20504 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules

hearing on proposed regulations that

reflect the new procedures for obtaining

an automatic extension of time to file an

individual income tax return.

DATES: The public hearing originally

scheduled for May 8, 1996, beginning at

10:00 a.m. is cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Slaughter of the Regulations

Unit, Assistant Chief Counsel

(Corporate), (202) 622–7180 (not a tollfree number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

subject of the public hearing is proposed

regulations under sections 6081 and

6651 of the Internal Revenue Code. A

notice of proposed rulemaking by cross

reference to temporary regulations and

notice of public hearing appearing in

the Federal Register for Thursday,

January 4, 1996 (61 FR 338), announced

that a pubic hearing on the proposed

regulations would be held on

Wednesday, May 8, 1996, beginning at

10:00 a.m., in the IRS Auditorium, 7400

Corridor, Internal Revenue Building,

1111 Constitution Avenue NW.,

Washington, D.C.

The public hearing scheduled for

Wednesday, May 8, 1996, is cancelled.

Cynthia E. Grigsby,

Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief

Counsel (Corporate).

[FR Doc. 96–11404 Filed 5–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 095–0008b; FRL–5464–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, Santa

Barbara County Air Pollution Control

District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

a revision to the California State

Implementation Plan (SIP) which

concerns the control of volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions, oxides of

nitrogen (NOX), and oxides of sulfur

(SOX) from flare and thermal oxidizers.

The intended effect of proposing

approval of this rule is to regulate

emissions of VOC, NOX, and SOX in

accordance with the goals of the Clean

Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or

the Act). In the Final Rules Section of

this Federal Register, the EPA is

approving the state’s SIP revision as a

direct final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views this as a

noncontroversial revision and

anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for this approval is set

forth in the direct final rule. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to this proposed rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this rule. If EPA receives

adverse comments, the direct final rule

will be withdrawn and all public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this document. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received in writing by June 6,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to: Daniel A.

Meer, Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air

and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the rule and EPA’s

evaluation report of the rule are

available for public inspection at EPA’s

Region 9 office during normal business

hours. Copies of the submitted rule are

also available for inspection at the

following locations:

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution

Control District, 26 Castilian Drive, B–

23, Goleta, CA 93117

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 95814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Section

(A–5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901, Telephone:

(415) 744–1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

document concerns Santa Barbara

County Air Pollution Control District

Rule 359, Flare and Thermal Oxidizers,

submitted to EPA on July 13, 1994 by

the California Air Resources Board. For

further information, please see the

information provided in the Direct Final

action which is located in the Rules

Section of this Federal Register.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: April 18, 1996.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–11207 Filed 5–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[IL–18–7–7024b; FRL–5436–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plan; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On October 21, 1993, the

Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency (IEPA) submitted to the USEPA

volatile organic compound (VOC) rules

that were intended to satisfy part of the

requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the

Clean Air Act (Act) amendments of

1990. Specifically, these rules provide

control requirements for certain major

sources not covered by a Control

Technique Guideline (CTG) document.

These non-CTG VOC rules apply to

sources in the East St. Louis ozone

nonattainment area which emit (at

maximum capacity) 100 tons of VOC per

year. These rules therefore provide an

environmental benefit due to the

imposition of control requirements on

sources emitting greater than 100 tons of

VOC per year that belong to certain

source categories. The USEPA proposes

to approve these VOC rules for major

non-CTG sources. This action lists the

State implementation plan revision that

USEPA is proposing to approve and

provides an opportunity for public

comment. A rationale for approving this

request is presented in the final rules

section of this Federal Register, where

USEPA is approving the revision

request as a direct final rule without

prior proposal because USEPA views

this as a noncontroversial revision and

anticipates no adverse comments. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to that direct final rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this proposed rule. If USEPA

receives adverse comments the direct

final rule will be withdrawn. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

document should do so at this time. The

final rule on this proposed action will

address all comments received.

DATES: Comments on this document

must be received by June 6, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulatory Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J),

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Comments should be strictly limited

to the subject matter of this proposal.

Copies of the State submittal and

USEPA’s analysis of it are available for

inspection at: Regulation Development
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20505

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J)

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven Rosenthal, Air Programs Branch,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, (312) 886–6052, at the Chicago

address indicated above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information see the direct

final rule which is published in the

rules section of this Federal Register.

Dated: February 7, 1996.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting, Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–11203 Filed 5–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[CC Docket No. 92–237; DA 96–678]

Carrier Identification Codes

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On April 30, 1996, the

Commission released a public notice

seeking further comments to the

Commission’s Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (Administration of the

North American Numbering Plan), CC

Docket No. 92–237 specifically on the

issue of the appropriate length of the

transition period for the expansion of

carrier identification codes (CICs) from

three to four digits. The intended effect

of this action is to seek further

comments because the record on the

NPRM is two years old, and significant

events have occurred since the record

closed.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before May 21, 1996, and reply

comments must be filed on or before

May 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Ward, (202) 418–2336, Elizabeth

Nightingale, (202) 418–2352, or Mary

DeLuca, (202) 418–2334, all of the

Common Carrier Bureau, Network

Services Division.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Released: April 30, 1996.

1. On April 4, 1994, the Commission

adopted a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (CC Docket No. 92–237)

addressing various issues relating to

administration of the North American

Numbering Plan and tentatively

concluding, regarding carrier

identification codes (CICs), that the

industry’s plan to expand Feature Group

D (FGD) CICs from three to four digits,

in the event of exhaust of the three digit

codes, was reasonable to ensure that the

demand for CICs could be met.

Administration of the North American

Numbering Plan, Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, 9 FCC Rcd 2068 (1994)

(NPRM)(59 FR 24103 (05/10/94)). The

NPRM also tentatively concluded that

the transition or permissive dialing

period for the expansion, during which

both three and four digit CICs would be

recognized, should last six years. The

pleading cycle in response to the NPRM

closed on June 30, 1994.

2. The record on the NPRM is two

years old, and significant events have

occurred since the record closed: (1)

The assignment of exclusively four digit

FGD CICs has begun, and in turn the

transition period has begun; (2) there

has been an unexpected increase in the

demand for CICs, due to new uses for

the codes recently discovered by the

industry; (3) we now expect an even

greater demand for CICs, with the

anticipated increase in carriers entering

the market as a result of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996,

Pub.L. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996)

(1996 Act); and (4) the local exchange

carriers are now obligated to provide

dialing parity under Section 251 of the

1996 Act, see 47 U.S.C. 251(b)(3).

3. We seek, therefore, to refresh the

record in CC Docket No. 92–237

specifically on the issue of the

appropriate length of the transition

period. Commenters should limit their

comments to updated factual

information in light of the recent events

described above. We ask that parties

neither simply reiterate their previous

comments nor raise any new issues, but

confine their discussion to how the

length of the transition period has been

affected, if at all.

4. Comments and reply comments in

response to this Notice should be no

more than 10 pages, and otherwise in

compliance with Sections 1.415 and

1.419 of the Commission’s rules.

Comments must be filed on or before

May 21, 1996, and reply comments must

be filed on or before May 28, 1996.

Comments and reply comments must be

sent to the Office of the Secretary, FCC,

1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20554. Two copies should also be sent

to the Network Services Division,

Common Carrier Bureau, FCC, Room

235, 2000 M Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20554. One copy should also be

sent to the Commission’s contractor for

public service records duplication: ITS,

Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037. Comments and

reply comments will be available for

public inspection during regular

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20554. Copies can

also be obtained from ITS at (202) 857–

3800.

5. We will continue to treat this

proceeding as non-restricted for

purposes of the Commission’s ex parte

rules. See generally 47 CFR §§ 1.1200–

1.1216. For further information contact,

David Ward (202/418–2336), Elizabeth

Nightingale (202/418–2352), or Mary

DeLuca (202/418–2334) of the Network

Services Division, Common Carrier

Bureau.

Federal Communications Commission

Geraldine Matise,

Chief, Network Services Division, Common

Carrier Bureau.

[FR Doc. 96–11438 Filed 5–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 96–100; RM–8789]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Amherst

and Lynchburg, VA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition by Greater

Lynchburg Stereo Broadcasters

proposing the allotment of Channel

294A to Amherst, Virginia, and the

allotment Channel 229A to Lynchburg,

Virginia. Channels 294A and 229A can

be allotted to Amherst and Lynchburg,

respectively, in compliance with the

Commission’s minimum distance

separation requirements. Channel 294A

can be allotted to Amherst with a site

restriction of 12.8 kilometers (8.0 miles)

northeast to avoid short-spacing

conflicts with the licensed site of

Station WLQE(FM), Channel 295A,

Bedford, Virginia, and with Station

WPXX(FM)’s construction permit for

Channel 294A at Semora, North

Carolina. The coordinates for Channel

294A are 37–40–36 and 78–57–19.

Channel 229A can be allotted to

Lynchburg without a site restriction.

The coordinates for Channel 229A at

Lynchburg are 37–24–49 and 79–08–33.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 24, 1996, and reply

comments on or before July 9, 1996.