approval

deficiencies must be submitted to EPA

no later than 6 months prior to the

expiration of the interim approval. The

dates for permitting authorities to

submit their combined program

revisions to address both the revised

part 70 and the interim approval

deficiencies will be 6 months prior to

the interim approval expiration dates

which will be set through a future

rulemaking.

The longer extension allowing

combining of program revisions to meet

both the revised part 70 and interim

approval deficiencies will be based on

the promulgation date of the revisions to

part 70. If only regulatory changes to a

program are needed to meet the revised

part 70, the extension may be for up to

18 months after the part 70 revisions. If

legislative changes are needed to a

program to meet the revised part 70, the

extension may be for up to 2 years. As

previously noted, the program revision

submittal date will be 6 months prior to

expiration of the extended interim

approval.

III. Interim Approval Extensions

The June 13, 1996 memorandum and

the October 31, 1996 action anticipated

promulgation of the part 70 revisions no

later than early 1997. As a result of not

being able to promulgate the revisions to

part 70 by early 1997, on August 29,

1997, EPA extended interim approvals a

second time (62 FR 45732). In that

action, EPA anticipated the part 70

revisions would be promulgated by midsummer 1998 and thus extended all

interim approvals that would have

expired before October 1, 1998 up until

that date. This would have provided the

necessary time for agencies to apply to

combine their program revisions and

EPA to take action on those requests.

It now appears that resolution of

issues will not take place until late

1998. Promulgation is now anticipated

for December 1999.

The EPA believes that the action to

extend interim approvals in this

rulemaking is necessary because of

further delays in promulgation of the

part 70 revisions. Due to these delays,

all interim approvals will expire before

part 70 is revised, thus denying these

agencies the opportunity to combine

program revisions. The EPA is aware

that many States have been expecting to

be able to combine the program revision
40056 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

correcting their interim approval

deficiencies with the program revision

to address the revised part 70. The

Agency estimates that it may take until

June 1, 2000 to receive all State requests

for combining program revisions and to

take the necessary rulemaking action to

grant the final extension to those

interim approvals. This action,

therefore, moves all interim approval

expiration dates up to June 1, 2000.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket for this regulatory action

is A–93–50. The docket is an organized

and complete file of all the information

submitted to, or otherwise considered

by, EPA in the development of this

rulemaking. The principal purposes of

the docket are: (1) to allow interested

parties a means to identify and locate

documents so that the parties can

effectively participate in the rulemaking

process, and (2) to serve as the record

in case of judicial review (except for

interagency review materials). The

docket is available for public inspection

at EPA’s Air Docket, which is listed

under the ADDRESSES section of this

notice.

B. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

Under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735,

October 4, 1993), the Agency must

determine whether each regulatory

action is ‘‘significant,’’ and therefore

subject to the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) review and the

requirements of the Order. The Order

defines ‘‘significant’’ regulatory action

as one that is likely to lead to a rule that

may:

1. Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more,

adversely and materially affecting 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.

4. Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in E.O. 12866.

Pursuant to the terms of E.O. 12866,

it has been determined that this action

is not a ‘‘significant’’ regulatory action

because it does not substantially change

the existing part 70 requirements for

States or sources; requirements which

have already undergone OMB review.

Rather than impose any new

requirements, this action only extends

an existing mechanism. As such, this

action is exempted from OMB review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Compliance

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the Administrator certifies that

this action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. In developing

the original part 70 regulations, the

Agency determined that they would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Similarly, the same conclusion was

reached in an initial regulatory

flexibility analysis performed in support

of the proposed part 70 revisions (a

subset of which constitutes the action in

this rulemaking notice). This action

does not substantially alter the part 70

regulations as they pertain to small

entities and accordingly will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

The OMB has approved the

information collection requirements

contained in part 70 under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has

assigned OMB control number 2060–

0243. The Information Collection

Request (ICR) prepared for part 70 is not

affected by the action in this rulemaking

notice because the part 70 ICR

determined burden on a nationwide

basis, assuming all part 70 sources were

included without regard to the approval

status of individual programs. The

action in this rulemaking notice, which

simply provides for an extension of the

interim approval of certain programs,

does not alter the assumptions of the

approved part 70 ICR used in

determining the burden estimate.

Furthermore, this action does not

impose any additional requirements

which would add to the information

collection requirements for sources or

permitting authorities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.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 1 year.

The EPA has determined that the

action in this rulemaking notice does

not contain a Federal mandate that may

result in expenditures of $100 million or

more for State, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or the

private sector, in any 1 year. Although

the part 70 regulations governing State

operating permit programs impose

significant Federal mandates, this action

does not amend the part 70 regulations

in a way that significantly alters the

expenditures resulting from these

mandates. Therefore, the Agency

concludes that it is not required by

section 202 of the UMRA of 1995 to

provide a written statement to

accompany this regulatory action.

F. 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, 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. The 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).

G. Applicability of Executive Order

13045

Executive Order 13045 applies to any

rule that EPA determines (1)

‘‘economically significant’’ as defined

under Executive Order 12866, and (2)

the environmental health or safety risk

addressed by the rule has a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency.

This final rule is not subject to E.O.

13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Children

from Environmental Health Risks and

Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23,

1997), because it is not an economically

significant regulatory action as defined

by Executive Order 12866, and it does

not address an environmental health or
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 40057

safety risk that would have a

disproportionate effect on children.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Fugitive emissions, Hydrocarbons, Lead,

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,

Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: July 17, 1998.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as set

forth below.

PART 70—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 70

continues to read as follows:

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

2. Appendix A of part 70 is amended

by the following:

a. Adding a sentence to the end of

paragraph (dd) under California;

b. Replacing the end date of the third

sentence with ‘‘June 1, 2000’’ in

paragraph (a) under Texas; and

c. Replacing the end date of each

paragraph with ‘‘June 1, 2000’’ as

follows: Paragraph (a) under Alaska,

Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut,

Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida,

Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,

Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,

Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey,

New York, North Carolina, North

Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island,

Vermont, Virgin Islands, Virginia, West

Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming;

Paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) under

Alabama and Nevada; Paragraphs (a),

(b), (c), (d)(1), and (d)(2) under Arizona,

Paragraphs (a) through (cc) and (ee)

through (hh) under California;

paragraphs (a) and (e) under Tennessee;

and paragraphs (a) through (i) under

Washington.

Alabama

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

(b) * * * June 1, 2000.

(c) * * * June 1, 2000.

Alaska

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Arizona

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

(b) * * * June 1, 2000.

(c) * * * June 1, 2000.

(d)(1) * * * June 1, 2000.

(d)(2) * * * June 1, 2000.

Arkansas

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

California * * *

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

(b) * * * June 1, 2000.

(c) * * * June 1, 2000.

(d) * * * June 1, 2000.

(e) * * * June 1, 2000.

(f) * * * June 1, 2000.

(g) * * * June 1, 2000.

(h) * * * June 1, 2000.

(i) * * * June 1, 2000.

(j) * * * June 1, 2000.

(k) * * * June 1, 2000.

(l) * * * June 1, 2000.

(m) * * * June 1, 2000.

(n) * * * June 1, 2000.

(o) * * * June 1, 2000.

(p) * * * June 1, 2000.

(q) * * * June 1, 2000.

(r) * * * June 1, 2000.

(s) * * * June 1, 2000.

(t) * * * June 1, 2000.

(u) * * * June 1, 2000.

(v) * * * June 1, 2000.

(w) * * * June 1, 2000.

(x) * * * June 1, 2000.

(y) * * * June 1, 2000.

(z) * * * June 1, 2000.

(aa) * * * June 1, 2000.

(bb) * * * June 1, 2000.

(cc) * * * June 1, 2000.

(dd) * * * Interim approval expires

on June 1, 2000.

(ee) * * * June 1, 2000.

(ff) * * * June 1, 2000.

(gg) * * * June 1, 2000.

(hh) * * * June 1, 2000.

Colorado

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Connecticut

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Delaware

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

District of Columbia

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Florida

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Georgia

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Hawaii

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Idaho

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Illinois

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Indiana

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Kentucky

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Maine

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Maryland

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Massachusetts

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Michigan

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Minnesota

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Montana

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Nevada

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

(b) * * * June 1, 2000.

(c) * * * June 1, 2000.

New Hampshire

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

New Jersey

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

New York

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

North Carolina

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

North Dakota

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Oklahoma

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *
40058 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Rhode Island

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Tennessee

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

(e) * * * June 1, 2000.

Texas

(a) * * * Interim approval will expire

June 1, 2000. * * *

* * * * *

Vermont

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Virgin Islands

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Virginia

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Washington

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

(b) * * * June 1, 2000.

(c) * * * June 1, 2000.

(d) * * * June 1, 2000.

(e) * * * June 1, 2000.

(f) * * * June 1, 2000.

(g) * * * June 1, 2000.

(h) * * * June 1, 2000.

(i) * * * June 1, 2000.

West Virginia

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Wisconsin

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

* * * * *

Wyoming

(a) * * * June 1, 2000.

[FR Doc. 98–19932 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

41 CFR Part 101–43

[FPMR Amendment H–198]

RIN 3090–AG64

Excess Personal Property Reporting

Requirements

AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide

Policy, GSA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation streamlines

and simplifies the assignment of the

disposal condition codes which Federal

agencies use to report their excess

personal property for utilization and

donation. This amendment will reduce

the number of codes from 11 to 5 and

more accurately define the condition of

the excess personal property.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martha Caswell, Director, Personal

Property Management Policy Division

(MTP) 202–501–3828.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. The General Services

Administration (GSA) has determined

that this rule is not a significant rule for

the purposes of Executive Order 12866

of September 30, 1993.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule is not required to be

published in the Federal Register for

public comment. Therefore, the

Regulatory Flexibility Act does not

apply.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

GSA has determined that the

Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U.S.C.

chapter 35) does not apply because this

regulation does not contain any

collection requirements which require

the approval of the Office of

Management and Budget. This rule is

also exempt from Congressional review

prescribed under 5 U.S.C. 801 since it

relates solely to agency management

and personnel.

List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 101–43

Government property management,

Excess government property.

For reasons set forth in the preamble,

41 CFR Part 101–43 is amended as

follows:

1. The authority citation for part 101–

43 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 205 (c), 63 Stat. 390: 40

U.S.C. 486(c).

PART 101–43—UTILIZATION OF

PERSONAL PROPERTY

Subpart 101–43.48—Exhibits

2. Section 101–43.4801 is amended by

revising paragraph (d) and in paragraph

(e) by removing the words ‘‘paragraph

(e)’’ and adding in their place the words

‘‘paragraph (d)’’ to read as follows:

§ 101–43.4801 Excess personal property

reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(d) The appropriate disposal

condition code from the table below

shall be assigned to each item record,

report, or listing of excess personal

property:

Disposal

condition

code

Brief definition Expanded definition

1 Excellent .................... Property which is in new condition or unused condition and can be used immediately without modifications

or repairs.

4 Usable ....................... Property which shows some wear, but can be used without significant repair.

7 Repairable ................. Property which is unusable in its current condition but can be economically repaired.

X Salvage ..................... Property which has value in excess of its basic material content but repair or rehabilitation is impractical

and/or uneconomical.

S Scrap ......................... Property which has no value except for its basic material content.