21460 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices

Notice of Revised Exhibit J

May 6, 1996.

Take notice that the following

hydroelectric application has been filed

with the Commission and is available

for public inspection:

a. Type of Application: Revised

Exhibit J.

b. Project No.: 2299–037.

c. Date Filed: October 30, 1995.

d. Applicant: Turlock Irrigation

District.

e. Name of Project: Don Pedro Project.

f. Location: On Tuolumne River, La

Grange City, Tuolumne County,

California.

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power

Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 791(a)–825(r).

h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Paul D.

Elias, General Manager, Turlock

Irrigation District, P.O. Box 949,

Turlock, CA 95381 (209) 883–8211.

i. FERC Contact: Anum Purchiaroni,

(202) 219–3297.

j. Comment Date: June 24, 1996.

k. Description of Project: The licensee

filed a revised exhibit J to reflect

changes to two of the project’s

transmission lines; the East and West

lines. Under the license, the East and

West lines extended from the Don Pedro

switchyard to Turlock Irrigation

District’s Geer Substation. In 1983, the

licensee constructed a new substation

(named Hawkins) between Don Pedro

Project and Geer Substation. The

licensee reconfigured the East line by

constructing 2 miles of new line

connecting it to the Hawkins Substation,

and removed the West line from service.

The total length of the East line is 23

miles, which is 8 miles shorter than

authorized by the license. The new

substation and reconfigured

transmission line, which were

constructed without prior Commission

authorization, affected properties owned

by the licensee.

1. This notice also consists of the

following standard paragraphs: B, C2,

and D2.

B. Comments, Protests, or Motions to

Intervene—Anyone may submit

comments, a protest, or a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

requirements of Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214.

In determining the appropriate action to

take, the Commission will consider all

protests or other comments filed, but

only those who file a motion to

intervene in accordance with the

Commission’s Rules may become a

party to the proceeding. Any comments,

protests, or motions to intervene must

be received on or before the specified

comment date for the particular

application.

C2. Filing and Service of Responsive

Documents—Any filings must bear in

all capital letters the title

‘‘COMMENTS,’’

‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS

AND CONDITIONS,’’ ‘‘NOTICE OF

INTENT TO FILE COMPETING

APPLICATION,’’ ‘‘COMPETING

APPLICATION,’’ ‘‘PROTEST,’’ or

‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE,’’ as

applicable, and the Project Number of

the particular application to which the

filing refers. Any of these documents

must be filed by providing the original

and the number of copies provided by

the Commission’s regulations to: The

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426. A copy of a

notice of intent, competing application,

or motion to intervene must also be

served upon each representative of the

Applicant specified in the particular

application.

D2. Agency Comments—Federal,

state, and local agencies are invited to

file comments on the described

application. A copy of the application

may be obtained by agencies directly

from the Applicant. If an agency does

not file comments within the time

specified for filing comments, it will be

presumed to have no comments. One

copy of an agency’s comments must also

be sent to the Applicant’s

representatives.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–11675 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5502–9]

Agency Information Collection

Activities Up for Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

listed below is coming up for renewal.

Before submitting the renewal package

to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA or the Agency) is soliciting

comments on specific aspects of the

collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 9, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Phaseout Manager,

Stratospheric Protection Division, U.S.

EPA (6205J), 401 M Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460. Materials

relevant to this proposed rulemaking are

contained in Public Docket No. A–92–

13. This docket is located in Room M–

1500, Waterside Mall (Ground Floor),

U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460. Dockets may

be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.,

Monday through Friday. A reasonable

fee may be charged for copying docket

materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Land, Stratospheric Protection Division,

U.S. EPA (6205J), 401 M Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 233–

9185, phone: (202) 233–9185, fax: (202)

233–9637. For questions only, you may

use the electronic address:

land.tom@epamail.epa.gov. All

comments must be sent to the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected entities: Entities affected by

this action are companies that produce,

import, export, transform, and destroy

controlled ozone-depleting substances,

as well as suppliers of laboratory ozonedepleting chemicals and companies

deemed to have an essential use of these

chemicals beyond the phaseout.

Title: ‘‘Recordkeeping and Periodic

Reporting of the Production, Import,

Export, Recycling, Destruction,

Transhipment and Feedstock Use of

Ozone-depleting Substances.’’ OMB

Control Number: 2060–0170. EPA

Control Number: 1617.06. Expiration

Date: September 30, 1996.

Abstract: EPA accelerated the

phaseout of controlled class I ozonedepleting substances under Section 606

of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (CAA) in regulations published on

December 10, 1993, in the Federal

Register (58 FR 65018) and codified in

40 CFR Subpart B (§ 82.1 et seq.) These

regulations were amended in the

Federal Register on May 10, 1995, (60

FR 24970) in order to ensure an orderly

phaseout and account for exempted

production and consumption. Under the

Montreal Protocol and Title VI of the

CAA, consumption is defined as

production plus imports minus exports.

The ICR renewal indicates changes in

reporting requirements resulting from

the phaseout. The reasons information

is collected, the way information is

used, and whether the requirements are

mandatory, voluntary, or required to

obtain a benefit, are described below.

The ICR renewal will not include any

burden for third-party or public

disclosures not previously reviewed and

approved by OMB.

EPA monitors production, import,

export, transformation, destruction of

controlled substances and special
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices 21461

exemptions beyond the phaseout of

class I controlled substances through

reporting requirements published in

regulations. These reporting

requirements are designed to:

(1) Satisfy U.S. obligations under the

international treaty, the Montreal

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the

Ozone Layer;

(2) Fulfill statutory obligations under

Section 603(b) of Title VI of the CAA;

(3) Report to Congress on the

production, use and consumption of

class I and class II controlled substances

as statutorily required in Section 603(d)

of the CAA;

(4) Address Federal and industry

concerns regarding illegal imports of

newly produced and previously used

controlled substances that are

undercutting U.S. markets.

The information submitted to EPA is

maintained in a Tracking System that

allows the Agency:

(1) to maintain control over total

production and consumption of

controlled substances to satisfy

conditions of the CAA and fulfill U.S.

obligations under the Protocol,

(2) to monitor compliance with limits

and restrictions on production, imports,

exports and specific exemptions to the

phaseout for individual U.S. companies

(3) to enforce against illegal importers

and other violations related to the

control of class I and class II controlled

substances.

The Montreal Protocol and Title VI of

the CAA establish limits on total U.S.

production, import and export of class

I and class I controlled substances. As

of January 1, 1996, the U.S. is obligated

under the Protocol to cease production

and import of class I controlled

substances (except methyl bromide)

with exemptions for essential-uses,

transformation, destruction and

previously used material. The Protocol

also establishes a limit on total

consumption of class II controlled

substances beginning in 1996. The CAA

has its own limits on production and

consumption of controlled substances

that EPA must enforce using the

information submitted.

To ensure U.S. compliance with the

limits and restrictions established by the

Protocol and the CAA, the regulation

establishes controls on individual

companies. The limits and restrictions

for individual U.S. companies are

monitored by EPA through the reporting

requirements established in the

regulation. The information provided is

entered into EPA’s Stratospheric

Protection Tracking System. The

Tracking System allows EPA to conduct

compliance monitoring for individual

companies, as well as compliance

monitoring for the U.S. with respect to

Protocol obligations and statutory

requirements under the CAA.

EPA uses the information to direct

special attention to illegal activities

associated with the import of both

newly produced and previously used

controlled substances. Illegal imports

and the avoidance of the tax on these

chemicals make them more available,

reduce the incentive to shift to

alternatives, and penalize companies

who are complying with U.S. laws. EPA

is an active part of the Federal interagency taskforce conducting nationwide enforcement actions. The

information provided to EPA in

response to the accelerated phaseout

regulations often form the basis for

cases.

The regulation outlines both

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements. EPA has produced a new

Guidance Document that explains the

simplifications and changes in postphaseout reporting and includes the

revised forms. In conjunction with the

new Guidance Document, EPA is

developing a new industry electronic

version of the reporting/tracking system

for industry reporting. EPA is also

initiating a review of all reporting

requirements under the Montreal

Protocol and plans on leading an

international effort to simplify them to

reduce U.S. burden and burden for

reporting companies.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the Agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

Agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology, e.g., permitting electronic

submission of responses.

An Agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information,

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for EPA’s regulations are

displayed in 40 CFR Part 9.

Burden Statement: The burden hours

shown represent the hours in the

information collection request (ICR)

renewal. The renewal significantly

reduces overall burden hours due to the

transition to the post-phaseout period.

The annual burden hours prior to the

phaseout were estimated to be 34,110

hours. Today’s ICR renewal estimates

annual burden hours to be 10,532 hours.

The following is a Table summarizing

the burden hours for compiling

information and submitting it to EPA

Headquarters:

Collection activity Number of

respondents

Responses/

respondent

Total responsesHours per

response Total hours

Producer’s Report ..................................................................................... 8 4 32 16 512

Importer’s Report ...................................................................................... 6 4 24 16 384

Notification of Trade ................................................................................. 2 1 2 2 4

Export Report ............................................................................................ 10 1 10 120 1200

Lab Certification ........................................................................................ 1000 1 1000 1 1000

Class II Report .......................................................................................... 14 4 56 16 896

Transformation and Destruction ............................................................... 15 1 15 120 1800

Essential Use and ..................................................................................... 12 4 48 32 1536

Lab Suppliers ............................................................................................ 25 4 100 32 3200

Total burden hrs ............................................................................. .................... .................... .................... .................... 10532

This estimate includes the time

needed to review instructions; develop,

acquire, install, and utilize technology

and systems for the purposes of

collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any
21462 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Send comments regarding these

matters, or any other aspects of the

information collection, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to

the address listed above under ADDRESS

near the top of this Notice.

Dated: April 30, 1996.

Paul M. Stolpman,

Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs.

[FR Doc. 96–11755 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[FRL–5502–8]

Air Pollution Control; Proposed

Actions on Clean Air Act Grants to the

South Coast Air Quality Management

District; California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed determinations with

request for comments and notice of

opportunity for public hearing.

SUMMARY: The U.S. EPA has made two

proposed determinations that

reductions in expenditures of nonFederal funds for the South Coast Air

Quality Management District

(SCAQMD) in Diamond Bar, California

are a result of non-selective reductions

in expenditures. These determinations,

when final, will permit the SCAQMD to

keep the financial assistance awarded to

it by EPA for FY–95, and to be awarded

financial assistance for FY–96 by EPA,

under section 105(c) of the Clean Air

Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments and/or requests for a

public hearing must be received by EPA

at the address stated below by June 10,

1996.

ADDRESSES: All comments and/or

requests for a public hearing should be

mailed to: Douglas K. McDaniel, Air

Grants Section (A–2–3), Air and Toxics

Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California 94105–3901; FAX (415) 744–

1076.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas K. McDaniel, Air Grants

Section (A–2–3), Air and Toxics

Division, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California 94105–3901 at (415) 744–

1246.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

authority of Section 105 of the CAA,

EPA provides financial assistance

(grants) to the SCAQMD, whose

jurisdiction includes Los Angeles and

Orange Counties in southern California,

to aid in the operation of its air

pollution control programs. In FY–95,

EPA awarded the SCAQMD $7,454,238,

which represented approximately 7.8%

of the SCAQMD’s budget.

Section 105(c)(1) of the CAA, 42

U.S.C. 7405(c)(1), provides that ‘‘[n]o

agency shall receive any grant under

this section during any fiscal year when

its expenditures of non-Federal funds

for recurrent expenditures for air

pollution control programs will be less

than its expenditures were for such

programs during the preceding fiscal

year. In order for [EPA] to award grants

under this section in a timely manner

each fiscal year, [EPA] shall compare an

agency’s prospective expenditure level

to that of its second preceding year.’’

EPA may still award financial assistance

to an agency not meeting this

requirement, however, if EPA, ‘‘after

notice and opportunity for public

hearing, determines that a reduction in

expenditures is attributable to a nonselective reduction in the expenditures

in the programs of all Executive branch

agencies of the applicable unit of

Government.’’ CAA § 105(c)(2). These

statutory requirements are repeated in

EPA’s implementing regulations at 40

CFR 35.210(a).

In its FY–95 § 105 application, which

EPA reviewed in early 1995, the

SCAQMD projected expenditures of

non-Federal funds for recurrent

expenditures (or its maintenance of

effort (MOE)) of $82,811,585. This MOE

would have been sufficient to meet the

MOE requirements of the CAA, i.e. it

would have been equal to or greater

than the MOE for the previous year (FY–

94). In January of 1996, however, the

SCAQMD submitted to EPA final

documentation which shows that its

actual FY–95 MOE was $78,479,091.

This amount represents a shortfall of

$2,026,404 from the MOE of

$80,505,495 for the preceding fiscal year

(FY–94). In order for the SCAQMD to be

eligible to keep its FY–95 grant, EPA

must make a determination under

§ 105(c)(2).

Furthermore, in its FY–96 § 105 grant

application the SCAQMD projected

MOE of $78,452,571. This amount

represents a shortfall of $26,520 from

the actual FY–95 MOE of $78,479,091.

In order for the SCAQMD to be eligible

to be awarded its FY–96 grant, EPA

must make a determination under

§ 105(c)(2).

The SCAQMD is a single-purpose

agency whose primary source of funding

is emission fee revenue. It is the ‘‘unit

of Government’’ for § 105(c)(2)

purposes. The SCAQMD submitted

documentation to EPA which shows

that over the last three years emission

reductions brought on by a combination

of economic recession and more

restrictive emission rules have reduced

fee revenues from stationary sources

from a high of $74,433,331 in 1990–

1991 to $52,282,026 in 1994–1995. The

SCAQMD projects this revenue loss to

continue through FY–96. As a result, the

SCAQMD has instituted hiring/salary

freezes, furloughs, and layoffs, has

reduced its equipment purchases and

contract expenditures, and has

instituted new programs to reduce costs

such as permit streamlining, computerassisted permit processing, and

privatization efforts.

Therefore, the SCAQMD’s MOE

reductions resulted from a loss of fee

revenues due to circumstances beyond

its control. EPA proposes to determine

that the SCAQMD’s lower FY–95 and

FY–96 MOE levels meet the § 105(c)(2)

criteria as resulting from a non-selective

reduction of expenditures. Pursuant to

40 CFR 35.210, these determinations

will allow the SCAQMD to keep the

funds received from EPA for FY–95 and

be awarded financial assistance for FY–

96.

This notice constitutes a request for

public comment and an opportunity for

public hearing as required by the Clean

Air Act. All written comments received

by June 10, 1996 on this proposal will

be considered. EPA will conduct a

public hearing on this proposal only if

a written request for such is received by

EPA at the address above by June 10,

1996.

If no written request for a hearing is

received, EPA will proceed to both final

determinations. While notice of the final

determinations will not be published in

the Federal Register, copies of the

determinations can be obtained by

sending a written request to Douglas

McDaniel at the above address.

Dated: May 2, 1996.

David P. Howekamp,

Director, Air and Toxics Division, U.S. EPA,

Region 9.

[FR Doc. 96–11753 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[FRL–5503–5]

Acid Rain Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA today announces the

allocation of allowances to small diesel