18792 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Because Ohio has historically accepted

delegation of section 112 standards

through automatic delegation, EPA

proposes to approve the delegation of

section 112 standards and requirements

through automatic delegation. The

details of this delegation mechanism

will be set forth in a Memorandum of

Agreement between Ohio and EPA. This

approval applies to both existing and

future standards but is limited to

sources covered by the part 70 operating

permit program.

d. Limiting HAP Emissions Through a

FESOP Program. On October 25, 1994,

EPA conditionally approved OAC 3745–

35–07 for establishing a mechanism for

creating federally enforceable limits on

a sources potential to emit (59 FR

53586). This rulemaking, which became

effective on December 27, 1994,

authorizes the State to issue federally

enforceable State operating permits

addressing both criteria pollutants and

HAPs.

e. Title IV. Ohio’s program contains

adequate authority to issue permits

which reflect the requirements of Title

IV and its implementing regulations.

Further, Ohio provided a commitment

on January 5, 1995, to incorporate by

reference the Federal Acid Rain Program

regulations (40 CFR part 72) by October

1, 1995.

B. Potential Interim Approval Issue

Ohio’s definition of ‘‘title I

modification’’ does not include changes

reviewed under a minor source

preconstruction review program. On

August 29, 1994, EPA solicited public

comment on whether the phrase

‘‘modification under any provision of

title I of the Act’’ in 40 CFR

70.7(e)(2)(i)(A)(5) should be interpreted

to mean literally any change at a source

that would trigger permitting authority

review under regulations approved or

promulgated under Title I of the Act (59

FR 44573). EPA is currently reviewing

the public comments on this issue and

is in the process of determining the

proper definition of that phrase. EPA

does not believe that it is appropriate to

determine whether this is a program

deficiency for Ohio until EPA completes

its rulemaking on this issue. For a more

complete discussion of this issue see the

November 9, 1994, approval of the

operating permit program for the State

of Washington (59 FR 55813).

C. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to grant full

approval of the operating permit

program submitted by Ohio on July 22,

1994, and amended on September 12,

1994, November 21, 1994, December 9,

1994, and January 5, 1995. Among other

things, Ohio has demonstrated that the

program meets the minimum elements

of an approvable State operating permit

program as specified in 40 CFR part 70.

The scope of the Ohio program that

EPA proposes to approve in this notice

would apply to all part 70 sources (as

defined in the approved program)

within the State of Ohio.

As outlined in II.A.4.c., EPA is also

proposing to grant approval under

section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR 63.91 of

the State’s program for receiving

delegation of section 112 standards that

are unchanged from Federal standards

as promulgated. This program for

delegations only applies to sources

covered by the part 70 program.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Request for Public Comments

EPA is requesting comments on all

aspects of this proposed full approval.

Copies of the State’s submittal and other

information relied upon for the

proposed full approval are contained in

a docket maintained at the EPA

Regional Office. The docket is an

organized and complete file of all the

information submitted to, or otherwise

considered by, EPA in the development

of this proposed full approval. The

principal purposes of the docket are:

(1) To allow interested parties a

means to identify and locate documents

so that they can effectively participate

in the approval process; and

(2) To serve as the record in case of

judicial review. EPA will consider any

comments received by May 15, 1995.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from Executive

Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

EPA’s actions under section 502 of the

Act do not create any new requirements,

but simply address operating permit

programs submitted to satisfy the

requirements of 40 CFR part 70. Because

this action does not impose any new

requirements, it does not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Operating permits, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: March 29, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–9059 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 76

[AD-FRL–5186–9]

RIN 2060–AD45

Acid Rain Program; Nitrogen Oxides

Emission Reduction Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; Response to

Court remand.

SUMMARY: The EPA is today issuing a

proposed rule in response to a remand

by a U.S. Court of Appeals. The rule

reinstates emission limitations for

nitrogen oxides (NOX) from coal-fired

utility units under section 407 of the

Clean Air Act (‘‘the Act’’). The emission

limitations for NOX, along with

emission limitations for sulfur dioxide

from utility plants, will reduce acidic

deposition and prevent serious adverse

effects on natural resources, ecosystems,

materials, visibility, and public health.

On March 22, 1994, EPA promulgated

a rule establishing NOX emission

limitations. The rule established

emission limits generally achievable

using ‘‘low NOX burner technology’’ and

established a procedure for obtaining an

alternative emission limitation if a unit

could not achieve the prescribed limit

using such technology. On November

29, 1994, the U.S. Court of Appeals for

the District of Columbia Circuit ruled

that the definition of ‘‘low NOX burner

technology’’ in the March 22, 1994 rule

exceeded EPA’s statutory authority. The

Court vacated the rule and remanded it

to the Agency for further proceedings.

On March 28, 1995, EPA and

environmental and utility-industry

parties signed an agreement addressing

the March 22, 1994 regulations,

including issues raised by the Court’s

remand.

Based on the Court’s decision and a

review of the record, the Agency is now

revising the March 22, 1994 regulations.

The low-NOX-burner-technology

definition is revised to comply with the

Court’s decision. Other provisions

concerning the compliance date for

Phase I NOX emission limitations, AELs,

and plans for averaging NOX emissions

of two or more units are also revised.

Because the rule revisions are consistent

with the Court’s decision and the

Agency does not expect to receive

adverse comments, the revisions are
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 71 / Thursday, April 13, 1995 / Proposed Rules 18793

also being issued as a direct final rule

in the Final Rules section of this

Federal Register. The revisions are also

consistent with the March 28, 1995

agreement.

DATES: Comments on the regulations

proposed by this action must be

received on or before May 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments. All written

comments must be identified with the

appropriate docket number (Docket No.

A–92–15) and must be submitted in

duplicate to EPA Air Docket Section

(6102), Waterside Mall, Room M1500,

1st Floor, 401 M Street, SW, Washington

DC 20460.

Docket. Docket No. A–92–15,

containing information considered

during development of the promulgated

standards and requirements in this

proposal, is available for public

inspection and copying between 8:30

a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday, at EPA’s Air Docket Section at

the above address. A reasonable fee may

be charged for copying. Additional data

and information pertaining to the rule

may be found in Docket No. A–90–39.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Tsirigotis, Acid Rain Division

(6204J), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington,

DC 20460 (for technical matters) at (202)

233–9620; or Dwight C. Alpern (same

address) (for legal matters) at (202) 233–

9151.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If no

significant, adverse comments are

timely received, no further activity is

contemplated in relation to this

proposed rule and the direct final rule

in the Final Rules section of this

Federal Register will automatically go

into effect on the date specified in that

rule. If significant, adverse comments

are timely received on any portion of

the direct final rule, that portion will be

withdrawn and all public comment

received on that portion will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on the relevant portions of this

proposed rule. Because the Agency will

not institute a second comment period

on this proposed rule, any parties

interested in commenting should do so

during this comment period.

For further supplemental information,

the detailed rationale, and the rule

revisions, see the information provided

in the direct final rule in the Final Rules

section of this Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 76

Environmental protection, Acid rain

program, Air pollution control, Nitrogen

oxides, Incorporation by reference,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: March 31, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–8735 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

46 CFR Parts 90, 97 and 148

[CGD 87–069]

RIN 2115–AD02

Carriage of Bulk Solid Materials

Requiring Special Handling

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;

termination.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

terminating rulemaking intended to

amend the Coast Guard’s regulations for

the carriage of certain bulk solid

materials. The proposed rules would

have added to the list of materials

permitted under the regulations

materials carried under Coast Guard

Special Permits issued pursuant to this

regulation (Special Permits) and other

materials contained in the International

Maritime Organization (IMO) Code of

Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes

(IMO Bulk Solids Code, or ‘‘BC Code’’),

including coal. The Coast Guard wishes

to focus its available resources to

actions of the highest priority; therefore,

the Coast Guard is terminating further

rulemaking under docket number 87–

069.

DATES: This proposed rulemaking is

terminated April 13, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Frank K. Thompson, Hazardous

Materials Branch, Office of Marine

Safety, Security and Environmental

Protection, (202) 267–1217.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On April 28, 1989, an Advance Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) was

published in the Federal Register (54

FR 18308). The Coast Guard received 16

letters commenting on the ANPRM. No

public hearing was requested, and none

was held. The comments received in

response to the ANPRM were

considered in the development of the

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM).

On April 12, 1994, a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking was published in

the Federal Register (59 FR 17418). The

public comment period on this NPRM

had been scheduled to close on July 11,

1994; however, because of several

requests from interested members of the

public, the Coast Guard published a

supplemental NPRM on August 5, 1994

(59 FR 40004) reopening the public

comment period for an additional 30

days ending September 6, 1994.

In response to the NPRM, the Coast

Guard received 55 letters containing

more than 200 comments. Commenters

included shippers, carriers, terminal

operators, marine surveyors, trade

associations, private individuals, and

the Canadian Coast Guard. No public

hearing was requested, and none was

held.

After a comprehensive review of its

active regulatory program, the Coast

Guard has determined that this

rulemaking is of relatively low priority

at this time. The Coast Guard wishes to

focus its available resources on actions

of the highest priority and has

determined that the best course of

action is to terminate further rulemaking

under docket number 87–069. In

keeping with the President’s direction to

Federal agencies to review their

regulations, the Coast Guard will

reexamine this issue at some point in

the future to determine if further

rulemaking is necessary. Based on these

considerations, the Coast Guard is

terminating further rulemaking under

docket number 87–069.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Acting Chief, Office of Marine Safety Security

and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 95–9037 Filed 4–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 94–123, DA 95–694]

Radio Broadcast Services; Television

Program Practices

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

reply comment period.

SUMMARY: The Commission granted a

joint request by the Network Affiliated

Stations Alliance for an extension of

time for filing reply comments in this

proceeding. The Commission

determined that the extension of time

was warranted in light of the time

necessary to compile information

critical to resolution of the numerous

and complex issues raised in this