[Federal Register: May 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 92)]
[Notices]
[Page 27024-27025]
[DOCID:fr12my08-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0087; Notice 1]

Michelin North America, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    Michelin North America, Inc. (MNA), has determined that certain
light vehicle tires that it manufactured during the period beginning
September 22, 2007 through October 26, 2007 (DOT weeks 3707 and 4207),
do not fully comply with paragraphs S5.5 & S5.5(c) of 49 CFR 571.139
(Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139 New Pneumatic
Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. MNA has filed an appropriate report
pursuant to 49 CFR Part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility
and Reports.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), MNA has petitioned for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the
basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
    This notice of receipt of MNA's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    Affected are approximately 3,385 Michelin brand P235/55R17 98H MXV4
PLUS tires, produced September 22, 2007 through October 26, 2007 (DOT
weeks 3707 and 4207). Paragraphs S5.5 & S5.5(c) of 49 CFR 571.139
require in pertinent part that:

    S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)
through (h) of S5.5 each tire must be marked on each sidewall with
the information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one side
wall with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (h) according
to the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. The
markings must be placed between the maximum section in S7 of the
standard. The markings must be placed between the maximum section
width and the bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum
section width of the tire is located in an area that is not more
than one-fourth of the distance from the bead of the shoulder of the
tire. If the maximum section width falls within that area, those
markings must appear between the bead and a point one-half the
distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire, on at least one
sidewall. The markings must be in letters and numerals not less than
0.078 inches high and raised above or sunk below the tire surface
not less than 0.015 inch.
    S5.5(c) The maximum permissible inflation pressure, subject to
the limitations of S5.5.4 through S5.5.6 of this standard.

    MNA explained that the subject tires were manufactured with an
incorrect maximum pressure value (350kPa (51 PSI)) marked on the
outboard (reference) sidewall while the correct maximum pressure value
(300 kPa (44 PSI)) was marked on the inboard sidewall. MNA expressed
its belief that both maximum pressure values marked on the tires are
acceptable choices for this tire. MNA also believes that the
noncompliance exists because two maximum pressure values have been
applied to the same tire.
    MNA defends its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety by stating the following reasons:
    (1) Performance requirements--The Subject Tires meet or exceed all
of the minimum performance requirements of FMVSS No. 139.
    (2) Maximum Pressure Value--Paragraph S5.5.4 of FMVSS No. 139
limits the choices for the allowed maximum inflation pressure to 240,
280, 290, 300, 330, 340, 350, or 390 kPa depending on the load version
of the tire. The Tire & Rim Association (T&RA) standard ``P. 1-34''
specifies pressure level options for the maximum permissible inflation
pressure marking for a corresponding load version and its maximum tire
load. The choice of the maximum inflation pressure level then becomes
the choice of the tire manufacturer, as long as it is in compliance
with the established values under FMVSS No. 139 paragraph S5.5.4. For
the subject P235/55R17 standard load tire, both maximum inflation
pressure values (350 kPa and 300 kPa) are acceptable choices.
    (3) Maximum Pressure Marking--Paragraphs S5.5 and S5.5(c) of FMVSS
No. 139 both specify that each tire must be marked on each sidewall
with the maximum permissible inflation pressure. The manufacturer's
selected inflation pressure value must be marked on both sidewalls of
the tire in kPa, followed by the appropriate PSI value (FMVSS No. 139
paragraph S5.5.4(a)) in parentheses. Since only one selection is
allowed, the same value is required on both sidewalls. Therefore, the
noncompliance lies only in the fact that both values have been applied
to the same tire.
    (4) Strength--Each standard load tire has a specified tire strength
requirement. This requirement is defined in FMVSS No. 139 paragraph
S6.5 (and FMVSS No. 109 paragraph S5.3) and must be met whether the
selected maximum permissible pressure marking value is 240 kPa (35
PSI), 300 kPa (44 PSI), or 350 kPa (51 PSI). The Michelin P235/55 R17
98H MXV4 PLUS tire meets this requirement. The 350 kPa (51 PSI) maximum
inflation pressure marking therefore has no impact to the tire's
performance.
    (5) Overloading--The use of either of the maximum inflation
pressures displayed on the subject tire sidewalls as the source of
information for the recommended inflation pressure will not result in
an overloading of the tires nor reduce the load carrying capacity of
the tires since both values are above the recommended inflation
pressure (240 kPa (35PSI)) for the tire's maximum load rating.
    (6) Tire labeling--Maximum permissible inflation pressure labeling
on tire sidewalls is poorly understood by the general public and it
should be removed from tire sidewalls because it has limited safety
value and may confuse customers about the proper source for the
recommended inflation pressure.
    MNA also states that it has corrected the problem that caused these
errors so that they will not be repeated in future production.
    MNA requested that NHTSA consider its petition and grant an
exemption from the notification and recall requirements of the National
Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act on the basis that the
noncompliance described above is inconsequential as it relates to motor
vehicle safety.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and
notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted by
any of the following methods:
    a. By mail addressed to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building

Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.
    b. By hand delivery to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on
weekdays from 10 am to 5 pm except Federal Holidays.
    c. Electronically: by logging onto the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be faxed
to 1-202-493-2251.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.
    Comment closing date: June 11, 2008.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
CFR 1.50 and 501.8).

    Issued on: May 6, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. E8-10483 Filed 5-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22726-22728]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10378]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83207; File No. SR-MSRB-2018-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change To Revise the Language of Certain Administrative Rules To
Continue To Help Ensure That They Reflect MSRB Practices and Improve
Consistency Among the Rules

May 10, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
notice is hereby given that on May 1, 2018 the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (the ``MSRB'' or ``Board'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by the MSRB. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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

    The MSRB filed with the Commission proposed amendments to MSRB Rule
A-3, on membership on the Board, MSRB Rule A-4, on meetings of the
Board, MSRB Rule A-5, on officers and employees of the Board, and MSRB
Rule A-17, on confidentiality of examination reports, to revise the
language of the rules to continue to help ensure that they reflect MSRB
practices and improve consistency among the rules (collectively, the
``proposed rule change''). The MSRB has designated the proposed rule
change as being immediately effective upon filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) \4\ thereunder.
The proposed rule change is concerned solely with the administration of
the MSRB in that it amends certain rules that relate exclusively to the
internal operation of the Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's
website at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2018-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal

office, 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, the MSRB 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 these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The MSRB has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The MSRB has adopted administrative rules (``A-Rules'') that
pertain to the operation and administration of the Board, which are
identified by the prefix A.\5\ The MSRB routinely reviews its A-Rules
for accuracy and adherence to governance best practices. As a result of
a recent review of certain A-Rules, the MSRB is proposing to amend
Rules A-3, A-4, A-5 and A17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See MSRB Rule A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule A-3(b)(i)
    As part of its review of the A-Rules, the MSRB sought to improve
internal consistency among its rules. The MSRB has adopted certain
definitional rules which define terms used in the rules of the
Board.\6\ Rule D-4 defines the term ``Board'' as the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board, but in one instance Rule A-3(b)(i) refers
to the ``Board of Directors.'' The proposed rule change would replace
this reference to ``Board of Directors'' with the defined term
``Board'' for consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rule A-3(b)(iii) and (iv)
    Rule A-3(b)(iii) sets forth information regarding the Board
application process, including the public notices which the Nominating
and Governance Committee (``Committee'') publishes and the information
that applicants must provide to the Committee. In describing the
information that the Committee's public notice will require, Rule A-
3(b)(iii) references ``applicant recommendations.'' In practice, the
Committee solicits applications through an application form completed
by applicants.
    While applicants can recommend themselves and this phrasing is
therefore not inaccurate, the proposed rule change would amend Rule A-
3(b)(iii) and (iv) to better reflect the manner in which the Board
conducts the application process by replacing references to
``recommendations'' with ``applications'' and making other conforming
changes.
Rule A-3(d)
    During the review, the MSRB noted an obsolete cross-reference in
Rule A-3(d), which stems from previous amendments to Rule A-3.
Specifically, on January 25, 2011, the Commission approved amendments
to former Rule A-3(c) (now Rule A-3(b)) \7\ to reflect changes made by
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010
(the ``Dodd-Frank Act''),\8\ which amended Section 15B of the Exchange
Act.\9\ Subsection (vi) of the former Rule A-3(c) (now Rule A-3(b)) was
deleted, which included a requirement that the public representatives
on the Board, prior to assuming office, be subject to approval by the
Commission to assure that they were not disqualified as public members
by reason of association with a broker, dealer or municipal securities
dealer. The deletion was made as the MSRB took the process of assuring
public status upon itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Release No. 34-63764 (January 25, 2011), 76 FR 5417 (January
31, 2011) (SR-MSRB-2010-17).
    \8\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time of this change, a cross-reference in another part of
Rule A-3 to the Commission's approval function was inadvertently not
deleted. This cross-reference is currently contained in Rule A-3(d), on
vacancies, and it provides that vacancies on the Board with respect to
public representatives are filled by Board vote, ``subject to the
Commission's power of approval referred to in section (c) of [Rule A-3]
. . . .'' As noted, however, after the 2011 amendments, there is no
longer any Commission approval function for public representatives, as
was previously described in Rule A-3(c). The cross-reference,
therefore, has been without any effect. The proposed rule change would
delete the obsolete cross-reference in Rule A-3(d).
Rule A-3(c) and (f)
    The Dodd-Frank Act grants the MSRB broad rulemaking authority over
municipal advisors and municipal advisory activities \10\ and requires
that the Board include at least one individual who is associated with
and representative of municipal advisors (``municipal advisor
representative'').\11\ As indicated above, the MSRB amended its A-Rules
to reflect certain changes made by the Dodd-Frank Act. However, the
more recent review of the A-Rules identified two provisions which refer
generally to other Board member categories but have not been amended to
address municipal advisor representatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Section 15B(b)(2) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78o-
4(b)(2)).
    \11\ Id. In addition, not less than 30 percent of the total
number of regulated representatives must be municipal advisor
representatives. MSRB Rule A-3 (Membership on the Board).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 29, 2009, an amendment to Rule A-3 became effective to add
section (g) (now Rule A-3(f)), on affiliations, which prohibits two
persons associated with the same dealer from serving as members of the
Board at the same time.\12\ The same concerns that arise from two
representatives of the same dealer serving on the Board at the same
time could also arise with municipal advisor representatives and,
accordingly, the rationale underlying Rule A-3(f) should apply evenly
to all categories of regulated representatives. Thus, the proposed rule
change would amend Rule A-3(f) also to address municipal advisors, such
that two persons associated with the same municipal advisor would be
prohibited from serving on the Board at the same time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Release No. 34-60408 (July 30, 2009), 74 FR 39372 (August
6, 2009) (SR-MSRB-2009-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, Rule A-3(c), which provides that an affirmative vote of
two-thirds of the whole Board is needed to remove a member from office,
requires that the vote to remove include the affirmative vote of at
least one public representative, one broker-dealer representative and
one bank representative. The rationale of this provision is to require
the affirmative vote of at least one member of each Board category in
the decision to remove a member. According to the same rationale, this
provision should be extended also to require the affirmative vote of at
least one municipal advisor representative to remove a Board member
from office; thus, the proposed rule change would so amend Rule A-3(c).
Rule A-4(d), Rule A-5(c) and Rule A-17
    Lastly, the proposed rule change would amend certain provisions in
Rules A-4, A-5 and A-17 to refer to the MSRB's most senior executive as
``Chief Executive Officer'' instead of the current title of ``Executive
Director'' due to an

intended alignment with other existing MSRB officer titles.
2. Statutory Basis
    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 15B(b)(2)(B) and (I) of the Act.\13\
Section 15B(b)(2)(B) provides that the MSRB's rules shall ``establish
fair procedures for the nomination and election of members of the Board
and assure fair representation in such nominations and elections of
public representatives, broker dealer representatives, bank
representatives, and advisor representatives.'' While the proposed rule
change would not alter the MSRB's Board nomination or election process,
it would help to continue to ensure that the MSRB's rules reflect that
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(B) and 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 15B(2)(I) provides that the MSRB's rules shall provide for
the operation and administration of the MSRB. The proposed rule change
amends provisions of the A-Rules that relate to the operation and
administration of the MSRB. The MSRB also believes that the proposed
rule change will further enhance the Board's governance procedures by
improving descriptions of the MSRB's practices and improving internal
consistency.

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

    Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act \14\ requires that MSRB rules not
be designed to impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The MSRB
believes that the proposed rule change does not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act, in that the proposed rule change simply amends language in
the A-Rules to continue to help ensure they reflect the MSRB's
practices and improve consistency among MSRB rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\16\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MSRB-2018-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2018-03. 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 website (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 website 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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or 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-MSRB-2018-03 and should be submitted on or before June
6, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-10378 Filed 5-15-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Part 52

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0527; FRL-       ]

	Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

West Virginia; Amendments to Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)

Air Quality Permit Program

AGENCY:	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:	Final rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of West Virginia.  This revision establishes
amendments to the State’s prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) preconstruction air quality permit program regulation.   The
intended effect of this action is the approval of a State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection.

EFFECTIVE DATE:  This final rule is effective on [insert date 30 days
from date of publication].

ADDRESSES:  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0527.  All documents in the docket are listed
in the www.regulations.gov website.   Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.  Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form.  Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
and 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State

submittal is available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE, Charleston, WV
25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemarie Nino,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I.	Background

On August 9, 2006 (71 FR 45485), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the State of West Virginia.  The NPR proposed
approval of amendments to West Virginia’s  prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) preconstruction air quality permit program.  The
formal SIP revision was submitted by West Virginia on December 1, 2005.
On December 22, 2005, WVDEP provided supplemental materials consisting
of a letter and an attached one page table requesting that EPA exclude
from its December 1, 2005 request for SIP approval the provisions of 45
CSR 14, as set forth in the attached table, that pertain to “Clean
Unit” and “Pollution Control Project” in order to ensure that
their federally-approved regulations are consistent with the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit’s June
24, 2005 ruling in New York v. EPA, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir 2005).  In a
separate action, EPA will act on changes made by West Virginia to its
nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program, also submitted on
December 1, 2005.

The Clean Air Act requires that all states including the District of
Columbia to submit revisions to their State Implementation Pans that
requires State and local permitting agencies to adopt and submit
revision to their part 51 permitting programs, implementing the minimum
program

elements of the December 31, 2002 “NSR Reform” rulemaking no later
then January 2, 2006

(67 FR 80240).  West Virginia amended its regulation to satisfy this
requirement.

Summary of SIP Revision

West Virginia amended its regulation (45 CSR 14) to meet the minimum
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 and the Clean Air Act.  This approval
action will effectively replace the previous-approved version of 45 CSR
14 as approved in the West Virginia SIP on October 22, 1996 (61 FR
54735).

Other specific requirements of West Virginia’s existing prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) construction permit program as 45 CSR 14
and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and
will not be restated here.  No public comments were received on the NPR.

III.	Final Action

EPA is approving amendments to the State’s prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) preconstruction air quality permit program
regulations as a revision to the West Virginia SIP.

IV.   Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A.   General Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action
is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For this reason, this
action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).  This action merely approves state law
as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.  Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).  Because this rule approves pre-existing
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4).   This rule also does not have tribal implications
because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).  This action also
does not have Federalism implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).  This
action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement,
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.  This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks( (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA(s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.  In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS.  It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act.  Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.  This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B.   Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States.   EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.  This rule is not a
(major rule( as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C.  Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial
review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [insert date 60 days from date of
publication of this document in the Federal Register].  Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action.  This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements.  (See section 307(b)(2).)  This final rule
approves West Virginia’s prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
preconstruction air quality permit program.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.

                        _/s/__________________________

Dated:   10/16/06                         			William T. Wisniewski,
                           								Acting, Regional Administrator,

                                  					Region III.

40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52 - [AMENDED]

1.  The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:

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

Subpart XX ( West Virginia

2.  In ( 52.2520, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the
entries for 45 CSR 14 to read as follows:

( 52.2520  	Identification of plan.

*	*	*	*	*

(c) * * *

	EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE WEST VIRGINIA SIP

State citation

[Chapter 16-20 or 45 CSR]

Title/subject

State effective date

EPA approval date

Additional explanation/

citation at 40 CFR ( 52.2565

*******

45 CSR 14

Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary
Sources of Air Pollution for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration

Section 45-14-1	General	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication
date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Section 45-14-2	Definitions	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication
date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Section 45-14-3	Applicability	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	New Section

Section 45-14-4	Ambient Air Quality Increments and Ceilings

6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number
where the document begins]

	Formerly

Section 45-14-3

Section 45-14-5

	Area Classification	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date]
[Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-4

Section 45-14-6

	Prohibition of Dispersion Enhancement Techniques

	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number
where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-5

Section 45-14-7

	Registration, Report and Permit Requirements for Major Stationary
Sources and Major Modification	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-6

Section 45-14-8	Control Technology Requirements	6/2/05	[Insert Federal
Register publication date] [Insert page number where the document
begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-7

Section 45-14-9	Requirements Relating to the Source’s Impact on Air
Quality	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert page
number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-8

Section 45-14-10	Modeling Requirements	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-9

Section 45-14-11	Air Quality Monitoring Requirements	6/2/05	[Insert
Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number where the
document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-10

Section 45-14-12	Additional Impacts Analysis Requirements	6/2/05	[Insert
Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number where the
document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-11

Section 45-14-13	Additional Requirements and Variances for Sources
Impacting Federal Class I Areas	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-12

Section 45-14-14	Procedures for Sources Employing Innovative Control
Technology	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert
page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-13

Section 45-14-15	Exclusions From Increment Consumption	6/2/05	[Insert
Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number where the
document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-14

Section 45-14-16	Specific Exemptions	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-15

Section 45-14-17	Public Review Procedures	6/2/05	[Insert Federal
Register publication date] [Insert page number where the document
begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-16

Section 45-14-18	Public Meetings	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-17

Section 45-14-19	Permit Transfer, Cancellation, and Responsibility
6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number
where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-18

Section 45-14-20	Disposition of Permits	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register
publication date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-19

Section 45-14-21	Conflict with Other Permitting Rules	6/2/05	[Insert
Federal Register publication date] [Insert page number where the
document begins]

	Formerly Section 45-14-20

Section 45-14-25	Actual PALs	6/2/05	[Insert Federal Register publication
date] [Insert page number where the document begins]

	New Section

Section 45-14-26	Inconsistency Between Rules	6/2/05	[Insert Federal
Register publication date] [Insert page number where the document
begins]

	New Section

*   *   *   *    *    *    *

*	*	*	*	*

 PAGE  6

 PAGE  12