2910 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Proposed Rules

misunderstand the legal effect of AD’s

on airplanes that are identified in the

applicability provision of the AD, but

that have been altered or repaired in the

area addressed by the AD. The FAA

points out that all airplanes identified in

the applicability provision of an AD are

legally subject to the AD. If an airplane

has been altered or repaired in the

affected area in such a way as to affect

compliance with the AD, the owner or

operator is required to obtain FAA

approval for an alternative method of

compliance with the AD, in accordance

with the paragraph of each AD that

provides for such approvals. A note has

been included in this notice to clarify

this requirement.

There are approximately 126 Model

DC 10–10 airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 77 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 14 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $64,680, or $840 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The total cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government.

Therefore, in accordance with

Executive Order 12612, it is determined

that this proposal would not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 94–NM–178–

AD.

Applicability: Model DC–10–10 airplanes,

as listed in McDonnell Douglas DC–10

Service Bulletin 57–129, dated August 12,

1994, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (e) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition; or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any airplane from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of

the wing front spar and damage to adjacent

structures due to fatigue cracking in the

upper cap of the front spar of the wing,

accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total

landings, or within 1,800 landings after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, perform an initial eddy current test

high frequency (ETHF) surface inspection to

detect cracks in the upper cap of the front

spar of the left and right wing between

stations Xos 667.678 and Xos 789.645,

inclusive, in accordance with McDonnell

Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin 57–129,

dated August 12, 1994. Repeat this

inspection thereafter at intervals specified in

paragraph (b) or (c) of this AD, as applicable.

(b) For airplanes on which no crack is

found: Repeat the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 10,000 landings, or

accomplish the crack preventative

modification in accordance with McDonnell

Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin 57–129,

dated August 1994. Accomplishment of that

preventative modification constitutes

terminating action for the requirements of

this paragraph.

(c) For airplanes on which any crack is

found that is identified as ‘‘Condition II’’ in

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

57–129, dated August 12, 1994: Accomplish

paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD in

accordance with that service bulletin.

(1) Prior to further flight, perform the

permanent repair for cracks in accordance

with the service bulletin; and

(2) Within 12,500 landings after the

installation of the permanent repair specified

in paragraph (c) (1) of this AD, perform an

ETHF surface inspection for cracks, in

accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat

this inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 7,000 landings.

(d) For airplanes on which any crack is

found that is identified as ‘‘Condition III’’ in

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

57–129, dated August 12, 1994: Prior to

further flight, repair the cracking in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(e) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles ACO, FAA. Operators shall submit

their requests through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

6, 1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–791 Filed 1–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Proposed Rules 2911

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

22 CFR Part 213

Collection of Debts by Tax Refund

Offset

AGENCY: Agency for International

Development.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Agency for International

Development proposes to issue

regulations to allow the agency to

recover delinquent debts owed the

United States Government through the

offset of tax refunds.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before February 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Mr. Jan Miller, Office of the General

Counsel, Room 6881, N.S., Agency for

International Development, Washington,

DC 20523.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jan W. Miller, (202) 647–6380.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

proposed rule will enable the agency to

recover delinquent debts owed the

United States Government through the

offset of tax refunds. The proposed rule

sets forth the procedures to be followed

by AID in using tax refund offset.

Regulatory Flexibility and Impact

Analysis

This action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities including small

businesses, small organizational units

and small governmental jurisdictions.

This action does not constitute a

‘‘major rule’’ under Executive Order No.

12291.

Environmental Impact

This action does not constitute a

major Federal action significantly

affecting the quality of the human

environment.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 213

Claims, salary offset.

Accordingly, it is proposed to amend

22 CFR part 213 as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 213

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 621 of the Foreign

Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, 22

U.S.C. 2381; Subpart B also issued under 5

U.S.C. 5514; 5 CFR part 5550, subpart K.

Subpart C also issued under 31 U.S.C. 3720A.

2. Part 213 is amended to add a new

subpart C as follows:

PART 213—COLLECTION OF CLAIMS

* * * * *

Subpart C—Collection of Debts by Tax

Refund Offset

213.21 Purpose.

213.22 Applicability and scope.

213.23 Administrative charges.

213.24 Pre-offset notice.

213.25 Reasonable attempt to notify and

clear and concise notification.

213.26 Consideration of evidence and

notification of decision.

213.27 Change in conditions after

submission to IRS.

Subpart C—Collection of Debts by Tax

Refund Offset

§ 213.21 Purpose.

This subpart establishes procedures

for AID to refer past due debts to the

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for offset

against income tax refunds of taxpayers

owing debts to AID.

§ 213.22 Applicability and scope.

(a) This subpart implements 31 U.S.C.

3720A which authorizes the IRS to

reduce a tax refund by the amount of a

past due and legally enforceable debt

owed to the United States.

(b) A past due legally enforceable debt

referable to the IRS is a debt which is

owed to the United States and;

(1) Except for judgement debt or other

debts specifically exempt from this

requirement, is referred within 10 years

after AID’s right of action accrues;

(2) In the case of individuals, is at

least $25.00.

(3) In the case of business debtors is

at least $100.00;

(4) In the case of individual debtors,

cannot be currently collected pursuant

to the salary offset provisions of 5 U.S.C.

5514(a).

(5) Is ineligible for or cannot be

currently collected pursuant to the

administrative offset provisions of 31

U.S.C. 3716;

(6) Is the debt of a debtor (or in the

case of an individual debtor, his or her

spouse) for whom AID records do not

show debtor has filed for bankruptcy

under title 11 of the United States Code

or from whom AID can clearly establish

at the time of the referral that an

automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. 362 has

been lifted or is no longer in effect;

(7) Has been disclosed by AID to a

consumer reporting agency as

authorized by 31 U.S.C. 3711(f); and

(8) With respect to which AID has

given notice, considered any evidence,

and determined that the debt is past-due

and legally enforceable under the

provisions of this subpart;

§ 213.23 Administrative charges.

All administrative charges incurred in

connection with the referral of debts to

the IRS will be added to the debt, thus

increasing the amount of the offset.

§ 213.24 Pre-offset notice.

(a) Before AID refers a debt to the IRS,

it will notify or make a reasonable

attempt to notify the debtor that:

(1) The debt is past due;

(2) Unless repaid within 60 days

thereafter, the debt will be referred to

the IRS for offset against any

overpayment of tax;

(3) The debtor has at least 60 days

from the date of the notice to present

evidence that all or part of such debt is

not past-due or not legally enforceable;

and

(4) AID will consider any evidence

presented by the debtor and determine

whether any part of such debt is pastdue and legally enforceable.

(b) The notice will explain to the

debtor the manner in which the debtor

may present such evidence to AID.

§ 213.25 Reasonable attempt to notify

clear and concise notification.

(a) Reasonable attempt to notify. AID

will have made a reasonable attempt to

notify the debtor under § 213.24(a) if it

used a mailing address for the debtor

obtained from the IRS pursuant to the

Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.

6103(m)(2) or (m)(4), unless AID

receives clear and concise notification

from the debtor that notices are to be

sent to an address different from the

address obtained from the IRS.

(b) Clear and concise notification.

Clear and concise notification means

that the debtor has provided AID with

written notification including the

debtor’s name and identifying number

(as defined in the Internal Revenue

Code, 26 U.S.C. 6109), the debtor’s new

address, and the debtor’s intent to have

the notices sent to the new address.

§ 213.26 Consideration of evidence and

notification of decision.

(a) AID will give the debtor at least 60

days from the date of the pre-offset

notice to present evidence. Evidence

that collection of the debt is affected by

a bankruptcy proceeding involving the

debtor shall bar referral of the debt.

(b) If the evidence presented is not

considered by an employee of AID but

by an entity or person acting for AID,

the debtor will have at least 30 days

from the date the entity or person

decides that all or part of the debt is

past-due and legally enforceable to

request review by an employee of AID

of an unresolved dispute.

(c) AID will provide the debtor with

its decision and the decision of any

entity or person acting for AID on to

whether all or part of the debt is pastdue and legally enforceable.
2912 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 8 / Thursday, January 12, 1995 / Proposed Rules

§ 213.27 Change in conditions after

submission to IRS.

AID will promptly notify the IRS if,

after submission of a debt to the IRS for

offset, AID:

(a) Determines that an error has been

made with respect to the information

submitted to the IRS;

(b) Receives a payment or credits a

payment, other than an IRS offset, to the

account of the debtor;

(c) Receives notice that the debtor has

filed for bankruptcy under title 11 of the

United States Code or the debt has been

discharged in bankruptcy;

(d) Receives notice that an offset was

made at the time when the automatic

stay provisions of 11 U.S.C. 362 were in

effect;

(e) Receives notice that the debt has

been extinguished by death; or

(f) Refunds all or part of the offset

amount to the debtor.

Dated: November 22, 1994.

Tony L. Cully,

Controller.

[FR Doc. 95–776 Filed 1–11–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6116–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PA 41–1–6288; FRL–5133–5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; Limited Approval/

Limited Disapproval of Reasonably

Available Control Technology

Requirements for Major Sources of

VOC and NOX

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing three

alternative actions in today’s notice

concerning Pennsylvania’s State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision,

which contains regulations requiring

major sources of volatile organic

compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides

(NOX) to implement reasonably

available control technology (RACT).

The intended effect of this action is to

propose and solicit comment on the

range of alternative actions regarding

the Pennsylvania RACT submittal

(Pennsylvania Chapters 129.91 through

129.95 and the associated definitions in

Chapter 121). The three alternatives

propose either limited approval/limited

disapproval or full disapproval of the

Pennsylvania regulations. In addition to

the specific issues related to the

Pennsylvania submittal, EPA is also

specifically taking public comment on

the general issue of whether RACT

submittals of regulations which allow

for future case-by-case SIP revisions

meet the RACT requirements of the

Clean Air Act and should be approved

now, for Pennsylvania, and can be

approved in the future for submittals by

any state to EPA. EPA’s resolution of

this issue in this rulemaking will affect

its completeness and approvability

determinations in future case-by-case

SIP revisions meet the RACT

requirements of the Clean Air Act and

should be approved now, for

Pennsylvania, and can be approved in

the future for submittals by any state to

EPA. EPA’s resolution of this issue in

this rulemaking will affect its

completeness and approvability

determinations in future rulemaking on

SIP submittals by other states. These

actions are being taken under section

110 of the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before February 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Thomas J. Maslany, Director, Air,

Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air, Radiation, and Toxics

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107; Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Resources, Bureau of Air

Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400

Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cynthia H. Stahl, (215) 597–9337, at the

EPA Region III address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

February 4, 1994, the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Resources

(PA DER) submitted a revision to its

State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the

control of VOC and NOX emissions from

major sources (Pennsylvania Chapters

129.91 through 129.95 and the

associated definitions in Chapter 121).

This submittal was amended with a

revision on May 3, 1994 correcting and

clarifying the presumptive NOX RACT

requirements under Chapter 129.93. The

Pennsylvania SIP revision consists of

new regulations which would require

sources which emit or have the

potential to emit 25 tons or more of VOC

or NOX per year in Philadelphia or 50

tons or more of VOC per year in the

remainder of the Commonwealth to

comply with reasonably available

control technology requirements by May

31, 1995. Outside of the Philadelphia

ozone nonattainment area, sources of

NOX which emit or have the potential

to emit 100 tons or more per year are

required to comply with RACT by no

later than May 31, 1995. While the

Pennsylvania regulations contain

specific provisions requiring major VOC

and NOX sources to implement RACT,

the regulations under review do not

contain specific emission limitations in

the form of a specified overall

percentage emission reduction

requirement or other numerical

emission standards. Instead, the

Pennsylvania regulations contain

technology-based or operational

‘‘presumptive RACT emission

limitations’’ for certain major NOX

sources. For other major NOX sources,

and all covered major VOC sources, the

submittal contains a ‘‘generic’’ RACT

provision. A generic RACT regulation is

one which does not impose specific

upfront emission limitations but instead

allows for future case-by-case

determinations. This regulation allows

DER to make case-by-case RACT

determinations which are then

submitted to EPA as revisions to the

Pennsylvania SIP.

This proposed rulemaking is intended

to take comment on whether a generic

RACT submittal, such as

Pennsylvania’s, meets the requirements

of sections 172(c), 182(b)(2), and 182(f)

of the Clean Air Act. This rulemaking is

designed to clarify whether EPA will

approve RACT submittals that allow the

SIP to be revised with future case-bycase RACT determinations, or will

instead require specific and

immediately ascertainable emission

limitations.

Background

Pursuant to sections 182(b)(2) and

182(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA),

Pennsylvania is required to implement

RACT for all major VOC and NOX

sources by no later than May 31, 1995.

The major source size is determined by

its location, the classification of that

area and whether it is located in the

ozone transport region (OTR) which is

established by the CAA. The

Pennsylvania portion of the

Philadelphia ozone nonattainment area

consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware,

Montgomery, and Philadelphia Counties

and is classified as severe. The

remaining counties in Pennsylvania are

classified as either moderate or marginal

nonattainment areas or are designated

attainment for ozone. However, under

section 184 of the CAA, at a minimum,

moderate ozone nonattainment area