Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 57785 

from the production of carbamates and 

carbamoyl oximes (EPA Hazardous 

Waste No. K157)—Provided that the 

maximum weekly usage of 

formaldehyde, methyl chloride, 

methylene chloride, and triethylamine 

(including all amounts that cannot be 

demonstrated to be reacted in the 

process, destroyed through treatment, or 

is recovered, i.e., what is discharged or 

volatilized) divided by the average 

weekly flow of process wastewater prior 

to any dilution into the headworks of 

the facility’s wastewater treatment 

system does not exceed a total of 5 parts 

per million by weight OR the total 

measured concentration of these 

chemicals entering the headworks of the 

facility’s wastewater treatment system 

(at facilities subject to regulation under 

the Clean Air Act as amended, at 40 

CFR parts 60, 61, or 63, or at facilities 

subject to an enforceable limit in a 

federal operating permit that minimizes 

fugitive emissions), does not exceed 5 

parts per million on an average weekly 

basis. Facilities that choose to measure 

concentration levels must file copy of 

their sampling and analysis plan with 

the Regional Administrator, or State 

Director, as the context requires, or an 

authorized representative (‘‘Director’’ as 

defined in 40 CFR 270.2). A facility 

must file a copy of a revised sampling 

and analysis plan only if the initial plan 

is rendered inaccurate by changes in the 

facility’s operations. The sampling and 

analysis plan must include the 

monitoring point location (headworks), 

the sampling frequency and 

methodology, and a list of constituents 

to be monitored. A facility is eligible for 

the direct monitoring option once they 

receive confirmation that the sampling 

and analysis plan has been received by 

the Director. The Director may reject the 

sampling and analysis plan if he/she 

finds that, the sampling and analysis 

plan fails to include the above 

information; or the plan parameters 

would not enable the facility to 

calculate the weekly average 

concentration of these chemicals 

accurately. If the Director rejects the 

sampling and analysis plan or if the 

Director finds that the facility is not 

following the sampling and analysis 

plan, the Director shall notify the 

facility to cease the use of the direct 

monitoring option until such time as the 

bases for rejection are corrected; or 

(G) Wastewaters derived-from the 

treatment of one or more of the 

following wastes listed in § 261.32—

organic waste (including heavy ends, 

still bottoms, light ends, spent solvents, 

filtrates, and decantates) from the 

production of carbamates and 

carbamoyl oximes (EPA Hazardous 

Waste No. K156).—Provided, that the 

maximum concentration of 

formaldehyde, methyl chloride, 

methylene chloride, and triethylamine 

prior to any dilutions into the 

headworks of the facility’s wastewater 

treatment system does not exceed a total 

of 5 milligrams per liter OR the total 

measured concentration of these 

chemicals entering the headworks of the 

facility’s wastewater treatment system 

(at facilities subject to regulation under 

the Clean Air Act as amended, at 40 

CFR parts 60, 61, or 63, or at facilities 

subject to an enforceable limit in a 

federal operating permit that minimizes 

fugitive emissions), does not exceed 5 

milligrams per liter on an average 

weekly basis. Facilities that choose to 

measure concentration levels must file 

copy of their sampling and analysis plan 

with the Regional Administrator, or 

State Director, as the context requires, or 

an authorized representative (‘‘Director’’

as defined in 40 CFR 270.2). A facility 

must file a copy of a revised sampling 

and analysis plan only if the initial plan 

is rendered inaccurate by changes in the 

facility’s operations. The sampling and 

analysis plan must include the 

monitoring point location (headworks), 

the sampling frequency and 

methodology, and a list of constituents 

to be monitored. A facility is eligible for 

the direct monitoring option once they 

receive confirmation that the sampling 

and analysis plan has been received by 

the Director. The Director may reject the 

sampling and analysis plan if he/she 

finds that, the sampling and analysis 

plan fails to include the above 

information; or the plan parameters 

would not enable the facility to 

calculate the weekly average 

concentration of these chemicals 

accurately. If the Director rejects the 

sampling and analysis plan or if the 

Director finds that the facility is not 

following the sampling and analysis 

plan, the Director shall notify the 

facility to cease the use of the direct 

monitoring option until such time as the 

bases for rejection are corrected. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–19841 Filed 10–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 405, 412, 413, 415, 419, 

422, and 485 

[CMS–1500–F2] 

RIN–0938–AN57 

Medicare Program; Changes to the 

Hospital Inpatient Prospective 

Payment Systems and Fiscal Year 2006 

Rates; Correcting Amendment 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correcting 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects 

technical errors in the final rule that 

appeared in the August 12, 2005 

Federal Register entitled ‘‘Changes to 

the Hospital Inpatient Prospective 

Payment Systems and Fiscal Year 2006 

Rates.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: This correcting 

amendment is effective August 12, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marc Hartstein, (410) 786–4548. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Summary of Errors 

In FR Doc. 05–15406 (70 FR 47278), 

the final rule entitled ‘‘Changes to the 

Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment 

Systems and Fiscal Year 2006 Rates’’

(hereinafter referred to as the FY 2006 

final rule), there were technical errors 

that are identified and corrected in the 

regulations text of this correcting 

amendment. The provisions of this 

correcting amendment are effective 

August 12, 2005. 

On page 47487 of the FY 2006 final 

rule, we made technical errors in the 

regulation text of § 412.230(d)(2)(iii). In 

this paragraph, we inadvertently 

omitted qualifying language related to 

our reclassification policy. Accordingly, 

we are revising § 412.230(d)(2)(iii) to 

accurately reflect our policy on 

reclassification of a campus of a 

multicampus hospital. Therefore, on 

page 47487 first column, lines 23 

through 25, the phrase ‘‘may seek 

reclassification to a CBSA in which 

another campus(es) is located’’ would 

be corrected to read ‘‘may seek 

reclassification only to a CBSA in which 

another campus(es) is located’’ and on 

lines 29 and 30, the phrase ‘‘may 

submit’’ would be corrected to read 

‘‘must submit.’’

57786 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

II. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and 

Delay in Effective Date 

We ordinarily publish a notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register to provide a period for public 

comment before the provisions of a rule 

take effect in accordance with section 

553(b) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). However, 

we can waive the notice and comment 

procedures if the Secretary finds, for 

good cause, that the notice and 

comment process is impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest, and incorporates a statement of 

the finding and the reasons therefore in 

the rule. We can also waive the 30-day 

delay in effective date under the APA (5 

U.S.C. 553(d)) when there is good cause 

to do so and we publish in the rule an 

explanation of our good cause. 

Our policy on reclassification of a 

campus of a multicampus hospital in 

the FY 2006 final rule has previously 

been subjected to notice and comment 

procedures. These corrections are 

consistent with the discussion of this 

policy in the FY2006 final rule and do 

not make substantive changes to this 

policy. This correcting amendment 

merely corrects technical errors in the 

regulations text of the FY 2006 final 

rule. As a result, this correcting 

amendment is intended to ensure that 

the FY 2006 final rule accurately reflects 

the policy adopted in the final rule. 

Therefore, we find that undertaking 

further notice and comment procedures 

to incorporate these corrections into the 

final rule is unnecessary and contrary to 

the public interest. 

For the same reasons, we are also 

waiving the 30-day delay in effective 

date for this correcting amendment. We 

believe that it is in the public interest 

to ensure that the FY 2006 final rule 

accurately states our policy on 

reclassification of a campus of a 

multicampus hospital. Thus delaying 

the effective date of these corrections 

would be contrary to the public interest. 

Therefore, we also find good cause to 

waive the 30-day delay in effective date. 

III. Correction of Regulation Text 

Errors 

Given the errors summarized in 

section I of this correcting amendment, 

we are making the following correcting 

amendments to 42 CFR Part 412: 

PART 412—PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT 

SYSTEMS FOR INPATIENT HOSPITAL 

SERVICES 

■ Section 412.230 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d)(2)(iii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 412.230 Criteria for an individual hospital 

seeking redesignation to another rural area 

or an urban area. 

* * * * * 

(d) 

(2) * * * 

(iii) For applications submitted for 

reclassifications effective in FYs 2006 

through 2008, a campus of a 

multicampus hospital may seek 

reclassification only to a CBSA in which 

another campus(es) is located. If the 

campus is seeking reclassification to a 

CBSA in which another campus(es) is 

located, as part of its reclassification 

request, the requesting entity must 

submit the composite wage data for the 

entire multicampus hospital as its 

hospital-specific data. 

* * * * * 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital 

Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, 

Medicare—Supplementary Medical 

Insurance Program) 

Dated: September 29, 2005. 

Ann C. Agnew, 

Executive Secretary to the Department. 

[FR Doc. 05–19924 Filed 9–30–05; 11:06 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 65 

[Docket No. FEMA–P–7646] 

Changes in Flood Elevation 

Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Emergency 

Preparedness and Response Directorate, 

Department of Homeland Security. 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

SUMMARY: This interim rule lists 

communities where modification of the 

Base (1% annual-chance) Flood 

Elevations (BFEs) is appropriate because 

of new scientific or technical data. New 

flood insurance premium rates will be 

calculated from the modified BFEs for 

new buildings and their contents. 

DATES: These modified BFEs are 

currently in effect on the dates listed in 

the table below and revise the Flood 

Insurance Rate Map(s) in effect prior to 

this determination for the listed 

communities. 

From the date of the second 

publication of these changes in a 

newspaper of local circulation, any 

person has ninety (90) days in which to 

request through the community that the 

Mitigation Division Director of the 

Emergency Preparedness and Response 

Directorate reconsider the changes. The 

modified BFEs may be changed during 

the 90-day period. 

ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each 

community are available for inspection 

at the office of the Chief Executive 

Officer of each community. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Bellomo, P.E., Hazard 

Identification Section, Emergency 

Preparedness and Response Directorate, 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20472, (202) 646–2903. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

modified BFEs are not listed for each 

community in this interim rule. 

However, the address of the Chief 

Executive Officer of the community 

where the modified BFE determinations 

are available for inspection is provided. 

Any request for reconsideration must 

be based on knowledge of changed 

conditions or new scientific or technical 

data. 

The modifications are made pursuant 

to Section 201 of the Flood Disaster 

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, 

and are in accordance with the National 

Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 

4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR Part 65. 

For rating purposes, the currently 

effective community number is shown 

and must be used for all new policies 

and renewals. 

The modified BFEs are the basis for 

the floodplain management measures 

that the community is required to either 

adopt or to show evidence of being 

already in effect in order to qualify or 

to remain qualified for participation in 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP). 

These modified BFEs, together with 

the floodplain management criteria 

required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the 

minimum that are required. They 

should not be construed to mean that 

the community must change any 

existing ordinances that are more 

stringent in their floodplain 

management requirements. The 

community may at any time enact 

stricter requirements of its own, or 

pursuant to policies established by other 

Federal, State, or regional entities. 

The changes in BFEs are in 

accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This rule is categorically excluded from 

the requirements of 44 CFR Part 10, 

Environmental Consideration. No