30814 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 18, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

it. Verification procedures shall be

conducted at reasonable times during

normal business hours.

(5) Anti-duplication rules. A filer

shall be subject to no more than one

verification procedure per calendar

year. An Annual Statement of Account

shall be subject to a verification

procedure only once.

(e) Scope of verification. The verifying

auditor shall limit his or her

examination to verifying the

information required in the Annual

Statement of Account. To the extent

possible, the verifying auditor shall

inspect the information contained in the

primary auditor’s report and the

primary auditor’s working papers. If the

verifying auditor believes that access to

the records, files, or other materials in

the control of the filer is required

according to GAAS, he or she may, after

consultation with the primary auditor,

require the production of these

documents as well. The verifying

auditor and the primary auditor shall

act in good faith using reasonable

professional judgment, with the

intention of reaching a reasonable

accommodation as to the necessity and

scope of examination of any additional

documents, but the decision to require

the production of additional documents

is solely that of the verifying auditor.

(f) Verification Report. Upon

concluding the verification procedure,

the verifying auditor shall render a

report enumerating in reasonable detail

the procedures performed by the

verifying auditor and his or her

findings. Such findings shall state

whether there was any failure of the

primary auditor to conduct properly the

primary audit or obtain a reliable result,

and whether there was any error in the

Annual Statement of Account, itemized

by amount and by the filer’s elected

fiscal year. If there was such failure or

error, the report shall specify all

evidence from which the verifying

auditor reached such conclusions. Such

evidence shall be listed and identified

in an appendix to the report in

sufficient detail to enable a third party

to reasonably understand or interpret

the evidence on which the verifying

auditor based his or her conclusion. If

there was no such failure or error, the

report shall so state.

(g) Distribution of Report. Copies of

the verifying auditor’s report shall be

subject to the confidentiality provisions

of § 201.29 and shall be distributed as

follows:

(1) One copy, excluding the appendix,

if applicable, shall be filed with the

Register of Copyrights.

(2) One copy, with the appendix, if

applicable, shall be submitted to each of

the interested copyright parties who

retained the services of the verifying

auditor and who are authorized to

receive such information according to

§ 201.29.

(3) One copy, with the appendix, if

applicable, shall be submitted to the

filer of the Annual Statement of

Account.

(4) One copy, with the appendix, if

applicable, shall be submitted to the

primary auditor.

(h) Retention of Report. The Register

of Copyrights will retain his or her copy

of the verifying auditor’s report for three

years following the date the copy of the

verifying auditor’s report is filed.

(i) Costs of Verification. The joint

interested copyright parties who

requested the verification procedure

shall pay the fees of the verifying

auditor and the primary auditor for their

work performed in connection with the

verification procedure, except, if the

verification procedure results in a

judicial determination or the filer’s

agreement that royalty payments were

understated on the Annual Statement of

Account, then,

(1) if the amount is less than five

percent (5%) of the amount stated on

the Annual Statement of Account, that

amount shall first be used to pay the

fees of the verifying auditor and the

primary auditor, and any remaining

amount plus any applicable interest on

the total amount shall be deposited,

allocated by the filer’s elected fiscal

year, with the Register of Copyrights, or

(2) if the amount is equal to or greater

than five percent (5%) of the amount

stated on the Annual Statement of

Account, the filer shall pay the fees of

the verifying auditor and the primary

auditor, and, in addition, shall deposit

the amount found to be due plus any

applicable interest on the total amount,

allocated by the filer’s elected fiscal

year, with the Register of Copyrights.

(j) Independence and qualifications of

verifying auditor.

(1) The verifying auditor shall be

qualified and independent as defined in

this section. If the filer has reason to

believe that the verifying auditor is not

qualified or independent, it shall raise

the matter with the joint interested

copyright parties before the

commencement of the verification

procedure, and if the matter is not

resolved, it may raise the issue with the

American Institute of Certified Public

Accountants’ Professional Ethics

Division and/or the verifying auditor’s

State Board of Accountancy while the

verification procedure is being

performed.

(2) A verifying auditor shall be

considered qualified if he or she is a

certified public accountant or works

under the supervision of a certified

public accounting firm.

(3) A verifying auditor shall be

considered independent if:

(i) he or she is independent as that

term is used in the Code of Professional

Conduct of the American Institute of

Certified Public Accountants, including

the Principles, Rules and Interpretations

of such Code applicable generally to

attest engagements (collectively, the

‘‘AICPA Code’’); and (ii) he or she is

independent as that term is used in the

Statements on Auditing Standards

promulgated by the Auditing Standards

Board of the AICPA and Interpretations

thereof issued by the Auditing

Standards Division of the AICPA.

Dated: June 6, 1996.

Marybeth Peters,

Register of Copyrights.

Approved by:

James H. Billington,

The Librarian of Congress.

[FR Doc. 96–15390 Filed 6–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–5521–5]

RIN 2060–AD98

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface

Coating) Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On December 15, 1995, the

EPA issued national emission standards

for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)

under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act

as amended in 1990 for shipbuilding

and ship repair (surface coating)

operations. The NESHAP requires

existing and new major sources to

control emissions using the maximum

achievable control technology to control

hazardous air pollutants. This action

revises the compliance date for sources

subject to this standard and revises the

date for submittal of implementation

plans. Specifically, this action extends

the June 13, 1996 deadline for submittal

of an implementation plan to December

16, 1996. The compliance date is

extended from December 16, 1996 to

December 16, 1997. This action is being

taken because the EPA has learned that

sufficient time was not provided to
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 18, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 30815

prepare the implementation plans and

establish the necessary inventory

management systems to ensure

compliance with the standard. This

action is also being taken to improve

coordination of compliance with the

NESHAP with the anticipated

implementation of the control

techniques guidelines (CTG)

requirements for shipbuilding and ship

repair facilities.

This action also removes the

requirement that implementation plans

be approved by the EPA. This

requirement is being removed because it

was not EPA’s intent for the

implementation plan to be the

mechanism for enforcing the rule.

DATES: The direct final rule will be

effective August 19, 1996 unless

significant, adverse comments are

received by July 18, 1996. If the effective

date is delayed, timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

submitted to: Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center (6102),

Attention Docket Number A–92–11,

Room M–1500, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Mohamed Serageldin, Emission

Standards Division (MD–13), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park,

North Carolina 27711, telephone

number (919) 541–2379.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities. The regulated

category and entities affected by this

action include:

Category Examples of regulated

entities

Industry ........... Facilities that build, repair,

repaint, convert, or alter

ships. The term ship

means any marine or

fresh-water vessel, including self-propelled vessels,

those propelled by other

craft (barges), and navigational aids (buoys).

Note: An offshore oil and

gas drilling platform is not

considered a ship for purposes of this regulation.

Federal Govt ... Federal Agencies which undertake shipbuilding or repair operations (see

above) such as the Navy

and Coast guards.

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

the types of entities that EPA is now

aware could potentially be regulated by

this action. Other types of entities not

listed in the table could also be

regulated. To determine wheher your

facility is regulated by this action, you

should carefully examine the

applicability criteria in § 63.782 of the

regulation. If you have questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Any significant and timely adverse

comments received on any portion of

this direct final rule will be addressed

in a subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule contained in the

Proposed Rules Section of this Federal

Register that is identical to this direct

final rule. If no significant and timely

adverse comments are received on this

direct final rule, then the direct final

rule will become effective August 19,

1996 and no further action is

contemplated on the parallel proposal

published today.

I. Basis for Changes to Rule

A. Compliance Date

The EPA is extending the compliance

date from December 16, 1996 to

December 16, 1997 to allow time for

sources to develop the necessary

inventory management systems,

administrative controls, and to allow

coordination of compliance plans for

this rule and the CTG, which is planned

for publication in the near future. When

the final NESHAP was issued, the EPA

selected a one-year compliance period

to allow time for sources to deplete

existing inventories of coatings and to

conduct compliance planning

procedures. Since the final rule was

issued on December 15, 1995, the EPA

has learned that there are a number of

companies subject to this rule that

presently do not have inventory

management systems necessary to

ensure compliance, and that some

facilities are relying on outside

consultants to develop such systems. In

such cases, at least one year is needed

to establish the paint inventory

management and administrative control

system. Additionally, at the time the

final NESHAP was issued, EPA

expected to issue final guidance for the

CTG for shipbuilding and ship repair

(surface coating) operations in the near

future. Issuance of this CTG has been

delayed. Since control techniques for

volatile organic compound emissions

could affect the compliance approach

selected for the NESHAP, the EPA

believes that it is appropriate to extend

the compliance date for the NESHAP to

allow coordination with rules adopted

by States to implement the CTG. Based

on the anticipated schedule for issuance

of the CTG, the EPA believes that

extension of the compliance date to

December 16, 1997 should provide

sufficient time to allow coordination of

compliance planning for both the

NESHAP and any applicable State rules.

B. Implementation Plan

The EPA is extending the June 13,

1996 deadline for submittal of

implementation plans to December 16,

1996. The deadline for submitting these

plans is being extended because the

EPA has learned that sufficient time was

not provided to prepare the

implementation plans and establish the

necessary paint inventory management

and administrative control systems to

ensure compliance with the standard.

Because information available to the

EPA during the development of the

NESHAP suggested that most shipyards

had some form of inventory

management system, the EPA expected

that 180 days should be sufficient to

prepare the implementation plan. Due

to information received from the

industry since the final rule was issued,

the EPA believes that one year is a more

appropriate time-frame for selection of

the compliance approach and

development of the implementation

plan. Therefore, this document revises

the date for submittal of implementation

plans to December 16, 1996.

This action also removes the

requirement that implementation plans

be approved by the EPA. This

requirement is being eliminated since it

was not the EPA’s intent for the

implementation plan to be the

mechanism for enforcing the rule and, if

the plans are subject to approval, some

people might argue that was the role of

the plan. The implementation plan will

serve to provide guidance and assist in

enforcement of the rule.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements of the previously

promulgated NESHAP were submitted

to and approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB). A copy

of this Information Collection Request

(ICR) document (OMB number 1414.02)

may be obtained from Sandy Farmer,

Information Policy Branch (PM–223Y);

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;

401 M Street, SW; Washington, DC

20460 or by calling (202) 260–2740.

Today’s changes to the NESHAP

should have no impact on the
30816 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 18, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

information collection burden estimates

made previously. The change to the

implementation plan requirements

merely extends the date for submission

of plans from existing sources. These

changes do not impose new

requirements. Consequently, the ICR has

not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

Under Executive Order 12866, the

EPA must determine whether the

proposed regulatory action is ‘‘not

significant’’ and therefore, subject to

OMB review and the requirements of

the executive order. The Order defines

‘‘significant’’ regulatory action as one

that is likely to lead to a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy, a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety in

State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency;

(3) materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in the executive order.

The Shipbuilding NESHAP

promulgated on December 15, 1995 was

determined to not be a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory

impact analysis was not prepared. The

amendments issued today extend dates

for submittal of implementation plans

and the compliance date and remove the

requirement for approval of

implementation plans. These changes

do not add any additional control

requirements or costs. Therefore, this

regulatory action does not affect the

previous decision and is not considered

to be significant.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

requires the identification of potentially

adverse impacts of Federal regulations

upon small business entities. The Act

specifically requires the completion of a

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those

instances where small business impacts

are possible. Because this rulemaking

imposes no adverse economic impacts,

a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not

been prepared. Pursuant to Section

605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator

certifies that this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) as

amended by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of

1996, EPA submitted a report containing

this rule and other required information

to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by section

804(2) of the APA as amended.

E. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, the 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, the EPA must select

the least costly, most cost-effective or

least burdensome alternative that

achieves the objectives of the rule and

is consistent with statutory

requirements. Section 203 requires the

EPA to establish a plan for informing

and advising any small governments

that may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the

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. Therefore, the

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act do not apply to this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hazardous

substances, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 7, 1996.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63,

subpart II, of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 63

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

Subpart II—National Emission

Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship

Repair (Surface Coating)

2. Section 63.784 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 63.784 Compliance dates.

(a) Each owner or operator of an

existing affected source shall comply

within two years after the effective date

of this subpart.

* * * * *

3. Section 63.787 is amended by

revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (b)(4)

and by removing and reserving

paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:

§ 63.787 Notification requirements.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) * * *

(ii) Not later than one year after the

effective date of this subpart, submit the

implementation plan to the

Administrator along with the

notification required by § 63.9(b)(2) or

(b)(5) of subpart A, as applicable.

(2) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(4) Major sources that intend to

become area sources by the compliance

date. Existing major sources that intend

to become area sources by the December

16, 1997 compliance date may choose to

submit, in lieu of the implementation

plan required under paragraph (b)(1) of

this section, a statement that, by the

compliance date, the major source

intends to obtain and comply with

federally enforceable limits on their

potential to emit which make the

facility an area source.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–15439 Filed 6–17–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–5520–5]

RIN 2060–AF33

Hazardous Air Pollutant List;

Modification

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is amending the list

of hazardous air pollutants in Clean Air

Act Section 112(b)(1) by removing the

compound caprolactam (CAS No. 105–

60–2). This rulemaking was initiated in

response to a petition to delete the

substance caprolactam which was filed

by AlliedSignal, Inc., BASF

Corporation, and DSM Chemicals North