33882 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Callers within the Washington

Metropolitan Area must dial 703–412–

9810 or TDD 703–412–3323 (hearing

impaired). The RCRA Hotline is open

Monday-Friday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.,

Eastern Standard Time. For more

detailed information on specific aspects

of the HWIR-media rulemaking, contact

Carolyn L. Hoskinson, Office of Solid

Waste (5303W), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20460, phone (703)

308–8626.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

29, 1996, EPA proposed Requirements

for Management of Hazardous

Contaminated Media (HWIR-media). See

61 FR 17870. The Agency established a

90-day comment period and indicated

that comments on the proposal would

be accepted until July 29, 1996.

EPA has received written requests to

extend the comment period for HWIRmedia from the Commonwealth of

Massachusetts, WMX Technologies,

Inc., American Petroleum Institute, and

the American Industrial Health Council.

The additional time requested was for

60 days.

As justification for a time extension,

stakeholders noted: (1) the significant

impact on state superfund and

hazardous waste programs, (2) the need

to coordinate comments with other

organizations, (3) the complexity of the

rulemaking, (4) the overlap of this

comment period with the comment

period for the Advanced Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for

Corrective Action for releases from

Solid Waste Management Units at

Hazardous Waste Management Facilities

(61 FR 19432 (May 1, 1996)) which ends

July 30, 1996, and (5) the need to gather

and evaluate data.

The Agency has decided to grant an

additional 30 days beyond the proposed

90-day comment period to allow

stakeholders enough time to review the

provisions of the rulemaking and to

formulate comments and

recommendations for the Agency’s

consideration in developing the final

rule. The Agency believes that 120 days

allows for sufficient time for

commenters to evaluate the proposal,

coordinate comments with others, and

gather and evaluate data. This 30 day

extension will stagger the comment

deadlines for this proposed rule and the

corrective action ANPR (61 FR 19432)

mentioned above.

The Agency does not believe that the

60 day extension requested is necessary.

The Agency has extensively involved

stakeholders during the preparation of

the proposed rulemaking, beginning in

January 1993. EPA announced public

meetings of the HWIR Federal Advisory

Committee in the Federal Register and

the public was invited to attend and

participate in the discussions between

January 1993 and September 1994.

Stakeholders were aware of the types of

issues that would be discussed in the

proposed rule, and therefore have had

adequate time to prepare to present

comments and data to the Agency on

the general issues. As for the specific

requirements proposed in the April 29,

1996 proposal, 120 days provides

sufficient time to respond. There is

broad agreement that reform of the

RCRA Subtitle C management

requirements for remediation wastes is

needed. The Agency wishes to move

forward with this important reform, and

believes that the requested 60 day

extension would cause unnecessary

delay. Accordingly, the Agency is

extending the comment period 30 days

to August 28, 1996 to provide for a 120-

day comment period.

The Agency also received requests to

extend the comment period for 60

additional days for the RCRA corrective

action Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (‘‘ANPR’’) (61 FR 19432)

from American Petroleum Institute and

the American Industrial Health Council.

As justification for a time extension,

stakeholders noted: (1) The need for

adequate time for public review, and (2)

limited expert resources to comment on

both the HWIR-media (61 FR 18780)

proposal and the corrective action

ANPR (61 FR 19432) at the same time.

The Agency has decided to retain the

current 90 day comment period for the

ANPR; comments on the ANPR are due

by July 30, 1996. Although the ANPR

requests comment on a range of

corrective action issues, it does not

propose any specific changes to the

program, and is primarily soliciting

views of interested parties rather than

detailed technical analysis. Therefore,

the Agency believes that a 90 day public

comment period is adequate time. The

Agency intends to move expeditiously

forward with its plans to identify and

implement improvements to the

corrective action program. Any newly

proposed or reproposed corrective

action regulations which follow the

ANPR will undergo appropriate public

involvement and review as part of the

rulemaking process. In addition, the

Agency is providing relief from

commenting on HWIR-media and the

corrective action ANPR at the same time

by extending the comment period for

the HWIR-media proposal.

One of the requests for an extension

asked that the Agency specifically

identify those portions of the 1990

corrective action proposal (55 FR 30798

(July 27, 1990)) which EPA plans to

promulgate as final. EPA has not

determined what, if any, portions of the

1990 proposal are appropriate for

finalizing, but rather solicited comment

on this issue. EPA provided opportunity

for notice and comment on the 1990

proposal at the time of that proposal.

Comments submitted during the 1990

comment period, as well as comments

on this ANPR, will be considered before

the Agency takes final action on any

part of the 1990 proposal. In the May 1,

1996 ANPR (61 FR 19432) EPA requests

that commenters identify specific

elements of the 1990 proposal which

could be promulgated without

additional public review and the

advantages and disadvantages of

immediately promulgating such

provisions. Please see the May 1, 1996

ANPR (61 FR 19432, 19456) for

additional discussion of this issue.

Dated: June 20, 1996.

Elliott Laws,

Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid

Waste and Emergency Response.

[FR Doc. 96–16669 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA–7184]

Proposed Flood Elevation

Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: Technical information or

comments are requested on the

proposed base (1% annual chance) flood

elevations and proposed base flood

elevation modifications for the

communities listed below. The base

flood elevations and modified base

flood elevations are the basis for the

floodplain management measures that

the community is required either to

adopt or to show evidence of being

already in effect in order to qualify or

remain qualified for participation in the

National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP).

DATES: The comment period is ninety

(90) days following the second

publication of this proposed rule in a

newspaper of local circulation in each

community.

ADDRESSES: The proposed base flood

elevations for each community are

available for inspection at the office of

the Chief Executive Officer of each
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Proposed Rules 33883

community. The respective addresses

are listed in the following table.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael K. Buckley, P.E., Chief, Hazard

Identification Branch, Mitigation

Directorate, 500 C Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Federal Emergency Management Agency

proposes to make determinations of base

flood elevations and modified base

flood elevations for each community

listed below, in accordance with Section

110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act

of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR

67.4(a).

These proposed base flood and

modified base flood elevations, together

with the floodplain management criteria

required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the

minimum that are required. They

should not be construed to mean that

the community must change any

existing ordinances that are more

stringent in their floodplain

management requirements. The

community may at any time enact

stricter requirements of its own, or

pursuant to policies established by other

Federal, State, or regional entities.

These proposed elevations are used to

meet the floodplain management

requirements of the NFIP and are also

used to calculate the appropriate flood

insurance premium rates for new

buildings built after these elevations are

made final, and for the contents in these

buildings.

National Environmental Policy Act

This proposed rule is categorically

excluded from the requirements of 44

CFR Part 10, Environmental

Consideration. No environmental

impact assessment has been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Acting Associate Director,

Mitigation Directorate, certifies that this

proposed rule is exempt from the

requirements of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act because proposed or

modified base flood elevations are

required by the Flood Disaster

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104,

and are required to establish and

maintain community eligibility in the

NFIP. No regulatory flexibility analysis

has been prepared.

Regulatory Classification

This proposed rule is not a significant

regulatory action under the criteria of

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of

September 30, 1993, Regulatory

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Executive Order 12612 Federalism

This proposed rule involves no

policies that have federalism

implications under Executive Order

12612, Federalism, dated October 26,

1987.

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform

This proposed rule meets the

applicable standards of Section 2(b)(2)

of Executive Order 12778.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67

Administrative practice and

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, 44 CFR Part 67 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 67—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 67

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

§ 67.4 [Amended]

2. The tables published under the

authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be

amended as follows:

State City/town/county Source of flooding Location

#Depth in feet above

ground. *Elevation in feet.

(NGVD)

Existing Modified

Arkansas ................ Adona (City) Perry

County.

Howell Creek .................... At confluence with Rocky Cypress Creek None *363

Approximately 400 feet upstream of Locust Road.None *411

Rocky Cypress Creek ...... Approximately 6,950 feet downstream of

Railroad Street.

None *339

Approximately 1,500 feet upstream of

Railroad Street.

None *366

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Adona, City Hall, Highway 10 West, Adona, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable Bill Greene, Mayor, City of Adona, P.O. Box 101, Adona, Arkansas 72001.

Arkansas ................ Houston (City)

Perry County.

West Fork Mill Creek ........ Approximately 450 feet upstream of Little

Rock and Western Railroad bridge.

N/A *286

Approximately 1,650 feet upstream of

Route 113 bridge.

N/A *286

West Fork Mill Creek Tributary 1.Approximately 200 feet above confluence

with West Fork Mill Creek.

N/A *286

Approximately 250 feet upstream of

Route 216 bridge.

N/A *297

West Fork Mill Creek Tributary 2.Approximately 650 feet upstream of confluence with West Fork Mill Creek.N/A *287

Approximately 300 feet upstream of private drive (northern).N/A *295

Houston Creek ................. Approximately 1,400 feet downstream of

Little Rock and Western Railroad

bridge.

N/A *305

Approximately 1,100 feet upstream of

Route 113 bridge.

N/A *329
33884 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Proposed Rules

State City/town/county Source of flooding Location

#Depth in feet above

ground. *Elevation in feet.

(NGVD)

Existing Modified

Maps are available for inspection at City Hall, City of Houston, Main Street, Houston, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable Jerry Lawson, Mayor, City of Houston, P.O. Box 166, Houston, Arkansas 72070.

Arkansas ................ Searcy (City) White

County.

Deener Creek ................... At confluence with Little Red River .......... *221 *221

Just upstream of North Main Street ......... *221 *221

Approximately 100 feet upstream of

North Maple (Highway 16).

*223 *225

Approximately 100 feet downstream of

Ella Street.

*232 *233

Gin Creek ......................... At confluence with Deener Creek ............ *221 *221

Just upstream of Davis Drive ................... *221 *221

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Searcy, City Hall, 401 West Arch, Searcy, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable David Evans, Mayor, City of Searcy, 401 West Arch, Searcy, Arkansas 72143.

Arkansas ................ Washington County

and Incorporated

Areas.

Middle Fork White River ... Approximately 0.22 mile upstream of

Highway 16.

None *1,182

Just downstream of Harris Drive (Extended).None *1.192

White River ....................... Approximately 2.8 miles downstream of

Highway 74.

None *1,181

Just downstream of Highway 74 .............. None *1,195

Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of East

First Avenue.

None *1,215

Maps are available for inspection at the Washington County Courthouse, 2 North College, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable Charles Johnson, Washington County Judge, 2 North College, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701.

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Fayetteville, City Hall, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable Fred Hanna, Mayor, City of Fayetteville, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701.

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Elkins, City Hall, 201 West First Street, Elkins, Arkansas.

Send comments to The Honorable Barbara King, Mayor, City of Elkins, P.O. Box 331, Elkins, Arkansas 72727.

California ................ Grass Valley (City)

Nevada County.

Wolf Creek ........................ At corporate limits (approximately 4,100

feet downstream of confluence of Little

Wolf Creek).

None *2,220

At confluence of Little Wolf Creek ............ *2,314 *2,312

Just downstream of Freeman Lane ......... *2,351 *2,351

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Grass Valley, 125 East Main Street, Grass Valley, California.

Send comments to The Honorable Devere Mautino, Mayor, City of Grass Valley, 125 East Main Street, Grass Valley, California 95945.

California ................ Nevada County

(Unincorporated

Areas).

Wolf Creek ........................ At Allison Ranch Road ............................. None *2,041

Just downstream of Marlor Bridge ........... None *2,066

Approximately 2,950 feet upstream of

Marlor Bridge.

None *2,110

Approximately 100 feet upstream of private bridge.None *2,206

Approximately 4,050 feet upstream of

confluence of Allison Ranch Ditch.

None *2,300

Just upstream of Brunswick Road ........... None *2,605

Approximately 2,980 feet upstream of

Brunswick Road.

None *2,677

Little Wolf Creek Approximately 3,300 feet above confluence with Wolf Creek.None *2,451

Approximately 3,740 feet above confluence with Wolf Creek.None *2,455

Maps are available for inspection at Nevada County, 950 Maidu Avenue, Nevada City, California.

Send comments to The Honorable Karen Knecht, Chairperson, Nevada County Board of Supervisors, 950 Maidu Avenue, Nevada City, California 95959–8617.

California ................ San Joaquin County (Unincorporated Areas).North Fork Mokelumne

River.

At divergence from South Fork

Mokelumne River.

*15 *15

Approximately 5,500 feet upstream of divergence from South Fork Mokelumne

River.

*15 *15
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Proposed Rules 33885

State City/town/county Source of flooding Location

#Depth in feet above

ground. *Elevation in feet.

(NGVD)

Existing Modified

Approximately 14,000 feet upstream of

divergence from South Fork

Mokelumne River.

None *18

At Interstate Highway 5 ............................ None *19

At confluence with Cosumnes River ........ None *19

Maps are available for inspection at the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, 1810 East Hazelton Avenue,

Stockton, California.

Send comments to The Honorable Robert J. Cabral, Chairman, San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors, 222 East Weber Avenue, Room

701, Stockton, California 95202.

Missouri .................. Butler County (Unincorporated

Areas).

Pike Creek ........................ Just upstream of U.S. Highway 67 southbound.*339 *339

Approximately 800 feet upstream of

Roxie Road.

*342 *340

Just upstream of Highway PP .................. *345 *346

Approximately 800 feet upstream of confluence of North Branch Pike Creek.None *347

North Branch Pike Creek Approximately 700 feet downstream of

Holly Trail at the City of Poplar Bluff

corporate limits.

*410 *411

Just upstream of Holly

Trail.

At Oak Grove Road .................................. *421

*427

*420

*427

Maps are available for inspection at 114 Elm Street, Poplar Bluff, Missouri.

Send comments to The Honorable Bob Manns, Chairman, County Commissioners, County Courthouse, Poplar Bluff, Missouri 63901.

Missouri .................. Poplar Bluff (City) Pike Creek ........................ Just upstream of the Missouri Pacific

Railroad.

*335 *336

Butler County ......... At confluence of Black

Creek.

*338 *339

At confluence of Sunset Creek ................ *342 *340

Approximately 400 feet downstream of

confluence of North Branch Pike Creek.

*347 *346

North Branch Pike Creek Approximately 350 feet upstream of confluence with Pike Creek.*348 *347

Approximately 2,000 feet upstream of

confluence with Pike Creek.

*363 *364

At confluence of East Fork Pike Creek .... *383 *382

Approximately 100 feet upstream of Russell Road.*409 *410

Just upstream of Oak Grove Road .......... *427 *427

Hogg Creek ...................... At confluence with Pike Creek ................. *339 *339

Just upstream of Tremont

Street.

*345 *345

Approximately 150 feet upstream of Pershing Street.*354 *354

Just upstream of Gray Street ................... *393 *393

Just upstream of North 14th Street .......... *424 *422

Hogg Creek Tributary ....... At confluence with Hogg Creek ................ *349 *347

Approximately 500 feet upstream of confluence with Hogg Creek.*351 *351

Just downstream of Highland Road ......... *360 *358

Park Creek ....................... Just upstream of 5th Street ...................... *338 *338

At 6th Street ............................................. *338 *339

Just upstream of 8th Street ...................... *340 *340

Just upstream of Oakwood Drive ............. *346 *346

Shady Creek ..................... Approximately 400 feet downstream of

North Main Street.

None *352

Approximately 150 feet upstream of

Montclair Drive.

None *359

Just upstream of Fox Drive ...................... None *379

Just upstream of Shady Lane .................. None *399

Approximately 500 feet upstream of

Woodstone Road.

None *429

Woodlawn Branch ............ Approximately 200 feet downstream of

East Avondale Drive.

None *346

Just upstream of confluence of Clay

Creek.

None *351

Just upstream of South Avondale Drive None *354
33886 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 127 / Monday, July 1, 1996 / Proposed Rules

State City/town/county Source of flooding Location

#Depth in feet above

ground. *Elevation in feet.

(NGVD)

Existing Modified

Maps are available for inspection at the City of Poplar Bluff, 114 Elm Street, Poplar Bluff, Missouri.

Send comments to The Honorable Ron Black, Mayor, City of Poplar Bluff, P.O. Box 460, Poplar Bluff, Missouri 63902.

Oklahoma ............... Adair County (Unincorporated

Areas).

Caney Creek .................... Approximately 3,900 feet downstream of

confluence with Spring Tributary.

None *976

Approximately 1,600 feet upstream of

County Road.

None *1,042

Approximately 1,850 feet upstream of

County Road.

None *1,044

Approximately 5,500 feet upstream of

confluence with Eighth Street Tributary.

None *1,059

Approximately 1,600 feet upstream of

Oklahoma Avenue.

None *1,118

Eigth Street Tributary ....... At confluence with Caney Creek .............. None *1,054

Approximately 150 feet downstream of

Eighth Street.

None *1,068

Master Drain Tributary ..... At confluence with Caney Creek .............. None *1,050

Maps are available for inspection at the Adair County Courthouse, Stilwell, Oklahoma.

Send comments to The Honorable Darryll Wilson, Chairperson, Adair County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 169, Stilwell, Oklahoma

74960.

Oklahoma ............... Stilwell (City) Adair

County.

Caney Creek .................... Approximately 3,000 feet downstream of

Olive Street (at the corporate limits).

None *1,042

Approximately 2,700 feet downstream of

Olive Street (at the corporate limits).

None *1,044

Approximately 700 feet downstream of

Olive Street (at the corporate limits).

None *1,059

Just downstream of Elm Street ................ None *1,085

Just upstream of Oklahoma Avenue (at

the corporate limits).

None *1,118

Eighth Street Tributary ..... Approximately 350 feet downstream of

Eighth Street (at the corporate limits).

None *1,065

Approximately 100 feet downstream of

Eighth Street (at the corporate limits).

None *1,068

Maps are available for inspection at the City Clerk’s Office, 503 West Division, Stilwell, Oklahoma.

Send comments to The Honorable Neil Morton, Mayor, City of Stilwell, 503 West Division, Stilwell, Oklahoma 74960.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’)

Dated: June 25, 1996.

Richard W. Krimm,

Acting Associate Director for Mitigation.

[FR Doc. 96–16698 Filed 6–28–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–04–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Parts 1 and 8

[Docket No. OST–96–1427; Notice 96–16]

RIN: 2105–AC51

Classified Information; Revision

AGENCY: Department of Transportation

(DOT), Office of the Secretary.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: DOT proposes to revise its

regulations regarding classification and

declassification of, and access to,

classified information, and to delegate

to the Assistant Secretary for

Administration authority to ensure

compliance within DOT with the

regulations and the underlying

Executive Orders. This action is taken in

response to the President’s Regulatory

Reinvention Initiative and in order to

implement recent Executive Orders.

DATES: Comments are due August 30,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Documentary Services

Division, Attention: Docket Section,

Room PL401, Docket No. OST–96–1427,

Department of Transportation, C–55,

Washington, DC 20590. Any person

wishing acknowledgment that his/her

comments have been received should

include a self-addressed stamped

postcard. Comments received will be

available for public inspection and

copying in the Documentary Services

Division, Room PL401, Department of

Transportation Building, 400 Seventh

Street, SW, Washington, DC, from 10:00

a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET Monday through

Friday except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert I. Ross, Office of the General

Counsel, C–10, Department of

Transportation, Washington, DC 20590,

telephone (202) 366–9156, FAX (202)

366–9170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1995,

the President of the United States issued

two Executive Orders making

substantial revisions to the rules under

which agencies of the Executive Branch,

such as DOT, manage information that

requires special treatment in the interest

of national security. Briefly stated,

Executive Order 12958 of April 17,

1995, Classified National Security

Information, requires that less

information be classified; and Executive

Order 12968 of August 2, 1995, Access

to Classified Information, requires

agencies to provide administrative

review of decisions to deny access to

classified information. This proposal

seeks to implement both Orders. To