2216 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Proposed Rules

C. Crediting Like Work Experience for

Training Purposes

Currently shaft and slope and

construction workers are not required to

take part 48 training in most instances.

Following current policy, if a worker

performs shaft and slope work for 12

months or more within 36 months and

is then contracted to perform extraction

and production work, the worker would

not receive credit toward establishing

experienced miner status for time

already worked. MSHA is reviewing the

possibility of allowing these workers to

receive credit toward establishing the 12

months of mining experience required

to maintain experienced miner status.

Another issue MSHA is considering is

experienced miner credit for like work

experience for a person from a nonmining environment. This would allow

such a person working on mine property

to be considered experienced for

training purposes. A related issue is

how the operator would document the

existence of like work experience.

D. Independent Contractor Training

Current policy allows independent

contractors to have their own training

plan or use the mine operator’s plan.

Contractors can also conduct their own

training, be trained by the operator, or

use approved cooperative or state

programs. MSHA is considering

different language to make it easier for

independent contractors and operators

to determine what type of training (new

miner, newly-employed experienced

miner, or hazard) is required for

independent contractors.

E. Completing and Signing Training

Certificates (Form 5000–23)

MSHA is considering clarifying the

legal responsibility of the person

certifying that training is completed and

who may sign the form and when.

MSHA is also interested in comments

on how computerized versions of Form

5000–23 can best be utilized within the

existing regulatory framework.

III. Request for Comments

This notice covers the main points

raised at the various public meetings.

During the comment period, anyone

may submit comments or suggestions

related to any aspect of part 48 policy.

Dated: January 16, 1996.

J. Davitt McAteer,

Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and

Health.

[FR Doc. 96–1079 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Chapter I

[FRL–5402–9]

Open Meeting of the Negotiated

Rulemaking Advisory Committee for

Small Nonroad Engine Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: FACA committee meeting—

negotiated rulemaking on small nonroad

engine regulations.

SUMMARY: As required by section 9(a)(2)

of the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Pub. L. 92–463), EPA is giving notice of

the next meeting of the Advisory

Committee to negotiate the Phase II rule

to reduce air emissions from small

nonroad engines. Small nonroad

engines are engines which are spark

ignited gasoline engines less than 25

horsepower, including lawn mower,

chain saw, and weed wacker engines.

The meeting is open to the public

without advance registration. Agenda

items for the meeting include discussion

of the emissions standard and standard

structure. The Committee is hoping to

finalize a series of recommendations to

EPA regarding the control of emissions

in Phase II of the rule.

DATES: The committee will meet on

February 16, 1996 from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The location of the meeting

will be the Courtyard by Marriott, 3205

Boardwalk, Ann Arbor, MI 48108;

phone: (313) 995–5900.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Persons needing further information on

the substantive matters of the rule

should contact Gay McGregor, National

Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory,

2565 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor,

Michigan 48105, (313) 668–4438.

Persons needing further information on

committee procedural matters should

call Deborah Dalton, Consensus and

Dispute Resolution Program,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20460,

(202) 260–5495, or the Committee’s

facilitators, Lucy Moore or John FolkWilliams, Western Network, 616 Don

Gaspar, Santa Fe, New Mexico, 87501,

(505) 982–9805.

Dated: January 19, 1996.

Deborah Dalton,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 96–1209 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 70

[VIOO1; FRL–5403–2]

Clean Air Act Proposed Full Approval

of Operating Permits Program: The

United States Virgin Islands

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed full approval.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes full

approval of the operating permits

program submitted by the United States

Virgin Islands for the purpose of

complying with Federal requirements

for an approvable state program to issue

operating permits to all major stationary

sources and to certain other sources.

DATES: Comments on this proposed

action must be received in writing by

February 26, 1996. Written comments

should be addressed to Steven C. Riva,

Chief, Permitting and Toxics Support

Section, at the New York Region II

Office listed below.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s

submittal and other supporting

information used in developing the

proposed full approval are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations:

EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, 21st

Floor, New York, New York 10007–

1866, Attention: Steven C. Riva.

EPA Region II, Caribbean Field Office,

Centro Europa Building, Suite 417, 1492

Ponce de Leon Avenue, Stop 22, San

Juan, Puerto Rico 00907–4127,

Attention: Jose Ivan Guzman.

The U.S. Virgin Islands Department of

Planning and Natural Resources,

Division of Environmental Protection,

Building 111, Apartment 14A, Water

Gut Homes, Christainsted, St. Croix,

U.S. Virgin Islands 00820. Attention:

Leonard Reed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Umesh Dholakia, Permitting and Toxics

Support Section, at the above EPA office

in New York or at telephone number

(212) 637–4023.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

As required under title V of the Clean

Air Act (‘‘the Act’’) as amended in 1990,

EPA has promulgated rules which

define the minimum elements of an

approvable State operating permits

program and the corresponding

standards and procedures by which the

EPA will approve, oversee, and

withdraw approval of State operating

permits programs (see 57 FR 32250 (July

21, 1992)). These rules are codified at 40

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

70. Title V requires States to develop,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Proposed Rules 2217

and submit to EPA, programs for issuing

these operating permits to all major

stationary sources and to certain other

sources.

The Act requires that States develop

and submit these programs to EPA by

November 15, 1993, and that EPA act to

approve or disapprove each program

within 1 year after receiving the

submittal. The EPA’s program review

occurs pursuant to Section 502 of the

Act and the Part 70 regulations, which

together outline criteria for approval or

disapproval. Where a program

substantially, but not fully, meets the

requirements of Part 70, EPA may grant

the program interim approval for a

period of up to 2 years. If EPA has not

fully approved a program by 2 years

after the November 15, 1993 date, or by

the end of an interim program, it must

establish and implement a Federal

program.

II. Proposed Action and Implications

A. Analysis of State Submission

1. Support Materials

The Governor of the United States

Virgin Islands submitted a Part 70

permitting program for the U.S. Virgin

Islands with a letter requesting EPA’s

approval on November 18, 1993 and

supplemental packages through June 9,

1995. The program contains a

description of how the Virgin Islands

intends to implement the program

consistent with the requirements of the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42

U.S.C. §§ 7401–7671q) and 40 CFR Part

70. The program includes supporting

documentation such as evidence of the

procedurally correct adoption of the

permitting rule, permit application

forms, and a sample permit form. On

May 15, 1995, the Attorney General of

the U.S. Virgin Islands submitted a legal

opinion stating that the Virgin Islands

Department of Planning and Natural

Resources (VIDPNR) has adequate legal

authority to carry out the program. It

should be noted that the Virgin Islands’

program contains some wording errors

and as such the Virgin Islands has

agreed to correct those errors prior to

final approval. These wording errors in

the Virgin Islands’ legislation (Act No.

6011 signed into law September 2, 1994)

are:

(1) Section 212(a) states that ‘‘No rule

or regulation and no amendment * * *

shall take effect AFTER public comment

and/or hearing on due notice as

provided herein’’. The word ‘‘after’’

should be replaced by the word

‘‘without’’.

(2) Section 205 (a), (b) (1) and (2)—

replace ‘‘chapter’’ with ‘‘with respect to

Part 70 permit program’’.

(3) Section 215(a)—delete

‘‘compliance order’’ and replace with

‘‘notice of violation’’ after

‘‘Commissioner is authorized to issue

* * *’’

(4) Section 215(b)(3)—There should

be an additional sentence following

‘‘$250,000’’. ‘‘The assessment of any

administrative fine in excess of

$250,000 may be enforced by the

commencement of a civil action by the

Attorney General pursuant to the Virgin

Islands Law.

2. Regulations and Program

Implementation

The Virgin Islands’ Part 70 permitting

regulation is contained in Subchapter

204 and Subchapter 206 (Divisions 1

and 2) of the Virgin Islands Rules and

Regulations, Title 12, Chapter 9 (RAR).

The Virgin Islands’ regulation meets the

main requirements of Part 70 as

described below:

a. applicability (40 CFR 70.2 and

70.3): Sources required to obtain a

permit under the Virgin Islands’

regulation are defined as ‘‘Part 70

sources’’ and include all major Part 70

sources. The rule defers non-major

sources until the Administrator

completes a rulemaking to determine

how the title V program should be

structured for non-major sources and

the appropriateness of any permanent

exemptions. The regulation

permanently exempts any source that

would be required to obtain a permit

solely because it is subject to Standards

of Performance for New Residential

Wood Heaters or the National Emission

Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants

for Asbestos, Standards for Demolition

and Renovation. The regulation

provides for the R&D Facilities to be

treated separately with the concurrence

of the Commissioner. In as much as the

Commissioner will be in a position to

determine whether or not the facility

meets the support facility test this does

not constitute an approvability issue.

b. permit content (40 CFR 70.6):

Subchapter 206–71 requires that each

permit contain emission limitations and

standards to ensure compliance with all

applicable requirements. Permits may

also contain certain operational

flexibility requirements such as terms

and conditions for reasonably

anticipated operating scenarios and for

the trading of emissions increases and

decreases (to the extent the applicable

requirements provided for such trading)

in the permitted facility. Such

operational flexibility provisions are

explained more fully in Subchapter

206–65 of the RAR.

c. public participation (40 CFR 70.7):

The public will be provided with notice

of, and an opportunity to comment on,

draft permits relating to initial permit

issuance, permit renewals, and

significant modifications (Subchapter

206–73 of the RAR).

d. permit modifications (40 CFR 70.7):

Sources may apply for expedited permit

changes for minor permit modifications.

Significant modifications must undergo

all Part 70 permit issuance procedures

(Subchapter 206–82 of the RAR).

e. EPA oversight (40 CFR 70.8): Each

permit, renewal, and minor or

significant modification is subject to

EPA oversight and veto (Subchapter

206–73 of the RAR).

f. enforcement authority (40 CFR

70.11): Chapter 9 of Title 12 of the

Virgin Islands Code, pertaining to the

air pollution control and related

purposes (VI’s Act # 6011) as amended

on September 2, 1994 directly provides

for enforcement and penalties for civil

and criminal violations of permits and

rules. Penalties will be assessed up to

$50,000 per day per violation for civil

violations, and up to $10,000 per day

per violation for criminal violations.

g. insignificant activities (40 CFR

70.5): A list of insignificant activities

can be found at Attachment 1 of the

RAR. Insignificant activities which need

not be described in the permit

application only include activities on

the list as long as no applicable

requirements apply to the activity and

the activity emits 0.05 pounds per year

or less of a criteria pollutant or 400

pounds per year or less of the hazardous

air pollutants. However, for

insignificant activities exempted

because of size or production rate, the

RAR requires that a list of such

insignificant activities must be included

in the permit application.

h. complete application forms (40

CFR 70.5): DPNR submitted a permit

application completeness criteria

checklist which will be used to help

DPNR determine if an application is

complete. Subchapter 206–63 defines

what elements must be in an application

in order for it to be complete.

i. variance provisions: Section 211 of

Title 12, Chapter 9 of the Virgin Islands

Code (statute) contains provisions for

DPNR to approve variances from

otherwise applicable emissions

limitations, provided such variances are

permitted under conditions and in a

manner which is not less stringent than

the conditions under and the manner in

which variances may be granted under

the federal Clean Air Act. Any such

variance shall not excuse compliance

with any Title V permit term or

condition. A variance from a federal

condition must be processed as a Title

V permit condition. The Commissioner
2218 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Proposed Rules

of the DPNR may not authorize a

variance which concerns a Federal

Clean Air Act requirement and SIP

requirements. Under Subchapter 206–71

of the RAR, DPNR may provide for an

emergency variance from compliance

with technology-based emission

limitations provided that: (1) The cause

of the emergency can be identified, (2)

the permitted facility was being

operated at the time of the emergency,

(3) the owner/operator took all

reasonable steps to minimize levels of

emissions that exceeded emission

standards or requirements of the permit,

and (4) submitted notice of the

emergency to the Department within

two (2) working days of the time when

emission limitations were exceeded due

to the emergency. The EPA does not

recognize the ability of a permitting

authority to grant relief from the duty to

comply with a federally enforceable Part

70 permit, except where such relief is

granted through the procedures allowed

by Part 70. A Part 70 permit may be

issued or revised (consistent with Part

70 permitting procedures) to incorporate

those terms of a variance that are

consistent with applicable

requirements. A Part 70 permit may also

incorporate, via Part 70 permit issuance

or modification procedures, the

schedule of compliance set forth in a

variance. However, EPA reserves the

right to pursue enforcement of

applicable requirements

notwithstanding the existence of a

compliance schedule in a permit to

operate. This is consistent with 40 CFR

70.5(c)(8)(iii)(C), which states that a

schedule of compliance ‘‘shall be

supplemental to, and shall not sanction

noncompliance with, the applicable

requirements on which it is based.’’

3. Permit Fee Demonstration

The Virgin Islands’ workload analysis

and fee demonstration shows that the

state will collect sufficient revenue to

implement the Title V program. The

Virgin Islands will collect permit fees

beginning at $18 per ton of actual

emissions of regulated pollutants. The

Virgin Islands’ fee demonstration and

regulation state that the Virgin Islands

may raise fees if necessary in the future.

Furthermore, the Virgin Islands’ law

requires that sufficient fees be collected

to cover direct and indirect expenses

necessary to develop, administer and

enforce the Virgin Islands’ Title V

program, including the Small Business

Technical and Environmental

Compliance Assistance Program as

required by Section 507 of the Act. The

Virgin Islands’ law establishes a special

account which is independent and

separate from any other account in the

Virgin Islands and must be used only for

the Air Quality Program.

4. Provisions Implementing Section 112

of the Act

a. authority for Section 112

Implementation: Virgin Islands has

demonstrated in its Title V program

submittal adequate legal authority to

implement and enforce all Section 112

requirements through the title V permit.

This legal authority is contained in

Virgin Islands’ enabling legislation (V.I.

Code Title 12, Section 201) and in

regulatory provisions defining

‘‘applicable requirements’’ and stating

that the permit must incorporate all

applicable requirements. EPA has

determined that this is sufficient to

allow Virgin Islands to issue permits

that assure compliance with all Section

112 requirements. The Attorney

General’s legal opinion also certifies

that VIDPNR has authority to implement

the air toxics program and to accept

automatic delegation of future national

emission standards for hazardous air

pollutants. Section 206–71 of the RAR

provides that NESHAPs when

promulgated by the EPA Administrator

will become effective as part of Virgin

Islands’ rules and regulations. Section

206 of the RAR provides for the

following Section 112 requirements:

i. case-by-case MACT determinations:

In the event that no applicable

emissions limitations for the hazardous

air pollutants have been established by

the Administrator, VIDPNR will make

case-by-case Maximum Achievable

Control Technology (MACT)

determinations as required under

Sections 112(j) and (g) of the Act. The

EPA issued an interpretive notice on

February 14, 1995 (60 FR 8333), which

outlines EPA’s revised interpretation of

112(g) applicability. The notice

postpones the effective date of 112(g)

until after EPA has promulgated a rule

addressing that provision. The notice

sets forth in detail the rationale for the

revised interpretation.

The Section 112(g) interpretive notice

explains that EPA is still considering

whether the effective date of Section

112(g) should be delayed beyond the

date of promulgation of the Federal rule

so as to allow states time to adopt rules

implementing the Federal rule, and that

EPA will provide for any such

additional delay in the final Section

112(g) rulemaking.

VIDPNR has provided broad language

in its regulation that will allow the

implementation of 112(g) immediately

after EPA promulgates its rule.

ii. early reductions: The rule

authorizes VIDPNR to issue permits

with an alternate emission limit under

the Act’s Section 112(i)(5) early

reductions program.

iii. The rule requires sources subject

to Section 112(r) of the Act to prepare

and submit risk management plans. A

source must submit annual certification

ensuring the proper implementation of

the risk management plan.

b. Section 112(l): Requirements for

approval specified in 40 CFR 70.4(b),

encompass Section 112(l)(5) approval

requirements for delegation of Section

112 standards as they apply to Part 70

sources. Section 112(l)(5) requires that

the state’s program contain adequate

authorities, adequate resources for

implementation, an expeditious

compliance schedule, and adequate

enforcement ability, which are also

requirements under Part 70. In a letter

dated May 30, 1995, VIDPNR requested

delegation through 112(l) of all existing

112 standards and all future 112

standards for both Part 70 and non-Part

70 sources and infrastructure programs.

In the letter, VIDPNR demonstrated that

it has sufficient legal authorities,

adequate resources, capability for

automatic delegation of future

standards, and adequate enforcement

ability for implementation of Section

112 of the Act for both Part 70 sources

and non-Part 70 sources. Therefore, the

EPA is proposing to grant approval

under Section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR Part

63.91 to Virgin Islands for its program

mechanism for receiving delegation of

all existing and future 112(d) standards

for both Part 70 and non-Part 70

sources.

Virgin Islands commits to

appropriately implementing the existing

and future requirements of Sections 111,

112 and 129 of the Act, and all

maximum achievable control

technology (MACT) standards

promulgated in the future, in a timely

manner.

B. Options for Approval/Disapproval

and Implications

The EPA is proposing full approval of

the operating permits program

submitted to EPA by the United States

Virgin Islands on November 18, 1993

and supplemented through June 9, 1995.

Among other things, the Virgin Islands

has demonstrated that the program will

be adequate to meet the minimum

elements of a State operating permits

program as specified in 40 CFR Part 70.

Requirements for approval, specified

in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass section

112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a

program for delegation of section 112

and standards as promulgated by EPA as

they apply to part 70 sources. Section

112(l)(5) requires that the State’s

program contain adequate authorities,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 17 / Thursday, January 25, 1996 / Proposed Rules 2219

adequate resources for implementation,

and an expeditious compliance

schedule, which are also requirements

under part 70. The Virgin Islands has

informed EPA that it intends to accept

automatic delegation of Section 112

standards and programs. Therefore, the

EPA is also proposing to grant approval

under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR

63.91 to Virgin Island for its program

mechanism for receiving delegation of

all existing and future section 112(d)

standards for both part 70 and non-part

70 sources, and infrastructure programs

under section 112 that are unchanged

from Federal rules as promulgated.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Request for Public Comments

The 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 Offices located in New

York and San Juan and at VIDPNR. 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

rulemaking. 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. The EPA will consider

any comments received by February 26,

1996.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from Executive

Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The EPA’s actions under Section 502

of the Act do not create any new

requirements, but simply address

operating permits 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.

D. Unfunded Mandates Act

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most cost

effective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the

proposed approval action promulgated

today does not include a federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to either

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This

federal action approves pre-existing

requirements under State or local law,

and imposes no new federal

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Environmental

Protection, Intergovernmental relations,

Operating permits, and Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401–7671q.

Dated: December 5, 1995.

Jeanne M. Fox,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–1207 Filed 1–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

UTAH RECLAMATION MITIGATION

AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION

43 CFR Part 10010

Policy and Procedures for

Implementing the National

Environmental Policy Act

AGENCY: Utah Reclamation Mitigation

and Conservation Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Central Utah Project

Completion Act established the Utah

Reclamation Mitigation and

Conservation Commission

(Commission) and directed that the

Commission be considered a Federal

agency for purposes of compliance with

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969, as amended (NEPA). In

accordance with NEPA and Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations, Federal agencies must

establish procedures to guide their

actions in implementing NEPA. This

rule establishes the Commission’s

policies and procedures regarding NEPA

implementation. It defines the

procedures that the Commission will

follow in preparing environmental

documents and in making decisions

pursuant to NEPA. The rule also

provides information to other agencies

and the public regarding how they may

participate in the Commission’s NEPA

activities. The intended effects of this

rule are that the Commission will have

at its disposal specific guidance on how

to fulfill its NEPA responsibilities, and

that the public will have a clear

understanding of the Commission’s

NEPA procedures.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule

will be accepted on or before March 11,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Planning Manager, Utah

Reclamation Mitigation and

Conservation Commission, 111 East

Broadway, suite 310, Salt Lake City,

Utah, 84111. Telephone: 801–524–3146.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan

Degiorgio, Telephone: 801–524–3146.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Commission was established by

the Central Utah Project Completion Act

(Public Law 102–575, October 30, 1992).

The Commission’s mission is to

implement mitigation and conservation

measures to offset the effects of Federal

reclamation projects in Utah and to take

other actions for the conservation of

important fish, wildlife, and recreation

resources. The Commission was

established to focus the authority for

reclamation mitigation and to

coordinate interagency efforts toward

meeting mitigation needs. This rule

provides the Commission, affected

Federal agencies, the State of Utah, and

the public with the necessary guidance

to evaluate the environmental effects of

Commission activities and to ensure

that these will promote the protection

and enhancement of environmental

quality. It is adopted in accordance with

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321–

4347) and with Council on

Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508).

NEPA Rule Content

This rule provides direction on all

aspects of the Commission’s NEPA

process. It establishes general policies,

provides guidance on initiating the

NEPA process, describes procedures

relating to Environmental Assessments

(EA) and Environmental Impact

Statements (EIS), describes the

relationship between NEPA and the

Commission’s decision making process,