16836 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 63 / Monday, April 3, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Inventory (TRI) Surface Water Releases

and Transfers to POTWs, March 13,

1995.

(5) Letter of February 2, 1995 to Carol

M. Browner, Administrator U.S. EPA

from Dr. Genevieve Matanoski, Chair,

Executive Committee, Science Advisory

Board.

IX. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

Under section 3(f), the order defines a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an

action likely to lead to a rule (1) Having

an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or 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 (also

referred to as ‘‘economically

significant’’); (2) creating serious

inconsistency or otherwise interfering

with an action taken or planned by

another agency; (3) materially altering

the budgetary impacts of entitlements,

grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4)

raising novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in this Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this Executive

Order, it has been determined that this

amended proposed rule is not

‘‘significant’’ and therefore not subject

to OMB review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

of 1980, the Agency must conduct a

small business analysis to determine

whether a substantial number of small

entities would be significantly affected

by a proposed rule. Because the

amended proposed rule does not create

any new requirements and consolidates

other requirements, it would not

significantly affect facilities, including

small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

This amended proposed rule does not

result in any new information collection

requirements subject to the provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Community right-to-know, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, and

Toxic chemicals.

Dated: March 29,1995.

Susan H. Wayland,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

Therefore it is proposed that, 40 CFR

part 372 be amended as follows:

PART 372—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 372

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.

§ 372.65 [Amended]

2. Sections 372.65(a) and (b) are

amended by removing the entire entry

for ammonium sulfate (solution) and

ammonium nitrate (solution) and by

adding the following language to the

ammonia listing ‘‘includes anhydrous

ammonia and aqueous ammonia from

water dissociable ammonium salts and

other sources; 10 percent of total

aqueous ammonia is reportable under

this listing’’ under paragraph (a) and

removing the entire CAS No. entry for

7783–20–2 and 6484–52–2 under

paragraph (b).

[FR Doc. 95–8202 Filed 3–30–95; 1:29 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 94–67; RM–8481]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Collegeville, MN

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; dismissal.

SUMMARY: This document dismissed a

petition for rule making filed by Saint

John’s University requesting the

allotment of Channel 260A to

Collegeville, Minnesota, and reservation

of the channel for noncommercial

educational use. See 59 FR 35292, July

11, 1994. In reviewing this proceeding,

we discovered that we erroneously

proposed reservation of the channel at

Collegeville. The Notice should only

have proposed allotment of a channel to

Collegeville. Saint John’s proposal does

not meet the established guidelines to

reserve a channel in the commercial

band. Since no comments were received

expressing an intention to use the

channel as a commercial station, we

have terminated the proceeding without

making an allotment. With this action,

this proceeding is terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 94–67,

adopted March 16, 1995, and released

March 28, 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, D.C. 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, D.C.

20037, (202) 857–3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

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

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

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–7947 Filed 3–31–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AD11

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants: Proposal To Determine

Endangered Status for Three Wetland

Species Found in Southern Arizona

and Northern Sonora

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of

petition findings.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) proposes endangered

status pursuant to the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended,

for two plants, Spiranthes delitescens

(Canelo Hills ladies’-tresses) and

Lilaeopsis schaffneriana spp. recurva

(Huachuca water umbel), and one

amphibian, the Sonora tiger salamander

(Ambystoma tigrinum stebbinsi). These

species occur in a limited number of

wetland habitats in southern Arizona

and northern Sonora, Mexico. They are

threatened by one or more of the

following—collecting, disease,

predation, competition with nonnative

species, catastrophic floods, drought,

and degradation and destruction of