[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 212 (Friday, November 3, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75611-75612]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24336]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2381]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before February 1, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2381, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations 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 flood hazard determinations, 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 flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Dane County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Project: 21-05-0012S Preliminary Date: July 11, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Madison........................  City County Building, 210
                                          Martin Luther King Jr.
                                          Boulevard, Room 403, Madison,
                                          WI 53703.
City of Monona.........................  City Hall, 5211 Schluter Road,
                                          Monona, WI 53716.
City of Sun Prairie....................  City Hall, 300 East Main
                                          Street, Sun Prairie, WI 53590.
Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin...........  Tribal Office Building, W9814
                                          Airport Road, Black River
                                          Falls, WI 54615.
Unincorporated Areas of Dane County....  City County Building, 210
                                          Martin Luther King Jr.
                                          Boulevard, Room 116, Madison,
                                          WI 53703.
Village of McFarland...................  Municipal Center, 5915
                                          Milwaukee Street, McFarland,
                                          WI 53558.

Village of Windsor.....................  Windsor Village Hall, 4084
                                          Mueller Road, DeForest, WI
                                          53532.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-24336 Filed 11-2-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans for York, Cumberland, Androscoggin,
Kennebec, Knox, Lincoln, Waldo and Hancock County, Maine

Introduction

On April 30, 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published the final phase 1 rule for the implementation of the new
8-hour 0.08 ppm parts per million (PPM) ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS).  40 CFR Parts 51.905 (c) and (d) of this
rulemaking established maintenance plan requirements for areas
designated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS that were previously
nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone standard and for attainment areas
with a maintenance plan under the 1-hour ozone standard.  These
anti-backsliding provisions require these areas to adopt and submit a
plan that will ensure maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard for at
least 10 years from the date of the area’s classification as
unclassifiable/attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

Maintenance Plan Requirements

The 8-hour ozone 110(a)(1) maintenance plan is a SIP revisions providing
for continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the maintenance
area for 10 years from the effective date of the area’s designation as
unclassifiable/ attainment.  The section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan must
contain the following elements:

An Attainment Inventory;

A Maintenance Demonstration;

Continued Ambient Air Quality Monitoring;

Contingency Plan; and

Verification of Continued Attainment.

Description of  the 8-Hour Maintenance Areas

Maine has portions of four planning areas that are designated as
attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone standard that also had a
designation of either nonattainment or attainment with an approved
maintenance plan for the for the 1-hour ozone standard as of June 15,
2004 (the effective date of the 8-hour ozone standard designation for
these areas).  These areas are:

Planning Area 1- Portions of York and Cumberland Counties;

Planning Area 2- Parts of Androscoggin and all of Kennebec County;

Planning Area 3- Portions of Knox and Lincoln Counties; and

Planning Area 4- Portions of Hancock and Waldo Counties.

An exact list of the towns in each of these areas is shown in Table 1.

Planning Area 1 was designated as “moderate” nonttainment for the
1-hour ozone NAAQS.  This planning area is currently monitoring
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard, and the 1-hour standard based
on 2003-2005 ozone data.  Planning Area 2 was designated as a moderate
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone standard, and has been
monitoring attainment of this standard since the early 1990’s.
Planning Area 3 was also designated as moderate nonattainment area, and
has been monitoring attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard since the
early 1990’s.  Planning Area 4 was designated as a marginal
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and was officially
redesignated to attainment in 1996.  The 8-hour maintenance areas in
Maine are illustrated in Figure 1.

Attainment Inventories and Maintenance Demonstration

The Phase I implementation rule provides that the 10-year maintenance
period begins on the effective date of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
designation.   In order to ensure maintenance of the 8-hour NAAQS, an
area must first develop an attainment emissions inventory, which details
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxide of nitrogen (NOx) emissions
for the maintenance area.  Although a state may use any of the three
years upon which the 8-hour ozone designation was based (i.e., 2001,
2002 and 2003), EPA recommends that areas use 2002 as the attainment
inventory base year.

The key element of the maintenance plan is a demonstration that the area
will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for the 10-year
period following the effective date of designation.    In order to
demonstrate continued maintenance, a state may utilize either an
emissions inventory approach, or other methods such as modeling.  Maine
is

utilizing the emissions inventory approach, and has demonstrated that
future emissions of ozone precursors will not exceed the attainment
inventory levels for each of the Planning Areas.

Table 1

Areas in Maine Required to Submit a Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan

Area	Cities and Towns Included

Planning Area 1

8-hr Attainment Portion of the old Portland, ME 1-hour moderate
nonattainment area	York County: Acton, Cornish, Lebanon, Limerick,
Newfield, Parsonsfield, Shapleigh and Waterboro.

Cumberland County: Baldwin, Bridgton, Harrison, Naples, and Sebago.

Planning Area 2

8-hr Attainment Portion of the old Lewiston-Auburn, ME (Androscoggin and
Kennebec Counties) 1-hour moderate nonattainment area	Androscoggin
County: Auburn, Greene, Leeds, Lewiston, Lisbon, Livermore, Livermore
Falls, Mechanic Falls, Minot, Poland, Sabattus, Turner and Wales.

Kennebec County: Albion, Augusta, Belgrade, Benton, Chelsea, China,
Clinton, Farmingdale, Fayette, Gardiner, Hallowell, Litchfield,
Manchester, Monmouth, Mount Vernon, Oakland, Pittston, Randolph,
Readfield, Rome Sidney, Unity Twp, Vassalboro, Vienna, Waterville,
Wayne, West Gardiner, Windsor, Winslow, and Winthrop.

Planning Area 3

8-hr Attainment Portion of the old Knox and Lincoln Counties, Maine
1-hour moderate nonattainment area	Lincoln County: Jefferson, Somerville
and Whitefield.

Knox County: Appleton, Hope, Union and Washington.

Planning Area 4

8-hr Attainment Portion of the old Hancock and Waldo Counties, Maine
1-hour Maintenance area 	Hancock County: Towns and townships of Amherst,
Aurora, Bucksport, Castine, Dedham, Eastbrook, Ellsworth, Franklin,
Great Pond, Mariaville, Orland, Osborn, Otis, Penobscot, Verona,
Waltham, Oqiton Township, T3 ND, T39 MD, T40 MD, T41 MD, T32 MD, T34 MD,
T35 MD, T28 MD, T22 MD, T16 MD, T8 SD, T9 SD, T10 SD, and T7 SD.

Waldo County:  Towns of Belfast, Belmont, Brooks, Burnham, Frankfort,
Freedom, Jackson, Knox, Liberty, Lincolnville, Monroe, Montville,
Morrill, Northport, Palermo, Prospect, Searsmont, Searsport, Stockton
Springs, Swanville, Thorndike, Troy, Unity, Waldo, and Winterport.

Figure 1 Map of Areas Required to Submit a Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance
Plan

The emissions inventories used in this section 110 maintenance plan are
derived using EPA methodology (See Appendix A for a detailed description
of the methodology used to prepare the section 110 maintenance plan
inventories).  In the case of the four areas in Maine required to submit
a section 110 maintenance plan, the emissions shown in the tables are
for the full county (due to the difficulty of parsing out inventory data
to a sub-county basis).  The inventories are shown for the base year
2002, an interim year 2009 and the final year 2016.  In all four areas
the emission trends in both NOx and VOC are downward due to a
comprehensive suite of state and federal emissions control programs.
The total emissions shown for 2009 are always lower than the base year.
This is important, since in the base year all these areas were
monitoring attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.  This inventory
analysis demonstrates that this level will not only be maintained in
2009, but will be lower.  The same can be said when comparing 2009 with
2016.  Emissions always decrease.  This clearly demonstrates that the
8-hour ozone standard will be maintained for the ten year period between
2004 and 2014, which is the required test, even though a specific
inventory was not prepared for 2014.

The following four tables illustrate both the attainment inventory and
maintenance inventories for the Section 110 (a) (1) maintenance areas in
Maine:

Maintenance Area 1

	Cumberland	03

York	31

	all emissions expressed in tons per summer week day

2002	2002	2009	2009	2016	2016

Category	Subcategory	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx

Point

3.251	12.953	3.785	8.604	4.455	10.040

Nonpoint

30.930	4.752	31.158	5.377	34.397	5.596

Mobile	Onroad	28.258	55.657	15.586	30.811	10.333	15.130

Mobile	Nonroad	17.735	9.619	14.747	7.847	12.895	5.410

Mobile	Locomotives	0.017	0.514	0.014	0.389	0.012	0.323

	Total	80.191	83.495	65.290	53.028	62.092	36.499

Maintenance Area 1- York and Cumberland County

Maintenance Area 2

	Androscoggin	01

Kennebec	11

	all emissions expressed in tons per summer week day

2002	2002	2009	2009	2016	2016

Category	Subcategory	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx

Point

0.393	2.979	0.620	2.740	0.740	3.180

Nonpoint

12.394	1.433	12.296	1.639	13.471	1.635

Mobile	Onroad	13.188	23.639	7.336	13.291	4.795	6.523

Mobile	Nonroad	5.827	3.782	5.163	3.004	4.386	1.966

Mobile	Locomotives	0.018	0.489	0.015	0.368	0.013	0.304

	Total	31.820	32.322	25.430	21.042	23.405	13.608

Maintenance Area 2- Androscoggin and Kennebec County

Maintenance Area 3

	Knox	13

Lincoln	15

	all emissions expressed in tons per summer week day

2002	2002	2009	2009	2016	2016

Category	Subcategory	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx

Point

0.811	6.149	1.140	4.990	1.240	5.650

Nonpoint

6.688	1.985	6.933	2.174	7.641	2.291

Mobile	Onroad	4.316	7.655	2.356	4.173	1.537	2.065

Mobile	Nonroad	6.596	2.163	5.393	1.923	4.637	1.545

Mobile	Locomotives	0.006	0.176	0.005	0.133	0.005	0.110

	Total	18.417	18.128	15.827	13.393	15.060	11.661

Maintenance Area 3- Knox and Lincoln County

Maintenance Area 4

	Hancock	09

Waldo	27

	all emissions expressed in tons per summer week day

2002	2002	2009	2009	2016	2016

Category	Subcategory	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx	VOC	NOx

Point

1.366	2.207	0.510	0.370	0.600	0.430

Nonpoint

7.551	1.470	7.677	1.642	8.348	1.789

Mobile	Onroad	7.202	11.757	4.013	6.558	2.608	3.267

Mobile	Nonroad	7.906	2.691	6.680	2.361	5.580	1.798

Mobile	Locomotives	0.009	0.230	0.007	0.172	0.007	0.142

	Total	24.034	18.355	18.887	11.103	17.143	7.426

Maintenance Area 4- Hancock and Waldo County

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring

The maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone standard must also include
provisions for the operation of an ambient air quality modeling network
to verify continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in each
maintenance area.  Maine is committing to the continued operation of an
appropriate air quality monitoring network to verify continued
maintenance of each area's attainment status in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58.  Any proposed monitoring network modifications will be
accompanied by technical and statistical analyses sufficient to document
that a given monitor may be removed or relocated because it is
unnecessary or duplicative.  The final monitoring network design shall
be subject to the approval of the EPA Regional Administrator.

Contingency Plan

The maintenance plan must include contingency provisions, as necessary,
to promptly correct any NAAQS violation that occurs after redesignation
of an area.  It should include measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedures for adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit
for action.  Specific triggers that would put the plan into motion must
be identified.  This plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the
SIP and should ensure that the contingency measures are adopted
explicitly once they are triggered.

As detailed in EPA guidance on redesignations, a contingency measure (a
control program or set of controls) must be clearly defined and be
implemented within a reasonable time frame if there is a lapse in
attainment.

Despite the best efforts to demonstrate continued compliance with the
eight-hour ozone NAAQS, the ambient ozone concentrations may exceed or
violate the NAAQS.  Therefore, as required by section 110(a)(1) of the
Act, Maine has listed possible contingency measures in the event of a
future ozone air quality problem.  At the conclusion of each ozone
season, the Maine DEP will evaluate whether the design value for each of
the maintenance areas is above or below the 8-hour ozone standard.  If
the design value is above the standard, the DEP will evaluate the
potential causes of this design value increase.  The DEP will examine
whether this increase is due to an increase in local in-state emissions
or an increase in upwind out-of-state emissions.  If an increase in
in-state emissions is determined to be a contributing factor to the
design value increase, Maine will evaluate the projected in-state
emissions for the relevant maintenance area for the ozone season in the
following year.  If in-state emissions are not expected to
satisfactorily decrease in the following ozone season in order to
mitigate the violation, Maine will implement one or more of the
contingency measures listed in this section, or substitute a new VOC or
NOx control measures to achieve additional in-state emissions
reductions.  The contingency measures(s) will be selected by the
Governor or the Governor’s designee within 6 months of the end of the
ozone season for which contingency measures have been determined
necessary.  Possible contingency measures include:

Adhesives

Establish VOC content limits for industrial and commercial application
of solvent-based adhesives and sealants based on California Air
Resources Board (CARB) suggested RACT controls (1998).

Asphalt Paving

Reduce the VOC content limit for cutback asphalt from 5% to 4%, and
lower current VOC content limits for emulsified asphalt by 20%.

Automobile Refinish Coatings

Adopt the VOC content limits captained in the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) regulations.

Consumer Products

Adopt and implement the July 20, 2005 California Air Resources Board
(CARB) regulations.

Rule Effectiveness Improvement

Increase enforcement of existing rules in order to increase
effectiveness.

Small Source Non-CTG VOC RACT

Reduce the major source and Chapter 134 non-CTG VOC RACT applicability
threshold from 40 to 10 tons per year of actual emissions.

Verification of Continued Attainment

Pursuant to EPA requirements, the Maine must ensure that it has the
legal authority to implement and enforce all measures necessary to
attain and maintain the NAAQS.  Sections 110(a)(2)(B) and (F) of the
Act, and regulations promulgated in 40 CFR 51.110(k) suggest that one
such measure is the acquisition of air quality and source emission data
to demonstrate attainment and maintenance.  The state submittal must
indicate how the state will track the progress of the maintenance plan.
This is necessary due to the fact that the emission projections made for
the maintenance demonstration depend on assumptions of point and area
source growth.

One option for tracking the progress of the maintenance demonstration
would be to periodically update the emissions inventory.  In this case,
the maintenance plan should specify the frequency of any planned
inventory updates.  Such an update could be based, in part, on the
annual update of EPA’s national emissions inventory (NEI) database,
and could indicate new source growth and other changes from the
attainment inventory (such as changes in vehicle miles traveled or in
traffic patterns).  As an alternative to a complete update of the
inventory, the state may choose to do a comprehensive review of the
factors that were used in developing the attainment inventory to show no
significant change.  If this review does show a significant change, the
state should then perform an update of the inventory.

The state of Maine has the legal authority to implement and enforce
specified measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS.  Key
regulatory elements that the state will keep in place to maintain
attainment are as follows:

1.	Existing source regulatory program requiring controls for certain
source types for which EPA has defined reasonable available control
technology in guideline documents; and

2.	Requirement for controls for all major sources.

In addition to maintaining key elements of its regulatory program in
place, the state will acquire ambient and source emission data to track
attainment and maintenance.

Maine will track the progress of the maintenance demonstration by
periodically updating the emissions inventory.  This tracking will be
performed annually in order to enable the state to implement contingency
measures as quickly as possible.  The update will be based, in part, on
the annual update of the NEI, and will indicate new source growth and
other changes from the attainment inventory, including changes in
vehicle miles traveled or in traffic patterns and changes in MOBILE6.2
or its successor.

The state will report the results of this tracking program to EPA every
three years.

Conclusions

Maine has met all section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan requirements to
ensure that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will continue to be maintained in all
areas that were nonattainment areas or attainment areas with maintenance
plans for former 1-hour ozone standard.

The section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan requirements and how Maine has
met them are as follows:

Attainment Inventory-Maine prepared and used a 2002 base inventory
following EPA’s Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule.

Maintenance Demonstration-Maine prepared an interim year (2009) and a
final year 2016 inventory.  The emission trends for all four areas in
Maine required to perform a section 110 maintenance inventory are all
downward and prove that the 8-hour standard will be maintained through
at least 2014. The year required by EPA.

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring-Maine is committing to the continued
operation of an appropriate air quality monitoring network to verify
continued maintenance of each area's attainment status in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 58.

Contingency Plan-Maine has developed a contingency plan to ensure
violations of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS are addressed and promptly
corrected.

Verification of Continued Attainment- Maine will track the progress of
the maintenance demonstration.  This tracking will be performed annually
in order to enable the state to implement contingency measures as
quickly as possible.  The state will report the results of this tracking
program to EPA every three years.

This maintenance plan ensures air quality better than the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for years to come.

Appendix A

Methodology Used to Prepare

State of Maine

Section 110 Ozone Maintenance Inventories

Revision of April 13, 2006

	In the first quarter of 2006, the Air Toxics and Emissions Inventory
Program began the development of multi-year, ozone redesignation and
maintenance plan inventories for nine Maine counties.  The purpose of
these inventories was to support the redesignation of two, 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas and four, 1-hour nonattainment areas to attainment
status and provide a long-term demonstration that attainment could be
maintained.

	In its letter to James Brooks on December 6, 2005, EPA outlined the
requirements of this inventory:

2002 summer, daily emissions inventories for NOx and VOC which would
serve as the base year for the four, 1-hour nonattainment area
maintenance plans;

2005 summer, daily emissions inventories for NOx and VOC which would
serve as the base year for the two, 8-hour nonattainment area
maintenance plans;

2009 summer, daily emissions inventories for NOx and VOC which would
serve as an interim year for all six maintenance plans;

2016 summer, daily emissions inventories for NOx and VOC which would
serve as the end year for all six maintenance  plans; and

On-road mobile source emission projections, by town, for each 8-hour non
attainment area.  This projection will serve as the NOx and VOC
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes.

	The purpose of this document is to provide a general overview of how
each inventory was developed.

Point

	Maine once again used the 2002 inventory from the recent SIP amendment,
15% VOC emission reduction plan (approved by EPA, FR14815, March 24,
2006).  For later years, the Point Source Inventory data is grown out
from 2004, using SIC growth factors from EGAS 5.0 Beta, for developing
the 2006 Ozone Redesignation Inventories.

	Wyman Station data for 2002 and 2004 is from EPA’s Acid Rain Program.

Nonpoint

	Maine used its final submission to the 2002 National Emissions
Inventory (February 2005, with state edits, May 1, 2005) as the basis
for developing the 2006 Ozone Redesignation Inventory.  Documentation
detailing the development of 2002 NEI emissions estimates can be found
in “Methodology Use to Prepare the State of Maine 2002 Emissions
Inventory,” (September 12, 2005) which is located on Maine DEP’s
website at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.state.me.us/dep/air/emissions/docs/ME_2002_NEI_Narrative_fin
al.pdf"
http://www.state.me.us/dep/air/emissions/docs/ME_2002_NEI_Narrative_fina
l.pdf .

	The following additions and corrections were made to this data set.

Petroleum and Petroleum Storage: Gasoline Service Stations: Stage 1:
Submerged (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) and Stage 1: Balanced Submerged (SCC:
2501060053) have been corrected for the ozone summer season.  Annual
emission estimate use average daily VMT to calculate emissions, however,
summer daily VMT must to used to accurately calculate summer ozone
season estimates.  The ozone season estimates use summer-weighted VMT to
allocate fuel distribution.  All other parts of the calculation are
consistent.

Petroleum and Petroleum Storage: Gasoline Service Stations: Stage 2:
Total (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) was deleted from the Nonpoint inventories.
These emission estimates are now included with the Onroad sector.  It
was included in the nonpoint sector with the 2002 NEI because E.H.
Pechan, who had developed Maine’s Onroad estimates, had specifically
excluded Stage 2 emissions from the MOBILE model runs.  For these
inventories, however, we have left Stage 2 emissions with the Onroad
estimates.

Petroleum and Petroleum Transport: Marine Vessels (SCCs: Crude Oil –
2505020030; Residual Oil –<PHONE_NUMBER>; Distillate Oil –<PHONE_NUMBER>;
and Gasoline –<PHONE_NUMBER>) emission estimates were changed after the
2002 NEI submission.  In May 2005, Maine learned that all ballast is not
segregated and zeroed out emissions from non-segregated ballasts.

Emission estimates for Commercial Bakeries (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) and
Breweries (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) were added to the ozone redesignation
inventories.  These categories were include in Maine’s recently
approved 15% Plan inventory, but were not included in the 2002 NEI.
Emissions of wineries and distilleries were once again confirmed to be
de minimis

Two Nonroad sources have been grouped with the Nonpoint sector.  They
include the following categories and SCCs:

Marine Vessels; Port and Underway Emissions	SCCs: 228002100,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
2280002200, and<PHONE_NUMBER>

Aircraft	SCCs:<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>, and<PHONE_NUMBER>

Other Combustion: Prescribed Burning of Rangeland (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) was
miscoded in Maine’s 15% Plan as Other Combustion: Prescribed Burning
for Forest Management (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>).  There is no prescribed burning
for forest management in Maine’s ozone nonattainment areas.  Maine DEP
then looked at the raw data and realized that the prescribed burning did
not occur during the summer season.  Therefore, Prescribed Burning of
Rangeland was removed from these inventories.

EPA-generated data for 11 Solvent Categories was added or substituted
for Maine data.  This data was not available for Maine to use in its
2002 NEI submission. However, with some exceptions, we are using a
majority of the data here since it is more complete.  The 11 Solvent
Categories included VOC data for 43 SCCs.  Where Maine had submitted
state-calculated, VOC emission estimates for SCCs included in the 11
Solvent Categories, we deleted our state-calculated values in favor of
the EPA estimates.  The following is a list of exceptions to our
acceptance of the EPA-generated data for the 11 Solvent Categories:

Emissions estimates for Dry Cleaning – Coin-Operated Cleaners (SCC:
2420020370) were deleted because we have verified, through inspection
and survey, that no such facilities exist in Maine.

Emissions estimate for Rubber/Plastics (SCC:<PHONE_NUMBER>) was deleted
because it was determined during our review of the 2002 Draft NEI that
these emissions were included in the Point source inventory.

Emissions from four SCCs in the Miscellaneous Non-Industrial: Consumer
and Commercial Products categories (SCCs:<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
2460400000, and<PHONE_NUMBER>) for which Maine has submitted data were
reported under different SCCs (SCCs:<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and<PHONE_NUMBER>) by EPA in the 11 Solvent Category data.  The State data
was deleted from the inventory to prevent double counting.

	Growth factors were developed using the EGAS model, version 5.0 beta.
Growth factor projections assumed a 2002 base year.  New SCCs created
for the 11 Solvent Categories were not reflected in the EGAS model.
Growth factors, based on similar SCCs, were used where the EGAS model
provided none.

	Annual emissions were apportioned to tons per summer weekday using
EIIP, Volume III, “Introduction to Area Source Emission Inventory
Development,” Chapter 1, Section 4.2.6, “Seasonal Activity” and
Section 4.2.8, “Calculations for Temporal Adjustments” (January
2001).  See   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eiip/techreport/volume03/iii01_apr2001.pdf"
 http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eiip/techreport/volume03/iii01_apr2001.pdf
.  SCC-specific, apportionment factors can be found in the
tblAnnual_to_TPSD table of the 2006RedesignationArea.mdb database.

	Maine did take advantage of controls which were currently in effect or
would become effective in future years.  The following table lists the
SCCs and control efficiencies expected in future years.

SCC	Pollutant Code	2002 Control Efficiency	2005 Control Efficiency	2009
Control Efficiency	2016 Control Efficiency	Rule Citation

06-096 CMR

2401001000	VOC	0	0	0.35	0.35	CH 151

2401005000	VOC	0	0.38	0.38	0.38	CH 153

2401100000	VOC	0	0	0.35	0.35	CH 151

2415030000	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415045000	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415065000	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415100000	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415100385	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415300000	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415300370	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2415300385	VOC	0	0.66	0.66	0.66	CH 130

2460100000	VOC	0	0.142	0.142	0.142	CH 152

2460200000	VOC	0	0.142	0.142	0.142	CH 152

2460400000	VOC	0	0.142	0.142	0.142	CH 152

2460600000	VOC	0	0.142	0.142	0.142	CH 152

2460800000	VOC	0	0.142	0.142	0.142	CH 152

2461021000	VOC	0.8	0.8	0.8	0.8	CH 131

Nonroad

	Maine used the NONROAD2005 Emission Inventory Model (November 2005) for
the nonroad engine emissions modeling.  The following table summarizes
the inputs.

 	2002	2005+

	South	SUM	SUM	All redesignation plan counties

Fuel RVP	7.8	7.8	except Hancock and Waldo

Oxygen Weight %	0.64	0.5

	Gas sulfur %	0.0197	0.0339

	Diesel Sulfur % (default)	0.25	0.2284

	CNG/LPG (default)	0.003	0.003

	Min Temp	63	63

	Max Temp	90	90

	Avg Temp	75	75

	Altitude 	LOW 	LOW

	Stage II Control Factor	0.0	0.0

	North	SUM	SUM	Hancock and Waldo Counties

Fuel RVP	9	9	only

Oxygen Weight %	0.64	0.5

	Gas sulfur %	0.0197	0.0339

	Diesel Sulfur % (default)	0.25	0.2284

	CNG/LPG (default)	0.003	0.003

	Min Temp	63	63

	Max Temp	90	90

	Avg Temp	75	75

	Altitude 	LOW 	LOW

	Stage II Control Factor	0.0	0.0

Notes:

	2002 RVP, Oxygen Weight % and Gas sulfur % calculated from 2002 Fuels
report.

0.25 Diesel Sulfur % for 2002 supplied by Pechan

NONROAD defaults used for 2005 and later years

	Additionally, rail road fuel use data became available after the
submission of the 2002 NEI, so the Locomotive emissions were
recalculated using the following methodology:

Fuel usage totals were obtained from the major rail companies that did
business in Maine in 2002, except for the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic
Railway company.  Montreal did not respond to our repeated requests for
fuel use data.

To estimate Montreal's fuel consumption, average fuel consumption per
track mile value was calculated from the three large railways that had
supplied data.  One company had supplied both the line fuel usage, and
yard engine fuel usage.  This percentage (15% in rail yards) was used to
estimate the amount of fuel that Montreal burned in its yard engines,
which was added to the value estimated for line work.

The number of switch yards and track miles per company and county were
derived from GIS databases.  Railroad tracks leased from the state were
apportioned to each company, resulting in a 5% fuel usage increase per
company.  We assumed that each rail yard had one yard locomotive.

To calculate emissions from Yard Locomotives, we multiplied the amount
of fuel used in yard engines by the emission factors in Table 7 of the
Sierra Document.  This was double checked against using the number of
switch yards per company, (and the assumption of one yard locomotive per
yard) and multiplying this by the emission factor in Table 8 of the
Sierra Document.  We also made an estimate of fuel use from switch yard
engines by using the 226 gallons of fuel per day per engine consumption
value in Sierra.

The amount of variability in emissions from these three methods, and the
lack of cooperation by the rail road companies in volunteering fuel
consumption data, points to the need to amend DEP’s regulations to
compel railroad companies to file emission statements

The Sierra Report shows large drop in the sulfur content in locomotive
fuel in 2008, and variable emission factors over time.  Additionally, we
grew out railroad use from 2002 using EGAS growth factors

Once the per-company emissions had been determined, these emissions were
apportioned based on the amount of track in each county, and the number
of switch yards, as determined from the GIS database.

Onroad

	Maine used MOBILE6.2.03 (September 24, 2003) to generate emission
factor for the redesignation inventories.  The following table
summarizes the command inputs used in the input files.

Evaluation Month	7 (July)

Fuel Program	1 (Conventional Gasoline East)

Fuel RVP	7.8 for Kennebec, Androscoggin, Knox, Lincoln, Cumberland,
Sagadahoc and York counties

9.0 for Waldo and Hancock counties

Min/Max Temp	63. and 90.

Anti-Tampering Program	For Cumberland County (catalyst removal and gas
cap)

ANTI-TAMP PROG     :

99 83 20 22222 11111111 1 11<PHONE_NUMBER>2

For all other counties (catalyst removal only)

ANTI-TAMP PROG     :

99 83 20 22222 11111111 1 11<PHONE_NUMBER>1

Stage II Refueling	Stage II refueling is only applicable to three
counties: Cumberland, Sagadahoc and York counties.

For Cumberland County

STAGE II REFUELING :

95 3 45. 4.

For Sagadahoc County

STAGE II REFUELING :

95 3 41. 3.

For York County

STAGE II REFUELING :

95 3 35. 3.

Inspection/Maintenance Programs	I/M Programs is only applicable to
Cumberland County.

I/M PROGRAM        : 1 1999 2025 1 TRC GC

I/M MODEL YEARS    : 1 1974 2025

I/M VEHICLES       : 1 22222 11111111 1

I/M COMPLIANCE     : 1 96.0

I/M GRACE PERIOD   : 1 1

Maine LEV II Program	Data files specific for Maine’s LEV II Program
were developed and supplied by EPA.

94+ LDG IMP        : MELEV2.D

T2 EXH PHASE-IN    : LEV2EXH.D

T2 EVAP PHASE-IN   : LEV2EVAP.D

T2 CERT            : LEV2CERT.D

Maine created two MOBILE6 input files for each county – one which used
the National LEV Program input file and one which used the Maine LEV II
Program input files (listed above).  Maine is approved to take only 90%
of the Maine LEV II credit and both files were needed to calculate those
values.  90% of the Maine LEV II credit is taken for all years and all
planning areas included in the demonstrations.

Appendix B

Emission Control Programs Providing Ozone Precursor Reductions in the
Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Areas

.

Emission Control Programs Implemented Prior to 2002

The following emission control programs were implemented by the State of
Maine prior to 2002.  Citations to EPA approval of state rules are given
in Appendix C.  Unless noted otherwise, all rules are implemented
statewide. These programs represent emission reductions prior to the
federal 8-hour ozone nonattainment designation, but continue to provide
real and permanent decreases in emissions from the affected source
categories, especially for those source categories (e.g., nonroad
engines) where source turnover/replacement is an important element of
rule penetration:

Control Programs Implemented Prior to 2002

State Control Program							Implementation Date

Fuel Volatility (RVP) Reductions to 9.0 psi				May 1, 1989

Stage I Vapor Recovery (>250,000 gal. annual			October 1, 1989

throughput)

Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt VOC Restrictions			January 1, 1994

NOx RACT								May 31, 1995

Non-CTG VOC RACT						May 31, 1995

Stage I Vapor Recovery (>10,000 gal monthly			May 31, 1995
throughput)

Solvent Degreaser Control						May 31, 1995

Surface Coating Control*						May 31, 1995

Rotogravure and Flexography Printing Control			May 31, 1995

Stage II Vapor Recovery (1,000,000 gal or 				Nov 15, 1996

greater annual throughput)

Bulk Terminal VOC Reduction					May 31, 1996

Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance in			January 1, 1999

Cumberland County

Low Volatility Fuel Program in Southern Maine 			May 1, 1999

	(7.8 RVP)

High Pollution Vehicle Retirement Pilot Program			November 1, 2000

*As part of the surface coating rule, the Department has incorporated by
reference MACT standards for aerospace manufacturing and rework,
shipbuilding and repair, and wood furniture manufacturing.

Federal Control Program					Implementation Date

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP)		Prior to 1990

Federal Fuel Volatility (RVP) Reductions to 9.0 psi		1992

Tier I (Post 1990 Vehicle Standards)				February 19, 1993

Small Engine Standards					Phase I 1996

Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities			Phased program starting 1996

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings		1999

Autobody Refinishing						1999

Onboard Vapor Recovery Systems				Phased program starting 1998

Consumer Products						1998

Diesel Truck and Bus Engines				Phase I 1990

								Phase II 1998

Non-Road Diesel Engines					Phase I 1996

								Phase II 1999-2007

Lawn and Garden equipment					Phase I 1997

Pleasure craft							1998

Aircraft							Phase I 1996

Marine vessel							1998

National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV) 		1999

Emission Control Programs Implemented After 2002

The following control programs represent real and permanent decreases in
emissions achieved after 2002.

Highway Mobile Source Emission Control Programs

Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program (FMVCP)

	The Federal Motor Vehicle Program, enacted prior to 1990, created
significant reductions in vehicle emissions by establishing emission
standards for new motor vehicles.  These emission standards have become
increasingly stringent over the years, providing significant reductions
of both VOC and NOx.   As the vehicle fleet “turns over”, older
generation vehicles are replaced with new vehicles meeting the more
stringent emission standards.  Fleet turnover is the principal mechanism
by which more motor vehicle emission standards result in reduced
emissions.

The Tier 1 vehicle emission standards for automobiles and light-duty
trucks were phased in beginning in 1994, the national low emission
vehicle program (NLEV) began in 1999, and the Tier II vehicle emission
standards began in 2004.  These reductions are quantified in the highway
mobile model (Mobile 6.2.03) runs in Appendix A.

California Low Emission Vehicle Program

Beginning with the 2000 model year, Maine began implementing the
California Low Emission Vehicle Program (LEV), which provides
significant emission reductions above and beyond the federal Tier 1 and
NLEV programs for passenger cars and light duty trucks.  In 2004, Maine
began implementing the California Low Emission Vehicle II (LEV2)
program, which further reduces on-highway mobile source emissions from
new passenger cars, light duty trucks, medium duty vehicles, and
heavy-duty diesel vehicles.  EPA only allows the Maine DEP to take
credit for 90% of the total credit allowed for by the California Low
Emission Vehicle II (LEV2) program (see 70 FR 21959; April 28, 2005).

Quantification of these reductions is contained in the highway mobile
model (Mobile 6.2.03) runs in Appendix A.

Federal Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (2004/2007)

The federal heavy-duty engine and vehicle standards were phased-in
beginning in 2004 and will provide significant reductions in nitrogen
oxides (and particulates).  Beginning in 2007, more stringent standards
based on the use of high-efficiency catalytic exhaust emission control
devices (or comparable technologies) will reduce NOx emissions by 95
percent.  NOx and non-methane hydrocarbon standards will be phased in
between 2007 and 2010 for diesel engines, and gasoline engine
requirements will be phased-in between the 2008 and 2009 model years.
Quantification of these reductions is contained in the highway mobile
model (Mobile 6.2.03) runs and the non-road emission runs in Appendix A.

Low Sulfur Gasoline

Beginning in 2004, gasoline sulfur limits were phased down, with fuel
sulfur in 2006 limited to 30 parts per million (ppm).  These reduced
gasoline sulfur levels improve catalytic converter efficiency and
longevity, thereby providing greater emission reductions from on-road
gasoline powered vehicles.  These emission reductions are also contained
in the highway mobile runs in Appendix A.

On-Road (2006) and Non-Road Diesel Fuel (2010)

Federal rules require the use of ultra-low sulfur (15 parts per million)
diesel fuel beginning in 2006 for on-highway diesel fuel, and 2010 for
most non-road diesel fuel.  These fuels enable the use of aftertreatment
(post-combustion) technologies for new diesel engines, reducing both NOx
and particulate emissions.  These emission reductions are contained in
the highway mobile runs and non-road modeling runs in Appendix A.

Federal Nonroad Engine Standards

EPA has established emission standards for a number of nonroad engine
categories.  These engines operate in a wide variety of applications,
including construction equipment, marine vessels, lawn and garden
equipment, and locomotives.

Land-Based Diesel Engines

In 1994, EPA adopted the first set of emission standards (“Tier 1”)
for all new nonroad diesel engines greater than 37 kilowatts except
those used in locomotives and marine vessels.  The Tier 1 standards
reduced NOx emissions from these engines by 30 percent.  EPA has since
adopted more stringent standards for NOx, hydrocarbons (HC) and
particulate matter.  Tier 2 standards were phased in between 2001 and
2006, while Tier 3 standards will be phased in between 2006 and 2008.
The Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards will further reduce nonroad diesel
engine NOx emissions by 60 percent from Tier 1 levels.

Land-Based Spark Ignition Engines

EPA regulates three broad categories of nonroad spark-ignition engines:
small spark ignition engines, large spark-ignition engines and
recreational vehicles.  Small engines below 19 kW (25 horsepower) are
typically used in lawn and garden equipment such as lawnmowers, string
trimmers, and chainsaws.  These engines have been regulated for HC
(hydrocarbons), NOx and carbon monoxide since 1997 under a multiphase
approach.  The Phase 1 standards resulted in a 32 percent reduction in
hydrocarbon levels from these engines.  (Phase 2 standards for small
engines were phased-in between 2001 and 2007, and provide and additional
60 to 70 percent reduction in HC and NOx emissions (depending on the
application).

Large nonroad spark ignition engines (greater than 19kW) are typically
used in industrial equipment such as forklifts, airport service
equipment, generators, and welders.  The federal emission standards for
large spark-ignition engines are also phased-in, with the first
standards becoming effective in 2004, and more stringent standards
requiring a 90 percent reduction in NOx and HC emissions along with
reduced evaporative losses taking effect in 2007.

The recreational vehicle category includes off-highway motorcycles,
all-terrain vehicles, and snowmobiles that operate on gasoline.  In
2002, EPA adopted emission standards for new recreational vehicles that
will be phased-in beginning in 2006.  These standards will reduce HC
emissions from these vehicles by 67 percent.

Nonroad engine emissions were estimated through the use of EPA’s
Nonroad2005 model and are detailed in Appendix A.

The following five control programs adopted by Maine have been approved
by EPA.  Citations to EPA approval of these regulations are given in
Appendix C.

Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control

The Department adopted its Chapter 151 Portable Fuel Container Spillage
Control rule in 2003.  This rule requires all portable fuel containers
sold, or manufactured, in Maine to be equipped with an automatic
shut-off device that stops fuel flow before the fuel tank overflows and
an automatic device that closes and seals when it is removed from the
fuel tank.  In addition, portable fuel containers must be constructed of
low-permeability materials.   The emission reductions attributable to
this program are estimated in Appendix A.

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings

In 2004, the Department adopted its Chapter 151 Architectural and
Industrial Maintenance Coatings rule.  This rule regulates VOC emissions
from approximately 51 categories of architectural and industrial
maintenance coatings beginning January 1, 2006.  The VOC emission
reductions from this rule are detailed in Appendix A.

Mobile Equipment Refinishing and Repair

The Department’s Chapter 153 Mobile Equipment Refinishing and Repair
rule was adopted in 2003, and addresses VOC emissions from automobile
and mobile equipment refinishing activities.  This rule requires the use
of high-efficiency application technologies, and establishes work
practices and training requirements.  The emission reductions from this
rule are estimated in Appendix A.

Solvent Cleaning

In 2004, the Department amended its Chapter 130 Solvent Cleaners rule to
further reduce the emissions of VOCs from solvents used in solvent
cleaning operations.  The amended rule requires the use of very low
vapor pressure solvents (1 mm mercury or less) in cold cleaners.  These
emission reductions are estimated in Appendix A.

Distributed Generation

The Department’s Chapter 148 Emission From Smaller Scale Electric
Generating Resources applies to all non-mobile generators having a
capacity equal to or greater than 50 kilowatts installed on or after
January 1, 2005.  This regulation limits emissions of nitrogen oxides
(NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM), and carbon
monoxide (CO) from smaller-scale electric generating units, and is
expected to reduce emissions growth from these units.

Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT)

The CAAA require EPA to review and update its list of categories of
industries that emit one or more of 188 listed toxic air pollutants, or
Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS).  For listed categories of major
industrial sources, the law requires EPA to develop standards requiring
those industries to achieve emission reductions equivalent to putting
into place what is known as “maximum available control technology”
(MACT).  Many of the HAPS under these industrial categories of control
are also VOCs, and compliance with these new MACT standards as they are
promulgated will decrease VOC emissions from the affected industries.

Appendix C

Department Rules Incorporated in the State Implementation Plan

As of 6/1/06

State citation	Title/subject	State effective date	EPA approval date
Explanations

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch1.pdf"  Chapter
1  	Regulations for the Processing of Applications.	05/20/85	03/23/93,
58 FR 15430.	Portions of Chapter 1

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch100.pdf"
Chapter 100   	Definitions.	07/25/95	10/15/96,61

FR 53639.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch101.pdf"
Chapter 101   	Visible Emissions.	10/10/79	02/17/82, 47

FR 6829.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch102.pdf"
Chapter 102   	Open Burning.	01/31/72	05/31/72,

37 FR 10842.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch103.pdf"
Chapter 103   	Fuel Burning Equipment Particular Emission Standard.
01/24/83	02/26/85,

50 FR 7770.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch104.pdf"
Chapter 104   	Incinerator Particulate Emission Standard.	01/31/72
05/31/72,

37 FR 10842.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch105.pdf"
Chapter 105   	General Process Source Particulate Emission Standard.
01/31/72	05/31/72,

37 FR 10842.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch106.pdf"
Chapter 106   	Low Sulfur Fuel Regulations.	02/08/78	01/08/82,

47 FR 947.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch107.pdf"
Chapter 107   	Sulfur Dioxide Emission Standards for Sulfate Pulp
Mills.	01/31/72	05/31/72,

37 FR 10842.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch109.pdf"
Chapter 109   	Emergency Episode Regulation.	08/14/91	01/12/95,

60 FR 2887.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2004_ME_ch110.pdf"
Chapter 110   	Ambient Air Quality Standards.	07/24/96	03/22/04,

69 FR 13227.	Adopts PSD increments based on PM10, in place of increments
based on TSP.

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch111.pdf"
Chapter 111   	Petroleum Liquid Storage Vapor Control.	09/27/89
02/03/92,

57 FR 3948.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch112.pdf"
Chapter 112   	Gasoline Bulk Terminals.	07/19/95	10/15/96,

31 FR 53639.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch113.pdf"
Chapter 113   	Growth Offset Regulation.	06/22/94	02/14/96,

61 FR 5694.	Part of New Source Review Program

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch114.pdf"
Chapter 114   	Classification of Air Quality Control Regions.	04/27/94
08/30/95,

60 FR 45060.	Revision to Remove Presque Isle as nonattainment for PM10.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch115.pdf"
Chapter 115    	Emission License Regulation.	06/22/94	02/14/96,

61 FR 5694.	Part of New Source Review Program

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch116.pdf"
Chapter 116   	Prohibited Dispersion Techniques.	10/25/89	03/23/93,

58 FR 15430.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch117.pdf"
Chapter 117   	Source Surveillance.	08/09/88	03/21/89,

54 FR 11525.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch118.pdf"
Chapter 118   	Gasoline Dispensing Facilities.	07/19/95 	10/15/96,

61 FR 53639.	Stage II vapor recovery requirements added.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch119.pdf"
Chapter 119   	Motor Vehicle Fuel Volatility Limit.	06/01/00	03/06/02,

67 FR 10100.	Controls fuel volatility in the state. 7.8 psi RVP fuel
required in 7 southern counties.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch120.pdf"
Chapter 120   	Gasoline Tank Trucks.	06/22/94	06/29/95,

60 FR 33734.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch123.pdf"
Chapter 123   	Paper Coater Regulation.	09/27/89	02/03/92,

57 FR 3949.	The operating permits for S.D. Warren of Westbrook, Eastern
Fine Paper of Brewer, and Pioneer Plastics of Auburn incorporated by
reference at 40 CFR § 52.1020 (c)(11), (c)(11), and (c)(18),
respectively, are withdrawn.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch126.pdf"
Chapter 126

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch126_AppendixA.p
df"  Chapter 126 Appendix A  	Capture Efficiency Test Procedures.
05/22/91	03/22/93,

58 FR 15282.

  HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/ME_ch127.pdf"
 Chapter 127  	New Motor Vehicle Emission Standards.	12/31/00	04/28/05,

70 FR 21959.	Including Basis Statements and Appendix A. Low emission
vehicle program, with no ZEV requirements. Program achieves 90% of full
LEV benefits.

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch129.pdf"
Chapter 129

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch129_Appendix.pd
f"  Chapter 129 Appendix A  	Surface Coating Facilities.	01/06/93
06/17/94,

59 FR 31157.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2005_ME_Ch130.pdf"
Chapter 130  	Solvent Cleaners.	06/17/04	05/26/05,

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch131.pdf"
Chapter 131   	Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt.	01/06/93	06/17/94,

59 FR 31157.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch132.pdf"
Chapter 132   	Graphic Arts: Rotogravure and Flexography.	01/06/93
06/17/94,

59 FR 31157.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch133.pdf"
Chapter 133   	Gasoline Bulk Plants.	06/22/94	06/29/95,

60 FR 33734.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch134.pdf"
Chapter 134   	Reasonably Available Control Technology for Facilities
that Emit Volatile Organic Compounds.	02/08/95	04/18/00,

65 FR 20753.	Regulations fully approved for the following counties:
York, Sagadahoc, Cumberland, Androscoggin, Kennebec, Knox, Lincoln,
Hancock, Waldo, Aroostock, Franklin, Oxford, and Piscataquis. Regulation
granted a limited approval for Washington, Somerset, and Penobscot
Counties.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch137.pdf"
Chapter 137   	Emission Statements.	11/10/93	01/10/95,

60 FR 2526.

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch138.pdf"
Chapter 138   	Reasonably Available Control Technology for Facilities
that Emit Nitrogen Oxides.	08/03/94	09/09/02,

67 FR 57154.	Affects sources in York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc,
Androscoggin, Kennebec, Lincoln, and Knox counties

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch141.pdf"
Chapter 141

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_ch141_Supplement_
FederalRegisterGeneralConformity.pdf"  Chapter 141 Supplement - Federal
Register 11/30/93 General Conformity Rule   	Conformity of General
Federal Actions.	09/11/96	09/23/97,

62 FR 49611.

  HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/ME_ch145.pdf"
 Chapter 145  	NOx Control Program 	06/21/01 	03/10/05

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2005_ME_Ch148.pdf"
Chapter 148  	Emissions from Smaller-Scale Electric Generating Resources
	07/15/04	05/26/05

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2006_ME_ch151.pdf"
Chapter 151 	Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
10/06/05	03/17/06

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2005_ME_ch152.pdf"
Chapter 152  	Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from
Consumer Products 	08/19/04	10/24/05

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2005_ME_Ch153.pdf"
Chapter 153 	Mobile Equipment	02/05/04	05/26/05

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2005_ME_ch155.pdf"
Chapter 155    	Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control	07/14/04
02/07/05

  ]

  HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/region1/topics/air/sips/me/2003_ME_MaineVehicleInspe
ction.pdf"  Vehicle I/M   	Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance.	07/09/98
01/10/01,

66 FR 1875.	"Maine Motor Vehicle Inspection Manual," revised in 1998,
pages 1-12 through 1-14, and page 2-14, D.1.g. Also, Authorizing
legislation effective July 9, 1998 and entitled L.D. 2223, "An Act to
Reduce Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles and to Meet Requirements of the
Federal Clean Air Act."

 69 FR 23951

 EPA’s Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) already requires
the development of a 2002 inventory.

 See Appendix B for a description of state and federal emissions in
these maintenance areas and Appendix C for citations to EPA approval of
state rules.

 Sierra Research, Inc. “Revised Inventory Guidance for Locomotive
Emissions, prepared for the Southeastern States Air Resource Managers,
Inc. (Sierra Research, Inc. 1801 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814), June
2004

  This rule is applicable in York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc, Androscoggin,
Kennebec, Knox and Lincoln counties.

 Stage II vapor recovery program is located only in York, Cumberland,
and Sagadahoc counties.

 This rule is applicable in Androscoggin, York, Cumberland, Knox,
Lincoln, Kennebec, and Sagadahoc counties.

 There are two phases of on-road standards, the first in 2004 and the
second in 2007.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 14 (Monday, January 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3318-3319]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1174]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66163; File No. SR-CBOE-2012-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval
of Proposed Rule Change To Decouple and Extend CBOE's Credit Option
Margin Pilot Program to January 17, 2013

January 17, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 13, 2012, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons and is approving the
proposed rule change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    CBOE is proposing to decouple and extend the duration of its Credit
Option Margin Pilot Program through January 17, 2013. The text of the
rule proposal is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    On February 2, 2011, the Commission approved the Exchange's
proposal to establish a Credit Option Margin Pilot Program
(``Program'').\3\ The Program became effective on a pilot basis and has
run on a parallel track with FINRA Rule 4240, which is similarly
operated on a pilot basis.\4\ CBOE's Program is currently scheduled to
expire on January 17, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63819 (February 2,
2011), 76 FR 6838 (February 8, 2011) (order approving [SR-CBOE-2010-
106]). To implement the Program, the Exchange amended Rule 12.3(l),
Margin Requirements, to make CBOE's margin requirements for Credit
Options consistent with FINRA Rule 4240, Margin Requirements for
Credit Default Swaps. CBOE's Credit Options (i.e., Credit Default
Options and Credit Default Basket Options) are analogous to credit
default swaps.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63819 (February 2,
2011), 76 FR 6838 (February 8, 2011) (order approving [SR-CBOE-2010-
106]).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this current proposal, CBOE proposes to decouple its Program
from the FINRA Rule 4240 margin pilot program. CBOE's decoupled Program
will be substantially similar to the provisions of the FINRA Rule 4240
margin pilot program operated by FINRA.
    CBOE understands that in connection with renewing its Rule 4240
margin pilot, FINRA will be revising its Rule 4240 by adding new
Supplementary Material .02, which sets forth alternative tables to the
existing tables that may be used by market participants to compute the
required margin. CBOE similarly proposes to adopt alternative tables to
the existing tables in its rules that may be used by Trading Permit
Holders to compute the required margins. These new alternative tables
are set forth in Rules 12.3(l)(3)(ii), 12.3(l)(3)(iv) and
12.4(l)(4)(ii). Also, a few minor changes are being made to Rule
12.3(l) to renumber paragraphs and to make other non-substantive
changes.
    Finally, CBOE proposes to extend its decoupled Program for an
additional year to January 17, 2013.
    CBOE notes for the Commission that there are currently Credit
Options listed for trading on the Exchange that have open interest. As
a result, CBOE believes that is in the public interest for the Program
to continue uninterrupted.
    In the future, if the Exchange proposes an additional extension of
the Credit Option Margin Pilot Program or proposes to make the Program
permanent, then the Exchange will submit a filing proposing such
amendments to the Program.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes this rule proposal is consistent with the Act
and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a national
securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section
6(b) of the Act.\5\ Specifically, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) Act \6\
requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest, and because it

enhances fair competition among exchange markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2012-007 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2012-007. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2012-007 and should be
submitted on or before February 13, 2012.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing, CBOE requested that the Commission approve the
proposed rule change on an accelerated basis so that the Program will
continue uninterrupted. After careful consideration, the Commission
finds the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities exchange.\7\ In particular, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act \8\ because the proposed rule change will further investor
protection and the public interest by permitting the Program to
continue uninterrupted since there are currently Credit Options listed
for trading on the Exchange that have open interest. In addition, the
Commission believes that the proposed alternative tables that may be
used by market participants to compute the required margin will provide
market participants with some flexibility in computing margin, while
still permitting the continued use of the existing margin tables.
Finally, the Commission notes that the proposed rule change is
substantively similar in all material respects to the margin pilot
program administered by FINRA under FINRA Rule 4240.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also finds good cause, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)
of the Act,\9\ for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th
day after the date of publication of notice in the Federal Register.
This accelerated approval will allow the existing decoupled Program to
continue without interruption and extend the benefits of a pilot
program that the Commission has previously approved and extended.
Moreover, the Commission notes that the proposed rule change is
substantively similar in all material respects to the margin pilot
program administered by FINRA under FINRA Rule 4240.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\10\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2012-007), be, and it
hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis to January 17, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1174 Filed 1-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P