55792 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

will not affect small businesses.

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 606(b),

this final rule is exempt from the initial

and final regulatory flexibility analysis

requirements of sections 603 and 604.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance program numbers are 64.104,

64.105, 64.109 and 64.110.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and

procedure, Claims, Health care,

Individuals with disabilities, Pensions,

Veterans.

Approved: October 26, 1995.

Jesse Brown,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 38 CFR part 3 is amended as

follows:

PART 3—ADJUDICATION

Subpart A—Pension, Compensation,

and Dependency and Indemnity

Compensation

1. The authority citation for part 3,

subpart A, continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless

otherwise noted.

2. Section 3.353 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 3.353 Determinations of incompetency

and competency.

* * * * *

(b) Authority. (1) Rating agencies have

sole authority to make official

determinations of competency and

incompetency for purposes of:

insurance (38 U.S.C. 1922), the

discontinuance and payment of

amounts withheld because of an estate

in excess of $1,500 (§ 3.557(b)), and,

subject to § 13.56 of this chapter,

disbursement of benefits. Such

determinations are final and binding on

field stations for these purposes.

(2) Where the beneficiary is rated

incompetent the Adjudication Officer

will inform the Veterans Services

Officer of jurisdiction of that fact. The

Veterans Services Officer will develop

information as to the beneficiary’s

social, economic and industrial

adjustment and appoint (or recommend

appointment of) a fiduciary as provided

in § 13.55 of this chapter, select a

method of disbursing payment as

provided in § 13.56 of this chapter, or in

the case of a married beneficiary,

appoint the beneficiary’s spouse to

receive payments as provided in § 13.57

of this chapter. The Adjudication

Officer will authorize disbursement of

the benefit in the manner selected by

the Veterans Services Officer.

(3) If in the course of fulfilling the

responsibilities assigned in paragraph

(b)(2) the Veterans Services Officer

develops evidence indicating that the

beneficiary may be capable of

administering the funds payable

without limitation, he or she will refer

that evidence to the rating agency with

a statement as to his or her findings. The

rating agency will consider this

evidence, together with all other

evidence of record, to determine

whether its prior determination of

incompetency should remain in effect.

Reexamination may be requested as

provided in § 3.327(a) if necessary to

properly evaluate the beneficiary’s

mental capacity to contract or manage

his or her own affairs.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–27278 Filed 11–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PA 66–1–7113; A–1–FRL–5323–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; Pertaining to the RACT

Approval for Panther Creek Partners

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On September 8, 1995, EPA

published approval of a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by Pennsylvania (60 FR

46768). This revision would have

approved requirements to establish

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) for Panther Creek Partners,

located in Carbon County. The intended

effect of the action was to approve

nitrogen oxide (NOX) RACT for this

major NOX source located in

Pennsylvania. Because EPA received

adverse comment, EPA is amending the

September 8, 1995 final action, only as

it pertains to Panther Creek Partners.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cynthia H. Stahl, (215) 597–9337.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

approved this direct final rule without

prior proposal because the Agency

viewed it as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipated no adverse

comments. The final rule was published

in the Federal Register with a provision

for a 30 day comment period (60 FR

46768). At the same time, EPA

announced that this final rule would

convert to a proposed rule in the event

that adverse comments were submitted

to EPA within 30 days of publication of

the rule in the Federal Register (60 FR

46802). The final rulemaking action

would be withdrawn by publishing a

document announcing withdrawal of

this action. In this action, EPA is not

withdrawing the final rule; but

amending the final rule as it pertains to

Panther Creek.

Adverse comments pertaining to

Panther Creek Partners were submitted

to EPA within the prescribed comment

period. Therefore, EPA is amending the

September 8, 1995 final rulemaking

action, only as it pertains to Panther

Creek Partners. All other RACT

approvals contained in the September 8,

1995 are approved as described in that

document. All public comments

received will be addressed in a

subsequent rulemaking action based on

the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: October 23, 1995.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52 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 NN—Pennsylvania

§ 52.2020 [Amended]

2. In § 52.2020, paragraph

(c)(102)(i)(B)(8) is removed and

reserved.

[FR Doc. 95–27290 Filed 11–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[MT32–1–7117a, ND6–2–7081a, UT21–1–

6915a, WY7–1–7042a; FRL–5303–1]

Clean Air Act Approval and

Promulgation of State Implementation

Plans; Prevention of Significant

Deterioration; Designation of Areas for

Air Quality Planning Purposes;

Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,

Utah, and Wyoming

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: In this document, EPA is

approving revisions to the prevention of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 55793

significant deterioration (PSD)

permitting regulations which were

submitted as revisions to the State

Implementation Plans (SIPs) for

Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and

Wyoming. The revisions were submitted

mainly to address the replacement of

the total suspended particulate (TSP)

increments with increments for PM–10

(particulate matter 10 micrometers or

less in diameter). Also, North Dakota

and Wyoming submitted PSD program

revisions to incorporate changes in the

Federal PSD regulations for utility

pollution control projects. All of the

States except Montana made other

minor revisions to their PSD programs.

EPA is approving the SIP revisions

because they are consistent with the

corresponding Federal regulations. EPA

is also removing the TSP area

designation tables and revising and/or

adding PM–10 area designation tables in

40 CFR part 81 for these States as well

as for the State of South Dakota (which

has been delegated authority to

implement the Federal PSD regulations

in 40 CFR 52.21). With the PM–10

increments becoming effective in these

areas, the TSP area designations no

longer serve any useful purpose relative

to PSD.

DATES: This action is effective on

January 2, 1996 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by

December 4, 1995. If the effective date

is delayed, timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the States’

submittals 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; Montana

Air Quality Division, Department of

Health and Environmental Sciences, 836

Front Street, P.O. Box 200901, Helena,

Montana 59620–0901; North Dakota

Division of Environmental Engineering,

State Department of Health and

Consolidated Laboratories, 1200

Missouri Avenue, P.O. Box 5520,

Bismarck, North Dakota 58502–5520;

Utah Division of Air Quality,

Department of Environmental Quality,

150 North 1950 West, P.O. Box 144820,

Salt Lake City, Utah, 84114–4820;

Wyoming Air Quality Bureau,

Department of Environmental Quality,

Herschler Building, 122 West 25th

Street, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002; and

The Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vicki Stamper, 8ART–AP,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500,

Denver, Colorado, (303) 293–1765.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In this document, EPA is acting on

revisions to the PSD permitting

programs for the States of Montana,

North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. The

revisions were generally made to

address the following changes in the

Federal PSD permitting requirements in

40 CFR 51.166:

A. The replacement of the TSP

increments with increments for PM–10,

which were promulgated by EPA on

June 3, 1993 (58 FR 31622–31638); and

B. The promulgation of revisions to

the Federal PSD permitting

requirements regarding utility pollution

control projects that States could

voluntarily adopt into their PSD

regulations, which were promulgated by

EPA on July 21, 1992 (57 FR 32314–

32339).

Specifically, the following submittals

were made:

The Governor of Montana submitted

revisions to the Administrative Rules of

Montana (ARM), rules 16.8.945,

16.8.947, 16.8.953, and 16.8.960, on

May 22, 1995 to incorporate changes in

the Federal PSD permitting regulations

for PM–10 increments.

The Governor of North Dakota

submitted revisions to Chapter 33–15–

15 of the North Dakota Air Pollution

Control Rules on April 29, 1994 to

incorporate changes in the Federal PSD

permitting regulations for utility

pollution control projects and PM–10

increments. Also, the State incorporated

the significance levels for the three

municipal waste combustor pollutants,

which EPA promulgated on February

11, 1991 (56 FR 5506). The April 1994

submittal also included other revisions

to the North Dakota Air Pollution

Control Rules, which EPA will act on

separately.

The Governor of Utah submitted

revisions to R307–1–1 and R307–1–3 of

the Utah Air Conservation Regulations

(UACR) on February 1, 1995 to

incorporate changes in the Federal PSD

permitting regulations for PM–10

increments. The State also made some

nonsubstantive changes to its PSD rules.

The Governor of Wyoming submitted

revisions to Section 24 of the Wyoming

Air Quality Standards and Regulations

(WAQSR) on March 14, 1995 to

incorporate changes in the Federal PSD

permitting regulations for PM–10

increments and utility pollution control

projects. The State also revised the

minor source baseline date definition

relative to particulate matter, which was

previously required by State rule to be

triggered no later than January 1, 1996

if not triggered earlier by the first

complete PSD permit application, so

that it now will be triggered no later

than January 1, 2001. The State’s March

14, 1995 submittal also included two

new sections to address EPA’s general

and transportation conformity

requirements, which EPA will be acting

on separately.

This document evaluates the States’

submittals for conformity with the

corresponding Federal regulations and

the requirements of the Act. In addition,

this document provides justification

regarding the removal of the TSP

designation tables in 40 CFR part 81 for

Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and

Wyoming, as well as for the State of

South Dakota which has been delegated

authority to implement the Federal PSD

permitting regulations in 40 CFR 52.21.

II. This Action

A. Analysis of State Submissions

1. Procedural Background

The Act requires States to observe

certain procedural requirements in

developing implementation plans and

plan revisions for submission to EPA.

Section 110(a)(2) of the Act provides

that each implementation plan

submitted by a State must be adopted

after reasonable notice and public

hearing. Section 110(l) of the Act

similarly provides that each revision to

an implementation plan submitted by a

State under the Act must be adopted by

such State after reasonable notice and

public hearing.

The EPA also must determine

whether a submittal is complete and

therefore warrants further EPA review

and action [see section 110(k)(1) and 57

FR 13565, April 16, 1992]. The EPA’s

completeness criteria for SIP submittals

are set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix

V. The EPA attempts to make

completeness determinations within 60

days of receiving a submission.

However, a submittal is deemed

complete by operation of law under

section 110(k)(a)(B) if a completeness

determination is not made by EPA

within six months after receipt of the

submission.

Public hearings to entertain public

comment on the initial PSD SIP

revisions were held by Montana on

September 16 and November 9, 1994; by

North Dakota on September 28, 1993; by

Utah on August 30, 1994; and by

Wyoming on December 15, 1994. After

these respective public hearings, the

rule revisions were adopted by each

State. The rule revisions were formally
55794 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

1The EPA did not promulgate new PM–10

increments simultaneously with the promulgation

of the PM–10 NAAQS. Under section 166(b) of the

Act, EPA is authorized to promulgate new

increments ‘‘not more than 2 years after the date of

promulgation of * * * standards.’’ Consequently,

EPA temporarily retained the TSP increments, as

well as the section 107 areas for TSP.

submitted to EPA for approval on May

22, 1995 from Montana, April 29, 1994

from North Dakota, February 1, 1995

from Utah, and March 14, 1995 from

Wyoming. Each SIP revision was

reviewed by EPA to determine

completeness shortly after their

submittal, in accordance with the

completeness criteria referenced above.

The submittals were found to be

complete, and letters dated June 26,

1995, June 22, 1994, March 22, 1995,

and May 26, 1995 were forwarded,

respectively, to Montana, North Dakota,

Utah, and Wyoming indicating the

completeness of each submittal and the

next steps to be taken in the processing

of each SIP submittal.

2. Evaluation of States’ Submittals

a. PM–10 Increment Revisions. As

discussed above, EPA promulgated

increments for PM–10 on June 3, 1993

(see 58 FR 31622–31638). EPA

promulgated revisions to the Federal

PSD permitting regulations in 40 CFR

52.21, as well as the PSD permitting

requirements that State programs must

meet in order to be approved into the

SIP in 40 CFR 51.166. EPA or its

delegated State programs were required

to begin implementation of the

increments by June 3, 1994, while the

implementation date for States with SIPapproved PSD permitting programs

(including Montana, North Dakota,

Utah, and Wyoming) will be the date on

which EPA approves each revised State

PSD program containing the PM–10

increments. In accordance with 40 CFR

51.166(a)(6)(i), each State with SIPapproved PSD programs was required to

adopt the PM–10 increment

requirements within nine months of the

effective date (or by March 3, 1995). For

further background regarding the PM–10

increments, see the June 3, 1993 Federal

Register document.

(1) Montana’s Submittal. In order to

address the PM–10 increments, the State

of Montana revised the following

sections of its PSD permitting

regulations in the Administrative Rules

of Montana (ARM): 16.8.945(3)(c),

16.8.945(21)(d), 16.8.945(24)(d),

16.8.947(1), 16.8.953(7)(a)(iii), and

16.8.960(4). EPA has reviewed these

revisions and has found that the

revisions address all of the required

regulatory revisions for PM–10

increments promulgated by EPA on June

3, 1993. Note that the State elected not

to adopt 40 CFR 51.166(i)(12), which

provides an exemption from addressing

the new PM–10 increments for sources

who have submitted a PSD permit

application which the State has

determined to be complete before the

PM–10 increments take effect.

Montana’s rules do not contain this

grandfathering clause, which is

acceptable.

(2) North Dakota’s Submittal. In order

to address the PM–10 increments, the

State of North Dakota revised the

following sections of its PSD permitting

regulations in Chapter 33–15–15–01 of

the North Dakota Air Pollution Control

Rules: Sections 1.c., 1.e.(4), 1.aa.(2)(c),

2.b., 4.d.(3)(a), and 4.j.(4)(b). EPA has

reviewed these revisions and has found

that the revisions address all of the

required regulatory revisions for PM–10

increments promulgated by EPA on June

3, 1993. Note that the State elected not

to adopt 40 CFR 51.166(i)(12), which

provides an exemption from addressing

the new PM–10 increments for sources

who have submitted a PSD permit

application which the State has

determined to be complete before the

PM–10 increments take effect. North

Dakota’s rules did not include this

grandfathering clause, which is

acceptable.

(3) Utah’s Submittal. In order to

address the PM–10 increments, the State

of Utah revised the following sections of

its PSD permitting regulations: the

definition of ‘‘net emissions increase’’ in

UACR R307–1–1 and Sections 3.6.3.A.,

3.6.3.B., 3.6.3.D.(2) and (3), 3.6.4.C.(2),

3.6.4.D., 3.6.5.E.(2), and 3.6.5.F.(2) in

UACR R307–1–3. EPA has reviewed

these revisions and has found that the

revisions adequately address all of the

required regulatory revisions for PM–10

increments promulgated by EPA on June

3, 1993.

(4) Wyoming’s Submittal. In order to

address the PM–10 increments, the State

of Wyoming revised the following

sections of its PSD permitting rules in

Section 24 of the State’s regulations:

Subsections (a)(ix)(B)(III), (a)(xii)(D),

(a)(xv)(B), (b)(i)(A)(I), (b)(i)(E)(VI)(1)(k),

(b)(viii), and (b)(xii)(I). EPA has

reviewed these revisions and has found

that the revisions address all of the

required regulatory revisions for PM–10

increments promulgated by EPA on June

3, 1993. Note that the State elected not

to adopt the provision of 40 CFR

51.166(b)(14)(iv) which allows a State to

rescind a minor source baseline date if

it can be shown that the emissions

increase from the major stationary

source, or the net emissions increase

from the major modification,

responsible for triggering that date did

not result in a significant amount of

PM–10 emissions. The State is thus

being more stringent than the Federal

regulations regarding this issue, which

is acceptable.

EPA consequently finds that the

revised PSD regulations for Montana,

North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming

adequately address all of the required

revisions of the June 3, 1993 Federal

Register document for PM–10

increments. For further details, see the

Technical Support Document (TSD)

accompanying this action.

b. TSP Area Deletions. Section 107(d)

of the 1977 Amendments to the Act

authorized each State to submit to the

Administrator a list identifying those

areas which (1) do not meet a national

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)

(nonattainment areas), (2) cannot be

classified on the basis of available

ambient data (unclassifiable areas), and

(3) have ambient air quality levels better

than the NAAQS (attainment areas). In

1978, the EPA published the original list

of all area designations pursuant to

section 107(d)(2) (commonly referred to

as ‘‘section 107 areas’’), including those

designations for TSP, in 40 CFR part 81.

One of the purposes stated in the Act

for the section 107 areas is for

implementation of the statutory

requirements for PSD. The PSD

provisions of part C of the Act generally

apply in all section 107 areas that are

designated attainment or unclassifiable

(40 CFR 52.21(i)(3)). Under the PSD

program, the air quality in an attainment

or unclassifiable area is not allowed to

deteriorate beyond prescribed maximum

allowable increases in pollutant

concentrations (i.e., increments).

EPA revised the primary and

secondary NAAQS for particular matter

on July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24634),

eliminating TSP as the indicator for the

NAAQS and replacing it with the PM–

10 indicator. However, EPA did not

delete the section 107 areas for TSP

listed in 40 CFR part 81 at that time

because there were no increments for

PM–10 promulgated at that time.1 States

were required to continue implementing

the TSP increments in order to prevent

significant deterioration of particulate

matter air quality until the PM–10

increments replaced the TSP

increments. With the State adoption and

implementation of the PM–10

increments becoming effective, the TSP

area designations generally serve no

useful purpose relative to the PSD

program. Instead, the PM–10 area

designations now serve to properly

identify those areas where air quality is

better than the NAAQS, i.e., ‘‘PSD

areas,’’ and to provide the geographic
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 55795

2 It should be noted that 40 CFR part 81 does not

presently list all section 107 areas for PM–10. Only

those areas designated ‘‘nonattainment’’ appear in

the State listings. This is because under the listings

published by EPA in the Federal Register on

November 6, 1991, EPA’s primary objective was to

identify nonattainment areas designated as such by

operation of law upon enactment of the 1990

Amendments. For States having no PM–10

nonattainment areas designated by operation of law,

EPA did not include a new PM–10 listing.

Nevertheless, section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii) mandates that

all areas not designated nonattainment for PM–10

by operation of law, are designated unclassifiable.

The PM–10 increments apply in any area

designated unclassifiable for PM–10.

link necessary for implementation of the

PM–10 increments.2

Thus, in the June 3, 1993 Federal

Register document in which EPA

promulgated the PM–10 increments,

EPA stated that, for States with SIPapproved PSD programs, EPA would

delete the TSP area designations at the

same time EPA approves the revision to

a State’s plan incorporating the PM–10

increments. For delegated PSD programs

or in States where EPA administers the

PSD program, the TSP area designations

were to be deleted after the PM–10

increments became effective in those

States (i.e., June 3, 1994). In deleting

any State’s TSP area designations, EPA

must ensure that the deletion of those

designations will not result in a

relaxation of any control measures that

ultimately protect the PM–10 NAAQS.

(1) Montana’s TSP Areas. Montana

has four areas listed in 40 CFR part 81

as nonattainment for the TSP standards

but which are not designated

nonattainment for PM–10: the Colstrip

area, the Billings area, the Great Falls

area, and the East Helena area were all

designated nonattainment for the

secondary TSP standard. EPA has

reviewed the existing approved

particulate matter control strategies for

these areas and has determined that the

deletion of the TSP nonattainment

status for these areas will not result in

a relaxation of any controls that would

adversely impact the PM–10 NAAQS.

Consequently, EPA believes it is

appropriate at this time to delete the

TSP designations for these areas. If the

State subsequently revises any of the

particulate matter control strategies

currently in the SIP for these areas, it

must submit a SIP revision to EPA for

approval that must meet all applicable

requirements of the Act. EPA will retain

for PM–10 these four section 107 areas

listed in the current TSP table for

Montana, consistent with the June 3,

1993 Federal Register document which

requires retention of the TSP baseline

areas for PM–10 unless revised by the

State in accordance with 40 CFR 51.166.

Montana has three areas in the State

designated nonattainment for TSP

which are also included in

nonattainment designations for PM–10:

the City of Missoula and the Missoula

area (the City is designated

nonattainment for the primary TSP

standard and the Missoula area is

designated nonattainment for the

secondary TSP standard), the Butte area,

and the City of Columbia Falls. The

State has adopted PM–10 SIPs for all of

these areas, and these plans have all

been approved by EPA. (See 59 FR

2537–2540, January 18, 1994, for

Missoula; 59 FR 11550–11554, March

11, 1994, for Butte; and 59 FR 17700–

17703, April 14, 1994, for Columbia

Falls.) Thus, EPA believes it is

appropriate at this time to delete the

TSP area designations for these areas.

However, there are some discrepancies

in the boundaries between the TSP

nonattainment designations and the

PM–10 nonattainment designations for

the areas of Missoula and Butte.

Specifically, the PM–10 nonattainment

boundaries for the Missoula and Butte

areas do not encompass the TSP

nonattainment boundaries for those

same areas. Thus, the area in between

the TSP nonattainment boundary and

the PM–10 nonattainment boundaries

for these areas could be considered

separate section 107 areas for PM–10.

However, after discussing this issue

with the State, it has been mutually

agreed upon that these ‘‘in-between’’

areas would be incorporated into the

‘‘rest of State’’ section 107 designation.

As stated above, the State has adopted

adequate provisions in its PSD program

for the implementation of the PM–10

increments. Therefore, EPA is deleting

the State’s existing TSP designation

table in 40 CFR 81.327.

(2) North Dakota’s TSP Areas. As

stated above, North Dakota has adopted

and submitted adequate PSD revisions

for PM–10 increments. In addition,

North Dakota had no TSP areas

designated as nonattainment. Thus,

deletion of the TSP area designations

will not result in relaxation of any TSP

controls that would impact the PM–10

NAAQS. Since North Dakota also has no

PM–10 nonattainment areas designated

in the State, there is no PM–10

designation table currently in 40 CFR

part 81 for North Dakota. Therefore,

EPA is deleting the TSP area

designation table and is creating a PM–

10 area designation table in 40 CFR

81.335. EPA will retain for PM–10 the

two section 107 areas listed in the

current TSP table for North Dakota,

consistent with the June 3, 1993 Federal

Register document which requires

retention of the TSP baseline areas for

PM–10 unless revised by the State in

accordance with 40 CFR 51.166.

(3) Utah’s TSP Areas. As stated above,

Utah has adopted and submitted

adequate PSD revisions for PM–10

increments. In addition, Utah has in

place EPA-approved PM–10 SIPs for the

two areas in the State which were

previously designated nonattainment for

TSP and which are currently designated

nonattainment for PM–10: Salt Lake

County and Davis County. See the July

8, 1994 Federal Register document for

further details on EPA’s approval of the

PM–10 SIPs for those areas (59 FR

35036). Since the State has adopted, and

EPA has approved, PM–10 SIPs for the

State’s two areas that were designated

nonattainment for TSP, EPA believes it

is appropriate at this time to delete the

TSP area designations. Therefore, EPA

is deleting the State’s existing TSP

designation table in 40 CFR 81.345.

(4) Wyoming’s TSP Areas. As stated

above, Wyoming has adopted and

submitted adequate PSD revisions for

PM–10 increments. Wyoming has one

area listed in 40 CFR part 81 as

nonattainment for the TSP secondary

standards: the Trona Industrial Area.

However, this area was not

subsequently designated nonattainment

for PM–10. EPA has reviewed the

existing approved particulate matter

control strategy for the Trona Industrial

Area and has determined that the

deletion of the TSP nonattainment

status for that area will not result in a

relaxation of any controls that would

adversely impact the PM–10 NAAQS.

Consequently, EPA believes it is

appropriate at this time to delete the

TSP area designations for Wyoming. If

the State subsequently revises any of the

particulate matter control strategies

currently in the SIP for the Trona

Industrial Area, it must submit a SIP

revision to EPA meeting all applicable

requirements of the Act.

As discussed further in the TSD, EPA

established at the State’s request three

new separate areas under section 107 of

the Act for particulate matter on January

14, 1993 (see 58 FR 4348), and a fourth

area was designated under section 107

of the Act on September 12, 1995. Since

the June 3, 1993 Federal Register

document requires retention of the TSP

baseline areas for PM–10 (unless revised

by the State in accordance with 40 CFR

51.166), EPA will incorporate those

areas, as well as the Trona Industrial

area, into the existing table for Wyoming

PM–10 area designations in 40 CFR

81.351.

(5) South Dakota’s TSP Areas. The

State of South Dakota was delegated

authority to implement and enforce the

Federal PSD permitting regulations in

40 CFR 52.21 on July 6, 1994 (see 59 FR

47260, September 15, 1994). As
55796 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

discussed above, the PM–10 increments

were thus effective in South Dakota on

June 3, 1994. Therefore, it is appropriate

at this time for EPA to delete the TSP

area designations in 40 CFR part 81 for

South Dakota. South Dakota has one

area listed in 40 CFR part 81 as

nonattainment for the TSP primary

standard: the Rapid City Area. However,

this area was not subsequently

designated nonattainment for PM–10.

EPA has reviewed the existing approved

particulate matter control strategy for

the Rapid City Area and has determined

that the deletion of the TSP

nonattainment status for that area will

not result in a relaxation of any controls

that would adversely impact the PM–10

NAAQS. Consequently, EPA believes it

is appropriate at this time to delete the

TSP area designations for South Dakota.

If the State subsequently revises any of

the particulate matter control strategies

currently in the SIP for the Rapid City

Area, it must submit a SIP revision to

EPA meeting all applicable

requirements of the Act.

Since South Dakota also has no PM–

10 nonattainment areas designated in

the State, there is no PM–10 designation

table currently in 40 CFR part 81 for

South Dakota. Therefore, EPA is

deleting the TSP area designation table

and is creating a PM–10 area

designation table in 40 CFR 81.342. EPA

will retain for PM–10 the two section

107 areas listed in the current TSP table

for South Dakota, consistent with the

June 3, 1993 Federal Register document

which requires retention of the TSP

baseline areas for PM–10 unless revised

by the State in accordance with 40 CFR

52.21.

c. Utility Pollution Control Projects.

On July 21, 1992, EPA promulgated

revisions to Federal PSD and

nonattainment new source review (NSR)

permitting requirements, as well as to

the Federal new source performance

standard (NSPS) requirements in 40

CFR part 60, regarding utility pollution

control projects (57 FR 32314–32339).

Specifically, EPA made changes to the

definition of ‘‘major modification’’ in 40

CFR parts 51 and 52 to set forth the

conditions under which the addition,

replacement, or use at existing utility

generating units of any system or device

whose primary function is the reduction

of air pollutants (including the

switching to a less polluted fuel where

the primary purpose of the switch will

be the reduction of air pollutants) will

or will not subject the source to

preconstruction review. Refer to the July

21, 1992 Federal Register document for

further information. States were not

required to adopt revisions to

implement these changes regarding

utility pollution control projects,

although these changes are in effect in

areas where the Federal PSD permitting

regulations apply. Both North Dakota

and Wyoming opted to adopt revisions

to their PSD programs implementing the

July 21, 1992 Federal Register

document.

(1) North Dakota’s Submittal. In order

to address the new provisions for utility

pollution control projects, the State

revised the following sections of its PSD

permitting regulations in Chapter 33–

15–15–01 of the North Dakota Air

Pollution Control Rules: Sections 1.a.(3)

and (4), 1.h., 1.i., 1.m., 1.x.(2)(h)–(k),

1.bb., 1.dd., 1.ee., and 1.ff. EPA has

reviewed these revisions and has found

that the revisions address all of the

regulatory revisions for utility pollution

control projects promulgated by EPA on

July 21, 1992. However, there are two

definitions in which the State used the

term ‘‘administrator of EPA’’ when, in

fact, EPA’s PSD regulations allow the

State to have authority for those

decisions. Therefore, EPA is delegating

the State authority for the following

decisions:

(a) In the definition of ‘‘major

modification’’ in 33–15–15–

01.1.x.(2)(h)[1] and [2], the State will

have authority (rather than EPA as

stated in North Dakota’s rule) to

determine whether the addition,

replacement, or use of a pollution

control project at an existing electric

utility steam generating unit can be

excluded from being considered a

physical change or change in the

method of operation; and

(b) In the definition of ‘‘repowering’’

in 33–15–15–01.1.ff.(2), the State will be

the authority (rather than EPA as stated

in the State’s rule) to give expedited

consideration to permit applications for

any source that satisfies the

‘‘repowering’’ requirements and is

granted an extension under section 409

of the Act.

(2) Wyoming’s Submittal. In order to

address the new provisions for utility

pollution control projects, the State

revised the following sections of its PSD

permitting regulations in Section 24 of

the State’s rules: Subsections (a)(x)(H)–

(K), (a)(xix) (D) and (E), (a)(xxviii),

(a)(xxix), (a)(xxx), (a)(xxxi), (a)(xxxii),

(a)(xxxiii), (a)(xxxiv), and (a)(xxxv). EPA

has reviewed these revisions and has

found that the revisions adequately

address all of the regulatory revisions

for utility pollution control projects

promulgated by EPA on July 21, 1992.

Consequently, EPA is approving the

PSD revisions regarding utility pollution

control projects submitted by North

Dakota and Wyoming.

d. Other PSD SIP Revisions. (1) North

Dakota’s Submittal. In order to address

the PSD provisions for municipal waste

combustors promulgated by EPA on

February 11, 1991 (see 56 FR 5506), the

State of North Dakota revised the

definition of ‘‘significant’’ in Section

33–15–15–01.1.hh. of the State’s rules.

EPA has reviewed the revision and has

found it consistent with the municipal

waste combustor pollutant significance

levels in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23).

Therefore, EPA is approving this

revision.

(2) Utah’s Submittal. The State of

Utah also made minor administrative

revisions in its PSD program to the

definitions of ‘‘baseline date,’’ ‘‘baseline

area,’’ and ‘‘significant’’ in UACR R307–

1–1 and Sections 3.6.2.B., 3.6.2.D.,

3.6.2.E., 3.6.4.A.(1), 3.6.4.C.(1) and (2),

3.6.5.A., 3.6.5.B.(1)(a), 3.6.5.C., 3.6.5.D.,

3.6.5.E.(1), 3.6.5.F.(1), and 3.6.6 of

UACR R307–1–3. EPA has reviewed

these minor changes and finds the

changes approvable.

(3) Wyoming’s Submittal. In

Wyoming’s March 14, 1995 SIP

submittal, the State revised the

definition of ‘‘minor source baseline

date’’ so that it will be triggered no later

than January 1, 2001. The State had

previously set the minor source baseline

date to be triggered no later than January

1, 1996. In any case, the State is not

required by EPA to set a mandatory

minor source baseline date. The State is

only required to have the minor source

baseline date be triggered by the first

complete PSD permit application for a

major stationary source or major

modification locating in or significantly

impacting an attainment/unclassifiable

area designated under section 107 of the

Act, and the State’s definition of ‘‘minor

source baseline date’’ meets that

requirement. Thus, since the State

definition is more stringent than the

Federal definition, it is approvable.

III. Final Action

Based on the review and justification

provided in this document, EPA is

approving the SIP revisions regarding

PSD permitting submitted by the States

of Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and

Wyoming on May 22, 1995, April 29,

1994, February 1, 1995, and March 14,

1995, respectively.

In addition, EPA is deleting the TSP

area designation tables and/or revising

the PM–10 area designation tables in 40

CFR part 81 as follows:

A. For Montana, EPA is deleting the

TSP area designation table and is adding

the Colstrip area, the Billings area, the

Great Falls area, and the East Helena

area to the existing PM–10 area

designation table as unclassifiable for
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 55797

3EPA is designating the PM–10 areas as

unclassifiable, rather than attainment, at this time

to be consistent with section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Act

which stated that any area which was not initially

designated as nonattainment for PM–10 shall be

designated unclassifiable. EPA will consider

redesignating these areas to ‘‘attainment’’ status at

a later date. Both ‘‘unclassifiable’’ and ‘‘attainment’’

areas have the same status for PSD purposes.

4See footnote number 4.

5See footnote number 4.

6See footnote number 4.

PM–10 in 40 CFR 81.327.3 In addition,

EPA is incorporating the area in

between the TSP nonattainment

boundary and the PM–10 nonattainment

boundary for the Missoula and Butte

areas into the ‘‘rest of State’’ section 107

designation.

B. For North Dakota, EPA is deleting

the TSP area designation table and is

creating a PM–10 area designation table

listing the ‘‘Metropolitan FargoMoorhead (Minn.), AQCR 130’’ area and

the ‘‘Rest of State, AQCR 172’’ area as

unclassifiable for PM–10 in 40 CFR

81.335.4

C. For Utah, EPA is deleting the TSP

area designation table in 40 CFR 81.345.

D. For Wyoming, EPA is deleting the

TSP area designation table and is adding

the ‘‘Powder River Basin’’ area, the

‘‘Pacific Power and Light’’ area, the

‘‘Hampshire Energy’’ area, the

‘‘Kennecott/Puron PSD Baseline Area,’’

and the ‘‘Trona Industrial’’ area to the

existing PM–10 area designation table as

unclassifiable for PM–10 in 40 CFR

81.351.5

E. For South Dakota, EPA is deleting

the TSP area designation table and is

creating a PM–10 area designation table

listing the ‘‘Rapid City’’ area and the

‘‘Rest of State’’ area as unclassifiable for

PM–10 in 40 CFR 81.342.6

In all of these State’s PM–10 area

designation tables, EPA is clarifying that

the ‘‘Rest of State’’ areas denote a single

area designation for PSD baseline area

purposes. In addition, EPA is revising

the headings of all of the PM–10 area

designation tables in 40 CFR part 81 to

read as follows: ‘‘[Name of State]—PM–

10.’’

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. Under the

procedures established in the May 10,

1994 Federal Register (59 FR 24054),

this action will be effective January 2,

1996 unless, by December 4, 1995,

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If such comments are received, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

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.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this action will be

effective on January 2, 1996.

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.

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

small entities. 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).

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector, or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under Section 110

of the Clean Air Act. These rules may

bind State, local and tribal governments

to perform certain actions and also

require the private sector to perform

certain duties. The rules being approved

by this action will impose no new

requirements; such sources are already

subject to these regulations under State

law. Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action. EPA has also determined that

this final action does not include a

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate or to the private sector.

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 January 2, 1996.

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)).

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements,

Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: September 19, 1995.

Jack W. McGraw,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Title 40, chapter I of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:
55798 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart BB—Montana

2. Section 52.1320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(42) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(42) On May 22, 1995, the Governor

of Montana submitted revisions to the

prevention of significant deterioration

regulations in the Administrative Rules

of Montana to incorporate changes in

the Federal PSD permitting regulations

for PM–10 increments.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Revisions to Administrative Rules

of Montana (ARM), rules 16.8.945(3)(c),

16.8.945(21)(d), 16.8.945(24)(d),

16.8.947(1), 16.8.953(7)(a), and

16.8.960(4), effective 10/28/94.

* * * * *

Subpart JJ—North Dakota

3. Section 52.1820 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(27) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1820 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(27) On April 29, 1994, the Governor

of North Dakota submitted revisions to

the prevention of significant

deterioration regulations in chapter 33–

15–15 of the North Dakota Air Pollution

Control Rules to incorporate changes in

the Federal PSD permitting regulations

for utility pollution control projects,

PM–10 increments, and municipal

waste combustors.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Revisions to Chapter 33–15–15 of

the North Dakota Air Pollution Control

Rules, Section 33–15–15–01,

Subsections 1.a.(3) and (4), 1.c, 1.e.(4),

1.h, 1.i, 1.m, 1.x.(2)(h)–(k), 1.aa.(2)(c),

1.bb, 1.dd, 1.ee, 1.ff, 1.hh, 2.b, 4.d.(3)(a),

and 4.j.(4)(b), effective 3/1/94.

Subpart TT—Utah

4. Section 52.2320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(31) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(31) On February 1, 1995, the

Governor of Utah submitted revisions to

the prevention of significant

deterioration permitting regulations in

R307–1–1 and R307–1–3 of the Utah Air

Conservation Regulations to incorporate

changes in the Federal PSD permitting

regulations for PM–10 increments and

to make other minor, administrative

changes.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Revisions to the Utah Air

Conservation Regulations, R307–1–1,

the definitions of ‘‘baseline area,’’

‘‘baseline date,’’ ‘‘net emissions

increase,’’ and ‘‘significant,’’ effective 9/

22/94, printed 10/24/94.

(B) Revisions to the Utah Air

Conservation Regulations, R307–1–3,

Sections 3.6.2.B, 3.6.2.D, 3.6.2.E,

3.6.3.A, 3.6.3.B, 3.6.3.D.(2) and (3),

3.6.4.A.(1), 3.6.4.C, 3.6.4.D, 3.6.5.A,

3.6.5.B.(1)(a), 3.6.5.C, 3.6.5.D, 3.6.5.E,

3.6.5.F, and 3.6.6, effective 10/1/94,

printed 10/24/94.

Subpart ZZ—Wyoming

5. Section 52.2620 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(26) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2620 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(26) On March 14, 1995, the Governor

of Wyoming submitted revisions to the

prevention of significant deterioration

permitting regulations in Section 24 of

the Wyoming Air Quality Standards to

incorporate changes in the Federal PSD

permitting regulations for utility

pollution control projects, PM–10

increments, and to make other minor

changes.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Revisions to Section 24 of the

Wyoming Air Quality Standards,

subsections (a)(ix)(B), (a)(x)(H)–(K),

(a)(xii)(D), (a)(xv), (a)(xix)(D) and (E),

(a)(xxviii)–(xxxv), (b)(i)(A)(I),

(b)(i)(E)(VI)(1), (b)(viii), and (b)(xii)(I),

effective 2/13/95.

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

§§ 81.302, 81.303, 81.305, 81.306, 81.307,

81.313, 81.314, 81.315, 81.320, 81.323,

81.327, 81.329, 81.332, 81.336, 81.338,

81.339, 81.344, 81.345, 81.348, 81.349,

81.351 and 81.355 [Amended]

2. In each of the following sections, in

the heading of the table for PM–10

nonattainment areas, the words

‘‘Nonattainment Areas’’ are removed:

§§ 81.302, 81.303, 81.305, 81.306,

81.307, 81.313, 81.314, 81.315, 81.320,

81.323, 81.327, 81.329, 81.332, 81.336,

81.338, 81.339, 81.344, 81.345, 81.348,

81.349, 81.351 and 81.355.

§§ 81. 327, 81. 335, 81.342, 81.345 and

81.351 [Amended]

3. Sections 81.327, 81.335, 81.342,

81.345, and 81.351 are further amended

as follows:

3–1. By removing the table in each

section for TSP;

3–2. In §§ 81.327, 81.345, and 81.351

by revising the newly renamed table for

PM–10 to read as set forth below;

3–3. In §§ 81.335 and 81.342 by

adding a new table for PM–10 to read

as set forth below.

§ 81.327 Montana.

* * * * *

MONTANA—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Cascade County, Great Falls area ........................................................................ 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Flathead County:
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 55799

MONTANA—PM–10—Continued

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

The area bounded by lines from Universal Transmercator (UTM) coordinate 700000mE, 5347000mN, east to 704000mE, 5347000mN, south to

704000mE, 5341000mN, west to 703000mE, 5341000mN, south to

703000mE, 5340000mN, west to 702000mE, 5340000mN, south to

702000mE, 5339000mN, east to 703000mE, 5339000mN, south to

703000mE, 5338000mN, east to 704000mE, 5338000mN, south to

704000mE, 5336000mN, west to 702000mE, 5336000mN, south to

702000mE, 5335000mN, west to 700000mE, 5335000mN, north to

700000mE, 5340000mN, west to 695000mE, 5340000mN, north to

695000mE, 5345000mN, east to 700000mE, 5345000mN, north to

700000mE, 5347000mN.

11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Columbia Falls and vicinity ............................................................................. 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Township T30N, R20W—Sections 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, and 18

The City of Whitefish and surrounding vicinity bounded by lines from Universal Transmercator (UTM) coordinates 695000 mE, 5370000 mN, east

to 699000 mE, 5370000 mN, south to 699000 mE, 5361000 mN, west to

695000 mN, 5361000 mN, and north to 695000 mE, 5370000 mN.

11/18/93 Nonattainment ....... 11/18/93 Moderate.

Lake County, Ronan, Polson ................................................................................. 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Lincoln County, Libby and vicinity ......................................................................... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

T30N, R31W—Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 23, 26, 35, and west 1⁄2 of

Section 24, west 1⁄2 of Section 25, and west 1⁄2 of Section 36; plus T31N,

R31W—Sections 26, 27, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35 and the east 1⁄2 of Section 30.

Lewis and Clark County, East Helena area .......................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Missoula County, Missoula and vicinity including the following sections: 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

T13N, R19W—2, 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30,

31, 32, 33, and 34; T12N, R19W—Sections 4, 5, 6, 7; T13N, R20W—Sections 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, and 36.

Rosebud County:

Lame Deer ...................................................................................................... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Colstrip area ................................................................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Sanders County (part) .................................................................................... 1/20/94 Nonattainment ....... 1/20/94 Moderate.

Thompson Falls and vicinity: Including the following Sections: R29W, T21N—

Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 16.

Silver Bow County, Butte ....................................................................................... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

The following area of Butte-Silver Bow excluding the territorial limits of the City

of Walkerville: Beginning at the Northwest corner of Section 2, T.3N., R.8W.,

thence Easterly to Northeast corner Section 5, T.3N., R.7W.; then Southerly

to Northwest corner Section 9, T.3N., R.7W.; thence Easterly to Northeast

corner Section 10, T.3N., R.7W.; thence Southerly to Southeast corner Section 22, T.2N., R.7W.; thence Westerly to Southwest corner Section 19,

T.2N., R.7W.; thence Northerly to Northwest corner Section 19, T.2N.,

R.7W.; thence Westerly to Southwest corner Section 14, T.2N., R.8W.;

thence Northerly to Southwest corner Section 35, T.3N., R.8W.; thence

Westerly to Southwest corner Section 34, T.3N., R.8W.; thence Northerly to

Northwest corner Section 27, T.3N., R.8W.; thence Westerly to Southwest

corner Section 20, T.3N., R.8W.; thence Northerly to Northwest corner Section 17, T.3N., R.8W.; thence Easterly to Northwest corner Section 14, T.3N.,

R.8W.; thence Northerly to the point of beginning.

Yellowstone County, Billings area ......................................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Rest of State1 ........................................................................................................ 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

1 Denotes a single area designation for PSD baseline area purposes.

* * * * *

§ 81.335 North Dakota.

* * * * *

NORTH DAKOTA—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Metropolitan Fargo-Moorhead (Minn.), AQCR 130 ............................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Rest of State, AQCR 172 1 .................................................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

1 Denotes a single area designation for PSD baseline area purposes.

* * * * *
55800 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

§ 81.342 South Dakota.

* * * * *

SOUTH DAKOTA—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Rapid City Area ..................................................................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Rest of State 1 ........................................................................................................ 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

1 Denotes a single area designation for PSD baseline area purposes.

* * * * *

§ 81.345 Utah.

* * * * *

UTAH—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Salt Lake County ................................................................................................... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Utah County ........................................................................................................... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Ogden Area Weber County (part) City of Ogden .................................................. 9/26/95 Nonattainment ....... 9/26/95 Moderate.

Rest of State 1 ........................................................................................................ 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

1 Denotes a single area designation for PSD baseline area purposes.

* * * * *

§ 81.351 Wyoming.

* * * * *

WYOMING—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Sheridan County:

City of Sheridan .............................................................................................. 11/15/90 Nonattainment ....... 11/15/90 Moderate.

Trona Industrial Area ...................................................................................... 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Campbell County (part)

Converse County (part), That area bounded by Township 40 through 52 North,

and Ranges 69 through 73 West, inclusive of the Sixth Principal Meridian,

Campbell and Converse Counties, excluding the areas defined as the Pacific

Power and Light attainment area and the Hampshire Energy attainment

area.—Powder River Basin.

11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Campbell County (part), That area bounded by NW1/4 of Section 27, T50N,

R71W, Campbell County, Wyoming.—Pacific Power and Light Area.

11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Campbell County (part), That area bounded by Section 6 excluding the SW1⁄4;

E1⁄2 Section 7; Section 17 excluding the SW1⁄4; Section 14 excluding the

SE1⁄4; Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16 of T48N, R70W and Section

26 excluding the NE1⁄4; SW1⁄4 Section 23; Sections 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28,

29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 of T49N, R70W.—Hampshire Energy Area.

11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Campbell County (part), That area described by the W1⁄2SW1⁄4 Section 18,

W1⁄2NW1⁄4, NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Section 19, T47N, R70W, S1⁄2 Section 13, N1⁄2,

N1⁄2SW1⁄4, N1⁄2SE1⁄4 Section 24, T47N, R71W.—Kennecott/Puron PSD Baseline Area.

11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

Rest of State1 ........................................................................................................ 11/15/90 Unclassifiable ......... ....................

1 Denotes a single area designation for baseline area purposes.

* * * * *
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 213 / Friday, November 3, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 55801

[FR Doc. 95–27062 Filed 11–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

Radio Broadcasting Services; Various

Locations

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission on its own

motion, editorially amends the Table of

FM Allotments to specify the actual

classes of channels allotted to various

communities. The changes in channel

classifications have been authorized in

response to applications filed by

licensees and permittees operating on

these channels. This action is taken

pursuant to Revision of Section

73.3573(a)(1) of the Commission’s Rules

Concerning the Lower Classification of

an FM Allotment, 4 FCC Rcd 2413

(1989), and the Amendment of the

Commission’s Rules to Permit FM

Channel and Class Modifications

[Upgrades] by Applications, 8 FCC Rcd

4735 (1993).

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 414–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Order,

adopted October 6, 1995, and released

October 17, 1995. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the Commission’s

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractors, International

Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M

Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC

20037, (202) 857–3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 73—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended,

1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, as amended.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2–3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of

FM Allotments under California, is

amended by removing Channel 257C3

and adding Channel 257C2 at Central

Valley.

4. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Idaho, is amended by

removing Channel 296A and adding

Channel 296C at Caldwell.

5. Section73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Iowa, is amended by

removing Channel 240C2 and adding

Channel 240C3 at Estherville and by

removing Channel 255A and adding

Channel 255C3 at Jefferson.

6. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Kansas, is amended

by removing Channel 269C2 and adding

Channel 269A at Emporia and by

removing Channel 240C2 and adding

Channel 240C3 at Winfield.

7. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Michigan, is amended

by removing Channel 291A and adding

Channel 291C3 at Tawas City.

8. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Minnesota, is

amended by removing Channel 237C

and adding Channel 237C1 at Grand

Marais.

9. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Missouri, is amended

by removing Channel 224A and adding

Channel 225C3 at Malden.

10. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under New Mexico, is

amended by removing Channel 296C

and adding Channel 296C2 at Armijo.

11. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under North Carolina, is

amended by removing Channel 246C1

and adding Channel 246C2 at Hatteras.

12. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Oklahoma, is

amended by removing Channel 300A

and adding Channel 300C3 at Altus.

13. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Oregon, is amended

by removing Channel 228C3 and adding

Channel 228C2 at Lakeview.

14. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under South Dakota, is

amended by removing Channel 256C1

and adding Channel 256A at Huron.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–27261 Filed 11–2–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

48 CFR Parts 1215, 1252 and 1253

[Docket OST–95–776]

RIN 2105–AC–32

Revision of Department of

Transportation Acquisition Regulation

AGENCY: Transportation.

ACTION: Interim final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Department is revising

the Transportation Acquisition

Regulation (TAR) to make minor

editorial or administrative corrections

including changes to the TAR Matrix to

adhere to the Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) guidance for

incorporating provisions and clauses in

solicitations and contracts by reference

to the maximum practical extent.

DATES: This rule is effective November

3, 1995. Written and signed comments

must be received on or before December

4, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties should

submit written comments, preferably in

triplicate, to Docket Clerk, Docket No.

OST–95–776, Department of

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,

S.W., Room 4107, Washington, D.C.,

20590. Please cite TAR administrative

revisions in all correspondence

concerning this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elaine Wheeler, Office of Acquisition

and Grant Management, M–61, 400

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

20590: (202) 366–4272.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

The Department of Transportation

(DOT) 1994 edition of the TAR was

effective on October 1, 1994. Use of this

document has indicated that some

editorial corrections and administrative

changes are necessary including a

change to the TAR Matrix to reflect the

FAR guidance to incorporate provisions

and clauses by reference to the

maximum practical extent.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This interim final rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

because the basic policies remain

unchanged and only editorial

corrections or administrative changes

are being made.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the changes to the

TAR do not impose additional