[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21864-21866]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8821]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2011-1013]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay City, MI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising the drawbridge opening schedule
for the Lake State Railway Bridge at mile 3.10, the Independence Bridge
at mile 3.88, the Canadian National Railway Bridge at mile 4.94, the
Liberty Street Bridge at mile 4.99, the Veterans Memorial Bridge at
mile 5.60, and the Lafayette Street Bridge at mile 6.78, all over the
Saginaw River at Bay City, MI. The previous regulation was confusing,
outdated, and unnecessarily restrictive for both commercial and
recreational vessels. The revised regulation will simplify the
regulatory language, increase access through the drawbridges for all
vessels, and provide for the reasonable needs of all traffic.

DATES: This rule is effective May 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments and related materials received from the public, as
well as documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the
docket, are part of docket USCG-2011-1013 and are available online by
going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-1013 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search''. This material is also
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Lee Soule, Bridge Management Specialist, Ninth Coast
Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing material in the docket, call Renee V.
Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On December 8, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Saginaw River, Bay
City, MI, in the Federal Register (76 FR 76637). We received one
comment in response to the proposed rule supporting the NPRM as
written. No public meeting was requested, and none was held.

Basis and Purpose

    Lake Carriers Association (LCA), an organization representing U.S.
shipping companies on the Great Lakes, requested that the existing
drawbridge regulation for Saginaw River be reviewed and changed to make
the regulation easier to understand and to remove restrictive
drawbridge schedules for commercial vessels. The existing regulation
was reviewed in its entirety for all drawbridges, vessel types, dates,
and hours of operation.
    Lake State Railway Bridge at mile 3.10 is a swing bridge that
provides 7 feet vertical clearance in the closed position and unlimited
clearance in the open position. The Independence Bridge at mile 3.88 is
a bascule bridge that provides 22 feet vertical clearance in the closed
position and unlimited clearance in the open position. The Canadian
National Railway (CN RR) Bridge at mile 4.94 is a swing bridge that
provides 8 feet of vertical clearance in the closed position and
unlimited clearance in the open position. The Liberty Street Bridge at
mile 4.99 is a bascule bridge that provides 25 feet of vertical
clearance in the closed position and unlimited

clearance in the open position. The Veterans Memorial Bridge at mile
5.60 is a bascule bridge that provides 15 feet of vertical clearance in
the closed position and unlimited clearance in the open position. The
Lafayette Street Bridge at mile 6.78 is a bascule bridge that provides
20 feet vertical clearance in the closed position and unlimited
clearance in the open position. There is no alternate waterway for
vessels entering or departing Saginaw River.
    The draws of the Lake State Railway and Canadian Railway Bridges
currently open on signal for all vessel traffic that requires a bridge
opening, except that from December 16 through March 15 the bridges open
on signal if at least 12 hours advance notice is provided.
    The draws of the Independence Bridge, Liberty Street, Veterans
Memorial, and Lafayette Street drawbridges open on signal from March 16
through December 15, except as follows: The draws need not open for the
passage of vessels less than 50 gross tons from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
and 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., except Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays
observed in the locality. The draws need not open for the passage of
downbound vessels over 50 gross tons from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and
4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., except on Sundays, Federal holidays, and
holidays observed in the locality. From 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Saturdays,
Sundays, and Federal holidays, the Independence Bridge and Veterans
Memorial bridges need not open for recreational vessels except from
three minutes before to three minutes after the hour and half-hour, and
the Liberty Street and Lafayette Street bridges need not open for
recreational vessels except from three minutes before to three minutes
after the quarter-hour and three-quarter hour. Currently, the draws of
these bridges shall open on signal from December 16 through March 15 if
at least 12 hours advance notice is provided.
    The proposed drawbridge schedules and revised regulations were
developed with all known stakeholders, including; Lake Carriers
Association, Canadian Shipowners Association, local Coast Guard units,
City of Bay City, MI, Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), Bay
Harbor Marina, Pier 7 Marina, Liberty Harbor Marina, and Bay City Yacht
Club.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received one comment supporting the NPRM as
written. No changes to the proposed regulation have been made in this
final rule. The revised regulation reflects current conditions and
provides for the reasonable needs of all modes of transportation.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule increases access through the drawbridges for
all entities compared to the existing regulation and drawbridge
schedule. All known marina owners and small entities were consulted
during the development of this revised rule. Additionally, all vessels
that do not require bridge openings may transit the drawbridges at any
time.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.

Collection of Information

    This rule would call for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule would not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect

on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a
significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement
of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that this action is one of a category of actions which
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. This rule is categorically excluded under figure 2-
1, paragraph (32)(e), of the instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard revises
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.647 to read as follow:

Sec.  117.647  Saginaw River.

    (a) The draws of the Lake State Railway Bridge, mile 3.10, and the
Canadian National Railway Bridge, mile 4.94, both in Bay City, shall
open on signal; except that from January 1 through March 31, the draws
shall open on signal if at least 12 hours advance notice is provided.
    (b) The draws of the Independence Bridge, mile 3.88, Liberty Street
Bridge, mile 4.99, Veterans Memorial Bridge, mile 5.60, and Lafayette
Street Bridge, mile 6.78, all in Bay City, shall open on signal, except
as follows:
    (1) From April 15 through November 1, between the hours of 6:30
a.m. and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays, the
draws of the Independence and Veterans Memorial Bridges need open for
the passage of recreational vessels only from three minutes before to
three minutes after the hour and half-hour, and the Liberty Street and
Lafayette Street bridges need open for the passage of recreational
vessels only from three minutes before to three minutes after the
quarter-hour and three-quarter hour.
    (2) From January 1 through March 31, the draws of these bridges
shall open on signal if at least 12 hours advance notice is provided.

    Dated: March 12, 2012.
M. N. Parks,
Rear Admiral, U. S. Coast Guard Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2012-8821 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 210)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63696-63698]
[DOCID:fr31oc06-8]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2006-0747; FRL-8231-5]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Antelope
Valley Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision concerns
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from the usage of solvents.
We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on January 2, 2007 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 30, 2006. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2006-0747, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

Follow the on-line instructions.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous

access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read
your comment due

to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What Rule Did the State Submit?
    B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?
    C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?
    B. Do the Rule Revisions Meet the Evaluation Criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. the State's Submittal

A. What Rule Did the State Submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date that the
amended rule was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                               Table 1.--Submitted Rule for Direct Final Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Local agency                  Rule No.              Rule title              Amended     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVAQMD..................................          442  Usage of Solvents..............     11/15/05     03/10/06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30, 2006, the submittal of March 10, 2006 was determined
to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which
must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are There Other Versions of This Rule?

    We approved a version of AVAQMD Rule 442 into the SIP on November
16, 1983 (48 FR 52054).

C. What Is the Purpose of the Submitted Rule Revisions?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. This rule was
developed as part of the local air district's programs to control these
pollutants.
    The purposes of the AVAQMD Rule 442 revisions relative to the SIP
rule are as follows:
     The rule is revised to conform to present AVAQMD rule
format and to be consistent with other District rules.
     A section on purpose is added for clarity.
     A section on applicability is added to clarify that the
rule is not applicable to other rules with VOC emission limits in
Regulation IV (such as Rules 461, 462, 463, and 464) and Regulation XI
(such as Rules 1102 and 1151).
     A section with definitions is added for clarity.
     A section with monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements is added to determine compliance.
     A section describing specific test methods is added to
determine compliance.
     The current VOC emissions limit that allows disposal of up
to 1.3 gallons per day of VOC by any means is made more stringent by
prohibiting disposal of VOC in a manner that would allow evaporation of
VOC into the atmosphere.
     The current emissions limit for VOC of 18 kg (39.6 pounds)
per day is retained and converted to the equivalent monthly emission
limit of 540 kg (1,190 pounds) per month.
     The current VOC emissions limit for organic materials that
come in contact with a flame, are baked, are heat cured, or are heat
polymerized of 195 kg (429 pounds) per month is removed; however, the
VOC emissions limit for these processes are covered by other rules in
Regulations IV and XI.
     The current VOC emissions limit deletes the 8,036 kg
(18,000 pounds) per day limit for ``non-photochemically reactive''
solvents. A part of these solvents are covered by the ``VOC'' limit and
a part do not have a limit because they are not precursors to ozone.
     A limit on VOC emissions from coating aerospace assemblies
and a limit for tire manufacturers expired by their own terms.
     A limit on VOC emissions from primer or topcoat
application to motor vehicles is covered by Rule 1151.
     An exemption for aerosol cans is added, because they are
regulated by Rule 1102.
     Exemptions for high solid or ultra-high solid materials
are removed due to a change in VOC terminology.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about
this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA Evaluating the Rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
major sources in nonattainment areas (see section 182(a)(2)(A)), and
must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The
AVAQMD regulates a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part
81). However, RACT is not required for Rule 442, because no major
sources of VOC are expected to be covered by Rule 442. Major sources
are covered by other rules in Regulations IV and XI.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
     Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
     Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon
monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
     Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
     Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

B. Does the Rule Meet the Evaluation Criteria?

    We believe the rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The TSD
has more information on our evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendation To Further Improve a Rule

    The TSD describes an additional revision to AVAQMD Rule 442 that
does not affect EPA's current action but is recommended for the next
time the local agency modifies the rule.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, EPA is fully
approving the submitted AVAQMD Rule 442 because we believe it fulfills
all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we
receive adverse comments by November 30, 2006, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on January 2, 2007. This will incorporate the
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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 (Pub. L. 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 standard, 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.).
    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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    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 January 2, 2007.
    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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 1, 2006.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(344) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (344) New and amended regulations for the following APCDs were
submitted on March 10, 2006, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 442, adopted on May 7, 1976 and amended on November 15,
2005.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E6-18173 Filed 10-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P