Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2001 / Proposed Rules 23873

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions not specifically

required by law. In particular, the Act

addresses actions that may result in the

expenditure by a State, local, or tribal

government, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector of $100,000,000 or more

in any one year. Though this proposed

rule would not result in such an

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of

this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not effect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under

Executive Order 12630, Governmental

Actions and Interference with

Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule meets applicable

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform, to minimize litigation,

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce

burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this proposed rule

under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks. This rule is not an economically

significant rule and does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that may disproportionately affect

children.

Environment

We considered the environmental

impact of this proposed rule and

concluded that, under figure 2–1,

paragraph (34)(b), of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1C, this proposed

rule is categorically excluded from

further environmental documentation.

The proposed rule is excluded under

paragraph (34)(b) because it is

administrative in nature and has no

environmental effect. A ‘‘Categorical

Exclusion Determination’’ is available in

the docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 140

Continental shelf, Incorporation by

reference, Investigations, Marine safety,

Occupational safety and health,

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR part 140 as follows:

PART 140—GENERAL

1. The authority citation for part 140

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333, 1348, 1350,

1356; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. In § 140.10, add, in alphabetical

order, the definition of ‘‘Minerals

Management Service inspector’’ to read

as follows:

§ 140.10 Definitions.

* * * * *

Minerals Management Service

inspector or MMS inspector means an

individual employed by the Minerals

Management Service who inspects fixed

OCS facilities on behalf of the Coast

Guard to determine whether the

requirements of this subchapter are met.

* * * * *

3. In § 140.101—

a. Revise the section heading to read

as set forth below;

b. Redesignate paragraphs (b) through

(e) as paragraphs (c) through (f);

c. Add a new paragraph (b) to read as

set forth below;

d. In redesignated paragraph (c),

before the words ‘‘marine inspectors’’,

add the words ‘‘Coast Guard’’; following

the words ‘‘OCS activities’’, add the

words ‘‘, and MMS inspectors may

inspect fixed OCS facilities,’’; and, at

the end of the last sentence, add the

words ‘‘or MMS’’; and

e. In redesignated paragraph (d),

remove the words ‘‘a marine inspector’’

and add, in their place, the words ‘‘a

Coast Guard marine inspector or an

MMS inspector’’; and remove the words

‘‘The marine inspector’’ and add, in

their place, the words ‘‘The Coast Guard

marine inspector or the MMS

inspector’’.

§ 140.101 Inspection by Coast Guard

marine inspectors or Minerals Management

Service inspectors.

* * * * *

(b) On behalf of the Coast Guard, each

fixed OCS facility engaged in OCS

activities is subject to inspection by the

Minerals Management Service (MMS).

* * * * *

4. In § 140.103—

a. In paragraph (b), remove

‘‘140.101(e)’’ and add, in its place,

‘‘140.101(f)’’; and remove the words

‘‘Marine inspectors’’ and add, in their

place, the words ‘‘marine inspectors and

Minerals Management Service (MMS)

inspectors’’; and

b. In paragraph (c), remove

‘‘140.101(e)’’ and add, in its place,

‘‘140.101(f)’’; and at the end of the

paragraph, add a sentence to read as

follows:

§ 140.103 Annual inspection of fixed OCS

facilities.

* * * * *

(c) * * * A copy of the completed

form must be retained on the facility for

2 years after the inspection and made

available to MMS on request.

* * * * *

§ 140.105 [Amended]

5. In § 140.105—

a. In paragraph (a), after the words

‘‘during an inspection’’, add the words

‘‘by a Coast Guard marine inspector or

a Minerals Management Service (MMS)

inspector’’;

b. In paragraph (b), before the words

‘‘is reported to’’, add the words ‘‘or an

MMS inspector’’; and, after the words

‘‘time specified by the’’, remove the

words ‘‘Coast Guard’’;

c. In paragraph (c), after the words

‘‘fire fighting equipment deficiencies’’,

add the words ‘‘on fixed OCS facilities’’;

and remove the words ‘‘the OCMI’’

wherever they appear and add, in their

place, ‘‘MMS’’; and

d. In paragraph (d), after the words

‘‘Marine Inspection,’’ add the words ‘‘or

MMS (for deficiencies or hazards

discovered by MMS during an

inspection of a fixed OCS facility)’’.

Dated: March 16, 2001.

R.C. North,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant

Commandant for Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 01–11848 Filed 5–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS

AFFAIRS

38 CFR Part 36

RIN 2900–AE20; 2900–AE60

Loan Guaranty: Title Evidence

Requirements and Occupancy

Requirements for Conveyance of

Properties to VA by Holders;

Acceptance of Partial Payments;

Indemnification of Default

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Proposed rules: withdrawal.

SUMMARY: This document withdraws the

proposal to amend the loan guaranty

regulations that was published in the

Federal Register on August 6, 1990 (55

FR 31847). We proposed to authorize

the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to

specify the title documentation required

from the holder when VA acquires a

property which was financed with a

VA-guaranteed loan that has been

terminated and to authorize the

Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish

a date by which VA must receive such

title documentation from the holder.

Further, we proposed to require that a

property acquired by VA be vacant

23874 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2001 / Proposed Rules

when conveyed to VA unless someone

properly in possession by virtue of a

redemption period occupies it or VA

otherwise directs the holder. This

document also withdraws the proposal

to amend the loan guaranty regulations

that was published in the Federal

Register on March 2, 1994 (59 FR 9944).

In the March 2, 1994 document, we

proposed to change the regulations by

requiring that the mortgage holder

provide notice to VA when refusing to

accept partial payment on a loan in

default and to clarify when a veteran is

liable to VA for a loss due to a loan

default. We are reconsidering the issues

raised in both proposed rules in light of

changes that have occurred in the

industry since the proposals were

promulgated. These issues may be the

subject of a future rulemaking

proceeding.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Richard Fyne, Assistant Director for

Loan Management (261), Loan Guaranty

Service, Veterans Benefits

Administration, Department of Veterans

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20420, phone (202)

273–7380. (This is not a toll-free

number.)

Approved: February 15, 2001.

Anthony J. Principi,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–11745 Filed 5–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[Region 2 Docket No. NY46–217b, FRL–

6977–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans For Designated Facilities; New

York

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA)

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

the New York supplementary submittal

for meeting EPA’s conditional approval

of the New York State Plan for

regulating existing Municipal Solid

Waste Landfills. The supplemental

submittal documents that, except for

two landfills, all are in compliance. A

Title V permit containing a compliance

schedule with all five federally

enforceable increments of progress has

been provided for one landfill and the

other landfill is undergoing an

applicability determination. In the

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this

Federal Register, EPA is approving the

State’s State Plan submittal, as a direct

final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial submittal and

anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for the approval is set

forth in the direct final rule. If EPA

receives no adverse comments, EPA will

not take further action on this proposed

rule. If EPA receives adverse comments,

EPA will withdraw the direct final rule

and it will not take effect. EPA will

address all public comments in a

subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before June 11, 2001.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be

addressed to: Raymond Werner, Chief,

Air Programs Branch, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290

Broadway, New York, New York 10007–

1866.

Copies of the State submittal are

available at the following addresses for

inspection during normal business

hours:

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th

Floor, New York, New York 10007–

1866.

New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, Division

of Air Resources, 50 Wolf Road,

Albany, New York 12233.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Craig Flamm, Air Programs Branch,

Environmental Protection Agency, 290

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New

York 10278, (212) 637–4021.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information see the direct

final rule which is located in the Rules

Section of this Federal Register.

Dated: April 19, 2001.

William J. Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator Region 2.

[FR Doc. 01–11830 Filed 5–9–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 62

RIN 3067–AD23

National Flood Insurance Program;

Assistance to Private Sector Property

Insurers

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: Based on recent cost

information, we (FEMA) propose to

adjust the expense allowance under the

Financial Assistance/Subsidy

Arrangement between the Federal

Insurance Administrator and the private

sector insurers that sell and service

flood insurance.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

should be received on or before June 11,

2001.

ADDRESSES: Please submit any written

comments to the Rules Docket Clerk,

Office of the General Counsel, Federal

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C

Street, SW., room 840, Washington, DC

20472, (facsimile) 202–646–4536, or

(email) rules@fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edward L. Connor, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, Federal Insurance

Administration, 500 C Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20472, 202–646–3443,

(facsimile) 202–646–3445, (email)

Edward.Connor@fema.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

Financial Assistance/Subsidy

Arrangement between the Federal

Insurance Administrator and the private

sector insurers that sell and service

flood insurance under the Write Your

Own (WYO) program, participating

insurers are entitled to an expense

allowance—a portion of the flood

premiums from the policies that the

insurers sell. The expense allowance is

based on data for the property/casualty

industry published, as of March 15 of

the prior Arrangement year, in Part III

of the Insurance Expense Exhibit in

A.M. Best Company’s Aggregates and

Averages for five property coverages.

Based on our analysis of recent

expense information from the

companies, we conclude that we should

increase the current expense allowance

under the Arrangement. We are

therefore proposing a change in the

expense allowance to reflect this new

cost information.

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)

NEPA imposes requirements for

considering the environmental impacts

of agency decisions. It requires that an

agency prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) for ‘‘major

federal actions significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment.’’ If

an action may or may not have a

significant impact, the agency must

prepare an environmental assessment

(EA). If, as a result of this study, the

agency makes a Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI), no further