Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Proposed Rules 28545

transport from other areas, contingency measures will be implemented

according to the following schedule:

Activity Completion time

Violation of the ozone NAAQS:

Verify violation and submit plan to analyze violation to EPA for approval ................ 60 days after violation measurement.

Submit completed analysis, public notice and comment material to EPA for approval.14 months after violation measurement.

Implement Stage II vapor recovery ............................................................................ 24 months after violation.

Non-CTG RACT measures ......................................................................................... 24 months after violation.

The Walworth County submittal

adequately addresses the five basic

components which comprise a

maintenance plan (attainment

inventory, maintenance demonstration,

monitoring network, verification of

continued attainment, and a

contingency plan) and, therefore,

satisfies the maintenance plan

requirement in Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv).

E. The Area Must Have Met All

Applicable Requirements Under Section

110 and Part D

Section 110 and Part D requirements

were discussed under section II B,

above.

III. Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing to approve

WDNR’s December 15, 1995, request for

redesignation to attainment for ozone

and Section 175A maintenance plan for

Walworth County.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. The EPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

Ozone SIPs are designed to satisfy the

requirements of Part D of the Act and to

provide for attainment and maintenance

of the ozone NAAQS. This proposed

redesignation should not be interpreted

as authorizing the State to delete, alter,

or rescind any of the VOC or NOX

emission limitations and restrictions

contained in the approved ozone SIP.

Changes to ozone SIP VOC regulations

rendering them less stringent than those

contained in the EPA approved plan

cannot be made unless a revised plan

for attainment and maintenance is

submitted to and approved by EPA.

Unauthorized relaxations, deletions,

and changes could result in both a

finding on nonimplementation [Section

173(b) of the Clean Air Act] and in a SIP

deficiency call made pursuant to

Section 110(a)(2)(H) of the Clean Air

Act.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989, (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604.) Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), 2 U.S.C.

1532, requires that the EPA prepare a

budgetary impact statement before

promulgating a rule that includes a

Federal mandate that may result in

expenditure by State, local, and tribal

governments, in aggregate, or by the

private sector, of $100 million or more

in any 1 year. Section 203, 2 U.S.C.

1533, requires the EPA to establish a

plan for obtaining input from and

informing, educating, and advising any

small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely affected by the

rule.

Under Section 205 of the Unfunded

Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1535, the EPA

must identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule for which a

budgetary impact statement must be

prepared. The EPA must select from

those alternatives the least costly, most

cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule, unless the EPA explains why

this alternative is not selected or the

selection of this alternative is

inconsistent with law.

Because this proposed rule is

estimated to result in the expenditure by

State, local, and tribal governments or

the private sector of less then $100

million in any 1 year, the EPA has not

prepared a budgetary impact statement

or specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or

least burdensome alternative. Because

small governments will not be

significantly or uniquely affected by this

rule, the EPA is not required to develop

a plan with regard to small

governments.

SIP approvals under Section 110 and

Subchapter I, Part D, of the Clean Air

Act do not create any new requirements,

but simply approve requirements that

the State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of a

regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of the State

action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA

to base its actions concerning SIPs on

such grounds. Union Electric Co. v.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Motor

vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxides,

Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 13, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–14118 Filed 6–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
28546 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Parts 6000–9000

[WO–340–1220–00–24 1A]

RIN 1004–AC87

Preservation and Conservation Health,

Safety, and Enforcement

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: In response to President

Clinton’s Government-wide regulatory

reform initiative, the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) has conducted a

page-by-page review of its regulations to

determine which should be eliminated,

revised, or moved to internal guidelines.

The purpose of this notice is to share

with the public how the BLM plans to

restructure Parts 6000–9000 of Title 43

CFR into a more streamlined, userfriendly framework. The notice has no

regulatory text.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send Comments to the mail

address: Regulatory Management Team

(420), Bureau of Land Management,

1849 C Street, NW., Room 401LS,

Washington, D.C. 20240, OR the Internet

address:

WOComment@WO0033wp.wo.blm.gov

[For Internet, please include ‘‘Attn:

AC87’’, your name and return address.]

You may also hand deliver comments to

the BLM Regulatory Management Team,

Room 401, 1620 L Street, NW.,

Washington, D.C.

Comments will be available for public

review at the L Street address during

regular business hours, from 7:45 a.m. to

4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Frances Watson, Regulatory

Management Team, at 202–452–5006.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

4, 1996, President Clinton issued a

Memorandum to all Federal

Departments and Agencies directing

them to simplify their regulations. In

response to this directive, the BLM

reviewed its regulations using the

following criteria:

• Is the regulation current?

• Can the regulation be eliminated

without negative consequences?

• Is the regulation’s subject matter

better suited for policy statements or

manual/handbook guidance?

• Can the regulation be easily

understood?

This Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking shows how the BLM plans

to reorganize, renumber and retitle 43

CFR Parts 6000–9000; it includes no

regulatory text. The text for these parts

will be available in the near future when

the BLM publishes proposed

rulemaking in the Federal Register for

public review and comment. Some of

the proposed regulations will be revised

substantively; some merely will be

rewritten in a more readable format;

some will be removed. We will provide

detailed explanations for our actions

when the proposed rulemakings are

published in the Federal Register.

Under the Regulatory Reform effort,

the BLM has revoked some unnecessary

regulations in previous issues of the

Federal Register, and will publish

reinvention proposals in coming issues

in a continuing effort to implement the

President’s plan.

For convenience, this preamble

includes two charts. The first chart

shows the new framework for 43 CFR

Parts 6000–9000. The second is a

conversion chart for these parts, which

shows the existing parts and the

corresponding new parts. It also

indicates the parts that have been

deleted and will be deleted, and lists the

disposition of those parts that will be

moved out of Parts 6000–9000 to other

parts of Title 43 of the Code of Federal

Regulations.

Framework for 43 CFR Parts 6000–9000

SUBCHAPTER F—PRESERVATION AND

CONSERVATION (6000)

Part

6000 [Reserved]

6100 Wildlife Management

6200 Wild Free-Roaming Horses & Burros

6300 Wilderness and Primitive Areas

6400 Wild and Scenic Rivers

6500 Areas of Critical Environmental

Concern

6600 Paleontological Resources

SUBCHAPTER G—HEALTH, SAFETY, AND

ENFORCEMENT (7000)

7100 Trespass

7200 Law Enforcement, Criminal

SUBCHAPTERS H–I [RESERVED]

7300–9000 [Reserved]

CONVERSION TABLE FOR 43 CFR

PARTS 6000–9000

Existing parts New

parts Comments

6000 ................. 6100

4700, 4710,

4720, 4730,

4740, 4750,

4760, 4770.2,

4770.3.

6200

CONVERSION TABLE FOR 43 CFR

PARTS 6000–9000—Continued

Existing parts New

parts Comments

8500, 8560.0

(All sections),

8560.1,

8560.1–1,

8560.2,

8560.3,

8560.4 (All

sections),

8560.5(b).

6300

8350, 8351 ....... 6400

1610.7–2 .......... 6500

3622, 8224,

8365.1–5(b).

6600

9230 ................. 7100

4770.1, 4770.4,

4770.5,

8340.0–7,

8341.1, 8343,

8343.1,

8560.1–2,

8560.5(a),

9000, 9239,

9260, 9261,

9262, 9263,

9264, 9265,

9266, 9267,

9268, 9269.

7200

6220 ................. .............. Removed 11/30/

95, 60 FR

61487.

8000 ................. .............. Removed 04/09/

96, 61 FR

15753.

8100 ................. .............. To be removed.

8200, 8223 .............. To be removed.

8300 .............. Removed 04/09/

96, 61 FR

15753.

8342.3 .............. .............. Moved to new

Part 1500.

8340.0–1,

8340.0–2,

8340.0–3,

8340.0–5,

8340.0–8,

8341.2,

8342.1,

8342.2.

.............. Moved to Part

1600.

8344 ................. .............. Moved to Part

2920.

8360.0 (All sections), 8361,

8362, 8363,

8364, 8365.0,

8365.1,

8365.1–1,

8365.1–2,

8365.1–3,

8365.1–4,

8365.1–5(a),

8365.1–6,

8365.1–7,

8365.2 (All

sections).

.............. To be removed.

8370, 8371 ....... .............. To be removed.

8372 ................. .............. Moved to Part

2920.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 5, 1996 / Proposed Rules 28547

CONVERSION TABLE FOR 43 CFR

PARTS 6000–9000—Continued

Existing parts New

parts Comments

8400 ................. .............. Removed 04/09/

96, 61 FR

15722.

8600 ................. .............. To be removed.

9100, 9180,

9183, 9185.

.............. Moved to Part

2000.

9210 ................. .............. To be removed.

Dated: May 24, 1996.

Bob Armstrong,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

[FR Doc. 96–14095 Filed 6–4–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–84–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Part 391

[FHWA Docket No. MC–96–4]

Proposed Research Plan on Vision

Standard

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), Department of

Transportation.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is requesting

comments on a proposed research plan

to explore performance-based

alternatives to the existing vision

standard for drivers of commercial

motor vehicles (CMV). The findings of

this research effort may result in the

modification of that standard. The

FHWA seeks comments on all aspects of

the research plan, including its

scientific merit, likelihood of achieving

its objective, methodological validity,

consideration of all relevant research,

and other practical issues.

The FHWA is also announcing a

public hearing to obtain comments on

the proposed research plan. The hearing

is designed to obtain public input on the

proposed research plan, not to

determine the status of individual

drivers or participants in the vision

waiver program. At the hearing, the

FHWA does not intend to discuss the

status, results, or recommendations that

might result from the vision waiver

program.

A review of scientific literature

relevant to the vision standard and the

proposed research plan have been

placed in FHWA Docket MC–96–4. In

addition, both documents are accessible

electronically through the Federal

Highway Administration’s World Wide

Web (WWW) site.

DATES: The comment period will remain

open until further notification in the

Federal Register. The public hearing

will be held on August 9, 1996, at the

Chicago O’Hare Marriot, 8535 West

Higgins Road, Chicago, IL, 60631, (312)

693–4444.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed

comments to FHWA Docket MC–96–4,

Room 4232, HCC–10, Office of the Chief

Counsel, Federal Highway

Administration, 400 Seventh Street.,

SW., Washington, DC 20590.

The literature review and proposed

research plan are on the Federal

Highway Administration’s World Wide

Web site (http://cti1.volpe.dot.gov/

ohim/whtnewhd). Users with questions

about the operation of the WWW site

should call the FHWA Computer Help

Desk at (202) 366–1120.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Charles Rombro, Federal Highway

Administration, Office of Motor

Carriers, 400 Seventh Street SW., room

3104, Washington, DC 20590, telephone

(202) 366–5615. Office hours are from

7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA is authorized by statute to

establish minimum physical

qualification requirements for drivers of

commercial motor vehicles. 49 USC

31502.

The Congress provided the FHWA

with complementary regulatory

authority with the enactment of the

Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984,

codified in substantial part at 49 U.S.C.

31101–31162. This Act directed the

Secretary to establish minimum safety

standards to ensure, inter alia, that ‘‘the

physical condition of operators of

commercial motor vehicles is adequate

to enable them to operate such vehicles

safely * * *.’’ 49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(3).

The physical qualification regulations

for CMV drivers in interstate commerce

are found at 49 CFR 391.41. The

qualification standards cover 13 areas

which directly relate to the driving

function. All but four of the standards

adopted by the FHWA permit the

individual determination of a driver’s

qualification. A person’s qualification to

drive is determined by a medical

examiner who is knowledgeable about

the on-the-job functions performed by a

commercial driver and whether a

particular condition would interfere

with the driver’s ability to operate a

CMV safely. In the case of vision,

hearing, insulin-using diabetes and

epilepsy, the current standards are

absolute, providing no discretion to the

medical examiner.

The current vision standard specifies

that drivers must meet the following

three conditions:

1. distant visual acuity in each eye of

at least 20/40, and distant binocular

acuity of at least 20/40 in both eyes; and

2. field of vision of at least 70 degrees

in the horizontal meridian of each eye;

and

3. the ability to recognize the colors

of traffic signals.

In order to improve protection for the

public and provide for individual

determinations of fitness to drive

wherever possible, the Agency is

interested in developing performancebased standards. In a Federal Register

notice on the vision waiver program

published on November 17, 1994 (59 FR

59386), the FHWA announced its

intention to initiate a research plan to

‘‘develop parameters for performancebased visual standards for all

commercial drivers.’’ 59 FR at 59389.

The research plan outlined in this

notice is designed to move the Agency

towards a performance-based vision

standard. This standard would

incorporate the measurement of those

visual capabilities deemed necessary for

the safe operation of commercial

vehicles. The research discussed below

is designed to relate specific visual

functions to specific driving tasks, such

as the ability to stay in a lane. The

standards would still be prescriptive in

that they would establish a minimum

score which individuals would be

required to meet to be allowed to drive;

however, the scoring scheme would be

based on detailed research on the visual

attributes required to safely operate a

CMV.

Research Plan

The FHWA has developed a proposed

research plan, an outline of which is

provided below.

Background

The FHWA’s review of the existing

literature on vision and driving research

led the FHWA to the following

conclusions:

1. The current testing standard lacks

criterion, or predictive, validity; that is,

it is not clear that central visual acuity

by itself is a good predictor of safe

driving. This detracts from the

perceived fairness of the standard. The

principal shortcoming of the current

standard is the emphasis on central

visual acuity, which is a measure of

how well an individual can discern

static images in the center of vision

under conditions of high luminance.

Since many driving situations involve

dynamic images under low luminance,

other visual capacities may be equally