30024 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 1996 / Proposed Rules

commenting on this document should

do so at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule

must be received on or before July 15,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR18–J),

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the State submittal are

available for inspection at: Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR18–J), Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark J. Palermo, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604, (312) 886–6082.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information see the direct

final rule published in the rules section

of this Federal Register.

Dated: May 13, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–14964 Filed 6–12–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[LA–22–1–6870; FRL–5520–4]

Approval and Promulgation of Section

182(f) Exemption to the Nitrogen

Oxides (NOX) Control Requirements

for the Calcasieu Parish Ozone

Nonattainment Area; Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve

a petition from the State of Louisiana

requesting that the Calcasieu Parish

marginal ozone nonattainment area be

exempt from applicable NOX control

requirements of section 182(f) of the

Clean Air Act (Act). The section 182(f)

NOX requirement from which the area

will be exempt is NOX new source

review (NSR). In addition, approval of

the section 182(f) petition would

remove the NOX general conformity

provisions and the NOX build/no build

provisions of the transportation

conformity rule (for conformity

provisions, see the November 24, 1993

and November 30, 1993 Federal

Register). The exemption for conformity

NOX requirements is found, generally,

in 40 CFR part 93, subparts T and W.

The section 182(f) NOX provisions are

explained fully in the EPA’s NOX

Supplement to the General Preamble,

published in the Federal Register (FR)

on November 25, 1992. The State of

Louisiana made the request for

Calcasieu Parish based on a

demonstration that additional NOX

reductions would not contribute to

ozone attainment in the nonattainment

area.

DATES: Comments on this proposed

action must be received in writing on or

before July 15, 1996.

ADDRESSEES: Written comments on

these actions should be addressed to Mr.

Thomas Diggs, Chief, Planning Section,

at the EPA Regional Office listed below.

Copies of the documents relevant to

these proposed actions are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the following

locations. The interested persons

wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the

appropriate office at least 24 hours

before the visiting day.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, Air Planning (6PD–L), 1445

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas

75202–2733.

Louisiana Department of Environmental

Quality, N.B. Garlock Building, 7290

Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana

70810.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Matthew Witosky or Mr. Quang

Nguyen, Planning Section (6PD–L),

Multimedia Planning and Permitting

Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,

telephone (214) 665–7214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

NOX are precursors to ground level

(tropospheric) ozone, or urban ‘‘smog.’’

When released into the atmosphere,

NOX will react with volatile organic

compounds (VOC) in the presence of

sunlight to form ozone. Tropospheric

ozone is an important factor in the

nation’s urban air pollution problem.

Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, was

designated nonattainment for ozone and

classified as marginal pursuant to

sections 107(d)(4) and 181(a) of the Act.

Under section 181(a), marginal areas

must attain the National Ambient Air

Quality Standard for ozone (the ozone

standard) by November 15, 1993. Please

reference 56 FR 56694 (November 6,

1991, codified for Louisiana at 40 CFR

81.319).

The Amendments to the Act (1990

Amendments) made significant changes

to the air quality planning requirements

for areas that do not meet the ozone

standard. Subparts 1 and 2 of part D,

title I of the Act contain the air quality

planning requirements for ozone

nonattainment areas. Title I includes

new requirements to control NOX

emissions in certain ozone

nonattainment areas and ozone

transport regions. Section 182(f)

requires States to apply the same control

requirements to major stationary sources

of NOX as are applied to major

stationary sources of VOC. For marginal

areas, the NOX requirement is to provide

for nonattainment new source review

(NSR). In addition, there are new NOX

requirements under the general and

transportation conformity provisions of

section 176(c). This approval exempts

the area from the section 182(f) NSR

NOX requirements (see the NOX

Supplement to the General Preamble 57

FR 55620), and from the NOX

requirements of the general, as well as

the NOX requirements of the build/no

build provisions of the transportation,

conformity rules (see also 58 FR 63214

published on November 24, 1993 and 58

FR 62188 published on November 30,

1993, as amended, particularly at 60 FR

44790, 44794, of August 29, 1995).

Applicable EPA Guidance

The Act specifies in section 182(f)

that if one of the conditions listed below

is met, the new NOX requirements

would not apply:

1. In any area, the net air quality

benefits are greater without NOX

reductions from the sources concerned;

2. In a nontransport region, additional

NOX reductions would not contribute to

ozone attainment in the nonattainment

area; or

3. In a transport region, additional

NOX reductions would not produce net

ozone benefits in the transport region.

In addition, section 182(f)(2) states

that the application of the new NOX

requirements may be limited to the

extent that any portion of those

reductions are demonstrated to result in

‘‘excess reductions’’ of NOX. The

previously-described NOX provisions of

the conformity rules would also not

apply in certain areas that are granted a

section 182(f) exemption (see

amendment to transportation

conformity rule and associated

explanation at 60 FR 44794). In

addition, certain NOX provisions of the

I/M rule would not apply in an area that

is granted a section 182(f) exemption

(see 57 FR 52989).

The EPA’s Guideline for Determining

the Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 1996 / Proposed Rules 30025

Requirements Under Section 182(f)

(December 1993), and 2 revisionary

memoranda signed by John S. Seitz,

Director of the EPA Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, dated May 27,

1994 and February 8, 1995, describe

how the EPA will interpret the NOX

exemption provisions of section 182(f).

As described more fully in the Seitz

memoranda, petitions submitted under

section 182(f)(3) are not required to be

submitted as State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revisions. Consequently, the State

is not required under the Act to hold a

public hearing in order to petition for an

area-wide NOX exemption

determination. Similarly, it is not

necessary to have the Governor submit

the petition.

It should be noted with respect to the

application of section 182(f) NOX

waivers to certain NOx requirements of

the transportation conformity rule that

the EPA has revised the transportation

conformity rule to ensure consistency

with section 176(c) (see especially 60 FR

44790, 44794). This rule revision

requires areas subject to section

182(b)(1) (moderate and above, but not

marginal ozone nonattainment areas) to

submit transportation conformity NOX

exemption requests as revisions to the

SIP. Because Calcasieu is classified as

marginal, the revision addressing

182(b)(1) is not applicable.

State Submittal

On October 28, 1994, the Louisiana

Department of Environmental Quality

(LDEQ) submitted to the EPA a petition

pursuant to section 182(f) which

requests that the Calcasieu Parish

nonattainment area be exempted by the

EPA from the NOX control requirements

of section 182(f) of the Act. On

December 21, 1995, the Governor of

Louisiana submitted a request for

redesignation of the area to attainment

which contained additional information

relevant to the State’s NOX exemption

petition. The request for redesignation is

currently under review and will be

addressed in a separate rulemaking

action.

The State’s NOX waiver petition was

based on urban airshed modeling

(UAM). Subsequently, an analysis of

ambient air quality data (‘‘clean air

data’’) indicates that the area is

currently in attainment of the ozone

standard, prompting the state to submit

a request that the area be redesignated

as attainment. The state’s modeling and

monitoring data together demonstrate

that additional NOX reductions would

not contribute to attainment of the

ozone standard in the area. Overall, this

demonstration is consistent with the

EPA’s section 182(f) guidance. The

State’s submission includes a letter from

Gustave Von Bodungen, Assistant

Secretary of the LDEQ, to Jane N.

Saginaw, Regional Administrator of the

EPA Region 6, and LDEQ’s summary of

the State’s photochemical grid modeling

results. Further, the State’s submission

requesting redesignation to attainment

for Calcasieu Parish contains qualityassured and quality-controlled data

showing attainment of the ozone

standard. This data is for the three-year

time period of 1993 to 1995.

Analysis of State Submission

The following items are the basis for

the EPA’s action proposing to approve

the State of Louisiana’s section 182(f)

NOX exemption petition for the

Calcasieu Parish ozone nonattainment

area. Please refer to the EPA’s Technical

Support Document and the State’s

submittal for more detailed information.

A. Consistency With EPA Section 182(f)

Guidance

Chapter 4 of the EPA’s December 1993

section 182(f) guidance states that the

typical procedure for demonstrating that

additional NOX reductions would not

contribute to ozone attainment is to

utilize photochemical grid modeling,

such as UAM, to simulate conditions

resulting from three emission reduction

scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC

reductions; (2) substantial NOX

reductions; and (3) both VOC and NOX

reductions. To demonstrate that NOX

reductions are not beneficial to

attainment, the area-wide predicted

maximum 1-hour ozone concentration

for each day modeled under scenario (1)

must be less than or equal to that from

scenarios (2) and (3) for the same day.

Chapter 7 specifies that the application

of UAM should be consistent with the

techniques specified in the EPA

‘‘Guideline on Air Quality Models

(Revised),’’ and ‘‘Guideline for

Regulatory Application of the UAM

(July 1991).’’ This guidance specifically

applies to moderate and higher

classification ozone nonattainment

areas. As discussed in the following

sections, the EPA believes that the

State’s UAM demonstration together

with the ambient air quality data

showing that the area is attaining the

ozone standard support the granting of

an exemption from the NOX

requirements of section 182(f) of the

CAA.

B. UAM Modeling Analysis

Although many ozone nonattainment

areas used photochemical grid modeling

that was required by the Act for their

attainment demonstrations to apply for

a NOX exemption as a marginal

nonattainment area, the Act did not

require Calcasieu Parish to perform such

modeling for the purpose of an

attainment demonstration. Thus, where

such an area can make an adequate

showing of the effects of NOX

reductions with respect to attainment

through alternative means that are

otherwise consistent with relevant

guidance, EPA could approve the area’s

demonstration.

The LDEQ submitted the results of a

photochemical grid modeling exercise

that was carried out, in conjunction

with Calcasieu’s attainment efforts, to

determine if the Calcasieu area was the

object of ozone and precursor transport.

Although the modeling utilized for this

exercise does not precisely replicate the

procedures EPA guidance suggests be

used to support a 182(f) exemption

petition. However, the EPA believes the

modeling analysis that was performed

by LDEQ when combined with the

area’s clean air data is comprehensive

enough to use in determining if the area

should receive an exemption.

The LDEQ used UAM version IV, an

EPA-approved photochemical grid

model, to develop the attainment

demonstration for Calcasieu Parish. The

State’s modeling activities were

performed in accordance with the EPA’s

‘‘Guideline for Regulatory Application

of the Urban Airshed Model.’’ The

discussion below summarizes the EPA’s

analysis on how the State’s modeling

demonstrations complied with the

EPA’s guidance. Please refer to the

EPA’s Technical Support Document for

more detailed information.

1. Episode Selection

The State used the EPA ‘‘Guideline

For Regulatory Application of The

Urban Airshed Model’’ to select

episodes for use in the Calcasieu Parish

UAM modeling exercises. Data from

1991 and 1992 were examined for

episodes which cover at least 48

consecutive hours and the worst-case

meteorological conditions. Three

episodes from 1992 were selected for

the UAM analysis for the area.

Episodes selected for the Lake Charles

modeling represent three different

meteorological regimes which can be

characterized as exhibiting potential for

transport of pollutants from source areas

near Baton Rouge to the Lake Charles

area, absence of transport potential, and

potential for transport from areas in

Texas.

2. Model Domain and Meteorological

Input

The LDEQ used a large modeling

domain for Calcasieu Parish to ensure

that the model captured the movement
30026 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 1996 / Proposed Rules

of VOC and NOX emissions generated by

the surface sources. The domain covers

all or part of seven counties in Texas

and eight parishes in Louisiana. The

domain modeled encompassed 32,000

square kilometers of surface area.

Meteorological data were collected from

numerous monitoring stations in the

area. The LDEQ followed the methods

described in the UAM User’s Guides to

develop model inputs for wind field

data, mixing heights, temperature, and

meteorological scalars for the areas. Data

was obtained from the Aerometric

Information and Retrieval System

(AIRS), LDEQ data gathering activities,

the Texas Natural Resource

Conservation Commission (TNRCC),

and other direct measurement

techniques.

3. Boundary and Initial Conditions

LDEQ used the air quality data

collected at monitoring stations

throughout the domain to construct the

initial conditions of the model exercise.

Some default values were used where

actual measurements were not available.

The applied boundary conditions were

developed to measure possible transport

into the area from the east and west.

4. Emissions Inventory

The Calcasieu Parish modeling

exercises were conducted using VOC

and NOX emission inventories compiled

by survey and direct measurement by

the LDEQ. The modeling emissions

inventories are composed of point

source, area, on-road mobile, off-road

mobile, and biogenic emissions. Where

applicable, emissions were adjusted for

pertinent conditions related to the

episode day to be modeled, thus

producing day-specific emissions. The

EPA procedures for developing episodespecific emission inventories were

followed.

For Calcasieu Parish, the LDEQ

developed three emission inventories

for all three episodes modeled.

Although the projected inventory does

not reflect the attainment year for the

area, the inventory projected for 1993

does not differ significantly from 1991

and 1992 inventories. Hence, the EPA

believes the State’s analysis still

provides a valid technical basis to

evaluate the NOX contributions.

5. Model Performance

For all UAM activities, model

performance is measured quantitatively

and qualitatively. The EPA has issued

guidelines to statistically measure

accuracy. In addition, the EPA strongly

recommends that agencies submit

graphical analysis, as a complement to

statistical analysis. While the EPA has

recommended ranges for statistical

accuracy, there are no rigid criterion to

accept or reject a model exercise.

Similarly, qualitative characterizations

such as good, satisfactory, fair, or poor

describe the EPA’s best professional

judgment about graphed model

performance, but are not used to grade

the model exercise as acceptable or

unacceptable.

Based on the above criteria, the

Calcasieu model performance was

satisfactory. Both graphical and

statistical performance measures were

employed for all meteorological

episodes and monitoring networks.

Sensitivity analysis was also conducted

to assess the stability of the models

across a range of possible input

parameters.

For the August 20–21, 1991 episode,

two of the three EPA-criterion statistical

measures obtained for the area are well

within the EPA’s recommended ranges

for good model performance (see Table

2 of the technical support document).

For the April 7–8, 1992 episode, the

statistical analysis for the primary day,

April 8, indicates fair model

performance. The statistical measures

were well within the EPArecommended ranges for the primary

episode day. However, simulated

maximum concentrations are, in

general, lower than observed peak

concentrations. For the April 20–21,

1992 episode, the model performance is

good. The statistical measures all fall

within the EPA-recommended ranges,

and the temporal profiles of many sites

were fairly well simulated.

Both graphical and statistical

performance measures were used to

evaluate the model. Using these

analyses, the predicted results from the

model were compared to the observed

results for each episode. These analyses

indicate that the model performed

satisfactorily for the three episodes used

for the UAM demonstration.

6. Section 182(f) Demonstration

As noted previously, Calcasieu Parish

is a marginal ozone nonattainment area

and EPA’s NOX exemption guidance

does not fully address the requirements

for less than moderate nonattainment

areas that were not required to utilize

photochemical grid modeling for their

attainment demonstrations. For

purposes of their 182(f) demonstration,

the LDEQ modeled the three episodes

discussed above under a substantial

NOX reduction strategy only. The VOConly and VOC plus NOX reduction

modeling strategies listed in EPA

guidance were not performed. EPA

nonetheless feels that the State’s UAM

demonstration in combination with the

area’s ambient air quality data provide

adequate justification for proposing

approval of the NOX exemption petition.

The justification related to clean air

quality data is discussed in Section C of

this notice.

The LDEQ’s modeling considered

across-the-board reductions in the

projected NOX point source emission

inventories. The State modeled 50 and

25 percent emission reductions in the

NOX point sources inventory for each of

the three episode-days. This generated

six different sensitivity tests to gauge

the direction and intensity of the

atmospheric reaction to NOX reductions.

The State modeled 25 percent NOX

reductions to characterize the effect of

NOX control strategies that could have

a more immediate impact. For all three

episodes at 25 and 50 percent

reductions, the results for the

controlling day show that domain-wide

predicted maximum ozone

concentrations increase as the NOX

reductions are applied.

As explained in the EPA’s 182(f)

guidance, the EPA believes it is

appropriate to focus this analysis on the

area-wide maximum 1-hour predicted

ozone concentration, since this value is

critical for the typical attainment

demonstration. For all three episodes,

the controlling day showed that the

domain-wide predicted maximum

ozone concentrations are lower without

NOX reductions. The model results lead

to the conclusion that NOX reductions

would increase the domain-wide

maximum ozone concentrations. Please

refer to the EPA’s Technical Support

Document for more detailed

information.

C. Clean Data Eligibility for NOX

Exemption

On December 21, 1995, the EPA

received a request from the State to

redesignate the Calcasieu area to

attainment. The request for

redesignation is based upon three years

of quality-assured monitoring data that

show no violations of the ozone

standard. The data that constitute the

substance of the redesignation request is

available to the EPA through the

Aerometric Information and Retrieval

System (AIRS). Since the data were not

available when the State initially

requested a NOX exemption, the State

chose to base its waiver request on

modeling data. Now that monitoring

data are available, the EPA believes it is

appropriate to consider the air quality

data in conjunction with the modeling

information contained in the State’s

NOX exemption petition in determining

whether to approve the State’s NOX

exemption request. Moreover, since the
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 1996 / Proposed Rules 30027

EPA’s NOX guidance provides for

granting NOX exemptions based solely

on clean air data, the State could have

resubmitted a request for a NOX waiver

based only on clean data. However,

rather than having the state resubmit an

additional petition, the EPA decided

that the air quality data and modeling

information already before the Agency,

when analyzed in combination,

constituted an adequate basis to propose

approval of the waiver request. The EPA

will act upon the State’s request for

redesignation in a subsequent notice.

An EPA review of the AIRS ambient

air quality data concluded that no

violations of the ozone standard

occurred in the area from 1993 through

1995. Since the absence of such

violations over a 3-year period indicates

that an area is in attainment of the

ozone standard, this data provides

further support for the conclusion that

the section 182(f) test is met. This is true

because for an area, like Calcasieu, that

is already attaining it is clear that

additional reductions of oxides of

nitrogen would not contribute to ozone

attainment in that area. ‘‘Guideline for

Determining the Applicability of

Nitrogen Oxide Requirements Under

section 182(f)’’ December 1993. See the

TSD for additional information

regarding the area’s air quality data.

Proposed Rulemaking Action

In this action, the EPA proposes to

approve the 182(f) NOX exemption

petition submitted by the State of

Louisiana for the Calcasieu Parish ozone

nonattainment area. The EPA believes

that all section 182(f) exemptions that

are approved should be approved only

on a contingent basis. As described in

the EPA’s NOX Supplement to the

General Preamble (57 FR 55628,

November 25, 1992), the EPA would

rescind a NOX exemption in cases

where NOX reductions were later found

to be beneficial in the area’s attainment

plan. That is, a modeling based

exemption would last for only as long

as the area’s modeling continued to

demonstrate attainment without the

additional NOX reductions required by

section 182(f). Similarly, if an area that

received an exemption based on clean

air quality data which shows that the

area is attaining the ozone standard

experiences a violation prior to

redesignation of the area to attainment,

the exemption would no longer be

applicable.

If the EPA later determines, based on

new photochemical grid modeling that

NOX reductions would be beneficial in

Calcasieu Parish, or because of an ozone

violation, the area would be removed

from exempt status and would be

required to adopt the applicable NOX

provisions of the NSR and conformity

rules except to the extent that NOX

reductions are shown to be ‘‘excess

reductions.’’ In the rulemaking action

which removes the exempt status, the

EPA would provide specific information

regarding the reapplication of the NSR

rules and the conformity rules.

The subsequent modeling analyses

mentioned above need not be limited to

the purpose of demonstrating

attainment as required by section

182(c)(2)(A). For example, an area might

want to consider a strategy that phases

in NOX reductions only after certain

VOC reductions are implemented. As

improved emission inventories and

ambient data become available, areas

may choose to remodel. In addition,

alternative control strategy scenarios

might be considered in subsequent

modeling analyses in order to improve

the cost-effectiveness of the attainment

plan.

In summary, the UAM modeling

results together with ambient air quality

data showing no violations of the ozone

standard during the last 3 years in

Calcasieu Parish support the conclusion

that additional NOX reductions would

not contribute to attainment of the

ozone standard in this area. The EPA

therefore proposes to approve a NOX

exemption for the Calcasieu Parish area.

Approval of this petition means that the

area is exempt from new source review

for sources of NOX, the NOX

requirements of the general conformity

rule, and the NOX ‘‘build/no build’’

provisions of the transportation

conformity rule (see 58 FR 63214 and 58

FR 62188). This exemption will remain

effective for only as long as modeling

continues to show that NOX control

activities would not be beneficial in the

Calcasieu Parish nonattainment area,

and/or so long as, prior to redesignation

to attainment, the area does not violate

the ozone standard.

Request for Public Comments

The EPA requests comments on all

aspects of this proposal. As indicated at

the outset of this action, the EPA will

consider any comments received by July

15, 1996.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., the 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, the EPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant economic 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.

Approvals of NOX exemption

petitions under section 182(f) of the

CAA do not create any new

requirements. Therefore, because the

Federal approval of the petition does

not impose any new requirements, the

EPA certifies that it does not have a

significant impact on affected small

entities. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of State action. The CAA

forbids the EPA to base its actions

concerning SIP’s on such grounds

[Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A. , 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410 (a)(2)]. The Office of Management

and Budget has exempted this action

from review under Executive Order

12866.

Unfunded Mandates

Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector, or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under section 110

of the Clean Air Act. These rules may

bind State, local and tribal governments

to perform certain actions and also

require the private sector to perform

certain duties. To the extent that the

rules being approved by this action will

impose no new requirements, such

sources are already subject to these

regulations under State law.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action. EPA has also determined that

this action does not include a mandate

that may result in estimated costs of

$100 million or more to State, local, or

tribal governments in the aggregate or to

the private sector.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen

dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic

compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
30028 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Dated: June 7, 1996.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–15034 Filed 6–12–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

41 CFR Part 101–20

RIN 3090–AG00

Small Purchase Authority

AGENCY: General Services

Administration.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This General Services

Administration (GSA) proposed rule

revises the regulations regarding the

delegation of authority to occupant

agencies to contract for reimbursable

space alterations. The present FPMR

provisions stated in 101–20.106.1 cite a

project accomplishment threshold of

$25,000. This threshold was established

based on the small purchase authority

in place at the time of the original

publication of this provision.

Since the purpose of this FPMR

provision is to provide occupant

agencies choices in their use of a service

provider, it is recommended that the

Simplified Acquisition Procurement

threshold be used. Rather than establish

an authority at a selected value, the

reference should be changed to link it to

the Federal Acquisition Streamlining

Act of 1994. Therefore, if the value of

the statute changes the FPMR would not

require a change. The present

Simplified Acquisition Procedures

(SAP) authority is $50,000 for GSA

procurement activities.

Modifying the FPMR provisions to tie

to the SAP authority gives occupants

increased flexibility in accomplishing

alteration tasks and fully delegates the

authority to do the work.

No other changes are suggested.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 15, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to General Services

Administration, Office of Property

Management, Portfolio Customer Team

(PMX), 18th and F Streets, NW, Room

G118, Washington, DC 20405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Neely, Portfolio Customer Team,

PMX, (202) 208–1497.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

General Services Administration (GSA)

has determined that this rule is not a

significant regulatory action for the

purposes of Executive Order 12866.

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the revisions do not

impose record keeping or information

collection requirements, or collections

of information from offerors,

contractors, or members of the public

which require the approval of the Office

of Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

This rule is not required to be

published in the Federal Register for

notice and comment. Therefore, the

Regulatory Flexibility Act does not

apply.

List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 101–20

Concessions, Federal buildings and

facilities, Government property

management.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, it is proposed to amend 41

CFR Part 101–20 as follows:

PART 101–20—MANAGEMENT OF

BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS

1. The authority citation for Part 101–

20 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sec. 205(c) of Pub. L. 152, 63,

Stat., 390, 40 U.S.C., 486(c).

Subpart 101–20.1—Buildings

Operations, Maintenance, Protection,

and Alterations

2. Section 202–20.106–1 is amended

by revising paragraphs (b) and (e) to

read as follows:

§ 101–20.106–1 Placing of orders for

reimbursable alterations by occupant

agencies.

* * * * *

(b) No individual order, or

combination of orders for a single

alteration project, shall exceed the

statutory limitation for a simplified

acquisition procedure, and agencies

shall not split orders so as to circumvent

this limitation.

* * * * *

(e) Where no GSA contracts or

agreements are in effect, an agency may

contract directly for services up to the

maximum of the statutory limitation for

simplified acquisition procedures per

project after obtaining written approval

of the GSA buildings manager. Agencies

contracting directly must provide the

GSA buildings manager with complete

documentation of the scope of work and

contract specifications at the time of

submission for approval. Each project

shall include appropriate reviews by the

regional safety staff. If contracting for

security systems, agencies must submit

the design work to the regional Federal

Protective Service Division for review

and approval. Agencies shall be

responsible for inspecting and certifying

satisfactory completion of the ordered

work. All work must conform to GSA

fire and safety standards. GSA at

anytime has the authority to make

inspections and require correction if the

project is found not in compliance with

GSA fire and safety standards. As-built

drawings must be submitted to the GSA

buildings manager within 30 days of

completion of work.

Dated: April 5, 1996.

Robert A. Peck,

Commissioner, Public Buildings Service.

[FR Doc. 96–15002 Filed 6–12–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–23–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 36 and 69

[CC Docket 96–45; DA–96–926]

Federal-State Joint Board on Universal

Service; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The purpose of the notice is

to inform the general public of a

meeting that will be held by the FederalState Joint Board on universal service.

DATES: The Federal-State Joint Board in

CC Docket 96–45 will hold an open

meeting on Wednesday, June 19, 1996 at

9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in

Room 856 at 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Irene Flannery, Accounting and Audits

Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at

(202) 418–0847.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the

meeting, the Federal-State Joint Board

will hear from two panels of experts

addressing universal service issues set

forth in Section 254 of the

Telecommunications Act. Specifically,

the panelists will address what types of

functionalities schools, libraries, and

rural health care providers require of

telecommunications services, as well as

the cost, on a nationwide basis, of

providing services able to deliver those

functionalities.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–15146 Filed 6–11–96; 11:17 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M